The Clinical Psychologist Next Door
A recent survey assessing pastoral attitudes toward mainstream therapeutic practice says this:
“Although psychology and religion deal with overlapping subject matter, the relationship between psychology and the church has a tumultuous history.”1
I love understatement.
I’ve had years to watch this tumultuous history unfold. I’ve witnessed skirmishes over whether counseling (or therapy)2 should be restricted to the pastor’s study or practiced more broadly. I’ve heard those committed to integrating Christian and “secular”3 therapeutic theory taken to task by those who argue that only the Bible should be used. One seminary professor of counseling told me thirty-five years ago that there were at that time nine distinct schools of thought on what constituted Christian counseling, suggesting that even within a Christian theistic framework shots were being fired.
To step into this tumult is perhaps the act of a fool, but as pastors we have little choice. We have people to care for and therefore judgments to make. It is assumed that the only way to properly care for our congregants who need specialized attention is to funnel them into some variety of Christian counseling. To direct them to a clinical psychologist or licensed counselor practicing outside of a Christian presuppositional framework is considered to be by definition dangerous and to be avoided.
I’d gently like to suggest that we reconsider this judgment. Such narrowing of the field of possible help quite possibly cuts our people, and ourselves, off from a rich vein of resources that God himself has provided. We toss a lot of babies out with the bathwater when we conclude that nothing good can come from this Nazareth.
The concern that no one can safely and adequately treat matters of human thought and behavior absent a biblically informed anthropology and ethic is a bias that unnecessarily neglects the gifts of God’s common grace. God has revealed much about the human mind and behavior to those outside the church. Over time therapeutic techniques have been examined, critiqued, evaluated, and improved. Those well trained and well disciplined in this field can and do have a positive impact upon their patients (or clients)4 regardless of where those practitioners stand theologically. Our comfort level with various therapeutic models should have more to do with that model’s willingness to be responsive to, and disciplined by, current psychological research than with its correspondence to our theological assumptions. Therapy, whether Christian or not, needs to be first and foremost psychologically sound.
The analogy is by no means original, but I think valid, that when I could hardly walk and needed my torn meniscus to be repaired, I needed a surgeon whose surgical technique was guided by the best research and honed by careful training. I needed a skilled surgeon. When I need psychological or relational guidance, I want to place those concerns in the hands of one trained and skilled in addressing those concerns. Obviously one can argue about the presuppositions that underlie both “secular” and the varieties of Christian therapies, and the degree to which those presuppositions impact a therapeutic outcome. But we can’t let those arguments overshadow the psychological soundness of the therapy. Good therapy, in the end, is simply good therapy, and good therapy is not the sole possession of the Christian counselor.
Five hundred years ago pastors may have only had the Bible to guide their pastoral care. But as well we amputated limbs without anesthesia and put psychologically troubled people into asylums. All of us to one degree or another lean on the research and insight gained over the years. Though much of it would be labeled “secular” does not mean it is to be repudiated. The best therapist is going to be the one most receptive to learning from and being disciplined by the tools which have been shown to be the most useful and effective. Not every good surgeon can quote Scripture. Not every good therapist needs to.
I, of course, have my own biases in arguing this.
My wife and I had complex needs when we began seriously looking for help. We chewed through three Christian counselors to no avail. Our journey eventually led us to three clinical psychologists with doctorates from “secular” universities. We found them to be wise in their approach, respectful of our faith, and skilled in their practice. Contrary to the caricatures, none taught us to hate our parents or to question the validity of our religious convictions. We are better people today, and no less Christian, than when we started, and we needed the clarity and skill of these therapists to help get us there. We thank God for them.
There are poor practitioners in every field and so, of course, pastors need to be discerning. But we cannot and ought not allow a legitimate caution to become a universal prejudice. As pastors we want to help our congregants find the best therapy available for them, that which is the most psychologically sound and suited to their needs. That quite possibly could come from the clinical psychologist next door.
The paper with which I began concludes by saying, “Our findings suggest that many religious leaders continue to believe that church ministry and psychological science are incompatible.” Such a denial of common grace may in the end deprive us, and our people, of the legitimate help that the Holy Spirit has provided.
Attitudes of Religious Leaders Toward Integrating Psychology and Church Ministry
Adam S. Hodge and Joshua N. Hook (University of North Texas)
Don E. Davis (Georgia State University)
Mark R. McMinn (George Fox University)
Though I think I could make a reasonable stab at distinguishing the words “therapy” and “counseling” for my purposes they are the same.
I put “secular” in quotation marks because often our judgments of what that means are blurry. It’s sometimes used to minimize the legitimacy of approaches outside of a particular Christian culture, which is unfair. For my purposes, it refers to a perspective that does not directly arise from theistic convictions.
Here, too, there is a distinction of labeling. Counselors tend to have clients and therapists tend to have patients and the distinction is immaterial to me.
Well done Randy, AGAIN!