Hi Everyone
I am grateful for this discussion and the depth of feeling and concern being
expressed.
Looking at the sum of what has been shared from the "balcony instead of the
dance floor" I am reminded
of the breaks and schisms that occurred in other groundbreaking movements -
such as between
Freud and the "early adopters" of his methods. Perhaps, our need to individuate
inevitability requires
us to vocally step away from the shadow of the father figure or in this case
the step-mother figure
who seems to have acted, at least once, sans merci.
As an organizational development facilitator, I look through another lens that
is less concerned about
the developer/founder of a process or methodology and more concerned about my
own capacity, self-awareness
and conduct in effectively using that process with the individual, team or
organizational client. I try to have a pretty big toolkit
and select the right approach that meets the needs of a particular client.
Sometimes, it works out
beautifully and sometimes less so. The limiting factor is not the process
developer and his or her blind spots.
It's me and my own capacity to be with and have space for "what is" without
regressing or losing myself.
Given the human brain's "negativity bias" is it possible to hold what does not
seem to be working, in others and ourselves,
without losing sight of what does work? Our hero's shirt seems to have a stain.
Okay, he's human like the rest of us with our
mistakes and blind spots. Is that all we can see now or is all that is
praiseworthy still visible too? It's not really about loyalty versus
individuation. Putting it in other terms I think Carl Young said something
about the ability to hold seeming opposing views
in one's mind at the same time is a sign of maturity.
Thanks for listening
Harrison Snow
Team Building Associates
________________________________
From: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on
behalf of Maria Bürger-de Castillo mkbdc@xxxxxx [ConstellationTalk]
<ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2017 11:33 AM
To: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ConstellationTalk] Fwd: Orders of love and trauma
Hello Everyone,
Your question concerning the Potsdam Declaration makes me answer
again,"and what has become of it since then? That is, do people invoke
this regularly? Was it put aside? Has it become a code of conduct? "
The Potsdam Declaration and other critical attacs of Bert Hellinger are
treated in the book "Die Entwicklung des Familienstellens nach Bert
Hellinger: Über Psychotherapie hinaus " by Thomas Gehrmann (S.88ff) .The
author`s main theses is that many persons don`t understand that
Hellinger's family constellations and psychotherapie are two different
fields.
One consequence of this "battle" was that Bert took the way to Spain and
Latin America after having been excluded by German constellators.
Since 1999 I found the critic of persons who didn't leave Hellinger that
they are "caught in a cult , that they are blindly following a revered
and feared leader". The first one was Hans Jellouschek who did not
accept that Bert commented the presence of a dead person in the
constellation. I don't follow Hellinger as a revered and feared leader
but as a source of love, inconditional love, and in the comunity of
Spanish speaking constellators I feel at home. Compared with the German
Scene I only know, they are so full of respect and love.
Someone here asked for the traduction of "Orders of Love". In Mexico
they speak of " the basic principles of life" (los principios básicos de
la vida) as synomym to "Orders of Love".
I have seen so many attacs to Bert and Sophie which I could ignore, they
did not affect me. Now I am asking myself: Why does this attac provoked
by a posting of an extract of You Tube from Russia affects me so much?
Hellinger has always shown that he is the chef in the ring. Fide
Ingwersen describes it when all the German Therapists went to Bert's
primal Therapy group. He always has confronted individuals by sending
them back to their place or out of the room if he thought it had to be so.
That in this case this behavior is put in the neighbourhood of fascisme,
this provokes me a big pain. Perhaps it triggles the pain I had when
German facilitators like Dr. Langlotz and others treated Bert as nazi ,
more than 10 years ago. And here this critic has been done by a person I
admire and love so much.
On the other side, I have been in Cancun this february for the official
mexican fare-well of Bert, and Bert let us all know how deap there has
been his suffering from the exclusion in Germany. Perhaps that is the
second reason why it affects me so much here. For me , I feel it like a
deep lack of love and respect.
Concluding I want to send you a link of a lady, with her private history
, and I remember the constellation Sophie was directing with her: Nearly
all of us were shocked by Sophie's intervention. But the result was healing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSWohbnHetQ&index=4&list=PL2tMu0ccKsHVVMZie1KkMmiX8dT_i8u4h
Best wishes for all, and thanks for your work .
Maria
Am 20.04.2017 um 22:47 schrieb Kathy Curran
kcurran@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [ConstellationTalk]:
Heiki:
Thanks for reprinting the Potsdam Declaration. For those of us newer in
constellations, might you also share who authored this, who signed it
(not every name, but rather - all people in attendance at x, etc.,) and
what has become of it since then? That is, do people invoke this
regularly? Was it put aside? Has it become a code of conduct? This
would be very helpful.
In general I have appreciated this conversation very much. We do deal
with what could be thought of as esoteric energies and often working
with those kinds of energies conjures up the idea of a cult - blindly
following a revered and feared leader. To see this diversity of opinion
shared here, all respectfully, and in many cases in a very learned
manner, says a lot about the health of this movement. This is
heartening to one new in the field.
Katherine Curran
Sent from my iPad
On Apr 20, 2017, at 3:33 PM, Heiki Eesmaa heiki.eesmaa@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:heiki.eesmaa@xxxxxxxxx> [ConstellationTalk]
<ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Potsdam Declaration on Systemic Constellation Work (revised)
The work with role-playing and constellations has a long tradition in
family and systemic therapy. Such work is rooted primarily in
therapeutic techniques as they were developed in Family Sculpture work
or in Psychodrama. In the form practiced by Bert Hellinger, it has
achieved a wider public recognition that it never had before.
Regrettably, Hellinger has increasingly distanced himself from his
original systemic work. But he is still to be given credit for his
contributions in strengthening constellation work.
Above all, he has developed new and innovative procedures that promise
to resolve the dynamics of entanglements.
However, today we have reached the point where, not only essential
parts of the practice of Bert Hellinger --- and many of his followers
---, but also many of his statements and procedures are to be regarded
explicitly as incompatible with the fundamental premises of systemic
therapy, namely:
* Neglecting to clarify statements and their related directives
* The application of mystifying and "self-immunizing" descriptions
("something greater", "taken into service of . . ." etc.)
* The unqualified use of generalized formulations and dogmatic
interpretations ("always when", "bad effect", "punished with death",
"the only way", "forfeit the right," etc.).
* Employing potentially humiliating interventions and submission
rituals ?
* The allegedly compelling linkage of these interventions with
specific models of human types and their associated world views (e.g.,
regarding gender issues, parenthood, dual nationalities, etc.)
* The idea that one person can reach a truth that is denied to the
other person. This leads to the use of absolutist terminology and
implies that, in a partnership, it is pointless to strive for
cooperation in the relationship.
By contrast, we validate many examples and permutations of
constellation work, all being done in the context of a systemic-
constructivist understanding of therapy, and within the framework of a
competent and responsible therapeutic relationship.
We understand these points as constructive attempts to develop further
this already proven therapeutic technique and also to submit it to
more and more scientific testing.
To that extent we also resist any vague or imprecise criticism of this
kind of practice.
Constellation work "beyond Hellinger" should be developed further as a
therapeutic instrument, but the close connection with his name is not
to be maintained any longer today. /
July 2004 /
