Thursday, June 08, 2006

Intermittent Explosive Disorder

I had studied Intermittent Explosive Disorder just recently in my psychopathology class and the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders had reported that this disorder was "apparently rare" although it admitted that no prevalence study had ever been conducted. Before I got to this phrase I had remarked at how common the symptoms seemed. All it took was a reaction that was "grossly out of proportion to the stressor."

But a study that hit the news recently found that 5-7% of Americans suffered from the disorder. I have a feeling that this will be the new diagnosis of choice for clinicians, just like ADD and ED. But I think this is sadly appropriate. Our society has been infiltrated by a hateful spirit, particularly on the road.

I remember taking a test for road rage as a 17 year old in the middle of a traffic school class. I scored extremely high because I had answered "yes" to questions like: Have you ever fantasized about killing or severely hurting other drivers on the road. Certainly not a bragging right, even for an adolescent. I remember that being a turning point for me, as I was forced to face my own vicious anger. But how many people have not had that opportunity, or have refused to face that truth even when it stares them in their eye?

I have considered myself fortunate to have had a change of heart since that day. I assure you I am a much improved driver and am thankful that I have avoided drivers who seemed ready to "severely hurt" me. But I know that many of the drivers on the road are filled with rage. They fume with anger as they wait on traffic. They may not take it out on another car. But many will take it out somehow, often on someone in their own family.

Sunday, June 04, 2006

Fathering

I read Henri Nouwen's The Return of the Prodigal Son and he brought up something I had never heard suggested in the many times I have heard the story of the prodigal son (Luke 15). Nouwen said that the call of every follower of Christ is to become like the father in the story.

If you are unfamiliar with the story then it goes something like this: boy asks father for his share of inheritance, boy runs off to foreign land to gamble and spend his money on prostitutes, boy goes broke, boy comes back to father to ask to become a servant, father embraces his son and lavishes his riches on him by throwing a feast, boy's brother is pissed off cuz he was always the good kid and never had a party thrown for him, father tells the brother that he could have celebrated anytime. Maybe you should just read it yourself!

Oooook... back to the father. The father is the God-figure clearly from the story. He forgives graciously and holds no wrong against his son, even though he ran off to waste his money. The father was waiting for his son to return and runs to him when he sees him in the distance.

Some of us can relate to the story of the prodigal son. I know I can. And some can relate to the older brother. I can relate to his legalistic sense of entitlement too. But I had never thought that my goal in life is to become the father. But it makes sense for we are called to become like Jesus who is God.

I wish I had more time to write on this. But maybe this is something you shouldn't be spoon fed. Maybe you need to think about this yourself. You don't need to be a man to become like the father. In fact I think the father has many of what we might call feminine qualities. He runs after his son, embraces and kisses him, and gets incredibly excited at his return - not precisely what we would call a cowboy man. But the father demonstrates love. He demonstrates the ability to love unconditionally. I believe we should all aspire to be like the father - loving and seeking those who need to be loved and found.

Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Tolkien vs. Lewis

I've engaged in a mini-debate with a professor over whether Tolkien or C.S. Lewis is better. I've not read much of Tolkien but I've read a fair amount of Lewis and from what I understand they take opposite views on the use of allegory.

If you have read the Chronicles of Narnia or The Great Divorce, you know that Lewis likes allegory. Aslan is clearly the Jesus figure and The LW&W is the story of Christ's death and resurrection. Tolkien, on the other hand, shied away from allegory nearly completely. He preferred to "sub-create" a new reality to which we could escape. This reality had the same values as earthly reality but it was a different story that did not directly relate to the Christian story. Tolkien liked certain elements of the Christian narrative, such as eucatastrophe (i.e. the happy ending after a catastrophe) and escaping into an alternate reality (Christians create a reality where an invisible God is more clearly visible). But Tolkien does not create an allegorical story.

There are two realities that are being "created." For Lewis it is the reality of the Kingdom of God. His stories clearly describe how God interacts with the world. For Tolkien it is a fairy story (and he readily describes his story as this) which is not merely for children but which describes a land where we can go to experience life.

So here is my opinion on the matter. What good is it to create an alternate reality that is not actually based on reality? Why not do as Lewis does and shed light on the Kingdom of God through the use of story. Is this not what Jesus does when he shares stories, or parables, with his followers. Perhaps Lewis is a bit didactic at times in that he tries to take some of the mystery of the experience away. But I think Lewis actually evangelizes through his stories, and not in some confrontational manner, by simply presenting the story of Christ in a manner which we can relate.

Tolkien, on the other hand, writes incredible stories (and he is clearly a better storyteller than Lewis) but the stories simply are made for enjoyment. The ethics may be the same as Christian ethics but since when is Christianity about ethics alone? I believe that books that share the story of Christ are greater books than books of fantasy and lore because they allow us to gain a greater understanding of who God is and who we are.

In the same way, therapy can be a means of simply allowing the client to escape into another world. And that is important for some. In fact, for those who do not want to discuss faith issues that may be where I get stuck. But I prefer to help the client see that God really exists and that God is a part of their life story.

Perhaps literature should be appreciated apart from its function. And perhaps we should consider how therapy tickles the client and makes them feel good. But to me that is far less potent than imagining therapy that brings clients into the love and grace and glory of God.

Wednesday, May 24, 2006

The Psychology of Salvation

Ok this blog was a long time coming. I think I'm finally ready to write it. I had saved it as a "draft" a couple months ago but couldn't motivate myself to finish it. The problem earlier was that my theology was changing. The way I saw the world was changing. I was beginning to see "the point" of holy living. It made sense why I should live a righteous life. But I didn't know what to do with the fact that I kept messing up.

I ended up beating myself up every time I would fall short of my own expectations. I would drown myself in guilt and the result was usually that I felt God was distant. I put my own guilt on God because why should God love me if I couldn't love myself? I think this is why I turned my back on God for that short period, which I wrote about in a previous blog. I was so pissed off at God for flooding me in guilt. In fact it was me who was putting guilt on myself and pretending like it was God.

So where does salvation fall in all of this? If you would have asked me two months ago I didn't have a clue. I started writing this blog and I couldn't finish. I just didn't understand what the significance of being saved was. I thought that if I entered into my guilt, and I used it as a motivation to change, then I would be able to live God's life for me. I had some of it right. I was transforming my mistakes into something positive. But God's grace had no part in that. And when I ended up failing I didn't know what to do. I just felt guilty and ashamed.

But the concept of salvation provides me with something deep. The word "saved," once stripped of the religious stuff, is a powerful word. "Saved" indicates that there is something which I could not protect myself from. Coming back to salvation meant that I had to rely on God's actions and not my own. Instead of feeling like I have to make myself feel bad for doing wrong - which is ineffective at making me do the right thing by the way - I accepted the forgiveness of my sins. I was able to accept the story of Christ's crucifixion as grounds for believing that God is forgiving. And if God can forgive me then I should be able to forgive myself.

I can't understand why I didn't understand this just a couple months earlier. I had been raised on this. I guess it is just so unnatural to receive forgiveness that we have to intentionally accept it. But since I have started to practice receiving grace again people have remarked that I look happier. I don't know quite what it is, but I feel lighter. And I am now able to reconnect with God in ways that I haven't been able to in months. I think I'm starting to reappreciate God's grace. And that's it. The psychology of salvation is that it frees us from the cycle of guilt that can keep us trapped. It brings us into freedom. There is nothing that can make us feel worthy in the midst of our guilt except accepting the forgiveness of God.

In case you are interested here's how my previous post, which I was unable to write any more on, began:
If you have read my blog for a long time, you might have noticed that I steer clear of the Christian belief that Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sins. Not because I don't believe it. Mostly it is because I just don't know what to make of it from a psychological perspective. Which is fine for me because I can accept that I will not ever fully understand God's greatest act for all mankind. But I'm afraid that it paints the picture that I believe that Christ's death on the cross means nothing. So here I will be a tad theoretical and I heartily encourage feedback because it is a topic that I am only beginning to consider.
Once I got to there I couldn't write any more. I said that I was afraid that it suggests that Christ's death meant nothing to me... but I could not argue the opposite. Clearly at the time I really thought that Christ's death meant nothing. Now this might shed more light on why I nearly renounced my faith. Without the work of Christ I'm stuck with a bunch of guilt and anger towards God. And because of all that anger I could not deal with the reality that God exists. Thank God that He taught me what it means to be saved by grace and not by works.

Monday, May 22, 2006

Mirror Neurons and Our Connectedness

I'm taking a Cognitive Psychology class and my professor has been speaking a lot about embodied cognition, or how we "think" with more than just our brain. He also brought up "mirror neurons" which are neurons that fire when we see someone doing something in the same way that they would fire if we were doing them ourselves. Now this was perhaps one of the biggest findings in neuroscience in the last decade. (see Mirror Neurons)

The significance is that mirror neurons testify about our innate wiring to be affected by our environment and the people around us. I find it amazing to think that I can experience what someone is going through simply by seeing them go through it. Apparently, our gut reaction when we see someone getting hurt or crying is something that is hard wired into us. It seems our Creator wanted us to be relational beings.

I think the most exciting part of it is realizing that what we consider to be me actually stretches out beyond our flesh. We are connected to other people and the things around us in ways we simply cannot avoid. We interact with the world and the world interacts with us. As John Donne prophetically wrote, "No man is an island unto himself."

Saturday, May 20, 2006

Forgiveness is Action

One error that the modern person, Christian or not, commonly makes is to believe that forgiving a person means simply making a decision within your mind not to remain angry at that person. We mistakenly believe that forgiveness is separable from reconciliation, or making things right between the two parties involved. But if that was the case then forgiveness would remain merely an abstract concept and forgiveness would mean nothing.

I believe that true forgiveness means that we are willing to do good to another person as if they had done nothing wrong to us. And sometimes when a person says to themself, "I forgive them," that may be exactly what they mean. But I believe that forgiveness requires action whenever possible. Why? Because a person could merely tell themselves they forgive another person just so they don't have to deal with the guilt of not being a forgiving person.

The problem is that people like to feel good about themselves. They want to think of themselves as kind, forgiving people. And if they are ever brought to the point where they must forgive another, then suddenly they feel ashamed because deep down they don't want to forgive. So what do they do? They pray or say to themselves that they forgive the other person or party. But they still treat the person with contempt, claiming perhaps that the person has "lost their trust or respect" or that "they still need to learn their lesson."

Real forgiveness, on the other hand, requires action. Because we can deceive even ourselves, we need to let our forgiveness change the way we act. True forgiveness requires that we act to restore the relationship, regardless of whether or not we were wrong. The only way to own forgiveness is to embody it. Just as Christ was the incarnation of God's forgiveness of humankind, so we must incarnate our beliefs into action. We must stop acting self-righteous and we must take responsibility to "prove" our forgiveness. Otherwise we risk the seething anger of hostility that will eventually tear down our souls.

Finally, I hope you may gain peace, patience, and grace if you embark on this. It is perhaps the greatest challenge of maturation to learn how to forgive and reconcile. Sometimes it does in fact mean that you keep a healthy distance. There are people out there who you should not "forgive and forget" what they have done. But unless we learn to test our willingness to do good to those whom we have reason to remain angry against, we may really be hiding a great deal of anger within us against them.

Wednesday, May 17, 2006

Connecting with God

How do we measure our relationship with God? I have sometimes strayed to believe that it all depends on the emotions I feel as I pray. Then I have gone to the other end and said that it all depends on how righteous a life you live. I suppose that I'm not the only one. The one side stresses that the religious law has been abolished and replaced with freedom. The other side stresses that relationship with God will lead you into holiness. So how ought we live?

I am returning once again to the third option. Jesus offered himself as the new source for fulfillment. "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest." (Matthew 11:28) And prepare yourself for some spiritual cannibalism...
"Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. 57Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your forefathers ate manna and died, but he who feeds on this bread will live forever." (John 6:53-58)
The point is that we need to rest and exist in God. If we get caught up in performing, or in doing as we please, we are missing the mark. We must stop criticizing ourselves when we aren't perfect. Instead we should accept the forgiveness of Christ with joy.

Why the sermon in a blog primarily about psychology? Because if we take the road of legalism we will end up getting caught up in focusing on our behaviors. Then we will end up focusing on ourselves more and more and then get frustrated more and more. Why? Because it is hard to receive forgiveness when we forget who it is that forgives. If we stay in relationship with God as an end in and of itself, then we will not be constantly troubled (psychologically) by our behaviors. It is a sign of a lack of connection with God if we are feeling depressed or bothered that we are not growing spiritually.

The solution is that we can connect with God through constant prayer and that can be the measure of our walk with God. There is no doubt in my mind that prayer, if authentic and honest, will lead you to holier living. But holy living is a byproduct and not an end in itself. If you are interested in learning how to walk in prayer with God I suggest "Practicing the Presence of God" by Brother Lawrence. It costs just a few dollars at Christian bookstores. The final warning is that we are also not supposed to feel guilty if we are not constantly in prayer with God. If we do not connect with God then it is our loss because the spiritual connection ought to be fulfilling and fun. We should not feel guilty, only sad, that we forget to pray to God.

As it says in 1 Thesalonians 5:17, "Pray without ceasing."