Running head: INTEGRATIVE APPROACHES TO PSYCHOLOGY AND CHRISTIANITY 1
Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity
Katrina Prince
Liberty University
2
INTEGRATIVE APPROACHES TO PSYCHOLOGY AND CHRISTIANITY
Abstract
3
INTEGRATIVE APPROACHES TO PSYCHOLOGY AND CHRISTIANITY
Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity Summary
4MAT Summary
David Entwistle’s book, Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity: An
Introduction to worldview Issues, Philosophical Foundations, and Models of Integration is an
evaluation of the assimilation of psychology and Christianity. Entwistle first assesses the
historical background concerning the integration of psychology and Christianity, and then
delivers its theoretical foundations, followed by a section that explores various models of
integration. He provides a compelling connection between science and theology and explains
how combining the two can give a more complete understanding of human behavior.
Entwistle describes the historical dialogue between theologians and scientists and how
although the two approaches differ there is often harmony between Christian and secular
perspectives (Entwistle, 2015). He begins with the thoughts of Tertullian that one must decide
if they will seek knowledge through human reason or from faith (Entwistle, 2015). In
response to Tertullian the author responds with the claim that “all truth is God’s truth,” in
other words no matter how truth is discovered, it was created by God (Entwistle, 2015). The
author then reveals the historical framework of integration with mentions of Augustine, the
Middle Ages, and medieval Scholasticism (Entwistle, 2015).
Entwistle explores differing worldviews, the effects surrounding them, and explains that
personal worldview influences the process of how science and theology are integrated
(Entwistle, 2015). He admits that Christianity has had the biggest impact on history but goes
on to explain that a biblical perspective alone in not a complete assessment (Entwistle, 2015).
He encourages readers to find evidence of God’s truth from psychology and science as well as
from scripture (Entwistle, 2015). He proposes four epistemological approaches that encourage
4
INTEGRATIVE APPROACHES TO PSYCHOLOGY AND CHRISTIANITY
integration which include logic, empiricism, revelation, and hermeneutics (Entwistle, 2015).
He then focuses on biology and behaviorism (psychological anthropology) and humanity’s
finiteness and fallenness (theological anthropology).
Entwistle (2015) depicts five models of integration which include Enemies, Spies,
Colonialists, Rebuilders, Neutral Parties, and Allies. The Enemies model claims that science
and faith are not compatible and rejects process. The Spies model lacks commitment to any
religious system, invest little in religion, or water down religion; it does however recognize
the potential that religion can promote well-being. This model reconstructs process (Entwistle,
2015). The Colonialists model borrows from psychology only when it conveniently supports
their religious beliefs (Entwistle, 2015). The Rebuilders model obtains psychological views
from Scripture and Christian tradition, the belief is that Theology transforms Psychology
(Entwistle, 2015). The Neutral Parties model keeps psychology and theology separate of one
another by placing emphasis on distinctiveness and not unity (Entwistle, 2015). Finally, the
Allies model is holistic in nature and seeks to unify psychology and theology; this model
claims that all truth comes from the Christian God (Entwistle, 2015).
In the final chapters Entwistle explains the integration of theology and psychology in a
comprehensive manner that is easy for the reader to understand. He emphasizes his beliefs by
describing real-life scenarios in which the reader can relate. Entwistle gives a clear view on
the similarities and dissimilarities that are associated with integration. He concludes by giving
a clear understanding of how to integrate psychology and theology in future studies.
Concrete Responses
I must admit that I am nervous while writing this section, as my views, I am sure, differ
greatly from others that have shared their personal experiences, and I do not know if this
5
INTEGRATIVE APPROACHES TO PSYCHOLOGY AND CHRISTIANITY
comes across as a parable. I grew up “holiness Pentecostal,” went to private schools, directed
the church choir, was the youth leader, was a missionary to Poland and Ukraine, graduated
from Bible college, and am ordained. Something happened to me along the way in which the
more I studied, the less I believed in God. I have tried to believe on several occasions
throughout my life since, but I just cannot resolve that there is a God that created us just to
worship Him and if we do not then we are doomed to an eternity of misery.
I understand the concepts that Entwistle is trying to make, and I also understand that
most people need to believe that there is something bigger than them that takes a direct
interest in their life. I do not look down on people that believe differently than me as I can
appreciate that most people need spirituality in their lives. This understanding allows me to
know how important it is to others that seek counseling that I play the role of an Ally. Allies
use psychology and theology in order to have a holistic view.
While I can understand and can talk as an Ally, I probably am more of what Entwistle
calls Spies (Entwistle, 2015). While I do not believe that theology and psychology need to be
separate for others, I absolutely separate them in my own worldview. I am committed to the
field of psychology and do have an antagonistic view of religion. However, my life is
surrounded by Christianity, my family are Christians, my fiancé with whom I attend Church is
a Christian, and I go to a Christian college. To be totally honest I do not know where I fit in
exactly with Entwistles’ Model of Disciplinary Relationship (Entwistle, 2015).
Reflection
Entwistle’s strength is his capability to summarize the history of conflict between
psychology and theology in a concise unbiased approach. His view on the “quest for faithful
reading” clearly supports his Allies model of integration and resolves possible integrationist
6
INTEGRATIVE APPROACHES TO PSYCHOLOGY AND CHRISTIANITY
disagreements (Entwistle, 2015). The Christian reading his book may wonder if he minimizes
the gospel message due to his desire for pleasant integration and his overemphasis of
disciplinary integration. He also does not address what a believer should do with the
information he presents. The book is well written, but I can understand how it may be hard for
nonprofessionals to find his weighty material hard to read. I can see how his use of difficult
words could make his message difficult to decipher.
It may be hard for counselors who employ total integration of psychology and theology
to “avoid imposing their own values, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors” onto their clients as
suggested by the American Psychological Association (APA, 2014, A.4.b). Entwistle does not
address how a Christian counselor can counsel a non-believer without bringing his or her own
worldview into the therapy room. The underlying assumption rather is that Christian
counselors should sneak their worldview into counseling with the hopes of a conversion.
Theological Interaction
I personally resonate with what Entwistle (2015) calls Neutral Parties, I do not think
theology and psychology need to be in conflict with one another but a mutual respect for
territory is needed. According to Entwistle (2015) I follow two masters, in that when in Rome
I do as the Romans and when in Athens I do as the Athens. I believe this is what any good
multicultural counselor is does. While I personally do not follow Christian teachings, I do
understand the importance it plays in the lives of many Americans. According to Hays and
Erford (2018) 80% of Americans claim to believe in the God of the Christian bible. It is for
this reason that I believe it is important that counselors are multicultural and are able to
incorporate theology and psychology into counseling.
7
INTEGRATIVE APPROACHES TO PSYCHOLOGY AND CHRISTIANITY
According to Entwistle (2015) I recognize the distinctiveness of psychology and the
uniqueness of theology and can identify their similarities. While I do not agree with the first
version of the model, that all psychological and theological findings should be completely
separate; I agree that the models have independently come to the same conclusions and can be
paralleled. However, I also think that theology and other spiritual teachings/religions can
come to the same parallels. I agree that personal worldviews influence the pursuit of
knowledge but accept the modernist division of knowledge into autonomous disciplines
(Entwistle, 2015).
I agree that theology and psychology can overlap but also believe that they are distinct.
I also see the importance of being able to see the complementary findings between the two for
the sake of multicultural counseling. According to Entwistle (2015) I hold the position of
psychologic neutrality; I am committed to the profession of psychology, believe that religion
and/or spirituality is important to most people but not necessarily the Christian belief. I agree
with Entwistle (2015) when he states that this model “Lacks the commitment of Christian
orthodoxy and is often simply ‘spiritual’ or ‘religious’” (p. 233). Again, I believe it is
important for counselors to be able to combine both theology and psychology for patients
with a Christian worldview while simultaneously compartmentalizing both.
While Entwistle (2015) contends that those who take the Neutral parties stance fails to
adopt a deep collaboration between theology and psychology, I disagree. Having been
surrounded by Christianity my whole life I can collaborate the two deeply for those I am
counseling that identify with Christianity, I just do not do so in my personal life.
While Entwistle (2015) claims that the Neutral Parties model presents a fragmented
view of personhood I think a good multicultural counselor is able to counsel in a holistic
8
INTEGRATIVE APPROACHES TO PSYCHOLOGY AND CHRISTIANITY
fashion for all persons regardless of their theological stance. To say label oneself a “Christian
counselor” is putting oneself in a box thereby excluding all others that need counseling that do
not take a Christian worldview. According to Sanders (2013) we should not have arrogance
and inflexibility about our personal theories, values, and paradigms as it can greatly inhibit
the counselor’s ability to relate with clients whose beliefs are different from our own.
Action Steps
I agree that integrating psychology and theology can provide a more holistic treatment
for clients that have adapted a Christian worldview. I plan to continue studying Christian
psychology as the belief in the God of the Bible is the mainstream belief for most Americans
(Hays & Erford, 2018). I plan on improving and becoming more open-minded in my
worldview in order to counsel those whose beliefs are different from my own.
It is important to remember that even within the Christian community a counselor does
not know exactly where in the disciplinary models he or she may believe. Therefore, it is
important to remain neutral and develop trust with clients in order to treat them holistically on
within their worldview. According to Entwistle (2015) some clients may come to counseling
because of hurt resulting from one of the five models. It is therefore important to approach
Christian counseling within the context of the client’s worldview and not my own. I plan on
remaining open to Scripture as well as other religious belief systems while claiming neutrality
between psychology and theology. This can be achieved by seeing the two different
perspectives of a common phenomenon; knowing that the psychology and theology can
overlap and support each other (Entwistle, 2015).
9
INTEGRATIVE APPROACHES TO PSYCHOLOGY AND CHRISTIANITY
References
American Counseling Association (ACA) (2014). Code of ethics as approved by the ACA
Governing Council. Retrieved from: https://www.counseling.org/resources/aca-code-
of-ethics.pdf
Entwistle, D. N. (2015). Integrative approaches to psychology and Christianity (3 ed.).
rd
Eugene OR: Cascade Books.
Hays, D. G. (2018). Developing Multicultural Counseling Competence: A Systems Approach.
New York, NY: Pearson.
Sanders, R. (2013). Christian counseling ethics: A handbook for psychologists, therapists,
and pastors. (2 ed.
nd ). Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.
