I recently spoke with a couple of friends who believe that mental illnesses are a result of sin-meaning they believe that if people had true faith they would not have mental illnesses. They gave the example of how one of them used to have anxiety, but now that they are christians they don't have anxiety anymore. When we talked about OCD,for instance, one of them said "Here is the google definition of OCD, Obsessive-compulsive disorder is characterized by unreasonable thoughts and fears (obsessions) that lead to compulsive behaviors. [However] the Bible says to only fear God, so if someone truly trusted God this disorder wouldn't happen [as there is] no need to fear anything." I don't agree with this. My question is, can you argue against homosexuality and how God can bring peace and triumph from this and still not agree with nouthetic counseling? I believe you don't have to hold to their line of thought and still believe that God can free people from homosexuality. What are your thoughts? Is that consistent?
Nouthetic Counseling and Mental Illnesses/homosexuality
- Thread starter jprince
- Start date
- Status
Recognize that there is nouthetic counseling as a philosophy of Christian practical theology; and then there's individual counselors who adhere to one degree or another to nouthetic principles. Obviously, if enough self-styled practitioners of the nouthetic school take the very same approach to counseling a particular issue or a class of problems, then it is probably safe to say such-and-such is the nouthetic approach.
But, applications of principles or techniques are tremendously person-variable. A person can be generally in agreement with Jay Adams' (N.C.'s "father") approach, without being a sycophant. Just like someone can be in general agreement with a "VanTil" approach to apologetics, while not slavishly lauding his every statement or conclusion, or that of one of several branches of his root.
Adams was seeking to reinvigorate pastoral counseling as a Bible-based function of ministry, rather than an adjunct of the field of Psychology. Where (often competing) psychological schools had in the last century shouldered out the pastor as a community-resource, offering in place of spiritual answers secular treatments; Adams reasserted the right and the helpfulness of the role of the Bible, wielded by those "mighty in the Scriptures," to the real help of people.
The question that must be answered in every supposed case of mental "anguish" or apparent departure from "well-adjustment," is: What sort of problem is this, and does it have a true spiritual component? Is EVERY fear the direct result of identifiable sin? That seems like an important matter to sort out, and deciding in advance that one knows the source of the issue (in sin) and therefore the certain diagnosis (in repentance) seems to me terribly simplistic.
I've had Jay Adams personally as a teacher, and I am pretty sure he would avoid a too-hasty, pre-packaged solution to every case. There are "biblical counselors" who find fault with Adams for granting "too much" to the psychologists. He isn't pure enough for them. They've taken his approach, and tried to get themselves and others to achieve a "further reformation" of the field of counseling.
It's still accurate to say that N.C. (as Adams propounded it) approaches many alleged mental-illness as soul-problems. This is fundamentally different from most psychological approaches that see man as essentially a biochemical bag of naturalistic processes. Actually, a well-rounded N.C. interpretation of the human condition is to see man as a body-soul duality, a union of two parts. Bodily problems need bodily solutions, spirit-problems need spiritual solutions. And there is a realm of interaction between the two, necessarily.
A nouthetic counselor realizes that depressed people were really helped long before the modern era, and the introduction of serotonin-reuptake-inhibitors and a host of other chemical mental-state adjusters. One might well ask if the introduction of different (approved by shrinks and states) mood altering drugs--different from the old standby of alcohol--as behavior modification, is the right approach. It's not only Christians who have raised this question.
Some people, with drugs now coursing through their blood and brain, may in fact be better able to hear, process, and adopt biblical counsel. Others can't. I know of a man who was drowning in the results of his infidelity. He eventually stopped seeing his pastor; and when the pastor sought him out he answered: "Now that I have (prescriptionX) I don't feel bad about that stuff anymore." So, did the psychologist's solution actually do him good? It got him out of depression, and happy in his adultery.
Hmsxy is aberrant, unnatural behavior; a thing obvious to anyone, Christian or non-Christian, not living in this era of mass confusion encouraged by politically and economically powerful deviance. But it is also not a behavior with a single requisite cause and development, or a nifty and handy solution (take two verses and call me in the morning). But some nouthetic or "biblical" counselors do adopt a simplistic, flip-the-switch mentality to solving this life-dominating problem.
Another problem that comes about in certain biblical-counseling circles is how divorced this counseling is from the rest of the ministry of the means of grace. Adams was a seminary professor, training mainly future pastors. These men needed some revival of the skill of previous ages, as in the days when Puritans dealt with "cases of conscience." Once again, in the mid-20th century, many pastors (not so much in our traditions) were taught less Bible, and more psychology in seminary.
So, N.C. was born to guide pastors into confidence in the Word to do its ancient work. Now, he had a hand in creating one of the first non-ecclesiastical Counseling Centers; then eventually in other training centers around the country for producing a particular brand of counselor. This is a two-edged sword, in that it expanded the reach and presence of such counseling in settings outside the church. But while most nouthetic counselors will advise believers to join themselves to church, and may not attempt to counsel unbelievers apart from their gospel need; N.C. is not set (by its various practitioners) firmly and exclusively within the ambit of the Church. It is not always integral or an offshoot of some church's ministry of ordained means.
This abstraction of counseling from the pulpit/font/table weakens the whole enterprise. Not every counselor is ordained, vetted and trained and judged mature and balanced enough for the work. N.C. loves that Paul says to all believers, "you are competent to counsel one another." But that is said to the church, and within the bounds of the church where an ordained ministry exists to guide all that lay-effort to love one another and so fulfill the law of Christ.
People who are struggling with sins may be helped overnight by a word fitly placed. But that's probably less common (and even less in our spiritually unhealthy age) than the need for prolonged treatment. We don't want unnecessarily lengthy recovery; but neither are folks helped by promises of quick development of new strength and the rapid defeat of sin. People respond differently, and pastors who seek the care of souls have variable skills.
No matter what "school" or approach is adopted by a pastor--N.C., biblical, psychological of some kind, other?--one should have a soul-physician's determination to see his patient through to as much spiritual health as possible. How many hurting people have been discarded as "irremediable" by so-called ministers they went to, in order to find help?
What kind of help are we equipped to offer? The Bible, first and absolutely, for the sustenance of the soul. Other techniques there may be, which may offer some relief; A.A. comes to mind. But no technique of dealing with sin's pull will give eternally lasting benefit; only the Word of law and grace can do that.
But, applications of principles or techniques are tremendously person-variable. A person can be generally in agreement with Jay Adams' (N.C.'s "father") approach, without being a sycophant. Just like someone can be in general agreement with a "VanTil" approach to apologetics, while not slavishly lauding his every statement or conclusion, or that of one of several branches of his root.
Adams was seeking to reinvigorate pastoral counseling as a Bible-based function of ministry, rather than an adjunct of the field of Psychology. Where (often competing) psychological schools had in the last century shouldered out the pastor as a community-resource, offering in place of spiritual answers secular treatments; Adams reasserted the right and the helpfulness of the role of the Bible, wielded by those "mighty in the Scriptures," to the real help of people.
The question that must be answered in every supposed case of mental "anguish" or apparent departure from "well-adjustment," is: What sort of problem is this, and does it have a true spiritual component? Is EVERY fear the direct result of identifiable sin? That seems like an important matter to sort out, and deciding in advance that one knows the source of the issue (in sin) and therefore the certain diagnosis (in repentance) seems to me terribly simplistic.
I've had Jay Adams personally as a teacher, and I am pretty sure he would avoid a too-hasty, pre-packaged solution to every case. There are "biblical counselors" who find fault with Adams for granting "too much" to the psychologists. He isn't pure enough for them. They've taken his approach, and tried to get themselves and others to achieve a "further reformation" of the field of counseling.
It's still accurate to say that N.C. (as Adams propounded it) approaches many alleged mental-illness as soul-problems. This is fundamentally different from most psychological approaches that see man as essentially a biochemical bag of naturalistic processes. Actually, a well-rounded N.C. interpretation of the human condition is to see man as a body-soul duality, a union of two parts. Bodily problems need bodily solutions, spirit-problems need spiritual solutions. And there is a realm of interaction between the two, necessarily.
A nouthetic counselor realizes that depressed people were really helped long before the modern era, and the introduction of serotonin-reuptake-inhibitors and a host of other chemical mental-state adjusters. One might well ask if the introduction of different (approved by shrinks and states) mood altering drugs--different from the old standby of alcohol--as behavior modification, is the right approach. It's not only Christians who have raised this question.
Some people, with drugs now coursing through their blood and brain, may in fact be better able to hear, process, and adopt biblical counsel. Others can't. I know of a man who was drowning in the results of his infidelity. He eventually stopped seeing his pastor; and when the pastor sought him out he answered: "Now that I have (prescriptionX) I don't feel bad about that stuff anymore." So, did the psychologist's solution actually do him good? It got him out of depression, and happy in his adultery.
Hmsxy is aberrant, unnatural behavior; a thing obvious to anyone, Christian or non-Christian, not living in this era of mass confusion encouraged by politically and economically powerful deviance. But it is also not a behavior with a single requisite cause and development, or a nifty and handy solution (take two verses and call me in the morning). But some nouthetic or "biblical" counselors do adopt a simplistic, flip-the-switch mentality to solving this life-dominating problem.
Another problem that comes about in certain biblical-counseling circles is how divorced this counseling is from the rest of the ministry of the means of grace. Adams was a seminary professor, training mainly future pastors. These men needed some revival of the skill of previous ages, as in the days when Puritans dealt with "cases of conscience." Once again, in the mid-20th century, many pastors (not so much in our traditions) were taught less Bible, and more psychology in seminary.
So, N.C. was born to guide pastors into confidence in the Word to do its ancient work. Now, he had a hand in creating one of the first non-ecclesiastical Counseling Centers; then eventually in other training centers around the country for producing a particular brand of counselor. This is a two-edged sword, in that it expanded the reach and presence of such counseling in settings outside the church. But while most nouthetic counselors will advise believers to join themselves to church, and may not attempt to counsel unbelievers apart from their gospel need; N.C. is not set (by its various practitioners) firmly and exclusively within the ambit of the Church. It is not always integral or an offshoot of some church's ministry of ordained means.
This abstraction of counseling from the pulpit/font/table weakens the whole enterprise. Not every counselor is ordained, vetted and trained and judged mature and balanced enough for the work. N.C. loves that Paul says to all believers, "you are competent to counsel one another." But that is said to the church, and within the bounds of the church where an ordained ministry exists to guide all that lay-effort to love one another and so fulfill the law of Christ.
People who are struggling with sins may be helped overnight by a word fitly placed. But that's probably less common (and even less in our spiritually unhealthy age) than the need for prolonged treatment. We don't want unnecessarily lengthy recovery; but neither are folks helped by promises of quick development of new strength and the rapid defeat of sin. People respond differently, and pastors who seek the care of souls have variable skills.
No matter what "school" or approach is adopted by a pastor--N.C., biblical, psychological of some kind, other?--one should have a soul-physician's determination to see his patient through to as much spiritual health as possible. How many hurting people have been discarded as "irremediable" by so-called ministers they went to, in order to find help?
What kind of help are we equipped to offer? The Bible, first and absolutely, for the sustenance of the soul. Other techniques there may be, which may offer some relief; A.A. comes to mind. But no technique of dealing with sin's pull will give eternally lasting benefit; only the Word of law and grace can do that.
Edward
Puritanboard Commissioner
A search on Nouthetic turned up 47 results (at least one of which isn't relevant, and several of which appear to be duplicates)
You might look at this one:
http://www.puritanboard.com/showthr...nouthetic-and-integrationist-counseling/page2
You might look at this one:
http://www.puritanboard.com/showthr...nouthetic-and-integrationist-counseling/page2
- Status
