The Mission of God to the Mentally Ill: What Role Does the Church Play?.
Check out my blog on Biblical Seminary’s new faculty blog. Addresses the most frequent search terms and comments on this blog.
Category Archives: biblical counseling
Christian counseling theory and the bible: A dangerous mix?
Maybe Christian counselors shouldn’t use the bible when they promote their counseling theory. Maybe they should just articulate their theory and leave the bible verses out. Sound radical? An overreaction? Guilty as charged. But…consider with me that some of our most popular Christian models may be built on rather flimsy biblical data.
Some (simplistic) background thoughts
All Christian counselors recognize that the bible plays a unique role in counseling theory. Otherwise, they would just be “counselors.” But not all use the bible in the same way. Some view the bible as the primary (even sole) guide or resource for understanding human nature and recovery from every sort of relational and/or emotional struggle. These counselors would likely cite 2 Tim 3:15-16 as evidence that Scripture is powerful and primary in our fight against sin and suffering. Others view the bible as a helpful foundation designed to remind us who God is, who we are, and a resource for comfort, encouragement, and rebuke. But, these counselors might also look to other resources as well–psychological research, physiology, medicine, sociology, etc. They would not dismiss the value of the bible but would argue that the bible doesn’t intend to be the answer guide for all the questions we might have. Thus, sources of human knowledge are important to the work of good Christian counseling. Now within this second camp, counselors vary widely as to how important either Scripture or human sources of knowledge function in their given practice. Some seem to emphasize (or neglect) one source more than the other.
The problem…
No matter where a counselor falls on the above continuum, it is far too easy to use the bible to baptize a particular viewpoint or theory. From my most recent christian counseling conference, I heard a plenary speaker say something like this (not a quote but pretty near exact):
Men need respect. It is their airhose. Women need love. It is their airhose.
Along with this statement, the speaker bolstered their points with personal stories and biblical passages indicating the women should be loved and men treated as having authority (submitted to). Here the speaker used bible passages to indicate that men are designed to operate optimally when respected and women designed to operate optimally with love.
Is this true? It could be. I certainly think that this SEEMS to be true for most men and women. But, and this is the BIG BUT…does Scripture indeed teach this. Does Paul teach us that these are our basic needs in order to function well?
Close but way off
Notice that love and respect cannot be our “airhose.” Habakkuk 3:16f would suggest that when everything has been taken away, it is possible to have joy in all things. Notice that Ephesians 5 is about what each are commanded to do…not about what each of us needs to receive. Christ is our “airhose” and nothing else. This speaker would have been better served just teaching us about observations made about what actions tend to make for better marriages than to indicate that the Scriptures teach us we have these two needs.
So, the next time you pick up a cool book by a christian counselor. Check out how they use the bible. As a support for a good theory (e.g., this verse teaches us…)? Or, as a source for understanding the problem of evil and the nature of our God who leads, guides, and saves us?
If you are interested in this topic, let me give you a couple of resources.
- October 2011 print issue of Christianity Today covers the general misuse of the bible. It is not just counselors who do this. They list the example of a book with anti-aging techniques supposedly gleaned from the bible.
- 2 chapters in Care for the Soul:Exploring the Intersection of Psychology & Theology (IVP, 2001). Chapters 12 and 13 both cover the issue of hermeneutics. Richard Schultz addresses how counselors misuse wisdom literature and chapter 13 (myself and my colleague Bryan Maier) give more general recommendations for good hermeneutic work.
Share this:
Good Read! New book out for lay counseling training
I am frequently asked about the best materials out there for churches interested in building a lay counseling ministry. There are materials out there that help to teach people to be good listeners. There are materials out there that give lay counselors an education on the nature of problems and how God is in the business of changing hearts and minds. These same materials help readers realize that lay counseling can be a credible and highly important ministry in the church. While professionals are needed for difficult cases, many counseling needs can be handled “in-house” if the church supports and supervises wise lay counselors. 
Well, a new book is out and though I have not read it all, I have gotten a flavor of it, enough to recommend it to you all if you are looking for such a book. It is written by Robert Kellemen, author of a number of counseling texts and frequent blogger. Don’t miss his answer to a question of mine at the bottom.
Why is this an important book?
Here’s why:
- Most prior books on this topic present lay counseling either as an anemic listening only task or speak only in theological terms and fail to actually train lay counselors to listen well. This book considers both the biblical basis for lay counseling AND is concerned about listening skills as well.
- Most prior books forget to bring the WHOLE church along in the vision of biblical counseling. Bob has the readers consider the church culture and health. If the church (leaders) aren’t buying in to this, there won’t be a counseling ministry.
- Bob focuses on the character of the counselor. This is HUGE. What’s worse than a poorly trained counselor? One who is well-trained but arrogant and un-reflective.
- Bob covers practical matters of a counseling ministry including the ethics of lay counseling. This is extremely important if a church doesn’t want to make mistakes that could lead to lawsuits.
Click here for more on the book including a table of contents, video trailer, and sample chapter.
So, I asked Bob this question:
Most churches seem divided between those who support lay biblical counseling and those who think counselors should be specialists outside the church. How does your book speak to both?
Bob’s answer is extended but helpful:
That’s an excellent question. Anyone who knows the focus of my ministry knows that I tend not to be an either/or person, but rather a both/and person. I believe God calls both biblical counselors in the church and those who counsel outside the church.
Equipping Counselors for Your Church, by the very nature of the title, is much more focused on local church-based equipping. However, in chapter one I address More Than Counseling: A Vision for the Entire Church. Here I outline seven different “styles” of meeting counseling needs in the Christian community–including the “specialist model.”
A main reason I choose to focus on equipping counselors for the church is that very few others are doing so. While we have scores and scores of books about training professional Christian counselors, the last book written on equipping counselors for the church was Tan’s 1991 book–based upon his 1980s dissertation which in turn was based upon research from the 1970s. We’ve gone an entire generation without a book on equipping counselors for the church! Frankly, that’s inexcusable given the Bible’s clear mandate that we equip God’s people to speak the truth in love so that we all grow up in Christ (Ephesians 4:11-16).
Further, we have 100s of counselor education programs in Christian colleges, graduate schools, and seminaries, but in my research, few of those programs have required courses in equipping counselors. In the one course I took on the topic in my seminary MA, we were told that it was not possible to equip counselors for the local church! I couldn’t disagree more. I always tell pastors, counselors, and students that if you are going to obtain a Master’s Degree that means you have so mastered the topic that you not only are able to do the work of counseling, you should be able to equip others also.
So, we could debate the issue forever (biblical counselors in the church or specialists outside the church), but the fact is, there’s a dearth of biblical, best-practice material available for those who are committed to equipping one-another ministers for the church. Equipping Counselors for Your Church brings together two-dozen best-practice churches who are doing it successfully now, plus my experience launching and leading biblical counseling ministries in three very different churches. It provides a biblical, logical, theological, relational, field-tested, practical step-by-step “4E” process: envisioning, enlisting, equipping, and empowering.
Share this:
CS Lewis on “headship”
Last week my prayer partner John read me a bit from CS Lewis’ “The Business of Heaven“, a daily reader. This little vignette covers the controversial topic of headship. Christians have frequently gotten up in arms over the meaning of headship and submission in the marriage relationship (Ephesians 5:21-33). We can boil most of these arguments down to matters of power. Who gets to be in charge? What is mutual submission? Are you loving right? Submitting right? How often should the decider (thank you George Bush and Saturday Night Live for this wonderful noun) be putting his/her foot down?
Wherever you fall on this discussion of the meaning of the Ephesians 5 passage, the following from Lewis is quite apt:
We must go back to our Bibles. The husband is the head of the wife just in so far as he is to her what Christ is to the Church. He is to love her as Christ loved the church–read on–and gave his life for her (Ephesians 5:25). This headship, then, is most fully embodied not in the husband we should all wish to be but in him whose marriage is most like a crucifixion; whose wife receives most and gives least, is most unworthy of him, is–in her own mere nature–least lovable. For the Church has no beauty but what the Bridegroom gives her; he does not find, but makes her lovely. The chrism of this terrible coronation is to be seen not in the joys of any man’s marriage but in its sorrows, in the sickness and sufferings of a good wife or the faults of a bad one, in his unwearying (never paraded) care or his inexhaustible forgiveness: forgiveness, not acquiescence. As Christ sees in the flawed, proud, fanatical or lukewarm Church on earth that Bride who will one day be without spot or wrinkle, and labours to produce the latter, so the husband whose headship is Christ-like (and he is allowed no other) never despairs… (p. 169-170)
There is a lot of substance in the above quote. You might do well to read it again, slowly. I gather a couple of crucial points.
- You want to see Christlikeness in a husband? Much easier to see it in a difficult relationship than in an easy one. It is easy to love the most lovable.
- Headship is not about being the decider so much as it is about being the first to sacrifice his desires for hers.
- Sacrificial living is not acquiescing to another’s desires. That is a weak way of relating to others. A thoughtful person may well say “no” to another’s wishes when humbly considering that the request is not good or healthy or is unjust. And yet, many of our denials of other’s wishes are less about right and wrong and much more about personal freedom and control. There is great power in choosing to set aside personal desire for the sake of another.
- The same can be said for women who are trying to figure out how to “submit” to “unworthy” husbands. However, this biblical passage has much more to say about the sacrificial, others-focused husband.
Lewis goes on to say that he does not mean to baptize difficult or miserable marriage. There is no extra value to martyrdom. He only wishes to remind us that it is easy to point out the flaws of another in such a way that makes our self-serving choices legitimate. Even when we must refuse a loved one or confront them about their flaws, it should be done for their sake, and not our own.
Share this:
Competing Models of Christian Counseling? Who is Right?
A couple of recent pieces have me thinking about (a) models of Christian counseling and, (b) the intramural conversation amongst Christians on which model is most Christian. One piece is David Powlison’s article in the Summer 2011 issue of the Westminster Today magazine (this link is to the magazine site but the current issue is not yet up). The second is by Ed Welch–a blog on Biblical Counseling Coalition website.
This is not a new topic for me. From my “About Me” page you can see that I have training in biblical counseling and also in clinical psychology. I respect the folks at CCEF who had a huge impact on my life and thought–especially that lovely editor they employ ;). While getting my PsyD I published on the historic divide between biblical counselors and Christian psychologists and the need to build bridges. I’m an associate editor for Edification, a Christian Psychology peer-reviewed journal.
All that to say, I have some thoughts on some ways we might move beyond right/wrong while still being concerned about building a clear, cogent, God-honoring model of Christian counseling.
Drop the labels
Yes, we should drop our labels. What is the difference between a Christian counselor, Christian psychologist, integrationist, or biblical counselor? These differences are as varied as the numbers of people who use them. Yes, there are probably some benefits to communicating a personal stance with one of these terms. But, for every benefit, there are probably any number of negatives, including the use of the label as a curse. “Are you that kind of biblical counselor” (whatever kind you find offensive)? “Are you a Christian who happens to be a psychologist or a Christian psychologist?”
In addition to dropping labels, we should also drop broad brush judgments. Calling Christian psychologists “syncretistic” is offensive and ill-fitting. Calling biblical counselors “psychology bashers” does not accurately portray their nuanced approach. Saying that psychology and biblical counseling is “fundamentally incompatible” (from either side of the debate) ignores the benefits that both sides gather from each other.
No labels? What then?
Facets. I’m sure there going to be problems with this idea too but let us choose to focus on facets of counseling models. For example:
- How does Scripture shape counseling foundations and goals?
- How do we learn from, utilize, and critique psychological constructs, data, etc?
- How does typical human development trajectories influence our understanding of the change process?
- How do we learn from those who do not share our epistemic foundations?
- How do we articulate diverse counseling goals (suffering well? symptom reduction? discipleship? skill acquisition? insight?) as all working toward the common goal of glorying God and enjoying him forever.
Listen first, repent first
In Ed’s blog post (linked above on the BCC site), he captures the most essential characteristic needed if we are going to learn from each other. We ought to,
listen and enter into the world of the other person (or in this case the other counseling perspective) in such a way that the person representing the perspective says, “Yes, that’s me. You understand.”
It is a sad thing that we counselor types start with diagnosing other model builders without listening first to both the content of that model and the person behind it. We treat our fellow counselors in ways we would never treat a client. How should we listen to others? Can we see what they see? Can we see what they see that we tend to ignore? Can we see the benefits of what they do and the potential liabilities they see in our model?
Be willing to repent where you have unfairly labeled, categorized, and marginalized one who was working for Christ’s kingdom–even if you think you have been hurt more.
List own weaknesses first
Most debates, whether between thinkers or spouses, rarely succeed in winning over the other person. Why? Because we are too busy defending, explaining away, pointing out the weaknesses of the opponent to actually deal with reality.
Wouldn’t it be refreshing to hear a counseling model builder express his/her models weaknesses or needed growth points first before exploring the deficits of the another? “My model doesn’t yet have a good understanding of ____. Your model does so much better with that and I want to learn from you.”
Build the center
Rather than start with the differences (which do indeed exist), what if we cataloged the similarities and areas of agreement among Christian models of counseling? In addition, what if we recognized those things we might not have noticed with out the help of those outside our own community. For example, Scripture may speak a great deal about loving neighbors but a particular model of psychology may flesh out what loving a very unique population of client ought to look like. Even if Scripture is sufficient, we do not diminish it when we acknowledge we hadn’t made a particular application without our neighbor’s help.
Acknowledge differences
We will not see eye to eye. We will disagree. Let us acknowledge these where they arise. Let us make sure the differences are real and categorize them into those that are peripheral and those that are substantial. For example, David Powlison speaks about the need for a counseling/care for the soul model back in the 1950s. Despite quality practical theology and discipleship programs, he asked,
But what was the quality [in the 50s] of corporate wisdom in comprehending the dynamics of the human heart? What sustains sufferers and converts sinners? Westminster Today, 4:1 (2011), p7
Right away I ask myself, are these the only two options (sustaining, converting) for Christian counselors? Is it possible also to have the role of treating symptoms? Teaching skills? Reducing suffering? I’m fairly sure that this initial difference is not really there. I suspect David does not reject mercy ministry to reducing suffering. But in dialog, he and I might end up agreeing that some biblical counseling models fail to focus on skill intervention in their quest to address the human heart. And we would likely agree that some christian psychology models fail to address the spiritual discipline of suffering well and the need for conversion. Might we end up agreeing that we want a full-orbed model that neither diminishes nor over-promises symptom care or sanctification?
Promote each other
Finally, we do well to promote each other at our conferences and learning communities. We encourage wide-ranging reading, critical interactions (note, not criticizing), and sharpening of each other. And we commit to lovingly correcting those of our “friends” who speak ill about our neighbors. We reject the fear of defending an outsider for fear of being rejected ourselves.
Share this:
Healing, recovery, restoration and other words for “getting better”
Recovered. Healed. Better. Restored. Resolved. Whole. What words do you use when describing positive change regarding traumatic events like abuse, the pain of adultery, or other like experiences? And more importantly, what do those words convey to yourself and others?
Why am I thinking about this? Soon, I will begin teaching an on-line summer class called “Healing Trauma in International Settings.” To be honest, I’m a little uncomfortable with the title I chose. Words matter and “Healing” conveys a message. Imagine replacing “healing trauma” with
Trauma treatment
Trauma recovery
Trauma care
Now, maybe I’m being overly sensitive but consider some of these other kinds of problems we face
- You break your tibia during an aggressive move on the basketball court. Your leg heals and you go back to your basketball playing. Here we use healing to denote that you regained your former capacity to play sports. You are back to normal or near normal.
- You cut your finger while slicing vegetables. You go to the hospital to get stitches. While you have a scar, your finger heals and you use it again. In time you have only a slight scar to remind you of that day.
- Your house sustains a fire. You lose belongings. Your insurance company restores your house and replaces your possessions.
- Your car is stolen. The police recover it and return it to you (with fuzzy dice attached)
- You have a protracted conflict with a family member. At some point, you have a heart to heart and resolve your differences.
My examples all convey a resolution of a problem where the problem recedes, maybe even disappears. But what about trauma? Is there a form of resolution and healing of rape or sexual abuse or domestic violence where the memories disappear? Should there be? Wouldn’t forgetting these experiences place the person in danger of living in unreality and, in some cases, at risk of re-injury? Here are some important questions:
- What does healing from an affair look like? How do you know you have “recovered”? What symptoms or experiences would remain?
- What does healing from a rape look like? What would be expected if you “pretty well recovered”? What is to be expected to not change?
As a counselor I do not want to under or over-sell the recovery process. Victims do find tremendous healing but to assume all vestiges of a traumatic experience go away would be false. Unfortunately, we who have not been traumatized sometimes expect the kind of recovery where victims go back to a way of life and thinking as if the trauma never happened.
If we are honest, we wish to live in a world without lasting consequences from sin and suffering.
We want people to “get over” their pain and go back to a way of life as if it never happened. It would be like asking a person who lost a leg to hope they will run exactly like they did before losing the leg. Indeed, they may run again. But never as fast and never as easy. There will be a stump to care for, a hip to learn new motion, phantom pains to re-interpret, and limits to accept.
This world of limits is one God wants us to live in and one we detest. Our first parents saw the limits of their wisdom and desired to get wisdom on their own. We too love the happily ever after story where humans obtain health and healing apart from limitations. We tell the stories of miraculous healing as if we no longer live in a broken world.
Let us endeavor to tell true stories of healing that glorify God and remind us that we depend upon him for every breath.
Share this:
Physiology of fear
Image via Wikipedia
Had a conversation regarding fear and anxiety with someone yesterday. In light of that I am resurrecting a post I wrote from 2007 (with a few edits) regarding the physiology of fear. We often view fear as only a spiritual or faith problem. But for those who want to know what is going on in their bodies when they experience fear, consider the following:
(Those interested in other posts on anxiety can search that and related terms in the search box at the upper right hand of this blog)
…
Am teaching on anxiety, panic, and OCD tonight. Definition of anxiety: Responding to ambiguous stimuli (life situations) by reading them in the worst or most dangerous possible light. The Scriptures teach us that fear and worry are not good things. Time and time again God tells his people not to be afraid. We see that God wants us to see life through a different set of eyes, much as Elisha wanted his servant to see the army of angels instead of their enemies (2 Kings 6). But given the numerous encouragements to not give in to fear, we must admit it is a common struggle for every human being. Some struggle more than others.
What is going on with those whose lives are filled with worry and fear? Are they less spiritual? More sinful? It is easy to say, “buck up” to folks who are anxious–and entirely unhelpful to most. Logical challenges to fear (e.g., really, what is the chance you will die in a plane crash today?) may help some in the moment, but usually don’t get to the root of the matter. Jesus encourages fearful people by pointing them to see life from 40,000 feet. He doesn’t deny risk and suffering but encourages folks to keep their eyes on him. And with Peter, he reaches out to grab him even when he does start looking at the waves.
But what of the physiology of anxiety? What do we know and how does the christian counselor make use of the data?
- Fear responses are quickly learned and seemingly etched into the amygdala. One bad experience of food poisoning from a turkey sandwich at Applebees means my stomach tenses a little when I see deli turkey, even without remembering the food poisoning. Imagine what happens if you suffer repeated assaults or worse! The earlier the person is exposed to deep fears, the more likely they suffer from hyperarousal and startle responses.
- Neurotransmitters are involved which means you act first and think later. There’s little conscious cognitive processes involved until after anxiety is under way. Fear inducing stimuli lead to immediate neurotransmitter changes that then divert blood from organs to muscles. Tension builds, shallower, less effective breathing begins. Carbon Dioxide levels decrease in the blood stream which in turns creates pain, numbness, and a sense of danger. And so the cycle continues. During and after, we make attributions and so enhance the connections of the feared stimuli and our flight response. The higher the perception of pain, the greater fear/flight response. Despite medical advances, most of our medications either shut down the feed-back loop (beta blockers, anti-anxiety meds like xanax) or attempt to increase the available neurotransmitter serotonin associated with positive outlook.
- OCD, in particular, has some probable links to early exposure to viruses such as Strep and Flu. There is a higher incidence of OCD in people born during winter months and who live in colder climates. The link is not clear.
- PTSD patients have higher right hemisphere brain activity (than do non-PTSD individuals) when exposed to anxiety provoking stimuli. Further, it appears that trauma patients have greater difficulty coming back to “center” after a trigger. Likely the hypothalamus and other brain structures are overactive in the stress response and do not “cool” down quickly.
That’s just a few things we think we know about the physiology of fear. Now, what do we do with fear from a spiritual standpoint?
- Worship. Worship/meditation on other things takes our attention away from the fear stimulus. It forms habits and relationships as we repeat what we want to believe until we actually own it and believe it on its own merits.
- Fight. We do challenge our thinking as soon as we can. Yes, the fight/flight chemicals are coursing through our veins but we challenge just the same so we can break some of the connections and the ways we reinforce our fears. One other way we fight may seem a bit odd. We admit there are real things that are scary and overwhelming out there. We do not try to deny the reality of suffering (past or future) but admit it over and over. It is scary to die. I was assaulted in that alley. I am in pain and more may be coming. But, God is with me and it is good to call on him and ask him tough questions about his protection of me.
- Stay Present. Being present in the moment is essential to avoiding living in the fear of the past or the future. Some fear is indeed in the present but most are not. When I am able to focus or describe the now, I am less likely to be imagining a future feared event. “Right now I am sitting at my desk and looking at a picture of my children and enjoying the smiles on their faces. Right now I am getting ready for bed and working on a sudoku puzzle and noticing that I am getting tired.”
- Work. Building habits where I do not allow myself to run from the feared situations (where appropriate!). Moving myself closer to some of the feared scenarios in a slow and consistent manner. No, this is not flooding (where you are dumped in the pit of snakes because you have a phobia of snakes…). Allow the work to take the time to reorient the deep recesses of the brain. Don’t expect or look for immediate change!
Share this:
What is the difference between a trial and a stressor?
Words matter. The words you use to describe an event really do shape how you will view it and how you will respond to it. For counselors, the words they use to conceptualize a client/case will shape how they see clients and how they will attempt to intervene. This is why I take considerable time in my Practicum class to practice case conceptualization.
Most beginning counselors are good at collecting information. But, for most, that data might well be a hopelessly knotted ball of twine. 
Where to start pulling? How do we make sense of the various pieces of data? And since data never comes to us uninterpreted, which “data” do we tend to gravitate to? Behaviors? Family history? Motivations? Biology? Environment? Client beliefs? But even more confusing are the words we use to describe these sectors of life–and the meaning they convey!
Stressor v. Trial?
Here’s how language influences case conceptualization. Your client experiences long-term family discord due to an adult child with schizophrenia. The family member routinely goes off medications and the police have to be called in order to transport him or her to the hospital after threatening self-harm. Your client comes to counseling to seek support for handling this difficult situation. As you can imagine, the client feels alone, worn down, and wondering how to keep going despite no sense that the situation will get better any time soon.
What do you imagine might be the impact of calling this family situation a trial? And how might you view it differently if you called it a stressor. Notice any differences? Benefits of each? Drawbacks of either? In your mind, are they equivalent? (See Eric Johnson’s brief discussion of these two words and their similarities/differences in regard to Christian psychology in his Foundations for Soul Care, p. 240)
Here is my thinking. Within Christian tradition, a “trial” signifies a difficult time or season but from a spiritual or divine perspective. It conveys a purpose–a testing or proofing of one’s faith. We tend to view trials (or desire to at least) from an eternal point of view, “testing of your faith produces perseverance…” (Jas 1:3). Notice that while “trial” does signify difficulty, the focus is largely on the purpose it serves.
On the other hand, a “stressor” is something that causes stress or distress in a person’s life. Notice that this word carries no sense of eternity, divine value or purpose. It merely describes a facet of life that is troubling a person’s life.
Imagine with me a counselor who uses “trial” to describe the distress in the life of the client mentioned above. How do you expect that might shape the counselor’s view of the situation and thus response sets to that client? Would our counselor be more likely to view the trial as something to endure, more likely to engage in spiritual conversations so as to find comfort and peace in the middle of the storm? Would their conversations tend toward the hope of heaven? Is it possible that using the language of trials might cause a counselor to ignore the real-time experience of distress?
Now imagine the counselor who uses “stressor” to describe the same distress. Would this counselor be more likely to discuss in detail the physical, psychological impact of living with a mentally ill and unstable family member? Would this counselor then be more focused on finding ways to decrease the moment-by-moment stress levels? Is it possible that using the language of stressor might cause a counselor to ignore an eternal perspective?
Hopefully, you can see the value of both word meanings and the interventions described. It is possible to use the language of trials and focus in on the details of how that trial impacts the client. And it is possible to use the language of stressors and keep in mind an eternal perspective. Whatever language, the interventions off stress education and reduction and hope building are necessary interventions.
If you are a counselor or counseling student, observe the language you use to describe your clients and their lives. How does that language influence your view of them and the interventions you might use with them?
Share this:
Serious mental illness and Christianity: Questions about responsibility
Today marks the end of the semester and the end of Counseling & Physiology. At the end of this course I ask students to talk amongst themselves regarding what they have learned in the course and what questions remain. The most frequent questions have to do with this:
What of a person’s struggles can be viewed as physiological; what is spiritual? What is the client responsible for?
[I should explain. We looked at problematic behaviors (e.g., cursing, aggression, etc.) after brain injury and the physiology of bipolar disorder. The class took bodily weaknesses quite seriously and recognized that sometimes our expectations of individuals exceeds capacity.]
At the end of this post I’m going to give you what I think are some better questions to ask. But first: Simultaneously, a couple of my old blog posts are getting a lot of attention these days–both having to do with the problem of serious mental illness, faith, and the response of the church. I highly recommend you skim the posts (both are incredibly short) but hang out with the comments.
https://wisecounsel.wordpress.com/2007/06/26/serious-mental-illness-and-faith-what-to-do/
These two posts are some of the most viewed and most commented on. Each and every comment reveals a world of heartache, alienation, and confusion about how one should think about mental illness, healing, responsibility, and the Christian faith. Clearly, we have not talked about this problem enough in the church–either to those with chronic mental illness or to their loved ones. Far too many are suffering alone.
Does it matter what of your problems are physical and what are spiritual?
Let’s say that you are a parent of a 3-year-old. Due to no fault of your own, your child misses their afternoon nap. It is now 6 pm and your child is both hungry and tired. She sees some candy and begins to whine for it. You know that you will feed the child in 15 minutes. You decline to give the candy and your child now has a temper tantrum. What do you do? Or, what SHOULD you do? You most likely provide mercy and kindness as you try to calm the child down. If the child screams, cries, and maybe even strikes you…has she sinned? Yes. Does it matter at the moment? Probably not so much as you acknowledge the child is limited by her lack of sleep.
Now, let’s extend the analogy. Would you treat your 40-year-old spouse in a different manner if they also had a tantrum because they were tired and they wanted dinner NOW? Of course, you would determine their moral capacity to be greater than the 3-year-old.
Back to our question…is it necessary to consider the division between spiritual and physical problems? Here’s why I think not. Problems are problems. Physical problems are spiritual problems in that we don’t do things only with our body and leave out our spirit. And spiritual problems always include the body. We don’t have spiritual experiences outside our neurons. Further, I still have to respond to the 3 or 40-year-old now (illustration above). Yes, I need to discern how to respond. Do I teach, comfort, discipline, rebuke, encourage? Am I responding with grace and mercy? Less important (though highly desirable) is my efforts in trying to keep the problem from happening again. Isn’t that really what is behind the physical/spiritual question: Who is going to make sure that x problem is taken care of?
Here are some better questions:
1. What can I do to help bring increasing comfort, hope, and encouragement–right now?
2. What response is my client capable of–right now (post hoc)?
3. What spiritual or physical interventions might be of help–right now?
4. How can I encourage my client to accept/respect their body (and its limits)–right now?
5. How can I encourage my client to see the hand of God in their life–right now?
6. What community resources and/or involvement can be made available–right now?
Notice the emphasis is on practical/mercy ministry, increasing insight, and commitment to seeing self from God’s point of view (rather than “normal”, “acceptable” as defined by church or larger community).
Share this:
Considering Marriage at Virginia Beach
In a couple of days I’ll be going to Virginia Beach to attend the CCEF conference on marriage. If you are in the area or going to the conference yourself do stop by the Biblical Seminary booth and say hello. We have info to show you on
- new on-line courses next summer and fall
- a summer class on forgiveness
- an exciting (FREE) conference next March 17-19 dealing with sex trafficking and abuse and showcasing Diane Langberg and Bethany Hoang (IJM) that can be taken for credit (not free) or CEU.
- information and even a discount for moving your completed CCEF DE courses into graduate accredited credits.
At the conference I’m especially interested in seeing what will be said on the topic of damaged relationships. Often we Christians paint the beautiful image of sacrificial, Christ-centered marriage. And we should–because too often we lose sight of the vision of what marriage is intended to be. But we ought also to address the issue of brokenness and how to live in the now when marriage does not seem to be working. We of all people ought to be the best at describing marital life when change isn’t forthcoming.
So, here’s a couple of conference session titles I’m most interested in
Thriving in a failure-t0-thrive marriage (Julie Lowe)
Adultery: Can there be a day after the worst day ever (Tim Lane)
Too broken to fix (Mike Emlet)
When will the new day dawn? Loving a spouse who was victimized in the past (Julie Lowe & David Powlison)
Also looking forward to the view of the ocean. Missed seeing much of it this summer. Anyone up for a quick dip?
Share this:
Filed under biblical counseling, Biblical Seminary, christian counseling, marriage
Musings on Faith and Psychology 