Foundations

POSITIVE PS¥CHOLOG¥ AS A RESOURCE FOR PASTORAL THEOLOGYAND CARE: A PREEIMINAR¥ ASSESSMENT1

MARY CLARK MOSCHELLA YALE DIVINITY SCHOOL

The field of pastoral theology and care has long relied on insights fro™ the social sciences in its quest to “construct theology growing out of the exercise of caring relationships...” (Mission Statement of the Society for Pastoral Theology, 1990). Positive psychology, a very young, developing field of psychology, involves the study of psychological wellness, goodness, and fulfillment. This article explores the potential of positive psychology as a conversation partner for pastoral theology and its related practical disciplines, h begins with a brief introduction to the field of positive psychology, through an overview of three publications: one popular book (Seligman, 2000); one reference book, (Peterson & Seligman, 2004); and one introductory textbook (Peterson, 2006), This is followed by a review of pastoral theologian Robert Wicks’ use of positive psychology in a recent text (Wicks, 2010), and a reflection on implications for pastoral theology and care. The article then offers a critical evaluation of positive psychology, noting its strengths and weaknesses fro™ a pastoral theological perspective, as well as critiques in the scholarly and popular literature. The article concludes with a preliminary assessment of the value of positive psychology for the field of pastoral theology and care.

What ؛s Positive Psyehology?

Martin Seligman first uses the term “positive psychology” to name a new initiative of his presidency of the American p^chological Association in 1998.2 In his best-selling book, Authentic Happiness, Seligman tells tbe story of his dawning perception that most prior research in psychology, including his own, had focused on advancing the scientific and ciinicai understanding, identification, and treatment of psychiatric disorders. Whiie affirming the value of what had been learned, Seligman began to view the scope of research and treatment modalities as too narrow. He worried that an almost exclusive focus on pathology in the research had led the field to embrace a “disease model” of human nature. He questioned the idea of treating persons with psychiatric illnesses only in order to bring them up to a vague level of “normal” human functioning. He wondered what could be learned about psychological improvement above the line of normal, and set out to explore greater levels of positive emotions, fulfillment, and accomplishment. Together with his colleague, Mihaly CNikszentmihalyi, Seligman proposed a new area for psychological research, focusing on psychological health and wellness, strength and virtue, and the pursuit of what Aristotle termed, “the good lifo” (Seligman, 2002, p. ix). According to another l<ey figure in the movement, Christopher Peterson, “The most basic assumption that positive psychology urges is that human goodness and excellence are as authentic as disease, disorder, and distress” (Peterson, 2006, p. 5). These researchers and others, primarily at the University of Pennsylvania, launched numerous empirical studies of positive emotion, human strengths, virtues, fulfillment, and positive social institutions.3

THE JOURNAL o r ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUMMER 2 0 1 1 5 -1

Of course, this emphasis on human srtengtos, resources, and health is not entirely new. Antecedents ean be found in the humanistic psychology movement of the 1950s, particularly the worl< of Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers. For pastoral theologians, Howard Clinebell’s work on growtb counseling (1981) migbt come to mind, as well as Margaret Kornfeld’s more recent text. Cultivating Wholeness (2000). Family therapy is also known for its strengtbs-based methods (Walsh, 2006). Authors in positive psycbology acknowledge some of tbe parallels in humanistic psyehology, yet also point to distinguishing features of their enterprise (Peterson, 2006, pp. 8-10).

Fositive Emotion: Past, Future, and Present

Positive psycbology involves tbree main areas of study: positive subjeetive experiences such as pleasures and emotions; positive traits sueh as virtues and character strengtbs; and positive institutions such as families, sehoois, communities, and societies. In Authentic Happiness, Seligman eites studies tbat indicate that positive emotion is good for people. It has been shown to contribute to emotional “broadening and building” (Frederickson, 2001) and to predict health and longevity (2002, p. 40). Seligman describes positive emotion in a temporal scheme, wbicb includes happiness related to tbc past, tbc future, and tbc present. He provides instruments for readers’ self-assessment of emotional levels and exercises for increasing positive emotion in each of these (2002, p. 45). Positive emotions that bave to do witb tbc past include “^tisfaction, contentment, fulfillment, pride, and serenity” (2002, p. 62). In order to increase satisfaction witb tbc past, Seligman offers exercises involving practices of gratitude and forgiveness.

Positive emotions related to in the future include optimism, hope, faitb, and trust (2002, p. 62). The exercises ا ت هآ ا ׳ ' س؛ here involve learning how to dispute one’s negative self-talk, or “explanatory style” (Seligman, Reivich, laycox, and Gillham, 1995). Readers are urged to begin to do two tbings: (1) find “permanent and universal causes of good events;” and (2) find “temporary and specific causes for misfortune” (Seligman, 2002, p. 92). This disputation process is similar to some of the exercises that cognitive therapists advocate for challenging unhealthy or “twisted” thinking patterns (Bums, 1999).

In regard to positive emotions in the present, Seligman enumerates “)oy, ecstasy, calm, zest, ebullience, pleasure, and (most importantly) flow” (2002, p. 62). He describes tbc diverse types of pleasures and offers several ways to amplify them (2002, p. 110), including savoring pleasures, varying them, expressing thanks, marveling, and luxuriating in them. It has been shown that people adapt quickly to pleasures; tbc positive enjoyment of them decreases as tbc novelty wears off. Tbis is called tbc “hedonic treadmill” (2002, p. 49), a principle of which the advertising industry is well aware.

Seligman considers positive emotion more complex tban pleasure. He uses tbc term “gratification” to denote the positive emotion that comes from activities involving absorption, concentrated effort. This is also known as “flow” (C^kszentmihalyi, 1997). Gratifications include things like reading a good book, playing volleyball, volunteering to belp someone, or otber activities that require sustained effort in order to meet a goal. While watcbing TV might yield pleasure, reading a book might offer gratification. Autbentic happiness, in Seiigman’s terminology, involves more gratifications than pleasures (2002, 111-121).

5 -2THE JOURNAL OE ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUMMER 2 0 1 1

What leads people to seek out act؛¥Íties that go beyoud pleasure to involve gratification or flow? Seligman and Peterson assert that good character has something to do with these choices. Ofeourse, the term “character” has been challenged by numerous twentietb-century intellectual and psyehologieal movements, including behaviorism, environmentalism, and Marxism, to nam ejust a few (Seligman, 2010, pp. 125-129). Authors in positive psychology are attempting to revise and rehabilitate a notion of good cbaracter, because tbey believe that tbrougb the cultivation of character strengths people can increase their wellbeing, fulfillment, and excellence. For theologians, discussions of a link between the practice of virtue and happiness will recall the writings of Aristotle, Augustine, and Aquinas. Indeed, tbc study of tbe interrelationship between goodness and bappiness has a long pbilosopbical and tbeological pedigree (McMahan, 2005).

¥ rtues and Charaeter Strengths؛

This brings us to the second area of study in positive psycbology, wbicb focuses on positive traits such as virtues and character strengths. In this area, researchers bave worked to identify and test particular lists of virtues and strengths for their salience and multi-cultural stability. Attempts bave been made at creating manuals for describing and classifying strengths and virtues. Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook and Classification is one sucb manual (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). Here the authors imitate tbc DSM-1V approach to classifying psychiatric disorders, calling their work a “manual of tbe sanities” (Peterson and Seligman, 2004, pp. 3-32). This cigbt bundred-page compendium identifies six core v i i ^ ^ c o u r a g e , justice, humanity, temperance, transcendence, and wisdom, (2004, pp. 36-40). The autbors find evidence of these core virtues in the major influential religious and philosophical traditions within China, South Asia, and tbe West, broadly construed. While not claiming that tbese virtues are understood or valued in precisely the same ways across tbese “iiterate cultures,” tbe authors suggest tbat tbere is enough “convergence” around tbese six broad virtue classes to consider them ubiquitous (2004, p. 51). A review of previous classification systems is offered, which includes reference to psychologists such as Erikson, Maslow, Kohiberg, and Gardner, as well as pltiiosophic treatments of virtue etbics.

Tbese core virtues are tben used to organize a longer list of twenty-four specific cbaracter strengths. Ten criteria for the selection of the strengtbs were considered; in order for a particular strength to be selected for the classification, it had to meet at least five of the criteria (Seligman & Peterson, 2004, pp. 16-31). Strengths are understood as more specific and less abstract than the virtues. Strengtbs are viewed as character traits, psycbological ch ^c teristics of an individual that can be seen across time and in diverse situations (Seligman, 2002, p. 137). The twenty-four strengths so grouped appear in the table on the following page.

5 -3THE JOURNAL OE ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUMMER 2 0 1 1

Table of Charaeter Strengths and ¥ rtues؛

Virtue 1: Wisdom and Knowledge Virtue 4: Justice 1. Creativity 13. Social responsibility 2. Curiosity 14. Fairness 3. Open-mindedness 15. Leadership 4. Love of learning 5. ?erspective Virtue 5: Temperance

16. Forgiveness and Mercy Virtue 2: Courage 17. Humility 6. Bravery 18. Prudence 7. Persistence 19. Self-regulation 8. Integrity 9. Vitality Virtue 6: Transcendence

20. Appreciation ofbeauty Virtue 3: Humanity 21 Gratitude

16. Love 22. Hope 11. Kindness 23. Humor 12. Social intelligence 24. Spirituality

A chapter is de¥Cted to a systematic description of each character strength. Each chapter begins with a vignette, telling the story of a person who exemplifies the particular strength. This is followed by sections on definitions, history, measures, development, enabling and inhibiting factors, gender and cultural aspects, interventions, and so on. This volume is also linked to a companion website that offers an electronic version of the Values In Action Inventory of Strengths (VAI-IS) for adults (u^ .v iharacter.o rgT

?ositive psychologists believe that most people have “signature strengths,” a short list of these strengths that they practice enthusiastically and that feel authentic to them. Readers can identify their signature strengths by taking tbe VA1-1S inventory, either in written form or on-line, ?ositive psychologists recommend that people try to find ways to make greater use of their signature strengths in their work, play, and relationships in order to increase fulfillment, meaning, and “authentic happiness” (Seligman, 2002, pp. 160-161).

A third volume of note is Christopher Peterson’s ٨ Primer in Positive Psychology (2006). This accessible textbook summarizes the history, vocabulary, literature, and basic themes of positive psychology. It covers all of the topics noted above, stressing that learning positive psychology is “not a spectator sport” (?eterson, 2006, p. 25), and providing exercises to help students try out the concepts and practices that the research suggests will contribute to “the good life.” This text also includes chapters on positive thinking, values, interests, abilities, accomplishments, wellness, positive interpersonal relationships (love), and positive institutions. It is to the last chapter that we will now turn.

5 -4THE JOURNAL o r ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUMMER 2 0 1 1

Positive Institutions

What is a positive institution? Pete1־son c a ta o s different types of social groupings, from mere aggregations or assemblies of people who bave no connection to each other, to collectivities, in wbicb people bave something in common, to groups, where people interact and mutually influence one anotber, to organizations, which have structure, traditions, and customs, to institutions, which are sets ofiike organizations “with sustained, pervasive influences within a society or even the world as a wbolc” (2006, p. 280). Institutions are large-scale associations such as government, religion, family, and education. Peterson notes that institutions are too large and complex to be cbaracterized as completely positive (2006, p. 276). He prefers to use wbat be considers a ligbt-banded term, “enabling institutions,” ̂to describe institutions that support, enable, or allow good outcomes for their members. Peterson seeks to identify institutional-level virtues, or moral characteristics that are an enduring part of institutional cultures tbat promote tbc fulfillment of their members. He stresses that, l؛l<e Aristotle, be is not defining fulfillment as simple happiness or as code for money, status, or pleasure, but as reflective of “the willful choice and pursuit over time of morally praiseworthy activities” (Peterson, 2006, p. 281).

Peterson then surveys tbc psychological research on good families, schools, workplaces, societies, and religion. He identifies some widely valued institutional-level virtues, which include: purpose— shared moral vision; safety-protection against tbreat or danger; fairness— equitable rules and consistent means of enforcing them; humanity— mutual care and concern; and dignity-regard for the personhood of each individual member (2006, p. 298). This tbird area of positive psycbology appears to be tbc least developed, perbaps because tbc literature necessarily goes beyond the authors’ purview into fields sucb as sociology, organizational management, and psychology of religion. Nevertbeless, tbc attempt to identify characteristics of positive institutions recognizes tbc impact of social sy stem s upon the wellbeing of persons.؛

Bounce

Robert j. Wicks, at Loyola University in Maryland, is a Roman Catholic pastoral tbeologian wbo has begun to appropriate some of tbc insights of positive psychology in his work. Wicks sees benefits in this literature for caregivers, wbo are vulnerable to second-hand stress and professional burn-out. In د ،،: Living the Resilient Life (2010), a self-care guide for caregivers, Wicks notes that positive psychology can broaden our horizons so that wc consider our strengths “rather than merely focusing our outlook on tbc negative, on only things that need fixing” (2010, p. 89). Wicks finds compelling the evidence that “positive mood states help people build enduring personal resources” (Carr, 2004, cited in Wicks, 2010, p. 90). Reflecting on the studies of psycbologist Barbara Frederickson (2001), Wicks notes that “tbc benefits of happiness extend beyond just tbc enjoyment of good feelings. . . . Positive emotions strengthen resources that are drawn on tbrougbout life to improve coping and improve our odds of survival” (2010, pp. 91 -2),

Wicks finds the literature of positive psychology relevant to his larger project of belping caregivers cultivate resilience from day to day. In particular, he utilizes the concept of signature strengtbs. Based on this, be provides a table of exercises for

5 -5THE JOURNAL o r ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUMMER 2 0 1 1

“Enhancing Happiness and Optimism, and in Turn, Resilience” (2010, pp. 93-4). He describes the study uf pusitive psychulugy as a way “to provide a reflective grid that focuses us on those positive experiences, events, behaviors, cognitions, gifts, talents, and conditions to he recalled, celebrated, and reinforced” 0 آ0 ا ق , pp. 93, 95, emphasis in the original). Wicks includes a selected bibliography of writings in positive psychology and encourages caregivers to make a habit of reading this literature in order to enhance their own resiliency 0 آ0 ا ق , p. 95). Noting that toe benefits of self-care extend beyond toe caregiver, Wicks writes, “We can’t sbare what we don’t have. It’s as simple as that” (2010, p. 65).

Along with his adaptations of positive psychology, Wicks also offers his own checklists for self-awareness and protocols for self-care, including tools for debriefing for caregivers at risk for vicarious ?TSD (2010, pp. 38-47). As one who has worked extensively with caregivers, including disaster-relief workers who were evacuated from the civil war in Rwanda, Wicks knows from whence he speaks. The book also includes working explanations of meditation and mindfulness, as practiced in diverse religious traditions. Wicks notes that persons oflewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Christian, or other faiths can benefit from these practices (2010, p. 135). His focus is on practice rather than explicit theology.

Implications for ?astoral Theology and Care

In order to understand the implications of positive psychology for pastoral theology and care, we need to get a sense of the extent of scholarly tield and toe magnitude of the popular positive psychology movement. In an article in the Chronicle o f Higher Education, lennifer Ruarl< outlines toe remarkable growth of this academic field and its related popular success (Ruark, 2009). Well-subscribed courses in positive psychology are now being offered in major universities across toe U.S. as well as internationally. There is a de،ticated journal. The Journal o f Positive Psychology, a guild, the International Positive Psychology Association (1PPA), a Master’s program at toe University of Pennsylvania, and a new Ph.D. program at Claremont Graduate University. Research in positive psychology and related subjects (such as neuroscience) has attracted extensive funding from diverse sources.6 The popular, self-help literature on positive emotion is also voluminous, and it reaches into the field of executive coaching.

What can we make of this growing field of research and “applied psychology” ̂ Does toe field of positive psychology have any implications for the field of pastoral theology and care? One way to look at toe significant interest in positive psychology is as an indication of a widespread longing for happiness and wellbeing. Perhaps this movement suggests spiritual longings that are not fully recognized or honored through religious institutions and spiritual care practices.

Beyond this, positive psychology raises some interesting questions for the field of pastoral theology and care. What do we believe about toe human condition? Is goodness as real as sin and evil? While we have eloquent descriptions of human experiences of the absence of God and/or the ambiguity of God (Poling, 1996) rarely do we find reflections on experiences of the goodness of God.7 ?erhaps this is due to our appropriate focus on care for the suffering of the world. Peggy Way states:

THE JOURNAL OE ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUMMER 2 0 1 1 5 -6

(T)he reality of the human creature as finite and limited; historically situated; and vulnerable to suffering violence, and evil cuts tbrougb historical time and context. God’s “entirely beautiful” creatures (W. H, Auden) participate in death and dying, loss, grief, and mourning, situations of violence, horrors of Holocaust and natural disasters. ... The focus of pastoral care on these situations, along with its contemporary participation in attempts to cure, fix, make right, and correct various vulnerabilities, seems to have diminisbed the discipline’s firm grounding in the faitb claim as to the goodness of God. (2005, pp. 138)

Way’s comments raise an important question for our field. Are we pulled into the mood and sway of “tbese situations,” to the point that WC miss seeing the beauty, wonder, and gifts of human life tbat are also real? Positive psychology prods us to revisit tbese questions.

Strengths and Limitations

Robert Wicks has picked up on two of tbe main strengths of positive psycbology-its numerous hands-on exercises that can help foster well-being by focusing attention on the goodness and wonder of life, and its strengtbs-based approach that can cultivate empowerment. We will look at each in turn and tben consider otber issues, before turning to the critiques of positive psychology.

Effective Exercises

Tbe positive psychology texts described here offer numerous user-friendly exercises for reader to try out. These exercises are surprisingly effective ؛٨ shifting inner habits of tbougbt that affect mood states. For example, one simple exercise that is repeated in several positive psychology texts is meant to foster gratitude, which is considered both a positive emotion and a strengtb. In this exercise, which is called “Three Good Tbings,” persons are encouraged to sit down at tbe end of each day and write a list of three good things that bappened that day. In order to encourage deeper reflection, persons are also encouraged 0 آ ask themselves why this good fbing happened and 0 آ write down their answers. In order for this exercise to take bold as a babti,ل آ can be repeated for 21 consecutive days. Tbis very simple exercise has been shown to increase self- reported bappiness and decrease depression in follow-up studies done six months after this babti was intiiafed (Feterson, 2006, p. 38).

Fastoral theologians and caregivers can appreciate the value of an exercise that offers people even a small bedge against depression. Furthermore, the practice of gratifude is central in biblical religions (as well as others). In the words of the psalmist, “I will give thanks to the Lord wifb my wbolc beart; I will tell of all your wonderful deeds” (Fs. 9:1 NRSV). In religious settings, this exercise could be re-interpreted as a practice of felting of God’s gifts and reflecting upon why they were given. Small groups could covenant 0 آ engage in this daily babti of paying attention to blessings and then meet regularly so آ^طآ members can share experiences of gratitude. This exercise or some ada؛tiation of it could also be used in pastoral theology and care courses آ^طآ address

5 -7THE JOURNAL OE ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUMMER 2 0 1 1

pastoral formation, □ is c n s s ^ the exercises in a ci ass or group helps reinforce and expand the learning.

While many of these user-friendiy exercises are iaudabie and restorative, not every exercise in this literature is weii-suited to the repertoires of pastoral care or formation. For example, Seiigman’s forgiveness exercise (2002, pp. 79-81) might generate caution in light of previous work in pastoral theology that challenges the wisdom of encouraging quick and easy forgiveness in all cases (Cooper-White, 1995, pp. 253-256). Along these lines, pastoral theologians may also question whether “forgiveness, mercy” should be considered a standard character strength.

Forgiveness is a sensitive subject for pastoral theologians because wc are all too familiar with the horror stories of battered women whose pastors advise them to forgive their abusers and return home, whereupon they experience more domestic violence. Further, if forgiveness is listed as a ubiquitous strength, this seems to Imply that those who cannot forgive are weak. In reality, it requires enormous strength (and some would say virtue as well) for a battered person to resist her or his abuser’s pleas for forgiveness and reconciliation.^ In tight of these issues, the exercise for forgiveness that Seligman offers for general use could be harmful rather than helpful.

At the same time, pastoral theologians can investigate the prodigious work of positive psychologists who study forgiveness such as Charlotte vanOyen Witvliet (e.g., Witvliet et al., 2004), Additionally, given our concern for “constructive theology growing out of lived experience,” wc could also learn from listening to the voices of religious leaders such as Desmond Tutu, who testify to the liberation that some survivors of the violence of apartheid described when they forgave their former enemies (Tutu and Tutu, 2010).

Faith-friendliness

Fositive psychology is friendly toward persons of faith, since many studies indicate that religious participation increases wellbeing (Seligman, 2002, pp. 59-61). It is encouraging to tind research that supports the efficacy of faith practices in contributing to emotional health and wellbeing. However, the positive psychology literature described here does not go into a detailed analysis of which faith practices contribute to weiibeing and why. We must look to tbe psychology of religion and pastoral theology to supplement and refine this kind of ci aim (See Pargament, 2007; Hummel, 2003).

In terms of communal care, positive psychology’s list of institutional-level virtues noted above might be fruitfully compared to Margaret Kornfeid’s description of healthy congregations (2000, pp. 15-44). similarly, this research would support pastoral leadership strategies that focus on identifying and making use of the particular strengths and ministries of laypersons within congregations (Sheip & Sunderland, 2000).

Concernfor the Least

A challenge for pastoral theologians may be our sense of calling to minister to “the lost and the least,” those who are suffering and in need of healing, or, to use a time- honored scriptural metaphor, the sheep that have wandered away. To shift our focus from those who are most in need to the study of wellness, goodness, strengths, happiness, and

THE JOURNAL o r ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUMMER 2 0 1 1 5 -8

fulfillmert may seem callous or neglectfol. Surely we do not want to participate in a diversion from the needs of those who suffer or who are oppressed.

Though this research usually does not directly address bereavement, psychiatric illnesses, or forms of social marginalization, the findings of positive psychology nevertbeless may he of service to many wbo suffer from these conditions. In regard to psycbiatric illnesses, positive psychology is clearly not a substitute for medical treatment or psychotherapy. Still, many of the strategies identified for increasing wellbeing may he of use to persons wbo are managing chronic illnesses and conditions such as mood disorders. Tbe focus on strengths in positive psychology is critical in that it is empowering. It offers ways for persons to identify and expand parts or aspects of themselves tbat are vital, such as talents and interests. Given the ways in which persons witb psycbiatric illnesses are stigmatized and stereotyped, the tools for identifying and building on strengths may he particularly salutary. Such exercises and babits can support tbe deep recognition on the part of “soul sufferers” that tbey are more tban their symptoms (Greider, 2007, pp. 43-50).

Critiques

Tbere are some important critiques of positive psychology for pastoral tbeologians to consider. The first and most striking difficulty is toe veritable explosion of tbe popular literature, much of which is of uneven quality. Many of the popular books likQ Authentic Happiness are written in the vein of self-help, lacking the deptb and breadtb of scholarly discussion that we would like. Clearly the profit motive helps drive tbe wave of frenzied publications, conferences, and ¥ou-Tube videos. Seligman and ?eterson both appear anxious to establisb tbeir status as founders of tbe movement, so mucb so that tbey quote themselves frequently, and in some cases, repeat large swatbs of text in different publications. Also, as these authors try to differentiate tbeir work from otber schools of psychology, tbey often oversimplify Freud and his successors, gltofy dismissing them rather than carefully explaining points of agreement and disagreement (Tor example, Seligman, 2002, pp. 66-68). These factors combined will make tbe popular literature offensive or off-putting to many pastoral theologians.

Research Methods andFindings

?ositive psychologists are conducting extensive empirical research. In our quest to engage in intelligent and bolistic care practices, we can benefit from critically examining their metbods and tbeir findings. Many of the instruments used to measure wellbeing rely on self-reporting questionnaires (Peterson, 2006, pp. 80-91). This presents some limitations, tbougb since tbe self-reports of symptoms of illness or dis-ease are taken seriously in psychology and pastoral counseling, self-reports of life satisfaction can he viewed as baving similar merits and limitations. It has been pointed out that many of the conclusions drawn from the use of tbese life-satisfaction questionnaires are correlational rather than causative. Tor example, self-reported optimism is associated with a bigb level of achievement in many professions. Tbis finding only proves a correlation between toe two tbings, not that one causes tbe otber.

THE JOURNAL o r ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUMMER 2 0 1 1 5 -9

Other critiques of the science of positive psychology concern the validity of the “happiness equation:” H=s+C+V. In this equation, H stands for happiness, s stands for “set point” (which indicates the natural level of happiness that an individual experiences), c stands for life circumstances, and V stands for factors under voluntary control. Critics point to the lack of precision in this equation and the ^eudo-scientific way in which it is described (Ehrenreich, 2009, pp. 156-158).

Seligman, in particular, claims that positive psychology is descriptive rather than prescriptive. ¥e t some researchers challenge the conclusions that positive psychologists draw from the research, fo r example, the evidence linking positive psychological states to health outcomes is debated (Coyne, Tennen, Rancher, 2010; Held, 2004). It becomes clear that the very success of a positive psychology “movement” that is closely aligned with the needs of the market creates conflicts and tensions related to scientific integrity (Coyne, Tennen, and Rancher, 2010, p. 36; Ehrenreich, 2009; Ruark, 2009).

Seligman and Peterson emphasize that their findings are based on positivist scientific research, rather than phenomenology or case studies. They appear to be trying to distinguish themselves from humanistic psychology. One critique, following foucault, suggests that authors in positive psychology are “valorizing their own movement,” while deriding and sidelining humanistic psychology as a “false prophet” (McDonald and O’Callaghan, 2008, pp. 133-135). It is further argued that the leaders of the movement lack reflexivity, and that by creating an “overarching document” {Character Strengths and Virtues, described above), they are positioning themselves as “the arbiters of expert knowledge related to human happiness and wellbeing” (2008, p. 138). Thus positive psychology is not value-free as it is claimed, but unwittingly prescribes the constraining ideology of current neo-liberal values (2008, p. 140). It is recommended that positive psychology open itself to alternative positions, such as other schools of psychology, in order to find a more flexible approach to the study of human happiness.

a¡ Contexts andDiversity׳¡¡¡¡¡¡¡' )

The critique of the overarching narrative of positive psychology brings up the question of cultural complexity. While there are some studies of cultural differences in positive psychology, there is not a strong focus on cuiturai context in the texts wc have examined here. Even where cultural differences are studied, researchers in positive psychology tend to use quantitative rather than qualitative approaches. There is also a tendency to oversimplify or essentiaiize cuiturai traits.

Eor these reasons, positive psychology does not fit easily into our postmodern pastoral theological discussions (Doehring, 2006), This problem is not unique to positive psychology, but is also found in reconciling the insights of many schools of psychology with the issues raised by postmodernism (Kvale, 1992). Pastoral theologians will therefore always need to bring contextual lenses of analysis to bear on this conversation, complexifying it with questions that address issues of social location, power dynamics, and cultural difference ( f ee, 2009),

5 -1 0THE JOURNAL o r ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUMMER 2 0 1 1

Social Justice?

? a s tra l theologians might question whefoer positive psychology’s emphasis on uplifting emotional states will lead to the neglect of social justice issues. Will wc be so concerned witb the inner life tbat wc stop paying attention to the urgent needs of tbe world? While it is indeed possible to use tbis material to distract from the urgent issues of our day, such as climate change and growing social inequalities, positive psychology does not promote isolated individualism. Indeed, much of the research points to the importance of love and integrity and fulfillment through service to a broader purpose. Seligman often uses the word “calling” to describe wbat be considers the most autbentic and lasting paths to bappiness.

As to tbc issue of giving too much attention to the inner life in light of pressing concerns for social justice, consider the reflections of theologian Wendy Fariey, wbo writes:

Attention to the interior landscape of human beings is not a rejection of the claims ofjustice. To the contrary, attention to our interiority deepens our capacity forjustice. ©٢ rather, it roots justice in the wellspring of compassion . . . .Attention to interiority can resuscitate our capacities for relationship and ignite in us tbc desire for compassion and deligbt in this life. In this sense it is integral to the desire forjustice. (2005, p. xviii).

Attention to the interior experience can “resuscitate our capacities for relationship.” This bolistic goal can be cultivated witb some of positive psycbology’s resources. By increasing the frequency and deptb of inner experiences of gratitude, compassion, and joy, wc can root work forjustice in deep compassion. This can help sustain heart-felt commitments to social justice ministries over the long baul.

Still, the question has merit. While justice and humanity are considered two of tbc main virtue classes, wc do not find an explicit commitment to social ju s tic e -fo r example, the alleviation o fp o v e rty -in this literature. In fact, because several studies indicate that beyond a certain baseline of adequate income, wealtb is not a good predictor of happiness, positive psycbology does not logically bolster efforts to overcome income disparities. On this point, Seligman notes, “It can be morally right and politically desirable to attempt to close the gap between rich and poor, not on the grounds that it will make tbc poor happier, (which it likely will not do), but on the grounds that it is a just and bumane obligation” (2002, p. 280). We find something less tban a full morai or political commitment to social justice in these words. There is also some irony in the fact that wbile tbc leaders of tbc positive psychology movement continue to stress a lack of association between income level and happiness, tbey sell tbeir wares to executive coaches for exorbitantly high fees.

Anotber way of looking at tbc positive psychology research on income and happiness is as supportive of counter-cultural theological values that challenge consumerism. Pastorally, these findings might be engaged as evidence of the wisdom of Jesus’ injunction in Tuke’s gospel to “Sell your possessions and give alms” (Luke 12:33 NRSV). Evidence that great wealtb does not increase buman happiness could be used to

5 -1 1THE JOURNAL OE ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUMMER 2 0 1 1

enrich congregations’ conversations about their mission and purpose. Such conversations might prompt the re-examination of communal faith, values, and practices such as the community’s use of natural and financial resources. While there is not a shared moral or political commitment to social justice in the positive psychology literature, the findings can be engaged in such a way as to enliven pastoral theological conversations and commitments.

Preliminary Assessment

Positive psychology is a young field that may or may not live up to its promise to study human experiences of wellbeing, goodness, and flourishing in a transparent and open manner. While some critics dismiss the field as merely the heir of the “power of positive fhinking movement” and consider آل a mind-numbing form of social control (Ehrenreich, 2009), others counter that there is more to positive psychology than optimism and note that the exercises it promotes support mindful and attentive living (Dacey, 2008).

It is not necessary to accept the entire program of positive psychology in order 0 آ appreciate the research and exercises that do have merit. In making use of these materials, pastoral theologians will need to sift through the rubble of the strident claims of the leaders of the movemenf and discuss and discern what we can learn from the more scholarly research. We will also need to continue to raise questions about social and cultural contexts, power arrangements, and the tacit assumptions of the “overarching document.” This article is offered in the hope of inviting such discussions.

Recognizing the limitations and problems in the positive psychology literature examined here, we find that positive psychology’s focus on human wellbeing, goodness, and strengths offers wisdom for pastoral theology and practice. As noted earlier, “The most basic assumption that positive psychology urges is that human goodness and excellence are as authentic as disease, disorder, and distress” (?eterson, 2006, p. 5). This prods us to remember, first, that experiences of the goodness of God are real and worth exploring; and second, that “God intends the flourishing of the beloved creatures, and affirms their desire for free play in a good world” (Way, 2005, p. 138).

In recent years, some pastoral theologians, working from diverse p e r s p e c t i v e s and with various methodologies, have begun researching experiences of human flourishing. We now have good work addressing hope (fester, 1995; Capps, 2001; Keshgegian, 2008; Bidwell, 2010); resilience (Wicks, 2010; Holton, 2011); play (Koppel, 2008; Hamman, 2011); and joy (Gay, 2001; Way, 2005; Son, 2009). Studies in positive psychology can help us continue to develop and teach pasforal theologies and care practices that nurture the wellbeing of persons and communities.

To take goodness seriously does not mean denying the daunting realities of pain, sin, or suffering. Tor آل is otten in the middle of pain, sin, and suffering that the awareness of the goodness of life or of God dawns, perhaps in the form of hope, longing, a glimpse of beauty, or a taste of love. Pastoral theologians and care givers who comprehend experiences of the goodness of God deeply, in an embodied way, will be better able to foster heating and hope, even in sttuations of ambiguity. Along toese tines, Peggy Way writes.

5 -1 2THE JOURNAL o r ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUMMER 2 0 1 1

Pastoral practitioners must have courage to absorb the reality of the creature’s perils and awfulness . ..a n d be present to see the vastness of other blessings and emerging possibilities. Acceding to one’s creatureliness carries the courage to he within it along with character؛sties of persisting, resisting, enduring. Accompanying such a process is delight in thejoys ofcreaturely existence, even celebration, without guilt or shame that the entire creation is not yet fulfilled. (2005, p. 141)

Persistence, resistance, and endurance are strengths worth cultivating; we may “delight in thejoys of creaturely existence” while also being faithful to the calling to care.

Endnotes

1. My thanks to the Henry Luce III fellows in Theology grant program of the Association of Theological Schools for affording me the time to worl< on this study. Thanks also to Roslyn Karaban for serving as a reader and the .ا()¡¡¡■¡¡¿¡¡ editors who reviewed the first draft of this article.

2. The first person to use the phrase “positive psychology” was actually Abraham Maslow(1954. p. 353). See Christopher Peterson, 2006, p.4, n l.

3. For a sense of the scope of the literature and teaching related to positive psychology at the University of Pennsylvania, visit the Center for Positive Psychology website at www.ppc.sas.upenn.edu. Note the Master’s nrouram in Applied Positive Psychology (MAPP).

4. In the study of addiction, the term “enabling” has a negative connotation. Here Peterson uses the term in a positive way to indicate institutions that are supportive to the wellbeing of their members.

5. For a pastoral theological yiew of social systems, see Larry Kent Graham, 1992,

6. “The National Institute of Mental Health has given more than $226-million in grants to positive-psychology researchers in the past 10 years, beginning with just under $4- million in 1999 and reaching more than nine times that amount in 2008. The John Templeton Foundation has long supported the worl<, and recently awarded Seligman a grant of nearly $6-million to encourage collaborations between positive psychologists and neuroscientists. Backing has also come from the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Education, and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, among others” (Ruark, 2009).

7. See Peggy W ay’s essay, “The Goodness of God” (2005, pp. 138-152).

8. For a pastoral theological discussion of the complex issues related to intimate partner violence, see Jeanne Hoeft, 2009. F o ra discussion of forgiveness in pastoral theology and care, see John Patton, 2000.

5 -1 3THE JOURNAL OE ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUMMER 2 0 1 1

References

Bidwell, D. R. & Batisky, D. L. (2009). Abundance in finitude: An exploratory study of children’s accounts of hope in chronic illness. The Journal o f Pastoral Theoloov. 79(1), 38-59.

Bidwell, □ R. (2010). E sc h a to ^ y and childhood hope: Reflections from work in progress. The Journal o f Pastoral Theology 20 (2), 109-127.

Burns, D (1999). Feeling good: The new mood therapy revised and updated. New York: Avon Books.

Capps, Donald. (2001). Agents ofhope: A pastoral psychology. Eugene, OR: W ipf& Stock.

Carr, A. (2004). Positive psychology: The science ofhappiness and human strengths. London: Routledge.

Clinebell, H. (1981). Contemporary growth therapies: Resources/or actualizing human wholeness. Nashville, EN: Abingdon.

Cooper-White, p. (1995). The cry o f Tamar: Violence against women and the Church ’s response. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress.

Coyne, j. C., Tennen, H., & Ranchor, A. V. (2010). Fositive psychology in cancer care: A story line resistant to evidence. Annals o f Behavioral Medicine, 39 (1), 35-42. doi :10.1007/sl2160-010-9157-9

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Findingflow: The psychology ofengagement with everyday life. New Yorlc Basic Books.

Dacey, M. (2008). The message of positive psychology. Chronicle o f Higher Education, 54 (27), B25.

Doehring, c. (2006). The practice o f pastoral care: A postmodern approach. Touisville, KY: Westminster John Knox.

Ehrenreich, Barbara. (^009). Bright-sided: How the relentless promotion ofpositive thinking has undermined America. New Yorl<: Metropolitan Books.

Farley, w . (2005). The wounding and healing o f desire: Weaving heaven and earth, Eouisville, KY: Westminster John Knox.

Frederickson, B. E. (2001). The role ofpositive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory ofpositive emotions, d/ne/'ican ¡*sociologist218 ,56 ؛- 226

5 - 1 4THE JOURNAL OE ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUM M ER2011

Gay, V. P. (2001). Joy and the objects ofpsychoanalysis: Literature, belief, and neurosis. Albany: State University ofN ew Yorl< Press.

Graham, L. K. (1992). Care ofpersons, care o f worlds: A psychosystems approach to pastoral care and counseling. Nashville, FN: Abingdon.

Greider, K. 1. (2007). Much madness is divinist sense: Wisdom in memoirs o f send- suffering. Cleveland, OH: Pilgrim.

Hamman, 1. (2011). A play-full life: Slowing down and making peace. Cleveland, OH: Pilgrim.

Hoeft, 1. M. (2009). Agency, culture, and human personhood: pastoral theology and intimate partner violence. Eugene, OR: Pickwick.

Holton, M. 1. (2011). Building the resilient community: Lessons from the lost boys o f Sudan. Eugene, 0 ^ : Cascade.

Hummel, L. (2003). Clothed in nothingness: Consolation fo r suffering. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress.

Koppel, M. S. (2008). Open-hearted ministry: Play as key to pastoral leadership. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress.

Kornfeld, M. z (2000). Cultivating wholeness: A guide to care and counseling in faith communities. New Yorlc Continuum.

Kvale, S. (Ed.) (1992). Psychology and Postmodernism. London, Newberry Park, CA, and New Delhi: SAGE.

Lee, K. S. (2009). Engaging difference in pastoral theology: Race and ethnicity. The Journal o f Pastoral Theology 19 (2), 1-20.

Lester, A. D. (1995). Hope in pastoral care and counseling. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox.

Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New Yorlc Harper & Row.

McDonald, M., & O'Callaghan, j. (2008). Positive psychology: AFoucauldian critique. Humanistic Psychologist, 36 (2), 127-142. doi: 10.1080/08873260802111119

McMahon, D. M. (^006). Happiness: A history. New Yorl<: Grove.

Pargament, κ . I. (^ ٠٠^). Spiritually integrated psychotherapy: Understanding and addressing the sacred. New Yorl< and London: Guilford Press.

5 -1 5THE JOURNAL OE ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUMMER 2 0 1 1

Patton,2000 .Forgiveness in pastoral care and counseling. In M. E. McCullough, K .(ل. ( I. Pargament, and C. E. Thoresen (eds.), Forgiveness: Theory, research, and practice, pp. 281-295. New ¥ ٥٢١٤ and London: Guilford Press.

Peterson, c. (2006). A primer in positive psychology. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. p. (2004). Character Strengths an¿¡ Virtues: A handbook and classification. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

Poling, E N. (1996). Deliver usfrom ،?١٧/.· Resisting racial and gender oppression. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press.

Ruark, lennifer. (^009). An intellectual movement for the masses 10 years after its founding, positive psychology struggles with its own success in Philadelphia. Chronicle o f Higher Education, 55 (43), 4.

Seligman, M. E. p., Reivich, K., Jaycox, E., and Gillham, j. (1995). The optimistic child: A proven program to safeguard child¡■¿¡¡ ¿¡pain*/ ¿¡¿¡)¡׳¿**¡on ¿¡¡¡¿ا build lifelong resilience. New Yorl<: Houghton-Mifflin.

Seligman, M. E. p. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize your potential fo r lastingfiilfillment. New Yorl<: Free Press.

Shelp, E. & Sullivan, R. (^٠٠٠). Sustaining presence: A model o f caring by people o f faith. Nashville, FN: Abingdon.

Son, A. (2008). Agents of joy as a new image of pastoral care. The Journal o f Pastoral Theology 18 (1), 61-85.

Tutu, D. & Tutu, M. (2010). M adefor poo¿¡¡¡¿**: And why this makes all the ¿{¡ ¿ ¡ لا׳ ¿¡¡¿¿. New York: HarperOne.

Walsh, F. (2006). Strengthening fam ily resilience. (2nd cd.) New York: The Guilford Press.

Way, P. (2005). Created by God: Pastoral care fo r all G od’s people. St. Touis, MG: Chalice.

Wicks, R. j. (2010). So¡¡¡¡¿¿: Living the ¡׳¿*¡¡¡¿a¡ life. Oxford and New Yorl<: Oxford University Press.

Witvliet, C. V. 0 ., Phipps, K.A., Feldman, M. E., and Beckham, j. c. (2004). Posttraumatic mental and physical health correlates of forgiveness and religious coping in military veterans. .¡()¡¡¡■¡¡¿¡I o f Trauma ¿¡¡¡¿ا St¡■¿**, 77, 269-273.

5 - 1 6THE JOURNAL OE ?ASTORAL THEOLOGY 2 1 ( 1 ) , SUM M ER2011

آلمآورلم؛

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may priut, dow nload, or send artieles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international eopyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATT,AS subscriber agreem ent.

No eontent may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)’ express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS eollection with permission from the eopyright holder(s). The eopyright holder for an entire issue ٥۴ ajourna! typieally is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, tbe author ofthe article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use آس covered by the fair use provisions of tbe copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright hoider(s), please refer to the copyright iaformatioa in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initia؛ funding from Liiiy Endowment !)٦٥.

The design and final form ofthis electronic document is the property ofthe American Theological Library Association.