Cheating at Solitaire

The Danger of Self-Deception in Pastoral and Counselling Ministry

 

Dr Mervin van der Spuy

Professor of Counselling Psychology (retired)

Professional Counselling Therapist (Paraklesis Counselling)

info@paraklesiscounselling.com

 

I borrowed the phrase “Cheating at Solitaire” from an article about self-deception written from a business perspective about executive mental health and organizational performance ( Litz, 2003). The question is: will pastors and Christian counsellors “cheat at solitaire”? Self-deception is so undeniable a fact of human life that if anyone tried to deny its existence, the proper response would be to accuse this person of it (Wood 2009). Unfortunately, pastors and counsellors are not immune to this, and self-deception remains an ever present danger in pastoral and counselling ministry.

Litz (2003) points out that the occurrence of self-deception, and its negative impact on organizational performance, has surprisingly had very little written about it in management literature. Likewise, and in spite of the incidence of high-profile-pastors' and counsellors' involvement, self-deception has not been given much attention in pastoral ministry. Botha (2005), reflecting theologically on self-deception, points out that one would expect, given our ability to live in false realities of “fantastical fictions” that the problem of self-deception would be studied by theologians and biblical scholars, but finds surprisingly that it appears to be avoided by these disciplines.

The intent of this article is to make pastors and counsellors aware of the danger of self-deception by providing a better understanding of it, and in particular realize its potential negative influence on pastoral and counselling ministry, and the mental wellbeing of pastors and counsellors. This is done by addressing the following questions: What is self-deception, how does moral reasoning go wrong, what is the relationship between self-deception and delusion, and how can self-deception be prevented or its effects be minimized?

 

What is Self-Deception?

It must be said at the outset, that a precise definition of self-deception is not easy, and some would say, probably a vain endeavour. Botha (2005) points out that self-deception includes a wide variety of behaviours and mental experiences which in themselves are related to one another. He lists honest mistakes, phony feelings, irrationality, wishful thinking, delusions, difficulties with memory and language, avoidance, ignorance, hypocrisy, maintenance of self-esteem, false belief, blind faith and even hypnosis. However, self-deception is more than just the individual components – it's more than just rationalization or denial. Self-deception is similar to, but distinct from, psychological phenomena like wishful thinking and more than just self-serving bias ( Litz 2003) . In wishful thinking we want something to be true, but remaining aware that it is not. Self-deception, in addition, requires that we commit our consciousness to believe, and that on the basis of the wish, our belief is behaviourally manifested.

It is generally accepted that to deceive is to make someone believe what is untrue. It therefore logically implies that self-deception is deceiving of oneself as to one's true feelings, motives, circumstances, and actions – believing what is untrue. Clearly, belief is intrinsically involved in self-deception. It is only when one's belief-system is challenged and when evidence is brought forth that contradicts this belief, that the dynamic aspects of self-deceiving faith are clearly seen. Noordhof (2009) says that there are two apparent paradoxes that lie at the heart of discussions of self-deception, one focusing on belief, the other on intention. The belief paradox concerns how the self-deceived person can combine both “the belief that p” and “the belief that not-p”. The intention paradox concerns how the self-deceived can intend to believe “that p”, and manage it, without knowing what they are up to (believing “not-p”), and be able to make it in some way legally acceptable. Writing in the fourth century BC, the Greek scholar Demosthenes noted the ease with which self-delusion occurs and noted that “nothing is so easy than to deceive one's self, for that which we wish, we readily believe.”

Scripture refers to people looking into a mirror, and after looking at themselves, going away and immediately forgetting what they looked like, as being deceived (James 1:19-27). The danger of self-deception in pastoral and counselling ministry is not that you just ‘forget what you looked like', but that you are able to hold two contradicting ‘pictures' of yourself at the same time. Self-deception in this sense is therefore about finding a way to not admit to ourselves something we recognize as true but do not wish to believe. The Arbinger Institute (2002) defines self-deception as the state of not knowing and resisting the possibility that there is a problem, while one may actually be the problem oneself. Researchers seem to agree that four criteria must be satisfied simultaneously for the state of self-deception to exist: first, a person must hold two contradictory beliefs; second, these beliefs must be held simultaneously; third, only one of these beliefs must be subject to awareness; and fourth, that the state of non-awareness, that is, the choice of what the individual chooses to not think about, is intentional (Litz 2003).

Self-deception involves the subversion of the evidence-based belief formation process (the deception) and the subversion is due to the agent's own desires (the self). Van Leeuwen (2007) further points out that self-deception seem paradoxical and notes three issues: First, it seems that self-deception involves a conceptual contradiction - in order to deceive one must believe the contrary of the deception one is perpetrating, but if one believes the contrary, it seems impossible for that very self to believe the deception. This represents a spiritual or belief component in self-deception. Second, a view of the mind (the psychological component) that seats rationality as an important function, and exhaustive mental ability, has become widely accepted. The idea of attributing irrational beliefs to people does not make sense as we find it difficult to understand someone's beliefs unless they are rational. But the mind can be deceived and self-deception is highly irrational. Third, from a bio-genetic perspective of cognitive mechanisms of the brain we know that we are well-equipped to provide reliable information about ourselves and our environment. Self-deception, however, undermines the knowledge we have of ourselves and the world. Dyck and Padilla (2009) refer to the phenomenal advances in the neurosciences and the discoveries about our nature as moral beings. Neuropsychology has modified how we view our brain capacity for sensible (and non-sensible) experiences. It not only helps us to understand how self-deception occurs, but it also creates hope through new research on brain regenerativity and plasticity, and psychopharmacology does offer us new treatment options.

How do we make sense of the term ‘self-deception'? We can draw divisions between parts of the mind so that one part can count as deceiving the other, or we can focus on the development of a belief-system that simultaneously believes “p” and “not p” (Moomal & Henzi 2000). Self-deception can be seen as the mind's way of protecting itself from psychological pain, but pain, physical and psychological, occurs for biological reasons. Self-deception is more than just an ‘‘active misrepresentation of reality to the conscious mind'' (Van Leeuwen 2007). To advance our understanding of our capacity for self-deception as a property of being human, it seems clear that we should understand it from an integrated bio-psycho-social-spiritual perspective.

 

How Moral Reasoning Goes Wrong: Self-Deception

Botha (2005) points out that in probing the concept of self-deception, we become aware that we are facing something pervasive and ever-present: “the human propensity for self-delusion is rooted, not merely in the way we choose to interpret our experience, nor in occasional pathologies of experience, but in the very formation of experience”.

At its core the concept of self-deception is an ethical issue. Whether it is the missionary that holds strong racist views while at the same time ministering to the very same people-group she hates; or the pastor who secretly visits prostitutes while fervently condemning immoral behaviour from the pulpit; or the lecturer that signs the code of conduct requiring abstinence, but does partake on international flights and drinks alcohol with selected friends; or the prominent politician that abuses his powers to have sexual relationships with his staff while promoting strong marriage and family laws in parliament - it is clear that in self-deception moral reasoning seems to go wrong. Self-deception is not harmless, it undermines one's agency and it gradually erodes moral ethical values. As Van Leeuwen & Neil (2009) points out “self-deception does not produce choice worthy happiness”. Neither does it benefit the mental wellbeing of the person nor does it bring glory to God within the body of believers.

We can deceive ourselves so easily because of our capacity (a dark legacy of the fall) to wilfully disregard our intuitive perception of moral value in favour of the attractive (though self-deceptive) creations of our socially constructed imaginations (Wood 2009). In ethical and moral decision-making, our imaginative abilities give us a way to conserve an image of ourselves as morally upright and blameless, even when we are not. According to Pascal (in Wood 2009), the central threat to being morally upright is neither ignorance of the moral law nor moral weakness, rather the main threat to the moral life is self-deception. As such, moral wrongdoing is usually a product of self-deceptive moral reasoning. The heart (our special cognitive faculty) intuitively perceives moral value and produces a spontaneous moral judgment and conviction that is both cognitive and affective. The heart perceives value, but imagination bestows value. Our imagination determines the subjective moral value of objects and situations depending on how we understand and interpret them, but our imagination can be a deceptive and self-serving faculty. It is therefore easy to see why we are highly likely to come to believe that our self-serving but enticing imaginative fantasies are true. Our imaginative fantasies are so enticing because we ourselves voluntarily construct them as maximally attractive.

How can one both know and not know the 'truth'? At the beginning of the twentieth century, Sigmund Freud (whose theories lead to the separation of mind, brain, and spirit) proposed that we all constantly hide the truth from ourselves, often with disastrous results. To Freud, self-deception follows from defence mechanisms which people activate as protection against recognising the actual, but unacceptable, motivations of behaviour. More recently, scholars have analysed the possible causes, effects, tactics and moral value implications of self-deception more from an integrated perspective (overcoming the mind-brain-spirit split). It seems self-evident that self-deception serves to camouflage one's errors, weaknesses or wrongdoings (from a biblical perspective sinful behaviour). Whether it is to reinforce self-esteem or to protect self-image, or whatever reasons, a self-deceived person persistently avoids acknowledging the truth, even when it would normally be appropriate to do so ( Botha 2005) . Truth is a function of our morality and truth matters. Our ability to know ‘truth' and to live authentically is dependent on our capacity to avoid the pitfall of self-deception. So the challenge in avoiding self-deception becomes confession of failure, acknowledgement of sinful behaviour, acceptance of loss and ineptitude, experiencing grace, committing to virtues living, and pursuing a moral character with integrity.

 

Self-Deception, Dissociation, and Delusion: The “Swaggart Blind-Spot”

The Hartford Institute for Religion Research (1999) found that 23% of ministers had some sort of sexual indiscretion that caused a rupture between pastor and congregation. There is no statistically significant difference between the occurrence of sexual misconduct between, pastors, pastoral counsellors, Christian counsellors, secular counsellors, therapists, and psychologists. Therapists (95% male and 76% female), acknowledge having been sexually attracted to their patients on occasion, and at least 20% of clients report that they had sexual encounters with their therapist (Remley 2010). How is it possible that in spite of the most stringent ethical guidelines and codes strongly supported by therapists, that they do the opposite of what is required? Only through self-deception!

Self-deception usually emerges in the context of our self-conscious and reflective efforts to solve an unsettling question and the related cognitive dissonance. When confronted with two opposing views (cognitive dissonance) we either try to resolve it or we try to find a way of reducing the dissonance. In this way says Scott-Kakures (2009), self-deception is a problem and a failing that springs from distinctive human capacities and abilities, capacities and abilities that are required for and engaged in our self-conscious efforts to settle questions. However, settling questions is an unsettling business. It is my submission that if dissonance reduction fails and the questions are not settled (current cognitive perspective can rule out neither p nor not-p), the self-deception process proceeds with dissociation and delusions – developing what I refer to as the “Swaggart Blind Spot” . While adhering to and promoting the one belief (that p), the self-deceived person seems to be dissociated from the other belief (not p), and vice versa. While engaging with the one, the other seems to be hidden away in the ‘blind spot'. So, in such a case, two opposing cognitions that in themselves could well not stand in a consonant relationship can, nonetheless, be brought into a dissonant and inharmonious relationship by virtue of the presence of the dissociative blind spot. Dyck and Padilla (2009) state that people can indeed be so blinded that they engage in evil actions, seeking happiness for themselves through their passions and appetites in pursuit of overindulgence and excess.

In some way the dissociation leads to a full-blown delusion in which the subjects lose their grip on reality with regard to certain subject matter - with the result that they have little chance of being able to make appropriate cognitive adjustments to the way the world is (Noordhof, 2009). The American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (2000) defines delusions as: “A false belief based on incorrect inference about external reality that is firmly sustained despite what almost everybody else believes and despite what constitutes incontrovertible and obvious proof to the contrary.” This identified mental instability is an essential feature in self-deception. Noordhof (2009) observed that “the delusory belief persists even if subjects recognize that they would not believe it if it were somebody else's belief.

Once dissociation takes place and delusions appear, intervention, care-giving, therapy, etc., seems to have very little preventative power. Pastors and Christian counsellors should be made aware to get help at the earliest development of or indication of self-deception happening.

 

Preventing Self-Deception: Honest Self-Awareness

Taking inventory of who we are in God's eyes, Morgan (2011) reminds us of the eminent Swiss psychoanalyst, Carl Jung, who said that all of us have a shadow self. Comparing it to a long bag filled with all the ‘dark parts of the self' that we would prefer to keep hidden and secret. From time to time we look inside the bag as we drag it along, but it contains the dark parts of ourselves that we like to deny. It contains all the evil stuff that divides our hearts, the negative stuff that hurts our relationships, the toxic stuff that is so much part of all of us. We would prefer not to face it and not to take responsibility for all the shadows within our hearts. The difficulty is that eventually the shadow self escapes. Instead of accepting it and working with it, we tend to blame others, even demonize others, we inflict pain on others, and in self-deception we also inflict pain on ourselves. Mental health practitioners (and pastors) should not assume that they are invulnerable to impairment (Ford 2006).

 

Morgan (2011) encourages us to embrace and face the parts of the heart and deceptive intentions that don't take us to God. The first step in preventing self-deception is to be made aware and come to acceptance of the fact that we all have the ability and propensity to do so.

Pienaar (2009) postulates that self-awareness is the key to combating the self-deception trap and Ford (2006) says that self-awareness is a key aspect of professionalism. Corey et al (2007) note that professionals who work intimately with others have a personal and professional responsibility and commitment to self-awareness – being aware of their own feelings, needs, problems, life issues, and ‘unfinished business'. Whereas counselling training does give attention to personalization issues and even requires student-counsellors to go for therapy, prospective pastors are seldom trained to be skilled in this area. Ethical and legal issues like dual-relationships, confidentiality, transference and counter-transference should be part of pastoral training (Sanders 1997). The pastor may be trained to do house visitation, but has anybody told her what to do when a congregant tells her that he had a sexual dream about her. What does the pastor do if she feels sexually stimulated by it? Does she call the elders for a board meeting? I think not. The cognitive dissonance will most likely be internalized and it could be the first step towards self-deception. Unresolved personal issues, feelings and problems can gradually subvert professional competence and “grease the slide into the abyss of burnout or an unethical dual relationship” (Ford 2006).

Parker and Davis (2009), using the perspectives of Winnicott acknowledge that every person has a “false self”- ranging from the healthy to the truly split-off compliant false self which is mistaken for the whole. On the continuum there are people with healthy ego capacities, and conversely, at the pathological end of the false-self continuum are people with impaired ego capacities. Such individuals will almost always act out of the false self. Rather than allowing congregants, pastors and counsellors to come to their own conclusions regarding morality, the church's commanding culture may instead necessitate the use of the false self and could therefore facilitate self-deception. Hands and Fehr (1993) points out that clergy often maintain a facade of professionalism while their pain is hidden. In fear of shame and condemnation they have no place to admit the truth. The church should be a safe-place where the ‘shadow self' can be acknowledged and explored, but I doubt that it is.

Instead churches might be encouraging self-deception when they offer authoritative foreclosed answers to questions of morality. Parker and Davis (2009) say that the rigid moral stances of the church might implicitly demand unquestionable obedience from all while it forbids any critical or honest self-awareness. I would suggest that all pastors should seek out adequately trained and skilled therapists to come alongside them in their quest to honest self-awareness – thus preventing the pitfalls of self-deception. All counsellors should be involved in ongoing supervision that goes beyond case-conferencing and deals with personalization issues.

Whenever a believer's relationship with God is experienced as unable to ‘hold the person' and accommodate his or her feelings (especially negative ones), there is a great likelihood that the person will cope with the cognitive dissonance by using their false self. The pastor or counsellor may experience God (and the church) as unable to receive one's aggression, hatred, or other kinds of sinfulness. They then may recurrently present a false self which complies with this perception of God and progressively move towards self-deception. The pastor or counsellor that perceives God as requiring only strength and perfection, while not allowing or accepting human weakness or failure, may hide self aspects that are thought to be unacceptable in their ‘blind-spot'. Parker and Davis (2009) say that even in prayer the believer might only express an acceptable image of self.

The second step in preventing self-deception therefore requires a paradigm shift for pastors and counsellors. They need to move away from believing that hyper-spirituality and perfection is required, to a place where honest self-awareness is not only accepted, but a virtue in authentic living.

The third step in preventing self-deception is to create an environment of non-judgemental acceptance and unconditional love - characterized by safety, nurturance, responsiveness, and consistency. Pastors and counsellors should develop relationships that erode the need for self-deception. Within a care-giving setting, such ministry or intervention must occur within the context of the therapeutic relationship. This requires wise self-disclosure that is boundaried – not dramatic TV exposés or brave (foolish) public confessions. The “Jerry-Springer-let-it-all-out-in-public” style is not what is needed – what is needed is a safe care-giving holding environment. Churches might be able to compensate for their care-giving failures by at least providing good-enough holding environments that will support authentic living. The church and church leaders can create the macro environment for authentic living, but the safe environment needed for honest self-awareness needs to be contained. Congregants, friends, and family may be well-intentioned, but they have neither the skills nor the know-how to deal with honest self-disclosure. Again I would urge those in ministry to seek out professional help where confidentiality and therapeutic safety is at least somewhat guaranteed.

The fourth step in preventing self-deception is to develop adequate self-care skills. Cottone and Tarvydas (2007) list: continuing education, consultation and supervision, networking, and stress-management strategies as professional self-care skills. They suggest the following for personal self-care skills: healthy personal habits, attention to relationships, recreational activities, relaxation and centeredness, self-exploration and awareness. In similar vein Hands and Fehr (1993) directs those in ministry towards healthy integration, encouraging self-appreciation and intimacy with God, self, and others. One way that pastors and pastoral-care workers can nurture their true self, is to allow for the spontaneous gestures and honest authentic living of their congregants, and by allowing themselves the same. Self-care does not come naturally, we have to overcome our inertia tendencies and actively and purposefully pursue self-care. Ultimately, says Hands and Fehr (1993), “the attaining of self-intimacy is a spiritual quest”.

The fifth step in preventing self-deception is to develop an integrated spirituality. Crook (2007) presents a Christian method for making moral and ethical decisions. Sometimes the choice between right and wrong seems so clear-cut that no decision appears to be necessary, but most decision making is much more complicated, and as we've seen, once self-deception sets in, moral reasoning is compromised. Crook (2007) points us to the bible, Christian community, and personal experience, as sources of guidance, but his basic stance is “that Christian morality is decision and action emanating from character that is shaped by a faith relationship with Christ”. Whereas scripture and church are objective realities that are open to discussion and interpretation that can be accepted or rejected, personal experience is subjective and therefore more difficult to deal with, and as we've seen vulnerable to self-deception. Crook (2007) says that ultimately the responsibility falls on the individual to make personal judgements, using their mind, trusting the leading of the Holy Spirit, and allowing for the prompting of their conscience. Our mind can be tricked (deceived), our conscience can be unreliable, and we might misunderstand the prompting of the Spirit. An integrated spirituality seems to be required to prevent self-deception.

With the emergence of Zen Buddhist-based Mindfulness Therapy infiltrating Christian counselling it is important to note here that mindfulness and self-enhancement (self-promoting illusions) were positively correlated. Boatright and McIntosh (2008) found that the data indicated that the more participants reported being “mindful”, the more they reported self-aggrandizing illusions. A distinction should be made between “honest self-awareness” and “mindfulness”. Mindfulness requires non-judgmental, non-elaborative, present-awareness. To be mindful entails experiencing what arises within the presently aware mind: thoughts, aversions, attachments, desires, memories, ideas, and sensory input are all witnessed objectively, in a non-judgmental, non-attached manner. This is in stark contrast with the work of the Holy Spirit which reveals to us our sinful heart and convicts us of wrongdoing. It is not an emptying of the mind, but an infilling of the Spirit!

The notion of an integrated spirituality would therefore extend to the nurturance of holistic, integrated images of the Trinity. A practical way of promoting a more integrated spirituality is the use of scriptural passages that encourage a movement toward more authentic living and openness to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Speaking of the Holy Spirit (John 7:38,39), Jesus said: “He who believes in Me [who cleaves to and trusts in and relies on Me] as the Scripture has said, ‘From his innermost being shall flow [continuously] springs and rivers of living water'” (Amplified Bible). Integrated spirituality requires and emphasises the need to be “continuously filled with the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18). As Crook (2007) concludes: “Life in the Spirit entails awareness of the presence of God, a sense of fellowship with other believers, and a common commitment to the truth that unites people under the presence of God.”

Search me, O God, and know my heart;

test me and know my anxious thoughts.

Point out anything in me that offends you,

and lead me along the path of everlasting life

(Psalm 139: 23, 24. New Living Translation)

By far the most pastors and counsellors are upright and ethical professionals who strive to live with authenticity and integrity, but we can all benefit by becoming aware and accepting the fact that we all have the ability and propensity to self-deceive. We can all benefit by challenging some of the prevailing paradigms while we strive to make the church a safer and more healing environment. With an active and vibrant integrated spirituality we can learn to practice good self-care.

In conclusion, hopefully, these reflections on self-deception will help pastors and Christian counsellors not to “cheat at solitaire”.

Bibliography

 

APA. 2000. “Diagnostic and Staistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4 th ed text revision). APA Publisher Washinton DC.

 

Boatright, Rusty A., and William D. McIntosh. 2008. "The relationship between mindfulness and self-promoting illusions."

Mental Health, Religion & Culture 11, no. 6: 561-566. Religion and Philosophy Collection, EBSCOhost

(accessed April 14, 2011).

 

Botha, Pieter J. J. 2005. "Theology, Rationality and Truth-Claims: Metatheoretical Reflections on Self-Deception."

Religion & Theology 12, no. 2: 97-128. Religion and Philosophy Collection, EBSCOhost (accessed April 19, 2011).

 

Corey, G, Scneider-Corey, M. & Callanan, P. 2007. “Issues and Ethics in the Helping Professions 7 th Ed.”Brooks/Cole.

 

Cottone, R.R. and Tarvydas, V.M. 2007. “Counseling Ethics and Decision Making 3 rd Ed.” Pearson Merrill/Prentice Hall.

 

Crook, R.H. 2007. “An Introduction to Christian Ethics 5 th Ed”. Pearson Prentice Hall.

 

Dyck, Arthur J., and Carlos E. Padilla. 2009. "The empathic emotions and self-love in Bishop Joseph Butler and the

neurosciences." Journal of Religious Ethics 37, no. 4: 577-612. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost

(accessed April 19, 2011).

 

Ford, G.F. 2006. “Ethical Reasoning for Mental Health Professionals.” SAGE Publishers.

 

Hands, D.R. and Fehr, W.L. 1993. “Spiritual Wholeness for Clergy – a New Psychology of Intimacy with God, Self and Others.”

The Alban Institute.

 

Harbaugh, G.L. 1992. “Caring for the Caregiver” The Alban Institute.

 

Hartford Institute for Religion Research. 1999. “A Quick Question: How common is clergy sexual misconduct?”

Quick Question Archives. http://hirr.hartsem.edu/research/quick_question18.html. (accessed April 19, 2011).

 

Litz, R.A., 2003. “Cheating at Solitaire: Self-Deception, Executive Mental Health, and Organizational Performance.”

Business and Society Review 108:2 235–261. Center for Business Ethics at Bentley College. Blackwell Publishing.

 

Mele, Alfred R. 1983. "SELF-DECEPTION." Philosophical Quarterly 33, no. 133: 365-377. Religion and Philosophy Collection,

EBSCOhost (accessed April 19, 2011).

 

Moomal, Z. & Henzi, S.P. 2000. “The Evolutionary Psychology of Deception and Self-Deception”. South African Journal of

Psychology 2000, 30 (3). Sabinet, SA ePublications (accessed on April 19, 2011)

 

Morgan, Thomas J. 2011. "Taking Inventory of Who We Are In God's Eyes." Priest 67, no. 3: 21-22.

Religion and Philosophy Collection, EBSCOhost (accessed April 18, 2011).

 

Noordhof, Paul. 2009. "The Essential Instability of Self-Deception." Social Theory & Practice 35, no. 1: 45-71.

Religion and Philosophy Collection, EBSCOhost (accessed April 14, 2011)

 

Parker, Stephen, and Edward B. Davis. 2009. "The false self in Christian contexts: a Winnicottian perspective." Journal of

Psychology and Christianity 28, no. 4: 315-325. ATLA Religion Database, EBSCOhost (accessed April 18, 2011).

 

Pienaar, Cobus. 2009. “The role of self-deception in leadership ineffectiveness - a theoretical overview”. South African Journal

of Psychology, Vol 39, Issue 1, Mar 2009 Pages 133-141. Sabinet, SA ePublications (accessed on April 19, 2011)

 

Remley, T.P. & Herlihy, B. 2010. “Ethical, Legal, and Professional Issues in Counselling 3 rd Edition”. Pearson Merrill.

 

Sanders, R.K. (Ed) 1997. “Christian Counseling Ethics – a Handbook for Therapists, Pastors and Counselors.” Inter Varsity Press.

 

Scott-Kakures, Dion. 2009. "Unsettling Questions: Cognitive Dissonance in Self-Deception." Social Theory & Practice 35, no. 1:

73-106. Religion and Philosophy Collection, EBSCOhost (accessed April 14, 2011).

 

The Arbinger Institute. (2002). Leadership and self-deception. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler

 

Van Leeuwen, D. S. Neil. 2007. "The Spandrels of Self-Deception: Prospects for a Biological Theory of a Mental Phenomenon."

Philosophical Psychology 20, no. 3: 329-348. Religion and Philosophy Collection, EBSCOhost (accessed April 14, 2011).

 

Van Leeuwen, D.S. Neil. 2009. "Self-Deception Won't Make You Happy." Social Theory & Practice 35, no. 1: 107-132. Religion

and Philosophy Collection, EBSCOhost (accessed April 14, 2011).

 

Wood, William D. 2009. "Axiology, Self-Deception, and Moral Wrongdoing in Blaise Pascal's Pensées." Journal of Religious

Ethics 37, no. 2: 355-384. Religion and Philosophy Collection, EBSCOhost (accessed April 14, 2011).

 

 

 

 

© Mervin van der Spuy Paraklesis Counselling 2011

 

 

Paraklesis Counselling

Box 1033, Niverville, MB R0A1E0 Canada

www.paraklesiscounselling.com

info@praklesiscounselling.com

 

 

In February 1988, Swaggart, a very well known Pentecostal American pastor, teacher, musician, television host, and televangelist, stirred controversy after a private investigation found he had solicited a prostitute for sex. Initially, Swaggart denied the accusations; but, as a media investigation proceeded, he acknowledged that some allegations were true. He later apologized for the acts in a televised broadcast and his contriving confession is well-remembered.

Jerry Springer (born February 13, 1944) is an English-born American television presenter, best known as host of the tabloid talk show The Jerry Springer Show since its debut in 1991 .