The Christian Approach to Psychology
One area in which the “war” between science and faith is manifest is the study of human mental
processes and behaviour – commonly known as psychology. Some psychologists view
Christianity as a “crutch” for weak people, or something that is obsolete given our advanced
understanding of neuroscience. Some Christians view psychology as unnecessary – all we need
to know about human minds is found in the Bible. And some Christians who are also
psychologists compartmentalize their work and their faith. Yet, as with other areas of science,
there is no need for conflict or separation. There are many areas of compatibility and much can
be gained from responsible dialogue and mutual respect.
The study of psychology, although not always labelled as such, is ancient. Much wisdom about
human behaviour and motivations is found in the proverbs and prophetic writings. Jesus’
admonition to love and forgive others is seldom disputed. Theological masters, like Augustine,
Aquinas and Calvin, wrote about the nature of the soul and mind, and spiritual direction has long
been practised in the church. It is only in the past century that psychology has developed as a
science. There are two primary areas: experimental psychology, which can be viewed like other
sciences in terms of describing God’s creation (and therefore little disputed, although the
interpretation of the data is often disputed), and clinical or counseling psychology, which is the
source of much potential conflict with Christianity, and the focus of this discussion.
The Church has sometimes either denied the findings of clinical psychological science or
uncritically appropriated its beliefs. However, the past few decades have seen much helpful
discussion on responsible integration of Christian theology and psychology. Both psychology
and theology have an underlying metaphysic (what we are) and ethic (how we should be), and
recognize that these are complex. Both seek to understand and help improve the myriad mental
and emotional problems which people experience, and thus have similar aims. Integration is a
difficult task, partly because there are multiple variations and interpretations within both
disciplines. I suggest an approach which considers similarities between theology and psychology
within the biblical drama of creation, fall and redemption.
Both psychologists and Christian theologians affirm the intrinsic value and worth of human
beings (theologians believe this is because we are created in the image of God and loved by
him). Both recognize that humans are innately spiritual, and more than a random collection of
neurons. People are also innately relational: psychologists use the therapeutic relationship itself
as a means of healing, and Christians emphasize the importance of community, especially the
church. Humans are rational beings, and psychology and theology draw on this capacity for
reason. People are also innately moral, with an understanding of right and wrong. Finally,
theology teaches that humans have free will, and psychologists know that the ability to choose is
essential to any counseling process.
However, both psychologists and Christian theologians recognize that something is very wrong
with humanity, evidenced in destructive behaviours as well as tormented mental lives. There is a
profound alienation from self and other. Christians would include alienation from God, and
would label this as sin, whereas psychologists would label it most often as illness. They would
agree that the essence of the problem is relational; wounding occurs in relationship and causes
guilt, shame, anxiety, depression, disordered perceptions, and poor self-esteem, for example.
Problems occur as a consequence of living in a disrupted and disordered world (due to sin
according to theology; due to neurochemical disease, poor parenting, or societal trauma
according to psychology).
Both psychologists and Christian theologians attempt to help people by addressing and healing
what is wrong. They recognize there is good in the world – “common grace” in theological
terms. They stress the importance of loving relationships (Christianity stresses loving God first)
both in the process and the content of psychotherapy. Both affirm the virtues of honesty,
humility, respect, self-control, patience, courage, commitment, forgiveness, mercy and
compassion. The so-called Golden rule (treat others as you would like to be treated) is used by
both Christian and secular counselors. Alcoholics Anonymous is an excellent example of
similarities between psychology and theology: they suggest belief in a power greater than
themselves, encourage taking a moral inventory, admitting wrongs and making amends.
Psychology and theology also have similar goals and processes. They aim to bring the
unconscious into conscious awareness, or the darkness into the light; they work towards healing
and wholeness, reorientation and reconciliation; they consider therapeutic/spiritual growth as a
journey.
My focus on broad similarities does not mean I am unaware of differences between psychology
and theology. However, I believe these disciplines can learn from each other. Christians are right
to be concerned that perhaps the therapist has replaced the confessional priest, and that group
therapy has replaced Christian community. Theologians can appropriate psychological research
regarding human behaviour and psychotherapeutic techniques. Psychologists can mine theology
with respect to human spirituality and the relationship between body, mind, and soul. I respect
both disciplines and encourage each to think broadly and carefully consider the many potential
areas of dialogue.
What is the relationship between psychology and theology?
“The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness,
and self-control.
There is no law against such things.”
Galatians 5:22-23 (NRSV)
If the Spirit can produce all the above, why do not we rely on the spirit instead of counseling to
have joy, peace, self-control, etc.? The Bible does not claim to be the only source for dealing
with the problems of our soul (psyche, in Greek). In other words, spirituality is a great source,
but not the only source, to help us deal with our mental and emotional issues. In light of that,
what is the relationship between psychology and theology?
This has been an ongoing conversation for a long time. Early fathers of the church tried in
different ways to engage the two disciplines with each other. Some Saints established
monasteries, similar to hospitals today, to care for patients with mental illnesses. This includes
St. Basil (329–380), and St. Jerome (343–420), and St. Benedict (480-543).
Psychology and theology differ in most of their source materials and methodologies. Many
theologians consider scripture as their primary reference, while philosophy, history, archeology
doctrines, and others as secondary sources.
“Psychology utilizes reason, observation of nature” and experiment, and also relies on sources
especially philosophy (Entwistle, 2010, pp. 37, 137).
I believe that psychology plays a significant role in analyzing theology. Psychology offers
explanations and definitions for behaviors in connection to Christian ethics. Psychology
verbalizes our theological feelings and behavior. Psychology helps to understand our theological
narratives and the reasons behind them.
Theology can be a good source for psychology for meaning-making as part of the process of
recovery. Theology offers a reflection to psychology so that it can have a better understanding of
certain things in life such as justice, rights, and equality.
Since theology is a human need for some people, theology offers to psychology an understanding
of human need condition and the philosophy behind it. Spirituality or faith “may enhance the
ability to cope with negative life events” (Beohnlein, 2007, p. 264). Thus, spirituality or religion
can be an excellent source for courage and strength which contribute to the personality of
resiliency. Spiritual imagination can have a positive impact on the victim’s healing.
Psychological studies suggest that perhaps religious belief and spirituality (some call it neuro-
theology) can reduce amygdala activation in the brain which reduces stress and increases
motivation. Spirituality may offer the opportunity to process and establish a ground for
forgiveness in different ways.
The conversation regarding psychology and theology is certain to continue for years to come. It
is important to remember that both have great value and much to offer those who struggle with
mental health issues in today’s complex world.
BBrief explanation of main approaches used in psychology
Psychology is about understanding our mind and how it impacts on our behaviour. It looks into
communication, memory, thoughts and emotions; Understanding what drives our decisions,
actions, thoughts and feelings allows us to address any challenges we might be facing.
There are five major approaches in psychology. These are biological, psychodynamic,
behavioural, cognitive and humanistic. Each approach attempts to explain human behaviour
differently. An approach is a view that involves certain assumptions about human behaviour.
There are many different theories within an approach, but they all share the same assumptions.
This post will briefly explain main approaches in psychology and will discuss the approach that
is most widely used nowadays in mental health. The aim of this post is to provide some
understanding of different perspectives.
Main assumption of behavioural approach is that all behaviours are learned through interactions
with the environment. When you think of people in laboratories wearing long white coats and
observing rats, these are behavioural psychologists. They acknowledge emotions however they
believe only behaviour can be objectively and scientifically measured.
Psychodynamic approach starts with Sigmund Freud. His theory of psychoanalysis is one of the
biggest steps in the field of psychology. This approach explains our behaviour through our
childhood experiences. It looks back at our childhood to make sense of our actions in the present.
It believes our choices are heavily influenced by our unconscious mind.
Humanistic approach focuses on the view that each person is unique and has free will to change
at any time in their life. It believes we are responsible for our own happiness. It emphasises how
our perception of the world is subjective therefore it is an opposing approach to any scientific
attempts to explain human behaviour.
Cognitive psychology is about knowing the processes that happen in our minds. It studies
cognition, which are the processes through which knowledge is acquired. Memory, perception
and attention are examples of these processes.
Biological perspective revolves around the view that all thoughts, feelings and behaviour have a
biological cause. It studies brain and genetics. It believes that most of our behaviour is inherited
and can be explained using neurological terms.
Nowadays cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is the most widely used approach to help people
overcome challenges. This approach combines assumptions of cognitive and behavioural
perspective. It states that our thoughts, feelings and behaviour are all connected.
Main assumptions of CBT are:
Our challenges come from developing faulty thoughts about others, our world and us.
These faulty thoughts cause distortions in the way we see things, they make us think
irrationally.
We live in this world through making sense of our experiences, the way we process
information makes us form certain views and beliefs about oneself, others and the world
around us. If these beliefs are inaccurate or our ways of reasoning are inadequate, then
our emotions and behaviour may become distorted.
CBT’s aim is to change our negative thinking patterns. This negative thinking patterns result in
unwanted emotions and behaviour.
Psychology is a fascinating field that allows us to understand ourselves and the world around us.
This understanding is crucial to overcome any challenges in life. Each approach in psychology
brings something new to this understanding. It is our personal choice which one speaks to us the
most.
References
Beohnlein, J. K. (2007). Religion and spirituality after trauma. In L. J. Kirmayer, R. Lemelson,
& M. Barad (Eds.), Understanding trauma: Integrating biological, clinical, and cultural
perspectives (pp. 259-274). Cambridge University Press: New York, NY
Entwistle, D. N. (2010). Integrative approaches to psychology and Christianity (2nd Ed.).
Cascade Books: Eugene, OR
B
