Trust

Passages

Every passage tagged with this emotion in the Vela corpus. Search the body text, narrow by source or register, click through to a book’s profile to see how the passage sits with the rest of the work.

Page 7 of 29 · 20 per page

• From Combating Cult Mind Control: The Guide to Protection, Rescue and Recovery from Destructive Cults (1988)

  But we were in this for the long haul. If he walked out now, the family would simply have to continue giving him information each time they saw or spoke with him. We had to trust that George wanted to do the right thing. At one point, George complained about the deception his parents had used to get him to his grandmother’s house. They apologized profusely. I asked him to put himself in their shoes and suggest any other course of action they could have taken that would have been effective. He could think of none. He knew that if he had received any advance warning, he would have gone straight to his superiors and they would have dissuaded him from making the trip. George’s parents reminded him that he had turned down a previous offer to meet former members and read critical information. He was astonished; he didn’t even remember it. They reminded him that he had met his cousin Sally a month earlier. At the O’Briens’ request, she had made just such an offer, and George had turned her down cold. His parents told him they felt they had no other choice. During those three days, I was able to do a good deal of counseling with the family on ways to communicate more effectively with George—and with each other. I also helped them work on some of their own issues and concerns, which were quite separate from their son’s cult involvement. In this way, George could see that the whole family was learning and growing together, and that his renewed family involvement could be a stepping stone to developing closer relationships with everyone. After the three days were over, George was not willing to say that he would never return to BCC. He did say that he wanted more time to study and think about what he had learned. He also decided not to return to his apartment, but to stay with his parents. There he would read books and articles, watch videotapes of shows on cults, and continue to speak and meet other former members. Within a month, George declared to his family that he would never return to the Boston Church of Christ. He had attended services and Bible studies at the Burlington Church of Christ, one of the 18,000 mainline Churches of Christ, where he met some 65 other refugees from the Boston group. He now says he feels far happier than when he was in the cult, and has a much better understanding of the Bible. Since leaving, he has spent a good deal of time helping others understand the destructive aspects of BCC. Although George’s parents would probably prefer that he attend their Unitarian church with them, they respect his right to choose his own way. For years, after the intervention, his father attended a weekly Bible study group with his son in order to learn and get closer to him.

• From Memoirs of Hadrian (1951)

  As for me, I was wondrous free from concern; like Caesar on his bark, I was entrusting myself to those planks which carried my Fortune. I gave proof of this confidence by restoring the Parthian princess immediately to her father, instead of holding her in our lines until my departure. I promised also to give back the golden throne of the Arsacid dynasty, which Trajan had taken as spoil. We had no use for the thing, but Oriental superstition held it in great esteem. The high ceremony of these sessions with Osroës was purely external. In substance they differed little from talks between two neighbors who are trying to arrive at some peaceable settlement over a boundary dispute. I had to do with a sophisticated, Greek-speaking barbarian, not at all obtuse, not necessarily more perfidious than I, but vacillating to the point of seeming untrustworthy. My peculiar mental disciplines helped me to grasp this elusive intelligence: seated facing the Parthian emperor, I learned to anticipate, and soon to direct, his replies; I entered into his game; last, I imagined myself as Osroës bargaining with Hadrian. I detest futile discussions where each party knows in advance that he will, or will not, give way; truth in business appeals to me most of all as a means of simplifying and advancing matters. The Parthians feared us; we, in turn, held them in dread, and from the mating of our two fears would come war. The Satraps were pressing toward this war for ends of their own; I could see at once that Osroës, like me, had his Quietus and his Palma. Pharasmanes, the most turbulent of those semi-independent border princes, was even more a danger for the Parthian Empire than for us. It has been charged against me that I kept those base and corruptible lords in hand by resort to subsidies; the money was well spent. For I was too confident of the superiority of our forces to be governed by false pride, so was ready for any concession of mere prestige, but for nothing else. The greatest difficulty was to persuade Osroës that if my promises were few it was because I meant to keep them. But he did believe me, in the end, or acted as if he did. The accord concluded between us in the course of that visit has endured; for fifteen years nothing has troubled the peace on the frontiers for either side. I count on you, Marcus, to continue this state of things after my death. One evening in Osroës’ tent, during a feast given in my honor, I observed among the women and long-eyelashed pages a naked, emaciated man who sat utterly motionless. His eyes were wide open, but he seemed to see nothing of that confusion of acrobats and dancers, or those dishes laden with viands.

• From Sin: The Early History of an Idea (2012)

  But God’s work with Pharaoh extends well beyond the borders of the Exodus story. “God deals with souls not in view of the fifty years of our life here,” writes Origen, “but in view of the endless world. He has made our intellectual nature immortal and akin to himself, and the rational soul is not shut out from healing, as if this life were all” (III. i, 13). Behind these individual biblical episodes, as behind this mortal life itself, stands the endless shining plain of Origen’s spiritual cosmos. And framing these stand Origen’s ethics (if we want to look at this philosophically) or, rather, his commitment to a particular construction of the god of the Bible (if we want to look at this theologically). That god is both just and merciful. The image of the potter, from the prophets via Paul in Romans, in fact articulates the principle of God’s scrupulous fairness. “Every soul in God’s hands,” urges Origen, “is of one nature, and all rational beings come, if I may say so, from one lump”—the phurama (Greek) or massa (Latin) of God’s clay in Romans 9.21 (III. i, 22). No one, accordingly, is bad because he cannot be good: everyone, from Satan to Christ, was “created” equally, with exactly the same capacity for good or evil. The sole factor distinguishing all these rational beings one from another is their own individual exercise of will. Origen’s cosmology, accordingly, nullifies any problem of evil. In the light of eternity, there is no evil, only various temporal learning situations. Thus any difficulty with Jacob and Esau disappears: “The reasons why Jacob was loved and Esau hated,” he explains, “lie with Jacob before he came into the body and with Esau before he entered Rebecca’s womb” (III. i, 22; “hate,” of course, is more scriptural façon de parler: God hates none of his creatures). The eternal souls of people, stars, demons—remember, humans do not exhaust the category of intelligent life—all make themselves, through their uncoerced choices, into vessels of honor or dishonor. But God is the impartial lover of souls, swaying considerate scales: he loves all his creatures equally, and works for all of them equally. The eternal damnation of any of his creatures would represent a failure on God’s part. But God cannot fail. He throws no one away. He arranges matter, thus history, to facilitate his purpose of ultimate redemption.10

• From The Unexpected Legacy of Divorce: A 25-Year Landmark Study (2000)

  She and Brad are not talking about it. She still feels like a pawn, bending to other people’s interests. But, she said, Brad’s new girlfriend is a decent person and that’s helping. Above all, Racer wants to see his dad. She said, “In spite of Brad’s problems, which worry me a lot, I have this gut feeling that Brad and Racer have a good connection. They have a whole thing going about baseball. Racer knows all the teams and he has this incredible baseball card collection that he lugs back and forth. Racer wears his Giants cap sideways, just like Brad does. And he’s starting to roll up the sleeves on his T-shirt and whistle between his front teeth. Guess who does the same thing. Brad must be doing something right because Racer loves him. I have to say that’s one thing that mediator got right. Racer definitely feels that he has two parents.” But what does Racer say about all this? Paula asked if I could talk to Racer directly. She pointed out that her family had been coping with divorce for two generations and she was worried. She wanted my opinion about how the child was doing. I agreed to an informal meeting and saw Racer the next day. Paula ushered him into my office, introduced us, and said she’d be back in an hour. He was startlingly like a male version of Paula as she’d been as a child, with her unruly, curly black hair and bright green eyes. His Giants hat was sideways, just like Paula had said it would be. With wonderful poise, he sat in the chair facing mine, crossed an ankle over the opposite knee, and said, “What’s up?” Quickly adjusting myself to Racer’s grown-up tone and attitude I said soberly, “Your mom brought you to see me because I’m trying to understand what divorce is like for children. You’d help me out a lot if you could tell me what it’s like for you, especially the part about living some of the time with your mom and some part of the time with your dad.” Racer fiddled with his cap. “You mean you want my advice?” “I sure do. You’re an expert on seven-year-olds. I know some seven-year-old kids whose folks are divorcing and the kids want to know what’s best to do. What’s it like for a seven-year-old kid when his folks break up?” “It’s okay. Except not all the time.” Racer shifted the cap again. “Tell them they’ll wish they could see both of their parents more.” “If you could make it any way you want, how would you arrange how you live?” Racer didn’t miss a beat. “I’d have them move closer. I don’t like Dad’s house but I like being with him.

• From Untrue (2018)

  Tim and I had been introduced several years earlier by a mutual friend. A life coach of sorts, though he doesn’t use that label, he had been a trusted confidant at a difficult moment in my life. My husband and I had hired Tim to act as something between a midwife and a therapist as we rearranged our relationship and household along more equitable lines once I decided I needed to work full-time again post-kids. It was a challenging process, even for my easygoing husband, because I wasn’t sure what I wanted, and because the changes we were trying to bring about felt like an inconvenience in the best instance and a terrifying upending of the order of things, albeit an imperfect order of things, in the worst. As is often the case with relationships forged in times of distress, mine with Tim felt comfortable, almost intimate, very quickly. He is several years older than I am, telegenic, calm, and positive—he once had a high-pressure, fast-paced media job—and by the time we were meeting that day, he knew a lot about me. He knew how I reacted to stress, what triggered my temper, how I worried about my children, what I am afraid of. Soon after our initial phase of working together, Tim moved. I had been nervous, but he assured me we could be in touch electronically. By now, we were no longer working together, but I considered him a good advisor and friend and often texted him for his opinion when I began to write an article or confront a knotty issue in my professional or personal life. Tim would usually respond to me within the hour, modeling composure and humor that invariably set me at ease while showing me how to be a better person. “Now send her a nice email and then move right along, for the sake of your health and your career. No reason to cut off a possible path to more success,” he advised once when I confessed I had told a producer who cut me out of a news segment of my annoyance. Ever pragmatic and optimistic, he said “It’s what writers do” whenever I brooded, then recommended that the second I felt negative, I tell myself, “Right. My brain’s doing that again.” I saw him whenever he was in town, which was every few months or so. Tim was so generous and centered that it made me curious about how he got that way—seemingly impossible to ruffle, steady, happy. I began to ask him about his work and life and childhood, pressing for details about what he liked to do in his free time, his marriage, and his grown children. He was gracious and answered my questions but let me know that he felt most comfortable when focusing on other people. “People are never boring,” he said with a laugh more than once. I respected Tim’s clear sense of what he did and didn’t want to share with me.

• From Untrue (2018)

  “She said to me then and has always said to me, ‘Whatever it is that is a dream for you, you will be able to pursue your dreams if you’re married to me. And whether that’s you want to be able to bike across the country, or you need to have a relationship with someone else, as long as it doesn’t endanger the marriage, as long as it’s not distracting, that’s okay.’ Drinking, drugs, all the other things that people do that end up ruining their relationships—I think she was telling me, ‘I want us to have freedom, but not the freedom to wreck our marriage.’” It never occurred to Tim to offer anything less than Lily had, once she opened up the discussion. Tim knew it was going to be a marriage of equals and, as he explained, of “respect for what we each wanted, tempered by respect for each other’s feelings. Lily was always very independent and that was a huge part of her appeal for me.” They decided to be married by a judge, and they spoke with him ahead of time about changing their marriage vows to remove “forsake all others.” Their understanding, Tim explained to me, was explicit, and its bedrock was an agreement that their relationship had priority. “If she ever asked me to stop seeing someone, I would, in a second,” Tim said. Lily never asked him to. Tim never asked Lily to. Their system worked—neither knew more than he or she wanted to, or had less than they desired of each other and others. Several years after getting married, they had kids and decided it made sense for Lily to stay home with them for a time. “She loved being a mommy, but she really missed having a career and being with her colleagues” is how Tim described this period. Lily eventually became very down and then clinically depressed. The couple took a step that seemed logical to them, given Lily’s love for her work and Tim’s desire for more time with the kids. He would stay home. Like their open marriage, their professional/domestic arrangement worked well for them, even in an era when it was rarer than it is now, and at the same time it raised some eyebrows. I asked him what that was like, how they dealt with judgment. “I never really cared what other people thought of us as a couple, whether they agreed or approved or disapproved of our choices. So we ended up having a group of friends that got us and supported the way we are,” Tim explained, shrugging. “The ones who didn’t get it or judged just kind of stepped away.”

• From Combating Cult Mind Control: The Guide to Protection, Rescue and Recovery from Destructive Cults (1988)

  Expect that, at some point, you will be invited to talk with older members or leaders. Don’t accept this invitation—but also don’t merely say no. Stall for as long as you can. Tell the person that you care about them and trust them. You’re not interested in talking with strangers. You want them to explain everything to you. If they say that they don’t know the answers to some of your questions, you can gently point out that you are concerned that if they don’t know the answers, they may have made a commitment to the group before they were ready to do so. Suggest that they take a step back and spend a few weeks researching the group. If the group is legitimate, what do they have to lose? Information can also help you understand just how fully indoctrinated the person is. When I was speaking with Bruce, I was able to ascertain his stage of involvement, so I guessed that to tell him about the Moon pledge service would be disillusioning for him. When you know what someone knows and doesn’t know, it makes the counselor’s job much easier—and increases the chances of success. Develop Specific Skills to Promote a New Perspective When you are able to establish good rapport and accumulate a good deal of information, the last step is actually developing the skills and strategies to undermine or side step the mind control used by the group. Too many people try to jump to this step before they have accomplished the first two. This is a big mistake. Only when you have laid the groundwork can you really be effective. Remember that you want to connect with and empower the person’s real self, not the cult self. Reminding them of earlier positive life experiences is the most effective way to do this. For example, you might call the cult member and say, “Hi, it’s Steve. I’ve been meaning to call for a while. You know, I was down visiting the old school today, and I remembered when you and I used to go early, so we could play handball on the school wall. Do you remember the time when the gym teacher chased us across the field demanding the ball, because we accidentally cracked his window?” Or, a father might call his son and say, “You know, son, I was flipping through the channels on TV the other day and saw a show on bass fishing. We haven’t done that in years. I sure would love to go back up to the lake with you sometime this summer. It would be so good to spend some time with you, just you and me and the fish.” Evoking these positive feelings and memories can be a powerful way to undermine cult programming. However, be cautious about overusing this technique and thus arousing suspicion.

• From Martin Luther (2016)

  And then Rome finally concluded that the Ninety-five Theses were heretical: On August 7, 1518, a summons to Rome reached Luther in Wittenberg. This was the first step toward a trial that might end at the stake. The papal legate Tommaso de Vio, known as Cajetan, had arrived at the Imperial Diet, the meeting of the estates of the empire, in Augsburg in the spring of 1518. Recently made a cardinal, Cajetan was a serious churchman who led a simple, exemplary life. He was also a scholar who for many years had been writing a modern commentary on the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas. Yet he was open to humanist ideas, too, and had advised his fellow Dominicans that wars of subjection should not be fought against native peoples in the New World. The mission to Augsburg was his first diplomatic posting and it was a difficult one, for he was trying to secure German support for Pope Leo X’s crusade against the Ottomans. The German estates proved recalcitrant, unwilling to raise the taxes required, and insisting that the Pope and Emperor Maximilian accept their complaints about the exactions of the papacy as a condition of any further subsidy. 25 Luther’s ruler Friedrich the Wise was in a powerful political position at Augsburg. Not only was his support crucial for getting the estates to pay up; Maximilian’s key aim at the Diet was to secure the election of his son Charles to the imperial title. As one of the Electors, Friedrich’s vote mattered, and so Cajetan, disappointed and furious at the shortsightedness and self-interest of the estates, had to tread carefully when the question of the Elector’s professor at Wittenberg was raised. Both Friedrich and Spalatin were impressed by Cajetan’s apparent good faith and open-mindedness: Indeed, the cardinal stated that he was willing to avoid a trial in Rome by meeting with Luther on German soil, at Augsburg. He seemed to be a man with whom they could deal; Spalatin wrote to Luther calming his fears and assuring him that the cardinal was well inclined toward him. By the summer of 1518, however, it was clear that matters were serious. There were further reports of plots against his life, and Count Albrecht of Mansfeld was warning him not to leave Wittenberg. 26 On August 28, Luther wrote to Spalatin in Augsburg, weighing up what to do: “In all this I fear nothing, as you know, my Spalatin. Even if their flattery and power should succeed in making me hated by all people, enough remains of my heart and conscience to know and confess that all for which I stand and which they attack, I have from God, to whom I gladly and of my own accord entrust and offer all of this. If he takes it away, it is taken away; if he preserves it, it is preserved. Hallowed and praised be his name forever. Amen.”

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  GREGORY. (Mor. 3. c. 11. Job 2.) But while the crowd thronged Him, one woman touched our Redeemer, because all carnal men in the Church oppress Him from whom they are afar off, and they alone touch Him who are joined to Him in humility. () The crowd therefore press Him and touch Him not, because it is both importunate in presence, and absent in life. BEDE. Or one believing woman touches the Lord, since Christ who is afflicted beyond measure by the diverse heresies multiplying around Him, is faithfully sought by the heart alone of the Catholic Church. AMBROSE. For they believe not who throng Him; they believe who touch. By faith Christ is touched, by faith He is seen. Lastly, to express the faith of her who touched Him, He says, I know that virtue is gone out of me, which is a more palpable sign, that the Divine Nature is not confined within the possibility of man’s condition, and the compass of the human body, but eternal virtue overflows beyond the bounds of our mediocrity. For the Gentile people is not released by man’s aid, but the gathering of nations is the gift of God, which even by its little faith turns to itself the everlasting mercy. For if we think what our faith is, and understand how great the Son of God is, we see that in comparison of Him we touch only the hem, we cannot reach the upper parts of the garment. If then we also wish to be cured, let us touch by faith the hem of Christ. But he who has touched Him is not hidden. Happy the man who has touched the extreme part of the Word. For who can comprehend the whole? 8:49–5649. While he yet spake, there cometh one from the ruler of the synagogue’s house, saying to him, Thy daughter is dead; trouble not the Master. 50. But when Jesus heard it, he answered him, saying, Fear not: believe only, and she shall be made whole. 51. And when he came into the house, he suffered no man to go in, save Peter, and James, and John, and the father and the mother of the maiden. 52. And all wept, and bewailed her: but he said, Weep not; she is not dead, but sleepeth. 53. And they laughed him to scorn, knowing that she was dead. 54. And he put them all out, and took her by the hand, and called, saying, Maid, arise. 55. And her spirit came again, and she arose straightway: and he commanded to give her meat. 56. And her parents were astonished: but he charged them that they should tell no man what was done.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  I answer that, God enables man to work miracles for two reasons. First and principally, in confirmation of the doctrine that a man teaches. For since those things which are of faith surpass human reason, they cannot be proved by human arguments, but need to be proved by the argument of Divine power: so that when a man does works that God alone can do, we may believe that what he says is from God: just as when a man is the bearer of letters sealed with the king’s ring, it is to be believed that what they contain expresses the king’s will. Secondly, in order to make known God’s presence in a man by the grace of the Holy Ghost: so that when a man does the works of God we may believe that God dwells in him by His grace. Wherefore it is written (Gal. 3:5): “He who giveth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you.” Now both these things were to be made known to men concerning Christ—namely, that God dwelt in Him by grace, not of adoption, but of union: and that His supernatural doctrine was from God. And therefore it was most fitting that He should work miracles. Wherefore He Himself says (Jn. 10:38): “Though you will not believe Me, believe the works”; and (Jn. 5:36): “The works which the Father hath given Me to perfect . . . themselves . . . give testimony to Me.” Reply to Objection 1: These words, “a sign shall not be given it, but the sign of Jonas,” mean, as Chrysostom says (Hom. xliii in Matth.), that “they did not receive a sign such as they sought, viz. from heaven”: but not that He gave them no sign at all. Or that “He worked signs not for the sake of those whom He knew to be hardened, but to amend others.” Therefore those signs were given, not to them, but to others. Reply to Objection 2: Although Christ came “in the infirmity” of the flesh, which is manifested in the passions, yet He came “in the power of God” [*Cf. 2 Cor. 13:4], and this had to be made manifest by miracles. Reply to Objection 3: Miracles lessen the merit of faith in so far as those are shown to be hard of heart who are unwilling to believe what is proved from the Scriptures unless (they are convinced) by miracles. Yet it is better for them to be converted to the faith even by miracles than that they should remain altogether in their unbelief. For it is written (1 Cor. 14:22) that signs are given “to unbelievers,” viz. that they may be converted to the faith.

• From Untrue (2018)

  Maybe what those in the self-described “poly community” are trying to achieve is a hedge against these types of disasters. Perhaps their path confers the benefits of pair-bonding to their children and in some cases themselves while shielding everyone from the unrealistic expectations of monogamy and the painful effects when the fragile concept shatters. When I tell Tim about polyamory, how it is a relatively new, emerging cultural practice and identity for people who join groups like Open Love, Polyamory Society, and Loving More for support, I presume he will see them as kindred spirits. Instead, he is somewhat incredulous. “I don’t think of myself or my marriage as polyamorous,” he says tactfully, deliberately. He clearly wants me to understand where he’s coming from. “That Lily and I decided to be in an open marriage is not an identity for me. What would I have in common with a bunch of people, just because they happened to not be monogamous with their spouses?” Lily did not want to speak to me. Tim explained that she was very private, that she agreed that Tim could talk about her, and that she trusted his version of events and didn’t want or feel the need to chime in. There is a level of trust between Tim and Lily that struck me as pure. If someone had described their situation to me before I began work on this book—“They’re open. It was her idea. He has girlfriends too”—I might have thought it indicated that something was wrong with each of them, that they had a fear of intimacy or had attachment issues, or that there was something sleazy about what they were doing. In short, I would likely have presumed they were “troubled.” Or had troubled pasts. Now I saw them as creative and committed. And I saw Lily as deeply, thoroughly true. A Female Philosopher of PolyLily may be something of an iconoclast, but she is far from alone. The philosopher Carrie Jenkins has turned her considerable intellectual energy and acumen toward analyzing arrangements like Lily’s. Jenkins is a tenured professor of philosophy at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, where she holds a coveted Canada Research Chair, figurative real estate that in the academic world packs a punch not unlike having a beachfront property in Malibu or living in the fancy part of town in Anywhere, USA. Her areas of expertise are heady stuff: epistemology, metaphysics, and the philosophy of language, math, and romantic love. As an undergraduate and graduate student at Trinity College, Cambridge, Jenkins immersed herself in the works of Ludwig Wittgenstein, G. E. Moore, and Bertrand Russell. In addition to her teaching and research duties, Jenkins has been an editor of the prestigious journal of academic philosophy Thought. Her 2008 book Grounding Concepts: An Empirical Basis for Arithmetical Knowledge was well received and well reviewed by her peers but did not exactly create shockwaves, gain her a mass following, or earn her many impassioned detractors.

• From Combating Cult Mind Control: The Guide to Protection, Rescue and Recovery from Destructive Cults (1988)

  Keep in mind that arrangements to reserve a professional team are ideally made several months in advance. How To Help A Cult Member Change And Grow It may seem that helping a cult member to go through personal changes is a long and circuitous way to help them break free of their group. After all, isn’t it most important to get them away physically from the people who practice mind control on them? Actually, no. It is vital to recognize that the only way to get people permanently out of destructive cults is to help them get back in touch with their real selves. This is your long-term objective. Only then can they start growing toward new personal goals that mean something to them. While keeping this long-term objective in mind, everyone concerned with helping a cult member should also focus attention on three short-term objectives: The first is building rapport and trust. Without trust, nothing you do will be effective. The second is gathering information about how the cult member thinks, feels, and views reality. The third is planting seeds of doubt about the cult and promoting a new perspective. Let’s look more closely at each of these. Build Rapport and Trust When you first become aware that someone you care about is a cult member, act as though you don’t know they are in a cult—unless, of course, they’ve told you. Don’t tell them that you are studying counter-cult information or that you have made contact with experts. If you do, the result will likely be a breakdown of trust. A curious yet concerned posture is the most effective stance anyone can take in relating to the cult member. It is relatively easy to elicit rapport and trust when you are genuinely curious, because all you are doing is asking questions in a non-judgmental way. Because you care about the person, you want to know everything that is important to them. Show approval and respect for the person, their ideals, their talents, and their interests. However, be careful to show only conditional approval of their participation in the cult. Let them know that you are withholding final judgment on the group, until all the facts are in. In some cases, it might be appropriate to tell them you have a feeling in your stomach that something is not right about the group, but you are not sure. If the cult member tries to give credit to the group for positive aspects of their life, like no longer using pot or drinking excessively, tell them you think that is great—but remind them that you think they deserve the credit for the positive changes, not the group.

• From Combating Cult Mind Control: The Guide to Protection, Rescue and Recovery from Destructive Cults (1988)

  Wisely, the O’Briens were willing to intervene in George’s life only to the point where he would be able to recognize and understand the mind control practices of destructive cults. They did not want to bring George under their own control, or simply try to make themselves feel better. Their commitment was to help their son think for himself. The Beliefs Underlying My Approach Since cults lure people into what amounts to a psychological trap, my job as a counselor is to show a cult member four things. First, I demonstrate to them that they are in a trap—a situation where they are psychologically disabled and don’t feel able to leave. Second, I show them that they didn’t originally choose to enter a trap. Third, I point out that other people in other mind control groups are also trapped. Fourth, I tell the person that it is possible to escape from the trap. While these four points might seem obvious to people outside a cult, they are not immediately apparent to anyone under undue influence. It often takes someone who has been caught in such a trap to convey this message with the necessary strength and determination. This is why former cult members, especially former cult leaders, are usually the most effective people for assisting the exit process. My approach rests on several core principles (or, if you like, beliefs) about people: One is that people need and want to grow. Life is ever changing, and people inherently move in a direction that will support and encourage growth. It is important that people focus on the here and now. What has been done in the past is over. The focus should not be on what they “did wrong” or “didn’t do,” but on what they can do now. The past is useful only insofar as it provides information that may be valuable in the present. It is also my observation that people will always choose what they think is best for them at any given time, based on their experiences and the information they have. It is equally clear to me that each person is unique and each situation is different. Each person has a special way of understanding and interacting with reality. Therefore, my approach is totally client-centered. I adjust myself to fit each specific client’s needs, and my client is always the cult member. I don’t expect them to adapt to my needs or expectations. In my approach, the counselor’s job is to understand the person thoroughly—what they value, what they need, what they want, and how they think. I have to step inside their head—in a way, to temporarily become them—in order to understand and help them do what they want to do. My approach depends on having faith that, deep down, even the most committed cult member wants out.

• From The Day the Revolution Began (2016)

  Abraham is not simply an “example” of either the way God’s grace operates or the way some humans have faith. When Paul quotes Genesis 15:6 in Romans 4:3 (“Abraham believed God, and it was calculated in his favor, putting him in the right”), he invokes the entire chapter, as his frequent references and quotations make clear. To be sure, Paul insists that Abraham’s faith (in the God who raises the dead) is in its essence the same as Christian faith (that God raised Jesus from the dead). But this takes place within the larger covenantal context. Genesis 15, after all, is where God establishes with Abraham the covenant: he will give him a family of many nations, which involves not just the single “promised land,” but the whole world. That is what Paul says in Romans 4:13, implying that he is reading Genesis in the light of psalms such as Psalms 2 and 72, where the “inheritance” is extended under the Messiah’s rule from a single piece of territory to the entire creation. And this in turn depends, as he says in 4:5, on taking the Abrahamic promise to mean that God would “justify the ungodly,” in other words, that God would take “sinners” from throughout the world and bring them, forgiven, into his family. (The vital note of forgiveness of sins is emphasized in the quote from Ps. 32 in 4:6–8.) The family in question, he makes clear in 4:17–22, is the family that shares with Abraham the true worship of God (i.e., “faith[fullness]”). Abraham, unlike those spoken of in 1:18– 23, “grew strong in faith and gave glory to God, being fully convinced that God had the power to accomplish what he had promised” (4:20–21). The question Paul faces in 3:21–26 is then the double problem of human sin and idolatry, on the one hand, and the divine faithfulness, on the other. This central passage is flanked on either side by passages that speak of the divine faithfulness to the covenant with Abraham and his family as the means by which this human plight will be resolved. All this means a vital shift from the usual reading of Romans to a truly Pauline one. Paul is not saying, “God will justify sinners by faith so that they can go to heaven, and Abraham is an advance example of this.” He is saying, “God covenanted with Abraham to give him a worldwide family of forgiven sinners turned faithful worshippers, and the death of Jesus is the means by which this happens.” This joins up with the clear implication of 2:17–20: God called Israel to be the light of the world, the answer to the problem of human idolatry and sin.

• From Bad Behavior (1988)

  “I don’t really mean they’re stupid. A lot of them are businessmen. They must have some kind of brain to do that. But they’re dumb about women and they’re dumb about sex.” She rocked him over on his back and lay on him, her fingers perched on his shoulders, her face right against his. “They actually think they can buy you for a hundred and fifty dollars. Like you’re going to become sexually excited because they give you money. I mean they can pay you to do certain things. But they can’t buy anyone for a hundred and fifty dollars.” She rolled off him and flopped on her back. “It’s so retarded. They don’t have any idea of what good sex is, so they wouldn’t know you can’t buy it.” She turned her head to him. “I hope I’m not insulting you. I’m not talking about you.” He stuck his body up on one elbow so he could look at her. “No. No, I think it’s very interesting. I’m flattered that you choose to tell me these things.” Her stomach was sticking out like a little bread loaf. He tickled it lightly. She scratched her stomach. “Why did you come back so soon?” “Don’t you remember last night? I find our, uh, sex highly erotic. Not because I pay for it, but because it just is.” He paused to let her react. She stared at him and blinked. “Besides, I like you. I think there’s something between us. I think that if I were a few years younger and we met under slightly different circumstances, we might even have what’s now called a relationship.” She smiled and looked at the happy lions snoozing on the designer sheets. He put his hand on hers. “The first night I came here, you were uncertain, kind of shy. You came out and admitted it, you asked me questions. You trusted me. Tonight when you were mad, you didn’t put on a phony smile. You let off steam, told me how you felt. You didn’t treat me like a customer. That’s nice. There’s hardly anybody that’ll be real with you like that anymore. Sometimes even my wife isn’t honest with me.” She looked up from the smiling lions. “You shouldn’t come to prostitutes looking for honesty.” “You’re not a prostitute. Don’t say that about yourself.” “What do you think I am?” “You just happen to be a pretty, sexy girl who, uh—” “I have sex for money.” “Well, all right.” He slapped her thigh nervously. “You’re right. You’re a prostitute.” It sounded so horrible. “But you’re still a wonderful girl.” He grabbed her and snuggled her. “You don’t know me.”

• From Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption (2014)

  He freely acknowledged that he’d made poor decisions, particularly where women were concerned. By all accounts—from friends, family, and associates like Sam Crook—Walter generally tried to do the right thing. I never regarded our time together as wasted or unproductive. In all death penalty cases, spending time with clients is important. Developing the trust of clients is not only necessary to manage the complexities of the litigation and deal with the stress of a potential execution; it’s also key to effective advocacy. A client’s life often depends on his lawyer’s ability to create a mitigation narrative that contextualizes his poor decisions or violent behavior. Uncovering things about someone’s background that no one has previously discovered—things that might be hard to discuss but are critically important—requires trust. Getting someone to acknowledge he has been the victim of child sexual abuse, neglect, or abandonment won’t happen without the kind of comfort that takes hours and multiple visits to develop. Talking about sports, TV, popular culture, or anything else the client wants to discuss is absolutely appropriate to building a relationship that makes effective work possible. But it also creates genuine connections with clients. And that’s certainly what happened with Walter. — Shortly after my first trip to see Walter’s family, I received a call from a young man named Darnell Houston who told me that he could prove that Walter was innocent. His voice shook with nerves but he was determined to speak to me. He didn’t want to talk on the phone, so I drove down to meet with him one afternoon. He lived in a rural part of Monroe County on farmland that his family had worked since the time of slavery. Darnell was a sincere young man, and I could tell he’d been debating for a while whether to contact me. When I arrived at his home, he walked out to greet me. He was a young black man in his twenties who had joined the “Jheri curl” craze. I had already noticed that the popular process of chemically treating black hair to make it looser and easier to style had come to Monroeville; I’d seen several black men, young and old, sporting the look with pride. The cheerful bounce of Darnell’s hair contrasted with his worried demeanor. As soon as we sat down, he got right to business. “Mr. Stevenson,” he began. “I can prove that Walter McMillian is innocent.” “Really?” “Bill Hooks is lying. I didn’t know he was even involved in that case until they told me he was part of how they put Walter McMillian on death row. First, I didn’t believe Bill could have been part of this, but then I found out that he testified that he drove by that cleaners on the day that girl was killed, and that’s a lie.” “How do you know?” “We were working together all that day. We both worked at the NAPA auto parts store last November.

• From Bad Behavior (1988)

  She studied art history and Latin. I was very impressed by that.” “Was she the first person you had sex with?” “Almost.” “I bet that’s why you see prostitutes.” She let go of him and hurried to get dressed. The outermost flesh of her backside jiggled as she balanced on one spike heel and stuck the other through a leg of her underpants. “What do you mean?” “You had so little chance to screw around when you were young. You’re trying to get it now.” Her fingers were flying over the tiny buttons of her checked dress. “You know, I think you’re writing a book. That’s what you’re doing here. You’re one of those journalists doing undercover work on prostitution.” She smiled miserably. “No.” “What do you do, besides work here? I think you do something. Am I right?” “Of course I do something.” She said “do” very sarcastically. She trotted to the mirror and got out her shiny silver lipstick case. “What? What do you do?” He came toward her. “I don’t like to talk about it here.” She opened her black leather bag to replace the lipstick. He glimpsed a roll of money and a packet of condoms in sky-blue tinfoil. “Why don’t you like to talk about it?” “It makes me unhappy.” The telephone by the bed rasped, indicating the end of their hour. — He saw her again the following night, and the night after that. He relished the way she laughed and playfully squeezed him around the stomach with her hefty thighs, or impatiently squiggled out from under him so they could change position. Her nonchalant reaction to his efforts to impress her sexually made him believe that her excitement, when it did occur, was real, that she wanted him. But if he so much as put a hand where she didn’t want it, she’d fiercely slap it away and snap, “I don’t like that.” “That’s why I like you so much,” he said. “You don’t let me get away with anything. You’re straightforward. Like my wife.” During that time, she told him that her real name was Jane. She still wouldn’t talk to him about her life outside the pale green room. Instead, she asked him questions about himself. He was too embarrassed by now to tell her that he’d lied about his job. The lie turned out to be a mistake. Not only was she unimpressed by his false attorneyhood, she was an animal lover. The longest conversation they ever had on a single subject was about a cat that she’d had for fifteen years, until the fat, asthmatic thing finally keeled over. “He had all black fur except for his paws and his throat patch. He looked like he was wearing a tuxedo with a white cravat and gloves, and he was more of a gentleman than any human being I’ve ever known. I saw him protect a female cat from a dog once.”

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. 31. in Matt.) Our Lord conveniently waited until the death of the girl, that the miracle of her resurrection might be made public. For which reason also He goes slower, and speaks longer with the woman, that the daughter of the ruler of the synagogue may expire, and messengers come to tell Him. As it is said, While he yet spake, there cometh one from the ruler of the synagogue’s house, saying unto him, Thy daughter is dead. AUGUSTINE. (de Con. Ev. l. ii. c. 28.) But since Matthew states the ruler of the synagogue to have told our Lord that his daughter was not on the point of death but quite dead, and Luke and Mark say, that she was not yet dead, nay, even go so far as to say that there came some afterwards, who told her death; we must examine, lest they should seem to be at variance. And we must understand that for the sake of brevity, Matthew chose rather to say, that our Lord was asked to do what it is obvious He did, namely, to raise the dead. For our Lord needs not the words of the father concerning his daughter, but what is more important, his wishes. Certainly, if the other two or any one of them had mentioned that the father had said what those who came from the house said, that Jesus need not be troubled because the maid was dead, His words which Matthew has related would seem to be at variance with his thoughts. But now to those who brought that message, and said that the Master need not come, it is not said that the father assented. The Lord therefore did not blame him as distrustful, but the more strongly confirms his belief. As it follows, But when Jesus heard it, he answered the father of the girl, Believe only, &c. ATHANASIUS. (Orat. in Pass. et Crucem. Dom. 4.) Our Lord requires faith from those who invoke Him, not because He needs the assistance of others, (for He is both the Lord and Giver of faith,) but not to seem to bestow His gifts according to His acceptance of persons, He shews that He favours those who believe, lest they should receive benefits without faith, and lose them by unbelief. For when He bestows a favour, He wishes it to last, and when He heals, the cure to remain undisturbed.

• From Tropic of Capricorn (1934)

  In the morning I was up bright and early, shaved, put on my best clothes and hotfooted it to the subway. I went immediately to the main offices of the telegraph company . . . up to the twenty-fifth floor or wherever it was that the president and the vice-presidents had their cubicles. I asked to see the president. Of course the president was either out of town or too busy to see me, but wouldn’t I care to see the vice-president, or his secretary rather. I saw the vice- president’s secretary, an intelligent, considerate sort of chap, and I gave him an earful. I did it adroitly, without too much heat, but letting him understand all the while that I wasn’t to be put out of the way so easily. When he picked up the telephone and demanded the general manager I thought it was just a gag, that they were going to pass me around like that from one to the other until I’d get fed up. But the moment I heard him talk I changed my opinion. When I got to the general manager’s office, which was in another building uptown, they were waiting for me. I sat down in a comfortable leather chair and accepted one of the big cigars that were thrust forward. This individual seemed at once to be vitally concerned about the matter. He wanted me to tell him all about it, down to the last detail, his big hairy ears cocked to catch the least crumb of information which would justify something or other which was formulating itself inside his dome. I realized that by some accident I had really been instrumental in doing him a service. I let him wheedle it out of me to suit his fancy, observing all the time which way the wind was blowing. And as the talk progressed I noticed that he was warming up to me more and more. At last some one was showing a little confidence in me! That was all I required to get started on one of my favorite lines. For, after years of job hunting I had naturally become quite adept: I knew not only what not to say, but I knew also what to imply, what to insinuate. Soon the assistant general manager was called in and asked to listen to my story. By this time I knew what the story was. I understood that Hymie—“that little kike,” as the general manager called him—had no business pretending that he was the employment manager. Hymie had usurped his prerogative, that much was clear. It was also clear that Hymie was a Jew and that Jews were not in good odor with the general manager, nor with Mr. Twilliger, the vice-president, who was a thorn in the general manager’s side.

• From Martin Luther (2016)

  An early portrait of 1509 shows Spalatin with delec- table curls, dressed in a simple grey gown with a black lining which combines academic reserve with courtly display. A woodcut from 1515 depicts a serious young man in sober garb, meditating on the Cross. But Spalatin was not a courtier by birth. His father was a tanner, and he came from Spalt near Nuremberg. One of the ‘new men’, he had risen through education. He joined the court but knew that, as a - commoner, he was not an aristocrat’s equal; there was also specula- tion that he may have been illegitimate. While he was a trusted servant and important advisor — and on occasion intimate enough to be present when the Elector did his toilette before dinner — he was not invited to join the table afterwards.* Spalatin seems to have had a sure touch for negotiation and manoeuvre, a grasp of the possible and a sense of realism which Luther lacked. Like Luther he was educated in Greek as well as Latin, and he became part of the humanist circles around Conrad Mutian and Nikolaus Marschalk at the University of Erfurt. He did not possess Luther’s abrasive self-confidence, and was a poor speaker. But the two men formed a hugely creative partnership. Spalatin bought books for the university library and supported university reforms that brought in biblical studies and those of the Church Fathers. Together they made a series of brilliant appointments, of whom Melanchthon was the star. Repeatedly Luther would recommend people to Spalatin, asking for small favours, pensions from Friedrich or seeking posts for them. Spalatin worked tirelessly in the service of the Elector, often late into the night; he nevertheless found time to translate Luther’s Latin works into German, and did so with a fine musical sense.? We have just Luther’s side of the friendship, because it is only his letters that have survived — carefully catalogued and reverentially THE DIET OF WORMS 175 34. Lucas Cranach the Elder, Georg Spalatin Honouring the Cross, 1515. annotated, often in Greek, by Spalatin.° As the sheer number of Luther’s letter indicates — over 400 — this was perhaps the central rela- tionship in his life in between 1518 and 1525: he wrote more letters to Spalatin than to anyone else, even though they saw each other regularly.