We all want to be happy! Why then do we resort to masochism,
a form of self-punishment - sadomasochistic sex, self-denial or even self-mutilation?
However, masochism is not restricted to those forms we usually think of as “pathological.”
In its many manifestations, it actually has gone mainstream.
Masochism seems to be at work when we silently endure
painful relationships, ones we need not endure. How does this work? We feel
guilty about something and therefore want to atone or compensate for this guilt
by enduring the discomfort. Strangely, there seems to be a subconscious
life-script, an inner logic that requires us to transact a cryptic deal with
ourselves. We pay the price of enduring some discomfort, and then we entitle
ourselves to receive a reduction in guilt.
Similarly, according to this hidden contract or “logic,”
after having paid the price of a few lashes, we have “bought” the right to
enjoy the things that are more important to us, like sex. Of course, this
sexual satisfaction we derive from the lashes is predicated on deep-dwelling
shame that regularly requires this “sacred offering.”
More commonly, armed with masochism’s inner logic of or “contract,”
we punish ourselves when we fail to perform up to our standards and reward
ourselves when we succeed. Likewise, I had my own internal script that specified
what pleasures I could enjoy. Since “over-consumption” would make me feel guilty,
I would restrict myself to three minute showers. My internal reward system
signaled me that I was not worthy of longer showers. If I exceeded the limit
that my legalistic script imposed upon me, I’d have to compensate with some form
of saving-the-planet activity.
Similarly, when I’d get an “A” on an exam, I’d feel worthy
and entitled to buy a chocolate milkshake. However, if I failed to receive the
“A,” the milkshake wouldn’t have felt quite right going down. Somehow, I
understood that my coveted sense of worthiness came at a price. Either I would
have to earn it or if I couldn’t earn it, I would have to suffer for it.
Others, when they feel that they have achieved a certain
scripted level of “worthiness,” feel entitled to take a vacation. Meanwhile,
others who have a more stringent script never feel worthy of taking a vacation.
In many religions, self-denial and/or self-flagellation have
become the staples for everyday righteousness or feelings of OK-ness. Sometimes
they take the form of puncture wounds or walking on hot coals or even knives.
As an Augustinian monk, Martin Luther endured walking on his knees, walking
barefoot in the snow and long periods of sleeplessness in a vain attempt to
prove himself to God. The faithful prove themselves by what they suffer.
In other religions self-denial is accomplished by making
costly sacrifices, sometimes human, in order to earn the favor of their
deities. As the plague stalked Europe in the
1300-1400s, a flagellant sect arose. They thought that the plague was a sign of
God’s displeasure and punishment. Therefore, the flagellants paraded through Europe whipping one another, convinced that this would
earn God’s favor. And for this, they received high grades from their admirers.
Masochism takes many forms. Benedict XVI writes about
another form of masochism. He notes how Western culture, en masse, has turned
against itself and its own Christian heritage:
- This
case illustrates a peculiar western self-hatred that is nothing short of
pathological. It is commendable that the West is trying to be more open,
to be more understanding of the values of outsiders, but it has lost all
capacity for self-love. All that it sees in its own history is the
despicable and the destructive; it is no longer able to perceive what is
great and pure…Multiculturalism, which is so constantly and passionately
promoted, can sometimes amount to an abandonment and denial, a flight from
one’s own heritage. (Quoted by Jean Bethke Elshtain, First Things, March,
2009, 36)
Author
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali Muslim turned atheist,
shares this insight:
- In
certain countries, "left-wing," secular liberals have stimulated
my critical thinking and that of other Muslims. But these same liberals in
Western politics have the strange habit of blaming themselves for the ills
of the world, while seeing the rest of the world as victims. To them,
victims are to be pitied, and they lump together all pitiable and
suppressed people, such as Muslims, and consider them good people who
should be cherished and supported so that they can overcome their
disadvantages. The adherents to the gospel of multiculturalism refuse to
criticize people whom they see as victims. Some Western critics disapprove
of United States
policies and attitudes but do not criticize the Islamic world, just as, in
the first part of the twentieth century, Western socialist apologists did
not dare criticize the Soviet labor camps. Along the same lines, some
Western intellectuals criticize Israel,
but they will not criticize Palestine
because Israel
belongs to the West, which they consider fair game, but they feel sorry
for the Palestinians, and for the Islamic world in general, which is not
as powerful as the West. They are critical of the native white majority in
Western countries but not of Islamic minorities. Criticism of the Islamic
world, of Palestinians, and of Islamic minorities is regarded as
Islamophobia and xenophobia.
Self-castigation is subtly and subconsciously understood as
a reasonable payment for self-validation, a necessary defense against shame. It
works something like this: “I am a good and worthy person if I champion the
interests of others and am willing to criticize my own traditions.” (It is not
my intention to devalue good deeds, but rather their self-righteous
motivations!)
Can we ascribe all of these phenomena to pathology or to the
idiosyncrasies of a limited number of cultures? Obviously, there is something
more global taking place. Ordinarily, it would have been more in keeping with
our pleasure-seeking nature to believe, “I make my gods happiest with me when
I’m thoroughly enjoying myself”? However, this type of hedonistic religion is
always replaced by more masochistic forms. Why? Why haven’t we become more
proficient in rewriting our scripts to eliminate the necessity for pain and to
maximize pleasure? Why has this mysterious script proved itself so impervious
to editorial “improvements,” especially in view of the encouragement given to
hedonism by our permissive, pleasure-seeking age? Evidently, there is something
else indelibly taking place in humanity’s game-plan. This is why human history
consistently testifies that we are more than ready to pay the price of
self-mutilation or self-deprivation.
I don’t think we’re ready to answer this question until we
have expanded our inquiry to include the sister of self-denial—self-indulgence!
They both address the identical problem of shame and feelings of unworthiness.
Although seeming polar opposites, they are kissing cousins. Writer and
psychotherapist, John Bradshaw, points out that these opposite responses are
both shame-generated:
- The
most paradoxical aspect of neurotic shame is that it is the core motivator
of the super-achieved and the underachieved, the Star and the Scapegoat,
the “Righteous” and the wretched, the powerful and the pathetic. (Healing the Shame that Binds You,
14)
Interestingly, both self-indulgence and self-denial are
closely associated in the practice of Eastern religions. Some of their
practices attempt to dry up desire and lust through the fires of
self-mortification, like rain evaporating on hot Florida asphalt. By extinguishing desire,
they hope to transcend the “world of delusion.”
However, the opposite teaching of self-indulgence is often
taught as a more appealing alternative. Instead of trying to burn away their
desires, some gurus teach radical self-indulgence. As one Hindu mystic
commented, “Fasting will only increase desire, and you will only think about
food. Instead, consume as much honey as you can, and you won’t desire it
anymore.”
The Doors’ Jim Morrison had a similar outlook. As is the
case with all of us, his sense of shame wouldn’t be silenced by self-denial.
Instead, he believed that it had to be saturated by self-indulgence until it
fell apart, like a soggy paper towel. He was convinced that this would result
in freedom and spiritual purification:
- “Sensuousness
and evil is an attractive image to us now…It’s like a purification ritual
in the alchemical sense. First you have to have the period of disorder,
chaos, returning to a primeval disaster religion. Out of that you purify
the elements and find the new seed of life.” (Quoted from Hungry for Heaven, Steve Turner, 96)
How do we explain self-mutilation and self-indulgence in the
same breath? Is there a common thread connecting them? All humanity experiences
guilt and shame. Counselor John Bradshaw claims that these feelings are so
powerful that they are life-controlling. Guilt and shame tell us that there is
something the matter with us and compel us to do something about the disturbing
alarm they sound. We therefore resort to denial, self-mutilation,
self-indulgence, drugs and even workaholism to convince ourselves that we’re
really worthy people in the face of our persistent shame. We cut ourselves and
for a few moments feel that life, once again, is good. (Clinical studies have
shown that after an act of self-mutilation, cortisone production, directly
associated with stress, is reduced.)
We deprive, afflict, and sacrifice ourselves for good
reason. But why should self-castigation make us feel better? We are created in
the image of God. Therefore, we are highly moral creatures, and we are
painfully aware when we violate our internal God-infused rule book. In addition
to this, we also have a sense that there must be retribution for the
infractions. We’re then confronted with two choices: either we confess and seek
the mercy of the One who created the rules or we deal with the problem
ourselves. If we have a problem with God, we usually deal with the problem
ourselves. This is exactly what Adam and Eve did. They covered their sin and
shame with fig leaves—hardly an adequate solution. We, however, do the same
thing. Instead of fig leaves, we cover ourselves with good deeds,
accomplishments or self-affliction. We convince ourselves that we are fully
able to pay the price for our guilt and shame. And we often do such a good job
of this that we actually become convinced of our own righteousness, superiority
and entitlement.
But an entitlement mentality is a lethal poison. Because of
their self-inflicted punishments, the flagellants convinced themselves and others
that they were even more spiritual and entitled than the priests. Consequently,
they entered the cathedrals, driving away the “less worthy” presiding priests,
sometimes even beating them.
Guilt and shame cause such psychological turmoil that we
can’t ignore them. We feebly erect a wall of denials and self-righteous
rationalizations in a vain attempt to shield ourselves against their
indictments. However, we find that they are like inflated beach balls in the
ocean, which inevitably resurface no matter how valiantly and persistently we
fight to keep them submerged.
Are we condemned to vainly pursue an unattainable freedom
from these slave-masters? Have we become servants of denial and image
management to hide the painful truths about ourselves? It would seem so. If we
need to feel that we are significant and worthy people and our unalterable
script tells us we’re not, we have a problem—a fatiguing quest after the
transient feeling of worthiness.
The Biblical faith affirms that we do have a very real
problem—God (and even our God-given human nature) has been offended by both our
sin and our inadequate, self-absorbed attempts to atone for our sin through
self-righteous acts and justifications. We have covered ourselves with fig
leaves in the form of accomplishments hoping that this would obscure the
offense and silence the guilt and shame. When this failed to work, we ran from
God and refused to meet Him in the light of true confession. And we have been
running ever since.
However, He paid the price through mutilation by our human
hands so that we wouldn’t have to suffer mutilation at His hands or even our
own. If we are convinced that Christ has paid the price for our sins in full
and that nothing will separate us from His love and forgiveness, then the sense
of guilt and shame and the need to continually prove ourselves is neutralized.
Bradshaw claims that “By being aware of the dynamics of
shame, by naming it, we gain some power over it” (23). He’s right if by “being
aware of the dynamics of shame” he means understanding that we have a real-live
sin problem that only God’s grace can adequately address. We do have to “name
it” by confessing it, not in denying it or by covering it over by
self-atonement or good deeds. Good deeds do play their very vital role, but not
as a ploy to deny our guilt. As rain falls from clouds, so must forgiveness
come from God. Any attempt to forgive ourselves is nothing short of
masturbation and a refusal to grapple with the objective offense of our sins.
Martin Luther subjected himself to the most extreme and
painful disciplines trying to earn God’s love. However, in the midst of his
studies, the concept of grace and reconciliation through Christ suddenly came
alive as never before. In his Commentary
on the Book of Galatians, he wrote,
- Although
an impeccable monk, I stood before God as a sinner troubled in conscience,
and I had no confidence that my merit would satisfy Him. Therefore I did
not love a just and angry God, but rather murmured against Him…Night and
day I pondered until I saw the connection between the justice of God and
the statement, “The just shall live by his faith” [Rom 1:17]. Then I
grasped that the justice of God is that righteousness by which, through
grace and sheer mercy, God justifies us through faith. Therefore I felt myself
to be reborn and to have gone through the doors into paradise.”
Luther discovered something that many of us have
discovered—the Word of God is transformational! It (and the God who gave it) is
the necessary antidote for masochism in its various forms. I still don’t enjoy
taking long showers, but I no longer experience the need to prove my worthiness
by keeping them under the three minute limit. In contrast to the reassurances
of many psychologists that I was a “great guy,” it was only the Word of Christ
that was able to convince me of this and free me from my internal shackles.
When we reject the gift of God’s righteousness procured on
the Cross, we condemn ourselves to endlessly pursue our own righteousness, like
Sisyphus self-condemned to push his boulder. When we fail to receive this
payment for sin, we likewise sentence ourselves to lives of masochism,
endlessly trying to pay off a debt that is far beyond our means to ever
satisfy. Consequently, we are always paying, always pushing, always trying to
prove ourselves.
In retrospect, I find it so remarkable that Jesus’ death on
the Cross is the only antidote for humanity’s obsessions. It’s also the perfect
piece to complete the jigsaw puzzle presented by our confused lives. Pleasure
seeking, denial, and masochism each had failed to fill the gap. This forces us
to ask the question, “Why is there is such an incredible fit between this
Bible-centered event that occurred 2000 years ago and my mental well-being?”
Perhaps, Christ is the missing piece!
