Conversations with Nana

Most of us already know how to enjoy ourselves in a relationship that’s going well. But, when things go wrong from time to time, some people can have the best intentions and still end up in a mess. Sometimes we can’t point to anything specific, it just seems that ways of being oneself irk or even offend another. At other times, we can easily call up specifics. But, the question is how to approach these difficult times. We often talk ourselves out of speaking at all, for fear of hurting the other person, or being hurt, or seeming too bossy or too critical. We are often already so angry or disturbed that it takes a monumental effort to pretend we are not. If we do manage not to lash out in anger, which happens to the best of us from time to time, the other person usually knows us well enough to see through the pretense, so that the resulting tension makes it difficult to talk without becoming defensive. The point is this: feelings have been tapped. Whether you think your feelings and the feelings of the other person are right or wrong, petty or monumental, negative feelings can only smolder for so long before surfacing.

If your goal is to retaliate, to inflict hurt in return for hurt, to teach a lesson, to win the day, then the approach you want is a battle stance. When winning the battle becomes more important than keeping the relationship, probably the tried and true methods are the best. You know, the ones you’ve used so many times before in so many failed relationships. Make the encounter a contest and work to win, even knowing that the winner will stand alone.

But, keeping your relationship necessarily means finding a way to move through the problems and into a happier state of togetherness. To start, instead of seeing difficulties as barriers to relationship, look at them as patient teachers – patient because they will persist, they won’t just slip away over time. The only efficient way to eliminate hidden resentments is to address problems as they arise, not in a contest of wills, but in unity, looking together at the issues.

If you were to ask what is the most important tool in building a relationship, many people are quick to say communication, which is a reasonable response. But, communication skills are only as good as the motivation and willingness of the people involved. A strong relationship is built first on cooperation — a series of attitudes and behaviors that reinforce a willing team. Cooperation does not mean compromise or losing. Rather, it is a contract to hold the other’s best interest at heart, and an understanding that the other person is doing the same with you. Some of us have to reread this contract a lot. We get caught up in nursing our wounds and taking care of number one, usually at the other person’s expense. In order for the foundation to be solid, mutual best interest has to go into the mix.

Cooperation starts with a promise to remain as non-defensive as possible, especially during conflicts. Carry with you the attitude that, above all else, you want to learn from each encounter something useful that will help in similar situations in the future. In the case of conflict, you will need to know how this conflict came about, how the other person thinks and feels regarding it, what is wanted and needed from you. Sounds good, but keeping open to the other requires a commitment to non-defensiveness, which needs to become a life practice. Certain types of questions need to become second nature, such as: What can I learn here? What is my part in all of it? What can I do differently next time? How can I help my partner?

Cooperation requires the understanding that only you are responsible for how you feel, how you act, and the consequences of your actions. Unless you are truly held against your will, there is no such thing as someone else “making” you do something. This is a hard thought for many people to grasp at first, because often the people we love seem to have such a strong hold over us. We hear ourselves saying, “You made me…” and “I wouldn’t have … if it weren’t for you.” We may not be in control of the external events in our lives, but we definitely create our reactions to them. Years of conditioning may have helped shape our negative reactive habits, but that only means that we are also capable of learning new, more positive ones.

Different people react to the same event in a variety of ways. Personality, mood, circumstances, biorhythms, health, past experiences, and who knows what else, all combine to help push us into reactive states. In each case all of these powerful influences are personal ones, coming from within. We stop blaming others when we realize that no one else is responsible for making us happy or unhappy. At the most, their words or behaviors are merely reminders of an old path we are used to taking, familiar but not successful. The key is there is no one to blame, not even you. When blame is removed, cooperation is much easier.

We need to accept that bad times, as well as good, are a typical part of being alive and interacting with others. Serious conflict is usually painful, causes turmoil, and makes us want to run in the other direction just to avoid dealing with it. To successfully work through the problem at hand, we have to accept our escape feelings as natural. Accept them but don’t act on them. One of the attitudes we must cultivate is the willingness to sit through all the anxiety, hurt, anger, and general discomfort that it takes to get to the other side of an argument. In order to sort through feelings together, we have to allow others to affect us both negatively as well as positively.

Another important ingredient is the willingness to give the benefit of the doubt. If the other person were truly an enemy, there would not be any reason to want to keep the relationship going. With a true enemy, winning the battle means getting rid of the opponent. But someone you love, even when relations are strained, is a person you normally feel close to and who you want to keep on your side – a friend temporarily in opposition, not an enemy. We need to remember that just as we believe we are justified in our position, so does the person on the other side of the argument. Giving the benefit of the doubt means understanding that each of us believes we have important reasons for behaving the way we do.

An important part of cooperation is the willingness to look into all areas of ourselves to see what personal issues might be contributing to our reactions. Painful relations from the past, especially with our parents, sneak in and we can become confused about who the other person really is. But, recognizing that personalities are getting all mixed up is not an easy task. A way to start is to question every aspect of the encounter. For example, you can ask yourself:  What does this moment remind me of in my past? Who in my family is similar to this person? How would my mother or father have approached me on the same issue? Who do I sound like when I respond this way? What you are looking for is similarities and patterns that cause you to exaggerate your responses and to get caught in a revolving door. Once you begin to recognize that you are dealing with childhood pain, you can temporarily stop the process and separate the issues.

We need to recognize that each of us has a part in contributing to our arguments in the same way we each contribute to our good times together. Even though it may be embarrassing to admit one’s role, the truth is that there is no such thing as a one-sided argument as long as there are two or more people involved. Owning up to your part of the problem is an attempt to keep everything on the level. Admitting that you have participated in some part of a problem may appear to give the other person the upper hand for while. The person may even take the advantage willingly, which is natural, given everyone’s need to feel in control, but a cooperative balance will have to be restored. There is an important point to remember here: Accepting personal responsibility is not the same as admitting blame or taking on guilt. When who is to blame becomes the primary discussion, productivity and growth are squelched. Blaming oneself or others is simply not productive. Accept that you have each contributed to this situation and move on to finding remedies. Look for solutions not fault.

Finally, recognize that the other person is trying just as hard as you are. It’s not fair to demand that behavior change and then ignore the other person’s attempts because you think they are too small. We claim the person is not trying hard enough, or moving fast enough. We expect them to immediately and completely change, as if they were defiantly withholding themselves rather than truly not understanding or having the necessary skills. We need to be thankful even for small, faltering steps in the right direction. Acknowledge all positive efforts on both sides. People start with small steps in learning new ways. Any forward movement is a sign of good will.

Finding the right individual mix for each important relationship in our lives takes thought, time, and often trial and error. Cooperation means that everyone involved understands the importance of non-defensiveness, openness to learning, taking personal responsibility, accepting discomfort, giving the benefit of the doubt, separating past wounds from current issues, admitting one’s role, and remaining open to each other’s positive attempts. Cooperation means that throughout problem solving, you will help each other remember your original agreements of working together with everyone’s best interest at heart.

Some jealousy is caused by real events such as flirting, secrets, dishonesty, etc. and some is unfounded with the accused partner astonished that the issue has come up. Both kinds feel real and usually cannot be stopped just because a person decides to do so. In fact, simply deciding to not act jealous, with no other resources than will, can be a big problem in itself. Eventually, the squelched feelings surface again, often with even greater fury.

Regardless of the way jealousy is triggered, the tumultuous emotions never feel good. To make peace with jealous feelings, it helps to know that there is actually a good side to this otherwise disruptive experience. The jealous person, like an early warning system, is often the first in a relationship to notice something is going wrong. The other partner simply may not yet see there is a problem. The best remedy is to talk it out. However, the person you want to talk with may not want to talk with you for any number of reasons. You may find that your partner is evasive, angry, passive-aggressive, or blaming about your jealous feelings, which may be the behavior of someone who is caught, or someone who is innocent but exhausted by the accusations. Defensive behavior is designed to stop the attack, and may put off the jealous person for the time being. But, the jealous condition has a life of its own, and the thwarted feelings will smolder until they blaze up again in the future. It is especially difficult to promote healing in such volatile circumstances, but it is helpful to remember the positive side: Regardless of the other person’s reasons for the distance, you are learning something valuable about your partner and the nature of your relationship.

If you and the other person (the recipient of your jealousy) are able to hear each other, there is a good chance for some kind of mutual understanding, ranging anywhere from the enormity of the other person modifying or stopping the troubling behavior, to at least an increased sense of compassionate awareness. If your partner is comforting, empathetic, sympathetic, reassuring, and wanting to put your mind at rest, and you still find the struggle overwhelming, your jealousy may be a personal, older issue and not one about your relationship. The other person’s sincere reassurance soothes only briefly because you do not have yet the inner trust and capacity to tell the difference. Your inner state allows only a temporary respite from a deeper, older wound. Unfounded jealousy based on insecurity has to do with “intrusive thoughts,” once helpful survival strategies, but now no longer valid.

But some of the territory is simply tricky. For example, the reassuring partner who wants to put your mind at rest may be a compulsively unfaithful person who has learned to deny and lie so well even he or she believes the reassurances. Or you may convince yourself jealousy is unfounded, only to learn that infidelity is not rare, but common in all walks of life. How can you know what is real? The answer lies in changing the question. Instead of policing the other person, turn the spotlight inward:  What works for you? What path allows you peace of mind? Where can you best experience self-fulfillment?

The pain of unfounded jealousy is that it is often attached to shame. We hear that insecure and emotionally immature people feel jealous, and we don’t want to think of ourselves in that light. We feel embarrassed, ashamed, and inadequate for having jealous feelings, which adds to the pain and confirms that we are the lesser person. So we try not to be jealous. In trying to not be jealous, people often “decide” to trust, as if trust is a commodity, one size fits all. If you have been seriously hurt in the past, you may have no skills at sorting out reality from insecurity, and may too quickly dismiss the warning bells in an attempt to not be a jealous person. History may repeat itself and trust is shattered even more. Then, to add even more shame and confusion, some people fail to see how they may remain trapped by choosing less than trustworthy partners, and continue to relive their own unique view of how the world works.

Another way to look at the trap of jealousy is to think about control and how well it does or doesn’t work in taming the turmoil. We work to control our intrusive thoughts, we try to control our future by chosing our partners carefully, we want to control the other person’s behavior. If we acknowledge that we have no control, certainly not constant and universal, we are often left with the anxious feeling of facing the unknown: something – anything – could happen and I will be responsible, and possibly destroyed. Courage is required to let go of the dictator’s firm grip, and instead move into our own inner experience. Objectivity needs to replace fear. Has your partner been unfaithful because you failed – or, more realistically, because he/she changed the commitment? Are you truly diminished as a person because another moved in a different direction? Can you hold firm to your values and standards about relationships and yet be gracious enough to admit that your partner may not have such a grip? The goal of a healthy person is to love fully and yet let go when circumstances call for change. The secure person enjoys others, feels a need for company at times, and may work for the deeper connection of intimate relationship, but also understands and recognizes when change is inevitable. If change means loss, the secure person suffers sadness but also understands that others will be available to him or her.

The insecure person believes that he or she is unable to exist successfully without the other. In the case of jealousy, the insecure person demands that the other be constant, one pointed in focus, and move within strict guidelines. The person who is insecure discovers his or her identity only through the other and, thus, becomes completely dependent on the other’s good will. Distance, distraction, or disengagement is perceived as a kind of death, and even as a kind of murder, thus causing the fear in jealousy to turn to rage.

The simple solution, then, seems to be, stop jealousy. But, however noble it sounds, the idea that we can simply stop urgent, compelling behavior by trying to control it fosters the same kind of debilitating rigidity that occurs in trying to control others. Exaggerated feelings of jealousy are a problem, of course, but not the problem. The place to concentrate is deeper than jealousy, which is a secondary product. Insecurity is the target of real change. Concentrating on changing insecutity does not mean force of will, but rather a prolonged effort on behalf of self through inner nurturing, empathy, and understanding. The goal for the secure person is to become one’s own source of strength.

2005

Finally, I thought, I had cleaned out my Costa Rica church files and I could move on to something other than religion to write about. But, yesterday I had two Jehovah Witness visitors at my door, and here I am again. I don’t mind people loving and bragging about their religion – the message could just as easily be politics, sharing food recipes, or pulling out pictures of the kids or grandkids. I enjoy a good conversation where ideas are exchanged. The problem is the implied, or usually blatant, attitude that their way is the only right one.

The Witnesses must have actually listened to people like me over the years. All the bad jokes about them being obnoxious  are really from a previous era. The ones I encounter these days are polite and mild in their approach. In my twenties – that would be some forty years ago – people would hide behind the closed door and hope the Witnesses would just drift away, because if they caught you they wouldn’t let go. The advice I was given in those days was to growl or otherwise vehemently slam the door in their faces. In fact, the majority of Witnesses are locked into door-to-door and street corner solicitation in the same way desperate and unskilled people feel forced to do telephone solicitation. They believe this is the only avenue left for survival. I can only imagine that such rude behavior as door slamming and nasty remarks inspire even further their conviction that the world is a godless place and they alone are on the right path. As a personal defense, maybe they mentally align with those early Christians being served up to the lions – martyrs for the Word.

Their communication tactic seems to be to ask an innocent type question that anyone would agree with, such as, Do you think that murder is harmful to children? People want to appear nice, in spite of the door slamming advice, and some, at least, answer the question. The question is always worded in a way to solicit a ‘yes’ answer. The content is not important, of course, it’s the ‘yes’ that is so valuable – sales tactics 101. If you can start with a basic premise that everyone agrees with, and if you keep the steps small and reasonable, you very likely can lead to closure. I remember one lady at the door many years ago who was determined to save me, even after I explained (politely) that I wasn’t interested. She couldn’t seem to grasp how I would want to deny the truth once I heard it. Finally, her companion literally had  to pull her away. Somewhere back in those days of my wanting to be a kind person, I developed a tactic of my own, which I gleaned from their own dogma: “I know you are mandated to talk with me, and I know how important this message is to you. I have heard it, and I understand, and I am not interested.” There, I had sealed my fate in the eyes of God, and they were freed of any further obligation – for the time being. Witnesses keep logs and street maps, hitting the rejecting and reluctant in about three month spurts, hoping that the next time might coincide with some personal loss or disillusionment that might provide a door-opener.

Nowadays even my short I understand speech is not really necessary. Usually a simple, “I’m not interested,” is sufficient, which is too bad, in a way, because I actually am interested – not in the message (is there anywhere in the world by now that the message has not been announced?) – but in the minds of true believers, in the logic they try to follow. Once a team came (they always travel in twos) with a lady named Karen. There was something lively about her, a sparkle in her eyes usually missing in the others. She seemed to genuinely enjoy the encounter, causing me to reason, for the first time, that the flat monotones or the insincere friendliness of many of the others may not be from brainwashing so much as simple stage fright. The Witnesses don’t select their most suited, innately talented speakers; rather, everyone in the congregation is required to preach. Statistically speaking, some of them must be shy and feel exposed, wishing they could be anywhere else. Karen, on the other hand, looked like a fun person to be around, as if there was a good laugh bubbling up any moment. So, when she asked me what my beliefs were, I decided to take a chance and said, “Look, I do have thoughts about all this, and I love to talk with others about how we each believe, but the bottom line here is that you really don’t care about what I think, you are only asking that as a way to tell me about what you think.” To her credit and my astonishment, she came back with, “You’re right. I really don’t care about what you think. I just want to tell you about the truth.” At last, an honest sales person. Yay, Karen.

Another time, the team delivered up a man who actually did sales for a living. Each team has a leader. Sometimes you can clearly see the hierarchy, as in the case of a father and teen son who once came by, and sometimes the two of them may be closely matched in hours on the beat. In this case, the solemn one with the flat affect was the lead solicitor and the other young man was in the learning role, except that his enthusiasm for sales and closure got the best of him and he and I did all the talking. I learned that he and his wife had drifted into a kind of distant, dull marriage. Eventually, she became involved with the Witnesses to the point that he wanted to try them on as well. I imagine the impasse: share in her interests or lose her altogether. Now, he reported, they had common ground and a great peace and happiness in their marriage. He paused and looked at me expectantly. This was the moment of closure, where I might say how much I wanted the same. I’m sure he’d like to think that he planted some seed that day. “I’m very happy for you,” I said. “There is nothing better than sharing a mutually happy lifestyle – worshipping together, really connecting in your hearts.” I, in turn, was hoping he might see that religious compromise may not exactly equal a true heart connection. Side by side  looking forward, is not the same experience as facing and looking into each other.

He was offering his life story as witness to his truth, while I, on the other hand, employed my own sales-resistant tactic: keep it about him. He was new in his religion and may very well have been sincere, but, in general, the Witnesses’ offer  is not really coming from a fullness of heart. Each Witness wants a piece of the Kingdom of Heaven, a place and lifestyle – death style to be more specific – that soothes fears of eternal disenfranchisement. One lady in my  Costa Rican village  built several studio type cabinas on her property and thus generated income over the years. Recently she stopped newly renting to non-Witnesses and spread the word that she was looking for Witness tenants. One of her renters who eventually moved had been there many years and puzzled over the change, thinking they had gotten along well enough. But the imminent coming of the end of the world means that only Witnesses will survive the apocalypse and continue living as their reward. Perhaps the Costa Rica lady wanted Witness renters so there would be no messy dead bodies to drag off in the end. A former Witness wrote in her memoirs how she and her preaching companions would evaluate the houses they visited according to who would like to move in after the final accounting. She didn’t mention what to do with the dead non-believers, unfortunately.

They are told that preaching the Word is the only way to achieve God in eternity, and not preaching is the equivalent of going to hell. They are not interested in people really, only in collecting numbers of souls for their own sakes. The Baptist pastor in Cahuita shared his frustration that whenever someone’s poverty was a problem, the Witnesses sent the beggars and destitute to his church for free food and handouts. Once, as I was dragging myself home in the extreme and humid heat, lugging a backpack and bags of groceries, a passenger van pulled up alongside me, and a bouncy blond American girl popped out. She asked me if I spoke English. I was so hot and bedraggled, that I automatically answered, “Si.” She said they were from Kingdom Hall, the name for a Witness gathering place, and wanted to give me the word of the Lord. “Give me a ride,” I thought. But, “not interested,” was all I said.

6/14/12

Imagine this: You are driving down the road and see a sign, “Men working. Use left lane only.” So you pull into the left lane, but as you continue to drive you notice that other cars are using the right lane and there are no men working anywhere. Pretty soon you realize it’s Sunday and the workers simply forgot to take down the sign. What you saw was real. You really did see a real sign. But the sign wasn’t true. You were following something real but not true.

Guilt can be something real but not true. Sometimes guilt is valid. For example, if a person abuses others, lies to those who trust him, or does any other type of hurtful behaviors, feelings of guilt may be a strong adjunct in stopping the behavior. The guilt is the sign designed to slow you down and make you pull over, to compete with the urge to carry on. The purpose of guilt is to control.

When something bad occurs, especially to someone we love or care about, it is easy for guilt to surface in the shape of self-blame. Guilt is a form of blame turned inward, as in the Catholic breast beating prayer, “My fault, my fault, my fault.” Whether you actually caused the bad event or not – something as simple as disobeying a family rule or as complex as the death or suicide of a family member or friend – guilt surfaces like the sign on the road: “Your fault, your fault, your fault. Slow down, pull over or it will happen again.” In cases such as these, guilt is designed to immobilize you.

Before the late 19th century when modern psychology was born, the older religious view was that guilt was a natural part of the soul’s conscience, placed there by God as a counter balance to free will. Modern thinkers, on the other hand, understand that guilt is indeed instilled, but after birth and by human teachings. Parents, teachers, culture, and especially religion plant the seeds of conscience with the hope that socialization will keep you in line, a driver who follows the signs.

Thus, the purpose of guilt is often noble, but the results can be conflicted. The problem in using blame as a way to stop behavior is that it doesn’t work. One of two things are bound to happen: The guilty person will become paralyzed with phobias and self-doubt, perhaps even to the point of depression or suicide, or the person will become desensitized to the guilt’s effects and continue the behavior, however haltingly. The conflict of trying not to practice addictive behaviors is a good example. Either way, the person sacrifices his or her ability to function independently and with efficacy.

This kind of crippling guilt is actually serving a deeper and darker purpose than its noble claim: to keep you from a more painful truth about yourself, but one that is healing and truly designed to steer you to a more effective path. In the men working metaphor, guilt is a real sign that we really perceive, but the actual words of the sign are false. The guilt sign would tell you that you have great power after all, power to cause negative events, even someone’s suffering or death. But the truth is not about blame, it’s about sadness, regret, loneliness, aloneness – any number of normal feelings that should follow such a loss. The inner grief feels unbearable – not to be survived – thus guilt gives you back a sense of power, a sense that you are, or can be in control.

The price you pay, however, in obeying guilt’s false signs, is that you are caught in an endless loop of blame – first yours, then someone else’s, then yours again – without ever seeing the clear path. The goal here is not to deny the guilt and jump over the problem. Denial only leads to other cover-up conditions, often leaking out in compulsive behaviors. The goal is to see the guilty feelings as a sign to indeed slow down in order to get to the healing truth.

Here are some ideas to work with:

1. When you are actually crying tears, allow yourself to cry as much as you can until you stop naturally. If the phone rings, let it go, etc. If you are in public and need to pull it in, make a promise that at the first opportunity when you have privacy you will let it live its natural course. Each bout of crying will not last forever but will run its course. Don’t tell yourself its stupid or shouldn’t matter. This is about respecting yourself and allowing healing through inner wisdom.

2. Listen to the thoughts in your head. When you hear anything about what you could have done differently, stay in your sorrow but gently redirect your thinking to the fact that “I am so lonely right now” or “I feel totally abandoned,” or whatever you find is the true feeling in the moment, including anger and other negative feelings. Anything that involves a string of too many words is not a feeling but a thought. The thoughts serve in the beginning but lead to dead ends – the feelings cause the true healing. Here is a hint: if you enter into a feeling state, such as lonely, the thinking will automatically stop. If you are still thinking, you haven’t gone deep enough. This takes a kind of courage, or trust in yourself. This is not about making yourself stop thinking – you will probably need to think things through on occasion; its about redirection, like the sign’s true message on a work day: go to the other lane to avoid calamity.

3. When or if you come up with some secret place where you believe you really should feel guilty, write a letter that you don’t intend to send and apologize, explain, etc. (You don’t intend to send it because you have already tried all the usual avenues of face-to-face dialog, or the moment has passed, as with a death, or you simply cannot find the will to follow through in person.) Write to the inner person, the one who can counsel with you in a wise way. If not write, talk to a photo or make a little altar with something significant on it. If you need more, have the other person write a letter back, telling you what you need to hear. Here is a therapy suggestion: write your letter as you would normally do, and then use your non-dominant hand to have the other person write to you. It will force you to slow down and get out of your thinking brain – the answers that hopefully surface will feel even more genuine. Also, you can actually mail this letter to yourself so that you will receive it in the mail several days later. In other words, you can use what is essentially ‘pretend’ in a truthful and helpful way.

4. You can create guided meditations where you rewrite the script and create a good movie. You can do this with analogies if that works for you. Divorce is an example:  You each approach a lake, sit on the grass facing each other, pick up a lotus flower and share eating the petals, smiling at each other, and, when ready, go on your separate paths waving goodbye and smiling.

The point here is to use the negative (the false sign) to your advantage, to point you in the true direction you need to go.

6/14/2012

As the Pastor was speaking today, teaching about how the trinity is not three different gods, several things came up for me. The idea of three in one and one as three might make sense to me if presented in simple human terms:

One can be charismatic, intuitive, strong, and confident with an ability to stand his ground during discord. He is highly intelligent with humor and a sense of whimsy. He is a teacher, and a counselor, and a coach, drawing on different aspects of how he is to fit each moment. He can be brutal when crossed, but forgiving after seeing how badly the other feels. Some people relate better to one aspect than another, and are sometimes surprised to hear him described differently by others.

The above is in the personification style and makes sense if you see God as a person of superiority – basically,  a superior human. It must have been difficult for the ancients to simply switch from the idea of many gods, each with his or her unique personality and role, to a belief in only one god. The awkwardness was addressed in two ways. On the one hand, much can be explained away through the concept of mystery, which is meant to keep God untouchable. Secondly, the ancients argued that the new one-only god required obedience, which demands a kind of blind trust.

While obeying one God only, the Christians encountered the additional burden of incorporating the idea of Jesus. Surely, the trinity takes care of some of the problem, however awkwardly at times, and any further untidy questions or doubts can be handled with a demand for belief. In order to benefit from the protection and power of God, a person must believe fully in the equality of the Trinity. If the Trinity doesn’t make sense to you, then your acts of belief and obedience become even more precious to God.

If you don’t want to obey and believe, you can use your gift of free will and turn away. However, God being the only one, there is really no place to turn. You will be stuck somewhere between annihilation and eternal suffering, depending on the particular dogma at play. The corollary here, given that failures in obedience would seem to eliminate most people, is the idea of repentance. As long as you believe, God’s capacity for forgiveness is endless, and even lapses in belief can be forgiven as long as repentance comes before death. After the crossing over, however, there are no second chances. You can only push this God so far, after all.

5/16/10

Today is May Day. The ancient ones danced around a sacred spot, or a decorated broomstick stuck upright in the ground. The Catholic Fathers gave May to the Virgin Mary to appease the people who felt they needed a female figure in their religion. Instead of dancing to Persephone, the goddess of Spring, or Astarte, Queen of Heaven, children dress up and dance to Mary, Queen of Heaven.

According to the Catholics, Mary is the Mother of Sorrows and Jesus is the suffering Christ. There is no laughter or play; it’s all very serious and scary. This is a good religion for masochists, victims, the chronically and terminally ill, the bereft, and the financially impoverished. Following the cross means suffering in the imitation of Christ. But what is the point of this extra suffering? The Catholic answer encompasses the practice of empathy and solidarity. Catholic voluntary suffering creates a kind of psychic hand holding across the globe and comforts Jesus during his ordeal.

Catholics believe that Jesus suffered and died in a one-time redemptive purchase a little over two thousand years ago. His one-time act of courage and obedience wiped out the lingering stain of Adam and Eve’s transgression, as well as human sin in general for past and future time. In other words, he died once in finite time, yet continually dies again with each new sinner. Thus the ancient rite of regenerative Spring becomes the Catholic May Day, the announcement of the hope of Easter – one more chance to sin no more.

5/1/2010

This is part of my Sunday Sermons series, where I wrote rebuttals to the Baptist preacher’s sermons while I lived in Costa Rica.

Today’s sermon was based on a reading from Isaiah, Chapter 5: 20.

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil,

who put darkness for light and light for darkness,

who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

Who might these woe-some people be? The pastor offered a few suggestions – “spin doctors,” for example. Having once been a sit-on-the-curb-in-a-stupor kind of alcoholic, the Pastor believes that advertisers who sell alcohol as glamorous are involved in the old bait and switch ploy. He also referred to the evil some corporations do while presenting themselves as doing good.

There are dozens of examples that can come to mind, and the Pastor touched on several in support of Isaiah. But what about the spin of religion itself? For example, one of the foundations of the Judeo-Christian religion has to do with the domination of animals, and anything non-human, to stretch the point. After God created, he gave everything to his human creations with the stipulation that they were to be in charge. Thus, we have a free mandate to tame, chain, work, wear, eat, and use experimentally. Good for humans, bad for animals, but ok because the Biblical God say we are the superiors.

Darkness and light is a bit trickier, however, because we are operating with a double meaning. Is Isaiah talking about the shadow side of evil and the light of truth and goodness, or is he just reworking an old metaphor, such as calling blue red just to be arbitrary? Is he simply repeating himself for poetry’s sake? Bitter and sweet is even more confusing to me. This sounds like the hypnotist who has you sniff ammonia and tells you its perfume, an ancient way of talking about advertising spin, such as the “good taste” of tobacco, or for that matter, of alcohol. We can play this game forever unless we define good and evil as absolutes, and then we just pick a side, depending on definitions and culture at the time.

Here is what the Pastor wrote on the board: El Psicólogo que tuerce la conducta. “The psychologist who twists conduct.” Could he be talking about me, teaching kids how not to get pregnant by learning to use a condom? Or me telling him I appreciate the teachings of Jesus, but not the Christian religion? Will the other psychologists in the church please stand up?

The second verse, “Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and shrewd in their own sight!” is about someone who thinks he is wise and shrewd. Maybe this means something like what the Hindu philosopher Ram Das says, “If you think you are enlightened, you probably are not.” The Pastor’s chalkboard interpretation was a direct hit: El profesor izquierdista. “The left wing professor.” If he isn’t trying to nail me, he must be operating on an unconscious level. Intellectualism and rational, critical thinking do not fit well in a fishing village church, and probably do look like the promptings of the devil. Woe to psychology in general.

10/3/2010

I think as a culture we have grown past the days of presenting personal rules and expecting them to be obeyed. As a culture, we have more or less thrown out our children to raise themselves. Media exposure is extreme now so that there is no such thing as an age of innocence, if there ever was. Adults are extremely busy and exhausted working to meet the demands of a materialistic society, and teens are learning to do the same. Religious rules are no longer intimidating, and many families, it seems to me, have not learned to teach ethics in a meaningful way.

I don’t know how to give a definitive answer about adolescent abstinence. To insist on one way over another usually just makes the forbidden more exotic and interesting, especially to adolescents and the emotionally immature. I am interested in teaching how to use critical thinking and sound reasoning, and to make conscious decisions that are effective in the long run.

3/23/11

This is part of my Sunday Sermons series, where I wrote rebuttals to the Baptist preacher’s sermons while I lived in Costa Rica.

Recently I watched a film about the evangelist Billy Graham’s early life. In the commentary at the end, the director explained that his mission as director was to provide as much as possible a fair and accurate accounting of the arguments against being a believer, so that he might tell Billy’s story of belief as openly as possible. In the story, one of Graham’s fellow seminarians gradually grew out of being a Born Again believer and into a dedicated Atheist. His role was to present the other side and he tried his best to reason with Billy, talking about the inconsistencies and far-fetched stories in the bible.

The movie director wanted to be fair to non-believers. He listened well to what that type of person had to say. He did have a bit of a problem in trying to represent the group as a whole with only one man’s voice, however, in spite of this drawback, I appreciated the effort and felt genuinely represented – to a point. As the atheist character grew in conviction, he came to an unfortunate conclusion: the Bible is either true or false, therefore the fantastic stories, such as Jonah living inside a whale, the contradictory statements, such as Jesus bringing a sword while standing for peace, and the inaccuracy of repeated details, such as the two stories of Jesus’ birth, prove that the book is false, not of God.

In other words, the movie’s atheist character carried the same rigidity and dogmatism he learned in his Christian religion into his anti-Christian stance. He was choosing from an either/or perspective, ignoring the grays in between – pretending the grays are not even a possibility – a dualistic kind of cognition called “black and white thinking.” He claimed that he expanded his thinking, but after his initial expansion, all he was really doing was staying with the idea that there is only one God and one true religion. When that proves false, then there can’t be anything else. Or, to use the language of expansion, he couldn’t imagine that the Christian story could be used for anything but truth or lies.

According to religious scholar, Karen Armstrong, before the current age of belief and true believers, the ancients lived with the fluidity of myth. Instead of asking, “Is this story true? Did it really happen this way?” their question would have been, “What can we learn from this story? How does it’s meaning fit in our lives?” In other words, the story could be useful for itself, rather than for the accuracy of details. If you want far-fetched stories, you should read the Hindu scriptures. And yet, there is something calming and deep for me every time I read passages in the Bhagavadgita. Alcoholics Anonymous may be the only “religion” that bends with the wind in their slogan, ‘Take what works for you and leave the rest.’ To paraphrase: If an idea inspires or uplifts you, it doesn’t matter where it came from, or even how low or fallen the messenger. Use the thought to energize you rather than using your energy in pointless debate.

Billy Graham’s antagonist, the atheist character, was locked in the endless debate. But since the point of the movie was to uphold Billy, there probably wasn’t much else the writers could do. A truly expanded thinker would have merely quietly moved on, without giving the audience the fiery passion needed to match Billy. Because Billy preached to the multitudes and did not seek out debate forums, the writers would have a hard time getting in so much counter information without turning the film into a documentary.

However, the even more helpful part of the movie for me was in getting the idea – finally – about what the Christians mean by a religion of ‘faith.’ My seemingly lifelong quest has been to talk with some devote Christians and learn how they are able to put together all the inconsistencies and contradictions, not to mention the literary timeline, and still come out a Christian. I get it now.

Belief is an agreement with oneself to accept something as true. For example, one might believe in democracy, and be willing to argue for it, and maybe even physically fight to uphold its principles. Instead of discouraging the person, the flaws and inherent problems in the system become fuel in the fire of commitment. The person is even more eager to promote the system, believing that if everyone cooperated in the ideal of the belief, everything would run just fine. In this type of committed belief, the system is not questioned, rather it is the cogs in the machine that become suspect, and are seen as capable of being fixed.

Belief is an intellectual exercise. Any subsequent emotional response comes from relief in finally knowing a way, a truth, an answer. The true believer is able to accept confusions and far-fetched notions, even fantastical ones, because they are true, and therefore not to be questioned. Rather than unpeeling the onion layer by layer, the true believer accepts the entire package, papery thin skin and all. Rather than try to discover how fantasy fits into reality, his intuitive task is to do the reverse: If the unreasonable is true, then the job is to learn how reality supports fantasy. As the expression goes, “I know it is true because the Bible tells me so.” An example comes to mind in the child who is told by his parent that there are no monsters lurking about. Depending on the child’s relationship with his parent, he either accepts the improbable truth (improbable because he definitely heard or saw something sounding like a monster), or he cannot, but clings to the comforting arms of his parent anyway, willing the parent to be right. This example may sound as if religion is being trivialized, but it was Jesus himself who said we must become as little children in order to join with him.

Believing the improbable, and even impossible, creates a kind of psychological denial that provides relief, peace of mind, and even serenity. Again, as they say in Alcoholics Anonymous, “Let go and let God.” In that sense, the preacher is not offering God to the people, but belief. If only you will believe you will be saved from your own inner turmoil, doubt, fear, shame, hopelessness. Belief is the answer, wearing the mask of a god. Belief is a powerful tool. Now, after seeing the Billy movie, I no longer feel baffled by the true believer’s stalwart position in spite of reason. I get it.

3/2/11

Deeper feelings, especially ones that harbor shame or guilt, are a fragile treasure. To tell no one is as difficult as telling just anyone. But who we tell, when, why, etc. is a private and selective process. We spend a lot of time experimenting and testing to find trustworthy listeners. Will she hold in confidence what I say? Will he understand that what I say today may not be the way I feel later on? Will she be able to see beyond the details and also see my unique way of looking at the events in my life? Will he respect my perspective even if it is confusing or seems wrong? Can she respond with care and empathy? Does he make his best effort to see things from my point of view?  Once someone has “passed the test,” they still have the ability to hurt, not because they mean to, but because we are especially vulnerable.

The more vulnerable you feel with a person, common sense says the less you should jump in and share. But you feel you have to share with someone because isolation is killing. People in this bind are smart to be wary because often they intuitively know they do not have the skills necessary to distinguish who might truly be a good listener – good meaning beneficial to the speaker. The world says, “You have to trust someone. You have to start somewhere.” However, while most people can listen well enough and demonstrate traits of a “good” listener, not many can hold the information in a respectful and compassionate way. It is always easier to look critically at another’s life and choices rather than at our own. Judgments leak out.

So, you have to be careful and assess each situation individually. Sometimes offering up just bits at a time gives you the chance to assess how your listener is affecting you, gives you time to back away from greater future hurt. Ultimately, you are looking for a listener who gives you a combination of truthfulness and kindness – not that common. Most likely you will encounter some failings in any listener, and most likely you will experience some hurt from even the most dedicated friend.

As the receiver of negative judgment, real or perceived, you need to see the true state of the judging person. Judgment comes from fear. Maybe a listener thinks: “What if I can’t help her? This is a big responsibility. Listening is not enough, I’m supposed to do something.” Or maybe he thinks: “If he is capable of this ___, then that means I am too and that just can’t be.” Seeing the true motives of another is very hard to do and most of us usually fail because what appears on the surface hurts so much. We develop judgments of our own. Compassion for self and the other is the key. Trust doesn’t mean blindness, or surrendering everything like a slave. But to trust another – to place your trust in another – requires trusting yourself as well, trusting that you will recognize when you need to protect yourself, to temporarily retreat, regroup, take a breath.

6/1/2012