There are some Christians who are uncomfortable with the idea of engaging with psychotherapy. Some feel it is inappropriate to learn from people whose view of the world is non-Christian, or anti-Christian, when it comes to matters of how to think about life. Others suggest that there is a dangerous spiritual element to psychotherapy, perhaps even labelling it ‘demonic’. Because the accusation is so serious, I would like to give a reasonably thorough response.

Since there appears to be much confusion over basic terms, let’s start with my definitions, so you can understand where I am coming from:

Counselling: A form of talking therapy: a helping relationship. There are lots of different types.

Therapy: Same as the above.

Psychotherapy: Similar to the above, but with the most rigorous levels of training available in the UK, often encompassing the work and thought of many different theorists and practitioners. The psychotherapist has been trained thoroughly in inter-personal processes.

Christian counselling: Talking therapy offered by Christians to other Christians. Sometimes people see this as ‘advice’. It may be that, but if it’s ‘advice’ then it’s not counselling or psychotherapy in the way recognised by professionals outside of the church.

Psychiatry: A medical specialism concerned with diagnosing and treating medical problems which manifest in the mind, emotions and behaviours.

Psychology: The academic research field dealing with how people are and how they exist in society with other people.

Demonic: Caused by or influenced by demons, the spiritual agents of Satan.

In my observation, people who regard my work as dangerous or demonic tend to come from a particular wing of the church. They are mostly influenced by particular favourite (usually American) teachers, ‘free church’ (nonconformists), largely dispensationalist and also tending towards semi-Pelagian heresy (denying the doctrine of election of the saints).

Bible verses are used as proof texts to evidence that Christians should not make use of ‘worldly psychology’ to heal their emotional problems; they just trust God to do that and pray about it. 

One such proof text is 2 Timothy 3v16-17: ‘All Scripture is breathed out by God and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work’. It is argued that these verses, and particularly the word ‘complete’, mean that Christian believers should only look to the Bible for emotional help and not to anyone or anything else.

Reading the rest of 2 Timothy is helpful to give us a clear understanding of these verses: they are making a straightforward and refreshing point. There is pressure on church leader Timothy from people trying to change the gospel, claiming fresh revelation, and presenting a version of Christianity with reduced suffering. St Paul (the writer) reassures Timothy that what he has heard is the whole truth; there is nothing lacking.

In fact, the slightly wider context to include St Paul’s previous letter to Timothy explicitly defines ‘demonic’ teaching:

‘Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, for it is made holy by the word of God and by prayer’ (1 Timothy 4v1-5).

False teachers, influenced by demons, are adding rules to the Christian life: ‘Don’t do this; don’t touch that.’ Apart from the evil of creating a culture of ‘superior’ and ‘inferior’ Christians according to the knowledge and keeping of extra rules, such teaching is demonic because it robs people of the joy of fulness of life that is found in embracing all the good gifts created by God.

So I would like to ask: which areas of existence are included in ‘things created by God’? I suggest that sciences, arts, social-sciences and humanities are all parts of human enquiry into areas of God’s creation. If this is so, to teach that certain area of study are off limits per se seems (to me) an unwise position to take. 

As to the further question of whether fields of learning can be corrupted by demonic influence – well then, of course they can. Anything in creation or any field of study can be, and to some extent always is, corrupted. In psychotherapy there are some areas of teaching by Freud, Rogers, etc that I don’t follow, just as there are aspects of any other discipline that I would likely pull away from.

From my Christian worldview, elements of study and teaching which go against God will never ultimately work well, but only ever produce short-term gains. From my point of view, only where understanding is in keeping with God’s universal laws of creation will there be lasting profit. 

But let’s not throw out the baby with the bathwater; let’s take what’s good, even if we learn some of it from people who are not perfect and not Christians. That is how we operate in almost every area of life, and according to St Paul we should receive everything in creation with thanksgiving as a good gift from God.

So, if God did indeed make everything, then there is no physical thing, and no conceptual thing, including fields of learning, that can be rejected outright without stepping into dangerous territory and being labelled a false teacher by St Paul, as per 1 Timothy above. Psychotherapy is a wonderful gift from God; used wisely it can be of enormous help.

I hope this goes some way to answering this objection. If you would like to engage with me on this subject then please send me an email (details on ‘contact’ page).