Journal of Rational-Emotive Therapy Vol. 5, No. 1, Spring 1987

RATIONAL-EMOTIVE T H E R A P Y A N D THE RELIGIOUS CLIENT

Constance Lawrence Christian Counseling Center,

Norwalk, CT

ABSTRACT: The religious client presents a particular challenge to the RET therapist in that the irrational beliefs responsible for the client's problems are often created or supported by distortions in the religious belief system. This paper will discuss the connections between religious distortions and the irra- tional ideas, ways to deal with them, and then present the most common reli- giously based irrational beliefs along with biblical disputations.

Although religious issues have traditionally been avoided in the therapeutic context~ increasing attention is being given in the litera- ture to the importance of considering how the client's religious beliefs might affect the issues being dealt with in therapy.

Duncan, Eddy and Haney (1981) state that "in our opinion, counsel- ors may make a serious mistake if they fail to take religious factors into consideration." They quote Strupp (1978), "one of the great stumbling- blocks in psychotherapy research and practice has been a failure to re- alize the importance of values." Rokeach (1973) suggested that the indi- vidual's values are a significant determinant of behavior.

Henning and Tirrell (1982) not only recognize the significance of the spiritual component of many of the problems brought into counseling, but suggest that exploration of spiritual issues is not only appropriate and ethical, but necessary when such issues are re]ated to the client's problems. They believe that an open and effective exploration of spiri- tual issues is possible regardless of the counselor's belief system by em- ploying the "well-learned counseling tools used to assist clients in ex- ploring other aspects of their lives."

Although these remarks were addressed to the counseling field in

Constance Lawrence, M.S., is Director of the Christian Counseling Center in Norwalk, CT, and also has a private practice in Weston, CT.

Requests for reprints may be addressed to Constance Lawrence, Christian Counseling Center, First Congregational Church on the Green, Park Avenue & Lewis Street, Norwalk, CT 06851.

13 ~ 1987 Human Sciences Press

14 J O U R N A L OF RATIONAL-EMOTIVE T H E R A P Y

genera l and not to any one therapy , they seem par t i cu la r ly appl icable to RET, which uses specific skil ls of ra t iona l t h i n k i n g to help cl ients deal wi th t he i r problems. A cogni t ive t h e r a p y which deals wi th the cli- ent ' s beliefs about life cannot ignore the impor tance of the re l igious ideas which create or suppor t those beliefs.

W o r t h i n g t o n (1986) poin ts out t ha t "Religious clients, especial ly those who are h igh ly re l ig ious and who hold conservat ive beliefs, often differ f rom o ther clients."

Rel igious cl ients can indeed pose a pa r t i cu l a r cha l lenge to the RET therap is t . They are l ikely to have the same basic types of i r ra t iona l be- liefs as Ell is (1962) has ident i f ied for the genera l popula t ion. They en- gage in the s ame types of cogni t ive error as o thers do (Beck, Rush, Shaw and Emery , 1979). However , t hey differ f rom other cl ients in two i m p o r t a n t respects: 1) the i r beliefs and cognit ive dis tor t ions are of ten g rounded in the i r re l igious bel ief system, and 2) the i r re l igious beliefs seem to create a predispos i t ion to a pa r t i cu l a r set of i r ra t iona l beliefs which, a l t h o u g h cer ta in ly not exclusive to re l igious clients, are of ten found in t h a t group.

I r ra t iona l i t i e s and dis tor t ions wi th a rel igious founda t ion are far more difficult to modify t h a n those wi th o ther etiology for several reasons:

1. The client may need to examine the underlying religious distortion be- fore being able or willing to deal with the irrationality of the belief it supports.

2. Even if the client agrees with the logic of the DIBS-- the Dispute of the Irrational Belief Sys tem-- (Ellis, 1974), the DIBS may never be completely accepted if an underlying religious distortion is not ad- dressed. The intellectual belief in the logic of the DIBS is cancelled out by the more deeply rooted belief in the religious distortion.

3. Religious beliefs are often introjected whole without being thought through or questioned, so the client may be unaware of the distortion or the connection to the irrational idea.

4. Questioning ideas based on the religious belief system creates an exis- tential anxiety which arouses automatic defensiveness, all the more puzzling because the client is often not aware of the religious etiology. The anxiety can be projected onto the therapist who then represents the source of threat and is seen as "the enemy." One way to cut through this resistance is to join with the client by discussing the reli- gious beliefs openly and knowledgeably while conveying a respect for the religion itself.

CONSTANCE LAWRENCE 15

In identifying the client's religious belief system as the source of cog- nitive distortions and irrational beliefs, it is important to make clear what is Not being said. Accusations are Not being made that religion is irrational, or that all cognitive distortions and irrational thinking are based in a religious belief system.

Many people, including religious ones, are perfectly capable of hay- ing irrational ideas which are unrelated to their religious beliefs. How- ever, many people do use their religion both to support existing irra- tional ideas and/or to create others (Duncan, Eddy and Haney, 1981). Since almost every counselor can attest to this fact, it is all the more surprising that the religious etiology is traditionally ignored in psycho- therapy.

Irrational ideas in the religious client are often part of a three part structure. The irrational idea is often created or supported by neurotic religious beliefs which are in turn grounded in biblical distortions. In these cases, neither the irrational ideas nor the neurotic religious be- liefs can be successfully disputed on rational grounds alone. A biblical distortion can only be corrected by use of the Bible. When the underly- ing biblical support is brought into balance, the whole neurotic belief structure will often give way.

While there are many differences in religious dogma among various denominations, a balanced biblical position will never support irra- tional or dysfunctional conclusions.

Even the therapist wwith a minimum amount of Bible knowledge can become familiar with the most common neurotic religious beliefs, their supporting biblical distortions and the biblical correction of the unbalanced position.

For example, a typical neurotic attitude might be perfectionism, sup- ported by the biblical "Be ye perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect." (Matt.5:48).

The neurotic attitude of perfectionism can be dealt with in the usual RET manner, but not before the underlying biblical distortion has been brought into balance. Extrapolating a doctrine of perfectionism out of the verse "Be ye perfect" is incorrect exegesis which leads to an unbal- anced conclusion.

The word "perfect" as used in this context relates to the believers po- sition in union with Christ, not to present experience (Unger, 1966).

A discussion of verses such as the following would also be helpful in bringing the attitude of perfectionism into balance: "There is none righ- teous" (Rom. 3:10). "If we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves" (1

16 J O U R N A L OF RATIONAL-EMOTIVE THERAPY

J o h n 1:8). Both of these verses indicate tha t no one is perfect. "By grace you have been saved th rough faith, and tha t not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; not t h rough works, lest any m a n should boast," (Eph. 2:8,9), which speaks of salvat ion as a gift by God's grace, not something to be ea rned by our own goodness or efforts.

Ignorance or Misunderstanding Resulting in a Biblical Distortion

Somet imes ignorance, incorrect teachings or misunders tand ings can lead to the biblical distort ion which then leads to the neurot ic belief. In these cases, p resen ta t ion of the balanced biblical position is often suffi- cient to allow the client to change his dysfunctional beliefs.

The following discussion will identify causes of neurot ic beliefs in the rel igious client, typical i r ra t ional ideas in each classification, the bibli- cal distort ions support ing t hem and suggested biblical corrections of the unba lanced position.

Some causes of neurot ic beliefs in the religious client are:

�9 a neurotic attitude toward life rationalized and supported by a biblical distortion

�9 ignorance or misunderstanding of biblical teaching resulting in a dis- torted view which then leads to a neurotic religious attitude

�9 religious beliefs which have never been thought out logically �9 doctrine built on one Bible verse or verses taken out of context �9 cognitive error

Al though the re is some overlap in the resu l t an t neurot ic religious be- liefs, each category will be discussed separate ly in order to i l lus t ra te how the etiology migh t affect the therapeut ic approach.

Neurotic Attitudes Rationalized by a Biblical Distortion

When the neurot ic a t t i tude is ra t ional ized by a biblical distortion, it is necessary to deal wi th both levels, but the biblical support should be addressed first.

For instance, m a n y people take the verse "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God" (Rom. 3:23) personal ly to mean tha t "I am worthless and no good." A balanced position is created when Rom. 5:8 is also considered: "While we were yet sinners, Chris t died for us," leading

CONSTANCE LAWRENCE 17

to the conclusion that "I am a sinner and I am worth the life of Christ." Fur ther discussion can bring in Gal. 2:16, which states that "Man is not justified by works." If the good things we do (works) don't make us worthwhile, and the bad things (sins) don't take away from our value (Rom. 5:8), then our value is not in what we do, but in the fact of our being.

Religious Beliefs Never Thought Out

As with secular beliefs, sometimes the religious beliefs have never been thought out carefully enough to reveal contradictions or inaccura- cies needing to be resolved. In such cases, clients will need more knowl- edge, but will also need help in discussing and examining their basic re- ligious beliefs which are leading to the dysfunctional result.

A typical belief in this category is the idea that "It is sinful to see anything positive in myself," based on Rom. 12:3, "Don't think more highly of yourself than you ought to think." Clients with this belief often don't go on to consider the rest of the verse, which goes on to say " . . . but have sound judgment." In other words, "Don't think too highly, but don't th ink too badly of yourself either! Have a realistic view." Other helpful verses might be Phil.4:13, "I can do all things through Christ," and 1 Cor.12:7, "The manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man." Further discussion might be on the fact of our being de- signed and created by God (who does all things well), and the fact that everyone has been given gifts and has a place in the body (the larger group, family, church, or even the world.) (1 Cor.12)

Belief Built On One Bible Verse Alone, or Verses Taken Out of Context

Verses taken out of context or a doctrine built on one verse alone can support a whole set of irrational beliefs. The biblical center correcting the distortion may include several verses and rational consideration of their meaning.

A common example of this misuse of Scripture is found in what I call "the doormat syndrome," in which a client is unassertive to the point of being a non-person. Many people are unassertive and can be helped through a combination of cognitive and/or behavioral therapy to learn new ways of thinking and behaving. However, in some religious clients non-assertiveness to the extreme is considered a religious value. Such clients will quote verses such as the following:

18 JOURNAL OF RATIONAL-EMOTIVE THERAPY

"If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me" (Luke 9:23).

"Don't think more highly of yourself than you ought to think" (Rom. 12:3).

"In honor prefer one another" (Rom. 12:10).

The "deny yourself and take up your cross" of Luke 9 is misinter- preted "don't give yourself anything you want and cross yourself out." According to Unger's Bible Dictionary, self-denial in the Scriptural sense is the renouncing of whatever is "prejudicial to the true interests of the soul." It is renouncing the self-will "so far as it opposes the will of God." (Unger, 1966)

Rom. 12:3 has already been discussed in the preceeding category. In Rom.12:10, "in honor prefer one another" the word "prefer" is most

commonly translated "honor" and "respect." Honoring and respecting another does not mean you should not also honor and respect yourself. In fact, the corollary of the Golden Rule, "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you" (paraphrased from Matt. 7:12 and Luke 6:31) is that if you do not believe yourself deserving of honor and respect, you should not give it to others!

Helping a religious "doormat" to get up off the floor will require this sort of discussion of the basic religiously based distortions.

Cognitive Error

Still other religious misuse comes from cognitive error applied to reli- gious teachings. When the problem is caused by cognitive error, discus- sion will be necessary both to help the client think through the re- ligious issue and to recognize the source of the distortion in bad think- ing habits.

The most common cognitive errors which result in the typical reli- gious distortions are overgeneralization, selective abstraction and di- chotomous thinking. They result in an extreme position or partial truth supporting a skewed conclusion. The verse discussed above, "All have sinned" (Rom.5:12), when taken to mean "I am worthless" is an exam- ple of a partial truth which needs to be rounded out by the other side of the picture, as in Rom.5:8, "While we were yet sinners, Christ died for US."

Personal causality and temporal causality are also common cognitive errors. In the religious client, personal causality can be eroded by a dis- cussion of the ramifications of the teaching that Jesus is Lord (Acts

CONSTANCE LAWRENCE 19

10:36 or "All power is given unto me (Jesus) in heaven and in earth." (Matt.28:18). The client might be led in a prayer of commitment to the Lord, acknowledging God's Lordship over all of life, and/or be advised to start each day with such a prayer.

Temporal causality in the religious client would need to be addressed differently, depending on whether the client sees God or Satan as re- sponsible for everything. In the first case, discussion might include the Parable of the Talents in Matt.25, God's repeated exhortations to his people to choose who they would serve and what they would believe (Deut.30:19, Jos.24:15, 1 Kings 18:21, Prov.3:31), and by a discussion of free will.

In the second case, discussions might cover the fact of Jesus as Lord, Satan as a defeated foe and the Christian's duty and ability to resist the devil (Ja.4:7).

Irrational Ideas Unrelated to the Religious Belief System

Not covered in the above list but of course present in the religious cli- ent as well as in other clients, are irrational ideas unrelated to the reli- gious belief system. The ideas presented by Ellis (1962) in his basic list of common irrational ideas which lead to neurotic behavior are typical of those which might be less likely to be grounded in the religious belief system. They are just as amenable to the typical RET Dispute using logic and reason with the religious client as with any other client. Even so, the Dispute can be more effective with the religious client when bib- lical support is added to the DIBS (Lawrence and Huber, 1982).

CONCLUSION

It is puzzling that RET has not gained more success and acceptance in the pastoral counseling field because, in spite of its founder's anti- religious views (Ellis, 1960), RET is based on a thoroughly biblical principle, the importance of what one thinks. Proverbs 23:7 summa- rizes it: "As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he." Perhaps one reason RET has not gained more popularity in the pastoral counseling setting is that counselors are dealing with the surface irrational ideas rather than attacking the foundational thinking distortions based in the reli- gious belief system which create and support the irrationality.

One need not be a theological expert to become familiar with the Bi-

20 JOURNAL OF RATIONAL-EMOTIVE THERAPY

ble and to use it as a resource to encourage the client to think through his own religious distortions. However, two ethical issues must be con- sidered: one that therapists not operate outside the bounds of profes- sional competence and the other t h a t t h e therapist not impose his own religious views on the client.

The first issue, professional competence, requires that when indi- cated, such as on issues of doctrine or church teaching, the client be re- ferred to his own clergyperson, or that authority be invited to join in a session.

The second issue, the fear of imposing the therapist's views on the client, led to the long-standing principle of therapeutic neutrality (Humphries, 1982). In order to remain therapeutically "neutral" thera- pists simply avoided any discussion of religion or values. Of course, in practicality such "neutrality" is impossible, as non-verbal behavior, the choice of therapeutic responses, the direction of the session, even the avoidance of religious issues, communicate a message.

Discussing the client's religious beliefs and helping the client use the Bible to think through unbalanced or distorted beliefs is not imposing the therapist's beliefs but applying the principles of rationality, consis- tency and logic to the religious belief system just as to any other beliefs.

Our goal must be not to judge the client's religion but to identify reli- gious distortions behind irrational or dysfunctional beliefs and to help the client think through these positions using his own religious author- ity, often the Bible as the Word of God.

REFERENCES

The Holy Bible (KJ, NAS, TEV, LB, Phillips Versions) Beck, Aaron T., Rush, A. John; Shaw, Brian F.; and Emery, Gary (1979). Cog-

nitive Therapy of Depression. New York: The Guilford Press, Ch. 12, 261. Duncan, Harold D., Eddy, John P. and Heney, Charles W. (1981). Using reli-

gious resources in crisis intervention. Counseling and Values, 25, 3, 186-188.

Ellis, A. (1960). An Impolite Interview with Albert Ellis. New York: Institute for Rational Living.

Ellis, A. (1962). Reason and Emotion in Psychotherapy. Seacaucus, N.J.: Lyle Stuart.

Ellis, A. (1974). Techniques for Disputing Irrational Beliefs (DIBS). New York: Institute for Rational Living.

Henning, Lawrence H. and Tirrell, Frederick J. (1982). Counselor resistance to spiritual exploration. The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 92-95.

Humphries, Robert H. (1982). Therapeutic neutrality reconsidered. Journal of Religion and Health, 21, 2, 124-131.

CONSTANCE LAWRENCE 21

Lawrence, Constance and Huber, Charles (1982). Strange bedfellows?: rational-emotive therapy and pastoral counseling. The Personnel and Guidance Journal. 210-212.

Unger, Merrill F. (1966). Unger's Bible Dictionary. Chicago, IL: Moody Press. pp. 261,843.

The New Testament and Wycliffe Bible Commentary. (1971) New York. p. 1013.