The Role of the Providence Debate in the Theory and Practice of Counseling

The "Providence Debate", as identified by Boyd and Eddy (2002), consists of two contrasting views pertaining to the manner in which "God governs the world" (p. 24). First, the Calvinist view asserts that God exerts control over all things including human behavior, experiences, and ultimate outcome. Second, the Arminian view postulates that God chooses to limit his control thus allowing an extent of human decision-making. As each argument includes scriptural support for the assumptions, an additional thought is how this parallels modern and postmodern counseling theory.

The modern and postmodern counseling models differ in regards to therapeutic intervention and the level of client ability to define one's own behavior. Modernist theorists assert that truth can be known through empirically-based evidence (Nichols & Schwartz, 1998). Furthermore, the functions of the world and universe operate according to laws that can be discovered. Therefore, grand narrative or broad-based theories were used as a method to explain human behavior (Nichols & Schwartz). The assumption is that "once the universal laws were discovered, humanity could control the environment - problems could be solved because anything and everything could be understood and overhauled" (Nichols & Schwartz, p. 317). As a result, in the counseling process, the therapist is viewed as the expert who could identify causes of dysfunction and disregard factors that were unexplainable by theory. The therapist shows more trust in empirical methods than the client's personal experience (Nichols & Schwartz).

In making comparison without surmising conclusions, the modernist perspective is reflective of the Calvinist view. For example, Calvinists believe that God exerts ultimate control, therefore discounting the humanistic perspective of self-determination. Similarly, modernists assume the role of expert and apply large-scale theoretical basis to explain client dysfunction without accounting for the individual's narrative. Just as the Calvinist and modernist views have consistency in certain assumptions, so does the Arminian and postmodern stances.

The postmodern view allows for the expression and acknowledgement of the individual story. Therefore, there is no grand narrative that accounts for human behavior or dysfunction, but the client experience has substance. As a result, there are other explanations for occurrences (Nichols & Schwartz). The focus is the meaning an individual places upon a situation or behavior. In comparison, the Arminian argument identifies God as limiting his control, therefore allowing people to make choices according to their morals and free will (Boyd & Eddy). Therefore, one's choices are based within personal perception and choice (Boyd & Eddy). As a result, as each view is different in perspective, it is important to consider the impact upon the Christian counseling process.

From a Christian perspective, is behavior and dysfunction due to God's sovereign will or due to personal choice and perception? Those who are trained in the field of counseling must be able to engage in intervention that responds to the need of the client. Furthermore, can an individual story exist within a grand narrative? These questions will be assessed through the comparison of a redemptive history article by Johnson (2000), which considers modern psychology and Bible theology precepts; and an article by Blanton (2008), which considers the integration of postmodern precepts with Christian thought.

Johnson expresses the concept of human agency, which is representative of the ability to make decisions, evaluate oneself, and be accountable in choices and goal attainment. Furthermore, he refers to God as the capacity for human agency, which is reflective of God's sovereignty. Yet, from an individual perspective as one who is part of a social context, it is the socially constructed reality of the individual that promotes a sense of self and whether to maintain or create a new narrative (Blanton). In other words, the way one perceives and interprets a situation may affect view of self. As written in 2 Corinthians 4:8-9, "We are hard-pressed on every side, yet not crushed; we are perplexed, but not in despair, persecuted but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed-..." As these scriptures reflect two ways the individuals can view self in the situation (i.e. pressed versus crushed). This point is further supported as Johnson identifies the concept of self-schemata, which reflects perceptions of self formed due to prior experiences. This is an example of the metaphor within a postmodern view of how persons create reality through language and within a social context (Blanton). Therefore, self-stories can contribute to one's reality and existence within a meta-narrative.

Overall, the therapist role is to aide the client in recognizing the definition of self and experiences and how this impacts the way one responds to and copes with situations. As God does support one's growth and change as supported by the pursuit of knowledge and wisdom that helps guide behavior (Psalm 1:2-3). In addition, He provides the Bible to promote self-awareness (James 1:23-24). Furthermore, in reflecting upon persons identified in Old and New Testament scripture (i.e. Moses, Paul), each had an idea of self and responded to God according to that perception. Yet, as their self-perceptions and previous behaviors were expressed to God, the additional traits within them were made manifest through a process of experiences. As a result, the therapist role shows consistency with that process in helping the person verbalize the abilities, confront the doubt, and engage in a self-growth process.

References

Blanton, P. G. (2008). Integrating postmodern and Christian contemplative thought: Building a theoretical framework. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 27(1), 73-84.

Boyd, G. A. & Eddy, P. R. (2002). Across the spectrum: Understanding issues in evangelical theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

Johnson, E. L. (2000). Describing the self within redemptive history. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 19(1), 5-24.