GAMES
PEOPLE PLAY IN RELIGION
Marvin
J. Parrish
Several
years ago a prominent psychiatrist, the late Dr. Eric Berne, wrote a
book entitled
Games
People Play.
He
reasoned that people often interact with each other in a highly
predictable game-like fashion. The games people play are usually poor
substitutes for honest human relationships. Dr. Berne catalogued a
large number of such games and his contributions have been widely
used by psychotherapists. The analysis of game-playing in human
interactions is an integral part of
transactional
analysis,
the
name Dr. Berne gave to his system.
One
such game described by Dr. Berne is “See What You Made Me Do”
(SWYMD). This particular game is a popular one. It occurs in a
variety of circumstances and can be played by almost anyone, such as
the man of the house who is out in his shop driving some finishing
nails into a future cabinet. His wife comes out to ask him for some
change to pay the paper boy. The man’s cabinet-making has not
gone well up to this point. When his wife intrudes, he misses the
nail, smashes his finger with the hammer, and screams, “See
what you made me do!” The man was just waiting for a scapegoat
and his wife’s appearance supplied that need.
Having
acknowledged my debt to Dr. Berne I will consider some games people
play in religion.
Many
of us play the game “Show Humility and Meekness” (SHAM).
SHAM is extremely difficult to play well. It requires sensitivity and
the ability to make subtle discriminations. One really has to know
his audience. If he overplays it, he will defeat his purpose. If he
tries too hard, he will lose the game. The trick is that one must
make it look like he is winning accidentally — and even
unknowingly. Fortunately, really being meek and humble does not
constitute a game. SHAM is a game because of the player’s
conscious and well-practiced affectation of these qualities.
Another
game, played particularly well by Church of Clirist people, is “Have
A Scripture Handy” (HASH). This game assumes that there is a
precise scriptural answer for all questions. Some argue that this
game is a derivative of “Speak Where The Bible Speaks; Be
Silent Where The Bible Is Silent.” HASH supporters generally
agree that these two games are related, but promote HASH as a safer
and more direct way of answering questions. They argue that “Speak
… Be Silent” does not adequately rule out the
possibility that “opinions of men” might creep into our
pronouncements unawares. In addition, they argue that “Speak …
Be Silent” is not a scriptural phrase and thus sets a dangerous
precedent.
There
are several theories as to why Church of Christ folk take to HASH so
well. One theory is that we have learned the truth of the old adage,
“Things are easier said than done.” Others claim that our
HASHplaying preeminence results from an unconscious attempt to return
to the letter of the law. The spirit of the law, these theorists
contend, is feared because of the current unrest over ideas about the
Holy Spirit.
Although
HASH is a popular game among our people, it is not without its
detractors. These detractors argue that HASH results in an
unprincipled melange of out-of-context quotations. There is also the
complaint that HASH is a piecemeal account of Christianity. However,
since the game is relatively simple to play and requires little
careful thinking, it will undoubtedly continue.
A
number of games revolve around the concept of truth. Our people have
excelled in playing a variety of these truth games. These games
suppose that the Church of Christ has a monopoly on truth, while
others have mere fragments or none at all. Such truth games make
excellent
party
games.
One
such game is “Preach All Truth, Mine Especially” (PAT
ME). PAT ME is played in a number of ways, for there is disagreement
among its adherents as to the rules. Preachers are often adept at
this game. When a congregation’s direction changes with each
new preacher, one can be reasonably certain that PAT ME has been
played repeatedly. However, one need not be a preacher to play the
game. PAT ME has demonstrated its divisive powers among players of
all types and persuasions. It has been known to split churches and
alienate Christians from each other. In fact, the game of PAT ME has
helped divide the entire religious world.
Another
truth game, designed to correct the deficiencies inherent in PAT ME,
is “Preach All Truth; Convert All Denominational Sinners”
(PAT CADS). Although PAT CADS is widely accepted, it has the same
pitfalls as PAT ME. Critics have even argued that the two games are
indistinguishable. We have been slow in recognizing our own game of
PAT ME while accusing others of such game-playing. While we admit our
practice of PAT CADS, we have failed to see its game like qualities
and its relationship to PAT ME.
This
can be seen in some minor games which together provide the essential
ingredients for the larger game. The adept PAT CADS player may
propose that he and a potential convert “Talk, Reason, And Pray
Together” (TRAPT). This game is particularly enjoyable when it
is played against someone with little experience. It is most
fulfilling when one of our members plays against a denominationalist.
For the best results the Christian should propose the idea of playing
TRAPT while a game of SHAM is in progress. Once the game of TRAPT has
been successfully sprung on the unsuspecting sinner, he is ready prey
for the game of “God Refuses A Sinner’s Prayer”
(GRASP). At this point one should very quickly merge into the game of
“I’m Right On (any topic under discussion). Not You”
(IRONY). To insure success it may be necessary to follow IRONY with
several quick games of HASH. So, begin with SHAM and proceed until he
is TRAPT. Then GRASP him and end with IRONY and HASH. We would do
well to put our entire line of truth games under the IRONY label.
Everyone would probably make his own rules, but at lease we would
have the right name!
Perhaps I have been satirical, but the point I wish to emphasize is that manipulation, subterfuge, and brainwashing should not be necessary to people who claim to have access to the power of Jesus. Games and gimmicks compromise the ultimate value of our ministry. If we cannot demonstrate the meaning of the Christian commitment by the example of our own lives, then all the cleverness in the whole world will not help us bring it to someone else. —Marvin Parrish is in graduate study in psychology at Washington University. His address:325 Mueller A ve., St. Louis 63135.