I will be very careful here, but I am not a big fan of counselling. You know what I mean, the sit in a room and somebody listens to you for years going over the same thing, and repeats certain words back to you, to show they are listening counselling.
I have a strong belief that counselling should be a process, there should be a goal, or at least the counselling should come to an end, or there fails to be a point to it, and I have to say, especially in christian circles. Jesus was declared wonderful counselor ( Isaiah 9: 6 ) , He also died for the grief and shame and guilt that we carry in this world, so that we do not carry it anymore. I can understand someone needing to be led through that process and I am also aware that we all carry things that we shouldn't, that some things leave scars and these things are not easily dropped. But that is the deal, Jesus gave His life so that we brought to all to him and leave it there, not carry around a burden.
There is also the point of the victim mentality, the counselling addicts, the poor me syndrome of ' If people do not understand what has happened to me, they will not understand me, they will not accept or excuse me.' ' Who is going to pay for what has happened to me' ' Why can't I blame' 'If no one listens to me, am I worth anything'
I don't say any of this without sympathy or trying to understand, but knowing the reailty that forgiveness, worth, love, understanding, acceptance only come through Jesus. Easy for me to say, harder to do.............
5 comments:
You say "I will be very careful here" and then indulge in the most crude stereotyping, with language that I think any victim of serious trauma, violence sexual or not, will find contemptuous. You offer shallow, simplistic theology rather than attempting compassion ... which means 'feeling with' or 'suffering with'. As a Christian who has spent quite a lot of time talking to victims of violence and rape, much of it perpetrated by evangelical christians, I have to say I find ths post sailing perilously close to blasphemy. Certainly, asking the question, whose intersts does this post serve, the rapist's or his victim's, the answer is clear, that this redneck talk serves the rapist. You claim that you do not say all this without sympathy, but I'm afraid you appear to say it all with a complete absence of sympathy. Or worse: you cannot mock victims without empowering their abusers. Sympathy does not mock and caricature as you have done. The thing that caricatures, dismisses and mocks in the way this post has done, in New Testament terms, is Pharisaism, not sympathy. Shame on you. The fact is that in this life we meet many damaged, wounded people, and our choice is simple, to help them, or to find reasons to walk by on the other side of the road. You appear to advocate the latter and, bizarrely, to do so in the name of Christ. Shame on you. May God have mercy on you enough to make you go away and actually THINK.
What are you going on about??? You have launched into a rather disturbing attack on myself, calling me shallow, contempuous, blasphemous, pharisaic, being a redneck encouraging rapists?????
Are you reading the same post? I am saying that counselling should be a process, that helps people deal with guilt and shame and encourages them to leave it at Jesus' feet and like it or not there are people who like to play the victim and don't want to get over things because of the attention they get. This comment does not encourage or empower abusers.
I do meet damaged people constantly, who I love and help in every way I can, which is something you would know about me, if you knew me, were not so quick to judge me or read things through without a huge chip on your shoulder ( yes now I am judging you), I will not walk on by and am here if you want to continue the conversation, God bless.
It's very sad if you genuinely can't see it, but your post is full of caricature, and caricature is neither careful, nor sympathetic. You unquestionably do treat victims with contempt in this post. I don't generalise, in my first comment, beyond your remarks in this post. I confess, when I read this particular post, I knew very little about you, and I've since read a number of other posts. There is a very self-indulgent strain in many of them, and a very undisciplined use of language. I'm afraid I find you rather self-righteous, and the impression of you I formed on the basis of this first post has not significantly changed. If you have the intelligence to read Le Carre and Patrick O Brian, you have the intelligence to recognise that your post was crude and, to use the word that first came to mind, brutal. It's political, in fact, in the broadest sense, not theological or spiritual. It's nasty, and I find it dishonest. The pattern 'I'm not going to be x' and then going on to be exactly x, is one that's very common in our spin-centred world. It's a step away from a lie. Shame on you. And an angry response with 'bless you' on the end only takes the pxxs out of the idea of blessing. For some of us, that word still has meaning. I hope you did find the comment disturbing, because I think you need to be shaken out of some rather unhealthy attitudes, and yes, including Pharisaism. The one thing I do regret is using the word redneck, as it's rather a slur on rednecks.
I will make a final point here because this will just go on, you are not making any point whatsoever, except trying to be clever and you are insensitive, abusive and rather upsetting and hurtful, first stone and all that. I do mean bless you, because when I made my reposte, I wasa not trying to be against you, only trying to understand, the only thing I now see in you is the hurt and pain. I am truly sorry for what it was that caused it, it was not me, please do not take out your own hang ups and very typical overthought into simple thoughts, which are my right to write. There is no blasphemy in my post or pharisaism, fact, or anger, or hate, or politics, or sex. Jesus is the answer, leave it at the cross. It is simple theology, the one Jesus preached.
It seems that 'being here if I want to continue the conversation' is only true if I first concede that you're a good, decent, kind man. And that points are simply not being made if you don't happen to agree with them. I'm sorry for your blindness, though it seems to be wilful, and sorry too that you abuse the gospel by making further patronising remarks, and passing them off as concern. Consider, for a moment at least, the possibility that you are wrong. I see no sign whatsoever that you have done this. And please stop using the cross as a device to buttress your own self-righteousness and patronise those who disagree with you. If you can't respond to criticism other than by attacking the critic, then I agree, there is no point in continuing, so I'll leave it here. My hope is still, as in my first comment, that you will start to actually think.
Post a Comment