|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/11/2009
Posts: 939
Points: 2,918
|
To what extent did your training pick up on the conflicting value systems of counselling techniques?
Intelfam, you asked me this question in the "Personal Conversations With God" thread.
Because the reply window to your post would not load I decided to try the "new topic" option, and here we are.
Since 1984 I have received and participated in ongoing training for various aspects of Christian Ministry. This training has mainly picked up on the conflict of values between secular humanism and Christian beliefs.
The difference resides in the Christian's rejection of the hyper-humanistic belief that mankind as a species is supremely intelligent and sufficient in himself, and can therefore solve all his problems without any input from a deity.
This difference can be quite marked when a counselee with strong Christian beliefs receives conflicting input from a secular humanist counsellor, some of whom consider religious belief itself to be a mental disorder.
This would be quite extreme, and for the most part professional counsellors show a lot of tolerance for theories, ideologies, and beliefs they do not agree with or subscribe to.
Christian ministers cannot avoid counselling their own, but mostly it is for everday matters rather than for mental disorders that require professional psychiatric treatment.
Job 33:15 "In a dream, in a vision of the night, When deep sleep falls upon men, In slumberings upon the bed;" Theology 101 "If He doesn't know everything then He isn't God."
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 2,424
Points: 7,126
Location: China
|
Dreamy -
I hope I'm not jumping in and de-railing your topic; but I have a question regarding something that has long puzzled me.
Could you possibly tell me why, among certain Christian sects, the word 'secular' - which would seem to be entirely redundant - is ALWAYS tacked on in front of the word 'Humanism'?
While I can quite see the need for the word 'classical' used to denote the beginnings of the Renaissance Humanist trend - it differentiates between the emergent thought of the movement and what it eventually evolved into - but 'secular' Humanism in respect of to-day's philosophical underpinning of Humanism, has always been rather puzzling nomenclature to me.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/11/2009
Posts: 939
Points: 2,918
|
Romany wrote:Dreamy -
I hope I'm not jumping in and de-railing your topic; but I have a question regarding something that has long puzzled me.
Could you possibly tell me why, among certain Christian sects, the word 'secular' - which would seem to be entirely redundant - is ALWAYS tacked on in front of the word 'Humanism'?
While I can quite see the need for the word 'classical' used to denote the beginnings of the Renaissance Humanist trend - it differentiates between the emergent thought of the movement and what it eventually evolved into - but 'secular' Humanism in respect of to-day's philosophical underpinning of Humanism, has always been rather puzzling nomenclature to me. Well, Romany, you may be on to something. I enjoyed your reply to the "browser-shy" thread, and your question doesn't derail this thread, so I'm thinking that because "humanism" has various usages (see TFD), adding "secular" narrows the context and emphasises the intended meaning, but you will notice I dropped "secular" from my second reference to "humanism" in the OP as "hyper-humanism" better expressed the degree of difference. I have never been a humanist in the sense of rejecting the belief that God exists and interacts with His Creation, but as a youth I did briefly maintain a secular lifestyle. from TFD Quote:
secular
- Has a root meaning of "temporal"—opposed to the eternity of the church—and means "not connected to a religion."
humanism
- a theory of the life of man as a responsible being behaving independently of a revelation or deity. Also called naturalistic, scientific, or philosophical humanism
- A system of thought that rejects religious beliefs and centers on humans and their values, capacities, and worth.
secular humanism
- the doctrine emphasizing a person's capacity for self-realization through reason; rejects religion and the supernatural
Job 33:15 "In a dream, in a vision of the night, When deep sleep falls upon men, In slumberings upon the bed;" Theology 101 "If He doesn't know everything then He isn't God."
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 19,779
Points: 59,343
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
As an atheist I see humanism as respect to (all) life, equality and freedom of all humankind.
I see no interference between religious and secular (and atheist) morals and ethics.
I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 1/18/2010
Posts: 1,197
Points: 3,275
Location: United Kingdom
|
Jyrkkä Jätkä wrote:As an atheist I see humanism as respect to (all) life, equality and freedom of all humankind.
I see no interference between religious and secular (and atheist) morals and ethics.
I can agree JJ in my everyday life. I think the difference is in any form of counselling, formal or informal, the "recipient" will want advice framed in their own world-view. Oh, not sure about this, but take me as an example. I was pretty athletic until I became disabled at 50years and am dogged by constant pain. I imagine that the answer to "why me" and "How do I deal with this" would be different were I to consult a humanist counsellor, a christian counsellor, a buddhist counsellor, a Freudian counsellor and a Jungian counsellor. The basic values of their systems would come up with very different answers - particularly to the second question.
"The voice of the majority is no proof of justice." - Schiller
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 1/18/2010
Posts: 1,197
Points: 3,275
Location: United Kingdom
|
In referring to humanists I tend to use the third definition that Dreamy got from TFD: (BTW Dreamy, I missed this appearing as a new topic)
secular humanism
- the doctrine emphasizing a person's capacity for self-realization through reason; rejects religion and the supernatural
..although my training/study would probably amend the second clause to read "and rejects the necessity for religion and the supernatural in self realisation"
Having said that, I go along with Jung in his view that "If you take away a man's religion, you have to give him a new one". While not a lot is known about the detail of any Jung's religious views, there was no doubt that he felt that, in the second half of life, the issue of meaning becomes more dominant in people's outlook on life. And that the goal issue (in which he departs radicallyfrom Freud), is an important part of what directs how we live our lives. In helping folk to find this meaning he claims that one should not replace one "childhood " religion by imposing a new (or reconstructed old) one.
But he did believe, as I do, that to feel that one's life has meaning does require one to have a coherent set of values and beliefs against which background to make decisions consistently. I know he felt that a "religious sense" was hard wired into us by evolution, but did not prescribe any established religion as "the one". In fact, he felt that the christian churches had lost their way and no longer, as institutions, offer any sense of meaning or the numinous to followers (unless they were not questioners and were happy to have their lives "other-directed".
I guess my babbling on, is just to say that a belief in self-realisation (and its desirability), a teleological view of life, is not contrary to a a religious belief - which some humanists would claim.
"The voice of the majority is no proof of justice." - Schiller
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/1/2011
Posts: 987
Points: 1,858
Location: United Kingdom
|
I feel strongly about this.
I have always stood upon my own two feet and never consulted a ‘counsellor.’ If my children had faced very
difficult issues then we as parents would have dealt with them better than any so called counsellor. I think
that often more harm than good is done when folk take it upon themselves, in a professional capacity to
dispense advice as if ‘ordinary folk’ are unable to understand or cope.
The fact remains that the vast majority of folk go through their travails with the help of parent’s family
or friends.
There is too much reliance on’ professional’ folk who are no better equipped than a good parent or a good
friend.
‘Counselling techniques ‘says it all. The fact is that the ‘ordinary’ man and woman mother , father ,
friend etc. is qualified by dint of life’s experience to offer loving and sound counsel. All that is needed
is love, understanding, and a bit of empathy and wisdom… not the sole prerogatives , I am bound to say, of
so called counsellors. Others should not be negated by the elitest rubbish of so called 'professionals,' in
whatever capacity... be it religious or secular.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 5/21/2009
Posts: 5,441
Points: 15,821
Location: United Kingdom
|
I suppose the main useful function offered by counselling is in situations in which someone cannot for whatever reason approach their normal sources of comfort and wisdom, perhaps because they are part of the problem. It is true you can sometimes clarify internal muddles by talking to a stranger and there are counsellors with specialist knowledge who can offer more than your best mate in the pub (or on the Clapham omnibus for that matter).
"Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon" Suzanne Ertz
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/1/2011
Posts: 987
Points: 1,858
Location: United Kingdom
|
Yes pedro, of course you are right there are always exceptions ... mine was a general gripe... nuff said. Perhaps I went a smidgen over the top... Ahem. I was reminded of the oft repeated phrase you hear or see in the media when some trauma has occurred: The couple... child etc., are being offered. counsel. It seems it has become the norm as if it were somehow indispensable whereas it is not.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 1/18/2010
Posts: 1,197
Points: 3,275
Location: United Kingdom
|
percivalpecksniff wrote:Yes pedro, of course you are right there are always exceptions ... mine was a general gripe... nuff said. Perhaps I went a smidgen over the top... Ahem. I was reminded of the oft repeated phrase you hear or see in the media when some trauma has occurred: The couple... child etc., are being offered. counsel. It seems it has become the norm as if it were somehow indispensable whereas it is not. Absolutely spot on, PP
"The voice of the majority is no proof of justice." - Schiller
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/11/2009
Posts: 939
Points: 2,918
|
percivalpecksniff wrote:
I feel strongly about this.
I have always stood upon my own two feet and never consulted a ‘counsellor.’ If my children had faced very difficult issues then we as parents would have dealt with them better than any so called counsellor. I think that often more harm than good is done when folk take it upon themselves, in a professional capacity to dispense advice as if ‘ordinary folk’ are unable to understand or cope. The fact remains that the vast majority of folk go through their travails with the help of parent’s family or friends. There is too much reliance on’ professional’ folk who are no better equipped than a good parent or a good friend.
‘Counselling techniques ‘says it all. The fact is that the ‘ordinary’ man and woman mother, father, friend etc. is qualified by dint of life’s experience to offer loving and sound counsel. All that is needed is love, understanding, and a bit of empathy and wisdom… not the sole prerogatives , I am bound to say, of so called counsellors. Others should not be negated by the elitest rubbish of so called 'professionals,' in whatever capacity... be it religious or secular.
I agree, and ironically percival, by posting this you are "counselling". Many years ago a large pentecostal church in our city had a mature couple on staff solely for the purpose of counselling during the week. He had a Masters Degree in something and was once an ordained Methodist minister, and together he and his wife attracted such a clientele that there was a 3 week waiting list, and only those who were attending mid-week home-groups(less formal, mini-church services to encourage participation in Bible Studies), and had already sought help from their home-group leader, were eligible for a place on the "production line". Although I liked the couple in question I think perhaps a sort of "guru complex" can at times infiltrate this type of ministry causing among less enlightened members of a congregation, an unhealthy dependency on counsellors as solvers of problems, enforcers of wise solutions, and infallible spiritual guides. I find these verses helpful: Psalm 1:1-3 (1) Blessed is the man that walks not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of the scornful.
(2) But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in His law does he meditate day and night.
(3) And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that brings forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he does shall prosper.
Job 33:15 "In a dream, in a vision of the night, When deep sleep falls upon men, In slumberings upon the bed;" Theology 101 "If He doesn't know everything then He isn't God."
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 1/18/2010
Posts: 1,197
Points: 3,275
Location: United Kingdom
|
Dreamy wrote:
Although I liked the couple in question I think perhaps a sort of "guru complex" can at times infiltrate this type of ministry causing among less enlightened members of a congregation, an unhealthy dependency on counsellors as solvers of problems, enforcers of wise solutions, and infallible spiritual guides.
So what happened?
"The voice of the majority is no proof of justice." - Schiller
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 7/12/2010
Posts: 862
Points: 2,543
Location: Tuscany, Italy
|
The problem of all counsellors is they try to give advice from the best of their knowledge, but if any advice meets or even comes close to the client's feelings they will never know. They think in a way following their own and their teacher's ideas about a problem. Every solution depends of a combination of factors. I hope I was clear enough.
Probably only (the) God(s) know(s) the answer(s) to everything.
Give a man a fish you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish you feed him for a lifetime - Chinese proverb
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 3/22/2009
Posts: 2,364
Points: 7,167
Location: New Hampshire, United States
|
Dreamy wrote:
Hi Dreamy, I've been watching this thread with interest. At first I didn't think I'd contribute to it but, as the topic seems to have changed I feel compelled to address the later issue; however, there are some points in your OP that I am curious about. A word of clarification, I'm assuming "counselors" refers to those performing mental health care below the level of psychologists, and psychiatrists, but have had some amount of training.
The difference resides in the Christian's rejection of the hyper-humanistic belief that mankind as a species is supremely intelligent and sufficient in himself, and can therefore solve all his problems without any input from a deity.
This observation seems to be made at the sociological level, not the individual. I know of no school of psychology that views the individual in them selves sufficient to the task of achieving complete, harmonious, psychological integration and maturity completely on their own. Personally I don't think most schools of psych. would even know what that is. Be that as it may, if your stated view were true at the individual level, there would be no need for input from anyone.
Setting aside the qualifier "hyper' for a moment I'd like to address the concept of "secular humanism", my first introduction of this phrase was in works by, I think, Josh McDowell, or his contemporaries, and it was definitely considered antithetical to Christianity. During my pursuit of a degree in behavioral neuroscience I became further acquainted with the term. Based on my understanding the characteristic of humanism you describe would apply to a very small percentage of those who ascribe to it. These would be either, neo-Maslovian new age types, or (shiver) trans-humanists.
If I am not mistaken most secular humanists would also be convinced that humans are the result of evolutionary processes, for such to believe that humans are supremely intelligent would be grossly out of line from such a perspective. Further anyone who has pursued an investigation into the nature of human mentality from such a perspective would be intimately familiar with the incredible problem of subjectivity.
I am not sure that Christians in general are aware that just about all evolutionists are, at least philosophically in complete agreement concerning the "nature of man", Christians call it evil, evolutionists call it, ruthlessly selfish, both are antithetical to the virtues of the Gospel.
Now as far as "hyper-humanism" is concerned, I know of only one group this could apply to, the "trans-humanists", these folks are very scary.
This difference can be quite marked when a counselee with strong Christian beliefs receives conflicting input from a secular humanist counselor,
I can see where there is a potential for extreme problems here, particularly if the secular counselor is telling a person what to do about a particular situation, this in my opinion is extremely unethical, misguided, and ought to be grounds for being barred from counseling. "Telling a person what to do," hmmm that is somewhat vague, and I'm not sure how to say what I mean in this type of statement. Hopefully I can make it clear with the following. In my opinion counselors at this level should by nature be good listeners, trained in the methods of active listening, be proficient in identifying, and communicating the nature of cognitive distortions and logical fallacies, and by helping a person identify any of these in their thinking, lead them to their own solution to whatever gave rise to the dissonance that led the person to seek counseling in the first place. This I would maintain ought to be the standard for any counselor, as an example of what I would consider grossly inappropriate on the part of a religious counselor, any statements preceded by "God's will for you is..."
Question authority, before it questions you. How do you know, that you know, what you know?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 2,424
Points: 7,126
Location: China
|
Dreamy - the whole discussion seems to have taken off by now in a direction that renders my original posting irrelevant.
Although you kindly provided TFD explanations for me I still fail to see why the word 'secular' must be tacked on. As I said, the emergence of Humanism during the Renaissance is a different story - there were still at that time notable persons who managed to cling to Deism while espousing Humanist values.
But to-day's Humanism is a philosophy which precludes the acceptance of a Supreme Being so I am left to wonder how it can be anything but secular?
However, I don't wish to go off on what would now be a tangent:- I simply felt I should reply as you took the trouble to give me a response.
So. I now bow away gracefully (I hope) to let the discussion re counselers etc. continue.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 1/18/2010
Posts: 1,197
Points: 3,275
Location: United Kingdom
|
ClubFavolosa wrote:The problem of all counsellors is they try to give advice from the best of their knowledge, but if any advice meets or even comes close to the client's feelings they will never know. They think in a way following their own and their teacher's ideas about a problem. Every solution depends of a combination of factors. I hope I was clear enough.
Probably only (the) God(s) know(s) the answer(s) to everything. Giving advice is a very tricky thing ClubFavolosa and it's my guess that counsellors avoid it like the plague. In a way this "not giving advice" is an example of the OP on conflicting values. If you sign up to the humanist value that folk are basically good and, deep down, want to do the right thing, then a humanist counsellor would argue that the "solution" is in the person and all you have to do is help them find it. But.....
"The voice of the majority is no proof of justice." - Schiller
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 1/18/2010
Posts: 1,197
Points: 3,275
Location: United Kingdom
|
Romany wrote:Dreamy - the whole discussion seems to have taken off by now in a direction that renders my original posting irrelevant.
Although you kindly provided TFD explanations for me I still fail to see why the word 'secular' must be tacked on. As I said, the emergence of Humanism during the Renaissance is a different story - there were still at that time notable persons who managed to cling to Deism while espousing Humanist values.
But to-day's Humanism is a philosophy which precludes the acceptance of a Supreme Being so I am left to wonder how it can be anything but secular?
However, I don't wish to go off on what would now be a tangent:- I simply felt I should reply as you took the trouble to give me a response.
So. I now bow away gracefully (I hope) to let the discussion re counselers etc. continue. I am not convinced Romany. As I said, Jung would be counted as a humanist, but his writing does not preclude a religion (I won't say a supreme being) and I would be careful to define someone like Rogers as a secular humanist as he overtly "precludes" any part to be played by a supreme being in his writings. Yet he is the sine qua non of humanist counselling. I think that is why the expression arises in this encapsulated field. I would agree with you when using humanist in the broader field of literature and philosophy though. Maybe the necessity of the epithet arises post hoc, when one reviews somebody's work in any field and tries to make sense of it? Doing so is the endless game of academia, doctorates are to be earned by nit-picking.....
"The voice of the majority is no proof of justice." - Schiller
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 2,424
Points: 7,126
Location: China
|
Intel - my bad.
Even thought it was printed in bold type for all the world (except me, it seems) to see, I wasn't registering the "counselling techniques".
I'd picked up on "I have received and participated in ongoing training for various aspects of Christian Ministry" through a narrower focus, I'm afraid, and was asking my question in respect of general, not specific terms.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 1/18/2010
Posts: 1,197
Points: 3,275
Location: United Kingdom
|
Hi Romany I thought it a valid point really and it made me go away and do some research (definitely not a bad!) It may also be relevant that this topic was a carry-over from another because of techie problems with the forum, so some of the ground had been covered elsewhere.
I think the topic has run its course as an online discussion anyway. But, out of interest, which branch of knowledge did you gain your definition of humanist? I am interested because english seems to be splitting off into separate languages. As knowledge is becoming more divided into specialisms - words seem to be getting "re-invented" as neologisms in arcane fields, then moving into the wider world as the knowledge spreads - and clashing with previously accepted meanings
"The voice of the majority is no proof of justice." - Schiller
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/11/2009
Posts: 939
Points: 2,918
|
intelfam wrote:Dreamy wrote:
Although I liked the couple in question I think perhaps a sort of "guru complex" can at times infiltrate this type of ministry causing among less enlightened members of a congregation, an unhealthy dependency on counsellors as solvers of problems, enforcers of wise solutions, and infallible spiritual guides.
So what happened? Sorry I had to leave you up in the air, but I've been offline awaiting a new modem most of the week, and preoccupied with other matters. What happened - the couple in question were getting older, their counselling ministry, like anyone's, was a drop in the ocean of life's problem's, and they joined a smaller church congregation. The large church they left went through an upheaval and attendance declined when its leadership changed and it split from its denomination to become independent, but it is basically still providing its brand of Bible-based counselling, not necessarily for mental illness. Marriage problems are an everpresent reality amongst Christians as well as non-Christians. As an exponent of systematic theology in my preaching and teaching from the Bible, my practice is to assist church members with accommodation, budget, and employment related problems, but once you start helping someone with these they often seek help for other problems of a spiritual nature that would be difficult for a non-Christian to understand... 1Corinthians 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
Job 33:15 "In a dream, in a vision of the night, When deep sleep falls upon men, In slumberings upon the bed;" Theology 101 "If He doesn't know everything then He isn't God."
|
|
|
Guest |