Is secular "psychotherapy" compatible with the principles and the anthropology of the Orthodox Church?
Photo from here
Honey and Hemlock (για τον ίδιο ελληνικά)
An
interview with Dr Jean Claude Larchet (*), University Professor who
holds a doctorate in the Humanities, and has studied Psychopathology,
Philosophy and the Eastern Church Fathers, and has also had clinical
experience in psychiatric hospitals.
This
is a transcribed excerpt from “Radio-Paraga”, a program on the official
radio station of the Church of Greece. It was broadcast on Sunday, 6
February 2000, under the title: “Is Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy a
Science?”. The program was presented by Father Konstantinos
Stratigopoulos.
*****
Fr K.S.: Thank you for
being with us tonight. The subject of our broadcast is psychotherapy
according to the Eastern Church Fathers versus secular “psychotherapy”.
Since you are an expert in this field, we would like to ask you a few
questions. In your opinion, is secular “psychotherapy” compatible with
the principles and the anthropology of the Orthodox Church?
Mr Jean Claude Larchet:
I think that we need to make a distinction. There are many types of
secular “psychotherapy”, but some of them are more prevalent, I would
say, especially psychoanalysis; and in the psychoanalytic movement we
have Freudian psychoanalysis and Jungian psychoanalysis. As far as
Freudian psychoanalysis is concerned, I would say that there is a fairly
significant issue of incongruity with Christian anthropology. In the
first place, this is because Freud makes certain premises that suggest a
vision of man as a being who denies God and his relationship with God;
besides that, Freud has a totally materialistic concept of man and
naturally, his perception of the shaping of human character with all its
singularities is almost at odds with the Christian perspective.
Let me explain myself: Freud,
for instance, believes that at the root of everything there are two
major categories of forces, two drives, which are the sexual and the
aggressive urges. In Freud’s thought, man’s whole psychological life can
be explained by these two, which also include more sublimated,
idealized impulses. For example, even the inclinations demonstrated by
man in church life, in philosophical thought, in artistic creation, all
the above tendencies are, according to Freud, forms of a certain form of
employing, a certain kind of channelling the sexual energy and we
obviously know that, contrary to that notion, in the Orthodox Church
sexuality is an energy that constitutes a diversion of what was
initially a God-oriented energy; in other words, man was created by God
with all of his functions oriented towards Him! From the moment man
distanced himself from God and sinned, from that moment, his energy
deviated in various ways, especially in sexuality, but also in malicious
aggression.
I would also like to say one
more thing about aggression. In Freud’s view, there is a primordial
aggressiveness in human beings, that is directed against everyone else;
but, for Christianity, aggressiveness should normally be directed
towards our fight against evil, our fight against sin, so when this
aggressiveness turns against other people, it constitutes a form of
perversion, a malicious orientation. Of course here we already have an
entirely different vision [of humanity].
From yet another perspective,
there is one more principle in Freud’s perception that is totally
incompatible with Christianity. It is the fact that Christian
anthropology strongly insists on man’s freedom, on the fact that man has
a capacity for self-determination that he must use in cooperation with
God’s Grace in order to evolve. By contrast, Freud thinks that man is
already conditioned – in terms of his psychic structure, his
psychological life – from the first years of his life and therefore is
subject to drives that have been instilled in his subconscious, so that
he is in a sense confined and unable to free himself on his own.
I would also like to say a few
words, briefly, about other forms of “psychotherapy”. We have just
mentioned Jungian “psychotherapy”, which is another, highly developed,
form. Apparently Jung has a vision, slightly different from Freud’s,
slightly more spiritual, but it is not a Christian spirituality. There
is, for example, great interest, among various mystic or esoteric
movements, regarding Jungian psychology and very often we find this type
of “psychotherapy” in connection with para-religions or beliefs that
are alien to Christianity! So now in the West we are witnessing the
development of psychotherapies which are closely linked to
para-religious movements and very often this is a means used by some of
those involved in such movements in order to lure people to them!
Therefore, the problems we are
facing, in my opinion, come down to the fact that there is no form of
psychotherapy that is really independent from anthropological
interventions. What I mean to say is that behind every form of
psychotherapy there is an implicit anthropology, i.e. a specific
understanding of man, and often these “psychotherapies” are constructed
outside Christianity and they are different precisely in terms of their
anthropology. By employing such psychotherapies we run the risk, if you
wish, of directing man’s psychic life towards models that do not fit in
with the Christian faith.
Fr K.S.: Can secular “psychotherapy” contribute to the therapeutic tradition of the Church?
Mr Jean Claude Larchet:
Actually, in my books I have elaborated on this, as well, and it may
seem strange, but I have developed the opposite idea, i.e. the notion
that, on the contrary, it is the Church that has something to offer to
secular “psychotherapy”. In the end, secular “psychotherapy” often seems
too inadequate in its understanding of man; in other words, it
conceives man in a purely psychological and purely social frame of
reference, but not at all in a spiritual context. Undoubtedly, in
Christian anthropology the psychic life is not truly autonomous, since
it is partly associated with the life of the body and very often depends
on the state of the body. The Fathers of the Church have often
mentioned this; in some cases we encounter mental illnesses or mental
disorders which are associated with physical disorders and which we have
to treat with organic means, with the use of medications.
But, on the other hand, mental
disorders are, in many cases, associated with spiritual maladies! We
should, therefore, make a clear distinction between conditions that fall
under the mental or the spiritual category of ailments and make sure we
do not confuse the two. In the Orthodox Church we justifiably have a
tradition of healing spiritual maladies. The Church Fathers have
considerably developed this approach by studying the passions, the way
they operate and their negative impact in human life; they have also
demonstrated that almost all passions engender significant disorders in
man’s psyche. For example, in the lives of saints we can see that anger
is the cause of many mental illnesses or that the passion of sadness
creates anxiety and anguish; acedia (spiritual apathy, sloth) is a
source of depression and debility, whereas the passion of fear gives
rise to neurotic phobias. So I’m thinking that there are, within the
traditional patristic heritage of the Orthodox Church, and especially in
the prolific teachings of the Church Fathers, there are many elements
that we can use in order to understand the disorders of the human
psyche, tend to them and heal them, contrary to the analyses suggested
by modern psychotherapies. When we read “The Ladder” by St John Climacus, when we read the books by Evagrius Ponticus, we find a very
elegant, very subtle and exceedingly profound analysis of the operation
of the human psyche. And they can be extremely beneficial to us, but
unfortunately this patristic heritage has often been largely forgotten.
Fr K.S.: What does the Orthodox Tradition offer to the treatment of mental illnesses?
Mr Jean Claude Larchet: It
is exactly here, I think, that we can find a wonderfully rich body of
teachings which are, nevertheless, somewhat forgotten. I believe that it
is precisely through the study of ascetic texts that we can attain an
awareness of how our psychic life operates, both in its healthy and
afflicted state, in a way that is entirely consistent with Christian
anthropology.
Fr K.S.: Can secular anthropology heal the soul?
Mr Jean Claude Larchet: Listen!
We need to make a distinction between two elements in the soul; we need
to discern between the mental and the spiritual. If the question is
whether it can heal spiritual maladies, then the obvious answer is that
no, it can’t. However, I would say that occasionally secular
“psychotherapies” can provide some relief from mental illnesses. But
there is no “psychotherapy” that can truly heal the soul. The evidence,
if you wish, is in the fact that these psychotherapies are manifold and
diverse. If there was really even one among them that could heal, then
it would have managed to become prevalent, it could have eclipsed the
others. The fact that we are constantly looking for new methods of
psychotherapy shows that we have not found a satisfactory form of
therapy. At least some psychotherapies allow for the alleviation of
certain types of psychic suffering resulting from mental disorders. But I
would say that we can also, in our current practice, provide some sort
of relief thanks to the ministry of listening. I believe that priests,
through the practice of hearing confessions, if they devote time to
listen to their parishioners who come to confess, if they listen to them
with love and also with a compassionate, sympathetic disposition and
aided by praying, they can reach as good as, if not better results than
those of “psychotherapy”. I would say that Christianity, the Church,
offers much more, because when a patient goes to a “psychotherapist”,
the “psychotherapist” listens to him and the patient often confides
secrets of his innermost life, his difficulties, etc., thus finding some
relief, but the Church offers more than lending an ear to our distress;
it offers charitable love, God’s forgiveness, and therefore the
dissolution of certain root issues, the suppression of certain causes of
psychic pain to the extent that some mental disorders are associated
with sins and passions.
Fr K.S.: Are the methods of secular “psychotherapy” in accordance with the therapeutic work of the Church?
Mr Jean Claude Larchet:
I’d like to stress the fact that there is a fairly significant
difference between the way secular “psychotherapy” works and the way we
can be healed inside the Church. Let me also add something concerning
the difference between psychoanalysis and what takes place in the Church
and has sometimes been compared with psychoanalysis – namely, the
mystery of confession.
The psychoanalytic principle is
based on talking about the past, on relating it in every minute detail
and discovering the situations that could have been the source of mental
disorders. The aim, eventually, is to become conscious of and express
things that may have been forgotten and could have been linked with the
origin of illnesses. But the patient or the person who is undergoing
psychoanalysis ultimately has to comprehend this situation without being
offered the means for finding a meaning in it, or, even better, for
overcoming the situation in any way – other than by accepting it.
Inside the Church there is a
very big difference, because confession is not only a return to the
past, but also the revelation of one’s real psychological state to his
spiritual father, whereby the latter will be able to give specific help
so that the person who confesses can, in his turn, find a way to fight
against his mental state and eventually be released from it. But
confession is not merely a psychological exercise; it is a practice that
needs to be interconnected with ascetic living as a whole –
particularly with praying and participating in the Church’s sacramental
life through which we receive what can actually help us: God’s Grace. In
“psychotherapy” we encounter man-made means of treatment and very often
we do not have the strength to face the state of our inner life that is
revealed through “psychoanalysis”. However, in the context of the
Church we receive the help and discerning guidance of our spiritual
father on the one hand, and the help of Divine Grace on the other.
I would also like to stress the
fact that psychoanalysis poses certain risks, because some people are
actually faced with difficult situations they experienced in the past,
situations that they are made to recall and become aware of, but are
unable to handle or even bear. Meanwhile, the psychoanalyst can offer
them no means, no way to overcome such situations; in fact,
psychoanalytic sessions sometimes result in tragedy: there have been
frequent cases of suicide or, instead of therapy, we often see a change
for the worse and further deterioration in the patient’s state; that’s
precisely because “psychotherapy” lacks this idea, or this reality, of
man benefiting from a powerful external source of help, which is what
happens in the Church.
On the other hand, I would also
like to add one more thing, if I may. There is danger, indeed, in
recalling our old passions in detail. The Church Fathers advise us to
confess our passions, to recount before God the sins we have committed –
not just be aware of them – and of course to be able to confess all of
our difficulties, as well. But the Fathers advise us against and
discourage re-living in detail whatever in our past didn’t end well,
whatever bears a connection with our sins. That’s precisely because
confession is not a recollection with which the patient is subsequently
stuck, but something that we confess before God in order to receive His
forgiveness. And forgiveness means exactly the elimination of all
pathological effects, even of the very source of the illness or
disorders connected – when there is a connection – with sin; in other
words, God’s forgiveness really offers a therapy that secular
“psychotherapy” essentially doesn’t.
Fr K.S.: Professor
Larchet, we are very grateful for your contribution and for everything
you have told us. Thank you very much. Goodnight.
(*)
Mr Jean Claude Larchet was born in North-East Francein 1949. He is
Doctor of Philosophy and Doctor of Theology in
theUniversityofStrasbourg, as well as the author of fifteen books and
numerous articles on theology and on the spirituality of the Church
Fathers, which have been translated into twelve languages. He is
considered as one of the leading Orthodox patrologists and an important
voice of Orthodox Christianity in Europe. He lives and works as a
professor in France and is the executive editor, in two French
publishing houses, of a series of books on contemporary spiritual
figures of the Orthodox Church, including the Elder Joseph the
Hesychast, the Elder Paisios, the Elder Ephraim Katounakiotis, the Elder
Haralambos, the Elder Porphyrios, Starets Sergei (the latter has also
been translated into Greek) et al.
He
is also the author of the book: “Therapy of Spiritual Illnesses – An
Introduction to the Ascetic Tradition of the Orthodox Church”
(«Thérapeutique des maladies spirituelles: Une introduction à la
tradition ascétique de l'Église orthodoxe»), Paris 2000.
See:
Jean-Claude Larchet - OrthodoxWiki (& here)
What do we mean by “Fathers of the Church”?
Saints
The holy anarchists
A Deer Lost in Paradise
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου