|
Post by humbletigger on May 31, 2010 10:47:27 GMT -5
I will agree with this, only traumatized people will be attracted to excessive religion, QF included.
People with unresolved trauma seem to be compelled psychologically to recreate that trauma in their lives over and over until they deal with it or die.
The children of the traumatized are always affected by this, wounded by this, and in this way the pain (and the compulsion to try to suppress it) continues to be passed on from generation to generation.
The only way to stop it is to first end the compulsive behavior, and then start dealing with the pain one was trying to suppress and ignore. In this way, the traumatized person can stop playing out the painful scenario over and over, process it in a healthy way, and move on with a new healthier ways of being.
This frees them up to admit how their addictions hurt others, take responsibility for that, humble themselves to those they have hurt (always the children) and model this new healthy way of processing the pain and anger of trauma.
Some people's pain is so overwhelming and their shame over the trauma so all-encompassing that they never stop their compulsive, destructive behavior. They are too afraid to stop the behavior, because then they will have to deal with the feelings/trauma and they are too terrified to take that step.
I wish people could understand this. Even with shows like Intervention and Celebrity Rehab with Dr. Drew people still fail to see this reality.
I guess they don't want to accept it, that it really IS TRUE that "there but for the grace of God (or random chance if you prefer) go I..."
Not all people who experience trauma will spend their lives suppressing and running from the pain. Some families will provide safe places to heal and model healthy ways of overcoming the trauma. Many times, however, the family is the source of the pain.
And sometimes even in healthy, supportive families, a person who has kept the trauma a secret from their families because of fear of rejection or hurting the family. Even if that fear is not valid, when a person believes that it is they will behave accordingly.
Like I wrote earlier, this is very personal to me, and it is also personal to all those who are escaping the QF lifestyle.
We don't have defective ("addictive") personalities.
In our woundedness we were attracted to things that gave us a feeling of significance and worth while at the same time provided a way to focus on something outside of ourselves so intently that it supressed our pain.
When we leave the "addiction" behind, we still have to deal with the trauma that was always there, plus new traumas that were dealt to us in our "addictions".
I guess I am asking for readers to thoughtfully consider the implications of this. Anyone traumatized as a child who was without resources to work through it for whatever reason, will be compelled to suppress the pain through outside stimuli, either socially acceptable means (work, hobbies) or otherwise (drugs, sex).
All wounded people without resources to deal with/process the trauma will respond in the same way. Only the types of excessive behaviors vary.
It is not dependent on the personality of the traumatized.
|
|
|
Post by nikita on May 31, 2010 11:13:20 GMT -5
Well, if you're going to include 'excessive religion' on that list then I think you would have to include 'excessive your-ideology-here' on that list as well. It's not just religion that could be that focus for a wounded person. Anyone who is obsessed with a cause or ideology could be exhibiting the same reaction to woundedness. Or not. It would depend upon the person involved and their motivations.
I guess I just don't want 'excessive religion' to become a 'symptom' of something when it might not be true for any particular person. That assumes that 'religion is okay in it's place but don't get too carried away about it'. And I don't think that is really a valid position. Yes, it can be that and certainly we've seen it be that for some people in the super hyper-vigilant fundie movements, and I also think it has that quality for some in the animal rights movement, and the environmental movement, and some feminist causes as well. It has that potential in any movement that endorses an extreme committment from some of its members. For some it's pathology, for others it is not.
I don't want to endorse the idea that if only Mother Teresa weren't so psychologically damaged she could have had a nice comfortable life running a local scrap-booking store... If you see what I mean.
|
|
|
Post by coleslaw on May 31, 2010 11:32:45 GMT -5
Vyckie, you posted this around the same time I was reading Robert M. Prices book, Deconstructing Jesus. In one of his early chapters he makes reference to Mary Douglas's anthropological-sociological research, saying
Although I doubt QFer's see themselves as upholding kosher laws, the food restrictions you mention seem to serve the same purpose - to regulate interactions with the wordly. And while it might be odd to think of people with 10 or more children as "celibate", restrictions on the unmarried are more extreme than those imposed by "worldly parents", many of whom may want their children to remain virgins until they get married but think that kissing and hand-holding are only to be expected, and who allow their children to dress according to fashion and function.
|
|
|
Post by krwordgazer on May 31, 2010 11:49:04 GMT -5
Humbletigger, I appreciate your words very much. I am an adult child of alcoholics who left home to be drawn into a Christian cult. I have been accustomed to thinking of myself as an "addictive personality." I never thought of it as a defect, but as a disorder which I will never completely be free of, yes. I guess that's the same as what you say in that we will always have to deal with the trauma we went through. But I find it healing to stop thinking of myself as an "addictive personality." Thank you. As for whether having an emotional disorder or mental illness makes you "defective," I know that is a common perception in society, but I think it's one we need to steer away from. We no longer think of people with physical handicaps as "defective," and I doubt you think of people with mental illnesses or handicaps as "defective," either. It's an image we have to fight against-- those of us who are affected by emotional trauma no less than those with other issues. Coleslaw, that's very interesting. It does seem to be the case that restrictive, isolating rules in one area have equivalents in other areas too.
|
|
|
Post by nikita on May 31, 2010 12:47:47 GMT -5
nikita - you seem to be using the term "Reformed" to refer to Dominion theology/Theonomy or maybe some other subset of the Reformed camp, but the views that you are calling "Reformed" most certainly do not represent the views of most people who would call themselves "Reformed." I know plenty of Reformed women who work outside the home and are not considered whores by their churches. As you say, the logistical hoops one has to go through to get to such a view are huge, and most Reformed people don't go there. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to overgeneralize. I'm sure there are Reformed groups that don't take it to such an extreme. I have problems with Reformed theology on many different levels and for which I don't really feel all that much, doctrines are going to differ, to each their own interpretations. But I have watched a number of my old cult-members wind up in some newer Reformed churches where the legalism is very extreme and that is the part I object to, the legalism and 'men only speak' thing they have going in them. Some have become QF in those congregations. Some of those congregations are very insular and exclusive and controlling of their members. So my perspective is coming from that place, where these things are occurring. If you say you are part of or know of Reformed churches that are less extreme then I bow to your experience and knowledge in this area. My exposure is to the stricter congregations (or home churches as the case may sometimes be). Perhaps Puritanism is the real problem and not Reformed theology per se. As an aside, for some reason I do not fully understand, every branch of my family arrived in this country in the seventeenth century and all of them were Puritans from England. In fact, one branch that arrived in 1633 actually left the Massachusetts colony they initially joined because the puritans there were too liberal for their tastes. That always cracked me up. Only my family would think puritans were too worldly to live with.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on May 31, 2010 14:08:18 GMT -5
Nikita,
I agree that any ideology which is all-consuming in a way that results in isolation from others outside that group, neglect of self-care, obsessive thoughts, etc. is on par with any other pathologically excessive behavior.
As for Mother Theresa, I was not surprised at the death to find out that she struggled with depression her whole life. She surrounded herself with human suffering as an occupation. She accomplished many amazing works of charity that still keep on giving today and I have the utmost respect for her.
She handled her all-consuming involvement in her faith in a responsible way, by making it a full-time occupation. She did not have children and then neglect them to do "ministry".
As to whether or not she had personal pain she was pushing aside by staying so active in helping those less fortunate, I could not say.
But I do know if you ask any person recovering from excessive behaviors (substance abuse, QF theology, cults of any kind, etc.) they will all agree that the behavior was a symptom of an underlying trauma that had not yet been addressed.
I have never once met any person in recovery who did not share this experience.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on May 31, 2010 14:13:50 GMT -5
krwordgazer, You're welcome.
|
|
|
Post by nikita on May 31, 2010 14:37:22 GMT -5
Not all. That may be a number of people, but it is not all people in that position. Some people I know right now who were involved in our cult were not particularly traumatized in their pasts, they had great families and childhoods and nothing bad happened to them before they became involved.
A person whose underlying motivation for a particular behavior or becoming super involved in a particular group or cause is due to trauma may uncover such a cause to be sure. And working through that issue in therapy is very important. But it doesn't follow that all people who become so entangled have some past trauma they are trying to work out. It doesn't necessarily go both ways. It may be that the subset of people who join recovery groups do have such a problem in their past, but they are not necessarily the entire set of people who either join or leave such groups.
There are also a great many people who have past trauma who do not join all encompassing causes or go down the path of destructive behaviors.
This is not to take away from the work being done to help those for whom this is a true issue. But generalizing to every person is what I object to.
|
|
|
Post by nikita on May 31, 2010 14:52:32 GMT -5
I only used Mother Teresa as a quick reach for someone as an example, I don't know her life or motivations. But the principle is my point. Devout religious devotion and service should not be dismissed as some kind of pathological reaction to a psychological problem. It's a very individual thing. Is the whole QF/P belief system a serious problem for the people who become involved in it? Yes. Does it create problems for those involved within it? Yes. But does becoming involved in it mean you have some psychological problem? Not necessarily. It is an insidious system, and people get led down the garden path to it through many different doors. I think people who have a more secular orientation have a hard time getting this part of it because it is so foreign to them, this worldview. This worldview makes it easier to slide into extremism if you run into the right teachers, the right books, the right people already involved.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on May 31, 2010 15:03:58 GMT -5
Well, we shall have to object to each other as civilly as possible then, I suppose. I object to the idea that being traumatized means one has a psychological problem. If your toe is bashed in, no one I(I hope) says that your toe is defective! It has been wounded through no fault of its own, and is now in the state of being wounded. Once the wound is cared for, and time has healed it, then the toe is restored. But during the whole process, it was a normal toe. People who react to traumas with obsessive behaviors of any kind are NORMAL people reacting in NORMAL ways to abnormal stressors on their psyches. But as for the rest, you could be right. Normal people who have not suffered from an abnormal stressor on their psyche could, I suppose, get involved in cultish groups. I can't imagine how or why, but I'll take your word for it. My experience and learning is not the sum total of human experience, that's for sure!
|
|
|
Post by nikita on May 31, 2010 15:37:02 GMT -5
I just know - really really know well - people for whom your statement would not be true, so that's why I countered it. My ex husband, for example. A number of my very closest friends, as another. There simply was no trauma, no bad family life, no abuse or underlying destructive behavior, nothing singling them out as people who would join a cult. Not all joining of cults would constitute obsessive behavior either. So there is a range here that I think isn't being adequately accounted for. There is a subset for which your hypothesis would definitely hold, I don't deny that. I just don't think we can expand outward from them to everyone else. I don't hold myself out as an expert in these things. I did earn my degree in social work with a minor in psychology and early childhood education. And I interned for a year at the county drug and alcohol treatment program (not by choice, it was the only placement left that year! My interests lay elsewhere but I got a great education on the subject that's for sure. ) And of course I was in an extreme cult from age fifteen until I was thirty one so I have that strange trip to add to the mix. I also don't have all knowledge of absolutely everything and everyone, but I had/have a front row seat to the cult/religion experience, both the good parts and the very very bad parts. So there's that. This is an interesting discussion.
|
|
|
Post by francescateresa on May 31, 2010 15:56:29 GMT -5
I will agree with this, only traumatized people will be attracted to excessive religion, QF included. People with unresolved trauma seem to be compelled psychologically to recreate that trauma in their lives over and over until they deal with it or die. The children of the traumatized are always affected by this, wounded by this, and in this way the pain (and the compulsion to try to suppress it) continues to be passed on from generation to generation. The only way to stop it is to first end the compulsive behavior, and then start dealing with the pain one was trying to suppress and ignore. In this way, the traumatized person can stop playing out the painful scenario over and over, process it in a healthy way, and move on with a new healthier ways of being. Humbletiger, Thank you very much for this spot-on eloquent explanation of the situation for many, many people. In my own life I've had to deal with a little bit of trauma to move past certain behaviors, but my step-son is recovering from some larger traumas that involve excessive religion. I am going to save what you have written. Thanks again!
|
|
|
Post by arietty on May 31, 2010 20:38:08 GMT -5
It's interesting, though, given that the QF worldview is so resistant to debt--and to making use of public services/welfare. Minimum wage workers often have to have up to three different jobs in order to cover the most basic living expenses. When you earn any income at all, your chances of getting any government assistance decrease dramatically... I wonder what QF people expect women to do when they need this money to feed their children? It seems like very superstitious thinking--this idea that money and finances will automatically work out as long as the mother isn't "worldly" and that the things women often do out of necessity are somehow "worldly." Especially surprising when so many QF families become poor with so many children and only one income. Yes the whole movement is rife with superstitious thinking. It's the idea that there is a formula you can discover and once you put it in place you will prosper. If you fail to follow the formula you will suffer. Superstition in a nutshell. As to welfare.. I was on a QF list where most of the people were on some kind of welfare. You won't see it in VF publications but it is common. Husbands suddenly layed off or injured and unable to work, babies still coming along every two years.. many families availed themselves of whatever financial and charity aid was available. They lived rurally for the most part. Life was very hard. Debt free is an ideal but only a minority of people manage it. The reality of QF outside of the very well off Rachel Scotts and VF'ers is one of pretty subsistence living. These women were very grateful for the help they got too I might add.
|
|
|
Post by arietty on May 31, 2010 23:07:14 GMT -5
I certainly believed a lot of those things. I wanted honest, christian children who didn't suddenly morph into teenagers listening to heavy metal and having sex with their boyfriend/girlfriend. I swallowed the whole trip about THE WORLD and all its EVIL WAYS and I was determined to protect my children and only fill them with godly stuff.
But.. something often confused me. I used to look at the worldly families in our church. Two kids, endless after public school activities, mom worked full time, they watched seemingly any movie and dressed in all the latest fashions, they were by every definition immersed in The World. And what puzzled me was that they seemed very happy! The kids weren't even rebelling in that they had great relationships with their parents, did well in school, the families seemed to get on very well. They just were not falling into chaos and drugs and teen pregnancies as predicted. This genuinely threw me for a loop.
|
|
|
Post by krwordgazer on Jun 1, 2010 0:29:45 GMT -5
But.. something often confused me. I used to look at the worldly families in our church. Two kids, endless after public school activities, mom worked full time, they watched seemingly any movie and dressed in all the latest fashions, they were by every definition immersed in The World. And what puzzled me was that they seemed very happy! The kids weren't even rebelling in that they had great relationships with their parents, did well in school, the families seemed to get on very well. They just were not falling into chaos and drugs and teen pregnancies as predicted. This genuinely threw me for a loop. Heh, heh. That sounds a lot like my teenager, Arietty. I don't work full time, but nearly so (30 hours a week), and my daughter isn't in endless activities, but that's largely because of her own personal choice. She'd rather have free time to be with her public-school friends (her two closest ones are also Christians). There's no need for her to rebel-- she is treated like a reasonable human being, capable of understanding the reasons for the common-sense restraints we do put on her. With the exception of those, she can do as she likes. (This is not to say she never breaks the rules, but when she does, the consequences are logical and not harsh.) She understands that she's worth too much to damage herself with drugs, and she has too much self-respect to let a guy, or a group of peers, lead her anywhere she doesn't feel right about going. I don't see where any biblical passage says to isolate your children from "the world." It does say clearly, though, not to "exasperate" them. I'm so glad we got out of the cult we were in before our kids were very old!
|
|
|
Post by Vyckie D. Garrison on Jun 1, 2010 10:31:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by coleslaw on Jun 1, 2010 10:56:35 GMT -5
What? The Bible doesn't tell us to send our children to public schools? I bet it doesn't tell us to take them to the emergency room if they get hit by a car, either, so maybe we shouldn't do that. And it doesn't tell us to use the computer to post to the internet, so we shouldn't do that. Especially the person that wrote that comment shouldn't do that.
|
|
|
Post by usotsuki on Jun 1, 2010 11:25:39 GMT -5
The excuse I used as a fundie was "sending your children to a school of any sort is shirking the parental responsibility to teach your own children", which of course I supported with Proverbs 22.6.
I still would be likely to prefer homeschooling, but no longer for that reason. My g/f and I have been through hell in the public school system.
|
|
|
Post by egalgirl on Jun 1, 2010 12:21:47 GMT -5
Ah, yes, the old "there is no public school/children's ministry/youth ministry in the Bible" argument. Homeschool convention is coming up this weekend in my neck of the woods - I am bracing myself for all the people who come back pumped up with new ideas about the way life ought to be.
|
|
|
Post by hopewell on Jun 1, 2010 13:33:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by arianadream on Jun 1, 2010 23:27:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ambrosia on Jun 1, 2010 23:34:23 GMT -5
Thank you for that. As someone who for years lived with a "fundamentalist Marxist", I get it! Binary thinking.
|
|
|
Post by nikita on Jun 1, 2010 23:45:32 GMT -5
That is very interesting, thank you for sharing that. I feel like someone just gave me some oxygen.
|
|
|
Post by arianadream on Jun 1, 2010 23:58:48 GMT -5
Thank you for that. As someone who for years lived with a "fundamentalist Marxist", I get it! Binary thinking. Yes - and I really like how the article talks about fundamentalism in general and doesn't limit it to conservative labels. You will find extremists and fundamentalists in nearly all belief systems. And really, doesn't it seem like QF and patriarchy movements really do promote the idea that life is simple if you just follow their simple rules? Decisions are supposedly never hard to make.
|
|
|
Post by ashmeadskernal on Jun 2, 2010 8:45:50 GMT -5
Ah, now I see my problem. I'm surrounded by fundamentalist worldly parents!
No, seriously. The people I know would fit every single bullet point. And I don't. By the way, they are Christian, and I'm not!
|
|