BS: Christian Persecution

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: John P
Date: 29 Sep 11 - 09:40 AM

A holistic approach to healing includes seeing to the spiritual, emotional, and mental needs of the patient as well as the physical. Trying to call Christian proselytizing an attempt at a holistic healing, however, is stretching that definition to the breaking point. Unless you are sure the patient is a religious person and wants to talk about, you just don't do it. The spiritual needs of the patient rarely includes being preached at. "Spiritual" and "religion" don't mean the same thing at all.

The practitioner's job is to step outside of the themselves and provide what the patient needs, not what the practitioner believes.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Musket
Date: 29 Sep 11 - 06:52 AM

Holistic approach is all well and good. GPs have a framework to guide them in offering more than the scientific aspects of healthcare. If they go beyond that, they are answerable to their registering body The GMC.

Physical symptoms can be addressed through a more holistic approach. If that were not the case, the placebo effect would not have a 20% success rate! GPs, more than any other doctor appreciate that that their role includes the overall well being. After all, a positive mind speeds up recovery. A study in The British Medical Journal many years ago demonstrated that in many minor ailment cases, patients started feeling better before the medication had a biological chance to start making a difference. Sometimes, just the act of getting off your arse and seeing a GP starts the recovery process. After all, your body contains enough chemicals to tackle many issues, they just need a kick start by the brain.

None of this affects the issue of bringing Jesus into the consulting room. You can get struck off for that.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 29 Sep 11 - 03:21 AM

The Basilica of Our Lady of the Peace in Yamassoukro would go a long way to make this case.

But I know, it's a bit of a quirk and a bit too much out of the ordinary.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Joe Offer
Date: 29 Sep 11 - 01:19 AM

Stringsinger, you're going to have to give me concrete examples of opulent churches being built where the people around them are starving. In the United States, the closest to your description might be the Polish cathedrals that served as hiring halls, places of employment, community centers, and symbols of ethnic identity. From what I know of Catholic churches being built in Africa, they usually serve multiple purposes - schools and community centers, mostly.

It's true the Spaniards built magnificent churches as a symbol of their power and oppression in South America, but that was a long time ago.

Nowadays, churches are generally built by the people and for the people - as was the case with ethnic churches in the United States.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Sep 11 - 07:05 PM

it was said

I haven't seen any clear and reliable report of what was said.

Incidentally a definition of "holistic" that is purely directed at physical symptoms is not one that I think too many practitioners would recognise. But that's maybe a topic for another thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Sep 11 - 06:27 PM

Pete, with the greatest respect, Holistic Medicine and Holistic treatment relate to treatment of the whole patient physically.

You are seriously stretching the meaning when you start to include the soul as being part of that treatment.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Stringsinger
Date: 27 Sep 11 - 10:59 AM

What Jim Carroll said. A-Women!

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 26 Sep 11 - 02:51 PM

don,i dont think that recruiting was on the docs mind at all.
if it were ,it was likely to be short lived in this life.
why is it so hard to accept that the holistic care was out of compassionate care.
care i presume that was offerred ,-not enforced-

look forward to next kemsing session .
best wishes
pete

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 26 Sep 11 - 11:59 AM

Pete, if it were only that, it wouldn't be too much of a problem, though on principle I would say it was inappropriate, and I am a Christian.

The point is that it was said to a person who was about as far down the road to death as it gets, a cancer sufferer who had just been handed the news that his cancer had returned.

For me, that adds up to a vulnerable patient, who will grasp at any straw which presents the slightest hope.

That is not the time for a one sided attempt at recruitment to the Church.

That, I think, is the reason why his superiors find his actions unprofessional, and in the circumstances, WRONG!

His job is to deal with the patient's physical and medical needs, neither of which require a religious commitment.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 26 Sep 11 - 11:36 AM

it appears on the surface that some people are too "touchy"
unless the doc insisted on sharing his faith after a refusal ,whats the problem?if a muslim or even an atheist medic wanted to discuss their faith i as a christian would,nt get upset by it.
it appears this practise offers a holistic approach and IMO as long as it is not obligatory on patients it is a good thing which some might be glad to avail themselves of.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Stringsinger
Date: 24 Sep 11 - 12:34 PM

Joe, would it be nicer if the money that was used to support those opulent edifices could be spent on improving the impoverished conditions of the people who support them? The demolition that needs to be done is the practice of giving to edifices when people are starving around them. This seems very logical to me.

When people are in need, why isn't the money better spent this way?

Do some people need to be re-educated?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Sep 11 - 10:10 AM

Once again, none of us have any information of the alleged conversation.

What's the point of arguing about specific incidents about which we know essentially nothing relevant?

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 24 Sep 11 - 08:07 AM

It isn't a Christian practice. It is a practice that has an NHS contract hence the GP is up in front of the GMC for his actions.

The system does sometimes work. If I still chaired a PCT (health authority) I would be asking out chief executive to formally give warning of breach of contract if the allegations were substantiated.

There is a place for Christians and that place certainly isn't setting the agenda for primary care. All healthcare, under the terms of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 is without regard to gender race or creed. And that includes private healthcare where the type of care is registerable. (GPs come under registration in 2013 but their work under their NHS contract has to be in line with their contract, which mirrors the regulations anyway.)

That said, many GP practices think they are above any laws or rules anyway and if is only the steady introduction of younger less arrogant GPs that gives me hope for an eventual joined up NHS care anyway.

Luckily, actual care isn't too bad because at the end of the day, their role is purely signing club notes and referring you to real doctors.

Good lark this anonymity.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Penny S.
Date: 24 Sep 11 - 06:26 AM

REsearch shows a lot of practices close by, but all are in one consortium, headed by a doctor at Bethesda. I couldn't get to their website.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Sep 11 - 06:25 AM

None of us know the actual facts about this particular case, so there's not much point in going on as if we did.

"If so and so is true that would be right and if so and if so and so is true that would be wrong..."

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Penny S.
Date: 24 Sep 11 - 06:20 AM

This is the first time I have come across the idea that an NHS provided service would also be religious. I do hope that there are other practices in the area (I had no choice where I last lived, or at my current address), especially given that there are a variety of faiths practiced by the public - I know that Thanet (the part of Kent) has, for example, a Jewish community. I, though a Christian, would not be happy if the only option was an openly Christian practice, because it would raise issues I might disagree with.

I don't know how it could have happened that there could be a sectarian practice, when it started, under what rules, and I think it should be monitored, and future practices of this sort prevented. This is not what the NHS should be about, and makes me concerned about the recent proposals in Parliament.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Joe Offer
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 06:57 PM

Stringsinger says: Joe, one argument that is indisputable is that the Catholic Church owns opulent edifices that are located in squalid and poverty-stricken environments around the world.

Nope, Frank, I can't deny that. Try tearing down those buildings, though, and take the time to listen to the outcries from the poverty-stricken people who built those buildings for themselves and their communities. The people built those buildings, and it's the people who take pride in them. For the most part, they weren't built under orders from Rome.

If the buildings were sold, who would buy them? If they were torn down, would there be any proceeds from the demolition?

Once again, your arguments don't seem particularly valid.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 06:29 PM

My local practice has a website too, but my guess would be that most patients have never looked at it. I joined the list before there were any websites to look at, and I don't give a tuppenny damn about the doctors' religious views, but I go there for medical treatment, and that's what I expect to get.

I'll take care of my soul, spirit, or whatever.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 06:18 PM

I note that the Bethesda Medical Centre (which is in Kent) actually states on its website that "spiritual matters are likely to be discussed with patients during consultations".

It's a bit analogous to someone who goes to a vegetarian restaurant and complains that the menu is all vegetarian dishes.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Wesley S
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 05:18 PM

I'll start worring about Christian Persecution when I see the hungry lions headed my way and there's no way out of the arena.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 05:04 PM

~~~In something called "the Bethesda Medical Centre" it seems strange if mention of Christianity is seen as unacceptable.~~~

Oh, really? How so? Bethesda is an Aramaic name, derived from
בית-חסדא
Hebrew for House of Grace. Can't see why the fact that it happens to have been mentioned in one of the Gospels should have anything to do with it.

Do only Christians live in Bethesda, Maryland? Not last time I was there, they didn't.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 04:35 PM

Persecution is persecution, whoever is being persecuted and whoever is doing the persecution.

"Don't ask me to care about Jenny being beaten up by her boyfriend. I know her father, and I think he's a right bastard"

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 04:32 PM

Stringsinger: "Gfs: quoting the bible makes no sense whatsoever as a rational conversation. Cherry picking the scriptures makes about as much sense as taking a rational statement as representative as a quote from Mein Kampf."

John 13:35 ""By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."

Not exactly 'Mein Kampf', now is it???????

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Stringsinger
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 04:24 PM

The faith-based initiatives by definition are preaching religion as a subtext for what they do.

Joe, one argument that is indisputable is that the Catholic Church owns opulent edifices that are located in squalid and poverty-stricken environments around the world.

The Pope is on conspicuous display reminding everyone of the hierarchical nature of the Church and for him to claim "Christian persecution" is the height of hypocrisy which he surely can't personalize.

Gfs: quoting the bible makes no sense whatsoever as a rational conversation. Cherry picking the scriptures makes about as much sense as taking a rational statement as representative as a quote from Mein Kampf.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 04:15 PM

""It's not at all clear what "in this way" amounted to. In something called "the Bethesda Medical Centre" it seems strange if mention of Christianity is seen as unacceptable. ""

If I am ill and go to my GP, I expect to be given the best that a fully qualified professional medical practitioner can supply.

If I am seeking divine guidance or intervention the logical Drop in Centre would be the local Church, Mosque, or Temple.

What is totally inappropriate, is for that medical practitioner to seek to delegate his responsibilities to a gifted, but possibly mythical, amateur.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 04:08 PM

""I deplored the use of smoke on civillians, but correctly denied that smoke is classified as a chemical weapon.""

How easily you distort the truth Keith, and without a sign of conscience.

Why do you not have the nerve to come straight out with the fact that you are talking about WHITE PHOSPHORUS, which burns spontaneously when exposed to air, and is not extinguishable by water, but burns until physically removed or exhausted.

It can burn right through a human torso, flesh and bone.

That's a little different than your weasel word "SMOKE", wouldn't you say?

Back on topic, while I deplore any persecution of any minority, by any majority, for any or for no reason, I have two points to make.

1. Aid to the Church in Need can pull percentages out of a hat until they are blue in the face, but that doesn't constitute one credible FACT until they supply chapter and verse to prove the source and veracity of their figures.

2. Does anybody think that persecution of minorities will magically cease if we withdraw AID, or, as is much more likely, will we simply ensure that those minorities will be the first to starve?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 03:48 PM

It's not at all clear what "in this way" amounted to. In something called "the Bethesda Medical Centre" it seems strange if mention of Christianity is seen as unacceptable.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 01:35 PM

I'm a Christian, go to church and am on the PCC etc. But I'd be extemely uncomfortable if any healthworker started talking to me about their faith in this way. It's inappropriate. We had a bus driver some years ago who accosted his passengers about finding Jesus etc. as they boarded the bus. Again, it was uncalled-for and unacceptable, it just got people's backs up.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 12:06 PM

LoL ~~~

☺

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Musket
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 04:56 AM

Well Michael, if faith binds people together, then Liverpool needs football, 'cos Christianity seems to be a divider there.........

Arsenal? Sorry, I will waffle away on posts without realising the upset I can cause (!)

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 04:18 AM

Not as much as mine is being this season, Ian: I'm an Arsenal supporter!

~Michael~

Drift? Don't think so: they call soccer 'the religion' in Liverpool, don't they? Liverpool! Everton! Tranmere Rovers - er???

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Musket
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 03:39 AM

Just want to point out that it is NOT a Christian medical centre. There is no such thing.

The Primary Care contract clearly states it is contracted to operate within the terms of the PCT equality scheme and equality legislation. The PCT (local health authority) commissions care that is equal, accessible to all and patients should not have to put up with this, any more than a pharmacist should be able to refuse to supply morning after pills when he / she is the duty pharmacist and there is nobody else to sign and dispense. If you come across religious overtones in your NHS care, somebody is not doing what is expected of them.

In addition, patients are seen by GPs, and GPs have clear obligations as to influencing vulnerable people, and even clearer obligations under the Hippocratic oath with regard to using their medical expertise without fear or favour.

Hence this GP is answering to his professional registration body (GMC) for the allegations.

Once very good reason I get rather agitated about this is that in a hospital, people of faith, and I am talking especially about Islam here.. leave their faith at the door. Hence a Muslim nurse will give personal care to a man. A muslim doctor will carry out an intimate examination or procedure on a person of the opposite sex etc. If we allow faith to enter healthcare in any way other than chaplaincy for those who would be comforted by it, it would open a huge can of worms, and not just wearing crosses and asking people if they have let Jesus in their lives.

It is not about persecuting Christians. It is not about stifling peoples' right to express their faith or any other related tosh. On that basis, if your boss asks you where the report is and you say Jesus told you to flush it down the toilet.....

I have always supported the concept of freedom of religious expression. I have also supported the notion that it is not used to influence the lives of those who don't want to play. I have noticed a push recently by leaders in the Christian world, especially here in The UK to play the "persecution" card in order to have more influence in society.

Stop it. It is doing your cause no good. All it does is entrench the position of those of us who only wish to be governed by those we vote for. You carry on singing in church on a Sunday and I will carry on singing on the Kop at Hillsborough on a Saturday. We all have faith, we all need to express it. I express mine at the temple of soccer. (I bet my faith is tested more often than yours...)

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Joe Offer
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 02:15 AM

Stringsinger says: they are actively pursuing their agendas....

Yeah, I suppose that's true. I'm affiliated with one faith-based program whose agenda is to provide "hospitality with dignity and love" to women in an impoverished area. Another one I work with has a different agenda: to encourage the county jail to treat prisoners with compassion and fairness. I'm involved in other faith-based organizations that protest capital punishment and promote the cause of peace.

I don't apologize for any of these agendas. They put to action what I believe. And please note that none of these faith-based programs makes any attempt to preach religion.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Sep 11 - 12:41 AM

Stringsinger: "Christians make up the majority of religious affiliation in the U.S. and they are actively pursuing their agendas when they are not persecuting others for their ideas or beliefs."


Matthew 7:21.."Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven. (22)"Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?'(23)"And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'(24)"Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock.(25)"And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded on the rock.(26)"Everyone who hears these words of Mine and does not act on them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand.(27)"The rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and it fell-- and great was its fall.(28)When Jesus had finished these words, the crowds were amazed at His teaching."

(Stringsinger): "Christians make up the majority of religious affiliation in the U.S. and they are actively pursuing their agendas when they are not persecuting others for their ideas or beliefs."

??????????

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Joe Offer
Date: 22 Sep 11 - 11:55 PM

But despite the fact that I dispute Stringsinger's logic, I find myself almost in complete agreement with him. I'm guessing that Aid to the Church in Need must be a rather insignificant Catholic organization. To say it is "Vatican-approved" is a bit of a stretch. Although the Catholic Church allows it to exist and bear the title Catholic, there's no indication that it is an agency of the Catholic Church itself. It has a right-of-center perspective and a "poor, pitiful me" attitude that I find detrimental.

Yes, it's true that in many places, Christians do suffer because of their religion. Ancient Christian communities are disappearing from Muslim countries, and that's a shame. However, maybe it's more true to say that almost everywhere in the world, minorities suffer terribly at the hands of the majority. That puts a more accurate "spin" on the matter.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Joe Offer
Date: 22 Sep 11 - 07:53 PM

Stringsinger, the Vatican hasn't sentenced anyone to any serious penalty for, like, a hundred fifty years - and it wasn't even the Vatican at the time, since the center of power at the time was the Lateran Palace. That was a different time, and people thought differently then. I can't defend their actions - but it was a long, long, time ago.
Whatever the case, your argument is about 150 years out of date. Time to find a new one, wouldn't you think?
I can't defend the more recent actions of the five to ten percent of priests who molested children in recent years, either. Nonetheless, the actions of long ago and those by a recent minority do not invalidate the right of other Catholics to speak against injustice.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Sep 11 - 07:32 PM

Christians make up the majority of religious affiliation in the U.S.

And the United States is a pretty small corner of the world. Religious persecution isn't something to sneer at, wherever it's happening or whoever is being persecuted. And it's probably on the increase.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Stringsinger
Date: 22 Sep 11 - 07:18 PM

I can't trust the Vatican as a credible objective source on persecution. After all, historically, they have been "masters of the craft". Auto-de-fes anyone?

Christians make up the majority of religious affiliation in the U.S. and they are actively pursuing their agendas when they are not persecuting others for their ideas or beliefs.

"Christian persecution" is Dominionist and Reconstructivist twaddle. However, in the U.S. today, Muslims are actively being persecuted by the police and some Christians.

Religious persecution, historically, almost defines the history of religion throughout the world. It seems you can't have one without the other.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 22 Sep 11 - 03:53 PM

One more vulnerable individual being persecuted by a "Christian"[sic]

No news here.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Van
Date: 22 Sep 11 - 03:46 PM

It is known in the town that this is a Christian medical centre and locals can choose to go to one of the other practices. It is after all called the Bethesda medical centre, bit of a clue. Other reports say that it was the mother, not the patient, who complained. I,m not a practicing Christian and have no axe to grind but I feel that it is unfair that the GP involved has all this publicity about his conduct but the complainant remains anonymous.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 22 Sep 11 - 03:29 PM

A Christian GP who asked a troubled patient if he had considered faith in Jesus appeared before medical watchdogs today.

Dr Richard Scott spoke about the matter of religion to the 24-year-old, who has been described as 'suicidal' and 'vulnerable', at the end of a consultation at his surgery, the General Medical Council (GMC) heard.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2040567/Christian-Dr-Richard-Scott-fights-job-asking-suicidal-patient-faith.html

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Greg F.
Date: 18 Mar 11 - 12:52 PM

Yep, Kevin , but he probably still would have been shot for being "uppity". You need to experience Dixie at first hand.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Mar 11 - 12:22 PM

...it was to his assassins unacceptable for a black man to be a political activist.

I rather suspect that if his politics had been pro-segregation and pro-war the fact that he was black might have been seen in a different light.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 18 Mar 11 - 12:05 PM

Fluids - check your facts. I know it's not your speciality, but for once do us a favour. You've already gone from purporting to know about that case to admitting your prejudice.

Martin Luther King was assassinated because it was to his assassins unacceptable for a black man to be a political activist.

Bhatti was assassinated purely for his political stances. If he had once been Muslim apostasy would have been added to the list of his alleged crimes.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 18 Mar 11 - 07:33 AM

Methinks M'Unlearned friend should quit whilst he's behind....

Political activity and religion may be different things in a dictionary but in Pakistan, the line is more than blurred.

Oh, and yeah... I am on the side of the oppressor. Every time mate, every time. if she worked for me, I would have been uncomfortable reinstating her. (Sorry everybody, a parallel thread is in danger of occurring here.) Like The NMC, I put safeguarding rather high on my agenda. A pity you weren't acting for her really, we could have a safer service if she had been struck off.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 08:44 PM

Well said Mr McGrath.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 08:20 PM

"The minorities minister was however murdered not because of his religion but because of his political activity."

That's not a million miles from saying that Martin Luther King was shot for his political activity and not because he was black. In one way that would be true, but at the same time it would distort the truth about the circumstances. The two went together.

Here is the very impressive video clip of Shahbaz Bhatti speaking about the likelihood of his own assassination.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 07:12 PM

AFAIK many different minorities in Pakistan are routinely persecuted.

The minorities minister was however murdered not because of his religion but because of his political activity.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 06:31 PM

So it's "whining" to mention such things, and inverted commas should be placed on any description of that kind of thing as "persecution"?

Maybe the victims in such cases were"asking for it"?

I don't actually believe Greg thinks that.

Subject: RE: BS: Christian Persecution
From: Donuel
Date: 17 Mar 11 - 06:24 PM

is there any room for remarks regarding jewish persecution here?

the st. valentine massacre of jews in germany in retribution for be blamed for the black death (plague) is a particularly horrifying and fascinating tale. a tale i call 'when flagellents go wild'