PatristicPsychology PDF

Patristic Psychology
http://catholicgnosis.wordpress.com/2008/09/25/patristicpsychology/
November 6, 2012
Posted on September 25, 2008 by John Uebersax

The ancients were far better psychologists than we give them credit for. It is a supreme folly of
modern men to think we are vastly intellectually superior to the ancients. True, we are
technologically more sophisticated, but there is no evidence that we are fundamentally better and
deeper thinkers than they.
Indeed, there is good reason to think just the opposite. Modern culture suffers from the effects of
three centuries of radical materialistic empiricism. It has reached the absurd point that we have a
purported science, psychology, which barely acknowledges the existence of the psyche. We have
fallen into the habit of believing that whatever we cannot touch, see, or measure does not exist.
One consequence of this is that centuries worth of sophisticated Western psychology originating
in antiquity and developed by Greek and, later, Christian writers, has been entirely neglected in the
curriculum of modern academic psychology.
It is now abundantly clear that we need to get beyond the limiting empirical-skeptical paradigm. But
as we do so, we shall discover that we do not need to re-invent psychology: we instead need to
pick up the thread where it left off (around the time of the Renaissance).
Briefly, what I propose here is that some department(s) of psychology most logically located at
a Catholic or Orthodox university or seminary initiate a special program in Patristic psychology. The
aim would be to present, develop, and train students and future teachers in a full system of
psychology specifically that area of psychology that relates to personal spiritual development
based on principles found in the Patristic tradition, earlier Greek philosophy, and later writings of
Doctors of the Church (St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Bonaventure, St. Gregory Palamas, St. John of
the Cross, etc.).
Indeed, one of the first challenges would be to more clearly identify what this particular field of
psychology is it is not exactly clinical psychology, nor cognitive psychology, nor depth
psychology, nor personality psychology, not transpersonal psychology. Rather it shares elements
will all of these. For now, I propose to call this a psychology of personal spirit ualit y or even the
study of psychological salvat ion.
The book, Ort hodox Psychot herapy, by Archimandrite Hierotheos S. Vlachos, appears to me the
best one currently available that might serve as a starting point.
From the Introduction:
From the Introduction:
The term Orthodox Psychotherapy does not refer to specific

cases of people suffering from psychological problems of
neurosis. Rather it refers to all people. According to Orthodox
Tradition, after Adams fall man became ill; his nous was
darkened and lost communion with God. Death entered into the
persons being and caused many anthropological, social, even
ecological problems. In the tragedy of his fall man maintained
the image of God within him but lost completely the likeness of
Him, since his communion with God was disrupted. However
the incarnation of Christ and the work of the Church aim at
enabling the person to attain to the likeness of God, that is to
reestablish communion with God. By adhering to Orthodox
therapeutic treatment as conceived by the Holy Fathers of the
Church man can cope successfully with the thoughts (logismoi)
and thus solve his problems completely and comprehensively.
Lets consider a single example of where this might lead. Cigaret t e smoking is one of the
greatest health epidemics in the world today. Yet modern medical psychology is unable to
conceptualize or treat the problem adequately. One reason is that medical psychology here is out
of its depth. Smoking can only be understood fully, and remedied, by understanding it in its
spiritual context. Smoking is not just a physiological addiction, a habit, or a conditioned reflex. It
originates with factors and forces the material level.
Let me make a statement boldly, but then allow me to qualify it: Smoking is a sin, and it is demonic.
Now what is meant by sin and by demonic here? That is precisely the question. Demonic here,
for example, doesnt mean there are invisible goblins jumping around placing cigarettes in peoples
paths and tricking them into smoking. The mere word demon, or, to use the original form,
daemon is a linguistic token, a symbol, used to denote a concept that is, at some level,
experientially self-evident. There is a realm of mental experience and activity, with behavioral
correlates, that, lacking any clearer term, we have come to describe with the word, demonic. One
quality of this activity is that it is energized in a certain way as though coming from a force outside
us. Basically, this much is all we can say with certainty and in saying this much we have not
committed ourselves to a specific metaphysical position.
In short, that smoking is sinful and demonic is known to us intuitively and experientially. This is
present in our folk wisdom and manifest in colloquial language. If someone says of a person, he
has finally rid himself of his demons nobody ever asks what that means. We know what it means,
at least roughly we simply cannot explain it in words.
Its even more obvious that smoking is sinful in the psychological sense of being self-destructive
activity, and corresponding to a fallen cognitive state certainly one in which one is not being
directed by anything like Wisdom or higher mental powers. It requires a turning away from God in
the mind and heart to smoke. So while smoking a single cigarette perhaps isnt much of sin, it is
still, technically speaking a sin and we shouldnt lose sight of that or be too hesitant to apply
the term.
Thus, it is more correct to say that smoking is sinful and demonic than it is to say, all this talk
about sin and demons is obsolete and unscientific smoking has nothing to do with them.
Another time we may pursue further this particular exampler. For now, let it serve to illustrate the
broader point: that modern psychology, in trying to restrict itself to a narrow scientific method,
has in the process rid itself of the power of human intuitive wisdom. Patristic psychology, among
other things, can aid us in reacquiring a system of psychology that is at once scientifically, logically,
and philosophically rigorous, and also more fully consistent with our experience as human beings. It
can be, simply put, a psychology of both the mind and the heart, in contrast to modern version of
psychology that is only a science of the mind (and only a portion of the mind, namely the rational
mind, at that).
But the other point illustrated is the practical relevance of this proposed enterprise. How many
lives are wrecked, and how many hundreds of millions of dollars are lost due to the effects of
cigarette smoking? It is a huge problem. We have, in our arsenal of weapons to levy against it, a
2000-plus year old tradition of thought developed by the keenest psychological minds the West
has ever produced and, for reasons already alluded to above, these ideas have been put aside.
Isnt it only logical that we now make a most serious effort to see if these ideas can help us
overcome the scourge of tobacco smoking?
And this is but one example. We could also list among the current psychological problems that
debilitate modern society alcoholism, depression, materialism, despair, and apathy. All of these are
addressed by Patristic psychology, and none are adequately addressed by modern psychological
theories.
Filed under: Cognitive psychology, Cultural psychology, Patristics, philosophy, religion, Sapiential
eschatology

PatristicPsychology PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PatristicPsychology PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PatristicPsychology PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Patristic Psychology

Posted on September 25, 2008 by John Uebersax

From the Introduction:

The term Orthodox Psychotherapy does not refer to specific

You might also like