Discuss the value of psychology in your day to day life as a church minister PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Discuss the value of psychology in your day to day life as a church minister PDF

Description

Discuss the value of psychology in your day to day life as a church minister Pastoral psychology is interested in the potential needs and values of persons in social relations, the creative possibilities of religious experience, and the methods by which pastoral services can be effective in working for these enlarging values. It seeks to understand personality and enrich interpersonal relations by investigating the dynamics of human motivation and the resources of religious growth. The pastor will be a thorough student of personality, knowing the characteristic emotional conflicts and anxieties, aware of nervous symptoms and cause, able to employ techniques of counseling and group leadership with scientific accuracy and practical effectiveness. The primary roles of a pastor are to feed the spirit and to shepherd the soul of each woman or man the Lord entrusts to the care of that minister. The soul, or psuche (I Thes 5:23) in Greek, has much to do with the mental health of an individual. While the Church and pastors seem to have crossed over the hurdles of the subjects of sex and money and those being addressed in appropriate ways from pulpits, one hurdle remains to be jumped. Mental health and psychology may be a final frontier with regard to the efficient and effective application of the Gospel in helping God’s people. Imagine having a church member who, though attending your church regularly, could not benefit from the transforming power of scripture because of a physical ailment which caused them to be deaf. You would likely do everything in your power (both naturally and spiritually) to assist and encourage such an individual in receiving any available help they needed to have their hearing restored. There are men and women in your church who suffer from a different kind of deafness. They experience psychological deafness. And they, as those with physical deafness, may not be benefitting fully from your ministry. Whether such “deafness” results from mental illness, a personality disorder or a childhood trauma which has resulted in faulty internalized core beliefs, people can be hindered without proper help. It is generally agreed among religion and mental health researchers that pastors are often sought in times of emotional difficulty and serve as front-line primary mental health caregivers in many communities. (Weaver, Flannelly, Garbarino, Figley & Flannelly, 2003 and Lish, Fitzsimmons, McMinn & Root, 2003). As such, a pastor who perceives himself as a “professional” might be well served by studying psychology in order to enhance his (or her) ability to meet mental health needs. That doesn’t mean having to earn a degree, necessarily. Simply reading some good books on various subjects could be very helpful for both pastors and their constituents. Here’s the reality….psychology is simply the scientific study of motivation and behavior. In my experience, today’s churchgoer wants to talk about mental health issues. If we fail to address them, their needs may go unmet or they are left to fend for themselves in that clinical world that can sometimes be unfriendly turf for Bible believing Christians. With a pastor’s informed guidance, they will likely be much safer. The good news is studying psychology does not require us to change our message. No, we maintain a good news message. Our message is simply applied more thoughtfully, skillfully and intentionally. A brilliant man of God, well trained in Theology and Psychology, once made this observation in an attempt to challenge young ministers to work diligently on their preaching, “Both brain surgeons and butchers use a knife. Which one are you?” I believe I am a better pastor and preacher because of my understanding of psychology. I have served the same congregation for 29 years and I’m more confident in the healing and transforming power of God’s Word than I’ve ever been…even after adding Licensed Clinical Psychologist with my Pastor title. On a personal note, I’m sure a part of my extensive study of psychology was motivated by my own need to repair brokenness in my life. I love to learn and the educational process was invigorating to my mind and spirit. It was also a wonderful healing adventure…one that is still in progress. Should you decide to study psychology in whatever form that might take, I bless your journey. The role of psychology in the church is a challenging subject since there are things within the discipline of psychology that have proven very helpful to some people. With this being said, I lean on people who have made counseling their life’s work in order to gain my footing on the subject. Some of these people would be counselors such as David Powlison and Ed Welch from CCEF. I particularly love the vision they have for restoring Christ-centered counseling to the church. However, that is another subject for another time…

Psychology has no ability or inclination to deal with the spiritual motivations of the heart. Even many contemporary Christian psychology models (hence the use of the phrase: “Counseling that is Christian”), do not address the root issue that all humanity faces – we are sinners. The heart’s problem is not that it is a leaky love tank longing to be filled. The Bible depicts the heart as the problem. Our motivations are polluted and need to be cleaned up. According to Scripture, the heart is fixated on expressing sin, a willful disobedience to what God demands. It is an idol-making factory making false gods out of people’s approval and ultimately putting ourselves on the throne. Counseling that is Christian will help people see how to truth collides with the desires of our heart. Counseling that is Christian will show how to stop the leak that has been created and then fill the tank with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Psychology on the other hand can only speak to personal wounding that has either been thrust on the individual by another or resulting from some “dysfunction” that, with the right insight or drugs, can be resolved without God ever being brought onto the scene. I see in this one distinction as the Achilles-heal of the psychological model. Psychology can only deal with what is produced from the heart and not the heart itself. The psychologist (non-Christian), deals with personal issues like a interior decorator working with a resident unable to clean up a home that is hopelessly cluttered with old furniture and garbage. Working with the resident the psychologist determines the right dimensions of the room, the value of the furniture and related memorabilia, then applies a color scheme that “works” with the newly-chosen contents of the room. When the job is done the room has been skillfully arranged and deemed livable again by the owner with the aid of the psychologist. Counseling that is Christian has a different goal altogether. This counselor works with the resident examining the clutter to see why it is there in the first place. Over the course of time, the counselor will guide the resident to identify items that should stay and things that need to be thrown-away based upon the desires of the true owner of the house, Jesus Christ. Both examples feature people with issues that need to be dealt with. Both examples center on a counselor providing help in making the residence livable. However, only a counselor who is a Christian can and will evaluate a course of action in light of the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Psychology holds no such authority structure nor does it have binding truth-claims that must be brought to bear on the individual seeking help. At best psychology helps a person’s life be livable. Counseling that is Christian helps a person live life for the glorify God. This one distinction will lead the individual in need to live life to its fullest. Is Psychology Needed Today? How did the apostle Paul counsel people in his day? Paul himself answers that in Colossians 1:28: “We proclaim him, admonishing [noutheteo] and teaching everyone with all wisdom, so that we may present everyone perfect in Christ.” He then warns us in Colossians 2:8, “See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.” Am I misreading Paul? Is he in error to suggest that we can find all wisdom in Christ? Do we in fact need the insights of psychology to provide for the deepest needs of Christians? Is modern life truly more complex than it was in the days of Paul? Those who believe we desperately need the insights of psychology seem to think so. A professor of counseling psychology at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School is committed to the concept of integrating secular psychology with biblical counseling. He argues that psychological truths fall under the category of general revelation and that new insights can be accepted if they are true and do not contradict the Bible. He offers this example: I think all Christians would agree that when you bury negative feelings, you bury them alive, and that can cause ulcers, even heart attacks. This process is undeniably true, but you can’t find it specifically in the Bible. If it’s true, then we embrace it and use it; if it isn’t true, then we don’t.4

One could argue with the professor whether “this process is undeniably true” and what it means to “bury negative feelings.” But a greater problem is how one determines whether a psychological discovery is true. He implies that the Bible is as silent about the human condition as it is about modern technologies: It isn’t a textbook on how to tune up our automobiles, or on physics, chemistry, or psychology. It does contain statements that relate to geology, anthropology, and psychology that must be integrated into those disciplines, but the Bible’s primary purpose is to tell us how to be right with God, not what to do when someone has a nervous breakdown.5 Are we to assume that there is no connection between one’s standing with God and a nervous breakdown? Is the Bible really silent on the issues of psychological health? Are mental/emotional problems the same as tuning one’s car or mixing chemicals? Integrationists see a categorical difference between psychological and spiritual problems and how to solve those problems. They say that the medical doctor should treat the body, the psychologist or psychiatrist should treat the mind, and the pastor should deal with the spirit. Those who insist that we must use psychology along with biblical counseling argue that “even though the Bible is all true, it does not follow that all truth is in the Bible.”6 They give examples: “In mathematics, medicine, physics, geography, marine biology and a host of other areas, there is much truth that is not mentioned in the Bible. God in his wisdom has allowed human beings to discover truths about the universe that are not discussed in Scripture.”7 While it is true that the Bible does not list mathematical formulae, modern medical procedure, every physical law, every geographic location, or every species of marine life, one must remember that none of those areas deal with essential spiritual truths. In reply, integrationists say: Some critics of psychology seem to argue…that God has not allowed human beings to discover any truths about interpersonal relations, mental health, counseling techniques, mental disorders, personal decision making or any other issues related to stress management and daily living. Such a view maintains that God has allowed human beings to discover truth in almost every field of human study except psychology.8 The problem is that many integrationists seem unable to discern the significant difference between the physical sciences and the so-called “social sciences.” We will deal with that subject at length later on. The question remains: Is psychology necessary today? Integrationists seem to think so because “some human problems are not mentioned in the Scriptures.”9 They believe that “the Bible was not written as a self-help, question-and-answer book covering every possible human problem. It does not claim to be a textbook of counseling techniques or personal problem solving.”10 No, the Bible claims to be far more—the very Word of God that “is useful for teaching, rebukin g, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16, 17). Of course, the Bible does not tell a student which specific college to choose, nor does it name the precise person a Christian is to marry. God does not remove from the individual the privilege and responsibility to use his mind, experience, and common sense, as well as the advice of godly counselors, to make important decisions. But those kinds of decisions involve specific applications of biblical truths, not universal principles. Contrary to integrationist reasoning, the Bible does present the principles which, if followed, will provide the answers for every human problem. The Bible provides the principles necessary to deal with eating disorders, nonbiogenic depressions, scholastic failure, child abuse, bitter memories, anxiety, and a host of other modern problems. Thus integrationists are grossly mistaken when they say that “many, perhaps most, of the problems people bring to modern counselors are never discussed in the Bible.”11

Though they admit that “often principles of behavior can be inferred from the Bible and applied to modern problems,”12 integrationists believe that psychological training is necessary to help Christians with deep problems: Surely there are times, many times, when a sensitive, psychologically trained, committed Christian counselor can help people through psychological techniques and with psychological insights that God has allowed us to discover, but that he has not chosen to reveal in the Bible.…The Word of God never claims to have all the answers to all of life’s problems.13 REFERENCES Lish, R. A., Fitzsimmons, C. R., McMinn, M. R., & Root, A. M. (2003). Clergy interest in innovative collaboration with psychologists. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 22 (4), 294-298. Weaver, A. J., Flannelly, L. T., Garbarino, J., Figley, C. R. & Flannelly, K. J. (2003). A systematic review of research on religion and spirituality in the Journal of Traumatic Stress: 1990-1999. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 6, 215-228. Freud is said to be the father of psychology discuss his contribution to the development of psychology What Does it Mean to be the Father of a Field? The title of "father" of a field is simply a poetic way of describing a person's founding of a particular subject and summarizing what people who study in that subject or were impacted by it feel was a large and important contribution to it. Sigmund Freud developed theories about the mind and its functioning and founded psychoanalytical treatment for psychological problems based on those theories. He devoted his life to learning, helping patients, and developing theories to further the understanding of the human psyche. He is rightly considered the father of psychoanalysis. While Freud took copious notes on his sessions with clients, his observations were mostly his interpretations of one person's problems at a time. His theories were largely extrapolations of very limited data. Freud's theory of the mind and problems his patients experienced were based largely on the idea of unconscious motivations or thoughts and motivations outside the awareness of the person. THEORIES OF FREUD Psychoanalytic theory Psychoanalysis was founded by Sigmund Freud (1856-1939). Freud believed that people could be cured by making conscious their unconscious thoughts and motivations, thus gaining "insight". The aim of psychoanalysis therapy is to release repressed emotions and experiences, i.e. make the unconscious conscious. Psychoanalysis is commonly used to treat depression and anxiety disorders. It is only by having a cathartic (i.e. healing) experience can a person be helped and "cured". Id The id according to Freud is the part of the unconscious that seeks pleasure. His idea of the id explains why people act out in certain ways, when it is not in line with the ego or superego. The id is the part of the mind, which holds all of humankind’s most basic and primal instincts. It is the impulsive, unconscious part in the mind that is based on desire to seek immediate satisfaction. The id does not have a grasp on any form of reality or consequence. Freud understood that some people are controlled by the id because it makes people engage in need-satisfying behavior without any accordance to what is right or wrong. Freud compared the id and the ego to a horse and a rider. The id is compared to the horse, which is directed and controlled, by the ego or the rider. This example goes to show that although the id is supposed to be controlled by the ego, they often interact with one another according to the drives of the id.

Freud defined the id as the part of the mind "cut off from the external world, that has its own world of perception. It detects with extraordinary acuteness certain changes in its interior, especially oscillations in the tension of its instinctual needs, and these changes become conscious as feelings in the pleasureunpleasure series. It is hard to say, to be sure, by what means and with the help of what sensory terminal organs these perceptions come about. But it is an established fact that self-perceptions—coenesthetic feelings and feelings of pleasure-unpleasure—govern the passage of events in the id with despotic force. The id obeys the inexorable pleasure. Ego In order for people to maintain a realistic sense here on earth, the ego is responsible for creating balance between pleasure and pain. It is impossible for all desires of the id to be met and the ego realizes this but continues to seek pleasure and satisfaction. Although the ego does not know the difference between right and wrong, it is aware that not all drives can be met at a given time. The reality principle is what the ego operates by in order to help satisfy the id’s demands as well as compromising according to reality. The ego is a person’s "self" composed of unconscious desires. The ego takes into account ethical and cultural ideals in order to balance out the desires originating in the id. Although both the id and the ego are unconscious, the ego has close contact with the perceptual system. The ego has the function of self-preservation, which is why it has the ability to control the instinctual demands from the id. "The ego is first and foremost a bodily ego; it is not merely a surface entity, but is itself the projection of a surface. If we wish to find an anatomical analogy for it we can best identify it with the ‘cortical homunculus’ of the anatomists, which stands on its head in the cortex, sticks up its heels, faces backwards and, as we know, has its speech-area on the left-hand side. The ego is ultimately derived from bodily sensations, chiefly from those springing from the surface of the body. It may thus be regarded as a mental projection of the surface of the body, representing the superficies of the mental apparatus."[3] Superego The superego, which develops around age four or five, incorporates the morals of society. Freud believed that the superego is what allows the mind to control its impulses that are looked down upon morally. The superego can be considered to be the conscience of the mind because it has the ability to distinguish between reality as well as what is right or wrong. Without the superego Freud believed people would act out with aggression and other immoral behaviors because the mind would have no way of understanding the difference between right and wrong. The superego is considered to be the "consciousness" of a person’s personality and can override the drives from the id. Freud separates the superego into two separate categories; the ideal self and the conscience. The conscience contains ideals and morals that exist within society that prevent people from acting out based on their internal desires. The ideal self contains images of how people ought to behave according to societies ideals. The unconscious Freud believed that the answers to what controlled daily actions resided in the unconscious mind despite alternative views that all our behaviors were conscious. He felt tha...