{"id":367,"date":"2012-04-14T22:09:16","date_gmt":"2012-04-14T21:09:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.morbidcornflakes.ch\/thduggies_blog\/2012\/everybodys-normal-part-ii"},"modified":"2012-04-14T22:09:16","modified_gmt":"2012-04-14T21:09:16","slug":"everybodys-normal-part-ii","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thduggie.com\/thduggies_blog\/2012\/everybodys-normal-part-ii","title":{"rendered":"Everybody’s Normal… Part II"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Everybody'sI’ve already begun summarizing John Ortberg’s “Everybody’s Normal Till You Get to Know Them<\/a>” – you can find my summary of and thoughts on Part I here<\/a>.\u00c2\u00a0 If you’ve already read my Part I summary, you’ll know that I’m summarizing mostly for my own benefit.\u00c2\u00a0 I will omit parts I don’t find helpful or interesting and include comments and further thoughts of my own, making no claim whatsoever to completeness or accuracy.\u00c2\u00a0 My goal is to support my memory, and if you, dear reader, benefit in the process, so much the better.<\/p>\n

In Part II Ortberg talks about how to get close to others without getting hurt.\u00c2\u00a0 We’re all in various stages of this dance in each of our relationships, though it’s not a given that our partner is at the same stage.\u00c2\u00a0 Perhaps we’re asking someone to dance who’s persistently ignoring us, or we’re missing the cues that someone is hoping for a few steps with us; perhaps we’re stepping on toes unawares, or trying to embrace someone salsa-style who’s wearing a hoop skirt and expecting a waltz.\u00c2\u00a0 Unfortunately, it’s harder to tell than in an actual dance hall, which is why Ortberg can write a few chapters on it.<\/p>\n

One point he makes is that in each relationship, the disclosure of who we are happens in a cautious progression, because of our “awareness that there are parts of us that are not too attractive.”\u00c2\u00a0 This, Ortberg says, is a consequence of the Fall.\u00c2\u00a0 We are no longer normal, we know it, and reveal it only to those we trust.\u00c2\u00a0 This progressive revelation is to be respected, Ortberg writes: “[N]o one – not even [God] himself – can get another person to be in a relationship by brute force. (…) [I]n authentic community, people are never coerced or manipulated into self-disclosure.”\u00c2\u00a0 This respect is a form of grace, an echo of how God treats us.<\/p>\n

Ortberg makes a point to distinguish this hiding of our unattractive parts from solitude.\u00c2\u00a0 Hiding is a sign of our weakness: it results from the Fall.\u00c2\u00a0 “The capacity for solitude,” Ortberg says, “is an indication of strength,” and predates the Fall.<\/p>\n

Having established the progression of disclosure in our relationships, Ortberg proposes three stages of openness on the way to community.\u00c2\u00a0 The first stage is guarded communication<\/em>.\u00c2\u00a0 Expressing every thought and feeling, according to Ortberg, is “[n]either wise [n]or biblical. (…) Scripture writers caution people to use wisdom about what they reveal.\u00c2\u00a0 In particular, don’t do deep disclosure with an untrustworthy person.\u00c2\u00a0 You can get badly hurt.\u00c2\u00a0 There is<\/em> a place for guarded communication.\u00c2\u00a0 But that’s not where true community lies.”<\/p>\n

The second stage Ortberg identifies is everyday authenticity<\/em>.\u00c2\u00a0 Everyday authenticity is the opposite of image management.\u00c2\u00a0 Ortberg uses the example of makeup, which covers up blemishes and underscores strengths in an effort to present a prettier face.\u00c2\u00a0 (Unfortunately, I read this section just before boarding a plane with an old logo on it.\u00c2\u00a0 It flew just fine, but I can attest that sometimes makeup does powerfully influence my trust level.)\u00c2\u00a0 But makeup is trivial; we use more sophisticated methods of image management (which Ortberg calls veils): “Some people hide behind their humor.\u00c2\u00a0 (…)\u00c2\u00a0 Some people use their intelligence as a veil.\u00c2\u00a0 Others use ignorance.\u00c2\u00a0 Some veil themselves in busyness, in their work, in their vast competence and success.\u00c2\u00a0 Some people have high-tech veils with remote controls or mouse pads.\u00c2\u00a0 Ironically, many people in the church veil themselves in spirituality.\u00c2\u00a0 They quote Bible verses or speak of ‘having deep peace’ or speak of ‘God being in control.’\u00c2\u00a0 They may say things that sound impossible to argue with, but their words are moats of protection, not bridges of relationship.\u00c2\u00a0 (…)\u00c2\u00a0 What’s your veil?” he concludes.\u00c2\u00a0 “If you’re not sure, the people closest to you can tell you.”\u00c2\u00a0 Marriage comes in handy here: Janet observes me daily and had a few pointers.\u00c2\u00a0 Their general thrust (not surprising for a guy) is that I tend to project superior competence or knowledge, for instance by passing an absolute judgment that isn’t open for discussion (“the composition of his photo could be better,” “that was a lousy parking job”) or by claiming certainty that my mistake won’t matter in the long run (“You bumped the other car!” “Ehh, no biggie.\u00c2\u00a0 Just a Boston kiss.”).<\/p>\n

If you’ve observed children, it’s obvious that these veils or masks are a learned behavior.\u00c2\u00a0 School is great at teaching it, for what is school but a great game of guessing and fulfilling expectations?\u00c2\u00a0 And after playing that game for years, it’s hardly a surprise it remains a habit, even though nobody wants it: not friends, not employers, not our church.\u00c2\u00a0 “The irony of the masks is that although we wear them to make other people think well of us, they are drawn to us only when we take them off.”\u00c2\u00a0 A corollary of that statement is that the best way to deepen a relationship is to make yourself vulnerable first.<\/p>\n

The third stage, deep disclosure with a few trusted friends<\/em>, Ortberg defines as “telling another human being those aspects of our lives that make us most vulnerable.\u00c2\u00a0 At this level we dare to unveil areas of failure or embarrassment that are quite intimate.\u00c2\u00a0 This kind of disclosure should not be entered into lightly.”\u00c2\u00a0 But “[y]ou cannot be loved if you are not fully known. (…) Sin causes us to seek hiddenness and separation, which in turn destroy community.\u00c2\u00a0 In confession, we enter back into community.\u00c2\u00a0 We come out of hiding. (…) One of the greatest steps you can take toward living in community is this: Move toward having someone in your life who knows all about you<\/em>.”\u00c2\u00a0 Ortberg mentions warning signs not to disclose deeply, such as inappropriate use of humor, judgmental statements or premature advice, and violating a confidence – but no matter how aware we are, “[r]isk is an indispensable aspect of authentic self-disclosure.”\u00c2\u00a0 In other words, self-disclosure should always be a mite scary.\u00c2\u00a0 If it isn’t, you’re probably disclosing trivialities.<\/p>\n

Ortberg stops to make sure readers understand that disclosure isn’t the be-all end-all.\u00c2\u00a0 “We don’t just need disclosure.\u00c2\u00a0 We need forgiveness, healing, and grace.”\u00c2\u00a0 We need the cross.<\/p>\n

We can foster disclosure, Ortberg says, by practicing acceptance on our part.\u00c2\u00a0 “Every word we speak has the power either to give a little life to people or to destroy a little bit of their spirit and vitality.”\u00c2\u00a0 How often have I carelessly spoken and carelessly quenched someone’s spirit?\u00c2\u00a0 Ortberg illustrates the principle with the story of the adulteress caught red-handed, which includes Jesus’ oft-quoted words: “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.”\u00c2\u00a0 He argues that we all carry our sins of the spirit as figurative stones – judgmental thoughts, superior attitudes, impatient words, bitter resentments, lovelessness.\u00c2\u00a0 “What is so insidious about the sins of the spirit is that the carriers don’t have a clue.”\u00c2\u00a0 But, Ortberg says, “[t]here is no room in Jesus’ community for throwing stones.\u00c2\u00a0 We are all too broken.”\u00c2\u00a0 We come in “two (…) categories: sinners who admit, and sinners who deny.”<\/p>\n

Note: Acceptance isn’t lazy indulgence or toleration.\u00c2\u00a0 The story ends with Jesus telling the adulteress to “go, and sin no more.”<\/p>\n

An integral part of acceptance is empathy, and Ortberg devotes the next chapter to this skill, in particular to non-verbal communication essential to reading others.\u00c2\u00a0 “One dangerous aspect of this skill,” Ortberg writes, “is that generally people who don’t read others well aren’t aware that they don’t. (…) The good news is that relational intelligence can be learned.”\u00c2\u00a0 That’s a pretty sneaky way to make sure everyone feels obliged to read on.\u00c2\u00a0 Here are some bits that stuck out.<\/p>\n

“When we practice [Proverbs 10:19<\/a>, i.e. we curtail our talking], we begin to learn amazing things.\u00c2\u00a0 We can live without getting the last word.\u00c2\u00a0 We can live without trying to make sure we control how other people are thinking about us.\u00c2\u00a0 We can live without winning every argument, without powering up over every decision, without always drawing attention to ourselves.”<\/p>\n

“When we stop talking, we also have the opportunity to engage in the most important intimacy-building skill in the world: listening.\u00c2\u00a0 (…)\u00c2\u00a0 It is ironic that we try to impress people by saying clever or funny things, yet nothing binds one human being to another more than the sense that they have been deeply, carefully listened to.”\u00c2\u00a0 Deep, careful listening includes asking questions, too – questions designed to draw out the other and learn more about him, without stopping the flow of his account.<\/p>\n

“[O]ne of the hardest things in the world is to be right and not hurt anybody with it.”\u00c2\u00a0 Otherwise we end up “winning disagreements and losing friends.”\u00c2\u00a0 In addition, “[b]eing fully right rarely brings as much life to people as simply being human.\u00c2\u00a0 (…)\u00c2\u00a0 ‘Seeing someone you admire do something stupid or clumsy will make you like him more.'”\u00c2\u00a0 This challenges me especially as a father, where I have the tendency to think my greatest asset is being right and knowing what the kids ought to do.<\/p>\n

“Without proper attention, relationships tend to drift.”\u00c2\u00a0 But attention doesn’t equal attention: the emotions of those interacting play a great role.\u00c2\u00a0 “Emotions are more contagious than the flu” and exchanged like a relational economy.\u00c2\u00a0 “Relationally intelligent people ask, ‘Who are the biggest contributors to our emotional economy?'”\u00c2\u00a0 I need not become dramatically expressive to be a contributor.\u00c2\u00a0 I need only to build up the vitality of those around me.<\/p>\n

“You are a guardian of the human spirit.\u00c2\u00a0 You have the power to manipulate and coerce if you want to.\u00c2\u00a0 You can avoid and ignore if you choose.\u00c2\u00a0 But you can also ennoble and inspire.\u00c2\u00a0 You can lift up and appeal to all that is good and honorable and holy.\u00c2\u00a0 You can remind fallible and finite people around you that they hold their lives and calling as a sacred trust, that their best efforts matter, that their worst failures will one day be redeemed.”<\/p>\n

Ortberg ends Part II with a chapter on conflict, because “community is worth fighting for.”\u00c2\u00a0 Ortberg uses Matthew 18:15 as a guideline, which could use a little more examination for the cases in which the second party doesn’t respond well at any of the stages.\u00c2\u00a0 Personally, I found his discussion of anger helpful.\u00c2\u00a0 He likens anger to a smoke detector: it’s a useful indicator, but it needs to be understood as such and only go off when warranted.\u00c2\u00a0 “Anger exists so you will be motivated to make it go away.\u00c2\u00a0 However, taking wise action while you are angry is exceedingly difficult.\u00c2\u00a0 As the arousal level goes up, you suffer from what therapists sometimes call ‘cognitive incapacitation.'”\u00c2\u00a0 Ortberg suggests stopping and asking “two key questions. (…) The first key question is, ‘Why am I angry?’\u00c2\u00a0 The second question to ask is, ‘What do I want?’ What would I like the outcome of this situation to be?\u00c2\u00a0 (…)\u00c2\u00a0 When we get angry, we start thinking about what we can say that will win the argument or inflict pain.\u00c2\u00a0 (…)\u00c2\u00a0 [A]nger makes us feel that we are absolutely in the right and are justified to do anything to hurt the other person.\u00c2\u00a0 So a very good thing for people with anger issues to say is, ‘I could be wrong.'”\u00c2\u00a0 It need not even be an urge to hurt and would – I much more frequently see my anger leading to defensive justification.\u00c2\u00a0 And justifying myself doesn’t encourage the other person to open up to me.<\/p>\n

“The litmus test of spirituality is not the absence of conflict; conflict will not disappear until we die.\u00c2\u00a0 The litmus test is how we handle it.”\u00c2\u00a0 “[I]f you’re going to involve a third party, you should do it with the goal of finding reconciliation.”\u00c2\u00a0 “[The] need for sensitivity is one of the most important – and often misunderstood – aspects of healthy anger management.\u00c2\u00a0 (…)\u00c2\u00a0 Three major reviews, covering dozens of studies over several decades, did not find a single study that demonstrates that catharsis – letting anger fly – is an effective way to manage anger.\u00c2\u00a0 It just creates more anger.”<\/p>\n

One point Ortberg makes is the difficulty of “saying the hardest but most important truth.\u00c2\u00a0 We fail to say the last 10 percent.\u00c2\u00a0 We get vague and fuzzy precisely when clarity is most needed by the other person.\u00c2\u00a0 Instead of saying, ‘You talked too much at the meeting,’ I might say, ‘It was hard to have a good conversation.'”\u00c2\u00a0 Ortberg puts this down to fear and pain avoidance, which may be partly true.\u00c2\u00a0 What he doesn’t mention is the risk taken at this juncture.\u00c2\u00a0 Confronting someone with something that hurt me makes me vulnerable to further hurt if the other party denies wrongdoing, especially when the offense isn’t directly provable.\u00c2\u00a0 His framework offers a good illustration.<\/p>\n

“Here is a general framework for the last 10 percent:
\na. Describe clearly what you observed: ‘You weren’t really listening to me.’
\nb. Explain how it hurt you: ‘I found myself feeling that I don’t matter to you.’
\nc. Tell what the consequences have been: ‘This could cause distance in our relationship, and I don’t want that.’
\nd. Ask for the change you would like: ‘I want to connect when we’re together.'”<\/p>\n

Now what if the other party answered after the first statement, and said: “No, I was listening.”?\u00c2\u00a0 Regardless of how clearly you formulated your observation, your reality has been denied, the other party has declared his reality superior to yours, and there are now no more grounds for you to feel hurt.\u00c2\u00a0 Not only are you still hurt because he didn’t listen, but you are now also rejected and implicitly told to feel guilty for your feelings of hurt.\u00c2\u00a0 Ortberg fails to address what to do when the other party is unresponsive, which I find is a weakness in this section.<\/p>\n

The main point is Ortberg’s last: “Aim at reconciliation.\u00c2\u00a0 (…)\u00c2\u00a0 If you’re not ready to do this, you’re probably not ready for the first six.\u00c2\u00a0 Direct confrontation doesn’t always do good.\u00c2\u00a0 Sometimes it escalates the conflict.\u00c2\u00a0 Sometimes it leads to violence.\u00c2\u00a0 Confrontation can do tremendous damage.\u00c2\u00a0 (…)\u00c2\u00a0 Sometimes we get deep scars and wounds from people.\u00c2\u00a0 Then we need something more than anger management.\u00c2\u00a0 We need a miracle.”<\/p>\n

The miracle, Ortberg writes, is forgiveness – but that’s Part III.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I’ve already begun summarizing John Ortberg’s “Everybody’s Normal Till You Get to Know Them” – you can find my summary of and thoughts on Part I here.\u00c2\u00a0 If you’ve already read my Part I summary, you’ll know that I’m summarizing mostly for my own benefit.\u00c2\u00a0 I will omit parts I don’t find helpful or interesting and include comments and further thoughts of my own, making no claim whatsoever to completeness or accuracy.\u00c2\u00a0 My goal is to support my memory, and if you, dear reader, benefit in the process, so much the better. In Part II Ortberg talks about how to get close to others without getting hurt.\u00c2\u00a0 We’re all in […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thduggie.com\/thduggies_blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/367"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thduggie.com\/thduggies_blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thduggie.com\/thduggies_blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thduggie.com\/thduggies_blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thduggie.com\/thduggies_blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=367"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.thduggie.com\/thduggies_blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/367\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thduggie.com\/thduggies_blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=367"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thduggie.com\/thduggies_blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=367"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thduggie.com\/thduggies_blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=367"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}