Monday, March 5, 2012

Pain Can Join or Separate Us - Part 2

In part 1 I talked about how much I personally dislike the oft-exclaimed sentiment: "my pain is unique and you will never understand what people like me are going through." This is pervasive in our society and I think that it is a great evil.

Before I explain why I feel so angry at this attitude, I should clarify what I am not saying. I am not saying that we should not feel pain, or that there is not a need for care and counseling to take into account the type of pain we are dealing with. Not at all! Obviously the above sentiment does have a basis in reality. There is certainly a sense in which we really can't understand exactly what someone else is going through. It would be foolish to say otherwise. In fact, I remember when I first read C.S.Lewis' book A Grief Observed. I found the book profoundly disturbing the first time I read it. Why? The book is a journal of Lewis' thoughts after his wife died of cancer, and in the first half of the book he bitterly questions almost everything that he had written so confidently about in all his other books. I, who have never lost anybody close to me by death, saw into a world that I frankly had not imagined existed. I guess I thought that the people who got terribly distraught at inevitabilities like death had some sort of spiritual problem. But the man in that book sounded so different from the spiritually wise and joyful Lewis whose other books I had been encouraged by, that I had to change my whole attitude toward those who grieve. I am not nearly so confident of how I will react when I experience the inevitable separation of the death of a loved one. I am sure that I still have much to learn about life, and can learn more about getting into other people's hearts and minds to be a comfort to them. That is why Paul wrote at the start of 2 Corinthians that "God comforts us in our afflictions so that we will be able to comfort others with the comfort with which we have been comforted".

So the point of this blog is not to imply that everybody's pain is not unique, nor is it meant to belittle anybody's private suffering, nor is it to say that we all don't need to grow in our own understanding as we suffer ourselves. What I am saying is that this should cause us to reach out all the more to each other, rather than using our pain as a way to build walls around ourselves, which really end up being made of resentment toward others who have had it better than we have.

So, what is the problem with the "you can never understand my pain"? Why do I think it is a pernicious attitude? Because:

  • It separates people into little private "pain groups". (You will never be a member of mygroup and how dare you even try to offer a comforting remark! How insensitive of you to trivialize my pain with your "it will be alright" platitudes!) Anything that fragments us into isolated subgroups only weakens us as a whole.

  • It sanctions self-pity as a virtuous activity ("oh, poor me! All my FaceBook friends, tell me how much you all feel sorry for me!"). People who relish their own pitiful condition as a way of getting sympathy often never get over their own problems. Many people would prefer wallowing in their own inadequacy rather than taking responsibility for growing up.

  • It gives many people a pervasive sense of entitlement. ("You have to excuse my obnoxious behavior because I am hurting."). Again personal responsibility goes out the window, and others who do not acknowledge your superior position as a victim become objects of bitterness.

  • It is used by manipulators (like politicians) to create entrenched power bases ("I feel your pain", "my opponent will never understand you." "You are the 99%! You are a poor victim of rich people. I will give you their money if you vote for me!"),

  • It creeps into families and churches, wreaking havoc and destroying the unity that we should have as Christians, family members and as human beings.


As an extreme example, I remember a friend of mine who came from a staunchly Catholic family, who was telling me how much his brother hated evangelical protestants. When I asked why it was so visceral with him specifically, I was told this story: Evidently someone came to his door one day to share his faith, but it was not long after the brother's wife had had a miscarraige. According to my friend, when he told the visitor about the sad news, the visitor said something like "well, at least the child is now with Jesus". Horrors! That earned a yelling, door-slamming reaction of offense from my friend's brother, who now labeled protestants as evil incarnate. To me the message seemed to be "How dare you try to offer comforting words to me! You don't know what I am going through!" This story struck me as very sad. Two Christians (at least by profession) could have drawn together and shared comfort in Christ, but instead the pain was a wedge (or bludgeon) to further separate people.

That may seem to be an extreme example, and I am not remotely saying that this is a Catholic thing. I have seen this in many other contexts as well. The point is that, over and over again, this kind of mindset will always be used for division, for justification of badness, and to excuse a self-serving or bitter attitude.

What is the practical part of my observations? That is harder, and will be dealt with in part 3...

Tuesday, February 7, 2012

TOP TEN DIRTY TRICKS TO WIN ARGUMENTS IN A CHURCH SETTING

Each of them has the common feature ofshort-circuiting discussions without actually presenting arguments. This list is very old and contains some examples of ways that I have seen conversations ended in the distant past. How many of these have you seen? What others have you seen?

NUMBER 10: The Biblical Stretch
Find some principle in the Bible and construct an entire argument based on an obscure mapping between the subject at hand and the convenient principle. (One famous seminar leader has several good examples of this, perhaps the most notable of which was his mapping of Melody=spirit, Harmony=soul, rhythm=flesh which was used to prove that contemporary music styles will bring in demons and cause people to have uncontrollable sexual urges since everybody knows the flesh is evil.) If you promote arguments in this way you can prove nearly anything and your opponents will be left looking like they are arguing with God instead of your arguments

NUMBER 9: Take offense at everything!
"Are you accusing me of [some sin]!?!?!?"
"You’re not listening to me! I will repeat what I said!"
"Why are you so hostile?"
Your opponent (who probably did not even realize that he was your opponent) is now on the defensive, trying to mend fences that he did not really even break. Used to avoid entire topics that you don’t want to address.

NUMBER 8: Bring up old offenses later that you never thought worth mentioning before.
"Two years ago you said this and really hurt me, but I decided to ‘take it on the chin’."
Does this mean that the offense was never forgiven or that is is now un-forgiven again?

NUMBER 7: Making a defense proves you're guilty.
"Why do you feel like you need to defend it??"
Used after attacking someone else’s liberty in Christ that you can’t deal with. Deliberately put them on the defensive and then point out that they are on the defensive.

NUMBER 6: "You’re making it your God!"
Like number 7 but a direct acusation of rank idolatry. If you try to keep up any argument you prove you are just a poor pawn of Satan!

NUMBER 5: "But God blessed it when we did it before"
You can’t argue with success! (Even though there may be no biblical justification given or an argument like #10 above.) Known in secular circles as anecdotal evidence, it only is really successful in quack medicine, paranormal TV shows and in churches.

NUMBER 4: "But the souls are important!"
This or any other platitude (true or not) can be used to justify just about anything and it has the benefit of never having to even remotely address any points in the discussion. When you use this you can prove that you need the $10,000 neon cross tower or to have everybody conform to a particular style of dress or music or architecture, because the souls are important. Your opponents, if they disagree with you, must feel the way they do because they don’t care if people go to hell. "But the paint is still looking good! Why do we need to re-paint the sanctuary?" "The souls are important."

NUMBER 3: "You are in sin..."
Often this is even true, but whether it is or not, the real usage of this is sometimes just to justify not listening to the other person’s point of view (or even give them the benefit of the doubt) until they "repent" first. If the other person can be shown to be "in sin" you never have to compromise with them or consider their feelings.

Remember the cardinal rule of spiritual pride: rightness excuses lack of courtesy and even kindness!

NUMBER 2: Break into tears.
A real show-stopper. Now nobody would dare be such a cad as to buffet your poor tender soul with things like logic or correct biblical exegesis. Many women (and even some men) can terrorize an entire church with this technique and reduce useful communications to zero.

NUMBER 1: "God revealed it to me"
Maybe the ultimate, since it is totally unverifiable and gives an aura of divine revelation to your opinion, feeling or pronouncement. "Well, then - the discussion is closed. I wouldn’t want to argue with God!"