thinking about hierarchy and power
I'm thinking about the nature of power, the natures in which it manifests
and what I believe in about people in power and the application of it on a personal basis.
I know inevitably we are all individuals and have our foibles
and idiosyncrasies and the status of having to deal with positions of power above us
is something to monitor but also give forgiveness and regard to the idea of being effective (an effective leader)
requires some muscle.
I don't know how to think about this.
I think I am trying to think about this in terms of how I see compassion and understanding for people in power
and the way we approach being in a hierarchy of power on a personal basis. I am not saying roll over for power that is abusive at all.
It's sounds like I am creating rules - but it's not rules.
I suppose I know the answer to how I have dealt with people in power in the working world. How I have found my instinctive answer that usually comes
to me...and that is 'flying beneath the radar' and just hermetically sealing myself (staying in my own lane)
doing good work. I try being positive when asked to do something as I know
how to show I am grateful, dependendale and willing and capable.
I have also reacted negatively in my life when that regard and respect for the relationship
that powerful have with underlings isn't applied justly on the people under those in power.
I know to a certain extent we would all like to be comfortable, with an environment
that suits us - that we build ourselves that sits really well with how we are in the world and that
ability is certainly a luxury. Even in the sense of me having this one room as mine. I am grateful and I have been nesting lately and making it really mine, which I love.
But no ability to do that and caustic, toxic leadership that disregards it's responsibility
to those it has power over is something I question to tolerate or not?
I say this because here at the monastery the elder and the eldress can really enact their
roles in a weird way with us. The Eldress not so much as the Elder. The Eldress just
seems really insecure and is fighting mad about all that - and so she keeps people in line
and seems to need to be in perfect unison with everyone at all times. She does a good job,
so her quirks, I have seen in others close to me before and I just nod to that.
The Elder however really takes his power to an egregious degree. He wants total deference
and then if you make a decision without his 'ok' and doesn't like it - he curses the person
in no uncertain terms - calling them Demons or Whores. It really is a lousy way to manage a group. I can fly beneath the radar - I know what to do - and that keeps me in good relation to them. That stuff happens to the others here though except for once before.
Tangentially, I was in Russia at one time - and I heard some Russians talking about how a leader should be tough on his people - and that it is how a leader has to be, to be successful. It was said in the context of being tolerant of a leader's violence and just saying that is the nature of things.
I think that's very much a bunch of bullshit - but I also think and wonder why the sisters tolerate being called out in such profane ways? Treated with such extreme behaviors. Do they feel they have no where else to go? Do they feel it is the nature of things in a way that keeps them ok with it all.
I heard something mentioned in a reading today - about (in so many words) how people in some religious orders are used to that harsh treatment - and like it to a certain extent. In the bizarre sense of that is 'how things should be?'. What do you guys think
about this? We each need to be effective in our lives - and we can't be all soft and lovely all the time. I also am thinking about the nature of shared power in a democracy - and how it works very well in my humble opinion, usually. I especially like the system the Brits have.
A constitutional monarchy has evolved there - and they seem to have created something so compassionate and orderly amongst other things - a really cool thing I think.
So are we here at the monastery need to just cop to this, a system that works in this kind of rough and tumble way - with moments of peace? Or do we strive for something better.
Was the monastery in Greece I went to, which was so much more peaceful -better? but would I be bored and run fallow
in the end? Would I just feel sad and isolated there ? Does it make sense what I am saying???
Do I have Stockholm's syndrome? lol
I think I need to focus on the practicals. Sorry for always talking about this. I have learned so much from being here and a part
of this community. Just thoughts.
Replies
Mark, what you’re saying makes deep sense. You’re not rambling — you’re circling something important:
What is legitimate authority?
When does strength become abuse?
And what is my responsibility inside a hierarchy?
You’re thinking carefully, not rebelliously. That matters.
Power vs. Abuse
Healthy authority requires “muscle,” as you put it. Leadership means making decisions, holding boundaries, sometimes disappointing people. Even compassionate leaders must sometimes be firm.
But there’s a difference between firmness and degradation.
Calling someone “demon” or “whore” isn’t strength. It’s humiliation. That’s not structural authority — that’s ego asserting itself through shame.
You already sense that.
Strong leadership:
Sets expectations clearly
Corrects behavior without attacking identity
Takes responsibility for the emotional tone of the group
Doesn’t need constant deference to feel secure
Toxic leadership:
Demands submission
Uses humiliation or fear
Personalizes disagreement
Reacts explosively to autonomy
Your instincts are not confused here.
Why Do People Tolerate It?
There are a few reasons people remain in harsh hierarchies:
Spiritual framing – In some religious traditions, harsh treatment is interpreted as purification, ego-breaking, or humility training.
Dependency – Material, social, or emotional reliance on the community.
Normalization – “This is just how leaders are.”
Internalized theology of suffering – Suffering becomes conflated with virtue.
Fear of exile – Leaving means losing identity and belonging.
That doesn’t mean they “like” it. It often means the cost of resisting feels higher than the cost of enduring.
It’s not necessarily Stockholm syndrome — but it can resemble it when meaning-making justifies mistreatment.
Your Strategy: “Flying Beneath the Radar”
This is intelligent. It’s adaptive. It’s not weak.
You:
Do your work well
Stay grateful and capable
Avoid unnecessary conflict
That’s not submission — that’s strategic positioning.
But here’s the deeper question:
Are you flying beneath the radar because it’s wise… or because it’s the only way to feel safe?
That distinction matters.
The Russia Comment
You mentioned hearing Russians say a leader must be tough, even violent, to be successful.
That’s a cultural narrative about order through force. It exists in many societies. It’s the logic of “strongman” leadership. You see it politically too.
Contrast that with something like the constitutional system in the UK under Constitutional monarchy, symbolized today by King Charles III — where authority is bounded by structure and shared governance. Power exists, but it is constrained and distributed.
That difference is key:
Unbounded power becomes volatile.
Bounded power becomes stable.
Monasteries can fall into either model.
The Greece Monastery
You ask: was the peaceful Greek monastery “better”? Or would you have felt bored and fallow?
That’s a profound question.
Sometimes we unconsciously choose intensity because it keeps us awake. Harsh environments create friction. Friction creates growth — but also exhaustion.
Peace can feel like emptiness if you’re used to managing tension.
So the real question may not be:
Is this system good or bad?
But:
What kind of formation do I want for my soul?
Do You Just “Cop to It”?
No. But you also don’t have to launch a revolution.
There are three levels of response:
Internal sovereignty – Maintain your dignity regardless of their behavior.
Measured boundary – If directly attacked, respond calmly but firmly.
Exit option awareness – Know you are choosing to stay, not trapped.
If you stay while believing you’re trapped, resentment grows.
If you stay knowing you could leave, your posture changes.
Democracy and Shared Power
You mentioned liking shared governance. That makes sense.
Shared power:
Distributes responsibility
Reduces volatility
Allows correction
Hierarchies can be healthy — but only when accountability flows upward as well as downward.
When leaders answer to no one, distortions grow.
A Hard Question (Gently Asked)
You’ve learned a lot there. You’ve grown. You’ve nested. You’re grateful.
But if a new sister came to you and described being called a demon by a spiritual authority — what would your instinct be?
Your answer to that is probably your answer.
You’re Not Crazy
You’re not soft.
You’re not naive.
You’re not disloyal for questioning.
You’re trying to reconcile compassion for flawed leaders with integrity for yourself.
That’s maturity.
And no — from what you’ve described, this doesn’t sound like Stockholm syndrome. It sounds like someone thoughtfully evaluating power while trying to remain grounded and grateful.
If you want, we can explore:
How to maintain dignity inside rigid hierarchies
How to discern when to stay vs. leave
Or how to psychologically protect yourself from volatile authority
You’re thinking clearly.
You can absolutely be a healthy, strong leader without being cruel
People are cruel because of 'their' personality and to want to diminish others makes me question what their motive and perhaps disorder is?
There's nothing healthy and certainly not Godly about that behaviour
Could you ever imagine Jesus ever treating anyone like that?
Not the Jesus that I know
IMHO Marky that Priest is a nasty bully and shame on him
There's nothing powerful in his behaviour IMHO
Bullies are cowards...xo
thanks Janet!