Praglin, L.J. (2004). Spirituality, religion, and social work: An effort toward interdisciplinary...

Revised Draft; published as: Praglin, L.J. (2004). Spirituality, religion, and social work: An

effort toward interdisciplinary conversation. Social Thought: Journal of Religion and

Spirituality in Social Work 23,4, 67-84

(see http://www.tandfonline.com/action/doSearch?AllField=praglin)

Spirituality, Religion, and Social Work:

An Effort toward Interdisciplinary Conversation

Introduction

Despite social work’s religious roots, in-depth inquiry regarding the relationship of religion

and/or spirituality to social work has been, until recently, disregarded in light of social work’s

ongoing quest for professionalization and scientific respectability (Marty, 1980; Trattner, 1989;

Hugen, 1994; Cnaan, 1999; Marty, 2001; Canda, 2002). Less easily investigated than empirically-

based data in the social sciences, issues regarding spirituality and religion have now reemerged as

legitimate area of inquiry in social work theory and practice (Canda & Furman, 1999; Van Hook,

2001). Some of this renewed interest has resulted from heightened awareness that culturally

competent practice embraces ethnic, class, gender, and age differences, but also spiritual diversity

(Derezotes, 1995; Bullis, 1996; Gilbert, 2000). Such recognition has proven especially significant in

understanding clients from various ethnic and racial minority groups (Lum, 1995; Canda and Furman,

1999; Cascio, 1999; Van Hook, Hugen and Aguilar, 2001; Sheridan 2002). Increasing recognition of

the critical influence of religious or spiritual factors in clients’ lives is reflected in the curriculum

policy statements of the Council on Social Work Education (1994), as well as by the Diagnostic and

Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) of the American Psychiatric Association (2000).

For the first time, the DSM-IV (V62.89) allows for the possibility of the V-code diagnosis of

"religious or spiritual problem.” This is used when the presenting issue includes “distressing

experiences that involve loss or questioning of faith, problems associated with conversion to a new

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/doSearch?AllField=praglin

Spirituality, religion, and social work

faith, or questioning of other spiritual values which may not necessarily be related to an organized

church or religious institution.” While such a designation may never be widely employed among

mental health professionals, the significance of its inclusion as a non-pathological variable by the

APA cannot be overstated. In addition, this decade has witnessed the emergence of the Society for

Spirituality and Social Work, as well as a symposia section on Spirituality within the Council for

Social Work Education’s annual meeting.

In the United States, and increasingly so internationally, social work mirrors a multitude of

helping professions which in the past decade have actively sought to integrate spiritual perspectives

into their knowledge base. These disciplines include medicine, nursing, pastoral counseling,

psychiatry, and psychology (Canda, 2002).

Religion and Spirituality in Historical Context

Some social work professionals applaud the newfound legitimacy of spiritual content within

their discipline. Norman Linzer, for instance, finds the spiritual and religious dimensions of human

life “vital areas of human functioning and service to clients is incomplete when they are overlooked”

(Linzer, 1999). Likewise, Sermabeikian (1994) asserts that, spirituality, as an overarching human

need, “is too important to be misunderstood; avoided; or viewed as regressive, neurotic, or

pathological in nature. Yet other social work professionals remain suspicious of such spiritual

inclusion. Unlike pastoral counselors, whose social location assumes familiarity with at least one

religious tradition in addition to counseling techniques, many social workers question not only

whether spirituality and social work mix well, but indeed whether they should do such stirring

(Sanzenbach, 1989; Clark, 1994). For some social work professionals, “religion” is equated narrowly

with rigidly dogmatic religious traditions or underlying coercive religio-political agendas which run

counter to social work goals and values, such as respect for personal autonomy and self-


determination, non-judgmental attitudes, inclusivity, and equality (NASW Code of Ethics, 1996).

Thus they legitimately fear pathological consequences of religious expression, such as passivity,

excessive guilt, or gender inequality (Joseph, 1988, Cascio, 1998, Loewenberg, 1988; Morrell, 1996).

Others wonder whether spirituality or religion are "private matters” more appropriately the domain of

the clergy. Some agency practitioners who rely heavily upon government funding, moreover, fear

that attention to religious issues may violate the separation of church and state, and thus the potential

for federal, state, or local support (Cnaan, 1999).

Like religious studies, the field of social work is by nature interdisciplinary. Social work,

however, grapples still with the highly divergent ideals of its founders. This hundred-year old legacy,

as Sharon Freedberg notes, consists equally of “religious stewardship, scientific professionalism, and

political idealism” (Freedberg, 1986). Such conflicting ideals have resulted, moreover, in a history of

struggles “within, between, and among the Judaeo-Christian value base from which the profession

evolved; on the scientific value of the ‘medical model’ and of Freudian theory; and on the political

social context of ideology and mission.” Such divergent motivations also help explain the current

heated debates over how, or whether, social work should engage spirituality and religion.

Tracing the development of spiritually sensitive social work in the United States, Canda

(2002) contends that professional social work grew slowly estranged from its overt religious

connections during the 1920’s through the 1970s. As social work became increasingly

professionalized, and also became heavily involved in public social welfare, it became more sensitive

to “the dangers of religious proselytization, moralistic judgmentalism, threats to separation of church

and state, and theological explanations of human behavior and social problems.” Although occasional

papers in the social work literature in the post-World War II era through the 1970’s concerned


existential and humanistic spiritual perspectives and/or the influence of Eastern religions, these

perspectives remained still more the exception than the rule. Starting in the 1980’s, however, the

profession witnessed increasing interest in and need for diverse approaches to incorporating spiritual

and religious concerns, both in social work publications and at professional conferences,

corresponding to the wider trend among both clients and practitioners in exploring their religious

roots and spiritual identities.

Separating Religion from Spirituality

In addition to the above-mentioned recognition of the necessity of recognizing spirituality as

an element of cultural diversity, the resurgence of interest in dialogue between religion and social

work, I propose, is also the result of a particular sociocultural phenomenon within our current period

of history. We now widely question the positivistic stance of the social sciences, while also finding

ourselves searching for both psychological and spiritual meaning apart from religious institutions

(Berger, 1965; Luckmann, 1967; Roof, 1993; Wuthnow, 1998). Urbanization, modernization, and

technological advances have led not only to increasing anomie, as Emile Durkheim and his

successors have shown, but to the rise of greater psychological introspection (Homans, 1989). We

now seek quests for psychological as well as spiritual cure apart from those institutions which once

imparted for many a shared sense of meaning (Praglin, 1998). Although the inevitability of

secularization thesis has been seriously questioned, especially regarding the gradual removal of

"religious dimension" from public sphere (Ebaugh, 2001), we continue to witness the institutional

loss of authority by the clergy, as well as the rise of noninstitutionalized quests for meaning by a

generation which moves “across religious boundaries. . . combin[ing] elements from various

traditions to create their own personal, tailor-made meaning systems” (Bellah, 1985; Roof, 1993).


This current cultural trend has led Robert Fuller to speak of “unchurched religion,” or of

being “spiritual but not religious” (Fuller, 2001). Forty percent of Americans call themselves

“unchurched,” while twenty percent of Americans claim to be concerned with spirituality, but are not

religious in terms of espousing one particular system of belief or doctrine. Many social workers and

their clients, moreover, figure very much into this trend toward a non-institutionalized spirituality,

tending more than pastoral counselors to work with clients questioning their faith or seeking answers

outside of established religious traditions. The emerging social work literature which celebrates

spirituality generally refers to this kind of nontraditional religiousness, often reflected in frequent

references to alternative religious practices or beliefs, mysticism, or new age trends (Cascio, 1998).

Such claims of being “spiritual but not religious” are witnessed widely today, despite the reservations

of some religious studies scholars wary of this generic sense of spirituality, unconnected to particular

texts, traditions, or communities. "So many people," Martin Marty comments, "now speak in terms

of, 'I'm not religious, but I'm spiritual.' . . . Those of us who study religion say that this is just one

more of the religions that are out there" (Marty, 2001). To Marty, many professionals speak of such

spirituality as a safer and easier way to dodge the inconveniences of institutional demands, and keep

controversies over church and state at bay. Yet, as Franz Metcalf has commented, such distinctions

have become widespread and meaningful for many: “People really use these terms, as you know.

Shall we attempt to retrain them? Who are we to do so? What is it they are expressing?” (F. Metcalf,

personal communication, 2002)

Despite the embrace of noninstitutionalized spiritual currents by some social work scholars

and practitioners, it is significant that social workers also claim full-scale adherence to the social

justice legacy and claims of the profession, as delineated in the Code of Ethics of the National

Association of Social Workers (1996; revised 1999; online at http://www. socialworkers.org). The


strong emphasis here upon the societal obligations of the social worker is significant and unique

among the helping professions, reflecting the inherited political idealism of the profession. In

contrast, the Code of Ethics of Pastoral Counselors does not tie directly such social awareness and

activism against poverty, discrimination, and oppression to its Code of Ethics (retrieved 11/06/02

from http://www.aapc.org/ethics.htm), although individual practitioners may very well espouse

values similar to those espoused by the social work Code of Ethics.

The NASW Code has attempted to define social work’s mission, key values, and ethical

principles through the following six primary values: service; social justice; dignity and worth of the

person; the importance of human relationships; integrity; and competence. Adherence to such values

further develops human well-being within both individual and social contexts, assists in meeting

fundamental human needs, and empowers those who are poor, weak, and oppressed.

Social workers accept dual responsibility to clients and the wider society. They therefore advocate

“socially responsible self-determination” in their clients, whether individuals, families, or groups,

through respectful recognition of differences and strengths in all `individuals and cultures. Social

workers, moreover, strive to ameliorate oppression, poverty, discrimination and other types of social

injustice by understanding the nature of both diversity and oppression related to race, ethnicity,

national origin, gender, sexual orientation, age, religion, or disability. Such work may take the form

of direct practice, or it may involve social administration, community organization, policy making, or

education and research.

Spirituality and Social Work: Four Responses

Social work scholars and practitioners have, I suggest, approached the question of whether, or

how, to integrate religion and/or spirituality in one of four typical ways: 1) resistance or avoidance; 2)

/index.cgi?NOFRAMES=TRUE&BACKGROUND=http%3a%2f%2fwww%2eaapc%2eorg%2fethics%2ehtm


an overly-generalized syncretism; 3) a radical separation of the terms spirituality and religion for

ideological reasons; or 4) a genuinely interdisciplinary engagement of the two disciplines, based upon

solid knowledge of the history and conflictual legacies of the profession.

The first response, resistance or avoidance of the dialogue altogether, is typical of those social

work professionals who equate “religion” with a narrow, rigid religious traditions, personal

pathology, or an underlying coercive religio-political agenda. Such incorporation would, therefore, be

antithetical to social work goals and values, such as respect for personal autonomy and self-

determination, non-judgmental attitudes, and equality. They legitimately fear what they foresee to be

the damaging consequences of religious expression, such as passivity, excessive guilt, or gender

inequality (Siporin, 1985; Joseph, 1988, Cascio, 1998, Loewenberg, 1988; Morrell, 1996). Others

wonder whether spirituality and religion are matters more appropriately the domain of the clergy.

Some agency practitioners also legitimately fear that attention to religious issues may violate the

separation of church and state, and thus the potential for federal, state, or local support (Cnaan, 1999).

A second response tends to be completely the opposite of the first. Here, there is an overly easy

embrace of the spiritual dimension as completely complementary to social work without considering

potential difficulties and dangers. Social workers who venture into the spiritual realm do tend to

stress the holistic nature of their discipline, and the importance of addressing needs of the total

person, rather than simply symptoms of individual problems. Yet some adapt such insights into an

overly indiscriminate syncretism. A similar sort of consensual, “no conflict” model is evocative of

the post-World War II embrace of psychiatry by U.S. religious leaders who became wholehearted

“avatars of psychiatry” (Abbott, 1980; Praglin, 1998). Have social workers now similarly become

“avatars of spirituality” without acknowledging it? Seemingly unaware of long-standing scholarship

about religion and spirituality in other fields, many social work professionals writing about


spirituality, moreover, publish their findings largely in social work journals, often citing only one

another, without extending their boundaries to incorporate a broader conceptualization of the topic.

To their credit, however, some social work scholars are aware of such dilemmas. William Powell’s

review of Edward Canda’s Spirituality in Social Work (1998), for instance, conveys his concerns over

the book’s contents, which he finds “a bit disturbing” due to their lack of focus. The chapters include

topics as diverse as “intuition in social work practice and education, Taoism and the strengths

perspective, psychospiritual crisis and death, the relation between church and state, and commentary

by the editor on needed connections between spirituality and social work . . . This points to the fact

that social work’s body of knowledge and literature on this topic, is limited, and must look beyond its

narrow confines”:

There's perhaps a bit too much narrow intellectual inbreeding here and a sign that the profession

should reach outside of its boundaries to incorporate a broader conceptualization of spiritual

subjects and issues. It seems unwise to examine one's own professional literature too exclusively

for a "conceptualization" of spirituality while largely ignoring the extremely rich body of

literature in a multitude of other fields and from a variety of minds (Powell, 2000).

A third recent response to social work and spirituality issue among social workers has involved a

highly complex terminological argument disguised in one-dimensional terms. This third response

proposes an almost complete separation of the terms “religion” and “spirituality.” While religious

studies scholars tend to define religion broadly as a culturally shared system of values, beliefs and

rituals which include spiritual concerns, social work scholars propose that “religion” be considered

much more narrowly in terms of specific worship practices, formal denominational affiliation, or

explicit participation in a faith organization: the external expression of a compilation of beliefs.

Spirituality, on the other hand, is viewed as interiorized religiosity (Cascio, 1998), the internal

expression of the basic human quest “for purpose, meaning and connection between oneself, other

people, the universe, and the ultimate reality, which can be experienced within either a religious or a


nonreligious framework” (Sheridan & Amato-von Hemert, 1999; see similar definitions by Joseph,

1988; Sanzenbach, 1989; Derezotes, 1995; Canda, 1997b; Canda & Furman, 1999).

This terminological line of reasoning is well received among those in the social work field

responsive to the non-institutionalized, nontraditional quests for meaning and purpose described by

Roof, Bellah, Fuller, Wuthnow, and others, cited above. Notably, both Jewish and Christian social

work scholars accept such language (Joseph, 1988; Linzer, 1999). Yet, such a contention, albeit often

fueled by ideological reactions to rigid and narrow sectarian interests, is largely conducted in a

manner not accountable to the historical and cultural legacy of those terms. It is, moreover, largely

alien to the academic fields of religious studies and to the humanities and social sciences generally.

Significantly, for instance, we find no entry for “spirituality” in the Encyclopedia of Religion (1987)

but can learn much about this concept by turning to articles about spirituality within particular

religions traditions (King, 1989).

Responding to the current spirituality trend in social work education (Miller, 2001), Marty

(2001) helps by contextualizing some of the resurgent conflicts arising between liberals and

conservatives. He reminds us that many of social work’s roots were religious, before most

professionals felt a need to distance themselves from religion.” Referring to an earlier article (Marty,

1980), Marty cites the counter-reaction of religionists, such as followers of the evangelist Billy

Sunday: “the clients of social workers would not stand where the ‘god-less’ wanted to place them.

Those clients often asked religious questions, and not to respond to their situations often meant

failing them. Social workers could not permanently shun these issues” (Marty, 2001).

Addressing the work of Canda, Marty finds that he and his advocates “talk about many of the

same things clergy and religionists in general talk about: ‘a sense of meaning, purpose, and

connectedness’”:


Try doing that without intersecting with the concerns of faith and religion. . . . To Canda's credit,

he is aware of all these difficulties, and he does not promote easy paths to acceptance of his

efforts. Perhaps more than he is aware, as chaplains are also finding out, code-naming something

‘spiritual’ . . . is not a way of avoiding the controversies that go with ‘religion.’ To anyone

concerned about religion, spirituality, or faith in the public sphere, here is one more alert: it is not

credible to address profound human needs without touching upon ‘meaning, purpose, and

connectedness.’ And it is very difficult to refer to and use those concepts appropriately (Marty,

2001).

A fourth response to the spirituality and social work conversation has also emerged. This fourth

approach insists upon a serious interdisciplinary engagement of spirituality and religion within social

work theory and practice. It recognizes conceptual and ideological differences between the two

disciplines, however, and is wary of easy answers. Such an approach also identifies the contending

ideological motivations of social work’s founders; acknowledges those forces that have disengaged

religion from social work; and recognizes our broader intellectual traditions which do not easily

separate the concept of religion from that of spirituality. Such awareness and common grounding

allow for genuine engagement in substantive, cross-disciplinary research and discussion. Without

these, the academic disciplines of religious studies and the social work will continue to remain

disparate and isolated.

Assuming a basic grounding of the conversation in terms such as those proposed above,

participants may then explore freely and creatively a variety of topics from a multiplicity of

viewpoints, thus enriching both fields. Canda, moreover, envisions such interdisciplinary encounters

to be increasingly global, embrac[ing] all people and all beings” (Canda, 2002). His approach to

spirituality remains highly generalized and thematic; one notes that his Spiritual Diversity in Social

Work Practice (Canda & Furman, 1999) includes only 35 pages, and one chapter out of nine, on

specific religious traditions and practices. To Canda, however, devoting more attention to separate

religions runs the risk of sectarianism and exclusivity, and encourages “a narrow definition of


spirituality that limits it to formal religious beliefs and institutions,” which runs directly counter to

social work values of empathy, unconditional positive regard, social justice, and realization of human

potential (Canda and Furman, 1999, 67).

In contrast to Canda’s volume, Van Hook, Hugen and Aguilar’s Spirituality within religious

traditions in social work practice (2002) acknowledges that while spirituality many be considered

apart from religion, they choose to anchor their text “in the context of particular religious traditions

and in terms of the sense of meaning and connection that religion can provide” (Van Hook, Hugen &

Aguilar, ix). This text is divided into fourteen chapters, twelve of which focus upon specific religious

traditions, each with a brief history, an outline of beliefs, rituals and practices, and a discussion of

implications for social work practice. The benefits of this approach include its acknowledgment of

the broad intellectual and historical context of various spiritualities, from which one may then more

readily discuss degrees of variation, acculturation, and alienation within each tradition. Nevertheless,

this text unfortunately displays great variability in the quality of its various contributed chapters. One

hopes that future editions will contain additional scholarship which more uniformly reflects a serious

engagement between social work and the historical and spiritual dimensions of each religious

tradition.

Educational Implications

Surveys of social work professionals over the past decade show that the majority of social

workers lack of knowledge of religious subject matter, and thus find themselves inadequately trained

to undertake spiritually competent social work practice with clients (Sheridan, Wilmer & Atcheson,

1994; Canda and Furman, 1999). Yet such educational preparation, once sorely lacking in the

curriculum, is slowly emerging in many programs of social work at both the baccalaureate and

master’s levels (Dudley & Helfgott, 1990; Netting, Thibault & Ellor, 1990; Amato-von Hemert,


1994; Canda, 1997a; Russel, 1998; Miller 2001). We now witness educational attempts to introduce

social workers to spiritual concepts and practice applications, although the content and quality of

such courses vary widely.

Social work departments within religiously-affiliated universities, not surprisingly, tend to

have the least difficulty incorporating this interdisciplinary undertaking. The Jesuit Saint Louis

School of Social Service, for instance, offers a course on spirituality and social work, in which the

spiritual dimension is justified as integral to the practice of social work:

The dignity we assign to human life is intrinsically related to a person or a society's values,

beliefs, and understanding of the existential meaning of life. Such archetypal experiences as

birth and death, joy and suffering, alienation and belonging, dishonesty and justice are core

issues in the lives of individuals and communities. Thus, social workers need to be prepared

to respond ethically, responsibly, and effectively to the spiritual meanings undergirding

peoples' human experiences and religious beliefs (retrieved 11/15/02 at

http://www.ihpnet.org/ss0.htm).

Similarly, the Catholic University of America’s course in “the spiritual/religious dimensions of social

work practice,” taught by M. Vincentia Joseph, finds an exploration of such dimensions to be

“consistent with the profession’s historical view of the nature of the person, a holistic conception,

more recently elaborated as the bio-psycho-social-spiritual perspective” (retrieved 12/22/02 at

http://ncsss.cua.edu//Outlines/sss661.pdf).

Roberts Wesleyan, the sole member of the Coalition of Christian Colleges and Universities

with an accredited graduate social work program, similarly finds that the spiritual dimension of

human life “unifies and gives purpose to human encounters within the layers and textures of the

environment and social interactions with other humans.” The spiritual perspective is seen as part of

an essential, synergistic dimension of the ecological model of social work practice. While finding that

“spirituality can be found in religious observance and worldviews that involve structure and

organization,” the course also acknowledges that for some individuals, “spirituality is individual and

http://ncsss.cua.edu/Outlines/sss661.pdf


private, but equally important in guiding behavior” (retrieved 10/14/02 from

http://www.roberts.edu/_/?path=/Social%20Work%20and%20Social%20

Sciences/Master%20of%20Social%20Work/Academic%20Information/&bookmark=90Church

%20Social%20Work.htm#).

Other institutions, either public or less overtly sectarian, tend in their spirituality courses to

stress the importance of understanding diverse religio-cultural viewpoints, as well as practitioner self-

awareness. The spirituality and social work course at the University of Pennsylvania, for example

“considers how spiritual and religious systems are related to diversity, including gender, social class,

ethnicity and culture, and sexual orientation.” The course, moreover, “strives to seek a balance in

exploring the universalistic as well as the pluralistic in relationship to spirituality. Some pluralistic

religious and/or spiritual traditions are studied as they exemplify commitments of spirituality and as

they intersect with a more universalistic spirituality” (retrieved 10/14/02 from

www.ssw.upenn.edu/home/programs/msw-courses.html)

Similarly, the University of Chicago offers a course in spirituality and social work practice

that employs both theological and current psychological texts to consider “the meanings and

assumptions practitioners and clients bring to the psychotherapy experience”:

Students are encouraged to examine their own religious beliefs and the ways these elements

inform and influence their practice. Clients’ belief systems are highlighted because attitudes

and experiences regarding spirituality and religion are a significant element of self-

understanding and development. (retrieved 10/14/02 from

www.ssa.uchicago.edu/programs/approvedhumdiv.shtml ).

Practice Implications and Guidelines

A recent survey by M.C. Gilbert has found that most social work practitioners consider

recognition of spiritual issues essential to a holistic clinical approach (Gilbert, 2000). Likewise,

http://www.roberts.edu/_/?path=/Social%20Work%20and%20Social

http://www/

http://www.ssa.uchicago.edu/programs/approvedhumdiv.shtml


Canda & Furman (1999), who compiled the results of several national surveys on the topic, found

most social workers to be members of religious or spiritual groups, and already utilize a broad range

of spiritually-oriented practices in their work. Less than ten percent of those surveyed, moreover,

found that addressing religion and spirituality in social work practice conflicted with social work’s

mission or the NASW Code of Ethics:

Nearly 80% of the respondents believe church/state separation does not prevent them from

dealing with religion in practice and 91% believe it does not prevent them from dealing with

non-sectarian spirituality in practice. These findings confirm that most social workers are

already likely to feel that dealing with spirituality and religion in practice is consistent with

professional values (Canda & Furman, 1999).

The question for most practitioners, then, is not whether, but how, to incorporate spiritual

perspectives into social work practice. Guidance has come from several writers, suggesting essential

competencies, values, skills and practical strategies for spiritually sensitive and ethically-based

intervention. Gilbert’s survey has indicated that the vast majority believe such practitioners must

possess in-depth information about spiritual development and assessment; be able to advocate for

spiritual diversity in groups; and be well-informed about community religious resources for purposes

of consultation, referral and support (Gilbert, 2000). Above all, however, these surveys convey the

widespread admonition that social workers dealing with religious and spiritual issues be able to

recognize clients’ rights to self-determination in their varied quests for spiritual transformation. To

avoid both judgmentalism and the imposition of one’s own values, this means that workers must first

possess solid spiritual grounding and self-awareness, and recognize the influence of inevitable

personal biases or unresolved spiritual issues (Sheridan et al., 1992; Anderson & Worthen, 1997;

Cascio, 1998; Gilbert, 2000). Kilpatrick and Holland (1990) observe, moreover, that one is less

inclined to be judgmental with clients, or to experience damaging countertransferential reactions, if

one has seriously examined his or her own spirituality.


In social work, practitioners tend to follow a stage or task-based approach with clients--

whether individuals, families, or groups--which includes the following steps: defining issues;

assessing needs; collecting and assessing data; planning and contracting; selecting and implementing

appropriate courses of action; monitoring and evaluating outcomes; and termination. These tasks are

carried out with a view toward empowering the client and building on his or her strengths, which may

very well include religious or spiritual resources (Cascio, 1998; Bullis, 1996). The social worker in

the assessment stage may employ techniques such as genograms and spiritual histories to garner

spiritually-related information in the assessment process (McGoldrick & Gerson, 1985). The

genogram may illumine influences and tendencies through the generations, while the spiritual history

may help identify the client's spiritual development, practices, beliefs, and influences of the family of

origin (Sheridan et al., 1992; Bullis, 1996). This spiritual history may also help the social worker

ascertain current conflicts, as well as potential sources of strength for the client, and thus help in

formulating reasonable therapeutic objectives (Bullis, 1996).

In the intervention stage of practice, the social worker and client may work to introduce or further

incorporate spiritual practices meaningful to the client, such as meditation, prayer, or various rituals

(Canda, 1990; Derezotes, 1995). Whether or not a social worker should pray with the client remains

controversial, however; in such cases, it may be beneficial to consult with a clergy member or a

pastoral counselor (Canda, 1990). Cascio (1998) reminds practitioners to use caution generally in

employing prayer, meditation, or ritual, and to be fully aware of possible boundary implications. She

suggests that social service agencies provide training and clear guidelines to workers in regard to

such practices. Barach (1997) similarly underscores the necessity of in-depth knowledge of religious

ritual, and possible collaboration with clergy, to ensure that clients’ religious and spiritual needs are

addressed appropriately. At the same time, therapists need to consult the ethical standards of their


professions to avoid imposing their values upon those with whom they work. Clients with

dissociative disorders, for instance, may present significant struggles around issues of “moral

responsibility, the meaning of their pain, the duality of good and evil, the need for justice, and basic

trust in the benevolence of the universe.” Depending upon the religious background, culture, and

spiritual practices of the client, such questions may also lead to a consideration of exorcism rituals to

rid the self of demonic, “not-self” personalities. Such rituals may actually allow certain clients “to

rearrange images of their personality systems in a culturally syntonic manner,” observes Barach. Yet

therapists should exercise extreme caution before even considering such an approach. Such rituals,

she stresses, “have not been shown to be an effective treatment for DID [Dissociative Identity

Disorder], have not been shown to be effective for ‘removing’ alternate personalities, and have been

found to have deleterious effects in two samples of DID patients that experienced exorcisms outside

of psychotherapy” (Barach, 1977, retrieved 2/22/03 from http://www.issd.orgindexpage/isdguide.

htm#diag).

Social workers also find that spiritual dimensions of practice often manifest themselves when

clients grapple with questions of “why me?” often in relation to chronic or life-threatening illnesses

(Millison, 1998). In fact, Cascio argues, failing to acknowledge a spiritual component at these times

may mean that the social worker is not handling these situations optimally (Cascio, 1998). Drug and

alcohol recovery programs as well often involve getting in touch with a spiritual dimension and

learning to depend on this “higher power” for guidance and strength. Yet, among progressives in the

addictions field, C. Morrell notes, there has been a longstanding avoidance of spirituality. This

avoidance has stemmed largely from associations to organized, conservative religion, which Morrell

and others have perceived as potentially abusive and exclusive, or overly “otherworldly,”

discouraging necessary political or social action. “These are real concerns, but they are not factors

http://www.issd.org/

http://www.issd.org/

http://www.issd.org/indexpage/isdguide.htm#diag)


inherent in recognizing a spiritual dimension in life,” Morrell concludes, pointing out that many

recovery programs avoid indoctrination and proselytizing, and instead encourage a broader concept

of spirituality as a form of liberation. In-depth knowledge of the roots of Christian spirituality, as well

as observation about the functional nature of the divine within a particular clinical situation, allows

Morrell to envision a recovery program which employs spirituality in the service of empowerment.

He views the incorporation of spirituality within substance abuse programs to “inspire and sustain

people to move beyond external and internalized oppression. . . . Beliefs and experiences that connect

them to others and challenge discouragement can be thought of as spiritual; they invigorate and

empower people. (Morrell, 1996, 309).

Conclusion

As mentioned above, a fourth response to the spirituality and social work conversation

involves a serious interdisciplinary engagement of spirituality and religion within social work theory

and practice. This approach, however, distinguishes conceptual and ideological differences between

the two disciplines, and is wary of easy answers. It realizes that neither social work nor spirituality

can be easily identified with one tradition or ideology; identifies those forces that have disengaged

religion from social work; and recognizes that many of our broader intellectual traditions do not

easily detach the concept of religion from that of spirituality. Such awareness and common grounding

allow for genuine engagement in substantive, cross-disciplinary research and conversation. Without

these, religious studies and the social work will continue to persist as separate disciplines,

inaccessible to each other.

To be sure, social work will continue to struggle with how to practically integrate incorporate

a spiritual perspective into social work's mission. That is where religious studies and related other


disciplines may be step in to provide perspective and their own “war stories.” Fields such as religious

studies may help social work in clarifying the concept of spirituality by situating the search for

meaning historically and sociologically. It may suggest methods of incorporating spirituality in

practice and in the social work curriculum. It may help social workers discern potential ramifications

of particular religio-political agendas, especially critical in these times which have eagerly embraced

the idea of faith-based organizations. Finally, it may help identify the ethical difficulties in using

spiritual practices in programs receiving federal funds. Although the above represents a complex

enterprise, such difficulty in itself should not justify abandoning the undertaking.

By further engaging interdisciplinary, intellectual traditions of the wider academy, social

work will strengthen itself as an academic field. By acknowledging its own conflicting foundational

history, social work practitioners will be empowered to fully consider the ramifications of the

sectarian agendas often surrounding the public embrace of spirituality. In return, social work may

contribute mightily by reminding us of its inherited legacy of social justice and client empowerment.

In bringing the disciplines of religious studies and social work into a mutually enriching,

interdisciplinary conversation, we may choose to adopt the social work approach of combining a

solid knowledge and skills base, alongside the cardinal maxim of client self-determination. As this

conversation continues to grow and evolve, the meaning of spirituality will “likely overflow the walls

the profession tries to erect around it,” as Edward Canda notes. Therefore, he concludes, “perhaps we

should start where the client is and define it as broadly and inclusively as it is visited in the minds and

lives of our diverse clients” (Canda & Furman, 1999).


REFERENCES

Abbott, A. (1980). Religion, psychiatry and problems of everyday life. Sociological Analysis 41(2),

164-71.

Amato-von Hemert, K. (1994). Should social work education address religious issues? Yes! Journal

of Social Work Education, 30, 7-11.

American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th

ed.). Washington, DC: author.

Anderson, D. A. & Worthen, D. (1997). Exploring a fourth dimension: Spirituality as a resource

for the couple therapist. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 23, 3-12.

Barach, P.M. (1997). Guidelines for Treating Dissociative Identity Disorder (Multiple Personality

Disorder) in Adults. International Society for the Study of Dissociation. Retrieved 2/22/03 from

http://www.issd.org/indexpage/isdguide.htm#diag .

Bellah, R.N., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W.M., Swidler, A., & Tipton, S.M. (1995). Habits of the

heart. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Berger, P. (1965). Towards a sociological understanding of psychoanalysis. Social Research 32, 26-

41.

Bullis, R. (1996). Spirituality in social work practice. Washington, DC: Taylor and Francis.

Canda, E. R. (2002). A world wide view on spirituality and social work: Reflections from the USA

experience and suggestions for internationalization. Currents: New scholarship in the human

services, 1(1). Retrieved 11/15/02 from http://fsw.ucalgary.ca/currents/canda1/canda.htm

Canda, E.R. & Furman, L.D. (1999). Spiritual diversity in social work practice: The heart of helping.

New York: The Free Press.

Canda, E.R. (1997a). Does religion and spirituality have a significant place in the core HBSE

curriculum? Yes. In M. Bloom and W.C. Klein (Eds.), Controversial issues in human behavior in the

social environment. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Canda, E. R. (1997b). Spirituality. Encyclopedia of Social Work. 19th ed. National Association of

Social Workers (1997). Alexandria, VA: NASW Press.

Cascio, T. (1998) Incorporating spirituality into social work practice: a review of what to do.

Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 523-531.

Cascio, T. (1999). Religion and spirituality: Diversity issues for the future. Journal of Multicultural

Social Work 7(3/4), 129-45.

Clark, J. (1994) (1994). Should social work education address religious issues? No! Journal of Social

Work Education, 30, 12-15.

Cnaan, R. (1999). The newer deal: social work and religion in partnership. New York: Columbia

University Press.

Council on Social Work Education. (1994). Curriculum policy statements for master’s and

baccalaureate social work degree programs. Alexandria, VA: Author.

http://www.issd.org/indexpage/isdguide.htm#diag

http://fsw.ucalgary.ca/currents/canda1/canda.htm


Council on Social Work Education. (1994). Handbook of accreditation standards and procedures.

Alexandria, VA: Author.

Danylchuk, L.S. (1992). The pastoral counselor as mental health professional: A comparison of the

training of AAPC fellow pastoral counselors and licensed clinical social workers. Journal of Pastoral

Care, 46(4), 382-391.

Derezotes, D.S. (1995). Spirituality and religiosity: Neglected factors in social work practice. Arete,

20(1), 1-15.

Dudley, J.R., & Helfgott, C. (1990). Exploring a place for spirituality in the social work curriculum.

Journal of Social Work Education, 26(3), 287-294.

Ebaugh, H.R. (2002). Presidential address 2001, Return of the sacred: Reintegrating religion in the

social sciences. Journal of the social scientific study of religion 41:3, 385-395.

Freedberg, S. (1986). Religion, profession, and politics: Bertha Capen Reynolds' challenge to social

work. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 56/2: 95-110.

Fuller, R. (2001). Spiritual, but not religious: Understanding unchurched America. Oxford

University Press.

Gilbert, M.C. (2000) Spirituality in social work groups: Practitioners speak out. Social Work with

Groups, 22 (4), 67.

Homans, P. (1989). The ability to mourn: Disillusionment and the social origins of psychoanalysis.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Hugen, B. (1994). The secularization of social work. Social Work and Christianity. 21(4): 83-101.

Joseph, M.V. (1988). Religion and social work practice. Social casework: The Journal of

Contemporary Social Work 69, 443-452.

Joseph, M.V. (1987). The religious and spiritual aspects of clinical practice: A neglected dimension

of social work. Social Thought 13(1), 12-23.

Joseph, M.V. Syllabus for course entitled, Spiritual/religious dimensions of social work practice.

Catholic University of America. Retrieved 12/22/02 at http://ncsss.cua.edu//Outlines/ sss661.pdf).

King, W. (1987). Religion. Encyclopedia of Religion, ed. M. Eliade. New York: Macmillan, 282-293.

Kilpatrick, A.C. & Holland, T.P. (1990). Spiritual dimensions of practice. The clinical supervisor, 8,

125-40.

Linzer, N. (1999). Resolving ethical dilemmas in social work practice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Loewenberg. F. (1988). Religion and social work practice in contemporary American society.

N.Y.:Columbia University Press.

Luckmann, T. (1967). The invisible religion: The problem of religion in modern society. New York:

Macmillan.

Lum, D. (1995). Culturally competent practice: a framework for understanding diverse groups and

justice issues, 4th ed. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

http://ncsss.cua.edu/Outlines/sss661.pdf


McGoldrick, M., & Gerson, R. (1985). Genograms in family assessment. New York: W. W. Norton

& Co.

Marty, M. E. (1980). Social service: godly and godless. Social Service Review, 54 (4), 4463-4481.

Marty, M.E. (2001) Sightings: Religion and social work 7/2/01. Retrieved 7/4/01 from

http://divinity.uchicago. edu/sightings/archive_2001/sightings-070201.html Martin Marty Center,

University of Chicago Divinity School.

Miller, D.W. (2001). Programs in social work embrace the teaching of spirituality. Chronicle of

Higher Education, May 18, 2001. Retrieved 5/31/01 from http://chronicl.com/free/v47/i36/

36a01201.htm

Millison, M.B. (1988). Spirituality and the caregiver: Developing an underutilized facet of care.

American Journal of Hospice Care (5) 2, 37-44.

Morrell, C. (1996). Radicalizing recovery: Addiction, spirituality, and politics. Social Work, 41, 306-

312.

National Association of Social Workers (1996). Code of ethics of the National Association of Social

Workers. Silver Spring, MD: author.

Netting, F.E., Thibault, J.M., & Ellor, J.W. (1990). Integrating content on organized religion into

macropractice courses. Journal of Social Work Education, 26, 15-24.

Powell, W.E. (2000). Review of E.R. Canda’s Spirituality in social work: New directions (1998).

Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services 81 (1), 105-106.

Praglin, L.J. (1998). The rabbinate after Freud: American rabbinical responses to psychological

thought and practice, 1912-1980. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Dissertation Services.

Roof, W.C. (1993). A generation of seekers: Spiritual journeys of the baby boom generation. San

Francisco: Harper Collins.

Russel, R. (1998). Spirituality and religion in graduate social work education. Social Thought, 18(2),

15-29.

Sanzenbach, P. (1989). Religion and social work: It's not that simple! Social Casework: The Journal

of Contemporary Social Work, 70, 571-574.

Sermabeikian, P. (1994). Our clients, ourselves: The spiritual perspective and social work practice.

Social Work, 39/2, 178-183.

Sheridan, M.J. (2002). Spiritual and religious issues in practice. In A. Roberts and G. Greene (eds.)

Social Workers’ Desk Reference, New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 567-571.

Sheridan, M.J., Wilmer, C.M., & Atcheson, L. (1994). Inclusion of content on religion and

spirituality in the social work curriculum: A study of faculty views. Journal of Social Work

Education, 30(3), 363-376.

Sheridan, M.J., Bullis, R.K., Adcock, C.R., Berlin, S.D., & Miller, P.C. (1992). Practitioners’

personal and professional attitudes and behaviors toward religion and spirituality: Issues for

education and practice. Journal of Social Work Education 28(2), 190-203.

Siporin, M. (1985). Current social work perspectives on clinical practice. Clinical Social Work

Journal, 13, 198-217.


Trattner, W.I. From poor law to welfare state: a history of social welfare in America. 4th ed. New

York: Free Press, 1989.

van Hook, M., Hugen, B., and Aguilar, M. (eds.) (2001). Spirituality within religious traditions in

social work practice. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Wuthnow, R. (1998). After heaven: Spirituality in America since the 1950’s. Berkeley: Univ. of

California Press.

Praglin, L.J. (2004). Spirituality, religion, and social work: An effort toward interdisciplinary...

Documents

Transcript of Praglin, L.J. (2004). Spirituality, religion, and social work: An effort toward interdisciplinary...