ME Action requested submissions from creatives with Severe ME or Very Severe ME to recognise, remember and support said folk on Severe ME Awareness Day (8th August each year).
I am thrilled that they accepted and published one of my poëms under my nom de plume, Criquaer! Follow this link.
To read the text of the poëm in full, please refer to my blog-post from January this year.
*
So chuffed!
*
I was born a sinner too. My sin is mentioned in the Bible 25 times. I tried to change, but couldn’t… Luckily society learned to accept us left-handed people.
Today, 13th August, is International Left-Handers’ Day.
I was born left-handed, a lefty, and was probably part of the last English generation to be forced to be right-handed, at least to write right-handedly. However, prior to disability, I used to be able to scribe with either hand. I use cutlery as a right-hander, but prefer to drink with my left. I played tennis and cricket with my left-hand, but kicked a ball with my right-foot (footedness usually indicates handedness). See this Wikipedia item on Handedness for further details.
Left-handers are often considered to be ‘evil’, ‘sinister’ (the English word is derived from the Latin for left, ‘sinistra’), ‘clumsy’ or less worthy than right-handers. There are many cultural reasons for this.
For several centuries, mainstream Christianity considered those who predominantly used their left-hands to be sinful. Some smaller denominations still do (see for example this by Seventh-Day Adventists). But when was the last time you heard a sermon denouncing left-handedness or sinistrality? The likelihood is probably never if one is young or not since your childhood or youth if one is more mature. In actuality there is not a single Bible verse that categorically states that left-handedness is sinful. The Church as a whole, however, used passages such as Matthew 25:31-34 & 41, to back up their wrongful assertions - a case of blatant eisegesis (placing one’s own suppositions etc. into an interpretation of Scripture)! For background, it may be of interest to note that Judaism does not hold any mores against left-handers (e.g. see this recent article).
Selective ‘Christian fundamentalists’ pick & choose which bits of the Bible they wish to believe in - oddly enough, usually those passages that appear to justify their own bigoted beliefs! Strange how they ignore other parts that are inconvenient, etc.
As a student at university, studying theology away from the biases of specific denominations was a revelation: I discovered just how much official Christianity (whether Evangelical, Anglican, Roman Catholic or Orthodox) has distorted and still distorts Biblical understanding and how it reprioritises and/or suppresses Jesus’ words & teachings.
For some two decades, I was a ‘born-again’ believer. In all the time that folk had prophecies, words of wisdom and pictures, funny how they could pick on sins but never seemed to find the love to support the sinned agin! Also odd was the obsession with sexual sinning, but a total ignoring of inter-personal wrong-doing (such as gossiping, back-biting, bitching, rumour-mongering, etc., and to which we can add the modern sins of trolling and gaslighting) which it can be argued are far more destructive to the individual, community and society as a whole.
The Church - in this sense, all denominations together - is and has long been out to protect itself and its powerful position. Jesus was a radical free-thinker who wanted to completely revolutionise society (e.g. Cleansing of the Temple). He was an early believer in equality - he was, inter alia, proto-feminist (see this article for several examples), anti-classist (e.g. The Widow’s Mite), and anti-racist (e.g. The Good Samaritan). He called for all of us to love everyone: not some wishy-washy emotionalism; but active love-in-action (or agapē).
Pope Francis has iterated the call for radical love-in-action (e.g. see my blog-post on his Evangelii Gaudium), but the bureaucracy of the clergy ensures that any radicalism is tempered by an ineluctable conservatism.
Change can only occur if the so-called faithful pursue it. Given a couple of millennia of history, I doubt such will come to pass… But one never knows - miracles do happen from time to time, for nowadays the Church no longer considers left-handedness as sinful!
Image description: a photo of Holocaust-survivor Elie Wiesel
and a quotation of his:
“Always take sides.
Neutrality helps the oppressor,
never the victim.
Silence encourages the tormentor,
never the tormented.”
There is no such concept as “political neutrality” in actuality. When individuals say to themselves that they are remaining neutral over a given situation, they are in effect lying to themselves and anyone with whom they discuss the matter. Taking a neutral position or ignoring what is going on around you, such as the German people under the NAZIs, is in effect support for that wickedness, as Elie Wiesel attests.
In a democracy, all citizens are responsible for the state of their democracy and the welfare of their fellow citizens. This is solidarity. This is agapē or love-in-action. This is social-justice. Unwillingness to support those who need it, is tantamount to turning your back on your neighbour, cf. Jesu’s words in Luke 10: 25-37:
The Parable of the Good Samaritan
On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
“What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”
He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’”
“You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”
But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbour?”
In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’
“Which of these three do you think was a neighbour to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”
The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”
Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”
There are not only sins of commission, but also sins of omission. All folk of Faith and all folk of high Morals must work for the good of all, not simply oneself and one’s loved ones, cf. Jesus & the most important commandments, often referred to as the Great or Greatest Commandment. This appears three times in the New Testament, in each of the Synoptic Gospels. I am quoting them in their Biblical order.
The Greatest Commandment
Matthew 22:35-40
One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” Jesus replied: “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
Mark 12:28-31
One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?” “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.”
Luke 10:25-28
On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?” “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?” He answered, “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’” “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”
People of Faith who are sitting on their hands and doing nothing, are not truly faithful… People of Morality who refuse to assist the needy, are not really moral. Both religious and Humanist ethics require of any individual that they:
Do to others as you would have them do to you!
or
Treat others as you would wish to be treated!
This is known as the Golden Rule. If the reader follows the link to the Wikipedia article, one can read its various formations or references in most religions.
*
NB All biblical quotations are from the New International Version aka NIV.
*
Once again, I apologise to readers for the odd appearance of this blog-post. I have tried several different ways to publish and deleted everything twice, but this is how Blogger has decided it is going to be!
Christ & Racism
- DO NOT - mix.
You can’t love God &
Hate His Creation ]
This sign from last year´s Black Lives Matter campaign could equally state:
Christ & Disablism (US Ableism)
- DO NOT - mix.
You can’t love God &
Hate Their Creation.
Sexism, Racism, Homophobia, Ageism, etc. have no place in Christianity. If you believe they do, you are no true Christian. Jesus made it crystal-clear that after loving G_d, the next most important commandment was to love one another. He himself averred that he came to fulfil and thus replace the Old Testament (OT), so there is no justification for quoting scriptures out of context. To be quite clear: There is NO place for hate, treading in the steps of JC!
Black lives matter.
Asian lives matter.
Disabled lives matter.
Wimmin’s lives matter.
LGBTQIA+ lives matter.
Senior citizens’ lives matter.
Poor, working-class men’s lives matter.
If you do not understand why any of the above groupings are suffering in British (or US or Oz) society, then do some research - the internet is full of personal stories, histories from differing perspectives and data for those interested in statistical analyses.
We all have our own prejudices. The path of Faith calls us to to challenge ourselves and learn to stretch out the hand of amity, of friendship to all, not just those who are like us.
*
Peace & blessings! 🙏🏻
*
Given I have had anaphylaxis from eating garlic and that I get rashes &/or vomit if I consume other members of the onion-family, and also given the [Medicines & Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency] MHRA’s current advice, I do not consider that I should have this specific vaccination. Do you concur? If not, please provide me with reasoning and a link or two to any relevant info.
March 2021
The latest advice from the ME Association [MEA] is for pwME to have the [AstraZeneca] AZ vaccination. Their reasoning being that it was tested on Brits and therefore probably is the least risky to us.
A large survey carried out by an M.E./F.M.S. support-group out in the US, found that severe-reäctions to any of the vaccines were roughly evenly spread across the four types used there. So it seems to me, it probably would not matter which vaccine I am given - but taking account of potential anaphylaxis as above!
May 2021
As far as I can tell the MEA has not updated its advice re vaccination. At the end of April HealthRising.org, which is running a survey of M.E. & F.M.S sufferers worldwide noted that:
“People with ME/CFS/FM still appear to be having more trouble with the AstraZeneca shot. Thirty-seven percent report having a severe reaction to the first shot, and 16% reported they were still having symptoms a month later. Not enough data was available for the second shot.”
If you consider I ought to have the vaccine, I believe it is your clinical judgement which must decide whether or not any type is preferable or not; so I shall accept your recommendation, with the proviso that I suffer from known allergies.
*
