ENTWISTLE REVIEW 2
Entwistle Review Assignment
Summary
Integrative approaches to psychology and Christianity: An introduction to worldview
issues, philosophical foundations, and models of integration by Entwistle (2015) speaks to six
distinct models. The models discussed are enemies, spies, colonialist, rebuilders, neutral parties,
and allies. Entwistle (2015) reviews each model and notes the similarities and differences that
the models have to one another. The reader is also prompted to explore how their own personal
beliefs, experiences, and biases may inadvertently influence ones understanding of psychology
and Christianity respectively, while ultimately guiding their integration model. While each of the
six models have their advantages and drawbacks, it is essential to dive deeper when making an
integrative decision. Not only does one need to deciding if and how psychology and Christianity
mesh, but we must also learn how our own understanding and belief of psychology and
Christianity has been constructed and applied through a lens we then place on the world in an
attempt to understand and make sense of what goes on around us.
The enemies’ model is described as an either/or mentality between psychology and
Christianity. This model is further broken down into what Entwistle (2015) identifies as secular
combatants and Christian combatants. Both combatants seek to disregard the other, unaccepting
of the ability for both psychology and theology to exist together. While neither combatant is
accepting of the other, they both take the same approach in believing solely in their own
understanding, incompatibility of the opposing’s approach with their own, and perception of
hostility and threat from the other, inevitably resulting in the inability of two “incongruent”
approaches to exist. This means that the enemies’ model is not integrative at all, as both sides
fully reject the concept of the opposing.
ENTWISTLE REVIEW 3
The spies model acknowledges the intermingling of psychology and Christianity but does
so with an ulterior motive. This model is broken down into domestic spies and foreign spies. The
foreign spy approach seeks to excavate someone’s faith only to better understand the
psychological benefits that are associated with the religion. One might not believe in the
religious practice but still promote it because of the belief of the psychological benefits that the
religious practice produces. Domestic spies acknowledge and adhere to religious beliefs but
focus primarily on reconstructing the beliefs to address psychology and personal wellbeing. The
spies’ model is described as integration of psychology and Christianity through manipulation of
one another by means of deconstruction and reconstruction of the opposing to best fit the others’
beliefs (Entwistle, 2015). Ultimately, this model uses religion as a cover to promote
psychological benefits through calculated selection and dismissal of the religion’s fundamentals.
Colonist, similar to spies, recognizes the co-existence of psychology and Christianity.
However, colonist do not seek to manipulate but rather selectively pick aspects of the opposing
to support or reject in a means to cultivate alignment from psychology to theology. Entwistle
(2015) states that this model can often be seen used by Christian counselors as it allows them to
select aspects of psychology that can be utilized specifically to support and further their overall
theological beliefs and worldview. This model does not seek to integrate psychology and
Christianity but rather incorporate select or isolative aspect of psychology to promote theological
interpretation.
The rebuilder model is also referred to as Christian psychology (Entwistle, 2015).
Rebuilders are different from colonist because they accept and respect psychology, while also
being skeptical, and acknowledge that aspect and benefits of psychology can be found within
religious philosophy and traditions. Psychology is a concept that provides benefit to humans but
ENTWISTLE REVIEW 4
must be examined and restructured as it once came from God and has been manipulated by man
overtime (Entwistle, 2015). The rebuilding of psychology into a support for theology is done
through an understanding of both parties but a focus on theological interpretation when
examining psychology.
Neutral parties can be described as separate but respectful of one another. This means
that psychology and Christianity can co-exist interchangeably. Both parties are respectful of the
other and both may be adhered too at different times, depending on the situation. Someone may
use this model when they have a personal commitment to both psychology and religion, being
able to isolate them respectively or find overlap of minimal interaction between the two
(Entwistle, 2015). This can further be dissected into Christian neutrality as the neutral parties’
model focuses more greatly on religion and spirituality as a whole rather than Christianity, and
therefore abandons some of the Christian fundamentals. Christian neutrality can be described by
Entwistle (2015) as acknowledging God has created scripture and psychology independently,
while also noting limited parallels between modern psychology framework and Christianity.
Lastly is the allies model. This is the most integrative model as described by Entwistle
(2015). Allies puts an emphasis on taking a Christian worldview and applying it to every area of
life, highlighting the great impact that a worldview has on oneself. When both parties are
properly understood and identified as truth from God, they can be appropriately integrated
together. It is believed that because God has created both things, without the manipulation of
man they are able to work together. While Christianity and psychology each have their own
independence, the model focuses less on which party to believe and more on servitude to God
who has divinely created both (Entwistle, 2015).
Interaction
ENTWISTLE REVIEW 5
I found these chapters by Entwistle (2015) to be very informational and enlightening. The
conversation of models is common and applicable to topics outside of psychology. However, I
had never truly thought about why we have models, how they were established, and what they
mean. Entwistle (2105) educated me on the use of models as an imperfect way to replicate
something in an effort to seek greater understanding. Prior to the reading, I had thought of
models simply as a set of rules to follow to achieve a designated outcome. While models merely
provide an outline to operate from based on our understandings, it also gives a sense of structure
that can aid in the replicability of applied skills, theories, experiences, etc., (Plucker & Makel,
2021). Replication is important as it offers the opportunity to fine tune our understanding of
something through the filtering of subjective inputs and the creation of research-based outputs,
benefiting the majority.
In relation to subjective experiences, this reading initiated in-depth personal exploration
to gather a greater understanding of ourselves and how we are presenting through the models and
theories we select and the work that we conduct. While I was aware that operating from various
models and theories focuses attention and priority on different things, I had not thought about the
way questions can so mischievously end up leading clients towards specific answers. Being
aware of this is critical as leading questions can take away from a client’s autonomy (American
Counseling Association [ACA], 2014) and provide inaccurate and skewed information about the
client and overall data if conducting research (Gous & Wheatcroft, 2020).
Understanding which integrative model we may be working from is essential as it
prompts reflection and introspection into our beliefs and understandings. Additionally, each
model may emphasis different areas and frame questions differently, resulting in leading or
tailored answers (Entwistle, 2015). As a counselor, one must always be cognizant of ethical
ENTWISTLE REVIEW 6
obligations and safety of the client. Entwistle (2015) reminds us by referring back to the ACA
Code of Ethics (2014) that as counselors we must self-reflect to identify potential biases and to
respect the clients’ religious beliefs and their desire on whether or not to incorporate those
beliefs in sessions. The ACA Code of Ethics (2014) explicitly references religion in sections C.5
and E.8. These sections speak to the necessity of nondiscriminatory practices and recognition of
diversity within assessments. Furthermore, the American Association of Christian Counseling
(AACC, 2014) speaks to integration in sections ES1-110, ES1-330, ES1-500, ES1-600, and ES3-
210-b. When looking specifically at a counselors call to soundness (ES1-600; AACC, 2014), we
are reminded of holistic care that is achieved through acknowledgement of a clients biological,
psychological, emotional, cognitive, social, cultural, relational, and spiritual influences. This can
be seen utilized in the Allies model presented by Entwistle (2015) as it respectively
acknowledges the important role that these factors play for individuals and that God has created
this uniqueness in all of us as he walks alongside us as the author of our lives.
Naturally, I have gravitated towards the allies model. I believe this best suits me as it
allows me to operate through a Christian worldview while also acknowledging the benefits of
psychology. When working with those who share a belief in Christianity and request
incorporation, I can utilize explicit integration in sessions through the use of prayer and scripture.
For those who hold differing beliefs than me or do not wish to incorporate faith into session, I
can still engage in the allies model through implicit integration (Tan, 2011). Implicit integration
can be done through personal prayer before or after session. This can also be done by showing up
in the image of Christ when meeting with clients, allowing them to see Him work through me
without directly speaking His name.
Application
ENTWISTLE REVIEW 7
Moving forward, the information I learned from the Entwistle (2015) readings will be
applicable to multiple areas of my practice. I have increased my conscious awareness of what
core beliefs and values I have that may draw me to certain models or theories and be able to
acknowledge how I show up to clients when working from that perspective. Self-reflection and
consultation will occur more often and be more insightful as I will sift through the skills and
methods applied, as well as questions asked to the client. In doing so, after the readings, I will be
able to better understand how I may be directing the client in sessions and ensure that the client
is coming to conclusions based on their own experiences and beliefs.
In a time where religion is often pinned against other topics and labeled as contrasting
and unable to co-exist, Entwistle (2015) showed me how Christianity and psychology can both
respectably be practiced and appreciated, just as God has afforded us. By holding firm to my
foundations in Christianity, I am able to see the offerings that He has placed on Earth for us to
cultivate and selflessly aid others through Him and in His name. Acknowledging Gods creation
while also remembering we live in a fallen world will allow me to hold steadfast to the pure
fundamental greatness of the Lord while also being aware of the badness that exists in the world.
When considering models and how to integrate two beliefs that are often pitted against one
another, I was reminded of perception. Neff and McMinn (2020) spoke on individuals’
predisposition to ponder the image of God however, it is also important to give thought to the
theology of imago Dei. By considering both images we are giving recognition to theology and
psychology, ultimately operating from an allies model.
ENTWISTLE REVIEW 8
References
American Association of Christian Counselors. (2014). Y-2014 Code of Ethics.
https://www.aacc.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/AACC-Code-of-Ethics-Master-
Document.pdf
American Counseling Association. (2014).H2014HACA Code of
Ethics.Hhttps://www.counseling.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/2014-
code-of-ethics-finaladdress.pdf
Entwistle, D. N. (2015). Integrative approaches to psychology and Christianity: An introduction
to worldview issues, philosophical foundations, and models of integration (3rd ed.).
Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers.
Gous, G., & Wheatcroft, J. M. (2020). Directive leading questions and preparation technique
effects on witness accuracy. Sage Open, 10(1).
https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019899053
Neff, M.A. & McMinn, M. (2020). McMinn, M. R.HEmbodying integration: A fresh look at
Christianity in the therapy room. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
Plucker, J. A., & Makel, M. C. (2021). Replication is important for educational psychology:
Recent developments and key issues.HEducational Psychologist,H56(2), 90–100.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2021.1895796
Tan, Siang-Yang. (2011). Counseling and psychotherapy: A Christian perspective. Baker
Academic. ISBN: 9780801029660
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
