I pulled a couple of excerpts on the theme of intimacy from Hands & Fehr’s Spiritual Wholeness for Clergy. I’d enjoy hearing your responses and thoughts. Make a comment, would you?
“Eric Berne calls [intimacy] a candid and honest emotional exchange (Berne, 1964). He maintains that there are only three possible human transactions: pastimes, games, or intimacy. Pastimes are routine, superficial remarks. “How are you?” Games are the many dishonest manipulations and hidden agendas among people. The only emotionally honest and candid interchanges are called intimacy.” (Donald R. Hands and Wayne L. Fehr. Spiritual Wholeness for Clergy. Herndon: The Alban Institute, 1993, p. 37.)
Think about recent conversations and interactions. How much time has been spent in “pastimes”? In games? In emotionally honest and candid interchanges?
“Etymologically. the word [intimacy] itself comes from the Latin word intus, meaning “inside”; its comparative is interior, meaning “more inside”; the superlative is intimus, meaning the “most inside.” The Latin word intimus, therefore, can also mean “best friend.” The whole series denotes depth and interiority, a sharing of one’s insides with another.” (p. 37.)
In the past 48 hours I can identify those three interchanges in all of my conversations. What I found is, by far, the majority of my conversations were superficial and “game-y” and were not a “candid and emotrional honest exhange.” At first I thought it was because to have those kinds of conversations….to be intimate…it could only be exchanged with a “best friend” or someone you could implicitly trust. But looking back, my deepest, most intimate conversation was with some I had only know for 24 hours. The difference was…he asked sincere, honest questions with a seeming appreciation to understand my thoughts (interior). He was attentive and engaged. In the end, he expressed gratitude for our dialogue. We were both enriched.
This reminds me that to have these kinds of conversations, I, too, must engage others with honest questions and personal engagement. Only then will we interact beyond the superficiality of our day.
Gail–Thanks so much for sharing your reflections. They hit home. I can identify with all three as well in recent conversations. Wish I couldn’t, but we probably all can.
Last Friday, in the context of a day alone with God, eight of us, many who had only met that day, shared at a deep, personal level with one another. It seemed to me that it was the result of a deep sense of being at home in Christ that was a fruit of the unhurried time we had each enjoyed with God, and then shared with one another in our last hour of regathering.
I had an surprising “transaction” with a hostess at CPK last weekend. I completely forgot about it until I read your post. She asked in the routine way “How are you?” and I responded with a normal “Good, Thanks” and then a not so normal, “Really Good!” (I had just left our weekend Refreshed retreat and was still feeling very overwhelmed by what the Lord had accomplished.) THEN, she asked “Why are you really good?” WHAT? Someone actually taking the time to go beyond the casual exchange and have a little conversation. It totally took me by surprise. When I told her we just left from a retreat, she continued with more questions. This really caught me by surprise because it is so unusual to have someone act like they are genuinely interested in you. Intimacy takes so much more thought and time than the routine, casual exchanges that we are used to. But, does it even make sense to have an exchange if it’s only a superficial one?
Thanks for the story, Nickie. Intimacy doesn’t thrive in the midst of hurry. It takes unhurried time to go deeper with others…