Integration as Reciprocal Interaction

Though the integration of psychology and Christianity has deep historical roots that go back many centuries, contemporary integration began in the mid-1800s in reaction to those trying to extricate psychology from its theological and philosophical roots. By the late 1900s the movement had “coalesced into a distinct psychological and interdisciplinary specialty” (Vande Kemp, 1996, p. 77). Today’s proliferation of integrative writings and training programs is truly phenomenal—influencing the academy, the church, and the practice of clinical and counseling psychology.

But not everyone who works in counseling or psychology is interested in doing integration. There are various ways to construe the relationship between faith and psychology, some of them integrative and some not. The litmus test is the extent to which reciprocal interaction is perceived as desirable and possible—what Jones (1994) refers to as a “constructive relationship” between psychology and religion. To what extent should counseling and our view of persons be influenced by both the Christian faith and contemporary psychology? Some believe that faith is enough, that psychology is irrelevant and perhaps dangerous. Others believe that psychology is enough, that faith ought to be left outside the counseling office. Integrationists believe that some sort of reciprocal interaction between faith and psychology is the best way to gain a comprehensive understanding of personality and counseling. This is not to say that psychology carries the same authority as the Christian faith, but that understanding and wisdom can be discovered in both.

By way of analogy, consider the temperature system in an automobile (see figure 1.1). On one end of the continuum is hot air and on the other end is cool air. Often a person selects a temperature in the middle, mixing the hot and cool air for the desired effect. The climate is more desirable and adaptable by combining both sources of air than it could be if only one source of air were available. Though some Christians would be quick to say that psychology is a bunch of hot air, and some scientists would say the same about religion, this is not the point of the analogy. In this analogy we are considering two sources of information: psychology and Christian faith. To what extent do we let the “air” from both systems mix in order to achieve an optimal balance? Or should we trust only one source of information and not the other? Reciprocal interaction involves the assumption that caring for people’s souls is best done by bringing together truth from both sources.

Different approaches to soul care can be viewed along the continuum of figure 1.1. At one end of the continuum are those who trust Christian faith exclusively for the care of souls. Many biblical counselors would position themselves near this end of the continuum, and indeed they provide an important corrective for those who have embraced the naturalistic worldview assumptions offered by many contemporary psychologists. At the other end of the continuum are the secularists who view religion as unimportant and irrelevant to the psychological services they provide. Though some secularists and biblical counselors may find parts of this book on IP interesting, most will find our desire to mix Christianity and psychology frustrating. It is for the people in the middle of the continuum that we write this book.

Figure 1.1. Integrative psychotherapy in relation to psychology and Christianity

Squarely in the middle of figure 1.1 is an integration perspective, which we hold as the most tenable position. Integrationists attempt to find truth from both sources—Christian faith and psychology. Christian psychology is a relatively new movement that views psychology through the lens of historic Christianity (Johnson, 2007). Though advocates of Christian psychology may question our affinity for psychological theory and science, they are likely to find IP interesting and useful in various ways as well. The remaining category in figure 1.1 is religiously sensitive counseling. Many counselors and psychotherapists today are trained primarily in the mainstream theories and methods of counseling, but have become attuned to the religious issues of their clients and want to consider these issues in the process of counseling. Religiously sensitive counselors may find some of our assumptions about Christianity and the authority of Scripture troubling, but will probably find the principles of IP useful in working with Christian clients.

Beginning with a Christian Worldview

An integrative endeavor such as this—constructing a Christian approach to psychotherapy—must have a beginning point. Some integrationists would argue that we should build this model atop two equally authoritative pillars: special revelation and general revelation. (Special revelation is God’s truth revealed through Scripture and seen in the life of Jesus, and general revelation is God’s truth revealed throughout creation.) After all, we are told, all truth is God’s truth. This adage has caused a good deal of mischief and misunderstanding.

Whereas it is undoubtedly true that God ordained all truth that exists—and that truth can be discovered in creation as well as Scripture—it does not necessarily follow that both sources of truth are equally authoritative throughout all of life. General revelation is more authoritative on issues left unaddressed in the Bible. For example, when it comes to constructing microprocessors or treating bacterial pneumonia, general revelation is the place to look. But many issues in life, including matters of great importance, are addressed in the Bible. Here the wise Christian places more confidence in special revelation than general revelation. Thus, when it comes to matters of understanding human...