A STUDY OF THE LENES 0F THOUGHT EN THE SPEAKWG 0F ARTHUR L. BIETZ, MiNlSTER-PSYCHOLOGIST Thesis for the Degree of Ph, D. MI‘CHEGAN SMTE UWERSITY MYRCN DALE HANNAH 1970 a. LIBRARY Michigan Scare .3 University .' . "M‘snncnpuf P" -. This is to certify that the thesis entitled A STUDY OF THE'LINES OF THOUGHT IN THE SPEAKING OF ARTHUR L. BIE'I'Z, MNISTER-PSYCHOLOGIST presented bg MYRON DALE HANNAH has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph 0 D 0 Speech degree in Major professor Date July 1, 1970 0-169 mugs-IL“ "' "Q' I- m; N I BINDING BY HUAB & SUNS' 300K BINDERY INC LIBRARY amozz- i. 17.111991 P '\' a... -.,. D -.... ~‘I‘ .. .:. ,:'~'-ovs. - ,. "'5' 1: g n: ' > u»... o - \ 'L L ; “-9. u.., .; f E 5311.1; 5:: 21:12 251': ::' .‘.‘ 3!. :‘.e:z's ‘--: - V . ' . (: "-' 5. I. \ Cir-«.2. .., - ‘ fl ‘ bl . Ov.'- “._ . ‘«.‘ 3 . I "‘ 1“ .1 7“ H. i 3" ‘Q-. .. ' s. f“:... .‘fi. “ a - " .' Q" . s‘. :b-___. o ‘ut.s a_‘ .,‘ D I I u. '- . as: "ll.é . 'I "z. I.- ‘v k I "- t . ‘ y.: u-. ‘ t I! -.I.“ .1 . \‘,. :E ~.,'.: 0".4 . - 0' . . . \ ‘I.’ ' D I. g. ‘ ( u. . ‘ ~w .'r" 4 guy.- A ABSTRACT A STUDY 0}? THE LINES or THOUGHT IN THE SPEAKING OF ARTHUR L. BIETZ, MINISTER-PSYCHOLOGIST by Myron Dale Hannah The primary purpose of this dissertation is to study Arthur L. Bietz, minister-psychologist pastor of the Glendale, California Seventh-day Adven- tist Church, as a man of ideas; i.e., to examine the lines of thought in his Speaking with particular interest in discovering: 1) his theories of comunication; 2) how he fuses the disciplines of psychology and religion in his speaking; and 3) the ways in which his speaking appears to be rele- vant to the needs of his audiences in California. Dr. Bietz's impressive credentials include a doctor of phiIOSOphy de- gree from the University of Southern California with a double major in both religion and psychology; and more than twenty years as a successful minister, educator, and clinical and lecturing psychologist. As a lecturer, he Speaks to approximately 100,000 peOple each year, besides those he reaches weekly from his pulpit and his daily broadcasts throughout Southern California. Chapter I contains a rhetorical biography, which indicates Bietz's com- mitment to becoming a preacher while a young child living with his parents and eight brothers and sisters on their North Dakota farm home and traces the influences of his home and schooling upon his professional career. Chapter II presents the characteristics of Arthur Bietz in an attempt to portray as vividly and clearly as possible, the man as a person, as well as in his professional capacities. «w ‘W- was . ow. " .' ‘ a _ ‘ . '.-'_:r “. Ufa:- ' ‘0 . ..- n... s .. o-D-l ‘v~.~o o :I.u~:5 o .u- v.5“ .. N D" '0 u gal-.w ' ‘ a vc .v. on. up... .; .,. . . :...:. 4 Jr) ....:‘.°. ., 0'. ‘l‘. O a . 9..,I._’_ ‘... 5.0! ..:.[. .t 0-, . ~-..:5. . ':.0.' ”o . z... .‘vu. ‘ ‘~ . , s , . I 5‘ ...:..‘ ‘5. . ‘0'“. .‘ .¥u D .~_ so». ~M ‘t ‘32:." g , 33:51. .- ‘b. ,. ..‘~.:: . ; I ‘5 a s. . u I‘. \ l ' . .. p I. e . _ ~ . int: ‘I a. (v . . ‘I. I ' a...'; ..E :' ~‘O «I. . \ -I . 35:. ., . \.-.; .“‘s: P.“ . t_ .5- . ‘a ,5 . -.' ‘62.: .; ' .. .‘ p ‘\ V2 .‘ '. o‘o“.é .: .. .A .. ~. e a , § ‘0 . .‘ .‘ t ”l. '3.»- . .‘ "‘. ‘n “‘6 -.- . p 9 'z “N ‘-’. .‘ ~ . o . ‘t u‘- I. n s_’~ _ Q . L. ' o.t.z s ‘ s Myron Dale Hannah Chapter III deals with Bietz's theories of communication, which were inferred from texts of his sermons and lectures selected for this study, as well as from transcriptions of the interviews that be freely granted to thetndter. Through his college days and the early years of his ministry, Bietz, naturally endowed as a speaker, gave little attention to the theories of speaking‘per se; but as he proceeded with his study of psychology, he deve10ped a deep interest in communication from the psychological point of view. However, when interviewed by the writer at a relatively recent date, Bietz did not profess a rhetorical or homiletical theory of public address. Chapter III, therefore, represents the writer's work in isolating these theories. Chapter IV deals with the California setting for Bietz's activities, delineating briefly the nature and history of the California environment and showing how the resulting way of life in that state has contributed to the needs of its pe0ple. The needs defined in this chapter provide a basis for considering the relevance of Bietz's speaking to the needs of those who make up his audiences. Chapter V is a study of Bietz's lines of thought taken largely from thirty-four selected sermons and lectures. The first four sections of the chapter study the fusion of Bietz's concepts of religion and psychology. The last section considers specific problems with which Bietz deals in his Speaking, and serves as a basis for considering the relevance of his Speak- ing to the needs of the peOple who make up his audiences. A detailed four- page outline of the contents dealt with within the chapter appears at the beginning, and the chapter itself is an expansion of this outline. The conclusions of the writer are: 1) Bietz's theories of conmunication are basic to his beliefs, both o! ‘ a: s. .a ‘ ‘ . ‘i' . Q .' ‘:.'J..U dub I. a" . .. ... . . .ac-hsustu-n‘ -4.'...£ .u.a.'.b.~¢au . .332 12:: greaizr ‘ I"‘V .. .. ‘ v. .n‘.‘ If. m.... «(o ._. .. '- .;‘.. .___“ “ ‘nz'e‘ as ‘~v I . ‘- n I..;' - 3“.“ ." " C, t\ ‘f u... "féj: _ “t [T a .5 ast. JV; .1 A.‘ z... ’\.-.;;-., . '..\ -- _ t 'c.‘ ‘ - W ' 4Q.“‘A . - . A n V o r 4'-., \~.‘p" ‘ 1 .‘ _ | a ‘ . ‘ n,. b __ -- a u - .', -1 . . ‘V: .‘n ‘- w. .- A: ‘ Myron Dale Hannah theologically and psychologically, and are of primary importance to his concepts of mental health, personal growth, and Spiritual welfare. His concepts of personal worth and of the positive versus the negative factors involving inhibitions and repressions in the communication process might well come into greater focus in the study of Speech theory. 2) Bietz has very ably fused the two disciplines in his Speaking in both the pulpit and on the lecture platform; and his message, whether he is Speaking as a minister or as a psychologist, is the same. Essentially, he is saying that any good psychology from the clinician's point of view Immt contain the basic elements of religion and, conversely, any good representation of religion should incorporate every relevant truth that lum been discovered and found useful by those in the fields of psychology and psychiatry. 3) After comparing the defined needs of Californians with the content oftfis messages, it is apparent that Bietz's Speaking is indeed relevant to Umeparticular needs of Californians who make up his audiences. The writer believes that many pastors who are able and willing to build fluznecessary background into their experience could profitably incorporate a fiufion of these two disciplines, religion and psychology, into their Speak- ing ministry, and that the content of Bietz's messages could substantially help anyone who is interested in studying such a fusion. A STUDY OF THE LINES OF THOUGHT IN THE SPEAKING OF ARTHUR L. BIETZ, MINISTER-PSYCHOLOGIST by Myron Dale Hannah A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Speech 1970 9 COpyright by MYRON DALE HANNAH 1971 ii Accepted by the faculty of the Department of Speech, College of Communication Arts, Michigan State University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of PhilOSOphy degree. Dir ctor of Thesis Guidance Committee: Kenneth G. Hance, Chairman Robert T. Anderson David C. Ralph Gordon L. Thomas iii . ‘l' Dun. '- ~ o l ‘ 1... .un‘. . I u.. 3'..-- -. ‘5. out tact-.U- . . I . ‘; - ' q-q- . .. .. “I .‘.... ' t ’ ' p->'.. ... ,v ~..C .‘..‘ . '..«...,“ Fin 0 yu..-_‘~“ . ... ‘l N“ L. . ' b. ‘ :a‘ " ~;. A. .. ' I-‘ ’ - \l- -.. .. 1‘; .g. ‘- . M“‘~o- .. n I s q . . \ In. _‘ I.-. a .. Us! _ .y “1‘ o . -‘ _~ .. u ‘. -‘ L_‘- ‘ H. . ._- C. .: -. . .. ... O F “'I. I»; . ._ . Q...‘ . ‘ “v. _ ‘ \. . ‘v . ~. ,_ Q \‘. ,a ..:'--.~.~_ - -“. .b ‘.~ 0 a "'x ;:._ ' ‘ .. ‘ . - .. , w .. ' 'F- enouL .....__. v . I ' w . . ,. r .O ‘ fl . ‘~v- ‘5 . v. I . I ’n. -.,_ . I a“... -.. .-'._l‘.' .0 .. " ' - ‘ ‘ ' h 9 ~. nu-..‘ .“ I h. . -.... . ‘ o .1 L .. ‘- I... ‘.‘ ta. ‘ .C. -' . .. -.‘.‘ _ -._‘ ‘— -~‘..‘ .L . ' c . V : _ ' ' I. "-l ‘ a.."_ -. ‘.~ .‘ \. 1' ._‘. with the warmth of their friendliness. John and Carol Davidson of Monterey Park and Mrs. N. F. Trummer, my wife's mother, of La Sierra, California, graciously took us into their homes during the weeks of research done in that state. John and Alma Allen of Battle Creek, Michigan, Opened their home to us and gave of their friend- flfip and encouragement during large portions of the time when this disserta- tion was being written. My deepest indebtedness is to my beloved wife, Sarita, who not only pajently and lovingly endured the deprivations and hardships involved in tadoctoral study, but has Spent countless hours in helping to gather mat- erials, typing and editing manuscripts, reSponding willingly to myriads of ideas, and helping in every way that she could. Truly, he who has found such a wife is wonderfully blessed. C---” - a- - o I . .~“"‘ ti-.- - .-.- F‘-_ - . L. "J " 0..--..I . -—~-.. .- - “ -0 . ‘Ifi §---... ~. -‘- ‘6'--- ‘_- ~. ! a - ..-.. 3*.-. v.‘_.‘_ "‘9—.. - ..--~.. . . g s-_ n i. \ -.-. .a _' rx. . ~-. -Q—r - ~ \ ‘3. ": .-- _ u -‘ . ‘1'. ‘. |~.‘. “~.n lb .__ 's C . . — I‘-"- I‘ - D .‘ . .. - \--~ - .. - - “\t‘.“.. - . -_.. . ~ ._ . - _. .\\. - \_‘ " h \_ .‘\ a“ .. ..“_. 1‘ ‘~“ " a. -.~n: .~.'- . w‘ .3 “s‘ "u. ‘1 ‘~ :-— -. --‘ ‘51-- a... -. - “i.- ~ - s w "- ‘3 - "" r. — ks I o - - ‘ ‘c “ ’: ~‘l "h ‘- “ ‘ a l “. ‘I 'o . TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . Chapter I. ARTHUR BIETZ: BIOGRAPHY. . II. ARTHUR BIETZ IN PROFILE . . . . . . . . III. "THE MEDIUM IS THE MESSAGE”: A STUDY OF ARTHUR BIETZ'S THEORY OF COMMUNICATION . . . . . . . . IV. "THE CALIFORNIA SYNDROME": A STUDY OF ARTHUR BIETZ'S MILIEU. O O O C C O O O O O O O V. "A GOOD PSYCHOLOGY AND A GOOD RELIGION ARE ONE": A STUDY OF ARTHUR BIETZ'S FUSION OF RELIGION AND PSYCH- OLOGY O O O O O C O O O I O O O 0 VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . APPENDICES Append ix A. "Synchronized in Time" - Typescript of Tape Recording of a Sermon Preached in the Glendale Adventist Church, Glendale, California, April 20, 1968 . . . B. "Space-age Religion" - Typescript of Tape Recording of a Sermon Preached in the Glendale Adventist Church, Glen- dale, California, March 29, 1969 . . . . C. "Four Ventures of Your Self" - Typescript of Tape Re- 3 IBLIOGRAPHY . . . . cording of a Lecture Given in the Whittier High School Auditorium, Whittier, California, September 25, 1967 . vi Page iv vii 28 45 68 125 333 345 351 360 372 ARTHUR L. BIETZ, PH. D. I . . .4 —. . . _ . .a .5. II are c .‘ v a. O . C . . .nx .. . a. .0. .h \ hi3 Ru \ A .I. .e .e .. .. .. Q. .a .. ..¢ ..¢ ‘ .. 1‘ .. .a .. _ ... L” _.. . . .3. A. f. .... .1 f .c ._. . . . . . .3 .t .. a 5 v ~ a r .. t .. . .6 . u it .. ax .. . .3 wu. .1 a a . J .a .H .. .u : ... .1 .. .. .z .. .. ..I . . .. . .1 g .2 .. .a .e .7 . . J. .c 5.. ..l .t l -.. .3 .. . .3 .T .... .: ‘c .. ... ..L. uvn. —F‘ ... ... a. o g c u u s n . . A. .u\ .. .u . .~ C. .: L. . .5 .: a v. . c a .. L. . o . . . L. o y a. 5.. .s. .s . \ u . ~. . .3 . .. .: .. .2 .o .. . I. .. . .. .. .. . . . . c. .u .3 .s. .. h . .. . s .. .. .. wk 4N . .\ .... ~k - .. u c .. . ... . .- .\ . a m . . c. . . . . INTRODUCTION Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study is to examine the lines of thought of the Speaking of Arthur L. Bietz as represented by selected sermons and lectures. In pursuing this purpose, the writer (1) studies the personal and biograph- ical factors which motivated this man to enter the ministry and subsequent- ly to become trained as a psychologist; (2) Studies the sociological backgrounds of California in order to discover the climate of Opinion and the expressed needs of the peeple who make up his audiences; (3) exam- ines the lines of thought in selected lectures and sermons of recent date Dian attempt to discover (a) his theories of communication; (b) how he tum fused the disciplines of psychology and religion in his Speaking; and U» in what ways his Speaking appears to be relevant to the needs of his audiences. Limitations Imposed on the Study This study is limited to a consideration of the inventional matters OfIku Bietz's Speaking, and deals with him as a man of ideas. The study does not purport to be a complete historical-critical Study of him as a Speaker. In considering the content of his messages, this study is limited to inferring (a) his theory of communication; (b) his fusion of the dis- ciplines of religion and psychology; and (c) the relevance of his messages to the needs of the people who make up his audiences. vii o I I I II . s . u r. s _ . . ~ . . .c. o . . . . .C v. v. . .u. . . . A ' fl» . . .. .3 .C _. a . t .L _. s c a. .. Cam .5 .. . L .. é. .3 p. 2 . J. _. p. . t. .t .\ .. ... ... u. i. c 4. .3 I. _.. ..I .A. .. -. .\. .x. n 5 e r” «we .I :u .o a 4. r . .n. . a u. o. o. u o n u. a. .t s z. s . .C . . . . . . .t .c c. . c .u .. . .t .6 a i . t . 2. .s. v . . . . 2‘ .x. ... T. . c .. .C . . ... t ..n .t u p. .3 .. F. .g n- \. .c .y. .4. a. A e be .1 .A . s .s .‘I . u!. a: . . p . u. .v. a». . . l :m .s .. a u u. a s .o ~ . . A a . . .C .u. .C .E .. .S Z. -.. . . L. T . . . .u .Fu . a o . . o .- o .. o — .4¢ .~. .u\ .u. . s us “ an. . s . .PN -.s .e. n- o v .u. nl‘ .-s h .‘h n .. s . s u. . . b .p .4- . o .a g . u .v. . - ~ c ~ . 5 ~ . . . -. 7.1. a. . . e . a . . - a . . . . . . . . . . . . .. x o . so. .. .. . ... w.. . .5 -. .3 . .... ... o.\ s. a I. . ... . :m .o. - 1‘ ~ a\ e -. . c m - Mn” 7. ..w . on ‘ ... f. . . ....\ ‘. .... . .... .. Inasmuch as Arthur Bietz has been lecturing and preaching for over twenty-five years, delivering hundreds of lectures and sermons, the wri- ter carefully selected, in order to make the Scope of this project manage- able, fourteen lectures and twenty sermons of relatively recent date, which had been electronically recorded as they were delivered. The detailed examination of Bietz' message content is largely limi- ted to the manuscripts of these thirty-four discourses, which, in the estimation of the writer, are a representative sampling of the whole. Significance of the Study Intrinsic Merit In an era when the social needs of America are in Sharp focus, when churchmen are searching deSperately for ways and means of meeting the basic tmrsonal needs of individuals in our society, addressing themselves to what cme has described as "the frightening irrelevance of the church to the life mfour times," there is intrinsic merit in studying the content of the mes- mmes of a man who appears to have been very successful in reaching and whudng the confidence of thousands of persons beyond his parish, as his Speaking ministers to them at the point of their need. In preparation for this extended ministry, Dr. Bietz obtained a Ph.D. degree from the University of Southern California, based upon the full course work for two separate degrees, one in religion and one in psychology. Ike then sought and received credentials as a licensed psychologist, that he xnigflit use this added avenue of service to complement his pastoral ministry. In the intervening years, he has distinguished himself as a much- Sought-after lecturer on psychologically-oriented t0pics. He estimates that 11s: Speaks to approximately 2500 people a week, or about 100,000 each viii Q ' u . '- 4 I. 5': .E\".t 0a -. on ...v ' o a Dnv-. ‘- "M 3' “.1... .. .I.. dun h.|. . ‘ ‘40-...0 (' ”.- ; . r b... \- .l—u» “hiya I C u... c‘ A :- v v a a»... .- o b. 1 o . . ' - o~I utu..4 . I I. "v e.. g. a“... . .' v .-a ': .. r.— l ._- .- a. H _ t a . . . .-.-..... ..,..t a. .I . . - - I 0 . . °‘ ‘ ‘9. - . .' o- . "“.oc~u! . H . -E... -._‘_l .‘Ou -' :.--\ D .;":;:‘—. ' ‘us.‘ . ~I.‘ . u ‘ A '“‘- .C: ..__'- "c..~.~ u ‘ . ~ w. c . 'G o O, . - .\..._‘ s_ n‘.._ ~ ‘ ".". v p c . I 99-. ".%1. ‘_‘ U. - . - a.._ ‘n. - ‘.-':“\ .‘q . ‘ 0 .Q I ‘~.: ; - Q“.= . ..- . I .‘H‘.’ -;I w. ..~ ‘w .~ ..;-. . ' : "..t t ‘~ a e 'I ~ . .s“ :.. . . .n‘ A._ " a . ‘ - -‘ ‘x':. -._ -. ‘4 ~._ _ . O ‘Q‘ ‘q - ‘x‘ a - . ‘¢ . ‘- ‘b.: ..“b “s:. . \ A H ‘. ls .~. . “‘ ‘s_ ‘ ‘~ ~‘. “..=:s 's ,\ . ‘.- ... \‘1 Q‘ ~ “ . N. ‘ ‘h ..~ . ‘ I “‘-.-. . ‘l‘h .- 1 x \ - ‘M i 't .. s .lo year, in his lecture audiences alone, besides the many that he reaches in person and through the radio broadcasts of his weekly sermons in the Glendale Adventist Church. There is an element of uniqueness in Dr. Bietz in that he is a fully-qualified professional clinical psychologist who has been for many years, and is at present, actively and professionally functioning as a clinician, while at the same time carrying the full reSponsibilities as the senior pastor of a large congregation. Since Bietz is professionally trained, qualified, and functioning in both the fields of religion and psychology, and since it has been his purpose for more than twenty-five years to represent in himself and in his Speaking a fusion of these two disciplines, there is intrinsic merit in discovering how a man of this stature has fused these two disciplines in the messages that he presents from both pulpit and lecture platform. This is eSpecially true since there appears to have been relatively little interdisciplinary dialogue between the fields of religion and clinical psychology in the past. Since the relevance of the Speaking of churchmen is in sharp focus today, there is also intrinsic merit in discovering how a man of Bietz's ability and background adapts his messages, representing the fusion of these two disciplines, to the needs of his auditors. The writer and those who seem to know Bietz best agree that his over- whelming interest in life is that of meeting the challenges of public oral communication. As one of his friends said, in somewhat common vernacular, "An audience is his bag." Bietz is a constant student of communication, of his audiences, and of the reactions of the people, even though he has never formally approached public Speaking as a study of rhetoric or homiletics. ix .._ n ...’- s»: o ‘ , ‘ -. . - . -. 'n . . _... .t I .u-a ‘IP- D ‘ . .- ... .. ~\.-.-- Ohub- 7...- v 5". o . -.. .-... — o I. -.C~- ' . FOO? "‘ ‘. goal...;\q ' .. 3-.....“ t . . .....-... ..' ’h. ~~h 5... . . . . »....-, . -._.4. v :0. J- ' - o.....!.‘_' w. ... . . -Q H -. .t Ia'. 5 ung_‘. u»... '|\ " --, ~.4._ v-o " --~-’...‘..- " -. \‘-‘- _. .AI‘C n.. ' . " I <.. \ F-- n.‘ , ... _ '\- \. .- -,_' ~- ~. :_ -.‘. In... -.., a u a flu . o..,fl' . -s N '- .“ — s.‘ - I ~ ~ -‘.' .. . ..:~-’..,‘ '. a Q~‘.‘ — .. . \ ‘ g ‘- .,. ‘u .t\ .._ ‘in‘ \_ ‘5‘. . .' ..g: ”s. 's ._ - ~~' ' O -‘N '-.. . r.- . . I O '7' I c.‘ 6 .- . n ' [5- ¢._ - .‘ ._ - ~ '-~'.' ‘ Q n g.‘ .- . ..‘§ . . i‘. . 'q ._ . .' ... . ._ n... . . '-. g a \‘ .- . . 4" “‘3. “H . . ‘L - 3. l-. ... -. p . . . '~. ..- . . . ‘~-L: -: ~ 9 § r" . . ' . . . ~A a,.;. . - b- - . r. , k . ‘v -? ', a“". .-A‘ Since Dr. Bietz's approach to oral communication has been almost entirely from the psychological rather than from the homiletical or rhetorical point of view, there is intrinsic merit in discovering the theory of communication of such a Speaker. Distinctiveness In addition to the factor of "intrinsic merit," there appears to be justification for this study in terms of its distinctiveness or uniqueness. During an interview in January, 1968, Dr. Bietz assured the writer that no one had yet undertaken a Study of his Speaking, and he indicated a wil- lingness to cooperate fully in granting interviews and in making materials available. Since no study of this kind concerning Dr. Bietz has been made, I it is not "just another project of the same type.’ Rather, in terms of purpose, scope, and general methodology, it is the first of its kind. Research Method As noted in the section on "Limitations of the Study," the emphasis in this dissertation is of a consideration of the content of Dr. Bietz's messages in lecturing and preaching, inferring from these: (1) his theory of communication; (2) the fusion in his Speaking of the disciplines of religion and psychology; and (3) the relevance of his messages to the needs of the people who make up his audiences. In pursuit of this objective, the writer approached Dr. Bietz, who graciously indicated his willingness to cooperate fully in granting inter- views and making available sermon and lecture notes, books he has authored, tape recordings of his Speaking from his own library, and any other docu- ments in his possession that could be of value to this study. Various persons were interviewed by the writer, including Dr. Bietz, X . . . . . .. 9| o v .a 9 o . . I c . . s a. — g _ . g s. . . .s. u. a . -. ... , . u. . . . s n- . s . . .. I. f .. .. .J . .. .-. s. .. . a a... .. L .. . . .wa .. . .. _. .. as 1‘ ~ he . .. . . J. .3 .. .e J. .f . .. . . q . p. v. .. ~. .. . .. . . w. .o. L” 4. .~ v. .. s» p. _ .. . 5. I .s .. ‘ L. at!- 5" D s r .r» v . .\. . . .Ds I 5 § .\d .b‘ .s~ on» v . .0” v. to. v. -<. -\. a. ‘98. Vt .hs «afi o. ..§ s «Ka 5. m». L. u- .C .e .5 .u .C .s in. .x. 5‘ .~ be .. .x .. g. .n .. .. .s. C. a «a. u . C. .c Q4. . . .t P“ .o. . . .C a .: .... . ... .1 . .. . . . . . .o .c .He J. .o. t .. a. .u -. 3.x. _. a u. a: k\ . . .2 L. Q. .l. ~o .‘u -. .. o. u. .5 c. u. .c. .. . A. xi. .s n‘ ‘. .2 . . s p\- -u .I p . :- . ... .s a .: .s a C a .A. .3 .z w a .. o .4. ~K. ..~ . . .u. .5 .-‘ .M u. .n. -. u . ‘~ .. 2‘ q.‘ .A. a— .u .: . . .. o . . ... . ~ g a :5 . . . . . s l. .. .. L. . .a. . . .h n.- .3 . ... .. ‘» .3 s . ... c . x. .3 .3 t. p. .P. a... o; o a o . o . o 5 ..~ z. . » \.~. on . . .f C i. hug - . . t. .: L. n n n . . I . u .u. ... . xi . . .s. v s .- .. u. n u .. . .. . ... «L H. 2“ .. .L .. .... ‘u We. WP. .o ... . .V s . .s... . ‘ ... .. \ .. members of his family, colleagues and friends of the past and present who have been closely associated with him and have first-hand information con- cerning his background and work that is pertinent to this study, and Sponsors and participants in his lecture and preaching activities. In addition, two of his lecture audiences were surveyed with a questionnaire. The writer Spent the winter quarter of 1968 and several weeks during the spring of 1969 in California, doing research for this project. Besides the numerous interviews that were recorded, the writer was present at many of Dr. Bietz's Speaking appointments for the purpose of making recordings and personal observations of his entire Speech situation as an aid to this study. A diligent search was conducted for any documents and data useful for this study. A.library of the recordings of Dr. Bietz's sermons for the past eight years was discovered, and representative selections were made from among these. Forty-seven recordings of Dr. Bietz's lectures were secured for the writer's personal library. From among these re- cordings, fourteen lectures were carefully selected and transcribed, to be used for detailed study in the project as a representative sampling of his lecturing. They were selected on the basis that, in the Opinion of the writer, they were representative of the kind, quality, and content of the forty-seven lectures which the writer was able to either attend and record personally or of which he obtained previously-made recordings. The lec- tures averaged 75 minutes in length, or twenty pages when transcribed. From among the thirty-two sermons that the writer had either heard and personally recorded or selected from the private collection of re- cordings already mentioned, twenty were transcribed to be used for detailed study as a representative sampling of Bietz's sermons. Ten of these rep- resented a series on the Ten Commandments, and were included because of the xi -l' w-W‘a! DA ~'- , I ...o~.... s. ‘nuau- -. 4 . ' a ._.»-.». .. ' ;"" 1. v. - ....~.... “vv . , . , i-uh' U a. 'w. - v r . .-~,. .. .“ - . . 'Vu. , ,_z -; u. : : .._.;' 'hl.‘.. ‘§._~. ~ v ‘ Iv- . g. h- .s" 3'2" I! "‘O‘ - ‘ c “ l ‘ ; .--, . ..._~. _ \c .hsvfi ~ .‘.- . ‘ d v.. ‘ ‘ D u_. ~ .-I--- . ~ .- ' . “‘m-“‘ \\ r— C 'o.. , “ ‘ ;.'o,. '- ‘..~ ' - - “n-1' _ ~ 4 u- _ . ! .,‘ ‘ 1 'u. I f..‘. :- ,‘-‘ .p .. ‘..."A a '. - no ‘J I I- ._' ”'~ . ‘: ..._ . . -.-_: ... . ..‘: o ‘4. a. no \I. In. .‘-" l‘:.C '1'. - "~ .1- . ‘.\‘ n i v . A s 0 f 9. ~““v , «.3 ~._ ‘~ .. .— _ .“ ‘. .- ‘._uv ! ‘s -. . i.- ' s.» i n. -‘ ‘4 P ‘. -~ s ..- ’ .. \ a ._ up" ‘.‘ ~~u --> -_ 1*. .‘..' '. ‘e; C. ‘ - ~‘ . o o -_ ‘ u‘ . . \ "‘. o " V .. -“ - . .- .. Obi - ‘n unique way they enabled Dr. Bietz to cover in a few sermons so many dif- ferent aSpects of life. The ten sermons in this series were balanced by ten others that were selected somewhat at random on the basis of their appearing to be representative of the kinds of sermons which Bietz makes a practice of preaching. Since the sermons average thirty-five minutes in length, or twelve pages when transcribed, it was believed that the larger number of sermons was necessary in order to lend some balance to the materials under consideration. In preparation for this study, the writer planned and completed Special course work at Michigan State University for the purpose of sup- plying historical, psychological, theological, and sociological background for this study. Besides these sources, leading authorities for the socio- logical setting in California have been consulted and their material used as a basis for Chapter IV, entitled, "The California Syndrome: A Study of Arthur Bietz's Milieu." From this background and the background gained from reading much that Bietz has written; from the interviews, dozens of which took place that were not formally recorded; from the observing of Dr. Bietz in numerous and varied Speaking situations; from the impressions gained from auditing scores of recordings of his Speaking; and from a detailed study of the transcriptions of the thirty-four especially-selected discourses, the writer deve10ped the outline of Bietz's basic beliefs implicit in these discourses under study, which outline appears at the beginning of Chapter V. For Sections I through IV of this outline, the writer took c0pies of the transcriptions of the thirty-four discourses, selected, marked, and clipped them according to the separate thoughts expressed in each dis- course, coded each clipping according to the place in the outline that it xii ., .u. deb .- . , ‘,.p‘\a r ,,...-u 4;? r .J‘n. 0‘ ‘..h u. .5 5.. L. “D .- 9| ‘H .—5 n. S I. o o, no In t 7' VI. tl' seemed to fit or support, and then arranged these clippings according to the sequence of the outline. Section V of this outline represents the Specific areas of need of the people of Southern California to which Bietz seemed to be addressing himself in the discourses chosen. This provides some basis for discover- ing in what way Bietz's Speaking appears to be relevant to the acknowledged needs of the pe0ple of California as expressed by those authorities con- sulted and referred to in Chapter IV. Since the writer was also interested in Bietz's theories of communi- cation, he inferred from the content of Bietz's discourses and interviews his theory of communication, and this appears in Chapter III. Materials and Sources of the Study The materials by Dr. Bietz that will be used in this study are ser- mon notes, magazine articles, books, and recordings of his lectures and sermons. Materials about Dr. Bietz have been collected from his relatives, col- leagues, friends, and participants in his Speaking activities. These mat- erials include letters, articles in neWSpapers, and numerous taped interviews with persons in the above categories. Historical, psychological, and sociological documents of a background nature have been gathered and consulted. The writer has collected for his personal library nearly one hundred recordings of Dr. Bietz's Speaking in a number of Speaking situations-- lectures, sermons, Sabbath School class discussions, Wednesday evening Bible Forums, morning.broadcasts of "In Quest of Life," baccalaureate and commence- ment addresses, a wedding, and a funeral. Mr. Sam Warren, director of xiii .H' ‘ ‘ Q. .' .‘q‘ .4 u D“ ‘U‘ ‘ vInn..- v.0 ,- . _. , .. .n .p"‘ o ‘ - 4 g 0-0' '.V ,3:ch a ". ....~" - . 0 U. .A,' 0- “R' . .. ‘. -_'l. .‘0 .n . ‘ a «Q \' - I .. uh U - n ' P ..’..... «O 1~o —. ..,..~.-. A L . " t -; ‘-¢..--.n1.\‘ I!» v ~ g —.-. antwovguk- ‘-. -,.. 4‘ ~v-..u H 'u.‘.- ‘ van...“ .._. 9 | _ _ ' ' .0 " h" .I 3‘ R V I; \‘§“ .. .v, Q. "-3. ‘vv. “- 3” ’ .At“ - .. \.I . .t Cw F- 0- v "~~'.. ‘ M I H- .I. .. A ...c V; V ‘ u..“r-‘ " ‘\ I, I ~ I‘ v .- a. . V --. s ‘M \ Q4 \ V, ‘ l" Adult Education in the Whittier school district of Whittier, California, graciously made available their collection of recorded lectures for the writer to c0py. Mr. Pete C. Buhler of Glendale, California, was a source for recordings of Dr. Bietz's sermons for the past eight years; and Mrs. Burt Proctor of Corona del Mar, California, generously shared her collec- tion of recordings and the notes she has taken at scores of Dr. Bietz's lectures. Introduction Chapter I: Chapter II: Chapter III: Chapter IV: Chapter V: Chapter VI: Organization of the Study Arthur Bietz: Biography Arthur Bietz in Profile "The Medium is the Message": A Study of Arthur Bietz's Theory of Communication "The California Syndrome": A Study of Arthur Bietz's Milieu "A Good Psychology and a Good Religion are One": A Study of Arthur Bietz's Fusion of Religion and Psychology Summary and Conclusions xiv 1. I L . b — F ‘u o. .L r. 2. .¢ 9. .. .L. ... _ s. .u u a” .9. o. . v Q _ . .A .. i» . a n. .. ..‘. o 2. $.u be .3 a: o. .9. .p.. .nu .P. p. .. ‘4‘ a. .P» Q» c Lu :. .s n. .m .3 r: . ~ .56 .nu ‘ . . .., .u .o. -.. n. on” .v» D. . c . . .-— . . u. n. u u . . .1 be ... . a O u c Q ~ 9 a a s b ~ . .- Q. . c... . . . . .z . . .. . L a. .. ... .\ c ». —.. M a Q .5. . i... ‘- .t L,‘ ..— .\.~ .Po . ~ Le a. .a. : a . — ~ \ ». . .-. s . . a g I a; .. L. -~ CHAPTER I ARTHUR BIETZ: BIOGRAPHY It was haying time as the North Dakota sun beat down upon the Sprawling acres of the Bietz homestead during the summer of 1913. Twelve- year-old Albert, the eldest son in the Bietz family, was skillfully man- aging a team of four horses as he pulled a huge load of hay alongside a haystack that had taken on unusual prOportions since the work had begun that morning. All day he had been struggling with all the energy and strength of his youthful body to do the work of a man. There was nothing that he wanted to do more than to fill a man's place in the world. He loved to work. He thrilled at the added strength and size of his body since haying time a year ago. Eldina, his oldest sister, was doing as well as he, but he knew that one day soon, she would be no match for him in the hay field, for this was a man's world and he dreamed of the day when there would be men enough to do the men's work on the Bietz place and the women could devote themselves to the endless chores in and about the house. He thought how fortunate it was that the three boys of the Six children were clustered together and that Emil and Reinhold, who were next to him in age, would soon be old enough to help their dad do almost all of the men's work about the place. Things were going well this year except for one thing. There was mother, in her characteristic place high up on the haystack, moving hay around better than many men could have done. While the Sight of her there toiling painfully was not an unfamiliar one, he was eSpecially l . U - D I .ou . a . . a; p .o .-q n . .- . k . . . u C u. . . . — . O s o . .. a S. —u . . 4. r... .m .\. nu . u . . .' us —. I... 3. 2. . . o . .. . ._ . .E . . n- o L .. .G 0. v - .... .. 2. o. u .a .r. .3 .. s. .u . . or.» n?» an a . p. b s an a; .k .L. o. .u. .3 .Is . . I. u . ml vs .3 v n .u» u . w” .-~ 5. .oo .3 n . s L. l... . L. c .- oflu .p. .u .3. .F. .1 u s . u u v n . a . ..- . .. .-. t n g n .S s a. nu I I I O I I o y s a. . L. n. u . .. . A a I I I o e .- . c .. L . s ,t I we . s . .. .t s .. . . uu . . a .uk .F» . n .- 0 u. v‘ ..,. ... .3 . s .. I n o. b s n .t I .z. a J . .. I !. 5;- ‘/~ 0s .* a\. .n‘ .u - s u e .h. u- . ‘ n . n .b. In L s s .~. ‘ s .u. e . v .. a .. .. ... -. . A . i . L. . ~.. resentful this season, for mother was pregnant again; in fact, the baby could come almost any time now. Recalling that day many years later, he said, "I knew how I felt, and how the rest of the children felt when mother was going to have him (Arthur). We were all disappointed as we thought there were already enough kids, and definitely felt that this should be the last one . . . . I always felt it was too hard for mother to be pregnant and up on a haystack moving hay around."1 At the conclusion of the haying season, on July 21, 1913, Arthur Leo Bietz was born to Daniel Samuel and Christina Unterseher Bietz on the family homestead near Bowdon, North Dakota. Frieda, an older sister, remembered that when Arthur was born, he was "so scrawny that everybody thought he would die . . . . He was so thin; mother had (had)to work too hard.”2 But deSpite Arthur's sickly infancy and the hardships of life on the North Dakota plains in the early years of this century, he and his eight brothers and sisters (for two more were born after Arthur), deve10ped as normally active children. Arthur's parents were both of German heritage. Theirs was a bi— lingual home where German was Spoken as frequently as was English. As a young man, Arthur's father had migrated to this country with his parents from Russia, where they had been part of a German colony who had settled there during the time of Catherine the Great. While a boy in Russia, Daniel Bietz had suffered a painful Spasm in his thigh one day while 1 Albert D. Bietz, letter dated May 16, 1968, subsequently referred to as Letter #1. 2 . Mrs. Ben (Frieda) Krueger, interview in her home, Lincoln, Nebraska, April 1, 1969, subsequently referred to as Intervieww#l9- .- ". Q.--- ~ ,.- - Ge .aw. -‘ {-0 a x. playing with some other boys in a well-filled grain bin. A country doctor who attempted to treat the ailment twisted the leg so violently that the bone was broken and the doctor was unable to set it. For months, as Daniel later related to his children, he lay behind their heating stove, near the point of death. Much of the time his lower body was en- cased in manure to keep his leg warm and draining. Eventually, as Arthur related, "the bones did somehow grow together, but his thigh was com- pletely stiff; and then his leg was, I'd say, three inches shorter." In Spite of this, Daniel "was very strong . . . (he) walked on tiptoe, and was not handicapped. He would run as fast and work as hard as anybody else. He never had a cane, and was exceedingly able to manage and manipulate that thing. In fact, I was never aware he was crippled; none of us were. This was something we became aware of later. This was Dad!" 1 Daniel Bietz and Christina Unterseher were each members of two pioneer families who had settled in the same rural North Dakota neigh- borhood. The Bietz family was of the Lutheran faith and the Untersehers were Baptists; but after attending an evangelistic series held in a tent by an itinerating Seventh-day Adventist minister, they became active par- ticipants in this newfound faith. A beautiful, wood-frame Adventist church was erected within a mile of the Bietz home and in a few years' time its membership grew to one hundred active members, which was an exceedingly large membership for that sparsely-populated rural plains country when tranSportation facili- ties were indeed primitive. In fact, the Bowdon church was the largest 1 Arthur L. Bietz, interview in his office in Glendale, California, May 6, 1969; subsequently referred to as Interview #4. '- ‘1 "4" .no "V in-" I ‘-I" ' . a .-— . -~n. b. 'v'l." 3.-..p’ . -A. a- .- ' - “ r ...r . ‘ 5, ..n‘ I... . V ~- ‘ I .'-’~-.." . .-u~o§u ' s .. n... . ‘ . . . P' . . ..4 ‘V‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ i. - - . . d..v A. . IV.-- 0 . a.. > §u . . t.’ ‘A 4.. __ .- 4 ..-n..§ .b -‘.P‘- . .v., .2. - . c A“- 5...‘. . . v . . w, .. -_... _. ___ .- ;. id .45-. H -. - .._ - -1‘. “-“ . " ~.>‘ - .1 ' ‘ x...“n _ I ‘ ax. I n" . . . fl . “' \ -_ ‘ ‘:“l:‘o-“ . ‘c "s- v ‘ .~ '- -~ 'V h 15‘ ‘_- l ‘ _ ‘~ -,._':~ . , “Q k.\ . ‘~‘ a“o_ - _ - ..:1 4.‘_" 3 -,_. §. ' . “‘1 -\- ‘ea"..‘ :F‘ 3 s...‘ ~~ .“-... A . ‘~=. u. 5..t - K . ' v .‘C: .~ ‘ ‘_ . Q , - “~l ‘5 ‘ u 5- ‘I §-: ‘ .~ A, L \‘ .'. -7; .' _\ , . ‘ a . - ‘ . .‘: .Q‘ H‘h‘ --z - k I“ on . U ‘ b ‘t ‘.§ ‘ “" c. s ‘ 0.x ~\ ~ . > v ‘6'. Q \ ~ -— - - ._‘ _‘ . ‘ § . ‘\ h s K m. - ~ . - .‘ . ‘L . 2 Adventist church in North Dakota. It was often the scene of state-wide church conventions, during which time the Bietz home was a beehive of activity, since the visiting church dignitaries - possibly because of its proximity - usually stayed there. Daniel and Christina Bietz firmly believed that each of their chil- dren should receive the best education possible. By this time the Seventh-day Adventists had begun to execute an ambitious plan not only to undertake the task of carrying the ”everlasting gOSpel” to all the world, but to develop a system of education wherever they went through- out the earth, that would provide what they termed a "Christian education" for all of their children and young people from the first grade through college. In 1892, Union College was established at Lincoln, Nebraska to pro- vide advanced educational opportunities for the youth of the plains states. Cheyenne River Academy, a boarding school for high school Stu- dents, was designed to serve the educational needs of the high school age youth in the Adventist homes of North Dakota. It was located at Harvey, North Dakota, approximately 35 miles from the Bietz home. While the local, union, and general conferences of the Adventist organization supported the high school and college levels of education, it was the responsibility of the local churches to provide an elementary school, if there was to be one, for the local children to attend. Daniel and Christina Bietz never faltered in their determination to provide a church school for the elementary school children in their church. The plan of finance in the Seventh-day Adventist church is based first upon the tithe, or a tenth of the members' increase or personal 2 Interview #19. BI?! ‘v Hr“- gov Q‘nn'i‘ ,CBE\un.o - . "C F c \ .: LC'AuAD. ._. v . . - . -,_ l' ' v :--'-' ’u - ..~.... Sn... ‘ 5-. u u. - v c - - - . .' .u. _., _.'H h... ,u . g-.. _ - 7.: o .'I " v .- "; :;-.._' _ ..‘ y.» -5; ‘ ', t .._.‘ A.-_ ‘ .. ,_.~. w .,',‘_v.“, o. . ......_.-.:K‘ t u " .\ ’ n.. . .. _“ -.‘ ;_, .. ‘ . .l‘ t._ ;’-. . ' d ‘ ‘ , _ 9- .- .' ox ‘ ‘C‘\ ' . _,“ L.--._‘ “ '\ " 0. "~.- v“ ‘ -, ' "‘U~ 9‘ {he . .. . _ -. ‘:. 3“ u, F< n.3,.“ h I I.“ - -I..._ n . 0 " ._ n -v _- n n \. ~\_ ...‘ "u ‘ .- -I i 5.. _ K- ...- v a. t. - ‘E E' s . - ‘..‘_-._ s 5“ s . - I ' . ‘0 g .s.. p’ ._‘ . u, :, -.,- ‘ 4 ~ fi‘ ‘Q-_ , ’ A .‘q‘- 0 . l‘ .5 . ‘ .—:--, ~‘\ 04" ‘ ._‘ . l “. - c ‘ ‘i‘ . , . .‘n "s . ‘.,‘ s._- v "t C . .5 _ ~: L ‘ . ‘s‘ .. 'm ‘- .- t.‘z ‘ . . 0' . '«c a. .. . w “t: 7 . 'd. . .~ 3 -_ ‘. .v ‘ ~ _n . . ¢ ._..-.. income. The tithe is turned over to the local conference and is used to pay the direct expenses of the local ministry and the administrative and missionary personnel throughout the world field. In addition to this, there are regular mission offerings to further support the ever-eXpanding mission endeavors; and besides these tithes and offerings, there are offerings that care for the local needs of the church and its church school. The Bowdon church never failed to have a church school during the time that the Bietz children were of elementary school age. Daniel Bietz made it consistently and explicitly clear that no matter whether anyone else contributed to this school or not, he was going to have a church school for his children even if classes had to be held in his own home and he had to finance it all alone. Reinhold, now one of the executive vice-presidents of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists and chairman of the board of Loma Linda University, remembers, ”And so there was never any question. And sometimes it looked pretty bleak on Opening day, or just a week or so before school Started, because there were not very many registered. But they knew that Dad would go ahead; and so by the time school started, there were pupils enough. And many times we boarded young- sters from other families at our own home during winter months so that they could go to school." 1 For many years the Bietz family also provided living quarters for the school teacher in the little building apart from the house that was used as a summer kitchen and was made as comfortable as possible for the teacher during the winter months. She ate at the Bietz table; and this gave Daniel Bietz, who had himself had no more than a third-grade education, l R.R. Bietz, interview in his office, Glendale, California, May 6, 1969; subsequently referred to as Interview #7. I . . I II I . . .. , . . v u u c .0 \_ .Q . ..¢ 9 . . . . . . . ._ . . .\ v. .\. a. ., .3 .o. .s u. .u. o. c ..¢ .5 . m. a . . . . . .C C .t q . . . p. r. o. . . x . s p. .t a; .r _. T .. ~... 9. a. n. n~ :. o. .n . .. .s. .. is .K Ca .. 3‘ 3 ... .q .. v . _.. r. L. __ a .. mu .. a a. .5 r .. .\ o .r. .4 pt. o. I. .t .o. .. .. t 1.. i :\ ye _ . . a C. .4 .t a. .s. v. .C .x .4 a; .C . s a ... . . . .. . .. a. _. C .. a .. p. .. .u. . .. ._. .. . 3 2‘ ..~ .2 at . .5. .w. 5: .x .3 .F. v. ..t .t .t .: I. f; n. -. a u . . . . , c a .1 v. . . a. o .— .. .. v. i“ .4 vs. L.» 3. e .. ‘\ s u a a» v is .4. o. a. .. .o. .u. 2. \ xv: s . L. a .. . a? .I .. .. . a. .v. a .o . .\~ .. . a a s a s a .— .» ..- . o J. .n. .-s .~ .o~. us a x L. A .p» .. e .u‘ 5 ~ s. .u- . . ~n- . c. z. u . :- o . .. . . . a v. 1. a. . a Ia . . . .p- p a .. . . .- .a .a. . . ‘_ . a 2. e e a s . .... on ..\. ..., . . .._ . . 1. .. . T L .2 .f . , ... . s. .. , _ .... . . . ... , . . s , - . ,.. O ;. . . . .. . . .4. : I .1 . . \ a little added Opportunity to be exposed to the world of books in his leisure moments.2 Not infrequently, adults who had been deprived of schooling in their childhood also attended the little church school in Bowdon. Albert, the oldest Bietz boy, remembered sitting in the same wide two-pupil desk with his uncle, John Unterseher, a man in his forties, and both of them learn- ing to read at the same time.1 Among the farm families of that day, a boy born into the household was cause for rejoicing, for now the family had another "hired hand." By the time one of these lads was fourteen, he could carry almost as large a share of the work as a grown man. But the Bietz family insisted on doing something that was almost unheard of at that time in rural areas such as this. As each of their children, boy or girl, reached the ninth grade, he was sent to Cheyenne River Academy to finish the high-school course. All nine of the Bietz children attended this aca— demy and then went on to Union College. Daniel and Christina Bietz were soundly criticized for this year in and year out, first by their parents and then by their neighbors, for the usual practice was to choose one or two of the brighter youngsters among the children of a family and permit them to go off to boarding school if they so desired.2 While the Bietz children were often taken out of the academy for a week or two during the critical planting and harvesting times in the Spring and fall, this by no means made up for their absence from the farm during the remainder of the year. Even the summer months often 1 Interview #19. 2 Ibid. . . . . o t t . . . _. ... h‘ ‘ .. .. s. .w . . .u. . 2 .. N .. 0‘s 0.... . A. . . ..s o u. w. . . . a... .r» 7a . O» “.L F._ on 6.. v. .3 r. .5 . 9 v. p” .k. .uu .... .t . . .. .2 _ o . .v. us . . a . .cc .4- . . o u. s t . .. . ‘IV . . .I. «in .Qw I v n . O CH ' Q .. are .._ .... Va... I —. as I .u. .: p\~ nu v. .3 .«w J. at ..-. .: q.. ..u .... .. .... .~ I )5 I 7. ;.. .. a J; .: .~.. .~ .F. s . .u. _. . h. found them away from home, for in order to finance their schooling for the next year, most of the Bietz children became colporteurs during the summer, selling denominational books and periodicals from door to door in a territory assigned to them by the conference colporteur leader. This meant that the burden of the farm work consistently fell back upon the shoulders of the parents and the elementary school-age children who were yet at home.1 Daniel Bietz's interests were not limited to his family, his church, and his farm; for throughout much of his life he was involved in civic affairs. He frequently served on school boards for the public school system, and seldom was he without an office in the county or township. For many years he was the road supervisor for the county in which he resided, and he served lengthy periods as the assessor of the township. His children remember him as a self-educated man who was always active in civic affairs.2 Arthur remembers his father as a happy man.3 Perhaps most of all he loved to sing. He had an outstandly beautiful bass voice. In church he could be heard singing above the rest of the congregation, and he often sang while at work. The song-fests at family worship and on Sabbath afternoon were keenly anticipated by the entire family. In later years the Bietz brothers were well known for their quartet singing. Albert and Emil were tenors; Reinhold was a baritone; but it was Arthur who 1 Mrs. Jake J. (Ottilia) Walcker, interview in her home, La Sierra, California, May 4, 1969; subsequently referred to as Interview #28. 2 Interview #7. 3 Interview #4. L "H. IR"! _= y'Vfl' . . ‘a‘a-l-p-I'.4 .. ..‘t y H C c u. Itht—QI. C m . I ‘~ -.> h... or... , a - .."' 4r... _. .- .. sol». .. \. . '- ...E‘. .. . . .- 4. ' c .0 n ’ -n g. ‘ c. . ‘ ‘I I. . - __ 4L" f - .' c.. ' .. \. ‘l-. v-, . ‘ -..... p . s. ’ - -. .“0 I ‘ “1:. " .-_ . . L. ‘>‘: \ . u- . t . ‘vu U In . . ~‘~Qv.t’. I s I inherited his father's rich, bass voice. Daniel Bietz had a deep interest in his children. He wanted to pro- vide them a good, happy home2 and instill in them a zest for hard work; he wanted them to be upstanding Christian men and women of good character; he was determined that they should have an Opportunity to receive a good education; and then he felt that they should take up whatever occupation best suited them. Mother Bietz shared all of these convictions with her husband--save one. She had an overriding interest - even a passion - that every one of her boys become a minister, if possible, and that all her children in some way be a part of the organized work of the Seventh- day Adventist church.3 In this she showed no interest in attempting to be objective. To her, the most important person in the world was a .. 4 . . . . . . . minister of the church. Visiting ministers never failed to receive an Interview #19. 2 As tangible evidence of this goal, Daniel Bietz, a good sign painter, [flaced the words "The Happy Home Farm" in large white letters across the front of their red barn. 3The nine Bietz children - Eldina (Mrs. John Koehler), Albert D., Emdl E., Reinhold R., Frieda (Mrs. Ben Krueger), Ottilia (Mrs. Jake J. lwflcker), Arthur L., Nathan, and Viola (Mrs. William Bieber) - in a ihnge measure fulfilled their mother's aSpirations for them as denomin- énional workers. Eldina taught church school in North Dakota for a time. thilia is on the staff of the La Sierra campus of Loma Linda University. ‘Vhfla is married to a minister who is at present the president of the Idaho Conference. Arthur is pastor of the Glendale Adventist Church. Emil isaindnister who has been principal of four academies, president of Cana- CHan Union College, business administrator of Portland Sanitarium, and is atguesent a missionary in Uruguay; and Reinhold has been a local and a Infion conference president and is at present one of the vice-presidents of ‘3m General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. Among the nineteen grandchildren, five grandsons are either doctors, ministers or teachers, atldnine granddaughters are married to doctors, ministers or teachers. 4 Interview #7. v tr p i . o . . . a. a. Q. a .. ... C .— 9 q .. z. .1. ”I .. v. .5 .. .. .. .r .. J of. .t . .u «‘u .t .t . . ... .. .... .. I . o . o . . 4 . .C . an ok .I .\J .. .Nu 3 p .2 .. .. 4. .. 2. u .. .Q .. .k .. .3 .. s. .t .. N .L . . . . c an v. A A .~. . . xv? p » .2 . . .2 L. . .L .3 .rd . . . . . . o s e .. .: C. 2. .. Ls . q a $5 .. .9: ,. .. . .. n. . .. o. .c -. .. .. y . . . . t v. on. . c e \. ..~ . a .y» it n a - n 3.. V" . . .. . . . .2 .2 . . .t .2 .. Z. ..I. .2 p. ._. .. u. .. m. .5. . p. .. :a . .: . . t .. .. .. . . a. .. .. . . . u. .. . . A. .a e . t .. an -.. .v . . . .2 .. .Z . ._ .. .. . . .. . . a . . . . f ‘Q A v‘ 1“, g . v u .u d l invitation to eat at her table and sleep in her home. Ottilia, the sister nearest in age to Arthur, recalls: "We lived just a mile from the church and all the ministers came to our house. The folks had us trained so we regarded the preachers as if they were angels. Absolutely, they could do no wrong. Somehow, we just reverenced them; and also the folks always spoke highly of them. This was a big thing to be a preacher. I know they never spoke of its being great to be a doctor or any- thing else but to be a preacher." 2 Mother Bietz was an industrious woman who always Spread a good table; and she delighted in inviting the visiting preachers to Sabbath dinner and then having the neighboring church members drOp in during the afternoon for a spirited discussion on religion. Needless to say, there was not room for all the children as well as the parents, so the children were shooed off - and this made these occasions seem of even greater impor- 3 tance to them. A sensitive, deeply emotional person, Christina Bietz was easily touched, and wept with her children in their sorrows. In church, the tears frequently streamed down her face as the sufferings of her Lord or the needs of others were depicted. It was the writer's privilege to preach for a number of years to a congregation of which Albert Bietz was a prominent lay member. Whenever a touch of pathos entered into the ser- mon, one could glance in Albert's direction and almost inevitably notice a visible reSponse on his countenance. He has related in private con- versation that he and his mother were very much alike in this reSpect; 1 Interview #19. 2 Interview #28. 3 Letter #1. . e o. o 5 o » . e o. u c . . v. . a C. .4 .: s . ._ . ... .3 .. ... .— 1. a . ..J n43 .u . . t. .... 2.. o. .9. .AU r n\ O . ... D§ .5 .w» .4 C. D. n s ._ . -\. ... . .. . 7: . . .. 5. A. Q ‘ i .0 Q Q. be : . . . ..h V. e . . o u. . . H. . ... .. . " “I“ o... w‘ -‘- v 0.. L ... . .. w. _‘ .‘ we ..e w. .s ... ... .u .t .2 .: ... u. . . . . . .... .... .. z‘ n in. . .. ,o. ,v. .& Q. 10 that while it was somewhat of a source of embarrassment to him at times, yet he was glad that he was sensitive to the eXpressed needs of other pe0p1e. Mother Bietz apparently gave to all of her children, in varying degrees, this capacity for a sympathetic reSponse to the needs of others. Although at birth Arthur was so thin and weak that the family feared for his life, it soon became apparent that he was deve10ping as a healthy, normally robust child. His pre-school years were marked with only the usual childhood diseases1 and with a happy relationship with his family and the animals in and around the Bietz household. By the time Arthur was ready to enter the first grade, one of the great decisions ofliis life had already been settled - he was going to be a preacher.2 While his brother Reinhold, six years older than he, at the age of twelve signed a Missionary Volunteer youth commitment card in his church indi- cating his desire to be a minister, he was not particularly vocal about this decision. However, Arthur from the early age of six never missed an opportunity to proclaim, if the subject of his future came up, that ‘hg was going to be a preacher! 3 His brothers and sisters relate that from the time Arthur was a "little shaver,” they would find him on numerous occasions behind the house or the barn or out in the field, preaching energetically, shaking his fists. "He was always preaching; this was right in his blood. And I sometimes wondered l Interview‘#28. 2 Arthur L. Bietz, interview in his office, Glendale, California, February 20, 1968; subsequently referred to as Interview #1. 3 Interview #7. _| I II... I . . ‘ Q n . . t. w. . .. ... —_ .t ‘m o. .2 a as -. _. I q . o. . ... ..q as . ...— _. 2‘ v. .h.. a... ~. .3 ... x : ... .. a. ,4 . . . ... .. .. t o. .n .. ... ... .... .. . ... .... .t . .t .w. ..b g I . r: . . . ... h. h. .. V‘ .BU . 4— .r‘ .b . . .- ... v. a! .w. ... C. .C .. a. — .C .... u. —. .2 .t . v. . . .. .C r a. ...» _ ,.. 3 . . 2 C ... : .. .t t ... . E ... Z . I - ... x... .l o L .3 o. o .o c C. o u .u. . . y t .‘ § ... — Q a . O u v c -. .V» — ~ H .3 .v» . u . .u» w t -‘ A... n . . u a . . .5 .. q . I: cs N. v s ..u o O b. . .... H. v o .I a” ... C. .s. .~ —“ .: 9 .: ,.. ._ ... .a o ‘ ..m “ é“ .. .. .. . . .. . .... .... : ... ... . .‘ . ... ... ... .. ... .. .. ... .. .. .. .. u. . .w .. ... _ .x.‘ .pw . u o . A. . ~... ¢ ... . . L... -.\ ...- ‘_ ...... u. u._ b. ~_ ~ ‘ ‘ \ s ‘ . . v. . ,. . v-a .. S“ . . a ... ... .. . 3.. In}. . . . _. a t . . s . . § . . . .uw ._ . . ... ..... u. u. _ I ...». r. .. u. .0 . ... a. .u . .... ., Pu ... . \‘ k. .r ... . c . . . . . ‘ rim-n}. I)”; . 11 where he got it from . . . But it seemed to be there from the very beginning." The animal population on the Bietz farm was large, and death among them was not infrequent. During Arthur's boyhood, dead animals were not buried in the ordinary fashion. Invariably there was a funeral service, with Arthur officiating by either preaching the sermon or translating his brother Reinhold's sermon into German, as was done in their church.2 The sermon was seldom a lengthy one, for usually these "funerals" took place during the working hours of the day, and pauses in the Bietz family's working day were always brief. When questioned about the nature of these sermonettes, his sister Ottilia stated that Arthur Spoke spontaneously of the animals as though they were members of the larger farm family, and that his remarks were always interesting and meaningful, and were uttered with deep feeling. Arthur very early deve10ped an interest in reading and a love for words. When he was ten years of age, he began carrying a little pocket dictionary with him wherever he went. He set as his aim to learn four or five new words each day. Not only did he learn the definitions for the words, but he practiced putting them into use.4 He loved to read, and he read "anything he could get his hands on"5 and at every Spare 1 Ibid. 2 Ibid. Interview #28 . 4 Ibid 0 5 Mrs. Arthur L. Bietz, interview in her home, Glendale, California, May 5, 1969; subsequently referred to as Interview #6. I ‘. -... "‘ Ly“. " a. " ... ,_. . o ,. .... .q.‘ ‘ ‘ .‘.'-. O . ‘ ~ 0'- -’ .3 ‘65 '--.q 4.“ v -- - . . ..g . . ~ g A .-. . . .-. h“ 8. A2 y... .- uu~ o -.. --‘; -..4-5‘ V... ....- ..v...\ . L... 9 O---‘ . wsy .' i‘.‘.~~ ~ ' “" ‘nc :- _ ‘ ...; 1~_ ... ‘-.. "-‘- o- -. ._ v... ." . .-. -H_‘. ~m I ‘ -- I. 15..-.-. - .. -.s.:.c.“v ‘ u. .. ‘ h. ‘ ..‘.R- .‘h ._‘ _ ~ ....-.‘--M . . . ;— -:. .-., ._~ - ‘ ...-5 5.0.: K. -5; . '§-. 3|. —. u ‘M . .-‘v. \“ ‘ 5" . 5‘ ~ .—_. . .. ‘ . ~ o -~n~ .__. ‘ 1 - . Z . I -_ - “ ‘-. ‘~—: ~- . . -— . .:"' s_- ' --.: -- § - _ V’: -I ‘— ‘-§ -‘ ‘-,_:—- “. ‘.‘ ... "t n. ' \-_ ‘ §_A— _ .. \ =‘~‘ ~. 1 :-‘ ‘.. ‘ . _'_‘ q. ‘;-.‘ o _ - kt- < ~§ ‘ . O ' u ‘ Q . '_ ‘ _~ K.‘ h _- fi - u. .; -; ‘ \‘. Q; '~ v:‘ . .Ls‘ ~ —h . - ‘~ \ ‘. . ~;.u ~ i. ‘ C o -‘ ‘: ‘- 12 nmment that he could find. Because he was so much younger than the cmher boys, the family used Arthur as a chore boy. They were forever telling him to get this and get that, and since he was too young to "fight back" he did the next best thing and hid where he couldn't be found. This hiding place usually was a spot where he could read uninter- l ruptedly. During these years Arthur became somewhat of a loner. His interest in reading and his using words that other members of the family sometimes could not understand began to set him apart from his brothers and sisters. The age difference between Arthur and his older brothers may also have been a contributing factor to this isolation. His oldest brother, Albert, related that the older boys in the family took a rather patronizing attitude toward this budding intellectual: "Arthur was cute and smart. Some of his charac- teristics we didn't like, because he always seemed to think a little deeper than most of the (other) children in the family. He was never satisfied, but was always digging for something more, and that is what made him a good reader.” 2 This unique position in the family may have given Arthur a little complex that made him a bit of a show-off. Mother Bietz began to develop a real concern over her young son, fearing that he was becoming a "smart aleck." She also feared that his wide reading was distorting his charac- ter and might tend to undermine his confidence in the teachings of his church. Arthur openly expressed his conclusions that came as a result of his "digging a little deeper," and this sometimes brought disagreement 1 Letter #1. 2 Letter #1. I I a . . ~ . .. . .. _ C 3 . O. Id 0. u ' . ... t .r. . c S L o s. v. ..a ..s W. 5... .3 o. a“ a». ... h. .u tr 3 v. nA. ..C .e e .s 5 p3 . .c .H. e v.6 .. v. u .4” .... t . . . . . —‘ Hr. v. €g . u. .N. .J. v . a .Rs a. .\ a.“ '5 v .. g a" ... nu .... Jr" ”R. .u. .V ..- .; ” ... v. .... . . . .. .w .. .. . .: . ... ..h . .. .... . .. r H... u... . .n 2 _- _. . . . .t V‘. ~ A H u .. c n . ._, h w; a; .An My, p~ Clll.|l||.lll1' 1., h . \. .. I _ we . 3 ..g LL ... .7. _. ... ... ... ... ..— 13 from other members of the family; but he was always ready and very able to prove his point.1 Even before entering his teens, Arthur demonstrated an unwillingness to bow to social pressures. There was a neighbor who consistently came to church each Sabbath (Saturday) with the back of his buggy loaded down with hay for his horse, although none of the other neighbors brought hay unless they were coming for an all-day meeting. The older boys of the community often discussed this unusual practice among themselves and finally formulated a question that they would like to put to this neighbor, but didn't quite dare. Then someone thought of Arthur; and, as expected, he was quick to volunteer his services. The neighbor was big and strong and had a quick temper; but Arthur boldly walked up to him and asked if his hay was for sale. (Buying and selling on the Sabbath was unheard of among these strict Sabbath-keeping German farmers.) Just as the boys expected, the man almost exploded with indignation; he ran toward Arthur, intent upon giving him a "good thrashing.” But Arthur's fleet-footedness was in his favor, and soon he was at a safe distance from his indignant pursuer, to the delight of his fellow con- 2 spirators and the consternation of his father, who severely reprimanded him. Similar instances prompted his mother one time to exclaim, "But, Arthur, what will the people think?" Arthur's reSponse was a wide grin. "I don't know what they'll think, but wouldn't it be interesting to find 3 out?" Mother never quite knew what to do with Arthur! 1 Ibid. 2 Letter #1. 3 Lecture, "Good Motivation," Corona, California, February 12, 1968; subsequently referred to as Lecture #12. In .. .. .. . a . :5 o. c p“ .K. . _ g I ~‘ I I u — . u ‘ s T .... .. P. t I ... Z . I t i a. .. L . . .. ,~ .n‘ _. u .\ . Q . . .\ s u xx _ .\ LN. up. mu .6 ..s. .. .c . «a . . .~ a as . .: ) ‘s . s as .C .C . .uu a a - .‘ - A\ V ,v« .s \. . d. .. 3 ‘5 .r _. : v . .a . a A . x ‘3 .I _. ~ ‘. . . .. ... u P. g I . . S ... _ . a. _ A. C ... v. ... .. .a. .. ._ ‘ .t .2 : . C ... Z .: ... ... .t .. ... 2. ... ; c .: a 95. .4 K .r .. .7 .t ... .. —_. v. .: {s ..l \\ a. .2 .. a.“ ... .. “a :. .: ... .. .. :. .. .. _ .t _ .... .a . ... .‘ . ~H H.. ... . .a .x. .a .. ... 4. ... ‘s _‘ ‘~ .‘t .. ... .. ... .._.. ..\.. .... . .. .v ... n‘ . . .. ~ - ..x i “ .. ... H." .. _. . ., L 2 .. ,. l ... .. .T _ .2 .. . ~ n‘. .. ... . a . I . . t a _. .. . ., . . ~ . .. a .. . . .a A. q. .t . . ,a a . I. \ ~_ . .~ .._\ ... . m. . ... .. . Va I. . —- - 14 Mother Bietz's growing concern for this son of hers who seemed to be a little different from the rest of her children was not alleviated by incidents like this, nor the one on a summer day when Arthur was twelve or thirteen years old. She looked out the window at noon, just in time to see him galloping a four-horse team at t0p Speed into the barnyard, gleefully mounted atop the two middle horses, one foot planted firmly on the back of each. Mother Bietz almost fainted from fright. When Arthur came in, she scolded him soundly, concluding with the exclamation, "What is ever going to become of you?” Grinning, Arthur replied, I'm 1 going to become a preacher!" Arthur may have been a little different from the rest, but his being different was a matter of being consistent with his vision of being himself in the role of a budding preacher. There is no indication that he has ever surrendered his individuality in trying to copy some well-known preacher's life style or Speaking mannerisms. Arthur's brothers and sisters, when discussing his tendency to be mischievous as a child, always hasten to add that Arthur was not a prob- lem; that basically he was both considerate and kind. In fact, his relationship with his sister Ottilia, two years older than he and un- doubtedly his closest childhood companion, was both intimate and tender. Ottilia reminisced that they did almost everything together; they played house together, they did chores together, they went to school together, they rejoiced together, they wept together. When Ottilia, who had periods of rather serious illness in her childhood and youth, became ill at school, Arthur was quick to come to her side and do everything he could to help. There were times, she said, when he would simply press his face against hers and his tears of sympathy would roll down her cheek. She said, "He 1 Letter #1. .. ~ \ o. o a . ... r. ... .. . . _. ... ... w L L .. .3 ..4 ., ... .6 —. . . ... a ..u.. .3 u. .t .3 c T . . I r .r .. .u .t 2. I Y. _. ... ... _. “a v. .F ... C :. .... C. e ...» ... ..u o. o. o ... \L_ v. u~ . .3 a v. .r q . . . . . 5 l a. ... S C . . .. .2 .2 t "I .t . . ... .. .... ... .3 a .C . . .3 .. .. . f. C .... .: .... E a L a. 3 ... 2 .. .. .... L ... L S .2 .... ... t x: a. r .. . u. .. ... ... ._ .. 5 I .. ... a Z .t .L .: ... .. f ”a v. ... .H ... .u ... . ... .. .. .a ..s v~ ... .. ... ... ... .2 ... .. .u ... . . . . u .d ... 7: . . .. . .t .... ‘ a . . ... . . t . .. .u . .. J. .. . .. .. .. .... n‘ . a . . .... .. ..r h. p. .A ... ... .- ... .. ... ... A ....~ ... n .J‘. . ... .ax . y. . w.— y ._ ... ... ... w... to “u ... ...... .M ..§ ‘ . ... 0 ..~ .a Q a . s ,. ,. ._ .. n . . 4. a . o a . . .u . .. r . _ .. . t .. .. : .... t . ., . .a _. .. .. .1. .. ... .. ... ...a e . Z . ... _ .. 15 was so very tender, so very good to me; I'll never forget that."1 Arthur was baptized into the Seventh-day Adventist church at the age of thirteen years. A revival meeting which lasted many weeks with high emotional emphasis had gotten no reSponse from Arthur, who from childhood had resisted an emotional approach to religion. After refus- ing to reSpond to all the emotional altar calls, he quietly made his own decision on the morning of the baptism. Although deeply interested in their Spiritual welfare, Daniel and Christina Bietz never forced anything upon their children, including the decision to join the Seventh-day Ad- ventist church through baptism.2 Arthur attended Cheyenne River Academy during his ninth, tenth, and eleventh grades. He was a good student and entered enthusiastically into the school activities. The financial crash of 1929 occurred as Arthur was ready to begin his senior year, and the depleted state of his family's financial resources made it impossible for him to return to the academy. In Spite of his parents' doubts, Arthur was determined to complete his education. He made a plea to his brother Albert, now married and re- siding in Lincoln, Nebraska, to allow him to come and live with him and to provide employment in the Kay Dee Manufacturing Company, of which Albert was the manager, in order that he might attend the College View public high school. To this, Albert agreed. Early that fall his parents took Arthur to the near-by town of Car- rington, where they bought him the few clothes they could afford, and then 1 Interview #28. 2 Interview #19. I I ll.- . 5 .I _ n .5 9” us «.d O. bu a. n. ...; .. .» v“ ... r . ... . J‘ .... .2 o . ... .... v. L.” S .... .. . _ . t .V e ... ... o. p. L a. s\ ... .a —n .. A... ..a o. ... 2.; i. .. .s _. .‘ ..t. .. o» C. ...- .i n... .C .h .. . s a; F. .— . um ” .u.. C. .5. ... on é. a . . .... sa 6 a .2 ....“ I .. - . .. Z. .... .. ... .c .... ..u L“ .. ... .“ .m u. v. V“ ... ..... .... p. o . .. ... . .m A“. .: an» ... . 0. . a c . .n ..U .I . . .. .. .. .. r I : . y o. u . .. o .. . g o ._ ... .. . . u. .. .. .. . . ... .: . . ..| . . . ... .. . . a. .u .. s ,. .. ,Z .. 7.. .. . ... .C ... . o . . _ ... .. . .5 \ . ‘ .’ _. . .... . _ * . - .. . .. ... . .. 1 .... .. .. .. . . . h . \..\ .. v.53... . . n |.. I‘. ...-F 16 gave him the money they had left, which amounted to fifty-one cents.l Taking him a mile and a half outside of town, on the road to Jamestown, they left him to hitch-hike the six hundred miles to Lincoln, equipped only with his suitcase, fifty-one cents, and a determination to complete his education.2 Arthur's mother later reported that leaving him on that gravel road that afternoon was one of her most agonizing moments.3 Arthur's first ride was with a truck driver who was going east to Chicago; and by the time they arrived in Fargo, where he had planned to look for a ride south, Arthur had made such a fine impression upon the truck driver that he offered to take him to Chicago to see the World's Fair, all expenses paid. Arthur, delighted with the Opportunity, gladly accepted. Following this high adventure, he began hitch-hiking to Lincoln. Rides were hard to get, as most of the truck drivers were not permitted to pick up hitch-hikers. After some time, he was offered a ride by a stock trucker.4 He arrived in Lincoln with ten cents in his pocket, which he used for carfare on the interurban from Lincoln to College View, five miles dis- tant. When he enrolled as a freshman in Union College a year later, he had no money for tuition, but he was willing to work hard to gain the education 1Letter #1. 2Memories seem to vary regarding this sum, which Bietz's oldest bro- ther Albert remembered as being 51¢. In the lecture "Let's Test Your Mental Health" (Corona, February 5, 1968), Dr. Bietz recalled having $10 to start the trip; in the lecture "The Future is Up To You" (Downey, March 17, 1960), he referred to the amount as being $6. 3Arthur L. Bietz, interview in his office, Glendale, California, December 29, 1969; subsequently referred to as Interview #5. 4 Letter #1. 5Lecture, "Let's Test Your Mental Health,” Corona, California, Feb- ruary 5, 1968; subsequently referred to as Lecture #29. .9 A .\ d .... ‘. Q . ..g...-, G..- .3 .2 .3 ‘ ..— —. .3 .3 . .2 17 he needed if he was to be a preacher. Though only seventeen, he was soon appointed manager of the college mill, which manufactured lawn furniture. Here Arthur was to experience his first managerial problems in directing thirty-five men. Directing student labor, Arthur often worked through long nights, and also spent some time in sales promotion in surrounding urban centers. During the following college years, he worked in the factory where his brother Albert, was manager. In addition to his heavy program of work and study, Arthur enthusi- astically entered into the numerous extra-curricular and social activities of college life, so much so that one day the president of the college, M. L. Andreasen, called him in and asked, ”Who is running this college, you or I?" The two were always close friends, a friendship which continued through the years after college until Dr. Andreasen's death.1 Arthur was a member of the male quartet which on several occasions made trips through adjoining states, presenting programs in Adventist academies and churches as a part of the public relations program of Union College. While home for Spring vacation during his freshman year in college, he and three other young men journeyed a hundred miles from his parents' home to provide music one evening for a series of evangelistic meetings held in Washburn, North Dakota. Violet Klein, a beautiful, in- telligent young lady, played the accompaniment for the quartet. Though Arthur held no conversation with her, he observed her most carefully and was deeply impressed. As he was leaving Washburn at the close of the evening, he remarked to one of his companions, "That's the girl I'm going 1 Lecture #29. II I I II V. ... v. ...u . .. o. . . ... .. ... ... .1 . I . a“ ~¢ —._ .K. r. ‘. on ..L o. ... .C ... ..u 5». .t .s 1 ... C v. .a . . e .: ... . r .9... AL .3 a. ... E . C . . Z .t a s ... T. .L .n. .. “A n... .... .. .. C .a ... e n. .1 .t w. .a ... “.0 .. .4 Q. I. .x .O a a" Z I .... .2 Y. .. a ... I .. S n. w: .I- ... .v- .s v. .. :- .<~ ... é» .s ..s .: . - . .. .4. .. ... ... ... o. .E .2 ... ... ... ... .... .. u. .t ... .0 . . -I . . . . . ~ .1 . . -. .: .. . H . . . . )0. . ... _. . .. ca .s. .. . . nw .. . ... .~ ~n »- p. . . . . . . . . , . . 2 : .. .. .0 .. .. . . . .... - ... ... .. .. ... . .. .... . . .. ... . . . . .. .n r . L ... ...L ... . ,_ .. . _. ...a. 18 l to marry!" He introduced himself to Violet through the correspondence of his sister Ottilia, then began to correspond with her directly. Violet was much impressed by his letters, perhaps even more so because she found it necessary to use a dictionary somewhat frequently. On rare occasions, Arthur found it possible to visit Washburn, and usually it was the 1923 Ford coupe that he had purchased in Lincoln, Nebraska, for $25.00 which he drove to see his girl friend. But rather than diSplay this rather dilapidated Ford, he would park it at the outskirts of town and walk to Violet's home.2 While Violet was becoming very fond of this persistent young man, she had definite reservations about his chosen life work, for she had always said she would never marry a farmer or a preacher. But in Sep- tember, 1934, after four and a half years of courtship, much of it by correSpondence, Arthur traveled to Chamberlin, South Dakota to convince her that it would be much more interesting to become his wife than to continue her nurses' training. In answer to her objection that she had never wanted to be a minister's wife, he said, "I don't want you to be a minister's wife; I want you to be MY wife."3 Love had won the day! Arriving in Lincoln with his bride-to-be and little, if any, money, Arthur announced his impending marriage to his brother Albert, who had not as yet met the young lady. Borrowing $2.00 from his brother, Arthur obtained the marriage license; and the next day, September 18, 1934, attended by Albert and his wife, the young couple were married in the 1 Interview #6; also Lecture #12. 2 Interview #6. 3 Ibid . . . .. .. . r .s. . . . . C. . ... . . . _ .— . P. g t. ..n .<— .. .. . .9. W. - 5.. .q q. p s r on .- .. I c a o . . is . . . .4! 05 — a... in {A a. .t u . . s .9. .. . ..Q 5. .‘ .\§ 5‘ . s ... PK ... t «V» b. .... I .. i .. .. e . a e Y .. . . I ... E .2 . . c ' l s u p. 1 £4 . . . . .s : . a. .I . .1 2. .. . .. .... ..T .n n n . .I A o a .3 .4. .r. .1. ... vs .. ... . .C .. ... .\ .a . v. .m» u. .u ... an J: G I .C a.» :1. a. .u h\ ... ..- y ...u . . . «y .s a .t ‘ J ‘c . .. .. s . n a ‘d.\ ._.. . . .. 1. .. q .. .. .2 . o. ..g .. w .. .. . .... ... . ... . . .. . n .. . . . .t 2.2 .... .. .. .x .. .3 . . . . . c . . .. .. .. .I ... .i .. .. .. is .. .. .. .. ... .. s. .s J . . .. u . . . ... ... ... .. ... . . . . . ... .. . .‘ .. v x . a. ..x v. . M nu. u o .. . o . .o ‘ .0 u‘ . .. a . ... u o a s . o . .. .. a . . .... . .. a .... . ... ‘ x ...u .... 19 l pastor's home. Arthur's senior year in college, which began with an event of great personal happiness, came to a close with a great personal sorrow, for in May, 1935, his father died. Daniel Bietz had been struggling for several years against almost impossible odds. The drought and the dust storms had almost ruined his farm; the stock was under-nourished; the crOps were poor; and the prices were the worst in memory. The last day that Daniel worked, while struggling to help an emaciated horse to his feet, he was injured internally and died a few weeks later. Daniel Bietz's untimely death was a great blow to the entire family. They felt, not without reason, that the heavy work and financial hard- ships entailed in making an education possible for all his children, con- tributed to his early demise. They regarded his death as a literal sacrifice for his sons and daughters.2 That he achieved the goal to which he dedicated himself was borne out in the words of a neighbor following Daniel's death and the subsequent loss of their farm: "Daniel Bietz lost everything he had, but he saved his children."3 Arthur, who had been particularly close to his father, felt this loss very keenly. Even yet, he refers to him in his lectures frequently and affectionately. Because of the bereavement, he had missed his final examinations and was unable to graduate. Even so, he was invited by the Minnesota Conference of Seventh-day Adventists to join with Pastor J. L. Tucker in Rochester, Minnesota, in conducting an evangelistic series of 1 Letter #1. 2 Interview #7. 3 Interview #19 . -_ . p. . .u . .. .o— c . . p . n. _ .... . ... . u. u . . . .u ‘. C . a s a o. .. . 2 u . 1 as . . . . .G .. 2‘ ... . t .C ... . .. . p. ... .. ... .. ... .. . .. .. . . L . n . . § . k. .\ ~ I ... v. «r .. ... .. . ., C 2. .. r . . . .. . .. .. .r. 2 .. ... .G ... ... .\ .C {a _. .s ..- s . n. ”v .... Z ... . . t e .. ... .... p. C .... .. ... .. C . . .. . . .. J 3: ... , C _ . E I .: .. .... .. C S .u. ... .3 .C . .. ... . . . . . . .. a z . . .2 . . 33 Be .... . a _. .C ... . . ...w .. .. -_ $.. ..., ...I ... .2 .3 ..n u. ... . 2. .t .. .- ... r . . .. . .t . . . 22 ... .2 .. .0 ... ... . .H .. .. .. .. ... ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... \. . . . Z .. s. . ... .. .. 2. .~ _~ .. .a .. ,2 o .. .: . . . . . . _ lam ..fl ... u” .H . .... .... w... .... w _. a ...W ..u ..p“ a. ....g ..~ . . .~.. . s \ “u .“ ... .h » . ... . u . . i. . ~ .... o . ... : ‘ . . ... ..a ’. t . - \w . x .A r. a . - PuLM .I 20 meetings just two blocks from the famous Mayo Brothers Clinic. At the outset of this evangelistic endeavor, there were only two Seventh-day Adventists in Rochester, and no church building. Arthur and his wife were only twenty-one years of age, they had no automobile, and the salary paid him by the conference was $12.00 per week. When Pastor Tucker moved on, only four weeks after the meetings began, the youthful Bietz picked up all the preaching responsibilities. Violet played the piano, and the two of them did most of the singing for the services. Arthur and Violet also carried a daily radio program in which the preaching and singing were a family enterprise. For Six months he walked to most of his appointments until he was able to purchase a good used car. The Bietzes stayed in Rochester for eighteen months, at the close of which time the church was housed in an acceptable building and a thriving congregation was organized with 175 members.1 After leaving Rochester, he was called to do itinerating evangelistic work in other communities in Minnesota. He went to Austin and then Al- bert Lea, where he stayed two years raising up a church and supervising the building of a church structure. He conducted two simultaneous tabernacle evangelistic campaigns in the two cities. He did comparable work in the next few months in Mankato. During this time he was also responsible for a district of seven churches, while at the same time conducting evangelistic meetings, often seven nights a week. Then he was called to the North Side church in Minneapolis, which at that time had a membership of fifteen. Two and a half years later, the Bietzes left this church with a membership of 400, reSponding to a call to be 1 Interview #1. . I . .. . . . a p . . .. . u . A o . ... .... C. vs _ Q ~ 9 V~ a. .\ “a .u .2 .. .. i. .. . . .. f 2.. _. a? .t .2 a . _. i ~ 1 u . r. c. . .... .2 .K x .3. .H‘ . .\ _ v. ... H” e .t p . 9w .u. a . u . ..u. _\— ~ . a .h‘ o . ... L\ . a . a” .C a” .. .u . . .. .2 .. : . _ ... a ..a . . V a .x. .. o. _ .. w . $\ L. . .. . q» .9 . . . b h u“. §n . . ... fix '\ \ ... V .. C p. t . .. . . . .C 2 . . ... . r u . .5 a” .9. .2 a... .a x .2 C a v a .. ~ .2 . \a . ... a-qv .54 . . o . v. n. xi. \L .w‘ I . \ .s a . ‘ s L. 4 L‘ a .. ... ._ ... ... a” v. ... o .. .. .. a a. q: 2. ... a u . a .s _ . .0 is . . .. .= . a . s . . a .a. a: a a a _ .. a .. . .. . a . ... .. ... o . a . . . a. .. ... ... a. “ . .. ... ..3 .. . ... ...... . . .... ... . . ..... ...... ....h. _ . .. a . c a . a a 4m . . . r . . a ..u . . .. .. .... . . ... . .a a . s . u \ t .. .. - . .. .. .. ... .. . ,. .. .. .. . ,. ... w a. .. . C . . .... . 21 l a pastor-evangelist in Berkeley, California. Arthur Bietz was ordained to the gOSpel ministry a few months be- fore leaving Minnesota. During the usual four-year interval before the Seventh-day Adventist denomination ordains its ministers, he had proved himself to be one of the most successful evangelists among all of the Adventist ministers in North America at that time. There were many factors that contributed to his success in Minnesota; but not the least of these were the intense drive and long hours that he put into his work. His wife recounts that "when we left Minnesota to come to California, he was on the verge of a breakdown. He had had pneumonia, and it was all 2 from working too hard. He nearly died." Arthur Bietz's ministry in Berkeley, California, extended from 1939 to 1943 - four years which were, in a sense, transition years in his experience. He continued a vigorous evangelistic program, and began broadcasting his preaching services over a local radio station. During his stay in Berkeley, the membership of his church was greatly increased. By this time, Bietz had met many situations in his work for which he did not feel adequately prepared. He read widely in search of answers to Specific questions and for solutions to the real problems with which he was confronted. He believed more and more that religion should com- pletely satisfy the basic needs of man. This led him to audit a number 4 of classes at the Pacific School of Religion in Berkeley. 1 Interview #5. 2 Interview #6. 3 Ibid. 4 Interview #1. ...-5“. ; -...- -U..~-o — s K -. -.s .... olivilu$zh¢ldfl ...k .\‘ .6 .r» u-. .. § § Q ‘ .V'u ‘\ Lt : s .. . . . 2‘ .T O. 2‘ .a. pa 22 In 1942, the president of the College of Medical Evangelists at Loma Linda, which later grew into Loma Linda University, extended an invitation to Bietz to join the faculty as head of the Department of Religion. At that time the invitation was unwelcome, and it was re- fused. A year later, in 1943, the invitation was repeated, and this time the Bietzes decided to accept.1 During the preceding year, Arthur Bietz's "clinical concept"2 of the ministry had strengthened. He was anxious to take advantage of this opportunity to do graduate work in the field of religion and psychology, which he believed would greatly increase his proficiency in his chosen work. He also found this new teaching and preaching ministry in the midst of professional young medical students to be highly stimulating. In his new professor-minister role, Arthur Bietz was to be the pastor of the White Memorial Church in the heart of Los Angeles and chairman of the newly-named Department of Applied Christianity on the Los Angeles campus of Loma Linda University. He immediately enrolled in the University of Southern California and completed the requirements for a B.A. with a major in psychology by the Spring of 1944. In the Spring of 1945, he received his Master's degree in psychology and religion from the same university with a thesis 1 Interview #1. 2 During the same interview he told the writer, "I deve10ped rather early in my ministry a sort of a clinical concept - the idea that unless religion could be applied to the actual life situations we were accom- plishing very little. I found very soon that abstract theory unrelated to real life problems and needs was relatively worthless." He stated that his reaching out for help in wide reading and the auditing of univ- ersity classes in Berkeley caused him to realize that some of the things he and the church were doing were actually a major cause of some of the difficulties with which he was dealing in his pastoral counseling. 5‘.- .‘m‘“ ..“ .-—“‘“ .. v a v - .- .g. a a ~o - . '-...-- —~~--.o*‘. -- —-.-a~ ’— A 23 Spanning both of these disciplines entitled, "Biblical Parallels to Modern Mental Hygiene Values." He completed the course work for his doctoral degree in religion and psychology during the ensuing year, receiving the degree of Doctor of PhilOSOphy from the University of Southern California in the Spring of 1946. His dissertation, again fusing both areas of study, was entitled, ”The Relative Roles Played by Clergymen and Physicians as Counselors Regarding Selected Types of the Emotional Problems of Young People: A Study of the Attitudes of 819 University Students." In reminiscing about his college and university work, Dr. Bietz indicated that his college work, taken when he was quite young, seemed rather dull to him and he took it "simply to get into the ministry.” But in retrOSpect he felt very differently about his graduate study. By the time he was twenty-nine, with eight years of experience behind him, he had a clear conception of what he wanted to study.1 Six of his professors made deep and lasting impressions upon him: Dr. Walter Muelder in the field of classical ideals and phiIOSOphy of religion; Dr. David Eitsen in the field of inter-relationships between religion and psychology; Dr. Robert Taylor in the field of religious education; Dr. Floyd Ruch, head of the Department of Psychology; Dr. Franz Alexander, who was a visiting professor in the school of psychology at the time Dr. Bietz was enrolled; and Dr. Louis Thorpe, also a widely- known psychologist in the department. With most of these men Dr. Bietz has established a close and personal friendship that is active to the present time. In fact, Dr. Thorpe has lodged a request that at the time 1 Interview #1. _....~ "E ,.- AM‘ I'll . . p h In“ L s . fl. .. . U .... .... ...: n- 7. ‘L ... o . _. v; «a .3 .1» .1 n— . . - .\\ D b 0’. on. v . .. u n I ‘l— h b I v. 0» b w . . . . xx. . .t n .s; .\~ ~_ .1 .\ ... .. ,.. . . . \ 24 of his death, Arthur Bietz be asked to officiate at his funeral. During the three and a half years that he studied at the University of Southern California, Bietz carried on with his full load of teaching and preaching reSponsibility. For eighteen years, from 1943 to 1961, he was pastor of the White Memorial Church in Los Angeles, chairman of the Department of Applied Christianity at Loma Linda University, a mem- ber of the management committee of five which was directly reSponsible for the operation of the university, and a member of the university board.2 An event of great importance in his personal life took place during this period. His only child, Constance Kay, was born on January 5, 1949, and in preparation for this long-anticipated fulfillment, he and his wife purchased their first home.3 Following the completion of his doctorate, he began receiving numerous invitations to be guest Speaker for various organizations. His wide reading contributed to his growing reputation as a Speaker with tremendous interest-appeal whose content was rooted in deep scholarship. In 1948 Mrs. Gertrude Gorham, owner of an artists' management agency, asked him for the privilege of booking him as a lecturing psychologist, as she was especially anxious to have a "Christian psychologist” 1 Interview #1. 2 Interview #4. 3 Lecture, "Are You in Hiding?", Corona, California, February 26, 1968; subsequently referred to as Lecture #2. Bietz, however, makes it clear that he believes that there is no such thing as a "Christian psychology" any more than there is a Christian biology or a Christian mathematics, for he believes that truth is truth wherever you find it. He agrees that there are Christians who are psycho- logists, but states that there is no "Christian psychology" as such. . p. .p. H a .3 ... a” 0.. ... ... v. .w. .s.. as. .9“ . . C. v. ..u .. .t .: ... .. v. ... a? ..a in .x u... g. ... 9. .‘ —.. .3 ... A. .4- ; _. ... r. ..o a. .— .. . ... .... ... . ... . a .. . a . ... . ,. . .. .; P... - .. 25 available for lectures} At that time, Dr. Bietz was not interested in having a professional agency book his Speaking appointments. However, Mrs. Gorham persisted for months, appealing to him to share his under- standing and his ability to communicate knowledge with the thousands of people in Southern California who might attend his lectures, but who would never be reached by any of the churches. The following year, Dr. Bietz agreed to let Mrs. Gorham's agency book him for a limited number of lectures. As Mrs. Gorham stated in an interview: He started in a small way; and I always say that good Speakers are like good food; you hear about it eventually, and soon they (the audiences) know where to get it. However, our own efforts alone could never have succeeded with the tremen- dous amount of reSponse that Dr. Bietz has had. AS the boys say, he "delivered the goods;" and if he hadn't delivered, his work would not have mushroomed as it has. Mrs. Gorham went on to say: So many wonderful professors are so academic in their approach. I say there are two kinds of professors - the behind-the-desk professors who should always stay where they are; and there are professors who know how to impart their information and are platform speakers. Dr. Bietz had ... both the academic knowledge and the great ability of im- parting it with tremendous interest and entertain- ment appeal to the public. Strangely, most of the public in the women's clubs and schools and colleges and conventions and management clubs, men's groups, service clubs, where he's been going, don't want to to be educated; but if they can get information in the form, perhaps, of a sugar-coated pill, then they'll just eat it up; and then when they get away, they re- alize they learned a lot as well as having been helped Gertrude Purple Gorham, interview in her office, Hollywood, Cali- fornia, April 24, 1969; subsequently referred to as Interview #15. 2 Ibid. - .«v -7”. ... -5... ..c... n a ... 26 a great deal. And this is, I think, one of the amazing parts of Dr. Bietz's ability. He is able to present something very profound, not in an aca- demic way but in a p0pular way, without in any way distorting or sacrificing his message. For most of the twenty years Dr. Bietz has been lecturing, he has quen to from 1500 to 3000 people each week during the nine-month lec- uHe season. Besides this, he Speaks twice each week to congregations nIhis own church, where the Saturday morning worship service with 1200 to 1500 in attendance is broadcast throughout Southern California cnmr Station KRGB in west Covina, a city near Los Angeles. Every morn- ingauz7:45 a previously-recorded four-minute devotional is broadcast over the same radio station. In 1961, two political phenomena within the structure of the Loma Lhfla University combined to cause Dr. Bietz to transfer the base of ins Operations from the Los Angeles campus of the university to the (Hendale Adventist Church at the corner of California and Isabel Streets h161endale, California. The first issue had to do with whether the two Cmmnmes of the university should be combined on the Los Angeles campus 0r-~~2"F‘. -- ,,.'.:u --.“d \v . .. ‘fl1' ' l ’0 “"-n Ar ‘ C ‘ “ i'dfio ‘su- ... . o ‘: ‘0 :uoop "‘ " ”*5---. 'r v ---C ‘-—. ‘ .- ,. ’. : ">o-__ R-, ‘ -.5-c" - _, -.. - . -. ""‘-.- _ -..--.-.'-\,._ . ' I Lt b..__ .-p s . . - ._ o “ '- -. .t ‘t 9-, . .. -.. L' ‘ "u-‘ — , ...-M I u. “u. . _ ~.' F‘V‘> \‘ ‘ I! s\n‘ '4‘: v .\ .5 .,, ._ 7‘. ..~ M. .‘ ‘ .. “ c g n. -.. . - a - ."‘:~..Q ’<-' h- .q5h‘2v—n ‘- '- A '1.’ “up ~~. ‘o‘p v ‘5‘? -.. 5‘- ._ . \3’ \. -g "” vr-ah. I' ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘u,’ ~ \~ -‘ ‘ § - "-: Q>-‘ - .- “‘s' "- ~"_ v . ‘K '~: ‘ - \ ... - ‘5 ... ‘ .3: .-- . ‘v 1 ‘n ‘ ‘. ~“‘. ’ \H - '5 . u .‘ -‘ ‘ ‘ .\ ‘ I - ~ as. “‘.‘L' ...“ - M ~15 .- - g y. . ~‘ .- I. ‘ u ‘. -; ~ ‘ ' - ‘\ 1-: .-1 o o g \, ~:"‘ \ '_ - \ 51 sharing, he must lead the listener to believe that he, too, is capable of making a comparable discovery; and if the Speaker is able to communicate his belief in the listener's ability to do this, a great deal is accom- plished toward Opening the channels of communication between these two. Bietz indicates that unless this concept of the worth of the in- dividual listener is actually held by the Speaker, the nonverbal expres- sions of attitudes, voice intonations, and gestures will sooner or later betray what the Speaker really believes, even though his words attempt to convey a different concept. "We are not understood by what we say; we are understood by what we are and what we do."1 The third step in relating to the individuals in the Speaker's audience is to give them an Opportunity to know him. Since most of them will know him only on the Speaker's platform, Dr. Bietz believes he must Share with his listeners significant portions of his life by referring to them in his lectures and sermons. This is a part of his plan to present a person rather than a talk. It was significant to the writer that in many interviews with those who have Sponsored Bietz's Speaking for a number of years, the Opinion was expressed that the most effective and memorable statements or references that Bietz made were those involving his own life and that of his family. One of those interviewed stated that the only improvement he could suggest for Dr. Bietz's speaking would be for him to make even more frequent references to his own life experiences and those of his family; for he felt that these had the greatest influence upon him and, he believed, upon the audience as well. Sermon #6. 2 Milton Thorne, interview in his Office, Walnut, California, April 30, 1969; subsequently referred to as Interview #28. a on .-,...'h .._C -v’..~‘ re 1. s . ... ..p. a __ . .. . ._ . .: ... h. x .w .... _. .N m. .... _. ... . ... ., .i .3 ... .... .... .4. n. .u .. _. G ... .C. I. ... 2H . : . . . .... .C C .. a p ... .: .c l .t f .1 E ._ ..u .. w. .L C 1 . . _ . .3 . . .3 . c I. .. . o L. . c .t a» 3: «Q .d L . .h \.. L. . . . c». a; p. .w . .2 .. . ... o . a .uu u o. L. 5. . . a .a. .l . . so a .. o .. .: «u ... at. t. v‘ .h a. —. .y .. .. .. ..m an .: - an o. .s «c .... .... ..q as .s .-. .u. n .. ... .. no ... .. .1 .. a. :— .. ...u .H .u .. .: ... Z. ... 2\ ..c . _.. .. u . e: U. .2 \\ ... .. g. ..e . . K ‘. ,1 . . n ~ .._ .. _ ,.. a ..\ .. x . .. w: A.4. s . .. .. ... ...x e . .e \ ... r . 52 The fourth step in opening a two-way channel of communication be- tween himself and the individual listener is to convey to the listener the feeling that not only does he know the speaker, but the Speaker under- stands and is friendly toward him. This process can take place Simultan- eously with the other steps. Dr. Bietz believes that the way he can best accomplish this is actually to be intimately acquainted with many different types of individuals who would be representative of a cross-section of his audiences. He states that he accomplishes this by wide counseling with many different types of pe0p1e. This cross-section of humanity represent- ed in his counseling to whom he indicates that he gives himself completely in a one-to-one relationship, he believes provides for him the necessary experience and background that qualifies him to generalize to the individ- uals in his audiences and relate to them successfully, since he perceives them to be typical of those whose lives he has personally shared in his counseling chambers. In an interview he said, "I refer to my personal work with clients, and then assume that the problems of these individuals in counseling re- late to the larger audience to which I Speak."1 He also indicated that he reads widely in many fields, especially in the areas recording the latest research in the Studies of human nature. After assimilating that which he believes is pertinent to life and education, he tests this in- formation in his daily laboratory of experience. From all of this he shares his pOpularized version of his understanding of human nature, and the successful pathways trodden by himself and others to personal 1 Interview #3. 53 fulfillment.1 Bietz's Concept of the Listener It is Dr. Bietz's concept that each person is created in the image of God; in fact, that each person i§_the image of God, and each person's potential for godliness may be eXpressed as his potential for humanness. He indicates that humanness is that extra dimension which peOple have a- bove that of the animals about them, which makes it possible for persons to be self-conscious--that is, conscious of their inner thoughts and feel- ings; to communicate verbally and to think abstractly, with all of the potential relationships that lie in this realm; to be conscious of the future, extending into eternity; and to be aware that they are subject to death, which awareness, he indicates, no animal possesses. This humanness, he says, centers in man's ability to communicate. As stated in the preceding pages, Bietz's avowed purpose in Speak- ing is to relate to each of his auditors as a person who is engaged in a continual process of discovery of what he himself was intended to be and may become. AS Bietz learns to COOperate with the laws of life and com- munication, his hOpe is that his Speaking will help to set other persons in his audience "into motion toward a greater self-realization which never StOps. . . . The urge of discovery, the urge of growth, becomes more ex- citing as one grows and becomes a better Christian, a better person, a finer, more mature human being. While Arthur Bietz is not unwilling to help those with pathological emotions, his overwhelming interest is in helping the normal person-- Interview #2. Interview #3. —|| | l .- F. n O. p. . .l a... ’ ...... . . .o . . . a .3 . o .. . a. J‘ . w. v. o . e _. ._ .e ....» v 5 w‘a s ...» _. _ . . q . ..s. n p . . ‘r . ~.. 3 .u C r. ... o. .3 .. .2 f. ... a r . .u ... .u .. ... ... .3 .u T .G .u .u. a u p“ . \ .c n .: L» p . 1: ... .N w. c v. o. r. .. .. .u ... .u Q. .. ..- .C ... |. A.» . o u . . . . o o c .~. ~ . .~. .4. ... .u. ... . ... . . . . .o . . ... 1. .m . g g a . .9. a .. nu —. a» .I ... .. . . .. . . .. . u t .. a ..r . . . . . . .... "v. .H . .. I“ _— . n u . . r . ... . .. ... . ... : a .... .... g ... I .. ... .C . .. .. ~\.. I I ... . 2. a . C a c .d .1 . . c Q» .~ a: _\ L» x.“ s. .Q .: . 54 that is, that wide range of persons who are not pathological, but who have learning problems due to normal neuroses (deficiencies in their ability to communicate both within themselves and with others). It is his desire to help peOple to discover their own potential for living suc- cessfully, for becoming more mature persons, for realizing more and more their potential for humanness. Generally Speaking, he equates success in living with success in communicating. This communication has first to do with communicating within oneself--that is, with one's own inner world of feelings and thoughts, both real and imagined. He would include one's communication or relationship with God in this realm of the inner self. The other as- pect of communication would be with those beyond oneself--that is, with fellow human beings. He indicates that those with troubled relationships are those who have failed in communication. He further states that the emotionally disturbed person is one in whom communication is broken down within himself.1 Since the range in normalcy among human beings takes in the vast majority of peOple, excluding only the pathological at one end of the Spectrum and the unusually well-informed and mature at the other end, it leaves this vast bulk of humanity in the middle with varying types and degrees of neuroses or learning problems or blocks that inhibit the com— munication process. As stated earlier, Bietz believes that it is the lack of successful communication within the person that causes him to have trouble communicating with, and relating to, others. His work as a 1 Arthur L. Bietz, "Course in Group Leadership and Team Management," Los Angeles, 1956, Lesson V, p. l. (Mimeographed.) . .-r- .‘ !\ ‘ .‘».- - ...-0". I' 1 . --;- a- .a ‘7' ‘ ‘:__‘...3 an» . p, .unr1q- . ~-o-Q¥1I‘~|o . ..--r.... -_-. f \ . . ..vi- ~us~ . .3 1.". C "x i A _. ' | a - '3' . H 1 'I .. \n ‘ ‘ b. t ..1: “ .Ilb— ‘.:‘*-\ _ . ...f‘ \- . ' .-_.. 55 clinical psychologist, pastoral counselor, consultant in management, lecturer, and preacher is premised upon the principle that the art of communication within, between, and among persons must be understood and practiced successfully if worthwhile objectives are to be achieved.1 The Place of Communication Blocks in Bietz's Theory of Communication In the conclusion of his reply2 to the question as to why he chose to be a combination minister-psychologist, Bietz said, "The attempt, of course, is to communicate; to get peOple out of their communication blocks into a larger world. I think this is essentially what public speaking should be." Since every audience is made up of individual auditors, and since it is Dr. Bietz's avowed purpose to relate successfully to each person in his audience, this brings the communication process within the individual into sharp focus as far as Bietz's theory of communication or Speaking is concerned. Inasmuch as his theory of communication has been arrived at through his psychological orientation, and since he speaks of it and uses it in this context, it seems impossible to talk about the blocks to this communication process without referring to certain basic psychological terminology. Perhaps a brief definition of these psychological terms would be in place here. "Anxiety" is a term that is in common use today, and its psycholo- gical implications are not appreciably different from those used in the vernacular. Dr. Bietz, who is eXpert in pOpularizing scientific concepts, Bietz, "Course in Group Leadership." 2 See Page 47. ....~— 9‘ " v y ,,. ....»u. ‘k. . a... ... _ .d A. .s ... . 56 seems to have in mind the simple dictionary definition of anxiety as be- ing "A blend of uncertainty, agitation or strong dread and a brooding fear about some contingency." "Neurosis," while not in such common use, is a term that seems to be pertinent to a discussion of Bietz's theory of communication. Defin- itive statements concerning the term "neurosis" made by Dr. Robert White of Harvard University seem to encapsule the meaning that Dr. Bietz im- plies as he uses this term. The statements are as follows: "The core of neurosis lies at the point at which anxiety has blocked or distorted the learning process so that new, adaptive learning cannot take place." And again, "Neurosis is the outcome of an attempt to avoid anxiety accomplished by the application of rather deSperate and unsuitable defense mechanisms such as repression." Here we find neurosis associated with the blocking of the learning processes. It is also said to be outcome of an attempt to avoid anxiety, and the factors that bring about this blocking of the learning processes are defense mechanisms such as repression. "Repression," as used here in a psychological context, has its own distinct connotation; and the following dictionary definition fits the use that this term is being given in this paper: "A process or mechanism of ego defense whereby wishes or impulses ... are kept from or made inaccessible to consciousness, except in dis- guised form."2 1 Robert W. White, The Abnormal Personality (New York: The Ronald Press Company, 1964), pp. 190 and 43. Dictionary definitions are taken from Webster's Third New Inter- national Dictionary, (Springfield, Mass.: G. & C. Merriam Company, Publ., 1968). ‘5 .- '- . . . ‘ ‘w. *- \ .t“‘ ‘y ‘\ X - .‘ ._‘ . ~ '.“ r, ‘h “t .“ .. ‘.-‘ V ‘- - .. n. . . L . . *. ~"—, 5 h v. u. . 5“ ' h A -‘. ‘ -‘~ -\ ’- ‘. ... “. u l a " I"- :“ . . w. ‘ ‘s g . . u . "... u; ...4 L'- ‘5‘. ..... ... :..‘.C \- ‘I‘ - - .... . v. \ ..‘5..»- "v-IDI~I . V a ...»u. n. .- -o 57 "Fear" is used in the conventional sense as "an unpleasant emo- tional state characterized by anticipation of pain of great distress." "Psychosis" might best be represented by the following statement by Dr. White: "A distinguishing mark of psychosis is a sub- stantial loss of contact with the surrounding world. This loss of contact is often referred to as a break or withdrawal from reality."1 Speaking of the factors that block effective communication between a Speaker and his auditors, Dr. Bietz said in an interview, I think many Speakers know how to beam in on certain fears and anxieties and get a reSponse in terms of peOple'S repressions; but these are all communication blocks. My hOpe will al- ways be to bring the peOple a growth avenue so that from their point of blockage they might be encouraged to walk down the journey of becoming better persons. Here Bietz identifies fears, anxieties, and repressions as communi- cation blocks. These are all obviously tied in with various neuroses, which as indicated in the definitions above, are based upon an inhibited learning process, or an area of conduct in an individual's life where experiences are repeated, from which he ought to learn certain lessons but the learning from these experiences does not take place. No matter from what reliable source we seek an answer for this, the answer seems inevitably to be to learn to communicate freely and successfully about these experiences in one's life. Dr. Bietz indicates that the average listener in any audience has many and varied neuroses or blocked learning 1 White, The Abnormal Personality, p. 51. 2 Interview #3. . n”..-\ A ‘5*-sb.‘u ..— _,.- .5» In» .. . a o . . nu. .3. n. a. .r.‘ v . ... ah. .. v. 34:, ‘4'. t: .: ... , .. g. .. ... *. a .: 2. .- . . .t . .- — . “um .PH ..A‘ .A‘ V. . . a y .— u Q» .‘ § .5 . .. ‘\_ 58 processes that every Speaker must deal with; and in order to be success- ful in Speaking to these persons in an audience, the Speaker must remove these communication blocks or at least take them into consideration if he is to get through. As an example, Dr. Bietz used a clergyman who himself is paranoid (one who is suspicious of others). He sees a snake under every stone, and the world's going to come to no good end; and all those of a different faith have to be watched because they don't belong to his group. Therefore they must be held with a degree of sus- picion as perhaps going down the road to perdition. Now this kind of an approach simply reinforces the ailments and the illnesses in human beings; and I think that a Speaker must always ask himself where the "Amens" come from; and the Speaker should, in essence, be very ashamed if he has certain peOple saying "Amen" to what he says. The individ- ual who is caught in a certain block will always like to have a Speaker Speak to his ailment and reassure him that he is not ailing. Now I think a minister or any Speaker has to ask himself, "What am I doing? Am I playing for the immedi- ate reSponse or for the long range closer relationship for these peOple to whom I am relating?" In other words, could I stay in this congregation two years? I could very well if I played simply on sicknesses of the congregation. But after that I would have to be looking for another place- ment, because I would be caught in the sickness myself and would become part of the sickness because I played to the sickness. But if I played toward health, conceivably the longer I would stay in the congregation, the more healthy my relationship should be to all the peOple there and the freer should be the interaction between the peOple and me.1 Bietz here expresses his theory that pessimism, intimidating threats, fear-producing discussion, and other kindred negative factors introduced by the speaker tend to inhibit the learning, comprehending, and remember- ing processes in the minds of his auditors, while at the same time they 1 Interview #3. ' . '.na‘ ..- ‘:.u.\‘ ' .\— .ld . .n. . . 1 x .. . ... n4. 9» A ——J .w» .Vu v. —. o9 . .Hs . —v. — C I. . 5 ... a ‘ .c .v. v. . t. . v-1.~ ‘ . .. nfll . . .. u . .: . . . c .» . , u.“ .l. . ... a p\_ «Q .. <_“ ~_~ ... Z .» n >- ....._ . a . -. 59 tend to reinforce already-existing inhibitions and communication blocks. He says, I could go before an audience and remind them of their wrongs and then add a bit of damnation and hell until I could break each (auditor) completely if he would follow. But that is not the way to do. It is tenderness, gentleness, and good humor that are required for the counselor and the Speaker, that too many don't demonstrate. The Role of Optimism in Bietz's Communication Theory While Bietz has never indicated that the Speaker should not give the whole picture when it is needed, he believes that the negative factors should be presented in tenderness, gentleness, and good humor--of course, adapting these traits to the gravity of any given Speech situation. He holds that playing upon the fears of the auditors, inflicting mental and emotional pain upon them, tends to inhibit or block the communication channels and to reinforce the existing blocks. Consequently, it is his avowed purpose to be, and to teach others to be, optimistic regarding life. He believes that laughter, good humor, Optimism, happiness, hope, buoyancy, and enthusiasm introduced into a Speaking situation through attitudes and verbal descriptions by the Speak- er, aid in every way the communication process and enhance comprehension, memory, and learning. He stated to a lecture audience: "I can't teach you one thing here tonight unless you feel sufficiently congenial and . 2 hOpeful to allow something to happen within your personality." 1 Lecture, "Unlearning Misery," Whittier, California, April 25, 1966; subsequently referred to as Lecture #43. 2 Lecture, "Happiness and Learning," Whittier, California, September 20, 1965; subsequently referred to as Lecture #15. 3 k- . r . ..n5 "" .u 'l‘ I... ..b- " . . .... o rt . ...-.‘u. 5... . .,.., g I.» A ~-— ...-g - “ "vut o- p .. ...-u. .\ . A! A _ . _ . I n ' ' - ... H“: . e. u . e F 7 .5‘,‘ C‘ ' ,HY‘; . ‘53» | -. .- 4.,.-‘.; . ... :— ‘u v: . I ‘- ‘N “- g \ Q s‘: \ A ‘A | ‘ ‘ ~ ‘fl. s,”“ s... 53,. fl “ D ~‘ .v- . . _h__’ ..‘t‘ “ ., .3 . . s 4‘ l .- ‘ 60 The writer has repeatedly observed Dr. Bietz grip large audiences with his message and his confident assumption that each person present can enjoy new levels of growth, achievement, and happiness in life. To illustrate this, Bietz has told his lecture audiences that they are able to unlearn their miseries; that is, to unlearn the painful experiences of the past in their lives. He suggested that they go home and write out all the painful experiences each has had in his lifetime. Then he sug- gested that they say to themselves, "I am going to face everything, with no intent to Spank or undermine myself. I will not run from any of it. I will face it all." Then he added, Try to associate it with a cushioning eXperience; with something good or funny if possible; and if you can, do this with somebody whom you know and trust. But the only way you can reassociate your misery successfully and unlearn it is through 1 gentleness, tenderness, and kindness with yourself. Bietz has also stated, Happiness develOpS a learning Situation and basi- cally nothing else does. Fear and punishment develOp inhibitions and repressions; but we do not learn from these circumstances. In fact, it makes learning much more difficult if not impossible. Here he is indicating that only through gentleness, tenderness, and kindness can a person talk about the miserable and difficult things in his life if he is ever to unlearn the attitudes that he has associated with them; that is, if he is to take them from their fragmented or sep- arated position in the personality, bringing them in and tying them into the personality as a whole. He says that unless the Speaker approaches the audience with Optimism, trust, confidence, gentleness, tenderness, 1 Lecture #43. 2Lecture #15. w. . .- i F.. u‘ .‘x Qu- ‘ § - ‘ 5* -.. n n s .. ..u flu v . Q—. ... . A ”Fm an r ..u h at. . . . . s . . v ‘ D. . a and .P. AM u.. V“ A.» .p. n A. .n .e .d - . ~ 5 s — u. o . .n. . .~ ... — ... u» d {a a,“ .3 -. .¢ p a - a ... o. . .s .m. .rb . ~ .— ... - pm u. “I .1; .u. H. ‘5. e . .u. A" s .. . ‘n. L. ~. ,~ .i . u . . ... s .. . . u . ... . _. . ... .. .. ,. ..c ..n” . u.. . . .4 . . ...t .. . ..N .. I, I .. .. ... a .u ., ...» .t . ... x. mm ... ... . .. .. . . .- 1 r. .. .lre ~79...an 61 and kindness in the same way that the individual must face himself if he is successfully to remove the blocks in his life's channel of communica- tion, then the Speaker is hindering rather than aiding the communication process. Communication as an Educational Process Arthur Bietz also approaches life and the theory of communication as an educational process. Among the many "hats" that Dr. Bietz wears is that of the professional educator, since he was on the faculty of the Loma Linda University School of Medicine for eighteen years. As one who currently Stays abreast of the latest research in the educational field, he is very much in demand as a consultant and lecturer in these circles. When Bietz Speaks of a hOped-for end product in a person, he sometimes refers to this as a truly-educated person-~that is, one who organizes, integrates, and makes useful in his own life that which he has an Oppor- tunity to learn. He adds that only an integrated or whole person, who is not fragmented by neuroses and repressed areas of experience in his life, can be a truly educated person. Once again, he indicates that the ch-k' 5 only"to accomplish this is to encourage the person to become accomplished in the necessary art of communication. The Need for Flexibilitygon the Part of the Speaker Successful oral communication is always related to Specific audi- ences and occasions; and Bietz expresses deep-seated convictions concern- ing the necessity for a Speaker to be flexible enough to adapt himself and 1 Lecture, "How to Fulfill Yourself," Whittier, California, May 5, 1968; subsequently referred to as Lecture #17. e S 3:18 I. II t ESE LR ,..u- .. I . ,..‘AQ w. o s 3 . «Q A}. \ . . . I. C a T . . . . . t ‘ .. . . . K a it ~ . .~ . a o. . .c a ‘ r c .0 A OD . v . K9: - K .. _ ..a ...l ”v. .t ‘\~ VL A\ S a. 3 N. . L ....u . “.... .hu 1.. .t .G ...» ..u .1.“ .0. E d .b C a U U .. u pm .C S :1 . . . . s ... a r a p e i c r c \J K P« .l . x \ . a 3‘ t Q» ual .: “t w § u k 1‘. r v. v .6 F. 1.‘ ts c .449 ‘L e we 1‘. v‘. t t 1n“ “u p a: .1 rs C a ~.nu h uhu l r .C a Z 5 5 LJ 3 a U .n a D. . c ..l e I a .1 S S Y. .0 r S 5 S e a i l E ...“ a . E t .l V; .0 ..L h“ C nu 5 .Wu ad .nb n a» 11‘ Va p.“ a ..D C v . w . "a. C e S T. I 1. a D. a M m .P v n 3. .3 a I... nr .1 a a e z. 5 .. L y y, L ., . S k... E . e k S 3 .. u A ”d s... S . . t . l \5 b C e .t u: ...H fl .u .a . "I Z S a C C .s . .. w .... . “:w ..... .. .. C ... C r .4 a e .. a” ...“ L ... ... .... : ... ..... . . a . . .. . a A . .. ..." w... 1 r ..H . . .... : ... ..... .... u I 1 .. .r.. ... .. ., . H .. _ I T. . .... ... .... .... . . a. .I. ... o“ W‘ ,C. ....M .H ._ 61 and kindness in the same way that the individual must face himself if he is successfully to remove the blocks in his life's channel of communica- tion, then the Speaker is hindering rather than aiding the communication process. Communication as an Educational Process Arthur Bietz also approaches life and the theory of communication as an educational process. Among the many "hats" that Dr. Bietz wears is that of the professional educator, since he was on the faculty of the Loma Linda University School of Medicine for eighteen years. As one who currently stays abreast of the latest research in the educational field, he is very much in demand as a consultant and lecturer in these circles. When Bietz Speaks of a hoped-for end product in a person, he sometimes refers to this as a truly-educated person--that is, one who organizes, integrates, and makes useful in his own life that which he has an Oppor- tunity to learn. He adds that only an integrated or whole person, who is not fragmented by neuroses and repressed areas of experience in his life, can be a truly educated person. Once again, he indicates that the onlyffgsaccomplish this is to encourage the person to become accomplished in the necessary art of communication. The Need for Flexibilitygon the Part of the Speaker Successful oral communication is always related to Specific audi- ences and occasions; and Bietz expresses deep-seated convictions concern- ing the necessity for a speaker to be flexible enough to adapt himself and 1 Lecture, "How to Fulfill Yourself," Whittier, California, May 5, 1968; subsequently referred to as Lecture #17. "ESE 31:11 a E'JIHCYOUS S: W" :15: IRE stor' IS ("11' t" ..ax'mg been a ' v .3 &D (II t.) "Hun-vnc; and this he C Cat: n so «at z.e ._ 62 his message to both of these as he becomes aware of the needs of the situation. In this reSpect he believes that the introductory Statements of any discourse are extremely important. In his lecturing he almost invariably begins with a humorous story of some kind and usually this story has a point that bears upon the subject of the lecture. His attitude as he ap- proaches the story is one of Optimism, and frequently he will make a remark about this having been a good day. This attitude, together with the taste- fully selected humor, puts him in touch with his audience. He says that his first remarks are used as a gauge to test his audience and their reSponse, in much the same way that a swimmer will approach a pool and lower the tip of one foot into the water to test the temperature and get the feel of it. He immediately establishes an eye contact with as many in his audience as possible; and this he continues throughout his discourse. This process of analyzing and adjusting to his audience never ceases until his discourse is finished.1 He believes that he must constantly remain flexible. He says, ”I don't use notes.2 I want to see the eyes of the pe0p1e. I want to see whether or not I am getting through. And if I'm not, then I must move with flexibility immediately to get a point of contact. So what I intended to say may not be at all what I will say, depending upon the particular at- mosphere of the group."3 Interview #5. Bietz does not use notes in his lecturing, and for several years did not use them in his sermons but he does use them at the present time in his preaching. He apparently feels that his preaching takes more careful pre- paration with the time limitation involved in broadcasting the services and because of the more critical nature of his congregation. 3Interview #3. .fl . \ . . 9 .. . _ at“: h. - r;( At. t) J U U— o. L .u. a .3 a .0.» u n! C» . e WV. «b D 3 M. .1 r. a v. z... ... .u 2 I wait. . w; a .l H h I XE C .. . e .t .1 r . U 5 PI Ad .... .Ku .hu .\N F; «I,» .: qI H.“ V. .1 Q. .L a\. at. vs at .i .3 s. uh. .Hlu ~ .uL . I. 1 wt ..‘L an. an .s « 2. 51. I L 71 .h . .t t. :3 a c . c ‘1. . . . . ..C :3 u. .5 -.. .: .. u. .\ .1. w .b .. . .: L C K . . to T ,; I .. . . . ... .. .. ,..... . a...“ 5 ...u ...n .... .1 .....l ._ a ; .... . i. ... 2.. I ..c ._ ... 6/ audience giving him rapt attention during the entire time. The writer asked him in an interview what technic he uses to relax his audiences periodically in order to keep from losing their attention. His reply was that his practice in this respect has not been deve10ped as a technic, but rather, "it comes from a very close contact with the audience, and a feeling with them that this must be a time when something ought to happen 1 in terms of a bit of a breath." In practice, Dr. Bietz is very skillful in using narratives, humorous references, and illustrations of various kinds to relieve the tension of his audiences. One of the ultimate objectives that Dr. Bietz has in his speaking is to involve as many of his auditors as possible in such a way that nearly as much may be accomplished in this group situation as might re- sult if he were counseling with only one or two persons in his counsel- ing chambers. There seems to be a substantial amount of evidence that he may be rather successful in doing this. For example, while discussing this point in one of the interviews with the writer, Bietz said, Just this last week I went into a drug store and a couple came up to me and said, "You don't know us, but we've attended some of your lectures. Our marriage was on the rocks. we came to the lectures; we applied what you said; we involved ourselves; and the last two years have been the happiest days of our lives. Our marriage is (now) just wonderful. You don't know us, we don't know you; but we recog- nized you and we thought we'd tell you this. Interview #1. 2 Interview #2. nr'" .: :fCallfcrnla. I: ' >‘ ‘s-:.;:e :ilieu in 2:311. :z. :: siape the t'l"‘r( " ‘ Tie chapter atterols .12: . m scciolcgical .. If Californians as my CHAPTER IV "THE CALIFORNIA SYNDROME" Introduction Arthur Bietz moved to California as a young man in his middle twen- ties. Since that time, he has Spoken to audiences made up almost entirely of Californians; he has been confronted by, and has been Speaking to, the needs of Californians; and in a very large measure, he himself is a pro- duct of California. It has seemed imperative to the writer to examine this unique milieu in which Bietz has lived and worked and which has done much to shape the thinking and needs of his auditors. The chapter attempts to portray briefly California's history, geo- graphy, and sociological setting, culminating in a discussion of the prob- lems of Californians as set forth by recent authorities on the subject. The expressed problems and needs of the people of California will provide a basis for considering the relevancy of his Speaking to the needs of those who have made Up his audiences. California's Mystique Though one of the fifty United States of America, California seems to be an entity apart. Celebrated in song and story, at once praised and damned, envied and decried, the subject of countless books and articles, it has for over a century represented to many millions the Opportunity for the better life, the promise of a fresh start, the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. 68 AV.“ 21 ..u- \A-1 ‘ 5a; of me Hester“ -..... ‘1’ "b ‘v 1" LL aLK Lat-t," b ’ ;, H 3:. 'Ewr‘pan's Eden, .32," and "Tue Great Excey" ..,‘...' ' H ; VI ' Zia :C Invent Lt. Brit" ..." ....” l : its... his :1. ‘k. ‘alifxnia has. earned ruffle Ez-zaer tental Soc i(-' u H, I: has been 53;: [723: ..v_,~ , .. L— ...: .c expect [at meme «4' h ' \w-v . . ' - “Ms-mt its 1" "-". r' st ula‘ ..5'.‘ 'M ...“ . ~~;“ ptLAdL g L L ‘5'. . "'3 .... Teat OPEn SPaCes F s.‘ ’- ‘~ “I Ccns train: of the "k trOuble Eac lfln h 1:. no EXCeptiUn.' Gen the 69 California has earned many sobriquets, both flattering and deroga- tory--"The Experimental Society," "A Putty Culture," "A State of Excite- ment," "Everyman's Eden," "A Paradise of Paradox," "A Nation Within a Nation,” and ”The Great Exception," to name a few. It has been said that if California did not exist, someone would have had to invent it. writers agree that from California, a state that does not conform to any normal or common pattern, the rest of the nation has come to expect the unexpected. Throughout its 120 years of statehood, California has been a frontier --the goal of the westering urge, the last StOpping-place this side of the Pacific Ocean. This may be, according to one author, because the West as a region occupies a Special place in the symbols of America. We go "down south" or "back East," but we move "out West"--a phrase which invokes not only the great Open Spaces but also the idea of escape from confinement, . 1 from the constraint of the old regions. The temptation to run away to the West seems to trouble each generation of Americans, and ours is no exception. The promise of the West has always been the promise of escape, the chance to "light out" and start life all over, to be reborn. And of the western states, one seems to have kept that promise most faithfully. California has not only attracted the majority of the western immigrants, it has also attracted the most ambitious and the most dissatisfied. It . . . performs the magic of making "boosters" out of "drifters." What attracts peOple to California? Many writers have attempted to Wilson Carey McWilliams, "California: Notes of a Native Son," in The California Dream, ed. by Dennis Hale and Jonathan Eisen (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1968), p. 4. Hale and Eisen, The California Dream, xi. C .... ... ... . x O.» o. .w. hr. 13 o__ ..L a ... L I“ T. c ..t 3 .L .. .s t n. 5 r . r. C C. L rk “u 3 C a” .-. f . C .1 8 C K v. a. kl C L. m w e a t m t t t C. e .1 r t C d '1 I t s i. o .. . .... a a m as T . ... 1‘ I 01 .\~ .1 D. .F m... n. S C .1. NC. a 3 E t .- t s . R .. S T ... nus. . ... ...... os ..uh V b. C. ...- .‘VV- «...-L ‘ ‘~‘. LLL . . ’ ‘v~‘ “sn. 1‘ 7O answer this question. Said one: California is, first of all, a place to which men move (a truth which is either trite or proverbial); and men move in reSponse to symbols, ideas, and images which are the foretaste of actuality. These symbols continue to exert a powerful influence on those who come to live in the state, shaping what they see and can perceive. More than any state, California is to its citizens what it is to the nation: a set of images, the largest Hollywood has ever created. ''The dynamite of California,’ states another writer, "was composed " He goes on to add of one part vigor and one part unsatisfied passion. that this was not the usual or typical frontier but "the acme of all fron- tiers, the most concentrated of quickly flourishing societies" in which "the peOple lived through a condensed version of the world's economic and cultural growth."2 Yet another author finds . . . many valid reasons why California has been a golden magnet for a pOpulation seeking a better way of life. Despite all that men have done to destroy California's climate and natural beauty, something truly beautiful still survives. The California way of life suggests wealth and leisure, not only to Philistines, but to artists and scholars of great merit. California has created a mystique which few regions of the world can match. Explanations for California's dynamism are both physical and mystical: "the unusual meeting of unique peOple with extraordinary environment, their ingenious mastery of its resources, and the momentum of the innovative society 1 Wilson Carey McWilliams, "Notes of a Native Son," p. 4. 2 Carey McWilliams, California: The Great Exception (New York: A.A. Wyn, 1949), p. 59. 3Ralph J. Roske, Everyman's Eden (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1968), p. 583. .Eaisci extrawabart. a ' C —.- — k .3.-va 0L C\_..:.."5Ct . s ‘::s:nm t .at the YCSLi' 33:;mzoters. ..e biggest >- vo one beliex intensely a mat ixe re.“ lieves C311 i P1 3C8, ream i T'le Cal if; .. ' Sta~e. ne 1 in his e~er 71 that has resulted.”1 California (is) an exploitation of a region of extraordinary resources by a peOple of aggressive, inventive nature who are not afraid to try to live by their wits . . . Two interacting factors are present: the place and the pe0p1e. In California, both place and peOple have distinguishing charac- teristics that have imparted distinctive traits to the society that tries to emerge. But without the distinctiveness of the place, California would not work.2 While no doubt some of California's renown has rested on the artifi- cial basis of extravagant advertising and publicity-seeking on the part of chambers of commerce, booster clubs, and commercial interests, it still remains true that the residents themselves have been the state's most ardent promoters. The biggest surprise, however, is the peOple: no one believes in "the California dream" as intensely as the Californian. Conversations with a native reveal two things: first, that he be- lieves California to be in some sense a "special" place, requiring "Special" rules; and second, that he is very conscious of being a Californian. . . The Californian not only believes the ethos of his state, he lives it, and diSplayS its main outlines in his everyday life. Because there is something different about California, the state has always been a target of curiosity and derision. In the East, where many remain mistrustful of the sudden size and strength of California, the state is sometimes dismissed as the breeding ground of kook and extremist, a barbecue culture held shakily in place by ribbons of freeway. 1Neil Morgan, The California Syndrome (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Pren- tice-Hall, Inc., 1969), p. 258. 2Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 10. 3Hale and Eisen, California Dream, xiii. 4Neil Morgan, The Pacific States (The Time-Life Library; New York: Time, Inc., 1967), p. 15. ¥ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIE::___________________________________::j--II Ire explanaticn may be . 13:5 Tue Satin, called :3... Linda), the general unre- ;;:;, :c'. the odd sense Cf is the author of a no. v Califcrnia's Cs; and ebrllient. to life there. eaS)‘ genera.;73' act be true tr deplore is u...“ Q - B'Crtfiwn , . '——‘ ('1 D) 1 '9' - rk ' _ .f Lat makes Cal; I‘ ‘ “ullCu-g'n ‘50“? Cent 72 The explanation may be in what Carey McWilliams, distinguished edi- tor of The Nation, called the "highly imperfect cultural adaptation (of (mlifornia), the general unrelatedness of things, the ever-present incon- gnfity, and the odd sense of diSplay.1 As the author of a recent history of California summed it up, California's culture and society are big, malleable and ebullient. The old taboos do not often apply to life there. A great deal about the state defies easy generalization. All that can be said with cer— tainty is that much of what was true yesterday will not be true tomorrow. While much that caustic critics deplore is unquestionably deplorable, much that is worthwhile and challenging is also occurring within the borders of the state. Background: Why is California What It Is? A brief look at California's history and geography will help in the ihmovery of what makes California what it is. Although four centuries have passed since the Spanish explorer Juan lkflriguez Cabrillo sailed into San Diego harbor September 28, 1542, just fifty years after the discovery of America, becoming the first European to Unmh the soil of the California of today, practically the entire story of its growth is crowded into the last 120 years. Not until 1769 was a set- tlement begun in San Diego, in part to fend off the threat of Russian ad- vmmes down the Pacific coast toward the mines and cities of New Spain, muiin part to evangelize the aboriginal Indian pOpulation. The latter acthdty was the Special burden of the monk, Franciscan Junipero Serra, 1Carey‘McWilliams, Southern California Country (New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, 1946), p. 233. 2 Roske, Everyman's Eden, p. 559. 73 who was instrumental in establishing the string of twenty-one missions along the coast from San Diego to Sonoma, which lasted over fifty years and have had such a profound influence on California history and culture.1 The origin of the state's name is Shrouded in mystery. Some trace it to "Califerne" in the Song of Roland, probably borrowed from the Per- sian Kari-i-farn, "the mountain of paradise."2 The more widely accepted version attributes the name to Calafia, the black Amazon queen in a romantic novel in vogue in Spain about the time the first explorers set foot in California.3 Its setting, an island near the Indies whose only metal was gold, fittingly foreshadowed this future "El Dorado" of the New World. On January 24, 1848, a few days before Mexico ceded its California territory to the United States, gold was discovered in the tailrace of John A Sutter's new sawmill at Coloma, on the south fork of the American River.4 Within a few months the stampede of gold-seekers caused California to emerge suddenly from comparative obscurity and become the cynosure of world-wide attention. Discovery of gold could not have come at a more opportune time. It followed on the heels of the announcement of American acquisition of the province, just as the United States was on the rebound from Mexican war activities and the American frontier was piling up against the baffling sub-humid and treeless Great Plains. EurOpe was still in fer- ment after the revolutions of 1848; and it is entirely understandable that 1Andrew Rolle, "California," EncycloPedia Americana, 1969 ed., Vol. 5, p. 210. 2Carey McWilliams, The Great Exception, p. 3. 3Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 136. 4 Rolle, "California," p. 211. 'q—J ~ - ..-. I o ‘1 ‘ _ . seekers genes 1th C2... 9 & 22.111131? every fetelgn na - , s.- on - "l N'- ...a~:es, a itflmnces . The '0 i g ~... , any. .a ... - - ..1, ...en inexper. ' n 9 V“ "luy. thug S"“& w“ ‘\.5 ,A.. o \ud“ {Lite’ I" Q |‘ ‘ '--=-LQ'\ a. Oi the Ccldeq ‘ r ‘ K‘. t"-. e PC‘pulatiC, 74 gold seekers poured into California from every state in the Union and practically every foreign nation.1 The discovery of gold divided California into two "states" for almost four decades, as northern California was invaded by hordes of newcomers while southern California remained virtually unchanged under Spanish- Mexican influences. The big activity boom in southern California occurred from 1885-1891, when inexpensive railroad tranSportation direct to Los Angeles became available, and was induced in part by promotional endeavors which stressed the pleasant and healthful climate and the vast stretches of cheap but fertile land. In the decade of the 1880's Los Angeles county grew 204% compared with the State's pOpulation which grew 40%.2 Since that time, the tides of migration have steadily swelled the pOpulation of the Golden State. In 1848, according to the generally ac- cepted estimate of the great 19th century California historian, Hubert Howe Bancroft, the pOpulation of California was 14,000.3 When admitted to state- 4 hood in 1850, its pOpulation, according to a federal census, was 92,597, although this figure was considered sketchy and inaccurate and a state cen- 5 sus taken two years later to correct it Showed 223,000. Since then, each 1 John Walton Caughey, California (New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1940), p. 1. 2 David N. Hartman, California and Man (2nd ed.; Dubuque, Iowa: wm. C. Brown Company, Publishers, 1968), p. 382. Gladwin Hill, Dancinngear: an Inside Look at California Politics (Cleveland, Ohio: The WOrld Pub. Co., 1968), p. 271. 4 Andrew F. Rolle, California: a History (2nd ed.: New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Co., 1969), p. 2. 5 Hill, Dancing Bear, p. 271. --:;'i:2 .ecaée has seen the 23135 doubled its resident .....' #:1 .h1.|a ..,-. ..tn of alncst 27 .zzai: the nation, having t7. .zztes in recent histcrv 1'. Y . \ .. 11:2 21:65 the rate 01 ‘2... p. ,. u :, but it is still *2 A recent Stud? California '- a; each day, ani OUXQI states a: and 400 die. ms 13 ‘0 m ‘ fi‘ 't..\ t ‘~ Lu ‘ .. to mate t..is r3.» r9 “‘9‘ cal-8e n8}: hlgrk‘flaV: .. each VEav- I E ‘ Eaz‘ .. - *ettIEd 8Q . :E:; of 75 succeeding decade has seen the pOpulation grow by 50%; in other words, the state has doubled its residents every twenty years for more than a century. With a pOpulatiOn of almost 20 million, California is now the most populous state in the nation, having taken away the lead from New York in 1964.1 At times in recent history, it has grown at the rate of 5% per year--more than five times the rate of the nation. During the 1960's, the rate slowed somewhat, but it is still 600,000 annually. In 1969, one in ten Americans lived in California. By 1975, demographers predict more than 25,000,000 2 residents, and by the year 2000, from 36 to 42 million. A recent study gave this day-by-day picture of California growth: About 1,000 babies are born each day, and nearly 1,000 peOple arrive from other states and countries. 100 persons leave, and 400 die. At the end of the day, California has 1500 more people than at the beginning. And to make this rate of increase even more graphic, we are told: Just to keep up with the influx, California has to provide 150 new elementary classrooms each week; three new high schools every month; 1,000 miles of highway evgry six months, and 300,000 new homes each year. Though California has only 118 peOple to the square mile--one-seventh as densely settled as New Jersey or Rhode Island--it is not a rural state, for 85% of its peOple live in cities, and three out of five live in the Los Angeles and San Francisco metrOpolitan areas.5 1 Hill, Dancing Bear, p. 8. 2 Rolle, California: A History, p. 2. 3Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 310. 4Curt Gentry, The Last Days of the Late, Great State of California (New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1968), p. 33. 5Morgan, Pacific States, p. 55. 76 During the 1950's and 1960's, most newcomers to the state came to Southern California. Los Angeles county alone gained more peOple than any state except Florida, New York, and California itself. In the early 1960's Los Angeles county was the most pOpulous of the 3,103 counties in America. By 1968, the city had a population of 3 million, the county 7 million. In other words, 37 out of every 100 Californians lived in Los Angeles county; 9 million (almost one-half the state's population) lived within a 60-mile radius of the city's old plaza.1 Evidence of the continual influx of residents is the fact that in most states, about 70% of the pOpulation is indigenous; in California, the proportion falls to 40%.2 (Some writers place the figure as low as 25%)3 What has drawn, and continues to draw, these hordes of humanity? The first great impetus, of course, was given by the gold strike of 1849. The '49ers were typically young, male, single, and from the Eastern seaboard. Wrote J.S. Hittell, an historian of early California: Selective forces were at work. The immigrants were by and large well educated. They had essentially the same traits as other Americans of the period, but the traits were more striking, because the immigrants made up--not a czoss-section, but a selection of the American pe0p1e. Soon thereafter, the news of the mild climate drew the aged and sick- ly, so that by 1880 the whole foothill district around Sierra Madre and San Rolle, California: a History, p. 4. 2 O MOrgan, The California Syndrome, p. 72. Herbert Brucker, "Memoirs of a Recent Migrant," Saturday Review, September 23, 1967, p. 21. . 4 Quoted in Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 9. n m H '1 H "1‘ O "1 3 'J I.) 't raig aticn, : California ~ political gt: SCSI cages, ; Of an Cppres. Servltude a1 and Equal CP; beginning, a u: a SECCnd 1urose Bier ". .J r K n (‘9 H (D Q. 0.. l continual Uoh tural author: the hopeful n Search 0 f the 77 Gabriel was "one vast sanitarium." One out of three early tourists were ”run down, consumptive, or ailing." Southern California became a paradise for morticians and faith healers.1 There are most basic reasons for this migration, however, than gold or climate. Californians are, by and large, peOple who have left a rela- tively good life in search Of a better one. Persecution and famine do not figure in the California migration. California was not simply the recipient of a mass migration, but of a certain type of migrant. The California migrant was not fleeing religious or political persecution, and he did not suffer, in most cases, from actual want. He was not a member of an Oppressed minority group, breaking out of servitude and seeking for the first time, a fair and equal Opportunity. He was, eSpecially in the beginning, a failure, and he sought not liberty but a second ch nce. The continent, to paraphrase Ambrose Bierce, tipped, and everything that was not tied down rolled westward. The result was a continual upheaval, a constant shifting of cul- tural authority and experience, created by all the hOpeful millions who went to California in search of their undefined "Something." Californians, then, are the people of all states, migrated in search of common quests. They have rejected geographic regionalism and ethnic ties for a loose confederation with those who Share similar aSpirations. The mainstream Californian of today is a highly individualistic migrant; if he were not, he would not have pulled up stakes in the East and gone West in the first place. 1 Carey McWilliams, Southern California Country, p. 100. A Hearst columnist of the 1880's whose tart wit and acid pen domin- ated the California literary world for decades. 3 Hale and Eisen, California Dream, xiii. ....“ .3. .--..5ca:1celed each other c .25mn um American nt: kicekzau.in the explz ‘hfled,present-day C. ~swdmmmnt. No one we $E$,its :. . ‘ -..‘.I;‘ ii '3 land to J n.1v: I ‘;O‘ ' ‘ J.n.aa-ng Ca.-.trnia Y ‘4 n (— J (D f r h (I) '__J r7 r1 3.. n) ('7 O 1 oil or motion ctrmmplanted to t? . ‘. ‘vo hithe West the: Nature ) grand er10\ 78 A cross-section does not necessarily mean a mental and emotional cross-section. The typical Mary- lander, after all, is not someone who leaves Mary- land to go to California. Frontiers historically attract two sorts of people: the enterprising and imaginative, and the escapists--in both cases, in- dividualists with less than ordinary regard for convention, established norms, and what has gone before. Perhaps the writer 0. Henry summed it up best: "Californians are a race of peOple," he wrote; "they are not merely inhabitants of a state."2 But not all authorities agree that the peOple are the most important factor in making California what it is. Veteran California historian John Walton Caughey felt that the selective forces Of successive migrations nearly canceled each other out so that the deviation of the state's popu- lation from the American norm was insufficient to compare with the geo- graphic element in the explanation of why California is what it is.3 Indeed, present-day California society is closely integrated with its environment. No one would pretend that its orange groves, its truck gardens, its oil or motion picture industries, or its recreational patterns could be transplanted to the Missouri Valley or reproduced on the Atlantic seaboard. In the West there is an eternal consciousness of the land. Nature, grandiose in scale, does not allow itself to be overlooked; it is a part Of life. Few peOple grow blase about the juxtaposition Of mountain, sea and desert. The challenge of the upcommon physical environment has always been sensed. 1 Hill, Dancing Bear, p. 20. 2 Quoted in Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 314. 3 . Caughey, California, p. 604. 4 Morgan, Pacific States, p. 55. :e: :w hcnared - y 1 0' '— \f' 4 C i .: ".12.: suetcn .ra... ..3. . ~‘ 1 rv-m. cc- 1.3.355. It 810...; . :13: is barren desert ani ‘V- -:- ' . ..gm. "L- ;‘ 11...:'bl).[.'l 0f hul‘... .L-‘ :1' ialifxnia lives in a'rra. “i I“‘ fl 'h l I ‘ .‘I . 0" ‘ in: Uf tile pry-51kg; _. uL... . , ‘. anti: JUST. bart'l‘C Q" .-:.. a: earthquakes. «xxx-1a 15 on the "C' irc‘; -.zezgnty percent of :2" cf faults in the e 5 «‘4. inc» - " ‘ePtible to (:3. Hundred so snail :afi‘35 . . ..e San Andreas, r1. litred ‘ ; am fifty miles c‘ 91.1 Pl “. 5 “Wash for Fears 79 Part Of the "uncommon physical environment” is due to California's sfize and shape. The third largest state (after Alaska and Texas), Cali- fOrnia is bigger than Germany, Italy, or Japan--eight hundred miles long, (nmr two hundred fifty miles wide. Superimposed on the Atlantic seaboard, hzwould stretch from Massachusetts to South Carolina and inland as far as Pflxsburgh.1 It encompasses one hundred three million acres, one-fifth of whflfllis barren desert and mountains, one-third of which is forested, and mfly'one-sixth of which is cultivable.2 Ninety percent of the pOpulation cfi'California lives in about fifteen percent of the land area.3 One Of the physical features that Californians have learned to live thh, albeit just barely submerged in their subconscious, is the constant Uneat of earthquakes. There is solid geological basis for this fear, for (blifornia is on the "Circle of Fire" or circumrPacific seismic belt in whuflxeighty percent of the world's earthquakes occur. Interlaced with lmndreds of faults in the earth's crust, California is, of the fifty states, tie most susceptible to quakes, thousands occurring there annually, all anfive hundred so small as tO be unfelt by man. California's largest fmflt, the San Andreas, runs from north and west of San Francisco some six mnmred and fifty miles downstate south and west of Los Angeles.4 Although for years seismologists have warned that a large quake is Hill, Dancing Bear, p. 15. 2 Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 311. 3Jerry Cohen and William S. Murphy, Burn, Baby, Burn! (New York: E-P. Dutton & Co., Inc., 1966), p. 12. 4 Gentry, LateL Great State, p. 23. ......aaai 7431;; under tne scil c L2.‘.:, :he official attita. ::‘..=::g:'e';elcp::.ents, in s: 'YZiiI the San Andreas fa A ..;"§:.:i£€, P5121 Spripg S - - 3 '-.-;:.:-. rise in San Fran...“ 80 building under the soil of California, most probably along the San Andreas fault, the official attitude has been to ignore the potential threat; and housing developments, in some cases whole communities, have been built on or near the San Andreas fault. NO Spot in Los Angeles county is more than Sixty miles away from it, while several major cities--San Bernardino, Riverside, Palm Springs-~are right alongside it.1 Skyscrapers have lately begun to rise in San Francisco and Los Angeles, as new construction tech— niques and materials make high-rise buildings possible in this earthquake- prone zone. Nevertheless, though repressed, the fear of earthquakes is close to the surface. "Southern Californians . . . are haunted by a vague and name- less fear of future disaster. The belief in some awful fate that will some day engulf the region is wideSpread and persistent.”2 No doubt this fear has been fanned by cultists' predictions of disaster that have abounded since the founding of the first of California's bizarre religions in 1840.3 But predictions of disaster are no match for the drawing power Of the climate, a pleasant, temperate weather that prevails over a vast portion of its land areas and is probably California's Single biggest attraction. Strictly Speaking, however, there is no "California climate" as the state has every climate known except the true trOpical.4 While climate may often be exaggerated as a factor in the lure Of the West, it is nevertheless a strong attraction. It provides diverse settings for year-round leisure, Gentry, Late, Great State, p. 165. 2Carey McWilliams, Southern California Country, p. 199. 3 Gentry, Late, Great State, p. 16. 4Hartman, California and Man, p. 163. L: y... .. _ ~36 $17.65“ .. * 'v~ st veg portion of t..e - .. 3 ac tne Gclcen Sta. " '. awed as long are as . I =""el Rant-ha, we t .‘b ‘k' , and by current wri'» it: :1: tell the differer‘ ‘\ .-;'.1:ain ranges, ocean b: ;;;';;3: be labeled alter: s: ~.- attracted unlimited . :.c‘ " A}. \~»~~. . a“ u icultura1 dewe 3f metion pictures '41:ha . .. ater; yet today " EVEN: . 4 xulhg 1n tag 1 _..:"'e praCtiCe “~13 t 81 and it is less likely to impede the movement of Californians with the harshness of hot and cold. ESpecially is this true in Southern1 Cali- fornia, the portion Of the state south of the Tehachapis (the transverse range that knifes across to the ocean just north of Santa Barbara). In- deed, Southern California and its climate are as distinct from northern California as the Golden State is from the remainder of the nation, a fact recognized as long ago as the 1880's by Helen Hunt Jackson, author of the pOpular novel, Ramona, who termed this region "a sort of island on the land,"2 and by current writers, who maintain that even the rankest neo- phyte can tell the difference once he enters this region. The combination of mountain ranges, ocean breezes, and semi-desert terrain makes a climate which can be labeled almost "artificial" in its air-conditioned equability and has attracted unlimited resources of manpower and wealth, made possiblefl intensive agricultural development, and drawn Specialized industries such as those of motion pictures and aerOSpace. ”God never intended Southern California to be anything but a desert," a vistor once remarked. "Man has made it what it is."3 Throughout this region there is not a single river, natural lake nor creek with year-round flow of water; yet today, through the miracle of irrigation, it is an area of great wealth and natural abundance, rich and prodigiously fertile. Vir- tually everything in the region has been imported (plants, trees, peOple, 1 . The practice of capitalizing the "s" was well established by 1920, according to Carey McWilliams. Carey McWilliams, Southern California Country, p. 7. 3 Ibid., p. 183. '. 'iifl'J fiw’ e‘éCt’ii'al energy); 1» ~-:-’ 2:231 and raplfl C «m and has a certain azr szr‘. of destiny awaib‘ M 9:: this feeling, pvr'. f::, according to one -225: in Les AUREZGS- 5' . - s -.v-rr r -1:-..:.....1c:$ in cadence v; 51.1: 'u'hjvte called "at: 3i‘fttji'5ix incorporated c1: 135, and is made up of we. 1“ “won“ ' ‘* «53.. ~16 Sprawling cellular r: ”...:acin in recent years '1' 2:: r ‘- . .cantry, accounting »...-..ed twelve metropc "iiéiles , . meg310130115 vi (“ii-"E ale 82 water, electrical energy); it is an artificial region, the product of forced growth and rapid change, and "like all irrigated civilizations, the land has a certain air Of unreality and impermanence about it."1 Yet, somehow, "the idea is held by everybody in Southern California that some sort of destiny awaits the place."2 And this feeling, perhaps, is strongest in the Los Angeles area it- self, for, according to one Observer, "Nowhere are dreamers more on the make than in Los Angeles. A Spark of nationalism ignites the place. Op- timism marches in cadence with materialism."3 A prime example of what William H. Whyte called "urban Sprawl," Los Angeles is the largest Of seventy-six incorporated cities in the county, covers four hundred square miles, and is made up of what once were Sixty-four separate communities. Many urbanists now regard Los Angeles as the prototype of decentralization of the Sprawling cellular metropolises that they see in the future.5 The pOpulation in recent years has increased faster than in any comparable part of the country, accounting for ten percent of all growth in the nation's two hundred twelve metropolitan regions.6 Some visionaries believe that Los Angeles megalopolis will eventually become a continuous urban area ex- tending along the coast from Santa Barbara through Los Angeles to San Diego.7 1 Carey MCWilliams, Southern California Country, p. 367. 21bid., p. 369. Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 231. Morgan, Pacific States, p. 67. 5 0 Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 231. 6Morgan, Pacific States, p. 67. 7 Ibid., p. 11. 83 California's economy can only be classed as ebullient. If called a nation of its own, California would rank sixth among world powers. Its gross "national" product is calculated at an annual rate of $108.8 billion1 and is exceeded only by that of the United States, the Soviet Union, West Germany, Japan, and France.2 Los Angeles and its environs have earned a ranking position with the major metrOpolitan areas of the world, many of which were world leaders before California was even discovered. In agriculture, California ranks first of the states with a $4.3 billion agribusiness that turns out two hundred farm products,3 leading the nation in production Of fifty-six of these.4 California is the Sixth ranking manufacturing state,5 and has assumed leadership in the exotic in- dustries ijelectronics, aerospace, and oceanography, with certain sections of the state ranking with the Harvard area as centers where science and industry merge.6 Almost half the Nobel laureates in America are in Cali- fornia; in 1968, one hundred eighty-five members of the National Academy of Sciences listed California as their home state (compared with one hundred thirty-eight for Massachusetts and one hundred thirty-two for New York)7 and one-fourth of the federal aerOSpace budget goes into California.8 The "California: A State of Excitement," Time, November 7, 1969, p. 64. Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 5. 3 "A State Of Excitement," p. 64. 4 Hartman, ibid., p. 5. 5 Rolle, California: A History, p. 5. 6Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 256. 7 Ibid., p. 318. 81bid., p. 11. . .1 . ,.‘- “'19 TaClCn 1" . 2'. .37”: “'7 .. -e 'I' 0" ':~- :l':,SI [“k ‘ .--‘ ' ‘.. , - ...-«r .L J ...", 350 has t.e . . ._ . .7: [36 QL‘JCIY‘.‘R1L .: 377.1. aLCC'd"h .2 <.~'_o ' ‘? ... 5‘ ' , .iirtv thousand p 1‘ L. ~a" ‘7' "‘ 7 ' : “Ail area 9 .ip.LHv-T~.'\'T. .. _A ._ . :'v ,. .. l". \ .uperseded by Di 5 ~.. '4 .."q 1 ..... ..icn draws six nill‘ fi.] ‘1' r‘ l .....ornia's mat- 55"» $1.3 billiw .l I“ add; hiding («1‘ Ci? V1 - .a..d a halt r‘. 84 state leads the nation in military contracts, receiving in 1967 close to $7 billion, almost twice the sum awarded the second-ranking state, Texas. California also has more federal workers than any other state--about equal to the metrOpolitan area encompassing the District of Columbia.1 The Bank of America, founded in 1904 as a poor man's bank in a San Francisco saloon by an immigrant's son, Amadeo Peter Giannini, is today the world's largest, with assets of over $25 billion, and a credit-card 2 system used by 25 million worldwide subscribers. It led the nation's banks into the electronic age with the industry's first fully-automated electronic accounting system.3 The motion picture industry has been important not only because it employs thirty thousand peOple in Los Angeles (about one percent of the metrOpolitan area employment)4 but also as a tourist attraction, although it is now superseded by Disneyland, the fabled $95,000,000 recreational plant which draws six million visitors a year. California's wage earners constitute a mass aristocracy that takes home about $1.5 billion per week; their per capita income ($4,111) is higher than that of any state or country on the earth.6 More than half of Cali- fornia's six and a half million families have incomes in excess of $10,000 1Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 270. 2"A State of Excitement," p. 64. 3Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 262. 62211- 5 Roske, Everyman's Eden, p. 552. 6 "A State of Excitement," p. 64. 85 annually, well over the national average and substantially above the second state, New York.1 By 1975, demographers predict personal income will have soared to $110 billion, compared with $76 billion in 1968.2 It has been stated that the true motive power of the California economy is its massive educational system. Californians have been vig- orously committed to giving their children free education from kindergarten through college. The total outlay for learning approaches $4 billion per year.3 The state spends $2 million per day to Operate its university sys- tem.4 By 1960, this outlay for public education had raised the educational level of its young peOple above that of the nation; Californians over twen- ty-five years of age had completed a median of 12.1 school years (the national average is 10.6 years.)5 Close to eighty-five percent of its high school graduates go on to college, compared with less than sixty percent in the nation as a whole.6 This thirst for education goes on into the adult level: the University of California has several thousand extension courses,7 and nearly one million Californians are engaged in some form of adult edu- cation, including large numbers of housewives and grandmothers.8 l _ Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 255. 2 Ibid. 3 fl: P° 256- 4 Hill, Dancing Bear, p. 17. Roske, Everyman's Eden, p. 542. 6 Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 256. 7 Ibid., p. 193 George B. Leonard, "Where the California Game is Taking Us," Look, June 28, 1966, p. 116. p“ walk"; - vs Ecuaver, though the sizesmation facilities :i :12 best science faCult :rersity anyt-‘nere,1 its 1:: xxknafiget cuts proposed 322226 faculty dissent ‘-“ l .. issues, and begin. : I 1 0— v: C) '1 r? he first tire Zze California voter 22:5. The state's bewildex s 31g: proportion (a: ‘ independent w t. ...... LStS and practicing : Californians tion. They lature and :1», mansion) a ta 6d the notion grESS’ and he 1n the White '.' - The :71. ilsm’ of dis: insistence (w Ilia Politics I," sq~~ unn . i l" '1 S tate of Kc' 2 I“ T.“ 16 GQlJernOr 1 ' t ‘\"‘ y ‘1. ~ {N1 hade 3 Inc ’ 317 86 However, though the University of California is one of the greatest public education facilities in the land, boasting among other things some of the best science faculties--including fourteen Nobel laureates-~of any university anywhere,1 its luster is threatened by the current political crisis-~budget cuts pr0posed by the governor, public indignation over stu- dent and faculty dissent which is reflected in voters' rejection of build- ing bond issues, and beginning in the fall of 1971, the imposition of tuition for the first time in the university's lOZ-year history.2 The California voter (so the story goes) is unpredictable and bi- zarre. The state's bewildering party disunity, its "lunatic fringers," and the high pr0portion (approximately one-third) of its citizens who are classed as independent voters3 make California the deSpair of political scientists and practicing politicians alike. Californians have an unfettered political imagina- tion. They have sent John Birchers to the legis- lature and the Congress, an actor to the Governor's mansion, a tap dancer to the U.S. Senate, entertain- ed the notion of electing an ex-child star to Con- gress, and helped place one of their local lawyers in the White House after denying him Sacramento. . . . The mixture of reformist zeal and conserva- tism, of distrust of government interference and insistence on government help . . . lend Califor- nia politics an eSpecially unreal air. This unnerving lack of political stability perhaps has its roots in California's history. To the state's pioneers, preoccupied with carving 1 "A State of Excitement," p. 66. "The Governor v. the University," Time, March 30, 1970, p. 69. 3Remi Nadeau, California: The New Society (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1963), p. 5. 4 "A State of Excitement," pp. 65-66. .. C -~~;-"iza:ion and personal . ===afixture of social 53' ::L::i:s were a nuisance; - ' f...— . ‘ g ...“... _, etc.) were non-par ' H.. - 3r ' ..esgerirent and the cesi: . n '59. H ,. . ..‘::h left and right; ' IE. '1‘1‘ :_—-— — " Toe emergence of the . ... v .-.. snowed up as forces Iiftte sociologists as a Shorn 0‘ L tra; it exercises, in the uncvm: To a member c 1115 Leftist Orlly anS'd v- t 5 ( 87 civilization and personal fortunes out of the wilderness, government was less a fixture of social maturity than a necessary evil. Orthodox party politics were a nuisance; after all, the citizens' prime concerns (water, Indians, etc.) were non-partisan problems. "The saga of politics," said one writer, "was an interplay between two great frontier forces--the urge to experiment and the desire for security. One causes radical surges to- ward both left and right; the other superimposes a stabilizing 'moderation.'”1 The emergence of the New Left and the Extreme Right, both of which first showed up as forces to be reckoned with in California, are explained by some sociologists as a result of the rootlessness of the West Coast society. Shorn of tradition and the moderating influence it exercises, the new Californian casts about for an alternative. Some find this alternative in the uncompromising principles of extremism. To a member of the John Birch Society, or to his Leftist counterpart, there are no questions, only answers; no problems, only solutions. The predominance of the Far Right in California politics may be due in part to the difficulty which some of the state's oldest residents have found in adjusting to non-frontier complexities. Ultra-conservatives flock to the John Birch Society, headquartered in San Marino, for deliverance from that confusing environment symbolized by the Beatniks and the hippies.3 "The more experimental and permissive the moral, artistic, political, and social Left, the more the Right backs up in its ruts, high-centering itself 1Hill, Dancing Bear, pp. 11-12. 2From a 1966 report of the liberal Republican Ripon Society of Southern California, quoted in Morgan, Pacific States, p. 127. 3 Rolle, California: A History, p. 683. zazzizuies hallowed by Intil recent yearS. ::’.;:;:al didoes as a sic” "finch what went on i :1964 California became :::;e::icns based on 3 Jul are that Californi; Egreseatatives, cmpareg 1 grease in electoral “.10: item more attent ionm :zle‘.‘ "4' t“ mucuon to cults ~—-.= it sects with bombas Z'ESE 3'35 tile 1 Temple of t1“. 7.33531; i n "05 Angeles in 88 on attitudes hallowed by the example of Ulysses S. Grant and Mrs. Grundy.”l Until recent years, there was a tendency to dismiss California's political didoes as a sideshow that, while amusing or curious, had nothing to do with what went on in the main tent of American politics. However, in 1964 California became the nation's most pOpulous state; and recent projections based on a July 1, 1969 Census Bureau estimate of state pOpu- lations are that California will have forty-two seats in the House of Representatives, compared to New York's thirty-nine,2 and a correSponding increase in electoral votes and influence in national political conventions. Even more attention-getting than its politics has been California's fabled addiction to cults and cultists. There were few evidences of cul— tism between 1850 and 1900; but as the region grew in wealth and fame, it began to attract some strange characters and the early 1900's found a ple- thora of sects with bombastic names Springing up. The most publicized of these was the Temple of the Four Square GOSpel founded by Aimee Semple Mc- Pherson in Los Angeles in 1922, whose followers numbered thirty-five thou- sand. At the time of her death in 1944, there were two hundred branches of her temple around the state, and even now the Temple counts a membership of twenty thousand.3 There were few California cults which did not practice some form of health faddism--as simple as vegetarianism, as ritualistic as Hatha Yoga. 1 Wallace Stegner, "California: The Experimental Society," Saturday Review, September 23, 1967, p. 28. 2 "Slower Migration Cuts House Seat Estimate," Associated Press dis- patch in Lincoln Journal, February 16, 1970, p. 2. 3 Morgan, Pacific States, p. 88. c 9 do ("7 ‘fi ‘ Martlers. In Los “*- I:.'.. ‘ 1:25." The Americ an Hedi - n A ' _ o . ;;.:'.:.::ar;sts than an) I. . :5. :5 3.5.3.3 nave links 'a" ' The apparently vi 1 1 it :szprcuing effect cf “" ‘. ...‘ I sill: 'u'. Sweet as say'ng . “‘1 ‘Y y .... I,“ 5 eligion among 1:14,: In the proce s ‘ g. practices, of? have undergon been loosened leaders of 1‘; Cmplained, 3 Catholic C'nur tices and prc mutations in rule off-beat sec t. 89 According to the Federal Drug Administration, cults support hundreds of dealers in health-food supplements, bogus diagnostical devices, and pure- water bottlers. In Los Angeles alone, there are seventy-six health food 1 stores. The American Medical Society says that California lists more chiropractors, allOpaths, naturOpaths, faith healers, herb doctors, and acupuncturists than any other state (almost more than all other states), most of whom have links with the cults.2 The apparently willing reception for these fads is due, in part, to the uprooting effect of migration, says Carey McWilliams. He quotes Dr. William W. Sweet as saying, "History is replete with instances of corrup- tion of religion among migrating peOple," and adds, In the process of moving westward, the customs, practices, and religious habits of the peOple have undergone important changes. Old ties have been loosened; old allegiances weakened. The leaders of the orthodox faith have repeatedly complained, with the exception of those of the Catholic Church, that established church prac- tices and procedures have undergone various mutations in Southern California. While off-beat sectarianism steadily declined after World War II,4 peOple turned in some numbers to more complex and sophisticated Spiritual guides, such as Zen Buddhism, Dianetics, and the Eastern religions of the swamis and the gurus.5 As bizarre cults give way to psychiatrists and 1Nadeau, The New Society, p. 259. 2Gentry, Late, Great State, p. 248. 3 Carey MbWilliams, Southern California Country, p. 269. / Morgan, Pacific States, p. 88. 5 Roske, Everyman's Eden, p. 553. ;:~:; therapy, observers w, belierly, in particular 5:: its stability of trait ;Sr.':':ern California alo: l 'ZI.5333 . Saving long been a 'r; 2'." rising that California :::;:;:s fry; the world. ‘: 2115 new type of your-g. .....j , .‘ II ..-..uluare was creatu- .. ... sat-3515 on love and .sr‘. aso included le tt in ..-.:::-., and their use of ...: hippies tong-re ea a ten by fifteen bl f. figha’. " -8 a major {Our-1'- :14 Ti ' -'_‘ . ruailclty and the il l_" . 1111's.. ' ‘ ) tne criminal e 5:27.13.- H ‘ , ..ad every ghet’ . x .. “§\y - ~§Jn $51G ide ’ 90 group therapy, observers wonder if SOphistication is taking place or not. The elderly, in particular, cling to religious cultism as a substitute for the stability of tradition. There are at least two hundred such cults in Southern California alone, with a combined membership of twenty-five thousand.1 Having long been a haven for varied religions and cults, it was not surprising that California became the home of hippies, the drug-bemused dr0pouts from the world. During the 1960's, the alienation from society of this new type of young rebels became so great that a Species of "under- ground culture" was created which centered on the search for "inward values," an emphasis on love and sharing, and the use of drugs. The hippies' life style also included letting their hair and beards grow, dressing as they pleased, and their use of psychedelic colors and ultrasonic music. The hippies congregated in the Haight-Ashbury district of San Fran- cisco--a ten by fifteen block section east of the Golden Gate Park--which soon became a major tourist attraction, rivaling Chinatown.2 With the lurid publicity and the ogling tourists came commercialization and an in- vasion by the criminal element; and before long it became evident that the community had every ghetto ill--poverty, malnutrition, illegitimacy, drug addiction, suicide, mental disorder, and venereal disease. Distrust gradually arose among those who came to feel that their way of life had proved no better than society's . . . Sociologists and psycholo- gists felt that the Hippies raised valid questions about society's ethics3 yet these malcontents did not provide solutions. 1 "A State of Excitement," p. 17. Hartman, California and Man, p. 346. 3Rolle, California: A History, p. 682. Zippies have since 1: EZEIZEC comunes in rural . religiras; and the hippie :Li-zing of the nation's y tether as the tau-t xxsfcmncn affiliati~n . rot-v .: :' ...iee Americans are tater: in their former ca 1:: atter arriving in Cal 121's ahead on owed their £01176 4.: :erbers are Ca: hc-ii since formal relig“ $3.1:- “ ..s onen resort to u cause trad-it in this cows; have been ad parts of the “P00 their Kite:- and Editor 91 Hippies have since left some of their larger centers; some have started communes in rural areas; others have pursued various eastern religions; and the hippie influence on the styles, entertainment, and thinking of the nation's youth has become wideSpread. Whether as the cause or result of the preoccupation with cults, the rate of church affiliation in California is low: while approximately two out of three Americans are church members, this is true for only about one 1 in three Californians. This means that a large pr0portion who were church members in their former communities did not bother to renew their affilia- tion after arriving in California. Because it is largely Protestants who have abandoned their former affiliation, more than half the California church members are Catholics.2 Since formal religion is declining in influence, conventional denom- inations often resort to unusual salesmanship to attract followers. "For the most part," a church survey made up in Los Angeles states, "the newly developing relig- ious teachers are sincerely trying to serve their followers, and prove to be strong influences be- cause traditional habits do not reach the peOple in this community. Even the older-type churches have been adOpting measures unsanctioned in other parts of the country for a more effective hold upon their pe0p1e." Writer and editor Remi Nadeau, a fifth-generation Californian and the author of several books on California, feels that there is also room for serious concern over some of the organized religion that does exist in Cal- ifornia. l Nadeau, California: The New Society, p. 178. 2 21%;: P: 182- 3Carey McWilliams, Southern California Country, p. 269. The Christianit pits is not we: gregation are t of them, but wt .. . Californ' attachment tr) cross denomina much real enth spreading the are so well a: time for reli; California the or modernist ; wnere the r:e-:.': but a gimmick gious sarictai ~LC ment. , . . I: almost Unique GIVOICQd fro: It is almost Ofle'fourth of This is all .- t ltornian is t the widest pa v .:., ‘ .mtmmbt the Califor re»: “ate e tern of living ~ ~port b LI: I'a'.‘ the world, “hic‘ n a COS t o fuptos 92 The Christianity preached in some of these pul- pits is not very demanding. Those in the con- gregation are told, not what religion expects of them, but what they can expect of religion . . . Californians do not have a strong personal attachment to their denomination but readily cross denominational lines. . . . There is not much real enthusiasm among many churches in spreading the GOSpel . . . Committee meetings are so well attended that there is not much time for religion. The result is that many California churches, whether of the fundamental or modernist persuasion, are reaching the point where the member is offered, not a challenge but a gimmick . . . (His church) offers reli- gious satisfaction without religious commit- ment. . . . In sum, California provides an almost unique experiment as a society largely divorced from organized religious guidance. It is almost as secular as France, where only one-fourth of the people are church affiliated. This is all the more remarkable since the Cal- ifornian is offered not just one faith, but the widest possible choice.1 No doubt the Californians' church-going is greatly affected by their weekend pattern of living. Friday is "get-away" day--from mid-afternoon on, the freeways Sport bumper-to-bumper traffic as residents flee to beaches and mountains. And this would not be possible without the famed California freeways-~the most intricate and expensive highway System in any comparable area of the world, which by 1980 will reach 12,500 miles in length, and this at a cost of up to $15 million a mile.2 The greatest concentration of motor vehicles in the world is in Cal- ifornia. In 1965 it passed the ten million mark--a ratio of one car per 1.7 residents.3 Nearly five million automobiles churn through the Los 1Nadeau, The New Sociegy, p. 182-5 paSSim. 2 Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 41. 3 Gentry, Late, Great State, p. 167. . I ‘ ‘ ~‘..;.cC :0 53.: .I" “" l‘n'nn “: 44*- };d ' ' ....d ,, . , . _ ., -. artf-fiug‘ I ._ .. ..t‘i. l U.‘-“ "0- \ 2 'J .rv ~~2a.. 93 Angeles megalopolis each day, Spewing exhaust from eight million gallons of gasoline.1 Only the states of New York, Pennsylvania, and Texas have more cars than does Los Angeles.2 One-half million peOple enter the down- town area every day; five persons commute by car to every two by bus. One-third of the available land downtown is devoted to parking. Metro- politan Los Angeles has only about five thousand peOple per square mile compared to San Francisco with sixteen thousand five hundred per square mile and Manhattan with seventy-six thousand. A mass transit system would be of doubtful merit in this urban Sprawl.3 But it is doubtful that the urban Californian would ever give up his automobile and his freeways, for the car has become "an extra, highly essential part of the human anatomy."4 7 What the promenade around the central plaza is to Latin cities, the freeway is to the Califor- nian: the parade of his peers, the lemming urge, the common meeting ground. Yet . . . it is chillingly impersonal, suicidally frenetic, and so vacuous as to make its inhabitants appear as the robots of a city that has become a puppet of technology. In many areas, congestion has reached the point where police are just as busy keeping traffic moving as in slowing it down. Anyone in the left lane driving Slower than the flow of traffic is liable to be ticketed. The high accident and violation rate is accounted for as much by the energy 1 "A State of Excitement," p. 66. 2 Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 41. Morgan, Pacific States, p. 63. 4 Nadeau, The New Society, p. 234. 5Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 46. ...~ :svemination 1 ;i::':er regions. 21353-115 as the _ ‘.,. we 7. --.¢... ..' 0‘ ' > "' 0-,... ... .' .~ ( _ . "“vg «it. 0': but sees-San Fran £15, with clc-s 3.53:6 people This nobi‘. ‘u -3 , one in ~.. ol . "’1 94 and determination in the California temperament as by the crowded, nerve- wracking conditions of the freeways. The eight million California drivers get more than four million traffic tickets a year. California Life Style Californians make up the most mobile segment of our society. They travel substantially more, both in business and in pleasure, than Americans of other regions. In recent years they have been buying half again as many paSSports aS the national average. They make up more than one-third of all pleasure travelers in the Pacific beyond Hawaii. According to an American Airlines survey, almost twice as many Los Angeles residents, on a per capita basis, flew between Los Angeles and New York as did New Yorkers.2 The Los Angeles-San Francisco commuter's airlanes are the most traveled in the world, with close to four million round trips per year.3 More than thirty thousand peOple are employed at the Los Angeles International Airport itself.4 This mobility is also seen in residential movement. On a national average, one in five families changes its residence each year; in northern California the ratio is one in three; in Southern California it is one in two. The apex of mobility is reached in San Bernardino county, which is the largest county in the nation and has a heavy military and aerOSpace factory pOpulation. There a recent survey showed that on an average every family moved every year. 1Nadeau, The New Society, p. 238. 2 Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 75. 3 Ibid., p. 40. 4 23.1.9.1, p- 51- 5Ibid., p. 76. 95 Some of the practical problems created by such mobility are illus- trated by the San Diego department store with seventy thousand revolving charge accounts, which must make three thousand address changes each month. Half of its customers move each year.1 Mest large Southern Cal- ifornia cities require new telephone books every few months.2 As Neil Morgan, columnist for the San Diego Tribune and author of several books on California, sums it up: The Californian has a penchant for impermanence. Those peOple with whom he involves himself seem interchangeable . . . He buys and sells his houses in much the same way that others buy and sell their automobiles and then he moves on. He tends to live on the land, an affluent squatter, rather than to become a part of it. He does not sink roots easily. He drifts between communities of amiable strangers. He may be immensely affable with his neighbors, but he chooses to avoid personal entanglement; his closest friend may be 20 miles distant by freeway. . . . This is the land of the urbane hustler, the professional nomad . . . . When the Californian talks of home, he often means a place in Kansas or Illinois or Missouri. In the end, with start- ling frequency, he does return to that home. Air shipments of corpses from the Los Angeles Inter- national Airport are over 3,000 each year. No doubt this impermanence and mobility have contributed to creating what sociologist Carle C. Zimmerman has called "communities of Strangers." Having broken old ties in moving West, the migrant is often Slow in making new ones. He is not likely to be deeply involved with his neighbor. 1 Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 77. 2Nadeau, The New Society, p. 35. 3 Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 70-71. 4 Morgan, Pacific States, p. 15. ‘ .I‘ . ' #1:“ .1 >H‘c “...-ILV vl‘.‘ - b “;’~'-a’ rue-n. M A ‘ ‘ .,..—y o .L.~ha§:\., 0': :‘;‘r‘\-\ l'xe' ...H... s\.' 96 Possibly this trait harks back to the pioneers, who shared an ability, as historian Arthur M. Schlesinger, Sr., put it, ”to build a Special brand of democracy, one based on the notion that the best good of all was served by everyone looking out for himself."1 The fences which Californians build about their homes effectively symbolize the compartmentalization of California society, in which the family tends to shut itself from the world and live its separate life. They build fences around their yards, often tall ones, thus clearly establishing the boundaries of their worlds, creating islands of permanence, certainty, comfortably familiar amidst a sea of change. After driving the freeways, it is a relief to return to something orderly, compact. Privacy is a factor, but whether for isolation or insulation is a matter of individual determination. More often than not, they have nothing against their neighbors. They Simply do not know them. Los Ange- les is composed of "communities of Strangers"-- peOple who share the same Streets, the same mailman and the same garbage collector, but little else. A natural corollary to the Californians' preoccupation with self is tolerance for others. One has difficulty doing as he pleases in a society of bigots or busybodieS. Here, everyone is free to "do his own thing"-- and it is difficult sometimes to know how much is broadmindedness and how much is simply that no one cares. In the matter of morals, Southern Cal- ifornia is, by and large, permissive. It has been suggested that those Who move there leave their morals behind. Perhaps a more likely explanation is that they had to learn to tolerate the more relaxed codes, or be miserable. l "A State of Excitement," p. 64. 2Gentry, Late, Great State, p. 186-7. 3 Ibid., p. 188. 3 97 In all the West Coast communities, the old Puri- tan ethic, shaped in conflict with an environment of storm and violent changes of weather, of Strug- gle with nature, seems to be withering away, to be replaced, in widely varying degree, by the old "vie Mediterranee" of interpersonal laissez-faire and dolce far niente, of wide tolerance and easy manners.I While many migrants bring old habits and seek to establish much of their former pattern of living, a basic implication of their migratior from other parts of the nation is their readiness to accept new ways of life. One of California's most salutary characteristics is an open mind --a willingness to give an idea 3 Sporting chance to prove itself, rather than condemning it out of hand.2 This climate of tolerance and absence of tradition encourages ex- perimentation and innovation. The fact is that Californians have become so used to the idea of experimentation that they are psychologically pre- pared to try anything. "Whenever we have had anything new to try out," reports A.0. Buckingham, chairman of Brand Names Foundation and vice-president of Cluett, Peabody and Co., "I have always asked our peOple to send it out here (Los Angeles) because I knew you would try it. I knew that you would not think of all the reasons that old established communities can think of why it wouldn't be successful, but that you would take it and say, 'Let's try it.' After you have tried it and made a success of it, then the old established cities accept it. If any- thing, that is the magic which has made Los Ange- les great."3 As a result, "whatever the fad--from rock 'n' roll to the new sound, from miniskirts to mod, from Sky to scuba diving, from the sensual to the 1 Stegner, "The Experimental Society," p. 28. 2 Nadeau, The New Society, p. 289. 3Quoted in Carey McWilliams, Southern California Country, p. 221. u ‘v-o' sq ...L'-. ... ‘ ”a a” \ - --.§.‘ A N n" ““VWS.-. : . V‘- P '5. ‘* - “0;, . .e ‘- -us- -.‘ ‘s ._~ - --- A. ‘ ‘x 4 .‘ .‘ a. v, ‘s ‘\ A - Q‘ . 3‘ ‘ b_ ‘ s... ‘\ ‘7. n -' ‘- .‘ ‘_\ -s 98 psychedelic--chances are it first caught on big in California."1 Even Los Angeles itself is a prototype of a concept of urban devel- Opment in which the vitality of the city is not concentrated at the center but Spun out into the periphery—-a cellular city whose Smaller communities would readily allow for the amenities of family life and community rela- tionships as opposed to the overpowering concentration of life in other 2 urban centers. Innovation has also carried over into the niche that women hold in California society. There is historical basis for this uniqueness, for, at a premium in the mining camps of early days, women were given preferen- tial treatment. A visitor to California in 1867 wrote that . . . under social arrangements so abnormal, a white woman is treated everywhere on the Pacific Slopes, not as man's equal and companion, but as a strange and costly creature freed fro the re- straints and penalties of ordinary law. In addition, the primitive conditions made the Western woman self- reliant, and the long distances made her master first of the horse and then of the auto. Her ascent in a man's world was accelerated during World War II when She went to work in the shipyards and aircraft plants. As a result, California women are not only more equal than in most other places, but they are becoming at least as equal as the California men. Wrote Dr. George R. Bach, a Los Angeles psychologist: There is a new kind of woman in the world. She is found mostly in California, leading the revolution l Gentry, The Late, Great State, p. 12. 2Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 250. 3 Carey McWilliams, The Great Exception, p. 80. 4 0 Nadeau, The New Soc1ety, p. 172. ..41 ‘11.: . w Timur-.W'" '— kijune, 1967, the .a.if:r:ia Woman," and :xsazc' women (two ~~=- lazilies; hem fee 1 v that i5 gal-1i? the SEXES- S dict, all C“ She is the fl the equal Of The Californ‘. male. S'ne (‘1 to. On the male. S'ne 6 She is inter~ I. g 0 - eea California VIOFJIC'Z‘ h“? we more liberal are m oung 1‘91: bEllev ‘ e In God ‘ I .‘i 99 that is taking place in the relationship between the sexes. She will be found tomorrow, I pre- dict, all over the world. She is the first really free woman in history, the equal of the male in every reSpect . The California woman does not compete with the male. She does not want to. She does not have to. On the other hand, she is not afraid of the male. She does not fear exploitation . She is interesting, stimulating, a real person. 1 In June, 1967, the Ladies Home Journal devoted an issue to "The California Woman," and concluded, based on a research sampling of four thousand women (two thousand in California, two thousand in other states) that she is different. This survey revealed the following differences between California women and their sisters in other states: California women have more liberal attitudes towards sex and birth control; prefer smaller families; are more racially tolerant; attend more cultural affairs. More of them feel younger than they are; more take adult education courses; fewer believe in God than they did before; fewer are regular church goers. Perhaps the most important conclusion from the questionnaire was that near- 1y three times as many California women felt that California women are different--that they lead "more glamourous, exciting lives." But writers seem to agree that, for all their freedom and equality with men, California women are not in danger of going masculine, and are not only as beautiful as any in the world but also as feminine, although they don't Show their femininity in the traditional domestic ways. Those 1 George R. Bach, Ph.D., "Her Amazing Sexual Freedom," Ladies Home Journal, July, 1967, p. 63. 2"HOW Different IS She--Really?" Ladies Home Journal, July, 1967, p. 63. :; 2e act pursuing c are- -:::l-.eir children, in a 331:: courses are enrol .‘ 7‘ 1.7.1435, pounds and 2:125 as the Everywtma 3.. inflation of bored :7 If California's we: 11:25 to be a state C 5:33E"5ix percent of [ht 1 u 1‘. 4 .,, and it is estimate; rigs-five is expected t 2:1:251 projections of California is the 1 2:t.'5:"’icll(.‘L1_c, deVOtitr 100 iflm>are not pursuing careers often spend their time in organized activities widitheir children, in attending classes (one-third of the university ex- tension courses are enrolled in by women), dabbling in the arts, "fending offvninkles, pounds and ennui" in all-day health clubs,1 and in such waflures as the Everywoman's Village in Van Nuys, "an eXperiment in the rehabilitation of bored middle-aged housewives."2 If California's women are different, so are its youth. California unminues to be a state of, for, and by its youth. Almost nine million (finty-six percent of the pOpulation) are less than twenty-five years of 388,3 and it is estimated that by 1980, the number of Californians under twenty-five is expected to increase about ninety percent compared with rational projections of fifty-nine percent. California is the first child-centered society, says Remi Nadeau, widiconSpicuous devotion to children almost reaching the point of child sunship. A cause for this may be the breaking of the continuity of gen- euations. With grandparents and other relatives left behind in the East, Y©ung couples turn more completely to their children. In turn, this brings (Nla tradition of more freedom for the youngsters, partly because of less 5 Inessure from.older relatives on preper upbringing. In short, California young peOple are probably more free, and more 1 "A State of Excitement," p. 60. 2Gentry, Late, Great State, p. 188. 3 Hartman, California and Man, vii. Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 269. 5 Nadeau, The New Society, p. 102. v , Jfrwrr—i -———— r‘e sl‘nate and the . . - -:-‘~-ine and their expo. , ~u .. ‘ 1 --.:1.1ior the annual m. :1:isi:g by ten perce... Certain it is that ftrzis youth are at the Mobile, tea. Parental re: Cf freedtfirfi, this Pleasa: sibilitiES. Where clima Year-rOumd Ti- 1 ‘ 9 g5 smould, tnen, C RC t3 lOl carefree, than their counterparts in other regions. They have in this state the climate and the facilities needed to enjoy the fullest measure of the bloom of life. This freedom, combined with the lack of parental discipline and their experimental attitude, no doubt helps to account for the rising incidence of delinquency among California juveniles, for even allowing for the annual population jump, juvenile arrests in all categories . . 1 are r181ng by ten percent or more each year. Certain it is that teenagers and adults tend to live in separate worlds in California, even more so than in the rest of the country. Cal- ifornia youth are at the forefront of national teenage emancipation. Mobile, reasonably well-financed, and with few parental restraints, they have a premature taste of freedom. They are not required to pay for this pleasant state with any particular reSpon- sibilities. And they live in a part of the world where climate and geography combine to provide a year-round grab bag of diversions. It should, then, come as no surprise to California parents that their offSpring are probing new frontiers of hedonism. The Western style is so leisure-oriented that the pursuit of pleasure is becoming a regional trait. The fact is that California, perhaps more than any other state, is really a fulfillment of the Ameri- can dream--considerable comfort, escape from drud- gery and hardship, reasonable leisure time, and the environment to make the most of it. Is this not the American promise--freedom to enjoy life as the fruit of honest labor? Wilson Carey MCWilliams, "Notes of a Native Son," p. 356. 2 Nadeau, The New Society, p. 135. 3 Ibid., p. 3. II J ‘yv‘w-IA 35:3 again, the envi: :::':e Californian, usual; zaxxcmmnt. Nature ;: 1;:fiwre. The sun nah: ngztareas, available: 1......011113' not Class the: ... ans sun-bathing a '-.-'.:=I‘. people live within fix“ L... sider the (I? wry- v “\.‘ PQ‘ ' I E California rL P0015 in the COHECHIV {Out with $lC,CCun In 1966, [34w registered 1 Pilots. ":1... three gclt é and only 3 lat ' , ion Cour: In SOUthern a m1111011. a milliQn b Of all kind 102 Here again, the environment is what seems to make the difference, for the Californian, usually without thinking it through, equates leisure and environment. Nature provides playgrounds, and Californians have cars to get there. The sun makes the seashore, mountains, and desert into amusement areas, available even to those whose budgets elsewhere in the nation would not class them as the leisure class. Swimming, boating, surfing, and sun-bathing are bound to be popular activities when fifteen million people live within a one-hour drive of an ocean beach.1 Consider these figures: California reputedly has one-half the swimming pools in the United States.2 They are not un- commonly found in the backyards of families with $10,000 per year income. In 1966, there were 13,000 private aircraft registered in California, with 70,000 active pilots. There are three times as many par- three golf courses as the second-ranked state, and only a slightly lesser multiple of regu- lation courses. The saddle horse pOpulation in Southern California is estimated at half a million. Californians own more than half a million boa 3, plus lavish beach equipment of all kinds. More fishing licenses are bought in California than in any other state. Car rentals are double the national average; sales of film and photographic equipment are Hartman, California and Man, -. 432. 2 Rolle, California: A History, p. 682. 3 Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 191. 4 Ibid. 5 Morgan, Pacific States, p. 90. se, of cour .1. A". ) | e fornia ‘ 1e Cal1 - o a 1a .ention- h L v-v a .3 tau 1 ‘ “all-e. \‘ 9‘ ~31; 103 half again as high in California as nationally.1 An estimated 300,000 go in for skin diving in its various forms. About half a million Cali- fornia youths regard themselves as surfers. A 1965 survey showed that Disneyland is second only to San Francisco as the most-visited des- tination in western United States, Even Las Vegas and Yosemite followed Disneyland. Then, too, California's population includes high pr0portions of older, retired people and of young people--both groups largely unproductive and requiring outlets for energies and interests. And, of course, implicit in all the outdoor activity is the cult of the body, the interest in vitality and good health. Commented one writer: "If the London fog can make the English 'moody and intrOSpective,' what must the California sun do the Californians? . . . . it is impossible to . . . . . 5 appear ashen and morose 1n Californ1a, even 1f one tries very hard." As was mentioned earlier in this chapter, there are many health fad- dists, and the ratio of doctors to pOpulation (175 per 100,000) is higher than the national average.6 However, the general interest in health seems not to be with health per se; rather than being an end in itself, health is simply a prerequisite for the enjoyment of life. 1 Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 190. 2Nadeau, The New Society, p. 224. 3Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 197. 4 Ibid., p. 194. Hale and Eisen, California Dream, xiii. 6 Nadeau, The New Society, p. 259. ‘1 Jun.- 3p".l' lg—w— This interesr 1n -‘-1‘~:lation, whicn 1r. :.'°_:'-.e new life patze: : .. gned 10. r" s:1:ia..v ces o O ' Voile tne state s ~u< s» 1:14;, the prOpC-rti‘r o.\. ..-1: peOple came to Ca ... . "p ....:I‘ place to die; 1" 1:51" ti, todav's elct a; :1 forced to retirt “5 332‘." ll _ “89’ I 00n ' t 'r ‘ “3 Sin-- '---16 Of t he thin ta (6 104 This interest in being healthy and active also applies to the over- 65 pOpulation, which in California doesn't "act its age." Rest homes and rocking chairs are out of style. The region has led in the evolution of a whole new life pattern for the retired--large, self-contained communities Specially designed for older pe0p1e.1 While the state's percentage of people over 65 is under the national average, the proportion seems higher in some areas because they congregate in Southern California and in particular communities such as Santa Cruz, Pasadena, Glendale, Santa Monica, and Long Beach.2 But there is little of the old negativism pervading the haunts of the aged. Whereas originally older peOple came to California, as one observer put it, "because it's a better place to die; their old bones don't ache so much in the warmer weather,"3 today's elderly don't think or act in terms of dying. They may be forced to retire at 65, but they aren't going to stop living. Said one retiree, "I don't mind dying, but I'd sure kick myself for dying before I do some of the things I've wanted to do all my life."4 Even death, when it does come, is looked upon somewhat differently in California. Entombment in mausoleums and the practice of cremation, 5 for instance, are much more common there than elsewhere in the nation. In funeral services and cemeteries, the morbid is banished in favor of Morgan,_§acific States, p. 133. 2 Nadeau, The New Society, p. 257. 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid., p. 265. 5 Carey MCWilliams, Southern California Country, p. 269. ”v.1: mas-NJ .' and digrait“;o Pct-Elli 1' ' in the Californ: :..a."’-;. 11.11: 0: Forest Lawn, w. : :taéi . C10n-b0ufi‘ ink 105 beauty and dignity. Perhaps the man most reSponsible for this noticeable evolution in the Californians' attitude toward death is Hubert Eaton, builder of Forest Lawn, world-famous for its statuary, fountains, gardens, and chapels. Though sometimes criticized and even lampooned for its unctuousness (as by novelist Evelyn Waugh's satirical The Loved One), Forest Lawn draws up to two million tourists and has five thousand fun- erals each year.1 Problems of California's People The foregoing has been a survey of the California scene, the life- style of the peOple among whom Arthur Bietz lives and works. It is evi- dent that California is unlike any other state, and its problems bear the imprint of this uniqueness. Perhaps nothing has more deeply affected America, and eSpecially California, than has man's progress in the field of tranSportation. Mobility has tranSplanted most California families from a tradition-bound, mores-supporting community somewhere back East to the Golden State, where mobility continues to play the dominant role in making the California life-style possible. The impermanence, the fluidity, the transience, the rootlessness, the privatism, the instability, the anomie, many if not most of the pleasure and recreational pursuits, to- gether with numerous other factors in the Californians' syndrome, are all directly or indirectly either the product of or made possible by mobility. Statistics indicate that the Californians are the most mobile of all Americans. This extreme mobility promotes a feeling of permanent imper- manence, particularly in Southern California. As social critic Eugene Burdick put it, "(The California) south of the Tehachapis is occupied by 1 Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 240. I! u gnu—A r-uvil Burchell, t Some see out, ant trunks are :—.aI-1: another, almost 1 instead the average Ca; ...... ._~‘ 106 a rootless, happy, very transient and roiling mob of pe0p1e."1 attitude dates back to the earliest migrations to California. Sidney H. Burchell, the English novelist, in the late 1880's" Some seem to regard existence here as camping out, and never make a real home, living in their trunks for years. Even those that have homes are making changes all the time, trading one for another, or building afresh. Yes, really, it's almost like living in a big tent, with houses instead of canvas tents. This Wrote The average Californian still thinks of himself as a sort of perman- ent tourist, with no real stake in political affairs or social problems. Because "the sense of community reSponsibility is blurred in so fluid a . 3 . . . . soc1ety," the Cal1forn1an re51gns from soc1ety and succumbs to what the sociologists call "privatism"--each family pursuing its own activities with little awareness of the others. In its orientation this life is actually ingoing, withdrawn. It is a rejection of society, in favor of the self. The rolling isolation booths on the highway, the fences around each yard, the absence of sidewalks between houses in the newer subdivi- sions, the tendence toward Specialized communities of young marrieds or senior citizens, are all sym- bolic of a society of strangers. Observes Leo Rangell, 8 Beverly Hills psychoanalyst, "Our modern culture fails to encourage the deep friendships between man that occurred in ancient times. (Yet) true friendship is a human trait which goes along with and makes possible civilization.” The point is that the California society is losing communi- cation-~at least horizontal communication among its members. 1 Eugene Burdick, "The Three Californias," Holiday, October, 1965, p. 67. Quoted in Carey McWilliams, Southern California Country, p. 507. 3 Morgan, Pacific States, p. 18. 4Nadeau, The New Society, p. 280. . c 1 inch enceavors a- snualjflstltutiCnS, «1 -' 211's society and an "‘ “1‘5".bcrhood; and pr. Lu....3. . v- 9 :1 act of much intete- . EOYIHEd a 1 leaVeS SOC As Nadeau s a: S ) The Calif is a ran Very COT, mUtUal 1 he 11....1'5 which he PurpQSe ocioloéis 51:11?“ a state . e-‘Kl’ hprOOte ' I; l\ . 4;. ' Tm 107 Such endeavors as the quest for meaning in life, the improvement of political institutions, and the demand for justice require participation in one's society and an affirmation of one's environment beyond the home and neighborhood; and precisely for this reason, says Remi Nadeau, they are not of much interest to Californians, who have adOpted the traditional feminine attitude that life's problems, duties, and joys are bounded by one's family and perhaps one's friends.1 He adds: In short, the Californian is preoccupied with private affairs at the expense of public affairs. . . . His individualism is . . . the type fore- seen by (Alexis de) Tocqueville in his Democracy in America --an individualism "which diSposes each member of the community to sever himself from the mass of his fellows, and to draw apart with his family and his friends so that, after he has thus formed a little circle of his own, he willingly leaves society at large to itself.3 As Nadeau says, The Californian seems intent on diSproving the statement that "no man is an island." . . . He is a man disengaged from society. Indeed, the very concept of a society of mutually reSponsible, mutually involved citizens goes over his head. He lives not in a society, but in an environment, which he means to make the most of for his own purposes. The sociologists' favorite word for the California condition is "anomie"-- a state in which the human being finds himself in a social vacuum, uprooted, drifting, marked by an absence of social norms and l Nadeau, The New Society, p. 173. The French writer's masterpiece of the 1830's which remains today a classical interpretation by a foreign observer of the American republican system and a democratic society. 3 Nadeau, The New Society, p. 6. 4 Ibid., p. 214. v gainful values. Says California . have little folk the st rather than lead the to ditions, 51 It makes 0: a: here is an in A large nu? and mid-ale- proliferate Roget's, One- 001.] a resic‘ of [he Pers grape "is t EJQOple hEre What will seems 3 1 19 S ented '60. 108 meaningful values. Says Andrew N. Rolle, professor of California history: California can be a disappointment for those who have little to contribute to its society. To such folk the state may seem impersonal and industrial rather than rural and friendly. California may lead the rootless, cut off from old ties and tra- ditions, simply not to care about the future. It makes others insecure. But there is an increasing number of Californians who are searching for meaning, for something in which to anchor their lives. This search takes various forms. A large number of the troubled souls, mainly young and middle-aged, join encounter groups which have proliferated in California. Psychologist Carl Rogers, one of encounter therapy's pioneers and now a resident fellow at the Center for Studies of the Person in La Jolla, is convinced that group- grOpe "is the new psychological frontier. The peOple here are all transients. They're saying 'What will I do for roots?'" . . . The answer, it seems, lies in that Holy Grail of the psyche-ori- ented '60's--. . . "meaningful interpersonal re— lationships." Though transience, with its accompanying rootlessness or anomie, figures largely in the problem of these "troubled souls," and though noth- ing short of meaningful relationships can fulfill this aching void, the Californian's privatism, his family-centered orientation, interferes with the cultivation of these interpersonal relationships. As Nadeau said: In the end, the Californian, no less than other peOple, hungers first of all for meaning in his life. If there is such a thing as personal hap- piness, a more plausible basis for it is surely one's significance to one's environment--more 1Rolle, California: A History, p. 684. 2 "A State of Excitement," p. 65. sirply, (“fit California arm's lengt CO the ncrrx It seems to be an *1;;i:-.ess is the unders: ..£ -.,.'7 ’ '. V o ‘ r..1.:c.y llnrQS this pvt LEVEL; (0 other pct“? tile Comic. To b0rrcwv.. Crowd 0: to be inn grade 7 being «1- .seaniné Lier- - L ' C alilOrniajc 1 n ‘ lfe b ECau Se . le “hiss: ...V Of b . e .-, "-1- In...) x “ 5E act. lxvit. 11-... les 01 “":n 109 simply, one's genuine value to others. But in California one's community is held at such an arm's length that one's significance is confined to the home. It seems to be an accepted though seldom Spoken fact that personal happiness is the understood goal of most all Californians. Here Nadeau pointedly links this personal happiness with one's significance or genu- ine value to other people. It has been repeatedly stated by authorities on social conditions in California that when the larger segment of the community is excluded, then great loss of happiness or meaning in the life is inevitable for many of these Californians. Though happily released from the family and com- munity pressures of their hometowns "back East,” they have lost the security and the settled view- point of a traditional society. They have lost the comfort of corporate behavior and belief and are unequipped by experience to seek Truth alone. To borrow from David Riesman's idiom in The Lonely Crowd, other-directed peOple are suddenly required to be inner-directed, and they can't make the grade. The intense activity prevents them from being alone long enough to face the question of meaning in life. Here is a reference to the intense activity that fills the lives of most Californians, apparently in order to avoid facing the emptiness in one's life because of the lack of meaningful purpose or goals and the con- sciousness of being valued or needed by other persons. Perhaps the most intense activities of the Californian seem to be in the direction of re- creation and the use of leisure time. While residing in Los Angeles, Clifton Fadiman observed in satirical vein, l Nadeau, The New Society, p. 251. 2 Ibid., p. 178. More effiCie' we are prep?- sure - - ' w reffens "35 report: "I h 312 have seen "Anyone not having azalscntent." Quoting a 22:11:: to relaxation ar .1710 creating an anxie: fipiizple living by ex; Traits; and the grand < {P-t‘r- "2 '~I5‘—I Certainly Californ ...:mon. And retreat ”filly y .1 every person sh easurable retreat 110 More efficiently than any contemporary society, we are preparing to shoulder the burden of lei- sure . . . What a fool that old fossil Lincoln Steffens was when he returned from Russia to report, "I have seen the future, and it works." .2; have seen the future-~and it plays. "Anyone not having fun," wrote Remi Nadeau, ”is suspected of being a malcontent." Quoting author Irving Stone's comment that California's devotion to relaxation and diversion demonstrates that "we are on the way to creating an anxiety-free peOple," Nadeau commented, ”but the effect of a people living by expediency rather than convictions may be just the Opposite; and the grand quest for diversion may be less a cure than a symptom."2 Certainly California has many advantages for those who want and need recreation. And recreation itself could never be considered a problem. Ideally, every person should have leisure time in which he could pursue some pleasurable recreational activity. To some in California this lei- sures means healthful activity, cultural and intellectual enrichment, and freedom; others associate it only with boredom, hectic amusements, and a feeling of worthlessness. California's fun philosophy becomes a problem when it is expressed as a hedonistic pursuit of unsatisfying pleasure, in an attempt to fill the vacuum that only the pursuit of meaningful goals and the realization of successful personal relationships can satisfy. Eimg_magazine recently described the view of most Americans when it said, "As most of them see it, 1 Clifton Fadiman, "Mining-Camp Megalopolis," Holiday, October, 1965, p. 60. 2 Nadeau, The New Society, p. 181. :1 act-d, godless, gregar l -- v II 1.. aacut . Even in the midsr c .izrzians often find the: Z‘tiecades ago, David R; P‘. 1.11115 to this fact. ‘. :i Ea: Francisco Cnr 0...; C -. . once a group of cape their when the b1 diVOrcee c at a time with the ( a leiely if&_E-";~ - . -1: IS VYLT‘Sri‘L ~LZ'. .3.“ m _ \ eating $0139, .::.:‘1_:‘:.\:a::L “3 ldet‘tv .c‘w'§,_ ‘81 are not “"510n c Q 3 \ .fi ' Q ‘N\' ‘ 4 V x 111 the good, godless, gregarious pursuit of pleasure is what California is all about."1 Even in the midst of intense activity involving other peOple, Cal- ifornians often find themselves feeling unattached and incredibly lonely. Two decades ago, David Riesman in his book, The Lonely Crowd, gave great emphasis to this fact. More recently, Curt Gentry related the experience of San Francisco Chronicle columnist Merla Zellerbach, who ... . once attended a meeting of the Organization, a group of single people banded together to es- cape their common isolation. "It makes my day when the bus driver recognizes me," one young divorcee confessed to her. "I buy groceries one at a time so I can step by more often and chat with the clerk," a secretary admitted. Observed a lonely widower, "I even love the rush hour." "I am convinced," said Carey MCWilliams, "that the pOpularity of the cafeteria is primarily due to the loneliness of the people. The possibi- lity of meeting someone--just someone--is much greater there than in a restaurant."3 It is evident, then, that the physical and material advantages of California are not sufficient, but must be matched with cultural and social cohesion. As Neil Morgan sums it up, All is not well with the New Californian. . . He says and does what he pleases, or what he pre- sumes to please him, but he is not pleased. He is more self-oriented than he has ever been before. No one frowns at him. There are no intimate neigh- bors to gossip, no established reputations to be "State of Excitement," p. 60. 2 Gentry, Lateinreat State, p. 109. 3 Carey McWilliams, §outhern California Country, p. 171. destroyed' exists, be , . He is about his to replaCE yet found It lurks L facade of many ways. Itisof interest :: fascribe the Cal 1 for mauanand includes :Zf‘flt: ~~10n an d deSpaiI 112 destroyed. The tolerance of the frontier still exists, but now it is a sociological frontier . . . He is uneasy about his freedom and unsure about his goals. If there are new social mores to replace those he has abandoned, he has not yet found them. His anomie becomes epidemic. It lurks unSpoken behind the glossy but fragile facade of California. Yet it is measurable in many ways. It is of interest to note that Morgan here used the term "anomie" to describe the California condition that is related to mobility and privatism and includes wideSpread loneliness and hedonism. Morgan con- tinues by saying, "But more significant patterns of California anomie are found in the high rates of divorce, suicide, homosexuality, illegitimacy, drug addiction, and crime, and the relatively low rate of church affiliation.2 BishOp James A. Pike made a comparable observation in referring to San Francisco as "leading the cities of America in the end products of frustration and deSpair: alcoholism, suicides, drug addiction, homosexu- ality and divorce."3 Indeed, California's statistics for the "end products of frustration and despair" are rather startling. With about ten percent of the national population, California has about twelve percent of known alcoholics. The sale of bourbon in California is three times as much as in Illinois, the state with the second greatest thirst for bourbon.5 San Francisco has the 1 Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 75. 2Ibid., p. 77. 3 Quoted in Neil Morgan, "California: The Nation Within a Nation," Saturday Review, September 23, 1967, p. 17. 4 Nadeau, The New Society, p. 251. 5 . Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 8. "rites: per capita alco'ncl aim-half times that c aside, cirrhosis of iiztzia, it is sixth; and Drug addiction is a ll :a‘iexican border, the 1- .175 helps account for t‘: nuJ, . . ..:.: a narcotics arrest. :2; to Sew York in narc .. . I .. 52'; York Citv.‘ me rate for majo :enation. In 1968: 1 “Men percent . More trestgd tnat year on ‘ "{é rcs e one hundred 5 Los Angeles' Efriljzo Cate 0f 3 15:3 l\ q Xac‘ eau, The \ 5H \ St ate 0 6 f v “or._ 5dn, p- dc 113 highest per capita alcohol consumption rate of United States cities-~two and one-half times that of the rest of California.1 In the United States as a whole, cirrhosis of the liver ranks tenth among the killers; in Cal- ifornia, it is sixth; and in San Francisco, it is fourth.2 Drug addiction is wideSpread, thanks in part to the proximity of the Mexican border, the continent's best-stocked marketplace for narcotics.3 This helps account for the fact that over eighty-three percent of the state's narcotics arrests are in Southern California. The state is second only to New York in narcotics offenders, while Los Angeles is second only to New York City.4 The rate for major crime in California has long been the highest in the nation. In 1968, the rate of personal crimes of violence rose almost eighteen percent. More than five percent of California's pOpulation was arrested that year on various charges. In San Francisco alone, forcible rape rose one hundred one percent between September, 1968 and September, 1969.5 Los Angeles' assault rate is sixty-five percent higher than New York's; the rape rate is almost triple. Law enforcement is complicated by the proximity of two underworld havens, Las Vegas and Tijuana.6 According to a 1967 wall Street Journal article, Southern California 1 Gentry, Late, Great State, p. 112. 2 "A State of Excitement," p. 65. 3 Ibid. 4 O Nadeau, The New Soc1ety, p. 149. 5 "A State of Excitement,“ p. 65. 6 Morgan, Pacific States, p. 86. I n. r \ NV) We srut capital of trm :ibtzed in the United $2. In :atters of sex, 35211255 that marks 50k ‘ Zalifzrnia cities extenc suites, factors to expe- raz-rsuad benign clima: zyactels consistently The young people n; Sizing attitudes towa: SW“? K n ' I .e..nedy , Methodi- ....;:, and it is taken exec. that one in Six- At the high SC" 42: greater. OTle LCS :12 gas . among stUdEQ" But sexual freed “:5 Stics'de fl ’ Often as: :15‘1hird -. hlgner than '5 rking mo re rapidlw 114 is the smut capital of the world.1 Sixty percent of all pornography dis- tributed in the United States is produced in Los Angeles county.2 In matters of sex, the level of permissiveness is high. The same casualness that marks social relationships among the milling hordes in California cities extends to sexual matters. The state has all of the enabling factors to expedite easy sexual relationships: plenty of cars, year-round benign climate, miles of beaches, and above all, affluence. Many motels consistently report over one hundred percent occupancy. The young people of California are leading the way in America's changing attitudes toward sex. "The atmOSphere is wide open," wrote Gerald Kennedy, Methodist bishOp of Los Angeles. "There is more promis- "4 Sociologists have cuity, and it is taken as a matter of course now. guessed that one in six American marriages is the hasty result of preg- nancy. At the high school level in California cities, the prOportion is much greater. One Los Angeles principal Speculates that three in four marriages among students stem from pregnancy or fear of it.5 But sexual freedom is not an easy burden for California youth. Teen- age suicide, often associated with drug abuse, is increasing; already it is one-third higher than the overall suicide rate. The rate of illegitimacy is rising more rapidly than the national average; the pe0p1e of California 1 Brucker, "Memoirs of a Recent Migrant," p. 21. 2 0 Mbrgan, The California Syndrome, p. 239. 3 Morgan, Pacific States, p. 89. 4 Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 85. 5 Ibid. '1‘” :13: sore children than gas: backlog of children Another product Cf 'slifcruia's No. l publi :fiLagnosed cases rose :flalifornia Berkeley c :‘ez'zousand students a: Iztlze past school year :eratio thirteen boy: 2:: of Public Health, :23: one hundred thong m: cases of gonorr'ne 3 (T, ._ g? 3 donosexual s seer “‘5 . .3: ''''' "'5',- : sexually potent hieereas on a nat O in 3.13“ ' . , ‘xtherat - e 15 Climb .“ I ‘NZV ', one Of the hr H.‘ ‘._‘I..’ M." 2 » 115 adOpt more children than those of any other state and still face the lar- gest backlog of children seeking homes.1 Another product of sexual freedom--venerea1 disease--has been called California's No. 1 public health problem. From 1964 to 1968, the number of diagnosed cases rose one hundred sixty-five percent. At the University of California Berkeley campus the gonorrhea rate in 1963-4 was .065 per one thousand students and the rate of contagion thirteen boys to one girl. In the past school year (1968-69) the rate was 8.1 cases per thousand, and the ratio thirteen boys to nine girls.2 According to the state's Depart- ment of Public Health, venereal disease cases in California numbered more than one hundred thousand last year. More than ninety percent of these were cases of gonorrhea, with over half the victims under twenty-five years of age.3 Homosexuals seem to congregate in California. In San Francisco, the homosexual pOpulation is seventy-five thousand, or fifteen percent of the city's sexually potent inhibitants.4 Whereas on a nationwide basis, marriage has one chance in four of ending in divorce, in California, one in two marriages ends in the courts, and the rate is climbing faster than the pOpulation increase.5 San Mateo county, one of the more affluent bedroom suburbs of San Francisco, in 1966 counted 2,631 marriages and 1,794 divorces (more than two out of three), 1 Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 86. 2 "A State of Excitement," p. 65. 3 walter Scott, "Personality Parade," Parade, June 14, 1970, p. 2. 4 "A State of Excitement," p. 65. 5Ibid. .... .v'vl m?- 12:: :he total number or .: astenance exceeding, the In all fairness, it :15 are out-oi-state gEZ‘. 2 maples who decide 1 5.21192 of this is the i a have been narriec One of the most au Easier of the American tetigh incidence of 6. 135$?- Anong other c: . . .-.. “lity, high use of ‘e-n.‘ nag, the over-enp‘n; :rontier attr ac t 5 California 0 f t: «5 aren‘ t 801‘.- ‘v gs ‘‘‘‘‘ o . ‘n‘. 116 with the total number of applications for divorce, annulment, and separate maintenance exceeding the demand for marriage licenses.1 In all fairness, it should be noted that this high rate of divorce has some out-of-state genesis, for California inherits from other states many couples who decide to make one last fresh start in the west. An in- dication of this is the fact that more than half of those divorced in Los Angeles have been married outside California.2 One of the most authoritative of marriage counselors, Dr. Paul POpenoe, founder of the American Institute of Family Relations of Los Angeles, traced the high incidence of divorce in California to the qualities of social va- grancy. Among other causes, he listed the lack of family ties, extreme mobility, high use of alcohol, low religious commitment, wild installment buying, the over-emphasis on "shallow, shabby standards," and the fact that the frontier attracts "the deSperate and unstable."3 California often proves to be the last try for the deSperate--if their problems aren't solved here, there is nowhere else left to go, and suicide often is the only way out. California has one and one-half times the na- tional rate of suicide.4 In San Francisco, suicide is the seventh cause of death, whereas in the United States as a whole, suicide ranks eleventh.5 Gael Greene, "When Divorce Becomes a Way of Life," Ladies Home Jour- nal, July, 1967, p. 62. Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 78. Paul POpenoe, Sc.D., & Dorothy Cameron Disney, "Ten Reasons Why Her Marriage Goes Wrong," Ladies Home Journal, July, 1967, p. 62. 4 Mbrgan, The California Syndrome, p. 78. 5H H A State of Excitement, p. 65. _'.I_'J ‘3 , "fir—1'" .::;r‘.-;crld War II, N "ear? ‘ ,Delore that time 3 a; . - s T‘xilcans. .5221; c a .etond only to ‘; 97‘; ' ..H‘ 1 -:55 C‘Jer "5322, four Western netr' tales-Long Beach, Seattl ta: St. Petersburg-Tar; in suitide rate. Seal Nadeau sums up The world is pects t00 ‘3“ is the obvio' "fun" philos isfaction 05 of happiness than other P in his life. verse escape have somethi orientation. in addition to the u. ,-\ a sane new challenge 5 P ~- ‘ii: p: ' ...umg important p ... ..2 Harts riots of 1965, care be free of seric e g: But duri n 9‘- u those years w: t discriminat 1\ t1 2 Organ, Paci‘w' L- . 117 In fact, four western metrOpolitan areas (San Francisco-Oakland, Los Angeles-Long Beach, Seattle, and Sacramento) have ranked consistently (after St. Petersburg-Tampa) as the highest four cities of more than 500,000 in suicide rate.1 Remi Nadeau sums up the import of these statistics in these words: The world is bound to be disappointing if one ex- pects too much of it. But still more devastating is the obvious challenge in these figures to the "fun" philOSOphy. What Lin Yutang calls "the sat- isfaction of wants" may not, after all, be the essence of happiness. In the end, the Californian, no less than other people, hungers first of all for meaning in his life. . . . Suicide and a1coholism--two di- verse escapes from the realities of 1ife--may well have something to do with the Californian's self- orientation. In addition to the foregoing problems of long standing, California has some new challenges that, having come to the forefront in recent years, are assuming important pr0portions. One is that of racial unrest. Before the Watts riots of 1965, most Westerners had blithely considered the re- gion to be free of serious racial friction. This was a pleasant illusion. Until World War II, Negroes did not constitute a sizable minority in the West; before that time, racial prejudice had been directed against Orientals and Mexicans. But during 1950-60, California showed a gain in Negro pOpu- lation second only to New York state; one of every four blacks who left the South in those years went to California, where it was felt there would be less overt discrimination and more job Opportunities.3 In that decade, 1 Morgan, Pacific States, p. 85. 2 Nadeau, The New Society, p. 251. Morgan, Pacific States, p. 86. *-':::ia's Negro populace- ~- .... 'V l: the tine of the 'n :4: the Los Angeles are. :.L:;*-.etto until it rear -a::i'.-'als were poorly s testes thirty percent; 5, :izie crime rate beta—”e :;s Sagro community had ,. - ... 9 ~ 0» a»: lawns, trees, rc- rae tragic diSpa‘: isrfeund helped fuel t ' v a ‘j 3"? : let one thousand 1 -~ttu'Q‘~JEt area of one I 3:813 ’ Date the , ’ ‘Q; ._ HQ: “a: ‘\ LO gan) Pa ck \Q : ) JUQQ s; Ce: 5 E“ and g :- ”his . 118 California's Negro populace grew by ninety-one percent, while its overall pOpulation increased by only forty-eight percent.1 At the time of the Watts riot, some two thousand Negroes were arriv- ing in the Los Angeles area each month, half of them crowding into the black ghetto until it reached the point of human saturation.2 Most of the new arrivals were poorly schooled and lacked job training. Unemployment reached thirty percent; some sixty percent of the peOple were on welfare, and the crime rate became the highest in the city.3 While on the surface, this Negro community had seemed an unlikely place for violence to break out--its lawns, trees, rows of single-family homes made it far superior to Harlem--the tragic diSparity between the Negroes' hopes and the reality they found helped fuel the riot that took at least thirty-four lives, in- jured over one thousand, destroyed $40 million worth of prOperty in a burned-over area of one square mile, and led to nearly thirty-five hundred arrests. Once the many do well, the few can't be suppressed. "The will-o- the-wisp--Californianism--. . . fuels the rage of the blacks and the Chi- canos5 and the newly militant Chinese, who are all the more conscious than minorities anywhere else of deprivation in the midst of fantastic plenty.6 1 Rolle, California: A History, p. 675. 2Roske, Everyman's Eden, p. 572. 3Morgan, Pacific States, p. 86 and "In Burned-Out Watts: It's Now, Baby," Look, June 28, 1966, p. 94. 4 Cohen and Murphy, Burn, Baby, Burnl, p. 317-18. 5This is the tougher name recently adOpted by the two million Mexicans in Southern California who are organizing for political action. 6 "A State of Excitement," p. 63. " "é!“ Another problem that r; ass-ting national pr c; 1: :i the environment . 1‘: butt of jokes in the ‘ saints of that city or 321335, which now share :5: worriscrze problems .n. l ..- hundred acres of Cal" :tzrbanization or free»: :5 --o' xcsl“ ..zuted fifty then .s“ ‘ .. .. a .. ‘ ccmulates in Cal at limbet ing inter if.“ ~- ‘ ..e by the tides o" ‘*=«3"all are are US 11‘. n A StatE :- Organ , N- alga l.- “imam ‘. 119 Another problem that has seemed most intense in California but is now assuming national prOportions is that of pollution and the conserva- tion of the environment. While the "smog" of Los Angeles has long been the butt of jokes in the rest of the country, it is far from that to the residents of that city or of San Francisco, San Diego, and even Palm Springs, which now share the air-pollution problem.1 But there are many other worrisome problems of this nature: the fact that three hundred to four hundred acres of California land are going under the blade each day to urbanization or freeway development;2 the diSposal of accumulated wastes (an estimated fifty thousand tons--over five pounds per person--of solid trash accumulates in California daily);3 the felling of the fabulous red- woods by lumbering interests; the Spoiling of beaches and destruction of wildlife by the tides of raw petroleum from off-shore oil wells around Santa Barbara-~a11 are arousing intense public concern. From Lake Tahoe to San Francisco and from Eureka to San Diego, people are seeing the Good Life fading fast under oozing oil slicks, tangled freeways and stifling layers of smog. The reaction is short of panic, but not much. Considering the pOpular out- cry, it seems likely that California will take radical action while the peOple of the East remain content to muddle along. California today is down and out, but tomorrow it may well show the rest of the nation how to clean up its air, land and water,4 Student dissent is yet another problem that, from an inception in California, has burgeoned nationally. California youth are at the forefront l "A State of Excitement," p. 63. 2 Morgan, The California Syndrome, p. 311. Hartman, California and Man, p. 40. 4John S. Carroll, "Reveille Out west," The New Republic, March 7, 1970, p. 13. "a“: 13% town- 3‘ 3:13:31 teenage 23;: maerous autOS 52:11:: ties.1 In 19 2:51;; of Californi 5:32: for student 3:2;ezstes encountere 4:. A: Berkeley, tie it: napalm-produc ing 2.21:5 wished to ex giartzent' , they we re 0: the other ha ...: - ~' -~:-§.IlCS, as many I : IliSSI‘OO-ZIS that a: I;s-..T ' .u:.1‘lbmz that attrac <~1-31laries? In the n ....t.«.n that educatic 80km rif 120 of national teenage emancipation because of their generally high incomes, their numerous autos, and their wideSpread rebellion against home and family ties.1 In 1964, when the Free Speech movement erupted on the Uni- versity of California campus at Berkeley, the name "Berkeley" became a synonym for student revolt. The continued student malaise was fed by stalemates encountered in both the civil rights struggle and the Vietnam war. At Berkeley, demonstrations were held against campus representatives from napalm-producing firms and the burning of draft cards was initiated. Students wished to expand radically the role they played in collegiate . . . . . . 2 government; they were impatient With the depersonalization of academic life. On the other hand, public distrust of the state university reached new heights, as many Californians began asking hard questions: Why pay for classrooms that are going to be wantonly burned? Why support the liberalism that attracts eminent scholars if it also Spawns student revol- uationaries? In the minds of many erstwhile campus boosters, the innocent equation that education equals the good life became suSpect.3 This in- creasing town-gown rift has had political repercussions that are now being seen on a national scale. Indeed, the manner in which events in California often foreshadow the future of the nation has been the subject of comment by many observers of that state. Phrases such as "a window into the future," "an Early Warning System for the rest of the country," "the national hot-bed and testing 1 0 Morgan, Pacific States, p. 90. 2 Rolle, California: A History, p. 680. 3 "The Governor v. the University," p. 69. ——-—-—-—c '23:,” ”a :icrocosm of . Eigf"%he Cutting en ~~ ...:an N ..Z .1‘.\ , are used fre- ecsgc,the prescient here America~ st rtling as cature . , search are a religions 3: here are Asa leteers, big ideal, its 5 Patters; it, its sober, raCketteers, out OldSter America is, "~- ‘u: 5“ a ~‘-¢n..‘1rized ’ Most of t‘ cnanged C WflriCa~- CalifOrni the pop‘t HESS, 121 ground," "a microcosm of America, good and bad," "the minutes of the next meeting," "the cutting edge of America," "the prototype for the rest of the nation,‘ are used freely by writers describing the Golden State. Fifty years ago, the prescient Farnsworth Crowder wrote: Here American institutions sharpen into focus so startling as to give the effect, sometimes of cari- cature . . . . Here American scholarship and re- search are at their best; American cults and quasi- religions are at their shallow and shabby worst; here are America's indignant soap-boxers and pamph- leteers, bigots surrendered to some over-simplified ideal, its scared reactionaries and its grim stand- patters; its baronial aristocracy, its patient poor, its sober, good-natured middle class; its promoters, racketeers, Opportunists and politicians; its fagged- out oldsters and its brash, raw youth. . . . What America is, California is, with accents, in italics.1 "Hardly a major move in our national life has not been foreshadowed in the Far West," editorialized ngk_magazine in 1966. ”Good or bad, hOpe horror, California goes on leading the way."2 And in late 1969, Time maga- zine summarized, Most of the trends that recently and radically changed California life are familiar in the other America-~though many first came to prominence in California. They include the hippie movement, the pOp-drug culture, wideSpread sexual permissive- ness, campus revolt, and, since the Watts explo- sion in 1965, more virulent ghetto riots. They also include, in reaction to much of this, a po- litical swing to the right. Not to mention pollu- tion of all kinds and the resulting concern for salvaging the threatened environment. The feeling that California is "where the future will be made" 1 Quoted in Cohen and Murphy, Burn, Baby, Burnl, p. 15. George B. Leonard, "California: A New Game With New Rules," Look, June 28, 1966, p. 32. 3 "A State of Excitement," p. 63. cares much of the writ; 11 zeasenvery tense , ”gene. But the fact ll. 2:3.er in t 0120 r r ow . -.. ...Aap - a . 1 Mineral datel ine . " Sex of the experi" Such as the. - -e "with extraord n "v‘ and. Licerica" and which 'ra. _2;~:r. nmbers that the L‘s "an ‘ intellectual f L ‘:.: a growing Companv 1;;3273 “'1“. i C < Sn; . "Ce Bloloey Lahm a ., I. ““‘»L;) an entirely ‘E-ucted at Santa \fi 122 permeates much of the writing about that state. "Here everything is in the future tense--very tense," stated Time magazine. "California is billed as a now scene. But the fact is, everyone living here has one foot in now and another in tomorrow. Here, you get the feeling, is the authentic in- ternational dateline."1 Some of the experimental programs being deve10ped in California are: "think tanks" such as that at the Rand Corp. at Santa Monica, whose staffers tackle "with extraordinary skill and hubris . . . virtually every problem in America" and which have attracted an intellectual elite to California in such numbers that the San Francisco-Los Angeles university axis has be- come "an intellectual flyway";2 the Esalen Institute at Big Sur Hot Springs, where a growing company of scientists, educators and religious leaders are studying the human potential; the Western Behavioral Sciences Institute in La Jolla, Calif., which is studying methods of improving human relations; the Space Biology Laboratory of the Brain Research Institute at U.C.L.A.; Synanon, an entirely different method of dealing with drug addiction, which originated at Santa Monica and now is being followed in Synanon Houses in several other major cities; innovations in programmed reading which could make genius-level learning ridiculously easy; experiments in using systems analysis to reshape the welfare state; Credit Data Corp., a pr0posed uni- versal credit watcher; a state-wide version of the Federal Budget Bureau's recommendation for a National Data Center - a data-bank where all California's records on the various social services will be computerized by 1973; and the l "A State of Excitement," p. 63. 2 Ibid., p. 64. iterate programing of egueecmurw by both 3m5,the future lo. 2;: editor of LOSE: ma; ‘ehermiclean off th7 cards, incurably Opt 1 V ...”. ...;Less that was once pt -2 : arrogant pr inc iple -;.;..: ,; ...... uld and better t‘: 21'. be doing them still 1: a state of extr 72:1 .-N spurred to gin-mi cl California of other consider problems. to CalifO' change fornia. Q ‘. C AS CitiZG Que to ti regard s tinual a do as tr probletu Of the 1 N n L e vac? v 2 123 deliberate programming of defense and space agency research findings into the peace economy by both business and government. Thus, the future looks very bright for California--unless, as the senior editor of L2 k magazine put it, "they lose their cool now that they've run clean off history's road map."2 Californians are rambunctious, impetuous, incurably Optimistic; they have "that unblinking confidence in progress that was once possessed by all Americans" and they "Operate on an almost arrogant principle that they are doing things better than their parents did and better than peOple are doing them elsewhere, and that they will be doing them still better tomorrow."3 In a state of extremes, superlatives, and near miracles, they are often Spurred to gimmick solutions for their problems. California itself, as a lure to the dissatisfied of other states, is a gimmick. Many Americans consider California the easy answer to their problems. Are they in ill health? They come to California. Is their marriage in trouble? A change of environment, a new start in Cali- fornia. As citizens, they tend to apply the same techni- que to the business of the state. They do not regard society as a group career, requiring con- tinual attention. They tend to believe they can do as they please, on their own, and when public problems arise they can solve them on the Spur of the moment with a gimmick. 1"The Turned-0n PeOple," Look, June 28, 1966, pp. 33-41 passim; also "Personal Privacy v. the Print-Out," Time, February 16, 1970, p. 38. 2 T. George Harris, "California, The First Mass Aristocracy Anytime, Anywhere," Look, June 28, 1966, p. 42. 3 Nadeau, The New Society, p. 290. 4 Ibid., p. 6. In the early years '3: ‘tirist and Student t ’:;a:ient . . . for the 22-.) instant, if peril- tie genius for imprcy; 5:5: selves problems as Latiilema, and can be 5:2, organizat ion , a l‘i-l grinned from frontier 22:21: in their future '“ ;:;;:a:‘:ced by ugliness , a point material boc .'.i achievement . Be. 'u'ith amazing for ‘ =2 in the material ""2ka at Berke lev What wil millions What it 124 In the early years of this century, Lord James Bryce, the great Eng- lish jurist and student of American life, observed that Californians were "impatient . . . for the slow approach of the millennium" and were "ready to try instant, if perilous, remedies for a present evil."1 If this Cali- fornia genius for improvisation can rise above the expedientialism which often solves problems as they come only to add to the difficulty of the next dilemma, and can become true social creativity, with the comprehen- sion, organization, and planning that is implied, then Californians will have moved from frontier conditions into urban grandeur. Then "a new faith in their future may help (them) to build more than plastic cities pockmarked by ugliness, crowding, and the blight of impersonality. At that point material boosterism will have given way to the confidence of solid achievement. Beauty lost will have become beauty rewon."2 With amazing foresight, Lord Bryce suggested the human problems in- volved in the material expansion of the Golden State in an address to an assembly at Berkeley in 1909. He asked: What will happen when California is filled by fifty millions of peOple and its valuation is five times what it is now, and the wealth will be so great that you will find it difficultto know what to do with it? The day will, after all, have only twenty-four hours. Each man will have only one mouth, one pair of ears, and one pair of eyes. There will be more people--as many, perhaps, as the country can support--and the real question will be not about making more wealth or having more people, but whether the peOple will then be happier or better. And that, of course, is the real question, not only for California, but for the rest of the nation as well. 1 Quoted in Carey MCWilliams, The Great Exception, p. 87. 2Rolle, California: A History, p. 685. 3 Mbrgan, The California Syndrome, p. 307. "A GOOD PSYC A 57m OF Mfr?!R t 1.5 ... 500d psycholc gy Religion as a r ience possible inhibitions is sonality ailmer B. One of Dr. Bie: a discipline t': concentrates 0: Should have be: and ethic s , an to life and 0t (p) II. A STUDY OF ARTHUR BIETZ'S FUSION OF RELIGION AND PSYCHOLOGY CHAPTER V "A GOOD PSYCHOLOGY AND A GOOD RELIGION ARE ONE": 1 Outline "A good psychology and a good religion are one and the same thing." A. Religion as a relationship concept is the most therapeutic exper- ience possible to man; but religion as a so-called education in inhibitions is a frightful producer of emotional problems and per- sonality ailments. One of Dr. Bietz's graduate professors stated that psychology is a discipline that dwells on mercy and forgiveness, while religion concentrates on right and wrong. Bietz thinks both disciplines should have both concepts built in. Psychology must have morals and ethics, and religion must put the person and his relationship to life and other persons above moral abstractions. Bietz contends that truth is of one piece, and neither science nor religion has a monOpoly on truth. The two should be fused at the point of truth and relevance. There should be a goal or purpose in life which embraces love of God and discovery of one's identity as a human being. A. To "love God with all you have, and your neighbor as yourself." 1. How to know and love God. a. God is a Person who has provided ourselves, others and all in our environment for our enrichment (which enrichment is His glory.) We may know Him by knowing these evidences, including the Bible. The material covered in this chapter does not purport to be an exhaustive treatment of Arthur Bietz's theological or psycholo- gical beliefs or understandings. It is an outlined treatment of his teachings as inferred from a detailed study of the oral dis- courses listed in the bibliography, with Special interest in those areas of thought that appear to present his fusion of the disci- plines of psychology and religion. 125 b. Man, made to conauni and man as c. Man's firs tity as a appreciate I. Leving his nei Once he h signed by r.} man's love | i self-wort} t.-.‘ - Wat happens i Man cones Within 152 and this g ended one, ion. v Results 3' Happiness after. Eternity “end the J 126 b. Man, made as the "image of God," with the godlike ability to communicate, is a dwelling place for this Creator God; and man may commune with God within himself. c. Man's first order of business is to discover his own iden- tity as a unique son of God (humanness); and learning to appreciate his true status, man is able to gain self-worth. 2. Loving his neighbor as himself. Once he has discovered his own worth and that he was de- signed by the Creator for loving relationships with others, man's love for his neighbor can flow from this position of self-worth. 3. What happens in the process? Man comes into his own, takes over the reins of his life. Within loving relationships, man is called upon to grow; and this growth process is designed to be a continual, Open- ended one, for man's goal is not a destination but a direct- ion. 4. Results a. Happiness is the hOped-for end product here and in the here- after. b. Eternity - man alone among the creatures of earth can compre- hend the concepts of death and eternity. The promise of eternity is a continued quest, in_a real-life situation, for becoming what we were intended to be inherently. B. The goal of life in the Bietz psychological context is to discover one's identity as a human being (his uniqueness as a human being and his potential self-worth) and to progress in a continual movement toward self-realization (as represented by wholeness and by the in- evitable quality of happiness). 1. Identity: Man is the highest of the creatures on earth and his qualities or capacities above that of other creatures constitute his humanness. Each person must identify his uniqueness as a human. a. Humanness has to do with: l. Man's ability to think abstractly and to communicate by symbols. 2. Man's ability for self-examination or to look within himself and become aware of what is happening, has happened, and what he plans shall happen. 3. Man's ability to make choices regarding thoughts, plans, actions, reactions, reSponses in a meaningful way if he will. ' __.—_.-r_—_._v. _.__.__. % .1 U! ' LC Q) J Self-realiz; ‘0 be, int-1'. 3- Wholencg PEYSOn j Cates b; learned whereas every p the det is res: Happin. a “Rel. mony it the 8m III. 127 4. Man's ability for interpersonal relations through communication. 5. Man's ability to tap a source of intelligence within himself that is obviously greater than himself, which may be discovered as he discovers his own inner self. This intelligence not only governs the involuntary processes of the life, but it is an integrating and organizing source of intelligence which every person may tap if he is willing to become aware of it and give heed to its direction. b. Self-worth is that which results from the recognition of one's own tremendous potential and capacity for meaningful, purposeful, rewarding living. 2. Self-realization, or becoming what one was inherently intended to be, includes: a. Wholeness: Becoming or functioning as a whole or integrated person is necessary for self-realization. Wholeness indi- cates balance or harmony in the life where all that is learned is organized and integrated to benefit the whole; whereas without this concerted effort by oneself to treat every part of the life in relation to every other part, man tends to fragment; i.e., one part is emphasized to the detriment of other parts of the life. Fragmentation is reSponsible for many personality ailments. b. Happiness: A product of moving toward self-realization as a whole person. This denotes a state of balance and har- mony in the life, a relaxed dynamic tension where all of the energies of the life are available to be directed creatively in some desired activity. Man is primarily a social creature made for relationships with God, himself, other persons, other living things, and inanimate objects. This need and potential for relationships, or humanness, is inherent in man; but it must be shared with him and developed by others in the early life of the individual, and as he matures, choice and reSponsi- bility are to be assumed by the individual. These provide for the establishment and continuance of relationships. A. Man's genetic endowment and personal circumstances are unique. B. Man's environmental conditioning begins at conception and his brain (the whole body and person) is programmed by the significant per- sons in his life during the prenatal, infantile, and childhood periods; and the individual has little if any knowledge of or re- Sponsibility for this that has been built in during this pre-con- scious stage of his life. r , V .1 w,pu—J .__.I—-— - Z'ne aetancrp‘nosi self-conscious) achieved or beg; nun the normal :escnsibility i er of reason. ‘ 1. Freedom con: 2. Reaponsibi1_ I k:% growth (his t sauna (and unlea . - I SKIP-'ERESS OI USE: A. Learning (and 1. two factors: 1- The positit a. Openne b. Awaren- C- lntegr: d- Inquiri Quest e. Happins f. lntere. Hillin ~- lhe negati fort ( b- lnhibi Which availa and cc C' Blind rule PrOductiVeneg S: fig 0 Creat Sn 1 ti. if Flat ' . . B "flat ls rlgh' C m: to do " ' lne . 3- hopproolem : ert . .. DU y rlé IV. 128 The metamorphosis from the pre-conscious to the conscious (or self-conscious) state is the design for humanness, which is not achieved or begun until sometime around fourteen years of age when the normal person can become aware of his ability to assume responsibility for his life and choices in using his kingly pow- er of reason. 1. Freedom comes to man as he begins to make his own choices. 2. ReSponsibility is implicit in man's ability to choose. Man's growth (his becoming, his self-realization) are achieved by his learning (and unlearning), remembering, and communicating, and by pro- ductiveness or usefulness. A. Learning (and unlearning), remembering, and communicating embody two factors: 1. The positive and essential: a. Openness b. Awareness c. Integrity (being in touch with reality) d. Inquiring Spirit (curiosity) Questing - questioning - discussion - weighing alternatives e. Happiness f. Interest in and good will toward another (or others) and a willingness to communicate personally. 2. The negative: a. Pain caused by fear, anxiety, guilt, and physical discom- fort (which tends to produce hostility and aggression) b. Inhibitions and repressions (induced by pain factors), which create blind Spots where information (memory) is un- available; which are the basis for a breakdown in learning and communication. c. Blind adherence to any structure of ideas or authoritarian rule (rigidity). Productiveness or usefulness, which is needed if the life is to be meaningful or rewarding and which as much as possible should con- sist of creative productiveness to give expression to the freedom for which man is designed. Some areas of life and conduct with related problems and needs of the peOple in his audiences to which Bietz addresses himself in his Speaking. A. B. C. D. E. What is right? What is wrong? What to do with misery The problem of loneliness Property rights Duty versus desire F. Hat 6. Marriage and the 5. Sex I. Restless youth I. The use of drug: __ i. Racial unrest a: l. Group identity I. H. 811' is . M- a Very EUCCet a. -._’ 31E 5 .N . . to him In Sear-g :5 291211: . . lne Intere S t :11 ansWer S to t. . “e ir ..- “lays read Widely is ““nla, he took gilt-it s ChOOl f Rr E I dew Clini. an ah and .. A: . t he age 0: s: {hit 8 senior. lai “3 at t. e LO 1 later , . ‘I 129 F. war G. Marriage and the Home H. Sex I. Restless youth J. The use of drugs K. Racial unrest and social reform L. Group identity CHAPTER V Text I. ”A good psychology and a good religion are one and the same thing." AS a very successful young minister, Arthur Bietz attracted many peOple to him in search of solutions to their real-life problems. With his genuine interest in peOple and their problems, he greatly desired to find answers to their questions and fulfillment for their needs. He has always read widely in search of information; and while located in Berkeley, California, he took advantage of the Opportunity to audit classes in the Pacific School of Religion. He stated in an interview, I developed rather early in my ministry a sort of clinical concept--the idea that unless religion could be applied to the actual life situations, we were accomplishing very little. I concluded that an abstract theory unrelated to real-life problems and needs was relatively worthless. At the age of twenty-nine he transferred to Los Angeles as pastor of the White Memorial Church and chairman of the Department of Applied Chris- tianity at the Loma Linda University School of Medicine. He immediately 1 Interview #1. 31 back tcral e well ar Indiscussing t 2:: :ac’n the same a: :fiuimrthat these 1;; relevance . He .::iec‘ to become the .15: is ,he attempted .. -. a? '19. ' ' HA2 Ciplines of re In one of E115 130 enrolled in the University of Southern California. He explained in an interview, I started my work at the university with a double major in psychology and religion, trying to bring psychology into some kind of fusion, so that the two disciplines would be understood as contributing to the same thing. . . . I took this double major, for I was planning to bring these two fields to- gether and was perhaps one of the first men to be a full psychologist as well as having a profession- al background in religion. I took all of the doc- toral examinations in the field of psychology as well as in the field of religion. In discussing the fact that religion and psychology are dealing with very much the same areas of human life and conduct, Bietz expressed his conviction that these two have to be brought together at some point of human relevance. He said, "They can't be things in themselves; and so I tried to become the person that embodied those particular viewpoints."2 That is, he attempted to become a person who represents the fusion of the two disciplines of religion and psychology. In one of his lectures he stated, "A good psychology and a good re- ligion are one and the same thing."3 This was said in the context of "as I have said on a number of occasions,” and seems to be a summary statement of his conclusions as the result of his study and experience in these two fields. It must be noted that he said, "A.gggg psychology and a good re- ligion are one and the same thing." This would seem to indicate that in his estimation, not just any philOSOphy of psychology or any philOSOphy of 1 Ibid. Interview #1. 3 Lecture, "Look In On Yourself," Whittier, California, September 19, 1966; subsequently referred to as Lecture #32. 131 religion would fit together in a fusion that would represent one and the same thing. Furthermore, the qualifying adjective "good" would also seem to indicate that, in his estimation, when he has distilled the best from psychology and the best from religion, then it is these two which can be fused into one and the same thing. It is the purpose of this writer to attempt to discover the basic lines of thought or philOSOphy in psychology and religion that Dr. Bietz has brought together in this fusion, which he apparently considers to consist of the good in psychology and the good in religion. In one of his lectures he summarized succinctly the areas of human life covered by psychology as follows: "Psychology has to do with human behavior and human welfare. It has to do with a study of human experience 1 Without doubt this was not intended to be a full and social interaction." and complete definition of Arthur Bietz's concept or understanding of the field of psychology, but it does say something of his understanding of the field and does indicate that the areas mentioned are included in his con- cepts of psychology and in his interests as well. By inference one can say that in the Bietz context, religion also should have to do with human be- havior and human welfare, with the study of human experience and social interaction. "Human behavior" would indicate that Bietz wishes to study what man does. "Human welfare" would be a study of that which is good for man, of that which will allow man to get the best out of life. A "study of human experience" would be a study of how life and the individual's environment 1Lecture, "Psychology and Morality," Whittier, California, November 12, 1968; subsequently referred to as Lecture #37. I -:registered by the per: ::.e receives the stir. :::. l'nis is a study c 5:11.11 interaction" has :zz’se study of interper- 1 person with animate Religion has a ma :i::s':ip to him. In t}., :;::e and the same t‘r‘. .a:;::s'nip with God 7. . I A. R.- L‘ tl re i,~ e:-' In One Of h“ Q l e . relationsn' .2: H . l‘n 132 is registered by the person himself; a study of his feeling reSponses, of how he receives the stimuli that come into his life and how he reSponds to them. This is a study of the thinking, the decision-making processes. "Social interaction" has to do with the personal aSpect of relationships, or the study of interpersonal relationships as well as the relationship of the person with animate and inanimate things in the environment. Religion has a major place in it for the study of God and our rela- tionship to him. In the context that "a good psychology and a good religion are one and the same thing," and since in Bietz's concept of religion a re- lationship with God should find a place of paramount importance in Bietz's concept of a good psychology, Dr. Bietz does give God a place of prominence in his psychological philOSOphy, and this will be discussed at length under Section II of the outline. A. Religion as a relationship concept is the most therapeutic experience possible to man; but religion as a so-called education in inhibitions is a frightful producer of emotional problems and personality ailments. In one of his lectures, in reSponse to a question put to him concern- ing the relationship of religion to certain psychological problems, Dr. Bietz made the following reply: A religious outlook on life, if personalized as a relational and relationship interaction, is the most therapeutic experience possible to human beings; but religion as a so-called education in inhibitions can be the most frightful producer of personality ailments and of mental and emotional illness. Here Bietz is giving some definition to a "good" and a "bad" religion. He is saying that the heart of a good religion is that it is personalized 1 Lecture #15. -.: terms of relationshi? IZEE and produces the ;-:.-;:.g and longe st- l a s 1 ‘22:: have a personal .2 with the animate ar. :5 religious outlook on merience possible to :ericr status to a peg: 33673, if PSYChClC 9 ~.. 'u ... :Letz frame of re 3r. Bietz gee. nailed education eats ' - . ..ality ailmen '-‘=tean t this exa: 133 in terms of relationships, and the ultimate in religion is that which pro- motes and produces the very best, the most loving, most consistently- growing and longest-lasting relationships possible. Bietz believes that man may have a personal relationship with God himself, with other persons, and with the animate and inanimate objects of the environment. This kind of religious outlook on life Bietz categorizes as the most therapeutic experience possible to human beings. In this he is giving religion a su- perior status to a psychology that does not have a religious outlook. However, if psychology and religion became perfectly fused or blended, in the Bietz frame of reference it could not then be said that his concept of psychology does not have a religious outlook. Dr. Bietz goes on to say in the above quotation that religion as a so-called education in inhibitions can be the most frightful producer of personality ailments and of mental and emotional illness. Assuming that he meant this exactly the way he said it, Bietz thereby indicates that a religion which uses inhibitions to reinforce its concepts and consequently blinds the individual to areas of truth has the potential of being the most frightful producer of personality ailments and of mental and emotional illness. In this, he is giving a "good" religion a superior status to a psychology that does not include a personal relationship with God. Since this aSpect of his philOSOphy will be discussed at length under Section IV-A of the outline, it does not seem apprOpriate to make further comment upon it here. B. One of Dr. Bietz's graduate professors stated that psychology is a discipline that dwells on mercy and forgiveness, while religion concen- trates on right and wrong. Bietz thinks both disciplines should have both concepts built in. Psychology must have morals and ethics, and w .. a a. :12 seems to imply '" :3tpsychology Eras 'r .,_ n -_u ".2: ought to be or tc : :ckgy is never’ ju rr relig relat sons This statement o: :itua‘e held by psycr. LA: ...e .3, that psychole ' ‘-. frustration and i s l svrongness of his 1 ”fine more comple- I reme: again a try am on the was a man). right, differ YOu dc feelir this On ti“; You R YOur D . r Bietz ha: a “On 3' He ind fidbit‘ s t:}] ~=3ifil ‘ rigs Cheer“ tlat 134 religion must put the person and his relationship to life and to other per- sons above moral abstractions. This statement of one of his professors represents to Bietz a typical attitude held by psychologists toward psychology and religion. This atti- tude seems to imply that psychology is accepting of the person as he is; that psychology has mercy and forgiveness to extend to every person; that psychology is never judgmental in reSpect to some standard of right and wrong; that psychology is attempting to help the person overcome his guilt and frustration and is not trying to tell that person what his right con- duct ought to be or to make recommendations to him about the rightness or the wrongness of his behavior. The more complete statement referred to above is as follows: I remember when I went to the university it was said again and again by one of my professors that psychia- try and psychology proceed on the basis of mercy and on the basis of love toward persons, whereas there was a moralistic attitude (on the part of the clergy- man). In other words, (they say) "You ought to do right, you ought to behave yourself. It makes little difference what you feel or how you feel, this is what you do. You do it, and we don't care much about your feelings and about your emotions. This is right and this is wrong; no questions asked. When you infringe on this, then you take the punishment and that's that. You knew what was right; you did the wrong; here is your punishment.1 Dr. Bietz has a great deal to say concerning attitudes toward right and wrong. He indicates that when religion becomes a so-called education in inhibitions, this undesirable education almost inevitably involves the teachings concerning right and wrong and the attitudes about these concepts that are held and shared. (This concept will be dealt with somewhat 1 Lecture #37. safely in Section V21 3:. Bietz seems to l .1132: to withdraw from: 115325 ethics in rela azetailed manner in a ;;:is anong those that ‘71E15prcject. The ..., i ' 131.31? of this outlin- -. Bietz has made it cl {:..’1 ' - ‘ . ..... Ly, that in his :ezining morals m :1 (i 135 extensively in Section V-A of this outline.) Dr. Bietz seems to be indicating that there are some psychologists who want to withdraw from any appreciable responsibility for teaching morals and ethics in relation to psychology. He dealt with this problem in a detailed manner in a lecture entitled "Psychology and Morality," which is among those that have come under close scrutiny in the research for this project. The writer will deal with this factor in detail in Section V of this outline. For the present it is Sufficient to state that Dr. Bietz has made it clear on a number of occasions, both implicitly and explicitly, that in his estimation psychology does have a reSponsibility for defining morals and ethics. In introducing the lecture referred to above, he said: My thesis this evening will be that we can build a system of ethics and morals on an empirical base and that this can be built without the threat of hell or perhaps even the reward of heaven. For there are a large number of individuals who don't believe in heaven and a large number who don't be- lieve in hell. So, obviously, what used to work in terms of getting right conduct no longer works.1 In effect, he was saying that in the past the morals and ethics pro- moted by the religionists had been in many cases reinforced largely by the threat of hell or the reward of heaven; and since a large proportion of the pOpulation now believes in neither heaven nor hell, he holds that psychology, to which many do look for direction, has an obligation to incorporate morals and ethics in its discipline. Bietz believes, and attempts to demonstrate in this lecture, that a system of morals and eth- ics can be built upon an empirical base in the psychological context. There is no apparent question with him as to whether or not religion 1 Lecture #37. . .~ . ‘- -——.—.L—-— w r-"asses morals and et “.5 sheet the legalisti 123223196 into inter pr -. 21E his sermons: 1 would liv of human b. magnificen a thousand together i choose the human heir all ethic 1: effect, Bietz L: 2rality not moral ::::.e: is not basical ‘o u ._‘ ‘n‘ her what is 2‘9 "I'V‘fi‘.".i _ ..-.zt‘rdk 1n uterest 8': 4‘1" 10‘ mOral stan ,\ ‘.‘ I” “it “grit be dx ‘ b. 5“ Pretglti0n repr- ‘u o \ a ‘Zmrtant or Slight be at 136 encompasses morals and ethics; but psychologists have often raised ques- tions about the legalistic, judgmental approach that is sometimes incorporated into interpretations of religion. Arthur Bietz stated in one of his sermons: I would like to say today that the life and dignity of human beings is infinitely precious; it has a magnificent grandeur; and a human being is worth a thousandfold more than all moral abstractions put together in one heap. The individual who would choose the moral abstraction for the death of the human being is denying the fundamental basis of all ethics and all Christian morality. In effect, Bietz is saying that he prefers to call problems concern- ing morality not moral problems but human problems. He says that the problem is not basically what's going to happen to the moral standards, but rather what is going to happen to the peOple involved, and that our principal interest should be in the person rather than in the moral stan- dard, for moral standards are an imperfect, limited interpretation of what ought or might be done in a given circumstance. He indicates that the interpretation represented in the verbalized moral abstraction could never be as important or as valuable as the person whose life or future well- being might be at stake. This concept will be discussed further under Section V of this outline. Bietz would put the individual person with his infinite worth at the t0p of the hierarchy of values; then morals and values become necessary in order to protect the individual's position in this hierarchy and to help the individual develop and fulfill his divinely-provided human potential. This line of thinking the writer has found to be incorporated in both Bietz's lecturing and preaching. 1Sermon #19. r- u .tsnththe writer, ,ifiiu is saying tt . . .... \ .6... sees an accepts i ii stehxhor of all tr Lhacre than one t ..Ag G. antruth and sec 5 :e :niverse operates , . - ._.. I‘l .:ctpartly fror.¢ reference made t --~. . ‘ . p“! v.- -...v. g. I don‘t pSychol I den'1 more t' Christ I thir and I ChOlo I den Psych He See—ES to 1 Erfim . IS seexln ~:‘ ._~ by the Say. .3- lther Ca in #9.-— ——‘._.n-.-—- w- 137 C. Bietz contends that truth is one piece, and neither science nor religion has a monOpoly on truth. The two should be fused at the point of truth and relevance. On more than one occasion, Dr. Bietz has stated in private conversa- tions with the writer, "I hold the position that truth is of one piece." By this he is saying that in in his estimation there is no such thing as Christian truth and secular truth. He reasons that since the God when he knows and accepts is the great Creator God who has made all things and is the Author of all truth and of all of the laws of the universe by which the universe operates, then truth, in whatever form it may take, is truth. It is not partly from God and partly from some other source. In discuss- ing a reference made to a "Christian psychology," Bietz stated in an interview: I don't think there is such a thing as a Christian psychology. There is a science of psychology, but I don't think there is a Christian (psychology any more than there is a Christian) mathematics or a Christian biology. I think there is biology; and I think there is scientific study of human nature; and I think that there are Christians who are psy- chologists and biologists and mathematicians; but I don't think there is such a thing as a Christian psychology and a secular psychology.1 He seems to be saying that whether it be a scientist or a religion- ist who is seeking for truth, he is seeking it in the same universe which is made by the same God and governed by the same laws that have been pro- vided by the same God; and that, in his estimation, truth which is discover- ed by either cannot be dichotomized into secular truth versus sacred truth. II. There should be a goal or purpose in life which embraces a love of God and discovery of one's identity as a human being. 1 Interview #1. Section II is a d. :life which appears t 3.52. Part A is an app. 2 discussion of reli; 2:55 expressed it in :tsrery sane goal as 326 thesis of the w C .e:ruring and his 313:: does not Speak r :;:.e and eternity in .: :1e experimental a. ._‘I ~~..'. _. out it does mea: tux ‘Hfl .. a . ‘2 find lectur ing 1 s ‘it‘aSEe J S Q‘d'n at :1; n the law-7‘ u , \1 he mi 138 Section II is a discussion of Bietz's concepts of a goal or purpose in life which appears to be the basis or foundation of his philosophy of life. Part A is an approach that has been inferred from his preaching and discussion of religious t0pics, and describes the goal of life as he has expressed it in religious terminology. Part B is a discussion of the very same goal as Bietz as described it in psychological context. It is the thesis of the writer that Bietz's basic message is the same in both his lecturing and his preaching. This is not intended to imply that Dr. Bietz does not Speak more of basic religious themes such as God and the Bible and eternity in a church setting, nor that he does not Speak more of the experimental and scientific details of psychology in his lectur- ing; but it does mean to imply that his basic message in both his preach- ing and lecturing is consistent and that what he says in each setting is greatly affected by his background and experience and understanding of the other discipline. For example, references to life after death are seldom if ever mentioned in his lecturing, since he obviously feels that those who want to hear him Speak on this kind of tOpic should hear him while Speaking as a minister of religion. A. To "love God with all you have and your neighbor as yourself." While Jesus was teaching a group of people, a lawyer, who was a Pharisee, asked Jesus a question in an attempt to confuse and entangle him in his own argument. He said, "Teacher, which is the great command- ment in the law?" And Jesus said to him, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it, You Shall love your :1 Lyn-w neighbor a ments dept Inofimr words, Jt gsnatue should let. abaicto all that t‘ :2: to the time that :xzeisteaching an: winsofthese texts 2.222 hes concerning 12:11: a sermon, "Love vc basis t Freedom value a I: may be note ‘~ \ me: mand : "LOV i a-aerto love on< Tige ' .. ’ "‘9 dignity “Winfielan of his 139 neighbor as yourself. On these two command- ments depend all the law and the prOphets." In other words, Jesus is saying that these two commandments, teach- ings that we should love God with all we have and our neighbor as ourself, are basic to all that the pr0phets and the laws of the Bible have said Prior to the time that Jesus Spoke these words, and they also summarize what he is teaching and demonstrating to them. Dr. Bietz has often used portions of these texts as foundational undergirdings for what he believes and teaches concerning the goals and purposes in life. For instance, he said in a sermon, "Love your neighbor as yourself" constitutes the basis of all morality and all ethical procedure. Freedom and morality have to do primarily with the value and the dignity of human life. It may be noted from this statement that Bietz believes that implicit in the command, "Love your neighbor as yourself," is the assumption that in order to love oneself, one must discover his own intrinsic worth or value, the dignity of his own life; and from this position of worth or recognition of his own worth, he can then appreciate the worth, and the friendship, and the value of his neighbor. Implicit also is the fact that one is able to recognize his own worth and value as he learns to know and love God who created him in the first place and who invested in him life, with its inestimable worth or value inherent in it. 1. How to know and love God. The writer has observed that this question is one of the most fre- quently asked and most perplexing questions that come to a minister. It 1 Matthew 22:36-40, (RSV). 2 Sermon #19. . . a ‘ 419W easy to gl\e ":9 ”2‘ attempts to g1 '.2<:i:as put to him. 212.2: which he gave cc a. GC~ 0t I er. We it Bietz place S gr. 7: relationship witr‘. relationship that we :ta personalized rel 1e writer asked Dr . ...’ 1 mime God. He rev; The rel this: and th. and t‘ht is all my enr what h This explanati r'-~. l-l 2» ‘ ‘ 'H §\j 140 is very easy to give a vague and mystical answer; but Dr. Bietz consis- tently attempts to give logical, concrete, and practical answers to the questions put to him. The writer was impressed with the straightforward answer which he gave concerning this question. a. God is a Person who has provided ourselves, others, and all in our environment for our enrichment (which enrichment is his glory). we may know him by knowing these evidences, including the Bible. Bietz places great stress upon the person of God. He indicates that our relationship with God should be a personal one and, consequently, the relationship that we have with anything in the environment about us should be a personalized relationship, whether the object be animate or inanimate. The writer asked Dr. Bietz how he believed an individual could get to know and love God. He replied: The relationship with God as I see it is precisely this: Interaction with the milieu or the persons and the environment which God has provided for me, and the recognition and acknowledgment that this is all from God and it is all provided for me, for my enrichment; and his glory is my enrichment with what he has provided for me. This explanation is premised upon the assumption that a person be- lieves in a God who has created all things. In Bietz's theological context he may make this assumption, because he believes that God was instrumental in bringing the Bible into existence and he accepts the fact of a loving Creator God as revealed in the Bible. But he believes that we learn about God by getting to know the things that he has made through an "interaction with the milieu or the persons and the environment which God has provided Interview #3. pg," We may knot-2 _:4~;_gu‘ye are able to v 2.2;: us is from 00d " "cise he infers fror. :fmfi,&fl has prOVi; b. awofd Bietz's the sis 22's ability to com 2:5: God-like qual it i serge of the chief e | If we get to k: 11:. environment wh iC H Q‘LL ‘x‘. 8 to love the .tance. The p| that PaCit LOVe COVER; you r | \I 111-1.; This Phra~- “~‘. 09"“ _ at 3516 he Image, 141 for (us)." we may know God by knowing the things that he has made, pro- viding we are able to recognize and acknowledge that all of the creation about us is from God and is provided for us, for our enrichment. This premise he infers from the Biblical account, which in itself is a part of what God has provided for our Study. b. Man, made as the "image of God," with the God-like ability to communicate, is a dwell- ing place for this Creator God; and man may commune with God within himself. Bietz's thesis is that love is a product of communication, and that man's ability to communicate is perhaps his highest ability or one of his most God-like qualities. This ability to communicate he would consider as one of the chief evidences of the "image of God"1 in man. If we get to know God by knowing all that we are able to know in the environment which he has provided, then we may learn to love him by learning to love those things that he has provided while recognizing that he has provided them for us in order that we may love them. Bietz has consistently equated love with successful communication. For instance: The psychologically healthy person knows full well that love is the end product of good communication . . . . You can generally equate love with the ca- pacity for good communication. Love is the capacity to have some regard for the communication process. . . . If you want to love, you must understand the other person; but to do 1 This phrase is taken from Genesis 1:27 (RSV): "So God created man in his own image, and in the image of God he created him; male and fe- male he created them." 2 Lecture #30. a I 9 I this you communiCL Comfort cessfull I you don then per start Ct Itis a self-ext :scanhave is wittx; :23 den, one's 0;” 2:26.13: God by knowin ssallabout us; an a: 3y eXperiencing t :22mmmnication. h5a.further s‘ ““3 Persons and ob abilzfa -u)to Communica {Eunion w ' . 1th Goo . toe “River-Se) Vi OUI‘CQ Oi if 13 .ts 1\ Ibid 2 E3: 7" Lectur ' “2 Wes ’ S 3 142 this you must know something of the art of communication. Comfort is the joy you feel when you are Suc- cessfully in communication with another. If you don't feel love any more for a person, then perhaps you ought to forget love and start communicating. It is a self-evident fact that the greatest of relationships that one can have is with another person who has an ability as high as, or higher than, one's own to reSpond in love. Bietz is saying that we learn to know God by knowing the peOple and the things that he has made which are all about us; and that we learn to love him by interacting with these and by experiencing the comfort, or the love, that comes from this success- ful communication. AS a further step, man may not only get to know and to love the other persons and objects in his environment, but having achieved this ability to communicate, to interact on a personal basis, may then enjoy communion with God (or, in a psychological context, with the intelligence of the universe) within himself. The Bible often Speaks of the Spirit of God or of Christ who dwells within man. Bietz believes that God does Speak to man through "the still small voice"3 and that man may tap this great source of intelligence if he will. This concept will be discussed in its psychological context in Part B of this section. 1 Ibid. 2 Lecture, "Learning About the Human Brain," Whittier, California, May 20, 1968; subsequently referred to as Lecture #26. 3 I Kings 19:12. J J . 1.449!!!” Van's surV ;--‘ ie‘:eIOPed se 3:22 533'5 ' Love is fir 2532223 the ind iv: :2. This is the tits ,. A parent or E :iild of God; t 1: receive love bu .2 ::e cormunicatic A Person may 143 c. Man's first order of business is to discover his own identity as a unique son of God (human- ness). Learning to appreciate his true status, man is able to gain self-worth. Man's survival depends upon other human beings Sharing their love and developed selves with him during his early infancy and childhood. Dr. Bietz says: Without help from genuine human beings, we cannot achieve the human experience. If children were isolated from their parents, were locked up in a room and simply given the necessary food and drink, they would never become human. They would be in- capable of reSponding and surely not able to love. He has also expressed the thought, "Nobody can love unless he first feels himself loved."2 Love is first a gift from some other loving person. Love is awaken- ed when the individual feels that another person appreciates and values him. This is the beginning of the individual's discovery of his own iden- tity. A parent or some other significant person may teach him that he is a child of God; that he is the image of God; that he is not only able to receive love but to love in return through his ability to participate in the communication process. A person may discover his uniqueness as a son of God through dis- covering that he has different talents and characteristics from those of any other person. Dr. Bietz has said many times that it is in this con- cept of being valued and appreciated and loved by God-fearing parents that the child may begin to learn his own true status, his incalculable worth, Sermon #6. 2 o 0 Arthur L. Bietz, When God Met Man (Mountain View, California: Pacific Press Publ. Assn., 1966), p. 52. I' J ‘ a | 1 fl .. '- *3 ) UI‘IVIVvva "~‘: uniquené ~~evrrowing "e '3" man to k: (h . Christ's if“ '0 is a clear j ... Jaifi :0 love hits .. .~‘ .- .s ,c‘e‘v e the val ..~ :- a--.' sus in ess a: niquenes 5; an: “33 ef Safety, Sec BlEtZ Stated Your told obli.g and t take 144 and his uniqueness as a child of God. This concept of self-worth is to be ever growing and expanding. It is this self-worth that makes it possi- ble for man to know and love God and all that he has provided for man to love. 2. Loving his neighbor as himself. Once he has discovered his own worth and that he was designed by the Creator for loving relationships with others, man's love for his neighbor can then flow from this position of self-worth. Christ's instruction to love one's neighbor as one's self, Bietz says, is a clear indication that before a person can love another, he must learn to love himself first. The person must first learn to receive love, to receive the valuation, the appreciation, that others place upon his life. This in essence is a matter of discovering one's own identity, one's own uniqueness; and these, if discovered and accepted, will build a founda- tion of safety, security, and confidence for the person himself. Bietz Stated this as follows: Your first obligation is to yourself. You've been told time and time again, perhaps, that your first obligation is to others. No; first you become strong and then you may take care of others. Don't try to take care of others if you are as weak as the next person. Now that supports the old adage which we've had from Biblical times which says in effect, "Don't you go running to help a blind person if you're blind. First go to the Optometrist and get some glasses, else you and the one you're trying to help will both end up in the ditch." That means, essentially, don't try to help others until you have been reasonably ful- filled yourself. l The reference is to Matthew 15:41 (RSV): "If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit." 2 Lecture, "Four Ventures of Your Self," Whittier, California, September 25, 1967; subsequently referred to as Lecture #11. 145 AS alluded to in the above quotation, there are many Christians who feel that their first interest ought to be in other persons; and they look down upon the idea of thinking well of themselves. Bietz repeatedly indicates that, in his estimation, this is not what Christ intended and it cannot be in harmony with the clear Statement of Jesus, "Love your neighbor as you love yourself." For, as was stated earlier, he believes that "'Love your neighbor as yourself' constitutes the basis of all moral- ity and all ethical procedure."1 Bietz concludes that when Christ summed up the message of the Bible in the two commandments which ask man to love God with all that he has and his neighbor as himself, in effect Christ was saying that man was made for loving relationships; and that this whole process of love begins by some human being loving another individual first, the person being loved accepting that love and the appreciation and value that this love places upon himself; then, having learned to love, appreciate, and value himself, he gains the capacity to love and thus may learn to love others and God. And so the cycle continues. 3. What happens in the process? Man comes into his own, takes over the reins of his life. Within loving relationships, man is called upon to grow; and this growth process is designed to be a continual Open- ended one, for man's goal is not a destin- ation but a direction. One of Bietz's most fundamental beliefs is that God created man to be a dynamic, growing organism; and that this growth is the result of the individual's choosing to c00perate with the plans and the laws at work in 1 Sermon #19. :eersiromneflt. “it.“ ' geculiar circrmistances :2: that man is made -ailable to man on the fischoices. This fre 53h 'Uesus theri sa' theinrm word, ye at the truth will ma iii". be discussed‘ in One of Bietz's o . 3 ran 5 growth p: P , ~- ,. l“ k;:_ 3% “iater w ill pour . .".: :s‘ ' r 4162 146 the environment, with the potential inherent within himself, and with the peculiar circumstances surrounding his life. Bietz emphasizes over and over that man is made for freedom and that God has made this freedom a- vailable to man on the basis of his assumption of the reSponsibility for his choices. This freedom is pointed up in the Scriptural text, John 8:31: "Jesus then said to the Jews who had believed in him, 'If ye con- tinue in my word, ye are truly my disciples and ye will know the truth and the truth will make you free.'" (Freedom, reSponsibility, and choice will be discussed‘in detail in Section III.) One of Bietz's favorite texts in support of his concept of the Christian's growth process is, "Whoever believes in me, streams of liv- ing water will pour out from his heart."1 In commenting upon this text, he said: These are words which Speak of life at its best; a life which is filled with radiance, with joy; a life which is deeply moving and highly reward- ing. It is, in essence, a perpetual fountain, a flowing river with inexhaustible properties of constant self-renewal. . . . Now our Lord Speaks of your life and mine as being streams of living water. That is God's desire for us. Water that is clear, water that is fresh, and water that flows. It is a picture of life reaching its highest poten- tial and it is a picture of fulfillment. It is, in effect, our smallness growing into ever-greater largeness. It is our mediocrity issuing forth in greater nobility. Yes, it is a picture of Chris- tians as persons, being at their best. Here Bietz is equating growth with being and becoming -- that is, 1 I 0 John 7:38, Good News for Modern Man. (New York: American Bible Society, 1966.) 2 Sermon, "Achieving Human Potential," televised on KNBC, Channel 4, Glendale, California, June 1, 1969; subsequently referred to as Sermon #1. , r. rigwhat you are ge. his talents, his 1'7an With what he l.~ ‘arbecone. 1n the (‘11. .! xxxeoi life reacn; 21:; a picture of t: inmssand his meal if gcal of the Chris “- toward becoming .. - | BletZ equates r k He says; There joyful oping 4 nothil‘i ing) 5 IQEUSe which he positive 6 “4323.52, hope -- ar r the Culture L355 to gether n the anal g- "e must be flo ;7€§:. The Iterna SOUIEQ 801mR that 1 E136 Sermon, H . -‘xiuently ‘Ll eter: 147 being what you are genuinely, authentically. Having discovered his iden- tity, his talents, his interests, his circumstances in life, one lives in harmony with what he has discovered and then begins moving toward what he may become. In the quotation above, Bietz compares the process to "a picture of life reaching its highest potential; a picture of fulfill- ment; a picture of the person's smallness growing into ever-greater largeness and his mediocrity moving toward nobility." He is saying that the goal of the Christian is a matter of being his best while he is mov- ing toward becoming what he may become in potential. Bietz equates the greatest rewards of life with this growing pro- cess. He says: There is nothing more thrilling, nothing more joyful, than a living, moving, growing, devel- oping experience; and conversely, there is nothing so Stultifying, so killing, so depress- ing, so negating, as that which is static and refuses new understanding and new experiences which outmarch the former eXperiences. The positive aSpects of Bietz's philOSOphy -- Optimism, joy, en- thusiasm, hOpe -- are associated with growth; they are a result of growth; they are the culture in which growth takes place. They are inseparably linked together. In the analogy of the Stream, Bietz says that the person's own stream of life must be flowing, churning, moving, purifying itself, expending power. The alternative is stagnation: Someone has said, "You often know where you are going, but you should never, never really think that you have fully arrived." And I think the l . . Sermon, "Life as Process," Glendale, California, February 22, 1969, subsequently referred to as Sermon #12. Christian riding a your bic In a sermon ent: xivofthe brain pr= . . ! :xxm urhuman bein There a at the develop been is is deep there i 0f the: and the There' Of the than L: On the dents envir activ rate. our t CaUSe We 1: reac‘ that hung Rm £0110wir 3:62;“ . “ml“ the ind. :aest and . baQKgr 148 Christian experience may well be something like riding a bicycle. You'd better keep peddling or your bicycle will fall.1 In a sermon entitled "Life as Process" he referred to a scientific study of the brain processes in rodents which he applies to the growth process in human beings. There are some fascinating experiments which are at the present time being done with respect to the develOpment of brains in lower animals. It has been found, for instance, that if the environment is deeply enriched and there are many toys and there is a lot of activity and newness in the life of these little rodents, their brains will develop and the circulation of the blood will be enhanced. There will actually be an increase in the volume of their brains and a tremendous capacity, greater than usual, for them to solve new problems. On the other hand, the brains of those little ro- dents who have a very deprived environment, whose environment is very dull and offers very little activity and no challenges will actually deterio- rate. Certainly the God of Heaven wouldn't wish our brains to remain in a deteriorated State be- cause of the stale intellectual climate in which we live. No; God wants us to reach out and to reach forth to truth that is relevant and truth that is meaningful and worthwhile in terms of human experience. The following reveals yet another facet of Bietz's attitude toward growth in the individual and Shows the application of his tremendous in- terest and background in the social and physical sciences. And so life is a process; life is a flame. It is not a Stone. Life is a chemical process. It is an electro-chemical interaction. It is a liv- ing, flowing current, and thought is not something Static; it is something that is happening now as 1 Sermon #12. 2 Ibid. .- I!" cv-‘.~-"_-"'—'—~ I‘m SP9» chemica you are going C absorb: And the living be dyn be onw is alw that a viting Aquotation t? sLl-izportant growt'r anxiulis as fol? "l fo' towarc Jesus' I thi of St have every Opene are s more expe pres is t hend manu of o the be 5 This 149 I'm Speaking to you. There is an electrical chemical process in action as you listen. As you are now thinking there is a process that is going on within you; a flame, as it were, which absorbs and reaches out toward the living God. And the Scriptures Speak Of God as a consuming, living fire. .And so the Christian life is to be dynamic; it is to be progressive; it is to be onward-moving. It is never static. The goal is always beyond us. There are new discoveries that are always ahead; new frontiers always in- viting us and beckoning us on. A quotation that seems to summarize Bietz's thinking regarding that all-important growth process that must be taking place in the life Of a Christian is as follows: "I follow after," said Paul. "I reach forward toward the prize Of the high calling in Christ Jesus" for the friendship which is ever new; and I think, if there is one thing that the lessons Of science have taught us, with which we should have been impressed, it is that we can't learn everything. The more the mysteries Of life are Opened to view, the more we realize that there are Still more mysteries to be solved; and the more we experience Of God, the more there is to experience. The more we are thrilled with the presence and the dynamiSm Of God, the more there is tO experience and the more our brains compre- hend, the better the circulation, the more the manufacture of protein; and perhaps the volume Of our brains and the manufacture Of protein and the linkage Of this to the genetic principle may be such that we Shall grow and grow and grow. This is what it means to be a Christian. 4. Results a. Happiness is the hoped-for end product here and in the hereafter. 1 Sermon #12. 2 Ibid 0 Inone Of his :5 the religious ide Life V have our n idea chiev ituée do th and H -- i: harmc being kxthe above a . A .- .eza person N r " ' ..t tor which llffi becoz 2;: :avorite v iew s W “~en.‘ until. And one 0 ..EaniSm when the ab" :lnsome desir annof these COIlC If 5 beer you You know whi bra 150 In one of his lectures, Bietz defined what he feels to be the basis Of the religious ideal. Life was intended for happiness and we cannot have it any other way. It's written within our nature. And our religion is based on the idea that you are a happier person if you a- chieve the religious ideal. And so the Beat- itudes are what we call, "Happy are those who do this," and "Happy are those who do that," and "Happy are these," and "Blessed are those," -- in other words, it's an appeal to an inner harmony and happiness that is meant for human beings. In the above quotation, Bietz states explicitly that happiness is that for which life was intended; or, to put it a little differently, when a person becomes what he was intended to be, he is happy. One of his favorite views of the human organism is that of an energy-producing system. And one of his descriptions of happiness is the state of the organism when the energies Of the life are flowing freely and unobstruct- edly in some desired and chosen activity. The following quotation involves both Of these concepts: If you want to release your energy and want to become the person that God intended you to be, you must have a good mental image Of yourself. You see, we do not know ourselves directly; we know ourselves only from the good or bad images which we have imprinted upon our mind and our brain. SO, change your mental image. Let your mental image be one of dignity; let it be one of worth. Whenever Jesus talked with human be- ings when he was here on earth, he made peOple feel great; and it has been said, When you meet a great person, you feel great. When you meet a small person, you always feel small. But God has 1 Matthew 5:3-12. 2Lecture, "Are You Having a Ball?" Whittier, California, October 3, 1966; subsequently referred to as Lecture #1. intended E He wants 1 The above quotati nxmgamiexperience Se translates the :thimm concepts 0 Edge and mental i :::e:-'ised analO gy a“ ...! b. mm 09’ LJ. 311: W . . e ‘ere Intendt it: 3 7 . -EllEVes in fOC U :"‘.d n - 0t mply Cha 4.2% in‘ ' , a 1n hls Dre: -6 Zn ue v- e z .. ‘3 potential And 5 of 8: Hey; be k.; 151 intended you to have a good self-image; but He wants you to have a picture of success. The above quotation is certainly an example Of the way Bietz's training and experience as a clinical psychologist Show up in his preach- ing. He translates the Christian's Objectives of happiness and hope and growth into concepts of the release of the energies of the organism, of having a good mental image of oneself, of self-worth and dignity, and the Often-used analogy among psychologists, "having mental pictures of success." b. Eternity - man alone among the creatures Of earth can comprehend the concepts of death and eternity. The promise of eternity is a continued quest, in a real-life Situation, for becoming what we were intended to be inherently. For Bietz the goal Of life is to be continually moving toward that which we were intended to be and which we are in potential. He is not one who believes in focusing the center of interest on the hereafter. This should not imply that he does not keep the hereafter in view in his think- ing and in his presentations; but for him the hereafter is a continuation Of the process begun in this life Of becoming what God has provided for us in potential. And so I think the Christian life could be Spoken Of as that eternal chase; it is that eternal jour- ney; and the paths to the City Of God must always be kept Open. The Spirit of God and the means of achieving the glories of God can never be captured, can never be confined in words, never be written down in formulas; for the Christian life is a pro- cess, it is not something which is processed; it is not something which is ever finished. Even through the ceaseless ages of eternity, we shall "grow up like calves in the stall" as the Scripture 1 Sermon #12. symboliE the othe be a CO‘. forward Bietz has Often 23:12 that is too Cf sang. In one of l .2152 is believed to irgrih the land (2 £3; 30b, were in it :eLiver neither son 2;? :1eir righteousne In Ot‘. and n the 1 live one c must his c 7" . the signifies Sitar} 33': 11‘, -E 5) Who “yer. 115* ~ these men de?“ ‘1 s eSS h . ’ IS 0‘ , 5111 one ' S 152 l symbolism puts it. In other words, even on the other side, in the better world, life will be a continual growing, a continual reaching forward. Bietz has often implied that the Christian's concept of salvation is one that is too often handled very loosely and with little definite meaning. In one of his sermons he referred to an Old Testament Scripture which is believed to refer to salvation. The setting is a time of great danger in the land of Israel; and the text says, "Though Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it (the land), as I live, saith the Lord God, they shall deliver neither son nor daughter; they shall but deliver their own souls by their righteousness." And Bietz comments, In other words, to each his own-~his own life; and no one can live by proxy. No one can live the life of Noah except Noah, and no one can live the life of Daniel except Daniel, and no one can live the life of Job except Job. Each must have the fulfillment of his own uniqueness, his own potential. The significant part of the above quotation seems to be in the last sentence. After referring to these great Bible characters who lived their own lives, who were accepted as men who had realized salvation, Bietz said that these men demonstrate that "each must have the fulfillment of his own uniqueness, his own potential." or, he is saying, salvation is the ful- fillment of one's uniqueness or his potential; salvation is the movement 1 Malachi 4:2 (KJV). 2 Sermon #12. 3 Ezekiel 14:20 (KJV). 4 Sermon, "Do Your Own Thing," Glendale, California, May 24, 1968; subsequently referred to as Sermon #4. i ' $177.." :xzi'EeIf-realizat: ilbeprenised upon iii, what he was it‘. Kw following r :fiastothe resurr. trining in the 11erv The gr the Chi hOpe 1 answer SO SO: love 1 of ii: That Sinfu of. 11* how 5 itSel B. 153 toward "self-realization”; and acceptance into the eternal kingdom of God will be premised upon each individual's participation in becoming, in this world, what he was intended to be. The following rather typical statement is an example of the way he refers to the resurrection and to eternity but gives the greater emphasis to living in the here and now with the future in view: The greatest enemy that we face is death; and in the Christian faith we believe that the greatest hOpe is the resurrection. Why is this so? The answer is, "Because life is the greatest gift." So someone has written a ballad which says, "I love life and I want to live; I want to drink of life's fullness, take all it can give." That is evil which takes from my life; that is sinful which destroys my capacity for fullness of living eXperience. That is wrong which some- how stifles and submerges the miracle of life itself. B. The goal of life in the Bietz psychological context is to discover one's identity as a human being (his uniqueness as a human being and his potential self-worth) and to progress in a continual movement toward self-realiza- tion (as represented by wholeness and by the inevitable quality of happiness). Section II of this outline is a discussion of the goal or purpose of life as Bietz describes it. Part A was an attempt to isolate his approach to the basic goal or purpose of life as he would describe it as a Christian minister to those who would be listening to him in the role of a preacher. Part B of this section is an attempt to isolate or summarize the way Bietz describes the basic goal of life to his lecture audiences who are coming to hear him Speak as a psychologist lecturing on psychologically-oriented tepics. 1 Sermon #28. Bietz's concep :ze audiences seens :eis, what he has t :35: entering into t 2316, which is a pr< 1. It might be n :33 be compared w -.l .l‘ :;..' has to do wit r above those pos Lizhe Christian cc higher abilities g: ‘l V :.:en ‘§ \ . _' a in USeful an 154 Bietz's concept of the goal of life'as he describes it to his lec- ture audiences seems to be that of a person discovering who he is, what he is, what he has to work with, something of what he may become, and then entering into the process of becoming that which he is able to be- come, which is a process of self-realization. 1. Identity: Man is the highest of the creatures on earth and his qualities or capacities above that of other creatures constitute his human- ness. Each person must identify his uniqueness as a human. It might be noted that "humanness" in Bietz's psychological context might be compared with "God-likeness" in the Christian context. "Human- ness" has to do with those qualities and abilities that peOple have which are above those possessed by the lower creatures of earth. "God-likeness" in the Christian context is sometimes thought of as a demonstration of the higher abilities given to man, as expressed by a loving person who is en- gaged in useful and rewarding pursuits of life. a. Humanness has to do with: l. Man's ability to think abstractly and to communicate by symbols. As has already been stated, Bietz observes that although a child is born into the world with the potential of becoming human, he is not human until some other human shares his humanness with him. The ability to com- municate with abstract symbols, he indicates, holds for man the greatest potential for developing his humanness. He uses Helen Keller as an exam- ple of one who, unable to see or to hear, did not become "human" until her teacher introduced her to words. While Helen Keller could never see other peOple nor hear their Speech, she was enabled to receive the humanness of 31:.ers as transmitted 1&2 develoned abilit; :‘zed example of hunt. Bietz indicate ':e:::e self-consciou :1: the use of word ante of what is he:~ {at we are thinkin, :the sense of wha . l Hezescribe this to name how this pS\ Now \ has lang bein the ing hume fro: SUE: sit whi ing ‘1! o “”113 ind iCE :ili‘v . L; 3 wthh CaX ”‘Elt him to ux b! ‘3 which he ma y 155 others as transmitted to her through word symbols; and this, together with her developed ability to use words, helped her become a beautifully cul- tured example of humanity.1 Bietz indicates that in order for a person to become human, he must become self-conscious; and it is impossible to become self-conscious with- out the use of word symbols. He says that while we as individuals may be aware of what is happening within us (i.e. what we are feeling) and of what we are thinking, yet other persons can never know who we really are in the sense of what we think, why we think it, and how we feel, unless we describe this to them with language. The following quotation will in- dicate how this psychological concept has permeated his preaching. Now we have said that man is a man because he has the capacity to use language. Speech and language are the sole prerogative of the human being. It is Speech which distinguishes us from the lower animals. Abstract language has noth- ing in common with any other creature except the human being. Now speech permits us detachment from life as well as involvement with it. Lan- guage permits us to rise above the immediate situation; language can also become a prison in which we live for an easy security, without go- ing out to meet the destiny of life. This indicates that it is language which gives man his great flexi- bility, which can bring him most extensively in touch with reality or can permit him to use words and images to construct a dream world of fantasy in which he may live unrealistically. Again he illustrates by saying, WOrds can be a substitute for human love. A man may say, "I love you, you know I love you; now 1Lecture, "Human Potentialities," Bellflower, May 6, 1969; subse- quently referred to as Lecture #23. 2 Sermon #11. hlliluSCratip leave r You've want tL guage ; also t2 barbar nature A name 156 leave me alone. But I married you, didn't I? You've got a legal contract. Go kiss it! I want to read my neWSpaper. Don't bother me." . . . . Now, as I have indicated, while lan- guage can help us to become truly human, it is also the source that can lead us to the most barbarous inhumanity. we must understand the nature and the limitations of human language. In illustrating his concept further, he said, A name is a word symbol. A name has to do with language, it has to do with linguistics. It has to do with a human capacity. In fact, if we were to point out that Specific which applies to our species which is very, very unique, we would have to say that it is our capacity to use language; and if we think of the human brain, if we think of the higher cortical areas of the brain, we think of the capacity to use symbols and to use words. When parents first hear a child say, "Mama," "Papa," you know the ecstasy in which they move. And at that point, we have the first emergence of a human being in what we call the genuine human sense, the capacity to use language. And if the ability to use language is not deve10p- ed, then we cannot really say that we have fulfilled our human capacity. In an interview in which the writer discussed with Dr. Bietz the relative importance to a discourse of inventional matters and ethical matters (ethos), he made the following statement indicating that he felt that both of these were conveyed by language: I think the Species Specific for human beings in language, and that's really all we have; and what- ever we communicate finally has to be in a lan- guage facility and competence, because we are hu- man only at the point of the refinement of their language facilities. we really have no other point of contact; because the language must con- vey emotion, the language must convey the ethos, the language must convey the motivation. So finally, it's an adeptness at language and bring- ing human beings to self-consciousness through 1 Sermon #11. 2 Ibid. mw—J languaé guage L sand t~ work: ‘ work 3 -" is a V3 constai I cann can gr withOLI We be: langua and la Among the gre ..e that Bietz sens Ti: iQ -.- _ introspect. «responses. Va ZT'WH‘ wut-llcate with ' c =Rffim can find :P 1 ‘ \§~ ...i tf‘ 157 language, and being so flexible in the lan- guage technic that one can readily use a thou- sand tools in his chest; so that if this doesn't work, we'll quickly take another; if that doesn't work, we'll throw it aside -- in other words, this is a very quick process that demands, I think, a constant addition of language facilities. Because I cannot grow without language and no human being can grow without language; no audience can grow without analytical language frames of reference. We become human - we become more human only through language and only through Speech; because Speech and language is what makes us human. 2. Man's ability for self-examination or to look within himself and become aware of what is happening, has happened, and what he plans shall happen. Among the great abilities that go to make up man's humanness is the one that Bietz sometimes Speaks of as man's ability to look in on himself. This is intrOSpection, the examining of one's inner feelings, thoughts, and reSponseS. Man is uniquely able to become aware of these and then to communicate with another concerning them. It is Bietz's thesis that until a person can find words accurately to describe that which is taking place within himself, he cannot really know or understand the inner processes of life that are basically available to his understanding.2 Man not only has the ability to look within himself, to become aware of what he is eXperi- encing within, to conceptualize these experiences by putting them into word symbols, and to understand this sufficiently to be able to intelli- gently communicate it to another person if he desires, but he is also able to remember what he has experienced within himself in the past and to gain Interview #3. 2 Lecture #43. :derstanding of : rersandiug. Bietz is refer; :::g"self-conscit eerhnce in the pr Lazay also plan th. You 5 his c highe me {C to (it self- crea: BlEtZ says t itPeppy today; a; ssareasonably g iii and why thi A” ,‘ ,7 stage t 0 repeat t The God not Offt Our God dee be: \I I Sermon #2 158 an understanding of these past experiences in the light of his present understanding. Bietz is referring to all of this when he Speaks of a person be- coming "self-conscious." But not only may a person be aware of his inner experience in the present and in the light of his past experiences, but he may also plan the patterns for this inner experience for the future. He says, You see, the unique thing about a human being is his capacity for self-awareness. There is the higher brain center which makes it possible for me to project my future, to know what I'm going to do, to be aware of how to get there; and this self-awareness makes me different from the lower creatures. Bietz says that through this ability man is able to know what makes him happy today; and knowing this, he can repeat it tomorrow. If a person has a reasonably good day today in terms of self-awareness of what is hap- pening and why things are going so well, he believes that the person can choose to repeat this experience in the future. Putting this in a reli- gious context and Speaking of these human qualities, he said, The only thing that you and I have to offer to our God is our intelligence, our remembering. If we do not offer him our intelligence, we have nothing to offer him. If we do not offer him our thoughts and our communication, we have nothing to offer God. In another sermon he said, God wants us to move to deeper levels, to reach deep within ougselves and there feel our whole being unified. 1 Lecture #11. 2 Sermon #25. Sermon #1. This capability :::s:iousness or sel: ".1125 of humanness . 3. Dr. Bietz beli were are many Circe :15 :1 site 5 c annot .... some to these . :aii:al behavior i s t ..1’3 each st imu lu s ‘ I (1' 1 if everyth ing . . .‘e‘: external situ happiness comes 1 3.19.138 that in ere he saic‘ 159 This capability for intrOSpection, which makes possible self- consciousness or self-awareness, he points out as one of the great qual- ities of humanness. 3. Man's ability to make choices regarding thoughts, plans, actions, reactions, re- Sponses in a meaningful way if he will. Dr. Bietz believes that man is a creature of choice; and that while there are many circumstances within and about an individual's life that his choices cannot control, yet each person can choose how he is going to reSpond to these. 'In this reSpect, he is at the Opposite pole from the radical behaviorist who considers man but a product of his environment, with each stimulus producing a predictable reSponse. Bietz believes that even if everything in one's environment were as nearly perfect as possible, this external situation would not guarantee his happiness; for, he says, "happiness comes from.within, and is that everlasting risk-taking and the believing that in taking the risk you can find some new self-discovery." Elsewhere he said: I make my own decisions; but in making my own de- cisions, I have to take my consequences. Then I can't blame anyone else any more. Then I can't project my own hostility on others; I can't say, "I would be happy if someone else treated me prOperly." You see, when you make your own de- cisions, then you do differentiate yourself from others. To become human, then, is to become lonely. Here Bietz equates a degree of loneliness with the assumption of 1 Lecture, "Using Your Mind, " Whittier, California, September 27, 1965; subsequently referred to as Lecture #44. 2 Lecture, "How to Manage Loneliness," Anaheim, April 21, 1969; sub- sequently referred to as Lecture #20. remembility for 0 ~ :xme,he alone is :tildren the impres _. evident when the pa: :s'out in life; ti 152 have done som- Izmiscontext he There. havi. chil You t to b. inst neve} Chil chil cred tak.I Crec in ( ful? are Bietz belie mamman abilitV “Ian Organimn a .. mmm Condii m H' F)”. _ ff‘: Ff OHU'U H' I. i‘ d D H 5‘. Le 160 reSponsibility for one's own choices, for when a person makes his own choice, he alone is reSponsible. He says that parents often give their children the impression that they have no choice. This is eSpecially evident when the parent assumes reSponsibility for the way the children turn out in life; that is, when parents indicate that they, the parents, must have done something wrong or their children‘would not have misbehaved. In this context he says: There is not going to be much ethical or moral be- havior unless parents very early relate to their children on the basis of, "Look, you have a choice. You can act decent; you can be nice; you don't have to be nasty; you can choose." And parents, for instance, who believe in morals and ethics will never take the full responsibility for what their children do. They wouldn't dare. For if your child is very successful you can't take the full credit for it; and if they fail, you had better not take the full blame. Because if you take the full credit, you imagine they have no right of choice in doing better than you did; and if you take the full blame; then you, too, say, "The poor dears are not reSponsible." Bietz believes that the ability to make choices is man's most basic and human ability. As has been previously noted, he often looks upon the human organism as an energy-producing system; and when the energies are flowing freely and uninhibitedly, the person is happy and the organism is in optimum condition. In this context he said: In order to have energy flowing vibrantly within us, it is necessary for us to make decisions. You see, so many of us suffer from mental indigestion. There is so much unfinished business. we have Stacked our problems instead of making decisions about these problems. Many persons, for instance, could be ra- diant with energy if only they would say, "Yes" or "No", and then Stand by these decisions. They Should know what they want. You see, the body goes into a 1 Lecture #37. 161 state of disorganization when the mind doesn't know what to do. IS there unfinished business? Are you a problem stacker? Or are you the kind of individual who can make decisions? You see, when the mind is in control and you can say, "Yes" and "No," then you may be amazed to find that there is a reservoir of energy that comes to the surface that you didn't even imagine was there. Some have lost the art of decision-making, and this always leads to boredom. When Bietz quoted Milton's "The mind is its own place, and in i“- self can make a heaven of hell, a hell, of heaven,"2he was in essence saying that no matter what the external circumstances are, no matter what may have happened to discourage us or to tend to bring about defeat in our lives of what may be available to us that should insure happiness and success, the ingredient that makes the difference in the individual's life is his ability to choose. He summarized this when he said, "Today I have 3 had a choice about the way I felt and related." 4. Man's ability for interpersonal relations through communication. It might well be said that Bietz believes that man is made for re- lationships. He said, Life finds its truest and highest fulfillment in sharing openly and honestly the relationships with God, with ourselves, and with all other persons whom God has created. This, then, you see, would relieve us of the alienation, the lack 2f identity, and the depersonalization in our times. 1 Sermon #1. 2 John Milton, Paradise Lost, Book I; quoted in Lecture #44. 3 Lecture #37. 4Sermon, "Loneliness," Glendale, California, March 24, 1968; subse- quently referred to as Sermon #13. A most importa tetheis made for I tth as an self tranef stant, make I it; a‘ sons. messa Metz indicat i: isolation frOm c 51:35 be more than ‘r'r‘r :- .5“ tuemo He saE. f 50 we Persd thin} SEIVQ with SOns you 162 A most important part of man's discovery of his identity is to learn that he is made for interpersonal relationships. Again he says, I think it is well for us to think of a human being as an instrument of communication. Think of your- self as a receiving organism, and as a sending, transmitting organism. You receive messages con- stantly; you correlate these messages; you try to make sense out of the incoming stimuli; organize it; and then you try to send messages to other per- sons. Some individuals are sending out very erratic messages; they do not know why they are misunderstood. Bietz indicates that man is not made to exist and function prOperly in isolation from other persons; but our humanity demands that other per- sons be more than just nearby. we need to relate to them, to communicate with them. He says, So we do need people; we need interaction. No person is a person in isolation; and we no longer think of persons as being totally within them- selves. We think of a human being in interaction with other persons; and if you take all other per- sons out of your life and go into isolation, then you become de-humanized. The above quotation seems to identify a very significant link in the Bietz chain of beliefs. Here he ties humanization to a successful rela— tionship with other persons. In the same lecture he goes on to further clarify this thought. He says, POpulation has increased tremendously, yet it can- not be said that there is a sense of unity or a sense of belonging. Someone has said that each person must have at least one person to whom he feels close. And if you do not feel close to at one person, then you cannot be a person, for no one can be a person by himself. we have to test ourselves against the other person. we have to 1 Lecture #26. 2 Lecture #20. As has been Signed to be huma i::'icated repeate aziieve the human nzerpersonal bas Earlier in $551 and highe: 52;; with God, w. 2 ' This 1 ‘t. .‘ MtQ‘ed dEScribe 1 163 know who we are as the result of seeing our- selves reflected in someone else. As has been noted earlier, we become human as a result of being helped to be human by others sharing their humanness with us. Bietz has indicated repeatedly that without help from other human beings, we cannot achieve the human experience. But the ability to relate to others on an interpersonal basis approaches the ultimate in humanness. 5. Man's ability to tap a source of intelligence within himself that is obviously greater than himself, which may be discovered as he dis- covers his own inner self. This intelligence not only governs the involuntary processes of the life, but it is an integrating and organ- izing source of intelligence which every person may tap if he is willing to become aware of it and give heed to its direction. Earlier in this outline, Bietz was quoted as saying, "Life finds its truest and highest fulfillment in sharing openly and honestly the relation- ship with God, with ourselves, and with all other persons whom God has created.2 This segment of the outline is an attempt to isolate and con- cisely describe the scientific or psychological concept of God and the in- dividual's relationship with him that Bietz shares with his lecture audiences. One of his clients, who has attended hundreds of his lectures and who has had regular counseling sessions with him for an extended period of time, said "He continually refers to a power greater than we are, to the great intelligence of the universe residing within us."3 The writer has 1 Lecture #20. 2 Sermon #13. 3 Mr. and'Mrs. Burt Proctor, interview in their home, Corona del Mar, California, April 17, 1969; subsequently referred to as Interview #23. 4 VIII-j - '7‘! "‘ risen-ed reference zezce of the unive :55":er well be t garscn's consciou able to all of us In his lect :c‘etail. The Art tha And but And per You the thi 164 observed references made by Bietz in his lectures concerning the intelli- gence of the universe that the individual may tap; the fact that intuition may very well be much more than a stray thought that just wandered into a ' O 0 person s consciousness; and many other references to an intelligence avail- able to all of us that is much greater than the person's own mind. In his lecture entitled, "Using Your Mind," he approached this theme in detail. The great joy of living is that I think that within Arthur Bietz there is an intelligence much greater than some of the stupidity which now shows itself. And that's just a fact; this is not true only of me, but it's true of all of you. Introducing this lecture, he said: And so tonight, I would like to impress you with, perhaps, a deeper and more complete approach to yourselves, to the nature of the universe, and to the nature of life. I would like to have you think this evening in terms of a frame of reference in- fused by an intelligence so much greater than our comprehension that if we seek to explain it, we al- ready tend to make a lie out of life itself. Per- haps one of the greatest weaknesses of the western mind is that it seeks to define everything and thinks that it can encompass that which is in the universe by the mind instead of being encompassed by an in- telligence greater than what we are able to grasp. Bietz asks a profound question: I wonder how many of us really believe that the mind is the essence of our being, and that intelligence is the milieu and the context, and the atmOSphere in which we function? Many times peOple will say, "Life just doesn't seem to make sense." I'd like to sug— gest to you that life is all sense, that life is in- telligence; and if there were no intelligence that was greater than what we see represented by the senses, 1 Lecture #44. 2 Ibid. 165 there would be no human existence.1 Bietz points out that he believes that our concept of reality is ex- tremely important to us, and that it has much to do with the way that our life is oriented. He says that in emphasizing the so-called scientific approach as a materialistic approach, many have ignored the reality of life itself, in that their recognition deals merely with the material universe, the universe of form, of organized matter; and this, he says, is not dealing with reality at all. But rather, he indicates, reality has to do with something that stands behind what we see; and the truth about a person is not what that person appears to be externally but is that some- thing which has produced the person; and this reality which is behind the person, which is behind all matter that we see, is intelligence and mind; and this, he believes, must be conceived to be the nature of the universe. For, he says, the universe is essentially intelligence, and the organization of matter is the result of intelligence.2 To illustrate this, he says, One gram of matter, so it is said, has in it 25 million kilowatt hours of energy. Think of that intelligence! Think, for instance, of the fact that matter can be turned into energy according to certain basic intellectual procedures and known laws, and then that energy can be turned back in- to matter again. As Bietz looks at the universe, which works by definite and discover- able laws, he sees order and direction and design in it all. Then he points to the fact that each human starts from sub-microscopic beginnings without 1Lecture #44. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. "another's 01' the ietekps, and in al greater than that c ligent-direction cc heather produce: tie genetic formul. ill be blue or hi iiin type of body arctic which neit LSDC‘EQ, he begins orge thre At 1 pha: thil See: Cha. fol dre wor kn Wot de\ Bietz indi< ‘- \ -‘ta .‘uL e ‘L- HALICh is g B 1‘! ‘) n O‘K‘mH-H-n 166 the mother's or the father's conscious direction. The embryo grows and develOpS, and in all of this there is an intelligence at work which is greater than that of the mother. He points out that there are no intel- ligent-direction connections between the mother and the deve10ping embryo. The mother produces.the food, but she has no intellectual connection with the genetic formulation or the genetic message which says the child's eyes will be blue or his hair will be blond or he will be so tall and of a cer- tain type of body formation. All of this is produced by an intelligence at work which neither the mother nor the embryo generates. After the child is born, he begins to grow; and then, Bietz says, . . . . an intelligence at work within the young organism produces certain reSponses at the age of three that are quite normal and up to expectations. At four you expect another type of developmental phase which all children go through; at ten, at thirteen, there is an intelligence at work which seems to bring order and meaning out of so-called chaos; and the parents simply stand and see the un- folding of intelligence as it relates to their chil- dren. And if you don't interfere and gum up the works of that intelligence and that growth, if you know the laws of that growth and at least to some degree work congenially with it, a fine human being will develOp. Bietz indicates that it is our privilege to discover this intelli- gence which is giving direction and order and beauty to life. If you think of the world as a materialistic world, and if you think of yourself simply as a mass of matter, then, of course, there is not a great deal that you can do about yourself. On the other hand, if the universe is pulsating with intelligence, and if the universe is pulsating with design; and if ygg. are the result of an architectural direction; if you know that energy is not a matter of disorganization but that energy is intelligent and that you can be a center of organizing intelligence - now I want to 1 Lecture #44. 167 emphasize this, because too many times I think we believe that we are the center of intelligence rather than the center which organizes and taps intelligence. If I believe that there is intelli- gence which I can release rather than produce, then life is much more hOpeful; and if my judgment at this particular moment is not adequate, I reco nize that there is an intelligence which I can tap. Bietz points out that he believes many peOple's problems center in the fact that they look out into the world and discover that there ate problems to be solved and needs to be met that are far beyond their abili- ties to cape with. He says that if we can see that there is an intelli- gence with the necessary power that is able to c0pe with and bring order and beauty out of the chaotic dilemma, we need not as persons be over- He suggests that in reality we see intelligence, design, dynamics, . . . . an organizational type of meaning which is directed toward certain end goals. In other words, our so-called conscious intelligence is such a small, small part of intelligence that it can hardly be said to be anything except a consciousness that there is intelligence. In other words, sort of a slight aware- ness that we on the surface can actually become aware of, that is intelligence at work! No physician ever heals a wound; he dresses it, but intelligence heals it. Most peOple think that intelligence is simply some surface thing which they produce, rather than intelligence being the very nature of the universe into which we tie ourselves, which we actually can begin to experience. In discussing the fact that it is every person's privilege and re- Sponsibility to build his personality, Bietz says that this great intelli- gence in the world, if given a chance, can be a magnificent thing in terms of helping each person to build his personality. 1 Lecture #44. .- ......J see rec the you the thr gen tel cen a c thi it, Sumar iZ ing 168 Not only is mind at work while I talk with you in what we call a superficial conversation. There is at work in you and me an intelligence which keeps us alive, which makes it possible for me to think; which makes it possible for me to see all of the things where I am not now consciously directing my seeing, yet I see them. I am not consciously di- recting certain processes within my body which, if they Should now cease, I would be dead. ‘Well, can you see that intelligence is not only the nature of the universe around us, but it is also in us and through us and is producing us, and this intelli- gence is goal-directing. It is true that our in- telligence - our mind - Simply becomes a radiating center of intelligence. Our minds simply become a creative center to use that intelligence; and this intelligence is goal-directed; and when I tap it, I become a dynamic, wholesome, growing human being.1 Summarizing all of this, Bietz says, Now I don't want to speak tonight in an esoteric sense or in an ethereal sense or in a metaphysical sense as such. I would like to suggest that this is not above physics as metaphysics is beyond phy- sics; but this ii the nature of life itself. This is what you are. That's how you happen to become who you are. He says that if one is to assume that by the very nature of reality he is linked to intelligence, and that this intelligence is self-directing, that it has a goal-direction greater than the individual knows, so that it is not necessary for the individual to move in greater and greater frustra- tion as he tries desperately to make sense out of his situation - if he accepts this premise, then he may lean back, as it were, on intelligence which is self-directing. Then he asks the question, You say, "Is this something that is up or down or over there?" No, it is inside you. Now we Speak of the deeper inner mind and we Speak of the 1 Lecture #44. 2 169 superficial conscious mind. W Speak of the conscious and the unconscious. Bietz definitely indicates that he believes that we contact this source of intelligence within ourselves. He illustrates this by saying that the very morning of the day that he gave this lecture, a woman came into his office deeply distressed, very nervous and upset, and in an ex- tremely emotional condition with the tears flowing freely. Now what did we do during this hour? There is an intelligence in this girl which, if she could con- tact during this hour, she would have the solution to her problem, which is precisely what happened. For when we probed a little beneath that superficial fright, after about thirty minutes She began to say, "I think this; I think that; well, it seems to me--" and she walked out of there in touch with a deeper portion of herself because the answers were there, in herself. All that the therapist had to do was to somehow help her to clear away the emotional rub- bish which had kept her out of touch with herself; and when that happened you would hardly have recog- nized her to be the same person. As a further illustration, he said: You've been working on a certain problem, and the more you've thought about it in terms of your con- scious mind, the more and more mixed up you got, and finally you decided to go to sleep. In the morn- ing you awaken and suddenly things become very clear that were very mixed up the night before. You see, when you sleep your conscious mind sleeps, but your deeper mind keeps working. If your deeper intelli- gence did not keep working, your heart would st0p beating, digestion would cease, metabolism would cease, and you would not live. A deeper intelli- gence, then, keeps on in what we call the involun- tary functions of the body. 1 Lecture #44. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. 170 To add another facet to this line of thinking, Bietz said, I was talking to a very outstanding physicist the other day who was questioning some of Einstein's conclusions. He said Einstein was not quite correct; he had some good things but there was something far more profound. "well," I said, "where did you learn that?" He said, "I didn't learn it, but it came to me." And then he went on to explain; and he produced a book by one of the outstanding physicists in the world, and he said, "Now this physicist says the same thing." He said, "I believe there is an intelligence at work within the universe which at a prOper time speaks; and if we are sensifized to that intelligence, then we can tune in on it." In this same regard, Bietz recalled that Beethoven Spoke of the fact that his music came through him, that he was attuned to melody; that Tchaikowsky indicated but he was attuned to Bietz gave in support who are aware of this that came through him and he was aware of this intelligence. All of this sensitized to it. of the intelligence of their own being. emotional problems which induce many of their physical ailments. that his great musical insights were not really his them; that Emerson observed that there was over-mind of his thesis that intelligence is available to those source of intelligence and who are willing to become Bietz reported that physicians have indicated in their medical mono- graphs that seventy-five percent of all physical ailments can be caused by wrong mental attitudes - that is, attitudes not consistent with the nature that people whose illness arises from this source are living in such a way as to be completely Opposed to the nature of their own organisms, which is the nature of the intelligence in which each must participate from the time of inception to his present level of growth. He added, 1 Lecture #44. These wrong mental attitudes cause He said 171 If you move against the intelligence of your own organism, you suffer the consequences. In other words, if you move to obstruct the intelligence, or to sabotage it, or to restrict it or to inhibit it, you could destroy yourself. On the other hand, the physician learns these intelligent laws, bio- chemical and physical and metabolic; he learns these laws and then c00perates with this intelli- gence, and an individual is restored in health. Bietz suggested that if a person is going to follow through on the basis that he has recommended, . . . . you're going to give more attention to in- tuition; you're going to let your hunches come through, and you're not going to completely ignore your flashes of insight. I dare say that a lot of people right here in this audience, if they had had the courage and understanding of their deeper intel- ligence and had followed some of their flashes of insight and their hunches, would be successful, great persons today in their field; but they never got to trusting a deeper intelligence within them. The great creative artists, the great poets, the great inventors, the great men in the discovery of the secrets of the universe, have had as it were a flash (of intellect that brought to them a deep secret); and almost every- body with a superficial mind was against them; they didn't see it. But these trusted their intuition; they couldn't prove it all but they knew it to be so, and the human race has profited from it. In other words, when you use your mind rightly, you're not go- ing to ignore the deep intuitions and the deep insights. In speaking to the person who is in need, who is attempting to build an authentic and beautiful personality, he said, There is an answer and there is a wisdom and there is an intelligence in the unconscious which, if con- tacted, would help any of us over many deep problems. But most of us live externally and most of us live superficially and we live erratically and we are dis- turbed. Intelligence is self-directing; meaning that if I can tap it, I am on my way toward the solution. . . 1 Lecture #44. 2. bid. 172 Now I think this can change your life completely. I think it can change you from an irrational, up- set, neurotic, emotional, disgruntled human being into a well-functioning, happy, creative, good- judgment, fine-relationship person. But it will depend now on whether or not you are willing to concede that there is an intelligence available to you greater than that which you are able to be conscioYSly aware of in terms of your parti- cular use. Perhaps as a final thought for this section, a statement from one of his sermons might tend to relate the Statements above, which have been taken largely from one of his lectures, to his religious concept of God. I used the term "mystery" a week or two ago, and someone said that mystery means the state of mind which is Opposite knowledge. No, no. It is the state of mind which believes that the unknown is knowable if only I will reach out with God in order to find his answers. That's the only basis on which I would wish to use the term "mystery." b. Self-worth is that which results from the recognition of one's own tremendous poten- tial and capacity for meaningful, purposeful, rewarding living. Self-worth is an extremely important concept in Bietz's psychological frame of reference. Self-worth is tied into identity in that the more man discovers of his identity as a human being, the more he can discover of his ability to think abstractly and to communicate successfully by symbols; as he looks within himself and discovers the processes there at work; as he remembers his experiences and reSponses to the past, and begins to make sense out of them; as he discovers his ability to make choices that will govern his reSponse to external stimuli; as he discovers his capability for 1 Lecture #44. 2 Sermon #12. 173 rewarding interpersonal relationships; and then if he makes the crowning discovery -- that he possesses the key that can unlock the storehouse of wisdom and that if he will become sensitized to it, he may tap the great source of intelligence in the universe that tends toward meaning, purpose, beauty, and rewarding living -- to the degree that he does this he will the more completely understand his identity and appreciate his self-worth. Bietz believes that a concept of self-worth is basic to any system of morals and ethics. Do you know of anything on the face of the earth that you conceive to have more worth than human beings? Let's just take it purely from the psy- chological human experience level. Do you know of something that has higher worth or more supreme value than a human being? Then, by the nature of the situation, you would have to say, even if you are not religious, even if you do not believe in hell, even if you do not believe in heaven--you will still have to believe, by virtue of being a human being and by virtue of using your intellect and your reflected capacity, that from the view- point of our understanding and eXperience, we know of nothing that has higher worth than a fine human being. He then continues by making an application of how self-worth ties in with moral conduct. Now, if I am cheap, then obviously I can be im- moral and I can be unethical; but if I have high worth, then it matters how I act. It matters how I act toward you if you are worth something. We say that a person who has value ought not to be vio- lated. And we deSpise almost naturally the person who takes, say, a thousand-dollar piece of art work and steps on it. We say, "There's something wrong here." We say to a young man or a young woman, "Look, you're worth something; don't cheapen your- self; don't destroy yourself." . . . . Now if you don't think that a human being has basic 1 Lecture #37. 174 worth, then we need not talk about morals and ethics at all; for all morality and all ethical behavior are based intrinsically upon the idea that you have value; that your sons and daughters are valuable; that their lives have a basic sanc- tity; and that life, because it is valuable, ought to be very well cared for. Bietz says that too frequently peOple are reluctant to help their children and others become aware of their great worth for fear that this will cause them to become egotistical: When you give yourself and your children self-worth, they will not have the big head; they will be able to be free. Project your worth; don't allow your- self into the mood of, "I'm no good; I'm worthless. I Should hide myself; I should be ashamed." Don't do that. Xenture self-worth, along with self- awareness. Bietz says that self-awareness not only brings into self-conscious- ness the qualities and assets that make for one's humanness and give him a basis for an appreciation of his own worth, but also brings into con- sciousness the awareness of the negative factors, the frustrations, the mistakes, the failures, the actions of the past about which one feels guilty; and all of these things tend to cause one to feel somewhat worth- less. Bietz believes that an awareness of these negative factors is essential to becoming a psychologically whole and healthy person. (The intricacies of this process will be discussed in detail in a later part of this outline.) For the present, it will suffice to say that the only way a person can overcome the negative factors in his life and go on growing into what he was intended to be is for his concept of his own self-worth to outweigh the negative factors that come into his awareness 1 Lecture #37. 2Lecture #11. r. J - -' l-. ‘i‘ 175 until they can be processed and overcome. In this regard, Bietz says, If you do not venture your self-worth along with your self-knowledge, you're sunk! That's why therapy is often very dangerous because unless the therapist can keep a person feeling that he's worth something while he becomes aware of some areas which he has been trying to block out, he's going to col- lapse. 30 sometimes the therapist has to leave well enough alone unless he feels that self-awareness can be matched by the venture of Self-worth. And again, Regardless of your limitations, regardless of the areas of your life which you may be ashamed of, re- gardless of guilt, you must know these things. But in order to continue to be aware of these things and not repress them again, you must feel that you are worth something. That's why you'll only tell your secrets to your dearest friends. Why? Be- cause you wouldn't dare tell your secret if you couldn't maintain your self-worth and your friends will still think well of you even though you tell them everything.2 In another lecture he elucidated upon this same facet of thought: DevelOp social skills; don't be a parasite. Ini- tiate friendship; learn social skills; accept your- self as a worthwhile human being; don't go around apologizing for the fact that you are taking up some Space on the earth. I know we're getting over-populated, but don't take it to heart and start apologizing because you're taking some Space. Don't be a worm crawling on the ground, saying, "I'm no good; step on me," for peOple have a way of accommodating us, you know! To one of his lecture audiences he said, You can't like me unless you like yourself. You girls will never be able to like a boy genuinely until you love yourself genuinely and enjoy your- self; and whin you enjoy yourself you can enjoy a young man. 1Lecture #11. 2 Ibid. 3Lecture #20. 4Lecture #1. 176 Here Bietz is bringing to a lecture audience very much the same concept embodied in the religious principle, "Love your neighbor as your- self." Implicit in this statement is the fact that until a person appre- ciates his own great self-worth and his status as a human being, which is what Bietz believes loving oneself amounts to, he is not able to love others. 2. Self-realization, or becoming what one was inherently intended to be includes: a. Wholeness: Becoming or functioning as a whole or integrated person is necessary for self-realization. Wholeness indicates bal- ance or harmony in the life where all that is learned is organized and integrated to benefit the whole; whereas without this con- certed effort by oneself to treat every part of the life in relation to every other part, man tends to fragment; i.e., one part is em- phasized to the detriment of other parts of the life. Fragmentation is reSponsible for many personality ailments. Holism has grown out of the Gestalt psychology, which was founded by three German psychologists, Wertheimer, Koffka, and Kohler. It says, in effect, that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts; that the whole has a function that could not be performed by its parts working individually. This Gestalt philOSOphy has been altered and adapted by those who are some- times referred to as the organismic school of psychology. It is an approach that has been especially pOpular with clinical psychologists who are inter- ested in helping the whole person; while experimental psychologists, gen- erally Speaking, are interested in focusing on isolated parts of behavior in order to fill in the missing links in our incomplete knowledge about man's behavior.1 1 Calvin S. Hall and Gardner Lindzey, Theories of Personality (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1957), p. 297. 177 While Dr. Bietz is obviously eclectic enough to make it difficult to identify him with a particular school of psychology, yet it is obvious that he supports the broad and basic principles generally outlined by the organismic theory of psychology. Self-realization implies a growth process in the individual toward becoming that which the self is capable of becoming. The self in this frame of reference is considered to be the whole person. Bietz seems to be saying that a whole person is one in whom the psychological defense mechanism of repression has not made serious inroads, so that the self has available to its awareness the recollection of experiences in all areas of the life. Repression will be discussed at length in a later portion of this outline; but suffice it to say here that repression sub- merges the memory of areas of experience into the sub-conscious because of fear and the threat of anxiety. Ideally, the person who is experienc- ing wholeness would be able to make each decision in his life while being open to an awareness of all past experience and of the needs of each part of his self. Discovering one's identity is a matter of becoming aware of each factor and facet of one's self and of one's potential. Wholeness is a matter of maintaining an openness and an awareness of all the discovered and, hOpefully, the discoverable aSpectS of oneself, and being able to communicate with oneself and, if necessary, with others concerning these needs. In the Bietz frame of reference, the alternative to wholeness is fragmentation, which denotes an emphasis upon a part of the life or of the self to the neglect or at the expense of another or other parts of the self. The following are excerpts from Bietz's Speaking involving his y w’.‘ Inn-nut. 178 approach to wholeness or holism. This evening I want us to think in terms of what we call looking at life in terms of holism. Are you functioning as a whole organismic unit, or are you functioning in what we call a state of diSplace- ment - in other words, putting an emphasis upon a very small aSpect of human experience and ignoring all other areas of human experience? Bietz has used the analogy of earthquake-resistant skyscraper struc- tures to illustrate wholeness in the personality. These skyscrapers are constructed in such a way that the steel framework is all tied together in one piece from the foundation to the very tOp of the edifice. Further- more, this construction is flexible rather than rigid, so that if there is a tremor, the structure will bend and sway, thus absorbing the stress and staying in one piece. Applying this to the human personality, he said, That, perhaps, is a very good parallel to being able to absorb the shocks of life. I assume that everyone of us at some time or another has undergone some kind of earthquake experience, a very traumatic, probably jolting kind of experience; and we were very fortunate if we could keep ourselves in one piece. Even though, perhaps, there was a bit of weaving and swaying back and forth, yet every part of the self was so tied in with the other part that no part gave way and Splin- tered itself from the whole. . . . How much of you hangs loose from the center of you? How many parts of you are inconsistently related to other parts of you? That's the question. And the idea today is to try to unify the personality, to face up to realities and to try to live as a person. Now that's an emphasis, for instance, that we hear more and more -- for a persog to be himself; that is, to be together in one piece. 1 Lecture, "Living by Fragments," Whittier, California, October 28, 1968; subsequently referred to as Lecture #31. 2 Lecture #31. Continuing with this same line of thought, he makes an application 179 to mental illness. To explain this fragmentation in terms of obsessions and compulsions, he said: Bietz indicates that a fragmented person is one who wants to keep things as simple as possible, so that he can explain them to his own sat- isfaction. is not simple, and therefore the only way that this attitude can be re- inforced is for a person to be unrealistic in his outlook. Now I want to say that if any part of you Splinters itself off from the rest of you and becomes the ba- sis for a major decision that affects you, then you're in trouble. If a part of you becomes so important that you make a decision on the basis of that part, to the neglect of the whole, then you are in difficul- ty. Mental hOSpitals are filled with individuals who are focused on a part of themselves. And it is very strange and very sad to see individuals who have shut out all areas of reality until they are aware of only a part. In these hOSpitals you will find many individ- uals who are so fixed and focused On a part of them- selves that they ignore all the rest of themselves. This is sickness. In terms of an obsession and a compulsion, here's an individual who is so interested in making money that he forgets his family, he forgets his children, he forgets how to take vacations, he can't spend money any more for trips abroad even though he may have the funds. That individual is so completely focal- ized on a part of the necessity of life that he de- stroys everything else because of it . . . He is incapable of reSponding to life in terms of its totality. This is the kind of individual who is usually very tired. This is the kind of person who has no release of energy, because one cannot really be enthusiastic and energetic until one functions totally.2 This is, however, an unrealistic approach to life because life 1 Lecture #31. 2 Lecture, "Releasing Energy," Whittier, California, May 10, 1965; subsequently referred to as Lecture #38. Then when the 180 evidences come flooding into his consciousness that clearly indicate that life is not as simple as he would like to think, the threat imposed to his structure of beliefs by this additional information is sub-consciously repressed in order to avoid the anxiety that would come as a result of his not being able to reorganize his thinking. Because of this, a fragmented person often attempts to reduce to very simple terms the reasons for other persons' behavior. If you must explain a person simply, then you must fragment that person and put that person into a very small piece. In other words, the less whole you are, the less ambiguity or mys- tery you can take. You've got to have every- thing plain; everything has to be understood; everything has to be just; everything has to be fair. And if it isn't you begin to come un- glued . . . Man is a complex organism, and the mind is exceedingly complex. If you would be whole, you must endure a bit of mystery with- in yourself. And so, if somebody would ask, "What are you like?" if you are whole, you would say, "I am a mystery!" Could you endure that? That's why the individual who is fragmented has great diffi- culty in making decisions. There is nothing that such a person is more afraid of than making clear- cut decisions, because a decision is a commitment; and the fragmented individual who makes a commit- ment is always afraid of having made a mistake. And the point is that every decision you make is a mistake!1 That is to say, every decision is a mistake in that something about it is sure not to be perfect, and some part of the outcome might have been better had a different decision been made. Wholeness and self-worth are intricately tied together, for self- worth comes as a result of discovering one's identity or one's wholeness 1 Lecture #31. '4‘. '. ‘ J "(ml—J 181 and the many facets and factors of his life that go to make up what he is and what he is able to do. The person who is fragmented does not focus upon the whole but upon the part, and therefore is not aware of his great worth, or his great abilities, or his great privileges. This fragmented person, then, is unable to take criticism graciously. I could take criticism if I were whole, because I am then constantly aware of the limitations of the parts. But that doesn't bother me too much if I'm whole. I am not obsessed with the parts because my confidence is in the whole; it is never in the part. Therefore if you criticize a part of me, that's not going to throw me. Dr. Bietz identifies happiness as a state in which all of the ener- gies of the life are available to be directed toward some desired activity. But he says that the fragmented individual cannot be happy because his energies, rather than being directed toward a goal, are significantly dis- sipated through energy leaks to the various compartments of the life where repression is at work. The only way fragmentation can be sustained is through denying to awareness the evidences of the needs of the neglected parts of the life, which denial is largely maintained through the invol- untary psychological defense mechanism of repression. The human organism is designed in such a way that the evidences of the unrecognized needs continually attempt to surface to consciousness; and significant amounts of energy are required in order to maintain sufficient tension to repress this disturbing evidence. Bietz says of this energy that is burned up as a result of fragmen- tation: Now the fragmented personality is always a person- ality lacking energy direction. How many pieces 1 Lecture #31. 182 are you in? How many directions are you going? Are you in a constant State of indecision? Is there so much resistance within you that the energy is in actuality burned in resistance? This happens because we are not whole. On the contrary, when we come together and function as organisms that are unitary, when we come in- to one piece, we can say, "It's great to be alive!" we feel our total being; the mind and body and the total being come together in some- what of a symphony, and we are aware of ourselves. we feel ourselves, and we feel the energy. Now this happens when we come together, when our energy is focalized; when life becomes a stream moving toward a Specific chosen direction. Bietz indicates that it is a delightful thing to see a person func- tion as a whole. For instance, to see someone laugh "all over," totally involved while he is laughing, and then to be able to be serious "all over." To see someone who is able to be totally involved in his work or play or love or worship or any other activity, never getting compulsive on any one thing, but always the whole Standing above the part, and the whole never being sacrificed in behalf of the fragment. He says it is a delight . . . to be able to listen to somebody and to listen to that person completely, not just half- heartedly. To eat and to enjoy it all over, so that the man is worth cooking for - this is the delight of any woman who is a good cook. But when a man reads the paper with a part of his being while he eats with another part of his being and thinks of yet something else, only a part of him is laughing; and with a small por- tion of himself he kisses his wife goodbye, and she knows quite well that he wasn't really there while he was kissing her; and the children know that the parents aren't really there while they are talking with them. 1 Lecture #38. 2 Ibid. 183 Bietz indicates that when a person functions as a total being, at that moment he is enthusiastic, for enthusiasm is the result of the organ- ism's functioning as a whole with all the energies flowing freely and available for direction. It is of interest to note that in Bietz's overall philOSOphy, it is the concept of wholeness that he applies to God and to the entire universe. In a sermon he said, I like the statement of one of the great scholars of our time (Teilhard), who said it this way: "The farther and more deeply we penetrate into matter, by means of increasingly powerful methods, the more we are confounded by the interdependence of its parts. Each element of the cosmos is posi— tively woven from all of the others: from beneath itself by the mysterious phenomenon of 'composi- tion,' which makes it subsistent through the apex of an organized whole; and from above through the influence of unities of a higher order which in- corporate and dominate it for their own ends. It is impossible to cut this network, to isolate a portion without it becoming frayed and unravelled at all its edges. All around us, as far as the eye can see, the universe holds together; and only one way of considering it is really possible, to take it as a whole, in one piece." In another sermon he said, So long as we keep denying God's wholeness and the wholeness of the universe and the wholeness of the human family, we will experience nothing but fear and give our children, environmentally and geneti- cally, nothing but impoverishment in the years ahead.2 b. Happiness: A product of moving toward self- realization as a whole person. This denotes Sermon, "An Organismic Universe," Glendale, California, March 3, 1968; subsequently referred to as Sermon #2. 2 Sermon, "Don't Splinter," Glendale, California, March 15, 1969; subsequently referred to as Sermon #7. 184 a state of balance and harmony in the life, a relaxed dynamic tension where all of the energies of the life are available to be directed creatively in some desired activity. This entire section is dedicated to a discussion of Bietz's concept of what constitutes a worthy goal in life for an individual. He believes that there is a great deal of confusion in the minds of many peOple con- cerning this. In our American culture, which is over-coercive in terms of external demands for success there has de- ve10ped on the part of a large number of individuals the belief that there is something much more impor- tant than life itself; and there are those who are willing to sacrifice life in order to be successful. In the Bietz context, making money, for example, is not an indication of success unless the money contributes greatly to the life and to one's ability to live it more completely or abundantly. He would say the same thing for objectives such as obtaining an education or a certain position, or any other goal; for if the achievement of these goals does not contribute to one's happiness and to one's growth toward becoming what he is able to become as a person, it is then sacrificing life for so-called success. In this context he says, Somehow they haven't realized that the purpose of life is happiness; and may I suggest that a lot of us here this evening are not having happiness sim- ply because we don't really believe in it. we've been taught that happiness, perhaps, is not a worthy goal of life. We have been taught that it doesn't matter how you feel; it's what you ought to do that matters. You do this and that and the other thing; and it doesn't matter whether you're happy in school, just so you get good grades! 1 Lecture #1. 2 Ibid. 185 DevelOping this same thought of happiness being the goal in life, he said, Then the goal of living is to achieve a mood, not anything else. The goal of living is to achieve a mental climate. The goal of living is to create an attitude, an attitude which over-rides every kind of transitional experience of life. This is what I ought to experience. Actually, this isn't something which you have to look for outside of yourself; this is something that is inside of you that wants to bubble out. For life itself is a bubbling, radiating force, and if it isn't covered with a lot of rubbish, then it is like an artesian well which flows; and perhaps one of the finest illustrations of this is that religious statement of the Master Teacher, who says that if you would truly enter into life, then there would be rivers of living water bubbling out incessantly from within you. The above is an example of Bietz's insertion of a religious concept into his lecturing; and it seems obvious that his concept of the goal of life in a religious setting is identical to that expressed in his lectures. In this sense he is saying that the goal of life is for life to be over- flowing with radiant happiness, which Springs from a state of wholeness and growth, and is a process of becoming what we are intended to be. I think that the greatest sorrow in life is that so many of us remain dwarfs of ourselves. We re- main pigmies of ourselves when we were intended to be tall in Spirit and radiant in eXpression. You see, it is possible for human beings to achieve a richness which is almost staggering to the imagina- tion. Isn't it true that all of us miss so much of the here-and-now living? How little we see when there is so much that we could be aware of! And how closed our lives often are when they Should be Open and expressive and free in communication with ‘ ourselves, with each other, and with our God. You see, God would like to have us break out of our self- made prisons, he would like to have us free ourselves from our culturally-imposed prisons. Yes he would 1 Lecture #1. 186 like to see our perceptions cleansed; he would like to have us use our eyes so that we can see; and our ears so that we can hear; for you see, there is a hearing and a seeing which many of us are actually missing. Our perceptions need to be cleansed. In effect, Bietz is saying that our perceptions need to be cleansed in order that we may see ourselves, our potential, our true worth, as we really are. To see the true goal in life as becoming what we were basi- cally intended to be, we must look beyond the blocks and barriers repre- sented by the negative factors that often engross, frustrate, and over- whelm us, diverting our aim and attention from the real goal of life. Now psychological consultants meet a great deal of misery. In a number of hours in counseling today, the air was filled with unhappiness, sorrow, disappointment, deSperation, and tragedy. And if during the course of an hour (the consultant) can add just a little happiness, and if the (counselee) becomes a little more capable of cheerfulness, then we can say that at least we've made some contribution.2 In expressing somewhat the same thought, he said, I am so impressed, again and again, and so happy when I see a (psychological) test indicating that the person is capable of happiness. Then, again and again, I see tests with indications of ner- vousness, aggression, and depression. You see, these are unfortunate peOple; and usually these are the persons who are rigid. The world isn't right; they aren't right; the husband isn't right; the children aren't right; this is dirty and that is bad; and they live in a miserable world of ex- ternalism and nothing turns out right because they haven't really been educated to understand that the purpose of living is for the enjoyment of life it- self. In other words, the goal of life is living, not something that has to do with the external world outside ourselves. Sermon #1. 2 Lecture #1. 3 Ibid. ”LIE-I .3... q _' m 187 Returning to one of his basic concepts that the human organism must be conceived of as an energy-producing system, and that happiness and the free flow of energy are quite synonymous, Bietz says: In actuality, a human being has to be conceived of as an energy system. This is what life is. To the degree that there is energy and the pr0per assimilation of energy, and to the degree that this energy flows freely and can be pr0perly di- rected, to that degree we find happiness and a feeling of unity within ourselves. The fact is, however, that there are many persons today, es- pecially, who seem to be complaining of fatigue, a constant state of being tired, of being bored. Many just don't have the energy to do what they want to do. Now this is a question in which psychologists are very much interested. Dealing with persons who are emotionally disturbed and who complain of fatigue, we (therapists) see transformations taking place again and again. An individual comes in who seems at the very lowest ebb of energy production; then as therapy continues over a period of weeks, perhaps months, finally we see the same individual transformed; energy is now available. So obviously this mat- ter of energy is not just a problem that has to do with physiology or with biochemistry. It is a problem that has to with our psychology. It is of interest, then, to psychologists and to those who want to live prOperly to take a look at this question of energy. Arthur Bietz would then say that if a person is completely aware of his identity, and if he could become completely aware of his true worth, he would be a whole person who would be open to the needs of all of the parts of his life, who would make clear-cut decisions regarding his life with his whole life in view as he makes them; that in so doing all of the energies of life would be available to him so that they could be directed toward whatever decision is to be made or whatever activities are to be experienced; and that the symphonic harmony and the free-flowing energies 1 Lecture #38. —_» 188 of this life would result in a completely happy person. III. Man is primarily a social creature made for relationships with God, himself, other per- sons, other living things, and inanimate objects. This need and potential for relat- ionships, or humanness, is inherent in man; but it must be shared with him and deve10ped by others in the early life of the individual, and as he matures, choice and reSponsibility are to be assumed by the individual. These provide for the establishment and continuance of relationships. In the estimation of the writer, Bietz is one who believes that man is primarily a social creature, a concept that differs from the classical Freudian theory, which is premised upon the idea that man is primarily a biological creature. This latter theory hypothesizes that the overriding need of a human being is that he cooperate with and attempt to satisfy the instinctual, biological urges and appetites of the life. This inevit- ably putS the sexual desires and instincts at or near the top of the hier- archy of human needs. Dr. Bietz does not agree with this approach, as will be increasingly obvious as his views on sex are discussed in a later portion of this outline. The alternate theory, that man is primarily a social creature, does not deny an important place to sex or any other instinctual urge or appe- tite of the life; but it does hold that social relationships are the ulti- mate expression of man's humanness and that the need for successful inter- personal relationships is the primary, the most essential need in the hierarchial arrangement of human needs. This latter theory freely admits that sex provides a way of person- ally interrelating, but it does not see sex as playing the dominant role in self-fulfillment so that a fulfilled life would necessarily be largely 189 preoccupied with sexual activities. Viewed primarily as a social creature, man is seen as one who is much concerned as to whether he is socially ac- cepted or not, who is greatly rewarded by finding what he feels is his useful place in society and who finds great reward in intimately and per- sonally Sharing himself, his talents, his interests, his resources, with those who are most significant to him. This theory allows for a program of giving fullest expression to each person's unique capacities for human- ness. All Of the biological urges are incorporated in man's asset of humanness, and thereby may be given their fullest and prOportionate ex- pression. There are some persons, no doubt, who would argue that this is large- ly a problem of semantics; but inasmuch as there is this dichotomy of thought in clinical psychological circles, in the Opinion of the writer, Bietz can best be classified among those who consider man to be primarily a social creature. A. Man's genetic endowment and personal circum- stances are unique. It is the uniqueness of man which is in focus here. Bietz indicates that there are no two persons alike even though they come from the same home with the same parents. Genetically, there are endless possibilities for variety, and each person is inherently different from every other per- son. It is also true that the personal circumstances surrounding each individual's life are different from those of every other person's life. Each person has a unique point of view, and he interprets all that comes into his mind through his senses in the light of this personal point of view, in the light of his unique past experiences and his uniquely inherited capacities and interests. 190 Concerning the genetic impact upon the person's life and his atti- tude toward it, Bietz says: Now we're beginning tO find out that a great deal of what we are is influenced by what we call a genetic pattern; we're putting more and more eme phasis upon genetics, upon inheritance. I was Speaking of this tO someone, and this person re- Sponded by saying, "well, that frightens me; because there are some problems in the family and I trust that they may not be in me." I said, "That's really not so frightening. Actu- ally, what is, probably is there anyway. But if we become aware Of what is there, our possi- bilities of maneuvering and achieving realiza- tion of ourselves is far beyond our imagination." I may lack something genetically, perhaps, in the inheritance pattern out of which I was formed; yet in terms Of what there is, how much better I might be doing if I knew how to project myself. There are times, you know, when we function rather well, and we have a feeling that it's a great life and we feel self-realization; but those moments could be increased. The fact is, regardless Of who you are and what your endowments may be, if you functioned as you could, chances are what you have inherited is very adequate for the tasks that face you. Again referring to our genetic endowments, he said: You are indeed to discover your own abilities. One Of the great experts in the realm of human intelli- gence has indicated that there some 150 different types of intelligence; so it is important that you should do your own thing. You have an intelligence which is uniquely your own. You have abilities which are yours alone, and you are not like another human being. There are no two persons alike. Of- ten it has been Stated in the past that all men are created equal; this is a fallacy which belongs to a pre-scientific age when life was so simple that it appeared as if all men were equal. But now in an age of complexity and Specialization we find that the individual abilities have been used to such a degree that we are able to observe all types of intelligence, all kinds of abilities. SO today 1 Lecture #11. 191 you must find your own abilities; you must find your own God-given talents; you must do your own thing or else you will never be happy and you will never fulfill what God really intended you to do. And surely, the supreme Objective of life is to discover one's self; is to find what God has im- planted within us, and then to fulfill and enlarge that ability to the fullest capacity.1 Turning now to the circumstances that surround a person's life and the environment in which he moves, Bietz makes the following rather signi- ficant comment: TO the degree that you are fused with what we call the field forces in which you move -- and just re- member that you do not move as an isolated unit apart from the environment -- you move within an energy system . . . I look at a beautiful tree, and I can drink it in, and I can drink thereby the energy of that tree into myself by Openness. You see, Open- ness is the very heart of the reception of energy. I open myself toward my loved ones; and their energy, their life, their goodness, flows into me and aug- ments my energy. Some peOple, for instance, to whom you are Open refresh you, and after spending an hour with them you feel as if you have had a good night's rest. In other words, they are that refreshing. You've been open to them and you have received their lives, their vitality, their strength, and you have augmented your own. But whenever you have a tired person, you have a person who is out of touch with the environment in which he moves. Not only is there uniqueness in our own point of view Of the environ- ment at any given time, but also in the time when we hold that point of view; i.e., the same point of view at a different time would be surrounded by different happenings; and then there is the element Of how we relate to the environment, how Open we are to it, what it is that we select from the environment to notice, and then what we record in our memory patterns concerning that to which we have related. Sermon #4. 2Lecture #38. 192 B. Man's environmental conditioning begins at con- ception and his brain (the whole body and person) is programmed by the significant persons in his life during the prenatal, infantile, and child- hood periods; and the individual has little if any knowledge of or responsibility for this that has been built in during this pre-conscious stage of his life. Bietz has pointed out that environmental conditioning begins with the embryo. Drugs taken by the mother, certain infections or illnesses of the mother, the food intake of the mother, together with many other factors which go to make up the milieu and circumstances surrounding the unborn child, make indelible impressions upon its life. Not only do environmental influences begin at conception, but all influences in life affect the whole person. Bietz's holistic philOSOphy of life prevents him from compartmentalizing the life into body, mind, Spirit, etc. He says: Now again I want to say to you that you do not have a mind; you are a mind. In other words, that's what you are. And the mind is what I am, not what I have; and intelligence is what I am, not what I have. This means, then, that every portion Of my organism is in- telligent; and if any part of my organism went stupid -- let's say that part of my leg below the knee -- then I would have to call a physician to amputate it immediately, because that stupidity, that part of my brain, would have to be quickly cut out to save the rest of the brain. Someone said to me, "Do you have to always talk with your hands?" Well, apparently 1 they are a part of my brain, and I need them to talk! Bietz speaks at length of the concepts Of building new neural pat- terns, Of building a brain. He is a constant and ready student of many fields of scientific research, and eSpecially those that have to do with human behavior. He rather quickly assimilates, organizes, and integrates 1 Lecture #44. 193 the concepts gained into his system of beliefs. Concerning research bear- ing upon the way the brain is deve10ped, he said: It is very interesting to know, as the result of recent research, that perhaps for every Specific memory, a new idea, a new specific protein has to be created. That protein, however, is very sub- ject to change and to deterioration, so that if you learned something, that protein which is this Specific memory is deteriorating; and unless it is replaced (as the result of prOperly-Spaced recall) by its identical, Specific protein, that memory will not be there. SO when you learn some- thing new, there is now evidence which shows that tied into the original genetic message, which is you, is this new memory; and then that genetic message unites with what is known as the RNA (the DNA is the genetic message; the RNA is a factory which produces new protein), and then that reproduces itself constantly; and you have the memory as permanent consolidation within your brain. Thus the experiences of life in terms of the above-stated concepts become flesh and blood, become a part of us; and at the point in life when we acquire the capabilities of becoming aware of who we are and what we are (which Bietz places at about the age Of fourteen), the individual ought to know how it was that he was processed, by what means he arrived at this point. In this connection Bietz says: Our brains have been built for uS by our parents, SO that all of the patterning of our brain is done for us before we become conscious of what is done; and the constant stimuli, the environmental factors of the in- teraction on the interpersonal level between parents and children, build the brains of the youngsters. You were set up by your parents; your brain was built by your parents, by certain school teachers who influenced you; but the very vital elements of your brain were built by your mother and your father, or by your aunt and uncle -- the peOple with whom you lived, those peOple upon whom you depended. Up until the age of about fourteen, there is no capacity to even under- stand what is happening. Perhaps about fourteen 1 Lecture #26. 194 the youngster will suddenly ask, "Why?" and then he is Often batted down and that will hold him for ano- ther two years before he comes up again for fresh air. SO victimized are we in the building of our brains that we have really nothing to say about the way our brains are built until it is almost too late. Speaking about the human capacity for self-awareness and for gain- ing a knowledge of how we have become what we are, Bietz said: You see, one of the unique things about a human be- ing is his capacity for self-awareness. There is the higher brain center which makes it possible for me to project my future, to know what I'm going to do, to be aware Of how to get there; and this self- awareness makes me different from the lower creation. It makes me different from the kind of person who functions only on the conditioned-reflex level. Set up by his parents, wound up, this individual, per- haps, has never really been aware of any of his ideas basically. He has his guilt, he has his emotional reSponses; he feels good, he feels bad, but he doesn't really know why. You ask such a person, "How do you feel?" and he may say he feels terrible. You ask him, "Why?". His reSponse often is "I don't know!" or you may ask, "Do you feel happy?" "I don't know!" Bietz says that many individuals come to him as a therapist and ask him why they do what they do. They seem to feel impelled to do many things, but they do not know why it is that they do them. He says that the problem with these individuals is that they have not become aware of themselves, aware of the process that has gone into the building of themselves, that has programmed them for doing what they do. Many peOple, he believes, are slaves Of policies, practices, and procedures: For many of us are Simply the servants Of the policies that have been drawn up, the policies that have been going for years; and if anybody should start thinking about the policies, God save him! 1 Lecture #26. 2 Lecture #11. 3 Sermon #ll. 195 Speaking of the conditioning of the brain to war, Bietz used as an illustration battles of the past: Last summer we went to the battlefield of waterloo, and visited the farm where the forces of Napoleon came against a coalition of fighting men from England and Germany. On that day long ago, from 11 o'clock in the morning to 7 O'clock in the evening, by hand- to-hand combat largely, 50,000 men were killed and their blood soaked the soil. That is what we would call a totally unconscious response to human existence --either to kill or be killed. Either you beat the devil out of me or I'll beat the devil out of you, and we will see which one will go; but I'll die or you'll die because there isn't room for both of us. These are peOple who live entirely on what we call the un- conscious level of the brain. Applying this same philOSOphy to our own day, he said to one of his audiences: If you are trying to Operate in a world such as we have today on the brain that your parents set up for you - if you are trying to Operate in Los Angeles at the present time on the brain that was set up back in Oklahoma or North Dakota forty-five years ago, you are in trouble! There are a lot of peOple who are breaking Simply because their brains have not been activated for new neural patterns to meet the rapidly-moving world Of today. Bietz says that the peOple who are fascinated with the world in which they live, who are growing, who are living useful lives, are peOple who are building brain material to cope with today's world. But those who are find- ing the world altogether too much for them have not built a brain that fits; they haven't done enough "brain work," and the world is moving far more rap- idly than their ability to adjust to it. When Bietz was asked why some peOple adjust so successfully to the world, he answered: 1 Lecture #26. 2 Lecture #11. 196 This is something that has to be learned; for we do not become human automatically, We become human only because someone has loved us, and someone has cared for us, and the inhumanity which we see, and the tragedy, is due to the fact that many of us have not been helped a great deal toward being hu- man. Many Of us have not felt the tender, loving experiences which make a home worthwhile. SO Of- ten I have talked with young women and young men who were just recently married; and they have said, "We don't really know what a marriage should be like. Will you tell us? we came from homes that were not homes. we do not know what a good home is like." Now these may go through the tragedy of a divorce, and the marriage may break; but I say often they have been more sinned against than sinning. Bietz indicates over and over that a successful adjustment to life must be learned, and that much of this is absorbed in childhood at a time when a person is not conscious of the fact that he is learning. One of the great Christians of our era, Albert Schweitzer, put it this way: "From the services in which I joined as a child, I have taken with me into life a feeling for the holy and a need for quiet and self-recollection, without which I cannot realize the meaning of my life. I cannot support the Opinion of those who will not let children take part in grown peOple's services until they to some extent understand them. The important thing is not that they understand, but that they shall feel some- thing of the holy presence." The fact the child sees his elders in full devotion at worship gives him a feeling of devotion in which he can join. He made this further comment concerning the importance and the im- pact Of the learning of the child during his pre-conscious years: It is indicated as the result of a recent study that by the age of three, the images and the feel- ings and the emotional tendencies to react are al- ready well established. By the age of three! How 1 Sermon, "Love and Sex," Glendale, California, April 26, 1969; sub- sequently referred to as Sermon #14. 2 o Sermon, "Space-Age Religion," Glendale, California, April 20, 1968; subsequently referred to as Sermon #23. 197 many there are who have offended these little ones! And perhaps the most significant things in life happen by about the age Of five, educationally and in terms of cementing the whole being together in an organism of unified action -- all this happens in childhood. All the child knows - whether the child is loved - the child feels long before the child can understand words. When Daddy says, "You're wonderful, and you've blessed us so much," or mother says something comparable, if the child can then say, "I know it, Daddy; I know it, Mother; I know I'm wonderful; I know I'm the gift of God to you and to myself; and I love God and God loves me," from such feelings all later conduct comes. Oh, the sorrow of the adult who has been offended in childhood! C. The metamorphosis from the pre-conscious to the conscious (or self-conscious) state is the design for humanness, which is not achieved or begun until sometime after about age 14, when the nor- mal person can become aware of his ability to assume reSponsibility for his life and choices in using his kingly power of reason. Bietz would divide the Span of human existence into three basic stages: the unconscious, the pre-conscious, and the conscious or self-conscious. The unconscious would Span the prenatal, infancy, and early childhood stages, where lasting impressions are made upon the life through influences that are unrecognized by the person and consequently can never be recalled, for no memory pattern was ever recorded. The pre-conscious stage would begin when the young child is mature enough to be aware of his experiences with sig- nificant peOple and with the environment in his life. While he is able to reSpond to the various Stimuli about him, his decisions are largely to COOperate or not cOOperate with the superior forces and authorities influ- encing him. He is not able to understand the processes that are taking Place in his life, nor is he yet able to weigh evidences and make decisions 1 Sermon #28. 198 independently for his own life. The self-conscious stage does not begin, Bietz has indicated,1 un- til about the age Of fourteen. Self-consciousness iS a matter Of growing into an awareness of one's own capacities that make up his humanness. This is a program of learning about or discovering one's identity. TO become self-conscious, the individual must understand that his life has been programmed by the significant peOple in his life and by the circum- stances that have surrounded him as these have worked upon the genetic endowments that were granted to him inherently. He must understand that his reSponses to the various Stimuli in life have been conditioned, and that his acquired humanness--that is, his deve10ped ability to think, to reason, to communicate, to relate to other peOple and things in the world; in fact, all that he has learned--has been bequeathed to him as a gift from those about him who have been willing to share their humanness with him. AS he moves into the mature and adult realm of self-consciousness, the young person must learn that he may understand through communicating with these significant others in his life and by reflecting upon his own past experience not only others how he was conditioned but the reasons others had for conditioning him the way they did. Then he may learn that he has the choice of unlearning many of these lessons that were conditioned into him in his early life if he wishes to change his reSponseS and the attitudes that resulted from this previous conditioning. But to do this involves a decision to become somewhat independent, which carries with it a very real element of loneliness; and as the young person begins to take over the reins of his life, he must understand that 1 See Page 199 with this independence comes reSponsibility. Referring to the above-summarized philOSOphy concerning the pre- conscious and the self-conscious stages of a person's life, Bietz said: Socrates of old said, "Know thyself." What he called "the unexamined life" is not worth living; and the only freedom that human beings have is the freedom which is granted them as the result of self-consciousness. If you are not conscious, you have no freedom. If you do not know yourself, you are in slavery. If you do not know what is going on within your life, you are blind. If you are blind, you don't know what you're doing, and you certainly do not know what you're doing to Others. And there are many individuals who do know what they are doing, and this is very unfor- tunate. They have never been given the Opportu- nity of self-consciousness. And I think this is something that has to be learned. It certainly does not come automatically. It's not something that our parents can give to us; it is something that is achieved by us--not without help, of course; but even with help, it demands our complete parti- cipation. For self-knowledge is precisely this: it is knowledge which you have come to; in other words, you know this. Not something you've been told; not something that you've read; it's some- thing that you know; and if all areas of your life could come to self-consciousness, then you would be free, completely free. Then you would be able to make the prOper selective responses and your energy would be released to a degree thai I think would be beyond your fondest imaginings. Bietz likes to Speak of "conditioning" as something that takes place 21“ tflne brain, and he uses the analogy of the self—conscious person's being able to "build his brain." He says: ' If it were not possible to influence the brain, to change the brain, then what are we here for, anyhow? we are certainly not here just to waste our time! we are here because our brains gag be changed; and if our brains are changed, we are different peOple. we need not reSpond tomorrow as we responded today. Something has happened to us. But it will have to 1 Lecture #30. 200 happen to the brain or it will not happen in terms of what we call a regulated1 self-reliant, self- directing human experience. Bietz often uses the expression, "The unexamined life is not worth living," and in this he includes one's past life as well as that which he is experiencing in the present. In this connection he said, Now I don't want to sink back into the brain portion which my father and mother built. I've explored that portion of my brain; I know exactly what's there. It's been long, hard work, but now it's pretty much in the light. Perhaps not completely, but pretty much so. Now I intend to build brain protein as long as I live; and if I am building brain protein at 80, I'm not going to be talking largely about my child- hood. I'll be having more interesting things going on than my mother and father ever experienced. I have more interesting things going than anything that was put into my brain when I was a child. In discussing the normal reluctance individuals have for accepting C hange , Bietz said: You can say, "I want the Old-time religion; it was good enough for my mother, it was good enough for my father, it's good enough for me. I want the Old patterns Of rearing children," -- and all this; but the Old patterns of rearing children wouldn't help anyway when the children have to adjust to a new kind of world. SO, whether we like it or not, we're up against a tremendous Opportunity. But I have to ex- plore and know my way around my own brain. I have to study; I have to read, I have to think, I have to enter into conversation; I have to make adjustments and not repeat the same platitudes of yesterday. To- day is a new day, and nothing that fit exactly yes- terday is going to fit today; because it's a differ- ent situation; and no situation which ever was in your past is like a situation which exists today. So if you're reacting to your husband, or to your wife, in the same way that you did ten years ago, it is a monotonous, boring kind of experience. But 1 Lecture #26. 2 Ibid. 4.“ ' fl 5' to become more mature and more self-conscious, Bietz often contrasts the present trends 201 if you're building brains together, you're more and more fascinated with each other; and every day becomes essentially a better day. process was not nearly SO prevalent. He said: Now in generations gone by, the whole emphasis of life was on conformity. In other words, the idea was that everyone was very much alike. Everyone obeyed; everyone conformed; and no one really dared to do his own thing. Now in a sense there was less loneliness in this, because someone else did the thinking for everyone; and persons didn't become unique in the sense that we become unique today. Today everyone wants to do his own thing. And that's all right, because in a sense we are all unique, for no two persons are like. But in order to become a person in your own right, you're going to have to accept a little more loneliness. Dr. Bietz's preaching is permeated with these concepts. For iJl £1 sermon that he preached on the Fourth Commandment, he said, \ we have come here on this holy Sabbath day to be- come reasoning men and women; to rise above un- conscious urges and instincts to the level of self- direction, to the level of understanding. The unexamined life is not worth living. Sabbath con- sciousness is the examined living. There are too many peOple today who are seeking happiness on a sub-human basis. And so the i- dentity crisis is resolved by Sabbath conscious- ness; by remembering, by knowing that we can put two and two together. we can put the experiences which we have into a meaningful, comprehensive pat- tern. . . For, you see, the Sabbath is for the purpose of arising into your highest self in the presence of God. It is to experience wholeness; and to 1 Lecture #26. 2 Lecture #20. in society for individuals with the past, when this instance, 202 remember is the only way of being whole only if he is conscious of what is really going on. We are called to be holy; that is, to be whole, tO be of one piece. we are called to be in touch with time and to be synchronized in the present; to be aware of what is going on this moment, and to be fully alive. For the Sabbath revelation is the truth that one can live only in the pre- sent. Unless you experience life in the present, 0 D C . 1 in an awareness, you W111 never experience it at all." Bietz is deeply convinced that man was intended to know himself, to know al 1 that he can of his past, to know what he is experiencing in the Prwasent, and to make intelligent decisions in the light of all the evi- <3eru2es that he can gather, so that he can be fully alive in the present arui (:an intelligently project meaningful plans for the future. He said, "Whatever you are conscious of, you are capable of handling. chng “this is a thesis: what you don't know, you can't handle."2 But, he Says, with knowledge it becomes fully possible for us to make whatever adjustments are necessary in order to handle our circumstances in life Su<-‘-v::essfully. \ I was talking today with a person while he was facing up to certain truths about himself; and he said, ”Well, now that I understand what's go— ing on, I think I can make some adjustments; I think I can actually rearrange some of my reac- tions to life." And that's true. In order to be able to do anything with respect to our lives, we have to become conscious Of what's going on within us; for you see so many of us tend not to know why we're doing what we're doing. 1. Freedom comes to man as he begins to make his own choices. 1 Sermon #25. 2 Lecture #11. 3 Lecture #20. 203 Bietz makes a rather interesting Observation on what is involved in being able to make a choice or a decision: Now you are going to have to make selective choices; but I'll say this, if you don't know your brain, you will not be making any kind of choices. For the sim- ple reason that if you are unconscious and subject to the brain that was built for you, and you never took any initiative on your own, you're not making decisions. For a decision is knowing what is going on, and then selecting what you want to do . . . . There are some peOple who live a lifetime and die at 75, who never made a decision in their lives! They were wound up by their parents, and that's the way they've been running. They never made a con- scious decision, for all decisions are conscious. Therefore I cannot make a decision until I am ac- quainted with my brain . . . And if my uncon- scious brain is eXplored, I can say, "That's where I am going today; this is what I am going to do today," and Since there's nothing to suck me down into the whirlpool of unconscious forces, I can make that day come out the way I intended it to be.1 The following is an even more general statement that Bietz made, applying the concepts Of self-consciousness and freedom to whole cultures in the world as well as to individuals: Freedom is completely dependent upon a degree of self-consciousness within a particular culture. If a culture becomes self-conscious, then that culture -- the people living within that culture -- can in effect be free; but the only freedom that I ever have is the freedom which is subjective. Now I want you to note that, because this can revo- lutionize your life. It can change your focus com- pletely, because so many of us think that we are handi- capped by external circumstances. we think that we are not succeeding because of others; we feel Often that we are not free because Of mother and father, and there are a large number of young peOple today who say they want to be free. Well, good; SO do I! But I think that we have too often had the impres- sion that freedom is something outside of ourselves. But it really isn't. Freedom is subjective; 1 Lecture #26. 204 freedom is something inside myself. You see, the brain is very slowly built as a result of a process which moves step by step through many days from infancy on through childhood and adol- escence and finally to adulthood. Now, our neural systems, if we are not conscious of them, can imprison us, and this Often happens. A large number of Older peOple, and younger peOple as well, are imprisoned by their own neural patterns --systems that they have set up. Freedom and choice are obviously interwoven with morals and ethics; arui in this reSpect, Bietz says: If you are going to believe in morals and ethics, you're going to have to believe in human freedom. Does a human being have the capacity to choose how he will live, or doesn't he? Am I responsible for the way I acted today, or am I not? Did I have a choice in the way I felt and the way I related? Did I have some choice with respect to my diSposi- tion? Now, if you have no choice, then there can be no morals, there can be no ethics. Can we say with some degree of certainty that a human being has the capacity to choose between what is betEer and what is not good? Have you Such capacity? Bietz definitely believes that each person must have deve10ped the caPatczity to choose in order to be able to become self-conscious. He said of himself: Somebody said to me this morning, "How are you?" I said, "Fine!" "How's that?" "I have chosen it; and when I choose it tO be fine, you can't mess it up for me!" But in order to accomplish that kind of day, I dare not slip into unex- plored, unconscious areas of my brain. And your pain and your sorrow are linked largely with that portion of your brain, which you have not explored. In essence, Bietz says that you are just as free as you are \ 1 Lecture #11. 2 Lecture #37. 3 Lecture #26. 205 self-conscious, as you are willing to become aware of who you are and ‘what you are. Your freedom is commensurate with your ability to choose, if you will, your reSponses to those things that have happened to you at any given time. The individual's freedom begins when he begins to make his own choices. 2. ReSponsibility is implicit in man's ability to choose. Each person's reSponsibility is commensurate with his freedom, and étll freedom is premised upon man's ability to choose. Freedom is simply tkue freedom to make decisions and act upon them. But the freedom of choice Ilenver implies freedom from responsibility for the outcome of those choices. Tale: more freedom there is in the choice--that is, the more there is in- VTDJJved in the way of persons or relationships or prOperties - the greater 3153 'the responsibility in that choice. Bietz said concerning the gravity 0 f freedom: But freedom means loneliness. To be free is a tremendous undertaking. Do you really want to be free, or do you want to be taken care of? Do you really want to take care of yourself, or do you want someone else to take care of you? . . The more freedom peOple get, and the more freedom they exercise, the greater is the risk of lone- You see, then you no longer simply be- You no longer simply conform to what others say. When you're free, you run the risk of loneliness. When you're a parasite, you don't take that risk, because you're a leech on someone else and someone else takes the re- Sponsibility for you.1 liness. long to the herd. Bietz links loneliness with reSponsibility, for the thing that makes t 0 lie: Iindividual stand out alone is that he makes a decision on his own, and \ 1 Lecture #20. 206 this in a sense separates him from all others who might decide different- ly than he. And this is obviously a lonely position. Bietz indicates that in order to have mature relationships in which genuine love and understanding are exercised and which are based on intel- ligence, each person must recognize that he is an individual who is sep- arate from others, and that what makes him separate is his ability to choose and to be reSponsible for his choices. In our relationships with each other, we have to accept a certain separation in order to have any kind of feeling for each other at all; for if we demand too much, we may end up having nothing! And I think that many people overextend their loneliness precisely because they expect more than can be given; and expecting too much, they begin to complain and get on each other's nerves until they have nothing at all. Bietz indicates that the attribute of uniqueness is dependent upon (>111: ability to choose; for to be unique is to be different; and to be Cligfferent means not only that we have different talents and capacities 1>th:that the ultimate uniqueness is in our ability to choose independently (>15 others and to be reSponsible for our own choices. This is undoubtedly rman's greatest uniqueness and his most human quality. Introducing a theological concept, Bietz indicates that he believes (3(3C1 has shared his omnipotence with the human family in giving them the ab 11 ity to choose . Either God is all-powerful, and therefore reSponsible for all evil in the world, or man has freedom and God is not all powerful. For the simple reason that God has created free human beings, he is no longer all powerful. That, of course, lays a demand upon you and me, and the demand is that we cease being false; 1 Lecture #20. 207 that we become genuine. Now this authenticity is not easily acquired. Continuing with the moralistic vein, Bietz discusses the concept of prejudice in the light of the principles discussed in this portion of the outline. Prejudice is a way of bearing false witness; and how much prejudice there is! You see, everything begins with becoming conscious of what you're say- ing and why you're saying it, and nothing at all has worth unless it has consciousness. The pre- judiced individual is unconscious; he moves from his stereotypes, from false images of people, rather than from true images. It seems that Bietz is saying in the above quotation that the preju- Ciicued person has to work and think in the realm of the unconscious - that 153a the realm of not being fully aware of what he is doing; and he is cer- téiiJlly not aware of the fact that he is reSponsible for his judgments, his aetions, and his decisions which are influenced by his prejudice. In effect, 11GB 1.3 accepting without conscious thought and reSponsible investigation what I‘EISB 'been taught him, what he has done in the past; and, in effect, he is Sliéaciding his reSponsibility as if it were non-existent. Bietz suggests that the only way that any person can be held respon- Sib 1e for anything that he does is to assume that he has freedom; and this freedom implies that he has a choice, and any reSponsibility that devolves If the individual Upon him does so because he has freely made the choice. Cair‘t1c>t be responsible, then it would be unjust to place any penalties upon Eli‘s behavior. This does not imply of course, that man is free from the \ s 1Sermon, "Tell It Like It Is," Glendale, California, May 17, 1969; uhsequently referred to as Sermon #26. 2 Ibid. -..-nian:”).fi. X. .. .. m 208 influences of his environment that press upon him; but he is free to choose how he will reSpond to these influences about him. Bietz stated that our whole educational system is premised upon these principles: We are free to choose to a great degree the kind of persons we will be. If this is not true, then the whole educational system is misdirected. If the human being, for instance, is not free, then we ought to have dictatorships, and we ought to have a benevolent kind of monarchy, claiming divine rights and making all the decisions for us. On the other hand, if the human being i§_free, and if the human being can make decisions, then there is such a thing as right and wrong in terms of decision. . . . I think a human being can be reSponsible; there- fore a human being can be called to account in terms of his attitudes and in terms of his behavior. In a personal conversation that the writer had with Dr. Bietz follow- ing one of the recorded interviews, the writer asked him to comment upon some of the personality theorists in the field of psychology who he thought had made a significant contribution to his personal philOSOphy. He indicated that all of them had added something to the field, as do the different colors to a rainbow. But in singling out several, it was significant that he men- tioned the theologian Paul Tillich, saying that he felt Tillich had made a substantial contribution to the field of psychology. In one of his lectures he made this statement concerning Tillich: Now it was Paul Tillich who observed that unless you accept the fact that you will die, which brings anxiety and loneliness - unless you accept this, you will become pathological. He also said that unless you accept your guilt-~for all of us are not as good as we'd like to be, for all of us have some sense of inadequacy in some areas; so Tillich said you must accept the fact that there's a certain a- mount of guilt that is absolutely essential in being you. You'll never be as perfect as you'd like to be . . . . Now Tillich said you've got to accept the 1 Lecture #37. 209 loneliness of some day dying; and you have to accept the loneliness of not being perfect; and you have to accept the loneliness and the anxiety of not being able to understand everything; for if you have to try to understand everything in this world, you'll soon understand nothing. Be- cause then you will have to make a quick closure and shut the rest of the world out, and then you'll have what we call a closed informational system and you will have a little box in which you shut yourself, and you will really be lonely. So lone- liness, I say, is the thought of being human. Don't fight against it.1 Bietz expresses deep concern for the fact that in this world of ours, where communication ties various cultures and societies very closely to- gether so that they must interrelate, a serious problem is imposed because of the fact that there are so many of these cultures and sub-cultures where the great majority of peOple basically have not attained the awareness that comes only as the result of self-consciousness. Yet it is only self- consciousness that makes it possible for these various cultures to live at peace with one another when their ideologies are at such odds; and without this deve10ped capacity, there is no way for these peOples to live at peace with one another when culturally they are so critically different. In this reSpect he commented: For instance, within cultures, one cultural level is conditioned one way and another cultural level is conditioned another way and another cultural condi- tion is conditioned still another way; and when you get those of different conditioning together, they despise each other! Why should they do this? The answer is simply that those who have been conditioned, those who have been patterned, whose neural systems have been set up in a certain way, unless they be- come self-conscious of what they themselves are, they will always be in collision with others. 1 Lecture #20. 2 Lecture #11. 210 In effect, he is saying that this lack of self-consciousness is the cause for religious wars and racial strife; for nationalism and for much of the trouble between peOples in the world. The answer, he says, is to become self-conscious: to recognize who we are and what we are and how we became conditioned to reSpond the way we do; to investigate the basis for our conditioning and then to make intelligent decisions concerning it, recognizing that we are free not only to investigate our past, but to un- learn that which we have learned. Then we may make decisions concerning our past, but we must then be responsible for these decisions. IV. Man's growth (his becoming, his self-realization) are achieved by his learning, (and unlearning), remembering, and communicating, and by produc- tiveness or usefulness. Section IV has to do with the factors and processes involved in growth, it being understood that growth is the process of self-realization or the state of authentically becoming what we were intended to be by our Creator and Designer, i.e., what we basically are in potential. The first and most basic element is that of learning. It would seem that in Bietz's concept learning is basically what life is all about -- learning who we are, what we are, how we became what we are, how we may become what we were intended to be; learning what our potentials are, what our freedom is, what our reSponsibilities are, and how we may fit into the present and project ourselves into the future. And having learned what we are good for, the second great element is that of doing it, of being crea- tively productive or useful. A. Learning (and unlearning), remembering, and communicating, embody two factors. Part A involves the great learning process which involves remembering 211 what we have learned and how we have learned it. As a result of this abil- ity to remember, we may make intelligent decisions about what we wish to retain of that which was bequeathed to us as we were conditioned by the significant others in our lives and by the circumstances which surrounded us; and we may discover what we wish to unlearn. Unlearning is a matter of discovering that what we learned or thought was in harmony with the facts or the truth is no longer in harmony with the facts or the truth as illuminated by the new evidences that we have com- piled and accepted. The process of unlearning involves reassociation. Reassociation becomes necessary as a result of deciding that some of. the attitudes and reSponses that we are experiencing in our lives, which we have learned to associate with certain accepted truths or understandings in the past, are not correctly associated. For instance, when a child has learned in the past that a policeman is very apt to hurt or harm him, the child will probably have an attitude of apprehension if he sees a police- man; and if a confrontation with a policeman seems to be imminent, this would trigger a reSponse of fear, of dread, perhaps of hatred toward the policeman. But if the child could learn that most policemen want to help and protect him and that the policeman represents safety and security, this reassociation with the new evidence that has been received and accepted can bring about an unlearning process that can recondition the child, so that instead of the reSponses of fear and dread and perhaps hatred when a con- frontation with a policeman seems imminent, it may bring on responses of relief, comfort, and friendliness. But in order for this kind of learning and unlearning to take place, remembering_is an extremely important part of the process. Remembering is something that can be either greatly helped or hindered. Communicating 212 is also vitally important to the learning process, for most of our learn- ing is bequeathed to us because others are willing to share or communicate what they are and what they have learned to us. But unless we can some- what accurately understand what they are attempting to communicate to us, our learning will be distorted and confusion will result. Conversely, if we are not able to communicate what we think and what we feel accurately, and so that others can somewhat accurately understand what we are attempt- ing to communicate, then it must be said that we do not really know or _ I." ‘ understand what it is that we think and what it is that we feel. For the only way that we can really test what we know and what we think is by whether or not we can communicate it to another. 1. The positive and essential factors involved. These are the factors that Bietz points out as being necessary to the learning process-learning factors that encourage, reinforce, and make learning, remembering, and communicating possible. a. Openness Openness is the antithesis to being closed. Being closed to certain types of informational data is saying, in effect, "I am no longer interested in learning any more about that kind of data or receiving information from that source." This obviously inhibits the learning process. Being closed also involves the possibility of capturing or imprisoning that which we feel and which we think within ourselves, making an attempt to hide it or disguise it from others beyond ourselves. Now in order to achieve and overcome loneliness, I think that the families have to learn the art of authentic closeness to each other. They have to learn to be Open to each other. But many peOple were not reared in this sense of openness, and there 213 are individuals who will feel threatened; and the reason is that often to be Open is dangerous, be- cause we may be judged by others.1 Here Bietz is saying that Openness involves exposure Of one's real or inner self, and exposure involves a risk. If others know what it is that we think and feel, which may expose a weakness or a point Of view that disagrees with theirs, this can bring on a reaction from Others that can be painful to us. Therefore Openness is not easy, but it is very re- warding in that it is one of the factors that makes the whole learning process possible. Again he said: Now I think that most human problems result from the inability to share what we actually feel, the inability to convey this Openly and kindly. SO many Of us feel that we are not understood, and also we feel a sense Of futility. We say, "Well, it's no use talking because we wouldn't be under- stood, anyhow." And so most peOple will not talk at all, because they say, "What's the use? I wouldn't be understood, or peOple would misinter- pret what I had to say."2 Here Bietz is saying that the problem Of the lack Of Openness is very wideSpread; yet in his estimation most human problems result from the inability to share what we actually feel Openly and kindly, indicating that Openness is necessary if most human problems are going to find solu- tions. Again, referring to peOple as energy-producing systems, he said: Whenever you see an energetic person, you see one who sees what others do not see; he hears what Others don't hear; he is Open to experiences that others do not experience. He is Open tO ideas that Others are 1 Lecture #20. 2 Sermon #26. 214 closed to. He is Open to personalities and to friendships that others are shutting out. When- ever you have a person who has energy, you have a person who is an Open system, and is aware Of the environment in which he moves. Bietz indicates that being Open is not an easy accomplishment, but rather it is one Of the crowning achievements of life, one that indicates that the person has begun tO become what God intended him tO be. We must find a way to communicate Openly and honestly and authentically, and in order tO achieve this, we must become the persons that God intended us to be. Because God Obviously is not simply interested in computer-like words which may issue from computer-like Objects. I am sure God isn't interested in this. b. Awareness Openness and awareness are very closely related; and while the two should ideally go together, they are certainly not the same thing. Aware- ness is an act Of tuning in on that which is within the person from the introsPective vieWpOint, and that which is without the person in his en- vironment. For instance, one facet of Openness may be to share some Of the inner personal experiences Of one's life. It would be impossible to do this unless one were aware Of these experiences and had tuned in on them and had learned tO understand them sufficiently to be able to share them Openly. However, Openness and awareness in this particular case are not the same thing, even though they are Obviously closely related. Conversely, Openness to evidences that can come through our senses to our person from the environment about us is essential to learning from 1 Lecture #38. 2 Sermon #26. 215 these sources; but of course we must choose to be aware of that which is happening or is present in our environment before these evidences can enter our minds through our senses. Speaking of awareness on an intrOSpective basis, Bietz said: In order to tap and use the mind in this largest sense that I have Spoken of this evening, you must have what we call a movement toward the inner core of your being. In other words, most peOple are surface peOple, externalists; and then there are what we call peOple who move from the inner core of their being, which is another way of saying that they are in touch with the center, the inner part of themselves. Now this demands a degree of aloneness; this makes available an intelligence that the superficial person who never reaches with- in himself never becomes aware of. That means you would have to have some time by yourself. You would have to have some sort of capacity to be- come acquainted with yourself. That would mean that you would have to be able to enjoy yourself. Every mature person, wherever you find him, and every creative person, enjoys himself; and this is because he is in touch with himself. Speaking again of intrOSpective awareness, Bietz said: Your total freedom is in the area of self-knowledge; and if you have very little self-knowledge, you know little or nothing about freedom. As your area of self-knowledge increases, your maneuverability, your flexibility, your alternatives increase; and if one door should shut, you've already got ten other doors that you can Open, because you have a degree of self- awareness of what is going on. That's why Often the life of a person who retires, who has been such a specialist that he has not been in the realm of gen- eral awareness, when he no longer has an outlet in his specific specialty, can go completely to pieces for him. Bietz is saying that an awareness of what is happening in the inner core of our being, i.e., an awareness of who and what we really are 1 Lecture #44. 2Lecture #11. 216 personally, is extremely important to our mental and emotional well-being, our learning process; and without this awareness, we cannot be a mature or a creative and happy person. In another lecture he said: Are you a closed system, or are you aware? I use the green hills, in fact, as one of the indicators of the success of therapy; when peOple are deeply emotionally disturbed, they see nothing, they just gaze inward; they're blind. And then after awhile they say, "Well, I see it in a different light. I saw the hills this morning as I came in; beautiful!" And then I begin to feel, Well, now things will be better, because this person is beginning to see be- yond his own nose. In the above quotation, Bietz was dealing with awareness from the extrOSpective point of view, indicating that before we become aware of what is happening about us, we must have Openness - that is, be Open to that which is about us, the alternative to what he called a "closed system.‘ He points out that a person who is deeply disturbed emotionally may gaze inward hour after hour with no indication that he is aware of what is actually happening to him; but when this disturbed person becomes aware of what is happening in the environment about him and can begin to talk about it, this awareness in itself is indication of real progress, a move- ment toward wholeness, a sign that things are definitely better with that person. Bietz indicates that awareness is something which you can give, and he ties it to an often-quoted Bible passage: All of this means that as you give an awareness, you receive energy. And here is a basic thing. You've heard it quoted many times, "It is more blessed to 1 Lecture #38. l « 1a 217 give than to receive,"1 and some folks can't under- stand this. But here's the point: If you are aware, you have Opened yourself to the influx of energy which is vitalizing and health-giving all the way through. Bietz is saying that the most important part is for us to give, and eSpecially for us to give awareness. He is saying that if we give aware- ness to the beauty of a rose, the green grass, the song of the birds about us, or to the laughter and warmth of a friend's fellowship, or whatever it may be that is about us, we will find energy, strength, and inSpiration flowing into our lives. This awareness is a most important part of our learning process. TO his congregation, he says that awareness is a most important fac- tor in learning how to live and how to meet the needs of others in this present time: What would it mean to be alert to the times in which you live as a Space-age Christian? I think it means essentially this: that you would know the needs of the time in which you live. You would understand es- pecially the hearts of the peOple of the time in which you live. To discern the signs of the times would be to be aware of what's happening in the minds and in the hearts of human beings who are crying out for help; and believe me, they are not asking for the kind of help that they were asking for fifty years ago! The following statement, made in a sermon on the Fourth Commandment, is another example of how Bietz uses psychological concepts such as aware- ness in his preaching: It is interesting to note that after every order Of creation, God said, "It's good; it's good." He knew l Acts 20:35 2 Lecture #38. 3 Sermon #23. 218 what He was doing. He Spoke, it was. He was aware, He pronounced it good. You've acted this week; you have done things. Now can you call it good? Are you in touch? DO you know what's going on? DO you know what you're doing? For on the Sabbath, a man functions as a think- ing man. What are my attitudes? Am I sharpen- ing my contact with God, with the environment, with the people? How am I doing? What is life all about? Why am I working? What am I neg- lecting? Am I a slave to the past or do I stand above it in awareness of what I am doing? Am I an unconscious slave or a conscious child of God? Have I said "Yes" or "No" to the right things? What should I change in my life? c. Integrity (being in touch with reality) All real learning is based upon the search for truth, or reality. Integrity has to do with wanting to know and to express the truth concern- ing anything that one wants to learn about oneself or anything in the environment. By nature, it seems to be an easy thing to imagine or pre- tend that things are the way we want them or would like them to be, rather than the way they are. A person is capable of rationalizing to the point where he may believe that things are different than they are; but when this condition exists, it definitely inhibits the learning process, for an un- truth can hardly be consistent with truth, and therefore the existence of pretenses or shams or false premises in the life are sure to result in confusion, distortion, discouragement, and many other conditions that in- hibit the learning process. Bietz indicates that perhaps the most difficult area in which we may recognize the truth and become willing to represent the truth authentically is in our own innermost lives. 1 Sermon #25. 219 But I think it can be said without fear of contra- diction that men defend nothing more violently than the pretenses by which they live. What we are inclined to defend most violently is our lying. And that lying, of course, is what a person is, not so much what a person may say. This is only a product. Pretenses are defended with violence, because pretenses in essence are not really con- victions. With convictions you love and with convictions you can be real and with convictions which are the result of your own thought you can be loving and kind and tender; but with pretensions and with sham you can only be violent and you can only hate. And so this Revelation aims at im- proving man's ability to be genuine and his ability to communicate that genuineness honestly and openly. In the same discourse, he said: Now the question we're asking in this Ninth Revel- ation is--and it is the question which God asks us: Are you authentic? Or are you phony? Are you true? Or are you false? Are you real, or are you artifi- cial? Are you genuine, or are you counterfeit? Are you free, or are you simply pulled and victimized by circumstances? Do you see things as they are and as you are? For remember this: You do not see the world as it is; you see it as you are. You do not see another person as that person is; you see him as you are. And therefore this Revelation ad- dresses itself to the question of integrity, to the question of human freedom, and to the realization of the authenticity of one whom God has created. Bietz is here saying, in effect, that many peOple have decided what it is that they would wish to be like, or what it is that they would wish for people to think they are like; and then they go about projecting that image to other peOple and to themselves, even though this image does not represent the truth about what they are really like. He says that the only real truth about a person is what that person can be when he is at 1 This quotation is taken from the ninth in a series of sermons on the Ten Commandments, which he referred to as the Ten Revelations. 2 Sermon #26. 3 Ibid. 220 his best. When he is less than that, he is bearing a false witness. Bietz says that when someone talks about another person, attempting to describe some untruthful or inauthentic thing that he has said or done, that this is projecting a false witness, for no one really knows that much about another person, nor is he able to read the other person's mind sufficiently to tell the truth about him. In this connection, he said: And when you listen to someone who says, "Let me tell you the truth about him," then be sure that you are about to listen to a liar. For the peOple who are always going around telling the truth a- bout everyone are bearing false witness. The truth about you is what you can be when you are at your best, and everything else about you is a lie. And one of the biggest lies is to be less than God in- tended us to be. This is to make a lie of oneself. Much has been said in psychological circles about persons wearing masks, living by pretenses, being unable to know and understand and face up to the truth about oneself. It would be expected that Dr. Bietz, as a psychologist-minister, would deal at length in his preaching on basic integrity. As the writer examined the texts of many of his sermons, he discovered this to be so. For instance: The thing that is amazing is not that evil people do wrong things but that good peOple tend so often to live behind pretenses; that good peOple are not authentic, that they are not real. That children, for instance, can grow up in a home and never know their parents because their parents have been phonies. That a daughter may grow up and never know her mother, never know her father; a son never know his parents, because, you see, they have lived behind masks. They have not been authentic and they have not been able to communicate themselves. 1 Sermon #26. 2 Ibid. 221 Again: You are very false and you bear false witness when you say what you think others want you to say and don't say what you're thinking. And believe me, a lot of us bear false witness. You are asked, for instance, to give what you feel and what you think, but you simply repeat certain stereotyped phrases which you know others want to hear, because you look for their approval since you are incapable of stand- ing on your own feet. That is being false. Jesus was never false. True, he got crucified for being authentic, for being real. All he would have had to do was to repeat the right words at the right place to the right peOple; but he would have been a phony. He would have borne false witness to his neighbors. He would not have been Saviour. He would not have been real.1 In one of his lectures Bietz offered some practical advice to help parents demonstrate integrity as they deal with their children: Face right up to the children and tell them, right from the very earliest, that you don't pretend to be omnipotent; that you don't pretend to be an angel; that you don't pretend to have all wisdom. So, for- get it! You're going to make mistakes, you're going to be a fool; you're not going to have the wisdom (you wish you had much of the time); and there will be times when you may lose your temper and may use words apprOpriate to the occasion! Well, let's see whether you can deal with reality. Speaking of the universal lack of integrity, he said: How many times we repeat our stale, dead stereotypes, just because we want the approval of someone else, and then deny ourselves and become phony individuals! we live, then, in a make-believe world, always guess- ing about what's in the other person's mind and never revealing what is in our own. 1 Sermon #26. 2 Lecture #30. 3 Sermon #26. 222 d. Inquiring spirit (curiosity) Questing - questioning - discussion - weighing alternatives The title chosen by Dr. Bietz for the weekly bulletin of his church is ”Quest." The inSpirational message he broadcasts at 7:45 o'clock each morning is entitled, "In Quest of Life." According to an associate l pastor, "questing" is one of Bietz's favorite terms, and he consistently attempts to motivate peOple to quest for the very best in life; to quest for learning concerning themselves and others and the world in which they live. At the close of each of his lectures and at the close of his wednes- day night Bible Forums, he conducts a question-and-answer period. His Bible class, conducted at 8:30 each Saturday morning, is basically a dis- cussion. He thrives in and constantly promotes a discussion atmOSphere. Bietz teaches that an inquiring Spirit and curiosity are basic and essential to a learning situation, and that this Spirit is designed into man and will continue to be there as long as he is not perverted or distorted. Sometimes folks say, "Why should we Spend all the money going to the moon? Why should we Spend all the money for research? Because it is the nature of the universe to have intelligence which is goal- directing, and we're linked to it. Intelligence moves, and we've got to move with it or die. That's it! It's going to cost some money? Good! Again he said: But the nature of intelligence is, Tell me more! What's new? What have you heard? What's going on? Heard anything new lately? Now the nature of intelligence is movement; it is dynamic; and 1 Interview #13. 2 Lecture #44. 223 if you got off some ten years ago, you'd better get on again! The universe hasn't stOpped; life hasn't stOpped; so you keep going. The idea that "The show must go on" is not just show business; it's intelligent business. He indicates that man is made for learning, for questioning, for solving problems, for finding that which is new, for discovering truth; and that unless an intelligent person's mind is used and is challenged, he is very apt to be disturbed emotionally. I was very much interested in a recent survey which was made by Dr. Earl T. Carter, who was associate professor of medicine at the Mayo Foundation in Rochester, Minnesota, where I had the privilege of beginning my ministry. Speak- ing of the ailments of airplane pilots, he said the reason so many of them are sick is because in order to become an airplane pilot you have to be highly intelligent, and you have to be able to solve a lot of problems. But now, when they get into the air, so much of the routine is taken care of automatically; and once the plane gets into the air the pilot has nothing to do but sit and be bored, and a very active mind is not used. As a result, Dr. Carter says, there are major symptoms of fatigue, and the pilots are ill and they don't know why they're ill. But Dr. Carter says that they are ill physically because they have such ex- cellent minds which were meant to solve problems and to stay alert, and here they sit in an auto- mated cabin where most of the decisions are made on the outside. SO their bodies are going to pieces. e. Happiness In the opinion of the writer, the emphasis on happiness and Optimism and good humor is at the very core of Bietz's beliefs. It could well be said of him that "learning is what life is all about." Bietz said, "Learn- ing is equivalent to growing, maturing, becoming the persons we ought to 1 Lecture #44. 2 Sermon #12. be. . . 224 . Learning, growing, happiness -- these three move together."1 Again he said: I dare not let any friction point exist within me, for to the degree that I do, I have less energy for the great business of enjoying myself. It takes a certain amount of energy to enjoy yourself, and I insist on having fun. I think that's what I was born for. I was born for en- joyment. I can only learn when I'm happy. My food digests well when I'm happy. I am easy to get along with when I'm happy. I was meant to be happy; but to be happy I have to marshall my energy and know how to utilize it, and that means I'm going to have to go after stress points and see what I can do about them. With Dr. Bietz, happiness is not a mere feeling; it's a state of being. It's a condition that is the result Of something very basic hap- pening in the life. He defines it this way: Basically every person is happy when energy is flowing unobstructed. It is not a matter of something making you glad and something else making you sad. No, happiness is being what you are, and unhappiness is not being what you are. Inhibitions and repressions restrict the flow of life; happiness is letting life flow into some desired activity. When Bietz Speaks of learning, he is Speaking of it in the sense of learning how to build a beautiful personality, how to build a brain, how to become what we were designed to be in potential. This is a matter of learning the truth about oneself and about one's attitudes. He says that this kind Of learning can take place only in an atmOSphere of acceptance, good humor, happiness, tenderness, and understanding. 1 Lecture #15. 2 Lecture #38. Lecture #15. Again: 225 Oh, yes, you can improve the grades by frightening your children; you can indeed raise the level of their information ingestion as the result of whip- ping them; but you have not taught them anything, really; you have only set up more hostilities and new problems within their personalities which they are incapable of handling; and as a result, they have had another course in inhibitions but not a course in learning . . . . Whenever you are scared, whenever you are merely inhibited, whenever you are merely warned, the edu- cative process is destroyed. Genuine learning comes as a result of happiness; and the unlearning of many things that you have had as restrictions in your life comes as a result of happiness. Unless you can be reasonably secure, no genuine learning can take place. When I'm scared, no genuine learning happens within me. When I am frightened, no learning happens; I'm just frightened, period! It was John Masefield who said, "The days that make us happy, make us wise." Now, how are you going to teach your children wisdom? By making them happy. How are your children going to learn to live health- fully from the mental and the physical vieWpoint? And again the answer is, The organism must be in a state of contentment, a state of well-being. You could work sixteen or seventeen hours a day and have a ball--unless, of course, you felt that your work was coercion. The following is an example of Bietz's introducing a thought on re- ligion in one of his lectures. But you say, I'm not going to be righteous if I'm happy! And I say that the only way to be righteous 'ig to be happy; and when you're miserable, you're not going to do the right thing. The children who are happy are going to choose the right way of living because they find it a lot of enjoyment. It has been 1 Lecture #15. 2 John Masefield, Biography. 3 Lecture #1. 226 found, for instance, that if you want your children to remain in your religion, they will remain in your religion if you've enjoyed your religion. But sup- pose you say, "No; I'm going to teach my children the doctrines; I'm going to teach them to memorize the whole Bible, verse by verse; and they're going to do this and that, and we're going to teach them to be religious." And then finally they hate every bit of it, and they leave the church that the parents wanted them to stay with, simply because they didn't understand that religion was for the sake of enjoy- ment, and not for the sake of mere knowledge. Dr. Bietz places a great deal of emphasis upon the need for a sense of humor. He indicates that a sense Of humor is a capacity to be happy. A sense of humor is a fruitage of security on the part of the individual and of a good degree of self-consciousness and awareness of one's weak- nesses as well as one's strength. In other words, a person must be secure in order to recognize his weaknesses, which are the things that most of us laugh at, and find something funny about them. He must also be honest and Open or he would not see the funny part of himself, which usually has to do with mistakes that he has made or weaknesses that are present in him. It is the knowledge that he is worth something, that he has abilities, that gives him the feeling of security which enables him to laugh at himself. We have many things in the world today, and we have a very high standard of living; and yet it cannot be said that most peOple have gained a greater capacity for happiness. A large number of high school girls were asked what they would like most of all as the outstanding characteristic in a prOSpective life partner, and the highest rating given a prOSpective marriage partner was a sense of humor. "I would like to be married to a man who has a sense of humor," they said. Which is another way of saying, I would like to be married to a man who has the capacity for happiness; I would like to live with someone who is cheerful; I would like to live with someone who isn't cynical and sour and down in the mouth. Then the 1 Lecture #1. 227 boys were asked concerning the qualities that they would want in a wife; and again at the tOp of the list came this requirement: They would like to marry a cheerful girl, a girl who had the capacity for humor, a girl who had the capa- city for laughter; a girl who was able to enjoy herself, her husband, her home, other peOple, her children. Bietz also referred to a sense of humor in a sermon on the Tenth Commandment ("Thou shalt not covet"): I think the covetous person, too, is a person who has never deve10ped a sense of humor; he has never been able to find happiness in that which he is actually doing. He does not enjoy what he is going. He hates to do what he has to do, and he is constantly fighting it; and because of this he has the sneaking suSpicion that others are having a better time, and there- fore he is covetous. Here it is evident that Bietz links a sense of humor and happiness to the developing life; i.e., to a life in which a person is learning what he can do, what his capacities are, and then has found a way of living, a work to do, that expresses these abilities, that gives expression to his truest self. This is a movement toward self-realization, which happiness, a sense of humor, Optimism, are both positive and essential factors in the Bietz philosophy. f. Interest in and good will toward another (or others) and a willingness to communicate personally. Bietz's belief concerning the importance of communication has been dealt with at length in Chapter III on his theories of communication, where he indicates that love is the ability to communicate with another successfully. 1Lecture #1. Sermon #4. 228 Earlier in the present chapter, he has been quoted as saying that the feeling of love is the feeling of comfort that we receive from another with whom we are communicating, and that we do not fully understand our- selves, our feelings, our capacities, until we learn to communicate these things successfully to someone else who is significant to us. This com- munication process is extremely important in the process of self-realization. The positive factors that have been discussed in the preceding sec- tion are factors that contribute toward successful communication, or love, in the life. As was stated, in order to communicate most successfully, one must be Open to his environment and to others with whom he wishes to communicate; he must be aware of himself, of the experiences he is having and has had within himself, as well as of the other person and his needs and responses; he must have integrity; he must have an inquiring Spirit; and he must be in a state of happiness if he is to be a successful, com- municating, loving person. In addition to the above-listed factors, Bietz believes that an in- terest in others, a willingness to communicate with them, is indeed basic to man's growth and self-realization. Inasmuch as this has been dealt with at length in Chapter III, there will be no further evidences or quo- tations from Dr. Bietz's discourses to substantiate this premise. 2. The negative: a. Pain caused by fear, anxiety, guilt, and physical discomfort (which tends to pro- duce hostility and aggression). Pain, in the Bietz frame of reference, is of little benefit to per- sons, while it does a very great harm. This is not to say that pain does not have a place in the design of life, but that the deliberate inflicting 229 of pain upon another, or the use of pain as a corrective or training de- vice is, in his opinion, almost always harmful. For instance: Now there is a great deal of evidence that shows beyond the shadow of a doubt that aggression and attack and meanness and hatred are the result of pain; and individuals who are born into the world with a great deal of pain are likely to be very angry . . . It is a strange thing that peOple who are in great pain find that hurting somebody is very rewarding. When you are really suffering, it makes you feel good to hurt somebody. Bietz refers to several experiments done with animals, which point up the fact that pain inflicted upon them inevitably causes hostility and aggression, and tend to support the clinical Observations made concerning the effect of pain upon the human reSponses. You can have animals who have lived together very happily and playfully, and then suddenly you can put electrodes into the bottom of that cage in which these animals live, and then push a button and shock the feet of these animals and give them pain, and immediately they will viciously attack each other. Friendly animals, when in pain, will destroy each other. A raccoon and a rat have been friendly for months. Suddenly the experimenter shocks them with an electric intensity, and the rat attacks the rac- coon and the raccoon attacks the rat, and of course the rat is gone! What made them attack? Pain. Friendly animals will always attack each other when they are in pain. Referring to another experiment, he said: It has been found that even if there is only one animal in the cage and you have a stuffed animal there, that animal experiencing pain will attack the stuffed animal and tear it to pieces. Also, it is found that an animal will attack any object like a rubber ball, given a certain amount of shock. It will jump at that rubber ball and tear 1 Lecture, "Six Rules for a Happy Family Life," Whittier, California, May 8, 1967; subsequently referred to as Lecture #41. 2 Ibid 0 of. 230 at it. Also, if the animal has been taught to push a button which will release an object, when this animal is in pain it will run and push the button and release the object and then attack it. Likewise there are peOple who are in pain, who are looking for somebody whom they can attack. If peOple are angry, if they are in pain, get out of their way. He indicates that many peOple have had more pain than they are aware They may have had pain through a series Of experiences over a period of many years. He says that many of these painful eXperiences have come to many persons at times when they are not sufficiently aware to know what was happening; but the nervous system, the organiSm, was reSponding in a very Specific way and the pain was registered in the unconscious. One thing that I have learned as a result of being a clinician is that all human beings are very much alike. You may think that you are robust psycholo- gically and are almost unbreakable from the view- point of psychiatric strength. This is not true. We are all very fragile, and the reason for this is that we have suffered a great deal. Young peOple, generally, can take a little more suffering because they haven't experienced as much. That's why teen-agers, for instance, can usually bring their parents down and conquer them. They're stronger. They can take a little more, many times, for the simple reason that they haven't suffered quite as much pain as the parents. Now this is something that is very important for us to remember: The more pain you have had in the past, the less pain you are likely to be able to endure in the future. And again: How much pain can you take? You think you can take a lot? I don't think you can! Do you think someone else can take a lot? I don't think so. I don't 1 Lecture #41. 2 Lecture #43. 231 think any human being can take a great deal. In this sense we're all alike. How quick we are to react in what we call an unpleasant way because some unpleasant memory has been triggered within us - some deep disappointment which has literally lacerated our hearts or our ego. There are in- dividuals whose egos are completely crushed and shattered; whose hopes were disappointed, per- haps right at the time when it was believed that the fulfillment of the life dream would come in- to action. Dr. Bietz says repeatedly that pain inflicted upon other persons is almost never helpful. If they are able to withstand the pain, it is sim- ply because they have not received very much of it in their lives. He says that sometimes we are tempted to think that pain is good for children, but he does not agree with this at all. Have you had too much pain? All right; all of us have had more than we should have had. I know - again and again peOple will give you the idea that children are ruined because they have been spoiled and have had too much comfort. Now I do not believe in this theory at all. It may be that some children have had insufficient guid- ance and some children have had insufficient achievement Opportunity; but that is something else again. It is not true that any one of us has had too much tender love, too much comfort, too much understanding and too much of what we call real, heart-warming interaction. No; you haven't been Spoiled because you've had it too good; no one is Spoiled because he had it too good. There may be other factors, as I have indicated, like guidance and achievement lack; but that's something that has nothing at all to do with the ideal of your having had too little pain. The fact is, the less pain you have had in the past, the more you will be able to take today. . . You have heard of nervous breakdowns. What's a nervous breakdown? A nervous breakdown is 1 Lecture #43. 232 essentially a level of pain and fatigue so great that the individual can no longer take on the nor- mal reSponses to life. ' In whatever form pain comes, be it through fear or anxiety or guilt or pliysical discomfort, Bietz makes it clear that he believes it inhibits the Zlearning processes of life, that it tends to negate all of the posi- tive factors that contribute to the learning situation, to remembering, and to successful communication. Speaking of fear and its accompanying anxiety, he said: I know many times individuals will say, "Oh, I learned a lesson that scared me half to death; but I learned something!" No, you didn't; you inhibited something. On occasion somebody has said, "Well, we ought to put a little of the fear of God into him in order to teach him." NO, you can't teach him that way. You can put the fear ’ in him; or somebody might be warned of the devil; but that isn't learning. It's simply inhibition. And inhibition takes place as the result of fear of myself, fear of the world, fear of other per- sons, fear of my incompetence, inability to deal with the very feelings which are aroused within me as the result of the normal experiences which come to me'as a human being. Bietz indicates that guilt is one of the greatest pain factors in life; There are persons who do not experience the full- ness of life because they are constantly crippled with guilt. There are those who actually feel that if they feel good they ought to feel bad because they are not good when they feel so good! This is the problem of the individual who always feels that piety and self-punishment go hand in hand. May I say to you that guilt has no value. Forgive yourself! Let God forgive 122. But always remember that unless you let God forgive you, and you allow yourself to forgive yourself, unless you're willing to forgive 1 Lecture #43. 2 Lecture #15. 233 others, you probably will have energy blocked within you. You see, good will releases your life and makes your energy flow like a stream of living water, and this is, of course, what God intended. So guilt can cripple you. Be done with it! Give yourself to good humor, to hOpefulness, and then know that God has forgiven you because, you see, God doesn't make promises to mock you and then fail to do what he has promised to do. In the above statement, Bietz says that guilt per se has no value. This is not to imply that guilt has no place in the human design, no more than one would want to say that a headache has no place in the make-up of the human organism. Both of these are part of the person's "alarm.system." But it is not desirable for guilt to be sustained or exaggerated, for its only function is to sound an alarm that something in the person's thoughts and perhaps conduct is out of harmony with his value system. Bietz indi- cates that prolonged guilt will block the energies of the life and inhibit the learning processes. He implies that guilt may be exaggerated or per- haps even distorted when it is undergirded with fear complexes. Therefore, he indicates that the manner in which misconduct is pointed out to an err- ing person is extremely important, for it can either enhance or inhibit the learning situation. The following quotation is related to this premise: Now it is my belief, and I hold to this with some consideration-~not carelessly but from a great deal of clinical experience--that most peOple--and I would almost be completely inclusive and say, all peOple--do the best they know how in terms of the functional resources which are available to them at the moment; and it is no use for me (as a speak- er Or a clinician) to remember the past and then add new guilt. This is a way to break an ego, to break a personality. I could get before a crowd Sermon #l. 234 and emphasize the guilt and the shame and the guilt and the shame, and then add a bit of dam- nation to it, and then a bit of hell, and tell them, "You ought to be ashamed!" until I could break them completely if they followed. This is what we call a transmarginal inhibition, where the individual finally breaks. That is not the way to do! Bietz indicates that for a religious person, forgiveness and release from guilt are constantly available. He said in a sermon on the Third Commandment: Are you a guilt-ridden person? Remember, the Third Revelation says it's because you use the name of the Lord in vain; you haven't met the loving God; you haven't met the forgiving God; you haven't met the creative God; you haven't met the God of love and tenderness and under- standing. Therefore you have religious terms which pin you down and you feel guilty and you never feel worth anything; and you never feel you can be accepted; and you have indee a groveling kind of dirt-eating religion. Him-flint 1m Bietz considers forgiveness, mercy, understanding, tenderness, and kindness to be among the positive and essential factors that are necessary in learning, remembering, and communicating in order to bring about self- realization. But he considers condemning a person and adding to his guilt to be a destructive and negative factor. This is not to say that he does not believe in defining wrong-doing, in advocating morals and ethics, but he believes that these things need to be pointed out in understanding, in tenderness, and kindness; in giving guidance and Opportunities to learn rather than trying to bring these positive factors about through punish- ment that inflicts pain. 1 Lecture #43. 2Sermon #ll. 235 b. Inhibitions and repressions (induced by pain factors), which create blind Spots where in- formation (memory) is unavailable; and which are the basis for a breakdown in learning and communication. In Section I of this outline, Dr. Bietz was quoted as saying, A religious outlook on life, if personalized as a relational and relationships interaction, is the most therapeutic experience possible to human be- ings; but religion as a so-called education in inhibitions can be the most frightful producer of personality ailments and of mental and emotional illness. Inasmuch as one of the major objectives of this dissertation is to give study to Bietz's fusion of the disciplines of religion and psychology, it appears that the concepts surrounding inhibitions and repressions come into sharp focus since they are psychological concepts; and Bietz says that the difference between a "good" religion and a "bad" religion is whether or not inhibitions and their ever-present ally, repressions are used as an educative tool. Perhaps a brief description of the meaning of the terms "inhibitions" and "repressions" would be in place here. However, this does not purport to deal exhaustively with these terms and their ramifications in psychology and religion. It is the desire of the writer to set forth these terms with their generally understood meanings in the way that he understands Dr. Bietz is using them in the sermons and lectures which are under study. It is the Opinion of the writer that Dr. Bietz is using these terms in a psychological context, and that they must be interpreted with their psychological implications. From the standpoint of clinical psychology and the theories of per- sonality, the term "inhibition" is a broader term than "repression." The 1 Lecture #15. 236 termi"inhibition” is assigned to the primary defensive process that in- cludes a number of defense mechanisms, the chief of which is repression. Robert White of Harvard University points out that inhibition in the human organism performs a dual function: Inhibition is, of course, a constant and indiSpens- able feature of all ordinary activity in the nervous system. Even such relatively simple acts as walking cannot be performed without synchronized inhibitions of certain muscle groups. Defensive inhibition is no different in principle from what goes on all the time; it is simply an intense, indiscriminate inhib- itory reSponse called forth by serious threat . . . Defensive inhibition is not a discriminating reSponse to danger; it is a deSperate and primitive reSponse. It should be understood that whenever inhibitions are referred to in a psychological context, almost inevitably the meaning intended is that which Robert White refers to in his statement concerning defensive inhibi- tions. The two following definitions selected from two reputable dictionaries are offered as psychological definitions of the word "inhibition." The blocking of any psychological process by another psychological process. Repression of or restgaint upon an urge, impulse, or activity of any kind. In Chapter III the term "repression" was defined as "a process or mechanism of ego defense, whereby wishes or impulses . . . are kept from or made inaccessible to consciousness, except in disguised form."4 1 White, The Abnormal Personality, p. 213. 2 American College Dictionary (New York: Random House, 1959). Webster's Third New International Dictionary. 4 Ibid. 237 Robert White classifies repression as "the most powerful of defense mechanisms" and says in definition of the term, Arthur Repression thus refers to the denial of that in oneself--memories or impulses--which, if not held in check, would create some kind of threat . . . Repression is particularly applicable to the for- getting, or ejection from consciousness, of memories of threat and eSpcially the ejection from aware- ness of the impulses in oneself that might have objectionable consequences. Bietz, in using these terms in his lecturing and preaching, frequently speaks of inhibitions and repressions. A typical sentence of his, which is lifted out of context for the purpose of demonstrating how he uses these terms, is as follows: She is inhibiting the youngster; that youngster is simply building up repressions, more and more and more; and some individuals by the age of seventeen and eighteen have been cultured in so much repressive inhibition, under the name of learning, that they are abnormal and distorted human beings. In the opinion of the writer, the above statements and quotations concerning the terms "inhibitions" and "repressions" appear to convey the meanings that Arthur Bietz has attached to these words as he has used them in his discourses, and eSpecially in the statement previously given to the effect that "religion as a so-called education in inhibitions can be the most frightful producer of personality ailments and of mental and emotion- al illness."3 It appears that the problems to which Bietz was referring in connec- tion with using inhibitions and repressions as an educative tool must be 1 White, The Abnormal Personality, p. 214. 2 Lecture #15. 3Ibid. Wm’fiz‘ 238 understood in the light of the goals and Objectives that he considers to be worthwhile in life. As has been pointed out earlier, his stated goal in life is that of growth toward self-realization, or growth toward be- coming what God has provided for us to be and intended for us to be. In the Bietz frame of reference, this is a matter of developing our human potential. This growth and development process is a matter of learning; and in essence it could be said that Bietz believes that learning is what life is all about. The positive and essential factors that Bietz has iso- Q‘IQ"... m lated as being necessary for learning are Openness, awareness, integrity, In- an inquiring Spirit, a happy, Optimistic, contented state in which communi- cation with one's self, with one's God or the great source of intelligence in the universe, and with others is taking place freely. He indicates that the fruitage of these positive essential factors in learning is what he terms "self-consciousness." This is a state of being Open and aware of what has happened and is happening within one's inner self; of having all 'of the experiences of the past available to memory and awareness; of being able to face oneself with honesty and integrity; where any part of one's life -- past, present or future -- can be looked into, questioned, and dis- cussed freely and Openly. But, Bietz says, inhibitions and repressions are the foe Of every one of these positive, essential factors in learning. Arising as they do from fear and prolonged, exaggerated guilt, inhibitions and repressions make many experiences and memories of the life unavailable to conscious recall. Instead of self-consciousness, there tends to be self-rejection. Instead of safety and security and a sense of worth, there tends to be insecurity. Instead of happiness and contentment and a free flow of energies, there tend to be hostility, aggression, fatigue, and a restriction of the flow 239 of energy. Instead of trust and good will and love and Open communication, there tend to be distrust, isolation, and even hatred. Instead Of an Open system, there tends to be a closed system. Instead of desirable flexibi- lity, there tends to be rigidity. Instead of wholeness, there tends to be fragmentation. Instead of integrity, there tends to be a greater loyalty to pretenses and social expectations. Instead of freedom, the effect of inhibitions and repressions tends towards slavery. These contrasts have been gleaned by the writer from statements that Dr. Bietz has made on many different occasions. Many quotations from his discourses that would support these contrasts have already been included in the foregoing pages Of this dissertation. Those following will attempt further to clarify the position that these concepts take in his teaching. Dr. Bietz apparently feels that inhibitions and repressions are directly linked with pain and the threat of pain; and the two damaging results are that they restrict and sometimes destroy the learning process and tend to render the person relatively incapable of being happy. Fear is, perhaps, one of the most painful experiences in life. To illustrate Bietz's concepts linking fear with inhibitions, three quotations will be repeated that were used in a different context earlier in this chapter. On occasion somebody has said, "Well, that will put a little of the fear of God into him and teach him." No, you can't teach him that way. You can put fear in him; or somebody might be warned of the devil; but that isn't learning. It's simply inhibition. And inhibition takes place as the result of fear of myself, fear of this world, fear of other persons, fear of my incompetence, inability to deal with the very feelings which are aroused within me as the re- sult of the normal experiences which come to me as a human being. 1 Lecture #15. 240 Speaking again of fear, he said: And whenever you are scared, whenever you are merely inhibited, whenever you are merely warned, the edu- cative process is destroyed. Genuine learning comes as a result of happiness; and the unlearning of many things that you have had as restrictions in your life comes as a result of happiness. Unless you can be reasonably secure, no genuine learning can take place. When I'm scared, no genuine learning happens within me. When I'm frightened no learning happens; I'm just frightened, period!1 Here Bietz links fear with inhibitions and repressions; and one of the principal outcomes is insecurity, with all of its frightful and dis- torting effects in the life and personality. Again he said: Yes, you can improve the grades by frightening your children; you can indeed raise the level of their information ingestion as the result of whip- ping them; but you have not taught them anything, really; you have only set up more hostilities and new problems within their personalities which they are incapable of handling; and as a result they have had another course in inhibitions, but not a course in learning. . For learning is something that finally makes you a person who knows how to live congenially with himself, with the world, and with other peOple. In the following quotation, Bietz links inhibitions with self- rejection and an inability to identify with and share oneself with others: Now I would like to say to you that all the inhibi- tions in the world never come under the category of learning. You can learn a thousand and one inhibi- tions and forms of self-rejection; and you can warn your children of this and that evil; but these come under the form of repressive inhibitions, where in- dividuals are incapable of identifying their own inner lives, are incapable of mutually sharing 1 Lecture #15. 2Ibid. 241 themselves with other persons, are incapable of discovering themselves. They are isolated from themselves and consequently afraid of their own feelings, of their own emotions, of their own selfhood.1 The following is an illustration that he shared with one of his lecture audiences: When Bietz says that under a repressive inhibition situation a person cannot learn a thing, as indicated earlier, he does not mean that informa- tion on a factual basis cannot be ingested. I had a mother come to me the other day. She said, "I don't know if I can send my little girl to my mother any more, because every time my little girl gets a little active, grandma pinches her and she screams." Grandma is teaching her, isn't She? She's teaching her how to behave prOperly. No, she's inhibiting the youngster. That youngster is simply building up repressions, more and more and more; and some individuals by the age of seventeen and eighteen have been cul- tured in so much repressive inhibitions under the name of learning that they are abnormal and dis- torted human beings, afraid of their own shadows. Then, often, a psychologist will see these people -- sometimes they are college graduates, profes- sional men, professional women; but they haven't learned a thing. And why haven't they? Because they have thought you could teach another by making him happy. I can't teach you one thing here tonight unless you feel sufficiently congenial to allow something to happen within your personality. And if you do not feel sufficiently congenial and hOpeful, the only thing you're wishing is that the lecture would stOp and not put any more pressures on you. ing and understanding, together with Openness, awareness, integrity, genuine curiosity, and happiness, tend to be closed Off or destroyed; and 1 Lecture #15. 2 Ibid. He does mean that basic learn- 242 since these are the avenues to learning, the gaining of a few facts should not be, in his estimation, confused with basic learning. He indicated that on many occasions parents will come to him, exclaiming that they don't know why their children act the way they do, for they were never taught that way; and in comment he says: . . . And of course they have the idea that when children have been given a set of inhibitions, that then they have learned something. No, they have simply been repressed; they have been given the wrong ideas with reSpect to the forces of life. This bears out the previously-quoted statement of Robert White, "Defensive inhibition is not a discriminating reSponse to danger; it is a deSperate and primitive reSponse." Bietz indicates that the general effect of inhibitions and repres- sions is not toward rationality or integrity, but they tend to distort one's understanding, since they drive from consciousness many evidences that cannot later be recalled or remembered and then, because of fear, place many areas of the life in an off-limits position where they are not to be questioned or investigated. In this connection he said: Some peOple are scared to death of getting ac- quainted with themselves. Scared to death of their inhibitions, scared to death of their past actions, scared to death of the future, scared to death of the present - but why? Actually, if I were in touch with myself, I could accept all my fears. The right use of your mind is not to try to get rid of your fears, but to absorb and accept them. StOp trying to forget! Here Bietz agrees with Tillich's philOSOphy that there is no way to escape all anxiety, because there are certain dangers and risks that are 1 Lecture #15. 2Lecture #44. 243 inherent in living. Bietz says that attempting to forget these things is not the answer, but rather the answer lies in becoming aware of them, of looking at them squarely and accepting them for what they are, and then moving out into life with Openness and awareness and integrity. The attempt to forget, to act as if things do not exist, is the route of re- pression and a flight from integrity. In one of his sermons, Bietz said: Space-age Christians must provide a greater courage; because if we're going to live in a greater world, in a more complex world-~and it's so very complex --we're going to have to have greater courage. There's going to have to be more of the release of the Spirit for courage, instead of repression of the spirit to keep it in a small, cramped Space. Repression in religion is out, in the Space age. Now it is release of the human being into the full- ness of the creation of God; and this takes courage. I talked to a clergyman the other day who said, "I think it is our duty to give the world a warning." I said, "It is our privilege to give the world courage. The warnings are sufficient on every side, but the courage is insufficient."1 In his sermon on the Fourth Commandment, Bietz Spoke at length about remembering and awareness, which he considers to be two great factors in the growth of Christian experience, and which he has established as two ready victims of repression. Hatred can never be dissipated except in awareness. Your hatred will be repressed and you will be re- pressed so long as you are not aware. But if you become aware, then hatred can be resolved. And so we say, "I must remember." Yes, it's important. There can be no conversation unless we remember; there can be no communication, there can be no talk between two peOple unless they remember something. The man who comes home to his family better re- member something tO say; and the wife who waits had 1Sermon #23. 244 better remember something so She has something to talk about; and parents had better remember something to say to their children; and children had better remember to say something to Mother and Daddy. That is loving; that is humanized empathy; that is Sabbath consciousness. c. Blind adherence to any structure of ideas of authoritarian rule (rigidity). Bietz would probably consider that blind adherence to anything would be a negative factor in the learning, remembering, and communicating pro- cesses; but this is Speaking Specifically of adherence to any structure of ideas or authoritarian rule. In this context the structure of ideas could be good or bad, liberal or conservative, or it could be labeled in most any way; but Bietz would consider that blind adherence to them would be a negative factor. As a religionist and as a psychologist, Bietz would not want any person to follow blindly even the most perfect religious i- deal nor the most correct understanding of psychology. As he has often said, "The unexamined life is not worth living"; and he has also indicated that we should not live by unexamined words, no matter in what context we may find them. In one of his lectures he said, "The authoritarian is always Shut away from the deeper levels of himself."2 The authoritarian, in other words, is not able to be flexible, to accept new and unfolding truth, and to or- ganize and integrate it into his understanding and system of beliefs. He suggests that in order to avoid this authoritarian stance, each person ought to be looking for new insights, for new appreciations, for new understand- ings, for a change of pace, for a change of location, for a change of l Sermon #25. 2Lecture #44. ' .H 24S vieWpoint; and to fail to do this is to be rigid and to tend to be auth- oritarian.1 In introducing his series of sermons on the Ten Commandments, Bietz said: I should like to suggest to you, as we explore together, that it might be far better if we did not think of our Studies as commandments. I should rather have us think in terms of each one of these Ten Words being revelations. I am sure that God is not an authoritarian God; I'm sure that God is not an arbitrary God. I am sure that God is not one who goes around try- ing to exercise powerful pursuit of interests. No, this commandment is to be thought of as a revelation, as an unveiling, as a discovery of the nature of man and the nature of life and the nature of the universe. Bietz states that authoritarianism, rigidity, and blind adherence to any structure of ideas, indicate a person who is now closed to particular points of view, and this in itself destroys the spirit of Openness. They indicate a person who cannot be aware; for awareness tends to be squelched by rigidity and the narrow confines of blind adherence to particular ideas. Bietz indicates that what this world needs are tough-minded Optimists. Now to be tough is not to be rigid. This week a woman said to me, "Oh, I had the most awful experi- ence! I was in the El Cortez Hotel in San Diego- my husband and I were there for a three-day vacation- and while we were eating on the tOp floor of the hotel, suddenly the chandeliers began swinging and the building was rocking and rolling. "Oh," she said, "I was scared!" Nothing happened to the building ex- cept that it gave them a nice, sweet cradle-rocking. It was the earthquake you read about a few days ago. But that building was tough because it was flexible. If the building had been rigid, it would have broken 1 Lecture #44, paraphrased. Sermon #2. 246 in a thousand pieces. The toughness of a Christian in the Space age is the toughness of flexibility, the agility of the human mind, the readiness of the human Spirit. The old rigidity that is fearful will break at every little shock-wave that hits you; but if you are built so that you can rock and roll as these big skyscrapers are built, you're tough. You are what we call a tough-minded Optimist, because you have built-in flexibility. Bietz preached a sermon entitled "Redemption and Reformation," in which he pictured the reformer as one who is rigidly set upon preserving and protecting a given set of ideas, and rather than sacrifice or adjust _ .. __ _.___.._ __.-. any portion of his ideas, he would rather sacrifice peOple. On the other hand, the redeemer is a person-centered individual who wants to redeem the person; who wants to help the person become all that he was intended to be; one who considers the person and his self-realization as the ultimate worth. In this context Bietz said: The reformer is either a conservative intel- lectual or a liberal intellectual. The Chris- tian is neither. He is God-centered, man- centered and in redemption. Therefore the con- text of a liberal intellect or a conservative intellect has meaning only for reformers, for both are equally reformers. But to be redeemed is to be in the loving acceptance of the re- deeming grace of our Lord Jesus Christ. I am no more interested in the reform of the liberal than I am in the reform of the conservative, for obviously redemption encompasses both, and this is SO important. Bietz is here saying that neither a liberal nor conservative stand indicates flexibility, for a person can rigidly adhere to sets of ideas 1 Sermon #23. Sermon, "Redemption or Reformation," Glendale, California, January 13, 1968; subsequently referred to as Sermon #21. 247 that are either liberal or conservative, and a person can be just as much a bigot and just as inflexible in one camp as in the other. He believes that rigidity, wherever you find it, is a foe to the growth and learning process. Bietz indicates that there is a great deal more rigidity in the world than most peOple recognize, and that one way of discovering rigid- ity is to examine the words that describe the platform upon which peOple are standing. It is a strange thing, is it not, that to explain language is often met with great resistance. To understand what words may mean is not welcomed by too many. Why? Well, there is resistance in terms of commercial interests; there is resistance often in terms of religious interests; there is resis- tance in terms of military interests; and there is resistance in terms of political interests; and there is resistance in those who like the words, the way they have the words, . . . for you see, old words give us easy security with our tribal gods. Most peOple live with unexamined words. They use words for name-calling, preconceptions, mother words, uncritical words, words to produce guilt. For all words, if not understood and if accepted literally, will be the greatest cause of guilt and the failure to accept a person as a person. PeOple can easily be destroyed by the misuse of words. Some of you here today, and some of you within the sound of my voice in your homes, are bleeding because you've been hurt by words. Some of you have cried this week; you have wept and tears have flowed freely because words have hurt you. And perhaps you have used words to cut deep- ly. Words, when literalized, become demons. Applying this to religion, Bietz said: Religion for a lot of people is to come together every week to play a game of religious words, and that's it. It lasts about an hour, and then we go l Sermon #ll. 248 home and our lives go on as they have before, and the living God is not there, and our lives haven't been changed, and there is no love between the per- sons involved; but we played our religious word game, didn't we? And so we're religious. And then we condemn those who didn't play a religious word game, who may have more Of the Spirit of God than those of us who played the game. Bietz clearly indicates that he believes that all such rigidity and blind adherence, even to accepted ideas, is an indication of stagnation, of a resistance to growth and movement, to becoming what God intended each person to become. It is a negative resistance to self-realization. B. Productiveness or usefulness, which is needed if the life is to be meaningful or rewarding and which as much as possible should consist of creative productiveness to give expression to the freedom for which man is designed. While Bietz believes that learning is what life is all about, yet he contends that unless a person finds a useful outlet for what he learns, unless he can find meaningful and productive activity in life which he and others will consider utilitarian and worthwhile, he cannot be happy. He believes that every person needs to be appreciated by others for what he is and what he is able to produce. Every person needs to feel that he is carrying a worthwhile load in life; and as much as possible, his pro- ductive activity ought to be an expression of his interests and abilities. Bietz indicates that creative productiveness is the ultimate; that if it is truly creative, it will give expression to the uniqueness Of the individual. He indicates that this expression of a person's real self can come only from a self-conscious person who enjoys Openness and awareness and finds real freedom within, from which may Spring this expression of 1 Sermon #11. 249 himself, his thoughts, his ideas, his deve10ped talents. But in order for this to happen, a person must know himself; he must have discovered who he is and what he is able to do; he must have discovered his own worth and his abilities. But as he gives expression to these, he makes even further discoveries; and his life and his talents develOp as he grows and learns and expresses himself in creative productiveness. There is nothing so thrilling as the Christian life; and it's a pity that so many peOple think of religion in terms of boredom and dullness and they think of the Scriptures as perhaps being dull and boring. You see, the human brain is a problem-solving dynamism, and the mind is never happy unless it has some prob- lems to solve; and I would say to you this morning that if you have no problems, you'd better quickly go and get some. Why? Because if you don't, you're not living; for a new problem to solve, a new chal- lenge to surmount, is of the essence of health. The mind is the capital of the body; and if the mind is not active, then the body can become ill very quickly. Here he indicates that the mind and the body are made for activity; that human beings are designed for challenges, for doing something that is meaningful, that can solve problems. The utilitarian aSpect of activity takes on real importance in the Bietz philOSOphy of life. For him, whether an activity is utilitarian seems to be determined by whether it is needed or appreciated by others, or whether it will help the individual in his own growth toward becoming what he wants to become and in achieving the goals that he has set for himself. In this context he said in one of his lectures: Is it utilitarian? What utility does this action have of mine? If I do this, what does it add to where I want to go and what I want to be? What is the utilitarian value of this action? Now a person 1 Sermon #12. 250 may make a decision something like this: Should I do this sort of thing? Should I smoke marijuana? What value has it? Should I smoke cigarettes? What value have they? What utility? What value in terms of my health, in terms of my good function? The use of alcohol---what utility does it have? An action which is wrong, like stealing, what utility does it have in the long run? If it has no utility, if it has no practical value, if it does not lead you to the goals that you want to achieve, then don't do it! If it has value, and if you can bring it into focus with what we call your health, your welfare, your long-range good, then do it? But if it has no utilitarian value, then why do it? Bietz would have us direct our activities toward solving problems, toward something that is useful, toward the attainment of a goal. But he indicates that it is better to attempt to do something worthwhile and make a mistake than to be so fearful that one does very little or nothing. How about the mistakes that you make? Can you laugh about them? I said today to a person, "Where did you get the idea that you were omni- potent deity?" He said, "I'm.always afraid I'm going to do something wrong." I said, "I'm not afraid; I always do it!" In other words, some people are so afraid of making a mistake they just never do anything at all. Are you the kind of individual who's got to do it perfectly? Are you the kind of a person, for instance, who says, "Whatever is worth doing is worth doing well"? Are you that kind? I say, A psychologically healthy person will say something like this: "Whatever is really worth doing is worth doing poorly."2 Bietz indicates that a thing that is worth doing, is worth doing ‘whether done poorly or well. If it is done poorly but is an expression of oneself, of what one has at the present time, then perhaps it will be done better next time. But at least one has moved out into life and made an attempt to do something. 1 Lecture #37. 2Lecture #30. 251 Speaking of the varying levels of energy which peOple seem to have, he said: Actually, we do not differ so much in the amount of energy that is available, but some peOple simply do not burn up their energy in stress. They utilize their energy in creative activity; and a person may work seventeen or eighteen hours a day and yet have a lot of energy left and feel completely satisfied in terms of being tired; but it's a good tiredness, and that energy can be quickly replaced by a few hours of sleep. The stresses of life that Bietz referred to in the above quotation would be the presence of any or all of the negative factors that have been described. He says that all of these tend to drain our energy resources, and each one is an energy leak. He indicates that a whole person who is moving toward self-realization, who has freedom within, who is characterized by an absence of repressions and inhibitions, has the energies of his life available to him to be directed into meaningful activity. This, he says, is the design of growth and the definition of happiness. V. Some areas of life and conduct with related problems and needs of the peOple in his audi- ence to which Bietz addresses himself in his speaking. A. What is right? What is wrong? This is the domain Of morals and ethics to which Bietz gives a great deal of emphasis in his Speaking. Bietz is a person who believes that words have tremendous power. As has been mentioned before, he indicates that, too Often, peOple live by unexamined words. With words we can hurt, kill, lie, cheat; and with words we can love, learn, build, and make others happy. But the same words mean different things to different people; and eSpecially 1 Lecture #38. 252 is this true of a combination of words. we should never assume that ano- ther person understands a word or a combination of words in the same way that we do. And no matter where the words may be found, whether they be in the Ten Commandments of the Bible or in the latest novel off the press, these words will be interpreted very differently by different people and different groups of peOple. Bietz indicates that when thinking of morals and ethics, we should be very careful that we examine our words, and that we should not inflexibly graSp a given understanding or an interpretation that might define right or wrong. Right and wrong, he says are not estab- lished by words or combinations of words; for as good as they may be, they have to be understood and they have to be interpreted. This should not imply that Bietz does not believe in revelation or in the Ten Commandments; but he does indicate that no matter where we find a definition of right or wrong, we need to be continually flexible concern- ing our attitudes toward this, and we Should always be Open and ready to learn more about them and to gain greater understandings of the truths in- volved in them. In this connection he said, in a sermon on the Sixth Commandment (or Sixth Revelation, as he chose to call it):1 I think that altogether too Often, when we have talked of morality, when we have talked of ethics, the words have not been very flexible; they have not been very living words. But too Often we have thought of morality as a form of judging peOple. we have thought of morality, perhaps, as the result of institutional demands; we have thought of morality as formal; we have thought of morality as dogmatic utterances; we have thought of morality and ethics in terms of legal procedures. But now this revela- tion calls our attention to something else. The 1 "Thou shalt not kill." Exodus 20:13. 253 heart of it all is person-centered, life-centered and person-involved. Now we see how goodness has a warm, human quality because it is the expression of the miracle of life itself.1 In this sermon and elsewhere, Bietz says repeatedly that there is no value on earth that is as great as a human life, and that never should human lives be exchanged for values that are lesser than the lives them- selves. In the Bietz frame of reference, right and wrong must be judged on the basis of whether it hurts or helps a human life. He said further in the same sermon: The heart of all morality is essentially this: I feel completely in my whole being that you have infinite worth, that you are a miracle of life and I can relate to you. This is the heart; and this is why the commandment, "Thou shalt not kill," is at the heart Of all conduct and of all worthy hu— man behavior . . . And so the worth of the individual human being is central to all principles of justice; and all jus- tice and all human conduct which is worthy is de- rived from this feeling of the sanctity of human life, of the miracle of human life, and of the worth of human life. You are a miracle. . . So often individuals today will say, ”What's right? What's wrong?" And my answer is very simple: That is right which enhances the miracle of life, and that is wrong which diminishes the miracle of life. And from this heart of all reasoning with reSpect to human goodness, we must procged in terms of our re- lationships with each other. In another sermon he says: And I want you to think very seriously about this. You see, right and wrong are better spoken of as the ability to be concerned for the life of human beings. Right and wrong had better be spoken of in terms of human beings. And the man who says l Sermon #28. 2Ibid. 254 that he does right and is unkind to his wife and mean and nasty to his children in the name of right, that individual is a Sinner. And that father or mother who is cruel and inhuman to his own children in the name of an abstract morality is a cruel sin- ner. He is not a moralist, nor is he ethical. Binztwes the term "humanness" as extensively in his preaching as heckesinfus lecturing. Humanness, or to become human, in the Bietz frame of reference means to begin to live up to the potential that is in- mnentin Hm human being, or, in many Christians' frame of reference, the chihiof