Cover
story Church in Crisis Scandal renews resistance to
psychology
By JOHN L. ALLEN JR.
Rome
The rector of Romes prestigious Gregorian University, a
Jesuit identified perhaps more than any other figure in the Catholic church
with the use of psychology in spiritual formation, has strongly defended the
practice in a July 9 interview with NCR.
The comments come during the countdown to a Vatican investigation
of American seminaries and religious houses of formation, in which the use and
abuse of psychological evaluation is expected to be a major bone of
contention.
If we take secular psychology blindly, its
inadequate, said Jesuit Fr. Franco Imoda. But if we believe
[psychology] has nothing to say to us because we already have everything in our
hands, we would be seriously mistaken.
Imoda, who holds a Ph.D. in psychology from the University of
Chicago and is the cofounder of the Gregorians 32-year-old Institute for
Psychology, is among the consultors for an upcoming document from the
Congregation for Catholic Education on psychological testing.
Second only to the question of an alleged homosexual
subculture, psychology is today a bête-noir for critics of American
seminaries.
Catholicism has actually long harbored reservations about the
discipline, whose founding figures tended to see religion either as an illusion
or a neurosis. Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen once blasted Sigmund Freud as a
purveyor of materialism, hedonism, infantilism and eroticism, while
G.K. Chesterton mocked psychoanalysis as confession without
absolution.
Imoda said these critics had a point, but protested too much.
Obviously we cannot make Freud a Father of the Church for
training priests. But the hypothesis that sometimes religion can be a defense
against psychological troubles
its a good hypothesis, he
said.
This traditional resistance crumbled after the Second Vatican
Council (1962-65), when psychological tools such as Rorschach tests and the
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory became standard fare in admissions
processes for diocesan seminaries and religious communities.
But in the wake of the American sex abuse scandals, in which
bishops often justified reassigning abusers on the grounds that it was what
their psychologists advised, the debate is back.
One catalyst has been the much-discussed book Goodbye, Good
Men, by Michael Rose, who argues that the priest shortage in the United
States has been artificially exacerbated by liberal vocations directors and
seminary formation teams hostile to conservative candidates. The primary tool
used to screen out conservatives, according to Rose, is psychological
evaluations labeling them rigid and intolerant.
Meanwhile morally lax candidates, including future abusers, got clean bills of
health.
Imoda, who has spent portions of each summer in the United States
for 35 years, said that while such abuse may occur, it is not widespread.
If these instruments are being used to exclude people simply
for being traditional, its wrong, Imoda said. But they
dont have to be used that way. They can also be used to exclude somebody
from the left who is immature.
More to the point, Imoda told NCR during an hour-long
session in his Rome office, its a mistake to think you can bypass
psychology in vocations work and skip directly to the spiritual level.
When you do spiritual direction, when you do training, you
do some psychological work, Imoda said. You cannot perform a
spiritual intervention completely separated from the psychological or human
aspect.
The aim, therefore, must be a critical sifting to see which
elements of secular psychology fit.
I believe, Imoda said, that institutions
sometimes fail to see issues that the psychological evaluation may
reveal.
How does it work?
Imodas institute has performed over 7,000 psychological
evaluations, often at the service of candidates for the priesthood or their
dioceses or communities. The process normally takes about two weeks, and
includes two or three extensive personal interviews, use of personal
inventories such as the Minnesota Multiphasic, and projective
techniques such as the Rorschach and sentence completion exercises. If a
community or diocese requests, the institute will also administer an
intelligence test. At the end, the individual is given a comprehensive overview
of the findings.
What does he look for in a healthy candidate?
In the cognitive area, balanced judgment, Imoda said.
Also flexibility, the capacity to distinguish the essential from the
accidental.
This can be especially challenging for religious people, Imoda
said.
Sometimes so-called orthodox Catholics are not
capable of seeing that Jesus Christ, the Trinity, even the infallibility of the
pope are one thing, while every document that comes out from the Vatican is
another. So, can they distinguish?
This tolerance for ambiguity, Imoda stressed, must be rooted in
deep fidelity.
My second level would be freedom, the capacity and the
actuality of commitment to objective values, Imoda said. Obedience
is a difficult thing from the point of view of maturity. It is not just
acquiescence. Sometimes you are a fighter when you obey, but you
obey.
Finally, Imoda outlined several key emotional indicators.
I look for joy, peace, serenity in the persons life.
In spiritual terms we would say, consolation. This is a key measure of
maturity. The opposite is depression, anxiety, restlessness.
In practical terms, of course, the American debate is not just
over what to look for in a candidate -- few would argue that a future pastor
should not be chronically depressed or angry -- but who gets to make the
call.
For example: Does someone performing psychological assessment for
seminaries need to be Catholic, or at least Christian? Some ex-seminarians tell
horror stories about atheistic psychiatrists who suggested they were mentally
disturbed for believing in the devil or praying the rosary.
Imoda said that for the simple purpose of excluding the presence
of psychopathology, any trained practitioner could do the job. But as far as
evaluating strengths and weaknesses in a person called to vocation, he said,
this does require a basic Christian outlook.
Imoda knows that over the past 32 years he has tried to stretch
the church in new directions, asking it to reconcile with a system of thought
it has long opposed. History suggests thats never an easy sell.
When St. Thomas said yes to Aristotle, it wasnt an
unconditional yes, Imoda said. He probably respected Aristotle more
than anyone else, but he also transformed him. Our insight was, why not do this
with some of the sciences? I think Freud said something interesting. Rogers
said something interesting, also the behaviorists. We have to exercise great
prudence, yes, but we must not exclude them, Imoda said.
Any exclusion, I think, is not Christian.
John L. Allen Jr. is NCR Vatican correspondent. His
e-mail address is jallen@natcath.org
National Catholic Reporter, August 2,
2002
|