ADVOCATING FOR INTROVERTS

Posted on January 11, 2011 by stanwiedeman

The young man talking to me was angry and highly frustrated. He felt ignored and ostracized only because he was socially awkward. He was not gregarious or outgoing. Conversation did not flow easily for him. It was not because he was dull-witted. On the contrary, he had an abundance of thoughts. He loved God and he loved people, but most people expected him to communicate that love along well-defined social paths. But his personality was built more for tracks than highways.

Adam McHugh has written an entire book addressing this problem. Introverts in the Church: Finding Our Place in an Extroverted Culture thoroughly explores the world of the introvert. The evangelical church has become an inhospitable environment for the introvert. “Versions of the word introvert are indelicately used in evangelical thought to refer to an ingrown, self-centered version of the church.” I have a hunch that you would describe an introvert as shy, withdrawn, antisocial or even socially handicapped.

A 2004 study conducted at a Christian college asked students to rate Jesus according to the categories of temperament used by the Myers-Briggs profile. One discovery of the study revealed a strong tendency to classify Jesus with the same characteristics that the students possessed. The one clear exception came in the extrovert-introvert scale. Ninety-seven percent of the students rated Jesus as an extrovert, while only fifty-four percent saw themselves that way.

The professor doing the study surmised, “The perception of an extroverted Jesus might reflect a tendency in American culture to value extroversion over introversion…. Making an assumption that Jesus was extroverted based on a cultural bias might make it difficult for introverts in such a culture to accept and affirm their own behavioral preference as legitimate and valuable; not something to be overcome or even tolerated, but something to be appreciated and blessed.” Jonathan Rauch, writer for The Atlantic, has said that introverts are “among the most misunderstood and aggrieved groups in America, possibly the world.”

McHugh points out that all of us are built with a capacity to look outwardly, interacting with the world around us, and inwardly, responding to our own thoughts, feelings and ideas. Everyone’s personality moves in both directions, but to varying degrees. Some are more comfortable with the external world, but have difficulty concentrating in solitude. Others thrive in the internal world, while communication with the outside world exhausts them.

Using three criteria, McHugh gives us a helpful way of distinguishing the personality that is natural to each person. The first is energy source. “Introverts are energized by solitude.” It is not that they do not like people, but social situations simply drain them. Extroverts, on the other hand, “need other people, interaction and various kinds of stimulation in order to replenish their energy.” Too much quiet yields anxiety and restlessness and sometimes depression.

The second characteristic is internal processing. Introverts have a need to process the barrage of stimuli, information, data, images and experiences in order to integrate them into their lives. “We need to filter information and experiences, allowing the good to take root in us and transform us, discarding the bad or irrelevant.” Extroverts process primarily through interaction and conversation. They tend to think out loud, clarifying their thoughts through dialogue. They rarely experience stimulation overload, a common complaint of introverts.

The third characteristic is that introverts prefer depth over breadth. Although introverts appear quiet and dull in group situations, they actually excel in relationships because they are comfortable with deep levels of intimacy. They also do not fear self-examination, which leads to self-discovery. Extroverts can handle a great diversity of information, acquaintances and experiences. Their sphere of influence runs much broader.

McHugh carefully distinguishes healthy introversion from shyness or aloofness produced by fear or insecurity. He does not defend the recluse. Introversion is not an exemption from the command to love your neighbor as yourself. “It means that whatever context we are in, we are predisposed toward what is happening inside of us more than we are in what is taking place around us.” In fact, he argues in one place that “the introverted trajectory of growth is toward relationships with others and relationship with the outside world.”

The value of McHugh’s insights goes beyond a mere description and defense of the introverted personality. He challenges the American evangelical preference for extroverts and disdain for introverts. This disorder has disabled the church by overlooking the immense contribution that introverts can make. God has created the inward parts of the introvert just as he has the extrovert. He has gifted them in ways that greatly benefit the rest of us, if we choose to value them for who they are and not merely tolerate them as second-class citizens.

Posted in The Church - the Body of Christ | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

FEAR OF THE FUTURE

Posted on January 4, 2011 by stanwiedeman

I wrote the following article in 11/27/2000. A terrorist attack on American soil, a war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the election of the first African-American president, the crash of Wall Street and an economic recession later, and where are we? Have things changed? In some ways. But in some very important ways, nothing has changed.

Leadership must always bear appropriate responsibility for the direction and outcomes of those whom it influences, but we should keep it all in perspective of a greater vision of history. Is God acting in and through these leaders and their decisions? What are His purposes? Does prayer make any difference in what happens or is political activity the real path to liberation?

Well, the 2000 Presidential election is finally over — in your dreams. Katherine Harris once again certified a winner in the Florida race, but Vice-President Gore had already indicated that he would continue to challenge the results until “the voice of the people is heard.” The election may be an election judge’s nightmare, but it is a media mogul’s fantasy – and just in time to rescue many journalists from unemployment lines following the millennium-mania of last year.

Many things must disturb any thinking Christian, from the ability to interpret a voter’s intent based on a dimpled chad, to the demonstrations of overly zealous political activists who seem to believe that their chanting (or ranting?) should affect vote tallies. But we should not allow political manipulations and maneuvers to subvert our faith in the sovereignty of the God who “rules over the nations” (Ps. 22:28).

Is this election important? We probably should not rank it in the top ten. Historically our nation has faced greater crises than some that loom on our immediate horizon. It is not unimportant, however. But then, what election of a national ruler ever is? Some critical issues await the attention of our 43rd President, issues that will have varying consequences for our future. And who knows what crisis may invade our national peace in the next four years?

But let’s put this election in its theological context. Regardless of who is inaugurated in January, 2001, he will be the man that God has sovereignly appointed to office. “But God is the Judge; He puts down one, and exalts another” (Ps. 75:7). “And it is He who changes the times and the epochs; He removes kings and establishes kings” (Dan. 2:21). No man ever has, or ever will, sit in the oval office whom God did not determine to sit there.

In times when rulers were determined by their genetic heritage rather than hand recounts, God demonstrated this authority. Nebudchadnezzar was probably the most powerful man in sixth century B.C. One day he awoke with a craving to eat grass like cattle and an uncontrollable urge to roam in the fields with the wild beasts. This mighty king entered into a phase of insanity, until he recognized “that the Most High is ruler over the realm of mankind, and bestows it on whomever He wishes” (Dan. 4:25). When that time was complete, God restored Nebuchadnezzar to his throne, and the king acknowledged before God that “no one can ward off His hand, or say to Him, ‘What hast Thou done?’” (Dan. 4:35).

Another world-class ruler enjoyed the benefits of probably the most advanced civilization in history. Possessing enough political power to control any slave uprisings, why should he listen to the request of an elderly Hebrew misfit to allow these slaves to go into the wilderness to worship their God? God, however, had a plan for this arrogant and stubborn king. “I will harden Pharaoh’s heart that I may multiply My signs and My wonders in the land of Egypt. . . . Then the Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord, when I stretch out My hand on Egypt and bring the sons of Israel from their midst” (Ex. 7:3-5). Ten plagues later, this mocking monarch begged Israel to leave his land. Israel learned that “God removes kings and establishes kings.”

In our democratic society where government is designed to be participatory, have we learned that lesson yet? Perhaps we naively believe that our republic is a reflection of the heavenly form of government. That democracy is divinely established to replace unstable monarchies. That God does not need to intervene since the will of the voters is sufficient to preserve a stable society. That a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, will usher in the final kingdom (or, uh, republic? uh, democracy?)

God is in His holy temple. He is seated on His throne. He is not merely an observer to history. He is history’s author. All of history, including the vote count in Florida, is unfolding precisely as He has already determined that it should. Nothing will interfere with His plan. That is where we “strangers and aliens” should place our confidence. After all, the next four years are very temporal, and we are looking forward to the eternal government of our eternal King.

Followers of Christ should be active in government affairs. We bring a perspective to the table that citizens of this world only cannot offer. We should provide a view of justice and compassion that reflects the nature of our Creator. We can bring the kingdom of God, the character of God’s rule, to bear on all three branches of government.

Yet, we also bring a confidence in the course of history, regardless of what turn it takes. As we live with faith in a sovereign God and trust in His plan of redemptive grace, we should not worry or panic if crises explode. Let’s bring that faith to the table in the second decade of 2000.

 

 

Posted in Politics and Christianity | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A LESSON FROM A FOUR-LEGGED FRIEND

Posted on December 22, 2010 by stanwiedeman

My wife and I watched Marley & Me the other night. The subtitle, The Life and Love of the World’s Worst Dog, reveals the movie’s plot. Marley is a yellow Labrador retriever, which becomes a test run of parenthood for John and Jenny Grogan (Owen Wilson and Jennifer Anniston). Although the story deals with the complexities of married life and personal identity, clearly the dog gets most of the screen time (or should I say the 22 dogs that played Marley throughout his life).

The movie is a real tear-jerker. In fact, it placed number 5 in a poll of the 20 movies that make men cry. All right, I confess. They were flowing down my cheeks. But come on. How can anyone who has ever owned a dog not be sobbing as you watch the final departure of this loveable, heroic mutt from the family who loved him?

I couldn’t help remembering my Irish Setter, Star. I took my new puppy with me when I began seminary. She was mild-tempered for a setter, unlike Marley. But she did share a deathly fear of thunderstorms with Marley. I was shocked to come home one day, after a storm, to find my chaise lounge ripped in shreds. Along with Marley, Star even survived torsion of the stomach, numbering among the fortunate ten percent.

Early one morning Star roused me from bed, which I thought was strange. Then I realized smoke was filling my bedroom. A comforter had fallen off the bed onto a space heater and was beginning to burn. I was able to extinguish it in the bathtub. Star knew something was wrong and awoke me, saving my life.

Why do humans form such powerful emotional bonds with their pets? (I will include all animals here, although I believe dogs occupy a privileged status as “man’s best friend.”) Animals are animals. They are not people. Maybe I am stating the obvious, but the line becomes blurred for most pet-lovers.

Perhaps John Grogan captures the essence of this relationship at the end of the movie. “A dog has no use for fancy cars, big homes or designer clothes. A water-logged stick will do just fine. A dog doesn’t care if you’re rich or poor, clever or dull, smart or dumb. Give him your heart and he’ll give you his. How many people can you say that about? How many people can make you feel rare and pure and special? How many people can make you feel extraordinary?”

Dogs model unconditional love. They are loyal and faithful without expectations. They do not demand that you return their unwavering acceptance. They just hope that you will meet a few of their basic needs: food, water shelter and occasional protection.

When it comes to human relationships, something gets in the way. We tend to pile needs upon needs, building Maslow’s pyramid. We entangle those needs with expectations, making the relationship more fragile. When the system is contaminated by sin, the relationship now requires intentional and diligent effort by both people. Carelessness, neglect and misunderstanding can wound the relationship deeply.

Love offered may not simply mean love received. Mistrust may convolute it with conditions. Misinterpretation may treat it as something more or less than it is. Insecurities may erect walls that love cannot penetrate. What a muddled mess we make of human relationships.

Is it any wonder that we bipeds place such value on the simplicity of a relationship with a quadruped? We can yell at them without needing to confess and explain later. We can ignore them, but still find them panting with glee when we arrive home. We can use them to somehow meet our own feeble needs, but they are content just to get our attention.

As Grogan gave his profound epitaph on the qualities of canine love, he was looking through the screen door at his wife and three children. Their marriage had survived the sorrow of a miscarriage, the sacrifice of a career and construction of a new identity to provide maternal care, the depression and angst produced by months of sleep deprivation, the transplant of home and family in order to pursue a new job, and a host of other stresses that marriage and family life place on relationships.

When Grogan asked, “How many people can make you feel extraordinary?” I think he already knew the answer. He was looking at them.

The depth and richness of relationships between creatures created in the image of the Creator cannot be equaled anywhere on this earth. Only the divine love of a Father and Redeemer for his wayward children surpasses human love. Don’t give up on those relationships God has brought into your life. In the end, they will be worth more than everything you invest in them.

 

Posted in Love, Movies, Nature of Man | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

ESCAPING THE CHRISTMAS INSANITY

Posted on December 13, 2010 by stanwiedeman

How will you spend Christmas? This question employs double entendre, because it uses the word “spend” with two meanings. The question usually implies the way that you practice your holiday celebration. With whom? What traditions? But in a consumer culture, the more common meaning of “spend” really applies here. How will you disburse your money, time and resources during the Christmas holidays?

Christmas is, first and foremost, a religious holiday. The day celebrates the birth of Jesus, Israel’s Messiah, the Son of God. Most of the traditions practiced this time of year somehow relate to that celebration. They focus on remembering the significance of the incarnation, the day God entered the world as a man.

Somehow secular culture has co-opted the holiday. Christmas provides an opportunity for social gatherings – an endless parade of parties. Most of these soirees have more to do with cocktails and schmoozing than it does with the Christ and worship.

The greatest extortion, however, has been committed by corporations. Christmas has become a season for spending money – lots of it. And retailers invest enormous amounts of money in advertising to convince you that you and your loved one will be so much happier after you purchase their products. Credit card companies alone spend more that $150 million on marketing.

I have tried hard to avoid this consumer ambush. Don’t get me wrong. Giving presents is not really a bad thing. It can be both fun and deeply meaningful. But it requires balance. Some experts estimate that more than half of Christmas shoppers overspend and increase their debt. At least $70 billion, over half of the money spent on Christmas last year, remains in debt retirement this Christmas.

The most insidious danger of the consumer Christmas is the myth that entices you to believe that happiness is directly related to wealth and the things it can buy. You may know better intellectually, but the subtle message of all those commercials, billboards, ads and, yes, holiday movies sabotage the heart. Then, when the pine needles have fallen and the presents are finally stored, you notice a discontentment in your soul and you promise not to get caught in the insanity next year.

Ironically, it is this insanity, in various forms, that Jesus came to heal. John Dwight phrased it this way in his song, “O Holy Night!”

Long lay the world in sin and error pining, Till he appeared and the soul felt its worth. A thrill of hope the weary world rejoices, For yonder breaks a new and glorious morn.

The world has been deluded by myths and enslaved to lies. It continues to search for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. And the world pines, painfully yearning for respite from the emptiness and anguish.

Light pierced the darkness. The birth of Jesus offered a new hope, release and relief. The soul that welcomes this baby as the incarnate Son of God discovers a happiness that is real and lasting, even without the parties and the presents.

You can escape the insanity, but it requires effort. Keep a limit on the activities. Plan outings that invest in the lives of those who are forgotten or neglected. Reduce the shopping list. Give to organizations in the name of people on your list. The gift multiplies itself by diverting attention from the self to the poor and suffering. Avoid television. Instead of increasing your viewing during the season, restrict it to programs that offer truth rather than lies disguised by sentimentality.

Keep reminding yourself of the reason for the season. It’s about Jesus. It’s about God’s invasion of the fallen creation. It’s about a renewed hope. It’s about a rescue from sin and its fallout. It’s about true joy. It’s about the glory of God. Don’t miss it.

Merry Christmas!

Posted in Christmas, Incarnation of Christ | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

CAN BAD MEMORIES BE GOOD FOR US?

Posted on December 7, 2010 by stanwiedeman

Is there any tragic or traumatic memory that you wish you could erase? An untimely death of a friend? An accident that still gives you chills when you remember it? A gut-wrenching broken relationship?

Michael Gondry used this premise to write Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Joel (Jim Carrey) learns that his girlfriend of two years (Kate Winslet) has erased the memory of their relationship. He visits the same doctor to have the procedure done to him. During the process he decides he really does not want to forget her, and tries to hide his memories from the technicians conducting the neurological search-and-destroy mission.

The 2004 movie was only a few years ahead of the science. In 2005, the fear-factor gene was discovered. This led researchers at the Medical College of Georgia and Shanghai Institute of Brain Functional Genomics to conduct experiments on laboratory mice to see if the science fiction was possible. They discovered that a drug induced at a specified time could remove certain proteins from the brain’s fear center to eliminate selected memories from the mice.

Last month, the chair of the department of neuroscience at Hopkins School of Medicine, Richard Huganir, said that the discovery of the molecular process in the formation of memories “raises the possibility of manipulating those mechanisms with drugs to enhance behavioral therapy for such conditions as post-traumatic stress disorder.” Some PTSD sufferers experience certain levels of healing from current behavioral therapy.

Debate surrounds the research. Kate Farinholt, executive director of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) questioned the ethics of the practice. “Erasing a memory and then everything bad built on that is an amazing idea, and I can see all sorts of potential. But completely deleting a memory, assuming it’s one memory, is a little scary. How do you remove a memory without removing a whole part of someone’s life, and is it best to do that, considering that people grow and learn from their experiences?”

Some recent films, like The Hurt Locker or the HBO miniseries, Band of Brothers, provide a better understanding of the kind of trauma military combatants suffer. These events can deeply scar people emotionally. Victims may be willing to take the risks incurred for relief.

Farinholt raises an important concern. Human memories are not usually isolated. Through layers of networks, they link with other memories, thoughts, beliefs, habits and personality formation. Even if the isolated memory could be erased, the consequences of that memory would not be reversed.

On a theological level, memories of bad events seem necessary for a fuller understanding of the grace of God. By God’s grace, one who believes in Jesus Christ is transformed into a new person (2 Corinthians 5:17). Walking in this grace, the new person in Christ participates in sanctification, the process of growing in relationship with Christ and in the habits of the new life in Christ. God’s grace is transformative.

Without memories of bad events, a believer would not likely seek the grace of God to discover the changes needed from those bad events, changes in perspective, emotions, beliefs and habits. After accepting God’s grace in Christ, the change in the apostle Paul’s life was dramatic, but the memory of his personal assault on the early followers of Jesus haunted him (Acts 26:9-10). Considering himself to be the worst of sinners (1 Timothy 1:15) drove him to God for grace and forgiveness.

But these bad memories were self-induced. What about the memories of the pain that others inflicted on someone through abuse or neglect? Can these be redemptive? These memories often produce emotional damage that cripples people. How could these memories benefit?

The New Testament writers agreed that suffering could yield great benefit. Paul said that tribulation could bring perseverance, character, hope and a greater awareness of God’s love (Romans 5:3-5). James urged believers to rejoice in suffering, because it could result in endurance, which is necessary for maturity (James 1:2-4).

These products of suffering depend upon a response of faith in God’s wisdom, love, sovereignty and grace. For some, the journey of acquiring these benefits is long and difficult, but many will attest that the joy of experiencing God’s grace along the way far outweighs the suffering. Deleting those memories would abort that journey of discovery.

Science continues to push the edges of ethical and theological restraint. A shallow or truncated view of human nature can result in dehumanizing people in the name of compassion. The so-called eternal sunshine may actually be the darkness of a missed opportunity to find true light.

Posted in Christians Engaging Culture, Science and Faith, Suffering | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment