With God’s help and with the help of certain things we know we’ll try to make a dive into our soul. Let’s offer an example. We see a lake. The water appears calm or perhaps there’s a little movement, but nobody knows what’s deep within it. However, when someone who is trained in such things – a frogman, for example – plunges in and goes a meter below the surface, two meters, three meters, he goes to the bottom of the lake provided that it isn’t extremely deep, and he sees what’s down there and informs us. And sometimes we take actions in keeping with what he tells us. We’ll try, then, to make a venture of that sort below the surface, a dive of that sort into the depths of our existence, in order to correct certain conditions that exist there that create troubles not only in us ourselves but also in our relations with other people.
Conscious, Subconscious, Unconscious
Remember what we said earlier – that according to contemporary psychology man’s psyche is composed of the three levels of conscious, subconscious, and unconscious. In the conscious the person has all those things he understands, perceives, feels, and he can control. I have this, that, and the other thing. I feel this way, I feel another way. Below the conscious is the subconscious, and below the subconscious is the unconscious. Within the subconscious and the unconscious there is a great deal of content, and this content is unknown. The person isn’t aware of it. In the past, we’ve mentioned that according to psychologists one-tenth of the person is conscious and nine-tenths is subconscious and unconscious. Allow me to mention again the example I used at that time so that we can understand this. Imagine a watermelon in the middle of a lake, in the middle of a cistern or a tank full of water. The watermelon is floating on the water. And let’s suppose that the part of the watermelon that’s out of the water is onetenth and the other nine-tenths is in the water. One-tenth appears. Nine-tenths doesn’t appear. If we translate this to man’s psyche, let’s suppose that the whole content of the person’s psyche is ten-tenths, we’ll say that by analogy only one-tenth of the psyche is conscious. This is what we see, what we know and control. This means that nine-tenths of our self is unknown. One part, perhaps three-tenths, is subconscious, that is, it’s a little below the level of the conscious, and we get an idea of what’s happening there. Six-tenths, however, is unconscious, it’s a dark basement, and we’re completely unaware of it. And it’s not merely unknown. Inside there are a thousand and one tendencies, some this way and others that way, and which inside in the depth of our existence create conflicts and battles and try to destroy one another. That is, one tendency tries to annihilate the other. While we don’t know all these things – since they’re in the depth of our existence, in that dark part that doesn’t appear – while they’re unseen, non-appearing, nevertheless we live them, because they’re within our self. They aren’t something outside of our self. And often it’s precisely these hidden things within us that lead us hither and yon. They cause us to speak this way or that, to conduct ourselves in one manner or another, to take this or that position. We spoke previously1 about that mother who, when her child is writing, pays no attention to the good letter, but to the badly written or crooked letter, and points it out to her child. She thinks that when she acts like this she’s doing an important job at that point. We say this because we have to emphasize that this mother believes that she’s helping her son, that she’s working and struggling for her son’s good. This is what she believes, this is what she thinks, and that’s why she acts this way. Deep down, however, there’s something else she doesn’t know. But whether she knows it or not, it exists, and this is exactly what impels her to see the crooked G rather than the good O, to see the spelling mistakes rather than seeing what’s correct where it exists. There is, then, something deep in her psyche that acts without her knowing it, and which impels her in this direction or that. In general in every man there is this part of his existence—which is in fact the larger part—which is unseen, unknown, and which leads man hither and yon. “The heart is deep beyond all things” Of course holy scripture said this long ago. As we read in the book of the prophet Jeremiah, “The heart is deep beyond all things.”2 That is, man’s heart has a depth, and however far one proceeds inside oneself, however much one understands, or however much one knows oneself, there is still a part that will remain unknown. And we see that later the Fathers of the Church do everything they can to know themselves. That is, they try to go ever deeper into their souls so that the part of the soul that is unknown becomes known one day and is continuously baptized in God’s grace, so that God’s grace continuously influences it, illumines it, and sanctifies it. That’s why a reborn man, a holy man, isn’t led about by inner conditions of which he’s unaware. One would say that “he’s led about” knowingly and consciously. That is, he knows what he’s doing, he knows what he’s seeking. And in the final analysis, he’s led by God’s grace, which has permeated to the depths of his existence. It has permeated his soul to the very depths.
Freud, Jung, Adler, Horney
As you know, up until a few decades ago, what are called the unconscious and the subconscious were unknown from the scientific viewpoint, from the psychological viewpoint. The Church Fathers were not unaware of them, however, nor is Holy Scripture. The Fathers said what they had to say on this subject and did what they did and were sanctified. Science, however – psychology, pedagogy – was unaware of the reality of the unconscious and the subconscious. A few decades ago, however, there appeared some great psychologists who occupied themselves particularly with this effort to make deeper progress into man’s psyche, to explain certain of man’s actions. Why is it, for example, that a man acts this way or another way? Why does he behave like this without understanding that what he’s doing isn’t correct? He doesn’t understand – which means that he’s led hither and yon by something. So then, as we said, while the Fathers knew these things, a few years ago, in some way science discovered the subconscious and the unconscious. And psychoanalysis began to be practiced, and a lot has been said about it, and today it’s practiced in all the countries of Europe. Even here in Greece there are certain expert psychoanalysts who try, with the method of psychoanalysis, to help men who are suffering and afflicted. The point is that whatever a man does, if he does it apart from God, in the final analysis even the good that he decides to do is not as effective as it could be if it happened by God’s grace, and often instead of bringing good, it does harm. The first to appear was Freud, certainly who said some correct things, some true things, but he also said all those strange things on the subject of psychology as well as many erroneous, blasphemous, and sinful things. Adler and Jung, who were Freud’s disciples, quickly understood that their teacher didn’t get everything right and at a certain point they disagreed with him and both abandoned him. Adler followed his own line of thinking and carved out a new path on these psychological themes. Jung, on the other hand, also followed out his own line of thinking. Perhaps he made further progress and had more good things to say than the other two, but he, too, was led astray. Like all men—and let’s keep it in mind—we, too, can be led astray, even when we’re doing the most holy things. It’s not simply those who occupy themselves with science and conduct experiments and research who can be led astray, but we, too, who occupy ourselves with the holiest things, with the most spiritual matters, and we should know that as men we will make mistakes, as men it will happen that we are led astray. The reason, for example, that in Greece today, while there are many of us who have some interest in spirituality and are trying to do something, in the end we have made a mess of it and flounder about—that is, we haven’t discovered ourselves yet so as to begin doing something little by little— is that each of us thinks that what he’s doing is perfect and everyone must follow it, everyone must accept it. The truth, however, is that every act, whatever it is, insofar as we men do it, however much God’s grace may be there somewhere, in the final analysis it has a human seal to it. And if we think that this human seal is the divine seal, then from that point on the act ceases to be spiritual, and instead of good it causes harm. Since, therefore, those who occupy themselves with divine matters can fall into error as human beings, so much the more can those men. And so Freud, Adler, and even Jung were led astray. I recall that when I was reading Jung’s views on these psychological topics, some of his positions were unconvincing to me. “It’s all good,” I thought, “but I feel this point here isn’t correct.” That was what occurred to me to say. Some of his positions, that is, weren’t in agreement with what the Fathers say, with what Holy Scripture says, with what the whole spirit of Christianity presupposes. Not long ago – about a year ago – a book fell into my hands which was written by a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst named Karen Horney, who appears to be a very great and important psychiatrist and she provided a great service, as it seems, there in America—she’s dead now—and she herself spent time as a disciple of Freud. It impressed me that she didn’t accept what Freud says, that is, his basic theses, which caused such harm in the world and in psychology itself. Furthermore I was impressed by what she said about Jung. “Whereas Jung,” she writes, “says this at this point, I don’t agree and it’s more correct to take it this way,” and she indicates her own position. As I was reading her book, then, I kept seeing that she didn’t agree with certain of Jung’s theses. Jung is considered to be a religious man – certainly he was a Protestant—and quite often he says that rather than visiting psychiatrists, it would be better for men to visit priests, that is, confessors, spiritual fathers. But since priests aren’t trained, he says, that’s why people have recourse to psychiatrists. Jung has good things to say, but as I told you, certain of his positions were unconvincing to me as well. And I noticed that her position convinced me more, unlike Jung’s, which left certain questions within me.
The facts of psychology in the spirit of the Church Fathers
Since we haven’t undertaken specialized studies on these topics and we can’t be absolutely certain about them, nor do we have time to occupy ourselves with them in detail, nor perhaps do we have the qualifications—because one must have the appropriate qualifications—we can’t somehow create our own school, our own method and theory and say things of our own. We’ll take the good things, the sound things, from what the experts say. We’ll take them as one takes facts from medical science, because you must know that certain of the things psychology or psychiatry says are rather like what medicine in general says. Doctors study what sick people display, they do certain experiments, and they arrive at certain conclusions. And they say, for example, for this pain to go away, you must take aspirin. For this illness to go away, you must have surgery. Or, you feel a pain here, but the trouble isn’t here, it’s in your stomach. And provided that they’ve carried out specialized studies and have learned things and know them, we’re obligated to accept those things. The only difference is that we’ll look at all these things in the spirit of the Gospel, in the spirit of the Fathers, in the spirit, generally speaking, of Christianity and the revelation. It’s the same here. After research, after hard work, psychology has made some observations today, some discoveries, and has drawn certain conclusions. Certainly the Fathers knew these things, as it has been said, from another point of view and in another manner. It’s not permissible for us now—at least this is my humble opinion and I don’t know whether I’ll change my mind later – to cross them out with the stroke of a pen and say, “Forget about them. Let them say what they want” if in certain questions they can be helpful to us. We can’t say that the doctor can’t help us. Even an ascetic, who may be the greatest saint, if he has a stomachache, yes, he’ll be courageous, he’ll be patient, but if he sees that God doesn’t cure him, he’ll go to the doctors. We have in mind the holiest men of the Holy Mountain, who come to Thessaloniki and have operations or undergo treatments to be healed. God could heal them, but it’s as if He told them, “Since there’s a way for you to be healed by the doctors, I’m not healing you. You’ll go there and be healed.” It’s the same thing in the situation that lies before us. As long as there are illnesses today that are related to psychology, that are related to these psychological investigations, and as long as we have the facts that come from these discoveries, if I may put it in this way, why shouldn’t we use them? It’s not permissible for us to cross all those things out with the stroke of a pen and say, “We don’t accept them.” We shall accept them. The only difference is that we shall see these things in the spirit of the Fathers, in particular the spirit of the Neptic Fathers, who help us a great deal in this sector. It was certainly in another way that the Fathers saw these points, understood them, confronted them, and finally conquered them, overcame them and became sanctified. Today science comes along and discovers all these things in another way. But the bad thing about science is that it sees things in a dry, merely scientific manner, and in the end, when specialists, mere scientists, try to help the men who have recourse to them, it’s not infrequent – from what I know, and I have some experience in these matters – that instead they make them worse. On the other hand, when one uses these things in the spirit of Christ, in the spirit of the Gospel, in the spirit of the Gospel and the Fathers, they are useful and help us a great deal. Because in and of themselves these things are true.
With the goal to truly live
With all of this I want to say, brethren, that with the help of the facts of psychology, with the help of the spirit of the Fathers, we’ll make an effort to enter a little deeper within ourselves, to know ourselves. We’ll try to make a deep dive into ourselves. And you know what? We’ll escape from a great many ugly things. That is, if God helps us and we catch those “fish” that dance around within us and do so much harm, we’ll escape from a great many sufferings. And our life will be easier, freer, and those of us who truly want to live the spiritual life will really be able to live it. Because—and I have to say this—someone who has complications within him, who has been blocked internally by any such things, can’t live the spiritual life. He certainly won’t be lost. If he takes heart, if he’s patient and says, “I have these problems. What am I to do? Since I’m not getting to the bottom of this, I hope God will save me,” and if he passes away with this patience and with this hope, God will save him, except that he won’t be able to live out his spiritual progress in this place. But I wonder if this kind of man can have that patience. Because these are the sort of things that create such darkness and carry a man away to such a degree that they don’t allow him to hope in God, to trust in God so as to calm down, to be at peace, to taste a little of God’s grace.
18-10-1970