In my previous post, I discussed the anti-religious bias that existed in psychology throughout most of the 20th century. I explained how Allen Bergin’s landmark article, “Psychotherapy and Religious Values” (Bergin, 1980a), challenged this bias and spurred a global movement to include spiritual perspectives in mainstream psychology. I mentioned that Albert Ellis, the founder of Rational-Emotive-Behavior Therapy (REBT), wrote a critical response to Bergin’s article. In this post, I provide more details about Bergin’s rebuttal to Ellis and their debate about religion and mental health, as well as the vital research it inspired.

The “Religiosity-Emotional Disturbance” Hypothesis

In Ellis’s response to Bergin, he hypothesized that “Devout, orthodox, or dogmatic religion (or what might be called religiosity) is significantly correlated with emotional disturbance. . . . Religiosity . . . is in many respects equivalent to irrational thinking and emotional disturbance” (Ellis, 1980, p. 627). He also hypothesized that “The elegant therapeutic solution to emotional problems is to be quite unreligious and have no degree of dogmatic faith that is unfounded or unfoundable in fact. . . . The less religious [people] are, the more emotionally healthy they will tend to be” (Ellis, 1980, p. 627).

In Bergin’s rebuttal, he challenged Ellis’s negative views of religion, acknowledging that although religion is “not always a positive influence,” it can be “powerfully benevolent” (Bergin, 1980b, p. 643). He also argued that there was little research support for Ellis’s hypothesis. He emphasized the need for more research on religion to explore how it can be both helpful and harmful to mental health.

Reviewing the Literature About Religion and Mental Health

I was a volunteer on........

© Psychology Today