Page 35 - EMCAPP-Journal No. 7

Foundational Discussions in Christian Psychology

relational domain, noting that it underpins and the image is marred by sin. Psychology, as a sci-
encompasses the other views. “Therapy works ence, observes divine creation, which includes
because it allows some part of the imago Dei human beings. Any counselor can observe the
to be reclaimed and reawakened in therapy” nature of God’s world whether they accept his
(p. 121). When people make choices towards sovereignty or not.
change, they improve from a psychological per-
spective (behavior change) and a theological However, understanding the theology under-
perspective (exercising God-given responsibi- lying the observations is especially relevant to
lity). Although McMinn and Campbell do not Christian therapists and clients. Whether they
specifically engage relational theology, they em- acknowledge it or not, all counselors espouse
phasize that Christianity is “a relationally based a theology. As McMinn (1996, p. 16) rightly
faith” in which people “experience a real rela- points out, “beneath every technique is a coun-
tionship with God through Jesus Christ” (pp. seling theory, and beneath every theory is a
344–5) and are called to be Christ-like in rela- worldview.” Unfortunately, many people are
ting to each other with grace, truth, and love. unaware of their theology, which can lead to
a disparity between belief and action. Agneta
Pamela Cooper-White (2007) also suggests a Schreurs (2002) believes that therapists need an
relationally-based psychotherapy from a psy- awareness of their own theologies, particularly
choanalytical perspective. The underlying Chri- because counselees also come with pre-existent
stian assumption is that humans are intrinsical- theologies. Often a patient’s theology may ob-
ly relational, loving, and loved (pp. 38–66). She struct therapeutic progress. People in therapy
engages relational theology specifically, dra- ask a multitude of questions:
wing on the work of feminist theologians such
as Catherine LaCugna. Cooper-White argues What is the nature of a relationship with
God? Subservience? Friendship? Judging and
for a relational understanding of God and per- punishing? Educational? Magical? Does this
sons as a theoretical framework and, in the se- transcendent Being want me to do some
cond part of her book, describes the therapeutic specific things, or to live according to certain
process through some case examples. She asso- principles? May I expect some special
ciates empathy with relationality and suggests favours or powers in return? And what about
kenosis as part of the therapeutic attitude, for this unique real-life situation I am in right
example; however, in my opinion, the two parts now, with all its nuances and ambiguities?
do not mesh well. Because of the centrality of (p. 219)
relationship to both theology and psychology Schreurs discusses various views on our rela-
described above, integration may seem natural, tionship with God and how they may help or
but perhaps needs to be done with more inten- hinder therapy. She makes a good point: re-
tionality. sponsible counselors need to be aware not only

Theology informing Therapy of their own beliefs but also of the beliefs held
It should be apparent that there are many simi- by their clients.
larities between relational theology and relatio- The biblical/theological idea of relationships
nal therapy: both recognize that relationships being fundamental to humanity has been well
require risk, both focus on love as a choice, discussed and underlies the commonalities bet-
both emphasize the need to heal broken rela- ween theology and therapy as well as some spe-
tionships, both value human autonomy and cific Christian psychologies. However, a relatio-
responsibility, both view relationships as dyna- nal theology view of God can inform more than
mic and flexible, and both emphasize process the therapeutic relationship. First, an emphasis
over content. Just as God is always present and on divine love over judgment can guide the
faithful to his people, good counselors are pre- process of therapy. There are often discussions
sent and authentic to their clients. This is likely in Christian psychology about the tensions bet-
reflective of the fact that we are created, in the ween internal (e.g., sin) and external (e.g., sick-
image of God, as relational beings, even though ness) attributions (e.g., McMinn, 1996, p. 130–

34