Thoughts and Encouragements for Wounded Helpers
Joined to a Healing God
|
Thoughts and Encouragements for Wounded Helpers
Joined to a Healing God |
Inner Parent, Adult and Inner Child:A brief review of Transactional Analysis in a Biblical Pastoral context |
2013-07-09As human beings we are influenced strongly in our speaking
and acting by what we experienced in our first years of life.
Many scientists have developed theories on the drives behind our actions.
The Transactional Analysis by Eric Berne and others uses a metaphor of
Inner Parent, Adult and Inner Child, as an instrument to gain
more insight into these drives and to make conscious choices.
Below are some 'highlights' from this theory, as well as a very brief
analysis from a Biblical pastoral perspective.
In the late 1950’s Eric Berne (1910-1970)
discovered that people in their interactions with others are influenced by
experiences and memories from their childhood, with the first five years
being particularly significant.
He discerned two influences: that of our own - sometimes childish - emotions,
and those of messages that we got from our parents and others. The latter
often contain a normative element - be it disapproving or affirming. This led
him to discern three ‘ego states’, ‘ways of being’ or
‘positions’ from which we relate to others. Those ‘ego
states’ are not theoretical constructs like Freud’s
‘ego’, ‘id’ and ‘superego’, or
like the common split between ‘conscious’ and ‘sub-’
or ‘unconscious’. Rather, they are phenomenological
realities involving our feeling, thinking, speaking and doing.
Simply put: they are ways in which we feel, think, speak or behave.
Berne arranged them in three groups, commonly represented by the letters
P, A and C, and drawn in small circles on top of each other:
Thomas Harris - one of Berne’s first adherents - refers to the Parent as ‘recordings of external events (taught concept of life)’, the Adult as ‘recordings of data acquired and computed through exploration and testing (thought concept of life)’, and the Child as ‘recordings of internal events (felt concept of life)’ - especially the emotions and feelings which accompanied external events (see the reference in note 1, chapter 2.).
These findings made Berne the founder of what has become known as Transactional Analysis. This Transactional Analysis gives attention to the way in which people interact with each other, and the dynamics that unfold in such interactions (either functional or dysfunctional). His work has become well known to a broad audience and I think we can learn a lot from Transactional Analysis1, even though I have some comments as well.
‘Positions’ and crossed interactionsThe three ‘positions’ as alluded to above, include the concept that we position ourselves in interactions to others as fellow Adult, as Child or as Parent. At the same time, we address the other person in his or her ‘position’ as Adult, Child or Parent. |
 |
 | In healthy communication there is
equivalence and balance. The communication between two persons in their Adult
position, like depicted here to the left, is the best example of this. |
 |
It gets a bit more complicated when one of the two persons
in the interaction is at Child level and the other positions him/herself as
Parent, as in the diagram on the left here.
For example: Peter asks somewhat timidly or insecurely and submissively
from his colleague John whether John likes Peter’s piece of work, and
John affirms it. If this pattern of Child-Parent can flexibly change over time
to Adult-Adult and Parent-Child, this can be okay as well. In the example it
could be that John and Peter regularly affirm each other in a difficult job.
In marriages I see this happen as well: one day she is somewhat insecure
and acts a bit more from the Child state, a week later he takes that role.
In an atmosphere of mutual acceptance things like this can happen and will
not lead to unequivalence (which is what it will lead to when it is always
one partner who is the ‘Child’ and the other always the
‘Parent’).
This becomes even more awkward when one directs him/herself
towards the other as Adult to an Adult, and the other reacts as a Parent
towards a Child (diagram to the right).
For example: person A asks: “Did you happen to see my car keys?”,
to which B replies: “No, of course not, I’ve told you already
three times to put them in their proper place!” Here B reacts as
‘critical Parent’ and sees A as ‘stubborn Child’.
The two interactions cross; they do not correspond to each other. This is
not respectful and almost without exception it is experienced as unpleasant.
Such a ‘crossed interaction’ we also see when
both act as Child towards the other as Parent. For example: A says: “I
have been treated very badly at work, I feel very miserable!”
Instead of responding to A’s request for some love and attention, B
reacts: “Well, what do you think that I feel, after ...?!”
In all likelihood, both will feel even more frustrated and sad than before
this interaction. Neither one received what they were searching for:
(Parent-al) encouragement in their (Child-like) frustrations.
A similar thing we see when A notices that there is a different kind of bread than usual and asks curiously (A-A): “Where did you buy this bread?” and B unjustly interprets this as a highly critical question like “What idiot kind of bread is this?” from A as ‘critical Parent’ and, from this interpretation reacts as ‘wounded/aggrieved Child’ towards that ‘critical Parent’ (C-P): “What is wrong with it?”
In these last examples B does not react to A’s actual question, but from an association recalled in B’s inner Child or inner Parent by A’s question. In such a case B’s reaction will likely not promote genuineness and authenticity in the rest of the talk, as it will provoke a change in the presenting ego state of A. The talk will likely not continue about what A wanted to talk about in the first place, but about what B felt, yet did not say. That is what makes ‘crossed transactions’ so unclear and discomforting for those involved. There are also crossed interactions that can end a dysfunctional ‘play’, but that is another chapter altogether.
Berne saw that in every person – even those acting from a highly regressed, immature state – there was also an adult that could be mobilized. In that sense, his theory of TA meant a positive break with old and far less hopeful views in psychology.
However, his theory also showed – in my opinion – to what extent Berne was a child of the modern time. His theory seems strongly inspired by Greek thinking and the so called ‘enlightenment’ that are so characteristic of post-war (World War II) modernism. This influence appears in the distinction he makes between emotions (Child), norms (Parent) and rational thoughts (Adult), and from the fact that he places rational Adult behavior in fact over and above the other two. Relationship and spiritual aspects remain outside the picture, while human rationality is implicitly elevated to be the highest norm. Norms and values we owe to our parents (with half implicitly the notion that these ‘imposed’ norms belong to the past, because modern, rational man can determine for himself what is good, purely by reason). And emotions are connected to ‘being like a child’ (read: irrational immaturity).
The Bible clearly points in a different direction here. In the Biblical notion man is before anything else a spiritual being, created for the relationship with God and with each other. Ultimately, our emotions, our body and our mind have put to the service of this. I dig deeper into this in my article ‘Life Renewal’ (on how change in our life comes about).
The way in which TA discerns between ‘Inner Parent’, ‘Adult’ and ‘Inner Cild’, brings me to another issue. We have been created in God’s image and likeness, and God is One. So, unity in our spiritual living and thinking, feeling and behaving is to be our goal. Where we make distinctions, or discern between various motivations or backgrounds to our behavior, that must always serve that goal of unity. What I do not appreciate is that Berne talks about ‘ego states’ where he means ‘ways of speaking and behaving, inspired by experiences from our past’. Where Thomas Harris describes how Eric Berne came to his theory, he even speaks of ‘personalities’ (see the reference in note 1, Chapter 2, back translated from Dutch):
“In one hour she (this counselee) changed into three different and distinct personalities: that of the little child controlled by emotions, that of the authoritarian parent, and that of the rational, logical adult woman and mother of three kids.”
(Notice that the adjectives used here speak volumes on the appreciation of the writer for the three positions!)
Speaking about ‘distinct personalities’ becomes
very confusing in this context. Yet, this is a way that people frequently use
and speak about TA, and in particular about theories around the ‘Inner
Child’. I have heard people speak about multiple Inner Children like
they were alters in a person with DID (Dissociative Identity Disorder).
I do not exclude the possibility that in this way, some helpers may have
induced DID in some suggestible counselees.
It should be stressed that the issue is an analysis of drives
- backgrounds from which we speak or behave in a certain way.
However, it can be a good thing to discern between
different drives.
Yet, the most important distinction is not whether they come from taught
norms and values, from childish emotions or from adult reasoning, but whether
they are in line with our life goal: connection with God.
So, whether they are spiritually connected to God versus isolated from
God, or,in other terms: spiritual, 'God-connected' (G) versus non-spiritual
or ‘fleshly’ (F) (from our natural state of alienation and
isolation from God).
The picture to the left illustrates what it is all about. Is the connecting
channel towards God open (G) or do we close Him out (F) (notice, that from
God’s side both channels are open; the ‘obstruction’
is on the F-side of ourselves)? Both positions (G and F) can then still be
divided into the P-A-C positions of TA.
That this is an essential addendum, may appear from the example in Genesis 3.
A seemingly (speaking in TA-terms) ‘adult reasoning’ can take us
away from the warm connectedness with God – like it happened there with
Eve, who considered that the ‘forbidden tree’ looked good and
that one could become wise by eating its fruit. So, this was good in TA-terms
(A) but spiritually seen totally isolated from God (F). Closer analysis shows
here that Eve was influenced by the distrust towards God that she had allowed
the snake to talk her into. Here is the spiritual-relational element
(G/F), that is perpendicular to, and encloses the three dimensions of the TA.
In Eve’s spiritually isolated behavior (F) was an element of fear:
what if God had an ulterior motive, like the snake suggested?
TA would characterize this as ‘Child’ (C).
Like I said earlier, there was an element adult reasoning in it (A).
And there was a normative (‘critical Parent’: P) element in it:
in fact Eve judged God, rejected His advice and decided to go her own way.
Yet, the most important was that she made a choice, perpendicular
to the connection she had with God and with her husband, Adam (F).
Concerning the latter: she did not involve Adam explicitly in the choice,
making the choice also for him, thus implicitly involving him also in the
isolation (F).
Within this reframing I do see use for the distinctions as made by Berne. In the dysfunctionality of our broken lives and society, it can be useful to have a critical look at what drives us: are we led by the Spirit of God (G), by humble (GA) or haughty (FA) human reasoning, by childish emotions (C) or by critical thoughts that we perhaps unconsciously adopted from our parents or other authority figures (P)? Also these C and P ‘positions’ can be in agreement with our connectedness with God (GC and GP, respectively) or not (FC and FP). From which of these ‘sources’ stems that particular remark that we make towards our life partner, or that reaction we have towards the colleague or fellow traveler in the bus? These questions could help us grow in maturity.
During the years I have encountered many people who had
problems because of a strong and very restrictive inner Parent. One person I
can think of, I will call Peter here. He never ever allowed himself to relax
for a minute, because relaxation meant being less productive. His critical
inner Parent continuously warned him to always be productive.
As Christians we may ask God in such a case to overwrite the messages
of that dysfunctional inner Parent with messages about His love and truth.
Carrying out a focused Bible study about these ‘messages’, where
we ask God for His Light and Truth about them, can be of great help here.
Sometimes it is really like a revelation when someone discovers how his or
her inner Parent was colored by the character or mistakes of his or her
father or mother or significant others, and that God appears to have a
totally different look at certain behaviors.
For the man mentioned earlier (Peter) it meant for example that he
discovered how much rest there is in the Bible stories, how often there
was a quiet stroll, how Paul was on a ship for months, etcetera.
Above all he could discover that God likes it that he just is there –
being together is more important than activity. In fact, in the course of
this process, God became his new Parent.
It is in itself Biblical to be critical towards childish drives and motives, as Paul indicated in 1 Corinthians 13: 11.
“When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became a man, I gave up childish ways.”
Paul talks here about growing to maturity and ‘giving up childish ways’. However, his notion of ‘childish’ is not exactly the same as the ‘Child’ that Berne and others talk about. Paul speaks first and foremost from the spiritual dimension. He sees himself as a spiritually mature man who has given up what was not in accordance with his spiritually connected (G) standpoint.
A very important aspect of this is that we become healed
by God from the emotional wounds from our childhood, such that those wounds
will not continue to ‘poison’ our thoughts, speech and behavior,
as I sometimes call it. This can mean that we allow ourselves to receive the
love and affirmation that we did not receive or insufficiently received as a
child (TA talks about developing our nurturing inner Parent, and this is a
good concept; it is good to be able to quiet yourself as a good parent would
do, self-talk - like we see in the Psalms - can be very healthy!).
In such cases, I do not speak of an ‘inner child’ as still
existing inside us, as if I am or have a split personality2. An example to clarify
this. Sarah (the name is fictitious) once came to me with the problem that
she could become very emotional at times – to the point of crying
– when an older man treated her in a friendly way. As a little girl she
had never experienced her father to be friendly towards her, and whenever an
older man was friendly to her now, the pain that she had felt as a little
girl and teenager surfaced again, as did her strong and unfulfilled longing
for fatherly affirmation. This ‘wounded inner girl’ was not an
alter inside her, but a constellation of emotions, longings and memories
that she still carried as an adult woman. We asked God to go back in time
to that girl that was longing there in vain for an affirming word, look or
gesture from her father, and we asked God to comfort and encourage her as
her good heavenly Father. In the present time I encouraged her to seek
God’s presence frequently in prayer and seek for His affirmation of
her as a woman now. (That included that she also learned to treat herself
more tenderly and caringly.) And God answered those prayers! At one of those
occasions a lot of old sorrow and grief surfaced that she literally could
cry out of herself in the presence of a wise older man, who – as it
were – embodied God here on earth in that moment. After that she could
receive God’s affirmation better and better, and she was better at
recognizing when she needed this affirmation or comfort. In that way, she
learned to cooperate with God in her own healing process.
(By the way, I wrote: ‘a wise older man’ - someone sufficiently
spiritually ripened to understand the depth of her grief and allow God to
comfort her through his arm around her shoulder, while at the same time
keeping sufficient distance as a man such that it was clear for Sarah and
himself that it was God Who had touched her and not this man.)
Yet another issue is having our reaction ‘correspond
to’ or ‘match’ the ‘position’ chosen by the
other person. This is part of what it means to ‘synchronize’ with
the other. If our reaction to what the other said does not ‘match’
his or her opening statement (whatever it is: A-A, C-P, P-C, C-C, etc.), why
is that? In general it is more pleasant for a good way of relating if a reply
‘matches’ in this respect.
On some rare occasions, however, this may not be the best option from a
spiritual viewpoint. An example: when, in Genesis 3, Eve offered Adam a bite
as well from the forbidden fruit (A-A, or P-C, depending on how you regard
it), Adam could have reacted spiritually (G) by saying: "No, of course
not! Stay away from that fruit! You know what God has told us, and you know
how He in pure love has only our best interest in mind!" By means of
such a P-C transaction (actually a G-F transaction, that is a spiritually
connected G position opposing Eve’s isolating F position) he might
well have been able to circumvent the fall with all the misery that came
from it.
Every position (P, A, C) has its own typical styles of
communication.
That of the critical Parent, for example, is very well known:
“Those youngsters these days... in our days we’d better not try
to...” In the language of the critical Parent it is always
others who do it all very wrong. The Government and the Tax service do
‘it’ wrong, the bus company doesn’t get its buses to arrive
in time, the weather is too hot or too cold, or too dry or too wet.
Preferably such a critical Parent finds either a ‘fellow in
complaining’ or else a victim to yell at or to accuse of all kind of
things. His or her speech is never about something the person wants to change
in his or her own life.
The miserable, wounded Child complains as well, but there
the complaint is directed at what the child misses her- or himself:
“nobody cares about me!” and the like.
As a helper, in practice I can do little with the complaints of a critical
Parent. Much more can be done with the needs of the wounded Child, or with
the communication of the cheerful Child or the rational Adult, although it
becomes more troublesome when the latter becomes a mask for a wounded person
to hide his true feelings behind. In that regard the communication of the
– in TA idealized – rational Adult can be very dysfunctional as
well! Such people – like the critical Parents above – I sometimes
refer to the book Abba’s Child by Brennan Manning. He discerns
the Pharisee (in TA terms: the critical Parent, and then especially the S
variant, and even religious) from the child of the Father (a very healthy
combination of G, C and A), and helps us get rid of the former to the
benefit of the latter.
TA and leadership in workplace and
church Sometimes I whish that there was more
knowledge of TA among leaders in trade and industry as well as in churches.
I see many leaders speak from the Parent position and treating their
subordinates in the Child position. Next they are surprised that their
hearers resist or passively adapt. They are surprised that these
‘children’ react and behave as they were treated: as children
with little initiative of their own, with childish emotions and with the
resistance of a toddler or teenager in the ‘no’-phase. Much
frustration in employees and church members, as well as in their leaders,
might be circumvented so easily. |
Finally I still want to add one critical note to the distinction between three parts, three subsets of emotions, thoughts, memories and motives in our lives. This note has to do with the modernistic character of the TA-theory and with what I already said above about making distinctions. All too easily certain emotions, thoughts or motives are labeled as belonging to our inner ‘Child’ and not to an ‘Adult’ way of being, while Biblically seen they do belong to the mature or adult position. As an example, I think here of spontaneity and wonder. In our modernistic western society we have misjudged the value of these and we have forgotten or never learned these skills, while they actually are an essential part of mature adult life. When we can wonder from hour to hour about what God does in our life and in our direct surroundings, what He has done there and will still do there, then that adds so much happiness to our life! The same is true when we can react spontaneously to what He brings to our attention!
Because TA starts from the Adult as purely rational, and sees things like playfulness, joy and intuition as part of the Child state, the good theory about that Child state is confused considerably, to my way of thinking.3 Playfulness, joy, wonder and intuition are not by definition immature remnants of unprocessed emotions from our childhood, but can be a healthy part of the spiritually connected Adult state (GA). This view keeps our image of the Child state more clear, as involving unfinished emotions rooted in our childhood and the thoughts we based on those emotions. This Child state then becomes something we - with Paul - may give up, by growing up spiritually and ripening in maturity. Part of that spiritual maturing will occur as we finish those unfinished issues and emotions from our childhood with God, and replace old feelings and thoughts with feelings and thoughts that are more in accordance with our connectedness with God (G state) in Christ.
What TA labels as inner Parent can also contain elements of what constitutes adulthood in God’s eyes – think for example of listening to Him and to the norms and values that He has given in His Word, the Bible. TA -rightly- brings attention to the fact that this should not be based on a slavish way of obeying norms or values that were imposed on us from outside, but on living from a renewed heart. Spiritually seen, that life from your heart is a life from inner connectedness with God in Christ Jesus. What God teaches in the Bible and what He affirms in our heart by His Spirit will then melt together in harmony.
The relationship of TA with dealing with our emotions is a subject I hope to deal with in more depth in a later article.
The Transactional Analysis offers a metaphor of ‘Inner Child’, ‘Adult’ and ‘Inner Parent’ which, Biblically seen, has to be subjected to the distinction between ‘spiritually connected with God’ (G) and ‘Separated from Him’ (F). We can focus on the ‘spiritually connected with God’ position in the way TA recommends to focus on the ‘Adult’ position. Within this framework the metaphor can help us gain a better insight into the drives behind our speaking and behavior. The metaphor of the 'Inner Child' can help us to recognize where we speak or react from an old emotional wound. In that case we can search God’s healing for this wound and in the meantime choose to restrain its influence in our life as much as possible. The metaphor of the ‘Inner Parent’ can help us in a similar way to check where our norms and values are based on the Bible or derived from a less honorable way in which a parent or significant other once treated us or what he or she has said. We then can choose to put God’s love and truth above the voice of our ‘Inner Parent’. Where the voice of our ’Inner Parent’ corresponds with the Word of God and the subtle guidance of His Spirit, we can honor our parents for that.
By the way, it is good to let that metaphor of the three ‘positions’ be what it is, a metaphor, and not to elevate the possible positions or drives to ‘ways of being’, ‘(partial) personalities’ or anything like that. The child we once were is not ‘in’ us any longer, as an ‘Inner Child’; there are only memories of past experiences, thought patterns, expressions and feelings from our childhood that are sometimes easily called to the surface by association from something happening in the present, and these memories can then influence our speaking, thinking, feeling and behaving (if we allow it to do so, that is).
An important aspect of the G-F positions that I added here
is what constitutes God’s way to take us away from the F-positions,
irrespective whether they can be identified as an inner Child without God,
an inner parent alienated from God or Adult separated from God. One Mediator
has been given Who can free our clogged connection channel to God: Jesus
Christ! Our tendencies to think, feel, speak and act in an F-way are more
profound than most of us think.
In God’s presence we may confess these tendencies and their sour fruit,
while at the same time asking God for forgiveness and cleansing.
We can quiet ourselves and let ourselves be filled with His Spirit.
We can focus our attention consciously on Him – very focused in
prayer and in reading His Word and in listening to His gentle voice, but
to some degree also in everything else we do. Then we will experience His
deep renewal gradually in all the thoughts and feelings that form the
basis for our daily actions. That is the most powerful renewal that we can
whish for our lives.4
All of this can contribute to our living more from the new heart that Jesus has given us, as Jim Wilder and others express so succinctly.5
| 1 | Thomas A. Harris, I’m ok, you’re
ok, Harper and Row, New York / Evanston, 1967. (See also this pdf version of a powerpoint, highlighting the main points of this
classic book.)
Eric Berne, Games People
Play, Grove Press, New York, 1964.
Eric Berne, Transactional Analysis in
Psychotherapy – A Systematic Individual and Social Psychiatry,
Ballantine Books (Grove Press), New York, 1961.
See also the Eric Berne website.
Claude M. Steiner, Scripts People Live –
Transactional Analysis of Life Scripts, Grove Press, New York, 1974 /
Bantam Books, London / New York / Toronto, 1975).
The famous metaphor from this, ‘A Warm Fuzzy Tale’, is available on the web. Jut Meininger, Success through Transactional
Analysis, Signet - New American Library, New York, 1973; ISBN: 0451126378
/ 0451058984. |
| 2 | It may be clear that I am not approving the
theory about the ‘Inner Child’ like suggested by people like John
Bradshaw. Though the TA-metaphor might be seen as supporting this theory, I
see its main roots in eastern mystic and in occultism based ideas by Jung.
In this theory the ‘Inner Child’ becomes like a person on its own
within the person and is given authority with an idolatrous pull. It then
becomes important, or so they say, to listen carefully to this ‘Inner
Child’ and to do as it tells you to or to give it whatever it says it
needs. The common mature critical and spiritual abilities are laid aside and
one is told to open oneself up for all kind of (often emotionally charged)
impressions and the like, that would emerge from this mystical ‘Inner
Child’. Remarkably, there is never mentioned that this
‘Child’ needs a good Father! It does not surprise me, that this
theory knows a broad adherence in New Age and occult circles; demons love to
use it!
For clarity: I do back the approach like that of the Pesso therapy, where in (group)therapy other people step temporarily (maybe only for five minutes) into the role of father or mother to give somebody as yet what he or she never got as a child (e.g. a certain affirmation). The need for affirmation (or whatever it is) is not a separate ‘inner child’, but an inner feeling of emptiness or something like that, that remained as a residue of a lacking experience. It may well be ‘filled’ as yet by an experience (Adler already spoke of a ‘correcting experience’) like receiving an authoritative affirmation or some gesture. For an impression of what Pesso therapy is all about, see e.g.: Monique Cuppen, Pesso-psychotherapie bij de behandeling van trauma gerelateerde klachten (Pesso psychotherapy in the treatment of trauma related issues; in Dutch), Study seminar ‘Knowledge in Treatment’, 7 December 2000, Knowledgecentre Post Traumatic Stress Disorders at Winschoten (NL). |
| 3 | How confusing this may get, I found illustrated
very well in the otherwise very thought-provoking book by Claude Steiner
from note 1. In Chapter 1 (p.34) he says: “The Child ego state
is essentially preserved in its entirety from childhood.”.
A little further (p.35): “The ... Child ... is said to be the best
part of a person and the only part that can really enjoy itself. It is the
source of spontaneity, sexuality, creative change, and is the mainspring
of joy.”
From reaching our fifth year of life, this would
totally exclude all further development in our personality in the area of
being able to experience joy and other emotions, yes even sexuality.
It is clear, that the rational modernistic starting point of Berne and
Steiner is blocking a healthy vision on mature emotional and relational
skills (including sexuality). |
| 4 | In a personal communication on an earlier
version of this article, David Takle spoke about the role of –
what he called – Malformation. He said (emphasis mine):
“For me, the greatest weakness of TA is that it assumes we can gather enough information about our past actions to make better choices in the future. What this ignores is that most of our interactions come out of who we have become at that point in our journey, not by deliberate, thought-out decisions. Whatever sense we may have that we are in control of our responses, most of the "data" that we use to arrive at a response is fed to us by processes going on below the conscious level, most of which was shaped by prior experience. Our way of being is formed over time by the things that happen to us, the things we do, and the way we interpret all of that. To whatever extent our interpretation of our own life is distorted (which I believe is very great) we will tend to react to life in ways that are more "fleshly" than spiritual. I call that Malformation. Now some of that internal malformation can be overridden by willpower, but (a) that does not change the underlying structures, and (b) much of the problem goes too deep for the will to conquer. So what I see in TA (and in this adaptation) is a tool for identifying weak points in our system. But the corrective measures have little to do with TA. They have to do with how we can engage with God to correct the underlying structures so that we tend to react in ways that are more in tune with the Heart of God. Without that careful distinction, people think that they are supposed to "Try Harder" to act like a Godly Adult, when in fact they will never be able to by their own strength.” I couldn’t have formulated it any better. See also: David Takle, The Truth About Lies And Lies About Truth - A fresh new look at the cunning of Evil and the means for our Transformation, Shepherd’s House, Pasadena CA, USA, 2008; ISBN 0 9674357 9 4. |
| 5 | See: E. James Wilder, James G. Friesen, Anne M.
Bierling, Rick Koepcke, Maribeth Poole, The Life Model - Living from
the Heart Jesus Gave You - The Essentials of Christian Living, and:
Bringing the Life Model to Life - The LIFE Model Study Guide for
Individuals and Small Groups, Shepherd’s House, Pasadena, CA, USA,
1999 and 2000 respectively.
Very clear this all becomes in the book that is addressing growth towards full maturity: E. James Wilder, (The Complete Guide to) Living with Men - Keep Growing and Stay Lovable, Shepherd's House Publishing, Pasadena CA, USA, 1993/2004; ISBN 0 9674357 5 7. |
I thank Martien Jan de Haan of Archippus for his constructive feedback
to an earlier, Dutch version of this article, and David Takle of Shepherd's House for his very helpful feedback on the
English version.
The most important references have been given in the notes above. Below a few additional references.
Howard J. Clinebell, Jr., Contemporary Growth Therapies, Abingdon Press, 1981 (esp. Chapter 6 on Transactional Analysis).
Brennan Manning, Abba’s Child - the cry of the
heart for intimate belonging, NavPress, Colorado USA, 1994.
See also the web-article: Living as God’s
beloved - an interview with Brennan Manning, about how we can experience
God’s love; from the on-line library of the Discipleship Jl (Navigators
USA).
Josh McDowell, with Ed Stewart, The Disconnected Generation - Saving Our Youth from Self Destruction, Word (Thomas Nelson), Nashville, 2000; ISBN 0-8499-4077-X (see an impression of this book, at the publisher).
André H. Roosma, ‘Difficult emotions, social-psychological ‘Games’ and the Karpman Drama Triangle’ (also in Dutch), web-article here at www.12accede.org
André H. Roosma, ‘Life Renewal ‐ by our thinking or...?’ (also in Dutch), web-article at www.12accede.org
André H. Roosma, ‘Living as children of the King’, web-article about pastoral care from Romans 14: 17, here at www.12accede.org
André H. Roosma, ‘True worship’, web-article on what worship is all about and why it is important, here at www.12accede.org
Bruce Thompson, Walls of my heart, Crown
Ministries Itnl, USA 1989.
Note: This book clearly describes how skewed
walls (as erected e.g. in codependence) cannot adequately protect our hearts.
To live securely and healthily, we have to built straight walls according to
God’s Word.
John Townsend, Hiding from Love (We all long to be
cared for, but we prevent it by -) - How to change the withdrawal patterns
that isolate and imprison you, NavPress, USA, 1991 / Scripture Press,
Amersham-on-the-Hill Bucks England, 1992. ISBN 1-872059-68-6.
Comment: John Townsend helped me to see the struggle we often face
between a desire and need for connection and a similar one for separation.
He also showed clearly how we can struggle about the fact that bad and
evil happens - most of the time totally outside our control. We somehow
have to resolve the urge to ‘make everything good’.
Lin Button of Pastoral Care Ministries wrote about this book:
“A life changing book for everyone who experiences problems in
relationships. It gives directions for a spiritual journey to the place
where you can receive love from God and others and where you learn to accept
yourself.”
| home |  | or back to the article index |
For more information, or your reaction to the above, you can contact me via e-mail: andre.roosma@12accede.nl.
André H.
Roosma, Accede!,
Zoetermeer NL, 2007-03-10 (NL)/ 2009-08-11 (Eng.)/ 2013-07-09;
all rights reserved.
Nederlandse versie