Review of Psychology in the Spirit: Part 3
Note: This is Part 3 of a three-part review of John Coe and Todd Hall’s Psychology in the Spirit. It was originally posted at the Gospel Coalition Review site. Read Part 1. Read Part 2.
Reflections on the Practice of Transformational Psychology
In theory, Coe and Hall address several of these vital questions. In actual practice, the authors at times seem to do the
very thing that they critique the classic “integration” model for doing. “A criticism against this view {integration} is that, despite the theory, in practice, integrationists tend to start with the categories of contemporary secular psychology and integrate the Scriptures into this already existing system, rather than allow the Scriptures and observation-reflection to come together in union and harmony with psychological categories” (p. 65).
For example, after a chapter where Coe shares his systematic theology of our relational nature, Hall then writes, “What I want to do in this chapter is attempt to flesh out the contours of a relational theory of human nature” (pp. 235-236). It is instructive to ponder where Hall heads in this chapter to flesh out Coe’s theory.
Given the focus of the theoretical portions of the book on the Spirit-dependent, Yahweh-fearing, regenerate sage, and upon the Scriptures as the bedrock foundation for understanding life, we might expect Hall to provide examples of his own sage-like reflections/observations. Or, he might have shared examples of other believers, either ancient or current, doing sage-like reflection. Or, we might have anticipated that Hall would flesh out Coe’s relational theology with profound, relevant, robust, nuanced examples from Scripture.
Instead, we read, “Recent developments in multiple fields (e.g., attachment theory, developmental psychology, affective neuroscience, relational psychoanalysis) are converging on a theory of implicit relational meaning” (p. 236). Most of the chapter then focuses on secular attachment theory. This is not a lone example. In another chapter, Coe turns to object-relations theory to flesh out his understanding of biblical relationality. In those chapters and others, the authors do not address the related issue of whether those theories were built upon observation and reflection on creation, or upon secular theory-building impacted by depraved presuppositions. Even if they were built upon Proverb-like observations, the broader question remains: Why use “non-sage” (unregenerate) observation as primary examples in a book that bases its thesis on Spirit-dependent, Yahweh-fearing, regenerate sage wisdom?
What warrant can we find in the model in Proverbs of a believing sage observing life under the fear of Yahweh that would suggest that the unregenerate psychologist in rebellion from Yahweh can derive moral wisdom for living? This seems a particularly relevant question given the passion of the authors. “The character of the psychologist is at the heart of doing psychology well in God” (pp. 105-106). “We want to make this point explicit as the foundation for the entire model” (p. 106). Speaking of the fall, “This explains why a secular psychology that rejects God’s revelation about the nature of sin and redemption is doomed from the outset, for it is a theoretical and psychological defense against dealing with the major issues of life before God” (p. 208). Their practical applications seem inconsistent with this sound theology.
It is when we move from theory to practice that we clearly demonstrate whether or not our stated confidence in the authority, sufficiency, profundity, and relevancy of God’s Word fleshes out. The issue of “integration” or “non-integration”—the relationship between extra-biblical information and special revelation—is often framed in terms of the authority and sufficiency of Scripture. It also needs to be framed in terms of the profundity and relevancy of Scripture. If we are confident in the profound depth of the treasure of God’s wisdom contained in His Word, then it seems curious to turn to object relations theory and attachment theory (which are not examples of sage-like, Spirit-dependent observation) to “flesh out” human relationality. Given the authors’ emphasis upon how profound are sage-like observations by Yahweh-fearing psychologists, the dearth of first-hand examples of such regenerate observations is equally intriguing.
Perhaps it can be explained in part by the mindset that at times seems to diminish the work of theologians while maximizing the work of psychologists. “It is interesting to note that it has often been psychologists and not theologians who have been most helpful in understanding the recalcitrant nature of psychopathology. Theologians and philosophers may have much to say about the origin, etiology and radical nature of sin, but it is psychologists who have excelled in providing an insightful understanding of how sin and psychopathology work in the human heart, and why many of the sins and vices we participate in will not go away by merely wishing them to be gone” (p. 297). Earlier they spoke of biblical counseling’s lack of attending to how the Scriptures “apply to real dynamics of human experience” that “tend to make some of their discussions a bit superficial, overly cognitive, behavioral, and not adequately integrated with how change and growth really work in human existence” (p. 62).
One wonders who Coe and Hall have and have not been reading. Certainly the great theologians, pastors, and soul physicians of church history offer ample evidence of insightful understanding of how sin works in the heart and how Gospel-centered ministry addresses the complex process of dealing with such sins and vices. And certainly, many pastors, theologians, and biblical counselors today are writing about and ministering from a robust, nuanced understanding of the depths of sin and the complexity of the change process. Other than a brief mention of David Powlison’s biblical counseling work, all of Coe and Hall’s references to biblical counselors either are to people who are actually anti-biblical counseling (Bobgan) or to writings from over a generation ago. Perhaps it would be helpful if the authors had further exposure to these new writings which evidence confidence in the profundity of Scripture and demonstrate the relevancy of Scripture for specific life issues.
The authors believe that “psychologists need to give these principles {of what makes psychotherapy work} away to the church, and seminaries, pastors, and ministry leaders need to plunder these truths to the fullest insofar as they provide insight into the psychospiritual growth process” (p. 338). Is it possible that it may need to be the other way around? Christian psychologists need to plunder the comprehensive progressive sanctification principles learned from a profound spiritual theology applied in real life to real people with real problems by compassionate Gospel-centered theologians, pastors, and biblical counselors?
The Indicative and the Imperative
Psychology in the Spirit is a watershed book that deserves careful attention. Its “indicative” sections (theory/theology) in particular point to Gospel-centered solutions. “Only the forgiveness available in the cross of Christ, and the love of God infused into the heart of the believer . . .” enable us to “see and reflect upon what is real and true” (p. 34). “Thus, it is in redemption, and not creation alone, that we find our fundamental identity” (p. 35).
However, the imperative sections (practice/methodology) fell a little flat. It would be like the Apostle Paul in Ephesians 1-3 providing the indicatives of who we are in Christ through the Spirit, but then moving in Ephesians 4-6 to imperatives that focused on principles from the world and power from the self. For Paul (and us) that would have been tragic. From Coe and Hall, it is disappointing because the core of their model (Spirit/Scripture/Sage Scientist) has great merit. And they appear to have a deep allegiance to the role of the Bible in the Christian life. Perhaps this introductory volume will lead to further works that demonstrate a greater focus on first-hand, Proverb-like, sage observations done with God in heart and Scripture in hand.
Join the Conversation
What is your review of Coe and Hall’s Psychology in the Spirit?
Trackbacks/Pingbacks