Nouthetic-Only Counseling: The Fad Continues

The issue of nouthetic counseling, modern psychology and evangelical schools is one that has frequently caught my attention. I have had many discussions with nouthetic-only counseling advocates in recent years. Here is one I posted.

The recent news out of Southern Seminary concerning this subject is only the latest in a series of small squirmishes that have begun in conservative, evangelical schools of higher learning (needless to say the schools that have adopted the nouthetic-only counseling teaching approach have been those who have been consistingly leaning towards the fundamentalist side of Christendom).

Having read the ABP article, I immediately wished to make commentary on it. Since Southern is not my seminary, I can freely do so.

But I also thought that both my audience and I would gain something by knowing exactly why this particular issue is of some importance to me. Now I have studied psychology in high school, college, and at seminary. When I usually discuss this issue with someone who is against modern psychology 1) they usually, but not always, do not know anything about psychology … except what they read in Competent to Counsel, and 2) think that my knowledge of the subject somehow invalidates my scrutiny of the discipline, i.e., I am too close to the subject to be objective. Of course, if I knew nothing about psychology then they would say that I was ignorant of the subject and therefore my opinion would again be invalid.

As a conservative evangelical, I hate to see conservative evangelicals make fools of themselves, especially in the area of science of which they tend to know nothing about. We really hurt ourselves as witnesses when we begin to make hay over matters we know nothing about, i.e. evolution.

But this ignorance also is theological. Many of these people have an ignorant view of human nature and the nature and purpose of the Scriptures. They have adopted a Platonic, Cartesian, and even a Lockian view of human nature that is foreign to the Bible. What is really ironic is that the atheistic psychologists whom the nouthetic-only crowd claims to be concerned about has the exact same dichotomous view of man’s nature. Naturally, atheistic psychologists arrive at unscriptural conclusions. But theistic psychologists do arrive at scriptural conclusions. Most of these Christian psychologists do have a correct view of the nature of man and know when to use psychological methods and when to use Biblical methods. The nouthetic-only crowd, who are understandably affronted by the unscriptural conclusions of atheistic psychologists, would rather dismiss all psychology rather than attempt to separate the wheat from the tares.

As a future educator of Christendom, I am always somewhat irritated when a particular discipline is hand-tied for the sake of political correctness (yes, let’s call the new nouthetic-only education fad what it is: a evangelical political correctness; it certainly isn’t theological correctness). I am even more infuriated to see students short-changed out of their education because of fads and theological naivete.

Also, I am very concerned that ill-equipped Christian counselors in the future are going to be unable to wrestle with many of the problems they will encounter because evangelical schools are unwilling to teach psychology.

As a future professor, I hate to see current professors vilified and fired because of naïve Christian politicians.


The Christian counseling department of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, which defined the role of pastoral counseling for generations of ministers and Christian counselors, will make a wholesale change by emphasizing "biblical counseling" over behavioral science.

Southern used to define many things. That school used to be one of the greatest seminaries in the world but now …

The move is a departure from the previous integrative or "collaborative" approach, favored by many pastoral counseling professors and advocates, which teaches both behavioral sciences and biblical theology to minister to a person's needs.

Now you cannot even teach both.

The move drew unfavorable responses from several Christian counseling specialists who were students of Wayne Oates, the former Southern Seminary professor who established the school's "psychology of religion" department more than 50 years ago and who is considered a pioneer in the pastoral counseling field.

He’s written some good books.

According to a report from the seminary's news office, the new vision for the department "is a wholesale change of emphasis built upon the view that Scripture is sufficient to answer comprehensively the deepest needs of the human heart."

Here is the problem in a nutshell. Psychology does not solve the problem of sin. Only the Word of God as recorded in the Scriptures can solve problems of sin. But Psychology solves problems that the Bible does not address, i.e., non-sinful issues that affect the mind, the body and the behavior. Not all of the problems that affects are minds, bodies and behavior are due to sinful natures. To believe otherwise is to have a, well, ignorant view of man’s nature and the nature and purpose of the Scriptures.

Seminary officials characterized the school's previous model as one that prepared therapists for state licensure more than it did for ministry in the local church.

Now the students will be ill-prepared for both.

But not everyone who is going to learn therapy at a seminary is going to serve full-time in a local church. Some students will be working in the world. If we keep Christians from being able to receive an adequate education at Christian schools, then these Christians will go to non-Christian schools and learn a non-Christian education. Is that what we want?

I once overheard two “future pastors” speak about this issue. They were discussing the problems of modern psychology but the one argument they made that interested me the most was that modern psychology prevented pastors from counseling because you have to have a degree in order to be qualified. Basically, learning modern methods of psychology is too difficult for a preaching pastor to concern himself about. And in this they were right. But 1) counseling in the local church was never meant to be the sole activity of a single “pastor” and 2) not all counseling moments will be done by an ordained minister within the confines of the local church.

I think some aspects of this issue stem from our attitude of the pastorship. We have elevated the office of pastor to such an exalted place that we expect him (always “him”) to perform the ministerial duties of an entire congregation. We have so elevated the position of pastor in our minds and activities that our seminaries only wish to train pastors and the occasional music minister. The idea that an un-ordained minister could learn counseling methods different from that of a preaching pastor is now so foreign to how we view the church that we shun at the suggestion. Again, why should a pastor of a church learn modern psychology? It would be like a lay-man learning advanced hermeneutical methods for teaching a Sunday School class.

"We're very concerned with the way in which so many institutions are really being driven by licensure demands in the way that we really intentionally want to be driven by the needs of the churches," said Russell Moore, dean of the school of theology and senior vice president for academic administration.

So because the local church and its needs are our primary focus, we are going to stop teaching those who will not be serving in ordained positions in churches. Yes, they are basically ceding an entire area of ministry to the world.

Moore called the previous approach to integrate theology and psychology a "failed" model "because it is so naïve about the presuppositions behind secular psychologies."

The naivete, I’m afraid, is with those who neither understand psychology nor the nature of man. Some think others are naïve when those doing the thinking just do not understand.

"I think we're seeing now that psychotherapy is not one vision of science," he said. "You can't simply say you're going to integrate the science of psychotherapy with Scripture because there are only sciences and theories of psychotherapy that are contradictory and incoherent."

Perhaps we shouldn’t use hermeneutics; it is only a science and an art form with many different theories that are often contradictory and incoherent. We could separate the good hermeneutics from the bad hermeneutics but why not just chunk the whole discipline out in order that we do not teach a false hermeneutics. The Bible is sufficient! We do not need hermeneutics!

Wade Rowatt, a former professor at Southern Seminary and a counselor at the St. Matthews Pastoral Counseling Center, said the same criticism of multiple and contradictory interpretations could be said of biblical theology, but ministers still learn and apply the Scriptures and integrate them with specific understandings of human personality.

Ah, he gets it.

"I don't want to pick a fight with Southern Seminary," said Rowatt, whose counseling center is affiliated with St. Matthews Baptist Church. "I don't want to pick a fight with this other model. But I do want to speak a clear word of support for the model that has been terminated -- that has been there 60-something years. It's a system that's produced chaplains' programs in hundreds of hospitals, that has trained hundreds of military chaplains, thousands of pastors to be effective care-givers in their congregations."

I think one reason that the leaders of the current convention are so old and the new professors and leadership are so young is because the new professors have no memory of what life was like before the takeover and the older leaders don’t want anyone to know. All they know is what they are told. Heck, we do not even want history books and history professors around who might give a different view of what life was like before 1979.

But you can’t hide the past. And these young professors, over time, are going to slowly begin to reach the same conclusions that previous generations did; it’s inevitable. And when this happens there is going to be another round of resurgence.

In the seminary's news report, President Al Mohler said the program will emphasize teaching pastors and other church leaders how to apply Scripture comprehensively to the concerns and crises of everyday life.

Because only church leaders are qualified to counsel. And those who aren’t qualified, we aren’t going to teach them how to be qualified.

Those future pastors are in for a shock.

"In this psycho-therapeutic age, it is really important that we think as Christians, that we employ authentically Christian thinking -- biblical thinking -- to human life, and that we do this in a way that, without apology, confronts and critiques the wisdom of the age and seeks the wisdom that can come only from God and from God's Word."

Psycho is right.

The issue is about application and context not principle and content.

But Vicki Hollon, executive director of the Wayne Oates Institute, said seminary officials are creating a false dichotomy "by implying that pastoral care and counseling is not and has not been biblical."

That’s what I said!

"They have created the proverbial straw man," Hollon said. "And their movement away from science reveals a lack of faith, or at least a fear that somehow science is outside the realm of God's creation and domain."

It is probably not so much a lack of faith as a lack of understanding about theology and psychology. One can still have good faith and be ignorant of things they know nothing about. I know practically nothing about leading worship in a church, but that doesn’t mean that I have inadequate faith. Contrarywise, knowing about leading worship or, in this case, psychology and theology doesn’t mean you have good faith.

Sufficiency of the Scripture seems to be a selectively utilized concept. There was a time when this biblical concept was used to argue against Christian associations, denominations, mission boards, and seminaries for the expressed reason that such is absent to the Scriptures. Ironically, those who are currently advocating a rigid interpretation of the sufficiency of the Scriptures are also strongly advocating creeds. This nouthetic-only counseling is just the latest in a long line of fad-driven, fundamentalist movements. Like all other movements, it will soon die and the next generation of rigid Christian traditionalists, whose fathers opposed psychology will embrace the discipline but have a new focus of ire.

The Louisville-based institute was established to advance the field of pastoral counseling, the focus of Wayne Oates' writings and teaching. Oates taught at Southern from 1948-74 and afterward at the University of Louisville School of Medicine. The author of 57 books, including "The Christian Pastor," Oates died at the age of 82 in 1999.

Now what is that spinning noise?

"Dr. Oates' unique contribution was to lead Baptists to say we need to be thoroughly informed about understanding persons through personality theory, and understanding families through family systems theory, and understanding groups of people -- understanding society," Rowatt said, "and then integrating it with sound biblical theological scholarship in constructing a theory for the pastoral shepherding of persons."

Using modern methods of investigation to apply biblical principles? Sounds like liberalism to me.

Rowatt described the process as a "trialogue," with "the minister, the person in crisis and the Holy Spirit, seeking wholeness and healing in a spiritual journey."

The basic 2 commandments. Loving the Lord and loving our neighbor. About as basically biblical as it comes.

But Moore said such a process is leading to the inclusion of counter-Christian beliefs in such programs. "What we're seeing in other institutions is an integrationism in which Freudian and Darwinist and behaviorist understandings of human nature are just uncritically accepted into a Christian worldview."

Notice this wording. Not “has led” but “is leading”. I noticed this terminology when reading a few recent books by some of the leaders of the conservative resurgence. According to their accounts, nothing that the “old” convention had done had “led” to liberalism but it was “leading” to liberalism. This means that in their own view there wasn’t a problem but soon would be one, but before a problem does come they needed to act. In this same way, the last 60 yrs of psychology teaching at Southern has not led away from the Scripture but is leading.

Okay, most psychologist, Christian or non-Christian, do not refer to Freud anymore. Freudian psychology was overwhelmingly abandoned in the 1960s. Either he is ignorant of psychology or he is simply using Freud as a straw man to represent to an even more ignorant audience all of the contemporary aspects of modern psychology that he dislikes. The same thing can be said about his use of Darwin. The equivalence would be for a moderate to accuse a contemporary conservative of Landmarkism simply because they do not like psychology.

Christian psychologists do critique modern methods of learning and application. That is why Christian psychologists do not use all modern methods; they pick and choose and compare different methods with Scripture. The fact that some wish to throw the baby out with the bathwater suggests that they are the ones who are not thinking critically.

Rowatt, who is also a professor of pastoral counseling at the new Baptist Seminary of Kentucky, countered that he hasn't seen the teachings of Freud advanced in any Christian pastoral counseling program he's aware of. "We don't train junior psychologists and psychiatrists," he said. "We train pastors who have a knowledge of Bible theology and the behavioral science and supervision in the integration of that for the practice of ministry."

See.

Roy Woodruff, retired executive director of the American Association of Pastoral Counselors and a student of Oates, said the implication that the previous pastoral counseling model was not biblically based "is either totally ignorant or totally arrogant, and I don't know which."

Both.

Southern officials said the new direction is not a new degree program but will involve "a wholesale change of emphasis." The seminary's master of divinity degree with an emphasis on pastoral counseling was renamed the "master of divinity with an emphasis on biblical counseling." Its master of arts in Christian counseling was renamed "master of arts in biblical counseling."

2 Peter 2:22

The 70 students already enrolled in both previous degree programs can finish the degrees they started, said Lawrence Smith, Southern's vice president for public relations.

That is the something that I am thankful for. At least they allow students to finish their degree programs. But if what those students are learning is so harmful to the future of the ministry then why allow them to continue? It must not be that detrimental then.

In the new model, students will take courses that deal with such topics as biblical and theological foundations for counseling, marriage and sexuality, parenting and family, and biblical foundations for the nature of personhood. Moore said Southern will teach women to counsel other women.

And men to counsel women but not women to counsel men.

Interesting.

According to them, a woman can not be a pastor. But even as un-ordained she could still counsel others, including men, because what she was doing lay outside the confines of the local church. Since the emphasis will now be towards nouthetic-only pastoral care, will women be trained to counsel men? Interesting.

The new direction does not deny the existence of some mental conditions that science attributes to chemical imbalances, such as bipolar disorder or severe depression, Moore said. "The problem is, we are living in an era in which there is the notion that there is a pharmacological solution to every human problem."

Yes, the new direction doesn’t deny the existence of such problems, we just will not teach students to deal with them. We’ll let Christian counselors go to secular schools to get such training. Heck, will let the lost go to secular psychologists to get help.

This guy is not thinking critically. Everything he says seems to come right out of the Jay E. Adams book.

Hollon and Rowatt said the new program will produce students who cannot gain the accreditation or certification required by many agencies for such roles as hospital, hospice or prison chaplain.

Well, women cannot counsel other women in the military because of the shift in SBC policy. Why not right off a whole other demographic to the Satan?

"Omitting knowledge from the behavioral sciences and the hard sciences will produce ill-equipped pastors, chaplains, counselors who will have knowledge of the tip of the iceberg without comprehensive understanding of the other factors," Rowatt said.

We may be sending a generation to hell but at least we’re sending them to hell biblically.