Journal of Religion and Health, Vol. 30, No. 2, Summer 1991
The Book of Job: A Grief and Human Development Interpretation ARLIN ROY ABSTRACT: The Book of Job exemplifies, in both form and content, typical unconscious grief reactions. Both theory and case illustrations are used to interpret Job as a vivid portrayal of successful adaptation to 1) the psychological stresses of grief, 2) the human developmental opportunities inherent in grieving, and 3) the spiritual development thus made possible.
It was 6:30 A.M. I was groggily dressing when the phone rang. "Can't they wait?" Sarita, my wife, answered: "Yes, No. Oh, no . . . . " Her niece Jenny had been killed while safeguarding another's safety. The first child, grandchild, niece--beloved and rebellious--left a large family that did not so much recover as simply go on. Grief tends to call up grief, this one from decades earlier. I was eight years old when the source of relaxed acceptance in my life, my grandmother, died. She was "simple minded" and "useless" to others, but the loss of her constant acceptance ripped open a psychological gash. By comparison, the book of Job describes greater losses. Job had been fortunate. Analogously, he was president of IBM, led a Kennedy-sized clan, demonstrated Jimmy Carter's piety, and was taking his ease at Pocantico Hills when disaster struck. He lost everything and everyone but his wife. To his scabious ash heap came three friends who maintained he must have done something wrong to deserve God's punishment. Job denied sin and challenged God to confront him directly; a fourth friend alleged that he did something unknowingly, but he maintained innocence. Then God spoke to Job of his total power and deeds beyond human understanding, whereupon Job recanted his illusions of knowledge. There is much to learn from Job. The form and style suggest insights that aid an interpretation of the content according to modern grief theory and The Rev. Arlin Roy, M.S.W., C.S.W., is Co-Director of the Northeast Counseling Center in. Pleasantville, New York, and Supervisor and Faculty at the Blanton-Peale Institute in New York City. 149
9 1991Institutes of Religionand Health
150
Journal of Religion and Health
ideas of psychological development. I will first attend to the way the text was written before turning to the three dimensions of grief reactions Job illustrates: 1) personal grief, 2) psychological development, and 3) spiritual development.
Job and levels of understanding Job is based on a folk tale written by several Hebrew authors, yet all the characters but one have non-Hebraic names. The name of the God of Israel, YHVH, recedes in the oldest, central section to a general divinity, and the author refers not to Judaic law but to a "universal moral code," thus presenting "man suffering, everywhere. ''1 The central story apparently did not serve subsequent authors' purposes, and they added a hymn, more speeches, an epilogue, and several extraneous chapters of divine glory-hogging. The original work's stark integrity was compromised by later additions that m a y have been designed to make God more understandable by making him seem more human, and to give the story a happy ending. They actually heighten the sense of several wishful authors quaking before a great vision of transformation, yet realizing that they could not ignore Job either. Further, his psychological standpoint is emotionally primitive and egocentric. The action takes place at that level of the psyche that is often called animistic or childish, one in which the boundaries of self and other are indistinct, so that when others speak to Job or he speaks to God, it is as if a part of Job speaks and replies; when Job attributes feelings and motives externally, it sounds perfectly natural, as in that primitive state it seems. God is seen as less than perfect: His actions were accompanied by an inferior consciousness. Time and again we miss reflection and regard for absolute knowledge. His consciousness seems to be not much more than a primitive "awareness" which knows no reflection and no morality. One merely perceives and acts blindly, without conscious inclusion of the subject, whose individual existence raises no problems. Today we would call such a state psychologically "unconscious. "2 Some, particularly some Christians, perceive Job as a distinct signpost in a development of consciousness prefiguring Christ. If the choice is between a view that God has been developing through history, which subjects God to the passage of time and vagaries of nature, or that h u m a n understanding has developed through time toward an increasingly profound understanding of Being Itself, then we can see Job as projecting his unconscious on God and trembling before that projected savagery. Job represents more than poetic creativity: 9 . . the people of those times wrote poetry with more lively apprehensions, because they conceived ideas of all things, including God himself, under analogous
Arlin Roy
151
forms; [they] reduced the universe to the shape of a house, and animated all that it contained with human passions, with love and hatred. 3 This poetic concreteness does not diminish Job's importance. This view recognizes Job's universality as an example of the struggle to develop a more profound awareness, a struggle we all experience during our development. In the long history of its interpretation, the main function of the book of Job has been to provoke reflection. . . . Because its argument is presented not by direct statement but by allusion, and its solution, the divine "answer to Job," by implic a t i o n . . , it permitted a great variety of approaches, of emphasis, of allegory and of various degrees of subtlety.4 Thus, I am adding my observations by drawing on the text of Job itself to compare it first with grief theories and then with h u m a n development theories.
Job and grief Denial and guilt. Job had lost family, wealth, and health, but not yet his life. Elisabeth Kiibler-Ross did her work with dying hospital patients who knew they were losing everything when they lost their lives. I see Job as both illustrating and anticipating several of Kiibler-Ross's stages of grief, as well as other characteristics of grief. Kfibler-Ross found t h a t patients' first response to possible terminal illness was denial and isolation. They "shopped around" for medical opinions, ordered "more tests," and denied the answers. Nearly all denied both at first and later. Job "took a piece of broken pot to scratch [his sores] as he sat among the ashes (2:8), where he complains: Why was I not still-born, why did I not die when I came out of the womb? (3:11) For then I should be lying in the quiet grave, asleep in death, at rest . . . . (3:13) There the wicked man chafes no more, there the tired labourer rests; the captive too finds peace there and hears no taskmaster's voice. (3:17-18) Job is denying t h a t death is an absence of feeling by calling it sleep, rest, and peace as an unconscious defense against the reality of loss and death. If Job literally wished death, he might have killed himself, since suicide in his time was neither a disgrace nor a sin. But he wishes not for a final end, only for
152
Journal of Religion and Health
"quiet," in words t h a t parallel suicidal persons' logic in which t hey just want "peace" and imagine t h e y will (after death) feel t h a t peace or know t h a t t hey are appreciated. As Kiibler-Ross notes, this is a time of risky despair: I think a person who has just lost his only relative or who may feel responsible for an accident that caused the death is a very highly suicidal risk himself. He will often be in a state of shock and denial. ~ By focusing on his complaints, Job can temporarily defend himself against the full emotional realization t h a t he has indeed lost almost everything. Job is n a t u r a l l y avoiding the reality t h a t he has little control over events and t h a t his successes and losses largely happen for no reason he understands. Incidentally, m a n y people a ppa r ent l y participated in this kind of denial when th ey recommended a book to me supposedly entitled Why B a d Things Happen to Good People, which Rabbi K u s h n e r actually entitled When . . . . This n o r mal and m i s t a k e n hope or assumption of control leads inevitably to guilt. First, the word "pain" itself derives from the same Latin root poena as do the words "punish" and "penalty," a common unconscious assumption under the stress of guilt. Second: The love relationship produces a certain amount of inner conflict. Death is so final that the person contemplating it is almost always inclined to regress to an earlier level of emotional reaction. This level is dominated by the superego, the inherited values of l i f e . . . [which] manifests its disapproval by a condemnation of the ego which causes the ego to feel a sense of guilt. This is akin to the feeling of loss of love that the infant experiences when he feels his mother or father has withdrawn the love so necessary to his psychological well-being. It is a feeling of unworthiness, of insecurity, of having evoked hostility2 This guilt t h a t fears p u n i s h m e n t is different from realistic or "conscience guilt," where we m a y have failed to meet our personal standards or transgressed an a g r e e m e n t with others, but grief seldom contains much realistic guilt. The book of Job illustrates fearful guilt by having Job represent the ego u n d e r attack from superego-like friends, one of whom derisively demonstrates his belief in grandiose control and i n e r r a n t divine justice: Is your religion no comfort to you? Does your blameless life give you no hope? For consider, what innocent man has ever perished? Where have you seen the upright destroyed? (4:6-7) K u s h n e r describes t he effect of this thinking: They were not active in the synagogue . . . . But when they were stunned by tragedy, they reverted back to the basic belief that God punishes people for their sins. They sat there feeling that their daughter's death had been their fault; had they been less selfish and less lazy. . . .
Arlin Roy
153
The idea that God gives people what they deserve, that our misdeeds caused our misfortune, is a neat and attractive solution to the problem of evil at several levels, but it has a number of serious l i m i t a t i o n s . . , it teaches people to blame themselves. It creates guilt where there is no basis for guilt. 7 H o w e v e r , we seldom see unconscious fearful guilt expressed openly; m o r e oft e n we see a defense a g a i n s t i t - - a n g e r .
Anger. G r i e f often is e x p r e s s e d as anger, w i t h m i n o r and major c o m p l a i n t s alike. R e s p o n d i n g to his b e t r a y a l by God, J o b voices his self-pity m i x e d w i t h b i t t e r i m p a t i e n c e and longing: O that the grounds for my resentment might be weighed, and my misfortune set with them on the scales! For they would outweigh the sands of the sea: what wonder if my words are wild? (6:2-3) Kfibler-Ross n o t e d t h a t " w h e n the first stage of denial c a n n o t be m a i n t a i n e d a n y longer, it is replaced by feelings of anger, rage, envy, a n d resentm e n t . The logical n e x t q u e s t i o n becomes: ' W h y m e ? ' - 8 She h a s t h u s m a t t e r of-factly legitimized, as do some J u d a i c sages, Job's angry, rebellious outbursts as a p e r s o n who "is not responsible for t h i n g s done u n d e r duress. ''9 A n g e r is a s e c o n d a r y feeling used defensively a g a i n s t p r i m a r y feelings like hopelessness, envy, a n d helplessness, w h i c h does not m i n i m i z e a n g e r b u t puts it in a perspective t h a t recognizes a n e l e m e n t of unconscious self-deception. Job wavers b e t w e e n his a n g e r (above) a n d pain: The arrows of the Almighty find their mark in me, and their poison soaks into my spirit; God's onslaughts wear me away. (6:4) It is from this p a r t i a l recognition t h a t a k i n d of g r u d g i n g admission of "Yes, b u t . . . " m a n i f e s t s i t s e l f as b a r g a i n i n g .
Bargaining. Job is i n t r a c t a b l e in his p u r s u i t of a justice h e can u n d e r s t a n d , as one of m a n y e x a m p l e s illustrates: Let me but call a witness in my defense! Let the Almighty state his case against me[ If my accuser has written out his indictment, I would not keep silence and remain indoors. No! I would flaunt it on my shoulder and wear it like a crown on my head; I would plead the whole record of my life and present that in court as my defence. (31:35-37) Job's hubris in a t t e m p t i n g to call God into a court of justice was recognized by his friends b u t not a d d r e s s e d as such. H e w a n t e d a b a r g a i n on a h u m a n level w i t h B e i n g Itself, a n d y e t t h a t p a r a d o x h a d not occurred to h i m because it is unconsciously accurate.
154
Journal of Religion and Health
Depression and acceptance. Job finally faces the fact t h a t he cannot understand, control, or bargain with an all-powerful, inscrutable God after He speaks: Who is this whose ignorant words cloud my design in darkness? (38:2) Did you proclaim the rules that govern the heavens, or determine the laws of nature on earth? Can you command the dense clouds to cover you with your weight of waters? (38:33-34) God goes on a bit, where a few choice examples would have sufficed, until Job answers: What reply can I give thee, I who carry no weight? I put my finger to my lips. (40:4) In this acceptance of a very small, nearly powerless place in a very large, oblivious universe, grief theorists and Job describe a similar acceptance. It is an acceptance t h a t is more t h a n resignation, in t h a t Job gives up all pretensions to his false pride and unconscious defenses against taking his real place in the world. The stage of acceptance simply means that people have faced that they are finite, that they live a different quality of life with different values, that they learn to enjoy today and not worry too much about tomorrow, and that they hope that they still have a long, long time to enjoy this kind of life. Resignation is more a feeling of defeat, of bitterness, of "what's the use, I'm tired of fighting.''1~ Because the substance of acceptance is alluded to but not elaborated in the oldest section of Job, later authors m a y have thought it necessary to explain things more fully. K u s h n e r claims t h a t God's struggle with the sea serpent symbolizes chaos and evil, indicating t h a t God is not all-powerful: if we can bring ourselves to acknowledge that there are some things God does not control, many good things become possible. We will be able to turn to God for things He can do to help us, instead of holding on to unrealistic expectations of Him . . . . The Bible, after all, repeatedly speaks of God as the special protector of the poor, the widow, and the orphan, without raising the question of how it happened that they became poor, widowed, or orphaned in the first place. 11 9
.
.
Other conclusions have been drawn from the final section, where Job regains wealth and family, all of which can provoke delightful discussion, but I t h i n k these multiple conclusions indicate t h a t acceptance is not one affective state but r a t h e r a perspective of h u m i l i t y t h a t permits a variety of emotions. The
Arlin Roy
155
previous storms are over. Job can go on to experience life with increased understanding gained from this t r a u m a but unburdened from his reaction to IOSS.
The truth in acceptance N o r m a l narcissism and the psyche. Some say it was enough for Job t h a t God made contact, and h e - - l i k e all of us--became aware of both his limits and his place within the cosmos. ~2 Buber saw the conclusion revealing a God who has a divine, superior justice whereby he distributes to each being t h a t which is appropriate "so t h a t each m a y become fully itself," and "man is called only to emulate the divine justice, which gives to everyone what he is. ''1~ In sum, Job becomes less egocentric when he gains more objectivity. If we tested and interviewed Job now, we would find t h a t he sees himself as unique but part of a larger whole. He is more t h a n chastised and silenced; Job has "changed his mind" in the sense t h a t his way of t h i n k i n g and feeling about himself is altered. He has moved beyond the conventional morality of his friends and his earlier self. Job might have appeared less egocentric if God were punishing him for sins committed or a h u m a n condition of sinfulness. But the book of Job would then be largely irrelevant to the h u m a n condition. Job's blamelessness makes him an example for all of us who have suffered from our narcissistic assumptions t h a t we are entitled to things t u r n i n g out well. To suffer unjustly at God's whim would make us especially entitled to rebel and self-righteously challenge God:
To defy with Promethean constancy a hostile universe, to keep its evil always in view, always actively hated, to refuse no pain that the malice of Power can invent, appears to be the duty of all who will not bow before the inevitable. But indignation is still a bondage, for it compels our thoughts to be occupied with an evil world. TM When we ordinary people suffer pain, we are in a worse position t h a n Job because we are not granted a definitive and unequivocal directive from God. Instead of a comforting self-righteousness, we must grieve for the illusions we held and go on to live realistically. To do so, some people grieve t h a t loved ones could not have been different, explore their newly discovered angers, give up on pointless bargaining, and attain some acceptance. This psychological development describes a recurrent grief process: "Growing up" entails a gradual growing away from the normal state of human symbiosis, of "one-ness" with the mother . . . . This growing away process i s . . . a lifelong mourning process. Inherent in every new step of independent functioning is a minimal threat of object loss. (italics in original) 15
156
Journal of Religion and Health
Normal narcissism is t hus often transformed into psychological autonomy t h r o u g h a repeated process of a child growing strong in the illusion of maternal one-ness, recognizing a distinction between him- or herself and mother, and internalizing w ha t the m ot her represents as a part of the self. This happens during the process of psychotherapy as a repetitive experience "of the full developmental cycle of idealization [of a client's father, in this case] followed by a de-idealization and thus of the opportunity for laying down reliable psychological structures (guiding ideals). ''16 For example, as a client said to me after two years of therapy: I'm still not comfortable with it, but realizing how hurt I've been and that I'm still going through it . . . that's what the emptiness is about too, really feeling sorrow, and a loss--the realization of a loss that has always been there. Finally I'm coming to grips with everything we talked about, missing my father, trying to emulate him, even letting myself really feel hurt. Therapist: You were defending yourself against the hurt? Yeah, a lot, denying I felt hurt . . . . So I got angry, felt victimized, tried to victimize other people by not being honest and not sharing. If I shared, mostly fear, I'd have to face up to all the things I've been believing. I mean, when I came to you I had an idyllic upbringing, I had wonderful parents, wonderful loving parents, and I had a nice middle-class suburban upbringing! I just had to be a wonderful "Mr. Perfect!" And it's obvious that was denial. E a r l y in my psychotherapy practice I had been confused w hen--fol l ow i ng the ap p ar en t relief and freedom of a timely, accurate i n t e r p r e t a t i o n - - m y clients often came to their next session subdued. I came to see this as nearl y inevitable, for it usually m e a n t t hey were giving up an illusion of how t hey wanted someone, or themselves, to seem. They were feeling grief for an ideal th ey had not realized or a hoped-for relationship forgone. Job's lessened egocentrism during this process m e a n t t h a t he deepened his underst andi ng of love. He and his friends put considerable energy and time into their relationship, but Job stood aside from the content of what t hey said in order to act more independently. He gave up almost everyt hi ng a n d the social structure t h a t sought to support him in time of need. We would see this structure as stifling, but Job fought against the stultifying content of t hei r viewpoint without once repudiating the relationship, much as most of us t ry to rid ourselves of constricting expectations we inherited from our families without giving up connections with them. As Fogarty notes: Expectations and emptiness emotionally link the nuclear and extended family in any problem area. Perhaps one can never return home. Certainly he [or she] can never leave home . . . . One must go into the emptiness and its connections with the extended family. It is the development of emotional separation while maintaining connectedness that will lead to change in self and different levels of expectations of self and others2 ~
Arlin Roy
157
One client illustrated this as she reported to me t h a t she could not sell, alth o u g h h e r boss t h o u g h t she could and she had done welt those times she had tried, because "I am terrified of m a k i n g 'cold calls.'" The genesis of t h a t belief was t h a t t hi r t y- e i ght years before, at the age of eight, she was sent out on h er older brother's newspaper selling c o r n e r - - i n winter, in Alaska--to sell newspapers and she sold fewer t h a n her brother usually sold. H er family had not let h er forget she could not m a ke "cold calls." As she grew stronger in her independence from the destructive beliefs of her family, she also was bet t er able to m a i n t a i n a relationship with them.
Spiritual development. J u s t as m y clients m ourn the losses i n h e r e n t in a different u n d e r s t a n d i n g of themselves in the world, so we all m o u r n the loss of a t r e a s u r e d u l t i m a t e meaning. Viewed from the perspective of our relationships and wha t t hey m e a n to us, we see a dynamic perspective of h u m a n development; but viewed from the perspective of how those relationships imply "a broader vision of the ul t i m a t e context," we see faithY There is thus an emotional and dynamic parallel to the h u m a n experience of losing others, a conception of the self, or a relationship to t h a t which is seen as u l t i m a t e t h a t is universal and strikingly elaborated by Job. H u m a n s n a t u r a l l y resist knowing they are small, fragile, and immature. P a r t of us would like to impose timeless, powerful fantasies on reality. But because we are shaped by external and internal forces, faith is a dynamic process arising out of our experience of interaction with the diverse persons, institutions, events and relationships that make up the "stuff' of our lives . . . . an active mode of knowing, of composing a felt sense or image of the condition of our lives taken as a whole. 19 We resist this only at great peril, lured by short-term consolation into stagnation. Jackson described a woman who, like Job, was unusual l y fortunate by birth, talent, and luck until her son was killed in war. Every young child goes through a period of omnipotence.., the cries and every essential need is met. Most people reach the point where they are weaned from that idea . . . . Circumstances conspired to re-enforce her immature feelings of omnipotence. When tragedy finally came it destroyed the house of cards of her emotional life. She was so completely disorganized that she was unable to function, and into the emotional vacuum moved a representative of an authoritarianism she would have found entirely unacceptable before the tragedy, to give her a sustaining relationship to a new and surer omnipotence, one that had the answer even to death. 2~ Because she would not give up her personal illusions of control and safety in a directly reassuring context, she was unable to metabolize grief into a developmental transition.
158
Journal of Religion and Health
Transitions t h a t start with the loss of a relationship but proceed to a loss of an unsatisfactory sense of self and faith in w hat had been seen as ul t i m at e demand a particularly active grief response. The sense of oneself, and t h a t which is held dear, moves toward more objectivity 9 The very identity and sense of t h a t which is worshipped becomes alien as a new sense of self and a wider, more comprehensive sense of w ha t is t rul y ul t i m at e seems necessary 9 These losses m us t be m our ned as pa r t of the transition t h a t is t rul y to someth in g greater: 9 9what Job was really rejecting was, first, the moral order as presented to him by his theologian friends and, secondly and consequently, the god to whom they appealed9 If there is no alternative to the doctrine of temporal retribution, then for someone who has experienced what Job has experienced, the conclusion is inevitable: the world is indeed a chaos9 If the only possible order is the order of justice that his friends proclaim, then Job must become, even against his will, a defender of disorder, because his fate will be the same whether or not he is upright and innocent (9:15-20) . . . . In his lamentation (which is a form of prayer) Job, like Jeremiah, was close to God, closer than his friends with their theology.21 J u s t as Job begins to see himself as part of something larger, as part of a process he can appreciate but hardly understand, so t here is grief for those who develop 9 This amounts to "first, the relativizing of what was t a k e n for ultimate, a loss of the greatest proportion; and second, a period of not-knowi n g . . , loneliness, or coldness. ''22 To see ourselves as in transition is humbling and realistic, freeing us from a rebellious or nihilistic e s t r a n g e m e n t from the activity of faith. A m e n t o r and colleague from my beginning ministry described his own evolution: 9 . . as I sought diligently to understand God, I replaced the Heavenly Father with Cosmic Mind, which yielded to the Life Force and the Life Force to Creativity. Each concept became inadequate as my perception of the universe expandedP Thus, grief is an inevitable par t of our developing into greater selves. Although this cannot fully comfort those in the midst of such transitions, the knowledge t h a t others (including the illustrious Job) have experienced such a change successfully could at least reassure 9 I realized, in m y t hi r d y e a r of therapy, t h a t the adaptation I had made at eight to th e loss of m y grandmother's sweet acceptance was a desperate, incessant co mm i t m ent to achieve. I allowed myself to grieve as I had not been able to in my youth, and t hen relaxed a little. When the m eani ng of t h a t loss was understood, it freed me to examine my assumptions and change, and thus healed some of t h a t psychological wound ripped open years earlier. Most of us carry such aches with us. If I mention the word "mother," does it bring a
Arlin Roy
159
flow of feelings and images gathered in years of living together, loving and hating? Or consider "father," "friend," "home," and so on. These evocations of significant personal experiences are both forever with us--forever part of u s - - a n d forever leaving. If they or we were unimportant, there would be no grief. If they or we were immortal, there would be little grief. If we were perfectly complete, there would be no narcissistic wounding. But we are mottal, personally significant, and imperfect; so we might as well celebrate with Job the ongoing process of development. Despite the obvious, inevitable loss of everything, of identity, and that which is seen as ultimate, humans persist with courage and fortitude to develop a greater sense of self and other.
References 1. Glatzer, N., The Dimensions of Job: A Study and Selected Readings. New York, Schocken Books, Inc., 1969, p.4. 2. Jung, C.G., Answer to Job. R.F.C. Humm, trans. New York, Princeton University Press/ Bollingen Foundation, 1973, pA3. 3. Herder, J., "God and Nature in the Book of Job." In The Dimensions of Job, op. cit., p.153. 4. Glatzer, op. cit., pp.287-288. 5. Kfibler-Ross, E., Living with Death and Dying. New York, The Macmillan Company, 1980, p.165. 6. Jackson, E., Understanding Grief. New York, Abingdon Press, 1957, pp.88-89. 7. Kushner, H., When Bad Things Happen to Good People. New York, Avon Books, 1981, p.10. 8. Kfibler-Ross, E., On Death and Dying. New York, The Macmillan Company, 1960, p.50. 9. Glatzer, op. cit., p.18. 10. Kfibler-Ross, Living with Death and Dying, op. cit., p.48. 11. Kushner, op. cit., p.45. 12. Glatzer, op.cit., p.8. 13. Buber, M., "A God Who Hides His Face." In Glatzer, o19. cit., p.63. 14. Russell, B., "A Free Man's Worship." Mysticism and Logic. Totowa, N.J., Barnes & Noble Books, 1976, p.43. 15. Mahler, M., "On the First Three Subphases of the Separation4ndividuation Process," J. International Psycho-Analysis, 1972, 53, 333. 16. Kohut, H., The Restoration of the Self New York, International Universities Press, 1977, p.18. 17. Fogarty, T., "On Emptiness and Closeness, Part II," The Family Compendium. New Rochelle, N.Y., Center for Family Learning, 1978, 2, p.43. 18. Lyon, K., and Browning, D., "Faith Development and the Requirements of Care." In Dykstra, C., and Parks, S., ed., Faith Development and Fowler. Birmingham, Ala., Religious Education Press, 1986, p.215. 19. Fowler, J., Stages of Faith. New York, Harper & Row, Inc., 1981, p.25. 20. Jackson, o19. cit., pp.172-173. 21. Gutierrez, G., On Job: God-Talk and the Suffering of the Innocent, Matthew J. O'Connell, trans. Maryknoll, N.Y., Orbis Books, 1987, p.84. 22. Kegan, R., The Evolving Self. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1982, p.197. 23. Smudski, R., "The Evolution of a Minister and a Church." A sermon preached on February 15, 1976, at the First Unitarian Church of Westchester, Hastings-on-Hudson, N.Y.
The Book of Job: A Grief and Human Development Interpretation ARLIN ROY ABSTRACT: The Book of Job exemplifies, in both form and content, typical unconscious grief reactions. Both theory and case illustrations are used to interpret Job as a vivid portrayal of successful adaptation to 1) the psychological stresses of grief, 2) the human developmental opportunities inherent in grieving, and 3) the spiritual development thus made possible.
It was 6:30 A.M. I was groggily dressing when the phone rang. "Can't they wait?" Sarita, my wife, answered: "Yes, No. Oh, no . . . . " Her niece Jenny had been killed while safeguarding another's safety. The first child, grandchild, niece--beloved and rebellious--left a large family that did not so much recover as simply go on. Grief tends to call up grief, this one from decades earlier. I was eight years old when the source of relaxed acceptance in my life, my grandmother, died. She was "simple minded" and "useless" to others, but the loss of her constant acceptance ripped open a psychological gash. By comparison, the book of Job describes greater losses. Job had been fortunate. Analogously, he was president of IBM, led a Kennedy-sized clan, demonstrated Jimmy Carter's piety, and was taking his ease at Pocantico Hills when disaster struck. He lost everything and everyone but his wife. To his scabious ash heap came three friends who maintained he must have done something wrong to deserve God's punishment. Job denied sin and challenged God to confront him directly; a fourth friend alleged that he did something unknowingly, but he maintained innocence. Then God spoke to Job of his total power and deeds beyond human understanding, whereupon Job recanted his illusions of knowledge. There is much to learn from Job. The form and style suggest insights that aid an interpretation of the content according to modern grief theory and The Rev. Arlin Roy, M.S.W., C.S.W., is Co-Director of the Northeast Counseling Center in. Pleasantville, New York, and Supervisor and Faculty at the Blanton-Peale Institute in New York City. 149
9 1991Institutes of Religionand Health
150
Journal of Religion and Health
ideas of psychological development. I will first attend to the way the text was written before turning to the three dimensions of grief reactions Job illustrates: 1) personal grief, 2) psychological development, and 3) spiritual development.
Job and levels of understanding Job is based on a folk tale written by several Hebrew authors, yet all the characters but one have non-Hebraic names. The name of the God of Israel, YHVH, recedes in the oldest, central section to a general divinity, and the author refers not to Judaic law but to a "universal moral code," thus presenting "man suffering, everywhere. ''1 The central story apparently did not serve subsequent authors' purposes, and they added a hymn, more speeches, an epilogue, and several extraneous chapters of divine glory-hogging. The original work's stark integrity was compromised by later additions that m a y have been designed to make God more understandable by making him seem more human, and to give the story a happy ending. They actually heighten the sense of several wishful authors quaking before a great vision of transformation, yet realizing that they could not ignore Job either. Further, his psychological standpoint is emotionally primitive and egocentric. The action takes place at that level of the psyche that is often called animistic or childish, one in which the boundaries of self and other are indistinct, so that when others speak to Job or he speaks to God, it is as if a part of Job speaks and replies; when Job attributes feelings and motives externally, it sounds perfectly natural, as in that primitive state it seems. God is seen as less than perfect: His actions were accompanied by an inferior consciousness. Time and again we miss reflection and regard for absolute knowledge. His consciousness seems to be not much more than a primitive "awareness" which knows no reflection and no morality. One merely perceives and acts blindly, without conscious inclusion of the subject, whose individual existence raises no problems. Today we would call such a state psychologically "unconscious. "2 Some, particularly some Christians, perceive Job as a distinct signpost in a development of consciousness prefiguring Christ. If the choice is between a view that God has been developing through history, which subjects God to the passage of time and vagaries of nature, or that h u m a n understanding has developed through time toward an increasingly profound understanding of Being Itself, then we can see Job as projecting his unconscious on God and trembling before that projected savagery. Job represents more than poetic creativity: 9 . . the people of those times wrote poetry with more lively apprehensions, because they conceived ideas of all things, including God himself, under analogous
Arlin Roy
151
forms; [they] reduced the universe to the shape of a house, and animated all that it contained with human passions, with love and hatred. 3 This poetic concreteness does not diminish Job's importance. This view recognizes Job's universality as an example of the struggle to develop a more profound awareness, a struggle we all experience during our development. In the long history of its interpretation, the main function of the book of Job has been to provoke reflection. . . . Because its argument is presented not by direct statement but by allusion, and its solution, the divine "answer to Job," by implic a t i o n . . , it permitted a great variety of approaches, of emphasis, of allegory and of various degrees of subtlety.4 Thus, I am adding my observations by drawing on the text of Job itself to compare it first with grief theories and then with h u m a n development theories.
Job and grief Denial and guilt. Job had lost family, wealth, and health, but not yet his life. Elisabeth Kiibler-Ross did her work with dying hospital patients who knew they were losing everything when they lost their lives. I see Job as both illustrating and anticipating several of Kiibler-Ross's stages of grief, as well as other characteristics of grief. Kfibler-Ross found t h a t patients' first response to possible terminal illness was denial and isolation. They "shopped around" for medical opinions, ordered "more tests," and denied the answers. Nearly all denied both at first and later. Job "took a piece of broken pot to scratch [his sores] as he sat among the ashes (2:8), where he complains: Why was I not still-born, why did I not die when I came out of the womb? (3:11) For then I should be lying in the quiet grave, asleep in death, at rest . . . . (3:13) There the wicked man chafes no more, there the tired labourer rests; the captive too finds peace there and hears no taskmaster's voice. (3:17-18) Job is denying t h a t death is an absence of feeling by calling it sleep, rest, and peace as an unconscious defense against the reality of loss and death. If Job literally wished death, he might have killed himself, since suicide in his time was neither a disgrace nor a sin. But he wishes not for a final end, only for
152
Journal of Religion and Health
"quiet," in words t h a t parallel suicidal persons' logic in which t hey just want "peace" and imagine t h e y will (after death) feel t h a t peace or know t h a t t hey are appreciated. As Kiibler-Ross notes, this is a time of risky despair: I think a person who has just lost his only relative or who may feel responsible for an accident that caused the death is a very highly suicidal risk himself. He will often be in a state of shock and denial. ~ By focusing on his complaints, Job can temporarily defend himself against the full emotional realization t h a t he has indeed lost almost everything. Job is n a t u r a l l y avoiding the reality t h a t he has little control over events and t h a t his successes and losses largely happen for no reason he understands. Incidentally, m a n y people a ppa r ent l y participated in this kind of denial when th ey recommended a book to me supposedly entitled Why B a d Things Happen to Good People, which Rabbi K u s h n e r actually entitled When . . . . This n o r mal and m i s t a k e n hope or assumption of control leads inevitably to guilt. First, the word "pain" itself derives from the same Latin root poena as do the words "punish" and "penalty," a common unconscious assumption under the stress of guilt. Second: The love relationship produces a certain amount of inner conflict. Death is so final that the person contemplating it is almost always inclined to regress to an earlier level of emotional reaction. This level is dominated by the superego, the inherited values of l i f e . . . [which] manifests its disapproval by a condemnation of the ego which causes the ego to feel a sense of guilt. This is akin to the feeling of loss of love that the infant experiences when he feels his mother or father has withdrawn the love so necessary to his psychological well-being. It is a feeling of unworthiness, of insecurity, of having evoked hostility2 This guilt t h a t fears p u n i s h m e n t is different from realistic or "conscience guilt," where we m a y have failed to meet our personal standards or transgressed an a g r e e m e n t with others, but grief seldom contains much realistic guilt. The book of Job illustrates fearful guilt by having Job represent the ego u n d e r attack from superego-like friends, one of whom derisively demonstrates his belief in grandiose control and i n e r r a n t divine justice: Is your religion no comfort to you? Does your blameless life give you no hope? For consider, what innocent man has ever perished? Where have you seen the upright destroyed? (4:6-7) K u s h n e r describes t he effect of this thinking: They were not active in the synagogue . . . . But when they were stunned by tragedy, they reverted back to the basic belief that God punishes people for their sins. They sat there feeling that their daughter's death had been their fault; had they been less selfish and less lazy. . . .
Arlin Roy
153
The idea that God gives people what they deserve, that our misdeeds caused our misfortune, is a neat and attractive solution to the problem of evil at several levels, but it has a number of serious l i m i t a t i o n s . . , it teaches people to blame themselves. It creates guilt where there is no basis for guilt. 7 H o w e v e r , we seldom see unconscious fearful guilt expressed openly; m o r e oft e n we see a defense a g a i n s t i t - - a n g e r .
Anger. G r i e f often is e x p r e s s e d as anger, w i t h m i n o r and major c o m p l a i n t s alike. R e s p o n d i n g to his b e t r a y a l by God, J o b voices his self-pity m i x e d w i t h b i t t e r i m p a t i e n c e and longing: O that the grounds for my resentment might be weighed, and my misfortune set with them on the scales! For they would outweigh the sands of the sea: what wonder if my words are wild? (6:2-3) Kfibler-Ross n o t e d t h a t " w h e n the first stage of denial c a n n o t be m a i n t a i n e d a n y longer, it is replaced by feelings of anger, rage, envy, a n d resentm e n t . The logical n e x t q u e s t i o n becomes: ' W h y m e ? ' - 8 She h a s t h u s m a t t e r of-factly legitimized, as do some J u d a i c sages, Job's angry, rebellious outbursts as a p e r s o n who "is not responsible for t h i n g s done u n d e r duress. ''9 A n g e r is a s e c o n d a r y feeling used defensively a g a i n s t p r i m a r y feelings like hopelessness, envy, a n d helplessness, w h i c h does not m i n i m i z e a n g e r b u t puts it in a perspective t h a t recognizes a n e l e m e n t of unconscious self-deception. Job wavers b e t w e e n his a n g e r (above) a n d pain: The arrows of the Almighty find their mark in me, and their poison soaks into my spirit; God's onslaughts wear me away. (6:4) It is from this p a r t i a l recognition t h a t a k i n d of g r u d g i n g admission of "Yes, b u t . . . " m a n i f e s t s i t s e l f as b a r g a i n i n g .
Bargaining. Job is i n t r a c t a b l e in his p u r s u i t of a justice h e can u n d e r s t a n d , as one of m a n y e x a m p l e s illustrates: Let me but call a witness in my defense! Let the Almighty state his case against me[ If my accuser has written out his indictment, I would not keep silence and remain indoors. No! I would flaunt it on my shoulder and wear it like a crown on my head; I would plead the whole record of my life and present that in court as my defence. (31:35-37) Job's hubris in a t t e m p t i n g to call God into a court of justice was recognized by his friends b u t not a d d r e s s e d as such. H e w a n t e d a b a r g a i n on a h u m a n level w i t h B e i n g Itself, a n d y e t t h a t p a r a d o x h a d not occurred to h i m because it is unconsciously accurate.
154
Journal of Religion and Health
Depression and acceptance. Job finally faces the fact t h a t he cannot understand, control, or bargain with an all-powerful, inscrutable God after He speaks: Who is this whose ignorant words cloud my design in darkness? (38:2) Did you proclaim the rules that govern the heavens, or determine the laws of nature on earth? Can you command the dense clouds to cover you with your weight of waters? (38:33-34) God goes on a bit, where a few choice examples would have sufficed, until Job answers: What reply can I give thee, I who carry no weight? I put my finger to my lips. (40:4) In this acceptance of a very small, nearly powerless place in a very large, oblivious universe, grief theorists and Job describe a similar acceptance. It is an acceptance t h a t is more t h a n resignation, in t h a t Job gives up all pretensions to his false pride and unconscious defenses against taking his real place in the world. The stage of acceptance simply means that people have faced that they are finite, that they live a different quality of life with different values, that they learn to enjoy today and not worry too much about tomorrow, and that they hope that they still have a long, long time to enjoy this kind of life. Resignation is more a feeling of defeat, of bitterness, of "what's the use, I'm tired of fighting.''1~ Because the substance of acceptance is alluded to but not elaborated in the oldest section of Job, later authors m a y have thought it necessary to explain things more fully. K u s h n e r claims t h a t God's struggle with the sea serpent symbolizes chaos and evil, indicating t h a t God is not all-powerful: if we can bring ourselves to acknowledge that there are some things God does not control, many good things become possible. We will be able to turn to God for things He can do to help us, instead of holding on to unrealistic expectations of Him . . . . The Bible, after all, repeatedly speaks of God as the special protector of the poor, the widow, and the orphan, without raising the question of how it happened that they became poor, widowed, or orphaned in the first place. 11 9
.
.
Other conclusions have been drawn from the final section, where Job regains wealth and family, all of which can provoke delightful discussion, but I t h i n k these multiple conclusions indicate t h a t acceptance is not one affective state but r a t h e r a perspective of h u m i l i t y t h a t permits a variety of emotions. The
Arlin Roy
155
previous storms are over. Job can go on to experience life with increased understanding gained from this t r a u m a but unburdened from his reaction to IOSS.
The truth in acceptance N o r m a l narcissism and the psyche. Some say it was enough for Job t h a t God made contact, and h e - - l i k e all of us--became aware of both his limits and his place within the cosmos. ~2 Buber saw the conclusion revealing a God who has a divine, superior justice whereby he distributes to each being t h a t which is appropriate "so t h a t each m a y become fully itself," and "man is called only to emulate the divine justice, which gives to everyone what he is. ''1~ In sum, Job becomes less egocentric when he gains more objectivity. If we tested and interviewed Job now, we would find t h a t he sees himself as unique but part of a larger whole. He is more t h a n chastised and silenced; Job has "changed his mind" in the sense t h a t his way of t h i n k i n g and feeling about himself is altered. He has moved beyond the conventional morality of his friends and his earlier self. Job might have appeared less egocentric if God were punishing him for sins committed or a h u m a n condition of sinfulness. But the book of Job would then be largely irrelevant to the h u m a n condition. Job's blamelessness makes him an example for all of us who have suffered from our narcissistic assumptions t h a t we are entitled to things t u r n i n g out well. To suffer unjustly at God's whim would make us especially entitled to rebel and self-righteously challenge God:
To defy with Promethean constancy a hostile universe, to keep its evil always in view, always actively hated, to refuse no pain that the malice of Power can invent, appears to be the duty of all who will not bow before the inevitable. But indignation is still a bondage, for it compels our thoughts to be occupied with an evil world. TM When we ordinary people suffer pain, we are in a worse position t h a n Job because we are not granted a definitive and unequivocal directive from God. Instead of a comforting self-righteousness, we must grieve for the illusions we held and go on to live realistically. To do so, some people grieve t h a t loved ones could not have been different, explore their newly discovered angers, give up on pointless bargaining, and attain some acceptance. This psychological development describes a recurrent grief process: "Growing up" entails a gradual growing away from the normal state of human symbiosis, of "one-ness" with the mother . . . . This growing away process i s . . . a lifelong mourning process. Inherent in every new step of independent functioning is a minimal threat of object loss. (italics in original) 15
156
Journal of Religion and Health
Normal narcissism is t hus often transformed into psychological autonomy t h r o u g h a repeated process of a child growing strong in the illusion of maternal one-ness, recognizing a distinction between him- or herself and mother, and internalizing w ha t the m ot her represents as a part of the self. This happens during the process of psychotherapy as a repetitive experience "of the full developmental cycle of idealization [of a client's father, in this case] followed by a de-idealization and thus of the opportunity for laying down reliable psychological structures (guiding ideals). ''16 For example, as a client said to me after two years of therapy: I'm still not comfortable with it, but realizing how hurt I've been and that I'm still going through it . . . that's what the emptiness is about too, really feeling sorrow, and a loss--the realization of a loss that has always been there. Finally I'm coming to grips with everything we talked about, missing my father, trying to emulate him, even letting myself really feel hurt. Therapist: You were defending yourself against the hurt? Yeah, a lot, denying I felt hurt . . . . So I got angry, felt victimized, tried to victimize other people by not being honest and not sharing. If I shared, mostly fear, I'd have to face up to all the things I've been believing. I mean, when I came to you I had an idyllic upbringing, I had wonderful parents, wonderful loving parents, and I had a nice middle-class suburban upbringing! I just had to be a wonderful "Mr. Perfect!" And it's obvious that was denial. E a r l y in my psychotherapy practice I had been confused w hen--fol l ow i ng the ap p ar en t relief and freedom of a timely, accurate i n t e r p r e t a t i o n - - m y clients often came to their next session subdued. I came to see this as nearl y inevitable, for it usually m e a n t t hey were giving up an illusion of how t hey wanted someone, or themselves, to seem. They were feeling grief for an ideal th ey had not realized or a hoped-for relationship forgone. Job's lessened egocentrism during this process m e a n t t h a t he deepened his underst andi ng of love. He and his friends put considerable energy and time into their relationship, but Job stood aside from the content of what t hey said in order to act more independently. He gave up almost everyt hi ng a n d the social structure t h a t sought to support him in time of need. We would see this structure as stifling, but Job fought against the stultifying content of t hei r viewpoint without once repudiating the relationship, much as most of us t ry to rid ourselves of constricting expectations we inherited from our families without giving up connections with them. As Fogarty notes: Expectations and emptiness emotionally link the nuclear and extended family in any problem area. Perhaps one can never return home. Certainly he [or she] can never leave home . . . . One must go into the emptiness and its connections with the extended family. It is the development of emotional separation while maintaining connectedness that will lead to change in self and different levels of expectations of self and others2 ~
Arlin Roy
157
One client illustrated this as she reported to me t h a t she could not sell, alth o u g h h e r boss t h o u g h t she could and she had done welt those times she had tried, because "I am terrified of m a k i n g 'cold calls.'" The genesis of t h a t belief was t h a t t hi r t y- e i ght years before, at the age of eight, she was sent out on h er older brother's newspaper selling c o r n e r - - i n winter, in Alaska--to sell newspapers and she sold fewer t h a n her brother usually sold. H er family had not let h er forget she could not m a ke "cold calls." As she grew stronger in her independence from the destructive beliefs of her family, she also was bet t er able to m a i n t a i n a relationship with them.
Spiritual development. J u s t as m y clients m ourn the losses i n h e r e n t in a different u n d e r s t a n d i n g of themselves in the world, so we all m o u r n the loss of a t r e a s u r e d u l t i m a t e meaning. Viewed from the perspective of our relationships and wha t t hey m e a n to us, we see a dynamic perspective of h u m a n development; but viewed from the perspective of how those relationships imply "a broader vision of the ul t i m a t e context," we see faithY There is thus an emotional and dynamic parallel to the h u m a n experience of losing others, a conception of the self, or a relationship to t h a t which is seen as u l t i m a t e t h a t is universal and strikingly elaborated by Job. H u m a n s n a t u r a l l y resist knowing they are small, fragile, and immature. P a r t of us would like to impose timeless, powerful fantasies on reality. But because we are shaped by external and internal forces, faith is a dynamic process arising out of our experience of interaction with the diverse persons, institutions, events and relationships that make up the "stuff' of our lives . . . . an active mode of knowing, of composing a felt sense or image of the condition of our lives taken as a whole. 19 We resist this only at great peril, lured by short-term consolation into stagnation. Jackson described a woman who, like Job, was unusual l y fortunate by birth, talent, and luck until her son was killed in war. Every young child goes through a period of omnipotence.., the cries and every essential need is met. Most people reach the point where they are weaned from that idea . . . . Circumstances conspired to re-enforce her immature feelings of omnipotence. When tragedy finally came it destroyed the house of cards of her emotional life. She was so completely disorganized that she was unable to function, and into the emotional vacuum moved a representative of an authoritarianism she would have found entirely unacceptable before the tragedy, to give her a sustaining relationship to a new and surer omnipotence, one that had the answer even to death. 2~ Because she would not give up her personal illusions of control and safety in a directly reassuring context, she was unable to metabolize grief into a developmental transition.
158
Journal of Religion and Health
Transitions t h a t start with the loss of a relationship but proceed to a loss of an unsatisfactory sense of self and faith in w hat had been seen as ul t i m at e demand a particularly active grief response. The sense of oneself, and t h a t which is held dear, moves toward more objectivity 9 The very identity and sense of t h a t which is worshipped becomes alien as a new sense of self and a wider, more comprehensive sense of w ha t is t rul y ul t i m at e seems necessary 9 These losses m us t be m our ned as pa r t of the transition t h a t is t rul y to someth in g greater: 9 9what Job was really rejecting was, first, the moral order as presented to him by his theologian friends and, secondly and consequently, the god to whom they appealed9 If there is no alternative to the doctrine of temporal retribution, then for someone who has experienced what Job has experienced, the conclusion is inevitable: the world is indeed a chaos9 If the only possible order is the order of justice that his friends proclaim, then Job must become, even against his will, a defender of disorder, because his fate will be the same whether or not he is upright and innocent (9:15-20) . . . . In his lamentation (which is a form of prayer) Job, like Jeremiah, was close to God, closer than his friends with their theology.21 J u s t as Job begins to see himself as part of something larger, as part of a process he can appreciate but hardly understand, so t here is grief for those who develop 9 This amounts to "first, the relativizing of what was t a k e n for ultimate, a loss of the greatest proportion; and second, a period of not-knowi n g . . , loneliness, or coldness. ''22 To see ourselves as in transition is humbling and realistic, freeing us from a rebellious or nihilistic e s t r a n g e m e n t from the activity of faith. A m e n t o r and colleague from my beginning ministry described his own evolution: 9 . . as I sought diligently to understand God, I replaced the Heavenly Father with Cosmic Mind, which yielded to the Life Force and the Life Force to Creativity. Each concept became inadequate as my perception of the universe expandedP Thus, grief is an inevitable par t of our developing into greater selves. Although this cannot fully comfort those in the midst of such transitions, the knowledge t h a t others (including the illustrious Job) have experienced such a change successfully could at least reassure 9 I realized, in m y t hi r d y e a r of therapy, t h a t the adaptation I had made at eight to th e loss of m y grandmother's sweet acceptance was a desperate, incessant co mm i t m ent to achieve. I allowed myself to grieve as I had not been able to in my youth, and t hen relaxed a little. When the m eani ng of t h a t loss was understood, it freed me to examine my assumptions and change, and thus healed some of t h a t psychological wound ripped open years earlier. Most of us carry such aches with us. If I mention the word "mother," does it bring a
Arlin Roy
159
flow of feelings and images gathered in years of living together, loving and hating? Or consider "father," "friend," "home," and so on. These evocations of significant personal experiences are both forever with us--forever part of u s - - a n d forever leaving. If they or we were unimportant, there would be no grief. If they or we were immortal, there would be little grief. If we were perfectly complete, there would be no narcissistic wounding. But we are mottal, personally significant, and imperfect; so we might as well celebrate with Job the ongoing process of development. Despite the obvious, inevitable loss of everything, of identity, and that which is seen as ultimate, humans persist with courage and fortitude to develop a greater sense of self and other.
References 1. Glatzer, N., The Dimensions of Job: A Study and Selected Readings. New York, Schocken Books, Inc., 1969, p.4. 2. Jung, C.G., Answer to Job. R.F.C. Humm, trans. New York, Princeton University Press/ Bollingen Foundation, 1973, pA3. 3. Herder, J., "God and Nature in the Book of Job." In The Dimensions of Job, op. cit., p.153. 4. Glatzer, op. cit., pp.287-288. 5. Kfibler-Ross, E., Living with Death and Dying. New York, The Macmillan Company, 1980, p.165. 6. Jackson, E., Understanding Grief. New York, Abingdon Press, 1957, pp.88-89. 7. Kushner, H., When Bad Things Happen to Good People. New York, Avon Books, 1981, p.10. 8. Kfibler-Ross, E., On Death and Dying. New York, The Macmillan Company, 1960, p.50. 9. Glatzer, op. cit., p.18. 10. Kfibler-Ross, Living with Death and Dying, op. cit., p.48. 11. Kushner, op. cit., p.45. 12. Glatzer, op.cit., p.8. 13. Buber, M., "A God Who Hides His Face." In Glatzer, o19. cit., p.63. 14. Russell, B., "A Free Man's Worship." Mysticism and Logic. Totowa, N.J., Barnes & Noble Books, 1976, p.43. 15. Mahler, M., "On the First Three Subphases of the Separation4ndividuation Process," J. International Psycho-Analysis, 1972, 53, 333. 16. Kohut, H., The Restoration of the Self New York, International Universities Press, 1977, p.18. 17. Fogarty, T., "On Emptiness and Closeness, Part II," The Family Compendium. New Rochelle, N.Y., Center for Family Learning, 1978, 2, p.43. 18. Lyon, K., and Browning, D., "Faith Development and the Requirements of Care." In Dykstra, C., and Parks, S., ed., Faith Development and Fowler. Birmingham, Ala., Religious Education Press, 1986, p.215. 19. Fowler, J., Stages of Faith. New York, Harper & Row, Inc., 1981, p.25. 20. Jackson, o19. cit., pp.172-173. 21. Gutierrez, G., On Job: God-Talk and the Suffering of the Innocent, Matthew J. O'Connell, trans. Maryknoll, N.Y., Orbis Books, 1987, p.84. 22. Kegan, R., The Evolving Self. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1982, p.197. 23. Smudski, R., "The Evolution of a Minister and a Church." A sermon preached on February 15, 1976, at the First Unitarian Church of Westchester, Hastings-on-Hudson, N.Y.
