Anger Read online

  In Naaman’s mind, Elisha the prophet has done him wrong. He has a right to be angry. Instead, the prophet has actually given him a cure for his leprosy. Elisha has done him great good, but because Naaman’s thinking is distorted, he is experiencing anger toward the prophet. In his rage, he is ready to return to his homeland, his mission not only a failure but a great embarrassment.

  Fortunately, there were some straight-thinking people traveling with him. His servants went to him and said,

  “Sir, if the prophet had told you to do something very difficult, wouldn’t you have done it? So you should certainly obey him when he says simply, ‘Go and wash and be cured!’” So Naaman went down to the Jordan River and dipped himself seven times, as the man of God had instructed him. And his skin became as healthy as the skin of a young child, and he was healed!

  Then Naaman and his entire party went back to find the man of God. They stood before him, and Naaman said, “Now I know that there is no God in all the world except in Israel. So please accept a gift from your servant.” (verses 13–15)

  Elisha refused his gift but acknowledged the healing power of God.

  Naaman represents the person who experiences strong but distorted anger but who, when confronted, stops his rage and listens to reason rather than allowing anger to control his behavior. As a result, this leader experienced healing and turned to honor the person at whom he had earlier been angry. Naaman demonstrates that distorted anger does not need to control our behavior and lead us to destructive acts.

  This biblical account gives us a positive example of how to respond to distorted anger. This raises two questions: (1) How do we identify when our anger is distorted? (2) How do we process distorted anger? The first question is easier to answer, and we’ll address it here. However, processing distorted anger is more challenging, and we’ll answer that in the next chapter.

  WRONGDOING—OR NOT?

  Distorted anger differs from definitive anger in one fundamental way. In definitive anger, there is always a wrong perpetrated; the anger is a response to this wrong. In distorted anger, a perceived wrong leads to anger—but the alleged wrong is only in your perception; there is no real wrongdoing.

  For instance, you are walking down the street and observe a teenage boy walk up to a younger and smaller boy, snatch his bicycle from his grip, and ride off down the street. The young boy is screaming, “That’s my bike! That’s my bike! He stole my bike!” Immediately you experience anger. Your emotions rise. Your heart rate quickens. Your mind begins to race: The very idea of bullying around a younger child. That’s not right! Something needs to be done. If the facts are what you perceive them to be, then your anger is definitive.

  But let’s assume that upon further investigation, you find that the bicycle actually belonged to the older boy, that the younger boy saw it unattended and decided to take a ride. When the older boy spotted him, he was simply retrieving his bicycle before the young boy got out of sight. Your anger toward the older boy is distorted in that he perpetrated no wrong. In fact, he was correcting a wrong that had been committed by the younger boy. Distorted anger is based upon a perception of wrong, whereas definitive anger is based upon genuine wrong.

  It becomes apparent that if we treat all anger as definitive, we will make some serious blunders in judgment. For example, if, in the above illustration, you assume that your anger is definitive, you may chase the older teen, knock him from the bicycle, and return it to the younger child. Only later will you realize that you have made a serious mistake.

  In order to understand distorted anger, we must return to our basic paradigm. In all anger there is first a provoking event; second, an interpretation of that event; and third, the rising emotion of anger. Physiological changes take place in the body, and we are ready for action. All of this occurs whether the anger is definitive or distorted. But if we are to have a wise response to anger, we must first discern whether that anger is based upon actual wrongdoing. This requires time and thought. Thus, the value of step two in the last chapter: Restrain your immediate response. Questions must be asked and evidence must be weighed in order to process anger positively. These questions must be asked of yourself and sometimes of the other person.

  In the illustration above, had you raced to the younger child and asked, “Is that your bicycle?” he may have said, “No, I was just borrowing it for a short ride.” Immediately you know that things are not exactly what you perceive them to be. With only one bit of new information, your anger is already beginning to subside. With the additional information, you may decide that no action toward the older boy needs to be taken, and you may end up giving the younger boy a lecture on not taking bicycles without permission. That’s a much different action than you would have taken if you assumed your original anger to be definitive. (Of course, if you heard different stories from the two boys, any action is difficult. You may assume one is lying. The solution may be to go home with one of the boys and talk with his parents.)

  Two questions are important in determining the validity of anger. The first is, What wrong was committed? And the second is, Am I sure I have all the facts?

  The first question strikes at the heart of the matter. If a genuine wrong has been committed, then your anger is definitive. If, however, your anger has been born out of some unrealistic expectation inside of you, then it must be handled as distorted anger. Much of our anger grows out of internal emotional and thinking patterns that have developed through the years. For example, the person who tends to be a perfectionist will have high expectations not only for himself but for others to whom he relates. When people do not live up to these expectations, he will likely experience anger. Such anger is often distorted anger because the person has committed no wrong.

  Jill is highly perfectionistic. Open the drawer of her dresser and you find all of her clothes neatly stacked and color-coordinated. Her closet is no less organized. This pattern for neatness and perfection appears in every aspect of her life. She is married to Jeff, who is highly creative, but neatness and organization are not even in his vocabulary. Jill often becomes angry when she observes Jeff’s dirty clothes stuffed in a closet corner; when she sees him looking for a report he completed two weeks ago but has misplaced; and when she gets inside his car, which hasn’t been cleaned since the day he brought it home from the dealer.

  But Jeff has committed no wrong; Jeff is being the person Jeff has learned to be. He has no inner compulsion toward neatness or organization such as Jill has. I am not suggesting that Jill’s anger is not real. It has the same emotional, physical, and cognitive aspects as definitive anger. She really is upset; she really believes that Jeff is wrong not to be neat. But if she is open to the facts, she will discover that thousands of people have Jeff’s personality traits and that these traits are not evil. Jill’s anger still needs to be processed in a positive way (we’ll come to that in the next chapter), but it will help if she can see it for what it is. Her anger is not born out of Jeff’s wrong-doing but out of her own compulsion for neatness and organization. If she can see it as distorted anger, she is far more likely to process it in a positive way.

  Sometimes examining our anger will lead us to question the person with whom we are angry. If we understand that we may not have all the facts, then we should be motivated to seek the facts before we jump to wrong conclusions.

  When we begin to examine anger, we will find that much of it falls into the category of distorted anger. Distorted anger is no less troublesome than definitive anger, but it needs to be processed in a different way. In chapter 5 we will consider how to process our distorted anger.

  QUICK TAKES

  “GOOD” VERSUS “BAD” ANGER

  “GOOD” (DEFINITIVE)

  Definition: Anger toward any kind of genuine wrongdoing; mistreatment, injustice, breaking of laws

  Sparked by: Violation of laws or moral code

  How to recognize: If you can answer yes to the questions, Was a wrong committed? and Do I have all the fac
ts?

  What to do: Either confront the person or decide to overlook the offense (see chapter 3, step four).

  “BAD” (DISTORTED)

  Definition: Anger toward a perceived wrongdoing where no wrong occurred

  Sparked by: People who hurt us; stress; fatigue; unrealistic expectations

  How to recognize: Feelings of frustration or disappointment feed the anger.

  What to do: Halt the anger, and gather information to process your anger.

  For every minute you are angry you lose sixty seconds of happiness.

  RALPH WALDO EMERSON

  HOW TO HANDLE “BAD” ANGER

  Lynn was smoldering. Her daughter, Emily, had admitted to her that she was getting Cs and even a D at college. As they talked on the phone, Lynn had to bite her lip to keep from screaming: “But your dad and I sent you to this wonderful Christian college! I loved college! I wish I could take some of the classes you’re taking! Do you know what we’re paying?”

  To Lynn, Emily’s poor performance almost felt like a slap in the face. But her anger was distorted—based on a perceived injustice. In this case, Lynn’s expectations fed her anger toward Emily.

  Many of us struggle with these wrong perceptions that feed our resentment. Such distorted anger is sparked by such factors as circumstantial evidence, faulty presuppositions, generalizations, our expectations or personal preferences, even plain tiredness—and sometimes a combination of these. Whatever the cause, we conclude incorrectly that we have been wronged. We have an anger that is not valid, definitive anger; it’s mistaken, distorted anger.

  We have emphasized that distorted anger is wrong, and that it is a direct outcome of Adam and Eve’s fall, arising out of our selfish, even prideful natures. But that does not rid us of our feelings as we are experiencing anger. So how do we address such anger—and channel it for the good?

  “I NEED YOUR HELP”: SHARING INFORMATION

  We begin by telling the other person our point of concern. This must always be done in a nonjudgmental manner. That’s why I am calling it “sharing information.” We are not sharing a verdict: “You let me down”; “You disappointed me”; “You didn’t do what you promised.” All of these are condemning, judgmental statements that tend to incite warfare. In contrast, “I’m feeling frustrated (disappointed, hurt, angry, or any other emotion), and I need your help” is a statement of information. It’s telling the other person what’s going on inside of you, and it is requesting an opportunity to talk.

  Sharing information rather than judgment is the first step in processing distorted anger. In sharing information, you are focusing on making the other person aware of your emotions, your thoughts, and your concerns. You are focusing on the event that provoked your feelings, not on the person. You are more likely to be able to do this if you have first determined that the person has not wronged you. He may have made your life difficult; he may have caused you frustration, but he has not committed an immoral act.

  “WHAT HAPPENED?”: GATHERING INFORMATION

  Earlier we noted that on some occasions, we will recognize that we don’t have all the facts. Therefore, it is difficult for us to determine whether our anger is definitive or not. Meredith and Jason have a quick dinner, and she dashes out the door to attend her evening class. Three hours later, she returns home to find Jason on the couch watching a movie, the dirty dishes still sitting on the table where they left them. Meredith goes into an “anger attack.” Thoughts race through her mind. I can’t believe this—watching a stupid movie for hours, and the mess just sits there while I’ve been working hard in class. The ants have probably cleaned the plates by now. I feel like going in there and kicking the television.

  Meredith has several options. She can conclude that her anger is legitimate, that her husband is a no-good, lazy slob, and she can respond to him with bitter words; she can withdraw in silence and be unresponsive to his efforts toward sexual intimacy later that evening; or she can try to handle her anger in a more responsible manner. If she understands the difference between definitive and distorted anger, she may begin by asking herself, What wrong has he committed? She may work hard in her mind to see his action (or inaction) as some sin. If she is successful, she may conclude that his sin is in not loving her. After all, aren’t husbands supposed to love their wives as Christ loved the church? Well, this is certainly not an expression of love.

  If she is wise, she will also ask herself, Do I have all the facts? If she is wise enough to ask the question, she will probably be wise enough to conclude that the answer is no, she does not have all the facts. Therefore, an important step is to get information from Jason as to what has happened and why.

  Meredith walks over to the couch, sits down, gives Jason a kiss, and says, “I have one small question before I give you another kiss,” she says. “Why are the dirty plates still on the table?”

  “Oh, Babe, I’m sorry,” Jason answers. “I sat down here to watch a movie. I meant to clean up when it was over, but the next thing I knew you were unlocking the door. I don’t know how long I slept. I even slept through all the explosions in the film. I must have been asleep for two hours.

  “I’ll get the dishes. I’m sorry. I must have been exhausted.” He stands, stretches, and goes to the kitchen to begin to clean up. “How was your class?” he says.

  Chances are Meredith’s anger begins to subside as she realizes that Jason’s failure to clean up the table was not a sinful act. Sleeping for two hours on the couch is not immoral; it is simply a sign of one’s humanity. Gathering information allowed Meredith to release her anger and perhaps even be glad that Jason was able to get some extra sleep.

  When we realize that our perception of the situation is distorted, we can release that distorted anger and work on accepting our spouses as human.

  “THIS REALLY BOTHERS ME”: NEGOTIATING UNDERSTANDING

  Sometimes even when our anger is distorted we cannot simply release it and accept what the other person has done. Often we need to negotiate understanding. For even when the other has done nothing morally wrong, his or her behavior is still painful. You still feel disappointed, frustrated, hurt, and angry. You need to understand the person’s actions—and he or she needs to understand your feelings.

  This requires open conversation in a nonjudgmental atmosphere. Understanding that the other person has not morally wronged you should help you approach them in a non-condemning way.

  Rita and Doug are in their late thirties. They both have vocations that they find fulfilling. However, Rita has been struggling with anger toward Doug during the past six months. All of a sudden, he has become health-conscious. Three evenings a week after dinner, he goes to the local gym to work out, leaving her with the chores and the kids. He comes home later and wants her to watch television with him and, to use his words, “make love” with him. She is finding her anger growing into resentment. She feels that he is neglecting his responsibilities to help the children with their homework on those three nights. Rita’s anger is growing daily. She feels as if she is about to explode. Doug seems to be happy, but she is extremely unhappy.

  When Rita expressed her anger to me in the counseling office, we began by trying to identify the specific things about Doug’s behavior that sparked her anger. We came up with the following list:

  • Doug is unfair to leave me with the chores while he goes off to have fun.

  • He is neglecting the children by not helping them with their homework on those three nights.

  • He is self-centered in that he expresses almost no interest in meeting my needs. In fact, I’m not sure he even understands what my needs are.

  When we explored her needs, we found that her primary love language—the way she really felt loved by her husband—was quality time; the thing she really wanted from Doug was time together. “We used to talk a lot,” she said. “I felt close to him; I felt like he cared. Now with him gone three nights a week, we just don’t have time to talk. I’m beginning to feel he does
n’t want to be with me.”

  We then turned our attention toward determining if her anger was distorted in these three areas. We looked at him leaving her with the dirty dishes three nights a week and I asked, “What wrong is he committing?”

  “I just feel like it’s unfair for him to walk out and leave me with the work. We both work outside the home. I work as hard as he does,” she said.

  “Does he help you around the house in other ways?” I inquired.

  “Yes, actually he does a lot around the house. He takes care of the yard and all the outside work. He also vacuums for me. And he’ll pitch in and help me with anything I ask him to do.”

  Then we turned to the matter of homework. “On the two nights that Doug does not go to the gym, does he help the children with their homework?”

  “Yes,” she said. “He always has. In fact, he used to help them every night. He still helps them a little bit when he gets home from the gym if there is something they’re having trouble with. But it’s not the same as it used to be.”

  “What was your life like before Doug started going to the gym three nights a week?”

  “We would eat together unless the kids had a school activity, and then we would just grab a bite. He would always help me with the dishes. Then he and I would sit down and talk for probably thirty minutes before he helped the children with their homework and I worked on other things around the house. It was great. I felt close to him. I felt like we were a family. Now I feel like we’re still a family, but he abandons us three nights a week.”

  When I asked if her husband knew about her feelings toward his gym nights, she thought not, but then she added, “I feel like he is neglecting me and that we are growing apart. … He just doesn’t realize what’s happening.”