David Brooks, New York Times writer, continues to write thoughtfully and in ways that challenge me to take what I know and find new ways to apply it. Recently he wrote about trauma. You would not think an article entitled, “Fighting the Spiritual Void,” would be dealing with the phenomenon of trauma. But the key is to see trauma, in part, as a spiritual issue. Most of us are educated to think trauma is a physical and psychological problem. We think about soldiers traumatized by war and victims abused by others. Sometimes we use the word rather loosely when we talk about being “traumatized” by someone or something.
So reading Brooks’ article helped me see it in a new way and to appreciate how much I have to bring to the table. He begins his thoughts in a way that resonates with many of us. “Wherever I go I seem to meet people who are either dealing with trauma or helping others dealing with trauma.” There does seem to be a lot of trauma these days. Like so many other things, we wonder if there really is more of it or if publicity, aided by the internet, just makes it more visible? In either case, there is a lot of trauma.
We get to the heart of Brooks’ argument when we read these words---quoting somewhat extensively. “Our society has tried to medicalize trauma. We call it PTSD and regard it as an individual illness that can be treated with medications. But it’s increasingly clear that trauma is a moral and spiritual issue as much as a psychological or chemical one. Wherever there is trauma, there has been betrayal, an abuse of authority, a moral injury.” Brooks is correct to understand that we have medicalized trauma. That is how I saw it until doing some research for my recent book. It certainly can be medical. I would be a fool to deny that. But it is more. And that is where Brooks helps me.
When we see it also as a psychological and, especially, spiritual issue, we get a fuller handle on how we might act in the face of trauma. We actually have more tools to combat it and to help folks heal. I love the phrase Books uses when he allows that medicine certainly can be used, “but it can’t heal the inner self.” No doubt, it would take a book to analyze and develop exactly what the inner self is. But that concept strikes me as both true and important. Of course, the inner self is not physical. I realize we live in a world where things not physical sometimes are difficult to believe. It is hard to think something is “real” unless we can see it, etc.
But we don’t see love, except as we see the actions of another. Love is quite real and most of us believe in it. I think love is both psychological and spiritual. And I think love may be generated from our inner self. I am ok realizing this line of argument can either be seen as profound or pure nonsense! Agreeing with Brooks, I am fine talking about an inner self. Ultimately, our inner self is tied up with who we are---our identity. Of course, this is what Thomas Merton was after when he talked about the true self. Merton knew much about this true self because he had so much experience with what he called, the false self.
Brooks adroitly recognizes that folks who are traumatized “find that their identity formation has been interrupted and fragmented.” Trauma messes up with who we are and the person we want to become. Brooks informs us that for traumatized people, “Time doesn’t flow from one day to the next but circles backward to the bad event.” Basically, this means that things are not normal. The trauma is real enough, but it renders us not normal. Interestingly, Brooks calls trauma a “moral injury.”
Brooks slowly reveals his major teaching. He comments, “As a culture we’re pretty bad at dealing with moral injury. Sometimes I look at the rising suicide and depression rates, the rising fragility and distrust, and I think it all flows from the fact that we’ve made our culture a spiritual void.” Our culture is a spiritual void. That is powerful. The answer is obvious. We need somehow to fill the void---to take care of the emptiness trauma folks experience. Brooks thinks a major part of the answer is morality. I think he agrees this also means a good dose of spirituality.
I find it interesting to see how Brooks articulates morality. He observes, “It’ll take a lot to make our culture a thick moral culture.” Obviously, this implies our current culture is pretty “thin.” However we look at our world---politically, economically, or socially---it is easy to agree with this assessment. When we privatize everything, we thin out the cultural significance. Individualism is the royal currency and I am the King!
Brooks’ final comment leads us to the title of our meditation. He tells us “nations and people have to grow a soul big enough to enclose the traumas that haunt them.” What a wonderful notion to believe we can grow bigger souls. I love the idea. I want a bigger soul. I am sure sometimes I act as a small soul. And that is not conducive to having a “thicker person.” And I can’t help my culture become morally thicker. This is to goal: big enough souls.
So reading Brooks’ article helped me see it in a new way and to appreciate how much I have to bring to the table. He begins his thoughts in a way that resonates with many of us. “Wherever I go I seem to meet people who are either dealing with trauma or helping others dealing with trauma.” There does seem to be a lot of trauma these days. Like so many other things, we wonder if there really is more of it or if publicity, aided by the internet, just makes it more visible? In either case, there is a lot of trauma.
We get to the heart of Brooks’ argument when we read these words---quoting somewhat extensively. “Our society has tried to medicalize trauma. We call it PTSD and regard it as an individual illness that can be treated with medications. But it’s increasingly clear that trauma is a moral and spiritual issue as much as a psychological or chemical one. Wherever there is trauma, there has been betrayal, an abuse of authority, a moral injury.” Brooks is correct to understand that we have medicalized trauma. That is how I saw it until doing some research for my recent book. It certainly can be medical. I would be a fool to deny that. But it is more. And that is where Brooks helps me.
When we see it also as a psychological and, especially, spiritual issue, we get a fuller handle on how we might act in the face of trauma. We actually have more tools to combat it and to help folks heal. I love the phrase Books uses when he allows that medicine certainly can be used, “but it can’t heal the inner self.” No doubt, it would take a book to analyze and develop exactly what the inner self is. But that concept strikes me as both true and important. Of course, the inner self is not physical. I realize we live in a world where things not physical sometimes are difficult to believe. It is hard to think something is “real” unless we can see it, etc.
But we don’t see love, except as we see the actions of another. Love is quite real and most of us believe in it. I think love is both psychological and spiritual. And I think love may be generated from our inner self. I am ok realizing this line of argument can either be seen as profound or pure nonsense! Agreeing with Brooks, I am fine talking about an inner self. Ultimately, our inner self is tied up with who we are---our identity. Of course, this is what Thomas Merton was after when he talked about the true self. Merton knew much about this true self because he had so much experience with what he called, the false self.
Brooks adroitly recognizes that folks who are traumatized “find that their identity formation has been interrupted and fragmented.” Trauma messes up with who we are and the person we want to become. Brooks informs us that for traumatized people, “Time doesn’t flow from one day to the next but circles backward to the bad event.” Basically, this means that things are not normal. The trauma is real enough, but it renders us not normal. Interestingly, Brooks calls trauma a “moral injury.”
Brooks slowly reveals his major teaching. He comments, “As a culture we’re pretty bad at dealing with moral injury. Sometimes I look at the rising suicide and depression rates, the rising fragility and distrust, and I think it all flows from the fact that we’ve made our culture a spiritual void.” Our culture is a spiritual void. That is powerful. The answer is obvious. We need somehow to fill the void---to take care of the emptiness trauma folks experience. Brooks thinks a major part of the answer is morality. I think he agrees this also means a good dose of spirituality.
I find it interesting to see how Brooks articulates morality. He observes, “It’ll take a lot to make our culture a thick moral culture.” Obviously, this implies our current culture is pretty “thin.” However we look at our world---politically, economically, or socially---it is easy to agree with this assessment. When we privatize everything, we thin out the cultural significance. Individualism is the royal currency and I am the King!
Brooks’ final comment leads us to the title of our meditation. He tells us “nations and people have to grow a soul big enough to enclose the traumas that haunt them.” What a wonderful notion to believe we can grow bigger souls. I love the idea. I want a bigger soul. I am sure sometimes I act as a small soul. And that is not conducive to having a “thicker person.” And I can’t help my culture become morally thicker. This is to goal: big enough souls.
Comments
Post a Comment