"Do Introverted Christians Need To Be Fixed?"

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

I have never felt comfortable at church. It has been 20 years since I last had a church home. And when you hear something about yourself enough times, you believe it. Therefore, with the people around me at church playing a big part in it, I developed the belief that I was pathologically shy. Only in the last several years have I discovered and been able to fully appreciate that I am simply highly introverted. That does not repair the damage done from many years of believing that there is something wrong with you. Anyway, I can empathize with the writer's concerns here.

 

[pdudgeon]

I tend to think that the difference is one of awareness.
the introvert is more likely to be aware of self, while the extrovert is more likely to be aware of others.

so where (and how) do these two groups meet in a church setting?

the answer is that they both need to develop a common focus on a third point.

that point can be a video, a speaker, a band, a communal action (ie group prayer, all standing, all seated, all eating, etc.)

ironically that doesn't happen when using individul hymn books or individual bibles, because the focus of attention is still on an individual hymnal, or bible that the person is holding. That was the normal way of worship in earlier days. so yes, more people were uncomfortable then.

So in answer to your question, the answer is no, the individual Christian doesn't need fixing..but the means of communication itself is what needs to be fixed.

 

[dms1972]

Typing people into introvert, extrovert isn't a good thing at all it seems to me because its binary. It might be better than being told you're pathologically shy, but not much in my reckoning. I was always refered to as "reserved" . But I still hate the term as much as introvert, because it leads people to think I like being alone, when I don't and only would like to meet people with similiar interests. All sorts of reasons come into why one would feel comfortable or not in any gathering. The issue isn't to do with introversion, or extroversion, its a matter of self-acceptance (as made in God's Image, and a new creature in Christ) and integration, rootedness, and belonging in a fellowship.

A 'third focus' is what has always been central to worship, if its not just formalism or conformism and its always been there in congregational christian worship and liturgy.

These so called 'psychological types' only appear after some conflicted-psychologist dreams them up. Christians who follow that thinking may then begin to absorb the psychological-spirituality, and religiosity from this Jungian typing which has it roots in gnosticism.

 

[Cactus Jack]

If it ain't broke don't fix it.

Being an introvert is part of being human. Just as is being an extrovert. I used to be an introvert, but then I changed with age and now I'm more of an extroverted introvert. Kind of a 50/50 of the two leaning in the direction of introvert.

 

[Autumnleaf]

I think introverts need to accept themselves as they are and build from there. Other people respond to us based on how we treat them. If we are quiet then we appear indifferent towards them and they will mirror that to us. If we open up and chat with them they will take that as a sign of interest and mirror that with us.

I am introverted but I have an extroverted job so I learned how to do small talk. Sometimes it can be delightful.

 

[dms1972]

I think introverts need to accept themselves as they are and build from there.

But its never as simple as "You are an introvert" , "she is an extrovert" etc. These are not personality types, they are merely scales, if they even measure what they purport to. Its never measured in terms of what you are - and at best these 'dimensions' are only validly measured in terms of social extroversion, not introversion (thats my opinion - but you'll see these tests don't tell people how introverted one has been, only how extroverted.)

These tests seem to me a bit like in the film Dead's Poets Society the text-book that Mr Keating (Robin Williams) told the kids to rip out the introduction of. It was measuring poetry plotting it on graph that was the problem, and assessing it in that way, and claiming that some mathematical way of assessing poetry would yield understanding, or show how great the poet was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjHORRHXtyI

I still think that the problem for christians is psychological-typing - or being typed by others and then accepting oneself as that type rather than as saved by grace and a new creature (a work in progress) becoming. Romans chapter 8 and chapter 12.

You can let Myers and Briggs, or Jung mold you if you want, but you'll always be their product, and they will have set the limits on who you may become.

Myers-Briggs was for only some workplaces (particularly a post-war industrial workplace, and even more so for women in the industrial workplace due to post-war labour shortages), not for places of worship, missions, or fellowships, or families, or finding a husband or wife. To use it in any of those ways is a complete misunderstanding of its original limited applicability.

Clinical psychologists rarely use it, and its validity was questioned long ago by the Educational Testing Service. Its more recent popularity is due mainly to marketing.

http://www.indiana.edu/~jobtalk/HRMWebsite/hrm/articles/develop/mbti.pdf

Psychological typing is putting people in a box, in a box for others convenience.

People are in a process of becoming - so the moment you put yourself in these boxes you cut off some if not most of the possiblities of becoming the person you were made to become.

Love leads to understanding, just as faith leads to understanding.

To say again it is WRONG to label someone, or use a reductionistic method to define a person, as though that had some determining quality - it doesn't have anymore power over you than what you give it, but others can sometimes browbeat another with these terms as though they knew what they were talking about.

Even if Jung had some insight here he used these terms esoterically, and not as straightforwardly understood, and that only adds to the confusion.

Neither of these descriptors are that useful anymore in my view.

 

[KitKatMatt]

No one needs to be "fixed".

People who interact with and absorb the world differently just need to work out ways to function that work best for them.

I'm an introvert, and going through therapy helped me a lot in identifying ways that I can behave so I can do stuff like other people. It's not shyness, it's the way I handle stimuli and react to it that makes me introverted. Now that I know what the case is for me, I do stuff like hang out with friends while having breaks from them a few times during the day so that I can relax and recover, before going back to do stuff with them.

 

[dms1972]

------

 

[variant]

I have never felt comfortable at church. It has been 20 years since I last had a church home. And when you hear something about yourself enough times, you believe it. Therefore, with the people around me at church playing a big part in it, I developed the belief that I was pathologically shy. Only in the last several years have I discovered and been able to fully appreciate that I am simply highly introverted. That does not repair the damage done from many years of believing that there is something wrong with you. Anyway, I can empathize with the writer's concerns here.

Fixed how? We can drag introverts into numerous social situations and let them be miserable.

It doesn't so much "fix" as desensitize them.

People find happiness different ways, a lot of people simply need to understand and accept that.

 

[RDKirk]

I behave as though an introvert in situations in which I am unsure of my position, knowledge, or validity. I behave as an extrovert in situations in which I am comfortable with my knowledge, position, or validity.

I don't mind teaching, but I hate selling...which are both reflections of my statement.

I don't mind being around people, but I'm also perfectly happy (perhaps slightly happier) being solitary. I did grow up as an only child, so I developed lots of ways to entertain myself when alone.

When in the company of others, I don't mind quiet.

What does that make me?

 

[variant]

You see how people are refering to themselves: "I'm an introvert" - this is totally wrong, and a indication how people have been browbeat with a label, and how harmful it is.

I opted for a test once, because the people I was dealing with lacked any real empathy or understanding, so I said look I'll take my chances and see what the test says.

Personality typing is like measuring poetry on a graph.

Take off the label.

Labels are only problematic if they are adhered to religiously or bogged down with extraneous emotional baggage.

Calling someone an "introvert" might simply be helpful in describing how they are likely to react in certain situations.

 

[keith99]

I behave as though an introvert in situations in which I am unsure of my position, knowledge, or validity. I behave as an extrovert in situations in which I am comfortable with my knowledge, position, or validity.

I don't mind teaching, but I hate selling...which are both reflections of my statement.

I don't mind being around people, but I'm also perfectly happy (perhaps slightly happier) being solitary. I did grow up as an only child, so I developed lots of ways to entertain myself when alone.

When in the company of others, I don't mind quiet.

What does that make me?

Well adjusted?

Escape while you still are.

 

[KitKatMatt]

You see how people are refering to themselves: "I'm an introvert" - this is totally wrong, and a indication how people have been browbeat with a label, and how harmful it is.

I opted for a test once, because the people I was dealing with lacked any real empathy or understanding, and seemed to actually have a lot of cynicism and bad faith because of their line of work, so I said look I'll take my chances and see what the test says.

Personality typing is like measuring poetry on a graph.

Take off the labels.

Rip it out.

It's fine if you don't want to use labels, but I personally do want to use them to describe certain traits of myself.

I spent forever trying to figure out what I was. I am going to use those labels happily because they've helped me figure things out.

 

[dms1972]

Fixed how? We can drag introverts into numerous social situations and let them be miserable.

Why do you think its up to you to do anything, let alone "drag" people somewhere?, or that its merely the social setting that makes someone uncomfortable sometimes (not miserable - your word). People like social situations if they interest them. I don't like walking through packed shops, or being on a packed bus - but I like other people, particularly if I can learn something from them, or we share some interest.

People come out of themselves in regard to common interests - listening to music, discussing a book, even debating or arguing, films (less so), and loads of other activities - there is no need to psychological type people.

But why do you, and who is "we"? - think there is a need to anything other than be kindhearted if you can, when you meet someone?

 

[dms1972]

----------

 

[variant]

Why do you think its up to you to do anything, let alone "drag" people somewhere?, or that its merely the social setting that makes someone uncomfortable sometimes (not miserable - your word). People like social situations if they interest them. I don't like walking through packed shops, or being on a packed bus - but I like other people, particularly if I can learn something from them, or we share some interest.

People come out of themselves in regard to common interests - listening to music, discussing a book, even debating or arguing, films (less so), and loads of other activities - there is no need to psychological type people.

But why do you, and who is "we"? - think there is a need to anything other than be kindhearted if you can, when you meet someone?

Ah, tone on the Internet.

I don't. That comment was facetious.

I don't see any easy way to "fix" how a person feels about something, and the only reason to even try would be if it is making them unhappy.

 

[Neogaia777]

I have never felt comfortable at church. It has been 20 years since I last had a church home. And when you hear something about yourself enough times, you believe it. Therefore, with the people around me at church playing a big part in it, I developed the belief that I was pathologically shy. Only in the last several years have I discovered and been able to fully appreciate that I am simply highly introverted. That does not repair the damage done from many years of believing that there is something wrong with you. Anyway, I can empathize with the writer's concerns here.

Sometimes introverted people resist love, or being held or will have a problem being "touched" It can even lead people to resist God's loving embrace...

I am introverted, and my response to love is what needs to be fixed, when I was a baby, I made my mom sad, because she would try to hold me and I would cry, but the moment she set me down alone with my toys, I was as happy as could be, so it runs very deep for me, but it does need to be fixed in me...

God Bless!

 

[variant]

Not at all, your starting to sound like those straight-jacketers - who want to be one step ahead, predicting what they can never predict, and getting annoyed then just strapping someone up when it was their psychological- methods made the mess.

Words are for dealing with the world. You will find it remarkably difficult to do anything without labels.

"Strait-jacketers" for instance is a label here...

Ironically trying to predict me?

 

[grandvizier1006]

But its never a simple as "You are introvert" , "she is extrovert" etc. These are not personality types, they are merely scales, if they even measure what they purport to. Its never measured in terms of what you are - and at best these 'dimensions' are only validly measured in terms of social extroversion, not introversion (thats my opinion - but you'll see these tests don't tell people how introverted one has been, only how extroverted.)


I still think that the problem for christians is psychological-typing - or being typed by others and then accepting oneself as that type rather than as saved by grace and a new creature (a work in progress) becoming.

You can let Myers Briggs, or Jung mold you if you want, but you'll always be their product, and they will have set the limits on who you may become.

Myers-Briggs was for only some workplaces (particularly a post-war industrial workplace, and even more so for women in the industrial workplace due to post-war labour shortages), not for places of worship, or fellowships, or families, or finding a husband or wife. To use it in any of those ways is a complete misunderstanding of its original limited applicability.

Clinical psychologists rarely use it, and its validity was questioned long ago by the Educational Testing Service. Its more recent popularity is due mainly to marketing.

http://www.indiana.edu/~jobtalk/HRMWebsite/hrm/articles/develop/mbti.pdf

Psychological typing is putting people in a box, in a box for others convenience.

People are in a process of becoming - so the moment you put yourself in these boxes you cut off some if not most of the possiblities of becoming the person you were made to become.

Love leads to understanding, just as faith leads to understanding.

To say again it is WRONG to label someone, or use a reductionistic method to define a person, as though that had some determining quality - it doesn't have anymore power over you than what you give it, but others can sometimes browbeat another with these terms as though they knew what they were talking about.

Even if Jung had some insight here he used these terms esoterically, and not as straightforwardly understood, and that only adds to the confusion.

Neither of these descriptors are useful anymore and they are often ignorantly applied to someone who at a particular point simply didn't know any of those close by, others can also behave in an excluding manner too, for very reasons. It has to be said.

Everyone can move outward, sometimes it takes prayer, and courage.

Selah

Yes, I agree 100%, even though I never watched Dead Poets' society. Which is ironic considering that a few months ago I had the opportunity to do so, but declined. I guess I messed that up

Anyway, I agree completely about the Myers-Briggs thing. The Christian online program thingy I'm in (too complicated to explain, just take my word for it! ) made us all take those things. I had taken one before, and just like always I got INTJ. Yay.

So, did that define my personality? Uh, nope. Tons of people get INTJ. And do you know why?

Asperger's Syndrome. I have Asperger's Syndrome, and that pretty much guarantees that you get one of the "introverted" types, and usually only particular ones like mine. So, basically, if I didn't have Asperger's, I'd get something different. So the "personality test" has given me a "personality" that consists of a neurological condition! I know that probably doesn't sound like a big deal, but having gotten out of a period of depression and feeling like I was just a label, it wasn't exactly helpful to be defining myself by a set of letters.

I wouldn't say that it was the test alone that "messed up my psyche", but just knowing that I was being labeled like that just sort of hurt me inside because I felt my label was some burden God couldn't lift. Now I realize that it's just how God has made me and that it's only a label if I make it that way.

Still, though, those tests bother me. Particularly because I've gone to a bunch of happy Protestant churches that love their tiny, local community and don't see the world beyond their neighborhoods, with occasional visits to University towns for football games (it's an American thing, the "football" isn't actually what you'd call football and the universities are pretty flimsy. Ironically, there is a university in a place called Oxford, with no relation to the actual Oxford University, and the university itself is just some place full of partiers and rednecks and...I'll just make a thread telling everyone about that later ).

Basically, their lives and interests bore me, and I don't want to eat food with them. I just go to church for sermons. I'm ok with meeting people and can easily bond with them if we're similar enough, but I can't fake smiles and shake hands of rednecks (something I was forced to do at my church for YEARS) who only talk about stuff within their culture.

So yeah, Protestantism, I've heard, favors extroversion, whereas Orthodoxy favors introversion. Why couldn't I have been an educated Byzantine ?

I could go on and on rambling about why I don't like these labels and Myers-Briggs stuff. It's not bad, per se, but people misuse it because they think it defines your personality. It defines how you look at problems and how you approach stuff, but it doesn't define EVERYTHING ABOUT YOU. Plus, for me, I keep getting marginal preferences of this over that. The only thing steady is introversion. So I've also gotten INTP, ISFJ, ISTJ, and ISTP. I think, they're all so similar since for me the margins of this over that is literally 1% sometimes.

What someone ought to invent is a personality test that doesn't give you labels. It just says, "You are like this and maybe you do this. You might like this and that, and here are some things to consider." Something that a bunch of people like me could take and all get different stuff because the test would take into account the fact that even my twin brother and I are very different (yes, I do have a twin).

And no, there's nothing psychological about it. I get why some people want to use it--to determine their strengths and maybe get some insight into how they think--but how a person thinks isn't their personality. Christians in a church tend to agree on various issues and share a Christian consensus, does that give them the same personality? No, of course not, but the Myers-Brigs fanatics like to say that this religion means this type and whatnot. Of course, INTJ got atheism That type indicator got me wrong, that's for sure.

I think the best thing to do would be to clarify what the Myers-Briggs is supposed to do. It's not supposed to be psychological, and it's not supposed to define your personality. Maybe a better term for it would be like a "way-of-thinking indicator", since that's really what the thing determines best--and it doesn't even do THAT perfectly well, of course.

Introverts don't need to be "fixed", but churches like the ones in my area need to be able to make some outlets for them so that they won't feel too uncomfortable and avoid going because they don't know anybody there.

 

[dms1972]

--------