We received a copy of the Spring, 2022, Biola Magazine, which is a publication of Biola University. This particular issue’s “The Last Word” is titled “Five Reasons for Christians to Go to Therapy.” The author, Dr. Doug Daugherty, is dean of Biola’s Rosemead School of Psychology. Rosemead is the epitome of a school that attempts to integrate psychology and the Christian faith. For too many years, Rosemead has promoted the idea of integrating Christianity with psychology, which cannot be done without denigrating God’s Word. Psychotherapeutic theories and therapies were devised by unbelievers, with most originators being antagonistic to Christianity. Therefore, psychotherapy was designed for the natural man (the Adamic nature, which is referred to in the Bible as the “flesh,” “carnal nature,” or “old man”). Thus, this unholy mixture is more likely to strengthen the flesh than the spirit. In looking at Daugherty’s five reasons, we see that psychotherapy is audaciously claiming to do what only the Bible ministered by the Holy Spirit can do. In addition, Rosemead is accredited by the American Psychological Association for preparing students to become licensed psychotherapists. One of us earned a doctorate and qualified for the California Clinical Psychologist’s License, but never applied for it, because we saw its many flaws, failures, and downright contradictions.
We know by asking the California Department of Consumer Affairs that no religious faith of any religion can be injected into client sessions of California-licensed psychotherapists. Also, the California licensed individual cannot state, infer, or imply in any manner that they provide “Christian counseling.”This is likely true of all other States. We doubt that Rosemead professors have made that clear to their students, as they advertise their integration of psychology and the Christian faith. Both the American Psychological Association, which accredits the Rosemead program, and each State’s psychological association would regard it as unprofessional if therapists of any religious faith would make it part of their counseling session. Therefore, those who integrate any religion with psychotherapy are dishonestly practicing outside the restrictions of their license. We say “dishonestly,” because when the conversation moves into Christianity and the therapist is guiding the discussion with precepts of Scripture, honesty would require the therapist to not charge money or call it psychotherapy. In looking at the following “Five Reasons for Christians to Go to Therapy” presented by Dougherty, we conclude that he must be under the delusion that licensed psychotherapists can practice and teach their faith while charging for their psychotherapy sessions under the auspices of their license. Furthermore, he is encouraging his readers to become clients of psychotherapy to enrich their Christian lives. Each of Daugherty’s five reasons follow with our response. In spite of the fact that Daugherty is the Dean of Rosemead, a school that trains students for the psychotherapy license, he appears to be totally unaware of the legal and professional limitations of the license!
Daugherty’s First Reason:
“Psychotherapy engages our capacity to grow in the context of a caring relationship.”
In this section Daugherty talks about how our creator made us for relationship and how a therapeutic relationship enables a person to experience “the love of Christ and the fellowship with the Father-Son-Holy Spirit.” The psychotherapist, who is only available for a set price, for a set amount of time and only within the lop-sided, artificial therapist-client relationship, cannot give what believers have been freely giving to one another in the Body of Christ for centuries prior to the advent of this unholy integration. Pastors are now intimidated into referring their flock to these purveyors of psychotherapy, who now saturate the Church as they sell their “caring relationship” for a price. Consequently, or perhaps only coincident with it, the Church has become anemic, lacking the very life that Christ died to give His followers. In this area of providing a “caring relationship,” the use of psychotherapy for Christians serves an indictment on the Church for not acting as Christ’s body with believers caring for one another in a loving relationship with one another, as Christ commanded His followers to love one another sacrificially. Sadly, a therapeutic relationship for pay is not sacrificial or even real; it is superficial, artificial, and costly.
Artificial Relationships in Therapy
In their book The Lonely American, Jacqueline Olds and Richard Schwartz discuss one of the serious realities of counseling: the artificial, paid-for relationship. They first mention “a curious set of rules” that exist in counseling and say, “the rules are quite different from the rules for ordinary relationships. The most striking difference is that the usual expectation of reciprocity disappears” (bold added). All the drama and narrative dialogue are about the counselee and her issues and problems.  The counselee gets to talk about herself and her litany of personal problems and the counselor does not get to talk about herself and her litany of personal problems, except for something brief that might be said to establish rapport. The expectation is that the focus of the counseling will be on the counselee’s “problems and life and words.” The counselor does not get equal time for her own issues. Dr. Thomas Szasz describes counseling simply as “rhetoric” and refers to counseling as “conversation.” Szasz asks, “In plain language, what do [the counselee] and [counselor] actually do?” He answers, “They speak and listen to each other.” Szasz asks and answers, “What do they speak about? Narrowly put, the [counselee] speaks about himself, and the [counselor] speaks about the [counselee].” The spotlight during the counseling hour is on the counselee.
The counselor/counselee relationship is diametrically different from normal relationships where there is reciprocity. Turn-taking occurs in normal relationships. One person speaks and another listens, but the listener gets to speak as well. The focus of attention is shared between one another’s “problems and life and words.” In normal conversations there is close to equal time given to and taken by both parties. The downside of the counseling relationship is that it is not the normal way conversations are carried on in the real world.
While “there are no reliable statistics” on what is called “self-disclosure,” it is considered to be unprofessional for a counselor to disclose her own personal issues to a counselee whether the time is paid for or not. Imagine a counselor talking about her own marriage problems or her own relational or (if paid) her own professional issues, saying for example, “My husband and I do not see eye to eye lately on a lot of matters,” etc., or “This has been a tough month. Some of my counselees have not returned and I have expenses to cover and my own personal income needs.” When such self-disclosure occurs, it is typically the end of the counseling. Why? Because the counselee is there to talk about her own problems and not to listen to the counselor’s problems, especially if she is paying for the counseling time.
Regardless of how dull and boring the counselee may be, the counselor has the responsibility to listen thoughtfully and often to hang on every word the counselee utters in an effort to obtain an accurate understanding of the problem and to respond appropriately. Normal friends will seem mundane after a therapeutic love-in that can occur in counseling. Olds and Schwartz aptly describe such skewed relationships:
The special partnership that allows a therapist to earn a good living and a patient to focus on neglected aspects of his life and experience would be a disaster outside of the office. Used as a template for other intimate relationships, it is selfish and self-absorbed. Other than therapists, only an occasional very self-sacrificing parent or a spouse who aspires to martyrdom is likely to sign on for that long term. A problem with psychotherapy is that it can make all other relationships look like they fall short when it comes to sustained, attentive caring and leave the patient circling back to therapy as the only relationship that is good enough.
Daugherty’s Second Reason:
“Psychotherapy can help us process and make sense of our jumbled internal experience and the realities of a broken world.”
Really? Solid Bible teaching through the ministry of the Holy Spirit can do far better than that! Daugherty says, “Our world is often spoiled by division, hatred, racism, sexism, and violence, and at the same time there is a common desire for love, mercy, reconciliation and justice.” Yes, a messed-up world does need “love, mercy, reconciliation and justice.” But true “love, mercy, reconciliation and justice” must be based on the truth of Scripture. “Christian” psychotherapy is mixed with notions from such atheists as Carl Rogers, who taught self-love to the extent that Christians came to believe that it was a third commandment, with the unbiblical idea that one cannot love others until one loves oneself. Of course, Rosemead and other promoters of mixing psychology with the Bible teach that all truth is God’s truth. Is all truth really God’s truth? We reject the Rosemead shibboleth that “all truth is God’s truth.”
Is All Truth God’s truth?
Individuals who want to make psychological theories and therapies available to Christians and who attempt to integrate such theories and techniques with Scripture justify these practices by saying, “All truth is God’s truth.” At first such a statement sounds plausible and even true. However, we need to look at what might be included on each side of the equation of “all truth = God’s truth.”
First of all, what is truth? While there are several definitions of truth, one generally assumes that truth represents that which is true, real, and actual. Truth is the perfect expression of that which is. If what is put into the category of “all truth” is limited to “the perfect expression of that which is,” then that would be “God’s truth.” However, the assortment of ideas, opinions, and even apparent facts under the designation of “all truth” reduces truth to meaning “imperfect human perception of that which is.”
The broad field of psychology at best involves human observation and interpretation of Creation and therefore is subject to human error and the blindness of the unregenerate heart as described in Ephesians 4:18, “Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart.”
Psychotherapy and its underlying psychologies have the further problem of subjective imagination also proceeding from unregenerate individuals. They represent a further departure from expressing that which truly is. Instead, they present some subjective observation, reasoned analysis, creative imagination, and much distortion. If these ideas are included under the declaration, “All truth is God’s truth,” one must conclude that those who use the expression have greatly misunderstood the nature of truth, let alone God’s truth.
In raising human observation, interpretation, and opinions to the same level and authority as God’s truth revealed through Jesus and in the written Word of God, those who promote psychology among Christians demonstrate their high view of human opinion and their low view of Scripture.
In his discussion of “all truth is God’s truth,” John Moffat says, “I think that, in many ways, this slogan is the verbal equivalent of a graven image; something that appears to represent truth but does not.” He explains:
None of the people that use this “all truth” expression actually say that they consider man’s thoughts equal to God’s revealed Word; it just happens to work that way in practice; just as at first the graven images were not meant to replace God, only to represent Him.
Then to show where “all truth is God’s truth” thinking can lead a person, Moffat says:
I can imagine Nadab and Abihu talking before the early worship service in the wilderness. One says to the other, “All fire is God’s fire. God made all fire; therefore it is all of him.” Or while Moses was up on Mount Sinai, the children of Israel could have said to Aaron, “All worship of God is God’s worship.” These analogies have the same deceptive sound of being logical at first glance, but they are full of the same ambiguity and deceit as the expression “all truth is God’s truth.”
In contrast to the broad category labeled “all truth” by those who want to include what humans perceive through their senses, achieve through their reason, conceive in their minds, receive from one another, and interweave with Scripture, the specific category of “God’s truth” includes only what is perfectly and flawlessly true. God Himself is true and He has made known His truth through His Son, who referred to Himself as the truth (John 14:6); through His written Word, which perfectly states what is true (John 17:17); and through the Holy Spirit, who is called the Spirit of Truth who will guide believers into all truth (John 16:13). With all that God has provided in His Son, His Word, and His Holy Spirit, one wonders why people are so enamored with the psychological opinions of men.
All humans have partial perception, fragmentary knowledge, and incomplete morality through common grace and general revelation. While these are gifts common to all mankind, they are contaminated by human depravity. Whatever truth people have perceived is contaminated by their unrighteousness. Apart from special revelation and special grace, all stand guilty before God, because they hold whatever truth they have gained through general revelation or common grace in a state of unrighteousness (Romans 1:18). Do such people appear to be reliable sources for Christians to seek counsel for godly living? Indeed, general revelation and common grace serve as very weak and even dangerous justifications for dipping into psychotherapy and its underlying psychologies, all of which were conceived and developed by unredeemed minds.
Renewing the Mind
Daugherty claims that “therapy can help us learn to be transformed by the renewing of our mind.” The Bible speaks much about renewing the mind:
I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. (Romans 12:1-2.)
Nothing in this passage would allow the wisdom of the world, such as psychotherapeutic theories and therapies, to be a player in this work of God. Notice that it says, “And be not conformed to this world”!
The mind is renewed by truth. Jesus is clear about what is “truth” as he prayed to His Father, “Sanctify them through thy truth. Thy Word is truth” John 17:17). Pastors should be preaching a clear biblical worldview by which believers can evaluate what they are hearing, seeing, and experiencing from the world. Confusion arises when truth is mixed with opinions of men. Just when believers need to be established in the Word of God, they are sold an unholy mixture of worldly psychology filled with the opinions of fallen, fallible men. This most popular potion will only enhance the carnal nature more than or rather than the spiritual nature (the new man in Christ).
Daugherty’s Third Reason:
“Psychotherapy can complement other approaches to spiritual formation.”
Daugherty claims, “Therapy is another means of grace.” How is it that this most popular “grace” did not appear until the twentieth century devised by atheists, such as Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, and Carl Rogers? (In 1958 California was the first State to license psychotherapists.) Non-Christians can be very spiritual in a spirituality of the wrong kind. Satan appears as an angel of light (2 Cor 11:14) and we contend that these integrationist practitioners of psychotherapeutic theories and therapies fit into the category of “deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.” And that “it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works (2 Cor 11:13,15). Christians need to understand that this mixture cannot be a “another means of grace” from God, but is another means of spirituality, which is carnal and sometimes occultic, as with the popular psychology of Carl Gustaf Jung, who openly admitted to having a spirit guide named Philemon. Christians also need to be aware of the dangers of the transpersonal stream of psychotherapy, which centers on the “spiritual aspects of human life,” as set forth by such psychologists as Abraham Maslow and Victor Frankl, neither of whom was a Christian. This major stream of psychology can draw Christians away from the faith and into unbiblical, deceptive counterfeit forms of spirituality.
Daugherty refers to Calvin’s idea of wisdom consisting “of two parts: knowledge of God and knowledge of self.” The Bible gives us all we need to know about “self”: sold under sin, but saved by grace, given new life, and in the process of being sanctified by the Holy Spirit as we grow in the knowledge of God through trials (Romans 1: 1-5; Phil 3:8-10). Psychology only offers human observations at best and opinions at worst.
In the last sentence of the paragraph, Daugherty says: “As we come to know God and ourselves better, we can see the places where we need to grow, applying helpful practices, engaging community and leaning on the grace of God.” It is a puzzle to us as to how a therapy client can “come to know God,” when God is not allowed in the licensed therapeutic process.
Questions arise as to “Christian” psychologists. Is there such a person as a Christian psychologist? Only if this is simply a professing Christian who practices psychology, just as one could be referred to as a Christian plumber as being a plumber who happens to be a Christian. A primary problem with this designation is that many Christians believe that Christians who are licensed psychotherapists do Christian counseling, when their license only authorizes them to therapize according to their training in psychological theories and therapies. In promoting themselves as licensed psychotherapists who do Christian counseling, they are being deceptive at the very least, unless they set aside their license and counsel for free or unless they give up their license.
Actually, there is no such recognized theory or therapy that is “Christian psychology.” The Christian Association for Psychological Studies (CAPS) is an organization of psychologists who are professing Christians. The following was admitted at one of their meetings:
We are often asked if we are “Christian psychologists” and find it difficult to answer since we don’t know what the question implies. We are Christians who are psychologists but at the present time there is no acceptable Christian psychology that is markedly different from non-Christian psychology. It is difficult to imply that we function in a manner that is fundamentally distinct from our non-Christian colleagues . . . as yet there is not an acceptable theory, mode of research or treatment methodology that is distinctly Christian.
Christian psychology depends on psychology itself. Because psychology is such a broad field, we want to make it clear that when we use the word psychology here, we are referring to psychotherapy and its underlying psychologies.
In order to find out if there is such a uniform practice as Christian psychotherapy, we asked ourselves and then others, “What types of psychotherapeutic approaches most influence the Christian psychotherapist?” No one we contacted was able to answer that question. Therefore, we devised a simple, easy-to-answer survey form comprised of a list of ten major psychotherapies. The survey was administered to members of CAPS. Each respondent was asked to rank one or more of these psychotherapeutic approaches that influenced his/her professional practice. Additional space was provided for participants to add other psychotherapies before ranking.
The results of the survey indicate that Christian psychotherapists or counselors are eclectic in that they are influenced by and use a variety of psychological approaches rather than just one or two. In other words, there is not just one Christian psychotherapeutic way. A great variety of approaches influence clinical practice. This survey demonstrated that, while some psychotherapies are more influential than others in the practice of Christian counseling, in general the Christian psychotherapist is both independent and eclectic in his/her approach to counseling. In addition, each Christian psychotherapist’s combination of counseling approaches differs from that of other Christian therapists.
There are licensed psychiatrists and psychotherapists who are Christians who regularly share the Gospel with a patient (psychiatrist) or client (psychotherapist) and even pray with them. They will say, “Only when it is appropriate.” However, under the circumstances, it is never appropriate! It is both unethical and illegal. It is unethical because of the limitations of their license and illegal unless the psychiatrists or psychotherapists are not advertising their license, the patient/client has not come to them based upon that license, and no money has been charged.
Daugherty’s Fourth Reason:
“Psychotherapy can help us practice transparency, humility, boundaries and taking responsibility.”
“Transparency” is a loaded word in psychotherapy. It is focused on self, others, and circumstances. Transparency is all about self. Self-exposure during therapy is a desire on the part of the client and a requirement on the part of the therapy! It is the very environment that stimulates sinful speaking about others, about circumstances, and even about self. Transparency is limited by what a psychotherapy client wishes to expose. However, because all have sinful hearts (Isaiah 64:6), the therapist will only obtain a biased, skewed, self-centered picture of what is really going on. Psychotherapy gives a platform to the client to talk about self, feelings, and others, absent any proof for what is said.
Transparency leads to deceptive feelings of intimacy, especially when the sharing majors on personal struggles with temptations and behaviors the Bible would label as sin. Such exposure can be very enticing with its focus on self. It is like a big story-telling session all about me, myself, and I and everyone else involved in my life. Sharing biased stories engenders emotional involvement in group, family, couple, and individual therapy. The therapeutic necessity of sharing personal sins and the “sins” of others is the foundation on which the sinful conversations of counseling rest, where self is center and sinful speaking of others is accepted and expected.
Whereas psychotherapy follows the format of transparency, the believer is established in the truths of Scripture and in an ongoing daily walk with the Lord. Transparency is not necessary because believers already have intimacy in Christ and can rely on God’s Word and the Holy Spirit to know what is going on in themselves:
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do. (Hebrews 4:12-13.)
Prayer is a further reason why such psychological transparency is not necessary in ministry. Paul prayed earnestly for believers to know God’s will for what to do:
We…do not cease to pray for you, and to desire that ye might be filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding; That ye might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God; Strengthened with all might, according to his glorious power, unto all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness. (Col. 1:9-11.)
It is interesting that Daugherty uses the word “humility.” In the one-up (psychotherapist) /one-down (client) therapeutic relationship for pay, who is practicing humility? The therapist is the authority, and the client is one who apparently cannot manage life and must pay for help, which should be freely given to one another in the fellowship of the saints. Believers do need one another, but as Christians we are equal at the foot of the cross and should be readily available for one another, which is something a licensed psychotherapist will not be able to do. Humility is a major fruit of the Spirit and is generally absent in the therapy setting as sinful conversations centered on self and stories about others who are not present regularly occur.
Boundaries and Responsibility
“Boundaries” is also a loaded word in psychotherapy and used to describe and prescribe solutions to a wide variety of sin. It gives people psychological reasons to block out other people in their lives. Unfortunately, Christians have taken this psychological concept and used it without realizing the subtleties of how the idea conflicts with Scripture. Debbie Dewart, in her article “‘Boundaries”—Drawing the Wrong Line!” notes that in Scripture, the term “is used to describe geographical property lines, but never personal ‘property lines.’ It serves geography well but mutilates the biblical concept of personal responsibility.” She also says that rather than exercising self-control:
Psychological “boundaries” encourage taking control and assuming ownership of our own lives in a manner that conflicts with the biblical view that believers are to submit control to God, knowing that they are not their own, having been “bought with a price,” the blood of Christ (1 Corinthians 6:19).
The psychological idea of boundaries distorts biblical truths about responsibility, in which the primary focus of responsibility is to self over and above a believer’s responsibilities to God and to others. Dewart contends that the “result is an unbiblical emphasis on the individual that obscures the unity and interdependence of the body of Christ.”
Daugherty’s Fifth Reason:
“Psychotherapy can help us model a way for others to grow.”
And how does Daugherty hope others will grow? By going to therapy! After paying for psychotherapy, the client has the “great opportunity” to be an example for other Christians to help them feel comfortable about going to therapy without feeling guilty. In other words, as psychotherapy clients tell others about going to therapy, they serve as evangelists for paid-for psychological therapy. Wow! What a clever marketing tool! In contrast, believers are free to encourage one another in the spiritual walk of faith rather being a patsy to financially enrich a psychotherapist who will lead one in fleshly, sinful ways as we have seen on “Psychotherapy & Counseling Videos.”
Believers need to be role models of turning to Christ, who is our constant companion and only hope for time and eternity. How often do Christians talk about how God is leading them through problems of living? Evidently quite rare, since the psychotherapy business continues to increase to a monstrous magnitude and serves as a siren-song, sinful substitute for our wonderful, perfect, indwelling Counselor (Isaiah 9:6; Col. 1:27). The very existence of Rosemead and the fact that pastors send their flock out to psychotherapy serve as an indictment on the Church. And the whole business is anti-Christ in replacing Him as the counselor and in replacing the life-giving truths of Scripture with the psychotherapeutic ideas of fallen mankind.
However, one can see why this would be an important point for psychotherapists to make because they need a constant flow of clients to stay afloat. According to Professor Jeffrey Kottler, in his book On Being a Therapist: “Various studies of therapydropouts estimate that roughly one-third of clients don’t return after their initial interview, and close to half don’t come back after the first two sessions” (bold added). Kottler also says, “A therapist with a large turnover might require more than four hundred new referrals every year just to survive” (bold added). For those who make a living at either psychological or biblical counseling, a prime motivating factor for the counselor is to keep each counselee in counseling as long as possible. While there is no scientific support for this idea, the justification involves the rationalization that the longer the counselee is in counseling, the greater good the counselor can do.
Underneath the rationalization is the reality of the revolving door of counselees, quickly and continually going out in large numbers and a need to have an equal number of counselees coming in. After all, the rent and utilities have to be paid and a sufficient income maintained. By our estimates, to make a decent living, a counselor would need to have at least 21 paying counselees per week. However, after the first counseling session, an average of 7 do not return, leaving 14. After the second counseling session, the average increases to 10 non-returning counselees. Paid counselors not only have to “hold their breath” about the possibility of each new counselee not returning but must be constantly on the prowl for new customers, as well as work on keeping old ones.
The Flesh or the Spirit
As people turn to the psychological opinions of men to fix themselves and their environment, they may improve the flesh but miss opportunities to grow in the spirit through troubles, trials, and tribulations. We have seen many psychological and “biblical” counseling sessions, but none that teach the value of growth through suffering the troubles, trials, and tribulations of life! The many psychotherapy sessions we have seen have all been play-acted to highlight a form of therapy at its best, but they all involve sinful and unbiblical conversations. In contrast, Christ has given us Himself!
Has Christianity become so superficial that it needs to be bolstered up with such worldly, carnal props? Jesus said:
Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light. (Matt 118-30.)
There is more power in the Word of God than in any form of psychotherapy:
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. (2 Tim 3:17.)
Paul was concerned about believers being beguiled with “enticing words” and thus warned:
As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him: Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving. Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power…. (Col 2:6-10.)
We pray that believers will not forget and abandon their birthright in Christ by choosing the fleshly psychological ways of the world over the spiritual ways of Christ and the cross.
Bottom line: Those Christians who go to psychotherapists and those pastors who refer congregants to psychotherapists must NOT believe in the sufficiency of Scripture for the issues of life. As we have said many times: Psychoheresy is one of the greatest heresies of modern-day Christianity.
 Doug Dougherty, “Five Reasons for Christians to Go to Therapy,” Biola Magazine, Spring 2022, p. 39.
 When we use the word “psychology” in this article, we are referring to psychotherapy and its underlying theories.
 Cheri Gyuro, Public Information Officer, California Department of Consumer Affairs, email, March 9, 2020.
 Jacqueline Olds and Richard S. Schwartz. The Lonely American. Boston: Beacon Press, 2009, pp. 164-165.
 Psychotherapy literature now uses the female gender when referring to a client because 80% of the clients are female.
 Olds and Schwartz, op. cit., p. 165.
 Thomas Szasz. The Myth of Psychotherapy. Garden City: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1978, p. 11.
 “Should Therapists Self-Disclose?” Psychotherapy Networker, Vol. 34, No. 2, p. 14.
 Olds and Schwartz, op. cit., p. 166.
 John D. Moffat, “Is ‘All Truth God’s Truth’?” The Christian Conscience (May 1997), p. 27.
 “Integrating Psychology and Christian Faith,” https://www.biola.edu/rosemead.
 Martin and Deidre Bobgan, “PsychoHeresy: C. G. Jung’s Legacy to the Church,” PsychoHeresy Awareness Ministries, https://pamweb.org/christian-psychology/psychoheresy-c-g-jungs-legacy-to-the-church/.
 Kendra Cherry, “The Practice of Transpersonal Psychology, verywellmind, https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-transpersonal-psychology-2795971.
 P. Sutherland and P. Poelstra, “Aspects of Integration,” paper presented at the meeting of the Christian Association for Psychological Studies, Santa Barbara, CA, June 1976
 It is always unethical, according to the American Psychological Association and state psychology associations. Also, it is illegal in California and likely so in the other 49 states.
 Debbie Dewart, “‘Boundaries’—Drawing the Wrong Line!” Psychotherapy Awareness Letter, Vol. 4, No. 2, https://pamweb.org/book-reviews/boundaries-drawing-the-wrong-line/.
 “Psychotherapy & Counseling Videos, https://www.psychotherapy.net/videos?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIneXk-f_2-AIV0iCtBh0HCQfhEAAYASAAEgL_3PD_BwE.
 Jeffrey A. Kottler. On Being a Therapist, Fourth Edition. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2010, p. 1.