Jesus in Times of Freud

JESUS IN TIMES OF FREUD
AN EXPLORATION OF THE APPLICATION OF JESUS’ MESSAGE TO

CONTEMPORARY PSYCHOTHERAPY
Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo
California Institute of Integral Studies
Integral Counseling Psychology
San Francisco, Ca.
2007
© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

He didn’t need to know more about humanity; he knew what people were really like.
Jn 2:25
If you bring forth what is within you, what you bring forth will save you. If you do not
bring forth what is within you, what you do not bring forth will destroy you.
Th 70:1-2

Table of Contents
I. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................................. 4
A. DOES JESUS AND PSYCHOTHERAPY MIX? ........................................................................... 4
II. SETTING THE FRAME ..................................................................................................... 5
A. HOW AM I READING THE GOSPELS? ................................................................................... 5

B. WHAT I DON’T WANT TO DO............................................................................................. 8
C. BASIC ASSUMPTIONS .......................................................................................................... 8
III. WHAT IS PSYCHOTHERAPY? ................................................................................. 11
A. WHAT IS THE PROCESS OF PSYCHOTHERAPY? ................................................................ 13

B. JESUS DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCESS OF PSYCHOTHERAPY ............................................ 17
IV. SOME SPECIFIC TOPICS........................................................................................... 22
A. ON HUMAN NATURE ........................................................................................................ 22

B. UNCONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE ....................................................................................... 24
C. DEFENSES ......................................................................................................................... 28
D. SIN AND FRAGMENTATION / TRUE AND FALSE SELF ....................................................... 30
E. THE SHADOW.................................................................................................................... 36
F. DIFFERENTIATION............................................................................................................. 42
G. BODY/MIND/SPIRIT .......................................................................................................... 46
H. MODELING ........................................................................................................................ 49
V. WHAT IS THE GOAL OF PSYCHOTHERAPY? ......................................................... 50
A. LIEBEN UND ARBEITEN .................................................................................................... 51

B. DEATH AND RESURRECTION ............................................................................................ 52
C. WHOLENESS / SELF-ACTUALIZATION .............................................................................. 59
D. THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN / SELF-TRANSCENDENCE ..................................................... 63
VI. CLOSING THOUGHTS................................................................................................ 66
VII. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 71
VIII. NOTES ............................................................................................................................ 74

I. Preliminary Considerations
I grew up a member of the Catholic Church. From a very young age, I have been
intrigued by the life and teachings of Jesus. Although I do not now profess the traditional
Catholic faith that I learned in my childhood, I have always loved Jesus of Nazareth. The
depth and sensitivity in what appear to be simple words has always fascinated me. I
remember reading the gospels and attending services, paying real attention to the priest’s
sermons; trying to understand the words read, and amazed by the apparently infinite ways
of interpreting them.
A. Does Jesus and psychotherapy mix?
When I decided to become a psychotherapist and began learning about

Transpersonal Psychotherapy 1 , I found many books dealing with the relationship of
Buddhism and Hinduism and Psychotherapy, applying their concepts to
psychotherapeutic work. In contrast, I was surprised by the fact that I found very few
books with a Christian approach 2 .
Some (cf. Baker, 2001) have called Jesus the greatest psychologist who ever
lived. I respectfully disagree. Jesus was not a therapist, as the word is understood
nowadays, but a spiritual master. However, let us not forget that the word psychology,
comes from the Greek psyche (“soul”), and in ancient cultures, there was not a separation
between the spiritual and psychological realms. In Jesus’ time, our modern
compartmentalization of religion, ethics, law and psychology may have appeared
artificial, rigid, impractical and even unnecessary. Most ancient cultures, conceptualized
humans as integrated body-mind-spirit beings--acknowledging the need for each of us to
walk our own path, to develop our own personality.
Jesus challenged us to listen and to see (in as much as we have eyes and ears to do
so), to open our hearts and to understand in order to heal ourselves and our world (Mt
13:15). He called us to welcome back our inner prodigal sons (Lk 15:11-32) and

wounded parts left abandoned by the side of the road of life (Lk 10:25-37); to heal our
fragmented self and be perfect as God is (Mt 5:48). He also suggested to us to build our
house upon rock, for it to resist the rains and floods of daily existence. Jesus promised us
that the truth (which includes self-knowledge) will set us free (Jn 8:32). He wanted us to
have life, and to have it abundantly (Jn 10:10); to live, to be free and to be happy.
I am convinced that understanding the psychological value in the teachings of

Jesus does not diminish their spiritual significance in any way, but instead allows us to
discover again their spiritual vitality and relevance in our everyday life. My purpose in
writing this essay, is to continue the effort begun by others, and to review Jesus teachings
in the light of modern psychotherapy. I hope that this work will help to further the
interest of others in this field.
II. Setting the Frame
A. How am I Reading the Gospels?
As strange as it may sound, many would agree that reading (and especially
interpreting) the gospels can be a risky business. Since written (sometime between 50
and 90 C. E.) and compiled in the current canon (ca. 160 A. D.) they have been used for
myriad purposes (many of which would even seem contradictory amongst themselves).
The four books (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) 3 have been used to justify wars,
slavery, witch hunting, etc.; as well as to create some of the most beautiful and noble
expressions of human emotions in all forms of art; and are used, on a daily basis, both to
carry out acts of love and kindness and acts of cruelty and hatred against other human
beings. Even in our day, many wars are based on different interpretations of basically
these same written words.
Should these books be read literally? Should they be interpreted? If so, who has
the authority to do so? Where did they get it from? Should we focus on the historical
Jesus or the Cosmic Christ? These are interesting questions, the answers to which are
beyond the scope of this work. There is a heated debate about which of the words
attributed by Jesus where really said by him, 4 and which might have been put in his

mouth to serve the purpose of each writer (e.g., Luke was writing for the gentiles while
Matthew for the Jews). Although it is a fascinating topic, I must humbly keep in mind
that I am not an historian or a theologian, but a psychotherapist. Therefore, I will avoid
entering into such discussions and take Jesus’ words as rendered in the gospels at face
value, without getting into such thorny issues 5 . For those same reasons, even if we were
to agree (as I believe) that Jesus was among the most advanced and self-realized human
beings that have ever lived, I will limit the scope of this work to his words and teachings,
without affirming or denying the divine nature and mission attributed to him by
Christians around the world 6 .
I will not be reading the gospels literally; since doing so would not make much
sense for our purposes. As expressed above, we are aiming to interpret Jesus’ teachings
from a psychotherapeutic perspective. We cannot ignore the fact that when he spoke, he
was not addressing issues of psychological health as we understand that concept today,
but of religious and mystical nature. Yet I believe that his teachings can be understood
and used to gain psychological insights without stepping into the spiritual or religious
arena. In other words, although I am fully aware that Jesus’ teachings can and should be
read primarily from a spiritual perspective, I will limit my endeavors to explore them
strictly in terms of psychological change 7 .
How should we proceed then? My starting premise is that spiritual writings (not
only the gospels) may be better understood when read as metaphor. I am aware that such
an approach may sound offensive to many, since metaphors are oftentimes believed to be
lies, fairy tales and legends, a view that I do not share. The term “myth” does not mean
false. I believe that myths are able to tell truths that cannot be told any other way.
Reading Jesus’ teachings as metaphors is neither destroying nor devaluing them, but
rediscovering their spiritual vitality and relevance. Metaphors carry us from one place to
another; they enable us to cross boundaries that would otherwise be closed to us
(Campbell, 2001). Metaphor is the language of myth; religious language is metaphorical
language trying to put in words a mystery that cannot be spoken. Campbell (2001) used
to quote Heinrich Zimmer, who said, “The best things can’t be told. The second best are
misunderstood” (p. 48). As a result, taking the words of Jesus literally may put us at risk

of missing the richness of its symbolic language.
Am I being disrespectful in approaching Jesus’ teachings as metaphors? I

honestly do not believe so. Jesus himself talked mostly in parables, in order to
circumvent psychological defenses and touch the heart of his listeners 8 -- to cut through
people’s tendency to rationalize, intellectualize and guard themselves against truth. The
gospels tell us clearly that metaphors (parables) were the means chosen by Jesus to teach
to the crowds: “All this Jesus said to the crowds in parables; indeed he said nothing to
them without a parable” (Mt 13:34; Mk 4:33-34).
Parables (and metaphors in general) have the advantage of being “democratic”

(De Wit, 1991) and respectful of the spiritual and psychological state of each listener.
They are accessible to everybody. Each person, regardless of age, spiritual or
psychological development, level of education or specific life situation, can learn
something from them. Besides, the more one takes the time to ponder their meaning, the
more their depth unfolds. Jesus was aware that those with eyes and ears (i.e. those ready)
would be able to see and hear what he meant (Mt 11:12, Mk 4:9). Jesus was sensitive to
the fact that one cannot “force” awareness or understanding into people. By using
parables, Jesus was acting just as a wise therapist would, not forcing a client out of his
defenses but working slowly until he realized directly what he had been doing 9 .
I will do my best not to apply a Procrustian method to Jesus’ sayings 10 . Funk,

Hoover & The Jesus Seminar (1993) remind us to be aware that there is always the
temptation to create a Jesus in our own image; to marshal the facts to support our
preconceived convictions. For that reason I will try to keep in mind the final rule of
evidence of the Jesus Seminar: “Beware of finding a Jesus entirely congenial to you”
(p.5).
To close this section, I just want to emphasize that suggesting that Jesus’ words
can be read in psychological terms does not mean that my interpretation is “better” or the
“right” way to understand him. With Sanford (1974) I believe that “The beauty of the
teachings of Jesus is that most of what He said has meaning on many levels: the social,
ethical, theological and psychological. But it is the psychological meaning which has

been largely neglected.” (p.22)
B. What I Don’t Want To Do
As stated above, the business of interpreting the gospels can be risky; therefore I
want to take a moment to further clarify what this work is not about.
This is not an attempt to “psychologize” Jesus’ teachings, but to interpret them in

the light of psychotherapy. Again, this does not suggest that such an interpretation is
right, better or more advanced that any other. It is only an attempt to illustrate Jesus’
deep and keen understanding of human nature, and how his teachings are timeless and
applicable to all ages.
It is also important to separate the present approach from Christian pastoral

psychology, which can be described as the application of Christian ethical and moral
principles to therapeutic work.
Finally, this is not an exploration of Jesus’ personal psyche (which has been done
more than once before).
C. Basic Assumptions
Words are powerful. Words as symbols are used to describe ideas, but each of us
confer a particular meaning to specific words depending on our background, education
and beliefs. Even the way we use and spell them is somehow affected by our background
(e.g., many would object to my decision to capitalize the word “God”); therefore, I would
like to begin by clarifying the way in which I will be using certain words and expression,
since for most –if not all– of them, the reader may already have an understanding
different from the one given here.
1. Religion. The word “Religion” comes from the Greek “re”: to bend back, to
go deep, and “lij’en” from ligament, to align, connect, re-connect, deep connection, to
come back, to come together, re-align at the base or bottom. Originally the word implied
reuniting or reconnecting, and also the idea of connecting back to the “source” (namely
God). Although it is important to keep such a sense in mind, (and in a larger way its

implications), here it will be understood as referring to reconnecting or to reunifying our
own fragmented self.
2. Sin. The word “sin” in Greek is “amartia” means missing the mark, not due to
so-called evil impulses from within, but out of our own ignorance. Sin springs from a
state of unconscious darkness brought on by lack of awareness. As long as we live in the
dark, without knowledge of what we are doing and why, our only hope is to blindly obey
something else than our deepest self; either our basic impulses (from the Freudian id) or
irrational rules (from our internalized superego), instead of living freely, out of love
towards ourselves and others. Sin can then be understood as ignorance, unconsciousness,
or fragmentation; hence, Jesus’ call to wake up, to become aware.
3. Satan. Satan has gotten very bad press, especially among biblical literalists,
for whom he is an actual being. 11 The word itself comes from the Hebrew, meaning to
oppose, to be or to act as an adversary, or to be[come] hostile (American Heritage
Dictionary, 2000). In our context, Satan can be understood as what we resist within,
whatever we oppose from inside. Klimek (1991, p. 155) explains that whenever we resist
facing the truth about ourselves, and the pain that usually accompanies the process, the
opposing (evil-pathological) unconscious energy used in repressing pain also represses all
type of feelings, putting us to sleep and taking us away from life. In psychological
terminology, such energy is named ego defense or psychopathology; in other context,
these same forces may be labeled Satan, evil or even Thanatos. It is well know in
psychodynamic work, that what we most resist (our shadow, our underdog, our libidinal
impulses, depending on the school of thought) is often the one that controls us. By
denying our demons we empower them. People are “in the power of Satan” or sin as
long as they are inwardly in conflict, divided within themselves, victims of their own
inner opposition (Mt 12:26).
4. Repentance.
From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, “Repent, for the Kingdom
of Heaven is at hand.” (Mt 4:17)
The Greek word for repentance in the gospels is “metanoia” which means change

of mind, and does not imply feeling guilt or remorse 12 , but rather becoming aware of
what we are doing and consequently changing our direction, behavior or thinking. It
implies a transformation of our lives, which includes turning away from our over-
identification with our Ego or what we believe is our identity (our masks or personæ) in
order to confront what is behind it (which, as we will discuss below, implies both
embracing our disowned parts and confronting the Opposer –Satan– within).
5. Healing. Episodes of Jesus healing people abound in the gospels. Such

accounts can be seen as metaphors of healing the psyche. It is worth pointing out that
repeatedly, after healing someone, Jesus says “your faith has made you well” (Mt 9:22;
Lk 17:19; 8:48; Mk 5:34; 10:52). Images of sin, possessions and Satan, are symbols of
fragmentation. Healing also represents the movement towards wholeness, towards
individuation, of healing the fragmented self. A fragmented self is at war against itself.
6. Faith. Faith and belief are sometimes used interchangeably; however, I will be
making a distinction between these two concepts. A belief is something of which a
person is convinced but is not certain about (e.g., I believe there is a place called Egypt,
but until I have not visited it, I do not know for sure). Once a person is certain, she no
longer believes, but knows. Belief has been compared to saying “I really, really want
something to be true, but I since I do not/cannot know, I choose to believe”. Many times
one believes in the words of others, to which she grants authority (I believe in my father,
in the president, in the Bible…); but still, believing comes as a willful choice in the face
of uncertainty. On the other hand, faith (from the Latin “fides”, reliable) implies a state
of openness to whatever is, even if it goes against our beliefs: “An openness to the truth,
no matter what the consequences, no matter where it leads you and when you don’t even
know where it’s going to lead you.” (De Mello, 1990 p. 18). Therefore, faith also entails
trusting something, not the belief itself but the process, the outcome. The attitude of a
person of faith is the very opposite of that of a believer. A believer (especially a fanatic)
clings to her beliefs no matter what, while a person of faith is able to let go of beliefs and
to become open, and trusting of the outcome, whatever it may be. 13 Faith demands the
courage to reexamine one’s convictions and adjust or reject them if they do not fit the
facts.

7. Perfection.
You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect (Mt 5:48).
At first glance, it seems like Jesus is asking for the impossible, how could we,
limited human beings, be perfect as God is? The key to this directive is to understand
that the Greek word for perfect is “telos” which can also be translated as reaching the
end, achieving completion or maturation. In that sense being perfect does not mean being
without fault or pure, but whole, all-encompassing, self-actualized, individuated. 14 In a
similar fashion the term “salvation” will be understood as referring to integration or
wholeness.
8. Kingdom of Heaven / Kingdom of God. The concept of “the Kingdom of

Heaven” or “the kingdom of God” is perhaps the most important in the whole of the
gospels, 15 occurring in them more than 100 times. Just in Matthew’s gospel, of the
fifteen Jesus’ parables, twelve begin with “the Kingdom of Heaven is like...” (Sanford,
1974, p.27). Jesus affirms that the Kingdom of Heaven is within us and we do not see it
(Lk 17:21). In psychological terms, he may be talking about our untapped human
potential, of which we are not aware due to our neurosis, psychopathology or
fragmented-self, but which exists within us nevertheless. The Kingdom of Heaven may
be described as a psychological reality insofar as it is attainable by the individual in the
development and unfolding of his personality. When we find and realize the Kingdom in
ourselves (when we become self-actualized beings) we experience a growing wholeness,
an increasing sense of the meaning of our individual personality, a realization of new and
creative energies, and an expanding consciousness. This leads us beyond our individual
ego-existence to an experience of the creative and transcendent source of life (Sanford,
1987).
Having set forth the way in which I will be using certain key-concepts in the
gospels, we must now proceed to define what we should understand by psychotherapy.
III. What Is Psychotherapy?

He said to them, “You read the face of the sky and of the earth, but you
have not recognized the one who is before you, and you do not know how
to examine the present moment.” (Th 91)
Anyone that has studied the history of psychotherapy, knows how difficult it is to
give a clear-cut answer to the above question. Although psychotherapy is only about 100
years old, it would seem that the many schools of though that have emerged (and keep
emerging) have complicated the discipline to a very, very high degree. At first, it would
seem that the answer would depend on to whom you asked the question. In all
probability a Freudian would offer a different reply than an Existential therapist, a
Jungian, a Reichian or a Cognitive Behaviorist, all of whom would come up with their
own and perhaps completely different answers. Nonetheless, on a closer look, it might
come as a surprise to realize that their answers differ not so much on the goal of the
therapy, but on the way to achieve it. 16
Corsini (1984), after reviewing the most influential approaches to psychotherapy,

concluded that what all psychotherapies have in common is that they are methods of
learning. All are intended to change people—by either making them think differently
(cognition), feel differently (affection), or act differently (behavior). It may mean
learning something new, relearning something forgotten, learning how to learn,
unlearning, and paradoxically, it may even mean learning what one already knows (pp. 4-
5).
To the above, I would like to add that psychotherapy is also a process of

understanding (of course understanding and learning are tightly connected);
understanding in a deeper sense--not only reactions to the environment, drives or
conditioning, but also perceptions, thoughts, feelings, emotions and goals.
Psychotherapy aims towards the understanding of ourselves, “If we cannot understand
ourselves, we can never hope to understand what we are doing, we can never hope to
solve our problems, we can never hope to live rewarding lives.” (Perls, 1973, p. 1)
Apart from these, they all seem to share the following basic assumptions: 17
(i) Some human behaviors and beliefs are undesirable, inadequate, harmful, maladaptive,
obstacles to fulfillment, or result in dissatisfaction, unhappiness or limitation to a client’s

potential.
(ii) These behaviors are the result of previous experiences (and what we learned from
them), caused by a mishap in the client’s personal history, which may produce
unconscious fixations, body armoring, inauthentic existence, repressed memories,
pathogenic beliefs, the splitting of the ego/personality, unfinished developmental tasks,
unhealthy relation to our first “objects”, poor conditioning, etc.; that need to become
understood/accepted/changed by the client.
(iii) The client should have the desire/need to change and be willing to take an active part
in the process.
(iv) The process of change/understanding/learning is not easy; on the contrary it is

usually frightening, painful or at least difficult.
(v) Human beings are capable of change 18 .
For our purposes, and merely as a working concept, it may be possible to define
psychotherapy as the process of looking at our entire life, perceptions, beliefs, feelings,
emotions, experiences and behaviors, to understand their origin, function and/or impact;
in order to accept or modify them to facilitate the achieving of our full potential as human
beings.
A. What Is The Process Of Psychotherapy?
Let one who seeks not stop seeking until that person finds; and upon
finding, the person will be disturbed; and being disturbed, will be
astounded; and will reign over the entirety (Th 2).
People who have never been in psychotherapy find it difficult to understand. For
many it is a sad state of affairs when a person needs to pay to someone to hear him talk
about his problems; something that –in their mind– could better be done (not to mention
more cheaply) by a close friend, a spiritual counselor or a family member. Such people
have yet to experience the intense transformative potential of a genuine, safe, accepting,
respectful, present, non-possessive, caring, non-manipulative and understanding
relationship as the one that –ideally– develops between therapist and client. Feeling
known in the analytic situation is not so much a feeling of being understood as it is a

feeling that the analyst “knows who one is” (Ogden, 2005, p.10). When the client begins
to feel known by the therapist in a way in which he has never before felt known, he
begins to feel safe to explore the boundaries of his own personality and to adventure
beyond what he has learnt to believe is appropriate.
Nothing is covered up that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be
known. Therefore whatever you have said in the dark shall be heard in the
light, and what you have whispered in private rooms shall be proclaimed
upon the housetops (Lk 12:2).
In spite of the benefits expressed above, it is not difficult to see how many would
view paying a complete stranger to listen to one’s innermost deepest secrets as (to say the
least) artificial. Unfortunately they are right, at least in part. The process of trusting
someone in order to explore one’s own boundaries and bring to light what is hidden
inside is almost completely alien to most of us, and certainly does not happen
automatically. It takes time and commitment to develop a sense of safety and trust
between the therapist and client. Moreover, the process is usually painful. Pain marks
the path and determines the sequence of the psychological work that needs to be done
(Ogden, 2005).
Patterson & Watkins (1997) express how this is not a straight-line progression,
but a typical learning process or curve, with plateaus and often regressions. They further
describe the main elements of this process, as consisting of:
(i) self-disclosure, revealing the “problems”, which implies self-exposure, and which, in
turn, requires openness and honesty,
(ii) self-exploration (or introspection), meaning working with the disclosed material,
where resistance is to be found,
(iii) self-discovery, realization or awareness of what is real,
(iv) self-understanding, when the client is able to see the discrepancies between who she
is and who she think she has/want to be, and can see the reasons, motives or origin of
such discrepancies, and
(v) self-acceptance, when the client begins to accept herself as she is, and commits to live

her life in accordance with her reality and potential. 19
Many cannot or will not endure the process, and quit therapy when things start
getting too painful, fearing it to be too much to handle. Those are the type of people that,
in Jesus’ words, “are not fit for the Kingdom of God” (Lk 9:62).
A man once gave a great banquet, and invited many; and at the time for
the banquet he sent his servant to say to those who had been invited,
“Come; for all is now ready.” But they all alike began to make excuses.
The first said to him, “I have bought a field, and I must go out and see it; I
pray you, have me excused.” And another said, “I have bought five yoke
of oxen, and I go to examine them; I pray you, have me excused.” And
another said, “I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come.” So the
servant came and reported this to his master. Then the householder in
anger said to his servant, “Go out quickly to the streets and lanes of the
city, and bring in the poor and maimed and blind and lame.” And the
servant said, “Sir, what you commanded has been done, and still there is
room.” And the master said to the servant, “Go out to the highways and
hedges, and compel people to come in, that my house may be filled. For I
tell you, none of those men who were invited shall taste my banquet.” (Lk
14:16-24)
Therapy “works” when the client is ready for it. Therapy is like the mustard seed
that fell on tilled soil, which “produces a great plant and becomes a shelter for birds of
the sky” (Th 20). People usually come to therapy driven by some wound (thus can be
considered as the poor and maimed, blind and lame). Those who can maintain the
illusion of “all is great” will avoid contact with their inner world. They are too content
and absorbed with the outside to pay attention inside. But no one knows the day and the
hour (Mt 24:36) when a crisis will occur, and the illusions will be shattered. Then people
are “compelled” by life’s sorrows to attend the banquet. Only when propelled by that
inner pain (conscious or not), will a person be willing to put herself on a “one-down”
position to a stranger. 20 Only those who have no option but to clean not only the outside,
but also the inside of their cup (Mt 23:25) remain to enjoy the psychological banquet of
growth and healing.
Growth means change; and the change experienced in the course of

psychotherapy implies challenging old beliefs that do not work in our present life, and
making the corresponding adjustments. Many of such old beliefs come from our early

life and had helped us in the past to make sense of our reality and circumstances. In
psychotherapy these are sometimes referred to as operating or organizing principles.
Operating principles work so deep within the psyche that we usually are not aware of
them. They are simply “the way things are”--the way the world is. Accordingly,
challenging them means challenging our core beliefs, questioning the way we do things,
the reasons that underline our choice-making and even opinions about our own self-
worth. During psychotherapy many of these organizing principles are challenged, and we
experience being torn between the old ways and new experiences, forcing us to grow and
expand. A client of Carl Rogers (1961/1995) explained it in the following terms:
As I look back on it now, I was peeling off layer after layer of defenses.
I’d build them up, try then, and then discard them when you remained the
same. I didn’t know what was at the bottom and I was very much afraid to
find out, but I had to keep on trying. At first I felt there was nothing within
me – just a great emptiness where I needed and wanted a solid core. Then
I began to feel that I was facing a solid brick wall, too high to get over and
too thick to go through. One day the wall became translucent, rather than
solid. After this, the wall seemed to disappear but beyond it I discovered a
dam holding back violent, churning waters. I felt as if I were holding back
the force of these waters and if I opened even a tiny hole I and all about
me would be destroyed in the ensuing torrent of feelings represented by
the water. Finally, I could stand the strain no longer and I let go. All I did,
actually, was to succumb to complete and utter self pity, then hate, then
love. After this experience, I felt as if I had leaped a brink and was safely
on the other side, though still tottering a bit on the edge. I don’t know
what I was searching for or where I was going, but I felt then as I have
always felt whenever I really lived, that I was moving forward (pp 110-
111).
Even if many quit, there are the few brave, for whom the love of truth outweighs
the false security of remaining the same. These few have the courage to go deep into the
realms of hell, into the darkness of their own fears, to face Satan within, and to die to
their old self, in order to resurrect anew.
For Roger’s client above, psychotherapy systematically demolished each and

every level of defenses until there was nothing to hold on to and nowhere to take cover.
Such a client is in the process of becoming a perfect human being, and can truly be called
a son of man, since he now understands by personal experience what Jesus meant when
he said “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man has

nowhere to lay his head.” (Mt 8:20)
B. Jesus Description of the Process of Psychotherapy
Seeing the crowds, he went up on the mountain, and when he sat down his
disciples came to him, and he began to teach them, saying:
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be
satisfied.
Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.
Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the
Kingdom of Heaven. (Mt 5:1-11)
The “Beatitudes”, as the passage above is usually referred to, have been
considered by many the quintessence of Jesus’ teachings. They are also among his most
difficult teachings to comprehend, especially when attempted to be understood literally.
Cahill (2001) summarized them in the expression “Happy the unhappy” (p. 77), which
accurately echoes the way many react to them.
Many explanations have been offered to make sense of what, at first sight, seem
to be naïve and paradoxical statements. Faced with the difficulty of trying to explain
proclamations that appear to be in clear contradiction with common sense and sometimes
just plain absurd, literalists concluded that that what Jesus really meant was that, those
who suffer in this life (the hungry, meek, persecuted, etc) would be compensated in the
afterlife. 21 Without affirming or denying such a view, I will follow Klimek’s (1991)
psychological interpretation of the beatitudes, which may speak closer to the people of
our time. Such approach provides an alternative for understanding what Jesus could have
meant; whereby, the beatitudes are transformed from a list of commandments or wishful
promises into lifelong principles leading to vitality and bliss.

Klimek makes clear how the first three beatitudes “embrace a methodology that is
identical to the process an individual goes through in the gut-wrenching experience” of
psychotherapy (1991, p. 57), the fourth is the result of the successful progression through
the previous three, while the last four represent the final result of its integration into our
daily life. Understood this way, the beatitudes represent a developmental sequence in the
human psyche. In this section we will explore only the ones dealing with the process of
psychotherapy, leaving the rest for the section on its final outcome. Klimek begins by
highlighting how, when reading the beatitudes, the first thing one notes is the language
chosen by Jesus. The word “blessed” does not mean simply lucky or happy, it has a
broader meaning, evoking a deeper sense of bliss, peacefulness and contentment with
life.
1. Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven. As
mentioned above, for most people therapy is a last resort, usually when pain has become
too much to ignore. Pain is a catalyst that compels a person to grow. Clients tend to
stick to therapy only when the pain of remaining the same hurts more than the pain of
changing.
We have seen how psychotherapy involves self-exploration, self-disclosure and

self-discovery. Confronting our innermost self and facing the web of defenses
(delusions, denials, projections, etc) put in place by our Ego, in order to find out what is
really going on within, is a humbling experience. Being poor in spirit means being
willing to take off the masks that we use to be “successful” in society and acknowledge
our own weaknesses and faults. In the process, “whomever is the greatest becomes the
servant, whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be
exalted” (Mt 23:11-12)--clearly a dispiriting experience.
Furthermore, as Roger’s above quoted client describes, the deeper the person is
willing to go, the more “stuff” she will find. Usually the process moves from superficial
and relatively benign insights to more painful, many times forgotten, memories and
realizations which only emerge as the superficial material is processed and the self
becomes stronger in an ever-growing process of discovery.

When the unclean spirit has gone out of a man, he passes through
waterless places seeking rest, but he finds none. Then he says, “I will
return to my house from which I came.” And when he comes he finds it
empty, swept, and put in order. Then he goes and brings with him seven
other spirits more evil than himself, and they enter and dwell there; and
the last state of that man becomes worse than the first (Mt 12:43-45).
Being poor of spirit means having the emotional sincerity, the state of
vulnerability, and the open mindedness to face ourselves. Being poor in spirit means
being able and willing to shatter our own “wealthy” but limited Ego-centered existence,
to repent and find salvation. People that have gone through this process of getting
psychologically “naked” can attest to how excruciating it is, and how –almost
paradoxically, as in the beatitudes themselves– the result is an increased sense of
lightheartedness and peace.
When you disrobe without being ashamed and take up your garments and
place them under your feet like little children and tread on them, then
[you] will see the Son of the Living One, and you will not be afraid (Th
37).
Or, as Rogers (1961/1995) puts it in contemporary psychological language:
In a favorable psychological climate a process of becoming takes place;

that here the individual drops one after another of the defensive masks
with which he has faced life; that he experiences fully the hidden aspects
of himself; that he discovers in these experiences the stranger who has
been living behind these masks, the stranger who is himself (p. 123-124).
However, the “humbling” of the Ego is only the first step…
2. Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted. As we mentioned
before, the psychotherapeutic process requires courage and a resolute commitment to face
ourselves. 22 Many times clients lament having to give up the apparent safety of their old
lives and the illusions of their childhoods. It is not uncommon to hear a client
complaining that he “wants his life back”. As the horse in the charming story, The
Velveteen Rabbit, stated: “[growth] doesn’t happen to people who break easily, have
sharp edges, or who have to be carefully kept.” (Williams, 1922/1991, p.5) Neither does
it come to those not strong enough to face themselves, to those who live in denial about
their lives, nor to those whose “false selves” (which we will explore below) are doing a

great job.
The coming of the Kingdom brings about a reorganization of the self so violent
that it can be easily described in apocalyptic language (Sanford, 1987). In fact it does
represent the end of the world for the old, false self, and the establishment of a new order
of being. The old attitudes and structures of personality must give way to new ones.
For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and
there will be famines and earthquakes in various places: all this is but the
beginning of the birth-pangs. … Immediately after the tribulation of those
days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the
stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.
(Mt 24:7-8, 29)
As a result of this dispiriting process, we find ourselves face to face with our
loneliness, our weakness, our fears and our darkness. The next step is to mourn for the
demolition of our defenses, our masks, our false beliefs and stories. We need to face,
understand, process, digest and mourn the depressing aspects of our lives (our psychic
wounds). Mourning begins the healing process. Real mourning (as opposed to
pessimism, blaming, cynicism, victimhood or self-pity), is “an experience of Self
awareness, as well as an exercise in genuine Ego strength, but only if one remains
dispirited and humble to the degree that he or she acquires the truth and the wisdom that
sets the soul free” (Klimek, 1991, p. 61).
As with the previous stage, mourning by itself does not automatically bring about
the Kingdom of Heaven. Learning to mourn help us develop the capacity to self-soothe
the wounded self, which in turn makes available the consolation about which Jesus is
speaking.
3. Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth. As with all the other
beatitudes, reading this literally forces us to imagine a Jesus fully disconnected from
reality or extremely naïve. Do we not live, as in Jesus’ time, under the law of the
strongest? Are we not determined by the survival of the fittest? Is Jesus really inviting
us to be timid and submissive? As with the others beatitudes, the real meaning of this can
only be grasped if we leave the world of literalism and understand His statement as a
metaphor.
Meekness here should not be understood as submissiveness but as gentleness or
serenity in the face of adversity. It is easy to react, to blame, to get even, to strike back;
far more difficult is attaining (which is different from restraining oneself) a level of
psychological inner balance that puts us above the challenges of day life occurrences.
Being meek is a clear manifestation of inner solidity and Ego strength.
Every one then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like
a wise man who built his house upon the rock; and the rain fell, and the
floods came, and the winds blew and beat upon that house, but it did not
fall, because it had been founded on the rock. And every one who hears
these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who
built his house upon the sand; and the rain fell, and the floods came, and
the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell; and great was the
fall of it. (Mt 7:24-27)
As a person advances in her psychotherapy, she becomes more and more

centered, and the things that before would have put her off balance do not trigger her
anymore. Such a person has attained a larger perspective, found her center, and as a
result has truly inherited the earth in all its beauty.
As amazing and rewarding as these steps may sound, they represent only the
beginning stages of the journey towards wholeness. Clearly psychotherapy is not, and
has never been,, the only way to travel this path; it is only a tool to move ahead in this
process. Peck (2003) describes Psychotherapy as a legitimate tool for personal growth,
just as using a hammer and nails are to build a house.
It is possible to build a house without hammer and nails, but the process is
generally not efficient or desirable. Few carpenters will despair of their
dependency on hammer and nails. Similarly, it is possible to achieve
personal growth without employing psychotherapy, but often the task is
unnecessarily tedious, lengthy and difficult. It generally makes sense to
utilize available tools as a shortcut (p. 57).
Having gone through the painful birth of a new self, and having started
experiencing the joy and fulfillment of living a fuller life (a glimpse of the Kingdom of
Heaven), it is not surprising that psychotherapy takes a central role in the client’s life.
The newly discovered self becomes like “a treasure hidden in a field” (Mt 13:44) that
now the client cannot wait to unearth fully.

The Kingdom is like a wise fisherman who cast his net into the sea and
drew it up from the sea full of small fish. Among them the wise fisherman
found a fine large fish. He threw all the small fish back into the sea and
chose the large fish without difficulty. Whoever has ears to hear, let him
hear. (Th 8)
IV. Some Specific Topics
Modern man lives in a state of low-grade vitality. Though generally he

does not suffer deeply, he also knows little of true creative living. Instead
of it, he has become an anxious automaton. His world offers him vast
opportunities for enlightenment and enjoyment, and yet he wanders
around aimlessly, not really knowing what he wants and completely
unable, therefore, to figure out how to get it. He does not approach the
adventure of living with either excitement or zest. He seems to feel that
the time for fun, for pleasure, for growing and learning, is childhood and
youth, and he abdicates life itself when he reaches ‘maturity’. (Perls, 1973,
p. xiii)
In the following pages, I will review some specific concerns of psychotherapy,

relating them with Jesus’ words and teachings. Although it is practically impossible to
have a bias-free approach towards the presentation that follows, my intention is to be
mindful of as many schools of thought and theories as possible. The limitation of this
approach is that some readers, especially those specializing in a specific school of
thought, may find my exposition less than exhaustive. I am willing to take that chance in
an effort to present different ways of thinking and how Jesus’ thought can fit with them.
23
A. On Human Nature
As mentioned above, psychotherapy is grounded in the belief that human beings

can change. Underpinning this belief is another “meta-belief” that human beings actually
want to change--that rooted deep within our humanity, there is a desire to grow, to
mature, and to transcend.
Virginia Satir used to say that people are geared for growth and change, and
capable of transformation. Basically all types of therapy affirm such a belief in one way
or another. The process of attaining transformation is referred to as separation-
individuation, differentiation, developing Ego strength or self-support. Transpersonally

oriented psychotherapists affirm that human development is a continuum, part of the
broader development of consciousness, from matter to life, from body to mind, from to
soul to spirit.
People look for a psychotherapist because something seems to be out of place,

something hurts, they want to satisfy their needs, get better, solve their problems or be
happy; but they do not know how to do it. Depending on their intellectual, emotional and
spiritual level of development, their concerns may be framed in terms of getting along
with their partner, finding a better job, finding meaning in their lives, etc. Rogers
(1961/1995) was of the opinion that each client comes with a different version of the
same basic question (or set of them): who am I really? How can I get in touch with this
real self, underlying all my surface behavior? How can I become myself? It may be
possible to affirm that at some level (and whether they are conscious of it or not), deep
inside, clients know that they can get more from life than they are currently getting. They
know that they can be more than they currently experience themselves to be. Therapy is
in many ways the process of seeing, hearing and understanding ourselves, and growing
from that understanding. The assumption is that, the better we know ourselves, the more
fulfilling our lives will be. Conversely, the less we know (or refuse to know) about
ourselves, the harder our lives will be. As Jesus would have put it: “him who has [self-
awareness] will more be given, and he will have abundance; him who has not, even what
he has will be taken away from him.” (Mt 13:12).
Two Thousand years ago, people were most probably dealing with similar types
of problems; however, there were no psychotherapists around. But at least in the region
of Galilee, when approached with these concerns, Jesus invited people, above and before
anything else to learn about themselves and attain the Kingdom of Heaven (Mt 6:33)--to
look beyond their daily concerns and focus all their efforts on realizing their full
potential: “The Kingdom of Heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls, who, on
finding one pearl of great value, went and sold all that he had and bought it” (Mt 13:45-
46).
Probably most psychotherapists would agree with such advice. Our self-
actualization should –ideally– supercede everything else, since what we do and how we

live is determined by who we are. We are meaning making creatures, we search and give
meaning to circumstances, and then believe that our opinions (our meanings) are reality
(we confuse the map with the territory). It is difficult for us to keep in mind that our
beliefs (our organizing principles) are not reality itself. Working on ourselves is always
our best choice in order to improve our situation, relationships and life. In a way, human
beings can be compared with snails: wherever we go we carry our shells, full of our
psychological “stuff” (our unresolved issues), on our backs, which will not go away until
we deal with them. No matter where we go, “we” will be there with us.
We do not see the world as it is, we see the world as we are. That is why therapy
is valuable, because it helps us to become aware of our shells, our maps, the color of the
spectacles through which we interpret life. It is not reality that makes us suffer, but our
interpretation of it: “There is nothing outside a man which by going into him can defile
him; but the things which come out of a man are what defile him” (Mk 7:15).
B. Unconditional Acceptance
For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that
the world might be saved through him. (Jn 3:17)
Since Freud made his then outrageous claims about infant sexuality, it would
seem like psychotherapy was born in controversy and thrives in it. As stated earlier,
there are very few things upon which psychotherapists of different schools would agree.
Many of them disagree on the origin (and even the existence) of psychopathologies, on
how to deal with them, and even –as we well explore later– on the final outcome of
therapy. We have already described a few of the basic assumptions that all types of
psychotherapy share, another principle to which all psychotherapeutic approaches seem
to agree, is that of non-judgmental acceptance of the client by the therapist. Not
surprisingly, one of the features that better characterized Jesus, who was accused of being
a “glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners” (Mt 11:19), was
precisely his ability to relate to all people in a non-judgmental and loving way.
The scribes and the Pharisees brought [to Jesus] a woman who had been
caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst they said to him, “Teacher,
this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. Now in the law Moses

commanded us to stone such. What do you say about her?” This they said
to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus
bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. And as they
continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is
without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” And once
more he bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. But when
they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the eldest, and
Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus looked up
and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go,
and do not sin again.” (Jn 8:3-11)
1. The importance and impact of being accepted. Why is acceptance so

important for psychological change? Should it not be the other way around? Should we
not condemn and fight all that we disapprove of within ourselves, others and ultimately
the world? Most of us, when we look within, can certainly see things that are not
acceptable and need to be changed. We all want to improve ourselves (and others),
accepting ourselves amounts to mediocrity and stagnation. Or so it seems…
In reality, we cannot change what we have not first accepted. If we really want to
change something within or without ourselves the first step is to stop denying reality and
to accept what “is”, including, and especially, ourselves. Unfortunately many of us do
not know how to do that, since we have never experienced being unconditionally
accepted just as we are, without demands or conditions. Later we will talk about how we
tend to project onto others what we cannot accept within (our shadow); here I want to
focus on how the experience of being unconditionally accepted by another human being
(the therapist) in itself has a therapeutic and healing effect.
Each one of us is loveable just as we are and precisely for who we are. In an ideal
world, we all should experience unconditional love from the day we are born; no strings
attached, no need to fit in or prove worthiness. Unfortunately, unconditional love is a
concept so foreign that many simply cannot even believe it is possible. Not having
received unconditional acceptance from those we loved the most, many of us learned that
certain thoughts, emotions and actions were not adequate, and concluded that we were
not adequate, that somehow we were not loveable as we were, that we had inside some
useless and even rotten parts. Somehow we had missed the mark, we were bad (sinners

in religious terminology) and learned to disowned those part of us that could lead us into
trouble, fully repressing them at times or simply hoping that we could get rid of them;
punishing ourselves (as others punished us before) for not being better. We not only do
not love ourselves, but we have internalized a harsh critic (a ruthless superego, a top dog,
a paternal figure) that constantly criticizes, judges and condemns us. “It” is like a sword
that wounds us--which we use against others in the same way, and by which we are also
wounded by others (Mt. 26:52).
Condemning ourselves does not help us to change. As a popular proverb states:

what we resist, persists. Only self-love, and not our efforts to improve ourselves,
produces change. 24 Self-sacrifice and cruelty to self is the source of much of our
suffering. Therapists know that acceptance and love are better ways (and perhaps the
only sure way) to promote change. Jesus knew that too, advocating “compassion, not
sacrifices” (Mt 9: 13; 12:7), 25 among each other and towards ourselves.
On of the first tasks of the therapist is to create a safe “container” for the client to
allow her to experience all those parts that she has denied or rejected. At first a very
difficult thing to do, since many of us, have spent our lives trying to get rid of precisely
those unwanted parts and features. Therefore she needs to be certain that no matter what
she is, does or has done; the therapist will not criticize her, condemn her, and (ultimately)
stop loving her simply for being who she is. Only after she has experienced being fully
accepted and loved for whom she is, might she be able to allow herself to see and accept
herself (instead of spending all her energy trying to please others by being who she thinks
they want her to be). 26 On the other hand, if the therapist were to be critical, he would
only become the latest version of the clients’ parents, teachers and preachers, confirming
her worst fears and therefore reinforcing the precise assumptions underneath the behavior
(sometimes called the pathogenic beliefs) that she is trying to eradicate.
We already referred to Williams’s Velveteen Rabbit (1922/1991), where she

summarizes the importance of acceptance in words that reflect the type of love (ideally)
offered in psychotherapy, and what it does as time goes by:
When [someone] loves you for a long, long time… then you become real.
It doesn’t happen at once, you become. It takes a long time. That’s why it
doesn’t happen to people who break easily, have sharp edges, or who have
to be carefully kept. Generally, by the time you are real, most of your hair
has been loved off, your eyes drop out, and you get loose in the joints and
shabby. But these things don’t matter at all; because once you are real, you
can’t be ugly, except to those who don’t understand. (p.8)
Unconditional acceptance is so central in psychotherapy, that it has been

suggested that it is more important for the client to experience acceptance than the theory
applied by the therapist. In the often-quoted words of Rogers (1961/1995), “the curious
paradox is that when I accept myself as I am, then I change. We cannot move away from
what we are, until we thoroughly accept what we are.” (p. 17).
2. What does this acceptance imply? The type of acceptance that a

psychotherapist offers to his clients has been discussed in detail by authors of all schools
under many names. It certainly implies, as Rogers (1961/1995) puts it “a warm regard
for [the client] as a person of unconditional self-worth – of value no matter what his
condition, his behavior, or his feelings” (p. 34). The key word here is unconditional.
Sequin (1965, cited in Yalom, 1980, p. 408) calls it “Psychotherapeutic eros”, including
among its qualities nonreciprocality, genuineness, and indestructibility: the type of love
that Jesus was reported to be able to give even to those who crucified him (Luke 23:34).
Yalom (1980) states that a mature therapist: “will care despite rebelliousness, narcissism,
depression, hostility, and mendacity. In fact, one might say that the therapist cares
because of theses traits, since they reflect how much the individual need to be cared for”
(p.408). More succinctly, Jesus affirms, “It is not those who are healthy who need a
physician, but those who are sick” (Mt 9:12).
However, such acceptance neither requires nor implies a denial of reality. It does
not mean mushy or pampering love--quite the contrary. It can be expressed in
disagreement or in accord, and it does not involve a fusion with the client. What is
required from the therapist is not to overlook and agree with whatever the client brings
forth, nor to repress personal emotions towards the client (even the negative ones), but to
be able to love him and appreciate his complexity and humanness. Just as a surgeon has
to accept the existence of an illness and fully appreciate its consequences in order to act
accordingly, sometimes love means opening a person up, thereby wounding him, in order

to heal him.
To accept in such a way, the therapist has to keep in mind that we differ from one
another only in what we do or do not do, not in what we are. It has been suggested that
the most remarkable feature of Jesus was the fact that he knew that, as a human being, he
was not better than the rest of us (De Mello, 1990, p. 30). Therapists must have the
capacity to identify with the client’s struggles and to find similar issues within
themselves. To find the client, we must look for him within ourselves (Bollas, 1987,
cited in McWilliams, 2004, p. 36).
The process of healing ourselves can only occur in a caring, trusting relationship.
It is hard to change and grow until we have been really seen and understood as who we
are and what we have been through. Only after the client is able to accept and love
herself, will she be able to truly accept and love others. Jesus emphasized this in his
version of the golden rule: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Mt 22:39), which
noticeably includes and presupposes loving self before loving others. Since we cannot
truly love what we do not know, the commandment also implies self-knowledge, which
in turn is the key to self-growth and love. Jesus invites us to wholly accept and love
ourselves, not only those parts that we have learnt are acceptable, but also those parts that
we have learnt to despise (our inner enemies). Jesus encourage us to be perfect as God is
(Mt 5:48), sending the sun and rain of our self-love to even those parts of us that we
believe are “not ok”.
You have heard that it was said, “You shall love your neighbor and hate
your enemy.” But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who
persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven;
for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the
just and on the unjust. (Mt 5:43-45)
C. Defenses
The Kingdom of Heaven may be compared to a king who gave a marriage

feast for his son, and sent his servants to call those who were invited to the
marriage feast; but they would not come. Then he said to his servants,
“The wedding is ready, but those invited were not worthy. Go therefore to
the thoroughfares, and invite to the marriage feast as many as you find.”
For many are called, but few are chosen (Mt 22:2-3; 8-9; 14).

If the Kingdom of Heaven is available to everyone, why should so few attain it?
The fact is that self-growth is not easy. As mentioned, the process is difficult and some
times excruciating. Psychological pain is necessary to the process. The client’s effort to
make psychological change is inherently frightening and painful, for it means giving up
ways of protecting herself that in infancy and childhood she felt to be critical to her effort
to maintain sanity and survival (Ogden, 2005, p.20). Those ways of protecting ourselves,
are many times referred to as “defense mechanisms”. Kahn (2002) defines them as a
manipulation of perception (internal or external) intended to protect us from anxiety
(p.123).
Freud used to refer to defense mechanisms as the cornerstone of psychoanalytic

theory. Therapists are instructed to remember that, as a rule, they are dealing with two
clients: one that wants to change, and one for whom everything is “just fine” and who
does not want to “rock the boat”. Human beings usually (in and out the therapy room)
want the final result, but do not want to go through the process to get there. We usually
oppose change; we hate new and love the habitual. 27. Our unconscious pulls us to what is
familiar; it wants us to keep repeating what has worked in the past instead of trying
something new.
Since Freud used military metaphors when he first described defense

mechanisms, many believe they are maladaptive patterns that need to be conquered. In
reality, defense mechanisms are unconscious means of self-protection, and we tend to
stick to them because they worked in the past. 28 However we should not automatically
assume that they are negative. Modern psychotherapy does not necessarily assume that
anything pathological is going on when a defense is operating. What may be seen as an
undesired resistance in one client may be a healthy self-preservation mechanism for
another; one which has kept him “together” (McWilliams, 1994).
Unfortunately, very often defenses work to keep the source of pain at bay instead
of helping us overcome it. Efforts are directed towards preserving our defenses rather
than getting rid of them once they are not useful any longer. Deep inside we feel that our
defenses keep us alive. In time, after manipulating the environment for a long time, we
become unaware of what we are doing, and believe that it is the only way of being in the

world. At this point, we do not experience them as resistance but “assistance”, we turn
them into laws and even expect others to follow them and behave in similar ways (Perls
(1973). That is why change is so difficult and always resisted.
But when the Pharisees saw it, they said to him, “Look, your disciples are
doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath.” … He said to them … “I
tell you, something greater than the temple is [happening] here. And if
you had known what this means, “I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,” you
would not have condemned the guiltless. For the Son of man is lord of the
Sabbath” (Mt 12:2-8).
The Pharisees are clinging to their defenses and demanding that Jesus and his
disciples observe the “Sabbath”. They are hoping to get to the kingdom just by “playing
it safe”, that is, by observing the Law without having to grow. The Law (defenses) is a
protection against a direct experience of the Kingdom of Heaven. A self-centered person
does not need outer rules to tell him what to do, since he knows within what is right or
wrong. 29 For ages, by fulfilling laws, rules, and doctrines, people have hoped to achieve
their proper relationship with God without having to relate to the inner world (Sanford,
1987). However Jesus knows that one enters the Kingdom not by repeating old practices
and behaviors, but by seeing through their futility and understanding that something
greater can happen as a result.
When therapy begins, clients are often unable to see their defenses in action.
Therapists are aware that it would be foolish (and usually useless) to attempt to force
them to see. Instead, a therapist will work with the client’s presenting issues, and during
the process the hope is that she will develop the capability to observe herself and spot her
defenses in action. If he attacks the client’s defenses directly, she will resist even more,
since we always empower the demons we fight. To the contrary, if he flows together
with her, eventually she will let them go by herself. Aware of this process, Jesus
admonished his disciples to “turn the left cheek” when struck on the right one (Mt 5:39).
D. Sin and Fragmentation / True and False Self
Knowing their thoughts, he said to them, “Every kingdom divided against

itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand;
and if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will
his kingdom stand?” (Mt 12:25-26)
The impact of parents and environment in the development of a child is almost
universally accepted by psychotherapists. Our early experiences set patters that will be
used later in life to relate to the world, others, and even to ourselves. If a child is lucky
enough to experience a “good enough mother” (Winnicott, 1962) and grow in a relatively
safe and nurturing environment that can “hold” his development, he will grow to believe
that the world is a safe place to inhabit--one in which he can be spontaneous and feel
real 30 . In contrast, when the environment is unsafe and/or the parents are unable to
respond to the child’s developmental needs, the process is interrupted and the child is
unable to be spontaneous, since he has to relegate his needs in order to accommodate to
those of his parents, especially his mother.
If a child is unfortunate enough to have parents so caught up in their own

neurotic struggles they can neither provide security nor encourage
autonomous growth, then severe conflict ensues. In such struggle, growth
is always compromised for the sake of security (Yalom, 1980, p. 8).
Not being allowed to experience her own spontaneity and joy, and forced (based
on her early experiences) to comply and hide her own real needs, she will grow up
fragmented, her inner kingdom divided, feeling unreal, incomplete, uncertain of her place
in the world--her own importance--and devoid of a sense of agency.
To accommodate and comply with such an unsafe environment, the child

develops a false self, the purpose of which is to keep safe his inner core, his true self;
hiding it by a set of relationships that appear to be real. As with defense mechanisms, it
is important to mention that at least for Winnicott, who developed the concepts of the true
and false selves, a false self is not inexorably a negative thing--there are degrees of
falseness. On the healthy side, the false self takes care of the true self, providing the
caring function that the environment did not, and helping the child to comply and to not
be exposed. It helps the child compromise in social interactions, and provides
adaptability without dominating the child’s personality. At its pathological extreme there
is the truly split-off, compliant false self, which appears to be the child’s full personality,
and which fully hides the true self, leaving it isolated. We will be focusing here on this
pathological manifestation, since it is the one that usually brings people to therapy.
Klimek (1991) states that,

A false Self cannot make a real adjustment to the real world; nor can a
false Self genuinely love, be loved, or feel fulfilled. A well-rehearsed
false Self can only feel empty and lonely as it darts through life amassing
recognition by doing and saying things to escape, impress or manipulate.
(p.117)
The false self keeps working under the assumption that aliveness is dangerous. In
order to be safe, compliance is required, so it becomes ever so skilful in reading and
accommodating to the environment. Winnicott believed that this defense may bring with
it considerable social success (egoic “wealth”), even if it is really a defense against
feelings of deep unworthiness. It is an attempt to hide the very real distress of the
individual concerned; who feels ‘phoney’ the more he or she is successful (Winnicott, as
cited in Davis & Wallbridge, 1981, p. 52). Jesus states that those who appear to know it
all but lack in themselves, are utterly lacking (Th 67). All the successes and treasures
that such people pile up on earth mean nothing, since they do not provide what they
really want: the love and acceptance that they did not received in childhood.
Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust
consume and where thieves break in and steal, but lay up for yourselves
treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where
thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there will
your heart be also (Mt 6:19-21).
Perls (1973) goes even further when referring to the false self (in his terminology
the self-concept), expressing that it is unable to give support. Quite to the contrary, it is
busy nagging, disapproving, and squashing anything of genuine self-expression. Due to
such division, the false self needs the permanent environmental support of approval and
acceptance, but at the same time, cannot accept genuine praise, so remains greedy and
dissatisfied with whatever affection it gets (p. 49). Jesus is clearly aware of this inner
conflict when he says: “It is impossible for a man to mount two horses or to stretch two
bows. And it is impossible for a servant to serve two masters; otherwise he will honor the
one and treat the other contemptuously” (Th 47:1-2). He knew that human beings cannot
have an authentic existence and enter the Kingdom of Heaven so long as they are riding
the two horses of self, being split between an overactive false self and underdeveloped
true self. Such fragmented individuals, operating from a false self, can clearly be
considered to be in the grasp of the Opposer, Satan, living in sin, divided against

themselves.
Jesus, concerned by the fragmented lives that people live, invited followers to
repent, that is, to turn around, become aware of their situation and change their ways (Mk
1:15), using religion as a way to reunite their fragmented portions, achieve self-cohesion
and restitute the self. He invites his disciples not to seek for approval or admiration
(which are characteristic of the false self’s aspirations), but instead to work quietly
within, growing closer to the Kingdom of Heaven:
And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites; for they love to
stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may
be seen by men. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But
when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your
Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you
(Mt 6:5-6).
Therapy done in the privacy of a room, behind closed doors, is an adventure of

discovery happening between two human beings, working and growing together to attain
wholeness. Like religion, psychotherapy is also a tool to accomplish self-cohesion,
providing an environment in which we can find our own identity, and learn to exist, feel
and practice how to be real.
A beautiful example of this process of caring for the true self is the parable of the
Good Samaritan, one of Jesus’ most well known. Usually understood as a teaching in
kindness towards others, it can also be read as a metaphor of love towards oneself. Jesus
taught this parable when a Pharisee approached him, after Jesus had expressed the
importance of loving our neighbor as ourselves, and asked him: “who is my neighbor?”
(Lk 10:29) to which Jesus replied:
A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among
robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half
dead. Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw
him he passed by on the other side. So likewise a Levite, when he came to
the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he
journeyed, came to where he was; and when he saw him, he had
compassion, and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil
and wine; then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and
took care of him. And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them
to the innkeeper, saying, “Take care of him; and whatever more you

spend, I will repay you when I come back.” Which of these three, do you
think, proved neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers? He said,
“The one who showed mercy on him.” And Jesus said to him, “Go and do
likewise” (Lk 10:30-37).
Our true self is the man who fell among the robbers. These robbers may have
been our parents, who were unable to take care of us in a way that allowed us to feel
secure enough to develop our true self, they could also be society’s rules, expectations
and demands to comply, which left us beaten on the road, scared and in need of
someone’s help. The priests and Levites of society failed to help us because the true self
is unable to cry for help, hidden by the well-meant false self.
In Jesus’ parables, Samaritan are always symbolic, and carry multiple meanings.
In the present case, he may be seen as the healthy false self that protects our true self in
infancy and helps us to survive our circumstances. Still, just as the Samaritan left the
man after taking care of him, we are to thank our false self for helping us during our
development, and let it go to allow the expansion of our true self. It is also significant
that help comes from a Samaritan, people despised by the Jews. Likewise in therapy help
comes from our despised parts--the parts and features of our personality that we have
rejected or denied, but which are precisely the ones we need to reintegrate to achieve
wholeness.
In addition we must emphasize again how Jesus’ teaching about kindness towards
others presupposes love towards ourselves, from which necessarily follows: to “go and
do likewise.” We have to begin by truly loving ourselves, allowing our true self to
blossom.
Nevertheless, giving up our false self is not an easy task. Let us not forget that it
was developed in the first place to protect us against the hardship experienced in
childhood. Having been disappointed, hurt, and let down many times, we developed our
own “civilized” ways to relate based on deception (diplomacy), masking feelings (tact),
disowning the body (felt to be primitive, irrational, obscene), and similar duplicities
(Schutz, 1973, p. 19). We have grown believing that we need to perform in order to
placate an unknown fear--to measure to certain standards--and still have been found

wanting. It is not surprising that we are afraid to present our true self. Additionally,
since the origin of such a split comes from very early childhood, it is not remembered,
and the fear of what has already happened is experienced as a fear of something that may
occur in the future (Winnicott’s fear of breakdown). That is, at least in part, the reason
why psychotherapeutic work may at times feel scary, disorienting, and even life (as we
have known it)-threatening; or as Ananda Coomaraswamy would put it: “No creature can
attain a higher grade of nature without ceasing to exist” (cited in Zweig & Abrams, 1990,
p.294).
Psychotherapy forces us to shed our pharisaic outer skin--to strip off our false self
clothes--in order to be fit to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. As we have mentioned,
people usually do not go to psychotherapy when everything is going ok in their lives.
Those are the “rich” people addressed by Jesus, attached to their self-concept, and the
cheering and applauding achieved by their false selves. Such people may not have the
humility to look into their lives, confront their pain and grow. This is clearly depicted in
the following passage:
And as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before
him, and asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal
life?” And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good
but God alone. You know the commandments: ‘Do not kill, do not commit
adultery, do not steal, do not bear false witness, do not defraud, honor
your father and mother.’” And he said to him, “Teacher, all these I have
observed from my youth.” And Jesus looking upon him loved him, and
said to him, “You lack one thing; go, sell what you have, and give to the
poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” At that
saying his countenance fell, and he went away sorrowful; for he had great
possessions. And Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How hard
it will be for those who have riches to enter the kingdom of God!” … It is
easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to
enter the kingdom of God.”(Lk 10:17-24)
To gather the courage to seek therapy, such people may need to face a crisis in
their daily existence (the death of a loved one, divorce, children leaving home, loss of a
job, etc). Others may do it because they are unable to maintain the false self’s illusion of
perfection (their lives are meaningless, or they cannot keep relationships, cannot get
employment, feel lonely, etc.). In any case, something pushes them to stop running

around, stand still, and look inside (as mentioned, a not always pleasant –although
usually rewarding– endeavor). It is not until their false selves fail that they have to come
out of their compliance “intoxication” and to take such step.
Jesus said, “I took my place in the midst of the world, and I appeared to
them in the flesh. I found all of them intoxicated; I found none of them
thirsty. And my soul became afflicted for the sons of men, because they
are blind in their hearts and do not have sight; for empty they came into
the world, and empty too they seek to leave the world. But for the moment
they are intoxicated. When they shake off their wine, then they will
repent.” (Th 28)
E. The Shadow
The Acceptance of oneself is the essence of the moral problem and the
epitome of a whole outlook upon life. That I feed the hungry, that I
forgive an insult, that I love my enemy in the name of Christ – all of these
are undoubtedly great virtues. What I do unto the least of my brethren,
that I do unto Christ. But what if I should discover that the least among
them all, the poorest of all the beggars, the most impudent of all offenders,
the very enemy himself – that these are within me, and that I myself stand
in the need of the alms of my own kindness – that I myself am the enemy
who must be loved – what then? (Jung, cited in Zweig & Abrams, 1990,
p.274)
Closely related to the concepts of true and false self, is that of the shadow as
envisioned by Carl Jung. Both affirm the existence of a split in our personality.
Although there are some elements in these schemes that might coincide, it would be
difficult, and most probably erroneous to try to find symmetrical parallelisms among
these two metaphors of the psyche. Still, Hendrix (1988, cited in Zweig & Abrams,
1990) gives a good description as to how the true self, the false self and the shadow
interplay: As one would expect, it all begins in our family of origin. Our parents, in their
attempts to educate us and forge our character, overtly or covertly, encourage certain
thoughts, feelings and behaviors and condemn others.
Ideally, parents want the best for their children, but their efforts are necessarily
tainted with their own psychological baggage; therefore, if the parents are convinced that
“only the strong survive” they will teach their offspring to “toughen up,” condemning any
sign of weakness. If they place little value in intellectual accomplishments and much in

physical strength, sports will be preferred to academic achievement. If in their minds
women are supposed to be quiet and feminine, they will condemn “tom-boy” attitudes.
Matters become more complex if the situation at home is less than ideal. Parents may
strictly reject any type of sexual exploration, strongly oppose any challenge to their
authority, promote with zeal the observance of certain moral or religious rules, etc. Even
worse, if the family of origin is dysfunctional, children may be almost forced to suppress
certain feelings, emotions or behaviors in order to survive (e.g.: If I am neither seen nor
heard I won’t get abused). Likewise, children will learn the “desirable” features by
observing the choices and actions their parents make.
The typical stages of this learning process begin with the child hiding the
forbidden behaviors from their parents, fantasizing about the banned actions or acting
only when not seeing. Eventually the child will conclude that certain thoughts and
feelings are unacceptable (or unsafe) and should be eliminated. In order to do it, he
internalizes the parent to police his thoughts and actions (develops what Freud would call
the Superego) and to punish him, making him feel anxious every time he indulges in
unacceptable actions or thoughts. This process is so unpleasant that eventually the child
will inhibit altogether those forbidden parts, leaving behind ‘holes’ in his personality.
The child has begun his sinful journey towards fragmentation.
Those holes are filled by the development of a false self (close to Jung’s
personæ), which, as seen, camouflages the repressed parts and protects the real self from
further injury (alas also leaving large portions of our psyche underdeveloped).
Unfortunately, this false self cannot discriminate, so it uses the same protecting strategies
in all circumstances, further isolating the true self, leaving her unable to truly relate to
others.
Nevertheless, the “successful” false self can only hold the show for a short while,
and people may start to criticize the person for being too cold, distant, superficial, needy,
etc. (i.e., attacking the actual survival strategies of the false self) causing further
wounding. “Now the child is caught in a bind. He needs to hold on to his adaptive
character traits, because they serve a useful purpose, but he doesn’t want to be rejected.”
(Hendrix, 1988, cited in Zweig & Abrams, 1990, p.51). To defend from these critics, the

child may opt to deny having such qualities (“I am not needy, cold, distant,” which in a
sense is true, since those are the false self’s traits), relegating them to the unconscious
psyche. These parts of the false self that are too painful to acknowledge since they
contradict our chosen idea of ourselves are relegated to the so-called disowned self or the
shadow.
The shadow is simply those things a person does not want to be. Since it has
become intolerable for the child to admit having such tendencies and traits, she will most
likely project them onto others and then fight them with all of her fury and indignation,
unaware of the fact that the battle is within and the “enemy” is inside.
He [Jesus] also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that
they were righteous and despised others: “Two men went up into the
temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee
stood and prayed thus with himself, ‘God, I thank thee that I am not like
other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I
fast twice a week, I give tithes of all that I get.’ But the tax collector,
standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his
breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me a sinner!’ I tell you, this man went
down to his house justified rather than the other; for every one who exalts
himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.”
(Lk 18:9-14)
Many have been puzzled 31 by the way in which Jesus, who above all preached
love and forgiveness, attacked the Scribes and Pharisees 32 . In many ways the Pharisees
may be seen as a metaphorical image of each of us at a certain stage in our own
development. Although it is entirely possible to argue that such attacks were later
additions to Jesus’ words, I believe that they can also be read as a forceful call to this
group to stop projecting their shadow onto others and begin acknowledging it. Projection
is among the most recurrent defense mechanisms. Still, it would be a mistake to conclude
that Jesus is categorically condemning the Pharisees (and us for that matter). He is
merely pointing out the state of affairs and inviting us to be honest with ourselves.
As we mentioned, Jesus fully knew, and psychotherapists have learned, that being
critical or judging a person usually does not help, on the contrary, such judgment may
cause the client to reinforce his defenses. Furthermore, Jesus knew that judging others
usually rests upon our unconscious projections, because we despise in others what we

cannot tolerate in ourselves, using the same harsh yardstick to judge them that we (mostly
unconsciously) use to judge ourselves. All judging is judging ourselves, which is why he
was keen on our taking care of our own psychological baggage first.
Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce
you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get.
Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice
the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, “Let
me take the speck out of your eye,” when there is the log in your own eye?
You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will
see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye. (Mt 7:1-5)
In the “Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” Robert Louis Stevenson writes
that all human beings are a commingling of good and evil. It would not be accurate to
assume that “we” (our personae) are good, while the shadow (recalling the conventional
meaning of the word) represents our dark and wicked impulses. The shadow is not our
evil twin brother, but the parts of ourselves that parents, society and circumstances have
compelled us to disown. The shadow is not intrinsically evil, it just does not agree with
what we believe we ought to be (Sanford, 1989, cited in Zweig & Abrams, 1990, p.21).
It gets a bad rap because the Ego projects its own undesired parts, what it believes is evil
onto it.
We are so reluctant to confront our shadow (our inner contradictions) that we

choose to ignore it (repress it), hoping that it will go away; however, as we have seen,
such actions are counterproductive; not only do they not solve the problem, but the
repressed “enemy” starts appearing in the guise of other people, and the hostility that has
its origin in ourselves takes the form of hostility towards others. What we are repressing
in ourselves, we see in others (projection) (Sanford, 1987).
No matter how hard we try to outrun our shadow, it will always catch up with us.
Thus, we would do well to befriend it; we either own our shadow or it will own us. We
have the option to be aware of our opposites, or we will be forced to beware them
(Wilber, 1977, cited in Zweig & Abrams, 1990). Moreover, keeping at bay our disowned
self takes huge amounts of psychic energy. Psychotherapy offers an opportunity to bring
the shadow to awareness and assimilate it to our personality, therefore reducing its

inhibiting or destructive potential and releasing trapped, positive life energy. Jung used
to say that in truth the shadow is 99% pure gold, since whatever has been repressed holds
tremendous amount of energy, with great positive potential. “All this undeveloped
energy is the ‘unlived life,’ which, for the kingdom to be realized, must get out into life in
a legitimate way” (Sanford, 1987, p. 138). As Ralph Waldo Emerson would put it, as
long as we stand in our own way, everything seems to be in our way. Ignoring our
shadow may have worked in the past, but eventually such one-sided development leaves
too much of the total personality repressed in the unconscious. Consequently, until we
accept our inner “enemy” we will not be able to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
But I say to you that every one who is angry with his brother shall be
liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother shall be liable to the
council, and whoever says, “You fool!” shall be liable to the hell of fire.
So if you are present an offering at the altar, and there remember that your
brother has something against you, leave your offering there before the
altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present
your offering. Make peace quickly with your opponent while you are on
the way to court with him. Otherwise, he will hand you over to the judge.
Then the judge will hand you over to an officer, who will throw you into
prison. (Mt 5:22-26) [Italics added]
This admonition does not deal with legal quarrels, but instead with the splitting of
the self. Jesus calls us not to fight with ourselves and to reconcile with our inner enemy
(our disowned self). Notice how Jesus mentions that if we do not make peace with the
shadow (the opponent), the judge (who is also within) will hand us (and not whoever is
guilty) to the officer to be punished; because each one of us is accountable for not healing
our inner split.
Yet it is not the shadow who creates the problem (and potentially our
condemnation) but our lack of awareness of it and our unwillingness to face it. As Jung
suggests in the above passage, the solution resides within us, in being kind to ourselves,
and in welcoming our disowned parts. We cannot enter the kingdom unless we are whole
(Sanford, 1974). In many ways that was Jesus’ mission: to help us to recover our
repressed parts and become whole; to seek and to save that which was lost (Lk 19:10).
Although we might fear that in doing so we will fall into the shadow’s grasp, in fact the
opposite is true, it is in not acknowledging it that we become its prisoner. Accepting our

shadow complements us rather than contradicts us, and what before seemed negative now
shows its positive side. “If you bring forth what is within you, what you bring forth will
save you. If you do not bring forth what is within you, what you do not bring forth will
destroy you” (Th 70).
Nevertheless, confronting and befriending our shadow may be even harder than
dropping the false self. Seeing our rejected parts almost always produces a sense of
horror, which is part of the process of integration (individuation in Jung’s terms). Our
personae experiences such an encounter as a threat and a potential defeat, thus it will
resist it. In fact Jung used to compare it with the alchemical stage of melanosis, or
nigredo, where everything turns black inside the vessel containing the alchemical
elements.
Jesus knew of this difficulty and, in addressing the process, utters some of his
most fierce words:
If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is
better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be
thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and
throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your
whole body go into hell. (Mt 5:29-30)
Hopefully even zealous literalists can appreciate that Jesus is not advocating for
us to actually sever parts of our bodies in our pursuit of holiness. Once more he is using
metaphors to get his message across. As we have mentioned, people refusing to confront
their shadow have lost large parts of their personalities and can easily become insensitive
and self-righteous; living by strict rules and regulations, projecting their unwanted traits
onto others and condemning them afterwards. Such people may not have problems
interpreting literally the passage above, since they lack compassion toward themselves
and others, and in their eyes the evildoers reside “out there.” Klimek (1991), on the other
hand, offers a more psychological interpretation of the passage, one that evinces what
Jesus probably had in mind when addressing how a rigid personae may become dead in
its inner world, whereby his “right” ways may prevent the individual from entering the
Kingdom of Heaven:

If your right way of seeing things (eye) causes you to become insensitive
in your heart and arrogant, throw it away. If your right way of dealing with
others (hand) causes you to lose your humility and become blind to your
real Self, your heart, your psyche, throw it away. (p. 102)
Paradoxically, plucking out and cutting off our prejudices against ourselves, and
bringing our darkness into light, will help us to achieve wholeness. To use another often-
quoted expression of Jung’s, one does not become enlightened by imagining figures of
light (which would be easy and pleasant) but by making the darkness conscious; an
upsetting process that not surprisingly is not very popular.
F. Differentiation
So far we have talked about individuation/integration as part of the process of

growing as a human being, or (depending on which tradition we are embracing) the path
to enlightenment. Jesus, within his circumstance (biographical, historical, cultural,
religious, idiomatic, etc), talked about entering into the Kingdom of Heaven (e.g. Mt
5:20; 7:21; 18:3; and 19:23). However, the process of wholeness is not only about
becoming a unity--that is, an individual (from the Latin, “individuus”, meaning
indivisible)--but also to learn to live in a community.
During the mid 70s, Margaret Mahler’s research made clear that the growth
process of the individual may be explained as a process of separation and individuation.
Very early in life, we begin this process of becoming aware of ourselves as separate from
our mothers, and then the environment--separating what is “me” from what is “not-me”.
Mahler called the moment when the child realizes that she is a separate entity from
mother and environment her “psychological birth”. However, as most developmental
psychologists and family therapists know, realizing that one is an individual is not the
end of the story. The process continues during adolescence and beyond. Rebelling
against our parents is, in a way, an effort to establish and affirm the boundaries of our
own selves, different and separate from them. The success of our family to negotiate this
process shapes our ability to be an autonomous differentiated adult. To continue our
growth process, we need to differentiate from our parents.
Many times, unfortunately, even long after we have physically left our family of

origin, we remain emotionally and psychologically attached to our parents, unable to
break old patterns, reliving and recreating the same dynamics, and even following the
same old but familiar rules (since breaking them would be felt as a betrayal). After years
and years of living together, we have internalized our fathers and mothers 33 and operate
mostly from their frame of reference, which, very often, limits our potential as human
beings. These inner parents have been identified and named by most psychotherapeutic
schools of thought, being called “the inner police”, the superego, the top dog, pathogenic
beliefs, parental tapes, etc.
We cannot avoid the fact that each one of us is born in a family, which in turn is
part of a community, a society, a country, and ultimately humanity. We are born in
society and to be whole, we must learn to live in society (even hermits have a relationship
with the society that they choose to leave behind). What is more, society provides us
with unique opportunities to deepen our growth. Relating to others constantly calls us to
create, express, and experience new and higher aspects of ourselves. Nowhere can one
do this more immediately and perfectly than in relationships. In fact, without
relationships one cannot do it at all (Walsch, 1996). Society (beginning with our family
of origin) brings about the chance of learning who we are, by learning who we are in
relationship.
Differentiation may be defined (Bowen & Kerr, 1988) as the process by which
individuality (the life force to grow and become an emotionally separated person) and
togetherness (the converse life force that propels child and family to remain emotionally
connected and operate as a unity) are managed. Differentiation is a balancing act
between these two pulls. “Most people want to be individuals, but not everyone is willing
to give up the togetherness required to achieve more individuality. People frequently are
willing to be ‘individuals’ only to the extent that the relationship system approves and
permits it” (p. 107). Differentiation means becoming more uniquely ourselves while
maintaining ourselves in relationship with those we love. It is neither rejecting our
family of origin (“back off! Let me do my thing!”) nor merging (“your wish is my
command and mine should be yours”). Giving up our individuality in order to be
together is as defeating in the long run as giving up our relationship to maintain our

individuality. Either way, we end up being less of a person with less of a relationship
(Schnarch, 1989, p. 55). Differentiation involves the ability to maintain who we are (a
sense of self or of standing on our own two feet) while in relation to people important to
us. It is only when we have accomplished (or at the very least began) this task, that we
are able to communicate and connect with the outer world (the other).
The “path” of differentiation, is just an expression of Jesus’ invitation to remove

the beam out of our own eye before offering to remove the speck out of our brother’s eye
(Mt 7:3-5). Growing means first feeling at home within ourselves, since only then will
we be able to live freely and truly love those close to us. As long as we are not
differentiated, we will be unable to speak or act according to our own desires, since we
will be too concerned about fear of rejection from our family (or partner, or group, etc).
We will need others to validate us, take care of us, protect us, solve our problems and
deliver us from evil. Differentiation is maturation, which in turn allows us to have a
more significant, more vibrant and honest relation with those closer to us.
As quoted above, people don’t want to give up togetherness, and among those few
who try, many end up giving up the idea when they face the opposition of those they love
the most (the very people they need to differentiate from) who might perceive such
attempts as threatening to the survival of the system itself. Jesus was not exempt from
such opposition. We read in Mk 3:31 that after he began his mission his family heard of
the things he was doing and teaching, thought he was ‘crazy,’ and went out to seize him;
however, he was able to “stand the heat” and remain connected to them. Bowen & Kerr
(1988) talk about such a capability:
Giving up some togetherness does not mean giving up emotional

closeness. It means that one’s functioning becomes less dependent on the
support and acceptance of others. Some degree of rejection predictably
occurs when someone embarks on a direction for oneself that is not
approved of by spouse, parents, colleagues, and others. The rejection,
which is triggered by the threat to the relationship balance, is designed to
restore the balance. When someone attempts to be more of a self in a
relationship system, the absolutely predictable response from important
others is, “You are wrong, change back; if you don’t, there are the
consequences!” (p. 108).

Jesus was aware of both the importance of relationships and the challenges of the
differentiation process, warning us about the difficulty while pointing out the importance
of freeing ourselves from our childhood conditioning, and the parental and family
systems ingrained within us.
Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to
bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father,
and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her
mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his own
household. He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of
me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me;
and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. (Mt
10:34-38; Lk 14:26-27; Th 55)
Jesus’ words have been interpreted as a command to love him more than our own
parents to the point of hating them; however, it may be read as an invitation to follow his
way, where loving “me” stands for loving his teachings and the desire to enter the
Kingdom of Heaven. 34 Read in psychological terms, the admonition gains a deeper
meaning, one that appears to be more congruent with Jesus’ message. Differentiating
may in fact imply “hating” (that is, being able to escape from their psychic grip) the inner
parents that we internalized as judges.
But our attempts to differentiate will most probably ruffle some of our real
parents’ feathers. The more fused and enmeshed a family is the harder it will be for its
members to differentiate, since the attempted differentiation of one of its members forces
the whole system to confront their dysfunctions and limitations. That is why “a man’s
enemies will be the members of his own household.” The process may be painful for the
whole family, since in order for the child to grow and enter the Kingdom of wholeness,
he will have to separate and detach not only from his immediate dependence upon the
family, but from the pathological assumptions upon which family life and reality are
usually based.
Many families usually come to therapy as a result of the problems caused by the
“black sheep” of the family (as opposed to the model-child), who becomes the identified
patient of therapy, when in fact, she is the one struggling to differentiate from the system,
forcing it to deal with their issues. “But many who are the greatest now will be least

important then [when in the Kingdom], and those who seem least important now will be
the greatest then” (Mt 19:30). She has to take hold of the sword of separation and sever
the pathological ties from her parents if she is to take up her cross and follow the way of
liberation espoused by Jesus (Klimek, 1991, p. 162).
The Kingdom of the Father is like a certain man who wanted to kill a
powerful man. In his own house he drew his sword and stuck it into the
wall in order to find out whether his hand could carry through. Then he
slew the powerful man. (Th 98)
Once differentiated, the person will be self-supported, and will not need to hold
on anywhere outside himself to feel whole (Mt 8:20). Such a person will refuse to rely
on others’ support to validate his experiences, judgments or emotions, thus become able
to develop meaningful relationships with like-minded people, based on respect, support
and honesty.
And his mother and his brothers came; and standing outside they sent to
him and called him. And a crowd was sitting about him; and they said to
him, “Your mother and your brothers are outside, asking for you.” And he
replied, “Who are my mother and my brothers?” And looking around on
those who sat about him, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers!
Whoever does the will of God is my brother, and sister, and mother.” (Mk
3:31-35)
Differentiated people are able to recognize and love others as separate individuals,
whose needs and wants are as important as their own. They are able to value and
understand another’s position even if it may contradict or interfere with theirs, without
shutting down or becoming defensive. It is not about winning or loosing, but about
getting into a place where both parties “win” by being heard, respected, understood.
Jesus addresses the positive effects of differentiation from family of origin when states
that:
Everyone who has given up houses or brothers or sisters or father or

mother or children or lands for the sake of my name will receive a hundred
times more [of what would have represented remaining in a dysfunctional
family], and will inherit eternal life. (Mt 19:29)
G. Body/Mind/Spirit

The connection between the mind and the body was known by many ancient
traditions long before Freud began studying the somatic manifestations of hysteria in the
women of Europe, and Reich and Lowen wrote about the complex interrelation between
body and psyche. However, only recently scientist, neurobiologists and psychologists are
reaching an agreement regarding the link between body, mind and spirit. Our body is a
blue-print of our psyche, in the same proportion that our beliefs and thoughts impact our
body and what we are capable of doing.
Jesus was fully aware that human beings constitute a body, mind and spirit triad.
Although some Christians have used his words to argue that he advocated in favor of
rejecting the “things of the flesh and live according to the spirit” (cf. Rom 8), such
arguments are hard to hold, especially when one takes into consideration the number of
Jesus’ reported miracles involving the nourishment and healing of the physical body.
The multiplication of bread and fishes, the transfiguration of water into wine, healing the
sick and handicapped, etc., portray a man fully grounded in the human experience and the
needs of the body. Cahill (2001) has noted that “Jesus was known as someone who
hugely enjoyed a good dinner with friends” (p. 88). In fact one can assume that the
physical body was important for Jesus by noticing how numerous the healing accounts in
all the gospels are. It is clear that, at least for those writing the gospels, Jesus’ healing
abilities where something to remark about. On closer look, it is interesting to see how
often Jesus links a healing miracle to the person’s faith that he (Jesus) can actually heal
them (Mt 8:10; 9:22; 9:29; 15:28; 8:23-17; Lk 5:20; 7:9; 7:50; 8:25; Mk 2:5; 4:35-41;
5:34; 10:52; 11:22),
When he entered the house, the blind men came to him; and Jesus said to
them, “Do you believe that I am able to do this?” They said to him, “Yes,
Lord.” Then he touched their eyes, saying, “According to your faith be it
done to you.” (Mt 9:28-29)
Conversely, it seems as if he was unwilling or unable to heal anybody in his own

town, “because to their unbelief” (Mt 13:58). Jesus seems to be aware of the body/mind
connection. He challenges us is to make real in our physical body what we have in our
hearts and minds--to “become what we believe” 35 --certainly, a double-edged sword.

Still, let us keep in mind that our beliefs include, above all, those unconscious
(therefore unknown to us) convictions and organizing principles that shape our daily
reality. Those are the type of beliefs that psychotherapists examine and challenge every
day in the therapy room, the beliefs that make us blind to the truth, crippled to our real
potential, and incapable of living a more fulfilling life.
On the other hand, Jesus’ healings do not end (and usually do not even begin) by
healing the body. His acts of healing can also be understood as metaphors for
psychological healing. A sick body can be seen as an imperfect body, thus healing
corresponds to perfection, to wholeness. Over and over Jesus emphasizes how it is faith
(in him, and nowadays also in the process of psychotherapy) that makes people whole.
That is why real healing cannot happen in absence of a real desire to be healed.
We have already mentioned how one of the basic principles of all types of psychotherapy
is the commitment to getting better--the desire to change. That is why Jesus asks the man
by the pool at Bethesda “Do you want to get well?” (Jn 5:6). Jesus is not only asking
whether the man wants to walk (a question with an almost obvious answer) but he wants
to know is if he is also psychologically crippled. Jesus wants to know if he is willing to
go through the hard and challenging work of psychological growth, which is a question
with a not so obvious answer.
Only after Jesus has heard the man’s willingness to get well, does he command
him to get up, pick up his pallet (his psychological crutches, excuses, limitations etc) and
walk (Jn 5:8). Jesus is aware that getting rid of such crutches is a process that occurs
within the person. In other words, the healing can only happen when the person is ready
for it. Once the man has seen the truth (of his situation and circumstances) Jesus invites
him to not sin again, completing the body/mind/spirit equation 36 . It is precisely due to
the body/mind/spirit unity that many healing episodes include casting out Satan. In such
episodes he is casting out the demons that fragment our selves. A fragmented self is at
war against itself (Sanford, 1987).
Jesus’ healings are signs that the Kingdom of Heaven is available here and now,
spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it (Th 13). These healings are enacted

parables of the process of wholeness. Wholeness is not only a psychological endeavor; it
implies and includes reclaiming our bodies and uniting with our souls. Body, mind and
spirit become therefore a holy trinity (not one, not three) in the Kingdom of Heaven; a
recognition and integration of the fact that these three are not separate “things” that
happen to overlap, but that each one is the individual.
H. Modeling
Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, “I am the light of the world; he who
follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.” (Jn
8:12)
The passage above, together with what scholars call the “I am” sayings, found
only in John’s gospel, are usually understood as claims made by Jesus about his divinity
as the son of God. Again, reading such words through the eyes of a psychotherapist, it
seems possible to imagine that Jesus had something else in mind.
A significant portion of human learning is observational in nature. Clients are

constantly observing their therapists, just as students observe their professors and
children their parents. A similar pattern can be seen in almost every relationship where
someone looks up to an authority figure 37 . Both in and out of the therapy room, our
deeds speak louder than our words, and clients are constantly checking if therapists
follow their own preaching, if they “walk their talk”. Modeling is the process through
which, by observing the coherence between the therapist’s words and deeds (and
hopefully the therapist is more integrated and happy as a result of it), the client
vicariously learns different ways of being in the world and, through
imitation/introjection, becomes more like the therapist. That is why, from Freud onwards,
the therapist has been expected to face his own demons and clear his own path (as much
as possible) and then invite others to walk together; as someone who has both already
visited the specific “country,” and at the same time is another fellow traveler on the path
of life (Yalom, 2002).
Jesus was fully aware that one of the most efficient and subtle ways to teach his
disciples about the potential and riches of the Kingdom of Heaven was through his
actions. The “I am” sayings may be read as Jesus’ way of saying: look at the way I am
and live; learn it and you will also attain self realization.
The fact that Jesus believed that what he had accomplished could also be done by
his disciples becomes evident when he expresses that those who will drink from his
mouth will become like him, “I myself shall become he, and the things that are hidden
will become revealed to him.” (Th 108).
V. What Is The Goal Of Psychotherapy?
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be
satisfied (Mt 5:6).
As we mentioned when we talked about the first three beatitudes, the fourth
represents the result of the successful progression of psychotherapy, through the process
as described by Jesus.
There are basically two approaches to deal with the challenges we face in our
attempts to live a fulfilling and happy life. The first approach, favored by many, and
society in general, is to look outwardly in a frantic attempt to accumulate the things,
recognition and persons that we have been told are important and can make us happy.
We could call this the “lacking” approach, since the person believes that there is
something lacking within, and thus sets out to get it, to fix the problem, to fill the void.
Unfortunately, such approach does not work (to which many “successful” and unhappy
people can attest), since it is trying to satisfy an inner deficit (emptiness, aloneness,
unworthiness) from without.
The second approach is the one suggested by Jesus and psychotherapy. This
approach invites us “to look deep inside and to try to remain in an alert state of humbly
seeking the Truth and Wisdom” (Klimek, 1991, p. 76). When the humbling process has
been successful, bringing us away from our own self-deception and closer to reality;
when deep mourning has taken place and we have become more centered and meek, the
normal result is for us to become not only more open to receive and do what is right but
to actually hunger and thirst to see and experience reality as it is. We are no longer afraid
of who we are, but eager to know ourselves even deeper. From within flows compassion,

safety, empathy, love for others, and fulfillment.
We have seen how psychotherapy is a method for (re)learning something, a

process for understanding and accepting ourselves through self-exploration, self-
disclosure and self-discovery, out of which personal growth happens. However, we have
also seen that things do not happen all at once. Just like the beatitudes describe the stages
in the process towards the Kingdom of Heaven; psychotherapy also more or less follows
a process, where usually more pressing and burning matters (current pain and suffering, a
sudden crisis, emotional upheaval, work and relationship issues) are explored first. As
therapy moves deeper, and the client has more access to her inner world, existential
concerns (identity, authenticity and meaning) come to the foreground. Finally, as the
person keeps growing and healing, other life concerns (love, transcendence, and
spirituality) are brought up more often during the sessions and take more time in the
client’s thoughts--in brief: from self-concern, to self-integration to self-transcendence. 38
The potential for growth can never be exhausted, the more we are willing to
explore, experience and live, the greater and more magnificent the results. There are no
known limits to the reclaiming, healing and development of the self (Cortright, 1997,
p.48). It would seem that the Kingdom of Heaven has indeed no end.
The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed which a man took
and sowed in his field; it is the smallest of all seeds, but when it has come
up it is greater than the plants, and becomes a tree that is large enough for
the birds of heaven to nest in its branches. (Mt 13:31-32)
A. Lieben Und Arbeiten
Freud was once asked what he thought a normal person should be able to
do well. The questioner probably expected a complicated answer. But
Freud, in the curt way of his old days, is reported to have said: “Lieben
und arbeiten” (to love and to work) (Erikson, 1950, as cited in The
Columbia World of Quotations, 1996).
Abraham Maslow, in a paper entitled “A Theory of Human Motivation” published

in 1943, suggested that there are five basic needs 39 that all humans share, and that need
to be satisfied in a specific order. Experience in psychotherapy confirms this. Only after
having covered basic “survival” needs 40 , will people then come to therapy, usually with

concerns dealing with everyday matters. Even if we can see that underneath such
concerns there are deeper needs and fears (e.g., the roots of the client’s latest discussion
with his boss may be buried deep within his unconscious and have to do with his fear of
“not being seen”; the marital crisis that finally brings a client to therapy may have its
origin in unresolved issues between the client and his abusive father, etc.),
psychotherapists know that we have to start with what is being brought by the client as
the “presenting issue” instead of trying to help him see the deeper motives beneath it. We
are instructed to “meet the client where he’s at” and let him write the agenda of the
sessions as much a possible. The fact is that only when people have achieved a certain
level of safety; they are able to go deeper to the roots beneath their problems.
Just as in Jesus’ time, nowadays many people are unable or unwilling to go

beyond trouble-shooting and symptom reduction, and will leave therapy as soon as they
feel some improvement to their most immediate concerns, before things move beyond the
surface. De Mello (1990), addressing this matter, states that many people don’t want to
be cured, they only want relief, since (as we have seen) to really “cure” their ailment
requires the painful medicine of self-awareness (p. 6).
While some forms of psychotherapy deal with content issues (behaviors, ways of
thinking, emotional blockages) and how to resolve them; others (the ones we have been
studying here, the so-called “depth psychotherapy”) deal with process issues; how we
relate to ourselves, our experience and our world (and even beyond the material world),
in order to expand our awareness and connect with the truth of who we really are. When
the client has dealt (in as much as it is possible given her current circumstances) with
these issues, she is able to “move” beyond the most shallow connotations of Freud’s
formula of what a person should do well.
B. Death And Resurrection
1. The end of life as we have known it.
And he [Jesus] said to all, “If any man would come after me, let him deny
himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. For whoever would
save his life will lose it; and whoever loses his life for my sake, he will
save it. For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and
loses or forfeits himself? (Lk 9:23-25)
We have explored how psychotherapy forces us to confront our deepest

organizing principles, tearing down all those ways in which we refuse to deal with reality
and see ourselves. Jesus’ “method” was similar. In his own way, he challenged 41 --at
times kindly at others forcefully--the ideas and beliefs of those who listened to him
especially those that considered themselves righteous) as an invitation to grow and enter
the Kingdom of Heaven. Not an easy thing to do.
Let us remember the man who approached Jesus asking for the way into the
Kingdom (Lk 10:17-24). From what we know, he was a well-intentioned man, who
followed the rules imposed by his religion and society. Still, he could not (would not)
follow Jesus because he was too attached to his “possessions”, which may be understood
not only as material stuff but also –and perhaps especially– psychological, such as
prestige, reputation, beliefs, organizing principles and defense mechanisms--the things
for which a limited Ego craves.
Although our Ego (that part of the whole where we locate our sense of “I”, our
individuality, what most of us would call our personality) is understood in many
approaches to psychotherapy as the façade we present to the world, it can be said that
Ego is the part of us that protects us in what appears to be threatening “out there”, where
only the strongest, fittest and cleverest survive 42 . Its “job” is its (our) self-preservation,
need fulfillment and gratification. Ego is also about power, security, control and
recognition; however, that is a very limited view of the Ego. On a larger scale, the Ego is
the embodiment principle, not something to get rid of, but something to use and develop
as we grow beyond its limited and limiting first skin. As the conscious part of our
psyche, our Ego holds the key to our psychological transformation. The real quest of
psychotherapy should not be to eliminate our Ego but to modify its role in our lives and
to move from an Ego-centered (thus limited) existence into what some theorists 43 call a
psychocentric consciousness.
Although they might use different language, most approaches to psychotherapy

challenge the limited vision of our Ego. In a way, we could say that many of the client’s

problems come from an over-identification with a rigid, limited Ego--from living an
Egocentric existence.
Jesus is referring to such over-identification when he states that to follow him (his
way of living) we need to deny ourselves (Jn 12:26). Jesus knew that denying ourselves--
that is to say, renouncing to our Egocentric inclination to seek power and security--is not
easy. The very idea produces anxiety, since it feels as if we were going to die. This
dying implies dying to our old ways, to our way of being, to our habitual way of acting
and reacting, to our fantasies that someday, somehow life (parents, partners, job, reality,
etc.) is going to be exactly the way we would want it to be. It requires us to relinquish
our most fundamental and cherished belief: our belief of what is real, our ideas of who
we are, of how people are, and of how God is (De Wit, 1991 p. 59-60).
In a way, it is a kind of dying, a total surrender of the Ego to something bigger.

The Ego does not disappear, but it moves from the center of our existence, allowing for
something bigger, the Self, to take the central stage. The process requires us to become
vulnerable, letting our little “me” die, together with our fears, convictions, doubts,
defenses and trifling eccentricities--to leave our old skin behind and be reborn in a fuller,
happier self. As expressed above, such dying implies plucking out and cutting off our
“right” (psychological) eye and hand respectively, which in the past had supported us (Mt
5:29-30), in order to incorporate the underdeveloped and disowned parts of our psyche,
needed to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
No one patches an old coat with a new piece of cloth that will shrink.
When the patch shrinks, it will rip away from the coat, and the tear will
become worse. Nor do people pour new wine into old wineskins. If they
do, the skins burst, the wine runs out, and the skins are ruined. Rather,
people pour new wine into fresh skins, and both are saved. (Mt 9:16-17)
The surrender of the old Ego is necessary, since it cannot contain the new state of
consciousness that the Kingdom of Heaven demands from us. If the new personality and
awareness are “poured” into the old framework, it will burst it.
Notwithstanding the beauty and grandeur of an Egocentric “temple”, it has to be

demolished to give room to the even greater, more magnificent (happier, healthier and

more authentic) temple of the true Self, of our Psychic Being.
And as he came out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look,
Teacher, what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!” And
Jesus said to him, “Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left
here one stone upon another, that will not be thrown down.” (Mk 13:1-2)
But this surrendering of the Ego should not be seen as a defeat or a sign of
weakness. As we have mentioned before, it takes a strong Ego to perform an act of self-
sacrifice. Out of fear, the Ego will defend itself against life and the inner world. A weak
Ego feels compelled to fight and struggle for its very existence. Only a strong Ego can
face death and achieve resurrection.
2. Resurrection (Integration/Individuation of the Self).
Jesus said to them, “When you make the two one, and when you make the
inside like the outside and the outside like the inside, and the above like
the below, and when you make the male and the female one and the same,
so that the male not be male nor the female female; and when you fashion
eyes in the place of an eye, and a hand in place of a hand, and a foot in
place of a foot, and a likeness in place of a likeness; then will you enter
[the Kingdom]”. (Th 22)
As we have seen, in the course of our development from childhood to adulthood,

we are invited (or forced) to deny, repress, or disown parts of ourselves. Most adults
function at only a small fraction of who they are and who they could be. We develop our
masks in order to please those around us and to protect the most tender parts of ourselves;
however, we have also discussed how those disowned parts keep impacting and directing
our lives, and how our inner fragmentation is the source of most (if not all) of our
problems, psychopathologies and ultimately our unhappiness. “Every kingdom divided
against itself is destroyed, and a divided household falls.” (Lk 11:17)
Although, as stated, many end up in therapy as a result of a crisis; others come

complaining of a diffuse feeling that “something is wrong or out of place”. Even when
they are not aware of it, even when they believe that their (false) self is doing pretty well,
not having a relationship with the unconscious is like fighting against a immense force
(that happens to be within) which affects them in ways they may not understand. From
such inner battles come the sense of being “a little off” that brings them to psychotherapy

even before a crisis occurs.
Healing in Psychotherapy is a journey towards wholeness. A process of

reconnecting or reunifying (which, as seen, is the original meaning of the word religion)
our own fragmented self. It is a repenting process that implies healing the splitting of our
psyche, of our conscious ideas and beliefs (the limited Ego) with our bodies and
emotions; and perhaps most significantly, the reuniting of our Ego with our unconscious
Self. The call is to “invite” the parts that have been ignored, rejected, forgotten or
underdeveloped. We do not like change, we like the habitual, we would much rather sit
with the parts of our psyche that we are used to being our friends and family: the parts we
know and accept. Certainly at first, sitting at the table with the outcast will feel awkward;
still, our efforts to integrate ourselves never go unpaid, since they are our ticket to a new
self, and our resurrection in the Kingdom of Heaven (Sanford, 1987).
When you give a dinner or a banquet, do not invite your friends or your
brothers or your kinsmen or rich neighbors, lest they also invite you in
return, and you be repaid. But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the
maimed, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, because they cannot
repay you. You will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.” (Lk 1:12-14)
Moreover, being aware of the split and working to make it conscious (an endless
job) gives an experience of freedom. Developing a relationship with our inner world is
like tapping into an unending source of creativity, joy, wisdom, freedom and power that
comes from within. What once burdened us now gives us strength (Sanford, 1987).
Jesus uses many metaphors to transmit to us this sense of joy. The joy of the shepherd
that finds one lost sheep (Lk 15:3-7) or a woman who finds a lost coin (Lk 15:8-10), both
of whom rejoice when they find what was lost. Once we have made peace with
ourselves, the possibilities appear to be indeed limitless, “If two make peace with each
other in this one house, they will say to the mountain, ‘Move Away,’ and it will move
away.” (Th 48)
Among Jesus’ many parables about integration and entering the Kingdom of
Heaven, perhaps the one about the prodigal son is the richest in meaning and symbolism:
There was a man who had two sons; and the younger of them said to his
father, ‘Father, give me the share of property that falls to me.’ And he

divided his living between them. Not many days later, the younger son
gathered all he had and took his journey into a far country, and there he
squandered his property in loose living. And when he had spent
everything, a great famine arose in that country, and he began to be in
want. So he went and joined himself to one of the citizens of that country,
who sent him into his fields to feed swine. And he would gladly have fed
on the pods that the swine ate; and no one gave him anything. But when
he came to himself he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired servants have
bread enough and to spare, but I perish here with hunger! I will arise and
go to my father, and I will say to him, “Father, I have sinned against
heaven and before you; I am no longer worthy to be called your son; treat
me as one of your hired servants.”‘ And he arose and came to his father.
But while he was yet at a distance, his father saw him and had
compassion, and ran and embraced him and kissed him. And the son said
to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you; I am no
longer worthy to be called your son.’ But the father said to his servants,
‘Bring quickly the best robe, and put it on him; and put a ring on his hand,
and shoes on his feet; and bring the fatted calf and kill it, and let us eat and
make merry; for this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and
is found.’ And they began to make merry. “Now his elder son was in the
field; and as he came and drew near to the house, he heard music and
dancing. And he called one of the servants and asked what this meant.
And he said to him, ‘Your brother has come, and your father has killed the
fatted calf, because he has received him safe and sound.’ But he was angry
and refused to go in. His father came out and entreated him, but he
answered his father, ‘Lo, these many years I have served you, and I never
disobeyed your command; yet you never gave me a kid, that I might make
merry with my friends. But when this son of yours came, who has
devoured your living with harlots, you killed for him the fatted calf!’ And
he said to him, ‘Son, you are always with me, and all that is mine is yours.
It was fitting to make merry and be glad, for this your brother was dead,
and is alive; he was lost, and is found.’” (Lk 15:11-32)
Since the reader is probably familiar by now with how I am reading the symbols
and metaphors used by Jesus, many of which are present in this parable, instead of going
over all of them again, I will only explore how this particular story describes the process
of integration.
Traditional interpretations of the parable identify us (sinners) as the prodigal son

and Jesus as the father. But in parables, like in dreams or poems, the teller can be seen as
all the images and characters (Mitchell, 1995), therefore Jesus is depicting in the story
parts of himself, and by extension, of ourselves. It is my belief that the parable grows in
depth when read that way. The prodigal son represents our shadow--the instincts and

drives that although we try to suppress, come to the surface and have their way in our
life--but also our zest, our irrepressible, jovial and yet untamed self. The older brother
may be seen as a harsh superego, a duty-bound self-righteous, unforgiving and joyless
top-dog full of demands for perfection, the part of our personality that has introjected all
the “shoulds” that society, family and authority have hammered into us since early
childhood. Together they represent the split parts of our personality. As long as they
remain in competition for control--in constant battle--harmony and wholeness cannot
occur. Both parts are necessary in a healthy individual. Jesus wants us to embrace all
our potential and possibilities, he wants us to be equally as cunning as snakes and as
innocent as doves (Mt 10:16). The older brother can lend maturity and responsibility,
while the younger humor and joy for living.
The father can be seen as the real self, the Psychic Being (in Sri Aurobindo’s
language), the Self (in Jungian terminology) or, in Augustine of Hippo’s words, “the One
within ourselves who is more ourselves than ourselves” (Yalom, 1980, p.280). He is our
wise inner guide that can, when we allow it, bring balance--a balance that can only
happen when both “brothers” are accepted and loved as part of the family. The father
rejoices when he sees the younger son coming back home, anticipating the long awaited
integration of the personality--the bringing back to life of the disowned parts that the
older brother considered unacceptable. He did not stop the young son when he decided to
leave, even if he (the father) always knew that the psyche needed both sons for the family
to be united, and to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
Returning to the beatitudes, the reader may recall how we explained that, while
the first three dealt with the process of psychotherapy and the fourth was the result of it,
the remaining may be best understood as emanating from an integrated position of
optimal psychospiritual health (Klimek, 1991, p. 80). Below I will address three more
beatitudes, leaving the last one, which seems to me a result of the process of self-
actualization, for last.
3. Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy. Only when we have
reintegrated the different parts of our inner family, our poor, maimed, lame and blind
features, will we stop projecting them onto others and judging them (as most probably we

were judged in our childhood and keep judging and condemning ourselves for not
measuring to some ideal standard imposed from outside). When no one condemns us
(especially ourselves) we do not condemn others (Jn 8:11). Only integrated individuals
are able to show real and lasting mercy, mercy first to themselves and then to the rest of
the world.
4. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. The pureness to which
Jesus refers is not that of something that has never been polluted. As things stand in our
society, it is basically impossible to go through the “normal” developmental process into
adulthood without some psychological scratches. Jesus may be talking about a heart that
has gone through purification by fire, whereby all the impureness (the influence of Satan,
sin, defenses, false beliefs, organizing principles, etc) have been burned and cleansed
away. Once we repent and our heart is pure, once we are transparent, we will be able to
perceive ourselves better and find God at the center of our Self.
5. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. The peace
that one experiences from the absence of inner conflict has been addressed by many
religions. Only a person that has been able to make peace within, ending the inner battle
between the factions of his personality, can be called truly blessed, and experience
himself as a son of God. It is such a peace that Jesus offers to his disciples: a peace that
cannot be attained by running after the things that our modern society would want us to
believe will make us happy; an inner peace that allows our minds to be still and our
hearts not to be troubled (Jn 14:27), thus unafraid in the midst of our lives. From that
sense of inner peace the heart becomes overflowing with feelings of abundance, praise
and unconditional love, and awed by a heightened realization of God’s abiding presence
(Klimek, 1991, p. 83).
C. Wholeness / Self-Actualization
I am the vine. You are the branches. Those who live in me while I live in
them will produce a lot of fruit. But you can’t produce anything without
me. (Jn 15:5)
As said before, as the psychotherapy work deepens the clients’ scope usually

moves from trivial concerns to broader matters.44 Clients become more aware of their
patterns, develop awareness of and an ability to access inner resources, and expand their
world view. As a result, clients start pondering different types of questions: How am I
living my life? What really matters to me? What do I live for? What do I live by? What
kind of contribution do I want to make to the world? How can I achieve my fullest
potential as a human being?
This evolution of the work is not surprising. Humanistic, Transpersonal, Integral

and Existential psychotherapist all agree that there is an inherent tendency within human
beings towards personal growth, towards the full actualization of our potentialities.
Before its expansion, our Ego strives to survive, “play by the rules” and minimize losses.
The Self, on the other hand, wants to be and experience what it means to be fully human,
to be fully alive, to blossom and bear fruit. Different thinkers give different names to this
process and goal: self-realization, self-enhancement, individuation (Jung), fully
functioning person (Rogers) and, self-actualization (Maslow). This later stated that self-
actualized people “seem to be fulfilling themselves and to be doing the best that they are
capable of doing. There are people who have developed or are developing the full stature
of which they are capable.” (Maslow, 1956, as cited in Patterson & Watkins, 1997, part 2,
chap. 2, p. 2)
As expressed elsewhere, the “I am” sayings represent repeated instances where

Jesus is modeling his way of being in the world for other to follow. Judging from his
words and deeds, it can be argued that Jesus was the paramount example of a self-
actualized person. Jesus invites (almost challenge) us to take our own cross (our life
issues, concerns, baggage, fragmentation, history, etc.) and follow him. He does not want
us to be disciples forever, but to become masters of our lives (Lk 6:40). He wants us to
be branches of his teachings until we have grow enough to become ourselves vines and
bear fruits as he did. “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me [in what I teach]
will also do the works that I do [will attain the same level of self-realization that I have];
and greater works than these will he do” (Jn 14:12).
Self-actualization is a very good sign of a “successful” psychotherapy. 45 Self-

actualized people develop the capacity to accept life on its own terms –instead of

resisting it– and in the process reclaim their power to live in accordance with their own
rules emanating from within: “If you follow my teachings, then you are truly my
disciples; and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (Jn 8:32). Only the
truth that one comes from within may liberate you.
Therapists of practically all traditions have expressed similar notions:
Ultimately, no human being can find genuine meaning in her life merely
by accepting the meaning handed down from those who have gone before.
Personal meaning must be created, not accepted. (Masterson, 1988, p. 17).
The idea of Gestalt therapy is to change paper people to real people…

And, to make the whole man of our time come to life and to teach him to
use his inborn potential to be, lets say, a leader without being a rebel,
having a center, instead of living lopsided. The goal of treatment is to help
the individual become aware of and own his or her entire self. All
previously disowned or devalued parts are integrated into the whole
person. We are looking for self-knowledge, satisfaction and self-support
and whole self-regulated persons (Perls, 1973, p.118).
“…the characteristic attributes of the person who emerges [from therapy];

a person who is more open to all of the elements of his organic experience;
a person who is developing a trust in his own organism as an instrument of
sensitive living; a person who accepts the locus of evaluation as residing
within himself; a person who is learning to live in his life as a participant
in fluid, ongoing process, in which he is continually discovering new
aspects of himself in the flow of his experience. He discovers how much
of his life is guided by what he thinks he should be not by what he is
(Rogers, 1961/1995, p. 107).
…the ‘cured’ patient no longer seeks for a happily-ever-after ending.

There may be those in the patient’s life who are not thrilled with her
transformation, for the reborn individual is one who can be obnoxious, but
she speaks her own word, and look deep inside to find it’… She will not
meet society’s expectations but will be her own true self: not a static self,
but a developing individual who can be unpleasant as well as nice. She
will be less amenable than before, but more vital, more real, and more
exciting to know (Brinton Perera, 1981, p.62-63).
In such a context, Jesus’ last beatitude, regularly understood as referring to

martyrdom, may be interpreted differently:
Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs
is the Kingdom of Heaven. (Mt 5:1-11)

Whoever knows the All but fails to know himself lacks everything.” …
“Blessed are you when you are hated and persecuted, for you will find a
place where you will not be persecuted.”… “Blessed are those who have
been persecuted in their heart; there are they who have known the Father
in Truth”. (Th 67-69)
A self-actualized person may make very little sense in modern society. When one
stops complying with the majority one will be questioned and persecuted, but since one’s
truth ultimately comes from within, it will not matter. The Kingdom of Heaven truly
belongs to such people. Those who have renounced the world cannot be controlled
anymore by means of reward or punishment; thus, they become constant reminders to the
unhappy masses that another (and healthier) way of living is possible. For the mass of
people unable or unwilling to leave their phony wealth behind and take up the cross of
self-confrontation, self-actualized individuals are frightening, since they appear to
threaten the status quo. Such masses will do anything (including crucifixion) to get rid of
the self-actualized and the pain that they evoke.
One who had entered the Kingdom of Heaven (unfortunately a rare occurrence in
our society), does not need to be frightened by rules or people, nor does he feel the need
to justify his actions, since such actions are grounded in an inner sense of honesty,
balance, self acceptance and love towards self and others.
And when he [Jesus] entered the temple, the chief priests and the elders of
the people came up to him as he was teaching, and said, “By what
authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?”
Jesus answered them, “I also will ask you a question; and if you tell me
the answer, then I also will tell you by what authority I do these things.
The baptism of John, whence was it? From heaven or from men?” And
they argued with one another, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will say to us,
‘Why then did you not believe him?’ But if we say, ‘From men,’ we are
afraid of the multitude; for all hold that John was a prophet.” So they
answered Jesus, “We do not know.” And he said to them, “Neither will I
tell you by what authority I do these things. (Mt 21:23-27)
Self-actualized people are accepting, lighthearted, spontaneous, unpretentious,

creative and playful. They still function in the world, but are not of the world (Jn 17:14-
19). They do no need external rules to control their existence (that reside in the
superego), or feel the need to prove themselves to others, but are guided from within.

They have renounced the world (Th 110) of expectations, one-upmanship, and pairs of
opposites. They know that entering the Kingdom of Heaven does not come from
fulfilling external rules but from self-knowledge, which can be achieved only through
inner work.
Moreover, the self-actualized person anchored within realizes that she is not, in
Alan Watts’ terms, a “skin-encapsulated ego”, but one with God and the Universe and
that God is inside her. As a result she feels at home in the world. She is totally content
with herself. Nothing disturbs her; nothing dislocates her from her centeredness. You
cannot take anything from her, you cannot add anything to her – she is fulfilled (Osho,
1972/1994, Vol. 1, chap. 10, quest. 1).
D. The Kingdom Of Heaven / Self-Transcendence
As we have seen, as the questions of meaning become central to therapy, new

perspectives open to our lives. It is not uncommon for a psychotherapist, after working
for a while, to see a shift in the client’s conversations, moving towards spirituality. As
we get to know ourselves, we become aware that we are more complex, more
multifaceted and deeper than we ever imagined. We stop looking only at our daily
struggles and mechanistic reactions, and realize that life has a lot more to offer.
Clearly, the deeper we pursue our real selves, the closer we move into the border
between psychotherapy and spirituality (Welwood, 1992, p. 57). Human beings are an
onto-psycho-somatic continuum, which in the ultimate analysis is an indivisible whole
(Shirazi, 2004, p.238); hence, mental health is inextricably tied to spiritual health and
awareness (Cortright, 1997, p.41). Integral and transpersonal oriented psychotherapists
see psychological development as part of a larger spiritual movement towards wholeness.
As multidimensional beings, true wholeness must include –they affirm– the
harmonization of the different parts of our being, towards the manifestation of our highest
human potential “as the indivisible unity of the existential and the transcendental”
(Chaudhuri, H, cited in Shirazi, 2005, p.237). There is one process of evolution from the
beginning of ego development to the final stages of spiritual enlightenment (Almaas
2000, p.161).

What do I want to do with my life? What do I want to leave behind? Those are
questions for which each person needs to find their unique answer. The
psychotherapeutic “journey” begins with ourselves (integrating ourselves, loving
ourselves, finding meaning) but should not end with ourselves. “One begins with oneself
in order to forget oneself and to immerse oneself into the world; one comprehends
oneself in order not to be preoccupied with oneself” (Yalom, 1980, p. 439). The
challenge is first to move outside our egocentric self and to plunge into life
wholeheartedly. To go beyond ourselves and get involved, to contribute, to make a
difference, to love and leave a legacy.
And he said to his disciples, “Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about
your life, what you shall eat, nor about your body, what you shall put on.
For life is more than food, and the body more than clothing. (Lk 12:22-23)
Regardless of how prolific our life has been, no matter how many adventures,
children, books or philanthropic works we leave behind, we still need to face yet another
question, we must ask ourselves: “What for?” What is the purpose of doing anything if
we are going to die anyway? Here is the place where psychotherapy and religion meet.
Eastern and Western religions, together with integral and transpersonal psychotherapies,
answer that our purpose is to dissolve into, to unite with, or to recognize that we are
already part of something higher 46 , regardless of whether we want to call it entering into
the Kingdom of God, realizing the Self, achieving Parinirvana, merging with Brahman,
discovering our true Buddha-nature, or coming to the realization that we are made of the
same basic “stuff” as everything else in the Universe. In the words of Haridas Chaudhuri
(cited in Shirazi, 2005):
The essential significance of transcendence is that man in his inmost being

is a child of immortality, an imperishable spark of the infinite… As a
mode of manifestation of being, his ultimate goal is union with that
ground of existence, transcending all other limitations. (p.243)
As stated, entering into the Kingdom requires an inner shift from our Ego-
centeredness. Let us reiterate, however, that transcending ourselves does not imply the
dissolution of our ego but rather its transformation 47 . Most traditions would agree that
such transformation is very subtle, since more than modifying or acquiring something, it

is a process of realizing or “dropping” something--more like an awakening from a
slumber of consciousness. Psychotherapist would similarly agree that much of the work
is remembering something or realizing that we already have the potential of being fully
human. Grasping that “we are already there” even if we do not know it. That the
Kingdom is really (and not only figuratively) among us. Entering the Kingdom of
Heaven is not a matter of trying harder but of seeing clearly that we are already there.
Thomas Keating (Circle of Bliss, 2006) puts it in these terms:
The beginning of the spiritual journey is the realization, not just the
information but a real interior conviction, that there is a higher power or
God or, to make it as easy as possible for everybody, that there is an Other
(with capital “O”). Second step, to try to become the Other (still with
capital “O”), and finally the realization that there is no other, you and the
other are one, always have been, always will be, you just think you that
you aren’t.
While Easter religions are more readily identified with a nondual/non-theistic

understanding of the world, and the Judeo-Christian worldview is seen as
dualistic/theistic; just as with Keating’s words, it is not difficult to read many of Jesus’
sayings and understand them as attempts to call our attention to the fact that we are all
One and one with God:
On that day you will know that I am in my Father and that you are in me
and that I am in you (Jn 14:20).
The king will answer them, ‘I can guarantee this truth: Whatever you did
for one of my brothers or sisters, no matter how unimportant they seemed,
you did for me.’ (Mt 25:40)
I pray that all of these people continue to have unity in the way that you,
Father, are in me and I am in you. I pray that they may be united with us
so that the world will believe that you have sent me. I have given them the
glory that you gave me. I did this so that they are united in the same way
we are. I am in them, and you are in me. So they are completely united. In
this way the world knows that you have sent me and that you have loved
them in the same way you have loved me. (Jn 17:21-23)
Jesus said, “When you make the two one, you will become the sons of
man, and when you say, ‘Mountain, move away,’ it will move away.” (Th
106)

As we have seen, the Kingdom of Heaven is not a place but a state of
consciousness associated with the inner growth of the individual. It is the final leg in the
journey of psychospiritual development that Jesus has outlined for us. With that in mind,
we are able to recognize that his apparent admonition to repent because the Kingdom is at
hand (Mt 4:17; 10:7) is not a scold but an invitation to change our way of being in the
world (our egocentric, false-self based existence) and see if we have eyes, and hear if we
have ears (that is, if and when we are ready), that the Kingdom is in fact spread out upon
the earth, and men do not see it (Th 113). The Kingdom is a present reality to be entered
into when we achieve an inner transformation so radical that it is experienced as a rebirth
(Jn 3:3; Sanford, 1987).
Jesus said, “If those who lead you say, ‘See, the Kingdom is in the sky,’
then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, ‘It is in the
sea,’ then the fish will precede you. Rather, the Kingdom is inside of you,
and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will
become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the
living Father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty
and it is you who are that poverty.” (Th 3)
VI. Closing Thoughts
This is my commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved
you. (Jn 15:12)
We have seen how Jesus’ teachings evince a profound understanding of human

nature; still, I am not trying to turn him into a psychotherapist. Jesus’ words can and
should be interpreted first and foremost from a religious and spiritual perspective;
however, as I hope this work has shown, one does not need to abandon their religious
beliefs to profit from reading Jesus’ words from a psychological perspective. Quite the
contrary, doing so may help us to further relate to his message and wisdom--something
clearly meaningful in a time so much in need of spiritual guidance and so burdened with
dogmatic interpretations of any kind that feel alien and distant to many.
We have seen how we can find in the gospels the kernels of many of today’s
psychological tenets. Jesus invites us to become aware of our life situation and change
our minds and hearts (repentance), eliminate our inner division (exorcize Satan), give up

our false organizing principles and beliefs (sin), be open to the truth (faith) and be whole
(perfect) as God, with the promise that by doing so we will attain the Kingdom (self-
actualization and ultimately transcendence). Jesus, using the language and tools available
in his day and time, wants us to let our defenses down, heal our fragmentation, embrace
our shadow, come back to our body, achieve differentiation, let our true self come
forward, and above all, accept ourselves and others unconditionally.
As we have seen repeatedly, Jesus accepted everyone without judgment. Whether

they were tax collectors, prostitutes, adulterous women, lepers, or Samaritans, Jesus
always welcomed them openly and lovingly without demanding anything in return. That
was one of the features that troubled many Jewish leaders and teachers of the law. He put
love and acceptance above rules and prejudices. Jesus practiced mercy and compassion;
he was not interested in honors or sacrifices. He was keenly aware that those who are
cruel, judgmental and unforgiving towards others (those unable or unwilling to see the
log in their own eye but ready to see the speck in their brother’s) are usually even harder
upon themselves. He knew that cruelty and reprobation, which is what many of us have
received since childhood, are among the worst causes of inner suffering and that, more
often than not, do not help to create the much desired change. De Mello (cited in Valles,
1988, pp. 172-173) expresses it in a beautiful formula:
Don’t change: Desire to change is the enemy of love. Don’t change

yourselves: Love yourselves as you are. Don’t change others: Love all
others as they are. Don’t change the world: It is in God’s hands and he
knows. And if you do that change will occur marvelously in its own way
and in its own time…
As Rilke put it, to love another is perhaps the most difficult of all our tasks. To
truly love someone is difficult. To really love another, one must lose or transcend oneself
(Yalom, 1980, p.365). In perfect love there are no demands, no expectations, no
manipulation, no “strings attached.” Perfect love casts out fear (1 Jn 4:18). As we have
explored, it is not surprising that unconditional acceptance, whether it is called positive
regard or psychotherapeutic eros, is a conditio sine qua non in a good psychotherapist.
Such acceptance by therapists as been often called love, and it certainly has
elements of the type of love advocated by the apostle Paul in his First Letter to the

Corinthians; love that is: patient, kind, wholly interested in the well-being of the other,
forgiving and trustworthy (1 Cor 13). Since we have already talked at length about this
above, it suffices to cite Maslow (cited in Moffatt, 1976, p. 41-42), who calls this type of
love “Taoistic objectivity”:
Love for a person permits him to unfold, to open up, to drop his defenses.
He lets himself be seen instead of hiding himself. If we love or are
fascinated or profoundly interested, we are less tempted to interfere, to
control, to change, to improve. That which we love we are prepared to
leave alone. We make no demands upon it. We do not wish it to be other
than it is. Which is all to say that we can see it more truly as it is in its own
nature than as we would like it to be or fear it to be or hope it will be. To
the extent that we can be nonintrusive, non-demanding, non-hoping, non-
improving, to that extent do we achieve Taoistic objectivity. … Taoistic
objectivity means asking rather than telling. It stresses non-interfering
observation rather than manipulative control. We already have such a
model in the good psychotherapist. His conscious effort is not to impose
his will upon the patient, but rather to help the patient discover what he
himself wants or desires, what is good for him, the patient, rather than
what is good for the therapist. This is the opposite of controlling,
propagandizing, molding, teaching in the old sense. It implies a preference
for spontaneity rather than control, for trust in the organism rather than
mistrust. It assumes that the person wants to be fully human.
In his poem “How to Know Love from Deceit”, Blake speaks to the same idea
when expressing that love breaks all chains from every mind. When we realize that we
do not need to do anything to deserve to be loved, and that we cannot lose it either,
something happens within. When someone loves us just as we are, it somehow gives us
permission to also love ourselves as we are. When we realize that we will be loved no
matter what we say, think or do, we become free to grow as we need to grow. Feeling
loved by her therapist, the client is invited to open up to her experience, just as it is, and
to bring forth her very being, just as it is (Adams, 2006). Psychotherapy becomes indeed
a cure through love, since, at least from one perspective; all psychopathology can be seen
as an absence of love:
It is the unloved person who is driven by his emptiness …to fill the gaping
void in his life by grasping compulsively at possessions, position or
power. It is the unloved person too who is so deeply insecure that the fear
of rejection and a desperate need for the approval of others make him
incapable of truly independent action (Soares-Prabhu, 2003, p.64).

Love is at the core of Jesus’ message. He is trying to transmit to us his Abba
(“Father in Aramaic) experience: the experience of feeling unconditionally loved by God.
Neither power, nor wealth, nor fame, nor freedom will get us into the Kingdom of
Heaven. Love is the key to self-actualization, and the result of transcending ourselves.
Love fosters love, melts away our defenses and helps us get in touch with our true eternal
nature, which Jesus calls Abba. For Jesus, the most important commandment of all the
law, and the only one he explicitly left to his disciples was to love God and love our
neighbor as we love ourselves; not as two independent activities to engage in, but as two
intimately interrelated actions, since “the one who does not love does not know God, for
God is love.” (1 Jn 4:8).
Accordingly, for Jesus self-love, love of neighbor, and love of God are
complementary and increase in essential simultaneity as part of our growth process. The
more we feel loved by our therapist and others (and allow ourselves to let love in), the
more we are capable of loving ourselves and loving our neighbor, the more we love our
neighbor, the more we love God. Jesus’ message thus covers the three aspects of
wholeness in human personality: personal (uniqueness), interpersonal (relatedness) and
transcendence (transpersonal).
Jesus invites us repeatedly to follow his way to self-realization and self-

transcendence. His teachings truly set us free (Jn 8:32). A freedom that comes from
oneness with God, so unique and absolute, so much in harmony with our true self and the
universe that we need no other security in life; freedom that allows us to live in the
present moment:
Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into
barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more
value than they? And which of you by being anxious can add one cubit to
his span of life? And why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the
lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin; yet I tell you,
even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. But if
God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is
thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O men of little
faith? Therefore do not be anxious, saying, 'What shall we eat?' or 'What
shall we drink?' or 'What shall we wear?' For the Gentiles seek all these
things; and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. But seek

first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be yours
as well. "Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will
be anxious for itself. Let the day's own trouble be sufficient for the day.
(Mt 6:26)
The supreme goal for Jesus is unconditional love. A self-realized individual for
Jesus is one who has achieved unity with God (hence loving himself while at the same
time transcending his limited Egoic self) and feels God’s unconditional love; which, to
the extent that it is experienced, empowers him to love his neighbor as perfectly as God
does. Psychotherapy is clearly not the only way to attain this (perhaps not even the best
way to do it) but it is certainly a tool that can help in the process.
The fully realized follower of Jesus would be a person who experiences, is able to
give, and fully merges with unconditional Love. Jesus recipe for psychospiritual health
may be condensed as follows:
To love ourselves is to love God, to love God is to love others, to love others is to love
ourselves.
–o–o–o–o–o–o–
© 2007 Sergio Rodriguez Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. U.S.A. All Rights Reserved

VII. References
Abrams, J. & Zweig, C. (Editors) (1991). Meeting the shadow: the hidden power of the dark side of human
nature. Los Angeles. J.P. Tarcher.
Adams, W. W. (2006). Love, Open Awareness, and Authenticity: A Conversation with William Blake and
D. W. Winnicott. [Electronic version]. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 46, 9
Almaas, A. H. (2000). The Pearl Beyond Price: Integration of Personality into Being, an Object Relations
Approach. Berkeley, CA: Diamond Books.
Andrews, R., Biggs, M. & Seidel, M. (1996). The Columbia World of Quotations. Retrieved on July 13,
2007 from Columbia University Press. Web site: http://www.bartleby.com/66/38/21738.html
Aronson, H. (2004). Buddhist Practice on Western Ground: Reconciling Eastern Ideals and Western
Psychology. Boston: Shambhala.
Baker, W. M. (2001). The greatest psychologist who ever lived: Jesus and the wisdom of the soul. San
Francisco: Harper.
Bernstein, A., (2001) Beyond countertransference: The love that cures. [Electronic version]. Modern
Psychoanalysis, 26,2; ProQuest Psychology Journals
Bowen, M. & Kerr, M. E. (1988). Family evaluation: an approach based on Bowen theory. New York:
Norton.
Cahill, T. (2001). Desire of the Everlasting Hills: The World Before and After Jesus. New York: Anchor.
Campbell, J. (Author) & Kennedy, E. C. (Ed). (2001). Thou Art That: Transforming Religious Metaphor.
Novato, CA: New World Library.
Castro Ferrer, J. M. (1998). Despertar a la Libertad. La Pedagogía Espiritual de Tony De Mello.
Santander: Sal Terrae.
Catholic Churh, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Citta del Vaticano (1993). Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Retrieved on August, 7, 2007, from the Holy See Web site:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p122a4p2.htm#III
Circle of Bliss (Producer) & Powers, W. (Director). (2006). One [Motion picture]. USA: Films Art
Foundation.
Corsini, R. (1984).Current Psychotherapies. Itasca, IL: F.E. Peacock Publishers.
Cortright. B. (1997). Psychotherapy and Spirit: Theory and Practice in Transpersonal Psychotherapy.
Albany: State University of New York Press.
De Mello, A. (1990). Awareness New York: Image
De Mello, A. (1992) The Way to Love. New York: Doubleday.
De Mello, A. (Lecturer). (1989). Wake up to Life, De Mello New York Conference. (Audio CDs). St Louis
MO: We and God Spirituality Center.
De Wit, H. (1991). Contemplative Psychology. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.
Edinger, E. F. (1987) The Christian archetype a Jungian commentary on the life of Christ. Toronto,
Canada: Inner City Books.
Ehrman, B. D. (2003). The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings New
York: Oxford University Press.
Ehrman, B. D. (Lecturer). (n.d.). Historical Jesus. (Audio lectures) Chantilly, VA: The Teaching
Company.
Funk, W.R., Hoover, W.R. & The Jesus Seminar (1993). The Five Gospels: What Did Jesus Really Say?
San Francisco: Harper.
Jackson, H. (1994). Using Self Psychology in Psychotherapy. Northvale NJ: Jason Aronson.
Johnson, R. A. (1993) Owning your own shadow: understanding the dark side of the psyche. San
Francisco: HarperCollins.

Kahn, M. (1997) Between Therapist and Client: The New Relationship. (Rev. ed.). New York: Owl Books.
Kahn, M. (2002). Basic Freud, Psychoanalytic Thought for the 21st Century. New York: Basic Books.
Kingdom of God (2007). Retrieved on January 25, 2007, from Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia Web
site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_God
Klimek, D. (1991). Wisdom, Jesus and Psychotherapy. Ann Arbor, Mi: Winsted Publications.
Kohut, H. (1976). The Restoration of the Self. New York : International Universities Press.
Kornfield, J. (2000). After the Ecstasy, the Laundry: How the Heart Grows Wise on the Spiritual Path.
New York: Bantam Books.
Lee, R.R. & Martin, J. C. (1991). Psychotherapy After Kohut: A Textbook of Self Psychology. Hillsdale,
NJ : Analytic Press.
Lewis, C. S. (1943/2001). Mere Christianity. San Francisco: HarperCollins.
Lewis, C. S. (1963/2001). A Grief Observed. San Francisco: Harper.
Madeleine. D. & Wallbridge, D. (1981). Boundary and space: an introduction to the work of D.W.
Winnicott. New York: Brunner/Mazel.
Marks, T. (1972). The Meaning of Life. Retrieved July 12, 2007, from Tufts University, Web site:
http://www.geocities.com/~webwinds/frankl/meaning.htm
Masterson, J. F. (1988). The search for the real self: unmasking the personality disorders of our age. New
York: Free Press.
McKenna, D. L. (1985). The psychology of Jesus: the dynamics of Christian wholeness. New York: W Pub
Group.
McWilliams, N. (1994). Psychoanalytic diagnosis: understanding personality structure in the clinical
process. New York: Guilford Press.
McWilliams, N. (2004). Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy: A Practitioner’s Guide. New York: The Guilford
Press
Mitchell, D. W. (Ed.) & Wiseman, J. A. (Ed.). (1999).The Gethsemani Encounter: A Dialogue on the
Spiritual Life by Buddhist and Christian Monastics . New York : Continuum.
Mitchell, S. (1995). The Gospel According to Jesus: A New Translation and Guide to His Essential
Teachings for Believers and Unbelievers. New York: Harper Collins.
Moffatt, R. (1976). Krishnamurti and Psychotherapy: Beyond East And West. Retrieved August 24, 2007,
from San Diego State University. Web site: http://www.isc.sdsu.edu/Documents/Krishnamurti.pdf
Ogden, T. H. (2005). This Art of Psychoanalysis, Dreaming Undreamt Dreams and Interrupted Cries.
London: Routledge.
Olthuis, J.H., (2006) With-Ing: A Psychotherapy of Love. [Electronic version]. Journal of Psychology and
Theology, 34,1; ProQuest Religion
Osho. (1972/1994). Vigyan Bhairav Tantra, Discourses Series, In Osho Books on CD-Rom. London: Osho
International Foundation.
Patterson, C. H. & Watkins, E. C. (1997) Theories of Psychotherapy. New York: Allyn & Bacon.
Perls, F. (1973). The Gestalt Approach and Eye Witness to Therapy. Ben Lomond, CA: Science &
Behavior Books.
Phillips, A. (1988). Winnicott. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ram Dass. (1975). Advice to a Psychotherapist. [Electronic version]. The Journal of Transpersonal
Psychology Vol. 7, No. One. .
Rogers, C. (1961/1995). On Becoming a Person: A Therapist’s View of Psychotherapy. Boston: Mariner
Books.
Sanford, J. A. (1974). Jesus, Paul and depth psychology: An investigation of the psychology and ethics of
Jesus and Paul in the light of contemporary knowledge of the unconscious. King of Prussia, PA:
Religious Pub. Co.
Sanford, J. A. (1987). The Kingdom Within: The Inner Meaning of Jesus’ Sayings. San Francisco: Harper.
Schnarch, D. (1998). Passionate Marriage: Keeping Love and Intimacy Alive in Committed Relationships.

New York : H. Holt.
Schutz, W. (1973). Elements of Encounter. Big Sur, CA: Joy Press,.
Scott Peck, M. (2003). The Road Less Traveled, 25th Anniversary Edition: A New Psychology of Love,
Traditional Values and Spiritual Growth. New York: Touchstone.
Shirazi, A. K. B. (2004). Integral Psychology: Psychology of the Whole Human Being. In Amorok, T.,
Micozzi, M. &Schlitz, M. (2004). Consciousness and Healing: Integral Approaches to Mind-Body
Medicine. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone.
Soares-Prabhu, G. & D'Sa, F. (Ed) (2003). The Dharma of Jesus. New York: Orbis Books.
Sommers-Flanagan, J. & Sommers-Flanagan, R. (2004) Counseling and Psychotherapy Theories in
Context and Practice: Skills, Strategies, and Techniques. New Jersey: Wiley.
St. Clair, M. (1996). Object Relations and Self Psychology. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Pub. Co.
Sullivan, B. S. (1989). Psychotherapy Grounded in the Feminine Principle. Wilmette, IL: Chiron
Publications.
The American Heritage Dictionary. (4th ed.). (2000). Retrieved on January 25, 2007 from Bartleby.Com.
Web site: http://www.bartleby.com/61/roots/S301.html
University of Toronto. (2001). The Five Gospels Parallels. Retrieved August 27, 2007 from the
Department for the Study of Religion. Web site: http://www.utoronto.ca/religion/synopsis/meta
Valles, C. (1988). Unencumbered by Baggage: An Intimate Biography of Anthony De Mello, Gujarat
Sahitya Prakash, India.
Walker, E. III. (2003). The Mystic Christ. Norman, OK: Devi Press.
Walsch, N. D. (1996) Conversations with God: An Uncommon Dialogue (Book 1). New York: G. P.
Putnam’s Sons.
Watts, A. (1961). Psychotherapy, East and West. New York: Vintage Books.
Watts, A. (1977). The essence of Alan Watts. Millbrae, CA: Celestial Arts.
Watts, A. (Lecturer). (1973). Jesus His Religion or The Religion About Him. (Audio Tape). Mill Valley,
CA: Electronic University.
Watts, A. (Lecturer). (1973). Karma of Christianity (Audio Tape). Mill Valley, CA: Electronic University.
Weiss, J. (1993) How Psychotherapy Works: Process and Technique. New York: The Guilford Press.
Welwood, J. (1992) Psychotherapy and the Power of Truth. The Yoga Journal, May/June issue.
Whitaker. C. (1989) Midnight Musings of a Family Therapist. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Wilber, K. (1999). The collected works of Ken Wilber (10 vols.). Boston : Shambhala.
Williams, M. (1922/1991) The Velveteen Rabbit. New York: Delacorte Press.
Winnicott, D.W. (1962). Ego integration in child development. In Winnicott, D.W. The maturational
process and the facilitating environment. London: Hogarth Press.
Yalom, I. D. (1980). Existential Psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books
Yalom, I.D. (2002). The gift of therapy: an open letter to a new generation of therapists and their patients.
New York: HarperCollins.
Zeiders, C. L. (2004). The Clinical Christ: Scientific and spiritual reflections on the transformative
psychology called Christian holism. New York: Julian’s House.

VIII. Notes
1
Understood as a theoretical framework which views psychological work within a context of spiritual
unfolding (Cortright, 1997).
2
Here I am talking about the intersection between Christian doctrine and modern psychotherapy principles,
which is different, in my view, from Pastoral Psychotherapy or Contemplative Psychology.
3
Since this is not a historical work, I will use these books using the names traditionally given to them,
regardless of the almost unanimous agreement that they were not actually written by the individuals to
whom they are attributed. Whenever possible, I will refer to the gospel of Matthew, since it is the one that
includes the largest selection of words spoken by Jesus.
4
One of the most interesting current products of such debate is the Jesus Seminar and the books produced
by their efforts.
5
Due to its significance for our purpose, and the fact that many scholars agree that it is as antique as our
oldest sources (at least in its earliest version), apart from the four canonical gospels, occasionally I will also
make reference to the Gospel of Thomas discovered in 1945 at Nag Hammadi, Egypt.
6
This is a hard decision to make, since there are many elements of the Jesus-Christ messianic traditions
that can be interpreted from a psychotherapeutic perspective. As an example, Klimek (1991) explains how
the idea of Jesus taking in the sins of the world for our salvation, corresponds to that of the therapist taking
over the emotions, burdens and pathologies for the clients, until she is strong enough to face them herself.
7
Nonetheless, I am aware that such approach, from a transpersonal viewpoint, may be nearly impossible;
since optimal mental health is always tied to spiritual health (Cortright, 1997).
8
De Mello was keen to say that the shortest road to the heart is a story.
9
In order to make the reading smoother, I will write using the masculine for the therapist while alternating
the gender of the client.
10
In Greek mythology, Procrustes (the stretcher), was a bandit from Attica. He was famous for having an
iron bed into which he invited every passerby to lie down. If the guest proved too tall, he would amputate
the excess length; if the victim was found too short, he was then stretched out on the rack until he fit.
11
Again, I am not denying or affirming his existence as such.
12
De Mello (1990) kept asking in his lectures, why should you weep for your sins? Why should you feel
guilty about what you did when you were sleep? Repent means to wake up to life.
13
Alan Watts (1977) suggests that a good scientist has more faith than a religious person, because (ideally)
she would be more open to the truth, even if it goes against her hypotheses, in fact her whole purpose it to
put them to the test.
14
I am aware of the different connotations of concepts such as self-actualization, individuation, self-
realization, etc. For now, I will be using them loosely and interchangeably. Later on, we will explore them
in relation to the concept “Kingdom of Heaven” used by Jesus.
15
Scholars have debated and almost unanimously concluded that the two terms can be used
interchangeably: In the synoptic gospels (which were written in Greek), Mark and Luke use the Greek
term "Basileia tou Theou," commonly translated in English as “Kingdom of God,” while Matthew prefers
the Greek term "Basileia tōn Ouranōn" which has been translated as “Kingdom of Heaven.” (“Kingdom of
God”, 2007).
16
Obviously a comparison between the different schools of thought in psychotherapy goes well beyond the
scope of this work. For our purposes, I will explore only a few of them, since, as expressed, it seems like
all aim towards similar general goals.
17
If the reader find these assumptions awkward to read s/he is right. This is the result of my attempt to
include the different language used by diverse approaches to closely related ideas.
18
As with almost everything else, the different psychotherapies disagree on how best to bring about change
and even what that change may look like.
19
Patterson & Watkins (1997) merge the last two in one phase, however in my opinion these have different
characteristics, therefore I decided to split it in two.

20
Whitaker (1989) Suggested that it is precisely that setting, on which the client is one-down to the
therapist from the very beginning, one of the reasons in which psychotherapy promotes (or provides the
space) for growth. Since it offers the kind of freedom that makes it possible for the client to be more
himself.
21
Whether that meant after dead or in this life, after an imminent apocalyptic event, has been also
contested.
22
This process also requires the therapist’s faith that when two people willingly put a certain intention in
motion, a natural process of growth that has been arrested will be released to follow its own self-healing
logic (McWilliams, 2004; cf. also Mt 18:20). The way in which such intention sets up a natural growth
process, that neither Therapist nor client understand but in which both can rely, is addressed by Jesus in Mk
4:26-29: "The kingdom of God is as if a man should scatter seed upon the ground, and should sleep and
rise night and day, and the seed should sprout and grow, he knows not how. The earth produces of itself,
first the blade, then the ear, then the full grain in the ear. But when the grain is ripe, at once he puts in the
sickle, because the harvest has come." Similarly, therapeutic work takes place underground and almost
unnoticeable for a long time, until the client is ripe, the fruits of a new way of being in the world can be
harvested.
23
In this work the following forms of psychotherapy will be somewhat taken into consideration:
Psychodynamic, Existential, Integral, Humanistic, Person-Centered, Self-psychology, Gestalt,
Transpersonal and Family systems. This work will not cover Cognitive Behavioral approaches.
24
Some, notably Alan Watts, would argue that trying to change is impossible, since the part of us (our Ego)
that wants to change is the same that the one attempted to be changed. In simple parlance, it would be like
trying to pull us up by our own bootstraps.
25
Here Jesus is quoting the Old Testament, the Book of Hosea (6:6).
26
As we will discuss below, experiencing this acceptance becomes the key element when working to
accept our “darkest” inner parts.
27
De Mello (1990) affirmed that Jesus was killed because not because his message (usually referred to as
the Gospel) was good (or not) but because it was new! (Note: the word Gospel, which means "good news"
derives from the Anglo-Saxon elision good-spell).
28
Freud used military metaphors when first described defense mechanisms, as a result, it is common to talk
about defenses as maladaptive patters that needed to be conquered. We are using it in that sense here;
however, modern psychotherapy does not necessarily assume that anything pathological is going on when a
defense is operating. What may be seen as an undesired resistance in one client may be a healthy self-
preservation mechanism for another that has kept him “together”. (cf. McWilliams, 1994).
29
That is what Nietzsche had in mind when he talked about the Übermensch
30
In Self-Psychology terminology, through transmuting internalizations, functions of such parents (the
must common selfobjects) and the environment, are internalized as inner structures and functions, helping
to develop a cohesive self.
31
For example, Mitchell (1995).
32
Notably the so-called “Seven woes” in Mt 23
33
Clearly the roles modern families are not monolithic. A family nowadays can be formed for a different
structure from the traditional man-woman dyad; roles and authority figures may or may not be the parents,
etc. However, since most of the literature still makes reference to the mother-father-children structure, I
will follow that same pattern here.
34
Below we will discuss how Jesus behavior was his way of “modeling” (in contemporary
psychotherapeutic jargon) to others the benefits of attaining the Kingdom of Heaven.
35
In some versions, Jesus’ words to the blind men are “Become what you believe”. The most common
translation is the one cited above.
36
In other occasions, like in Lk 2:1-12, Jesus focuses in the forgiveness of the sins before healing the
physical body.
37
Whether the person has in fact authority over the other person (as in the examples above) is not
significant, what is, is that the person perceives that the other has a higher standing than him. In the case of

psychotherapy, we already mentioned how that “one-down” situation between client and therapist can be
seen as one of the elements that facilitate the therapeutic work.
38
This scheme is only a generalization. As Cortright (1997) has pointed out, “Issues of existential identity,
authenticity, and meaning in life are intimately bound up with childhood wounds and structural deficits in
the self…” (p. 44) “…at any moment new psychological issues may come to the fore as reverberations
from the past overshadow present functioning. New levels of old wounds are continually activated and
become increasingly accessible with inner work.” (p.47)
39
Physiological (breathing, food, drink, shelter, sleep, excretion), Safety (protection, security, order, law,
limits, stability), Love and belonging (intimacy, friendship, family, work group), Esteem (self, status,
achievement, responsibility, reputation) and Self-actualization (personal growth and fulfillment)
40
If people are unable to satisfy the basic needs, they would hardly be able to function or have enough
psychic and emotional energy to deal with the rest of them.
41
Many felt so challenged (and were in so much denial) that preferred to plot and kill Jesus before
confronting themselves. Even if we would like to think that human beings have developed deeper
awareness since Jesus’ time, it would not be difficult to find in wars and most “ isms” (fundamentalism,
racism, feminism, etc.) an attempt to project our own fears and lacks outside, instead of looking within.
42
In such schemes the Ego includes our personae, our false-self. While in humanistic and transpersonal
psychotherapy the Ego has such meaning, on the other hand, for psychoanalysis the Ego is a mental
apparatus, which, along with the id and the superego, organize the psyche. (Cortright, 1997, p. 2)
43
Notably Sri Aurobindo and Haridas Chaudhuri.
44
Existentially oriented psychotherapists (cf. Yalom 1980), argue that, although clients may not talk about
them directly, the “big topics” (meaning, death, freedom, responsibility and isolation) are always present in
the therapy room, and therapists collude with them in avoiding talking about them. Although I agree with
it, in my experience many clients have more immediate presenting problems that need to be somehow
acknowledged (if not fully addressed) before moving to deeper waters in the psyche.
45
I hesitate to use the word successful since success can be measured differently for different people and
even for the same person in different moments of her life. In the present context, success refers precisely to
a higher level of self-actualization, to living a fuller and life.
46
In the well-known expression of Augustine of Hippo: Thou hast created us for Thyself, and our heart is
not quiet until it rests in Thee.
47
There has been much debate of what transcendence actually entails. While Eastern (Buddhist and
Hinduist) influenced thinkers talk about the dissolution of the separate self (or the illusion of it) into the
Whole; Western (Judeo-Christian) biased sages talk about a transformation of the self, becoming “the lesser
side of an integrated duality” (cf. Cortright, 1997). In my opinion, the debate is more of terminology in an
arena where words cannot really illustrate what is being described. Therefore I am opting for not getting
into such distinctions.

Jesus in Times of Freud

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jesus in Times of Freud

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JESUS IN TIMES OF FREUD

AN EXPLORATION OF THE APPLICATION OF JESUS’ MESSAGE TO

California Institute of Integral Studies

Integral Counseling Psychology

San Francisco, Ca.

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

I. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................................. 4

A. DOES JESUS AND PSYCHOTHERAPY MIX? ........................................................................... 4

II. SETTING THE FRAME ..................................................................................................... 5

A. HOW AM I READING THE GOSPELS? ................................................................................... 5

III. WHAT IS PSYCHOTHERAPY? ................................................................................. 11

A. WHAT IS THE PROCESS OF PSYCHOTHERAPY? ................................................................ 13

IV. SOME SPECIFIC TOPICS........................................................................................... 22

A. ON HUMAN NATURE ........................................................................................................ 22

V. WHAT IS THE GOAL OF PSYCHOTHERAPY? ......................................................... 50

A. LIEBEN UND ARBEITEN .................................................................................................... 51

VI. CLOSING THOUGHTS................................................................................................ 66

VII. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 71

VIII. NOTES ............................................................................................................................ 74

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

A. Does Jesus and psychotherapy mix?

When I decided to become a psychotherapist and began learning about

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

I am convinced that understanding the psychological value in the teachings of

II. Setting the Frame

A. How am I Reading the Gospels?

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

Am I being disrespectful in approaching Jesus’ teachings as metaphors? I

Parables (and metaphors in general) have the advantage of being “democratic”

I will do my best not to apply a Procrustian method to Jesus’ sayings 10 . Funk,

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

B. What I Don’t Want To Do

This is not an attempt to “psychologize” Jesus’ teachings, but to interpret them in

It is also important to separate the present approach from Christian pastoral

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

5. Healing. Episodes of Jesus healing people abound in the gospels. Such

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

8. Kingdom of Heaven / Kingdom of God. The concept of “the Kingdom of

III. What Is Psychotherapy?

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

Corsini (1984), after reviewing the most influential approaches to psychotherapy,

To the above, I would like to add that psychotherapy is also a process of

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

(iv) The process of change/understanding/learning is not easy; on the contrary it is

(v) Human beings are capable of change 18 .

A. What Is The Process Of Psychotherapy?

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

(iii) self-discovery, realization or awareness of what is real,

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

Growth means change; and the change experienced in the course of

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

For Roger’s client above, psychotherapy systematically demolished each and

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

B. Jesus Description of the Process of Psychotherapy

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

We have seen how psychotherapy involves self-exploration, self-disclosure and

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007

Or, as Rogers (1961/1995) puts it in contemporary psychological language:

In a favorable psychological climate a process of becoming takes place;

However, the “humbling” of the Ego is only the first step…

© Sergio Rodriguez-Castillo, San Francisco, Ca. 2007