Page 100 - EMCAPP-Journal No. 3

Comment

to “Notes on the outer circle of oppo-
nents of Christian Psychology“

Timothy A. Sisemore

It is a great honor to have the opportunity to respond to
this impressive piece by the noted Russian scholar, B.S.
Bratus. My goal in doing so is to react in light of the cur-
rent field of Christian Psychology in the United States
of America. I will offer a few thoughts on our common
opponents, on methodology, and the implications for
dealing with tragedy and suffering.

First, it appears the idea of Christian psychology have si-
milar opponents on opposite sides of the globe. In Ame- Timothy A. Sisemore, Ph.D., is Di-
rica, the theological objectors are primarily those calling rector of Research and Professor of
themselves biblical counselors who may admit certain Psychology and Counseling at Rich-
findings of neuropsychology to the discussion, but avoid mont Graduate University in Chat-
any implications of psychology for counseling, seeing the tanooga, Tennessee and Atlanta,
Bible as sufficient and the methods of psychology – even Georgia / USA. He is also adjunct
when conducted by Christians – as hopelessly compro- professor of psychology at the Uni-
mised by the methods of secular science. versity of Tennessee at Chattanoo-
ga, and directs the CBI Counseling
On the other side, Christian psychology is opposed by Center. Dr. Sisemore’s research and
the academic discipline of psychology which is decided- practice focuses on anxiety disor-
ly committed to what Bratus refers to as a “materialistic” ders and the relationship of Christi-
approach. While officially indifferent to the realm of the an faith and psychology.
spiritual as it falls outside the boundaries of empirical
science, often in practice there is hostility and even con-
descension. One key exception to this is the recent open-
ness to incorporating “spirituality” into psychotherapy. often our behavior is much that same at that of those who
Scholars such as Thomas Plante (a Roman Catholic), do not believe, and even sometimes that we use our faith
writing for the American Psychological Association, cite maladaptively to worsen our woes.
scientific literature supporting the inclusion of prayer,
meditation, and other spiritual practices into counseling On the other side of this divide is the Christian psycholo-
as data show they actually help those who have spiritual gy approach to research that seeks to reach out to the se-
beliefs. This has been naively welcomed by some who cularist by empirically explaining and documenting im-
miss the key point that this is still dismissing of the re- portant Christian beliefs. I am one of several American
ality of God or his intervention in lives, but merely sees scholars currently researching the influence on Christi-
an individual’s personal beliefs as “useful” in combating ans of understanding God’s grace. This is, of course, a
psychological distress. While this opens doors to Chris- strongly Christian concept, and we have been able, using
tian psychologists working with other Christians, it is good science, to show that understanding God as graci-
still not explicitly Christian as any spiritual practices of ous has positive impacts on the mental health of Christi-
any religion or spiritual movement is viewed the same as ans. We hope that such data will allow Christian psycho-
Christianity. logists continuing freedom to counsel other Christians
using Christian concepts yet with empirical support for
Bratus also discusses the problematic issue of methodolo- so doing.
gy in developing a Christian psychology. I agree that sci-
entific psychology tries to bifurcate the material from the Finally, I would like to react to Bratus’ discussion of suf-
ideal. It is a challenge we share on how to develop unique fering and meaning. Here is where secular psychology is
methodologies for the two. In America, the Psycholo- pushed beyond its limits. Psychology does much better
gy of Religion and Spirituality holds a respected place in at describing than it does at explaining. Yet, humans live
psychological circles. It basically uses secular methodo- in a world of meaning – or a lack of it. I write this only
logy to study religious practices and culture. In so doing days after a troubled young man killed his own mother
it offers important insight into the positive and negative and 25 people, mostly 6 and 7 year old children, at an ele-
impacts faith has on Christians. It affirms the benefits of mentary school in the northeastern USA. As I read Bra-
prayer and other religious practices while showing us that tus’ comments on Frankl, I was reminded how even in a

100