Chapter 6<\/p>\n\n\n\n
SPOTTING EMOTIONAL MALFUNCTIONS<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Now that we have a better understanding of what emotions are and what they are for, it is time to try to make some sense out of what must appear to many to be a bewildering array of neurotic symptoms and incomprehensible emotional disorders. Perhaps many professionals share this bewilderment, as there is now a movement underway to do away with the word \u201cneurosis.\u201d
\n[Editors\u2019 note: Since the publication of the original edition of this book, the American Psychiatric Association has indeed removed the word \u201cneurosis\u201d from its diagnostic terminology in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Other changes have also affected the original terminology in this chapter. Wherever possible, the current diagnostic terminology according to DSM-IV-TR (2000) standards has replaced the original terminology in this book, which was based on DSM-II (1968) standards. Notations have been made as appropriate. In cases where there is no current equivalent terminology, the original text has been preserved.]
\nYet, it is not too difficult to present a clear outline of those common emotional afflictions that concern all of us in some way. Whether we ourselves suffer from these afflictions or not, our entire society has an important stake in their successful treatment and their prevention in the future. In my opinion, the nonprofessional, the man in the street, will have to play an active part, whether as parent, teacher, educator, or in the increasingly popular area of \u201cinner healing\u201d by charismatics and Pentecostals. Without the help of the nonprofessional, psychiatrists and other mental health professionals can never hope to succeed in significantly reducing the incidence of emotional illness in present and future generations.
\nIn order to gain a practical and adequate understanding of the most common, widespread emotional afflictions, it suffices to distinguish between the neurotic disorders caused by repression, those caused by emotional deprivation, and other non-neurotic conditions such as personality disorders and psychoses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Dr. Baars, before you start discussing the various types of emotional disorders, will you please explain the difference between such terms as mental and emotional illness or health, neurosis and psychosis, and other commonly used psychiatric terms that lay persons often find very confusing?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A An excellent suggestion! Let me start with the terms \u201cmental\u201d and \u201cemotional.\u201d \u201cMental,\u201d from the Latin word mens, means \u201cpertaining to the mind, intellect, or reason.\u201d Strictly speaking therefore, mental illness is a disorder of the reasoning processes\u2014thinking, judging, etc. This occurs typically in a psychosis or psychotic state (like schizophrenia, paranoia, etc., and those conditions in which brain cells have been destroyed). However, the word \u201cmind\u201d has come to describe virtually anything that pertains to the psyche, as opposed to the body, like thinking, feeling, willing, memory, temper, character, etc. Therefore, \u201cmental health\u201d means \u201csoundness of all psychological functions.\u201d However, because nobody has ever clearly defined the concept of \u201cmental health,\u201d I personally prefer the term \u201cpsychic wholeness\u201d [the psyche being comprised of the spiritual life, intellectual life, the life of the will and the emotions], which allows for the inclusion of the spiritual element of man.
\n\u201cEmotional\u201d means \u201cpertaining to the emotions or feelings, as distinguished from the thinking processes of the mind.\u201d I think this is an excellent distinction that helps clarify psychological functions and issues. As there is already too much fuzzy thinking and talking in the fields of psychology and psychiatry, I shall make consistent use of this distinction between \u201cmental\u201d and \u201cemotional,\u201d between \u201cthinking\u201d and \u201cfeeling.\u201d
\nThus a psychosis is an illness that affects primarily the person\u2019s thinking processes (though secondarily it may also affect the emotions); it is a mental illness. (\u201cInsanity\u201d is a legal term.)
\nA neurosis is an illness that is primarily a disturbance of the emotions (though the thinking processes may also be affected secondarily); it is an emotional illness (disturbance, disorder, disease). The word \u201cpsychoneurosis\u201d is an old term for neurosis; it is no longer in use.
\nThe terms \u201cpsychiatrist\u201d and \u201cpsychologist\u201d continue to be a source of great confusion. According to a study by the American Psychiatric Association, \u201cThe public defines mental illness as crime, violence, alcoholism, depression and schizophrenia, and considers that the province of the psychiatrist.\u201d
\nThis, of course is a distorted view of what a psychiatrist concerns himself with. Moreover, it is misleading insofar as these areas mentioned represent different entities. Crime and violence are forms of behavior; alcoholism is an addictive disease; depression is a symptom; and schizophrenia is a psychotic disorder. According to the above study the psychiatrist would not concern himself with neurotic disorders.
\nPsychiatrists treat persons who suffer from different types of illnesses, involving mind, emotions and body\u2014which are characterized by a large variety of symptoms and forms of behavior. Many psychiatrists specialize in certain areas. I confine myself to the diagnosis and treatment of persons with neurotic disorders (with or without associated spiritual afflictions). I do this because in this area I have something special to offer that I would like to make available to as large a number of people as possible.
\nA psychiatrist is a physician with at least four years of specialized education in understanding normal and abnormal psychological conditions. A psychologist is not a physician; he has also studied normal and abnormal psychology and is usually an expert in giving and interpreting psychological tests. He cannot prescribe medications to the persons he sees in psychotherapy, nor is he trained to do physical or neurological examinations.
\n\u201cPsychopath\u201d and \u201cpsychopathic personality\u201d are also sources of confusion. Both are older terms, no longer in official use, to indicate a disorder that is neither psychotic, nor neurotic. The current official term for this condition, which often resembles a neurotic disorder, is \u201cpersonality disorder.\u201d This change may be an improvement to lessen confusion, but continued recognition and labeling of a variety of personality disorder subtypes perpetuates this confusion.
\nThere are several examples of how confusing these subtypes can be. A person diagnosed with Schizoid Personality Disorder indicates a person with a personality disorder with features resembling those of a schizophrenic; yet he is not psychotic. A person diagnosed with Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder is a person with symptoms resembling those in obsessive-compulsive repression, yet he is not neurotic. The same applies to other personality disorders: paranoid, antisocial, histrionic, etc.
\nI will discuss later the fundamental characteristics of a psychopath.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Is it possible for ordinary people to understand what neurotic disorders are all about? Should you not have at least a college degree for that?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Not at all. Anyone with a high school diploma can understand the different kinds of emotional disorders, how they originate and what their symptoms are. Members of my profession, particularly the psychoanalysts, have made things unnecessarily complicated with the introduction of such words as \u201cego,\u201d \u201csuperego\u201d and the \u201cid.\u201d I stopped using those and similar analytic terms long ago and substituted common sense terms from the field of rational psychology.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q On what school of psychology are psychoanalysis and modern clinical psychiatry based?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A This is a somewhat embarrassing question, unless you are already familiar with the many diverse concepts and formulations in the field of mental health and illness. This is never clearer perhaps than in a court of law, where both the prosecution and the defense can retain psychiatrists to examine one and the same defendant, and have them end up with conflicting, even diametrically opposed, opinions concerning the nature and causes of the defendant\u2019s condition.
\nTo answer your question, Freud, the father of modern psychiatry, did not start with a particular view of healthy or normal man. In other words, as a physician who had specialized in neurology (the study of the nervous system), he did not subscribe to any particular school of psychology. He started with emotionally and mentally ill people and interpreted their symptoms in his own, often most ingenious, ways. But they often had little or no bearing on the actual functions of the psyche of normal people as they were known in Europe in Freud\u2019s time. Since then, clinical psychiatry has been increasingly influenced by animal, experimental, social and behavior psychology\u2014and more recently even by pop psychology\u2014while the philosophic foundations of European faculty psychology have been absent from the American scene for the past half-century.
\nWithout ignoring\u2014in fact, with positive incorporation of well-established clinical findings in modern psychiatry, this book is based largely on rational psychology and faculty psychology (i.e., the study of man as man, the study of man\u2019s psychic faculties in the light of what man has discovered over the ages about all of reality, including man\u2019s beginning, his Creator and his ultimate goal of existence). Of course, here I address myself mainly to one particular aspect of this study, namely, man\u2019s emotional life, for the simple reason that it has been and is the least known and most neglected part of man.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Can you give us a simple outline of the various kinds of emotional afflictions that make people go to psychiatrists and psychologists for treatment?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A People go to psychiatrists in the hope of finding relief from the symptoms of a repressive disorder, emotional deprivation disorder, a psychosomatic disorder, or a pseudo-neurotic reaction (also called situational neurosis or reaction). I intend to outline these symptoms shortly in such a way that almost anyone can recognize them and determine their cause.
\nPeople who are psychopathic generally do not visit psychiatrists, at least not voluntarily. Only when they are in trouble with the law, and that happens quite often, are they seen by a psychiatrist at the request of the courts.
\nSelf-affirming persons by and large do not feel the need to see a psychiatrist as long as they expect to be successful in their striving to prove their importance and self-worth. When they have climbed to the top of the ladder of success and realize that is not the answer to their real expectations, it is usually too late to seek professional help. Death by suicide often intervenes.
\nAs it is important to recognize self-affirming persons and those with personality disorders, I shall include a brief description of both. But first, I shall describe the type of neurotic disorder that may have its beginning on the very first day of a child\u2019s earthly existence, if not before. Following that I will explain the neurotic conditions that start around the beginning of elementary school and the neurotic-like conditions that originate later on in life.
\nWhen a child is deprived in infancy, childhood, or puberty of the most fundamental element of emotional nourishment, namely, the unselfish, mature love of an adult person, he remains incapable of experiencing joy and happiness. As long as this fundamental need for being loved for who he is (as distinguished from for what he does or achieves) is frustrated, he hungers for feeling loved and wanted, for having a sense of belonging, for being lovable, for feeling worthwhile and significant for being who he is, for being unique, yes, simply for existing.
\nThe child\u2019s need for feeling loved is as fundamental as his need for food, air, and shelter. He cannot live if this need is not satisfied. Exist, yes, but not really live as a human being should live. Without this fundamental feeling of being loved by another being, he will continue to crave it. As long as this craving is frustrated, his emotional life cannot develop. By this I mean that he cannot develop that part of his emotional life that is primary\u2014his humane emotions which, together with his intuitive mind, determine his happiness and his capacity for making other people truly happy. The other part, however, his assertive emotions, usually develop to excess\u2014too much fear and despair in some, too much energetic striving in others.
\nHis psychic birth, as distinct from his physical birth, cannot take place without the gratification of this fundamental need. Without this second birth he remains emotionally a child, even though his body, intellect and spiritual life grow, provided, of course, that these parts of his being are given the proper food. Usually his intellectual and spiritual lives will suffer, even though the damage may not become noticeable until much later, particularly in times of great crises. It is then that one realizes that such an emotionally deprived person is like a house built without a firm foundation. It collapses in a storm, and what looked like a beautiful and strong superstructure of academic degrees, great business acumen, political talent, or religious fervor proves to possess no real strength. Genuine strength is found in the \u201cheart\u201d\u2014the humane emotions interacting with the intuitive mind\u2014which cements the body to the structures of intellect and spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q I am sorry for interrupting you, but you started out by calling this deprived condition a neurotic disorder. Yet you have not talked at all of a repression of unacceptable emotions and feelings. I have always heard that all neurotic disorders are caused by the repression of unacceptable feelings. Isn\u2019t that what Freud has always taught?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Yes, you are entirely correct in saying that Freud taught this. And what is more, the psychiatric profession as a whole still clings to this idea that all neurotic disorders are repressive disorders. Yet the damage to a person\u2019s emotional life which I just described is not at all due to repression. It is solely the result of adults withholding from him what is an essential building stone of his emotional life, of the infrastructure of the rest of his personality.
\nOne of the reasons why this type of disorder has been recognized so far by only a few psychiatrists is that some of its symptoms may also be seen in repressive disorders, and even in people who seem to be \u201cnormal.\u201d However, when you see all or most of these symptoms in their \u201cpure\u201d state, especially when fully developed, as they are in what we have designated as deprivation neurosis [now called emotional deprivation disorder], you will have no difficulty in recognizing it as a condition distinctly different from a repressive disorder.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Will every person who has been deprived of a parent\u2019s unconditional and unselfish love develop emotional deprivation disorder?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Not necessarily. Every person who has been deprived of the gift of feeling his own unique goodness and lovableness is called an unaffirmed person. He has not been affirmed (i.e., strengthened by another human being). There are three possible developments.
\nFirst, if he was totally unaffirmed at a very early age of his life, the chances are that he will develop the symptoms of this condition to a pronounced degree. He develops a full-blown emotional deprivation disorder.
\nSecond, if the lack of affirmation was not total, but only partial, and began somewhat later in life (or one parent made up to some extent what the other parent did not give at all), he is an unaffirmed person whose symptoms are milder and less pronounced. Many of these partially affirmed persons go through life as \u201cnormal\u201d persons who are never really happy and content. Their symptoms are miniatures of the well-defined, easily recognized and disabling manifestations of emotional deprivation disorder.
\nThird, if the partially affirmed person is by nature energetic, and has a lot of things going for him (e.g., a good or superior intelligence, the right connections, lucky breaks, a lot of money, a beautiful body in the case of women, and the like), he will often attempt to affirm himself. This means he will try to attain by his own efforts and means what he did not receive (or only partially received) as a gift from others. Clinically, the self-affirming person will appear and behave in a way that is totally different from the person with emotional deprivation disorder. Nevertheless, in close contact, a knowledgeable person will have no difficulty in detecting in him the same symptoms that, in more severe or milder degrees, are present in the other two types of unaffirmed persons, the person with emotional deprivation disorder and the \u201cnormal\u201d appearing, unaffirmed person.
\nI shall outline the typical symptoms of the unaffirmed person, though only summarily, because they are dealt with extensively in my books, Healing the Unaffirmed and Born Only Once.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Dr. Baars, I cannot understand why the syndrome of lack of affirmation, or emotional deprivation disorder, is not yet generally recognized by your colleagues. It makes a lot of sense; there is nothing vague or mysterious about it. I do not think you have to be a psychiatrist or a psychologist to recognize a person with emotional deprivation disorder. Are other psychiatrists and psychologists denying the existence of this diagnosis?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A No, they are not denying it. They simply have not yet heard about it. They recognize, of course, its various symptoms, but not the sum total of symptoms as a well-defined type of emotional disorder with a precisely-defined cause and therapy. If they had, I am sure they would have taken some steps to list it in the official diagnostic manual [Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders]. This would be a boon for countless persons with emotional troubles, judging from the hundreds of letters I have received since we first published an extensive account of emotional deprivation disorder in the English language. Practically all write that they are amazed to read such an accurate account of themselves and their emotional afflictions. Many have added that they have been in psychiatric treatment for years and have never heard their doctors explain the nature of their illness in terms of deprivation. All ask for the name and address of a psychiatrist in their part of the country who understands their illness and can treat them accordingly. Having had to disappoint them in this request has been a source of much sorrow to me and them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Then why is it that your colleagues have not read your books? I read somewhere that Born Only Once is already in its sixth edition [now in its 12th edition], and Healing the Unaffirmed is in its third [now in its 11th edition\u2014edited and revised]. Surely the psychiatrists must have these books in their libraries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Psychiatrists are bombarded daily with newly published books and articles. They have much to read and often insufficient time to keep up with their professional journals. Most stick to books by psychiatric publishers. When in the early seventies I submitted our 500-page manuscript for Loving and Curing the Neurotic to psychiatric publishing houses, I received nothing but friendly rejection slips and best wishes for publication elsewhere. I suspect that they did not feel comfortable with our occasional mentioning of God and the human soul, and topics like that. Speaking of such things is virtually taboo in my profession, even though psychiatrists claim to treat the whole man. But this whole man does not commonly include his spiritual life or his relationship to God, and life hereafter.
\nTherefore, when a nonpsychiatric publishing house happened to hear about the manuscript and offered to print it, we accepted that offer, even though we realized it would retard the acceptance of our ideas and discoveries in the psychiatric profession. In my opinion, it is only a matter of time before that happens. You cannot keep a good thing hidden forever.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Are there many people suffering from emotional deprivation disorder?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Yes, there are. As far as I can determine, the number is steadily growing, perhaps even at an alarming rate. In our society the number of people able and willing to love their children and other persons in a truly unselfish and mature manner seems to be on the decline. This is not so strange when you realize that individuals with emotional deprivation disorder and unaffirmed parents raise unaffirmed children, who then in turn deprive their children in the next generation, and so on.
\nOn the other hand, the number of people with repressive disorders seems to be on the decline since people repress their emotions less and less. This is not as good a development as it sounds, as I shall explain in the eighth chapter of this book. Counting all unaffirmed persons\u2014those with emotional deprivation disorder, unaffirmed \u201cnormal\u201d persons, and self-affirmers\u2014their number must be enormous. Have you ever noticed how many \u201cnormal\u201d people are doing things because it is so \u201ctherapeutic\u201d? They seem to sense that all is not well with them. \u201cMental health\u201d in our society is at a premium; psychological weakness or debility is all too common.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Can you tell us more about self-affirmation? You make it sound like an abnormal and unhealthy process, yet I believe that some experts in your field speak about self-affirmation as a necessary step in one\u2019s psychic development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A It is true that some mental health experts, like Rollo May, advocate self-affirmation. However, it is clear that they all do this without prior precise defining of \u201caffirmation\u201d in the specific psychological sense I have done. Therefore, their use of the term \u201cself-affirmation\u201d falls in the same category as \u201cself-fulfillment,\u201d \u201cself-realization,\u201d \u201cself-assertion,\u201d \u201cself-motivation\u201d and similar, not always precisely defined, terms.
\nSelf-affirmation, as distinguished from \u201cother-affirmation,\u201d is indeed detrimental to a person\u2019s psychic health as well as to that of the people around him. Unfortunately, there are huge numbers of people in our society who attempt to affirm themselves, and have been doing so long before \u201cmental health\u201d experts began to promote this.
\nSelf-affirming persons are unaffirmed persons who try to attain by their own efforts the feeling that they are good and lovable and significant, even though the important people in their early lives failed to give them that feeling. But the tragedy of it is that they never attain their goal. Even when they succeed in becoming very rich, or famous, or important in politics or business or the religious life, or whatever, and are envied or admired because of their power and fame, they are doomed to discover sooner or later that they are still where they started from, namely, feeling unloved and worthless and insignificant. When people love and admire you because of what you have done or do, it does not mean that you will feel loved and worthwhile because of who you are.
\nEven though self-affirming persons present a totally different clinical picture than those with emotional deprivation disorder, they are equally weak psychologically. They are both emotionally immature and weak as the result of not having been affirmed. The irony is that the self-affirming person in our society is even less recognized for what he is\u2014a person with an emotional illness\u2014than the person with emotional deprivation disorder. He is usually thought of as mature, normal, yes, even above average. His effect on society is negative, if not destructive. He is incapable of affirming others, and frequently will not hesitate to use and manipulate for his own purposes the very persons who love him. But most of this is seen and interpreted as the \u201cnormal\u201d behavior of the average American who is determined to get ahead in the world and give his children the material possessions he never received from his parents.
\nI am not saying that all men and women with their striving for achievement are necessarily self-affirming persons. As long as this striving remains reasonable and is not done at the expense of their children\u2019s emotional growth there is nothing to be concerned about. But the striving for power, success, fame, and the like, of self-affirming persons is not reasonable. Unless restrained by deep religious and moral convictions, as some are, they will not hesitate to work their way up at any price.
\nIn my opinion, the growing number of reports of wrongdoing on the part of so many public figures in our society is a reliable indicator of the increase in the number of self-affirming persons. There is little doubt in my mind that there exists a cause-and-effect relationship between the growing incidence of self-affirmation and such new social phenomena and global problems as abortion on demand, the so-called sexual revolution, agitation for more equal rights and fewer obligations, pollution of the environment, monetary chaos and inflation, waste of food and energy, violence, and so on. I intend to write about this at another time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Is it true that if a child is brought into the world by truly affirming parents his emotional life is assured of developing to full maturity?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Unfortunately, this is not so. Even though that child has a definite advantage over those children who from day one are deprived totally or partially of authentic love, he can still be harmed emotionally.
\nBasically, this can happen in two ways. He can be made to repress certain emotions and thus begin to develop what later on in his life will be recognized as a repressive disorder or he can be spoiled, as a result of which his humane emotions are blunted. Although this is not a neurotic disorder, it will have harmful consequences for his happiness in later life. As I have discussed the topic already, I shall now explain what a repressive disorder is and how it develops.
\nEmotional deprivation disorder, as we have seen, is the result of the child not receiving the proper emotional food of authentic love. A repressive disorder, on the other hand, develops when adults give the child incorrect ideas concerning his emotions and bodily feelings which stimulate his assertive emotions of fear and\/or energy. These emotions then begin to operate for the purpose of getting rid of those emotions and feelings which he thinks are bad, sinful, unacceptable to others, or cause hurt in himself or other people. The child may be informed correctly about everything else in the world, go to the best schools and so on, yet if he is given incorrect information, directly or indirectly, about the nature and function of his emotions, he has no choice but to react to this misinformation by repression, i.e., by pushing those emotions into his subconscious when he feels them. The same happens when he is given the right information, but prematurely, when he is too young to understand it.
\nHow deeply and to what extent he will repress depends on several factors, both outside and within him. If the false information concerns the emotions which serve man\u2019s two innate drives (of self-realization and reproduction); if it is given earlier in life when the child\u2019s emotional life is not yet clearly differentiated; if the verbal misinformation is reinforced by nonverbal behavior, or if the correct verbal information is contradicted by the actual behavior and emotional reactions of the persons in authority (emotional junk food); then the repressive process will be stronger and its adverse effects more widespread.
\nIf the child has an innate superior intelligence, if he is of a sensitive, serious and introspective nature, and sincerely motivated in willing to do what his parents and educators expect from him, his repression will be deep, consistent and, over the years, extend\u2014by association or logic\u2014to an ever greater number of sense objects and other parts of his emotional life. He develops what later will be diagnosed as Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.
\nIf the child, however, is of inferior, low, or borderline intelligence, not too sensitive or concerned about what he is taught, he will repress in a much more superficial way without the growing involvement of other feelings and sense objects. He will develop in time an hysterical neurosis, with or without conversion symptoms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Are you saying then that in times like these, when every adult seems to be more or less misinformed about emotions and feelings, all children develop repression and manifest a neurotic disorder, either the obsessive-compulsive type, or the hysterical type? <\/p>\n\n\n\n
A It indeed sounds like there is no other alternative, and that one must expect all people who were born, let us say, in the past one hundred years or so, to be neurotic (even when not counting those who were inadequately affirmed). However, even though I think that a large part of the Western world has been affected adversely by distorted beliefs about human emotions, I do not subscribe to the idea that everyone is neurotic or emotionally ill. There are always a certain number of children who let this misinformation go in one ear and out the other, if they heard it at all; or whose parents or educators for some reason just did not bother talking about such things, and allowed their children to grow up pretty naturally and spontaneously\u2014perhaps in rural, less sophisticated areas and times. The absence of emotional disorders in primitive societies suggests strongly that neurotic disorders are the product of technologically more advanced societies (though not necessarily philosophically and spiritually more advanced).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Can you tell us more about the manner in which incorrect knowledge about the nature and goodness of human emotions can cause a repressive disorder? I find that difficult to believe in view of the fact that Freud has told us that it is the superego that causes a person to repress. Your opinion seems to be quite different from his and what the psychiatric profession in general holds on this subject.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Yes, it is true that on this topic I am at odds with Freud and those of my colleagues who still subscribe to the idea that the superego is the culprit in the repressive process. The chief reason for my disagreement was my growing realization in clinical practice that if the therapist was to correct, or change, or eliminate the patient\u2019s superego which, the experts claimed, caused him to be neurotic, he could run into problems of an ethical and moral character (because the superego encompasses conscience, moral standards and social mores). This made me search for an intellectually more acceptable and satisfying solution to the cause of these neurotic disorders. I found it back in the mid-fifties just as I was sufficiently disenchanted to consider abandoning my profession. It was a chance discovery during a visit to my native country, but one which has brought me and untold numbers of my patients much satisfaction and happiness.
\nSuffice it to say, in explanation of what I consider to be the real cause of neurotic repression, that it is not what a person knows, or believes to be true, about emotions, human drives and human nature that leads him to repress, but rather his emotional reaction to these beliefs. His fear or emotional energy constitute the repressive force which moves him to try to get rid of feelings and ideas which he is led to believe are socially unacceptable, if not morally wrong. His emotional reaction does not depend so much on the actual teachings themselves, as on the emotional atmosphere in which they are presented.
\nFor example, in the past, the sixth and ninth commandments often aroused fear of sex in children, not only because there were two commandments on this subject (while stealing, killing, and such had only one!), but also because many teachers couldn\u2019t help but communicate their own anxiety and discomfort with this subject. Other children, again, associated fear with the emotion of anger, and thus began to repress it, because they were hurt by their parents\u2019 angry punishments and beatings, or also because they saw their parents hurt each other in anger. These latter children commonly would decide never to let their own angry feelings be a source of hurt and distress to others, and thus began to repress their own angry feelings energetically, rather than by means of fear.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Are you claiming then that a repressive disorder develops because one emotion represses another emotion?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Precisely! It is not the superego\u2014that strange concoction of conscience, moral standards and social mores\u2014that forces unacceptable emotions into the unconscious, but another emotion that interferes with the natural course of an emotion deemed to be the potential cause of trouble. A child\u2019s neurotic disorder has its origin in the intellect of the adults who must raise the child, and present it either with outright mistaken ideas about the child\u2019s own feelings, or with correct ideas before he is ready to understand them, or with correct teachings which are not further explained, or with concepts which are qualified in an atmosphere laden with fear, suspicions and doubt.
\nActually, these ideas presented by adults have their greatest impact on what I have called earlier the child\u2019s \u201csophisticated instinct.\u201d Because this instinct functions in immediate, intimate connection with the assertive emotions, his response will be one of fear or energy (hope and courage). It is this emotional response which sets the repressive process in motion. To say it differently, it is either the intellectual junk food fed to children by adults, or the proper intellectual food that is given prematurely to children and therefore cannot be digested properly by them. This arouses their fear or energy whenever these topics are brought up or personally experienced.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Can all emotions function as repressive ones, or are there certain emotions that do this more than others?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Usually it is the emotion of fear that represses other emotions. Or, if it is not fear, it is the opposite emotion of courage (which for reasons of convenience we prefer to call \u201cenergy\u201d). Both fear and energy are assertive emotions which in the normal person serve as motors that stimulate the person to protect himself from harm or to overcome obstacles. Like all other emotions they are good and necessary, but when they become engaged in interfering with other emotions they exert an unhealthy influence on man\u2019s psyche. This, of course, is because of the fact that no emotion should make it its business to prevent other emotions from running their natural course, which is to exercise their function in close cooperation with reason. All emotions should operate in equality, on the same level, and be open to the guiding or tempering action of the will informed by reason.
\nIn other words, the proper object of the emotion of fear is anything that is an actual threat to the well-being of a person, e.g., a rattlesnake ready to strike. And because no man has a single emotion that could be considered a threat to man, it is pathological to feel fear of another emotion. Conversely, the emotion of courage or \u201cenergy\u201d serves the purpose of stimulating one to defend oneself against anything that threatens one\u2019s safety, health or life. Again, as no one emotion ever falls in that category, it is neurotic to use the emotion of energy for the purpose of battling other emotions. If one does so anyway, one will develop a repressive disorder.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Earlier you described how a healthy, mature person reacts to something desirable by giving the example of a man\u2019s response to seeing an attractive brunette. Would this be a good time to explain how a person with obsessive-compulsive repression reacts?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A When a person with obsessive-compulsive repression\u2014let us say, a scrupulous man\u2014spots an attractive brunette, his immediate response will be one of fear. He is afraid she will arouse in him a desire that he considers sinful, potentially sinful, or an occasion for sin. He uses his fear to get rid of the desire immediately because he wills to lead a chaste life. He actually thinks that what he is doing\u2014letting his fear repress his desire\u2014is the reasonable thing to do. He does not know any better, for he has grown up with this approach since an early age and his beliefs and actions are based on his felt interpretations of moral teachings.
\nBut by repressing his natural responses to the sight of the pretty brunette\u2014the emotions of love and desire\u2014he makes these emotions inaccessible to guidance by reason. Because these repressed emotions are buried alive, and are not dead and forgotten even though it may seem so for the moment, they try to rise up in order to get what they need: guidance by reason. However, as soon as they get close to the conscious level, fear is aroused and pushes them back again into the unconscious. The battle between fear and desire is on, and goes on without pause, only to break down sooner or later in life.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Is it as easy for a nonprofessional to spot a person with a repressive disorder as it is to recognize a person with emotional deprivation disorder? The fact that there are different kinds of repressive disorders, such as the hysterical and the obsessive-compulsive kinds, seems to make it more difficult.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A It is not difficult once he is familiar with the basic clinical symptoms that these repressive disorders (the obsessive-compulsive and hysterical types) have in common. Then, when you see in addition to these common symptoms the more specific symptoms of the two kinds of repressive neuroses\u2014in the hysterical neurotic this could be an hysterical paralysis of an arm or leg; in the person with obsessive-compulsive repression this could be a hand-washing compulsion\u2014then it is not difficult to make a diagnosis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q What are the basic symptoms that all repressive disorders have in common?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A The basic symptoms of all repressive disorders are psychic and physical. The basic psychic symptom is that of tension. This is not surprising because in these persons two emotions are constantly engaged in a battle. Not just once in a while, but day and night. One does not repress one day, and deal normally with one\u2019s emotions the next day. The two opposing emotions are like the arms of two men engaged in arm-wrestling. The tension is as great as that of a rubber band being stretched between two hands pulling away from each other. Just as the band is under constant tension to the point of breaking, so the person with a repressive disorder suffers from a constant feeling of tension. He is constantly \u201cnervous,\u201d tense, unable to relax.
\nAs time goes on, this state of tension will proceed to restlessness, if not agitation, and an inability to sit still. Preoccupied with this tension and ways to find relief, it becomes increasingly difficult to concentrate on any particular thing. As the entire emotional life becomes affected in time by the repression of one single emotion, the person\u2019s reactions to stimuli from outside are increased and he becomes increasingly \u201coversensitive\u201d and irritable. The smallest things bother him; he is touchy, jumpy, easily startled, and may at times \u201cexplode,\u201d just like the rubber band in time will snap. He is more and more \u201cunreasonable\u201d in his reactions to the world around him. All this, of course, is the result of the fact that the normal tempering and regulating function of his intellect on his emotions is being interfered with by the repressive process.
\nBecause emotions have a psychic as well as a somatic component, bodily complaints will also make themselves felt sooner or later in the person with a repressive disorder. Most common complaints are fatigue, headache, backache, insomnia and some other ones, depending on individual constitution. The whole body may show the pressure under which the emotional life operates. The person\u2019s facial expression is often tense, while his posture may become bent or stiff. Not infrequently one can make a diagnosis of a repressive disorder by the way a person shakes hands; it is stiff and unnatural. Interestingly, the handshake of the person with emotional deprivation disorder is often the very opposite. It is often warm and prolonged as if he cannot or does not want to let go of the other person\u2019s hand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q What are some of the more specific symptoms of obsessive-compulsive repression?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A In these individuals it is the emotion that causes all the trouble; the process of repression determines the clinical picture. However, we must distinguish between the person with fear-based repression and the person with energy-based repression.
\nIn the person with a fear-based repressive disorder, the fear is so prominent that it places its mark on the entire personality. The fear pervades the person so intensely that it is aroused not only in the presence of an actual danger, like an approaching tornado, but even at the slightest possibility of danger, yes, even when no danger exists, but is only imagined. The person with a fear-based repressive disorder lives in constant fear that danger may befall him. Because the true object of his fear\u2014another emotion\u2014is deeply repressed, or even better, buried alive in the subconscious, there is nothing the person can do to deal with it. Instead, his fear often becomes focused on all kinds of other things, which may or may not have a reasonable relationship to the fear. As the person is unable to do anything to get rid of his fears, his fear turns into anxiety. Every person who has suffered with anxiety knows what a dreadful feeling that is. It is especially terrible when there seems to be no way of getting rid of it. The anxiety is with you all the time and makes life a veritable hell. When this symptom is the patient\u2019s only, or most pronounced, complaint he is officially diagnosed as having an anxiety disorder.
\nBut usually, in time, other symptoms are going to develop as well. Because it is most frustrating, if not maddening, not to know why one is so fearful and anxious, the mind will play a trick on the person with an anxiety disorder. This trick will give him the satisfaction of knowing, or rather of thinking that he knows the cause of his anxiety. Sooner or later the person with an anxiety disorder will find himself in an actually frightening situation, for instance, in an elevator stalled between floors. From that day on he will have a fear of being caught in an enclosed place\u2014he has a phobia of being in an elevator, and of all situations in which he is not in control of the situation. A typical example of this kind of phobia is the fear of flying. I have treated several men who flew their own plane without trouble, yet were too fearful to fly in a commercial plane. Of course, the difference is that these men are in control of their own actions when flying their own planes, but not when a passenger in a commercial plane. These people are afraid of the unexpected and are unable to trust others. The same holds true for people who are afraid to be a passenger in a car driven by somebody else. Others again have a barbershop phobia, and suffer unbearable anxiety when they finally must submit to the scissors.
\nIt is evident to all that the life of someone with an anxiety or fear-based repressive disorder is far from pleasant. His life becomes more and more depressing. Whenever the symptom of depression becomes dominant he will also be said to be suffering from a depressive disorder.
\nBecause the repressive process is an unnatural one it cannot be expected to be as successful later on as it usually is during the adolescent and young adult years, when the fear is strong enough to keep the repressed emotion from surfacing. When the repressive process is finally beginning to show signs of wear and tear, the repressed emotion begins to sneak to the front of his awareness. The person then becomes obsessed with the very things he has repressed successfully for so long. If it were the sex urge that he repressed for so long, he now becomes obsessed with sexual thoughts, fantasies and so on.
\nFrom then it will not be long before he becomes compelled to do the very things he was always afraid of doing. For instance, he may now begin to masturbate or look at sexual objects. Though he experiences intense feelings of guilt and remorse when he does these things, after a while the compulsion to masturbate, or attend obscene movies, or purchase pornographic magazines will make itself felt again. If he is to resist this compulsion, he can do so only by virtue of a greater effort of the repressing emotion of fear, for his will was excluded long ago from dealing with the sexual feeling as it should. At this final stage of fear-based repression this person is officially diagnosed with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.
\nThe difference between the official psychiatric diagnosis and mine is that the former is determined by the most pronounced clinical symptoms of the patient (anxiety, phobia, obsessions and compulsions), while my diagnosis of obsessive-compulsive repression describes the nature of the illness and the kind of person who develops it (as distinguished from the hysterical neurosis). If it is fear that causes the person to repress I call this obsessive-compulsive repression fear-based repression; if it is energy, energy-based repression. From this brief presentation it is clear that the repressive process is always doomed to fail in the end in its purpose, namely, to do what one had been led to believe was right. This is a most tragic and frightening happening for the person who for many years had become convinced that he had it made as far as control of his sexual urges was concerned. Having always conscientiously followed the admonishments, if not living examples of his educators who lived in chronic fear of everything sexual, he could not help but believe that his neurotic approach to his sexual urges was the only reasonable, correct and natural thing to do.
\nTo experience this failure in one\u2019s forties or fifties after years of heroic practice of continence can cause someone with obsessive-compulsive repression to fear that he is losing his mind, or create an attitude of despair and self-reproach in the belief that he has lost his will power and succumbed to his \u201cweak and evil nature.\u201d Of course, that person does not even know that his will had been inoperative in the repressive process, and that it is his fear that finally failed in its unnatural task of subduing other emotions and feelings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Is it correct to conclude from what you have said about anxiety disorders that everyone who experiences anxiety has an anxiety disorder?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A No, that would be a mistaken conclusion. Let me explain what anxiety is all about. Many people are confused concerning this topic, which comes as no surprise when one learns that some psychiatric textbooks require three pages to define \u201canxiety\u201d!
\nWhen our life, health, or whatever else we cherish is threatened by something evil, we experience the emotion of fear, which readies us, psychologically as well as physiologically, to defend ourselves or others. This we can do either by running away from the danger or, with the help of the emotion of courage, by opposing it in the hope of conquering it. In either case, provided we are successful, the fear abates. But what happens when we fail and thus remain exposed to the danger? It is then that our fear turns into anxiety, a most unpleasant feeling, but not necessarily a sign that we have an anxiety disorder.
\nOf course, the person with a repressive disorder is unable to deal effectively with the threatening evil, because he does not know what he is afraid of. He has repressed it deep into his subconscious, where it is beyond the reach of reason and will. Although in the beginning when he was young he knew what he feared, the ongoing repressive process buried it ever deeper as time went on, so that the whole process of repressing became automatic and virtually unconscious. Consequently, he became helpless in dealing effectively with what he had been told was a danger. His fear turned into anxiety along the way.
\nBut it is also possible for a person to know exactly what he is afraid of, and yet not be able to eliminate it at will. This may happen, for instance, to a soldier in the jungle who is exposed to a deadly sniper he cannot see. If forced to remain in that jungle for a prolonged period, his fear may turn into anxiety\u2014if not panic. This is one of the reasons why it is said that every person has his breaking point. The actor or after-dinner speaker may suffer enough anxiety to prevent him from eating. He knows what he is afraid of, but he can do nothing about it (except by being well prepared) as the time of acting or speaking is fixed.
\nA person may also experience anxiety when he believes himself too weak and inadequate to overcome what he considers a danger to him. A good example of this is the person with emotional deprivation disorder who lives in constant fear of the adult world around him. This unaffirmed person suffers from a fear that is not irrational, unlike that of the person with a fear-based repressive disorder who, for example, fears invisible germs on doorknobs. Feeling like a child in the adult world around him is a real source of fear. His life is fearsome indeed. This existential fear disappears as soon as the adults become truly loving in their attitude toward him.
\nOnce one is familiar with these two kinds of fear and anxiety it is easy to distinguish between them in meeting such persons.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Awhile back you spoke of an energy-based repressive disorder. I have never heard that term used before. How can energy cause a person to have a repressive disorder? I thought we were all supposed to be energetic and work hard.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Unless you had read some of our earlier writings you could not have known about energy-based repression. It is a new term introduced by my colleague in the Netherlands [the original term was energy neurosis], when she discovered that a person could misuse his emotions of courage, hope, daring, or whatever you want to call them, just as much as the emotion of fear, and apply them for the purpose of getting rid of what are considered unacceptable or dangerous emotions, feelings and urges. She decided to give all these emotions the collective name of \u201cenergy,\u201d as it is a fitting one in our energetic, driving and driven, aggressive and utilitarian world.
\nOf course, it is harder to spot a person with an energy-based repressive disorder in this kind of world where the hard-driving, aggressive businessman is praised for his energetic pursuits even though it leads much too often to all kinds of physical and psychological troubles, if not to premature death from a heart attack. But this is all the more reason to recognize this type of person early, because he himself is usually the last one to realize that he is in need of help. Ordinarily, he does not come to the attention of a psychiatrist, except for such late complications as chronic alcoholism or depression.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Are you saying that all people who are energetic have energy-based repressive disorders?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Not at all. Most of us need to be energetic in our work and lives. And even if one is too energetic and drives too hard part of the time or all the time, unhealthy as that may be, it is not appropriate to label that person with an energy-based repressive disorder. The term \u201cworkaholic\u201d would be more appropriate for him. It is only when a person uses emotional energy to interfere with and repress other emotions that he is considered to have an energy-based repressive disorder. It is just like a person who is excessively fearful, scared of a little mouse or cockroach, afraid of a thunderstorm, etc. Unless his fear interferes with the natural course of his other emotions he cannot be said to have a repressive disorder. Shy, timid, worrywart, etc., may be accurate names to describe that excessively fearful person, but not neurotic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q How do you recognize the person with an energy-based repressive disorder?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Characteristic for this illness is the all-pervading action of the energy that places its stamp on the whole personality. Although usually presenting an outward appearance of efficiency and self-control, a person with an energy-based repressive disorder radiates an air of inflexible self-restraint that permits no natural spontaneity. He acts somewhat like a robot in the use of his will for the purpose of imitating the natural expressions of emotions: by smiling, laughing, looking sad, etc. He wills certain manifestations of emotions which he does not really feel.
\nHe commonly displays an air of coolness and aloofness, even of hardness. The tension that is produced by the repressive process is revealed in his deportment and manner of speech, his tendency to overreact when irritated. In those moments his harsh, biting words, intolerance of opinion, and exaggerated outbursts are in marked contrast to his usual even, though always coldly polite, disposition.
\nUsually, persons with an energy-based repressive disorder are highly intelligent and gifted people who demand a repudiation of all feelings in everything they do, even in the spiritual life. Many even consider it their duty to rid themselves of feeling love for nature and art. Those feelings, they reason, might lead to the arousal of unacceptable emotions, and therefore should not be given an opportunity to grow.
\nPhysical symptoms characteristic of energy-based repression are low or absent muscle-stretch reflexes, low systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and a low or flat blood sugar curve. For a better understanding of the repressive disorders and their symptoms, one should consult Psychic Wholeness and Healing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q One often hears talk about hysteria and hysterical [histrionic] persons. Do those persons also have neurotic disorders, and if so, what kind?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A You are right in saying that the term \u201chysterical\u201d is a common one. Unfortunately, though, it is not always used correctly. For example, people who wail loudly or tear their clothing at a funeral, are often labeled hysterical by people who grieve in more moderate, less emotional ways. As the word hysteria has no other meaning than \u201cmorbid, senseless emotionalism that is neurotic in nature,\u201d it is a most unfortunate choice of words, one that symbolizes the confusion in the minds of many about psychiatric topics. And this particular topic is doubly confusing, because there also exists a personality disorder [Histrionic Personality Disorder] referring to what was formerly called \u201chysterical personality,\u201d to indicate a nonneurotic condition!
\nTo bring some order to this topic that is confusing for most people, I shall explain these two conditions as follows. The hysterical neurosis is one type of repressive disorder (the other is the already described obsessive-compulsive type). The hysterical personality [Histrionic Personality Disorder], on the other hand, is one of many and varied types of personality disorders, conditions which have nothing in common with repressive disorders, other than their occasionally superficial resemblance.
\nThe cause of both hysterical neurosis and fear or energy-based repressive disorders is repression. However, the difference is that in the person with hysterical neurosis the repressed emotions are allowed to do as they please and therefore will manifest themselves outwardly in the person\u2019s conduct. This differs radically from the person with obsessive-compulsive repression in whom the repressing emotions of fear or energy never permit this. In fact, the repressing emotions pursue the unacceptable emotions so relentlessly that they themselves, and not the repressed emotions, color the person\u2019s entire feeling life and conduct.
\nThe reason for this difference is that the hysterical neurosis occurs almost solely in persons with a below-average intelligence, while the other type occurs in those with a superior intelligence. Consequently, when two persons with different levels of intelligence repress the same unacceptable emotions\u2014usually sexual feelings or the emotion of anger or both\u2014with the same repressing emotions\u2014usually fear or energy\u2014the less intelligent person no longer concerns himself with the repressed emotion once it has been made to disappear from consciousness by a single act of repression in childhood. The more intelligent person, on the other hand, continues to occupy himself with the repressed emotion in some way or other in order to be sure that it will never surface and lead to intolerable actions. The result of all this, of course, is that in the more intelligent person the repressing emotions of fear or energy dominate the clinical picture, while in the less intelligent one the repressed emotion will manifest itself without activating in any way the repressing emotion of fear or energy.
\nFor example, if the sexual feeling has been repressed in a young woman of below-average intelligence she will often act in a flirtatious way, while not having the slightest awareness of the fact that her behavior is \u201csexy\u201d and suggestive of a desire for erotic affection or gratification. In fact, if a man were to take her up on what he perceives as an invitation for sexual intimacy the young woman with an hysterical neurosis would turn him down because that is the very thing she fears.
\nOr a man may repress the emotions that serve his drive for self-realization, his assertive drive. In that case these emotions may make themselves manifest in a pathological need to be recognized, or a need to force himself into the forefront, perhaps in association with an oversensitivity to all kinds of real or imagined slights or irritations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q What about persons with hysterical paralysis or blindness [conversion disorders]? Where do they fit in?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A They fit right here. Although in general in the person with an hysterical neurosis the repressing emotion (fear\/energy) allows the repressed emotion (sex\/anger) to do what it wants, it may at times become concerned enough not to permit its undisguised expression. When this happens the repressed emotion is forced to manifest itself via another route where the fear or energy of the person does not put any obstacle in its path. This gives rise to the so-called conversion reactions (the emotion is converted into a bodily reaction).
\nSuch conversions may affect every area of the personality. When they affect the external senses, for example, blindness, deafness, tunnel vision (like looking through a tube), or insensitivity to pain may result. When the internal senses are involved the person may forget who he is (amnesia), or appear to be in a trance, or suffer fainting spells. Other persons with an hysterical neurosis may become partially or totally paralyzed in one or more limbs; or be unable to speak. Others again may vomit or have diarrhea without showing evidence of an organic cause.
\nBut whatever organ system is involved in the conversion reaction, what gives away the nature of the condition is the fact that the person is not emotionally concerned about the particular somatic changes he developed. In other words, the hysterical paralysis or blindness, or whatever, is an emotionally isolated occurrence for the patient and lacks any identification with the repressing emotion. No wonder that the old psychiatric textbooks used to speak of la belle indifference (the \u201cbeautiful indifference\u201d or \u201cunconcern\u201d) of a person with an hysterical neurosis.
\nThis must conclude my discussion of the emotional disorders called neurosis, whether caused by deprivation or repression. What is left is a discussion of a totally different kind of emotional disorder, because its cause is unrelated to repression or deprivation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Can you tell us a bit about psychopaths?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A The fundamental characteristics of a psychopath are extreme selfishness, instability, lability, unpredictability and impulsiveness. Such a person relates everything to himself. His own self, and particularly his own physical and material well-being, is the only thing that matters. The good of others, if it means anything to him at all, always comes second. The psychopath does not know true love and friendship. If he loves it is only for his own sake, and the friendship lasts only so long as it is to his own advantage. In marriage the psychopath lives only for himself. The well partner is expected to adjust entirely to the psychopathic partner. There is not the least bit of devotion and concern for the spouse.
\nIn addition to this extreme selfishness, the emotional reactions of the psychopath are exaggerated, excessive, lacking in moderation (i.e., they are disproportionate to the stimulus). For instance, if he is slighted for some reason he may explode with anger, or show his displeasure for hours or days on end by a prolonged sullen silence. A slight reproof at work may prompt him to resign on the spot. If in military service, a reprimand by a person of higher rank may lead to a refusal to obey orders or desertion. A scolding by a teacher may lead the psychopathic student to attack the teacher, and so on.
\nThe immoderate emotional reactions and often impulsive behavior of the psychopath are accompanied by a marked lability of his emotions. Whenever his environment changes, or the sense object in his environment changes, his emotions change. A violent love may change to unreasonable hatred because of a trifle, and, conversely, a dislike may change into elation. His changes of mood occur not by the day, but by the hour, and make him unpredictable. One can never depend on him. His behavior is a constant surprise to others, and often beyond comprehension. As his emotional reactions and moods vary, so do his inclinations, interests and judgments, modified without any\u2014at least for others\u2014understandable motive. Often it is only a short step from excessive self-assurance and bravado to complete discouragement and indecision, just as inflexibility and stubbornness may suddenly turn into excessive pliability and dependence on others.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q What are the reasons that psychopaths act in such a selfish and unpredictable manner? To me they seem like spoiled children who must have their own way at all times and don\u2019t want to share with other kids.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A For some yet unknown reason there appears to be a constitutionally determined lack of control of the emotional life by the intellect. It is as if there is a missing connection, or an unbridgeable chasm, between emotions and intellect. Both seem to operate on their own; each goes its own way. In that sense the psychopath resembles the animal who, because it lacks a higher life of intellect and will, reacts to what it feels impulsively, spontaneously, instinctively, or in a manner determined by its training by a human being. The animal reacts to the concrete sense object as such, while man, if he acts humanly, correctly reacts to the sense object only so far as it is reasonable to do so.
\nIn the psychopath the normal subordination of the emotions to the intellect is not present, or only to a limited degree. For him the sense object has only sense value, and thus he lacks that which is precisely human in emotional activity. To give another illustration: a psychopath is discharged from prison after serving his second term for stealing cars. He knows that if he is caught stealing again he will get twenty years. Around the corner from the prison he sees a Cadillac with the key in the ignition. Seeing no one around he gets in and drives off, only to be caught a few hours later. In contrast, the nonpsychopathic car thief gets out of prison under the same circumstances. He too sees a Cadillac with the key in the ignition. He does not drive it away, because he doesn\u2019t want to go back to jail. He may not have become an honest and law-abiding citizen but he is going to think twice before he steals another car.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q I have known some people who developed the three fundamental characteristics of the psychopath only in later life. Doesn\u2019t that prove that this condition is not due to a defect of the constitution and present already at birth?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A It is indeed true that healthy people can develop these symptoms later in life as the result of serious brain concussions, brain injuries by shrapnel, epidemic encephalitis (inflammation of the brain) meningitis (inflammation of the covering of the brain), or some infectious diseases of the brain. This is not, however, a reason to say that there is no such thing as a true or congenital psychopath. In fact, it makes it more likely that such a condition does exist, for later in life acquired states of \u201cpseudo-psychopathy\u201d resemble the congenital ones so closely that they, too, could well be caused by somatic deficits in the brain, rather than by psychological causes. In my opinion, it will not be long before modern advanced research techniques will discover the exact cause of what some of us presume to be an organic deficit in the brain cells, or brain structures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Awhile ago you spoke of several types of personality disorders. Can you tell us more about them?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A I can, but it is really not that important to know each and every possible type of personality disorder. It would be better to understand the etiology of the disorder. To draw a comparison to cases of phobia, one can make a long, long list of phobias of this or that object of the fear, of closed spaces or open spaces, of heights or germs, and so on, ad infinitum. They may be interesting, but what is important is that one understands why a phobia develops, more so than what object is feared in such a morbid fashion.
\nThe same is true for the person with a personality disorder. It is necessary to recognize the fundamental characteristics of the different personality disorders and why they develop, but it is relatively unimportant how the individual psychopath\u2019s particular temperament, character and personality are affected by his disorder. The danger of focusing too much on the different types is that one could easily come to assume that every person who manifests the symptoms of one type automatically has a personality disorder.
\nTo give an example, a person may live in a world of imagined illness and believe himself to be suffering all kinds of ills, and then, moved by a deep pity for himself, unconsciously exaggerates his complaints, thus trying to arouse pity in others. By focusing on this person\u2019s attention-getting behavior we may be ready to label him with Histrionic Personality Disorder, and thus very difficult to treat successfully, while actually he is neurotic, and thus amenable to therapy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Is this all we should know about emotional malfunctions?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A There is one more item that may be of interest and practical help. It is the one exception to the rule that all neurotic disorders have their beginning in childhood. Adults who have always been in good emotional health can, under certain circumstances, develop what is called a situational reaction, or pseudo-neurotic reaction. This will occur when a person deems it necessary, because of a new situation in his life, to repress an emotion, most commonly, I think, the emotion of anger. When he does so, he will begin to manifest the usual basic symptoms of repression: tension, restlessness, inability to relax, and, in addition, often psychosomatic complaints, often followed by feelings of depression.
\nA typical example is that of the married woman who goes to the psychiatrist because of depression and\/or considerable gain in weight. It is not hard to find out that these symptoms began to develop some time after her mother-in-law moved in with the family. When she began to make her presence felt with advice to her daughter-in-law on how she thought the meals should be prepared and the children reared, the patient decided to go along for the sake of \u201cpeace\u201d in the family. This she got, but no inner peace. Her repressed feelings of irritation and anger gave her no peace. Her continued frustration drove her often to the refrigerator for some extra food, while her life became more and more tension filled. Depression followed.
\nFortunately, therapy is usually successful in a short period of time, once the patient realizes what she has been doing and dares to break the vicious circle of repression, frustration and more repression. This is most easily done when she gets the cooperation of her husband whom she has been protecting from an unpleasant relationship with his mother. A few talks by both with the house guest in which certain rules of conduct are laid down usually suffice to resolve the silent battle and its resulting repression. The depression clears up in a short time, and the extra weight is lost. Of course, the shorter the interval between the start of the repression and the time professional help is sought, the more rapidly the symptoms are relieved. It will take longer if many years have elapsed and the repression is chronic. Yet even here, because of the basic sound personality structure and preexisting emotional integration, the therapy takes effect much more rapidly than in persons who have repressed since early childhood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q If I recall correctly, you mentioned earlier that psychosomatic disorders also fall under the heading of emotional afflictions. Can you address yourself to this kind of emotional disorder?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A The connection between such psychosomatic disorders as stomach ulcers, migraines, hypertension, dermatitis, and many, many others, is more readily understood when you recall that every emotion is accompanied by certain physiological changes. When a person represses a certain emotion, let us say anger, this emotion is prevented from being guided by reason. In other words, the anger is prevented from running its natural course so that it cannot quiet down and allow the peace and harmony of the emotional life to be restored. As I explained earlier, the emotion of anger is buried alive in this repressive process in the subconscious. Even though the person may no longer be consciously aware of his anger, it remains active, no matter how deeply it has been buried. But so do the various physiological changes that are part and parcel of the emotion of anger.
\nSome of these changes occur in the blood vessels of the heart and the body for the purpose of preparing the person to react efficiently to the cause of his anger. Once the healthy person has done so, his anger abates and the physiological changes in the blood vessels disappear. The anger has served its purpose under the guidance of the person\u2019s reason. All is well.
\nNot so, however, in the person who represses his angry feelings. The changes in the blood vessels continue as long as the anger remains repressed. In time they permanently affect the blood vessels and thus lead to such conditions as hypertension, heart attack or migraines. Bodily organs have become the victims of a psychological occurrence because of the physiological changes that accompany the emotions which constitute the link between psyche and body. A psychosomatic illness is usually a late development in a longstanding repressive way of dealing with a certain emotion. As any organ or organ-system can be involved, the literature on this topic is extensive. For the purposes of this book it suffices that the reader is familiar with the fundamental mechanism responsible for a psychosomatic disorder. This is particularly important for those engaged in the ministry of healing through prayer. In praying for healing of a physical illness they must not neglect to pray for the healing of the psychological afflictions underlying the physical illness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Dr. Baars, several times you have mentioned depression. You said it can be a symptom in the unaffirmed person, especially the person with emotional deprivation disorder or a repressive disorder, and just now again in the pseudo-neurotic or situational reactions. But usually I hear or read that people suffer from a depression. This sounds to me that depression is an illness, not just a symptom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A It is true that both professionals and non-professionals usually speak of a depression, as if it were an illness in and by itself. Nevertheless, I believe there are good reasons to see depression most of the time primarily as a symptom that may be precipitated by different causes and in different situations. For instance, a person who has repressed his feelings of anger from early childhood often develops a \u201cdepressive disorder,\u201d an illness in which depression is the most prominent symptom. A person with a certain biogenetic and biochemical make-up may be exposed to certain stressful conditions which precipitate Bipolar Disorder, the depressive phase of which is characterized by the symptom of depression. Finally, one may suffer from depression due to a medical condition.
\nIt is important to note that in some individuals their lifelong inability to respond to their emotion of anger in a mature and effective manner is the most important cause for the development of the symptom of depression. To lose sight of this fact can cause treatment to be only partially effective. Medication can deal rather effectively with the worst of the depressive episode by lessening depressive symptoms and thus making cooperation in therapy possible; but unless the therapist is also able to help the client deal in more mature ways with his anger, he is liable to have recurrences of these depressive symptoms. When the therapist deals primarily with depression as a symptom of a lifelong failure to incorporate his emotion of anger, and secondarily uses antidepressant medication to lessen the depression and thus make cooperation in therapy possible, his chances of curing the patient permanently are much greater.
\nIt is not hard to see how a person\u2019s inability to use his emotion of anger for the purpose of asserting and defending himself can make life increasingly miserable, if not unbearable. It is indeed depressing to be a doormat, to always give in to others, to be unable to make others mind your wishes and preferences, or to be taken for granted, because of this emotionally crippling fear of anger.
\nGod gave us the emotion of anger as one of the many instruments of our human nature that, when properly used under the guidance of the higher faculties, can make our lives more pleasant, successful and safe. Indeed, anger can be a tremendous stimulant in our overcoming great obstacles, in giving us endurance and determination. In some instances this emotion can even be a lifesaving factor.
\nThis is illustrated dramatically by the prophet Isaiah\u2019s exclamation: \u201cI have trodden the winepress alone\u2026 .
\nI looked and there was none to help \u2026 none to uphold me \u2026 and my fury, it upheld me\u201d (Isa. 63:3-5 author\u2019s paraphrase).
\nThat the emotion of anger can be a lifesaving factor I experienced myself during my two years of imprisonment in the Nazi concentration camp of Buchenwald. Following my capture in the Pyren\u00e9es Mountains on the France-Spain border, endless interrogations about my participation in aiding Allied flyers escape from Europe, and stays in several French prisons, I was shipped with one thousand French prisoners to Buchenwald. Only six of us survived the long ordeal. Next to my faith in God, it was my constant anger at the Nazis for having deprived me of my liberty and their inhumane treatment of their prisoners that stimulated my determination to survive and to deny them the satisfaction of seeing me die. My anger stimulated my adrenal glands to provide me with energy to survive hard labor, a starvation diet and other hardships. Though I could never display my anger in any form, neither did I repress it. It was constantly directed by my reason which told me that to become outwardly angry at my captors would mean certain death. Prayer and anger allowed me to see the hour of liberation by General Patton and his Third Army. Nine hundred, ninety-four of the 1000 young Frenchmen in my transport from France to Buchenwald died, many of them as the result of their apathy and their lost \u00e9lan de vivre. Without hope, afraid of their captors, they had lost the will to live. As a result they succumbed to minor illnesses and infectious diseases.
\nNinety five percent of my patients recover from their depression when they learn to ask themselves, not, \u201cWhy am I so depressed?\u201d, but rather \u201cWhat is annoying me; who is making me feel angry?\u201d When they then identify the cause of their anger, and are helped to deal with that cause in ever more effective ways, the depression lifts. One cannot be angry and feel depressed at the same time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Chapter 7<\/p>\n\n\n\n
HEALING EMOTIONAL AFFLICTIONS<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A long time ago the Lord told the prophet Ezekiel to say these words to the people: \u201cI will give them [a] new heart and put a new spirit within them; I will remove the stony heart from their bodies, and replace it with a natural heart, so that they will live according to my statutes, and observe and carry out my ordinances; thus they shall be my people and I will be their God\u201d (Ezek. 11:19-20).
\nThose of us who have grown to chronological adulthood without a fully developed, well-balanced, and wholly integrated emotional life, often wonder when and how God will give us a new heart and spirit. Now that we know so much more about the preventable, man-made emotional disorders\u2014the repressive and emotional deprivation disorders\u2014that make our lives so unnecessarily difficult and sad, we have new hope that the time of fulfillment of God\u2019s promise to Ezekiel is near.
\nBut when we think of how God will bring this about, we tend to be somewhat skeptical. The number of emotionally wounded and crippled people is so vast, and the number of qualified professionals so small in comparison, that short of a miracle we cannot imagine how all of us can receive the new hearts and spirits we so sorely need.
\nYet, there is much that can be done with God\u2019s grace to help ourselves and one another. People need to know what neurotic conditions require professional help, and which disorders are best treated by one kind of therapist, and which by another kind. People so afflicted also need to know that in certain areas of repression they can do a great deal for themselves, and in other areas they need help and advice from a professional. Furthermore, unaffirmed persons need to learn what they can do, and give up doing, in order to become most receptive to the unconditional love of others. And finally, all of us need to learn how to pray with one another and thus to serve as the Lord\u2019s instruments for the healing power of His love.
\nI shall deal with all these topics to a reasonable extent and provide basic guidelines for further learning in some areas if this is needed and desired.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Could you begin by explaining what unaffirmed persons can do to help themselves? You have said that their number is growing by leaps and bounds, and one sometimes wonders whether there are enough mature, affirmed persons left to make up for the parents who failed to give their children their psychic births. The unaffirmed people I have met often have an utter sense of helplessness because they believe there is nothing they themselves can do to facilitate this psychic birth, thus being opened to their own unique goodness by another person. They seem convinced that someone has to come along and use some method or technique of affirmation that will take away their feelings of loneliness, insecurity, inferiority, and so on. If this is true, then I cannot see how all these unaffirmed people are going to receive the new heart the Lord has promised. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
A In the past several years I have realized that my choice of the word \u201caffirmation\u201d in the early sixties has been less enlightening than I expected it to be. In spite of defining it in books and lectures as an existential quality, as a way of being, too many people have interpreted it as something that is done for and unto others. Both the practical mentality of Western man and the distribution of poorly plagiarized books on affirmation seem to have contributed to this deplorable confusion. To provide some badly needed clarity I shall explain in a somewhat different terminology what has caused the unaffirmed person to become what he is, and how he can actively participate in his own healing, without being a self-affirmer.
\nThe unaffirmed person did not grow to emotional maturity, because as a child he did not live in the orbit of persons who were living the affirming life.
\nHe did not come to feel his own goodness, worth and lovableness because those significant persons in his life were not present to him with the full attention of their whole being.
\nBecause others did not open him to his own unique goodness, he remained self-centered, afraid and unable to open himself to the world around him, to discover and experience the goodness of others, and of God.
\nAs his \u201cheart\u201d\u2014his humane emotions and intuitive mind\u2014did not receive its proper nourishment, it remained undeveloped. Because of this he was forced to rely more and more on his \u201cmind\u201d\u2014his thinking mind and assertive emotions\u2014to pretend he was older than he felt, to act like others of his age, and to fearfully protect himself from being hurt by other people. He did this by not displeasing them, or by using his talents, or even other people, to make himself appear more important than he really felt.
\nAs his \u201cheart\u201d atrophied and shrank, his \u201cmind\u201d grew excessively. Ever more fearful and withdrawn from people and the world, or driven to be busy and to achieve in restless pursuits, his capacity to be loved and to find joy in friendship grew smaller and smaller.
\nBecoming more weary and suspicious of the affirming methods applied by friends, counselors and therapists, which did nothing to make him feel loved for himself, he despaired even more of receiving what he really needed. He became more demanding of those who were able to satisfy his need, as his fear of being hurt again by pseudo-affirming or self-affirming others closed him off more to those who truly lived the affirming life.
\nThis brief description of the fate of the unaffirmed person gives us all the clues as to what this person can do and be in order to become more receptive to those able and willing to love him unconditionally. In essence this requires that he must first undo, i.e., desist from, many of the activities of his \u201cmind.\u201d Next, he must learn to be according to the needs of his \u201cheart.\u201d
\nTo make this possible he must first create and arrange for conditions in his life that allow his undeveloped \u201cheart\u201d to do some growing. This requires knowledge of those conditions as well as determination, courage and perseverance to realize them. The unaffirmed person already possesses these qualities of courage and determination. He always employs them\u2014to his own disadvantage\u2014in ignoring slights and injustices and being nice to everyone, in making himself do what he does not feel like doing, and in putting up with the adult world in which he feels like a child. Thus, the unaffirmed person possesses ready-made qualities which, if redirected to the right goals, will enable him to live the first principles of the affirming life.
\nBy doing this first in the world of things and beings that were created by God before He created man, he is not dependent on the adult world that inspires so much fear. He saves himself the discouragement and frustration of vainly trying to \u201cearn\u201d what can only be received as a gift. Thus the affectivity of his \u201cheart\u201d has a chance to develop to the point that eventually it can be open and receptive to the gift of himself by another.
\nSince the already affirmed person must do many of the same things to protect and maintain his affectivity against being stifled or destroyed by the effectivity surrounding and accosting him in his largely utilitarian milieu, I shall list the conditions to be created and preserved that make it possible to live the authentic human life\u2014the affirming life.
\nBecause one of the first principles of affirming living consists in being present to everything that is, with the full attention of one\u2019s entire being, the \u201cmind\u201d must be more silent than it usually is in our \u201crational\u201d and rationalizing society. Normally, Western man meets every situation and person with an abundance of thoughts, judgments, opinions, comparisons, if not prejudgments and a know-it-all-attitude. This he does for the purpose of being safe and prepared to protect himself from the unknown; to make the best use of certain circumstances; to take advantage of an opportunity; to gain information; to make a good impression on the other person; in short, to advance his utilitarian needs. Or he looks at the world without seeing it, because he is so busily engaged in the pursuit of happiness: \u201cI have seen those trees, and flowers, and sunsets already before\u2014I have more important things to do.\u201d His overdeveloped, overstimulated \u201cmind\u201d prevents his \u201cheart\u201d from being present with the awe and wonder of a child who sees a dandelion for the first time; from letting the unknown become part of him, to let the mystery of the unknown be and not demand it to be like the already known. His \u201cmind\u201d prevents his \u201cheart\u201d from being moved with love and joy and tenderness, from being authentically present to the other for the sake of the other.
\nThe real meaning of authentic presence became even more clear to me when I was told of an Indian custom in the northwest region of our country. At a wake, which begins at dusk, no one speaks. The Indians enter the tent where the wake is held, shake hands in silence with the immediate relatives of the deceased, and sit all night in total silence around the body.
\nThe unaffirmed person, therefore, must dare to restrict the activity of his \u201cmind\u201d so his \u201cheart\u201d can be more open and sensitive. It takes courage to be open with the \u201cheart,\u201d for one is more vulnerable when one relinquishes the protective workings of the \u201cmind.\u201d For this reason the unaffirmed person must first apply these principles only to the world of animals, plants, and minerals\u2014to what we usually call nature. In that world he cannot be hurt as he has been hurt by the human beings who failed to be present to him. For the time being, while engaged in \u201cnatural or earthly contemplation\u201d he must try not to \u201cbother\u201d with people, or at least to do so as infrequently as possible.
\nIn order to reduce all unnecessary stimulation of his \u201cmind,\u201d the unaffirmed person\u2014like the affirmed person who must preserve his affectivity\u2014must avoid all unnecessary distractions (the trivia offered by TV, radio, telephone, papers and magazines) and solve daily problems as soon as they arise. (This also cuts down on fear and anxiety.)
\nHe must arrange as much as possible for greater quiet and more silence in his life. This he can do by avoiding the idle talk and chatter of others, and by refusing to participate in it himself. He must live more calmly and unhurriedly by setting priorities, avoiding overscheduling, limiting appointments, and refusing to give in to unreasonable demands on his time. A less demanding job in a more natural environment may have to be considered.
\nHe must create opportunities and time for plentiful exposure to the immediate sources of nourishment of his \u201cheart\u201d: the beauty of nature, pleasurable activities (fishing, playing, swimming, skiing and many others), the arts, philosophy, the Scriptures, meditation, divine contemplation\u2014in short to all that is good, beautiful and true. Such exposures stimulate his emotions of love, joy and desire. He should avoid stimulation of more than one sense at a time, so he can give his full attention to what he senses via one sense. A good example of this is the avoidance of background music while eating, studying, sunbathing, etc.
\nBy the same token he should avoid exposure to the bad, the ugly and false, so abundant in our secular, man-centered, utilitarian society that recognizes fewer and fewer absolute moral truths and God, and is bored by natural goodness and beauty.
\nThe effect of all this is enhanced by doing what is possible to refine his external senses and his sense of imagination. Gourmet drinking and dining; attending symphonies, plays, ballets; good literature; visits to museums, and so on, all refine the senses. The imagination which has already been overstimulated by fear and anxiety, must be helped to replace negative, paralyzing images with positive images which give new hope and courage and self-confidence.
\nFor many persons it is not an easy matter to be converted from the abundance of distractions which they had sought for the very purpose of not having to be aware of themselves and conscious of their frustrated needs. When one has been led to believe that one is bad, unlovable, inferior, unwanted, etc., it is only natural to try and turn off these thoughts and feelings. Being always busy and on the go, constant exposure to TV and loud \u201cmusic\u201d or rock, drugs that cloud the mind, and many other devices that destroy peace and quiet, are the usual ways to close oneself off from what one fears to be, but actually is not.
\nIt is often helpful to ease into the art of ever greater awareness of and receptive presence to all that is, including one\u2019s own self, by simply following one\u2019s normal breathing in an atmosphere of quiet, silence and relaxation; or simply listening to a symphony without trying to figure out who composed the music, or what instruments are being used, etc. One simply tries to be without doing. This process can be accelerated with the use of self-help tapes available from the author.
\nTo the extent that he cannot avoid the company of other people, the unaffirmed person should gradually reduce and relinquish his ways of pleasing and impressing others for the purpose of \u201cearning\u201d their love. These other-pleasing ways and attempts to prove one\u2019s worth and lovableness are extensively described in Healing the Unaffirmed and should be studied carefully. Each person should list his own particular ways of compensating for not feeling loved and worthwhile, and then \u201cwork\u201d at minimizing and abandoning these ways, while learning to be present to all that is in a new and healthy way. The more \u201chonest\u201d he can learn to be in recognizing and accepting his true emotions, and not give in to his fear of them, the more authentic he will be and the more meaningful the love and respect he will receive from others.
\nIf the unaffirmed person is in the habit of putting other people down, however subtly, he should stop these and other ways of denying people, of not letting them be who they are. (Of course, if their ways are harmful or offensive to the unaffirmed person he should make this known in some way.) Putting other people down because they are different may give the unaffirmed person a momentary sense of being better, but it does not contribute in the least to the fulfillment of his need for authentic love. On the contrary, it does the very opposite. People do not like to be put down and do not love those who do this.
\nThe unaffirmed person should make it as easy as possible for others to treat him better and with greater respect. This is done by letting them know what he likes, dislikes, feels, believes, expects, etc. He must go against his inclination to pretend that everything others say and do is agreeable with him, if in fact it is not.
\nMost unaffirmed persons, in their need for love, believe they must make every effort to love others and be loved by them. Instead, each person should direct all his efforts and energies at becoming comfortable with all of his emotions, not just that of love alone. He must learn to respond to his emotions and those of others without fear and in a variety of ways. This provides him with practical experiences and information about how his emotional responses can improve his life and relationships.
\nIf the unaffirmed person is also a workaholic or suffers from an energy-based repressive disorder, it is of great importance that he lives for an extended period of time in an undemanding, nonutilitarian milieu that permits him to be himself and live his life at his own pace.
\nEven before the unaffirmed person, who succeeds in following the foregoing advice, enters the orbit of others who live the affirming life, he will experience the following benefits of being wholly present to all that is.
\nIn the growing communion\u2014and decreased communication\u2014with all that is good and beautiful and true in God\u2019s creation, he experiences greater calm and peace. His capacity to feel love and liking grows, and thus there is more joy that replaces the sadness of his erstwhile coping with the unaffirming adult world of people around him. Though avoiding those people more, he feels less lonely as he is more present to God\u2019s creation and feels its beauty and goodness as His gifts to him. These feelings are enhanced as he takes more time for meditating on the most consoling passages of the Scriptures and the words of unconditional love that Jesus spoke. In time there is an ever deeper sense of belonging and being loved for himself as his capacity for spiritual contemplation is facilitated by that for \u201cearthly\u201d contemplation. This is particularly true when the aforementioned willed techniques (of being quiet, being present to one\u2019s breathing, etc.) become \u201csecond nature\u201d and thus create a need and desire to make the time available for being present to creation and the Creator.
\nHis fears and anxiety decrease as he discovers that there is little to fear in nature, the arts and the teachings of God which, fortunately, are being taught and explained with ever less ambiguity and greater clarity. His trust grows, and so does his hope for becoming fully whole, and for sensing his own goodness and worth without doubts. As he turns to his emotions and feelings more, he allows himself to be guided more by them in such matters as eating only when he has an appetite (instead of a fixed number of times according to custom and convenience), and meeting friends and relatives more with what his \u201cheart\u201d tells him, rather than with the fear-inspiring thoughts of his \u201cmind.\u201d
\nOf course, all this is only a beginning, an opening of the door from within by the unaffirmed person. But it is a most important beginning of a way of living that finds its completion in the other person or persons doing their part to open the door of his lonely, imprisoned self from the outside. Since the door had become heavier, and its hinges rustier than they once were in infancy and childhood\u2014because significant others were unable or did not bother to open it during the growing years\u2014those others must now give more of themselves to help the unaffirmed person open the door wide. This is definitely not a task for pseudo-affirming others who rely on techniques and methods of affirmation. Much less is it a task of self-affirming persons. In fact, the unaffirmed person must be protected and protect himself against these pseudo-affirming and self-affirming persons who only close doors, and never open them so the unaffirmed person can be set free from his prison of loneliness.
\nBut when the unaffirmed person, who as the result of creating for himself the conditions I have described, is ready to live with a reasonable degree of openness in the orbit of the person who truly lives the affirming life, the process of becoming who he is supposed to be is ready to be completed.
\nNot too long ago, on one of my lecture tours I met a Protestant minister who had suffered for years from a deep depression that no drugs or shock treatment had been able to alleviate. After reading Born Only Once he had decided to concentrate on doing nothing but simply be present to what he called all the little things around him. This he did in a spirit of praise and gratitude to God who had created those little things for his happiness. Proceeding from inanimate objects to flowers, pets and little children, he gradually lost his loneliness, fears and depression. The children especially made him feel that he belonged and that he was loved by them and God. From there it was only a small step to feel at ease and happy with the people who made up his parish and with his work.
\nThis account by the healed minister emphasized the need to follow my instructions regarding affirming living in a spirit of praise and gratitude to God. Thus the Christian unaffirmed person, in learning to live the affirming life, accelerates the process by giving praise and thanks to God every time he is present to what He has created: the grass, weeds, pebbles, trees, flowers, sunshine, rain and all else. The same is true for the man-made objects in his life, for they also are presents to him from God who used his fellow human beings in their construction: the bed, pillow, car, house, window, utensils, food, lightbulbs, vacuum cleaner, and on and on.
\n\u201cLord, I praise and thank you for the house that protects me from the elements; I praise and thank you for the water from the faucet that I use for so many purposes; I thank and praise you for the electricity that operates the toaster, the washing machine, etc.\u201d These simple, quiet, oft repeated observations of the things we usually take for granted in a spirit of thanks and praise is a most effective antidote to the counter-productive, utilitarian ways of looking at things.
\nIt is almost second nature for many people to focus on what is imperfect, missing, inadequate, and bad in the present with feelings of discontent and frustration. Others focus with feelings of worry and anxiety on what may happen in the future, on the unknown, possible sickness, lack of work and money, death, etc. Others focus with feelings of regret and bitterness on mistakes, setbacks, painful memories, frustrations of the past. To make the switch from this addictive habit of looking only at the negative to being present to the world around us in praise and gratitude to God can be difficult. This is particularly true for persons whose fear or mistrust of God has led them to believe that everything is up to their own efforts. Yet nothing is impossible, and once they follow the above advice, the effects quickly become noticeable in terms of growing inner peace and \u201cpassive\u201d energy, and a host of other benefits. In time, when one has matured more, one will also be able to give praise and thanks to God for permitting misfortune, pain and sufferings, in the certain faith that He will use them to bring about a greater good.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Should a person have any special knowledge of what to be and do for the unaffirmed person he wants to help become himself?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A No and yes. If that person is already living the affirming life fully, he just \u201cknows\u201d how to let the other be, and allows him to become himself at his own pace and in his own way. By being present to him with his \u201cheart,\u201d and feeling comfortable with his feelings of love and compassion, and not being embarrassed to \u201creveal\u201d these feelings naturally and spontaneously, but refraining from those expressions that do not constitute a good for the unaffirmed person, the unaffirmed person will feel the goodness, beauty, and worth of his own person.
\nFor him this \u201crevelation\u201d is life-giving, creative, strengthening, healing. It lays the psychological foundation for what can be perfected only by the Holy Spirit when a person willingly and freely, and under the proper circumstances and conditions, opens himself to this Spirit.
\nThe fruit of the Holy Spirit is: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. We become recipients of this fruit when other persons use His gifts\u2014faith, knowledge, wisdom, prophecy, tongues, interpretation, miracles, healing and discernment of spirits for our benefit, not for their own benefit.
\nThis is precisely what the person who lives the affirming life does. He shares what he has received as a gift from others, with those not yet gifted, and thus gives them the gift of themselves and thereby joy, peace, and love. When these natural gifts of the person who lives the affirming life are complemented by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, the fruit of the Holy Spirit complements the natural effects of his affirming life in the not-yet-affirmed persons.
\nThough the Spirit blows where He wills, in the natural course of events the Spirit works through others. He seems to prefer human beings to be His co-creators, co-affirmers, co-healers. It is an \u201cunbeatable\u201d combination, the Holy Spirit and man cooperating in bringing life, strength and healing to mankind. Obviously, this truth imposes a serious obligation on every human being to live the affirming life, and thus to be an authentic \u201crevealer\u201d or \u201cstrengthener\u201d of his fellow-man. He cannot simply leave it up to God or to the other person himself to become what he is meant to be. He is needed as a co-creator!
\nThe foregoing explains why it was proper for me to reply no to the question as to whether a person requires special knowledge about what to be and do for the unaffirmed person. But because there are so many pseudo-affirming persons who with their writings and practices have caused so much confusion\u2014and harm\u2014I had to answer also yes.
\nThese pseudo-affirming persons, who use the word \u201caffirmation\u201d so freely, and are so busy \u201caffirming\u201d others with their techniques of doing, do not know what the person who lives the affirming life knows. In fact, the pseudo-affirming person will have no idea that I have omitted something very important in what I have just described as \u201clife-giving, creative, strengthening, healing, revelation.\u201d Only the person who lives the affirming life knows that my comparison between his gifts and those of the Holy Spirit was not as complete and explicit as it should be.
\nIt is this one aspect, which I purposely omitted, which distinguishes the person who leads the authentic affirming life from the one who does not and pushes the \u201cbutton of affirmation\u201d in counseling; who devises new affirmation techniques for group encounters; who stresses emotions and feelings at the expense of moral truths; who makes a living turning out self-help books and offering pop-psychology courses which do not consider, or are ignorant of, the intellectual and spiritual needs of man. The pseudo-affirmers, or worse, the self-affirmers, engaged in counseling and related fields, are recognizable by the fact that they do not lead the affirming life themselves. This is not always easy to ascertain, for many pseudo-affirmers are of good will, sincere in wanting to help others, and are tireless in doing what they can, even to the point of exhausting themselves and becoming sick.
\nBut it is precisely because they do (and not because they are) that their services and help to unaffirmed people must be labeled pseudo-affirming. Frequently, these same people are also the willing supporters of the new educational approaches which are devastating in so many ways to the unaffirmed children in our society. They copy these new developments with great enthusiasm and are blissfully unaware of how they defeat their own, already inadequate, efforts to help others grow and become themselves. (See next chapter.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q What is it that you have purposefully omitted, and which should be an essential aspect of my affirming living if the unaffirmed person is to benefit fully from living in my orbit?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Perhaps I should have anticipated that in our feeling-dominated times many people would ignore what we described explicitly in our books as being a fundamental need for the unaffirmed person. He needs not only emotional strengthening, but also intellectual strengthening. He needs not only to feel the truth that he is loveable and good, but also to know how to live the truth, how to live according to the laws of his nature and those of the One who created his nature. Without knowledge of these laws he is unable to establish order in his life and to avoid whatever is detrimental to his relationship with God and his fellow human beings.
\nThis need is forgotten, if it ever was understood, by the many who are anxious to affirm others but are not yet affirmed themselves. Sure, they often, as part of their \u201cdoing-affirmation,\u201d give abundant advice and a variety of \u201cmusts\u201d and \u201cshould nots\u201d to the unaffirmed person, but frequently this advice is of a subjective and feeling nature. By this I mean, they tell him what they feel he should do, what they feel is right for him. This kind of \u201cteaching\u201d predominates in our times, in which powerful voices are heard in opposition to \u201cindoctrination of absolute values,\u201d to the existence of objective truths, and to God himself.
\nBut this kind of \u201cknowledge,\u201d this clarification of moral values on the basis of emotional reactions, is not what the unaffirmed person needs. He needs neither emotional junk food, nor intellectual half-truths and falsehoods. Just as he remains emotionally a child when pseudo-affirmers feed him emotional junk food, so does he slowly suffocate when they expose him to the indoctrination of their own value clarifications, or of their psycho-theological quicksand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Where do unaffirmed children and adults, once their emotional growth has advanced sufficiently, find the necessary knowledge to establish order in their lives, to live a virtuous life that brings them reasonable happiness in this world, and to enjoy lasting happiness in the after life?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A I believe everyone must find the answer to this question for himself. However, he will have a better chance to succeed when he is able to recognize the educational pitfalls of present day public and private schools, seminaries and convents, as well as the shortcomings of modern innovations in mainline churches, newly arising religious cults, and self-help movements.
\nWith the appearance of new and often better pedagogical approaches in education and religion, content has frequently been watered down, and in some cases the baby (content) has been thrown out together with the bath water (process). But it is exactly the long-established truths of the past that have not always been preserved by the change-loving liberals, which constitute the much needed food of intellectual strengthening. The fact that in the past these truths were too often presented in an authoritarian manner, which tolerated no questioning and requests for clarification, does not mean that those truths have been proven false. Too often, the liberals\u2019 justified rebellion against immature, dictatorial, self-seeking authority of the past has aimed at abolishing authority and replacing it with government by consensus. Their failure to work at helping authority to become mature, and govern as affirmed and affirming individuals, has harmed the unaffirmed person greatly. Mature, affirmed persons in authority are an indispensable source of much needed strength and growth for their subjects.
\nBecause of their emotional uncertainty in living, unaffirmed persons have a greater than average need to know the fundamental rules of living. The historical, philosophical and religious truths, as taught for example by the magisterium of the Catholic Church and the liberal arts colleges, have always been our primary sources of knowledge. Regrettably, the former has somewhat suffered of late in her credibility, while the latter have dwindled in number throughout the Western world.
\nUnaffirmed persons are not strengthened by a utilitarian education that prepares them for a job, even when this education is presented in a socio-psycho-therapeutic atmosphere aimed at meeting the emotional needs of the students. It is not fair to expect teachers to make up for the failures of unaffirmed and unaffirming parents, and to bring order in the emotionally disordered lives of their students, while at the same time having to tend to their duty of teaching them something more than trivia. But do they have a choice?
\nEducation that is worthy of the name aims at the development of the student\u2019s capacity to think, reason and form opinions and judgments. Internal emotional underdevelopment, frustration and turmoil seriously interfere with his responsiveness. Under these disabling and frustrating conditions all that can be done is to train him to act in the earnest and least demanding way. Usually this amounts to training him to hold a job that requires little more than operating certain machines and performing routine tasks.
\nI hope these brief reflections will stimulate a rethinking on the part of parents and teachers about young people\u2019s emotional and educational needs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Is it correct to summarize your teachings on affirming living\u2014in the context of the needs of unaffirmed persons\u2014by saying that this consists of being present with the full attention of one\u2019s whole being\u2014with \u201cheart\u201d and \u201cmind\u201d\u2014and of teaching intellectual and spiritual truths?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Yes, it is. But I want to add something regarding the second part of your summary. It is not only necessary for the affirmed person to know those truths and to be willing to teach them. He also must have the ability to present them at the right time to a particular unaffirmed person, and in the right ways, ways that are adjusted and suited to that person\u2019s emotional needs and degree of strength at any given time of his growth.
\nThis presentation also includes the capacity to correct, to admonish, to use, if need be, strong language that leaves no doubt as to the gravity of the matter at hand. It recognizes and respects the unaffirmed person\u2019s needs, and \u201cwhere he is, and comes from,\u201d but does not hesitate to offer truths in such a manner that he is open to them and capable of receiving and responding to them.
\nThis naturally takes great sensitivity and experience, as well as the other qualities that are the characteristics of the already affirmed person. But it is here that the pseudo-affirming and self-affirming persons fail, even when they possess adequate knowledge of established truths. Their affirmation techniques usually are practiced in an atmosphere of permissiveness and \u201csensitivity\u201d directed at not \u201churting anyone\u2019s feelings.\u201d
\nAll I have presented here concerning the affirming life is most clearly illustrated in the life of the first affirmer of man, Jesus Christ. Jesus came to earth to preach the Good News, and to live the Good News. Jesus strengthened man\u2019s need to know truths by preaching the Good News, since then preserved in the Scriptures. He presented these truths either directly and explicitly, or in parables, or in simple, almost incidental ways, but these were always adjusted to the level of development of the persons in His audience. He never compromised on these truths. He did not hesitate to use strong language, even though it would be sure to hurt the listeners\u2019 feelings: \u201cWoe to you scribes and Pharisees, you frauds! \u2026 blind guides\u2026 . Blind fools\u2026\u201d (Matt. 23:13-17).
\nJesus lived the Good News in His relationship with His apostles and the women with whom He shared much of His private life. Here He did His real, most effective teaching of people\u2019s lovableness in the eyes and heart of God. This teaching of the affirming life by Jesus was not done as I had to do it here, in words and laying down of principles, and pointing out pitfalls, and so on. He taught it in His way of being. To live the truth is always the most effective way of teaching the truth. Unfortunately, this way of teaching can be made available only to a limited number of persons. The multitudes must be satisfied with articles and books describing the truths lived by a certain person among his family, students, friends and associates. These fortunate few then have the task of promulgating those truths in their turn: first of all in living them, and secondarily, through oral teachings.
\nAnd so it was with the apostles whom Jesus chose to be His co-affirmers, co-creators of other people. For three years Jesus compassionately revealed to them their own goodness in His intimate, authentic presence to them, until they in turn were ready, following their conversion, to strengthen their brothers (Luke 22:32). The New Testament is replete with examples of how Jesus\u2019 teachings of truths were often preceded by His special ways of opening a person\u2019s heart with His sensitive, compassionate presence. Jesus knew what too often we forget or never have known, that the way to convince another person of a truth is not so much by logical arguments, but via the \u201cheart\u201d (\u201cand the Lord opened her [Lydia\u2019s] heart to accept what Paul was saying\u201d [Acts 16:14]).
\nWhen Jesus, or we, are authentically present to another person, and he as a result feels his own hidden goodness, he is so moved with gratitude that he is open to whatever other good Jesus, or we, have to offer him. (\u201cSaul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goad\u201d [Acts 26:14]\u2014and immediately Paul was converted).
\nWhen our presence is always authentic and we teach the truth in the right way, at the right time, the other person becomes stronger and will possess himself in peace and joy, capable of revealing to others the truth of their goodness and those of God and His creation. Under those circumstances one does not have to be afraid to \u201churt a person\u2019s feelings\u201d with the truth. That person\u2019s strength will not be shattered, because he knows and feels secure in the authentic presence of another.
\nThis is dramatically demonstrated by Jesus\u2014who always affirmed, never denied, not even in His strongest denunciations\u2014in His encounter with Peter. After nearly three years of revealing to Peter his unique goodness, and even his hidden strength of being a rock (Matt. 16:18), Jesus teaches Peter a supernatural truth at the very moment when Peter shows his deep love of Jesus by declaring that he wants Jesus to be spared from suffering and death. At that moment \u201cJesus turned on Peter and said, \u2018Get out of my sight, you satan! You are trying to make me trip and fall. You are not judging by God\u2019s standards but by man\u2019s\u2019 \u201d (Matt. 16:23).
\nThese are unkind, harsh unchristian words to persons who are not familiar with the meaning of the affirming life. To them these words are spoken by the man Jesus because He is also God, and therefore can permit himself an exception to the rule of always being gentle. Just as they tend to believe that as God, Jesus had the right to deviate from His teaching of \u201cturning the other cheek,\u201d when He became so angry that He fashioned a whip and used it on the moneychangers in the temple.
\nThose familiar with the meaning of the affirming life, and living it themselves, understand that these were the perfect affirming words spoken by Jesus. Perfect, because they were said to Peter who had grown strong enough not to be shattered by \u201churt feelings,\u201d and to be capable of learning the gravity of a particular supernatural truth.
\nThis particular passage is an excellent demonstration of the truth that no authentic teaching is possible by a pseudo-affirmer, much less by a self-affirmer. As he does not strengthen others with his techniques and methods of affirmation, they remain fragile and will be easily hurt when told even an authentic truth. The pseudo-affirming atmosphere of being \u201cnice,\u201d and saying the right things, of being tolerant and permissive, reveals the lack of authenticity of the person claiming to \u201cpractice affirmation.\u201d By just being with such a person for a while, one can sense the lack of authentic presence and authentic teaching. Such presence and teaching always radiate serenity, calm and peace.
\nI once was invited to give a series of lectures by a sister in charge of a diocesan formation center. She had heard me lecture for a period of five days and had become so enthusiastic with the concept of affirmation that she began to practice it right away in her sincere desire to help others grow. It was two years later before I was able to respond to her invitation to lecture in her diocese. Sad to say, her efforts proved to be nothing but pseudo-affirming practices. She had organized numerous groups and was involved in all kinds of organizations where she was busy \u201caffirming\u201d the people and teaching them to affirm others. In the hours she spent with me, introducing me, chauffeuring me to different meeting halls, taking me out to dinner, I never felt a moment of peace. With all her talk about affirmation, I never felt her being present to me. On the contrary, I almost felt denied, for I had little chance to be myself, except during the hours of lecturing and responding to questions and comments of the audience.
\nEven worse is the feeling one experiences when meeting a self-affirming person who claims to be engaged in affirmation therapy. Some of these persons direct centers that are designated as such and write affirmation books. They are more subtle in their deceit, for they are more clever, if not masters, in pretending that their actions stem from compassion. It may take longer to sense their self-seeking and striving for power, but it can never remain hidden indefinitely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Can self-affirming people be healed, or help themselves?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A If one were to approach them with the advice that they need help with their underdeveloped emotional life, they most likely would not know what you were talking about and would tell you to mind your own business. Or, they might tell you it is your problem that you feel unloved by them, even though your love for them is real. They will continue living their lives in the only way they know\u2014striving for fame, power, influence, riches, sexual love\u2014and, if you are not careful, they will not hesitate to manipulate you in the process.
\nSelf-affirmation may be compared to a cancer. Its cells feed on the surrounding healthy cells, and thus destroy them in the process. The cancer cells grow and multiply at a faster rate than normal cells, invade healthy tissues mercilessly and resist attempts to destroy and eradicate them. More often than not, the self-affirming cancer cells destroy the body in which they grow and thus ultimately also themselves.
\nIt is only if and when at last self-affirming persons discover that there is nothing but a void at the top of the ladder they have so strenuously climbed, that they may become open to their need for help, provided their depression does not become so severe as to precipitate suicide. But it is at that point that the frustrated self-affirming person can help himself by learning to live the affirming life, though by that time he may have his more advanced age against him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q What can psychiatrists do for the more severely disabled person with emotional deprivation disorder, especially when he is deeply depressed and wishes to be dead?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A The answer to your question is covered extensively in the book, Healing the Unaffirmed. There is no need to duplicate this here as the book is readily available from the publisher and bookstores.
\nWe must end here the discussion of the healing of unaffirmed persons in order to have more time to describe that of other emotionally afflicted people.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Dr. Baars, earlier you remarked that persons with repressive disorders should be treated by professionals. Does this mean that you are not going to tell us anything about the kind of therapy you think is best for these persons? In my opinion it would be helpful for nonprofessionals to know a little about this, so parents, teachers, clergy and others will know to whom they can refer these people.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A The therapies for persons with repressive disorders are described in depth in Psychic Wholeness and Healing. Both professionals and nonprofessionals will find in this book a presentation of the particular form of therapy my colleague, Dr. Anna Terruwe, and I employ in treating these persons. It is written in a style that is understandable to the nonprofessional who likes to expand his knowledge of these matters for whatever reason. At the same time it gives the professional person sufficient data for adjusting his present therapies for persons with repressive disorders.
\nWhat nonprofessionals should know about the treatment of repressive disorders is that the person with an hysterical neurosis, in my opinion, is best served by the psychoanalyst. His probing approach aims at bringing the repressed emotion into consciousness. This is necessary because the emotion has been placed beyond guidance by reason, and thus beyond control of the will. This person as a rule is completely unaware of the fact that he has repressed a certain emotion or feeling, and of how this is active in his unconscious and causes the hysterical symptoms that are obvious to everyone save the patient himself. The analyst, therefore, uses all the customary techniques to uncover the repressed emotion, so that the patient will become aware of it, and literally sense it to be alive within him. (The mere knowledge on his part that he is likely to harbor a hidden emotion is not enough by itself.) At that point the analyst must aid the patient in finding the proper means of responding to the emotion in a rational manner. As soon as that happens the hysterical symptom will no longer serve any useful function and it will disappear.
\nThis does not mean that the successful resolution of an hysterical symptom (e.g., blindness, paralysis, or the like) guarantees there will be no recurrence. In fact, recurrences are likely because it is very difficult to effect such a change in the personality structure of the person with an hysterical neurosis so that he will never again resort to repression as a way of dealing with certain emotional stress. As I mentioned before, these persons are usually of low normal, or below normal intelligence, and deficient in introspective power. For these reasons they do not lend themselves to fundamental personality modifications necessary to prevent future recurrences of hysterical symptoms.
\nTherefore, the best thing nonprofessionals can do for persons with such symptoms as I described earlier is to refer them to a psychoanalyst.
\nThe same is not true when it comes to advising persons with obsessive-compulsive repression. These persons should not be referred to psychoanalysts, but to those psychiatrists who are in agreement that it is not the superego, but rather an assertive emotion(s)\u2014fear and\/or energy\u2014which is responsible for the neurotic repression. This distinction makes a fundamental difference in the therapy of persons with obsessive-compulsive repression. These persons are intellectually so aware of the life they lead, so busily occupied with their own emotional experiences, and so intensely concerned with either controlling their emotional stirrings or avoiding whatever might stimulate feared emotions, that the complete unawareness and absolute autonomy of their symptoms, so typical in persons with an hysterical neurosis, is an impossibility.
\nThe essential feature of obsessive-compulsive repression is the forceful repression of an emotion by another emotion\u2014fear and\/or energy\u2014stimulated as they are by a misinformed intellect. From a therapeutic point of view, therefore, it does not make sense deliberately, through analytic probing, to bring more repressed material into the patient\u2019s consciousness. If one were to do this without simultaneously alleviating the repressing emotion(s), one would merely intensify the repressive process and make the illness worse.
\nIn these persons the therapy must be directed first of all at reducing the repressing emotions to a more normal intensity, namely, diminishing the fear or curtailing the excessive energy. By doing this the repression will lose its force and the repressed emotions will gradually emerge by themselves into consciousness, where they can find adequate release under normal rational control.
\nI have decided that a full discussion of this therapeutic process as far as sexual repression is concerned cannot be included in this book. Its closely associated moral aspects make the resolving of repressed sexual feelings a most delicate procedure. Its presentation would require a lengthier and more scholarly discussion than is possible in the scope of this book. However, a full expos\u00e9 of this topic will be included in Psychic Wholeness and Healing, especially the effect of neurotic repression on the freedom of the will.
\nI want to refer professionals and persons actively engaged in the ministry of inner healing to that book. It will give theologians, spiritual directors, ministers, and qualified religious men and women in pastoral work a thorough understanding of the pertinent psychological and psychiatric aspects of the therapy of obsessive-compulsive repression, which will enable them to provide the psychiatrist and patient with sound advice concerning the moral aspects of the patient\u2019s behavior during therapy.
\nChristians suffering from scrupulosity and other forms of obsessive-compulsive repression can rest assured that our particular interpretation of the repressive process, and our principles of its therapeutic resolution, are morally responsible and psychiatrically effective. Whether the same is true for the therapy of the Freudian psychoanalyst and the behavioral psychologist is something that cannot be claimed categorically. I assume that the individual Christian analyst or behaviorist would always take pains to refrain from giving advice that is in conflict with the moral laws. However, most Christian readers familiar with the extremely liberal positions in matters of sexual behavior advocated by \u201cmental health\u201d experts and certain theologians in our day will realize the need for a careful investigation of the therapist.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q I am somewhat disappointed that you cannot discuss here the therapy of sexual repression because of its delicate nature. Does the same hold true for the treatment of the repression of anger?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A No. I shall be happy to outline the salient points in the treatment of persons who have repressed their angry feelings. By my doing this you will also learn the essential approach in the treatment of sexual repression. But for the answers to the questions that may form in your mind about the moral aspects of teaching a person to stop repressing his sexual feelings, you will have to turn to Psychic Wholeness and Healing.
\nThe person who from early life was made to repress his feelings of anger must learn first of all to rid himself from the notion that it is bad for him to feel this emotion. If moral teachings about the actual or potential sinfulness of anger were the reason that the person as a child became fearful of anger, or driven to overcome his angry feelings, then these teachings must be ignored. This usually requires that the person understands the goodness of anger as an emotional tool given to us by God as an intrinsic part of our human nature for a positive purpose. He should have a good grasp of all I have written here about man\u2019s emotional life, and about anger in particular. Then without condemning or blaming his religious beliefs or religion itself, he must substitute: \u201cI may feel angry\u201d for \u201cI must never feel angry\u201d or \u201cI\u2019m afraid to be angry.\u201d This is an internal process of continued and repeated assurance that there is nothing to be afraid of, and that it is all right, in fact, desirable and necessary, to feel anger whenever one is exposed to situations that provoke this emotion. This process can be accelerated with the use of self-help tapes available from the author.
\nThis process of inward reassurance is aimed at mortifying one\u2019s irrational fear of anger or one\u2019s being emotionally driven to overcome it. It does not call for any external action by the person. In fact, he should avoid doing or saying anything for the purpose of expressing his anger, until he feels quite comfortable and at ease whenever he feels angry, irritated, annoyed, mad, etc.
\nAs this process may well take weeks or months, it is important that one is patient and does not attempt to speed up the recovery process, by expressing one\u2019s anger or asserting oneself prematurely (i.e., before all vestiges of fear or energy or feelings of guilt in response to feeling anger have disappeared). The advice often given to the effect that \u201cYou are much too passive and nonassertive; I want you to start growing up and get mad when people step on you,\u201d should be ignored. To force oneself to do this, in order to please the person who gave that advice, only aggravates the neurotic process.
\nSometimes people have repressed their angry feelings so deeply for so many, many years that they have to start making a special effort to identify their feelings of irritation or anger. They may have to be like Sherlock Holmes for a while, looking for clues as to what they may be feeling, or even asking themselves, \u201cAm I feeling anything at all? I know so-and-so didn\u2019t treat me right, but what do I feel?\u201d Some have become masters at short-circuiting their feelings of irritation by \u201cthinking them away\u201d at the very first stirrings. For instance, as soon as they begin to feel irritated when someone lights up a cigarette in a nonsmoking area, they will think of an excuse for that person\u2019s behavior (e.g., \u201cHe probably didn\u2019t see the sign, or he really needs it; besides it won\u2019t be long before he puts it out; I\u2019d probably do the same thing if I were he,\u201d etc.). These are all rationalizations aimed at not having to admit to one\u2019s feelings of annoyance or anger.
\nOr they may have reinforced their repression of anger by always saying, \u201cI shouldn\u2019t feel angry at such a small and insignificant thing; nobody else gets angry at such little things.\u201d Those persons must learn to accept and own every emotion whenever it is felt, without criticizing themselves for feeling it. It makes no sense at all to say, \u201cI should not feel this or that,\u201d or to others, \u201cYou shouldn\u2019t feel this way or that.\u201d
\nEven if you were the only person in the world to feel irritated, when someone, let us say, uses the word \u201cplease\u201d (to give a ridiculous example), neither you nor anyone else can criticize you for feeling that way. It may be very odd and inexplainable, but the word \u201cplease\u201d happens to stimulate in you the feeling of irritation. It may be necessary and advisable to find out why you feel that way, but it should not be done because you or others think, \u201cYou shouldn\u2019t feel that way.\u201d You feel it, and you may feel it. Then, when you accept that feeling of anger, you are free to do with it, and with the cause of the feeling, whatever you want. This you cannot do, however, if you respond with fear or energy; these emotions force you to repress the angry feelings and deprive you of the opportunity to deal with the cause of the feeling in a rational and sensible manner.
\nDuring this period of spotting, recognizing, accepting, and telling yourself over and over that it is all right to feel angry, and that you are grateful for feeling more and more comfortable with that feeling; of petitioning and thanking God for helping you to recognize His goodness in your feeling anger\u2014and all other emotions\u2014also practice calling a spade a spade. By this I mean, instead of using such expressions as \u201cI am so upset,\u201d or \u201cso hurt,\u201d say \u201cI am so angry,\u201d or \u201cmad.\u201d The use of the term \u201churt\u201d is particularly disabling and an obstacle to becoming emotionally aroused toward being capable of dealing effectively with the cause of the anger. Whether the user realizes it or not, the word \u201churt\u201d conjures up a visual image of being wounded, incapacitated, lying prostrate and helpless on the ground, waiting for the ambulance to come and the doctor to take care of him. He can\u2019t help himself; he is hurt and helpless.
\nIn sharp contrast is the effect of the use of the word \u201cangry\u201d or \u201cmad.\u201d The person who proclaims that he is angry visualizes himself standing up, ready to fight, if necessary, to protect himself and others. He is not helpless, but stimulated to do what is necessary.
\nThe foregoing is not intended to mean that \u201churt\u201d is synonymous with \u201canger.\u201d The noun \u201churt\u201d indicates an \u201cinjury\u2014blow or insult\u2014that causes bodily or mental pain.\u201d This mental pain is something like the feeling of grief, sorrow or sadness. However, when the hurt person reflects on the cause of the injury, he may well feel anger when, for instance, he realizes that someone he thought to be his good friend has offended him.
\nPersons with a neurotic disorder often skip this reflective process because they are not comfortable with their angry feelings. They remain \u201cstuck\u201d in the \u201churt\u201d phase. Because the humane emotions as such\u2014grief, sadness\u2014do not directly stimulate a person to move or act\u2014only to be moved\u2014he remains passive. Only when sadness is followed by the assertive emotion of anger do the adrenal glands secrete the necessary amount of adrenaline to move him to defend himself.
\nIn a mature, fully integrated person these two emotions\u2014one humane, the other assertive\u2014occur virtually simultaneously. We only have to look at Jesus to realize how true this is. When the Pharisees were watching Jesus to see whether He would cure a man with a withered arm on the Sabbath, Jesus asked them: \u201cIs it permitted to do good or to do evil on the Sabbath, to save life or to kill?\u201d When the Pharisees did not answer Him, Jesus began \u201clooking round at them with anger and sorrow at their obstinate stupidity,\u201d and He went ahead and restored the arm (Mark 3:1-6, NEB). The New American Bible reveals even more clearly the succession of the emotions felt by Jesus: \u201cHe looked around at them with anger, for he was deeply grieved that they had closed their minds against him.\u201d
\nOnce the person has been desensitized against repressing his anger by means of fear or energy, and is reasonably comfortable when his anger is aroused, then and only then is he ready to experiment with actions aimed at dealing with the source of his anger.
\nBeing inexperienced he must expect to make mistakes and be willing to learn from them. He must not demand instant perfection on the road toward learning mature, reasonable, sensible and, above all, effective responses to anger-provoking situations and people. He is to remember that it normally takes the first eighteen years of a person\u2019s life to learn what responses to feeling angry are the best in this or that situation, depending on who or what is involved, and what is at stake.
\nNot that it will take the adult as long a period, but quick, spontaneous, direct responses take some time to learn. As he is already physically and intellectually grown up, he will learn much quicker than the still-growing child and adolescent, provided, of course, he has the courage to \u201clive dangerously,\u201d to take risks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q What about the person who has repressed his angry feelings, not because of incorrect or untimely teachings, but because he was often traumatized by the irrational, angry outbursts of his parents, and their undeserved beatings and punishments?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Here the situation is a little different. Some of these persons decide at an early age never to hurt others as they have been hurt by their parents, and learn to suppress their angry feelings. They are aware of the anger they feel but will not express it, in the belief that anger is always and solely associated with harming others. They must be taught that there are many other ways of responding to their angry feelings, ways that are not harmful, are socially acceptable, and above all Christian, in the sense that they can provide the offending person with opportunities to treat them better in the future.
\nIf they hold their anger inside, in time not only will they suffer the effects of growing resentments, but they also will deprive the anger-provoking person of learning that he has offended or treated them unjustly. They deprive that person of the opportunity to make amends, apologize or mend his ways and treat others in a more Christian and loving way in the future.
\nA brief explanation of the difference between \u201crepression\u201d and \u201csuppression\u201d will make it clear why it is easier for persons who have suppressed their anger to be healed, than for those who have repressed it. Repression is a subconscious process and the person is often not aware of what is going on regarding his feeling of anger.
\nSuppression is a conscious process. The person knows that he feels anger but decides, for the wrong reasons, not to express it. For example, he may believe that it is always immature to show anger, or that anger never gets you anywhere. This belief prevents his anger from being guided by reason (e.g., \u201cIn this particular situation it would be stupid to become angry, because my boss is in such a bad mood that he\u2019d fire me on the spot. I\u2019ll wait for another opportunity to deal with the cause of my anger\u201d). However, because the suppressing person knows what he does, he is often helped more readily than the repressing person who first must learn to mortify his repressing feeling of fear and\/or energy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Does the foregoing also apply to unaffirmed people who refrain from becoming angry?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A No. The situation is different with them. You already know that unaffirmed people usually do not deal with their assertive feelings as they should, because they consider the showing of their anger as a threat to their intense need to be loved. These persons must be helped in a way that differs from that for persons with repressive disorders. Of course, if a person has both types of disorders, both treatments must and can be offered simultaneously.
\nLet me describe the principles of helping an unaffirmed person to use his feelings of anger to his advantage.
\n\u201cPure\u201d unaffirmed people are not afraid of their emotions. They were never made to repress them. If they do not \u201cexpress\u201d certain feelings, like hate and anger, it is because they are afraid this would \u201cturn off\u201d other people whose love they like to receive or fear to lose. Once they lose this fear, they begin to make better use of their feelings of anger. In other words, nothing special has to be done to help the unaffirmed person with his feeling of anger. All that is needed is that he receives authentic affirmation. This will allow the heart of his entire emotional life to grow to the level of the adult.
\nWhile this growth takes place, the person will benefit from learning more about the function and purpose of anger as an emotion, and how its discreet \u201chandling\u201d can, in fact, speed up the process of feeling secure with others. He certainly should learn that anger does not need to be expressed as anger, as angry, heated words or violent action. In fact, in the truly adult world there are many better ways of reacting to one\u2019s angry feelings, ways that hold the promise of greater effectiveness in dealing with the cause of one\u2019s angry feelings:
\nA polite remark that one does not care to be treated in a certain way; a quiet hint that one expects an apology for having been offended; a question as to why the other acted as he did even though he knew it would cause one to feel angry; a firm communication that one does not expect to be treated the same way ever again; an announcement that one will take up the anger-producing situation at a more suitable time (to regain one\u2019s composure or not to involve others, etc.).
\nThese and many, many other reactions are usually much more effective than the reactions uppermost in the minds of many in association with \u201cexpressing one\u2019s anger,\u201d or \u201cgetting angry\u201d: yelling, cursing, hitting, physical abuse, breaking things. For this reason I prefer to speak of \u201cresponding to one\u2019s feeling of anger\u201d instead of \u201cexpressing one\u2019s anger.\u201d In the truly adult person, anger is rarely expressed as the fore-mentioned extremes of anger, but as reasonable responses dealing as directly and effectively as possible with the anger-provoking person and his words or actions.
\nIf an unaffirmed person has never learned to do this, he must start later in life, be patient with himself, and allow himself sufficient time to become more adept and effective in a process that requires multiple and varied experiences in different situations and with different people. He will discover that the mature ways of dealing with his anger are more pleasing to others than his accommodating, \u201cnice\u201d ways, and much more likely to lead to friendships, love and respect.
\nLet me add some more pointers to facilitate the process of integrating the feeling of anger in your total personality.
\nYou will know when the process is more or less complete when you have no further need to speak of \u201chandling your anger\u201d or \u201cdealing with your anger.\u201d After all, we do not apply the same terms to our legs and fingers, the other tools God has given us as part of our nature. Once we have learned to use them and no longer stumble and fall, or clumsily drop things from our hands, we use them automatically. If we were to start \u201cdealing with them\u201d and give particular attention to the way we put one foot in front of the other, we would stumble and fall, because this interferes with the natural process of walking. That is our goal in integrating our angry feelings, and all our emotions: to feel and respond to them in a natural, appropriate and spontaneous manner.
\nYou will recall that I said earlier that in the matter of emotions, \u201cIt is all or nothing,\u201d (i.e., when you repress one emotion, the others will suffer the same fate\u2014though to a lesser degree).
\nTherefore, the person who has always repressed or suppressed anger must aid his other emotions to become more a part of him. For a while he must make it a point to be more sensitive to his feelings of love of the beauty of nature, of desire to be in the company of a good friend, of joy when listening to soul-stirring music, of compassion when visiting a sick relative in the hospital, of kindness for a little child, of gentleness with a beggar, of affection with spouse and children, of sadness when hearing bad news, and so on.
\nAnd even when the bodily feelings have suffered in the years of repression, then he must also gradually cultivate his awareness of and responsiveness to his bodily sensations, in a spirit of appreciation and gratitude to God for having provided him with taste buds, a sense of smell, tactile sense organs, and the like. Those senses, too, contribute to his joy of life provided those sense organs are adequately developed and are gratified insofar as this is reasonable according to the laws of nature and God.
\nAs long as there is too much talk about emotions and feelings, there is not yet enough experiencing of them comfortably and spontaneously. It indicates that the person who \u201ctalks\u201d emotions still has a way to go to feel them and make them his own. This is also true for those who use the word \u201caffirmation\u201d all the time, whether in conversation, in relating to others, or in training or treatment groups. This, of course, is already clear from what I have said about the difference between affirmation as a method, and affirming living.
\nFinally, there has to be an increasing amount of sharing of emotions in the process of learning to be a healthy \u201cemotional,\u201d sensitive, feeling person. Generally, this sharing of emotions can begin sooner with the nonassertive emotions, than with the emotions of anger, irritation, annoyance, hate and dislike. This sharing, too, must be regulated and directed by the laws of gradualness, human nature, and divine laws. This is particularly important for the feelings which are so easily abused because of their pleasurable aspects: the sexual feelings and the desires for food and drink.
\n\u201cThe more necessary something is, the more the order of reason must be preserved in it,\u201d is a particularly apt quotation in reference to the sex drive. For the very reason that sexual power is so necessary for the survival of the race, and the desire for food and drink for good health, they need the preserving and defending order of reason. This needs no further explanation in a society which presents such ample evidence of what happens when this fundamental truth is denied and ignored.
\nIn conclusion, a few helpful maxims:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1. Being honest and spontaneous with all your emotions and feelings, under the ready, natural guidance of a well-informed reason and a well-oriented will, perfects the relationship with yourself, others and God. A well-developed emotional life is indispensable to a satisfying, fruitful spiritual life.\n2. If your new, mature ways of responding to your angry feelings cause you to lose a friend, then your friendship with that person was not a true friendship, but a state of neurotic dependency. Sharing your true feelings, also those of anger, in mature ways never kills love and friendship. It deepens and strengthens a basically healthy relationship.\n3. The advice of \u201cforgive and forget\u201d is good. The complaint of many people that it \u201cdoesn\u2019t seem to work for them\u201d is evidence that it requires special clarification in the light of what I have said about the nature of our emotions in general, and the emotion of anger in particular.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nQ Dr. Baars, I am particularly interested in healing through prayer. Would your discussion of the need for forgiveness be a good time to touch on this topic? More and more people are resorting to prayer for their need to be healed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Yes, it would. The spiritual aspects of psychological healing constitute an essential part of any discussion on healing. I am most impressed by what I have observed and learned in my contact with leaders in Christian renewal and prayer movements. It is to be hoped that more professionals in the fields of medicine, surgery and psychiatry become open to how faith and prayer can contribute to their specialties. They may be hesitant to do this because of the fact that the Catholic Charismatic Renewal and Protestant Pentecostal movements seem to have attracted so many people with emotional afflictions. However, this phenomenon, resulting from the therapeutic failures of the young specialty of psychiatry, should not be a deterrent, but rather an invitation to the professions, to investigate with impartiality how the teachings of Christ can complement and perfect its secular concepts and work on behalf of the sick.
\nI want to conclude this analysis of the topic of anger with a discussion of forgiveness. Following this I want to add a few remarks about certain aspects of healing through prayer.
\nWhen do we forgive the person whose offensive behavior\u2014his betrayal, his manipulations, his taking advantage of us\u2014has aroused our anger and resentment? The answer to this question is provided by what I have said about the function of anger and all other emotions. Our anger arouses us to respond in the most effective way to the anger-provoking situation. We must first explore and apply every reasonable way to defend ourselves, to be reconciled, to obtain justice, to convince the offending person that he needs to correct his wrongdoing, that he must make restitution. For that God gave us the psychic motor of anger, and the \u201csteering mechanism\u201d of reason and will.
\nWhen everything reasonable has failed to give us our just due, and we cannot but continue to feel anger and resentment, the time has come to consider the solemn deed of forgiveness. Only then, and not before. For in this matter it is equally true that:
\n\u201cThere is an appointed time for everything, and a time for every affair under the heavens\u201d (Eccles. 3:1).
\nThere is a time to forgive, and a time not to forgive.
\nThe reason I can say this is because some people harm themselves by \u201cpremature forgiveness,\u201d which is detrimental to their psyche, even when moved by the holiest of intentions. Some people forgive prematurely in order not to have to face their feeling of anger. Being accustomed to repression of what is for them an unacceptable emotion, there is nothing left for them\u2014when possessed of good will and a desire to obey God\u2019s laws\u2014but to forgive. But these are precisely the persons who will complain that they cannot forget even though they have forgiven. They then usually blame themselves for the persisting feelings of anger and resentment which in turn keep the memories alive of the injustices and offenses committed against them.
\nThe \u201cpremature forgivers\u201d will often accuse themselves of not having \u201creally\u201d forgiven the offender, of not having been sincere, of being bad Christians. They become confused and bewildered because for them the maxim \u201cto forgive is to forget\u201d does not apply. Some extend this idea to God and assume that He, too, does not forget their sins, even though He has indeed forgiven them. What is caused by a psychological malfunction, namely premature forgiving, is interpreted in moral terms, and leads to self-condemnation, guilt feelings, weakening of faith in God. The dangers of depression and despair are ever present, as well as the other consequences inherent in a neurotic way of living.
\nBy erring to the other extremes, that is by refusal to forgive, or not forgiving out of ignorance in this matter, a person will suffer equally untoward consequences. His feelings of anger and resentment, if not bitterness, will grow in intensity and thus increasingly affect his psychic and physical states. It provides the fertile soil in which a psychosomatic disorder can take root, as well as for preoccupation with revenge and self-pity which interfere with one\u2019s daily duties, recreation, prayer life, and the joy of living.
\nThe one and only thing that can prevent these adverse developments is the timely act of one\u2019s will, namely forgiveness. I am convinced that when Jesus taught us to pray the Our Father, He had in mind our psychological well-being as much as our spiritual wholeness. He knew that every one of us would repeatedly be in situations in which he had \u201cevery right\u201d to feel anger and resentment as natural reactions to ill treatment by others. Wanting us to be happy even in those circumstances, He gave us\u2014in addition to reason and common sense to be used for the purpose of defense and attainment of justice\u2014the ultimate \u201ctool,\u201d so to speak, to be saved from the consequences of chronic, unresolved anger and resentment. That particular \u201ctool,\u201d of course, is the act of forgiving.
\nThis wonderful self-help \u201ctechnique\u201d must be employed in the correct way because it is a special gift of Jesus to us; it must be put to work with His help and participation. As it is an act of the will, and not a matter of feeling, it is done, ideally, only once for one particular offense by one particular person. (Special circumstances may make it necessary, of course, to forgive more than one person, even many, at one time.)
\nAs our emotions, in this case our anger, usually do not immediately \u201cknow\u201d what has taken place on the intellectual and spiritual level, they will make themselves felt again after one has forgiven. We still feel resentment even after one has forgiven! This is not proof that we were not sincere when we forgave that person, and asked Jesus to forgive him, too. It is the result of the imperfection of our being in the state of original sin. Our nature lacks the complete unity and wholeness that it possessed originally before the Fall. To the extent and degree that this unity is incomplete we will experience for a while a resurgence of our anger and resentment after we have forgiven. This will be true more so in persons with neurotic disorders than in fully affirmed and mature persons.
\nWhen this happens we can accelerate the ultimate quieting of these feelings by asking the Lord to bless that person whom we have and He has forgiven. A short prayer to that effect, while visualizing that person as our brother or sister in Christ and loved by Him, said each time our resentment makes itself felt, will assure the ultimate disappearance of our anger and resentment. The memory of what has happened will no longer disturb us because the Lord has healed us of its pain. Christ, the Healer, has done what no psychiatrist or psychologist can do under those circumstances. No drug, no electroshock treatment, no advice to \u201cforget it; there is nothing you can do about it at this late date,\u201d can undo or eliminate traumas of this sort. The Christian therapist knows this and aids his patients who have chronic resentments and psychosomatic afflictions by familiarizing them with the therapeutic instrument of forgiveness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q I appreciate this way of interrelating the psychological and spiritual aspects of our nature. It has obvious practical application that should appeal to every therapist. Can you expand a little more about the healing aspects of the Charismatic and Pentecostal movements in our society?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A \u201cA little\u201d is all that space will permit here. The subject matter is too vast to do it justice here. Suffice it to say that there are significant things happening among Christians who work at renewing the Church and the lives of the people of God.
\nWhat attracted me most to the Charismatic Renewal was the absence of the fear of the Lord, and the joy the members felt and manifested in sharing their prayer life together in Jesus. Their hunger for the Word of God and their openness to guidance by the Holy Spirit often have a remarkable effect on their personal lives. There is a greater spontaneity and sharing of feelings among most charismatics that, not surprisingly, scare off the uninitiated, especially the older generations who were raised in a reserved atmosphere, leading them to distrust man\u2019s sensory emotional experiences.
\nBecause there are so many persons with emotional difficulties among charismatics there exists a tendency for unrealistic expectations for healing of these sufferings. No doubt this is somewhat aggravated by the numerous instantaneous healings of physical illnesses that are reported from all over the world. Reports of healing of inoperable cancers, incurable diseases, severe injuries, congenital defects and mental retardation are not infrequent and testify to the infinite power of God\u2019s healing love for us.
\nAlthough there are claims of similar healings of emotionally and mentally ill people occurring within a very short span of time, I doubt that this occurs very frequently. In my experience the healing of the emotionally ill person takes place gradually and in stages. In my opinion, this is the more gentle and loving way for God to deal with His afflicted children.
\nA person who has been the victim of a neurotic disorder since childhood would be at a loss as to how to live in a healthy manner if the Holy Spirit suddenly were to heal his disorder. His lack of experience would be a formidable obstacle. If he were to be surrounded by emotionally full-grown and integrated friends and relatives it might be possible. But as conditions in society are now, the suddenly mature person would have considerable difficulty in convincing others that his way, not theirs, was the truly healthy, normal way of life.
\nWhat I do observe frequently, and what I believe is the experience of all prayerful people engaged in inner healing through prayer, is that the Lord heals in stages. He proceeds with healing from one traumatic memory to the next as they are offered to Him for healing in prayer. Or He heals them according to His own wisdom, without direction from the suffering person or his therapist.
\nIn that way there is time for the sufferer to gradually grow emotionally and to adjust to the social and moral demands and obligations associated with a more healthy personality. His friends and relatives in turn have time to adjust to his new way of being in the world, and to learn from him and his newly gained insights and experiences.
\nIn general I would advise those engaged in the healing of memories to de-emphasize effectivity in prayer. By this I mean that they should be less doing-oriented, less reliant on techniques of prayer, being less directive in constructing images of past traumatic scenes to be entered in this or that way by Jesus. Too many prayerful and spiritually gifted people seem to be interested in becoming therapists and counselors and rely more on psychological techniques, than on the one, primary gift essential in all healing prayer: compassion for the sufferer.
\nIt is the affectivity of the heart, one\u2019s compassion, that is the primary quality the Lord responds to and uses in His compassionate healing. Time and time again, the healings Jesus did in His lifetime followed directly upon His being moved to tears, with compassion and with the deepest emotions. He used no methods or techniques of psychodrama or positive imagination. Agnes Sanford said that no healings occur without compassion on the part of the person who prays with another. What I said earlier about the difference between authentic affirming living and pseudo-affirmation applies with equal force to the difference between compassionate healing and techniques of healing through prayer.
\nThis is not to say that the one who prays should not be familiar with psychological and emotional matters as I have described in this book. On the contrary, a sound knowledge of these matters will enable him to quickly grasp the psychological nature of a person\u2019s afflictions and their relationship to his spiritual life. These insights will do two things for him. First, they will deepen his compassion for the other and his suffering, and second, they will facilitate his choosing the correct order and timing of praying for the different memories in need of healing.
\nMan\u2019s affectivity, I have indicated before, is always in danger of being stifled by his effectivity. This holds equally true in the area of healing prayer. This precious, but fragile, possession must be protected at all times against the onslaught of our easily stimulated effectivity, which always threatens to put man in the center of the healing \u201cmovement,\u201d rather than God who uses our enlightened compassion for our suffering fellow human beings.
\nIn this connection, I want to remind persons engaged in the ministry of inner healing that they must never probe for hurts and painful memories. They must be respectful of the need for privacy and not put a person under pressure to reveal himself against his will. They should always keep in mind that it is not important for a therapist or healer to know everything about a sick or distressed person. What is important and therapeutic is that the latter trusts him enough, and feels really confident enough, to share certain intimate and private areas of his life voluntarily.
\nA final word concerns the need for a better understanding of man\u2019s emotional life among charismatics. They have been affected adversely by the substitution in our language of the word \u201cfeel\u201d for \u201cthink, believe, know,\u201d etc. They too do not always know the difference between feeling and knowing, and are confused as to the origin of their beliefs and attitudes. It seems plausible that their often observed fear of making judgments, and excessive reliance on inspiration by the Holy Spirit in making even the simplest decisions, is related to this confusion.
\nIt seems more logical to assume that the Holy Spirit wants charismatics to use all the God-given tools and faculties of their nature, rather than substitute the inspiration of the Holy Spirit for them. Besides, what faculties would be left under those conditions to determine what is from the person himself, and what from the Holy Spirit?
\nI am glad to see a gradual change for the better in the attitudes of charismatics and their understanding of human emotions. There is some better teaching on this topic, though there is still quite a way to go before this will become universal throughout the Charismatic Renewal. I base my comments on teachings originating in what is generally considered to be the center of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal in North America, and made available on cassette tapes.
\nWhile the basic attitude toward our emotions presented in this series is sound, the subject is \u201cspiritualized\u201d too quickly. The author, a well-known pastoral leader, cautions against misreading the Scriptures which in the past has created an unnecessarily fearful and suspicious attitude toward our emotions. There are still obvious traces of this attitude of old in this presentation. \u201cWhen we surrender ourselves to the Lord, it sets us free over our desires and emotions\u201d suggests that they are not so desirable after all. So does the statement: \u201cTo crucify the flesh and its passions happens when we belong to Jesus.\u201d They appear to contradict the opening remarks that emotions are not our enemies (like a tiger in the basement). The tapes contain good teachings on humility and guilt, yet they have relatively little to do with emotions as such. Statements like: \u201cWrong feelings are temptations,\u201d \u201cWe must learn how to handle anger,\u201d \u201cFear of the Lord is a good form of fear, a high form of fear,\u201d detract from the overall value of the series. Nevertheless, these cassettes constitute a good beginning and can be a valuable help in association with a more complete treatise on human emotions.
\nThe main obstacle I have encountered in the therapy of depressed persons\u2014more in fundamentalists than in Protestants and Catholics in general\u2014is the firm belief that anger is a sin. Not long ago a married woman in her late thirties sought treatment for a severe and disabling depression. It had developed insidiously a year earlier not long after she had become a \u201cborn-again Christian.\u201d She had been raised without religion. For the six months before her visit she had slept twelve to sixteen hours a day, and in her waking hours she ate constantly and had become grossly overweight. On her fourth visit she said, \u201cDr. Baars, I hope you don\u2019t mind my saying this, but I have to have complete confidence in you, if I am to do what you tell me. Everything you have said so far about anger makes sense to me, but for me the final word in everything lies in the Bible. It contains many passages that contradict what you have said about the goodness of anger. I have also read several books by good Christians who clearly state that anger is a sin, and that we must rid ourselves of it. Now I am confused and don\u2019t know what to do.\u201d
\nI explained to her my concepts about anger in the light of what is recorded in the Scriptures. Most of this is contained in the pages of this book. When she understood that there was no real contradiction, she dared to begin to follow my advice. Her depression lifted in a relatively short time and she became again the reasonably assertive woman she had always been. Her pseudo-neurotic depression had been precipitated as the result of her resolute decision to lead the Christian life and follow its teachings to the letter. Instead of joy, however, it had brought her grief. Without a spiritually oriented therapy, her depression would have deepened in spite of medication, and the risk of eventual suicide would have become considerable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q From time to time one hears about the need for deliverance and exorcism in people with emotional and mental illness. Does this mean that these illnesses can be caused by evil spirits?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A There was a time when I, not unlike most professionals in the human sciences, would have scoffed at such a possibility, if it had occurred to me at all. It is not that I have ever lacked belief in the existence of Satan and other evil spirits; there is simply too much evidence in the Scriptures to deny their existence. However, I had always considered all forms of psychological illness to be the result of natural causes, so it did not occur to me to give any thought to the likelihood of supernatural forces being involved in the genesis of psychological illness.
\nHowever, having witnessed a fair number of deliverances during the past five or six years, I no longer doubt that evil spirits can play some role in the cause or aggravation of psychological disorders, and can exercise an obstructive force to effective therapy. This is not to say that I agree with those persons who hold that evil spirits are responsible for all or nearly all such disorders. There simply is no evidence to support such a contention. It lacks as much proof as the contention of others who categorically disclaim the involvement of evil spirits in any and all psychological and physical disorders.
\nBecause of the fact that the truth always lies in the middle, every professional must keep in mind the possibility, if not the probability, of evil spirits exerting influence on the psyche whenever a person comes to him for treatment of an emotional or mental illness. At present the diagnosis of a spirit-caused illness must be made largely by exclusion, by the unresponsiveness to all known forms of therapy, and the historical information suggesting introduction and activity of evil forces in the life of the patient or his ancestors. However, once the deliverance process has begun, the presence of evil forces always manifests itself in unmistakable clinical signs and behavior. It is to be hoped that this subject will become the object of serious research by Christian professionals and ministers. Early differentiation and recognition of supernatural forces involving persons with psychological afflictions will make it possible to institute proper approaches to the healing process, thereby shortening the duration of the illness.
\nOf more immediate relevance to the topic of this book is the observation that many Catholic Charismatics and Protestant Pentecostals are inclined to consider certain human emotions as evil, because in the process of deliverance spirits often identify themselves as \u201canger,\u201d \u201clust,\u201d \u201cdespair,\u201d \u201chate,\u201d and so on. On lecturing to fundamentalists and Full Gospel Business Men\u2019s Fellowship meetings, I am often asked how I can consider fear a good emotion in view of Jesus\u2019 repeated admonitions to not be afraid, to \u201chave no fear.\u201d While the answer to this and similar questions\u2014which I like to call in a spirit of friendship, \u201cBible Bullets\u201d\u2014is obvious, the identification of evil spirits with names of emotions demands some reflection.
\nSince Satan is the father of lies, and his evil spirits cannot be expected to be any better than he is, it seems to me that they are not particularly interested in making sure that we are told the truth. In fact, it would be to their advantage to make us believe that our God-given emotions are actually evil, instead of good and necessary parts of our nature. Apart from the observation that in deliverance we are not always sure whether it is a spirit who speaks when asked to identify himself, or the person himself who lives in the belief that he is an evil person (e.g., because he entertains feelings of anger), it seems reasonable to assume that the spirit would answer with a single word, rather than with what seems to me would be a more accurate description, like \u201crepressed anger that is beyond control by reason and will.\u201d
\nSome years ago I became the \u201cvictim\u201d of such a spirit in one of my patients, a woman religious with severe obsessive-compulsive repression and emotional deprivation disorder. In our therapy sessions this woman developed an uncanny ability to arouse my anger. This, of course, is not too uncommon, but what concerned me was my inability to control it. This had never happened before, or since, but in this case session after session ended with a loud exchange of angry remarks and the patient storming out of the room in tears.
\nFinally, after weeks of my wondering what was happening, and why I could not handle my anger in a calm, professional manner, the sister expressed her own concern with this development in what was once a consistently pleasant, friendly physician-patient relationship. She told me she liked and respected me greatly and had no reason to be angry with me, but she knew exactly what to do or say that would make me lose my temper. It seemed, she added, that there was something in her that made her do or say those things.
\nWith her permission, I consulted Francis MacNutt, who was very familiar with deliverance and healing, who happened to visit me around that time. On his recommendation, we prayed over my patient for deliverance. She was indeed delivered of several spirits that left her quietly and without much objection. None of them identified themselves, nor were they instructed to do so, but if one of them had, I am certain it would have used the word \u201canger.\u201d There was a dramatic change in the patient\u2019s behavior and appearance from then on. Never again did her words or facial expression reveal any feeling of anger or hate toward me. The therapy sessions regained their calm.
\nFor the benefit of professionals not familiar with the spiritual aspects of healing, I shall conclude this chapter with an account of a most unusual healing. It merits attention because of its excellent clinical documentation, thorough testing, and several years of follow-up by professionals of a scientific rather than a \u201cbelieving\u201d bent. It involves a psychological disorder that resists all efforts at treatment through psychotherapy.
\nAt the age of twenty-one a transsexual with a \u201cnormal male chromosomal pattern, without psychosis, defective judgement or abnormal affect\u201d was fully prepared for sex-reassignment surgery. With facial hair removed by electrolysis, breast enlargement by means of estrogen, and first name change from John to Judy, he was passing well as a female. He had cross-dressed since the age of four. As a favor to a friend of his, he visited, on his way to the clinic to undergo surgery, a \u201cphysician of a fundamentalist Protestant religion foreign to his own, nonpracticing Baptist background.\u201d Following a total physical exam he was told that \u201chis real problem was possession by evil spirits.\u201d
\nAfter some discussion of this, there followed a \u201ctwo to three hour session involving exhortations and prayers by the physician and laying on of hands on John\u2019s head and shoulders.\u201d With several faintings during this period \u201ctwenty-two evil spirits were exorcised which the physician called by name as they left John\u2019s body. During and after this session he felt waves of God\u2019s love coming over him but was physically drained.\u201d The physician wrote to the reporting professionals that he \u201cshowed John that his life was a fake and that Jesus could redeem him and that a standard prescription of Scripture readings caused the spirit of the woman in John to disappear.\u201d
\nImmediately after the session John announced that he was a man, discarded his female clothing, and had his long hair cut into a short, masculine style. After two weeks he entertained some doubts about his conversion and again experienced some feminine feelings. He went to a very well known faith healer in another state, and after waiting two-and-a-half hours in line, the praying and laying on of hands began once again. During the next ten to fifteen minutes, \u201cJohn fainted, regained consciousness, fainted again, and, as he stood up to leave and join the audience, he realized that his breasts were gone.\u201d
\nJohn was followed for two-and-a-half years after the exorcism and \u201ctests of gender identity and gender role behavior showed a clear reversal of gender identity.\u201d He dated ten girls during the next two years, experienced some sexual arousal toward them, but never masturbated or considered sexual intercourse because of his religious beliefs. For the first several months he had some sexual thoughts of males, but attributed these to the devil. He was subsequently free of these homosexual thoughts for two years, and was looking forward to marriage.
\nThe authors concluded their report by stating, \u201cWhat cannot be denied, however, is that a patient who was very clearly a transsexual by the most conservative criteria, assumed a long-lasting masculine gender identity in a remarkably short period of time following an apparent exorcism.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Chapter 8<\/p>\n\n\n\n
ERRONEOUS GOINGS ON<\/p>\n\n\n\n
With the \u201cfeeling cult\u201d gaining in popularity we witness a growing movement to better the \u201cmental health\u201d of our population. Led by the psychiatric profession, financed and directed by many government agencies, this movement launched a popular auxiliary front of non-, near- and para-professionals rushing to the aid of their emotionally starved and disabled brothers and sisters.
\nWhile at present psychiatry finds itself in a crisis of credibility, the opposite is true of psychologism and pop-psychology, judging by the bookstores\u2019 shelves being packed to overflowing with self-help books, and the like. They purport to help people by teaching them the art of selfishness, to fight their fears, to look out for number one, to pursue loneliness, to create and actualize themselves, to hang loose while growing up absurd, to say \u201cno\u201d instead of \u201cyes,\u201d to learn the answers to all the questions they never dared to ask, to pull their own strings, to clarify their values, to have a sexual shakedown, to be effective parents, and on and on.
\nFor those who do not like to help themselves, but prefer to be helped by others, there is a great variety of gurus, facilitators, trainers, counselors, resource persons, behavior modifiers, instructors, and group directors, with or without academic credentials, who will show them how to touch and affirm, to scream and assert, to reveal and communicate, to sensitize and desensitize, to show and tell and share, in an abundance of workshops, encounter weekends, marathons or candle-lit meditation rooms.
\nWhatever good may be contained in these literary offerings and workshops toward the goal of warding off and preventing emotional repression and deprivation seems to be offset, to a greater or lesser degree, by forced provocation of feelings that do violence to the law of gradualness, by na\u00efve techniques and methods, incorrect psychological advice, lack of sensitivity, and new \u201cyou musts\u201d replacing old \u201cshould nots.\u201d One is reminded of the old saying, \u201cIn the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king.\u201d The psycho-babble of the Cyclops leads the blind to the fantasy island of \u201cmental health\u201d where they are to enjoy what no one has yet defined intelligibly.
\nIt is necessary to critically examine these varied overreactions to countless decades of warped ideas and moralistic attitudes toward our emotions and feelings. Their excesses, outright falsehoods and corrupt practices must be eliminated, in order that whatever is good and correct in these attempts to liberate people from their neurotic disorders will be more effective and beneficial. As our society is already showing evidence of contamination by new types of emotional afflictions as the result of these supposedly well-intentioned, but often bungling \u201ctherapies,\u201d the matter must be considered urgent.
\nThe preceding chapters provide sufficient data for the reader to draw his own conclusions about the extent and kinds of abuse in the area of \u201cmental health\u201d books and practices. Nevertheless, I would like to facilitate the reader\u2019s investigation of the good, the bad and the ugly of present-day psychologisms and prescriptions for instant gratification of feelings and desires. To present a complete survey, either of the pop-psychology literature, or the vast array of \u201cfeeling therapies,\u201d is out of the question. Nobody could possibly read all the self-help books or personally undergo all the \u201ctherapies.\u201d I shall limit myself to the areas and subjects about which I have received the largest number of inquiries from concerned individuals. When criticizing teachings or practices which, in my opinion, represent bad psychology, I shall do so without judgment of personalities or persons. I assume and respect their good will. If in this quick overview, I appear to be ignorant of important aspects of modern pop-psychology that have positive value, I would like to be so informed. I shall make use of it in future writings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Somehow I get the feeling\u2014or should I say impression or suspicion\u2014that you are critical of pop-psychology because it is advocated by lay people, rather than medical professionals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A I appreciate your honesty in sharing your impression. Be assured that I shall not hesitate to include in this critical analysis the ideas and practices of members of the medical, psychiatric and psychological professions as well. Already the impact on society of some of their sexual beliefs and practices is proving itself detrimental. As their \u201cnovel,\u201d if not sensational, ideas get easy press coverage in the communication media and on TV talk shows, while opposing views from other professionals are usually relegated to the back pages, their adverse influence grows more or less unchecked.
\nAn example of this development is Dr. David Reuben\u2019s philosophy that \u201cmaximum copulation frequence and maximum number of orgasms equal sexual fulfillment\u201d and its likely causal relationship to what I, and the majority of medical men and women, consider an unacceptable and novel practice among some members of our profession. I am referring to a peculiar outgrowth of the now popular delusion that sexual restraint is emotionally crippling and unfulfilling\u2014namely, erotic behavior by some doctors with their patients.
\nAccording to a 1973 survey, 92 out of 460 Southern California physicians believed that \u201cerotic activity between patient and physician, although they did not engage in it themselves, could be beneficial to the patient.\u201d Apparently their comments were directed at thirty-five or so Southern California physicians\u2014psychiatrists, general practitioners, internists, obstetricians and gynecologists, and surgeons\u2014who had sexual intercourse with their patients\u2014not in after-hours love affairs, but during office visits. In presenting the results of this survey, the authors stated that \u201cchanges in society, including the proliferation of therapies outside the profession, such as self-awareness, self-realization, sensual and erotic awareness, have their effect in stimulating patients and physicians.\u201d My own acquaintance with a few such professionals, including some psychologists, engaging in such practices with their clients supports the contention of one of these authors, \u201cto think, from a clinical standpoint, that one can do effective therapy in a dual relation is pure nonsense.\u201d
\nSimilar unethical goings on are reported to take place among psychologists. According to one survey 70 percent of 500 male psychotherapists knew patients or physicians who engaged in sexual relationships within the therapeutic setting. Some of them \u201crationalize\u201d their conduct by citing the work of Masters and Johnson of prescribing sex surrogate partners for therapeutic purposes! Quite a few were \u201cdepressed and found less and less meaning in their psychotherapeutic work.\u201d The psychologists reporting on the \u201cpoorly enforced sex ethics code of the American Psychological Association\u201d commented that \u201cmany psychotherapists are working through in their practices their own deprivations and deficient parent-child relationships.\u201d \u201cTheir motivation to become therapists, whether as Ph.D., MS.W., or M.D.\u2014is based upon a value system, i.e., ego gratification, monetary compensation, and power. Power and control have become very important elements in our society.\u201d
\nThese comments are most interesting and will remind the reader of what I have said earlier about self-affirming persons. (See Born Only Once.) These reports should alert the reader to the necessity of seeking not only professionally qualified therapists but also mature and affirmed individuals who have no need to affirm themselves at the expense of their clients.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q I am somewhat puzzled by your critical stance toward modern, liberating attitudes in sexual medicine and sex education in the schools. I read a book by several Catholic theologians who appear to support much of what you criticize and consider psychologically unhealthy. Should you not support what Catholic theologians are teaching?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A I can understand that you are puzzled by my contradicting what appears to be a large body of proponents of new approaches in \u201csexual health.\u201d Actually, it is impossible to say what percentage of educators, psychiatrists, psychologists, physicians, scientists and theologians are in favor of the new permissive and \u201canything goes\u201d attitudes toward sexual feelings and behavior. They receive most of the publicity in contrast to those who are considered old-fashioned, conservative and \u201cuptight.\u201d But it is not a matter of how many people are in favor of \u201cliberated sex\u201d and such. Basic principles, not polls, determine what is right and healthy.
\nFurthermore, your question seems to suggest that you believe I have an obligation to support all teachings of Catholic theologians. If so, you are mistaken. Catholic theologians are in the business of thinking and speculating about God, but cannot teach anything unless it is in conformity with the teachings of the magisterium. If you referred to the book Human Sexuality, you should know that what they write, suggest, and recommend in that book is certainly contrary to magisterial teaching. It is important for Christians to realize this, if they are to keep their balance in this world of ever changing, often contradictory, opinions and beliefs.
\nThe pastoral guidelines contained in Human Sexuality\u2014New Directions in American Catholic Thought\u2014are another example of how the feeling revolution has been able to sway, if not poison, thoughts and beliefs. In essence, these five authors, one of whom is apparently also a certified psychologist, hold that the morality of all sexual acts must be determined by \u201cthe principle of creative growth toward integration, i.e., the ability of sexual acts to foster the values of self-liberation, other-enrichment, honesty, fidelity, life-service, social responsibility, and joyousness.\u201d
\nWhat these authors have done, presumably in their concern to ease the sufferings of the large number of persons with neurotic disorders and emotionally deprived Christians, is to lower and dilute objective moral standards. They did so in the mistaken belief that the commandments and moral laws dealing with sexuality were and are responsible for this suffering, rather than the psychologically deficient ways and timing of presenting the truths of our faith to young people.
\nThus these authors, while frankly admitting that \u201cbroad consultation from recognized experts in the social and behavioral sciences provided only inconclusive data on the issues of human sexuality,\u201d revealed their ignorance of the fundamental distinction between neurotic repression and mature rational guidance of emotions. Yet it is precisely this crucial distinction which provides the key to the prevention and healing of emotional-spiritual afflictions. That this key is sound both morally and psychologically, the five theologians could have discovered for themselves, if they had studied man as man, with all his God-given faculties, and not merely as a behavioral response to environmental pressures.
\nAs the pastoral guidelines offered in the aforementioned book represent, in my opinion, nothing more than psycho-theological quicksand, Christian readers are warned not to follow them. Even if they were not to be morally culpable for adhering to those guidelines, because of the seeming authority of their source, they certainly would not escape serious psychological damage.
\nStill another example of the effect of the corrupt notion that emotions and feelings are of greater importance than thinking and knowing is the rapid deterioration of moral values and behavior in youth. Responsible for this modern indoctrination, directly or indirectly, in my opinion, are the teachings, programs and philosophies offered by Fletcher\u2019s Situation Ethics, Sidney Simon\u2019s Values Clarification, Lawrence Kohlberg\u2019s Cognitive Moral Development, SIECUS\u2019 Sex Education in Schools, and to a lesser extent Rev. Vincent Dwyer\u2019s Genesis II of more recent vintage. The common denominator of these modern teaching programs\u2014listed incompletely here\u2014is the awesome value placed on the process as over against the content of moral thinking and choosing values. The above process of so-called moral thinking is really moral feeling. What makes you feel good, fulfilled and satisfied, is the criterion of what is moral for you, and therefore must be accepted and respected by me and others.
\nThe moral absolutes and traditional values of Judaeo-Christian religions, unfortunately not always taught in times gone by with optimal respect for \u201cprocess,\u201d are being rejected with a vengeance in these modern teachings. The absolutes, taught by a God who is perceived by many as insensitive to our feelings, as demanding, authoritarian, coldly just, testing and scoring our weaknesses, are being thrown out and ignored. Now our feelings determine what is right and wrong, and it is how we feel relative to this or that course of action that counts. The tyranny of a feeling self replaces the tyranny of an unfeeling God.
\nGod no longer exists, or if He does, is irrelevant, while man is sovereign, a law unto himself, autonomous.
\nMan no longer can \u201cimpose\u201d his morality on others, as there is no moral law that holds true for all. Instead, man imposes his feelings on others, usually called \u201crights,\u201d against which there is no real objection possible. The old dictum, gustibus non est disputandum\u2014one cannot argue about tastes\u2014also holds true for feelings and emotions; they are beyond dispute, they are personal and unique. One can only reasonably argue about ideas and beliefs.
\nLikewise, my moral rights carry with them the corresponding obligations on the part of others to respect them. But this is not true for my emotional \u201crights\u201d or feelings. They might very well conflict directly with those of others. Which will win out can only be determined by force or power; or endless, fruitless, futile attempts to arrive at consensus; or the prolonged legal skirmishes of a society whose \u201cmorality is little more than a legalistic system.\u201d
\nThus \u201cmoral indoctrination\u201d is making way for \u201cprocess indoctrination,\u201d and is being justified and made palatable and attractive to thousands of teachers in both public and private schools by C.C.D. coordinators, high school guidance counselors, \u201csocial workers,\u201d \u201cmental health\u201d professionals, and the like, in our society. A brief outline of two such popular and widespread indoctrinations may be helpful for the uninitiated in understanding similar programs. They may also clarify to ordinary, nonprofessional people\u2014usually parents whose \u201conly\u201d gift is common sense and a heartfelt knowledge of truth\u2014why they often feel so frustrated and helpless in these changing times.
\nThese two popular programs of \u201cprocess indoctrination\u201d reveal how their thrust is to teach children to be suspicious of parental authority and values; to insist on their own preferences in all questions of behavior; to prefer comfort, security, instant gratification and survival above all else; and to reject any absolute standards of right and wrong, especially as presented and upheld by institutional churches and religions.
\nIn Sidney Simon\u2019s \u201cvalues clarification\u201d\u2014widely used in elementary and secondary public and private schools\u2014the children\u2019s growth, freedom and ethical maturity are promoted by helping them to know what they want, like and dislike. This is done by means of exercises or \u201cstrategies\u201d offering choices as to their emotional preferences. For example, a group of children will be presented with the strategy, \u201cWhat is the most religious thing to do on Sunday: (a) go to church to hear a good preacher; (b) listen to classical music on the radio; (c) have a big breakfast with the family?\u201d
\nThis and similar strategies offer severely limited and misleading options for conduct. As Simon holds that \u201cno one has the right set of values to pass on to other people\u2019s children,\u201d they are not advised of the importance of knowledgeable, well-informed, and conscientious judgment of moral issues. What matters to Simon is that they become clear about their desires and ways of self-gratification.
\nThis, of course, has a tremendous appeal to the growing number of youngsters in our society whose needs for authentic love and respect have been frustrated by unaffirmed and denying parents. With their starved emotional life these children are all too ready to devour any emotional food, unable as they are to distinguish junk food from health food, and unable to appreciate the higher caloric intellectual and spiritual foods.
\nThe more sophisticated ideas of Lawrence Kohlberg\u2019s six states of moral development exert their greatest influence on departments of psychology and philosophy and schools of education. Based on the work of Piaget, and certain cultural and anthropological studies, and developed at Harvard and the Center for Moral Education, Kohlberg\u2019s concepts can be summarized as follows:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1. Traditional moral education is undemocratic and unconstitutional.\n2. What is needed is a new psychology and philosophy that recognizes the child\u2019s right to freedom from indoctrination. The child must be seen by adults not as a pupil, but as a \u201cmoral philosopher in his own right.\u201d\n3. By means of exercises involving moral dilemmas and conflicts the child must develop through his \u201cSix stages of cognitive moral development.\u201d<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nWith the aid of a text containing twenty-one sexual conflicts and twenty-nine nonsexual ones, students are encouraged to argue and then vote in a democratic fashion, while the teacher remains \u201cimpartial, relaxes and enjoys it.\u201d
\nWhile Kohlberg\u2019s theory is supposed to provide an improved version of Simon\u2019s method\u2014the apex of morality, achieved in the sixth stage, is to treat every man impartially according to what is \u201cjustice\u201d or \u201cequality\u201d\u2014practice does not square with theory in Kohlberg\u2019s universe. As moral judgment to a very large extent involves assessing competing claims of individuals about their rights, their emotional wants, desires and preferences come to override reason, justice and impartiality in the discussion of \u201cmoral dilemmas.\u201d
\nWe don\u2019t have to be educators or pupils to know what Simon and Kohlberg represent. All of us experience in some way or other its tragic consequences: a world made increasingly less attractive by the tyranny of opposing passions and rights of minorities and majorities; by the pressures of the wants of special groups with influence and connections; by a more selfish, immoral, cold and ugly world that knows less and less the freedom of authentic morality, the genuine love, friendship and fidelity for one another founded in a loving God.
\nGenesis II, a very expensive, time-consuming program of films, tapes, minutely arranged and outlined fun exercises, sensitivity sessions, group discussions, \u201ctake-home\u201d paperwork, etc., aims at \u2018trying as a group of friends to discover and experience more realistic meanings of spirituality in our lives.\u201d The facilitator\u2019s handbook states emphatically that \u201cthe intellectual is not stressed in this program,\u201d that it is \u201cdevoid of formal study,\u201d because \u201csharing insights and experiences and feelings about what it means to be human and Christian\u201d are the principles of spiritual growth.
\nSteeped in Piaget\u2019s and Kohlberg\u2019s stages of moral growth, the Trappist originator of this program\u2014\u201cinternationally acclaimed for his expertise in the behavioral sciences and their relationship to spirituality\u201d\u2014claims that \u201cfeelings are the best indicator of what people value, so you must be in touch with your feelings.\u201d That the program is also badly in need of a more wholesome understanding of man\u2019s emotional life is evidenced by such statements as \u201cexpressing your negative feelings can also be helpful\u201d; and \u201cpositive affirmation\u201d (as if there could be such a thing as negative affirmation).
\nAs in most other \u201cgrowth-programs,\u201d Genesis II sees the process of affirmation as a matter of doing, \u201cbuilding a person up,\u201d by \u201cgiving strokes,\u201d avoiding \u201cputting down\u201d remarks; and by a series of \u201caffirmative exercises.\u201d A typical example of these mostly childish and boring exercises\u2014for adults, and junior\/senior high school students\u2014is that of participants walking around in a room with a sandwich board over their shoulders. On the front of these boards each person has written down what he thinks and feels about himself, while the others are to write down on the back of the board what they feel about him.
\nFor whom this program has been designed is not clear from the Genesis II facilitator\u2019s handbook. One gets the impression that it is for emotionally underdeveloped or disturbed Christians, who are thought to be in need of behavioristic programming and possibly also ideological brainwashing. It seems unlikely that any educated Catholic, even if in need of emotional growth, would be willing to complete all eighteen sessions after having been exposed in the fourth to an offensive, shallow, humanistic taped presentation of two views of how God created the world.
\nInterestingly, it is precisely at this point in the program, after the participants have been made to listen to what some people might well consider a blasphemous \u201cfanciful little skit,\u201d that the facilitator is warned to resist any suggestions by the participants that the format be changed, and that they do something else, because \u201cthey may be uneasy with the process or may not fully adjust to where it is going and may suggest that someone tell them more\u201d! The group must be kept in line with \u201ca light touch, but nonetheless firmly.\u201d
\nI would like to conclude my critique on a positive note. The teachings and practices of Simon, Kohlberg and Dwyer could be put to better use, if their strategies, exercises and games were to complement rather than replace sound moral teaching. That way the students would learn to distinguish between absolute moral values, subjective moral opinions and their own feeling responses to the persons faced with moral dilemmas. Of course, such a case study approach is far from novel. However, with our present deeper understanding of man\u2019s emotional life and its influence on his intellectual life and spiritual life, it would provide an even greater challenge to the casuist of great intellectual acumen and honesty.
\nThe word \u201caffirmation\u201d has become popular this past decade among human relationship and mental health counselors. Every one is speaking of affirmation and trying \u201cto do it\u201d to others. They say there has been precious little of it in the past, and that we must affirm each other if we are to become emotionally mature and happy.
\nIn spite of this good news, proclaimed by so many, there is little evidence of authentic affirmation being around. Good will and a sincere desire to improve the shortcomings of past interpersonal relationships, yes, but real strengthening of each other, no.
\nInterestingly, wherever members of a community\u2014religious, prayer group, covenant\u2014use the term most freely and glibly, there seems to be the least amount of true affirmation. Such places depress one with their bustling activity\u2014planned togetherness, meetings, expected modes of behavior and participation, carefully scheduled recreation, etc. There seems little opportunity for just being\u2014even less for being different or for wanting to be alone. Underneath the new freedom of behavior is often a hidden agenda of new conformism.
\nFor certain, those who cannot help being different are not expelled. They are tolerated in a kindly, long-suffering way\u2014full of hope and expectation that some day they, too, will want to conform to the new way of living. New because it differs as night from day from the old way. Not new as the result of having grown out of the new heart that God promised He would give His people. The sign of \u201cnew heart living\u201d is communion; yet, there is still too much communication to permit communion and authentic being.
\nTechniques and methods of pseudo-affirmation flourish everywhere. There is surprisingly little creativeness in these methods, as I see them taught and practiced around the country. At least much less than one would expect to be possible in devising ways of doing, saying, acting and playing with one another. This might well be proof of man\u2019s discursive mind having a more limited capacity than his intuitive mind, the true source\u2014together with his humane emotions\u2014of authentic affirmation, of being present to everything created with one\u2019s whole being.
\nFew seem to have delved deeply enough into the meaning of what I decided to call \u201caffirmation\u201d when I first\u2014in the early sixties\u2014translated Dr. Terruwe\u2019s term bevestiging. It seems an easy concept, so readily understood on first acquaintance. And even if one is told correctly that affirmation is a matter of being, not of doing, one wants to be practical and immediately begin with doing affirming things for others. Who has the time and patience to wait for the strengthening effect to slowly and gradually grow from another person\u2019s way of being-in-the-world? The need for affirmation is too great! One must act at once!
\nThere is another subtle difference between affirmation and pseudo-affirmation. Affirmation, or rather, as I described earlier, affirming living, is a way of being, in fact, the only way of living authentically as a human being, as another Christ. It is fruitful for everyone involved in terms of the highest human values: life, love, psychological health, and happiness.
\nHowever, affirmation can serve the self-affirmer in eminent ways when employed skillfully in a businesslike way, in terms of utility and gain. Of course, in reality, this can only be done under the banner of \u201caffirmation,\u201d for no one wants to buy an ersatz\u2014or substitute\u2014product, when the real thing is needed. Though the difference between the real thing and the substitute is clear to the mature, the true thinker, the sensitive one, it is much less so to the ones most in need of the real stuff. And because it is better than the stuff of denial that has caused the deepest wounds in the unaffirmed, the crumbs of pseudo-affirmation can be mistaken for real health food, but only for so long. In time, one will realize that health and happiness and healing are not forthcoming. This is like the prisoner in a concentration camp, or Gulag, who will devour ravenously the watery \u201csoup\u201d to prolong his life, only to realize in time that it is ebbing away, and that all he has gained is time, and maybe hope, for eventual liberation.
\nThere are people who have been treated for years\u2014at great expense\u2014in institutes or homes that have the word \u201caffirmation\u201d in their logo, who are unable to tell me in what way those places were different from those not claiming to offer affirmation therapy.
\nThey were given individual and group counseling, medications, psychodrama sessions and the like while living together in home-like settings, yet they had never felt a special, healing force emanating from the staff members who directed them, but who were never a real part of their lives. Though things looked different, and were given special names, it was the usual story of staff versus clients, of professionals who do not live the affirming life, but at certain times, in certain situations, push the button of affirmation (i.e., pseudo-affirmation), and expect great things to happen. In reality, these things can only happen when a person lives for a while in the orbit of others who live the affirming life!
\nThis is not to say that there are no such life-giving, others-strengthening communities. There are places\u2014not necessarily professional or therapeutic institutes\u2014where people really share and bear each other\u2019s burdens and joys in prayerful, truly unselfish ways, unconcerned about material gains and acquisition of reputation or fame. But, as far as I know, none of them employ the word \u201caffirmation\u201d in their logos.
\nAll this goes to show that those who live the authentic affirming life have no need to talk about it. Their way of living does the talking! Jesus led this life. His apostles learned it by osmosis; they were fulfilled by living in the orbit of the First Authentic Affirmer.
\nAgain, a positive note is in order. Techniques and methods of so-called affirmation have their value in helping people to relinquish their various ways of denial of other persons. Denial, the very opposite of affirmation, has been around a long time, and has left a long trail of psychic wounds in its wake. However, we should not dignify these methods of teaching more constructive ways of relating with the label of affirmation. To designate methods of increasing sensitivity, human awareness and relations, and personal growth as affirmation represents a form of spoiling. It leads people to believe that there is nothing more to human relationships than being nice and saying and doing the right things. It stifles their desire for learning the authentic way of living, and thus deprives them of the joy of ever experiencing its fruits.
\nAssertiveness training is one area in which unfamiliarity with the function of our psychological motors, and also with the syndrome of the unaffirmed person, can have adverse consequences for the trainee.
\nAssertiveness-training programs are a sophisticated outgrowth of the psychiatrist\u2019s advice to his passive, unassuming patient with depression to \u201cgo out and get good and mad at some people, break some bottles, or hit golf balls.\u201d Probably because of the rapidly rising number of meek and subdued persons, and with the growing interest in feelings and emotions, certain people saw their way clear to advance themselves by training people to develop their \u201caggressive drive.\u201d Mostly in groups, people\u2019s emotions of anger were force-fed by a variety of stimuli for the purpose of letting them erupt. They were congratulated and encouraged, of course for a fee, to continue with these sessions, in the expectation that practice would make perfect, and thereby change the person irreversibly from being meek to having fortitude.
\nThe rapid rise and fall of the assertiveness training fad already suggests by itself that all is not well with this approach. Psychologically, there are two basic reasons why this approach does not have beneficial results.
\nEmotions cannot be forced. As most people are afraid of their angry feelings and the effect on others if they are to express these feelings, they can only bring themselves to respond to the tactics of the trainer and group members, by repressing their fear of their anger (just as the meek patient could only obey his psychiatrist\u2019s advice by repressing his fear of his anger). But this means that he is trained to behave in a certain\u2014for others\u2014desirable way by means of a neurotic mechanism. In fact, his cooperation is brought about by a double neurotic repression (i.e., his prior \u201csingle\u201d neurotic repression of anger by fear is \u201cdoubled\u201d by the person using his energy to repress the fear that repressed the anger). Instead of improving psychically the person gets worse, even though his assertive behavior pleases the trainer and the group.
\nIf, following the course, the person reverts back to his original passivity and mildness, it is most likely blamed on his not really wanting to be healthy, not having fully cooperated, or of enjoying secondary gains from his unassertive attitude. The real reason, of course, that this training can never \u201ctake,\u201d is that all neurotic processes in time become inadequate in holding repressed material locked in the subconscious. The energetic repression of the fear of anger, superficial as it is in most assertiveness-training programs, soon proves to be inadequate, and the temporarily repressed fear of anger rises to the surface and makes the person unassertive again.
\nIf, however, the program does take and the previously unassertive person is successfully trained to be assertive, the results are not necessarily beneficial for society. This is particularly true for the unaffirmed trainee. The unaffirmed person whose realistic fear of the adult world keeps him from being himself is not really afraid of his angry feelings (or any of his other emotions). He just wants to be loved by all and therefore learns to be nice and please people (which in their minds excludes \u201cgetting\u201d angry). This unaffirmed person, therefore, with good assertiveness training methods can be made to become assertive and abandon his previously too passive and submissive role. If this change in behavior occurs without simultaneous adequate and authentic affirmation of this unaffirmed person, he may shift to the other side of the spectrum of nonaffirmation, namely to the self-affirming side. While first a meek, self-effacing unaffirmed person, he now becomes an assertive, if not aggressive, self-affirming, unaffirmed person. As I have already discussed the personality of the self-affirming person and his adverse effects on society, the reader realizes that his responsiveness to assertiveness training will not make the world a better place in which to live\u2014neither for others, nor for himself.
\nIn conclusion, assertiveness training programs should not be conducted save by fully mature and affirmed people who know which clients are passive and \u201cmeek\u201d because of repression, and which because of lack of affirmation. In addition to this knowledge they should be able to guide the former slowly and gradually to abandon his fear (see Chapter 7), and to affirm the latter, whose assertiveness will then spontaneously emerge in his own \u201cuntrained\u201d way, and at his own pace.
\nFrom time to time I am asked what I think of such self-help organizations as Alcoholics Anonymous, Recovery, Inc., Marriage Encounter, and T-Groups (the model for human awareness, personal growth and sensitivity groups). My commentary on these organizations should probably not be included in this chapter on erroneous goings on, because I consider their positive contributions\u2014except for T-Groups\u2014to outweigh the negative ones.
\nAlcoholics Anonymous, in stressing a spiritual awakening\u2014\u201cthat only a Power greater than the alcoholic can restore him to sanity\u201d\u2014has become the most successful organization to arrest the disease of alcoholism. In living the twelve steps and helping others to live them too, alcoholics assist one another in staying dry. That A.A.\u2019s recovery rate is not higher than it is, stems, in my opinion, from insufficient psychological help from professional sources. A.A.\u2019s will-training is excellent in the initial stage which requires the alcoholic to give up alcohol, so he can participate intelligently in the program. However, its educational program relies too much on building up will power, and not enough on the growth and healing of the emotional life, to assure permanent sobriety. I believe that A.A.\u2019s present recovery rate could be increased by at least 50 percent, if A.A. were to incorporate professional treatment of the alcoholic\u2019s underlying psychological difficulties. Why this is not done I have attempted to explain in my article, \u201cThe Alcoholic Priest,\u201d excerpts of which are contained in the footnote section.
\nThe foregoing comments concerning excessive reliance on will power are also pertinent to Recovery, Inc. Over the years I have treated several leaders of this organization who, in their own words, \u201chad benefited immensely from the Recovery program,\u201d yet had reached a plateau of partial well-being they were unable to transcend.
\nThe core of the program is systematic training of the will, while intellectualizing is taboo. Neither religion nor major moral questions\u2014notably those pertaining to sex\u2014are discussed. All discussions, presented in a format developed by Dr. Low to prevent \u201cdebate\u201d and \u201cargument,\u201d are limited to the \u201ctrivialities of inner environment.\u201d Recovery\u2019s overall aim is to help clients of psychiatrists cope in their normal milieu (i.e., to perform in an average manner).
\nTo comment on Recovery\u2019s understanding and attitude toward emotions and feelings would lead me too far afield. Suffice it to say that the Recovery clients who sought my help were \u201cstartled\u201d by my particular approach. All experienced considerable difficulty in letting up on their attempts to attain Mental Health Through Will-Training, as they had done for ten to twenty years in Recovery. As a result, their therapy progressed much more slowly and none attained the necessary freedom to be themselves and enjoy the potential contributions of their emotional lives to the fullest.
\nIn my opinion, it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to integrate the principles of Dr. Low\u2019s therapy and those of mine, because the practical effect of the Recovery concept is to promote, rather than eliminate, the process of neurotic repression through will-training.
\nMarriage Encounter recognizes that its program is not for persons with emotional difficulties. For couples who already have a reasonably healthy and good marriage it offers something of positive value.
\nHowever, there is one warning I should sound. In the focus on feelings it is not explained how participants\u2019 emotions are to be integrated with their higher faculties, and used in their determination to adhere to the teachings of the magisterium. As it is stated in Marriage Encounter\u2019s manual for the couples and priests who present the encounter weekends, \u201cFeelings are personal, inner reactions and are neither right nor wrong\u2026 . We don\u2019t want this talk to be instructional, heavy or lengthy\u2026 . We aren\u2019t teaching about feelings as much as we\u2019re sharing the importance we\u2019ve found sharing them has had in our marriage.
\nUndoubtedly, this educational void is responsible for the most frequently heard comment to the effect that the couples\u2019 emotional growth is not matched by an equal growth in knowledge of employing emotions in the service of adhering to established moral standards. This comment seems to be made most often in reference to the encyclical Humanae Vitae.
\nCorrection of this fault of omission would, in my opinion, make this movement one of the most promising contributions by the Church in its effort to build a stronger and healthier family life and to rear emotionally and morally better-equipped children.
\nThe reputation of T-Groups has suffered because of certain excesses. These excesses apparently stem from Western man\u2019s mentality to want to speed up and exaggerate a good thing, in order to get even better and bigger results.
\nIf sharing of feelings in groups is of therapeutic value for the participants, then constant hugging, kissing, touching, feeling and the like must have greater therapeutic value. If adults are to express all their feelings, even their sexual ones, then fornication must provide the ultimate means of therapeutic growth. And if this is good for adults in groups, then it must also be good in all life situations and at nearly every age level. If openness and self-disclosure in groups is good, then total and instant self-revelation by discarding all clothing must be better. If involvement of the group participants for a few hours has value, then marathon sessions must have twice as much value.
\nThese excesses are most deplorable from a moral viewpoint, and are psychologically damaging to all participants, not just those with emotional disorders. Unless these excesses are eliminated, unless T-Group leaders are chosen for their professional qualifications, personal maturity and moral character, unless T-Group use is restricted to purposes of training group therapists and of providing an additional treatment modality for wisely chosen patients, and unless professional psychiatric follow-up of individual participants is provided, I could not recommend such therapy groups.
\nA presentation of erroneous goings on would be incomplete without mention of the new \u201csexual freedom.\u201d The changes wrought by the revolt against old sexual mores, familiar as they are to all of us, are almost beyond belief.
\nIn less than half a century sexual hang-ups have been replaced by a \u201cliberated\u201d ideology of sex; sexual disorders by impotence and orgasmic dysfunctions even in young adults; castration anxiety by performance anxiety; shame by sexual prowess; modesty by group sex; premarital abstinence by peer pressure to be sexually active; the tyranny of past \u201cyou must not\u201d in matters of sex by the tyranny of \u201cyou must\u201d; neurotic repression of sexual feelings by neurotic repression of fear of sex; the old myth that masturbation causes mental retardation by the new myth that it is more fulfilling than intercourse; the birds and the bees by explicit sex \u201ceducation\u201d and pornography; and post-coital rapture by post-coital depression.
\nThe immediate consequences of the sexual revolution\u2014skyrocketing cases of venereal disease, unwanted pregnancies, crimes against the unborn child, sexual promiscuity, sex crimes, etc.\u2014are overshadowed by the growing deterioration of interpersonal relationships and their widespread effects on society. Casual sex, fun sex and impersonal sex\u2014all forms of self-affirmation\u2014have brought alienation and hostility between the sexes, aggravation of feelings of rejection, inadequacy, failure, loneliness and depression. Additionally, the number of divorces, family breakdowns, and abandoned and battered children have doubled. There has also been an alarming rise in suicide rates in young people, especially in the age groups of ten to fourteen and twenty to twenty-four.
\nThat the sexual revolution has been able to spread like wildfire is due in large part to the constantly growing number of unaffirmed people in our society. Their frustrated need for authentic love makes them extremely vulnerable and makes them put their faith in the false promises and unrealistic claims of sex \u201ceducators\u201d who have divorced sex from its procreative purposes and thus from its protective guidance of unselfish love. The psychic trauma inflicted repeatedly by successive discoveries that free sex is not accompanied by affirming love is devastating and further weakens already undeveloped psyches. They either become sexual self-affirmers who inflict their cancerous destruction on others, or commit suicide in despair of never finding what is obviously possessed by persons who are truly in love and dedicated to each other.
\nWhile it is true that the old repressive sexual morality derived from distorted notions of human sexuality, modern notions are even worse. Unfortunately, these modern, perverted concepts of human nature and human sexuality are likely to be with us for some time to come, unless the common sense of ordinary people prevails over the scientific indoctrinations by members of the health professions. Influential sexologists in the medical profession convened in Geneva in 1974 under the auspices of the World Health Organization Family Health Section. These men and women physicians:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1. Defined sexual health as \u201cthe integration of somatic, emotional, intellectual and social aspects of sexual being in ways that are positively enriching and that enhance personality, communication and love\u201d;\n2. Held that \u201cevery person has the right to receive sexual information and to consider accepting sexual relationships for pleasure as well as procreation,\u201d and prided themselves on this \u201cconcept of health that is almost revolutionary!\u201d;\n3. Were \u201cdeveloping techniques to integrate human sexuality into health practice\u201d;\n4. Claimed that \u201cbeing human means that we have the privilege of choosing when, how, and with whom we shall be sexual. This sexual self-determination is clearly what sex education is all about.\u201d<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThis \u201crevolutionary sexual health\u201d philosophy is but the logical outcome of minds that refuse to recognize man as a spiritual being and deny the validity of objective moral norms. Moreover, it betrays their ignorance of a philosophy of human sexuality that presents a satisfactory alternative to past and present obsessive-compulsive preoccupation with genital sex\u2014the past in repressing sex at all cost, the present in gratifying it by all means. Neither form of sexual preoccupation has been able to secure the joy and happiness that is sought by all. One makes man neurotic, the other blunts the feeling of love together with the other humane emotions, and thus makes him less humane and his sexual activities less authentically human.
Because the center of human sexuality is not located in our genital organs, but in the brain, it follows that our intellectual grasp of sexual matters must be correct and complete. This only can be accomplished if all dimensions of man\u2019s nature are included. No matter how much certain sexologists and theologians agitate against \u201cmoral imperatives\u201d which they hold responsible for sexual disorders, a philosophy of human sexuality must take into account the whole of man, precisely his spiritual dimension. When this is done and the psychological dimension is clearly understood, it is possible to arrive at a philosophy of human sexuality, and of man and woman, that can liberate us from the tyranny of sexual fear and compulsive sexual gratification.
One of the simplest and most lucid presentations of this philosophy can be found in a small sixty-five-page book entitled, How Can a Man and Woman be Friends? It is a practical guide to authentic sexual freedom and the joy of authentic love for anyone desirous of finding these in friendship, marriage, or the freely chosen celibate life. It is also must reading for those who want to free themselves from the loneliness and joylessness that is intrinsic to open marriages, casual sex, sexual exploitation, in short, sex without self-restraining love.
In conclusion, I want to briefly comment on the common denominator of the aforementioned and other contemporary erroneous goings on. In essence, this consists of a lack of balance between emotional and intellectual affirmation, between the giving of emotional health food and intellectual truths. If someone gives too much of one and too little of the other, he always detracts from the value of what is given in abundance. If one gives the emotional health food together with insufficient intellectual and spiritual food, the emotions are denied the necessary internal guidance and tempering. If, on the other hand, one gives an abundance of intellectual and spiritual truths together with emotional junk food, one offers only half-truths. As St. Augustine said, \u201cRes tantum cognoscitur, quantum diligitur,\u201d \u201cA thing is known to the extent that it is loved.\u201d If one\u2019s emotional life is undeveloped or repressed, so too will one\u2019s capacity to love what is taught be undeveloped.
When Freud\u2019s brilliant discovery (that repression of feelings and emotions always causes a neurotic disorder) became public knowledge earlier in this century, concerned educators rushed in to remedy the situation. The insight that the feelings of young people should not be repressed was translated into the maxim that \u201cfeelings should not be hurt\u201d or interfered with, and that children should be allowed to \u201cgo through a phase.\u201d In the home this led to permissiveness on the part of the parents, in the school to the lowering of educational standards and requirements to the level of the slower and intellectually less gifted students. As great care was taken not to hurt the feelings of the slower students, the brighter ones were not challenged intellectually. They became bored and began to seek other outlets for their feelings and frustrated energies. Both school and home sacrificed their children\u2019s innate need for discipline and order by giving them an unbalanced diet of emotional-intellectual-spiritual health food, for fear they would be repressing or hurting the children\u2019s feelings.
Feelings and emotions were increasingly viewed as people\u2019s most precious possessions\u2014witness the slogan of the unaffirmed person, \u201cI do not want to hurt anybody\u2019s feelings!\u201d This precious possession therefore had to be protected just as much as various laws protected their lives against potential murderers, their material possessions against burglars, and their reputation and good name against slanderers. Lacking such direct legal protection against trauma to feelings, permissiveness and sliding standards were here to stay with us for a long time.
We are all acquainted with the disastrous effects on individuals and society of the well-intentioned but too hastily conceived efforts by educators to contribute to the \u201cmental health\u201d of young people. The cure has proved worse than the disease. The juvenile courts are unable to handle the thousands of delinquents arrested each year; the schools have a hard time teaching the three R\u2019s and consequently, they graduate relative illiterates; the young seek to dull the pain of emotional and intellectual deprivation in drugs and sexual promiscuity; many sooner or later abandon the religions of their parents, some of them in favor of religious groups or sects where they can find more acceptance and love. To them religious doctrine is less important than the humane qualities of the leaders and the feeling of belonging that membership brings.
Seeking religious affiliation under these circumstances is for most persons, because of their extreme psychological vulnerability, a two-edged sword. Unaffirmed people can be readily taken advantage of by unscrupulous persons in positions of authority. They can be made to live by strict, even harsh, rules and to make financial sacrifices, as long as this guarantees them a certain sense of belonging. In the most extreme cases this may lead to the equivalent of the Jonestown massacre or other destructive consequences.
Protection against such tragic developments and correction of existing inadequacies and shortcomings in education and child rearing can be realized in the future only if we understand and live the basic principles of what I have described in this book as affirming living\u2014the properly balanced emotional, intellectual and spiritual strengthening of our brothers and sisters in the Lord.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Chapter 9<\/p>\n\n\n\n
BINDS AND DISPUTATIONS<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Dr. Baars, I am not sure whether I can square all of your teachings about man\u2019s sense of emotional life, interesting as they are, with Scripture. At least not with those passages which I have always interpreted as being condemnatory of man\u2019s lower nature. For example, in Romans 8:7, we are told: \u201cThe outlook of the lower nature is enmity with God; it is not subject to the law of God; indeed it cannot be: those who live on such a level cannot possibly please God\u201d (NEB). And Romans 8:3 reads: \u201cBecause our lower nature robbed it [the law] of all potency\u201d (NEB). Are these passages not a clear indication that our lower nature is a serious source of sin?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A They seem to be at first glance, I admit. But on deeper reflection it is not hard to see that all of Romans, dealing with this topic, confirms what I have presented in this book concerning the \u201cflesh\u201d and the \u201cspirit.\u201d Paul makes it clear that the feelings we possess on the level of our lower nature are not subject to sin and guilt in themselves, but only when they are deliberately taken up as an existential position. Only when they and they alone determine our mode of living are the emotions a vehicle of sin. But, even then, it is not the emotions but the freely willed refusal of the will informed by reason to guide the emotions which is the actual source of sin.
\nPaul\u2019s statement that \u201cour lower nature robbed it [the law] of all potency\u201d seems to confirm what I have said about irrational fear and excessive energy interfering with the necessary and needed cooperation between flesh and spirit. These supercharged, assertive emotions in the person with obsessive-compulsive repression take over the function of the free will, and thus rob the law given to us by God as a help, not a hindrance, of its willed effect. They make those persons impotent before the demands of the law.
\nThe same applies to Romans 7:5: \u201cWhile we lived on the level of our lower nature [before we were given faith], the sinful passions evoked by the law worked in our bodies\u201d (NEB). Again this is clarified by my thesis on the cause of repressive disorders. The law, holy in itself, but presented prematurely or without proper explanations to young children, stimulates fear or energy, which cause repression. The repressed emotions as a result, are denied rational guidance and in time start to operate by themselves in an obsessive-compulsive (i.e., nonfree) manner. The \u201csinful passions\u201d\u2014excessive irrational fear or energy\u2014\u201cevoked [stimulated] by the law,\u201d led to objectively sinful behavior.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q You say that our emotions are not sins. How can I feel hate and resentment and unlawful desire and not be sinning?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A If God punished us for our emotions\u2014instruments of our God-given nature just like our eyes, tongue and fingers\u2014He would be a very unfair God indeed. To restate what I have discussed before: There are two major errors about emotions. One sees them all as sins, to be fought against, because they are of our lower nature. The other sees emotions as the basis of all value and all action, without reference to any objective good or moral law. This second error is very popular in our time, and, as I discussed in Chapter 8, has already produced many unhealthy consequences.
\nRational Christian psychology teaches that our emotions are morally neutral; how we choose to act upon them determines our culpability.
\nJesus, fully God, and fully man, and without sin, experienced emotions and feelings which many people think of as sinful. He felt hate toward evil and the lukewarm as well as the moneychangers and the Pharisees. He felt irritation with His disciples, at their lack of faith, their incomprehension, and their fears. Moreover, Jesus couches much of His teaching in terms of desires of the human heart and the human body. He never condemns desire, but condemns lust, a willed action with the intention to do wrong (the same applies for the other six \u201ccapital sins\u201d\u2014all movements of the will, not emotions). When He taught, Jesus never represented forgiveness as an emotion (which it is not), but always as an action to be willed and performed.
\nRemember, Jesus loves us and knows us as men and women; He wants us to be renewed and transformed by His grace but as men and women, as human beings, not as perfectly programmed robots devoid of free will. He affirms the basic goodness in sinners and shows His faith in them\u2014in Mary Magdalene, the good thief, and many others. The pattern is always the same: first recognizing and revealing to the person his goodness; then the forgiveness and healing of the body and spirit; then and only then, the admonition to go and sin no more. Sin is a deliberate choice, not a feeling; if sin were a feeling, many of the psalms, which express anger and hate, would be sinful.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q I always thought we were supposed to get away from the body, and become more spiritual. If I start paying more attention to my emotions and bodily feelings, won\u2019t I become less spiritual?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A This is a common error because there is so much covert Gnosticism in our culture (as there always is in times of intellectual exhaustion or decadence!). The Gnostics taught that the human body is the source of evil in man, and that he must free the spirit from its evil influence. Body hatred has its polar opposite in body worship, one of the extreme errors of our time. These two opposites tend to generate each other (i.e., Puritanism breeds liberationism, and vice versa).
\nThe psychological manifestations of this constant struggle are very evident in our daily lives. As Christians, we believe in the resurrection of the body, in the Incarnation, and in the goodness of the works of God\u2019s creation. At the same time, we believe in the Spirit, the body as the temple for the Spirit, and in the spiritual nature of material creation.
\nSome of the Gnostics taught that Christ could not have a real body, since the body was evil. Jesus refuted them in His resurrected body by cooking and eating fish for breakfast with his friends as the perfect sign of His incarnate reality.
\nThis back-and-forth struggle between body and spirit is futile. It is not body or spirit, but body and spirit, interacting by means of intellect and emotions (psyche), which enable us to love God. Although the terminology is somewhat different from that of St. Paul, this tripartite composition of man is taken directly from the epistle to the Romans, Chapters 7-9, and elsewhere in all his epistles, which serve as the very basis for authentic Christian anthropology. Unless the body, \u201cmind,\u201d \u201cheart,\u201d and spirit work together, man cannot \u201cLove the Lord [his] God with all [his] heart, with all [his] soul, with all [his] mind, and with all [his] strength\u201d (Mark 12:30 NEB).
\nRemember this also, Jesus said, \u201cThis is my body to be given for you\u201d (Luke 22:19). If Jesus means what He says, and I believe He does, then we can see deeper meaning in this statement from the psychological point of view. I cannot give something to someone unless I fully possess it; I cannot give something with any meaning unless I know it, love it and own it. So Jesus cannot commit the perfect act of love by giving us His body in Communion or crucifixion unless He fully accepts it as His body and loves it for the masterpiece of God which it is.
\nI cannot fully love in married love unless I can give myself wholly to the other person, which requires that I be in full possession of myself, in the sense that I am not afraid of my body or my emotions and bodily feelings.
\nThe same is true in friendship and the freely chosen celibate life. Here, too, one must be able to give and love freely in self-restraining love (i.e., one must love the friend and all others on all levels of one\u2019s being while restraining oneself in those manifestations of love which do not constitute a good for the other or are contrary to the moral laws). This highest form of human love also requires that one is in full possession of oneself, for what one does not truly possess one cannot readily and joyfully hold back; one cannot have control of something\u2014or freely hold back or let go\u2014unless one possesses it.
\nA parallel truth is evident in asceticism, the practice of self-denial for the purpose of growing in spirit (such as fasting). This tends to become neurotic when the person is not at home with his body. The point of asceticism is not to hate the body or wish it out of existence, but to point the body in the right direction, in the sense that Paul speaks of it in Romans. As Augustine rightly pointed out, sin, in the teaching of Paul, is evil because of its direction away from loving God. There is a right direction of body, feelings and emotions toward God, all of which can be accomplished only by the person who is fully free to choose that right direction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q I was raised a Catholic and the nuns taught us that we must suffer and offer our sufferings to God. You seem to be saying that we should not suffer, but feel joy and happiness. To me, it sounds as if you are recommending a deviation from the imitation of Christ, and your teaching sounds like all those other psychiatrists who tell us to be free and do as we like.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A The answer to this apparent contradiction lies in the words of Christ who never taught a beatitude of illness, and lived a life that was apparently free of physical, emotional and mental illness. However, He did tell us to take up our cross as He Himself did\u2014the cross of being misunderstood, hated, persecuted, tortured and put to death. To be able to do so gladly in imitation of Jesus, we need strength, courage, faith, and if at all possible, good health, especially psychological health. For having to share in carrying Jesus\u2019 cross while one is physically and\/or psychologically ill, is more than many people can bear, more than Jesus himself had to bear.
\nThe Christian who becomes ill rightly seeks to be cured by a physician. He will employ every reasonable means to attain physical, emotional and mental health. He makes this suffering redemptive while seeking a cure, and being healed. The same holds true for the suffering of an illness for which no cure is possible.
\nSo, the nuns were right when they told you: \u201cWe must suffer and offer our sufferings to God,\u201d but not in the sense you understood it (and, possibly, they themselves meant it). All men must suffer to the extent that suffering of some kind is unavoidable in this imperfect world. But this is not to say that God created us for the purpose of making us suffer. What God had in mind when He created us is obvious from the facts as recorded in Genesis. He created Adam and Eve as perfect human beings, who walked and talked with Him in perfect surroundings called paradise. That their original perfect happiness came to an end as the result of their sin could not have changed God\u2019s purpose in creating man. God\u2019s purpose continues to be the same: to give all men and women the opportunity to share in His own infinite happiness if they so freely will it.
\nThis is confirmed in the answer to the first question in the Baltimore Catechism, \u201cWhy are we in this world?\u201d \u201cWe are in this world to know God, to love Him, to serve Him, and to be happy with Him forever in the world hereafter.\u201d
\nI admit that this answer implies, at least to some, that we are in this world for His sake, not for our own, and that we must work hard to please Him by studying, loving and serving him; and also that happiness is not to be ours now, but only in the world hereafter.
\nIf, however, we interpret this answer in the light of what I have said about affirming living and, of course, of all of revelation, we realize that God wants us to be happy and joyful here on earth. For we can come to know God only by being ever more present to Him with the full attention of our whole being; when we do so we will be moved with the joy of His love and love Him in return; and when we reveal to others how moved with joy we are, how much love we feel for Him in Himself, and in Him as He is in others, we serve Him. But again, in our serving others this way, we often will be loved in return, and we also experience with them the joy of love. The lasting joy of the life hereafter then becomes the ultimate fulfillment of our capacity for joy and happiness as we have developed this during our journey through life.
\nIt is in this fundamental joy, in this happy knowledge that all is well with the world, that underneath the man-made sufferings God is with us and loves us, that we are sustained in imitating Christ gratefully and with open heart, and can receive what He said He had come to give us: life and joy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I came that they might have life and have it to the full. (John 10:10)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
All this I tell you that my joy may be yours and your joy may be complete. (John 15:11)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Finally, in a certain way, those psychiatrists you referred to are right, as the nuns were. Of course those psychiatrists have something quite different in mind when they say, \u201cBe free and do as you like.\u201d But the Christian\u2019s goal is to become free\u2014and not to be a slave of his emotions or sins\u2014and to do as he likes (i.e., to develop a real liking for the moral good and to do it freely). But this happens only when the Christian\u2019s stony heart\u2014the \u201cheart\u201d petrified by the overgrown \u201cmind\u201d of, e.g., the person with a neurotic disorder\u2014has been replaced by a natural heart and a new spirit. With a new \u201cheart\u201d and spirit, the Christian is capable\u2014if willing\u2014of desiring to live according to God\u2019s statutes, and observing and carrying out His ordinances. With the desire of the \u201cheart\u201d supporting the will, the Christian is free to do the good he likes. To help suffering people attain this goal is the task of the Christian psychiatrist.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q You keep talking about reason. But I have always been taught that we should live by faith, and that people who rely on reason are philosophers and not Christians. Are we not supposed to fear men\u2019s reason as part of the folly of the wise?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A The Bible says, \u201cI am not writing thus to shame you, but to bring you to reason\u201d (1 Cor. 4:14 NEB). This is an example of the many times Paul speaks positively of reason. Reason, like all other aspects of our being and of our world, is perfected by faith, not negated by faith. \u201cAll things work together for the good of those who have been called according to his decree\u201d (Rom. 8:28). Paul condemns the false worldly philosophies that do not acknowledge our total dependence on God, but he never gives up his reason. Why should God give us a faculty and then expect us not to use it?
\nNotice in Romans 1:20 that Paul lays it down as a basic part of his argument that all men can understand God\u2019s moral law through their reason alone, if they do not corrupt themselves by pride. Faith calls us to a total engagement of our faculties, to be as wise as serpents, which we sometimes must be to unsnarl the mysteries of our own psyches.
\nI trust you see again how unwise it is to think in terms of either\/or. Reason or faith. Faith builds on reason; it takes over where reason leaves off. That is, if we are humble enough to admit that man cannot reason out everything for himself. And as the intellect builds on knowledge obtained from the senses, the mature man utilizes his senses and reason and intuitive mind and faith.
\nHe does the same with the emotions of desire and will and hope. Together, his faith and hope, backed by the other modalities of knowing and striving, support love.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q You talk about my learning to exercise my own will, but the Scriptures teach, in the words of Jesus, \u201cNot as I will, but as thou wilt\u201d (Matt. 26:39 NEB). How can I be free to be me, and be God\u2019s servant at the same time?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A We cannot will to do what God wills until our will is free and not encumbered by fear and a lack of faith and trust. We cannot will to surrender ourselves to God unless we possess ourselves in freedom\u2014and unless God gives us the grace to do so. That is why it is so crucially important for the Christian psychiatrist to remove all psychological obstacles to his patient\u2019s freedom of will.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Dr. Baars, this is not a question, just some comments and reflections. I have studied your writings and those of Dr. Terruwe very carefully and recognized without much difficulty that my troubles were those of a lack of affirmation and superimposed obsessive-compulsive repression. I thought you may be interested in hearing how I have applied your ideas to my personal benefit, and also to my field of interest as a humanities teacher.
\nThe most troublesome part of my personality has always been a deeply ingrained feeling of worthlessness and guilt. I am convinced now that the mortification of fear is the solution to this problem. The constant feeling of anxiety, sudden surges of inexplicable fear, the feeling of being off balance and not quite rooted in one\u2019s own body, the awkward sense of being perpetually displaced and threatened, the restless and indeterminate strivings of a will that knows not where to turn, since all avenues of action lead to fear-inspiring ends\u2014all those, which are reminiscent of Thoreau\u2019s line, \u201cI am a parcel of vain strivings\u201d\u2014can only be dealt with by recognizing the source from which they came originally (my mother, long deceased), and experiencing the appropriate anger, as often and as continuously as necessary to restore equilibrium.
\nMy mother was possessive, domineering, and an expert \u201cbehavior manipulator\u201d of her children. She approved our existence only when we conformed to an extension of herself. If not, she would create strong feelings of fear and insecurity by threatening to leave us. This scared us to death, for she would actually dress as if she was getting ready to leave. She never was satisfied with the way we felt, or what we did or said: \u201cYou don\u2019t know what you want; you don\u2019t know what you are doing; I don\u2019t know what\u2019s going to happen to you kids when I\u2019m gone. When I die, who\u2019ll take care of you? What would you do without me to take care of you? You\u2019ll never learn to take care of yourself. Nobody ever cares about me. I wish I could die. You kids are killing me. How could you do that to your poor mother who loves you?\u201d
\nHer disciplinary system was unpredictable. She changed rules all the time. She intimidated us with emotional displays. There were no certainties in my childhood emotional life, except we were sure to be made miserable every time we were happy. We were always told by her that whatever we felt was wrong, and that we should learn to feel like she did.
\nBut to return to what is happening in \u201ctherapy.\u201d As I began to dare to feel anger at \u201cChairman Mother and her sayings,\u201d I noticed rumblings, little waves and ripples moving into my abdomen and upper chest. All my life, my upper chest and lower abdomen have been, literally, no-feeling zones, as well as certain parts of my face, the sources of my headaches\u2014the result of retreat and paralyzed self in my childhood. This begins to explain the terrible deadness of my past life, and the inability to feel what others feel in poetry or times of sorrow and joy, the inability to let go. I couldn\u2019t let go because of the hypertrophy of fear, which I feared in turn; so every attempt to relax met with stubborn resistance. It was not until I learned the rational psychology of Aquinas-Terruwe-Baars that what I needed to let go was not the desire to relax, but anger. Now, whenever the old symptoms of fear make themselves felt, all I have to do is turn and face the monster with anger and a fierce will, and the relaxation of muscles sets in. Each time I do this, I feel myself change and grow, slowly but surely, in my feelings and emotions, with definite physical sensations accompanying the change.
\nI also understand now why my various excursions into Eastern techniques of relaxation were doomed to failure. They are all based on quietism. I wonder about the millions of people in our society, mostly young, who are in this same bind; they know there is something very wrong with them in terms of tension and anxiety, and they seek release where release is most obviously promised, in the stilling of the will altogether by negation of the personality. They see the Churches as Ought and Hypocrisy, experience that threat very vividly, see the tottering culture, and conclude that their inner problems can best be solved in the anomie of quietism. Drugs offer the same promise.
\nWhat we have as the most pervasive force in our declining culture is therefore a psychological nihilism. Value nihilism and revolutionary nihilism can gain so much credence among the young of the West because the psychological nihilism is already there to receive it, as a seed bed receives a seed. I see this more and more among my students and become more and more aware that it is espoused and encouraged by the liberal intelligentsia of academe, for it answers their purpose. It is often disguised as a form of existentialism. Faculties in the humanities tend to encourage despair, and punish all forms of optimism and religious commitment\u2014even the theologians.
\nThere are several books which analyze, from different perspectives, our contemporary situation. Each sees the modern university as a place where grievous errors are taught as a matter of rote. In one book, the author says our people are being devoured by a \u201cfashionable existentialism\u201d which drives us more and more to political suicide.
\nI think the roots lie deep in the psychological nihilism of the personality that emanates from so many focuses in our society. It is fashionable to feel despair and to be eaten up by nausea \u00e0 la Sartre, to complain that there is no meaning, to deride all attempts to see the truth. Add that trend to the psyches of many a person already stunted by a Puritan culture, and you have the legitimizing of self-hate, self-hate given philosophical underpinnings and literary respectability.
\nIn conclusion, I would like to comment on what is happening to my fantasy life since I began to try and live according to the principles described in your books. I have always been bothered by sinful thoughts and fantasies: pictures floating into my mind of what I would like to do, and enjoying those fantasies. As a child, I was taught that such imagined deeds are as sinful as real deeds. Also, I was taught that Jesus said that lusting in our hearts is just as evil as adultery.
\nI have discovered from your recommendations for obsessive-compulsive neurotics (in books and tapes) that when I do go ahead and be tolerant of my fantasies, the very fantasies that I used to try to stop, even when an apostate and away from the Church, that they began to change and develop in different ways or simply became boring after a while. At first, the luxuriating in the freedom of the imagination tended to run riot, but I can see already how this gets old and even silly. It is as if I am discovering \u201cnatural\u201d reasons for abandoning sexual fantasies that before not even all my will power of moral \u201cI must\u2019s\u201d and \u201cI should\u2019s\u201d could succeed in destroying. In fact, I am quite sure that those sexual fantasies grew stronger over the years because of my trying so hard and sincerely to get rid of them. Sad to say, I never thought I was engaged in a neurotic process. Because parents, priests and sisters taught me that I must will away impure thoughts, etc., I thought I was doing what is normal and reasonable. And because I didn\u2019t succeed, I blamed myself, and considered myself weak and evil.
\nI want to thank you for having shown me the difference between rational guidance and neurotic repression of emotions, and for giving me courage to substitute \u201cI may\u201d for \u201cI must.\u201d I am certain I will be healed, and that my love for God and His laws and commandments will grow from within me. How terribly sad it is that parents, teachers and religious used to think it necessary to impose moral behavior and love of God on children from without. It does not surprise me in the least that so many people have rebelled against excessive OUGHTism in their religion and upbringing. At the same time they have not found the answer either in total\u201d or discarding of all moral laws and authority. Your ideas truly represent, in my opinion, the golden means which are psychologically and morally sound and responsible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A I am grateful for your sharing some of your experiences and your reflections on the \u201crational psychology of Aquinas-Terruwe-Baars.\u201d It is sad indeed that you had to suffer so unnecessarily, for it is evident that you possess innate superior qualities which would have borne so much rich fruit for yourself and others, if you had been educated to be yourself, instead of trained to be like your mother. I hope you keep in touch with me, for I am sure that I can learn much from your profound insights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q In Colossians 2:11, 12 (NEB), St. Paul says that by Baptism I was \u201cdivested of my lower nature.\u201d I was baptized when I was a child, but I still feel the pull of lust very strongly, and it drives me to sin after sin. How do you explain this, and what can I do?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A It is necessary to notice that Paul always follows such statements, as he does here in the remainder of this epistle, with statements that make explicit the need to actualize the gifts God has given to us. The gifts we receive in Baptism are often blocked and prevented from being actualized by some impediment, e.g., a prematurely instilled excessive OUGHT-consciousness. This first must be healed by the means I have described, before one\u2019s lower nature can cooperate with one\u2019s will and God\u2019s grace.
\nRemember that this is precisely the problem Paul was dealing with when he wrote to Jewish congregations who had been immersed in legalistic thinking\u2014the problem of grace and law. Paul had to lead them to see that a whole new relationship to God\u2019s law had been revealed, through grace, which brings freedom of the spirit.
\nNotice also that many portions of Paul\u2019s epistles specifically admonish his missions congregations for falling into legalistic questions in a way that bespeaks scrupulosity and obsessive-compulsive behavior. That is why he keeps answering such questions by hammering away at the basic theme of freedom through grace, and a new, wholly new, relationship to the Law. If we treat Paul in a legalistic and overscrupulous manner, we are thoroughly missing his psychological and spiritual points. This would be a great pity, as Paul fully understood the need for proclaiming the new relationship to God inherent in Christ\u2019s grace, the fulfillment, not the alteration of the law, and the Good News of the gospel which frees us to live in holiness by faith, not fear.
\nWhen you have begun to practice the recommendations of this book, you will learn experientially how this is so, and will turn to the Scriptures again with new eyes and new faith.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q When I was a child, almost everything I wanted to do was forbidden as soon as I showed an inclination in that direction. As a result, I have never been able to give up doing these things secretly, even though they make me feel guilty when I do them, and make me miserable most of the time. I feel like I am on an endless treadmill. How do I get off?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A The ultimate consequence of the oppressive\u2014because excessive\u2014thou shalt not mentality of parents and educators is always an obsession with the things they forbade and a compulsion to do those very same things.
\nWhen this is a treadmill of sexual \u201csins,\u201d and more often than not it is, the victim feels more guilty and evil than he would if he had landed on a nonsexual treadmill. He believes that sins against the sixth and ninth commandments are worse than those against the other eight, because they deal with sex.
\nFew people realize it is not the sexual drive per se and a weakness of the will that are responsible for compulsive sexual \u201csins.\u201d If parents, and other educators, were to make the same fuss about some of the other commandments, the child would land on a treadmill of lying or stealing, or something else.
\nIn fact, one could set out to make a child develop obsessive-compulsive behavior about virtually anything, provided the child has all the superior qualities I described earlier, and the parents and religious instructors instill\u2014by their teachings, attitudes and behavior\u2014the same fear and\/or energy as regarding sex. Thus, if they wanted, they could create anything as ridiculous as a \u201cchair neurosis,\u201d a \u201ccandy neurosis,\u201d a \u201cdoorknob neurosis,\u201d or what have you.
\nIf there existed a religion that considered it a mortal sin to sit on a chair, to eat candy, to touch doorknobs, to take a shower, or whatever, all that would be necessary for adults to make their children develop a corresponding neurotic disorder, is to pound from an early age on the dangers and terrible consequences of doing these particular things. In the gifted children fear and\/or energy would then move them to be obedient and refrain from all such sinful actions. They would do so, with more or less near perfect success for a number of years, until later in life they would become increasingly obsessed with fantasies of sitting on a chair or eating candy, and finally end up being compelled to sit on a chair or eat the forbidden candy.
\nThose persons would then suffer the same intense feelings of guilt and shame that are commonly experienced by the victims of \u201coverexposure\u201d to the sixth and ninth commandments. But they would have the advantage of finding it easier to comprehend and accept, once it was explained to them, that it is not their own evil nature that causes them to sin, but rather an outside cause. It also would be easier for them to become free by applying the principle of therapy: the mortification of the fear and\/or energy of the chair, the candy, etc.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q I am always confused about guilt and guilt feelings. Are they the same?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A When a person freely commits a crime or a sin, he is guilty of that crime or sin. Normally the awareness of his guilt is accompanied by a feeling of guilt. This feeling functions as a psychic motor to support his will to make restitution.
\nA psychopath, on the other hand, does not have guilt feelings when he commits a crime. He may feel bad when he is caught, but not because he has done something wrong.
\nSomeone with a neurotic disorder often suffers from guilt feelings without having committed a crime or a sin. For example, a scrupulous person lives in constant fear that he has transgressed moral laws. This fear stimulates his guilt feelings, and vice versa.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Not too long ago I read an article by a Dallas psychiatrist who stated, \u201cNeither I nor my profession has the means to explain and predict the seemingly random acts of unprovoked violence that occasionally flash across front pages.\u201d If I remember correctly he cited violent TV programs and \u201cdehumanization\u201d as main factors. What is your opinion?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A I do not know exactly what that psychiatrist meant by \u201cdehumanization,\u201d but it could well refer to the effect on the personality of a child who did not grow up in the orbit of affirming parents and\/or other significant others. When a child grows up feeling unloved, unwanted, worthless and unlovable he often considers and feels himself to be bad. As a result he not only will hate himself, but also those who denied him what he senses to be a fundamental human right. In some, this hate may grow into a desire to take revenge and, if so, will lead to acts of violence against either the parents who have failed him, or any other authority figures.
\nIn my opinion, this particular cause of unprovoked violence in our society is of greater, more fundamental, importance than the usual cited causes like war, TV violence, alcohol-induced violence in families, etc. The growing number of unstable families\u2014because of divorce, working mothers, frequent geographical uprooting necessitated by job demands\u2014and of unaffirmed parents contribute to a quantitative and qualitative increase in lack of emotional and intellectual affirmation. This is the primary cause of psychological weakness with fewer loving relationships, less respect for others, intensified polarization, more denial and rejection, etc. All this could well be summarized perhaps by the word \u201cdehumanization.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q If it is true, as you say, that certain therapists and counselors employ ineffectual affirmation methods and techniques, how does a person in need of affirmation determine which therapists and institutes claiming to provide affirmation therapy actually do so in the true sense of the word? And how does one ascertain what affirmation books are reliable and authentic?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A The answer to your questions is not a simple one. It is comparatively easy for people, especially when ill and in need of effective therapy, to be taken in by books and articles boasting of accomplishments and cures, and by solicitations containing favorable statements by well-known public figures. The same holds true for people in need of affirmation.
\nIt would be well to keep in mind that the treatment of unaffirmed persons, particularly those with emotional deprivation disorder, was not generally known until recent times, and that therefore claims of large numbers of cures must be considered suspect. There simply has not been sufficient time to evaluate the results of this particular approach in a scientifically valid manner. There has been even less time for follow-up studies to differentiate between persons healed permanently and those who improved only as the result of living temporarily in a different environment and who had their original symptoms reappear after they had returned to their former milieu. Only Dr. Anna Terruwe in the Netherlands and I in the United States have treated persons with emotional deprivation disorder and other unaffirmed persons for a sufficiently long period\u2014approximately thirty and twenty years respectively\u2014to have a reasonably accurate opinion of the results of our therapy.
\nA careful and critical evaluation of affirmation books, and for that matter, of all books on psychology, is always in order because of the fact that the field is noted for plagiarism. Whether copying the ideas of another author and passing off the same as one\u2019s original work occurs more often in psychology than in other fields of endeavor I do not know. The fact that it occurs is reason enough to proceed with caution in evaluating authors and therapists.
\nThe introduction of such totally novel psychological terms as \u201caffirmation,\u201d \u201cdeprivation neurosis\u201d [emotional deprivation disorder] and \u201cself-affirmation,\u201d and failure to indicate whether the author himself or someone else first coined these terms, is reason to suspect him of plagiarism. Not acknowledging the professional ideas of another person is a form of denial, the very opposite of affirmation. The introduction of the aforementioned terms in the Dutch and English-speaking psychiatric literature by Dr. Terruwe and myself is well documented and precisely dated. This fact will facilitate any investigation of authors of affirmation books.
\nAn author focusing primarily or solely on emotional affirmation while ignoring or slighting the role of intellectual affirmation is likely to have less than adequate knowledge of the subject. To describe the latter as \u201cencouragement to develop one\u2019s intellectual capacities, to take more schooling and take delight in one\u2019s intellect,\u201d betrays great ignorance on the part of the writer. It might even indicate the possibility of plagiarism, and a poor job at that.
\nA person who writes in glowing terms about affirmation while only casually referring to the evil of self-affirmation either has not given the subject deep thought, or is possibly blind to that quality in himself\u2014many of us are poor self-evaluators\u2014and is trying to affirm himself by taking credit for ideas that are not his own. As I explained in Born Only Once, one form of self-affirmation consists of trying to become famous by any means, or of associating with famous persons.
\nA statement in the preface of a book that the author does \u201cnot have the intention of repeating what he has acknowledged elsewhere\u201d will make any reader wonder what he has to hide, and why. Even if the writer has done what he says he did, how is the reader to know which person had the original ideas used by the author in his book? In my opinion, the reader owes it to himself, and perhaps also to those entrusted to his care, to demand that the author give the proper acknowledgements and make it clear whether he or someone else deserves the credit for originality.
\nIf a writer seems to be a name-dropper and quotes persons of note who are unlikely to be personally acquainted with his work, as if they support it, one would be advised to check this out with them. One should ask them whether they were quoted correctly, or ever had the intention to speak in support of the author, and if so, whether they still hold the same opinion. It could well be that their opinion has changed, or that their statement was never supposed to express approval or support of that author in the first place. Name-dropping should be particularly suspect if the names are of persons who are not easy to contact, for instance, because of their high position in the Church or their place of residence in a foreign country.
\nLastly, in 1976 Dr. Terruwe and I found it necessary to retain an attorney to put a certain author on notice that unless \u201cany reference to the thoughts, words and ideas of Drs. Terruwe and Baars be properly cited and attributed in his intended publication\u2014a book on affirmation\u2014any such plagiarism may result in legal action for damages.\u201d Suffice it to say that the author in question decided to ignore this notice. When someone claims to be an affirmer, yet does not practice what he preaches, he is not an affirmer of others.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q In discussions about the seeming increase of violence in our society and world many persons seem to assume as a fact that human beings have an inborn aggressive drive. Do you agree with this notion?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A I certainly do not. If one agrees with Webster\u2019s definition of \u201caggression\u201d as an \u201cattack without provocation,\u201d then it is certain that man does not have an inherited, biological and fixed instinct or drive to be aggressive. Contrary to what many authors claim in order to justify violence as if it were a natural catastrophe, although man has the capacity to attack others without provocation he is not genetically fated to do so.
\nIn fact, the very opposite is true. Man has a fundamental, natural tendency to love and respect the well-being and integrity of his fellow-men. It is possible that some persons mistake man\u2019s innate drive to self-realization for an aggressive drive. However, this drive aims at the development of his innate potentialities, talents, character, etc., and may cause him to be assertive when obstacles to the fulfillment of this drive are placed in his way. His capacity to be assertive thus serves his innate drive for self-realization\u2014and for that matter also his other innate drive, that of procreation. Assertiveness must be clearly distinguished from aggressiveness if we are to understand the nature of man. \u201cAssertive,\u201d again according to Webster, means: \u201c(1) characterized by, or disposed to affirm, to declare with assurance, to state positively; (2) to maintain or defend, e.g., one\u2019s rights or prerogatives.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Is there a difference between \u201cimpulsive\u201d and \u201ccompulsive\u201d?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A Indeed there is, and a very important one at that. These two words are sometimes used interchangeably and thus cause confusion. \u201cImpulse\u201d is a sudden, involuntary inclination or feeling which prompts the person to action. If he does act without reflecting on the possible consequences, like a child or a psychopathic personality does, he acts impulsively, or on impulse! Impulsiveness characterizes the child, the immature adult, and the psychopath.
\n\u201cCompulsion,\u201d on the other hand, describes the irresistible need to perform certain acts, even though the person does not will to do them, either because they are senseless, useless or contrary to his moral convictions. These compulsive acts are typical of the person with obsessive-compulsive repression who is driven to perform those acts in order to achieve some temporary and transient respite of his chronic anxiety and tension.
\nSome of these persons are compelled to painstakingly clean everything they have touched over and over again, usually for fear that others may be harmed by dirt or germs. Others compulsively wash their hands and forearms with soap twenty or thirty times a day, even when they know that it makes no sense and creates needless disturbance in the home for spouse and children. Like compulsive masturbation, these actions represent the ultimate breakdown of the chronic repressive process and are proof of the fact that the person\u2019s will has been eliminated from dealing with the repressed emotions. That person is incapable of utilizing his free will in the area of repression, while being free in other areas, e.g., in matters of honesty. In other words, though compelled to masturbate, he is not compelled in the least to rob a bank.
\nIn this connection it is well to discuss briefly another term akin to compulsion, namely \u201cperfectionism.\u201d The intense striving to do things as perfectly as possible is seen most frequently in unaffirmed people who want to gain the acceptance, praise and love of others. It is learned in childhood, especially when the inadequately affirming parents are also difficult to please and constantly demand more of the child. Unlike the behavior of the person with obsessive-compulsive repression, that of the perfectionist is not irrational or senseless, but rather appropriate even though carried to an extreme. The greater the person\u2019s need for love and acceptance the more intense the need to do things perfectly.
\nBecause obsessive-compulsive repression can coexist with emotional deprivation disorder in one and the same person, it follows that compulsiveness and perfectionism can be seen together also. This, of course, explains why even professionals may use these two terms as being synonymous and confuse the patient. But recognition of the syndrome of nonaffirmation can bring the clarity required for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Are \u201cselfishness\u201d and \u201cself-centeredness\u201d the same?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A I am glad you asked me that question. I see so many patients in my practice who consider themselves selfish, while all they are is self-centered or egocentric. Virtually every person, even the most unselfish and \u201cother-centered\u201d one, will focus his attention on himself, when, for example, he becomes sick or disabled by an accident. By doing so he will move to seek the necessary help or treatment. His self-centeredness is a necessary condition for self-preservation. It will be present only as long as he is in need of help or treatment. Once this has been given, his self-centeredness will be replaced, if he is normally so disposed, by his usual concern and interest in others. Of course, when his suffering is chronic, like it is in neurotic conditions, the person is, of necessity, self-centered all of the time, or most of the time, even when of an unselfish and generous bent.
\nSelfishness, or egotism on the other hand, is something entirely different. The selfish person cares only for himself. He is self-seeking, and not in the sense that he is searching for his own identity! His own interests come first, even at the expense of the welfare of others. This extreme degree of selfishness is typical of the psychopathic personality. In less severe form, selfishness is characteristic of all human beings, since it is the primary consequence of original sin. A selfish person is always self-centered, but the reverse is not necessarily true. The self-centered person with a neurotic disorder who is also generous and unselfish in his suffering makes quite a different impression on all of us than the not-sick person who is decidedly selfish (e.g., self-affirming persons).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q People often say that I always feel sorry for myself and that I should stop doing that. How do I get rid of my self-pity?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A I don\u2019t think it wrong to feel sorry for yourself. If it were, it would also be wrong to feel sorry for others who are in trouble or miserable. Yet, nobody ever reproaches a person for feeling sorry for others. The explanation for this is that we usually do something for the persons who are miserable and stir our pity; we give them alms or help them in some other ways that will make life more pleasant for them.
\nBut this is not always the case when we feel sorry for ourselves. Either because we do not know what to do, or lack the courage to get ourselves out of the mess we are in, we feel sorry for ourselves without trying to change the situation. It is that lack of action which people reproach us for. They criticize our self-pity because it is not followed by activities aimed at alleviating our own misery. Perhaps we prefer to wait until others start to feel sorry for us, too. However, we cannot always count on that and should not compound that miscalculation by remaining stuck passively in our self-pity. The least we can do is to ask somebody else to help us, if we are unable to free ourselves from our pitiful situation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Dr. Baars, some time ago you said, I believe, that God does not punish us with hell. If so, do you mean by this that there is no hell, or that God never punishes?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A I do indeed believe that there is a hell. In fact, for me its existence is another proof of God\u2019s infinite love for us. God loves us so much that He wants us to have everything we freely will to have. Having created man with a free will, and being a perfectly just God who created us for happiness, He always wants to give us our just due. If we will to be united with Him in love our just due is to be with Him in heaven. If we will to have nothing to do with Him, if we freely reject Him, then our just due is to be separated from Him. Therefore, in order to give us what we freely will to have, God had to create a \u201cplace\u201d where He is not. That \u201cplace\u201d we know as hell.
\nLet me further illustrate the extent and depth of the meaning of God\u2019s justice. If I were to reject God freely, He would be unjust to me if He would refuse to let me go to hell, and instead insist on admitting me to heaven. The nature of free will demands that I must be given what is owed me by virtue of my free choice. In this hypothetical case, God \u201cmust\u201d let me go to hell.
\nWhether my going to hell is properly called punishment, is another matter. I don\u2019t think I have to go into this now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q I grew up a Catholic, and in those days, long since gone by, I often heard talk about \u201cconcupiscence.\u201d I don\u2019t know exactly what the word means, but I got the impression it was something bad within us, something we should rid ourselves of. Can you explain this? Also, could you say something more about \u201cmortification\u201d? I got the impression when you mentioned this topic before that you are critical of it. Yet, you obviously are against the unbridled indulgence of feelings and emotions. I am sorry if I have missed the point and am asking you to repeat yourself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A I did not use the word \u201cconcupiscence\u201d in this book for the very reason you mentioned; it is a misleading word that too often conveys a pejorative meaning it does not actually have.
\nNot too long ago a dogmatic theologian of renown criticized the ideas I had presented at a national congress of religious, and \u201cfelt compelled in conscience\u201d to exclude my address from the congress\u2019s printed symposium. One of his several criticisms of my talk read: \u201cChrist did not have a fallen human nature; He had no concupiscence,\u201d and also: \u201cDr. Baars is mistaken if he thinks Adam and Eve had concupiscence before the Fall, which is doctrinally impossible.\u201d Obviously, according to this critic, a proponent of the voluntaristic philosophy I mentioned before, concupiscence does not belong to human nature in its perfect state.
\nYet, \u201cAquinas defines concupiscence as the appetite for pleasure.\u2026 Pleasure, even sensible bodily pleasure, is not evil of itself. As the author of nature, God has placed pleasure in the exercise of certain natural operations, and especially those which pertain to the conservation of the individual and of the species.\u201d
\nJudging by a dictionary\u2019s definition, concupiscence is: (1) sensual appetite; lust, or (2) eager or illicit desire.\u201d In our daily language the voluntaristic (Ignatius, Suarez) meaning of the word has won out over the intellectualistic one (Thomas Aquinas). Concupiscence, a good in itself, has become synonymous with \u201cdisordered concupiscence.\u201d For this very reason I never use the word. As you already know I prefer \u201cpleasure appetite\u201d or \u201chumane emotions.\u201d
\n\u201cMortification\u201d is another troublesome term. According to the dictionary it means \u201cthe practice of asceticism by penitential discipline to overcome desire for sin and to strengthen the will.\u201d
\nYou are already aware that I consider it a poor choice of words from a psychological point of view, because the Latin word, mortificare, means \u201cto kill, to destroy.\u201d Nevertheless, I am in full agreement with the teaching that ascetical (from the Greek verb, asketik(\u00f3s), meaning \u201cto exercise\u201d or \u201cwork hard\u201d) practices or exercises are necessary to foster the integration between emotions and reason and will. In fact, I advocate an even wider application of these exercises. The Church has always stressed the mortification of the emotions of the pleasure appetite more so than those of the assertive. However, since both appetites have suffered in their original relationship to reason and will as the result of Original Sin, it follows that both need to be mortified, or tempered, equally. Yet, as I have explained, the assertive emotions of fear and energy have frequently been the subject of stimulation, rather than mortification, in the expectation that this would promote virtuous living. My opinion of this you already know.
\nOur understanding of the role of irrational fear and excessive energy in the development of obsessive-compulsive repression explains the need for the mortification of these assertive emotions. Moreover, it can be said that the mortification of these emotions, in a certain sense, is of a higher order than the asceticism of the emotions of the pleasure appetite.
\nMost of us tend to do what someone with obsessive-compulsive repression does in the extreme, namely, to attain our sanctification by our own energetic efforts and fearful attitudes. For some reason we prefer this, impossible as it is, to putting all our trust in God and surrendering ourselves to Him in faith. Yet, this is precisely what the Christian must do to such a degree that he cannot but perform good works willingly and gladly.
\nFor the person with obsessive-compulsive repression that is the hardest thing to learn, much harder than the mortification of the emotions of the pleasure appetite, even though he usually is already an expert at this. Yet, he too, when assisted by an understanding and compassionate therapist can learn to live the Little Way of St. Theresa of Lisieux, the way of faith and surrender.
\nIt is my sincerest wish that all this will eventually be understood by voluntaristic theologians, who, to quote the aforementioned critic, object to the idea that \u201crepression via Catholic teaching is the basis of emotionally misfit (his term, not mine!) Catholics.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Q Do you meet with much opposition to the ideas you have presented in this book?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A From time to time these ideas have been attacked and even condemned by officials in the Catholic Church. These critics have been few in number, but because of the high position of some, they had great impact. My colleague, Dr. Anna Terruwe, suffered for fifteen years from the condemnation of her ideas and work by the Holy Office in Rome. This, in spite of the fact that all the Dutch bishops and their own moral theologians, after conducting a full-scale investigation of certain allegations\u2014made by certain proponents of the voluntaristic philosophy\u2014and a hearing of Dr. Terruwe personally, had concluded that she was orthodox in doctrina et prudens in praxi (\u201corthodox in her teachings and prudent in their clinical applications\u201d).
\nFinally, one year after she wrote, for private use, a seventy-five-page expos\u00e9 of all that had transpired, the Holy Office in 1965 broke a decade of silence and refusal to respond to Dr. Terruwe\u2019s communications, and publicly expressed its regrets, declared \u201cher work to be founded on sound and correct principles and of great value to all,\u201d and offered to make reparation for the harm done to her good name and professional reputation. Not long thereafter His Holiness Pope Paul VI twice requested a private consultation with my colleague. On one of these occasions he called her work and ideas\u2014many of which are contained in the pages of this book\u2014\u201ca gift to the Church.\u201d
\nBecause of the widespread publicity that ensued in the Netherlands and abroad, her thoughts and pioneering work are now generally known and respected by professionals and nonprofessionals alike in much of Western Europe. They received special recognition from an eminent Dutch psychiatrist in a small book, entitled, The Significance of the Work of Dr. A.A.A. Terruwe for Psychiatry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
POSTSCRIPT<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe truth that we owe to man is, first and foremost, a truth about man.
\n\u201cPerhaps one of the most obvious weaknesses of present-day civilization lies in an inadequate view of man.
\n\u201cWithout doubt, our age is the one in which man has been most written and spoken of, the age of the foremost of humanism and the age of anthropocentrism. Nevertheless it is paradoxically also the age of man\u2019s deepest anxiety about his identity and his destiny, the age of man\u2019s abasement to previously unsuspected levels, the age of human values trampled on as never before.
\n\u201cHow is this paradox explained?
\n\u201cWe can say that it is the inexorable paradox of atheistic humanism. It is the drama of man being deprived of an essential dimension of his being, namely his search for the infinite, and thus faced with having his being reduced in the worst way.
\n\u201cThanks to the Gospel \u2026 the truth about man \u2026 is found in an anthropology \u2026 whose primordial affirmation is that man is God\u2019s image.\u201d
\nI shall be deeply grateful to God if the ideas presented in this book contribute in some way to \u201ca truth about man\u201d as spoken of by Pope John Paul II in his first major address of his papacy to the 300 Latin American cardinals, bishops, priests and religious at Puebla, Mexico, in January, 1979.
\nHis words underscore the meaning and spirit of what I consider my task and that of every Christian psychiatrist: to assist the Church and all Christians in knowing more about man as the image of God, to lessen his anxieties, to save him from his own abasement, and to bring order and strength to his psychic life for optimal receptivity to God\u2019s healing grace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
NOTA BENE<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Readers of this book wanting to obtain a better understanding of themselves in the light of what the author has presented in these pages, and perhaps wanting to seek assistance in reaching a greater degree of psychic wholeness, are invited to visit the Conrad W. Baars, M.D. website at www.conradbaars.com for further information. The website has a list of available books and self-help cassettes as well as information about upcoming lectures, seminars, conferences, \u201cworkshops,\u201d and television appearances.
\nThose continuing the author\u2019s work welcome readers\u2019 comments, questions or discussion regarding the subject matter presented in this book. They also invite contact with interested professionals, persons in the healing ministry and departments of psychology and psychiatry in this country and abroad for the purposes of:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1. referring persons in need of counseling and healing.\n2. advising students wanting to broaden their knowledge of rational and faculty psychology.\n3. disseminating and stimulating interdisciplinary knowledge and study of \u201ca truth about man.\u201d<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nAll inquiries and correspondence may be sent to: information@conradbaars.com or to Michael Baars (accompanied by a long, self-addressed, stamped envelope) at the following address:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Michael Baars\n P.O. Box 293\n Sikeston, MO 63801<\/code><\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Chapter 6 SPOTTING EMOTIONAL MALFUNCTIONS Now that we have a better understanding of what emotions are and what they are for, it is time to try to make some sense out of what must appear to many to be a bewildering array of neurotic symptoms and incomprehensible emotional disorders. Perhaps many professionals share this bewilderment, … <\/p>\n