Earticle

초록

영어

This study begins from the premise that theological language frequently employed in pastoral counseling may function as a channel of healing, but may also at times serve as a mechanism to concealing suffering. Within the traditional concept of care of souls (cura animarum), the suffering of the counselee has often been interpreted within a theological framework of meaning and thereby linked to healing. However, when theological meaning imposed by the counselor intervenes too early in the counseling process, a structural risk arises in which diagnosis and interpretation precede the full articulation of the counselee’s suffering. At the same time, an approach that relies excessively on psychoanalytic explanation also carries the danger of reduce the human person to a set of facts detached from their relational context. Accordingly, this study does not presuppose the superiority of either approach, but instead begins by critically examining how each can simplify human suffering in its own way. The study understands these two dangers not as a mere failure of balance, but as structural vulnerabilities inherent in the practice of care of souls, and seeks to identify the point at which such vulnerabilities emerge within the correspondence between Sigmund Freud, a central figure in psychoanalysis, and Oskar Pfister, who was both a psychoanalyst and a theologian-pastor. The correspondence between Freud and Pfister demonstrates that psychoanalysis and pastoral theology, rather than aiming at reconciliation or integration, were fundamentally concerned with the existential question of how care for those seeking liberation from suffering can be sustained. Although their dialogue did not culminate in theoretical agreement, it illuminates the attitudes and conditions required for care precisely at the point where the desire to confer meaning encounters the demand for factuality. The tension evident in their exchange is reproduced in contemporary pastoral counseling, where psychoanalytic and pastoral-theological approaches are often simultaneously called upon. For this reason, this study examines their correspondence in order to propose a reflective framework through which care of souls may critically examine its own interpretive authority and its modes of meaning-making. When pastoral counseling comes to function as a practice that explains suffering on behalf of the sufferer, care risks becoming an instrument of control. By contrast, when pastoral counseling creates the conditions under which suffering may be freely expressed, it can become a channel of liberation. This study argues that the correspondence between Freud and Pfister makes this point of divergence especially clear and helps explain why contemporary pastoral counseling should function not as an instrument that provides “correct meaning,” but as a practice that supports the process through which meaning is gradually formed. In this context, psychoanalysis does not replace the aims of pastoral counseling; rather, it serves as a critical device that enables pastoral counseling to reflect upon its own language and its impulse toward intervention. Through this study, it is hoped that pastoral counselors may become more aware of the need for a reflective posture that does not absolutize either their own certainty or their goodwill toward the counselee, but continually reexamines the diagnoses and interpretations they bring to the suffering of others.

목차

I. Einleitung
II. Die Korrelation von Psychoanalyse und therapeutischer Seelsorge im Horizont eines ganzheitlichen Menschenverständnisses
1. Die Stärkung der therapeutischen Seelsorge durch fortdauernde Kontroverse
2. Die unterschiedlichen Perspektiven der Beiden auf das menschliche Leiden
III. Analytische Seelsorge als System der Selbstreflexion der therapeutischen Seelsorge: die Funktion der Psychoanalyse innerhalb der therapeutischen Seelsorge
1. Die Deutungsstruktur der Seelsorge und die vorschnelle Sinngebung sowie der Punkt, an dem theologische Sprache als Abwehr wirksam wird
2. Pfisters praktisches Problembewusstsein und die Objektivierung als Bedingung der therapeutischen Seelsorge zur Aufrechterhaltung der Selbstreflexion
3. Die Funktion der analytischen Seelsorge: Der kritische Gebrauch der Psychoanalyse, der theologische Sprache reflexionsfähig macht
IV. Schlussbetrachtung: Die Implikationen des Briefwechsels zwischen Freud und Pfister für die heutige therapeutische Seelsorge
Bibliography
Abstract

키워드

저자

• Ko, You-Sik [ Hoseo University ]

참고문헌

발행기관

간행물

표지보기 관심저널 등록

• 간행물명

  신학과 실천 [Theology and Praxis]

• 간기

  연5회

• pISSN

  1229-7917

• 수록기간

  1997~2026

• 등재여부

  KCI 등재

• 십진분류

  KDC 230 DDC 230