Psychiatry is difficult

Psychiatry is more difficult than I expected, though not for the reasons I had expected. I had worried about being depressed and over-identifying with the patients as I did when I was a medical student. Perhaps it is with more life experience, or perhaps the fact that all my patients are teenagers, but this does not seem to be a problem so far. I still identify very strongly with the patients (as is appropriate for a paediatrician) but now I am able to keep myself a little apart and see their problems as, well, their problems. This lets me identify where their behaviour is adaptive and where it is not.

The problem seems to be with the parents. Perhaps it is this strong identification with the patients, or seeing where the parents own behaviour is not adaptive, but I find myself increasingly blaming the parents and getting frustrated with them. I see that this is not an adaptive response for me! Doing something about it is much harder, though...

As Michael G pointed out in his orientation lecture on that first day - sometimes the inability of the system to change or to accept help and suggestions is part of the problem. This is till their problem, not yours. While true, this only allys my anxiety partially. On Friday morning I didn't want to come to work and see three patients, which I recognize in myself as non-adaptive avoidant behaviour. Maybe that doctor/patient separation is not as complete as I thought!

Deuteronomy 8

A strong rebuke for the self made man today:

You may say to yourself, "My power and the strength of my hands have produced this wealth for me." But remember the LORD your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth. (Deut 8:17,18)

These days is more about intelligence, entrepreneurship and opportunism, but these is still the same strong flavour of those who work hard deserve to do well, and those who are just slacking off are also getting what they deserve. Dole Bludgers is another common term with the same implications.

I wonder if in our rich society people are more self-sufficient and therefore despise those who are not. If I have worked and made all my own money, why does God deserve any of it? I wonder if this is one of the reasons why it is harder for the rich man to get to heaven? Perhaps those who are rich don't feel the need for God and don't give God any credit.

CS Lewis was right again - God whispers to us in our pleasures but shouts to us in our pains. It is so easy to ignore God when things are going well. Thanking God for our blessings is not just for His benefit.

The "Text of Terror" (1 Tim 2:8-15)

Ben Witherington hits the spot! On Saturday (Feb 25) he wrote a translation and explanation of that difficult passage in Timothy: I do not allow a woman to teach or hold authority over a man.

He makes the point (which I think is the most important) that in this statement, if it is interpreted as a blanket rule, Paul then contradicts what he says in other places about women speaking in church, prophesying, teaching other women, etc. Since we know that this cannot be the case, why does it appear to be the case?

Ben points out that these verses are a corrective to a problem which already exists in the church, and probably a temporary measure rather than a permanent blanket rule. In a church which exists within a pagan society where women priestesses were powerful and educated, it would be natural for these women to want to take charge and teach, even if they were new converts (which is also forbidden elsewhere).

He talks about the women learning in quietness and submission to the teaching - in the Jewish Law, everyone was to keep quiet and in submission when the Word of God was being read. Paul points out that as a result of incomplete teaching from Adam about the rules of the Tree of Life, Eve was vulnerable to deception. A person not properly instructed is much more easily deceived.

I'll have to take this on faith, not being a Greek scholar, but apparently the form of "do not permit" used by Paul here implies "do not currently permit" rather than "would never permit", implying that when the current problem is resolved, presumably by good teaching and understanding, then at some future time the restriction may be lifted.

The whole childbearing bit seems strange to me, but apparently it is some kind of parallel between the Fall coming through Eve and the Saviour coming through Mary. Reminds me of Paul's section on "through one man (Adam) we fell and through one man (Jesus) we are saved". Very Paul.

Deuteronomy 5 - Blasphemy

I have finally read Jude's study on blasphemy from January (sorry Jude!) and found it to be much better than I had originally expected. Unfortunately for me, the session opened with a Billy Connelly movie, so by the time we got to serious discussion I was seriously bored and disengaged, and failed to give proper attention to the material under discussion.

Now that I come back to it with a clear mind - nothing clearer than my mind today - completely blank...

Oh yes, blasphemy. Jude's point is that blasphemy is not just about saying the Name of God in a disrespectful way, but about misusing the authority of God that goes with the Name. Paul is very clear about this when he says "Not I, but the Lord" and conversely "Not the Lord, but I". he was avoiding blasphemy by being clear about when he had divine authority to speak and when he did not.

These days I more often hear the reverse: "Somewhere in the Bible it says you should do what I want" seems to be the common use. Proof-texting and taking verses out of context to support our arguments is distressingly more common than taking the Bible seriously, as a whole Word of God. Brian McLaren talks about "taking verses and using them as weapons to bash our brothers into submission" which is also more common than using the whole of the Bible as a critique and a mirror for our own lives, which to me seems the more obvious purpose of it.

Sloughing off personal responsibility would be the other use for the name of God - God told me to do it becomes as much of a "get out of jail free" card as the devil made me do it. Uncomfortable parallel there.

Finally, the truth that every Christian who has ever lived with a non-Christian knows instinctively, the aspect of being a living witness:

When our actions are selfish, judgmental, divisive, or devoid of love, compassion and integrity, God’s reputation is sullied. And if we compound our offences by trying to cover them up and refusing to apologise and make good, then God’s name is dragged through the mire.

Deuteronomy 3-4 (Ash Wednesday)

This book makes the interesting community observation that though some of the tribes had by now taken their bits of the Promised Land, the menfolk of those tribes were still required to continue fighting for their brothers' land, until all could enter the Rest of the Lord together.

Today, there is much more of an "I'm OK so why should I worry?" attitude. On the other hand (human nature being what it is and selfishness common in every age) perhaps it was a problem then as well, hence a specific command was necessary!

Having conquered part, if not all of the Holy Land, there is another very interesting instruction, which again reflects the eternal nature of human forgetfulness:

Be careful and watch yourselves closely so that you do not forget the things your eyes have seen or let them slip from your heart as long as you live. Teach them to your children and to their children after them. Has anything so great as this ever happened? Or has anything like it been heard of? (Deut 4:9,32)

Human nature is ever forgetful and asking "So what have you done for me lately?" So quickly we forget the signs and wonders and love of God on which we first believed!

This Lent season, I shall endeavour to return to my first love and my first eagerness to learn of God. I will learn of God from his Word in serious study every day and remember to pray and give thanks, not just during Lent, but every day...with God's help!