![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ysobel46Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (that is, the Son of Timaeus), was sitting by the roadside begging. 47When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!"
48Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, "Son of David, have mercy on me!"
49Jesus stopped and said, "Call him." So they called to the blind man, "Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you." 50Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus.
51"What do you want me to do for you?" Jesus asked him.
The blind man said, "Rabbi, I want to see."
52"Go," said Jesus, "your faith has healed you." Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.
There are a lot of stories like this in the New Testament. The above one was the official lectionary reading for this week, but there are others. Blind people seeing, lame people dancing for joy, people who have been sick their whole lives or who are dying being cured. And I know they aren't meant to be taken literally; I don't know enough to know whether they're "omg look at how awesome Jesus is" stories, or direct metaphors, or something else.
But on a personal level, I really fucking resent these stories. Partly because they're way too easy to take literally; I can't tell you the number of times I've heard, from very well-meaning people, that if I just pray hard enough and with enough faith, I'd be all better. And partly because I can fall into the trap myself, and start hoping, and then questioning myself.
I'm in a church that Gets It, thank fuck. And the sermon this morning quoted from another source, one that made a point that really resonated with me:
In her experience,
the ancient world of the Bible viewed physical disabilities as :
(a) a cause for shame/fear/embarrassment/pity
(b) a punishment for sin
(c) evidence of the parents’ sin
(d) a test
(e) God’s plan
(f) all of the above.
In her experience,
the modern world of Cincinnati viewed physical disabilities as:
(a) a cause for shame/fear/embarrassment/pity
(b) a punishment for bad lifestyle choices
(c) evidence of the parents’ poor pre-natal care
(d) a test
(e) God’s plan
(f) all of the above
And in her experience,
Church
sometimes left her feeling more wounded
than whole.
(Go read the whole thing. It's worth it.)
And I realized not just that there were societal filters in place, but that I had internalized so much of that reasoning. Not c, because there wasn't anything prenatally that could have been done differently in my case, but all the rest.
It also let me realize the why behind something that has been bothering me for a while, in terms of personal culpability towards the degree of disability I have. I know it's not my fault that I'm disabled, but am I this much disabled because I didn't try hard enough to stay un-disabled?
The source of that comes from the concept of "Use it or lose it", a phrase which had been mentioned carelessly in passing in some context or other in the FOP community, and ... well. Really, the statement can be read one of two ways, where p = "use it" and q = "lose it":
a) p, because not-p will cause (or at least will risk causing) q. ¬p=>q. It says nothing about whether q will occur with p; it just says that without p, q is likely.
b) p, because p and q are opposites that cannot coexist. ¬p<=>q. It says that p will guarantee you not-q, and also that q means p didn't happen.
And for all that I'm fairly sure the "use it or lose it" in this specific context was intended to be more nebulous even than the first reading -- and in reality, with this condition, p has nothing whatsoever to do with q -- but I internalized it as the second: if I had tried harder to diligently exercise the range of motion I had, back when I had any to speak of, I wouldn't have lost it. I am the way I am because of the sin of laziness.
If I try harder, pray harder, believe harder --
It's all the same. And it all is about putting the burden of responsibility on me. And the guilt. And the sense of "I didn't do enough". Or I wasn't good enough, or I didn't have the right words, or I didn't do it with enough careful intention, or--
I know it's not true*. I know that the condition I have will take away regardless of whether or not I was using it. I know that saying "I have faith, Jesus, really I do, please heal me", in any context, won't lead to me being magically better.
I know all this. I just need to get myself to believe it.
*except for the parts that are, like the whole depression thing, which wasn't initially my fault, except for the bits that were just unintentionally setting my life up for fail, but I have pretty much equal culpability by this point, given how much control I've allowed it to have over me.
48Many rebuked him and told him to be quiet, but he shouted all the more, "Son of David, have mercy on me!"
49Jesus stopped and said, "Call him." So they called to the blind man, "Cheer up! On your feet! He's calling you." 50Throwing his cloak aside, he jumped to his feet and came to Jesus.
51"What do you want me to do for you?" Jesus asked him.
The blind man said, "Rabbi, I want to see."
52"Go," said Jesus, "your faith has healed you." Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.
There are a lot of stories like this in the New Testament. The above one was the official lectionary reading for this week, but there are others. Blind people seeing, lame people dancing for joy, people who have been sick their whole lives or who are dying being cured. And I know they aren't meant to be taken literally; I don't know enough to know whether they're "omg look at how awesome Jesus is" stories, or direct metaphors, or something else.
But on a personal level, I really fucking resent these stories. Partly because they're way too easy to take literally; I can't tell you the number of times I've heard, from very well-meaning people, that if I just pray hard enough and with enough faith, I'd be all better. And partly because I can fall into the trap myself, and start hoping, and then questioning myself.
I'm in a church that Gets It, thank fuck. And the sermon this morning quoted from another source, one that made a point that really resonated with me:
In her experience,
the ancient world of the Bible viewed physical disabilities as :
(a) a cause for shame/fear/embarrassment/pity
(b) a punishment for sin
(c) evidence of the parents’ sin
(d) a test
(e) God’s plan
(f) all of the above.
In her experience,
the modern world of Cincinnati viewed physical disabilities as:
(a) a cause for shame/fear/embarrassment/pity
(b) a punishment for bad lifestyle choices
(c) evidence of the parents’ poor pre-natal care
(d) a test
(e) God’s plan
(f) all of the above
And in her experience,
Church
sometimes left her feeling more wounded
than whole.
(Go read the whole thing. It's worth it.)
And I realized not just that there were societal filters in place, but that I had internalized so much of that reasoning. Not c, because there wasn't anything prenatally that could have been done differently in my case, but all the rest.
It also let me realize the why behind something that has been bothering me for a while, in terms of personal culpability towards the degree of disability I have. I know it's not my fault that I'm disabled, but am I this much disabled because I didn't try hard enough to stay un-disabled?
The source of that comes from the concept of "Use it or lose it", a phrase which had been mentioned carelessly in passing in some context or other in the FOP community, and ... well. Really, the statement can be read one of two ways, where p = "use it" and q = "lose it":
a) p, because not-p will cause (or at least will risk causing) q. ¬p=>q. It says nothing about whether q will occur with p; it just says that without p, q is likely.
b) p, because p and q are opposites that cannot coexist. ¬p<=>q. It says that p will guarantee you not-q, and also that q means p didn't happen.
And for all that I'm fairly sure the "use it or lose it" in this specific context was intended to be more nebulous even than the first reading -- and in reality, with this condition, p has nothing whatsoever to do with q -- but I internalized it as the second: if I had tried harder to diligently exercise the range of motion I had, back when I had any to speak of, I wouldn't have lost it. I am the way I am because of the sin of laziness.
If I try harder, pray harder, believe harder --
It's all the same. And it all is about putting the burden of responsibility on me. And the guilt. And the sense of "I didn't do enough". Or I wasn't good enough, or I didn't have the right words, or I didn't do it with enough careful intention, or--
I know it's not true*. I know that the condition I have will take away regardless of whether or not I was using it. I know that saying "I have faith, Jesus, really I do, please heal me", in any context, won't lead to me being magically better.
I know all this. I just need to get myself to believe it.
*except for the parts that are, like the whole depression thing, which wasn't initially my fault, except for the bits that were just unintentionally setting my life up for fail, but I have pretty much equal culpability by this point, given how much control I've allowed it to have over me.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-26 04:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-26 08:16 am (UTC)