Friday, September 16, 2016

4. Letting go and letting God – 4 pages

March 12, 2007

    I filled in for Fr. Mike Quinn this week-end.  The gospel was the story of Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well.  I used Jesus’ assertion that the Father sought those who would worship in spirit and truth as the take-off point for a sermon on letting go and letting God. 

    I invited members of the congregation to reflect honestly on their tendency to respond with repeat performances to individuals and situations that trigger pain, anger, fear, shame, frustration, irritation, confusion and the like.  Focusing on anger, I noted that my often desperate efforts to be more patient lead me to bury pain and anger alive.  I assume that I am controlling them, but future eruptions reveal that they controlled me.  I also indicated the ways that dulling pain feeds the pain in the long run.  Against this background, I suggested that the process of “letting go and letting God” involved four distinguishable steps.  But since I wanted to focus on the fourth step, I noted how I came to an understanding of the first three long before I understood the fourth.

    Thus, when I used the formula, “Let go and let God”, to process my own experiences, I had little difficulty in formulating the first step as the call to identify (name) the deep feelings that triggered my repeat performances, and this formulation suggested an assignment which enabled students to experience the process.  To frame the assignment, I provided a working model of nine basic feelings:  Pain, anger, shame, sexuality, care, compassion, joy and playful spontaneity.  Then, in classes leading up to the assignment, I involved my students in analyses which sorted out the basic feelings woven into standard emotional reactions.

    To set the stage, I suggested that we acquire a repertoire of emotional reactions through the process of socialization and that each emotional reaction incorporates a distinctive judgment and strategy.  E.g., I still struggle with the urge to deal with pain by transforming it into a hidden grievance against someone.  I also struggle with the temptation to react with open contempt.  Whether I go one way or the other depends on a judgment I pass at the moment.  And since both these reactions are so long-practiced that they seem spontaneous, I am not even aware that I am making a judgment and adopting a strategy.  But once I see these reactions as repeat performances, I see how they enable me to avoid vulnerable self-revelations.

    To show students the futility of efforts to overcome the reactions triggered by tangled feelings, I used such obvious examples as a young mother whose efforts to be more patient only set her up for an emotional eruption.  Then, to mark a distinction between deep feelings and emotional reactions, I used jealousy as an example of how deep feelings get tangled.  In their analyses of this common emotional reaction, most students suggested that jealousy revealed a deep-seated insecurity.  Initially, they tended to resist my suggestion that talk of insecurity objectified an intense fear of abandonment or betrayal which had to be faced and felt before its hold could be broken.  They failed to see that such an objectification implied that someone could give them a strategy for minimizing the consequences of wounds experienced in childhood.  And they failed to see that the objectification enshrined a judgment which absolved the jealous person of responsibility for disguising a despicable possessiveness as a moral judgment.

    From a philosophical perspective, jealous individuals provide paradigm examples of individuals who pretend that their accounts of events that upset them offer objective descriptions of themselves and the individuals they supposedly love so passionately.  To undermine this pretense, I dramatized two points.  First and foremost, once the fear of abandonment or betrayal is identified, the experience can be used to show how all emotional reactions have roots in one’s personal history.  Then, by extension, the analysis can be used to show why no one can pretend that the way they consign an event to a story tells the authorized version of the event. 

       (To show how deep feelings were evoked in tangled involvements, I also analyzed the outrage that a step-mother felt when she could not prevent the natural mother from wounding her step-son again and again.  In this situation, despite a profound sense of helplessness, a genuine care and concern for a boy she loved would not allow her to harden her heart.  Compassion fueled her anger.)

    Since feelings we bury alive continue to exert a hidden hold on us through long-practiced emotional reactions, the second and third steps call followers of Jesus to embrace their human condition fully, as he did in the Incarnation.  In Jesus’ words, those who trusted the Father’s providence and the Spirit’s urgings would find a more abundant life in the world and deepen their personal involvement with him, the way, the truth and the life.  In this context, the call to “Let go and let God” plunges us into a journey of discovery.

    On that journey, I discovered that a deepening involvement with Jesus, fully human and fully God, called me to identify, feel and own my deepest feelings with the knowledge that there is no way through either long-buried or raw pain, anger, fear and shame except through them.  So, when I moved from the first to the second step in the homily, I sought to show how judging ourselves sets in motion a process designed to dull the pain, mask the fear, control the anger and transform shame into guilt.  In this step, the call to “let go and let God” reminds us that, whenever we judge and condemn ourselves, we fall into the trap that this second step is designed to avoid.  -  I.e., whenever I tell myself that I should do something, I set myself up for going it alone, without God.  In effect, since I pretend that I should be able to change myself, my prayers of petition become hidden prayers of direction in which I tell God how to help me.  And in my reactions, I assign myself the villain-role in a drama revolving around victim-villain relationships.  In all these ways, I avoid feeling my feelings just as they are.

    The third step, to own the feelings I feel, focuses on letting go of judgments in which I cast others in the villain-role.  In some instances, they may be abusive brutes.  But I cannot change them, and blaming them will not heal my wounds.  So, unless I own the feelings I feel as my own, I cannot place them in the care of the Father’s providential activity, the urgings of the indwelling Spirit, and the intimate presence of Jesus, the wounded Healer.

    At this point in the sermon, I noted that I understood the dynamics of these three steps long before I grasped the dynamics of the fourth step.  I tried to weave these steps into honest conversations with the Father, the Holy Spirit and Jesus, and I involved individuals who came for spiritual direction in the process.  More often than not, however, nothing changed, within or without.  Often, others tried to explain the absence of transformation by judging that they must not be trying hard enough to let go, but I always sensed that trying hard to let go had to be counter-productive.  As usual, it took a particular event to reveal what prevented the process from bringing new life in God’s love and in the love of others.

    The event:  I was giving a week-end Serenity Retreat to members of Al Anon.  A recently divorced woman, the mother of eight children, came to the retreat.  I had known her for years, and I was always amazed at her trust in God.  In one of the talks, I sketched the first two steps of letting go.  In conversations with other women after the talk, she found herself violently angry.  Since such eruptions were uncharacteristic, she was shaken.  For the rest of the week-end, she complained that she had come seeking serenity, but found only uncontrollable rage.  And for the first time, I saw that letting go involved letting God work in God’s own way.  From my own personal history, I could see how she had coped with abuse by burying anger until she was filled with an ocean of anger.  On this retreat, faith-sharing with other women opened the flood-gates.

    My understanding of what was happening was crystalized when I heard one of the women tell her that the eruption was the work of the devil.  Suddenly, I saw clearly (1) that she was letting the Holy Spirit move in her tangled depths and (2) that the Holy Spirit had to bring to the surface the wounds that needed healing if she was to live fully and freely in God’s love.  And with that insight, I realized for the first time how letting go also involved letting God work in God’s way to foster the transformation in me.  In effect, I discovered the fourth step.

    As usual, I wondered why I had not seen the dynamics of this step earlier.  In the course on marriage, I argued (1) that vulnerable self-revelations required me to honest with myself, with God and with my loved ones about what I felt and thought and (2) that respectful self-revelations required me to leave my loved ones free to respond in their own way and time, since they might have to go through the grieving process (denial, anger, bargaining and depression) before they could respond vulnerably and respectfully.  Since I wanted an intimate involvement with Father, Jesus and Spirit, I might have seen that I did not communicate with them in this way.

    I began to understand why I had failed to understand the fourth step in letting go and letting God through my involvement with a woman who asked to talk with me.  In our first meeting, it became obvious that her husband was an alcoholic.  At the time, I would agree to be the spiritual director to someone in her situation only if she would give serious consideration to attending meetings of Al Anon, and she was the first person who went to a meeting before our next appointment.  In that first meeting, she heard the call to detachment.  As we processed that call, I suggested that it invited her to identify two inter-related strategies he had used to involve her as an enabler while facing honestly her willingness to be an accomplice to this sad game.  Thus, on the one hand, she had to admit her role in perpetuating the struggles that he used to excuse his next drunken bout, and on the other, she had to let go of any effort to change him, including those designed to make him as miserable as she was.  As she did so, she came to realize the need to observe the Al Anon slogan, “Keep it simple, stupid”, to ensure that honest  assertions of what she felt and thought were vulnerable self-revelations, not disguised efforts to change him. 
    In the following weeks, she recounted events in which her detachment involved placing herself and her children entirely in God’s care.  She could not believe that God called her out of the involvement, yet staying involved the possible loss of all financial security.  But after each such account, she would sigh and repeat a formula she had heard, “But I know that you have to wait on God because you don’t know how much work God has to do in you or in others before you are ready to receive the gift.”  -  After that, I knew that the Father’s providence had worked in the network of our mutual friends to send her to me for my sake, not hers.  And I could admit that the fourth step in letting go and letting God sometimes involved seeing how the Father’s providence and the Spirit’s urging entered into events that brought the worst out in me.

    Looking back on events that brought out the worst in me, I saw clearly that I initially reacted with denial, anger (at God as well), bargaining and the sort of depression that is mostly anger gone underground.  In the denial, I played God.  I.e., I implied that, if I were God, I would not work in this way.  I also saw that I often reacted as his Majesty, the Baby, when I brought the pain, anger, fear and shame that I had identified and owned to God.  I wanted God to pluck it out, like weeds in a field, and to do immediately and painlessly.  And when I could appreciate the need to wait on God, I discovered that I had identified, owned and brought to God only a few of the many emotional reactions I had used to bury pain, anger, fear or shame or absolve me from calls to love others as Jesus loves them.  In effect, I saw how many judgments and strategies I still used to take back control of my life.  And I had to admit that I was often blind to the gift God sought to give in the midst of these cross-situations in my life.


No comments:

Post a Comment