When Helping Hurts in Pastoral Counseling

With tips on how to avoid it

In 2009, Steve Corbett and Brian Fikkert published a profound book with a very simple thesis. In When Helping Hurts, the two authors argue that “when North American Christians do attempt to alleviate poverty, the methods used often do considerable harm to both the materially poor and the materially non-poor.” They wrote the book, in other words, to outline methods of poverty alleviation that help the poor in a long-lasting and sustainable way. They drew attention to the reality that many honest attempts to help exacerbate the problem, leaving people in a worsened condition than before.

I’ve noticed a similar dynamic in pastoral counseling. Multiple times in my counseling ministry, I’ve reached the conclusion that my counseling was having the opposite effect of what I intended. My efforts to make things better were really making things worse. Because I believe my experience is not uncommon, I want to share what I’ve learned about how this dynamic occurs and how counselors can avoid it.

In short, I begin to suspect that my counseling is hurting more than helping whenever I sense that the person I’m counseling might be viewing our meetings as therapy sessions. While therapy helps many people, I’m not qualified to serve in that role. Further, therapy and counseling have different goals, and confusing the two leads to false expectations that may severely limit counseling’s potential.

We live in a therapeutic culture in which the technical language of therapy commonly spills over into everyday language and shapes the way people interpret their lives. Terms like trauma and abuse are commonly used by nonprofessionals to describe mundane situations. Ads for therapy proliferate on podcasts and television, broadcasting a dominant message that therapy is normal for everyone and perhaps even necessary for thriving in this world.

In such a context, the role of pastoral counseling often gets confused with the role of the therapist. These two things, however, are not the same. Therapy involves working with a professional to explore emotions, thoughts, and behaviors toward the goal of overcoming trauma or managing depression and anxiety. Pastoral counseling, on the other hand, involves working with a pastor or biblical counselor to apply God’s word toward the goal of growth in faith and obedience. It requires regeneration through Christ and reliance on his Spirit.

In therapy, a long-term relationship of trust and dependence is fostered between the patient and the therapist. Often, the two work together indefinitely, and in many situations, the meetings go on regularly for years and even decades. Pastoral counseling, however, has a clear goal in sight. The counselor works to reach a point when meetings are no longer necessary because the problem that initiated the meetings has been resolved or at least improved enough to rely on the church’s regular rhythms and means of grace for continued accountability.

In therapy, the conversation is often the point. The therapist works to get the patient to “open up” about repressed emotions in hopes of achieving a breakthrough. In pastoral counseling, however, what happens after and between meetings is the point. The counselor seeks to lead Spirit-indwelt believers to “be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving [them]selves” (James 1:22).

What are the signs that counseling might be hurting more than helping? I suspect this problematic dynamic whenever someone insists on meeting but doesn’t do the homework I assign, whenever someone wants to continue meeting beyond the specified endpoint, or whenever meetings continue with no discernible progress in spiritual fruit. In any of these scenarios, I wonder if my counseling is hurting more than helping.

How does the pastoral counselor avoid such confusion? I’m still learning how to answer this question. Here’s a few things I’ve begun doing.

First, I clearly define the goals of our meetings and explicitly distinguish it from therapy. In the first meeting, I usually read a passage like James 1:22 to indicate that application of truth is the point.

Second, after the first meeting, I set a specific date for the conclusion of our meetings. My goal is to lead to an encounter with Christ through his word that results in faith and obedience. Our church provides several different options for regular discipleship and accountability. My role is short-term. I want to bring God’s word to bear upon a specific problem. That process usually only takes a few weeks. Sometimes, I commit to a longer course when I’m trying to assist in habit-formation.

Third, I require homework. In fact, I’m so serious about homework that I won’t meet again until homework has been completed. The counselee bears the responsibility for change, and his willingness to do the assigned homework signals the degree to which he understands that. Insisting on completed homework communicates that the conversation with me isn’t the main point; following the Lord in faith and obedience is.

I make a terrible therapist, but I’m striving every day to be a better a pastoral counselor. I can only genuinely help a person when they realize the limited scope of my work and see meetings with me as opportunities to conform their lives to the Savior who died to save them.