WHAT IS the CHURCH to MAKE of PSYCHOLOGY? by John E
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
on or publication of personal use only. Citati rums. Nutzung nur für persönliche Zwecke. tten permission of the copyright holder. WHAT IS THE CHURCH TO MAKE OF PSYCHOLOGY? by John E. Benson* A young man once came to my office all psychological and religious establishments in tied up in knots. Emotional problems had be this country. He concludes that, more and more, gun to affect his schoolwork and his marriage. religion is turning over its role as moral leader He assumed I would be able to help since I was and spiritual guide to the psychological coun both a pastor and a college religion teacher. selling profession.1 The public today hears a Immediately feelings of uneasiness came great deal more about human behavior—not over me. What was I to do? I had had no C.P.E. only what it is, but what it should be—from Propriety of the Erich Fromm Document Center. For wri express without prohibited material Eigentum des Erich Fromm Dokumentationszent Rechteinhabers. des Erlaubnis der schriftlichen – bedürfen von Teilen – auch Veröffentlichungen (Clinical Pastoral Education), let alone formal psychiatrists than from clergymen. psychiatric or psychological training: nothing Several sorts of responses have been made but a lot of theory, most of it in theology and by the church to this new institution of healing.2 philosophy. I remember wondering whether I Some have chosen to ignore it altogether, or to should assume the role of "pastor," or "teacher" treat it like an enemy. These are for the most or just "friend" in this situation. And if a pas part conservatives. Others have gone altogether tor, what exactly should I do? Become his con in the opposite direction and have allowed their fessor? pray with him? or just be an attentive whole concept of ministry to turn in the direc- listener? 1. Michael T. Malloy, "The National Observer, May 26 I have a feeling this is a rather common 1973, pp. Iff. occurence these days, not only in the religion 2. By this phrase and by the term "psychology" in this teacher's office, but in the local congregation. article, I shall mean all those professional counsellors We seem to be not at all clear about the relation in this country who are either doing research in, or are engaged in therapeutic activities having to do with between "soul care" and psychological coun man's mental health. For purposes of discussion I have selling. In a recent article in The National lumped together psychoanalysts (Freudian and Jun- Observer, Michael T. Malloy comments on what gian), Adlerians, Behaviorists, Gestaltists, and all the he feels is the current relation between the contemporary variations and blends of these, such as T.A., "Gestalt," "Primal Scream," etc . As the argu *Associate Professor of Religion, Augsburg College, Min ment unfolds it will become clear why this can be neapolis, Minnesota. done. Benson, J. E., 1974: What Is the Church to Make of Psychology?, In: Dialog, Minneapolis, Vol. 13 (No. 2, 1974), pp. 97-103. Propriety of the Erich Fromm Document Center. For personal use only. Citation or publication of material prohibited without express written permission of the copyright holder. Eigentum des Erich Fromm Dokumentationszentrums. Nutzung nur für persönliche Zwecke. Veröffentlichungen – auch von Teilen – bedürfen der schriftlichen Erlaubnis des Rechteinhabers. tion of helping people with emotional problems. The latter may do a great deal of personal coun I. selling, or they may interpret their preaching as a kind of emotional "preventative medicine." Malloy feels it significant the large number of The theoretical justification for separating clergymen who have simply left the ministry psychology and religion comes from recent to enter fulltime counselling or research in the studies in the nature of language. For some psychological field.3 Most of us, however, seem time now, philosophy of language6 and hermen- to stand somewhere between these two ex eutics have been showing us that religious state tremes. We outfit our seminarians with psychol ments do not answer to the demands made by ogy courses or give them pastoral counselling other descriptive or prescriptive sorts of state internships at local mental institutions. Some ments. They are more "expressive" than de of our larger parishes hire fulltime psycholo notative, more emotive and aesthetic than prac gists. Or we encourage our pastors to read as tical. A unique kind of logic holds in myth and much psychology as they can, and, if possible, ritual too.7 Religious expression objectifies a to get some C.P.E. We seem to have made our level of consciousness quite different from that peace with psychology. objectified by scientific factual expression; it is Malloy's article has made we wonder about more fundamental and more comprehensive; all this, however. Is it possible that the parish and it comes to us in the form of dramatic pastor has become more convinced of the value ritual and myth.8 of his counselling than of his priestly "religious" About ten years ago I first discovered what acts such as leading worship services, adminis language studies can do for understanding the tering the sacraments, preaching, and perform relation between religion and psychology. I was ing ministerial acts? Are there those who con assigned a course entitled, "The Christian View sider these priestly functions worthless except of Man." It was designed to bring Christian the as they lead to further counselling situations? ological anthropology into dialogue with various I put my opinions in the form of questions be other contemporary views of man: psychological, cause I do not know exactly how widespread sociological, political, biological, and literary. these attitudes are. But I know there is enough Gradually my initial enthusiasm for the of it going on to cause alarm. course turned into bewilderment, however. Something refused to jell. We studied all these In this paper I am going to argue that psy other views of man, but somehow the relevance chology can hurt us if we don't watch out. of the "Christian" view always eluded us. I'm What we need to do first is to separate psy somewhat embarrassed to admit it now, but chology and religion better than in the past. many students seem to have left the course Then we will be able to bring them together more enthusiastic about Erich Fromm's The again in a more fruitful dialectic. It will be Heart of Man,9 or B. F. Skinner's Walden II,w argued here that the priestly and prophetic than either Luther's or Augustine's anthropolo functions of the ministry need to be separated gical writings. We all admired the contemporary from "counselling." An imaginative recitation theologians who have written on the modern of the Christian story, "the Gospel,"4 needs to secular views of man: Martin Buber,11 Reinhold be heard again from pulpits, purged of psycho logical jargon. And a new birth of respect for 6. Ian T. Ramsey, Religious Language, (London: SCM ritual performance needs to be effected. Our Press, 1957); Kent Bendall and Frederick Ferre, peculiar way or reading Bonhoeffer has led us Exploring the Logic of Faith: A Dialogue on the Relation of Modern Philosophy to Christian Faith astray. We need to learn afresh how to cut the (N.Y.: Association Press, 1962); Frederick Ferre, "religious"5 functions of the church loose from Language, Logic and God. (N.Y.: Harper, 1969, 1961); false entanglements, allowing it once again to Anthony Flew and Alasdair Macintyre, eds., New Essays in Philosophical Theology. (N.Y.: Macmillan, be itself, proudly expressing its own inner life. 1955); and others. 7. Ernst Cassirer, The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms, 3. The number of former clergymen working with 'Trans Vol. II: Myth (New Haven, Yale University Press, actional Analysis" and "Gestalt Therapy" are especial 1961, 1953). ly striking in this regard. 8. Paul Ricoeur, The Symbolism of Evil (N.Y.: Harper 4. The precise meaning we intend by this term will be & Row, 1967). explained later in the body of the paper. 9. New York: Harper & Row, 1964. 5. By "religious" here—and throughout the paper—we mean those activities peculiar to the church over 10. New York: Macmillan, 1948. against the other institutions of society. The main ar 11. / and Thou (N.Y.: Scribner's, 1958); Between Man gument of the paper will try to clarify this, too. and Man (Boston: Beacon Press, 1955, 1947). Benson, J. E., 1974: What Is the Church to Make of Psychology?, In: Dialog, Minneapolis, Vol. 13 (No. 2, 1974), pp. 97-103. I Propriety of the Erich Fromm Document Center. For personal use only. Citation or publication of material prohibited without express written permission of the copyright holder. Eigentum des Erich Fromm Dokumentationszentrums. Nutzung nur für persönliche Zwecke. Veröffentlichungen – auch von Teilen – bedürfen der schriftlichen Erlaubnis des Rechteinhabers. Niebuhr,12 Wolfhart Pannenberg,13 and W. Nor should not be reduced completely to such de man Pittenger.14 But for most of us the excite terministic models the way Skinner himself ment seems to have been generated more by often does. Nietzsche's view of man as primar the way these men expounded and evaluated ily "will-to-power"17 and Darwin's picture of the non-Christian view of man than by the way man the animal struggling for survival can also they clarified the "Christian" view. be accepted for what they have to offer. They To be more precise: I had always worked express the interests of the moralist and the with a "models" approach to human nature. biologist, respectively. Though they too are not When dealing with a thinker we tried to puzzle the whole of man, at least their models describe out how he "pictured" man.