June 14, 2011 · 2:49 pm

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. 

 

11 Comments

Filed under AACC, biblical counseling, CCEF, christian counseling, christian psychology, Christianity, counseling, counseling science, Psychology, Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , ,

June 10, 2011 · 8:10 am

“Do you know who I am?” and other self-important acts


In the last little bit we’ve been subjected to lots of signs that famous people tend to fall into the trap of self-importance (or, is it a requirement to be self-important to run for office or seek the limelight?). What signs do I refer to?

  • Taking pictures of certain body parts and emailing them to others
  • Having no apparent qualms about serial cheating while in the limelight
  • Declaring, “Do you know who I am?” and believing that if the other person did realize the importance of the person, that they would give better treatment or allow the famous person off the hook

But we too suffer from the same struggle of self-importance. While I’ve never thought someone would treat me better if they realized my greatness and I’ve never thought it would be cool to send a risqué pic of myself to someone, I have thought, “How dare you treat me this way! I deserve better than this!”

Or how about these ones:

  • inching your bumper so close to the car in front of you so that the car wanting to merge into your lane can’t.
  • cutting in line at a store because you have to get somewhere soon
  • expecting others to praise you for routine work done
  • thinking that everyone is thinking about your gaffe or your entry into a room (this may be experienced as prolonged embarrassment and desires to flee)
  • worrying about fairness about chores and whether you’re doing more than another
  • ruminating on your unsung value to your company

What other acts of self-importance are you prone to? What do they say about your sense of self? We’d like to believe that the Congressman from New York or a drunk driving actor acting oafishly are cut from a different cloth and act in ways that you and I would never consider. But, in fact the root of their foolish behavior is (a) seeking self-importance and the acclaim of others, and (b) failing to see the value of self-denial.

3 Comments

Filed under Cultural Anthropology, News and politics, Uncategorized

Tagged as

June 9, 2011 · 4:47 pm

EFT Seminar in Philadelphia: 7/29/11


Those interested in learning more about Emotion Focused Couples Therapy might wish to take note of a local seminar being taught by a certified EFT trainer. My colleague, Anna Nicholaides, is helping to sponsor this and is hosting it at her office complex on Arch Street in Philadelphia. Cost is $115 ($150 for CEs) and includes lunch. Seminar runs from 9a to 4p. EFT is a validated couples treatment modality. If you are working with couples and having  a hard time softening them or de-escalating the conflict dance, you are likely to benefit from this seminar. See the HEALINGoneday6082011 flier and the registration Healing Relationships training registration[1] for more details.

Leave a comment

Filed under counseling, counseling science, counseling skills, marriage

Tagged as ,

June 7, 2011 · 2:42 pm

Multiple relationships: Just how many is too many?


Last night in our ethics class we took up the issue of multiple or dual relationships. For those of you who haven’t heard of either term, it refers to the situation where a counselor is not only a person’s counselor but they also have another relationship with the client as well: counselor and pastor, counselor and friend, counselor and business partner, counselor and friend of a child, and the like.

Every professional ethics code (secular or not) raises concerns about dual relationships given their potential for causing harm to the client. The AACC code recognizes that dual relationships are a given in Christian communities and something not to be banned outright. But even this code suggests that forming a dual relationship is a breakdown of professional relationships.

Over the years, I would estimate that 2/3 of the students in my program come thinking that dual relationships are good, even optimal and that those who would outright refuse more influenced by old psychotherapy models. So, part of my class is to talk about the benefits and liabilities of dual relationships. There are success stories and horror stories. But what is the value behind limiting these kinds of counseling relationships? It is to, “Do no harm,” to work for the client’s best interest and not one’s own.

Here’s what I asked my students last night. In an area filled with counselors, why would you think YOU ought to engage in a dual relationship? I want to push them to consider their reasons. Is it people pleasing? Is it to feel valued? Is it arrogance that no one else can help?

I am not against dual relationships and have engaged in some superficial one’s myself. But I do think we ought not engage in them without having forced ourselves to consider that maybe the reasons we do so are not really for our client’s best interests.

What do you think?

Of course, the answer to my title question is this: Even one unexplored dual relationship (exploring reasons why, options not to, possible dangers, informed consent, etc.) is too many.

3 Comments

Filed under AACC, ethics

Tagged as , ,

June 1, 2011 · 5:56 am

G.R.A.C.E.: A org you should know about


Yesterday, I accepted an invitation to join the Board of Directors of G.R.A.C.E. (Godly Response to Abuse in the Christian Environment).  I first met Boz Tchividjian, Executive Director of GRACE and a law professor at Liberty University, and other board members some years ago when they held a board meeting in Philadelphia. A very impressive group–prosecutors, former prosecutors, pastors, thinkers, and a lonely psychologist (Diane Langberg). I suspect I can thank her for this invitation.

If you have been following the news about abuse in protestant organizations then you may know that GRACE board members were involved in producing an investigatory review of child abuse at a New Tribes Mission boarding school (commissioned by the executive board of NTM).

Having sat with the GRACE board members last Friday night, I can tell you this is a sharp bunch who love Jesus and have a wealth of information for seminaries, churches, and other Christian organizations on how to prevent and respond to abuse in a Godly fashion.

I’m excited to join them in the work of educating the church (and counselors, lawyers, and anyone else who will listen) about how to handle abuse allegations. I’m hoping to get involved in web and print publications on topics related to the aftermath of pastoral abuse.

If this is a burden on your heart. Feel free to donate using PayPal on the link for GRACE above. It is a non-profit and donations are tax-deductible.

2 Comments

Filed under Abuse, Christianity: Leaders and Leadership, church and culture, counseling

Tagged as ,

May 31, 2011 · 5:40 am

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.

8 Comments

Filed under Abuse, adultery, biblical counseling, christian counseling, christian psychology, Christianity, counseling, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Uncategorized

Tagged as , , , , ,

May 30, 2011 · 5:47 am

Why addictive behavior is so hard to resist


Why are addictive behaviors, well, so hard to resist? We know they are bad for us. We know they won’t give us what we ultimately want. We’ve had times where we assure ourselves that we will not return to behaviors that have hurt us in the past…and hurt our families. We’re sure we would never find them appealing again.

And then we find ourselves returning to the habit again.

I’ve written more recent blog posts here and here on the topic of addictions (you can also use the search engine on this page to find others). You may also check out my “Slides, Articles, etc.” for links to talks on the cycle of addiction. Here, I want to help non-addicts take the mystery out of why addictions are so addicting.

It is quite simple, really. Addictions work–in the short run.§  Here’s out they work:

  1. I feel a particular “need” (craving, desire, want, …and I feel desperate about the “need”
  2. I solve the need with something that fills the need, at least temporarily.

Think about it. You wouldn’t drink alcohol for 2 days in order to get the benefit. You drink because in 20 minutes you will get the benefit. You wouldn’t view porn for a week in order to finally get some payoff. You view porn to get the pay off now.

Of course, when we solve with the addictive behavior, we rarely calculate the cost because the cost does not seem all that nearby. But the cost is there nonetheless. Cover-ups, deception, use leads to shame, self-hatred, distance from family, and ironically, increased desires or “need.”

On the other hand, “waiting” delays the use of the “substance.” When waiting includes using spiritual resources, friends, and other helpful mechanisms, it often encourages careful self-assessment. In time, the “need” may become more distant and the addict may come to see how unhelpful the “substance” really is. In Christian terms, this casting our burdens/desires on the Lord reminds us that we are not in the fight alone.

Why is it so hard to resist addictive behavior? Because they always give a pay off now. And Godly, wise, mature, delay or waiting tactics will never pay off in the immediate at the same rate of power. Praying IS powerful but God is not a vending machine and so praying rarely gives a person a cellular high.

If you are walking alongside an addict, remember that addictions make lots of sense and resisting almost always means increased pain, angst, and desire. So be sure to encourage them along the way. Telling them that their “I need” isn’t accurate may be true but probably won’t help them let go of desire. Rather, try hanging out with them in the “decision” spot pictured above. Sometimes when we delay deciding to use for a bit, we actually gain capacity to say no.

 

 

§By “work” I mean how we move from desire to action. I am not speaking here of the biological processes of addiction.

5 Comments

Filed under addiction, christian counseling

Tagged as , , ,

May 27, 2011 · 4:27 pm

Introduction to Healing Trauma course


Starting July1 I will be teaching an on-line course, Healing Trauma in International Settings. Here’s the introductory video for students to watch during week one that tells what I plan to have them do during the course. Don’t worry, most of the course ISN’T watching me talk. You can see the full syllabus here.

Leave a comment

Filed under Biblical Seminary, christian counseling, christian psychology, counseling science, counseling skills, Uncategorized

Tagged as , ,

May 23, 2011 · 5:47 am

On apology, again


Will Harold Camping apologize for his antics? What would you like him to say if he did?

One of the hardest things for us to do is to make a clear, direct, no-blinking apology when we have erred. Consider how many times you’ve heard such an apology, especially if the error was intentional (e.g., lying, deception, stealing, and other trust-breaking activities). Mistakes (the real ones) are quite easy to apologize for. For example, I broke the arm of one of my son’s friend by accident. I felt terrible and apologized many times over. I made no excuses for it.

Funny thing: the more guilt we actually own for an error, the less likely we will be willing to own it. We’ve all heard and even made some of these “apologies.” Mistakes were made, I did but you did worse, I’m sorry IF I might have hurt you, I was tired…

So, here’s the apology I’d like Camping to make:

I was wrong to try to guess the date of the return of Christ because the Bible clearly states that “no man knoweth the day or the hour.” Not only did I choose to ignore that verse but I also abandoned the plain teaching of Scripture and the common interpretations of passages down through the ages. Instead, I sought to convince people that I was someone smarter than everyone else. It is not surprising I rejected the good teachings of others since, in my arrogance, I left the church back in the 80s. While some might not know the teaching of the bible, I do. Failing to submit myself to a local community is forbidden by the Scriptures. A teacher is held to a higher standard and so I am responsible for encouraging foolish decisions of others who sit under me. I also apologize for encouraging cynicism and disbelief in the Bible all because I taught that there is a secret code in the Bible. In light of God’s mercy to me I ask for your forgiveness. As a sign of my repentance I promise to cease preaching and teaching. I promise to submit myself to those who can disciple me. Further, I will sell my assets and search to pay back all those who listened to me and spent their hard-earned monies to support my delusions.

Likely, however, he will do what most of us do with our apologies: excuse, blameshift, try to use other lies to make ourselves seem like truth-tellers or victims, etc.

Interested in reading other posts on the art and act of apology? See my first one here. You can also search the word “apology” in the search engine to the right of this post. There you will find several other posts on the topic, especially why it is so hard for us to apologize.

10 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , ,

May 19, 2011 · 11:45 am

What caused sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests?


Did you see the 152 page report published about the causes of sexual abuse of minors in the Catholic church? You can read a very short new story here which links to a pdf of the entire report. You don’t have to read the entire report since the first several pages serve as a summary of the entire report. The report is being rejected by most who have read it because the most prominent “cause” of the increase of child sexual abuse between the 1970s and 1985 is social and moral degradation. In the words of one radio host…”they’re blaming Woodstock? Really?”

What I want to read in the report is their comments on the culture of seminary training. Just what was going on in the lives of the seminary leaders? It may well be that seminary professors and leaders were explicitly and implicitly creating a culture of boundary violations, sexual abuse. It may well be that perpetrating priests were raised and brought up in the church and seminary under a leadership that encouraged such behavior (even if not outright).

Obviously, I’m not thinking that seminaries are only to blame. A culture of secrecy, a culture of protecting the system and ignoring the victim (or much worse), failure to assess priest candidates (both at initial entry and later), and failure to encourage real spiritual formation are just a few of the facets of this problem. But as a seminary professor, I do bear the responsibility of thematic problems of my graduating students. If one student is a bad apple, I’m not responsible. However, if my graduates begin to exemplify a particular theme (e.g., ethical violations, legalism, arrogance, etc.) then I may indeed be responsible for either (a) encouraging such behaviors, or (b) not identifying the problem behaviors/attitudes and not attempting to remediate the problem.

1 Comment

Filed under Abuse, Christianity

Tagged as , , , , ,