Preventing spiritual abuse? Listen to that little voice plus…


Over the summer, I have been writing a few thoughts about the nature and causes of spiritual abuse. At the end of this post, you can find links to those entries. I have been doing this in concert with Carolyn Custis James over at the Whitby Forum. I heartily recommend you read her take as well. This post will give you her latest and also provide links to her previous as well. For those of you who are new to the concept of abuse, here is my definition:

Spiritual abuse is the use of faith, belief, and/or religious practices to coerce, control, or damage another for a purpose beyond the victim’s well-being (i.e., church discipline for the purpose of love of the offender need not be abuse).

Like child abuse, spiritual abuse comes in many forms. It can take the form of neglect or intentional harm of another. It can take the form of naïve manipulation or predatory “feeding on the sheep.”

With this post I want to consider two means by which we might prevent spiritual abuse (both to ourselves and to others)

Listen to that little voice inside

If you are experiencing that ping inside that says you are being mistreated…stop and listen to it. Too often, we ignore that voice inside that says something is not right. And in those settings where leaders wield significant authority, those vulnerable to abuse are most likely to believe (or be told) that their feelings can’t be trusted. This is especially true in environments where a significant portion of the community (e.g., children, women) are treated as less trustworthy.

Now, notice I said “listen” to that inner hitch in your soul. Notice I didn’t say to always “believe” your gut. Our gut isn’t any more or less accurate than any other portion of our being, and feelings may or may not be accurate. But just as we out to pay attention to fire alarms and not grow complacent, we ought also to pay attention to that voice that says something in wrong with how we are being treated.

If that voice is ringing in your ears, I suggest you find someone to talk to who doesn’t have a major stake in how you respond to that voice. Such a person will be less likely to have their own axe to grind. You don’t need someone who tries to force you to stay in an abusive situation or someone who believes all spiritual leaders are abusive giving you advice. That sort of problem only continues the manipulation.

The point of listening to your own little voice is to notice your own experiences and to take them seriously as you explore what is happening.

Other ideas

Of course, there is much more objective ideas for preventing spiritual abuse. Education is one of our best means to prevent spiritual abuse

  • Educate the entire church about servant leadership and how it opposes power grabs
  • Educate the entire church about how the Gospel opposes all forms of oppression/abuse as well as opposed the subjugation of any portion of the community
  • Become missional (joining what God is doing in the world, opposed to focusing only on our own mission)
  • Teach leaders to listen as much as they exhort
  • Teach congregants to be Berean with everything that they are learning–to search the Scriptures to see if what is being taught is in accord with the whole of Scripture
  • Teach the congregation that deception and cover-up of abuses by Shepherds never pleases God

6 Comments

Filed under Abuse, Christianity, Christianity: Leaders and Leadership, Doctrine/Theology, Evangelicals, Missional Church

Why counseling? To be fixed or found?


Chuck DeGroat and Johnny LaLonde have written a post that some might find helpful when considering therapy or counseling (I use these words interchangeably). At some point in our lives, we all feel like life is getting out of control. We need help. We begin to wonder if there isn’t someone out there who can help us. But, even as we think these thoughts, we may also think, “what is the point? How can therapy fix this problem?”

Well, to give a partial answer, check out this first post over at Q Ideas. The authors argue that we should all be in therapy. However, they suggest that the purpose of such counseling is not so much to fix our problems but to understand ourselves, to admit our weaknesses, to be “found” or known. Now, these may sound like things that only wealthy people have the time to do. And yet, I would argue that in our isolated, individualized society, the normal communal means of being understood, supported, known, etc. are not often present in our lives.

Three paragraphs in this first post jump out for attention:

Don’t I go to therapy to get fixed? Believe it or not, I don’t advocate therapy because it fixes people. Now, while some forms of therapy help people get past difficulties that stifle them (e.g. panic attacks, major depression, bipolar symptoms), Christians should recognize there is always a deeper and more transformative purpose to counsel and care.

This was the ancient art called curam animarum—the care of souls. And the wisest therapists will foster this process. Now, the vast majority of clinicians practicing today have been trained in fix-it strategies—cognitive and behavioral solution-based processes which are aimed at quick, painless fixes. This is what sells. This is what insurance tends to pay for. But there is a profound difference here—fix-it strategies try to remove pain while deep soul care attempts to learn from it. Sometimes in the process we are afforded the mercy of pain relief. But it is not the goal. And so I counsel people to search carefully, to interview therapists, to ask many good questions.

And then this reflection:

But at the same time, I’m not convinced Christian therapists do this as well as secular therapists at times. Let me explain. Many settle for what Dietrich Bonhoeffer called “cheap grace,” a quick fix approach which stands in stark contrast to the “costly grace” of searching and knowing ourselves, through exploring our stories and examining our motives. This kind of care is, indeed, much more rare. Christian counseling which is reduced to mere Bible memorization, or repentance or a behavioral regimen misses the point.

Fixed and found?

I imagine that the authors would agree that both are possible. Therapy can lead to being fixed and found, to find relief and care for the soul. Therapies that ignore the need for immediate mercy and relief are of little value. I once talked to someone who had just completed a decade of psychoanalysis (3 sessions per week!). His therapist, a well-known analyst had just released him as having completed analysis. My new friend was looking for a therapist to deal with his longstanding panic disorder. I have also seen Christian counselors who have so emphasized discipleship that they paid little attention to easy helps for their addict clients. On the flip side, simple behavior change (now that is an oxymoron!) may provide some relief but miss insight into self and what God is up to in the world. In seeking only relief, we miss out on deepening our relationships with God and others. A superficial life lived may hurt lest, but is it worth living? 

Note at the bottom of the post there is a link to another post about how to choose a counselor. If you are looking for one, consider one who can have difficult conversations with you, one who does not over-simplify the problem, one who cares about your growing relationship with Christ, one who can provide ideas to bring immediate relief, and best of all, one who listens more than talks.

1 Comment

Filed under biblical counseling, christian counseling, christian psychology, counseling, counseling skills, Psychology

When trauma isn’t “post”?


Over the last year or so I have been doing some thinking about those experiencing ongoing trauma. We talk of PTSD, Post-traumatic Stress Disorder, as a set of symptoms experienced after a traumatic event or time. But some people continue to live in ongoing trauma. I’m reading James Fergusson’s The World’s Most Dangerous Place: Inside the Outlaw State of Somalia. Early in the book, he talks of seeing “Sister Mary, a warm-hearted big-bosomed Ugandan in combat fatigues, dispensing medicines from a table in the ruins of the villa’s kitchen.” (p. 45). Sister Mary explains that there are two medical problems she sees. The one she treats most often is diarrhea. But, she says, the other problem she could not treat,

The people here are stressed, she explained. They are traumatized. They do not know where to turn.

You talk a lot in the West about PTSD-Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder…but for these people there is no “post”. The trauma never ends.

What can people do when trauma isn’t post? Do they have to wait until the traumatic experience is in the past in order to deal with it? What can we do for others who remain in precarious and life-threatening situations? A friend raised this question when working with a group of refugees in a UN temporary camp. Some of the suggestions that were given this friend

1. Helping refugees find some way to hang on to small measures of empowerment: set up classes for children, build huts for those who are just arriving, develop “positions” for adults to fill so the camp runs smoothly and has a modicum of safety.

2. Reinstate religious and cultural traditions where possible

3. Practice corporate lament along with other worship activities

4. Allow people to tell as much story as they wish, whether by voice or artistic rendering

Notice that these are finding ways to cope by (a) making the moment better and (b) bearing witness, even if they can do nothing about the crisis. When a person feels some level of ability to respond to a difficult situation, that person often experiences less trauma than those who are unable to express any agency. Further, when they feel that they matter to others (someone listened to whatever they had to say), they tend to have less long-lasting PTSD symptoms.

1 Comment

Filed under Abuse, Psychology, Uncategorized

Do you enable spiritual abuse?


There are several kinds of abuse that take place in church settings. On this site we have talked about pastoral sexual abuse, sexual abuse, and spiritual abuse. Most recently, we have been discussing the matter of spiritual abuse in concert with Carolyn Custis James over at the Whitby Forum. I commend you to read her post last week about the underlying belief system of spiritual abuse.

This week we both want to consider some of the types of people who may be prone to enable spiritual abuse. No one, as far as I have ever met, intends to enable abuse. But certain beliefs, attitudes, and motivations may make it easier for abusive people to maintain power and position in the church.

Here are a few of those enabling attitudes that you and I, friends of victims, might display from time to time:

  • Status anxiety. Someone in power gives me status. To speak up against that person would jeopardize my position. Therefore I will not speak up. I do not want to disrupt my position or destabilize an organization that feeds me.
  • Mis-application of log/speck metaphor. A friend is showing signs of distress from an experience of abuse. She is angry, hurt, and confused. I see some “over-reactions” and so I focus on the log in her eye and suggest she has no business speaking of the speck in the abuser’s eye. Similarly, I suggest that we leave vengeance to God and deny the right to seek justice.
  • Defenders of leaders. We like to have strong leaders. When someone suggests one of our leaders is not good, we may feel the urge to come to their defense (either to defend character or to forestall a bad outcome for the leader and his family). We may show undue concern for the leader’s legacy or future in ministry.
  • Fixers. Some of us love to fix others. We offer unsolicited advice. We decide to take action to make calls we weren’t asked to make. Unintentionally we may put the victim at greater risk with our advice.
  • Self-Doubt. Did I really see that leader use theology to manipulate another? I must be mistaken. I’d only look like a greater fool to bring it up again.
  • Bitterness. When we come to believe that the church will never do what is right in protecting the sheep, we may send the message to others that we ought not to expect leaders to be just, kind, gracious, and caring. A victim of spiritual abuse may observe our bitterness and feel they are caught between accepting spiritual abuse and being in Christian community. Rather than lose their only community, they stay in an abusive environment.

I am sure there are other forms of enabling. Consider this post of mine about some of the reasons we fail to do what is right in light of allegations of sexual abuse. Some of those reasons are also present when we fail to do what is right in light of spiritual abuse.

 

2 Comments

Filed under Abuse, Christianity: Leaders and Leadership, church and culture, Doctrine/Theology

Counselors: How do you deal with attraction to clients?


For my counseling friends, you may wish to read this piece by Ryan Neace about sexual attraction in the therapist office. Do you have someone to talk to in this kind of frank manner about the reality of attraction? How do you handle it?

Remember, sexual attraction is not limited to just wanting to have sex with someone. Ryan does a good job identifying types of sexual responses to others beyond outright lust and fantasy. Notice also his drawing attention to the myth of the sexual vortex.

“The pastor who refuses eye contact sends a clear message…‘You are seductive. You are a sexual vortex that I may get sucked in to.’ The slippery slope of my lust is your problem. And my ministry is too valuable to allow the likes of you to trip me up.”

Given that we all have examples of counselors and leaders who crossed sexual lines, the myth and fear of the vortex can keep us from addressing needs of others. And, as he notes, it sends a very loud message to some clients (mostly women) that they are a danger at the cellular level). What a burden we place on others!

Two questions for readers:

1. How do you respond to incidents of sexual attraction?

2. How would you want to respond to the question posed to Yalom copied below (about whether he would in a different situation be attracted to a female client)? Redirect? Focus on the “deeper question”? Answer it?

Yalom considers a female client who asks, “Am I appealing to men? To you? If you weren’t my therapist would you respond sexually to me?”

… [Yalom’s answer]:

If you deem it in the patient’s best interests, why not simply say… ‘If everything were different, we met in another world, I were single, I weren’t your therapist, then yes, I would find you very attractive and sure would make an effort to know you better.’ What’s the risk? In my view such candor simply increases the patient’s trust in you and in the process of therapy. Of course, this does not preclude other types of inquiry about the question—about, for example, the patient’s motivation or timing (the standard “Why now?” question) or inordinate preoccupation with physicality or seduction, which may be obscuring even more significant questions. (bold emphasis Ryan’s)

4 Comments

Filed under christian counseling, christian psychology, Christianity, counseling skills, Sex, sexuality

Christian Cancer?


Biblical Seminary’s faculty blog has posted an older blog of mine on the “top form of Christian cancer”. Click here to go see what it is.

Leave a comment

Filed under "phil monroe", Biblical Seminary, Christianity, Relationships

Some additional thoughts I had after Rwanda


Over at the Seminary faculty blog, I’ve posted this short musing about Rwanda and some of the stories of loss and redemption we heard during the conference. Check it out and see one picture of a small group activity where we heard many of these stories. In truth, listening to these stories on the banks of exquisite Lake Kivu made for a surreal experience!

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Treatment of complex trauma: Why mistrust of the counselor is necessary and good!


I am reading Christine Courtois and Julian Ford’s, Treatment of Complex Trauma: A Sequenced, Relationship-Based Approach (Guilford Press, 2013). I won’t be blogging through each chapter but I do recommend it for those working with adult survivors of child sexual abuse, especially those who are new to “complex trauma.”

The first two chapters give an overview of complex trauma reactions and diagnoses. If you want to know more about complex trauma, see this post about another edited book by these two authors. Chapter three, “Preparing for Treatment of Complex Trauma” begins the meat of the book. In this chapter they take up the ever important issue of empathy, safety, and respect as foundation to therapy. They emphasize the need for,

safety within the therapeutic relationship with a therapist who is empathic and respectful yet is emotionally regulated with appropriate and defined boundaries and limitations. (54)

Challenging Counselor Safety Is Common and Good?

This empathy and trust relationship is both foundation and method of treatment (59). But while the therapist is responsible to see that at safe therapeutic relationship has been built, it requires the client to be involved in building such an environment. The truth is that the client’s role in building safety in the counseling office is by passive and active testing of limits. Most counselors tolerate suspicious questions the first or second time. But, it is important for counselors to,

being prepared to patiently and empathically respond to active or passive tests or challenges to trustworthiness as legitimate and meaningful communication that deserves a respectful reply in action as well as in words. (60, emphasis mine)

If the therapist understands and does not take mistrust as a personal affront, the therapeutic relationship can evolve gradually. The client can begin to recognize  that the therapist actually “gets” why he or she is initially skeptical, self-protective, or “realistically paranoid” and does not pressure the client to be a “happy camper” but instead works to earn trust by being honorable, reliable, and consistent. This also implies a view of the client’s initial mistrust as expectable in light of the client’s history–that is, as a strength rather than as a deficiency or pathology. (63)

Sometimes clients can present in an opposite way–to be entirely deferential and affirming the counselor before a track record can be developed. Therapists with these clients need also to be prepared to encourage a healthy level of distrust.

What is not helpful is “artificial neutrality or passive and intellectualized detachment on the part of the therapist…” (64). It is my sense that we usually do this when we are afraid of the client. Not so much afraid of being injured, but afraid of failing or being consumed by the trauma. Or, we get consumed by our own history. A healthy therapist must stay emotionally present yet aware of own internal machinations. A healthy therapist must be able to predict some of the angst that arises in treatment of complex trauma and able to prepare self and client for this inevitable distress.

2 Comments

Filed under Abuse, counseling science, counseling skills, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Psychology, ptsd

How do trauma symptoms pass to the next generation?


As a clinician, I have had anecdotal experiences that the trauma experienced by a parent is passed on to a child who presents with many trauma symptoms despite not having experienced the initial trauma. We have witnessed what looks like this kind of transmission in places like Rwanda where children born after the genocide seem to experience many of the same symptoms of their parents.

Thus far, the data about generational transmission has been mixed. Looking at 2nd and 3rd generations of holocaust survivors, some research indicates that later generations can be affected; some research indicates no secondary traumatization. The problem with this research is that much is focused on the content of transmitted symptoms rather than the process. In the latest issue of Psychological Trauma (v. 5:4, 384-391), Lotem Giladi and Terece Bell have published a study looking at both content and process of trauma symptom transmission (“Protective Factors for Intergenerational Transmission of Trauma Among Second and Third Generation Holocaust Survivors”). The authors hope to have a clearer picture of risk and protector factors. As they say,

“The research question was not whether 2G and 3G experienced greater psychopathology than controls, but rather why some of them still carry some Holocaust-related psychological distress whereas others do not.” (384)

These researchers tested whether psychological concepts of differentiation of self (a Bowen concept indicating the ability to balance need for connectedness with family and need for being a separate self) and family communication (a previous study indicated that 2G holocaust survivors suppressed communication of negative emotion around their parents).

What did they find? 2G and 3G both showed greater levels of secondary trauma than controls (though all amounts of STS were in normal range) and surprisingly, the 3G group did not show less secondary trauma than did the 2G group. Indeed, greater differentiation of the self and better family communication among the generations of holocaust survivors positively correlated with  few secondary trauma symptoms.

So, how do trauma symptoms get transmitted to the next generation? We do not really know yet but one possible answer is that trauma tends to influence emotion regulation, anxiety regulation, and thus decreased self-soothing behaviors. This may get passed on to the next generation via suppressed negative feelings (children who do not want to make matters worse) and identification with the parent’s distress (and partially responsible for it).

For those readers who might wonder if their own trauma is causing secondary trauma in children, consider these things:

  • Most of the 2G and 3G holocaust survivor families are not terribly harmed. Most do well. So, it is not a given that your family is being harmed by your trauma symptoms
  • Open communication about the trauma symptoms and impact on family (without laying blame!) is likely helpful. Also communicate how coping with trauma symptoms can also teach a family some positive lessons as well (patience, gentleness, boundaries, etc.)

7 Comments

Filed under Abuse, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Psychology, Uncategorized

Remember the “crack babies”? Results you might not expect


My local paper ran this essay this week: “Crack Baby” Study Ends With Unexpected But Clear Result. After 23 years, the study is over and the results might interest you. Turns out, cocaine is not the worst thing for you. It did not create underdeveloped children, mentally retarded children, emotionally disturbed children. Researchers found no evidence that cocaine accounted for clinically significant differences between exposed children and non-exposed children.

The Clear Result?

The clear result is not that cocaine has no negative impact (it does contribute to premature births and some other problems, but it doesn’t appear to contribute to life long problems in children born at full term.

The clear result is that both controls and exposed children were from the same environment: urban, minority, poor communities. The clear result is that POVERTY and VIOLENCE are significant contributers to things such as low IQ, exposure to traumatic experiences, etc.

Listen to some of these stats:

  • At age 4, control group average IQ: 81.9; exposed children average IQ: 79.0 (both significantly lower than average IQ of national population of children same aged
  • At age 6, 25% of kids in each group scored in abnormal range in math and letter/word recognition
  • By age 7, 81% had seen someone arrested, 35% had seen someone shot, 19% had seen a dead body outside
  • Drug use did not differ between groups: 42% had used pot (as young adults)

But some stats that astounded me:

Of the 224 kids, the researchers have kept track of 110. Here’s some additional data:

  • 2 dead, 3 in prison
  • 6 have college degrees, 6 on the way to getting a degree (these are the ones who they kept in touch with! I expect the percentage of college degrees to not would go down!)
  • and this one: 60 children born to the 110 participants (remember the ages of the participants must be between 23 and 26!)

Mix poverty with failing schools, fractured families, and you get folks who have few options to make it. Without much hope for a future, it is easy to give in to any pleasure or comfort for the moment. Thus, you see higher drug use and babies.

Good to remember that when we see a simple equation between problem and cause, we probably have it somewhat wrong.

1 Comment

Filed under addiction, news, Uncategorized