I have learned, over years of occurrences,
that when “the key does not fit the lock,”
the resolutions become longer and hard (-er).
The needed time and the nature of the exchange always take more time and becomes heavier when there is an unwillingness to honestly deal with a matter. When someone says to me, “We were on the phone,” or “That conversation went over an hour,” I am reminded of that general truth. Typically, sincere apologies, genuine acknowledgment of wrong-doing, and/or honest exchanges over a matter are by far shorter.
I remember a deacon asking and even challenging me about what and why something was done. It was obvious that he believed that it was a mistake, wrong, unwise, or improper. My response was, “Looking back at it, John, I think that decision was a mistake on my part!” John, “I’m good; that is all I need to know.”
The amount of time and the nature of the exchange shift from minutes to “chunks of time” when there is a refusal to face decisions and actions “without guile.” When there is excuse-making, dishonest honest arguments, disingenuous deflections, and/or a refusal to deal with legitimate issues, the time needed and the nature of the exchange adjust if there is going to be any hope of resolution.
Some may not be familiar with the anacronym — DARVO — “Deflect, Attack, Reverse Victim Order.” It is a shorthand way of referring to what we as wrong-doers typically do when engaged in ungodly self-defense. We typically, and sinfully . . . .
- Deflect: Deflect the discussion to an issue that is not the issue at hand. The subject being addressed now is not the issue at hand, and another issue is being interjected into the discussion that was not at issue at all.
- Attack: Now, the person who brought the issue to the attention of others is the one who is under attack. His actions, motives, approach, words, decisions become the focus.
- Reverse Victim Order: Now, the one who should have not what he did is the victim. He did the stabbing and is now saying that he is the one bleeding. The wrong-doer is the victim because he is being called out to his peers and/or is severely criticized.
When DARVO happens, the time and nature of engagement change because it now takes time to work one’s way through the jungle. Pulling the discussion back on track to the real issues, uncovering dishonest arguments, correcting the record, asking questions to reveal what actually happened, establishing the timeline which has been blurred, et al. — all takes time.
As Proverbs states . . . .
“He that is first in his own cause seemeth just; but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him.”
Such is the basis of our judicial system. The case sounds far different when there is some searching out as to what actually happened when some questions are asked.
That is why there is a fairly consistent reluctance to have both parties get together with others in leadership positions. Once the searching begins, the questions are asked, the details fill out the story — the truth of the matter begins to appear. Those who speak the truth are not the ones who are unwilling to engage. Those who know that when questions are asked, and the details are examined, wrong-doing will be understood or even exposed, and unfortunately, to their embarrassment. Now those who are listening to the issue realize that they were not afforded the facts of what actually took place.
√ DARVO was taking place!
√ The Key Doesn’t Fit The Lock!
√ The story doesn’t fit the facts.