After reviewing a dynamic model of guilt interpreted within a theological framework three approaches to guilt reduction are discussed. It is concluded that therapeutic attempts to either improve behavior or modify one's standards leave the major crux of the guilt dilemma untouched. Only a model of guilt reduction that gives primary attention to the nature and origin of the punitive guilt feelings can be fully effective.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
GlasserW.Reality therapy.New York: Harper and Row, 1965.
2.
NarramoreB.Guilt: Where theology and psychology meet.Journal of Psychology and Theology, 1974, 2, 18–25.
3.
NarramoreB.Guilt: Its universal hidden pressure.Journal of Psychology and Theology, 1974, 2, 104–115.
4.
NaramoreB.Guilt: Christian motivation or neurotic masochism?Journal of Psychology and Theology, 1974, 2, 182–189.
5.
PattisonE. M.Morality, guilt and forgiveness in psychotherapy. In PattisonE. M. (Ed.), Clinical psychiatry and religion.Boston: Little, Brown & Company, 1969.
6.
TournierP.Guilt and grace.New York: Harper and Row, 1962.
