Page 62 - EMCAPP-Journal No. 6
P. 62
Christian Anthropology
Eric Johnson (USA) Eric Johnson (USA),
Comment to Ph.D., is Professor
of Pastoral Care at
“ACC Finland, Christian Southern Baptist
Theological Semi-
Anthropology and Ethics“ nary and the direc-
tor of the Society
for Christian Psy-
chology.
It was a joy to read about ACC Finland in Toni
Terho’s article. In less than a decade they have ejohnson@sbts.edu
managed to develop a statement of faith, ethical
guidelines, and a number of training programs
to develop various levels of caregiving expertise
from a Christian standpoint. Overall, I am just
really encouraged by the remarkable work that the naturalistic anthropology upon which mo-
they have accomplished since their founding. dern psychology is based.
However, because I have been asked to write a
short response to the article, I will pick out a few This brings up the issue of how Christians ought
themes or expressions that caught my eye and to interpret modern psychology, the psycholo-
will make a few observations about them. gy based on the worldview of naturalism that
arose in the late 1800’s and became the domi-
Let me begin by expressing my great appreciati- nant version of psychology in the West in the
on for a number of features in the article. First, 20th century. It seemed as if ACC Finland takes
the discussion of Christian anthropology that a basically positive and constructive approach
provides the theoretical foundation for ACC to modern psychology, as seen in the following
Finland covered well many important themes statement: “the value of secular psychology and
that constitute classical Christianity. I was es- other humanities is not to be denied, but on
pecially pleased with its “creation-fall-redemp- the other hand the activity must be built on a
tion” framework. In contrast to some Christian classically Christian basis” (p. 8). This is a fair-
anthropologies, that are often limit their focus ly balanced statement, expressing sentiments
to biblical teachings regarding creation and shared by those holding the Christian psycho-
the Fall (or human sinfulness), this document logy approach (like myself), which also seeks
gave prominence to redemption, with reference to be enriched by the enormous contributions
to the salvation made possible by Jesus Christ, of modern psychology. However, I would also
who is also mentioned as the goal of human argue that this expression of a “hermeneutics of
development, as well as the necessary role of trust,” though warranted, should be combined
the Holy Spirit as the means of this redemptive with a “hermeneutics of suspicion.” Otherwise,
transformation. At the same time, it might also the contributions of modern, secular psycholo-
have been helpful to mention something about gy might be embraced without sufficient critical
the Bible’s eschatological orientation, which di- attention directed at what the deficits of a psy-
rects our attention to a future judgment and and chology built on naturalism. Christians would
consequent eternity with God. Perhaps more not expect a well-researched psychology based
questionable was the fact that the Bible and a on naturalism to present many themes that are
Hebrew concept of human beings were listed totally incompatible with the Christian faith,
as features of the anthropology even before the except perhaps in ethical areas, since naturalists
existence and nature of God was listed as a se- value what Christians also value but call it the
parate feature. One might argue that God’s exi- created order. Christians are more likely to be
stence is the single most important feature that concerned about what might missing from such
distinguishes a Christian anthropology from a naturalistic psychology. How is the under-
61
