Ancient Venting (Must Read for Pastors!)

Posted on January 19, 2010

In Exodus 16, we see significant– very sophisticated insight into the human heart. Fellow pastors, we really must learn that anger from the very people who we serve– complaining, venting, charges, gossip, slander, etc. are almost never to be taken at face value. Before we can forgive false charges and reconcile, we need to understand what happened. So instead of reacting tit for tat– which is what my heart yearns to do– to restore my dignity and reputation– we should take a few deep breaths, calm down and then be open to doing some relatively objective due diligence. We must develop better means and approaches to dig deeper into the heart motivations of the antagonist, the perpetrator.

So often we –victims– quickly take matters to heart– ‘that person hates me’, ‘I have done something wrong’, ‘I am a bad person’– a bad minister!– etc. But honestly, so often the accusations and grumblings and complaints are not even about us much at all.

This is one of the lessons that God teaches Moses and Aaron as the Sons of Israel wander out into the dangerous lifeless wilderness. By nature, the wilderness is an uncomfortable dangerous place for people. People are naturally uncomfortable in such a place– they have no oars in the boat, no strings to pull, no way to fix things that they are used to fixing on their own (such as hunger, thirst, nature, the heat). It is a frightening place– and even more frightening since they had just been cast — arguably willingly?— upon a God that they knew very little about– only that He was vast and powerful, more powerful by far than their previous ‘gods’ the Egyptians. So as they ventured out into the desert, their hearts begin to naturally spew out crap. Fear and being in a place where we are out of control gives birth to a vast plethora of excrement from within the bowels of our heart. This guano is generic– it does not need to do resume search on potential victims– it just dumps on whomever is in the room at the time– the higher in position– the better. Leaders, ministers, managers, pastors, Moses will do just fine. On farms, there is a device called a ‘manure spreader’ that has long revolving tongs that fling cow manure all over a field. That is what fearful, insecure hearts do that are forced into a situation where they are out of control– or dependent upon others (even God!).

It happens very quickly. It only took three days after a huge paradigm shifting victory for these former slaves to begin to grumble (15:24) against Moses (as if he hasn’t been through enough– on their behalf!), and then again in 16:2 (though this time against Aaron too). What was at the root? Fear, hunger, being put in a place where they cannot control anything– they cannot control their hour to hour fate much less their year to year lives. Fear, fear fear.

And so, God ministers to the oh so fragile Moses and Aaron. They get a tremendous bit of insight from conversations with God. And Moses said,

“When the Lord gives you [the people] in the evening meat to eat and in the morning bread to the full, because the Lord has heard your grumbling that you grumble against Him– what are we? Your grumbling is not against us but against the Lord.”

Leaders, ministers, pastors, priests, so often the people that you are trying to serve– at often great sacrifice to yourselves– will freely grumble, nominally against you. Maybe it is partially deserved (after all, we are in the same wilderness and have the very same hearts)– but often their real case is against God.

This is –so often– what real people do when we are ‘forced’ to give up control of our existence and throw ourselves upon His arms– again and again. And so often, He leads us straight into a wilderness– a very insecure, dangerous place. What comes out of our hearts in the wilderness? Fear, redeemed slaves flailing hard to control our path– fear, fear and more fear.

I get it. So often it is really not about us. All we can do is help others, and ourselves to see that our hearts are often not our friends. We can’t fix their hearts, much less ours– but together we can lean into the gospel of Jesus Christ, and access that perfect love that casts out fear.

Then we become once again reconcilers.

1 Comments

The Anatomy of an Argument

Posted on January 8, 2010

Mary blurts out to her significant other, “ I felt disrespected by your comment.”

Editor’s Note: ‘Mary’ is not a real person, maybe more of a composite of a variety of people that I have known, in a variety of sexes, ages, marital statuses– or if I were honest– seen in the mirror. Mary is not necessarily a female. She could be Mark or Mike—but the point is that this approach is very recognizable and should be easy for all of us to relate to.

Her significant other—let’s call him Bob—has heard this tone before, seen this look on Mary’s emotionless, in control game-face. The tone was not ‘angry’, or ‘hurt’—not observably so. It was emotionless really. The sentence was delivered very business-like— not personal- in fact – it was disconnected from the obvious implications of the statement. Everyone is familiar with the ‘tone’. It isn’t the tone of a victim’s testimony of what happened to them—filled with hurt and emotion. “I was minding my own business when my life was ruined—I can’t walk the streets alone anymore. I don’t feel safe anymore. I just want my life back!” It looks more like how the victim’s lawyer would present the same information—business-like and without emotion. “Your honor, my client was robbed at gunpoint, brutally attacked without provocation by the defendant.”

Bob’s response? Likely, Bob feels like he needs to defend himself. It wasn’t what he had hoped to be doing with his day. He had no desire to disrespect Mary. In fact, he is struggling to see what was so offensive. It seems like a mistake, of a misunderstanding on her part—or maybe a miscommunication on his part that he was blissfully unaware of. But the verdict was in—he felt. He was guilty of disrespecting Mary—again. So he had choices of responses to make—none of them good – he thinks. He could ask, “What did I say that made you feel disrespected?” This approach never worked. First of all, even if he disguised his defensiveness— put on a demure smile – look directly into her blank eyes—her response is that he is being defensive and making it worse by attacking her. On the other hand, he could quickly apologize for his lack of respect – hoping to send signals that he is not feeling disrespectful toward her. But this approach doesn’t normally work either. He is not even sure what it means. He is not sure what he is apologizing for. He could ask her respectfully to share what she is feeling—but the problem is – as he has found out in the past, she doesn’t seem capable, or willing to discuss her real feelings. In her eyes, he is the problem and his defensiveness is making matters worst.

Is there hope for Bob? For Mary? Perhaps—but it will take some humble heart-work on both parts.

Lets begin by unpacking Mary’s comment. Maybe she can learn to be more accurate with her choice of wording. She verbalized “I felt disrespected by your comment.” Is this really to the point? A good attorney would have a field day rebutting this testimony. Listen-

Defense Attorney- Is it your testimony under oath that my client’s comments were the instigating cause of your feelings of disrespect?

Mary (The Plaintiff)- Yes.

DA- I would remind you that you are under oath. Were there any other instigating causes of your feelings?

Mary- Like what?

DA- Was there something that occurred in your day before the event that may have led to your feelings? Was there something that occurred in your childhood? Was your father openly respectful? Were your teachers? Were you treated with honor by employers? Other authority figures in your life?

Mary- What difference does that make? I am feeling disrespected by your comments too!

DA- Really Ms. Mary, you seem somewhat fragile in that arena. It seems to me that there is a live nerve in this area.

Mary- I do not know what you mean. You sound just like your client—uh, I mean Bob.

DA- Mary, isn’t it true that you truly feel disrespected—but that might have been caused by many things—things that you may not even be aware of. Bob’s supposed disrespectful comments (and I am not acknowledging that my client was indeed disrespectful at all) might have just opened or exposed something else?

Mary- I don’t know.

DA- You said that you felt disrespected. Right? But, often, people who are truly disrespected respond with emotion. They can be angry, and hurt and want vindication, they want to be respected. But you showed no emotion at all. Why is that?

Mary- I don’t know. I don’t like this line of questioning.

DA- Can you say that Bob does or doesn’t feel respect for you?

Mary- I am not sure that I can answer that.

DA- Are you aware that that is disrespectful to my client? He has testified that he does respect you and in no way wants you to feel disrespected—in fact—he wants you to feel honored. Is it your testimony then that Bob has failed as a husband to honor you?
Mary- I am confused.

DA- Are you aware that the second part of your statement could be taken as an accusation of guilt? Not a foundation for real sharing or dialogue? ‘I feel disrespected by your comment”. It could be taken by my client that you have considered all other possibilities, other causes and have concluded that it was Bob’s comment alone that led to your feelings which you describe as ‘disrespect’. Bob has testified that what he ‘heard’ was that you accused him of being disrespectful of you— which he in fact denies. What is your response to that.

Mary- I see what you are doing, you are turning the debate and making it about me. The real issue is Bob’s disrespect of me in his comment. This is not about me. I brought the matter up. Don’t turn it to me.

DA- So you are testifying under oath that the cause of the feelings is solely and strictly Bob’s comments. Is that correct?

Mary- No, of course not. But his comments were disrespectful.

DA- What we are establishing as a possibility is that there are other things that are causing your feelings of disrespect.

Mary- Of course but what does that have to do with Bob?

DA- Exactly the defenses point. Is it possible that Bob’s comments were not disrespectful to you? But you left the conversation still feeling disrespected?

Mary- Anything is possible—but what difference does it make?

DA- Dear Mary, if this is possible—and based upon Bob’s testimony, he only wants to honor you—then in fact—it is you that disrespected him.

Mary- What….!?

DA- My client testified that he would have been then and remains now open to a real dialogue with you about what you are feeling subsequent to the conversation. He testified that he is even open to find out that what he said was indeed insensitive and offensive to you—matters about which he is ignorant at this point. But he is not open to a non-dialogue which begins with , “I charge you with this crime!” Mary, do you see the difference?

Mary- I am not sure what you mean. I said what I said without a raised voice—without anger, without showing my hurt.

DA- I am sure that you think so. But would you recognize the possibility of your anger, your defensiveness, your desire for justice and vindication coming out anyway in your body language, your tone of voice, or even your lack of obvious emotion?

Mary- I don’t see the relevance in this. I didn’t get angry or defensive until Bob became defensive to me.

DA- Do I need to ask the Judge that I may treat you as a hostile witness? Mary, are you able to see that you accused my client of wrongdoing without asking for any clarification? Without honoring him by sharing what feelings you had within you—without accusing him of being disrespectful? You did not act honoring to him, giving him the benefit of the doubt, or even allowing for the possibility that he was not in fact being disrespectful toward you—but that you made dangerous destructive assumptions and went with them. You trusted your feelings over Bob. Is that respectful?

Mary- Look, I know disrespect when I hear it.

DA- Is that your testimony? I put into evidence the observations of no less than Dostoyevsky in his brilliant The Brothers Karamazov regarding those who have learned to not be fiercely honest with themselves and therefore must by necessity blame others. Listen,
The man [or woman] who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to such a pass that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others. And having no respect he ceases to love, and in order to occupy and distract himself without love he gives way to passions and coarse pleasures, and sinks to bestiality in his vices, all from continual lying to other men and to himself. The man who lies to himself can be more easily offended than anyone. You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offence, isn’t it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain out of a molehill — he knows that himself, yet he will be the first to take offence, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it, and so pass to genuine vindictiveness.

My dear woman, is it possible—at all possible, even to the slightest degree that you indeed felt disrespected— but it was from within you— internally driven, a self-defacing happening deep within you—and not necessarily related to my client’s well-meaning comments at all? —That your real issue is more related to old shames, fears, embarrassments, and that your quickness to blame my client—without reasonable questions, without even minimal investigation, without any grace whatsoever— is the way that you have learned to survive? If so, then, as you say, it is indeed largely about you.

If this is the case, which now seems quite likely, my client was merely a whipping boy for your venting? That is not to say that my client is perfect, that he did not, or would not ever be disrespectful to you. The defenses’ case is that my client’s actions or lack of actions was not the primary cause your sense of disrespect— you came to the conversation with an intrinsic sense of self-disrespect. We have completed our case, that the primary, perhaps sole instigating cause of your feelings of disrespect was internal to your heart—not my client’s comments. The Defense rests.

Leave a Comment

Taking Offense per Fyodor Karamazov

Posted on December 21, 2009

So often, we have self-inflicted offenses that we take to heart, that are perhaps not real at all. Dostoevsky is stunningly insightful in his Brothers Karamazov.

The righteous Father Zossima is speaking to the worthless profligate father of the Karamazov clan, Fyodor— who has come with the rest of the family into audience with the aged saint— to nominally find family peace and reconciliation—but in fact– Fyodor has just to make a shameful scene— to act the buffoon as he hypocritically caricatures himself.

“I earnestly beg you, …not to disturb yourself, and not to be uneasy,” the elder said impressively. “Do not trouble. Make yourself quite at home. And, above all, do not be so ashamed of yourself, for that is at the root of it all.”

[Fyodor responds]
“Quite at home? To be my natural self? Oh, that is much too much, but I accept it with grateful joy. Do you know, blessed father, you’d better not invite me to be my natural self. Don’t risk it…. I will not go so far as that myself. I warn you for your own sake. Well, the rest is still plunged in the mists of uncertainty, though there are people who’d be pleased to describe me for you… But as for you, holy being, let me tell you, I am brimming over with ecstasy.”

He got up, and throwing up his hands, declaimed, “Blessed be the womb that bare thee, and the paps that gave thee suck — the paps especially. When you said just now, ‘Don’t be so ashamed of yourself, for that is at the root of it all,’ you pierced right through me by that remark, and read me to the core. Indeed, I always feel when I meet people that I am lower than all, and that they all take me for a buffoon. So I say, ‘Let me really play the buffoon. I am not afraid of your opinion, for you are every one of you worse than I am.’ That is why I am a buffoon. It is from shame, great elder, from shame; it’s simply over-sensitiveness that makes me rowdy. If I had only been sure that everyone would accept me as the kindest and wisest of men, oh, Lord, what a good man I should have been then! Teacher!” he fell suddenly on his knees, “what must I do to gain eternal life?”

It was difficult even now to decide whether he was joking or really moved.

Father Zossima, lifting his eyes, looked at him, and said with a smile:

“You have known for a long time what you must do. You have sense enough: don’t give way to drunkenness and incontinence of speech; don’t give way to sensual lust; and, above all, to the love of money. And close your taverns. If you can’t close all, at least two or three. And, above all — don’t lie.”

“You mean about Diderot?”

“No, not about Diderot. Above all, don’t lie to yourself. The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to such a pass that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others. And having no respect he ceases to love, and in order to occupy and distract himself without love he gives way to passions and coarse pleasures, and sinks to bestiality in his vices, all from continual lying to other men and to himself. The man who lies to himself can be more easily offended than anyone. You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offence, isn’t it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain out of a molehill — he knows that himself, yet he will be the first to take offence, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it, and so pass to genuine vindictiveness. But get up, sit down, I beg you. All this, too, is deceitful posturing….”

The Brothers Karamazov
Book II- The Unfortunate Gathering
Chapter 2- The Old Buffoon

Leave a Comment

“Sterile” Congressional Apology for Slavery Unacceptable

Posted on July 27, 2009

I resonate with DeWayne Wickham’s article in June 23 USA TODAY, ‘Congress needs to make a full confession on slavery” (full article available at http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/06/congress-needs-to-make-full-confession-on-slavery.html#more).

He writes

Last week, the U.S. Senate apologized for slavery and the Jim Crow century that followed. But like the House of Representatives, which passed a similar resolution last July, it failed to give a detailed confession of its complicity in this great crime.

Instead, the Senate followed the House’s lead and simply bemoaned the mistreatment of millions of blacks who were forced into slavery from 1619 through 1865. It didn’t say anything about what Congress did — or didn’t do — to aid and abet that “peculiar institution.”

That’s not good enough. For the sake of history and closure, Congress needs to describe the full nature of its offenses in support of slavery and the century-long period of legal disenfranchisement of blacks that followed. Too many people in this country have little knowledge of the legal cover Congress gave slavery. Too few people understand how Congress perpetuated the suffering of blacks long after the 13th Amendment ended slavery.

Apologies not enough

The apologies passed by the House and Senate, and the joint resolution that’s expected to come soon, amount to a guilty plea. As in a criminal case where a defendant cops a plea, Congress should be forced to give a detailed confession of its crimes against blacks.

Let’s assume for the moment that our representatives are really trying to do the right thing and to bring healing for the historical societal wound that has scarred our collective histories, both white and black. If– if that is the case, then it must also be assumed that they are wildly ignorant of the mechanisms of reconciliation and restoration. Their crude attempt at a ‘official apology’ was very lightweight– insufficient, lifeless, powerless– and it could be argued– even offensive to those who have been most deeply affected. Perhaps they should take note of other reconciliation forums that have been helpful in other countries in the world– for instance- the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission. While specific fine tunings and improvements could no doubt be made to the TRC, and a ‘commission’ specifically designed and custom fitted to our context— all ‘apologies’ will carry little weight until — at the very least– a public forum is given to those who have been generationally affected. Descendants of victims should be offered a public forum to voice their families woundings. This is not an offer of healing, or necessarily reparation and restitution– but it is inviting US Citizens to a place where they would be deeply honored and listened to. Minimally, this must be done before any healing is accomplished.

So kudos to Wickham. He finishes his column by saying,

In their sterile mea culpas, neither the House nor Senate have come close to admitting the role those bodies played in the sorry history they now decry. Until they do, their apology is a hollow act of political expediency.

And it should not be accepted.

Leave a Comment

When Faith Collides with Your Sight….

Posted on December 15, 2008

(my thanks to K. for her willingness and permission to share her personal narrative of abuse and church-damage. I hope that this would honor her by giving her a public uncensored voice to tell her story. All trials have testimony phase. Perhaps this can perform some of that function for K. and for others who have been abused and silenced. The following is her story, uncensored and without comment.)

I was raised in a very conservative, fundamentally religious family. By age eight I was already terrified that I would be left behind during the second coming. My mother was often told me Jesus would leave me behind. I was often beaten with wooden spoons, flyswatters, and belts for minor offenses. I was around 9 when I bragged to my father that I had lived through a whole day without a spanking. Two older teenage cousins sexually assaulted me when I was between 11 and 12 and beginning at age 9 I was regularly sexually molested by a schoolmate’s father. By the grace of God, I survived childhood relatively psychologically intact. At 18, I went to a conservative Bible college of my parent’s choosing in Knoxville Tennessee. I majored in nursing and Bible. I struggled with my fundamental roots and by age 30 had developed some sense of spiritual maturity and was very active in my church. I had spent some time in spiritual direction, had done a lot of private study and had developed my own rule of life, not unlike the Benedictines. I married at age 30 and had my first and only child 1 month before my 35th birthday. I married in the Methodist church my husband and his family and his family’s family had been raised. His family had been members there for over 100 years. His mother was baptized and married in that church as well as his grandmother. I taught Sunday school, confirmation class, led women’s prayer groups and held various positions of leadership. I had a more liberal view of Christianity and the scriptures than most but still felt accepted.

The year I turned 38 was a huge turning point for me. I had decided to finish my degree in religion and return to divinity school and become a hospital chaplain. I am no longer sure if people are called to vocations, but at the time I felt called. My grandmother was killed that year on Christmas Eve in a church parking lot. It was not my first experience with grief but it was overwhelming. At the time, I did not recognize the symptoms for what they were and six months later I found myself paralyzed with depression.

I was scared, humiliated, hurting and didn’t know what to do. My congregation had elected to allow a satellite pastoral counseling office from a nearby hospital to reside of the campus of the church. My congregation presented the therapist as the minister of counseling. He was licensed and ordained. He had many years of clinical experience. He occasionally filled the pulpit when our senior pastor was away. I knew I needed help and it seemed like a good plan. I had many reservations about seeking the help of a therapist, but convinced myself they were unfounded.

It was a confusing relationship from the beginning. The boundary violations were so astounding and so many, and I being naïve and hurting, didn’t even know they were occurring. I was trapped emotionally and spiritually. I viewed him as an authority figure and on many occasions challenged him and was always convinced by him that it was my own neurosis behind the feeling. People from the congregation would walk in on sessions and I was told this was to be expected. The church secretary knew I was his client and the reason behind my seeing him. He shared confidential information outside of sessions. He would approach me and talk to me outside of session. He shared personal information regarding himself, his family and his wife. Intimate details that were not pertinent to my treatment. If I became emotional, he would frequently hug and caress me. He said it was what I needed. He frequently berated me. He told me I was going to hell. He committed insurance fraud. When it became clear to me, he was abusing me; I confronted him and told him I was reporting him to his superiors, the church board and his licensure board. He attacked me physically, verbally and sexually.

After the attack, I sought treatment with another provider. I did not go to the police. I was too humiliated, too ashamed and too scared. I continued to try to attend church. I was a psychological and spiritual wreck. I had been reduced to a bloody pulp. I did attempt to report him to his agency and the church. It was not received well. The agency (supposedly based on Christian ethics) basically sent me an apology letter but refused to disclose what corrective action had been taken based on privacy laws. I was never granted a meeting with the agency. The church did meet with my husband and I twice and stated while they believed me, “it was better that one should die than the whole nation.” Those were their words. They also stated my complaint had not been the first, but in their opinion his ministry at the church was far more important than the harm he had caused me. Those were those words. We were instructed to leave. The senior pastor visited us once and promised to return but of course never did.

The spiritual and emotional and psychological consequences are devastating. For the past five years, I have attempted to function in therapy. My entire foundation for trust has been obliterated and I have made very little therapeutic gains. To find help has been a challenge. My faith has collided with my sight and I cannot seem to find any solid ground. I am unable to attend any church because of flashbacks and panic attacks, my entire social structure has collapsed, and my marriage is in ruins. I still am able to work but it is a daily struggle just to stay grounded, to control suicidal ideation and to find calm in my inner world. My entire system of faith has been stripped away. The monetary cost for medication and therapy this year alone has exceeded 10,000 dollars. I travel twice a week to see a therapist 60 miles one way from my home. To say that I cannot build a trusting relationship with him is an understatement. My therapy revolves around managing stressors and keeping me grounded in session, so that no real healing ever occurs.

I search for God in all of this and prior to this event, I would have described myself as someone firmly grounded in her faith and was quite sure it would weather any storm that life would bring. Simple things such a prayer, bible reading and even a hymn can trigger a flashback. I have come to really understand the meaning of the statements “the truest prayer you will ever pray is the shriek of your own pain” and “thank you.” There have been graces along the way…I see God in the faces of suffering individuals now, and I am grateful for the therapist but even that relationship is ridden with conflict and pain. It has not reached a healing stage and probably never will. This causes me great pain but I so badly want to heal but do not even know where to begin.

Jesus was able to heal because people believed in him…. what happens when your capacity for belief is shattered and you lack the ability to build that trust? The only means Jesus has to heal now are through the actions of others. Without the body of Christ, Jesus cannot heal. We are his hands and his feet. And while I know that it is a very human system and it is the only one we have, where do you turn when you been turned away? How do you forgive one who has obliterated your faith? I have tried other churches, I have tried to find individuals who will listen and it has been wounding. They need to protect the system, they need to manage their own shame my story causes and I end up taking care of their anxiety. It is a vicious cycle. So everyday, I get out of bed a try again, hoping that one day my dead soul will be resurrected and if not I try not to act out the role of a perpetrator. I try not to act out on my rage and pain. We all must come to terms with the duality of our natures. I just believe it would be easier if I could forgive but I lack the authority to do so. I read once that even Jesus did not forgive his abusers, he asked God to do it for him. I try to do that and then I try to forgive myself for not being able to forgive. This is a lonely desert and I try to remind myself I am walking a path many, many others have walked. It is just dark and I wish I had someone to hold my hand.

1 Comments

Dear Pope Benedict,

Posted on August 18, 2008

I approach this blog very carefully and humbly. I have not been a victim of clergy abuse, so I do not have the same moral authority to speak on the topic as those who have been devastated by such crimes. I would say though, that I have had friendships and deep heart-level conversations with some who have been abused– it is an vile destructive evil. Having said that, I still would like to add my two cents– carefully and thoughtfully– I hope. I would like to say that I, for one, appreciate Pope Benedict’s bold words on July 19th in Australia where he proclaimed

“I am deeply sorry for the pain and suffering the victims have endured,” he said. “These misdeeds, which constitute so grave a betrayal of trust, deserve unequivocal condemnation. Those responsible for these evils must be brought to justice.”

He followed those comments up with a personal meeting with abuse victims. A very powerful symbolic gesture for all who can hear it. Though some have criticized the Pontiff’s words and subsequent meeting as mere staging, I take his words and symbolic actions at face value– and suggest that this is a historic statement of guilt and frustration by the Pontiff. It is a good step in the right direction.

So– now having said that, I have some respectful advice. Since Australia’s senior Roman Catholic cleric, Cardinal George Pell said that the Church was open to “constructive, practical” suggestions, I would like to formerly request that the Church further the steps taken and initiate an open Truth Commission, similar to bodies set up in South Africa to give victims of Apartheid a voice; and is in the plan for Canada to give voice to the abuse of First Nations persons there. The goal of the Clergy Abuse Truth Commission would be to give frustrated, hurt and confused victims a real public voice– a public forum where they could tell their story, they could cry, where they would be persons of honor– not dishonor. No lawyers, no legal wordplays. Just harsh honesty. If done transparently and well, this would no doubt continue the healing process for the individuals and hopefully the church. It would seem to be the right thing to do.

There are– no doubt — significant organization details that would have to be worked out– including somehow vetting the participants without dishonoring any… but still, this should be done.

I think that would be a very messy, heart wrenching event that could go on for certainly weeks– maybe months- -but on the other hand, it would be wildly pastoral and healing. Commissions could be set up in areas most hard pressed. I know of rampant historic clergy-abuse in California, Philadelphia, Boston, Ireland and of course Australia. It is the truth that sets a person free.

This would be a very Christ-like thing to do that would serve the larger Church of Jesus Christ well and begin to restore some of the lost trust, which all of our various denominations share. These commissions would not slur the reputations of the vast majority of good Priests– in fact, this would provide the stage for them to powerfully and compassionately step up and be the good shepherds they are for their flocks through the event.

I am not a victim of clergy abuse, but I do understand the processes of forgiveness and reconciliation. This would be an amazing thing. No one then could accuse the Church of doing too little too late, or using staging, or cheap words. I would even volunteer the assistance of the local church which I serve. The good news of Jesus is much bigger than all of the spiritual abuse that has ever occurred. There is powerful healing available for victims and perpetrators. Let’s enter into the severe healing process together.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on my suggestion.

Respectfully,

Of course, I would love to hear the thoughts of victims of clergy and spiritual abuse as well. Does this sound like something that could bring you healing, hope and new life?

1 Comments

Fascinating Arabic Forgiveness Process

Posted on July 31, 2008

Check this out!

According to G. Irani and N. Funk, some Arabic communities in the Middle East still use the old fashion ways of working out a dispute. Not only does this model pre-date many of the cultures who are credited with discovering the Restorative Justice Movement, this communal model is very much in-line with the ancient Jewish approach as portrayed in the Old Testament, in particular during the High Holy Days of the Fall. Maybe there is an ancient bridge for peace in the Middle East that yet remains? This high community participation model is wildly different from the individualistic cognitive therapeutic model that reigns supreme in the West. There is much for us to learn here.

The historic Arabic forgiveness and reconciliation intervention approach to resolve both individual and groups conflicts is the sulh (settlement). The sulh is very public, inclusive of the whole affected community and is structured as a legal ceremony—complete with due diligence, trial, judge, plaintiff and defendant (Irani & Funk, 2002). In the sulh, both parties submit to the jurisdiction of the jaha, a team made up of wise and respected community leaders and elders. According to Islamic law, the sulh is legally binding upon the all of the participants. The sulh could be either “total” or “conditional”. The former officially ends all conflict as both parties resolve to end all disputes and not to hold any grudges in the future. The “conditional sulh” binds the parties to abide by a peace defined by specific conditions.

In the sulh, the family of the victim calls for a truce (hudna) and engages the jaha to accept the role of mediators. The jaha then engages in detailed fact-finding, interviews and other due diligence, defines the compensation (largely symbolic) from the offender’s family to the victim’s, and initiates the reconciliation ceremony, the musalah. The musalah typically takes place in the village square. The families of both the victim and offender line up on both sides of the road and exchange greetings; the latter offering apologies to the former.

Next, the two families shake hands, sealing the sulh settlement. It is often appropriate, as an act of atonement and humility, for the offender to directly approach the victim’s family. This is supervised by the jaha and is an important exercise of repentance and, on the other hand, of the capacity of the victim and family to forgive. Then it is not uncommon for the family of the victim to go to the family of the offender to receive a cup of bitter coffee—followed by a shared meal hosted by the offenders clan (Irani & Funk, 2002, pp. 24-26).

The goal of the sulh is not to punish the offender but to prevent escalation of dispute, restore dignity to the individuals who suffered loss, and most importantly, to restore peace and stability to the community.

[1] Irani, G., & Funk, N. (2000, August). Rituals of reconciliation: Arab-Islamic perspectives. Kroc Institute Occasional Paper #19:OP:2.

Leave a Comment

Repentance by Maimonides

Posted on June 5, 2008

Western forgiveness intervention models (e.g., Worthington, Enright) are clearly ‘victim’ focused. Researches have found that unforgiving victims tend to suffer from maladies such as depression, heart issues, depression, etc. So intervention models were designed to bring some healing to the victim by cognitive therapy so that they can unilaterally ‘forgive’ the perpetrator. Facilitators have observed and published significant successes in victim healing. My problem with this approach is not that they are unsuccessful in what they attempt to accomplish. They appear to be quite helpful in facilitating some healing of specifically the victim– measurably so. My problem is that for the most part, the offender and the larger community are– for the most part, ignored. These models are highly individualistic and utilitarian.

In contrast, modern Jewish intervention models are ‘offender’ driven; emphasizing the offender’s “teshuvah” (i.e., the ‘process of return’). For forgiveness and reconciliation to take place, the offender must become worthy of forgiveness by means of apology, remorse, and restitution (if appropriate) before God and mankind. Per the respected writings on the topic by the 12th ct Rabbi Maimonides (Mishneh Torah), appropriate offender teshuvah must include (a) Acknowledgement that one has done something wrong, (b) Public confession of one’s wrongdoing to both God and the community, (c) Public expression of remorse, (d) [Public announcement of] the offender’s resolve not to sin in this way again, (e) Compensation of the victim for the injury inflicted accompanied by acts of charity to others, (f) Sincere request of forgiveness by the victim, (g) Avoidance of the conditions that caused the offense, and (h) Acting differently when confronted with the same situation.

Very interesting. Without at all discounting the healing successes of the western victim-focussed intervention models, I wonder if they are missing much of the healing value– and for that matter, the community building value to both the victim and the perpetrator that would be part of a broader forgiveness intervention model. What do you think?

Leave a Comment

The Shack

Posted on March 24, 2008

I just finished reading William P. Young’s, ‘The Shack’ (Thanks Chris M. for the heads up). I highly recommend this provocative novel/allegory. It is about a father whose daughter is tragically kidnapped at a family vacation. The book offers a compassionate, very sensitive presentation of the wildly ranging emotional turmoil and mourning involved in such a vast loss— the feeling ’stuck’ in “The Great Sadness’. But it doesn’t stop there. It goes on to invite the father (and the reader) into a stunning healing journey that intimately involves the entirety of the Triune God.

How does a God-follower who has suffered such pain find the healing combination of a mercy/healing/forgiveness that does not treat justice lightly? Read ‘The Shack”.

“Mackenzie, Judgment is not about destruction, but about setting things right.”

Mack smiled, “I don’t feel stuck anymore.”

Leave a Comment

Mid-East Turmoil?

Posted on February 19, 2008

It is a mess in the middle east. There is an enmeshed conflict at just about all levels. Socio-economic, religious, personal and historic bitterness at mistreatments and past issues– and of course just flat out bigotry. We in the West are more and more aware that we are not getting the entire picture from the media (no conspiracy theory fodder meant at all– just the nature of the beast).

I am headed to Israel for a brief trip– of course to visit the amazing sites– to see the places where God spoke to Moses, Abraham, David, Paul and Jesus. It will be a stunning time.

We will also have extended times where we will dialogue with both Israelis, Arabic and Christian Palestinians. I want to look into their eyes and here the story straight. What are they feeling about their lot, their hopes for resolution and peace. What are they feeling toward the others in the conflict? Is there a plan that would seem to bring hope for reconcilation in our lifetimes? What would forgiveness for them look like?

As I was preparing, I came across a section from the prophet Ezekiel. I wonder if in it there is fodder for hope for each party. The prophet is looking ahead to the restoration of Spiritual Israel. He gives its boundaries, north, south, east and west. He is describing a ‘perfected, holy Israel’– an Israel that finally is free and safe, and reflects ‘shalom’. If you are looking forward to the restoration of a spiritual Israel– this is what it would look like. Listen to the prophet’s concern for the others in the land.

Ezekiel 47: 21 “You are to distribute this land among yourselves according to the tribes of Israel. 22 You are to allot it as an inheritance for yourselves and for the aliens who have settled among you and who have children. You are to consider them as native-born Israelites; along with you they are to be allotted an inheritance among the tribes of Israel. 23 In whatever tribe the alien settles, there you are to give him his inheritance,” declares the Sovereign LORD.

Fascinating isn’t it? Getting from where we are today to anything close to that seems impossible doesn’t it? But not to God. He is the great God who can bring restitution for all that was robbed from all mankind. In fact, He promises that He will do just that. His Spirit can heal fresh and age old wounds, individually and corporately. He can provide a safe place finally for all sides involved. Last but not least, He can give each ‘side’ the ability to see the other as ‘image-bearers’ of God Himself, and thus worthy of honor, respect and hospitality.

May it be so in our lifetimes– for the sake of all involved.

Leave a Comment