Sunday, April 21, 2013

A521.4.3.RB_RuggerioSteven

                                              Hope Springs and Hidden Agendas

Two nights ago, my wife and I watched the movie Hope Springs with Tommy Lee Jones and Meryl Streep.  The film is based around a middle-aged couple, Arnold (played by Jones) and Kay (played by Streep), recently celebrating thirty-one years of marriage.  Stuck in routine and resignation, they undergo five days of intensive marriage counseling in Hope Springs, Maine.  Sitting before their marriage counselor (brilliantly played by Steve Carell), Arnold and Kay unpack fears and unmet expectations.  Advertised as a comedy, this movie delivers an insightful look at the consequences of poor marital communication. 
McKay, Davis, & Fanning (2009), in their book Messages, stated, “You can’t ‘not communicate’ with others. Without saying a word, you reveal your feelings and attitudes” (p. 59).  Watching this movie and reading chapters 4-6 of Messages, I felt as if I were a counselor in the office with Arnold and Kay.  The combination of the movie and the book has opened my eyes and motivated me to enrich the communication with my wife, friends, and coworkers.
McKay, Davis, & Fanning (2009) said, “The key to nonverbal communication is congruence.  Awareness of incongruence in your own nonverbal message can make you a much more effective communicator” (p. 60).  When my wife and I used to argue, the conversations normally consisted of me badgering her with “What’s wrong” and her replying with “Nothing.”  The metamessage tug-of-war could last for hours.  When my wife clearly and purposefully articulates a word ensuring every consonant and vowel is pronounced, it means things are not well.  The obvious incongruence between my wife’s body language and her verbal “nothing is wrong” would send me spiraling into an abyss of frustration.  As a result, my incongruent apology wasn’t much better.  My “I’m sorry” was more apt to be translated as “Whatever I’ve done, will you please just forget it so we can get past this?” 
If the lack of congruence wasn’t enough to identify the obvious disconnection, our social kinesics and proxemics were sure to set off warning sirens.  Crossing her arms tightly across her chest communicated defensiveness and an unwillingness to share her feelings (McKay, Davis, & Fanning, 2009, p. 63).   Wringing my hands and rubbing my forehead, communicated anger rather than understanding.  Normally, when our relationship is strong, we spend our time in an intimate (touching to 18”) and a personal (1 ½’ to 4’) zone.  When we are arguing, the distinct zone of choice is social (4’ to 12’) and sometimes even public (12’ to 20’).  If my wife were to say, “I’m not mad” but refuse to breach the personal or intimate zone, then incongruence would again be raised.  In other words, our personal distance is in direct correlation to our feelings.
In Hope Springs, Arnold and Kay begin their marital session on opposite sides of the couch.  As the sessions move forward and they share their feelings, the distance between them narrows and subconsciously, they are drawn to each other.  When they fall into attacking one another, they move further away from each other on the couch.  It is a perfect dramatization of what is happening both physically and emotionally.  Like the actors, as my wife and I work through our argument, the space between us narrows.  As we move further toward each other, the volume of our speech is brought to a lower level, the tempo slows down, and we resonate a desire to understand each other. 
After twenty-eight years of marriage, my wife and I have learned that our relationship is greater than either of us in particular.  By choosing the higher road of reconciliation and empathy, our desire is to understand each other rather than prove a point.  As a result, we’ve learned a great deal about human communication techniques.  By studying couples in counseling, reading vast amounts of literature, and recognizing our own shortcomings, we’re better equipped to help spouses navigate the rough waters of a difficult marriage.  In the process, we’ve come face to face with McKay, Davis, & Fanning’s eight hidden agendas.
As a refuge for hurting people, the church is a conglomeration of hidden agendas.  As my wife and I discussed the eight hidden agendas described in Messages, we were able to positively assign many names under each category—us included.  There are normally three-tiers of church involvement: Leadership, regular attendees, and uncommitted.  Each category operates with different levels of commitment and agenda.  Here are a few hidden agendas I’ve experienced within the church:
1.                    “I’m Good.” This is the most frequently used agenda within a church.  Leaders use it to avoid losing position, attendees use it to keep people at bay, and the uncommitted use it because there is a lack of trust.
2.                    “I’m Good (But You’re Not).”  This is the “holier than thou” individual who is judgmental and critical of everyone while ignoring his or her own shortcomings.
3.                    “You’re Good (But I’m Not).” This is the person who does not want to change.  Rather than take corrective action, they resign themselves to believing they are who they are.
4.                    “I’m Helpless, I Suffer.” This is normally the people getting the lion’s share of the attention.  These are the ones rarely seeking to help anyone else.  Their goal is to manipulate others to feel sorry for them.
5.                    “I’m Blameless.” This churchgoer is not too far removed from “I’m Good (But You’re’ Not)” agenda.  Either way, nothing is their fault.  I have personally experienced this agenda when offering assistance or advice to an individual.  If they implement my advice and it does not go as they hoped, it is my fault, not theirs.
6.                    “I’m Fragile.”  As I mentioned earlier, church is a refuge for the hurting.  Fragile people come looking for help all the time.  However, the “I’m Fragile” agenda keeps people operating with a victim mentality.  When this agenda is exposed, people either change and incorporate a new mindset or they skip from church to church seeking sympathy.
7.                    “I’m Tough.”  Working in men’s ministry for over twelve years has introduced me to many of these agendas.  Intimidation and busyness cover a host of insecurities and self-esteem problems.
8.                    “I Know It All.”  Every church in every town has at least one of these people.  This is the Bible scholar, the one who has a Scripture verse for every situation, and the person with all the answers.  They hide behind their academics, resumes, and memory verses.

The key to breaking free from hidden agendas is to incorporate the rewards of self-disclosure as described by McKay, Davis, & Fanning.  An increased self-knowledge, closer intimate relationships, and improved communication would help many people suffering from perfection, misaligned perspectives, and legalistic viewpoints.  By overcoming guilt and sharing your feelings with others, there is less guilt and more energy.  Maintaining hidden agendas requires a lot of work and ends in overwhelming loneliness. 
One of my favorite lines in Hope Springs occurs when Arnold and Kay are at dinner.  Much has already been shared between them and some of the walls are down; agendas have been put aside for the night and for the first time in a long time, they feel close.  As the conversation traces back to when they first met, Arnold (in a moment of vulnerability) said to Kay, “You could have had your pick.  I didn’t think you’d ever want me.” In which Kay responds, “I never wanted anything more.”  By breaking through agendas and learning to communicate honestly and authentically, life and relationships are reconciled.

Legacy Never Hides.

Steve

References:
McKay, M., Davis, M., & Fanning, P. (2009). Messages. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications, Inc.

No comments:

Post a Comment