David Benner discusses two major points in his book Care of Souls. In part one of his book, Benner makes the case for the unity of the person. He argues against the dichotomizing of the person into various components like body, soul, and spirit, claiming that this leads to an inadequate care of the person. Tracing the history of spirituality and psychology and their interaction, he shows that when one discipline leaves the other out, the remaining discipline cannot adequately care for the person.

He further shows that even those post-enlightenment thinkers who chose to leave God out of their equation, still spoke of an immaterial aspect to the person and thus spoke to the wholeness of man. Finally, in part one, Benner shows how important both psychology and spirit are to one another in man’s search for meaning. Care of souls, then, must begin, for Benner, with an understanding of who we are as both spiritual and psychological and embodied beings.

With this background from part one, in part two he then calls for soul care as the highest form of help for the person. He proposes that a person can only be truly helped when the whole person is helped. Thus, those that focus only on the spiritual are not doing soul care in the same was as those that focus only on the psychological are not.

Finally, the person who desires to help others at this level must do so out of the sole motivation of love and with their own sole being cared for. Soul care does not happen without truly accepting the person for who they are, whether or not any change happens.

I think Benner disagrees with himself at times, especially in terms of the qualifications necessary to provide this soul care. At times it appears that one must hold advanced degrees and special training, while at others it appears that motivation, maturity, and a relationship with Christ is what is most important. ( )

David Benner discusses two major points in his book Care of Souls. In part one of his book, Benner makes the case for the unity of the person. He argues against the dichotomizing of the person into various components like body, soul, and spirit, claiming that this leads to an inadequate care of the person. Tracing the history of spirituality and psychology and their interaction, he shows that when one discipline leaves the other out, the remaining discipline cannot adequately care for the person.

He further shows that even those post-enlightenment thinkers who chose to leave God out of their equation, still spoke of an immaterial aspect to the person and thus spoke to the wholeness of man. Finally, in part one, Benner shows how important both psychology and spirit are to one another in man’s search for meaning. Care of souls, then, must begin, for Benner, with an understanding of who we are as both spiritual and psychological and embodied beings.

With this background from part one, in part two he then calls for soul care as the highest form of help for the person. He proposes that a person can only be truly helped when the whole person is helped. Thus, those that focus only on the spiritual are not doing soul care in the same was as those that focus only on the psychological are not.

Finally, the person who desires to help others at this level must do so out of the sole motivation of love and with their own sole being cared for. Soul care does not happen without truly accepting the person for who they are, whether or not any change happens.

I think Benner disagrees with himself at times, especially in terms of the qualifications necessary to provide this soul care. At times it appears that one must hold advanced degrees and special training, while at others it appears that motivation, maturity, and a relationship with Christ is what is most important. ( )

Case 4 shelf 5