Category Archives: conflicts

Rwanda Day Five


Today we visited Nsinda Prison (population 8000) to interview those convicted of genocide. As we pulled up to the prison we met a large group of prisoners returning to the prison from the fields. They had only 1 guard with a machine gun and another with a stick. Many prisoners carried produce. Again, it felt like we were transported back a century. It was a dusty ancient looking place with shirtless male prisoners carrying huge logs on their shoulders (for firewood for their cooking fires). We were ushered to a bare cinder block room with a log and metal roof. 4 stools were brought for us. One of us noticed several wasp hives attached to the roof. In walked 19 prisoners all accused and convicted of mass murder. Quite a few were women and two had babies. One baby nursed throughout the session. The one guard stood outside the room with the door open to the out of doors. We asked them about their experiences. These individuals denied much wrongdoing, felt their former government led them astray, confessed, asked for forgiveness but felt they were denied it. They espoused genocidal ideology in that Tutsis were accused of killing the president and succeeding in forcing out the Hutus in the country.

Oh, as we entered the prison, we were greeted with “Nothing but the Blood” in native tongue over a loudspeaker. Apparently, there was a church service going on. What a contrast between the song (which recognizes guilt and the need for cleansing and the perceived innocence of the genocidaires (“I only mutilated dead bodies.”)

Leave a comment

Filed under christian counseling, christian psychology, conflicts, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Psychiatric Medications, Psychology, Rwanda

Why texting is hazardous to your life


We already know that texting while driving endangers lives. No surprise there. But have you considered the danger of texting while angry? Texting while avoiding?

Consider the following situation. You have a set-to with a loved one while each are at work. Finding yourself hurt and angry, the thought crosses your mind to text that person to say something mature like,

“fine. u go rite ahed and do it. c if i care.”

Of course, you don’t really mean “fine.” Nor do you  want them to “go ahead”. You do care, otherwise you wouldn’t be texting while angry.

Notice the dangers here:

1. Texting give us the illusion of connection. We can send a message to communicate with another but don’t really call it a connection.
2. Texting provides an opportunity to jab each other when angry but avoid (for a few moments anyway) seeing the impact of that jab. Sure, we could say these silly and immature things to the other’s face, but with the advent of texting we don’t have to admit to ourselves that our words have impact.
3. Texting allows another to keep a record of our wrongs; to read it again and again and maintain the hurts. Yes, we can remember words spoken in anger, but keeping a copy would be tempting and very dangerous.

For those of you who text, maybe a few rules should apply.

  • If you are tempted to text someone so you can avoid them, don’t.
  • Don’t text or email when angry.
  • Ask yourself about impact: Does it truly meet the constructive requirement of Ephesians? And if it does, why not say it face to face?

4 Comments

Filed under anger, christian psychology, Christianity, conflicts, Relationships

Apologies revisited: Heard a good one lately?


Public, direct, and heartfelt apologies are difficult…and rare.

I’ve written here numerous times about apologies and repentance. I find public apologies very interesting, especially by those who can afford to pay someone to help them “get it right.” Last week I listened to a public figure hold a press conference after his conviction for DUI. This person has a lot of money and access to all of the best “coaches”. And yet, his apology was all about himself. Asked what he learned? “I learned that life is full of second chances and I got one.” Now, that could mean that he realizes that he was protected from killing someone with his car. He avoided ending his career. Or, it could mean something far less than remorse. Really, his “apology” was all about himself.
 
Here’s my question to readers: Have you witnessed or experienced a “home run” apology? What made it so? What features were present? How did you know it wasn’t merely learning the right words? Did you ever think you received a real heartfelt apology only to discover later it wasn’t?

In “Machete Season” (book about Rwandan “killers”), one victim gives one requirement:

“If killers come to church to pray to God on their knees, to show us their remorse, I cannot pray either with them or against them. Real regrets are said eye to eye, not to statues of God.” (p. 163)

3 Comments

Filed under conflicts, Cultural Anthropology, News and politics, Repentance, self-deception

Final thoughts on roots of evil


Well not really. Just that I posted on Tuesday that I would add a few more thoughts on this topic. On Sunday, Terry Traylor preached on the last verse of Judges and the first part of Matthew 21. You can hear it here. In his sermon he gave a nice summary of the book of Judges and the cycle we find in it:

1. The people stop dealing with sin, begin to flirt with it
2. God gives them over to their desires. He lets them have what they demand.
3. The people slowly recognize the problem, take a long time to do something about it, but finally call to the Lord for help.
4. God raises up a protector/deliverer.
5. God provides a period or rest and safety

Unfortunately, the cycle repeats itself. Except for one small problem: the cycle is broken when the people fail to cry out to God for help but keep going on their way. We could call it the “butterfly effect.” When the people fail to get rid of the idols but accept forms of syncretism, then it allows temple workers (Levites) to make it okay to have a concubine in the first place. He doesn’t protect her when some rapists come his way. He shows her no concern after her rape. She dies and he doesn’t give her the decency of a burial but sends her body parts to the 12 tribes and tells only the part that makes others look bad. And ultimately this butterfly effect ends with thousands dead in a civil war and innocent women stolen and subjected to forced marriages. All because everyone did right in their own eyes.

It would seem that this is part of the problem in Rwanda. You have a rather religious/Christian population that flirts with hatred and jealousy of the other, turns a blind eye to neighbors doing violence to others and ends up with civil strife and genocide.

Leave a comment

Filed under Abuse, Biblical Reflection, conflicts, deception, self-deception, sin

Some more thoughts on the roots of evil


Continuing my reading about the tragedies in Rwanda, I’m now following the writer Jean Hatzfeld–thanks to my colleague Carol King. He has written a few books on the genocide in an attempt to give voice to both surviving victim and killer. “Machete Season: The Killers in Rwanda Speak” is a chilling mix of interview of 10 “killers” from the district south of the capital and background information

[FYI, for those following this blog for some time, my trip to Rwanda has been delayed until at least July. Pray that it happens then!].

For most of the world, Rwanda was a quiet, tiny country that exploded into Tutsi genocide in 1994 after their Hutu president was assassinated. One day it is calm, the next an entire population of Hutus begin systematically destroying their Tutsi neighbors. Even soccer teammates killed each other, with no remorse.  

But dig a little and you find out that this is not so. Despite living and working together, Hutus (the majority) felt the minority Tutsis (treated as the upperclass by Europeans in the formation of Rwanda) had too much power. Much radio and media did comic portrayals about the killing of cockroaches (the Tutsis). Apparently, they were so funny that even the Tutsis listened and laughed.

It looks like this is what happened:

1. Conflict between groups, fanned by leadership (read pp 52-58 for how it happened).
2. Use of both comic discussions of killings plus occasional actual killings going unpunished
3. Lots of free beer, food (many ate meat every day when normally they only ate it at weddings), and promises of rewards
4. Threats of violence to Hutus if they do not follow outsiders orders. These outsiders “apprenticed” farmers into killers.
5. A large group involved (100% involvement) with lots of camraderie so as to defuse guilty feelings.
6. A simple task ordered: kill.
7. The abandonment by the white individuals in the country and so gave the sense that the world didn’t care and wouldn’t hold them accountable.

This is quite a chilling book (because thus far there is no apology or blameshifting in the book by those being interviewed). Here’s one especially difficult passage:

For my part, I offer you an explanation: it is as if I had let another individual take on my own living appearance, and the habits of my heart, without a single pang in my soul. This killer was indeed me, as to the offense he committed and the blood he shed, but he is a stranger to me in his ferocity. I admit and recognize my obedience at that time, my victims, my fault, but I fail to recognize the wickedness of the one who raced through the marshes on my legs, carrying my machete. That wickedness seems to belong to another self with a heavy heart. The most serious changes in my body were my invisible parts, such as the soul or the feelings that go with it. Therefore I alone do not recognize mysefl in that man. (p. 48)

Tomorrow I will post one more on this topic: the pattern of running away from and then back to the Lord as seen in Judges. Or, how we stop seeing our sin and forget to cry out to God.

3 Comments

Filed under conflicts, Cultural Anthropology, Rwanda, self-deception

Further thoughts about conflict


Whether we are two fighting 10 year olds or 60 year olds, we have a propensity to fight unfairly. Yesterday I mentioned the habit of character assassination. Today, I want to go a little further with these techniques (tongue inserted in cheek).

1. Make sure to start out telling the story in such a way that will emphasize your righteousness (overlooking your own sins) and equally emphasizing the other person’s sins. Be sure to read any and all possible data about the other’s motives in the worst possible light. Never give the benefit of the doubt.

2. If you are defending someone else who has done something wrong, be sure to protect them facing justice.

Some of these thoughts came to me during this week’s sermon on Judges 20. Note how the Levite tells the story about the awful Gibeah men but fails to point out his complicity in allowing his woman to be abused to death. Notice, as my pastor pointed out, how he generalizes from some people’s behavior to a whole people group. Notice also how the tribe of Benjamin fails to hold their own people accountable but closes rank to protect their own. These things are habits we easily engage in if we are not careful.

Or, how about a better way. Follow the model of dealing with conflict by first seeking personal assessment and repentance before pursuing the sins of others.

1 Comment

Filed under christian counseling, Christianity, conflicts, Relationships

Expectations and the will


We’ve been thinking a bit about expectations this week. Now, when our expectations fail to be met, we have a couple of less than optimal options;

1. Slide toward despair and anger. A passive response to not getting what we hoped for.

2. Find new ways to get what we expect or want (and, if necessary, justify our actions in case others think we are selfish).

On this second point, my pastor preached last Sunday on Judges 18 (The tribe of Dan looking for a reason to take a land not offered them by God). He listed several ways (tongue in cheek) we can become good syncretists (having the appearance of Christianity but operating on unbiblical principles). They are worth repeating as we may find that we actively seek to justify willful behavior so that we get what we want. I don’t have his list in front of me so I’m going on memory here:

1. Start going after what you want but then on the way ask God if he’s going to bless what you are doing

2. When you get an answer, be sure to read any ambiguity as supporting your own interests. Don’t consider that the person telling you that God is favoring you might be off his rocker (the priest was not following the Law because he was allowing Micah to have idols as well).

3. When you see that you can be successful at grabbing something not yours, assume that success means that God is in it. Assume might makes right.

4. If a better deal comes along (the priest or seeming success of Micah and his idols), assume the better deal is a good idea and grab all you can.

My pastor did a better job with these and I’m not doing justice here to his creativity but I do find that it is so easy for me to justify my expectations, find ways to fulfill them–even if I know God is not in it. Some examples I see from others:

1. Justifying rage towards children because they are rebellious

2. Justifying sexual sin because God wants me to be happy

3. Justifying overeating/undereating because celebration is good/too many people overindulge

4. Justifying withholding love because others aren’t doing their fair share

Leave a comment

Filed under Biblical Reflection, Cognitive biases, conflicts, deception, Desires, Psychology, self-deception, Uncategorized

A culture of criticism?


Some further thoughts about our propensity for evaluation. Is it only my perception or have we become a culture of critics? In past generations, we overlooked the flaws of others to maintain the looks of stability, honesty, and integrity. Now, we love to out leaders (sports, religion, politics, etc.) when they are immature, foolish, or downright evil. And the advent of the cellphone camera and blog means we can catch it on tape and share it immediately with the world.

I’ve noticed that this culture of criticism extends to the local community–even the church. Stand around with neighbors. How long does it take to hear your first gossipy complaint? Stand around at coffee at some churches and you might just hear a complaint about the sermon, the way the youth leader operates, a question about how the budget is being formed. Recently, I was at a function (non-church) of friends and I was surprised to hear catty complaints about whether or not others brought enough food or the right kind.

Why are we inclined to talk this way? What do we gain by pointing out the flaws of others? Pride? Self-righteousness? “Reasons” for why we can overlook our own sins? 

One more thought. Do we take greater pleasure in noticing the brokenness of the world than pointing out the good?

I am all for speaking the truth in love; for standing up against injustice and incompetence. But the repetitious meditating on what is wrong with others (including systems) seems to tear down more than it offers a way up.

7 Comments

Filed under Christianity, church and culture, conflicts, Doctrine/Theology, Psychology, Relationships

Frustrated goals? Here is one solution…


Let’s admit to ourselves that we carry a large number of goals for other people. We wish and desire for them to change their ways. Life would be so much easier if my son…my wife…my boss…my pastor would only… 

This is especially true in the counseling office. People come to counseling to find a way to fix a problem (person) in their life. They may well recognize their own need for change but commonly find their attention turning to the one person causing them great relational pain. Counselors are no less capable of being frustrated as well. We have goals for our clients–ways we want them to act. When they do not accept our goals or are not able to fulfill them to our egocentric demands, we too can be frustrated.

Here is one solution that may provide you with less frustration:

Make your goals things that you can meet on your own.Okay, maybe this sounds a little crazy, but hear me out. Let’s say your spouse frequently responds to your questions with irritable defensiveness. You know you are nothing but sweetness and light to him/her and that the problem lies solely with your spouse. You are frustrated that they do not get that they need to change. You’ve brought up nicely and you’ve brought it up repeatedly–even seeking help from a counselor. But to no avail.

Consider, then, a goal change. Goal: I want my response to my spouse to be filled with love, truth, and an invitation to warmly try again, even if they do not accept my invitation. You have the power, with God’s help, to meet this goal. You can use this to evaluate how well you are doing?

Does such a goal change make your suffering from your spouse’s crankiness any less? No. But when (a) you accept that you have NO power to make someone else change and (b) accept that you do have power in how you will respond to such things, you receive two benefits

  • You stop distressing over how to fix another person
  • You use different criteria to evaluate yourself and your life (and thus may find that your own irritation is adding to the vicious cycle and your negative evaluations of your life)

Now, I am not saying that if you are suffering at the hands of your spouse or child or boss that you should just smile and take it. It is okay to speak the truth to sin. Maltreatment does do damage and working to stop it is a good thing (if necessary, by removing oneself from the situation). But even then, you can offer an invitation to a new way of relating should the person be open to hearing you.

So, if you are frustrated with others not helping you meet your goals, consider whether or not you can rewrite your goals to be something within your power to do. Warning: it can be a challenge to give up a goal for another. It feels like giving up a dream. It will be easier to give up said goal for other if you recognize that there are a host of goals available for you right at your fingertips.

5 Comments

Filed under christian psychology, Christianity, conflicts, Psychology, Relationships

Why we give hollow confessions


On a way too regular basis we observe others making apologies and/or confessions for wrongs done. This morning in my house, my one son hurt the feelings of the other and in working through the problem he made his apology under our direction. Not to be outdone, the other son wasn’t truthful about the situation and so later he too made a directed apology (aka, highly encouraged, but not forced).

Have you noticed that these kinds of apologies, whether from a ten year old or a 50 year old, ring hollow? It is easy from our stand point to concur that they don’t really mean what they say.

I think, in general, that this assessment isn’t accurate. Here’s why.

To hurt another; to do something for ourselves at the cost of others requires that we divorce empathy and self, reality and fantasy. So, when we do apologize, we cannot quickly reconnect these parts. Often the person does feel bad, guilty, afraid of the consequences. Notice that these feelings are rather self-centered. In time, if they go about reconnecting care for others and their feelings, they will feel much more empathy and concern for the wounded party. However, at the outset of their confession, these two things are still divorced. Thus the hollow confession. They do not know what they are really apologizing for beyond a few facts. The longer the deception, the longer the disconnection and time taken to reconnect to the experience of the other.

There are other confounding variables that hinder empathic confessions. One’s goal (get out of trouble, stop the pressure, smooth it over, please the other) may also decrease the likelihood empathy.

Leave a comment

Filed under Christianity, conflicts, deception, Repentance, self-deception, sin