Reason

What do you think, dear reader?

If for some reason you or I decide that seeing someone in person is unwise, because they pose some kind of moral, emotional, spiritual, physical threat to well-being, would it not follow that the reason remains in place, perhaps perpetually? 

I mean, if I could make you deathly ill, to the point of you not wanting me in the vicinity of the very air you breath, does it not follow, again, somewhat logically, to assume said threat to life would never really go away, since all around us there are particles and peculiarities so microscopically small as to be invisible to the proverbial naked eye, that the threat of illness never departs: rather, it lurks in all nooks and crannies, awaiting a moment to pounce and pound unsuspecting, unprotected, naive and exposed prey. 

It is risky business being with other disgusting humans that cough, sometimes spit when they speak, and sneeze without a tissue, splaying germs far and wide. Morally, a sick person ought to suffer their fate solo, and be decent enough to refrain from possibly infecting others... better yet, they ought to take every available precaution seriously, and if not, it is their fault if no one wants them around, no one takes care of them if they are injured or ill, and if they happen to die a brutally painful death... that is on their heads, FOOLS! 

NOTE: This was the reasoning, the maladjusted malignant illogical reasoning we were subjected to not long ago, and it threatens to rear its ugly head more often then not, now that it has been established, that it is easy to divide people, even those that have pledged fidelity. 

Dear reader, it behooves me to remind everyone that happens to read my writing, how horribly devastating it was for those of us that would not buy the bull regarding CV 19, when relatives, old friends, neighbours, clients, and perfect strangers, treated us like we were a plague of pariahs, meant to be cast out from society: a sick society that could not see wickedness if their life depended upon it... and it did. Lives were, and are still, dependant upon seeing evil, and choosing good, for their own sake and the sake of those they may have influence over. 

There are people that want back into our lives, and rightly so, because what was wonderful before, could possibly be again. There is a caveat of compassion though, a proviso for re-entrance of repentance, and begging for forgiveness for treating others with rough, callous hands and hearts: alas, I do not believe the conditions will be met in order to repair and rebuild...  

Can you imagine being hit hard by your friend, not your husband, wife, brother, sister, child, uncle, aunt, grandparent, but by your friend's invisible hand of rejection, and them having no remorse for causing you pain? Now imagine them realizing that when they felt justified in giving you a swat, they were wrong, so wrong that somewhere deep inside, they had the stirrings of regret, and perhaps hear themselves saying, What have I done?

What have they done? 

Back to the top, dear reader. What say you? If I was a threat before to safety and well-being; if you were perceived as unconscionably wicked for not abiding by the rules superimposed by mercenary men and women, as your relatives, old friends, neighbours, clients, and perfect strangers did, what makes us suddenly worthy of being entertained as we once were? How did we go from being pariah, to relationship material again? 

Let me be really pointed: if you hold something against another, and find them despicable in some way, how do you dare keep them company? It is to their injury and yours, and is hypocritical. If damage has been done, there is only one way of repair, and it is saying sorry, asking for forgiveness with a contrite spirit, and then hoping against hope, that the other has left the door open a crack, in order for you to squeak your way back in. 

Let me be really pointed once more: I am not simply talking about forgiveness ~ not that forgiveness is by any means simple: an injured person that belongs to God, will have already commenced this work. I am talking about the one that was injurious: they have a significant responsibility, not only to attempt reunion, but to own what they did that caused fracture. The wounded one no longer trusts the soul swatter... they look in that persons direction with suspicion, and rightly so. Once a person has raised a hand to us, we can be sure that they may very well find a reason to do it again, and again. 

This is why we need the strength of Christ to resolve our reasoning to logical conclusions. Christ instead of CV 19... forgive me Lord, for this vulgar comparison, but dear reader, this is what we have seen. Humans forsook themselves, their families, co-workers, neighbours, and friends, in favour of fear, indulging the fear to the point of destroying relationships. 

Jesus would never, ever, want us to choose self-preservation at the expense of loving one another, being available and present for each other, in the face of real, or perceived threat... 

The ones that now think it safe to interact freely with whomever they choose, are not being chosen by those they rejected. If I was once a danger, if you were at one time a hazard, then in the coming days, you will be more so, if you continue to decide that you answer to God, and not those that would presume to impose, regardless of their relation to you. 

With good reason, we are godly. Without reason, we are lost.

And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me (Matthew 25:40)