Autism In The Pandemic: When We Don’t Conform

TL;DR: Crisis situations amplify society’s demand for conformity, which under normal circumstances is already a challenge for autistics.  The thoughts and feelings of divergent thinkers are valid and welcome even when these fall outside the norms being set by the pandemic.

This post, I’m sure, is not for everyone.  It may be for some, in parts, and others in other parts.  It is not meant to be a universally applied patch, but I offer it for those who will find it helpful.

Over the past three weeks, great good has unfolded in the world as people come together and support one another in many hours of need.  But there are social perils afloat in the community as we rally together.  Without exaggeration, some autistics are feeling now more marginalized than ever before.  But, why?  Can we really point a finger at the pandemic?

Yes.  Crisis situations amplify society’s demand for conformity, which under normal circumstances is already a challenge for autistics.  Furthermore, the ways we are not easily understood outside of crisis situations can become greatly magnified when tensions run high.  Yet, our needs have not changed, and we cannot put them on hold because everyone is somehow expected to cope with valor “because it’s a crisis.”  It is just as acceptable to be needy now as it was before the orders came to postpone all nonessential matters.

Another point to address: Autistic people do not automatically feel vindicated by either “stay-home orders” or “social distancing.”  In fact, many of us are keenly aware of how this new way of living is creating great pain and frustration for ourselves and others, and for us to wish that on anyone is absurd.  Autistics do not routinely stand six feet from our friends… many of us do enjoy hugs, when we expect them… and no, we have not all longed for the day when we are ordered to stay home.  (Some autistics are even extroverts who are struggling greatly right now!) There are many days autistics will retreat to recover our spent energy, but being part of the community is as important to autistics as anyone else.  If anything, autistic anxiety is likely much higher with all the new and rapidly changing rules, frightening images, panic buying and shortages of supplies we need, and the tremendous suffering we are now aware of, day after day.  Also, those of us who need a set amount of personal space to stay regulated are finding it most challenging to be home with other people, day after day, without the ability to have any truly “alone” time.  The assumption that quarantine is an autistic’s dream come true brings us right to the brink of crying foul in the name of cultural appropriation.

How, then, are autistics adapting to the new normal?  As best we can.  All these changes in our routines take time to assimilate and process.  The pervasive sense of fear is unnerving wherever we go, so our anxieties are likely a lot higher from that alone.  And then there is this: Video messaging is not easy for everyone.  Many (not all) autistics find Skype and Zoom highly provocative of our natural social anxiety.  Now, instead of only feeling self-conscious, we get to see that awkwardness in real-time.  If we have been told repeatedly that our poker-face puts people off, seeing it is not only awkward, but can feel shameful… even though it ought not to be.  It is ridiculously hard to navigate smalltalk on the grid screen, and even more so when the smalltalk is now centered on the pandemic.  In face to face encounters, autistics often go inwardly on “screensaver” during smalltalk as a way of coping and hanging in until a relevant topic begins, but we have little choice when we are on display.  With video chat now the preferred way of maintaining relationships, school and employment, those who are forging through are doing so at great cost to our energy level.

As far as the challenge of thinking outside the pandemic: It is okay to NOT feel afraid, to NOT enjoy online events, and to hold different and creative ideas for carrying on and engineering what we ordinarily would have done.  This one seems obvious, but it is huge and vitally important to say.  Why?  Because our social environment has become greatly limited to online interactions and brief actual conversations.  The same dynamics that marginalize people in everyday situations are now highly concentrated and nearly unavoidable.  Here’s how:  A pandemic is, by definition, a life-or-death situation.  The majority of any group are the ones who determine the rules for safety and standards of “right” conduct.  When anxiety is high and fear of infection is at play, ordinary allowances for diverse opinions are suspended.  It is how crisis management works.  However, when crisis management takes over the social setting as it has by the need for social distancing, the risk is extremely high for anyone who does not match the standards of the majority to be shunned, both overtly and subtly.  But, what if you honestly feel well prepared, resourceful, and have a good grasp on the expected operating procedures? What if you are not afraid?  That does not mean you are reckless, thoughtless, indifferent or skeptical… but the larger community may portray you that way.  The problem is, those who are not afraid become frightening to people who are already frightened.  One of the common responses to that is accusation and scapegoating.  We have seen enough of these dramatizations on shows like “The Twilight Zone,” when neighbors turn on one another in response to fear and failure to conform.  Autistic or not, there are many who feel confident, prepared and calm… and, therefore, marginalized. It is hard to participate in conversations dominated by fear and rumination when we do not feel that way.  Pockets of friends who are applying themselves to “the cause” turn angry toward the one in the group who feels their energy is better used elsewhere.  Creative ideas challenge the lockdown mentality and become a threat rather than the tremendous help they ought to be.  In short, people are much less likely to “live and let live” when they perceive a crisis at hand, and this is a hugely difficult time for divergent thinker.

Through all of these trials, may we remember that this time will eventually pass.  One way or the other, we and our communities will find ourselves wiser on the other side.  May we continue consecrating our autism, all the ways it shapes our minds and hearts, and trust that these areas of divergence will be gateways for God to form deeper and stronger relationships through our daily doings.

ACAT 21: A Study of Adam and Eve

Adam and Eve.

There cannot be many who have not heard some version of the Creation Story.  Adam and Eve are humanity’s notorious duo, the first of our kind and the first to bungle things up.  So numerous are the commentaries on these two that it borders on cliche to find their names in the Catholic Catechism.  Yet, there they are, occupying the entire Lesson Five of the Baltimore Catechism, and likewise, our discussion for this week.

The Church believes Adam and Eve truly existed.  They were created as man and woman were intended to exist, innocent of any corruption, fully expressing the rich gifts of their endowments of body, mind and soul by God, who loved the idea of them into flesh and bone and breath.  Whether or not there was a botanical tree with literal fruit, or a spiritual construct embodied by metaphorical assignment, it is certain that God warned Adam and Eve of “partaking of the knowledge of good and evil.”  God wished to preserve the innocence of the first man and woman by keeping their intellect focused on that which is good, beautiful and true.  Could God have created anything that was evil, ugly or false?  No… but He did create angels with free will, some of whom rebelled and set out to destroy and undermine God’s work.  God likewise gave free will to Adam and Eve.  While allowing them this freedom, he still intended them to live in purity and perfect balance.  There would be no useful reason to follow any of the doings of the renegade angels.

As we know from the story, Eve was tempted by Satan to partake of that knowledge of good and evil, despite God’s warning.  Satan asserted that God’s motive was to keep the man and woman from becoming a threat to God’s omnipotence.  “You will not die if you eat the fruit,” Satan said.  “Rather, you will become like God.”  It was a clever exploitation of human nature: arouse curiosity, plant doubt and watch the rumor spread.  Once Eve ate the fruit, Adam became curious and, using the disobedience of the other person as his rationale, followed suit.  Part impulse, part calculated risk, part willingness to listen to a voice sowing seeds of distrust… our ancestors’ eyes were opened.  Innocence was spoiled.  Now, instead of seeing the good and the beautiful and the true, they saw it in terms of every way it could be perverted, distorted, exploited and ruined.

Horrified, Adam and Eve no longer felt safe.  If goodness and beauty and truth could be corrupted, what guarantee did anyone have of anything?  What once was seen in abundance suddenly became scarce.  The present was no longer enough.  Security became risk.  In the presence of evil, God no longer seemed sufficient.  In short: FEAR was introduced into humanity.

Our previous posts have emphasized a consistent theme: 1 John 4:18.  Perfect love casts out all fear.  And, in Adam and Eve, we see the inverse at work: fear deprives us of perfect love.

In the story, Adam and Eve cower in fear as they comprehend what they have done, and they can’t un-see the evil they now know.  They understand why God instructed them to leave that fruit alone.  What will God think?  How could he love them now?  Fear and doubt paralyze their once clear intellect.  To make things worse, Adam and Eve now realize their very bodies can be used in perverse and corrupt ways, compared to the innocence and majesty of purpose they knew before seeing the ugliness of gluttony, lust and gratification.  They covered themselves in shame.

Of course God knew what happened.  With great sorrow, God watched His beloved man and woman fall away.  Their responses betrayed them.  Even God’s all-encompassing love fell into doubt in their minds.  Fear gripped Adam and Eve… and they could not bear the perfect love of God.  Perfect love casts out all fear… and so, Adam and Eve, enslaved by fear, were cast out on their own.

God did not abandon Adam and Eve.  He continued loving them and all of their descendants no less than perfectly.  With the institution of fear, however, humanity remains separated from God by the degree to which that fear holds sway over our minds.

Is there any hope for redeeming humanity’s relationship with God?  Yes.  In fact, God began laying the foundation for that redemption almost immediately.  Through promises and covenants with the ones who trusted Him in spite of this primal fall, God led the way for the eventual birth of Jesus, the act through which God would become human himself and go before us in a story that would reverse every misstep of Adam and Eve, eventually taking on every conceivable fear and facing it himself in an incomprehensible demonstration of solidarity and desire to restore faith in Divine Love.

Remember, our task here is to annotate the Baltimore Catechism in ways that speak to the contemporary autistic mind.  The Baltimore Catechism does a thorough job of explaining the “what” of the fall of humanity from grace.  We aim, with the help of St. Thorlak’s theology of merciful love, to explain “why” – because, without a sense of why, the Catechism reads increasingly like a book of arbitrary rules… which speaks little to autistics and non-autistics alike.

Reference: Lesson Five, Questions 39-49.

 

ACAT 18: God’s Governing Style

In exploring God’s infinite perfection, the Baltimore Catechism leads us to three more attributes to ponder, and all in one sentence.  Question 20 of Lesson Two explores the style in which God governs his creation by asking if God is just, holy and merciful.  The answer given is a threefold, interrelated “yes,” with each attribute explicitly defined:

Just: Providing what is deserved, whether merit or punishment

Holy: Exalted in goodness

Merciful: Less exacting than justice demands

The Baltimore text gives an example of a judge in a court of law who is motivated by wisdom and virtue.  A criminal found guilty in this court will be sentenced according to what is right – no more, no less.  Occasionally, circumstance will arise where the person’s guilt is mitigated by factors beyond control, such as impaired thinking, ignorance of the law or extreme and immediate need.  In such cases, a just judge would show mercy by overriding the typical sentence with something more fitting, and in no way does this suggest the judge is corrupt or bending any rules.  A just judge follows the rules.  A holy judge asks what is morally right.  A merciful judge considers each person’s humanity and frailty, and keeps or adjusts decisions based on what will lead that person to a better way of life.

When taken together, these three attributes form a solid platform of checks and balances.  Any overreliance on one detracts from the ability of the others to achieve their intention.  God’s justice is no less real than God’s mercy, yet neither dominate, nor do they switch off and on.  All three operate simultaneously at any given moment: justice and mercy bound together in holiness.  However many sermons, books and homilies may focus on one aspect over the other, the reality is a constant, perfect and simultaneous triad.

Our post last week considered God in the spiritual tradition of St. Thorlak, which portrays Him against the backdrop of His purpose, which is LOVE.  God brought creation into existence with love, through love and for love… so, it ought to follow that God governs creation likewise: with love, through love and for love.  This is where we can find a solution among those who assert one aspect of God’s governance over another (that is, the fire-and-brimstone image on the one hand, and the none-are-ever-condemned image on the other).  LOVE is what motivates and binds justice, holiness and mercy into one cohesive truth.  1 John 4:18 shows how this works:  “There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment.”  If God is wrathful, there is reason to be afraid – either fearing God’s punishment for what we have done, or fearing that we can never reach or maintain a level of goodness to stay in the safe zone out of God’s way.  Likewise, if God holds none of us to any standard of virtue, nothing in any other part of the catechism, or any religious teaching, makes sense.   Some will say that Jesus’ death erased sin and guarantees salvation for all, even to the point of eliminating the concept of hell or damnation.  That also fails to hold up under scrutiny and test, and it gives rise to a different kind of fear – that of everyone making up their own rules, justifying themselves without consequence, and gradually losing sight of the common good.

Perfect love casts out fear.  If God is the essence of love, there ought to be no fear or chaos in God’s governance.  The triad of justice and mercy bound by holiness is perfectly balanced, with neither fear of wrath nor moral chaos.  Loving justice defends those who are abused and restores what is taken by holding abusers accountable.  Loving mercy considers those who stand accused and invites them to choose the better way before the evil of their actions is locked in.  Both exist simultaneously.  Nobody loses.  Those who decline God’s invitation to holiness reap the fullness of justice… and, those who accept God’s invitation to holiness reap the fullness of mercy.