Page 53 - Creating Spiritual and Psychological Resilience

22 Creating Spiritual and Psychological Resilence

Every time we stop and examine our operating assumptions, reach
across disciplinary lines, or try to see things from the perspective of a
minister, if you happen to be a mental health provider or the other way
around, we create possibility for doing things differently. This “tran-
sient anthropological stance” loosens the grip that rigid categories of
analysis have on us, providing the necessary space to rethink how we
might respond. The potential space for doing things differently, even if
only a narrow crevice for a tentative toe-hold, permits us the chance to
find better concrete, pragmatic solutions when dealing with crisis and
other situations, by understanding one another’s perspectives, needs,
strengths and limitations.
In order to gain traction over the conflict and ambivalence surrounding
how to understand and manage distress, we need to look at history and the
ways that people create their worlds. But, those histories weigh heavily on
how we make decisions today by providing the idioms that give meaning
to the events in our lives.
A chaplain whom I interviewed articulated the tension between clergy
and mental health professionals that resulted from 9/11:

During 9/11, psychologists came out of the woodwork to help, but were not
prepared for acute psychological trauma. They were used to providing long-
term care. Many burnt out. People wanted to talk to clergy. If mental health
is going to be involved in acute care, they need to learn how to deal with these
situations.

This statement articulates many of the tensions that can make collabora-
tion challenging, if not impossible. I was often told in my interviews with
clergy and mental health professionals that the other group was unqualified
or misguided or even condescending and willfully obstructive. Spiritual
care providers often told me, “Mental health professionals don’t respect
us. They bring their psychological models to us and don’t think we have
much to offer.”
At the heart of these criticisms is a belief that the other professional
does not have the ability to respond to real-life problems, that their inter-
pretive frameworks are inadequate, with a sense of resentment and disre-
spect. However, an opportunity exists for examining the skills that might
be shared among disparate professions if common goals, such as reducing
suffering, can be recognized. An anthropological lens can provide the per-
spective for a broader view that facilitates this kind of examination.