Journal of Poetry Therapy, Vol. 4, No. 3, 1991
Scripture as Narrative and Therapy T h o m a s Edward Smith and Susan Counsell
The role of the Sc~pture within therapy is examined and recommendations are made on how and when it should be used. A rationale is given on why secular therapists should use the Scriptures and what role objectivity plays in such practice. Differences between therapeutic practice with Old and New Testament passages are described. Different roles for therapists who use the Scripture are also described. Contraindications for the use of Scriptule are given with attention to the therapist's position.
Therapists are routinely exhorted to use empirically derived paradigms and techniques. However, in their zeal to attain an "objective" stance in providing services, most therapists avoid using a potentially useful resource - the Bible. Their attempt to maintain "professional" objectivity may, in fact, leave them ill-prepared to serve a large client population: Christian or Biblically-oriented clientele. The Bible has many uses in therapy, and therapists' education about this resource enables them to comprehend and converse with devout clients. The Scriptures - the Old and New Testaments of the Bible - have been used for centuries to comfort, enlighten, and challenge those who read them. Maloney (1985) states that the Bible has been used in nontreatment settings in much the same way as therapists and physicians use other authoritative writings (e.g., pamphlets, books, booklets) as bibliotherapeutic suggestions for their clients/patients. Unfortunately, many This article is a revised version of a paper written for the Proceedings of the 40th Anniversary of the Florida State University School of Social Work (Nov. 10, 1990). T h o m a s Edward Smith, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor at the Florida State University School of Social Work, Tatlahassee, FL 32306-2024. Susan Counsell, M.S.W., is a social worker in Milwaukee, WI. Requests for reprints should be addressed to Dr. Smith. 149
9 1991 Human SciencesPress, Inc.
150
Smith and Counsell
therapists who are comfortable suggesting or quoting from secular books or pamphlets during sessions would find it difficult to use the Bible in a similar way (Bergin, 1980). One reason for this reluctance may be a belief that one should not mix religion and "science," and that religious ideas found in the Scriptures are matters of personal faith while the ideas contained in the secular materials which therapists give or use with their clients are "public opinions agreed upon by those who have studied the issues" (Maloney, 1985, p. 2). Maloney counters this belief by arguing that secular and scriptural written materials "are not entirely different, but exist along a continuum of similarity." Maloney concludes that both secular writings about mental health, personality and counseling techniques and the Scriptures are 9 . .mixtures of basic assumptions, rational logic and pragmatic observations. To discount the use of the Bible in these endeavors because of its private, as opposed to secular, knowledge is to miss the point that most written material states the opinion of a group of persons and that much that passes for being objective reporting is, in fact, prescriptive opinion about how life ought to be lived and understood (Maloney, 1985, p. 3).
Another reason that therapists may avoid use of the Bible is because it is based on a belief of divine inspiration and a theistic orientation. The use of Scripture in therapy implies a prometaphysical stance that seems contrary to the neutral, value-free stance that therapists purportedly espouse. However, the ideal of value-free therapy is a myth (Wick, 1985). Hunter (1976) states that "...psychotherapeutic research has convincingly demonstrated that even the most benign, empathetic, phenomenological therapist inevitably imposes values and moral judgments on his or her patients" (p. 151). Bergin (1980) further emphasizes the need to acknowledge religious values and beliefs and to integrate them into work with clients. He believed that " . . .until the theistic belief systems of a large percentage of the population are sincerely considered and conceptually integrated into our work, we are unlikely to be fully effective professionals" (p. 95). Religious values have become more important in the field of psychotherapy as evidenced by the increase in interest and involvement in religious and spiritual values as they relate to psychology and psychotherapy. Bergin (1980) cites increasing numbers of professional publications that focus on religious/spiritual issues (e.g., Journal of Theology and Psychology, Association for Mormon Counselors and Psychotherapists, Christian Association for Psychological Studies, American Psychological Association's Division 36 - Psychologists Interested in Religious Issues). Bergin believes that we have censored or ignored in a "casual and sometimes arrogant way something that is sensitive and precious to most human beings" (p. 98).
Scripture and Therapy
151
His proposal to integrate religious themes into the mainstream of clinical practice and research has been echoed by others (e.g., Vande Kemp, 1985). They believe as does Peck (1978) that " . . .psychotherapists . . .should push themselves to become not less involved but rather more sophisticated in religious matters" (p. 225). Siporin (1983) argues that therapists should no longer ignore or deny moral or religious aspects of their clients or of themselves and that a "secular ministry and a religious ministry are thereby seen not as mutually exclusive, but as complementary and reciprocal in meeting social service needs of people" (p. 18). Therapists need to acknowledge the importance of religious values such as those found in the Scriptures in providing therapy and to overcome the "downright fear on the part of the therapist to explore distinctly religious values" (Natale, 1985, p. 107). In the case of Christian clients, the key to their religious values lies in the Scriptures. The secular therapist must also know his/her own feelings and level of comfort about bringing Scriptures into therapy. The secular therapist may see the religious client as a stranger and be uncomfortable with such a client due to fears of making moral oversights or ceremonial violations (Stern, 1985). The therapist will need to evaluate his/her values and beliefs b e f o r e proceeding. With the rise of Christian populations and the popularity of fundamental religious movements and Scriptural study, therapists will probably be seeing more clients with whom the use of the Bible can be a meaningful part of the therapy process. In order to implement this resource in therapy, however, therapists need to answer several questions before proceeding, such as (a) who should use Scripture in counseling, (b) when it should be introduced, (c) how and with whom it is applicable, and (d) when its use is contraindicated.
Who Should Use Scripture in Counseling Use of Scripture as a part of the therapeutic process will depend largely upon the therapist's auspices. The clergy are able and expected to use Scripture as part of their work. Clergy operate within the tenets of specific denominations that are represented, and bring institutional parameters and constraints into the counseling environment. Therapists who are not clergy members, but who represent themselves as religious or Christian counselors often introduce Scripture as part of the therapeutic process. These two types of counselors, the clergy and the religious counselor, can credibly use the Bible and Scriptural messages in their work; it is, by definition, Scripturally oriented.
152
Smith and Counsell
But, what of secular counselors who don't represent themselves under such auspices? Secular counselors have no "permission" to introduce Scripture into therapy and use of the Bible or Scripture passages will not be a foregone conclusion nor an expected part of therapy. Because the clergy are considered knowledgeable about and devoted to spiritual issues, they are accorded the greatest respect, credibility and authority in using Scripture. The religious or Christian counselor ranks second on the continuum, having less credibility than clergy but no authority from specific religious denominations. The secular counselor has the least credibility and authority in Scriptural matters. This does not mean, however, that secular counselors are prohibited form using Scripture in therapy. Such usage can be a powerful tool when working with Biblically-oriented clients. It does mean, however, that secular counselors must proceed more slowly in introducing Biblical messages into therapy and must earn the credibility and authority in Scriptural matters that is automatically given to the other types of counselors. Secular therapists need to look for indications from clients as to the efficacy of using the Scripture in therapy, either by clients' references to Scripture or by therapists' questions concerning spirituality. By having to wait for clients' permission, therapists actually have the advantage of being in a "one-down" position (Fisch, Weakland, & Segal, 1982). Given the above constraints, why would a religiously-oriented client seek out a secular counselor? First, clients may have had past unsatisfactory counseling experiences with clergy persons (see Rayburn (1983) for a thorough discussion). Second, therapists' freedom from the constraints of a particular religious denomination may be important to a client who, while Scripturally oriented, wish to escape institutionally based, religious dogma in counseling. A religious counselor/clergy person may be governed by "moral code compliance" (Wick, 1983, p. 14) that clients may resent or fear. Secular counselors' freedom from specific religious dogma may enable clients to believe that the secular counselor would put less stress on dogmatic obligations, be less moralistic and will be more nonjudgmental (Kaslow & Gingrich, 1977, p. 14). Third, clients may not agree with a rigid Biblical interpretation and may fear clergy or religious counselors' interpretations concerning specific problems. Finally, clients may be unaware that religious counseling from ministers is available. To ensure a clienttherapist fit, a secular counselor with religious/Scripturally oriented clients should ask why the client had not chosen a counselor from the clergy or religious categories. This may assist secular therapists in knowing how best to "position" themselves and to use Scripture in therapy. Different readings of Scripture do not always produce the same interpretations. When they
Scripture and Therapy
153
are too disparate from the available options for clients, secular therapists versed in the Scriptures may provide the needed resource.
When to Bring Scriptures into Therapy Secular therapists who opt to use Scriptures in therapy view such use as an enhancement of their therapeutic repertoire, and as an integration of religious and secular elements that can greatly e n h a n c e therapeutic maneuverability (Fisch, Weakland, & Segal, 1982). As with any therapeutic tool, therapists' knowledge base will affect the therapy technique or resource that will be used. Therapists with knowledge of the Bible who have researched its use in therapy and investigated its dynamics and themes will be able to effectively use the Scriptures. Use of specific quotes may be especially useful for client and aid in providing effective interventions. On the other hand, a therapist with only minimal background and knowledge of the Bible and Scriptural messages may still be able to use the general themes and universally-known stories and parables (e.g., Prodigal Son, "eye for an eye,") in their therapy. The greater the knowledge base, however, the more comfortable therapists will be in using Scriptures. Can a counselor who doesn't believe that Scripture is inspirational or who doesn't profess a Christian orientation ethically use the Bible as part of therapy? Hindson (1982) likens the use of Scripture without belief to a salesman selling a product in which he has no confidence who "will reluctantly knock on the door, hoping no one will answer it" (p. 203). The decision is ultimately value-laden and personal. Perhaps, the question should be; "Under what conditions, if any, should a counselor who doesn't believe that a certain resource is valid, incorporate it into practice?" Only the individual therapist can ultimately answer these questions.
Evaluating Self and Client Therapists who have answered the above questions for him/herself with regard to using Scripture in therapy must also evaluate themselves and their clients on the following items: 1) 2) 3) 4)
Client use of the Bible; Biblical interpretation; Biblical orientation; and Biblical literacy.
154
Smith and Counsell
In assessing clients' use of the Bible, asking questions about how frequently clients read it, when or for what purpose they read it (e.g., to cope with stress, to be inspired), and with whom they read it, will be helpful. A further evaluation of whether clients' belief in the Bible is professed or operative (Burtchael, 1984) helps understand whether the Scriptures are a guide for living or used selectively to condone or justify actions. Is the Bible a source of comfort or conflict for the client? Knowing a person's "selective interest in Scripture leaves clues concerning what is meaningful to him, where the important areas of his emotional life, including his pain, are to be found" (Goodling, 1976, p. 184). Therapists should ascertain the similarity or difference of their own and clients' Biblical interpretations. The two most common interpretations are fundamental and liberal (i.e., evangelical, neo-evangelical) (Kantzer, 1983). Fundamentalist clients take the writings of the Bible literally, with little room for subjective interpretation. They see Scriptures as inspired by God and unquestionable. Liberal clients see the Bible as allegorical and traditional -- a story that illustrates religious principles through literary exposition. They also may believe that the work is inspired by God through the Holy Spirit, but are willing to look at alternative meanings and applications. An interpretation by the therapist that differs from the client's may offend or confuse the client and inhibit the joining process. Such a clash of interpretations could result in an "inerrancy debate" (Hindson, 1982) that will sabotage the therapeutic process. Next, the therapist needs to identify whether clients have an Old or New Testament orientation. While the overall theme and message of the Bible is that of God's love for all and the promise of salvation, the two Testaments differ to some extent as to how God is perceived and seen in relationship to humankind. The God of the Old Testament was an unknown God in many ways: indeed, His name was not even to be spoken aloud in early Jewish tradition. A predominant theme in the Old Testament was retribution and punishment by God of those who did not obey him. Although he named Jews as his chosen people, he also showed a swift and horrific vengeance to transgressors. Within the Old Testament, he was a God to be feared and obeyed - obedience that came out of fear of retribution. The Scripture provided ample examples for this fear. In Genesis 6, 7, and 8, God sends a flood which completely depopulates the world except for the obedient Noah and his family. In Exodus, ten plagues, each more horrible than the one before it, are sent against the Egyptians. Chapters 27, 28, and 29 of Deuteronomy give dire warnings against ingratitude and disobedience: invasions, depopulation, and exile. Other examples of this punitive God are found in Chronicles, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Joel, Nahum, and Zepaniah. While the Psalms do give a more gentle view of God, the
Scripture and Therapy
155
predominant picture of the Old Testament God is one of wrathful power and retribution. By contrast, the G o d of the New Testament is a very different one. Instead of a wrathful, jealous God who demands sacrifices and obedience, the Lord is depicted as tolerant and loving. "The heart of the Gospel, from which all else in Christian faith, life and ministry flow is the message that God has forgiven our sin, that he has not held our trespasses against us, but by the free giving of his Son, proclaimed and established our reconciliation with Him in faith, totally apart from all considerations of merit or deserving" (Hunter, 1976, p. 146). Instead of an unknown God, the Bible describes a God-made-man, who comes to live as a human. Instead of man sacrificing for God, God sacrifices His son for humankind. The focus of the God of the New Testament is nonviolence and reconciliation, rather than violence and retribution. No longer are the people threatened with punishments of all kinds: they are promised salvation for their obedience. The obedience comes from a desire to come closer to God, not from a fear of punishment. Corinthians tells of how the New Testament is not an external law obeyed through fear, but an internal code of conduct based on love of God and others - a code written "Not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh in the heart" (2 Corinthians 3:3). The New Testament Lord is a consoler, nurturer, and benevolent protector. In Matthew, Jesus tells the people: "Come unto me, all you who labor and are heavy-laden for my yoke is easy and my burden light. I am gentle and humble of heart" (Matthew 12:28-29). T h e violent retribution of the Old T e s t a m e n t is countermanded in Matthew 5:38-39: "You have heard the commandment, 'eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth'; but I say to you: offer no resistance to injury. When a person strikes you on the right cheek, turn and offer him the other." And in Matthew 5:44: "Love your enemies, pray for your persecutors." Rather than the pestilences, wars, exiles, and horrific acts of God, the New Testament miracles include feeding multitudes, walking on water to save the Disciples, raising the dead, and healing the blind, deaf, mute, and leprous. Mark states: "For the Son of Man has not come to be served but to serve -- to give his life for the ransom of many" (Mark 10:45). John 3:16 illustrates the Lord's love for humankind: "God so loved the world that he gave his only son." John continues to provide a picture of a loving Lord: "I am the Good Shepherd; the Good Shepherd lays down his life for his sheep" (John 10:11). In John, 13, Jesus shows his role as a servant to man by washing the feet of his Disciples. In John 12:47, Jesus says: "I did not come to condemn the world but to save it." And a New Covenant is cited in John 13:34: "I give you a new commandment: such as my love has been for you so must your love be for each other."
156
Smith and Counsell
Another primary theme of the New Testament, that of reconciliation and nonviolence, is further illustrated in Paul's letters to the Romans: "Bless your persecutors; bless and do not curse them" (Romans 12:14); "If possible, live peacefully with everyone" (Romans 12:18); and, again, "He who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law" (Romans 13:8). Romans 15 shows God as a source of all patience and encouragement - a source of hope. In Corinthians 5:18, Paul tells the people: "All has been done by God, who has reconciled us to himself through Christ and has given us the ministry of reconciliation." In Philippians 4:9, Paul speaks of the "God of Peach." In Colossians 3:12:14, reconciliation is further stressed: "Bear with one another; forgive whatever grievances you have against one another. Forgive as the Lord has forgiven you." And in 1 Thessalonians 5:13-15: "Remain at peace with one another. We exhort you to admonish the unruly, cheer the fainthearted, support the weak, be patient toward all. See that no one returns evil to any other." The Epistle to the Hebrews illustrates three points: (a) the superiority of Jesus' teaching over the Old Testament; (b) a reminder that the Old Covenant has grown obsolete and should be replaced; and (c) Christ's death will replace the old sacrificial rituals. The First Epistle of John gives the ultimate guidelines for the New Testament: "We should love one another" (1 John 3:11). The implications of these two orientations for therapists are important. The metaphor for a client who is Old Testament oriented will be that of fear of punishment, suffering and having to earn any merit to God's love. The metaphor for New Testament client will be forgiveness, love, nurturing, mercy and consolation. Carter (1980) states that those who have an Old Testament orientation will have a performance-based morality rooted in conscience and guilt "characterized by doing, achieving and performing"; whereas, the New Testament orientation has an identity-based morality "rooted in our position in Christ" (p. 47). Recognition of these different orientations and the attendant dynamics of each may be helpful to therapists in facilitating both the joining process and intervention. These orientations may also depend somewhat on the client's religious denomination, if known. Fundamentalist groups will be more Old Scripture oriented in most cases. The Neo-evangelist, or Liberal, groups may tend to have an orientation with more New Testament emphasis. The last factor which therapists need to assess is the Biblical literacy levels of both themselves and of their clients. Therapists who are more knowledgeable than their clients need to be careful not to become the Biblical authority, thereby intimidating the client and/or taking a superior position. On the other hand, therapists need to evidence enough literacy so that knowledgeable clients are able to give therapists some credibility in Scriptural matters.
Scripture and Therapy
157
Applications of Scripture in Therapy After therapist have assessed the above areas, and are comfortable with Scripture as a therapeutic tool, there are many applications for it in therapy. First, as mentioned previously, it can be helpful in the joining process. By sharing and/or showing an understanding of clients' world view, or metaphors, the therapeutic relationship can be enhanced and the joining process facilitated. Second, Scripture can be used to identify and explore major counseling themes (Goodling, 1976). Scripture can be used to support and affirm a client; provide a source of comfort during times of grief, crisis, or stress; and address many situations and feelings pertinent to a client's needs. Meyer (1974) find the Psalms to be especially useful in dealing with anomie. He states that the Psalms help clients to " . . . identify with other humans over the ages with similar conflicts, anxieties and feelings" (p. 26). Coyle and Erdberg (1969) also addressed methods in which the Psalms can be useful. Collins (1972) gave an extensive listing of how various Biblical passages can be applied to clients' needs. A third application of Scripture in therapy is that it can be helpful in aiding decision making and in reducing confusion. Therapists could suggest that clients look for situations similar to their own in the Bible and see how problems were resolved. Or, clients could be asked to apply certain passages to their current situation to see if there is guidance or illumination present. Or, clients could be referred to Biblical passages that describe incidents of guidance, wisdom, and understanding. Scripture can also be useful in systemic, structural settings with couples and families (Salinger, 1979). First, the Bible can be used to establish hierarchies and generational boundaries. Paul speaks of the primacy of the marital dyad and the subordination of the children to their parents. In Ephesians 5:31, individuation from the family or origin and unity of the marital couple is stressed: "A man shall leave his father and a mother and cling to his wife, and the two shall be made into one." The systems orientation is evidenced in 1 Corinthians 12:67: "To each person the manifestation of the spirit is given for the common good." The Bible also gives different tasks to different subsystems, but also promulgates the idea of interdependency and mutuality -- some key concepts in systemic thinking. With regard to the marital dyad, Salinger (1979) asserts that Paul makes an analogy between the marital dyad and the union of Christ with his people: the marital bond is so important that it is compared to that which Christ entered. Also, injunctions to spouses are bilateral, involving interdependency and mutual respect. Second, Biblical passages can be used to mitigate against scapegoating and triangulation (Salinger, 1979, p. 245). In Acts 10:34, the message is that
158
Smith and Counseil
"God shows no partiality," that each individual is valued and that interdependency is necessary. In Matthew 18:15-16, a model to avoid triangulation is given in which one is admonished to have an honest confrontation between two parties involved in conflict in order to resolve the problem before bringing any third party in to mediate or mitigate. Third, Scripture can be used to reframe a situation and unbalance a system. Goodling (1976) states that identifying Biblical passages that present conflicting opinions can "open up, if not force, a broader perspective" (p. 187). One example of a powerful reframe using Scripture would be in an area of frequent conflict in many families - submission of the wife and headship of the husband. Submission is valued as a Biblical concept; however, " . . . the emphasis that demands only wifely submission is wrong" (Green, 1984, p. 110). The misuse of Scripture on the issues of submission and headship has encouraged some husbands to become exploitative and abusive. "Scripture passages dealing with marriage and headship have been misused for years to justify male selfishness" (Green, 1984, p. 120). Paul's injunction to wives that they be submissive to their husbands is clarified in other passages which state that submission is mutual: "Yes, all of you be submissive to one another" (1 Peter 5:5) and "Defer to one another out of reverence to Christ" (Ephesians 5:21). In addition, husbands are a d m o n i s h e d to " L o v e y o u r wives as Christ loved the C h u r c h " (Ephesians 5:25). Neither Peter nor Paul tell husbands to dominate or control their spouses - they are to follow Christ's example of leadership through service and self-effacing devotion. When the Bible speaks to males as the leaders of families, it does not give them license to be aggressive or domineering. It refers repeatedly to leadership and headship in imitation of Christ's example. The distinction between domination and headship first appears in Hosea 2:14-19: " . . . you will call me 'My husband' and no longer 'My master'." Husbands are to nurture and support their wives giving to them as opposed to demanding from them. "So husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. H e who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the Church" (Ephesians 5:28-29). By refraining the commonly held view of submission and headship by using these passages, the system is challenged and perhaps, unbalanced. Fourth, Scriptural messages can be useful as strategic interventions such as paradox, metaphors, and parables (Boghosian, 1983). Boghosian speaks of Biblical uses of paradox as a strategic approach to break out of an old pattern. H e states that Jesus used paradoxical directives "often and masterfully: and that these Biblical passages were used in "facilitating change to more mutually satisfying ways of relating" (p. 102). Examples of Scriptural paradox include the case of the punishment of the adulteress
Scripture and Therapy
159
(John 8:1-11), the wisdom of King Solomon in deciding who the real mother of an infant was (1 Kings 3), and the idea of greatness through servanthood (Matthew 20:25-28). Other ways to use Biblical paradox include using the concept that suffering is a blessing, a gift from God, or a privilege. Christ's suffering as ransom for the salvation of all is the prototype. "Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps" (1 Peter 2:21-23). The sufferer can actually be seen as special in God's eyes: "For whom the Lord loves, He chastens" (Hebrews 12:6). Suffering can be portrayed as a cause for rejoicing and something which brings to the victim grace and special blessings: "Rejoice in the measure that you share Christ's sufferings" (1 Peter 4:12-14); "Blest are you when they insult you and persecute you" (Matthew 5:11); and, "When a man can suffer injustice and endure hardship through his awareness of God's presence, this is a work of grace in him" (1 Peter 4:12-19). Clients, therefore, can be enjoined to praise and thank the Lord for favoring them with the trials being endured. A previously discussed paradoxical element in the Bible is that of headship and leadership being viewed as forms of servanthood. Christ washed the feet of the Disciples (John 13:13-15) to illustrate how Disciples are to see themselves as leaders in the Church. In Matthew, Jesus tells his listeners that: "He who is greatest among you shall be your servant" (Matthew 23:10-11) and "The first shall be last and the last shall be first" (Matthew 19:30; 20:16). Also, in Luke, the admonition is: "He who exalts himself shall be humbled while he who humbles himself shall be exalted" (Luke: 18:14). In the Beatitudes, we read that "the meek shall inherit the earth" (Matthew 5:3-5) and that the poor in spirit are the blessed ones. All of these examples could be useful in working with clients who feel victimized or to empower some member of a system who previously was ignored or discounted. These examples also illustrate the power of a one-down position. Other paradoxical elements in Scripture that may be useful include the idea that one must love one's enemies (Matthew 5:44), pray for one's persecutors, and that death is only the beginning of life. Boghosian (1983) also illustrates the ways that Scripture can be used to create or join metaphors in order to circumvent resistance and be nondirective in therapy. He cites several metaphorical interventions in the Bible in which objects are used as metaphors for people - wine and wineskins (Matthew 9:16, 17); vines and their branches (John 15:10); and bread and water (John 6:35; 7:37-39) - that can be useful to therapists (p. 102). Use of parables in the Bible is another strategic intervention that Boghosian discusses. He called the parables "the strategic techniques which Jesus used most often to change behavior and attitudes" (p. 102).
160
Smith and Counseil
Boghosian noted that the use of parable was Jesus's way of acknowledging that people will resist open directives to change. He stated: "Christian people with psychological and spiritual problems have usually developed rigid, idiosyncratic ways of interpreting Scripture to justify their behavior. These are virtually impervious to direct confrontation, no matter how much authority is mastered" (p. 106). Therefore, use of various parables in the Bible may help to confront clients in a non-threatening manner in order to initiate change. Capps (1980) illustrated how the Bible can be adapted for use with a variety of clients and settings. He classified three models of Biblical counseling: Psalmic, proverbic, and parabolic. He identified the use of the Psalms in counseling as being appropriate for use in a client-centered therapy approach in which feelings, emotions and insight are important. It is a passive, nondirective model that works well with young adults. Capps's proverbic model parallels the reality and behavior modification approaches in therapy, with "heavy emphasis on counselor's tasks of admonishment and advice giving" (p. 255). The Proverbs are used as an example of moral judgment and the emphasis in using the Proverbs is behavioral change. It is an approach which is "deliberately and self-consciously directive" (p. 260), and is well-suited for use with late adolescents and early young adults. The parabolic model in which the various parables are used lies between the directive Proverbic model and the nondirective Psalmic model, is identified as "indirective" (Capps, 1980, p. 260), and is especially useful with middle-aged individuals. This application of parables has a healing and transforming theme that fosters an open-ended view of life. Capps (1980) notes this approach is especially useful with men and has an emphasis on insight as means of change.
Circumstances in which Use of Scripture Could be Harmful
Although the use of Scripture has been shown to have many applications and uses in therapy, there are also some circumstances in which Scripture is contraindicated. First, because Scripture is complex, its many interpretations can be a source of concern. Sproul (1983) addressed this problem of hermeneutics, or rules of interpretation. He stated that the right of private interpretation has "become a license of subjectivism . . . the Bible has become a nose of wax, easily twisted, formed and reshaped to fit the bias of the interpreter" (p. 36). Thus, the use of Scripture can become manipulative and/or intellectual sparring between clients and therapists. Such fencing is counterproductive to therapy and indicates that
Scripture and Therapy
161
the therapist are no longer using Scripture to help clients, but is jostling to attain an one-up position. Such use can lead to an impasse with clients and should be avoided. Second, Goodling (1976) stated that the use of the Bible may create or intensify an "authoritarian climate" (p. 185). This type of climate may inhibit a successful therapeutic relationship. Third, when the use of Scripture serves to amplify dysfunctional behavior, it should not be implemented. If the use of Biblical passages does not clarify an issue for clients, or if it reinforces a dysfunctional interactional pattern between subsystems or between the members of the same subsystem, it may not be useful. For example, citing Paul's admonition that a wife be submissive to her husband to a woman who is being battered by her spouse would be a questionable use of Scripture. Fourth, when therapists' orientations are very different from that of their clients and therapists are unable to join clients' metaphors or orientations, the use of Scripture is contraindicated. The use of Biblical passages in this instance would resemble clever sophistry by therapists. Therapists who are tied to their own Biblical interpretation that clients will not be well-treated are ethically bound to refer clients elsewhere.
Role of Therapists Who Use Scripture in Therapy Therapists can adopt a number of roles that allow both one-down and one-up positions. Both the client's needs and the therapist's style dictate which role should be taken. Therapists may shift from one role to another during therapy, but Whitaker (1977) and Watzlawick, Weakland and Fisch (1974) maintain that the one-down position is more efficacious. The role of teacher puts therapists in a one-up position. This can be useful at some points in therapy, but should not be the primary role for therapists because it takes the impetus and credit for change away from clients. The role of "expert" or "Biblical guru" is also a one-up position because therapists are defined as the repository of knowledge of which client seek. It puts therapists in an "authority" stance that may place unnecessary obstacles in the therapeutic process. If therapists do assume the role of an expert, clients may well depend on them to "do all the work" and, as a result, will not rely on self to change. The role of "co-seeker" of Biblical knowledge places therapists in an equal or one-down position. This may be a good role to adopt with knowledgeable clients who are interested in Biblical nuance and justifica-
162
Smith and Counsell
tion versus guidance. It may be counterproductive in that it may reduce therapist credibility. The role of "existential guide" (Handlin, 1985, p. 87) or "cryptomissionary" (Grosch, 1985, p. 125) can be an excellent one-down role - clients are in charge of using this instrument of God to their own best interest. One must be aware, however, that this can also be construed as a one-up role in that the therapist is somehow "special" or "chosen" for this task. Stern (1985) advocates that the therapist take the role of facilitator. This role is a one-down position that allows room for questioning and confronting clients without damaging the therapeutic relationship. The choice of the facilitative role also enhances the flexibility and maneuverability of therapists and is, perhaps, the best choice.
Conclusion
As has been shown, the use of the Bible and Scripture passages can be a powerful and useful resource in therapy. With some clients and circumstances, its use may be crucial. Therapists must be aware of their values, knowledge base, orientation, and interpretations, and dependence on Scripture in order to make a decision regarding its effectiveness in therapy. Certain clients and/or circumstances preclude the use of Scripture in therapy. As with any therapeutic resource, therapists must evaluate the efficacy and appropriateness of using the Bible as a part of therapy. But, to totally ignore the Bible as a resource and useful tool in therapy is a serious oversight on the part of many therapists and training programs. Training centers and universities who require students to become familiar with various ethnic and cultural client groups should also require their students to consider religious aspects of clients and resources available. With the resurgence of Biblical awareness and interest in an increasingly large "Christian" population, therapists and their training institutions must be able to provide effective and sensitive services to whoever may need them - including the clients for whom the Bible is an important and integral facet of their life. Jeske (1984) stated: "A client who is Christian deserves special consideration in therapy" (p. 268). It is time that therapists prepare themselves to provide such considerations.
References
Bergin, A. E. (1980). Psychotherapyand religious values. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 48(1), 95-105.
Scripture and Therapy
163
Boghosian, J. (1983). The Biblical basis for strategic approaches pastoral counseling. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 11(2), 99-107. Burtchael, J. T .(1984). A new pastoral method in theology. Commonweal, 111, 44-50. Capps, D. (1980). Biblical models in pastoral counseling. Pastoral Psychology, 28(4), 252-264. Carter, J. D. (1980). Towards a Biblical model of counseling. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 8(1), 45-52. Collins, G. R. (1972). Effective counseling. Carol Stream, IL: Creation House. Coyle, F. A., Jr., & Erdberg, P. (1969). A liberalizing approach to maladaptive fundamentalist hyperreligiousity. Psychotherapy: Therapy, Research and Practice, 6(2), 140-142. Goodling, R. A. (1976). The Bible in pastoral counseling. Duke Divinity School Review, 41(Fall), 178-196. Green, H. W. (1984). Turning fear into hope. New York: Camden Press. Grosch, W. N. (1985). The psychotherapist and religious commitment. In E. Mark Stern (Ed.), Psychotherapy and the religiously committed patient (pp. 135-146). New York: Haworth Press. Hendlin, S. J. (1985). The spiritual emergency patient: Concept and example. In E. Mark Stern (Ed.), Psychotherapy and the religiously committed patient (pp. 79-88). New York: Haworth Press. Hindson, E. E. (1982). The inerrancy debate and the use of Scripture in counseling. Grace Theological Journa~ 3(2), 207-219. Hunter, R. J. (1976). Law and Gospel in pastoral care. The Journal of Pastoral Care, 30(3), 146-158. Jeske, J. O. (1984). Varieties of approaches to psychotherapy: Options for the Christian therapist. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 12, 260-269. Kantzer, K. S. (1983). Biblical authority: Where both fundamentalists and neoevangelists are right. Christianity Today, 27(15), 10-13. Kaslow, F. W., & Gingrich, F. (1977). The clergyman and the psychologist as marriage counselors: Differences in philosophy, referral patterns and treatment approaches to nonmarital relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family Counseling, 3(3), 13-21. Maloney, H. N. (1985). The use of the Jewish/Christian Scriptures in counseling. Journal of Pastoral Counseling~ 20(2), 116-124. Meyer, S. G. (1974). The Psalms and personal counseling. Journal of Psychology and Theology 2(1), 26-30. Natalie, S. M. (1985). Confrontation and the religious beliefs of a client. In E. Mark Stern (Ed.), Psychotherapy and the religiously committed patient (pp. 107-116). New York: Haworth Press. The New American Bible. (1971). New York: Thomas Nelson. Peck, M. S. The Road less traveled. New York: Simon and Schuster. Rayburn, C. A. (1985). The religious patient's encounter with psychotherapy. In E. Mark Stern (Ed.), Psychotherapy and the religiously committed patient (pp. 35-45). New York: Haworth Press. Salinger, R. J. (1979) Toward a Biblical framework for family therapy. Journal of Psychology and Theology 7(4), 241-50. Siporin, M. (1983). Morality and immorality in working with clients. Social Thought, 9, 10-28. Sproul, R. C. (1983). Hermeneutics: What's all the fuss about. Christianity Today, 27(3), 36-37. Stern, E. M. (1985). Psychotherapy of religious commitment. In E. Mark Stern (Ed.), Psychotherapy and the religiously committed patient (pp. 1-10). New York: Haworth Press. Vande Kemp, H. (1985). Psychotherapy as a religious process: A historical heritage. In E. Mark Stern (Ed.), Psychotherapy and the religiously committed patient (pp. 135-146). New York: Haworth Press. Watzalwick, P., Weakland, J. H., & Fisch, R. (1974). Change: Principles of problem formation and problem resolution. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. Wick, E. (1985). Lost in no-man's-land between psyche and soul. In E. Mark Stern (Ed.), Psychotherapy and the religiously committed patient (pp. 13-24). New York: Haworth Press. Whitaker, C. A. (1977). Process techniques of family therapy. Interaction, 51, 4-19.