<p><a href="https://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/your-mental-health/about-mental-health/what-good-mental-health" rel="nofollow noreferrer">&quot;Good mental health&quot;</a> is a phrase (within double quotes) that came up with <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Good+mental+health%22" rel="nofollow noreferrer">5.8 million Google hits</a>, showing that it is a very popular layman term for a healthy psyche, however it is defined, whether one believes in the existence of an immaterial soul or not.</p>
<p>I think to define &quot;good mental health&quot; for religious believers, psychologists need a good model of a human person that does <em>not</em> exclude <em>a priori</em> the immaterial / non-empirical dimension of a person.  Even though this non-material aspect lies beyond the competence of the discipline of psychology, I believe the <em>effects can be studied</em> because it should manifest in a person's conscious reason, emotion, will, and even bodily functions.  For example, in Christianity</p>
<ul>
<li>God's grace, which is immeasurable, has a tangible effect on a person's will and</li>
<li>God's love, once recognized in a person's reason, produces an emotional response and reciprocating acts of the whole person.</li>
</ul>
<p>Therefore, without turning this into a spirituality/religion question, I think it is important for the theorist to make sure that <strong>a well-rounded model</strong> lies behind the definition of &quot;good mental health&quot; that in turn includes an accounting of <em>what's healthy vs. what's not healthy</em> in the following areas of normally functioning believers (we can exclude mind-altering substance abusers) who:</p>
<div class="s-table-container">
<table class="s-table">
<thead>
<tr>
<th style="text-align: left;">healthy</th>
<th style="text-align: left;">un-healthy</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: left;">take seriously the rational &amp; emotional experience of guilt, repentance, and confession of one's sins as an integral part of character development</td>
<td style="text-align: left;">turning it into guilt complex</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: left;">choose to suffer for others, even sacrificing their lives when they feel called, in the name of loving others</td>
<td style="text-align: left;">codependency</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: left;">talk to God a lot, yet scores normal in interpersonal communication</td>
<td style="text-align: left;">mask self-talk as talking to God</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: left;">listen to God for advice / insight</td>
<td style="text-align: left;">cannot distinguish voices from self, or worse, construe one's insight as God's command</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: left;">subject themselves to God as King</td>
<td style="text-align: left;">confusing him with an abusive father figure</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: left;">have a place for non-empirically verifiable tenets of faith</td>
<td style="text-align: left;">being susceptible to cult movements</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: left;">is conscientious to do regular acts of religion (going to mass daily, pray and fasting regularly)</td>
<td style="text-align: left;">being neurotic about them</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: left;">is humble</td>
<td style="text-align: left;">being a door-mat or having self-esteem issues</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: left;">choose to be cloistered but can offer wisdom to people in the world</td>
<td style="text-align: left;">social avoidance</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: left;">potentially experience vision from time to time, but could differentiate it from</td>
<td style="text-align: left;">hallucination</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: left;">etc.</td>
<td style="text-align: left;"></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<p><strong>My full question is</strong>: What models of a person do psychology theorists currently use in the past 20 years to help define a healthy psyche that explicitly includes the religious aspects of a person so that the model can feed into creating a &quot;healthy&quot; definition of religious behaviors?</p>
<p><strong>My expected answer</strong> is a list of books / journal articles of models that psychologists currently use, either in the academia, or in their counseling practice.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>A possible positive answer would be the 2009 G.C. Dilsaver's book <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/8154639-imago-dei-psychotherapy" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Imago Dei Psychotherapy: A Catholic Conceptualization</a> which includes a foreword by American psychologist turned Oxford faculty <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_N._Robinson" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Daniel N. Robinson</a> whose publications include philosophy of psychology:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Psychotherapy, too, [after comparing with general medicine], is intelligible as an undertaking only insofar as there is a model or theory of the healthy person -- the healthy mental life -- not sufficiently reflected in the life of this person, this patient. ...</p>
<p>In <em>Imago Dei Psychotherapy</em> Dr. Dilsaver comes to grips with this unavoidable starting point and defends a conception of human nature that he would have guide therapeutic practice.  ... What is advanced is a conception of human nature with which to understand the troubled and incomplete life and then the elements that must be incorporated into this life to relieve it and permit it to begin the process of redeeming its fuller and fullest promise.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But this theory is very limited in exposure, not in the mainstream.  I'm hoping for a more mainstream model being used by Christian psychologists.</p>
</li>
<li><p>A negative example would be the Freudian model of a human person which is inherently atheistic and therefore relegates a lot of what are otherwise healthy religious behaviors to negative diagnosis.</p>
</li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-11-17T12:22:21.233Z
Welcome to Psychology.SE. The subject of [Psychology of Religion](https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=psychology+of+religion+and+spirituality&oq=psychology+of+religion) is a huge one and the Google Scholar link here shows there are stacks of books, research papers etc. on the subject.  What you are asking here will need an extensive write-up on the findings within all these books and research papers.  Maybe you should separate your bullet points into separate questions? 1/2
Chris Rogers
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-11-17T12:22:37.213Z
2/2   For example, the bullet point looking at those who *have a place for non-empirically verifiable tenets of faith without being gullible to cult leaders* should have a separate question asking how psychology can determine those who have a place for non-empirically verifiable tenets of faith without being susceptible to cult leaders.  This way your question will be more focused and won't fill volumes of textbooks.
Chris Rogers
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-11-17T18:57:12.197Z
@ChrisRogers Thank you for the feedback.  I have changed the question into a model of a human person instead of the much-too-general approaches.  I'm hoping simply to be pointed out to a list of books / journal articles of models that psychologists currently use.  Let me know if this is still too broad.
GratefulDisciple
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-11-17T20:05:39.187Z
@ChrisRogers BTW, thank you for that Google Scholar link, which helps a lot as a starting point.  The [table of contents](https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=GS8cBQAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&ots=AQydjObdSm&dq=psychology%20of%20religion%20and%20spirituality&lr&pg=PR13#v=onepage&q=psychology%20of%20religion%20and%20spirituality&f=false) of the 2013 Handbook of The Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 2nd Ed shows a lot of promise.
GratefulDisciple
<abnormal-psychology><religion><cognitive-science-of-religion>
What models of a person do psychology theorists currently use to define a healthy psyche in religious believers?
GratefulDisciple
# What models of a person do psychology theorists currently use to define a healthy psyche in religious believers?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-11-16)

["Good mental health"](https://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/your-mental-health/about-mental-health/what-good-mental-health) is a phrase (within double quotes) that came up with [5.8 million Google hits](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Good+mental+health%22), showing that it is a very popular layman term for a healthy psyche, however it is defined, whether one believes in the existence of an immaterial soul or not.

I think to define "good mental health" for religious believers, psychologists need a good model of a human person that does *not* exclude *a priori* the immaterial / non-empirical dimension of a person. Even though this non-material aspect lies beyond the competence of the discipline of psychology, I believe the *effects can be studied* because it should manifest in a person's conscious reason, emotion, will, and even bodily functions. For example, in Christianity

* God's grace, which is immeasurable, has a tangible effect on a person's will and
* God's love, once recognized in a person's reason, produces an emotional response and reciprocating acts of the whole person.

Therefore, without turning this into a spirituality/religion question, I think it is important for the theorist to make sure that **a well-rounded model** lies behind the definition of "good mental health" that in turn includes an accounting of *what's healthy vs. what's not healthy* in the following areas of normally functioning believers (we can exclude mind-altering substance abusers) who:

| healthy | un-healthy |
| --- | --- |
| take seriously the rational & emotional experience of guilt, repentance, and confession of one's sins as an integral part of character development | turning it into guilt complex |
| choose to suffer for others, even sacrificing their lives when they feel called, in the name of loving others | codependency |
| talk to God a lot, yet scores normal in interpersonal communication | mask self-talk as talking to God |
| listen to God for advice / insight | cannot distinguish voices from self, or worse, construe one's insight as God's command |
| subject themselves to God as King | confusing him with an abusive father figure |
| have a place for non-empirically verifiable tenets of faith | being susceptible to cult movements |
| is conscientious to do regular acts of religion (going to mass daily, pray and fasting regularly) | being neurotic about them |
| is humble | being a door-mat or having self-esteem issues |
| choose to be cloistered but can offer wisdom to people in the world | social avoidance |
| potentially experience vision from time to time, but could differentiate it from | hallucination |
| etc. |  |

**My full question is**: What models of a person do psychology theorists currently use in the past 20 years to help define a healthy psyche that explicitly includes the religious aspects of a person so that the model can feed into creating a "healthy" definition of religious behaviors?

**My expected answer** is a list of books / journal articles of models that psychologists currently use, either in the academia, or in their counseling practice.

* A possible positive answer would be the 2009 G.C. Dilsaver's book [Imago Dei Psychotherapy: A Catholic Conceptualization](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/8154639-imago-dei-psychotherapy) which includes a foreword by American psychologist turned Oxford faculty [Daniel N. Robinson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_N._Robinson) whose publications include philosophy of psychology:

  > Psychotherapy, too, [after comparing with general medicine], is intelligible as an undertaking only insofar as there is a model or theory of the healthy person -- the healthy mental life -- not sufficiently reflected in the life of this person, this patient. ...
  >
  > In *Imago Dei Psychotherapy* Dr. Dilsaver comes to grips with this unavoidable starting point and defends a conception of human nature that he would have guide therapeutic practice. ... What is advanced is a conception of human nature with which to understand the troubled and incomplete life and then the elements that must be incorporated into this life to relieve it and permit it to begin the process of redeeming its fuller and fullest promise.

  But this theory is very limited in exposure, not in the mainstream. I'm hoping for a more mainstream model being used by Christian psychologists.
* A negative example would be the Freudian model of a human person which is inherently atheistic and therefore relegates a lot of what are otherwise healthy religious behaviors to negative diagnosis.

**Tags:** abnormal-psychology, religion, cognitive-science-of-religion

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Welcome to Psychology.SE. The subject of [Psychology of Religion](https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=psychology+of+religion+and+spirituality&oq=psychology+of+religion) is a huge one and the Google Scholar link here shows there are stacks of books, research papers etc. on the subject.  What you are asking here will need an extensive write-up on the findings within all these books and research papers.  Maybe you should separate your bullet points into separate questions? 1/2  
> **username_1**: 2/2   For example, the bullet point looking at those who *have a place for non-empirically verifiable tenets of faith without being gullible to cult leaders* should have a separate question asking how psychology can determine those who have a place for non-empirically verifiable tenets of faith without being susceptible to cult leaders.  This way your question will be more focused and won't fill volumes of textbooks.  
> **username_0**: @ChrisRogers Thank you for the feedback.  I have changed the question into a model of a human person instead of the much-too-general approaches.  I'm hoping simply to be pointed out to a list of books / journal articles of models that psychologists currently use.  Let me know if this is still too broad.  
> **username_0**: @ChrisRogers BTW, thank you for that Google Scholar link, which helps a lot as a starting point.  The [table of contents](https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=GS8cBQAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&ots=AQydjObdSm&dq=psychology%20of%20religion%20and%20spirituality&lr&pg=PR13#v=onepage&q=psychology%20of%20religion%20and%20spirituality&f=false) of the 2013 Handbook of The Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 2nd Ed shows a lot of promise.  

---

## 0 answers

