Page 136 - EMCAPP-Journal No. 5

A Portrait of a Christian Psychologist: Paul C. Vitz

splitting; c) to self-transcend; and d) to become adults. (e.g. “I can’t believe he did this to me.
an integral link (in most models) to interperso- He’s really evil, totally bad.”) In short, splitting
nal forgiveness. the self to advance self-forgiveness sets up a fal-
se understanding of self or it reinforces existing
The first point, the notion of reparation calls for primitive defense mechanisms.
some review. The self-forgiveness models assert The problem of self-reparation flows directly
that the “good” self accepts the commitment of into a second problem with self-forgiving, name-
the “bad” self to work to overcome what led to ly, that of self-reintegration. In self-forgiveness,
the crime, as well as to provide some (undefi- reintegration is said to work as follows. First, the
ned) reparation to make up for that crime’s bad client is split in two, such that self-forgiveness
effect on the self. However, the reparation that can be offered to the “bad” self. Second, the
most psychotherapists describe, at the center of client through the act of self-forgiveness heals
splitting, is not exclusively inwardly focused; the split. The client focuses inward and gives
rather there is an external object—an exter- himself (in isolation from his relationships with
nal relationship with the mother, for example. others) something he had not received or ac-
While there is some self-focused gain (i.e., ea- cepted from others (i.e., forgiveness). But how
sing guilt, mourning the loss of an ideal, and is it possible that self-forgiveness can heal the
affirming self-identification with the good ob- breach? How can reintegration occur in isola-
ject), reparation is also other-focused. Further, tion from a genuine relationship, since a client
healing from splitting occurs through an ever- cannot relate with the self alone? Neither the
increasing capacity of the baby/child to look integration nor identity formation can occur in
beyond self and to “take into himself goodness isolation from others. Indeed, many empirical
from the outer world” (Klein in Monte & Sol- studies reveal the necessity for relationship (a)
lod, 2003 p. 261). in overcoming psychological distress, (b) in de-
Thus, it is important to recall that reparation in veloping a self-concept and self-esteem, and (c)
object relations theory is between two people, in recovering a sense of moral agency. (For the-
or at least two different external but “interna- se points see Hewitt et al. (2003), McKimmie
lized objects”, e.g. the infant and mother. In the et al. (2003), Pyszczynski, Greenberg, Solomon,
work of reparation, there is something outside Arndt, & Schimel (2004), Shahar et al. (2004),
of self—namely an actual relationship, calling Vignoles, Regalia, Manzi, Golledge, & Scabini
for interpersonal connection. It is by the core (2006), Stapel & Blanton (2004)).
experience of being “in relationship” that the In addition, because the client is encouraged
splitting infant learns to construct the represen- to focus inward, even when primitive defen-
tation of the whole mother and its own self, in se mechanisms are not involved, the splitting
which even “bad” parts can be met without fear required in self-forgiveness pushes the client
or guilt. This raises the question: How does one away from himself as a fully integrated person.
part of the self give or make reparation to ano- Self-experience cannot be really separated into
ther part of the self? The two separate selves independent parts. There must be a core inte-
exist only in the person’s internal mental world. grated self because if the parts are truly separate
In addition, in adults with persisting splitting de- then the client is suffering from characteristics
fenses, it seems very likely that self-forgiveness of DID. In these extreme situations, one self
only worsens the pre-existing unhealthy split. forgives one of the other selves like a separate
Although serious splitting as a defense is usual- person forgiving another but this simply makes
ly associated with severe mental pathology such clear the underlying unreality, even potential
as Borderline Personality Disorder or Disasso- pathology, of such a self-forgiveness process.
ciated Identity Disorder (DID) it can also show In any case, when a client ‘splits’ in order to
up in much less disturbed individuals. For ex- judge himself for a crime, he is left to recreate a
ample, under the stress of intense interperso- new united vision of self. But, how can this hap-
nal conflict, of the kind relevant to forgiveness, pen? As Kieron O’Connor, et al observed, “…
splitting often re-emerges in relatively normal if each contradictory facet of the self is equally

136