Having suggested that psychosynthesis and constellations go hand in hand it is only fair that I tell you why I believe this is the case.
Psychosynthesis and constellations are both about radical inclusion. On a personal level we are all aware of the parts of ourselves we don't like. The lazy aspect of us that does not go to the gym or the inner critical voice. Psychosynthesis suggest we include them, be curious about them and see if we can engage in an inner dialogue with them. There is a charge in these parts, and so it is useful to pay attention to them. Similarly constellations insists that all parts of the system be included. So an irritating aunt or a difficult siblingare part of our system and need to be included.
Both psychosynthesis and constellations believe in potential. Internally psychosynthesis suggests that the difficult bits are a distorted manifestation of some qualities that are trying to emerge. So you inner critic that may leave you demoralised may be a form of protection, trying ensure you stay safe and asking you to be cautious. Similarly in constellations suggests the same. You may find yourself behaving in the same way one of your parents did. And this loyalty provides us with a wonderful opportunity to blame them. However this repeated pattern may potentially be a manifestation of the pure love we children feel for our parents. Dear mum or dad, I love you so much, I'll be just like you. And this love has a lot of potential if we are able to come to a healthier relationship to it.
For me however the most important similarity between psychosynthesis and constellations is their stance. A stance of deep humility. Both work with you and acknowledge your reality. It is not about making things fit some theory, but recognising your uniqueness. In the psychosynthesis world, counsellors refer to themselves as guides indicating that they may have some suggestions but ultimately you hold on your truth. Similarly constellations work is phenomenological. It insists on what is without overlaying with an artificial structure provided by theory.
So it makes sense to me why these two approaches, one that supports the individual and other that supports the individual in their systems. They go hand in hand.