Chapter one of McMinn’s and Campbell’s Integrative Psychotherapy begins with Christian foundations. Interestingly, chapter 2 (next week) is entitled Scientific Foundations. We may not want to make those distinctions. This chapter lays out their theological anthropology. They begin by asserting that a responsible Christian psychology is founded on the “bedrock” of a Christian worldview. “Christianity–informed by Scripture and responsible theological appraisal–is trump” (p. 25). This is a significant change from older integrative models that often describe their task as weighted equally on the pillars of psychology and theology.
The remaining portions of the chapter discuss what it means to be made in God’s image. They employ 3 ways of looking at imago dei: functional, structural, and relational. Functional: God’s image is revealed in human behavior (especially in our managing and stewarding behaviors). Structural: God’s image is revealed in our moral and rational capacities. Relational: God’s image is revealed in relationality and communicative activities. Psychology also addresses these areas (adaptive behavior, cognitive behavior, effective relationships). These form the 3 domains of Integrative Psychotherapy.
Then they tackle the Fall. They acknowledge that many psychotherapists live in denial about sin. Taking sin seriously, they say, doesn’t have to mean forgoing empathy. Instead the view it through the lens of Augustine. Sin, they assert is both a state of being (therefore “free will and personal resolve are not enough” to change behavior) and an act. We sin and are sinned against. Why does this matter to counselors? Because we have a tendency to deny and distort due to the effects of the Fall. Sin mars and colors everything one and everything. A robust doctrine of sin enables counselors to recognize the brokenness in the world.
The authors conclude the chapter looking at the theme of redemption. “A doctrine of sin, viewed in the context of a God who loves humanity, is the Christian’s great hope because it opens the possibility of redemption–God buying us back from the bondage of sin through the atoning work of Jesus Christ, restoring a right relationship with those who were lost in their sin” (p. 44). Long sentence, but sums of their view of redemption. This matters to the Christian counselor because it means there is hope for change, hope for healing, hope for redeeming broken things. This hope is not a general hope of change but founded, for them, in the revelation and incarnation of Christ. “And so a Christian approach to psychotherapy calls us to consider more than general revelation….In short, [it] involves an awareness of sanctification as we all seek to be transformed by the divine life revealed in and mediated to us by Christ” (p. 49).
My thoughts? McMinn and Campbell make a significant break with prior integrative models by acknowledging that the Christian worldview does provide a trump to all other competing reality claims. This does not need to set up an unnecessary sacred/secular divide but does remind us that the biblical data isn’t a sidebar to Christian care, but front and center. I’m glad to see them emphasize this without reservation. Too often folks talk about psychological truth as what is found in general revelation. This is problematic for two reasons. First it denies the rich psychological data in the bible. Second, general revelation has been misused to mean neutral data outside of Scripture. But, general revelation really is natural that points to the existence of the triune God.
Its clear this text isn’t trying to be an advanced text in biblical anthropology. But what it summarizes is in keeping with classical theology. We’ll have to see how this works out in their model and practice. They write for the professional counseling student. To keep them interested they have little sidebar vignettes and practical tips. Some may like that but I find it a bit annoying because it breaks the flow of their argument. But, I suppose it does tell the student that what they talk about is not all pie in the sky.
Next week, I’ll summarize their scientific foundations in chapter 2.

Hi Phil. My name is Tim Rice. I’ve been reading your blog for months now. I appreciate your perspective. I would like to have an off-blog conversation with you. Specifically, I’d like to ask if you would consider looking over a text I’ve written. It’s called Homeschool Psych: Preparing Christian Homeschoolers for Psychology 101. I would like my work to receive a rigorous critique and it appears you are very well-qualified to do it.
I thought they did a nice job laying out the connection they wanted to make between the various ways Christians have thought of the imago Dei and then allowed that to be a framework or underpinning for approaching aspects of personhood addressed in therapy. I think you are right that it is a clear statement that a Christian worldview ought to be trump at the front end of reflection on psychology in clinical practice.
BTW: I changed my site location and wanted to see if you could correct that on your Places to Visit, if you haven’t already. Thanks!