(by Philip G. Monroe. Associate professor of Counseling & Psychology at Biblical Seminary. Dr. Monroe is our blogger for the month of July and this is his third post.)

Today I received a request to evaluate a new model of Christian counseling. The writer wondered if I had heard of it and did I have an opinion about its quality.

Let me admit to you that I love and hate this question. I love it because I love to discuss concepts, ideas, and approaches. And having read many of the key writers in my field I have some strong opinions too. But I hate the question because many often just want to know if they should put the book in the good book pile or the toss pile. However, in this case, I know my questioner is thoughtful and interested in the deeper conversation.

Have you ever wondered how you might evaluate whether the next new book or model of Christian counseling is faithful to the Christian tradition? To good psychology? Should you recommend it or warn others away? I recommend the following “outside-in” procedure to help you come to that decision: 

1. Look at the packaging. First, explore how the authors sell the model? How do they place their endorsements? How effusive are they? Do the blurbs overemphasize the qualifications of the endorsers (their degrees, books, positions)? Are the endorsers also clients or users of the model? Second, how is the model advertised? How do they speak of healing? Do they seem to promise more than what seems reasonable based on prior experiences of change? Your findings here may not tell you all you need to know but ought to tell you whether the author is interested primarily in selling a product or participating in the advance of the field.
2. Model descriptors? All models need descriptor words so that the reader understands and can classify its connection (or opposition) to other models. What words do they use? What do they connect or disconnect from? This will tell you about who they like, dislike, and what they think their new model supersedes. Do they use many neologisms or combinations of words? For example (and I’m making these up), bio-spiritual attachment, theo-neuro healing. New words aren’t always wrong and can be useful. They can also be used to create impressions such as intentionally trying to sound biblical and scientific at the same time. Finally, how do they interact with Scripture? Many verses? A few that are deeply explicated? Stated theological suppositions without much support? Greek/Hebrew word studies leading to some previously unknown understanding of the human psyche or soul? Again, your impressions of descriptors ought to tell you whether or not the person is seeking superficial impressions of solid work or something more.
3. Observations. Every author or model begins their conceptual work via personal experience. Some may be anecdotal, others may be more scientific. But whichever is the case, the author has made some observations about problems and the way things get better. These are important to evaluate as almost every model builder (even the most naïve or wrongheaded) sees something of value. You may find this portion of your evaluation most helpful to you. What does this person see that you have not? What fresh angle do they have on something that you have overlooked? Have you become pessimistic about change or about the bible’s role in emotional health? Do they challenge your view on things?
4. Techniques. The interventions used by a model builder tend to be the most attractive portion of their work. They’ve spotted a problem and developed a solution or a process towards a solution. Often, readers skim for these tools in order to add them to their therapeutic belt-without considering how they fit into the larger scheme of things. Notice that interventions may work well but not always for the reasons the author suggests. Second, interventions usually produce an effect but does the effect lead in the right direction? For example, techniques designed to “get the anger out” have proven to have create short-term positive feelings but do not lead to long-term health (since anger’s root has not been touched). In your evaluation of techniques, what does the author see as most important?
5. Philosophy and Worldview. Now we drill down to the foundation. What is the model really built on? This part of your evaluation is the hardest as many authors don’t explicitly tell you (sometimes they don’t know themselves!). How do they interact with scientific literature? Do they use it to make global and black/white statements about human functioning? Are they willing to identify either holes in their theories or raise questions that still need answering (empirical humility)? Do they deny the value of scientific research? Can you describe their view of human nature? Of the nature of problems (causes and correlations)? Of the sources of solutions to human problems? Of health and optimal living?

Once you have explored your model in question using this outside-in technique, you should have developed some impressions. What have you learned that gives you pause? Sometimes such pause forms the basis of our new learning; of rebuke of erroneous thinking. Other times, pause reminds us that stepping outside the norms of scientific endeavor or historic Christian beliefs ought not be done lightly. Second, what has the author observed about the world we live in that might be useful to you? What techniques might be employed by you that are in keeping with your understanding of the Christian life? What of the model is dangerous and misleading? In your overall review, is there enough of that is worthwhile? Will the casual reader be helped or led astray?  

Why is such careful evaluation necessary? During my recent trip to Rwanda I had a conversation with a Christian man working in an NGO. He started the conversation this way,

“Do you know what is wrong with Rwanda? Christians in name only. Rwanda is supposed to be 98% Christian and yet look what didn’t happen in the country during the genocide. Christians didn’t rise up en masse and say no to this terrible sin. I was in [a Muslim country] recently and their Christian population is under 3%. And yet Christians there are bold and active.”

Sometimes the greatest threat to Christian psychology is not secular suppositions from psychology or a world that has set itself up against the truth claims of Scripture. Sometimes, the greatest danger comes from inside Christian psychology-from those who are “in name only” looking to build their own empire and willing to do so through superficial use of the bible or the science of human functioning.

May the Lord make us wise as serpents and harmless as doves!