Running head: A CRITIQUE OF TWO THEORIES:

A Critique of Two Theories: Crabb and Hawkins Amanda Page Liberty University COUN 507 January 29, 2012

Running head: A CRITIQUE OF TWO THEORIES:

A Critique of Two Theories: Crabb and Hawkins There is significant importance to examine and understand more than one model of counseling theory. Every client we encounter is different and receives information differently as well. For example, it may not be a wise decision to use a cognitive behavioral approach on a client who is not mentally or emotionally mature enough to utilize such thought process change. Christian counseling is no different. In this paper we will discuss two models of Christian counseling by Dr. Larry Crabb and Dr. Ron Hawkins by summarizing each of their views and then drawing a conclusion at the end. Crabb (1977) offers a model of Christian counseling that argues against the worldview of other secular models. He argues that a persons thought process is what guides a person to Christian maturity. He discusses that a persons reason for wanting to resolve their issues should be to achieve a better relationship with God and to achieve Christian maturity (Crabb, 1977). Crabb explains that many people believe that once a person accepts Christ as their savior that Salvation is an instantaneous event. According to Crabb (1977), there is much more to it

Running head: A CRITIQUE OF TWO THEORIES: than this. He explains that change and maturing involves changing the way we live and think, He further explains that such changes are not only for the outside but on the inside as well (Crabb, 1977). Crabb discusses that changes in the way we think about maturation is our motivation. He explains it in such a way that when a person changes their thinking their inward behavior and attitudes will be affected. In return when their inward behaviors and attitudes change then so do their outward expressions of their behavior and attitudes (Crabb, 1977).

Crab (1977) further discusses a need for change in our thought process when he indicates that people are primarily motivated by the need to acquire their personal needs. He indicates that problems arise when people have either failed to or feel as if they have failed to meet their needs (Crabb, 1977). Crabb discusses the faulty thought that some think their need is to be happy and when they cannot meet this need problems begin to develop and people go astray trying to find new ways to meet this need which often leads to destructive behavior and attitude. He further explains that if our need is a closer relationship with Christ and we can change our thought process or motivation of achieving this need then positive change occurs (Crabb, 1977). Hawkinss model deals more with changing the persons character rather than the thinking. He describes the persons character by using a circular figure where there are three circles inside of each other. The circles represent the inside to the outside of a person. The first circle is the spiritual, the second is the soulish, and the third is the physical (Hawkins, 2006). Hawkins then adds the surrounding factors that influence a person such as friends, family, economy, society, government, and etc. He then adds the other category which includes Christ, Satan, angels, and fallen angels (Hawkins, 2006).

Running head: A CRITIQUE OF TWO THEORIES: Hawkins emphasizes helping clients to create a changing strategy and then taking

ownership for it. He describes a four step process on how to create such a plan (Hawkins, 2006). Hawkins describes step one as gaining and understanding of the real issue. Step two is describes as reality testing of the issue and step three is the development of the action plan where the client takes ownership of the plan and will be responsible for the outcome of the plan. The fourth and final step is where the counselor helps the client to add support systems and accountability for the client and their process of change (Hawkins, 2006). As with any theory, whether it is secular or Biblical, each theory seems to have some things to offer and things that are missing. Both theories acknowledge God as necessary for change but each seem to go too far in one direction or the other. For example, Hawkins gives credit to external influences that affect a person and Crabb does not and his points seem to not have a good inclusion of psychology even though he does reference it. Hawkins acknowledges God as part of a person but does not seem to attach the need for closeness for God which appears more on the psychology end of the spectrum. It seems easy to think that we can find a perfect balance of both psychology and theology if balance is what we are looking for but when we are speaking of integration, balance is not the goal. We are looking for truth and God is truth. Crabb makes a good point when he says that we need to change our thinking and our behavior will change. Cognitive behaviorist might agree with this idea; however, emotional rationalists may totally disagree. Does this mean the emotional rationalists have no Biblical truth to their theory? I would doubt this to be so (Crabb, 1977 & Hawkins, 2006) As stated in the introduction of this paper, it is very important to study all of the different theories. The insight from the two theories was well worth the time but so is being cautious and asking God for direction before strictly enclosing on anything. We are in a field of handling

Running head: A CRITIQUE OF TWO THEORIES: lives that are important to the clients themselves, to their loved ones, and to God. We cannot afford to accept any less than truth.

References Crabb, L. (1977). Effective biblical counseling: A model for helping caring Christians become capable counselors. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House. Hawkins, R. (Speaker). (2006). Model for guiding the counseling process. (Streamed video lecture). Lynchburg, VA: Liberty University.