Rejoice ?

“Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn.” (Romans 12:15)

Not too long ago I heard a radio announcer speaking about this verse. She noted that it usually isn’t too hard to mourn with others, but it can be tough to rejoice with others especially when they have received something which you have been wanting and wishing to receive yourself. Touche!

I have been thinking about that comment. Immediately a dear friend came to mind. She has had a tough go of it in life- many disappointments in how things have worked out for her- yet, she can rejoice over another’s good news. I am always in awe of her. I do not think that I am that generous with my emotions. Internally I’m still grumbling and complaining to God, “Why her, not me?” (As much as I think I am getting better and more mature about it, those ugly thoughts still sometimes, overtake my response.) But my friend is genuinely happy for you. I have never asked her how she does it.

My guess is that she doesn’t compare her situation to anyone else’s. She is very comfortable in her skin and she doesn’t worry what other people think. I also think that she is a very grateful person. She is able to see the good in each and every situation and person.

When we pull the focus off ourselves and onto others, we do not have time for comparison, self-pity or ingratitude. We can truly be present with those who mourn and with those who rejoice.

Children have the capacity of joy for themselves and for others. Sure, in the development of little ones, there is the call of “mine” and taking toys from others, but generally they are excited when others are excited. If someone has a birthday, there are just as excited to “help” open the package and see what is inside as the person receiving the present.

Sometimes I wonder, “Why can’t I be like a kid- excited for and thinking only about the present moment? Can I go twenty-four hours without thinking about myself?” Any aspect of myself- whether it is physically (thinking of every ache, pain, itch, or how I look in “getting ready” for the day), mentally (relieving the conversations and reactions of others), or emotionally (thinking that I should’ve handled a situation better). I think of all the wasted time thinking of myself when it could be time better used.

Imagine what our world would look like if everyone spent less time thinking about themselves and more on others.

I think we would be less polarized. Most either/or arguments (the extremes) come down to selfishness: both sides want what they want, when they want it and are inconvenienced (mild reaction) or violent (extreme reaction) when others won’t do what they want or even support what they want. Perhaps in thinking of others, arguments would never get so polarized in the first place because as we first looked into ideas we could see the other side.

I think we would be more empathetic. Thinking about others allows us the room to walk in another’s shoes. We might not choose the path the other person has taken, but we are in a place of better understanding of why they chose what they did and think the way they do.

Jesus’ cousin John recognized that life was not all about him. John spent his entire life talking about Jesus, “the One who was greater than he” and getting others ready and prepared for Jesus’ coming onto the scene. Of course, this was thinking of another person who happened to be Divine. Yet with John putting Jesus before him, John modeled a posture that we should try and emulate: “He must increase, but I must decrease.” (John 3:30).

Becoming more like Jesus and less of ourselves, we will start exhibiting those attributes we all want but have trouble doing: kindness, thoughtfulness, mercy, forgiveness, grace, love and joy. When we start thinking of Jesus and of others, we can mourn when others mourn and we can truly rejoice when they rejoice.

Sportsmanship

Are you a good sport? A poor loser? A gracious winner?

Over the weekend there was an example of good sportsmanship in the men’s high jump at the Tokyo Olympics. Qatar’s Mutaz Essa Barshim and Italy’s Gianmarco Tameri, each of whom cleared 7 feet, 9 1/4 inches asked the officials if they could share the gold medal rather than have a jump-off. In some ways it was definitely a win-win decision for the fellows. (Although if one was super competitive, he might not have wanted to share the podium.)

Both gentleman are good friends having met at a junior meet over ten years ago. They have trained together. They suffered injuries and recovered together. Without a second hesitation, when confronted with the tie, they immediately thought of sharing the podium.

According to Merriam-Webster.com: sportsmanship is conduct (such as fairness, respect for one's opponent, and graciousness in winning or losing) becoming to one participating in a sport.

Diana Abed, Department of Philosophy at TU Dortmund, Germany says that with sportsmanship, there are four elements: fairness, equity, good form and the will to win. These four elements are equally important and not reducible to one another. Yet, the will to win is in systematic conflict with the other three elements. Hence, sportsmanship is not only compromised of these four elements, but also requires that a balance be held between them.

In the case of the two Olympic athletes, did friendship make it easier for them to demonstrate good sportsmanship? Or the fact that they understood each other: the sacrifices and rigors of the sport?

There has been much written about good sportsmanship, especially in teaching it to the younger generation- probably due to the fact that poor sportsmanship abounds both with the players and with the parents. When poor sportsmanship runs amuck, more than just hurt feelings occur- sometimes major injuries.

In our family, I have a nephew who was the victim of poor sportsmanship: a soccer opponent was angry at his team being down a goal. In the midst of a play, my nephew was fouled and tripped to the ground. The opponent cleated him on his face so that my nephew was rushed off the field and had to have a titanium cheekbone to replace his broken one.

When confronted, both player and parent demonstrated anger issues. They didn’t see anything wrong with the extremely aggressive behavior. For them, the risk of injury or causing injury was the cost of playing the game and in winning.

On the BBC website (https://www.bbc.com/sport/37405389) there is a brief article highlighting what they consider eight of the greatest displays of good sportsmanship (as of 2016 when it was written). I like the description from the 1969 Ryder Cup:

At the 1969 Ryder Cup, an event that was dominated by the USA at the time, Britain's Jacklin and American Nicklaus reached the 18th hole all-square with the overall scores tied at 15.5-15.5. It was the final match of the competition and, after Nicklaus holed his putt to make par, Jacklin faced a three-footer to earn the first ever tie in the event. Instead of forcing his rival to take his shot, Nicklaus picked up Jacklin's ball marker and conceded the tie. "I don't think you would have missed that Tony," Nicklaus said, "but I didn't want to give you the chance."

Good sportsmanship translates to more than just sports. It equates to being well-mannered and mature. It requires self-control. Sportsmanship builds character, team work, resilience, respect, discipline, kindness, inclusion, perseverance, humility. It is like all attributes: one display of good sportsmanship begets another. It not only shows respect for your opponent and the game but also for yourself. If you are angry at teammates or frustrated with opponents, then you (and if you have teammates) don’t play your best. One learns lessons by being a good sport: with both wins (humility) and losses (empathy), a person learns perspective in the game and in life. One learns balance.

Sometimes I wonder about the young man who injured my nephew. Where is he today? In looking back, no one recalls the significance of that game. Was it regular season? Tournament play? For that young man, was it worth it to have the blot on his character and record?

There is a sleeper hit on Apple TV- “Ted Lasso”. (Received 20 awards and nominations) It is a television series based on an old television commercial. A corny, mid-westerner coach is hired by a scorned ex-wife, now owner of a UK Football Club determined to ruin the team by hiring a man who knows nothing about European football. What she doesn’t expect is Ted’s positive, nice guy attitude and how he touches the lives of all he meets through his actions and words of wisdom. As Ted says to a cynical reporter, “For me, success is not about the wins and losses. It's about helping these young fellas be the best versions of themselves on and off the field.”

What about you? Do you show the best version of yourself? At work? At play? At home? I feel that sportsmanship is much more than what happens on the field, court, course, or ground. It is all about relationships: how we treat one another and how we want to be treated.

If the two Olympians didn’t know that about sportsmanship before, they certainly do now.

As Knute Rockne, football player and coach at the University of Notre Dame, said, “One man practicing sportsmanship is far better than a hundred teaching it.”

Empathy and Sympathy

This broken wing of mine has me thinking a lot about one’s health, other people’s health and how I have/have not related to other people’s pain.

I have been revisiting the idea of empathy and sympathy.

According to Marriam-Webster.com:

“Sympathy and empathy are closely related words, bound by shared origins and the similar circumstances in which each is applicable, yet they are not synonymous. For one thing, sympathy is considerably older than empathy, having existed in our language for several hundred years before its cousin was introduced, and its greater age is reflected in a wider breadth of meaning. Sympathy may refer to "feelings of loyalty" or "unity or harmony in action or effect," meanings not shared by empathy. In the contexts where the two words do overlap, sympathy implies sharing (or having the capacity to share) the feelings of another, while empathy tends to be used to mean imagining, or having the capacity to imagine, feelings that one does not actually have.”

I like the idea of empathy- having the capacity to imagine. It is the vision of walking in another’s shoes. While I now feel that I have a slight inkling (sympathy) of what friends or family members have experienced through the common shared experience of broken bones: the pain, inconvenience and limitations, I also am slightly able to imagine what it might feel like to experience a permanent change in activities of daily living. It makes me grateful for my experience (it could be worse) as well as encouraged for the example others have shown me (could/should handle it better).

There is a also a subtle difference between empathy and sympathy: the difference of those walking with you and those sorry for your walk, aka problem. And while there is a sorry/sympathy for what one is experiencing because I have had some similar experience, one has to be careful of staying in that “place”.

Feeing sorry for someone and their plight is understandable and the beginning of compassion. But to stay there keeps us in a place of superiority. We are so sorry (but glad it is not me.)

When we enter in and come along side someone we show a humility and an acknowledgement that it is by the grace of God that we go forward. We also are in a place of imagining the experience. Because we are not actually in it, we can be more objective and helpful in meeting any needs of the one going through the experience. After all, if two people were both starving, it would be hard to help one another find food.

1. Listen- Don’t have to say anything- just practice the presence of being. Tough to do but important. I think of the Jewish tradition of sitting shiva- the initial time after a loved one does, allowing the mourner space for disorientation and grief. Friends and family call upon the immediate family and just sit with them. In the tradition it is the mourner who initiates the conversation about the deceased or any other type of conversation. The purpose of the visitor is to be with the grieving one. I think that practice can be applied to anyone who is going through any difficulties.

2. Connect with their feelings- Imagine what it must be like to go through their experience- walking a “mile in one’s shoes”.

3. Acknowledge their pain- Don’t have to explain anything or offer assistance, etc- just let someone know that you recognize this (whatever the this is) stinks.

4. Show them love - What many people who have been in the midst of something say- don’t ask what you can do- just do something- a meal, help with laundry, childcare, etc. I must admit I am guilty of this- I want to jump right in but there is a part of me that is hesitant- don’t want to overstep a boundary or feel that I am being “pushy”.

What about you? How are you with empathy and sympathy? I know that I need practice. I feel that I should offer an apology to anyone with whom I have ever interacted- I probably did not handle a grieving, loss situation well. But, I can learn and move on.

Up For a Challenge?

Yesterday I had the privilege to hear author Barbara Morrison speak about her memoir: Innocent:  Confessions of a Welfare Mother.  It was eye-opening and inspirational.  Ms. Morrison had a college education and prior work experience, yet due to a series of circumstances she found herself at twenty-four, divorced, abandoned by her husband, disowned by her parents,  pregnant, with an eighteen month old and no job prospects.  She couldn't cover the cost of childcare, food, rent, clothing, transportation and so was forced to make the "choiceless" choice- receive welfare. She talked about the challenges welfare recipients face and the misunderstanding of the system.

Yes, her situation was extremely difficult and in her talk she alluded to it.  I am sure that there were many dark days and nights for her.  Yet I was struck by her matter of fact explanations, her generosity of spirit towards those who did her harm and her focus on the positive of her experience. She discovered and experienced a true community in the poor neighborhood with the other welfare mothers where she lived.  She was surprised to discover such kindness that if one didn't have enough food stamps to make it to the end of the month, someone in the community would share.  If a person in the community had a job interview, all the members would help provide decent "interview" clothing as no one had a complete ensemble.  If one was sick, someone in the community would watch her children until she got better. 

There is a sense that she doesn't take her current life situation for granted.  As she states, so many people are living from paycheck to paycheck.  All it takes is an accident, health issue or job layoff and they too would have to make the "choiceless" choice of becoming a welfare recipient.  She is grateful that every April 15th she has the privilege to pay taxes knowing that she can share her good fortune with others.  Sure the system might have its flaws but overall we are fortunate to live in a country where the systems relatively work. 

She was a product of the welfare system and the reason for the safety net.  Some people just need a little help to get going.  From the good fortune of legislature timing and kindness of others, she was able to receive a grant that enabled her to learn a new skill and get a job with upward mobility.  

She speaks about the stereotypes and judgements we all make of each other. "Lazy welfare mothers, hard hearted social workers, uncaring parents."  Her story once again underscores our need need to put ourselves in others' shoes for a while to see what their lives are like before we make snap comments.  

One way we can practice empathy is to take the food stamp challenge.  Can you live for one week on the same daily monetary allotment for food that a welfare recipient receives?  (approximately $4 per person per day)  In our household there are two of us- $8 a day x 7 days = $56 for the week for groceries.  If you use any food that is already in your household, subtract that amount from your daily amount. 

Click here to read more about the challenge.  

What is your feeling about the welfare system?  Have you ever experienced a "handout"?  How did that make you feel?  Have you ever had to live paycheck to paycheck?  Would you consider trying the food stamp challenge?  If you try it, please comment. 

Empathy

   There is a beautiful video from the Cleveland Clinic setting the groundwork for empathy.  Click here to see the video.  What I love about this four minute montage is that is reminds me that every person we encounter throughout our day has a story.  One could argue that a hospital intensifies situations but I think if you did a similar montage in a mall, school or local street your would see the same spectrum of fears, heartbreak, pain and joy.

I know that I have written a lot about empathy.  It just seems as if there isn't much of it going around.  Everyday there is another story of a group of people not getting along, harming each other with words or actions and ripping apart the fabric of our society.  It is another story of people thinking of themselves and not of anyone else. It is another story of people not being empathetic to one another. 

I guess like any other habit or behavior we want to change it is best to recognize the problem first. When people only think of themselves it comes out in their speech- "I, mine, me."  How many times do we talk about ourselves only?  Do we use the "I,mine, me" language more than the "you, yours, us"?  Certainly in this political environment, one doesn't have to look far to hear examples.  There is a fun country song by Toby Keith called "I Wanna Talk about Me."   The chorus goes: "Wanna talk about me; Wanna talk about I; Wanna talk about number one; Oh my me my; What I think; what I like; what I know; what I want; what I see; I like talking about you, you, you, you usually; But occasionally; I wanna talk about Me."  I know that times I have to stop myself and honestly ask, am I doing that?

We can start paying attention to those around us. We might not be comfortable asking the person standing behind us online at the grocery story, "How's it really going?" but we could offer a smile and say a silent prayer that today they would receive whatever they need to keep going. We can recognize that there might be something big going on in their lives.  Bigger and more important then the purchase of a loaf of bread, bananas and milk.  We can recognize that a little kindness might be all they need to separate a lousy day from a pretty good one.   

We can start by keeping the lines of communication open to our family, friends and neighbors. Whether we want to ask the people around us how they are, we can still be aware of the nuances of their reactions, statements and behaviors.  Many times it is through the simple act of spending time together and listening to each other that we can start to develop empathy and consideration for others. 

What about you?  How's your empathy level?  Have you ever spent a day wondering about the unsaid realities of the people you meet? 

How To "Play Nice"

This week in the wake of Chief Justice Scalia's untimely death, I found it interesting to hear a story about Chief Justice Breyer and his speech on Wednesday at Yale University Law School.  In the introduction of his speech he spoke of his friend and colleague Chief Justice Antonin Scalia.  The two were known for their polar opposition regarding the constitution: Chief Justice was an "originalist" that the justices should determine what the framers' original intent was and stick to it.  Chief Justice Breyer is a believer of "fluid constitution", that the values of the framers' must be molded to apply to our modern society. 

What caught my ear was that even though these gentlemen disagreed, they were respectful of each other and were friends.  In some ways, they agreed to disagree and enjoyed a good legal argument.  When I googled information about the justices, there were stories upon stories about their opposition but about their mutual respect of each other.  

How refreshing.  If only our current political candidates and our legislation could be so cordial with each other.  If only they would "agree to disagree".  But it made me wonder- how does one agree to disagree?  I feel that I don't see that practiced often enough and wonder even if I practice it.

There are many online psychology sites and relationship sites that talk about it.  There are ways to "agree to disagree" in marriage, in friendship, in the workplace, and in day to day interactions.  The commonality in the different scenarios seems to be- one needs to be empathetic and put oneself in the other's position.  In doing so, you build communication.  You listen, you show respect for the other person, you don't discuss a heated issue when either one is emotional or upset, you don't make any arguments personal, you speak to common issues and needs (if possible), you compromise and you humbly realize that you might not have all the answers. 

Interestingly that there was an article in the Sunday New York Times that spoke to divisiveness in our society.  Even though it was not stated it seems as if the commonality behind divisiveness and the avoidance of anything that appears to be divisive is that we as a society do not know how to "play nice" with each other in essence, how to respectively agree to disagree.  Instead we decide to avoid talking about issues at all.  Of course, in doing so we break down communication and understanding even further.

Upon reflection, I can see that avoidance in my own life and in the lives of people I know.  There have been times when topics or ideas seem to be divisive.  In some ways, the prevailing idea is that to keep the peace, there will not be any discussion about the situation.  Sometimes that is a wise course of action and certainly it is an easier one but generally avoidance is like covering an infected wound without the aid of any treatments.  Not a good practice.  At best there will never be any healing and at worst a chance of septicemia and death.

How are you with agreeing to disagree?  Do you discuss opinions or topics with family, friends, co-workers?  What does it look like?  Have you ever "argued" with someone trying to keep their needs and viewpoint in mind?  How did it go?

It seems to me discussing difficult subjects or opinions in a respectful way is needed if we want to be healthy in our individual relationships and in our societal ones.