“Holding On” to the Theology-Psychology Relationship: The Underlying Fiduciary Structures of Interdisciplinary Method

Abstract

This article explores the personal dimension of interdisciplinary method. How do we as individuals hold on to the content of our disciplines and the relation between them? Many recent attempts at relating psychology and theology have missed the “hidden curriculum” of the interdisciplinary “assignment.” The ability to hold on to the psychology-theology relationship (in a way that does not capitulate to a deconstructivist relativism or regress to a foundationalist absolutism) depends on a sufficiently complex structure of consciousness within the individual that is capable of upholding inherently relational concepts. Based on the developmental framework of Robert Kegan's “subject-object” theory (1994), the model proposed here offers a classification of three underlying fiduciary structures, (“traditionalist,” “modernist,” and “post-modernist”) and explores the way they shape interdisciplinary method through several case studies. As Christians, we affirm that relationality itself is ultimately revealed and transformed by the Spirit of Christ, opening up to us new insights into our relational existence.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adams

J. E.

(1970). Competent to counsel. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker.

Anderson

(1989). Isomorphic indicators in theological and psychological science. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 17, 373–381.

Barbour

(1990). Religion in an age of science. San Francisco: HarperCollins.

Brown

(1990). Rationality. New York: Routledge.

Hunsinger

(1995). Theology and pastoral counseling: A new interdisciplinary approach. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

Jones

S. L.

(1994). A constructive relationship for religion with the science and profession of psychology. American Psychologist, 49, 184–199.

Kae-Je

(1993). Psychologist or theologian?: Pastoral counseling, supervision, and professional identity. Journal of Pastoral Care, 47, 65–72)

Kegan

(1982). The evolving self: Problem and process in human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kegan

(1994). In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

10.

Loder

(1995, April). Practical theology and interdisciplinary method. Paper presented at the International Academy of Practical Theology, Bern, Switzerland.

11.

Loder

, & Neidhardt

W. J.

(1992). The knight's move: The relational logic of the Spirit in theology and science. Colorado Springs, CO: Helmers and Howard.

12.

Midgley

(1992). Science as salvation: A modern myth and its meaning. New York: Routledge.

13.

Murphy

J. W.

(1989). Postmodern social analysis and criticism. New York: Greenwood Press.

14.

Reich

K. H.

(1990a). The Chalcedonian definition: An example of the difficulties and the usefulness of thinking in terms of complementarity. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 18, 148–157.

15.

Reich

K. H.

(1990b). The relation between science and theology: The case for complementarity revisited. Zygon, 25, 369–390.

16.

Reich

K. H.

(1991). The role of complementarity reasoning in religious development. In Oser

F. K.

, & Scarlett

W. G.

(Eds.), Religious development in childhood and adolescence (pp. 78–93). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

17.

Rossouw

G. J.

(1993). Theology in a postmodern culture: Ten challenges. Hervormde Teologiese Studies, 49, 894–907.

18.

Sappington

A. A.

(1994). Psychology for the practice of the presence of God: Putting psychology at the service of the church. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 13, 5–16.

19.

Shults

F. L.

(1992). A theology of chaos: An experiment in postmodern theological science. Scottish Journal of Theology, 45, 223–236).

20.

Shults

F. L.

(1993). Integrative epistemology and the search for meaning. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 5, 125–140.

21.

Skinner

B. F.

(1971). Beyond freedom and dignity. New York: Alfred Knopf.

22.

Van Huyssteen

(1995, March). The shaping of rationality in science and religion. Paper presented at the Religion and Science Conference of the Royal Institute of Philosophy, University of Warwick, UK.

23.

Van Niekerk

A. A.

(1990). To follow a rule or to rule what should follow? Rationality and judgement in the human sciences. In Mouton

, & Joubert

(Eds.), Knowledge and method in the human sciences (pp. 179–194). Pretoria, South Africa: HSRC.

24.

van der Ven

(1984). Unterwegs zu einer empirischen Theologie. In Fuchs

(Ed.), Theologie und Handeln: Beitrage zur Fundierung der Parktischen Theologie als Handlungstheorie (pp. 102–128). Dusseldorf, Germany: Patmos Verlag.

25.

van der Ven

(1990). Practical theology as critical-empirical theology. In Visscher

(Ed.), Les etudes pastorales a l'universite (pp. 238–262). Paris: Les Presses de l'Universite d'Ottawa.

26.

van der Ven

(1993). Practical theology: An empirical approach. Kampen, The Netherlands: Kok Pharos.

27.

Worthington

E. L.

Jr. (1994). A blueprint for intradisciplinary integration. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 22, 79–86.