Clients come seeking help with their own values and “orienting systems.” But even when helpers insist that they are “value-free” in their work, a closer look reveals that they naturally bring their own preferred lenses, assumptions about what has meaning, and ideas of how to cope with challenges to that meaning. The problem is not that helpers have their own orienting systems – these can provide road maps for the work – but that they may be unaware of the impact of these orienting systems on their interactions with clients.
This idea applies, of course, to both counseling and spiritual guidance. I’d like to share some ideas that come out of my interest in supporting counselors and spiritual guides – here simply identified as “helpers” – while offering ideas that may also be useful to clients and seekers.
Significance and the Sacred
Let’s begin by drawing on the wisdom of Kenneth Pargament’s The psychology of religion and coping, published in 1997. This book was ahead of the more recent wave of publications on psychology and religion/spirituality, but Pargament is a well-known and well-respected psychologist whose ongoing research has been invaluable to the field. Spiritually-integrated psychotherapy: Understanding and addressing the sacred was published in 2007, and he is the editor of the APA Handbook of psychology, religion, and spirituality (2 vols.), published in 2013. He is widely recognized for his own empirical research as well as his familiarity with the research in the field as a whole. And his theoretical contributions have brought clarity and insight to this complex arena.
Pargament introduces two perspectives. After exploring different ways of defining religion (substantive vs. functional), he works towards bridging these distinct approaches. From the substantive tradition, we emphasize the sacred, and from the functional viewpoint we highlight the search for significance. Meaning, or significance, can be derived from numerous sources, but becomes religious/spiritual when it is imbued with the sacred. His definition of religion flows from these essential elements: religion is “a process, a search for significance in ways related to the sacred.”
Each helper clearly has his ow her their own value-orientation. So what challenges may arise from this personal preference? Obviously, the helper may judge a client’s perspective (as wrong, misguided, harmful), or impose her own convictions about what has meaning. But when a helper is unaware of how her own lenses may affect the client’s experience, the results may be even more problematic. For instance, numerous surveys suggest that mental health professionals – especially psychologists – tend to be less connected to religious practices and institutions than their clients. Their bias towards secular perspectives may (without their awareness) color their work, de-valuing their clients’ orienting systems and subtly emphasizing secular solutions.
Helper Orientations to Religion and Spirituality
Pargament suggests there are four basic “helping orientations” to religion. (Whenever the word “religion” is highlighted here, let’s add “spirituality.”)
- Religious rejectionism: outright rejection. This can be found in some of the major schools of psychology: Freud’s psychoanalytic view and Albert Ellis’s rational emotive therapy both dismiss religion as childish and irrational. Religious/mystical experiences are seen as indicators of deeper psychological problems. Pargament draws on his research to highlight the ways in which religion is not just a delusional defense, but may be associated with healthy forms of coping. And he carefully points out that rejectionism violates the ethical standards set by professional organizations. (The American Psychological Association and the American Counseling Association have both established spiritual and religious competencies.)
- Religious exclusivism: the interpretation of all human problems as spiritual in nature, usually blaming rejection of or separation from God, misinterpretation of religious teachings, or falling away from what is viewed as the One True Path. Purely psychological approaches are deemed harmful and misguided. Not only does this approach raise ethical concerns, but it may screen out potentially helpful resources. Pargament suggests that “the religious dimension cannot be fully reduced to the psychological dimension, nor can the psychological dimensions be fully elevated to the spiritual.” Even nonreligious methods of coping may be useful.
- Religious constructivism: all meaning is constructed, and constructions can be evaluated on the basis of theoretical and practical criteria. Constructivism discards the notion of an “objective reality,” emphasizing instead the ways in which human beings “construct” the world religiously or spiritually. If there seem to be problematic issues, the helper does not take a “truth” stance; rather, the challenge is to enter the client’s constructed world in order to “repair and strengthen” what is found there. Respect for the client’s traditions, symbols, and meaning-making is present to some degree, without imposition of the helper’s meaning-system. It may, however, be difficult for the helper to avoid conveying the sense that these meanings are personally created and even arbitrary, subject to manipulation. For the client, uncertainty about the therapist’s authenticity and trustworthiness may linger.
- Religious pluralism: “there is an absolute reality that includes a higher power, but…there are a variety of ways to approach it.” Respect for differences may coexist with belonging to a particular tradition. The helper honors the client’s orientation while remaining true to her own perspective. This both/and approach calls for a sharing of orientations: the helper searches for possible resources within the client’s framework, but may also offer alternative viewpoints derived from psychological theory and research as well as from her own framework of significance. Two worlds may meet, and may be enriched in the process. To protect against the power imbalance, the pluralist emphasizes an open and collaborative approach, sharing the setting of goals and choice of methods, and also acknowledging the helper’s own religious/spiritual orientation when it enters the conversation. There is no assertion of a superior Truth: there is simply space for several points of view that may be worth considering.
(Note: “religious pluralism” differs from the simple recognition of religious diversity. The latter is a descriptive term, while the former is “the energetic engagement with diversity,” going beyond tolerance to “the active seeking of understanding across lines of difference.” Pluralism is not relativism, but the encounter of commitments, embracing dialogue and encounter. See http://pluralism.org/what-is-pluralism/, Diana Eck, and the Pluralism project of Harvard University.)
Pluralism – and Bridging
The pluralist perspective is Pargament’s preference. At the same time he cautions that it asks a lot of us: an in-depth understanding of religious life in its various forms, how it can be helpful or harmful, and a grasp of skills for religious/spiritual assessment and intervention. These are endeavors that call for the investment of time and energy.
Helping professionals face the challenge of bridging between two ways of knowing and being – psychological and spiritual/religious – each of which claims deep and substantial value. Psychology has developed its own approaches to knowledge, honoring scientific guidelines in order to “offer some measure of insights beyond the limits of our ordinary understanding of reality.” Religions and spiritual paths have their own “ways of knowing,” with their own methods and insights (prayer, meditation, sacred literature, rituals, music, art, communal worship, tradition, reason, art, compassion). Yes, there is often tension between the two ways of knowing, and each may claim ultimacy.
Bridging and Boundaries
A counselor needs to listen closely to discern a client’s religious or spiritual leaning. Clients may be cautious about entering that territory unless they have a clear sense that their experiences and beliefs are welcome. A question or two on an intake form may be helpful in assuring the client that this is a safe place for exploration. Of course, it takes more than a form! If this is an area that you, as a client, want to include in your counseling experience, I encourage you to take some time in the first few sessions to share and ask some questions.
There is no question, of course, in spiritual guidance/direction! In that context, the uncertain boundaries have to do with the psychological territory. Most spiritual directors are comfortable including such explorations as loss and grief, life changes, relationships, emotional experiences, even some dimensions of simple trauma. If the spiritual guide senses that the seeker needs more depth and professional help, she will refer the seeker to a counselor or psychologist.
Whatever your particular background and commitment, I invite you to explore the possibilities of a both/and perspective – not simply as a mental exercise, but as an embodied, heart-ful endeavor. This orientation is for the sake of your personal well-being and growth, and for the sake of the world we live in. At the same time, appropriate boundaries are important if you are a counselor or spiritual guide. For seekers and clients, it may be helpful to understand the potential relationships between counseling and spiritual guidance. You are then better prepared to choose the path that feels right for you.
(Note: occasionally, my blogs are connected with a different author’s name. Please ignore! Just forgot to change the primary name from my web consultant to my own! Will keep trying to remember!)