Hi.
Yes Hania. I understand you.
The question about perpetrator.
Normally, we sympathize with victims. Why? We are victims, too. In real, or
in our mind/conscience. It is our trap.
I do not judge. But,...
When victim puts himself in his own place, by recognition of *his act of
love*, opens the door to perpetrator, to receive his opportunity.
(But perpetrator is not really, "the perpetrator". He is only "the act". But
results from what we see. What we suffers. - there are plenty more things
about this).
If he catch, or not, it's his responsibility.
Then, victim, can get out of the pain, to another level, of
conscience/consciousness. To another level of vibration.
The important work results directly on victim and by resonance on
perpetrator.
This is what happen.
This is what I see.
Then, it's a question of time.
Thanks you all.
2010/4/13 Hania Moser <haniamoser@xxxxxxxxx>
Hi Luis
I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean in your e-mail.
I'm not looking at Love from the point of pain, it was some other
aspect of my doubts about Hellinger science.
There are many questions Luis.
Thank you for your efforts
Hania
2010/4/13 luis moreira <luismvm@xxxxxxxxx>:
Hi Haniaencouraged
when you affirms this,... "*I disagree when victim is publicly
to love perpetrator, and*you're
*only move is wanted from victim to perpetrator, perpetrator remains
unchanged. Victim dignity is shattered again, this is no Love*." ...
trying to discover "the" Love for behind a fog curtain.for
In such a way never it will obtain to find... "the" Love.
You try to see "Love", from the point of pain. From your conscience, or,
consciousness.
You approach some questions where it seems not to exist consideration for
with the victim.
But the victim, is connected.
There is not known reason. But, from this connection, the chance appears
the love can to flow.give.
And, through the Constellation, this flow of Love, can be normalized. And
the transformations are given.
The problem is that it treats the victims as, incapable ones.
This shows an enormous lack of consideration for with what they are to
to
I never said it, here. But, for me, a Constellation, is the opportunity
activate the normality, of the flow of the Love.
Thanks
2010/4/12 Hania Moser <haniamoser@xxxxxxxxx>
Thank you Thomas, your sharing is very important for me, as I have
some doubts regarding Hellinger concept, and I feel on the edge in my
way of following his science.
On the one side of this edge is my experience of profound changes in
family and individual life as the result of constellation. There are
situations where nothing else could help.
However these movements and knowing field are no one possession, and
Hellinger does not own the knowing field too.
On the other side of my edge is what you expressed in your e-mail
Thomas. What is Love?
I agree that natural rules of surviving are as they are, and they rule
part of our life in relationship with world outside us.
I think that Hellinger did big thing describing them; he called it
love derived from conscioussness, and primary need and right to
belong. It's true.
But he didn't answer what is Love. Some traces of seeking this answer
I see in his saying that when we become adults, we lose our sense of
innocence and we are lonely. As we don't follow anymore family system
conscience in a way of the need of belonging.
When I face person suffering unreversible damage caused by her/his
mother neglect, (like you said in your e-mail :When a child is not met
by presence, they learn that love is a business deal. You will love
me if I do what is right. I will love you if you behave the way I
want you to.") I can't say "reach your mother".
Some parents are dangerous for their children, and we can see it often.
In surviving of human kind, the life of mother is more important than
child's, and Hellinger said it clearly, describing family system
mechanisms.
But this is not Love.
Hiding Truth could serve surviving of family as a system (like hidden
truth about incest) but it is not Love.
Perpetrators are not equal to victims, as they took something from
their victims, like life or sens of safety. I feel very worry when
people say about perpetrators and victims as they are the same (unless
victim became perpetrator but this is another chapter).
I disagree when victim is publicly encouraged to love perpetrator, and
only move is wanted from victim to perpetrator, perpetrator remains
unchanged. Victim dignity is shattered again, this is no Love.
I wouldn't discover America when I say that many rules in family
constellations promoted by Hellinger are based on Old Testament with
Ten
2010/4/12 Peter Honer <pchoner@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Well said Thomas.
cheers...Peter Honer
----- Original Message -----
From: Thomas Bryson
To: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 3:04 AM
Subject: [ConstellationTalk] Orders of Love revisited
Orders of Love Revisited
What Bert Hellinger labeled the 'Orders of Love,' aren't actually
about
love at all. They would be better called, Orders of Survival.
Hierarchy
between parents and children, belonging to the group and bonding
between
couples are mammalian in origin and actually have little to do with
love. They are functional survival strategies. They help the group,
the
individual and his or her genetic lineage to survive.
If one thinks of humans as a pack of wild dogs, hierarchy, belonging
and
bonding make perfect sense. They all aid survival. That is why when
we
do something that is against an order, we feel that we are doing
something wrong and it feels threatening. For a member of the pack
it is
dangerous to go against the top dog. It is dangerous to leave the
pack
and be isolated by a bigger predator. If we do not successfully mate
and
bond, our lineage ends.
Actual love is not based on behavior. That is the confusion that
children have when they think that if they don't do the 'right'
thing,
that they are not loved. Love comes from presence. When presence
meets
presence, love flows. When a child is not met by presence, they
learn
that love is a business deal. You will love me if I do what is
right. I
will love you if you behave the way I want you to.
The term Giving and Taking is also not accurate when it comes to
children. More accurate would be giving by the parents and receiving
by
the children. Taking is too active for an infant. If the child
doesn't
learn how to passively receive, it is generally because either the
parents are not there, are dangerous or else what is coming through
the
parents systemically is threatening. Then the child is right to move
away from the parents.
Taking is an active process that is later in development than
receiving.
If the child doesn't learn how to passively receive, later in life
he or
she may have difficulty taking taking their place as an adult in
life.
And with difficulty taking, they will have difficulty giving
giving
their gift to the world.
All love.
Thomas Bryson
tb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Facilitation, training and counseling in person or by Skype.
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
--
Luís Viegas Moreira
tlm. 919 744 249
web. www.odespertardoeu.blogspot.com
Skype. luismvm1
FaceBook. Luís Miguel Viegas Moreira
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
