Taken from a book about using creative arts in therapy for highly abused individuals.

"Also, we must understand and show compassion towards those in our sessions who have been hurt so deeply as to be unable to respond to another individual at all. Sometimes we only know who these people are from behavioral signals, for which we must constantly have our antennae out. We are not the judges, only to recognize that, even among normal people, cruelties may be imposed by a person which make a respect for that individual impossible, in fact unethical. If we can understand this fact of life, why, then do so many arts specialist, social workers, and psychologist feel that such problems do not affect those people who are described by some as handicapped, retarded, deaf, blind and so on? Human emotion is our common denominator. If one cannot hold total respect for individuals who do not want to work woth those who have hurt them, then we had better go into another field where we are not dealing with the arts and with human beings and their emotional backpacks, which have collected survival equipement we shall never have the privilege to know."

I have dissected this passage in an attempt to understand what is being said here. I am still at a loss. Would someone please help me.

"...we must understand and show compassion towards those ... who have been hurt so deeply as to be unable to respond to another individual ..."

To be honest, I've never met anyone like that, but it must be a horrible thing to experience.

"...we only know who these people are from behavioral signals..."

What are the signals eminating from such a person?

"...recognize that, even among normal people, cruelties may be imposed by a person which make a respect for that individual impossible, in fact unethical."

Is this sentence now referring to the perpetrator of the abuse?

"If we can understand this fact of life..."

That it is unethical to respect the perpetrator?

"why, then do so many arts specialist, social workers, and psychologist feel that such problems do not affect those people who are described by some as handicapped, retarded, deaf, blind and so on? "

What problems? The effects of abuse or those of being mentally or otherwise handicapped?

"Human emotion is our common denominator."

A clear, concise, declarative statement I agree with wholeheartedly.

"If one cannot hold total respect for individuals who do not want to work woth those who have hurt them..."

Is this referring to three different people here? The therapist, the victim, and the perpetrator?

"...then we had better go into another field where we are not dealing with the arts and with human beings and their emotional backpacks..."

Yeah, try creative writing for a change.

"...which have collected survival equipement we shall never have the privilege to know."

But, why not? I really want to know!

 

 

I didn't understand the passage either, or for how it was intended to be understood.

Brent

Scott admits borrowing that passage. What went before the passage and what comes after it might be interenting. Without knowing the context, it does seem vague.

William Buckley Jr. would say or write things at times and you thought on the surface that you were agreeing with, only to find out with more thought that possibly you were not in agreement and then maybe you did agree after all. I loved this man! Now he's gone! Great treasure, that mind.

It's been a long time since I've contributed but I look in occasionally.

Since you took the trouble to dissect the passage, OS, I'll try to pose some responses.


"'...we must understand and show compassion towards those ... who have been hurt so deeply as to be unable to respond to another individual ..."

To be honest, I've never met anyone like that, but it must be a horrible thing to experience.'"

Could it be possible you've met them but didn't realize they weren't responding to others - that they are able to keep up normal appearances for periods of time? How about mentally ill people who exist in their own world? Or if they are surface most of the time they fail at the relationships they do have because of their inability to sustain normal interaction. Maybe the reason you don't think you've ever seen one of these individuals is because it never occurred to you that they could be that way because of hurt they've suffered. They themselves probably don't even know it. Psychoanalysts have theories that childhood repression can hurt so deeply as to cause these kinds of neuroses.


"'...we only know who these people are from behavioral signals..."

What are the signals eminating from such a person?'"

The answer above would probably bring some to mind.



"'...recognize that, even among normal people, cruelties may be imposed by a person which make a respect for that individual impossible, in fact unethical."

Is this sentence now referring to the perpetrator of the abuse?'"

Years ago cruel and abusive child-training methods were taught, which good-intentioned people used deliberately. People should know better now, but there is still a lot of mental cruelty toward children, not to mention physical abuse.




"If we can understand this fact of life..."

That it is unethical to respect the perpetrator?


"'why, then do so many arts specialist, social workers, and psychologist feel that such problems do not affect those people who are described by some as handicapped, retarded, deaf, blind and so on? "

What problems? The effects of abuse or those of being mentally or otherwise handicapped?'"

Or perhaps they are one and the same in some cases?



"Human emotion is our common denominator."

A clear, concise, declarative statement I agree with wholeheartedly.

"If one cannot hold total respect for individuals who do not want to work woth those who have hurt them..."

Is this referring to three different people here? The therapist, the victim, and the perpetrator?

"...then we had better go into another field where we are not dealing with the arts and with human beings and their emotional backpacks..."

Yeah, try creative writing for a change.


"...which have collected survival equipement we shall never have the privilege to know."

But, why not? I really want to know!

I would like to hear Scott's answer, but I think the author is going back to the original statement in this passage that states we're talking about those who are unable to respond to another individual. They develope the survival technique of withdrawal (a mental illness of sorts) and their withdrawal precludes ever revealing survival equipment to the counselor because to do so would cause the very pain he has gone to so much trouble to escape.

I have to agree with Doug that the passage may be easier to understand within the context it was written. Standing alone, it appears very convoluted and its meaning unclear.

Yes Adiel, I'll admit I have limited experience with victims of abuse and those with oppressive childhoods. Most of those individuals however, do learn survival and coping mechanisms in order to respond to and interact with others. One of the most common of these is anger. I'm sure many of us have seen it used and maybe even used it ourselves. However, a total inability to respond and interact because of abuse is very rare. A situation like that is usually caused organically.

Scott, would you please explain how you derived "just forgive and move on" from this passage. No competent mental health professional would ever suggest that to a victim. After reading and rereading the passage and trying to imagine the larger context, I have come to some conclusions.

The author seems to be chastising those whom, because of their professions, are put into situations where they come in contact with victims of abuse and these situations are either mishandled or misdiagnosed. I can only imagine he is speaking to lay people or other professionals such as teachers, pastors, etc. Possibly, he is speaking to those who have taken it upon themselves to treat victims with nontraditional methods, such as creative art, without proper training or credentials.

Scott, Wonderful way to put "move on".

If one cannot hold total respect for individuals who do not want to work with those who have hurt them, then we had better go into another field...

Respect in one thing said. Total respect requires action. ...Well at least when your talking religion.

Trouble is, when moving on, one finds there are weeds in the new field already.

But its not our job to remove the weeds. What works best is if you focus on growing faster to the Son.

But why is it that once people define someone as "hurt" the very people that looked the other way as "they" passed are the ones that now want to "work with" you? The "hurt" one is not allowed to move on.

Adiel, thank you for your comments. The passage is not more easily read in context. If so, I would have encluded more of the "preamble". The passage is poorly written to be sure. I had to read it four or five times (slowly) to begin to get the meaning. But the difficult construct was not my point. My point was that it was interesting to me that a mental health care professional would say that at times, it is not good, even unethical, to be prodding a victim of severe abuse to forgive. Now I believe Alice Miller says this same thing. I think we need to be extremely careful here with our context of understanding, and NOT succumb to a knee-jerk religious reaction that doesn't agree with our Sunday school rhymes. Of course, we all know that forgiving is for us, not them. Who would know that better than someone who works day in and day out with abuse victims. So it must be a bigger picture than that.

Adiel, I think you understood the author the same way I did. It is not that we don't forgive. What it got out of it was how wrong it is for some "caring", "helping" person to be prodding us from the backsides to move on before we are read, or when we simply can't. Also remember, a professional like this author is likely seeing at times, and referring to here, a level of abuse which is incomprehensible.

My comment "Just Forgive and Move on" was sarcastic, and aimed at some of the destructive, insensitive "advice" offered on this forum from time to time. I offered this as food for thought. I don't know what the answer is.

The job of the Church leaders is to take away the punch bowl just when the party starts.

Maybe that fits better that we would like to admit. Maybe it depends on how full your glass is at the time. Is not the real problem when it becomes an us and them thing.

Anyway, thoughts as I read an article this week. Here is the real quote:



"The job of the Federal Reserve is to take away the punch bowl just when the party starts getting interesting."

William McChesney Martin (1906-1998), Fed Chairman (1951-1970)

What I am seeing is this; there are two basic levels of operation here.

The one school is to work through hurts and offensive issues by the sciences of the mind, i.e. by coming to a deeper understandings of one's self and of others.

The other school is to be delivered from the hurts and offensive issues by way of the reception of the Gospel of Christ, where one gets filled to overflow with the baptism of God's Love! Rather suddenly men and women are now delivered from the hurts and offenses because where the hurts and offenses were down on the inside of us, there is now an intense love toward those who hurt and offended us. I am not ashamed of this Gospel! How could I be?

The respective schools will likely see the other as being either a non-working thing or on the other hand as a prolonged thing of marginal relief.

The following paragraph needs to be voiced here. There are those from both schools on this forum. When the one who has embraced the Gospel says, forgive and move on, this person is coming from the position which assumes the person addressed is able to do this by the power of God's love! This is not always the case. I understand that to push one to forgive if one is not able or ready to can merely add to the general offense.

There are times that the science of the thing is welcomed before one receives the Gospel..Others may receive help from the science of the thing and not receive the Gospel. We're all loved.

There's a psychological profile that can be studied and observed in each approach and in each school of thought. We are big enough to look closely at this and make allowances.

The important thing is that we accept each other, at least if that is what we want. That is what I want with my fellowman. As for myself, I refuse to stand in judgment of anyone.

Scott

Thanks for your explanation. I totally missed the sarcasm part. I should have caught that. duh!     I think I can grasp what the author is saying now. If someone takes an ax and hacks my arm off, I might, over a period of time, be able to forgive that person. But, that does not replace my arm! The same holds true in any mental or emotional damage. 

Phsycologically, forgiveness is a prerequisite to a complete healing of emotional damage. I say this, not from any real knowledge, but from personal experience. However, urging forgiveness as an initial treatment is bassackwards, or putting the cart before the horse (pick your cliche). There must first be a comprehension, by the affected individual, of the situation that caused the damage in the first place. Then, tools and techniques must be learned and used to change unhealthy cognitive functions into healthy ones. Severe cases may even require pharmaceuticals. Then, and only then, can forgiveness take place.

"When the one who has embraced the Gospel says, forgive and move on, this person is coming from the position which assumes the person addressed is able to do this by the power of God's love! This is not always the case. I understand that to push one to forgive if one is not able or ready to can merely add to the general offense."

Doug, what qualifies one, who has embraced the gospel, to urge a victim of abuse to forgive and move on? What criterion is used to make the assumption that the victim is able to do so? You are correct in stating that it may cause additional harm. However, if healing has progressed enough that a victim is able to begin the process of forgiveness, then, I believe, the power of the gospel has a lot to offer.

Just as the healing miracles of Jesus' day are routinely taking place in ORs and ERs across the globe, so too has God provided for man to heal mental and emotional damages caused by violence and disease. Would you urge a victim of a chronic illness to "forgeddaboudit and move on", or would you urge that person to seek professional help? Why would you do anything less for a victim of emotional or physical abuse?

<<< What I am seeing is this; there are two basic levels of operation here. <br>
The one school is to work through hurts and offensive issues by the sciences of the mind, i.e. by coming to a deeper understandings of one's self and of others.

The other school is to be delivered from the hurts and offensive issues by way of the reception of the Gospel of Christ, where one gets filled to overflow with the baptism of God's Love!>>>

Doug, you are asserting something here which wraps things up nice and tidy, but your model is as much a product of the mind as what you call the "school of the mind". I have never in my life seen the gospel of Christ fix anybody at any real level, although I must hasten to admit, I have seen what purported to be it, make them very religious, but now just disfunctional in a different way. And furthermore, we cannot continue to appeal to "if propoperly understood" because it NEVER is. I have met tons of Christians. I have yet to meet one I want to be like, or that I want what they have.

Scott;

I am sorry that I was misunderstood. I have never in any of the things I've written suggested that there's a human being somewhere that's good enough to follow after. Let none of us think of looking for that.

What I have done is this; I have expounded the Gospel of Christ to the best of my ability and have spoken clearly of a baptism of Love that does miracles in the human family. This is not a thing to be out-smarted or out-argued, this is something to be humbly received.

It's not a model, it's a baptism! To the humble this is free! To the contrite this baptism is glorious! To the degree we walk in this baptism our lives spiral upward. Supernatural Love fixes everything finally.

>>I have never in my life seen the gospel of Christ fix anybody at any real level, although I must hasten to admit, I have seen what purported to be it, make them very religious, but now just disfunctional in a different way. And furthermore, we cannot continue to appeal to "if propoperly understood" because it NEVER is. I have met tons of Christians. I have yet to meet one I want to be like, or that I want what they have.< <br>
Guess you haven't seen much Scott. I have most certainly seen what you say you haven't. I have seen people who inspire me because of the dramatic changes in their lives. You have never seen anyone who has been transformed?

Doug, I may not have made myself clear. What i'm saying is that no where, no how, have I ever seen a man get the Gospel and the be rid of his baggage. It takes tons of work on every front to get rid of the baggage. It takes spiritual contemplation and work, and it takes mental contemplation and work. I don't believe there are two tracks. I believe there is one track, and its the entire package, but if you disagree, we can take this up off-line.

Scott;

I think we have two conversations going on here. I was [not] thinking in terms that absolute and full healing comes by being filled with the love of God in an instant. But love's ultimate aim and purpose in us is to do this!
We can depend on His love.

I thought we were speaking of forgiving and moving on as it relates to things on this particular forum. We're all pretty much aware of what those things are.

I believe in a [general way] that those hurts and rejections experienced by the men and women on this forum from the Holdeman organization can be overcome by the powerful baptism of God's Love! Once we Love those that hurt and rejected us [more] than they love us, the battle is pretty much over. That's my experience.

There are some who have been a whole lot more hurt than I was, but I was just as rejected as anyone.

I was asking myself the other day of what quality do those rejections actually consist of? The rejection is far more than the simple rejection of one's family members and friends. The table thing is only a symbol.

The larger picture is this; something very important to us from child-hood which we actually believed in, has utterly rejected us. In some cases this thing has utterly discarded us; now that's as deep as rejection can go. Being rejected by a spouse goes nowhere near this deep into the human soul.
I'll explain.

Knowing this, it's no wonder that some go back and find their mother. What your total confidence was in from a toddler has left you standing there on the street corner. Momma will not come looking for you and you're well aware of this; you must go looking for Mamma if you are to find her!

So we are not dealing with a religious organization, not actually. We are not dealing with the leaders of the organization, not really. We are not dealing with God [about this issue] as the conditioning would suggest.

We are dealing with deeply entrenched thought patterns from a very small child where our confidence and security was placed. It can be absolutely heart rending [and worse] to be rejected and discarded by the element that had our deepest alligiance from a small child. This is one's mother for all intents and purposes!

Those men and women who's physical mother left them standing there on the street corner at three years old are told that they were going after cigaretts or milk, and never came back. These never again are embraced and accepted by the return of the mother. [These men and women are rarely if ever healed other than by the baptism of God's Love!]

I am thinking just now of two men that I personally know of where this type rejection happened. The one little three year old boy stayed right there on the street corner [day and night] in New York city for three days, before giving up on his momma! My God help the human condition.

These mommas do not come after you, if you are to find them the burden is altogether on your back! They're preoccupied with other things than you and preoccipied with ideas that are valued more than you. Momma is gone!

When this occurs in christendom, the law has stoned you and left you for dead! Someone has retain another's sins, rather than remitted them! It's Jesus who leaves the ninty and nine and goes after the one because He cannot stand to see this one standing there on the street corner! The Father can do what the mother will not do! Neither do I condemn you, just go and miss the mark no more. Lay the stones down boys!

His Spirit is the comforter! I can tell you one thing, this one called Jesus has a baptism that fixes and heals! I can just see through my tears now so I'll finish this up.

Doug, I still don't understand. I have worked through much of my rage towards the holdies, and really don't feel much anymore. As far as I know, I have never been "filled with the Spirit" in the way that you speak.

If this is too long then read the last half.

The way in which I understand and experience it in my own life, is this; there is love in every human being from childhood. This love is quickened and surfaces more and more by a clear and unhindered consciounce. The unhindered consciounce occurs many times by an experience of forgiveness as one receives the risen Christ as one's restorer. That's the early portions of our walk with Christ.

Added to this measure of the Gospel is a baptism that can come upon the humble believer whose heart remains contrite and receptive. In our experience with others and with ourselves this experienced baptism of God's love travels upward from the heart toward the mind, bringing men and women to soundness of mind. This soundness works a tremendous level of acceptance and forgiveness toward those who have treated us despitefully and shamefully. That's it in a nutshell.

What I want to address is this; There are several christian type groups who practice what they call tough-love. Tough-love to these groups means to retain someone's sins rather than to remit these sins. The believer gets judged and banished many times.

Indeed the believer has both the power to retain and to remit sins. What we bind is bound and what we remit is remitted, but let us remember we are speaking of sins here and not the believer. Let's be on the side of remitting the sins of our fellows! In retaining the sins of the believer these groups believe they do God and their fellowmen a good service; the sinning believer gets judged and banished. To get on top of the situation [as His Church] we are privileged to remit the sins of our fellows. This is the true sign of a clean, glorious, and holy church! The church is not about legal memberships and white picket fences. It's not horzontal, it's vertical. It's only visible because believing human beings are visible.

The [early church] did not have memberships in a legal way. Legal memberships create organizations and Faith alone does not create organizations. The early church therefore was quite loosely organized. Someone did call the meetings to order for example. They were members one of another by His love in them and by that alone!

Hating sin and loving the one who sins just as Christ Jesus loves this one, is our privilage. These misguided groups for all intents and purposes reject and discard those who sin among them and say that this action is their love.

These groups say that they are supposed to do things that Jesus would not do; that the church is supposed to do things that Jesus presently is not doing. Think about it. These groups admit that Jesus does not and would not reject nor discard those who sin. These understand that the real Jesus leaves the ninty and nine and goes after the one who has strayed or sinned.

Therefore if we banish and discard the one who stays or the one who sins, the Spirit of the real Christ leaves us and goes after this one. What a place to be left in where the real Jesus walks away from us leaving us with religious intents of tough-love. Think about it. Historically this has occurred over and over to christian peoples. God will go searching for yet others in hopes of getting His love instilled into this world! At the same time these respective groups believe they are Spirit-led in these activities. The Spirit, is the Spirit of Jesus! How do we miss this?

The glorious church without spot and blemish is the church that considers herself to be a hospital with many wards and that for everyone whom God has done a recreative work in. There are all types of sickness and deseases and the glorious church of Jesus will not banish nor discard the sickest of these out into the streets. If that were legitimate then those who consider themselves to be free Christians without legalism could reject those who are sick with religious idolitary for example; hey, this would only reveal that the free Christian is still a legalist!

Finally this is not about tough-love at all nor is it the Love of Christ Jesus! Rather it's about the mother rejecting her off-spring for an idea and belief that furthers her agenda and makes her own existence better. That's the mother leaving her son standing on the street corner as she pursues her idolatry and adultry. This will strike hard and I understand that, but let the chips fall where they fall. If there is an offence by this the chips have accurately fallen. Let us all be challenged!

There is a worship of ideas and doctrines among christianity in many places and it is nothing less than idolatry. "Little children, keep yourselves from idols!" That's the John of the Bible speaking. John was much aware of how the anti-christ spirit which is a controlling religious spirit actually spoils the pure and real message of Christ!

Because of poor translations and because of not rightly dividing the Word of God this type of idolatry is able to manifest. This type idolatry coincides perfectly to the bewitched condition where precepts and ordinances are embraced as a thing to sustaine one's approval by God! These things [when added] are added to the message of Jesus and we have already moved away from the simplicity that is found in Christ Jesus!

There is a so-called doctrinal argument that can be made against this, but the Spirit of the Lord will come up with no argument to this!

There are religious spirits of control [bewitching spirits] that are invited in among a people who choose to worship ideas, precepts, ordinances, church organizations, and doctrines.

When this energy and these elements enter into a group or into an individual, it immediately causes one to be elevated above and beyond the Love that Christ Jesus has for humanity! We have become elevated above God in nature. There is nothing more deceptive than this in christianity.

Nothing more diabolical can occur in the name of what's good and true than this type thing. The root of this thing was planted among us in the garden with Eve and Adam! It's practiced in secular governmental forms around the world as well.

One thing I have distinctly noticed is this; those who have been baptized with the Love of God and are walking in this baptism will not practice something that Jesus is not presently doing! Christ-rule is the best that we have!