Christian psychologists can find it challenging to work in the context of secular psychology, with its presuppositions of methodological naturalism and its secularizing values. Unthinking engagement with the secular field of psychology can result in significant problems that must be carefully navigated by the Christian scholar. The doctrine of providence is briefly presented as an important theological foundation for an academic vocation in psychology. This is followed by a discussion of potential pitfalls, including secularization, an implied “God-of-the-gaps” theology, distorted notions of God's ways of working in the world, an incomplete picture of humanity, and the adoption of secularizing values. Following this, issues in philosophy of science foundational to the current discussion will be reviewed, and, finally, some suggestions for a vocational practice of psychology will be outlined.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArtigasM. (2002). The mind of the universe: Understanding science and religion. In RamosA., & GeorgeM. I., (Eds), Faith, Scholarship, and Culture in the 21st Century.Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press.
2.
BradshawB. (1994). Bridging the gap: Evangelism, development and shalom.Missions NP: Advanced Research and Communication Center.
3.
CreswellJ. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
4.
DoweP. (1997). Change and providence.Science and Christian Belief, 9, 3–20.
5.
EmmonsR.A. (1999). The psychology of ultimate concerns: Motivation and spirituality in personality.New York: Guilford Press.
6.
EricksonM. J. (2001). Introducing Christian doctrine (2nd ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.
7.
EvansC. S. (1977). Preserving the person: A look at the human sciences.Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity.
8.
GeivettR. D. (2003). Christianity and the plight of the humanities. Unpublished manuscript. Available from author.
9.
HillP. C. (1989). Implications for integration from a new philosophy of psychology as science.Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 8, 61–74.
10.
HillP. C. (1999). Giving religion away: What the study of religion offers psychology.International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 9, 229–249.
11.
JohnsonE.L. (1997). Christ, the lord of psychology.Journal of Psychology and Theology, 25, 11–27.
12.
JonesS.L. (1994). A constructive relationship for religion with the science and profession of psychology: Perhaps the boldest model yet.American Psychologist, 49, 184–199.
13.
KuhnT. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.).Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
14.
ManicasP. T., & SecordP. F. (1983). Implications for psychology of the new philosophy of science.American Psychologist, 38, 399–413.
15.
MillerW. R., & C'de BacaJ. (2001). Quantum change: When epiphanies and sudden insights transform ordinary lives.New York: Guilford Press.
16.
MorelandJ.P. (1989). Christianity and the nature of science: A philosophical investigation.Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.
17.
MorelandJ.P. (1997). Complementarity, agency theory, and the God-of-the-Gaps.Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, 49, 3–14.
18.
MoustakasC. (1994). Phenomenological research methods.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19.
O'ConnorR.C. (1997). Science on trial: Exploring the rationality of methodological naturalism.Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, 49, 15–30.
20.
PolanyiM. (1974). Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21.
ProctorR. W., & CapaldiE. J. (2001). Empirical evaluation and justification of methodologies in psychological science.Psychological Bulletin, 127, 759–772.
22.
RussellR. J. (1998). Does “the God who acts” really act in nature? In PetersT. (Ed.), Science and Theology (pp. 77–102). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
23.
SeemanB. N. (2003). Evanglical historiography beyond the “outward clash”: A case study on the alternation approach.Christian Scholar's Review, 23, 95–124.
24.
StewartA. J., & ShieldsS. A. (2001). Gatekeepers as change agents: What are feminist psychologists doing in places like this? In TolmanD. L., & Brydon-MillerM., From Subjects to Subjectivities: A Handbook of Interpretive and Participatory Methods.New York: New York University Press.
25.
StraussA., & CorbinJ. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26.
TracyT. F. (1995). Particular providence and the God of the gaps.CTNS Bulletin, 15, 1–18.
27.
Van LeeuwenM. S. (1985). The person in psychology: A contemporary Christian appraisal.Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press.
28.
Vande KempH. (1986). Dangers of psychologism: The place of God in psychology.Journal of Psychology and Theology, 14, 97–109.
29.
WertzF.J. (1999). Multiple methods in psychology: Epistemological grounding and the possibility of unity.Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 19, 131–166.
