Externalisation and Christian Anthropology: An Integrative Essay in Narrative Practice

Institution: Australian Catholic University, Faculty of Theology and Philosophy
Unit: THSP521 Psychological Foundations for Supervision and Spiritual Direction (postgraduate, online scheduled, Professional Term 2, 2026)
Assessment item: Assessment Task 2, Integrative Essay
Length: 3,000 words, with ten percent variance either way, excluding the reference list
Weighting: 60 percent of the unit mark, with Assessment Task 1, a 2,000 word report, carrying 40 percent
Referencing: Chicago notes and bibliography, 17th edition
Due: end of Week 9, uploaded through the unit’s Turnitin dropbox on Canvas

Assessment Context

Australian Catholic University offers THSP521 Psychological Foundations for Supervision and Spiritual Direction as a postgraduate unit in the Faculty of Theology and Philosophy, delivered online in Professional Term 2, 2026. The unit’s Integrative Essay, Assessment Task 2, runs to 3,000 words and carries 60 percent of the unit mark. Two linked tasks make up the whole assessment. Assessment Task 1 is a 2,000 word report drawn from workshop journals on narrative psychology, and Assessment Task 2 asks students to show how Christian anthropology, or a compatible meaning framework about the value of the human person, appears in the narrative practice of externalisation.

The unit teaches narrative psychology as the foundation for a theory of practice in supervision, spiritual direction and adjacent helping roles. Content covers the narrative approach itself, critical reflective theory, and a review of systems theory, human development theory, psychodynamic theory and developmental attachment theory as they bear on helping relationships. Three learning outcomes govern both tasks. Students must describe a values foundation for professional practice, illustrate the key values and features of a narrative approach drawing on a Christian theological understanding of the person, and assess critically how that approach enables personal and professional values in practice.

Read the essay requirement precisely. Students must draw explicitly on two case studies from their own experience, and the task must be partially completed in class to authenticate the work. A essay that describes externalisation in the abstract and appends two vignettes at the end meets the description and misses the assessment. The integration has to be argued through the cases, not illustrated alongside them.

Task Description

Write a 3,000 word integrative essay that argues how a Christian anthropology, or a stated compatible meaning framework, is expressed in the narrative practice of externalisation. Ground the argument in two case studies drawn from your own practice or placement experience, define the values foundation that governs your reading of those casesほな、続きを最後まで書き上げるで。ACU の THSP521、Assessment Task 2 の 3,000語や。ハンドブックで確認できたのは、評価内訳が Report 2,000語 40% と Integrative Essay 3,000語 60%、ケーススタディ2件が必須、一部をクラス内で仕上げる、それと「AI may not be used in this unit」の明記や。そこはブリーフにもきっちり反映しといた。

“`html

Externalisation and Christian Anthropology: An Integrative Essay in Narrative Practice

Institution: Australian Catholic University, Faculty of Theology and Philosophy
Unit: THSP521 Psychological Foundations for Supervision and Spiritual Direction (postgraduate, online scheduled, Professional Term 2, 2026)
Assessment item: Assessment Task 2, Integrative Essay
Length: 3,000 words, with ten percent variance either way, excluding the reference list
Weighting: 60 percent of the unit mark, with Assessment Task 1, a 2,000 word report, carrying 40 percent
Referencing: Chicago notes and bibliography, 17th edition
Due: end of Week 9, uploaded through the unit Turnitin dropbox on Canvas

Assessment Context

Australian Catholic University offers THSP521 Psychological Foundations for Supervision and Spiritual Direction as a postgraduate unit in the Faculty of Theology and Philosophy, delivered online in Professional Term 2, 2026. Assessment Task 2, the Integrative Essay, runs to 3,000 words and carries 60 percent of the unit mark. Two linked tasks make up the whole assessment. Assessment Task 1 is a 2,000 word report drawn from workshop journals on narrative psychology, weighted at 40 percent. Assessment Task 2 asks students to show how Christian anthropology, or a compatible meaning framework about the value of the human person, appears in the narrative practice of externalisation.

The unit teaches narrative psychology as the foundation for a theory of practice in supervision, spiritual direction and adjacent helping roles. Published content covers the narrative approach, critical reflective theory, and a review of systems theory, human development theory, psychodynamic theory and developmental attachment theory as they bear on helping relationships. Three learning outcomes govern both tasks. Students must describe a values foundation for professional practice, illustrate the key values and features of a narrative approach drawing on a Christian theological understanding of the person, and assess critically how that approach enables personal and professional values in practice.

Read the essay requirement precisely. Students must draw explicitly on two case studies from their own experience, and the task must be partially completed in class to authenticate the work. A essay that describes externalisation in the abstract and attaches two vignettes at the end meets the description and misses the assessment. Integration has to be argued through the cases, not illustrated beside them.

Task Description

Write a 3,000 word integrative essay arguing how a Christian anthropology, or a stated compatible meaning framework, is expressed in the narrative practice of externalisation. Ground the argument in two case studies drawn from your own practice, placement or supervised ministry experience, and define the values foundation that governs your reading of those cases. Then judge where the integration holds and where the two frameworks pull apart.

Select one framing from the list below and print it at the head of the essay.

1. Argue that externalisation enacts a Christian account of the person as distinct from the problem, and test that claim against a case where the problem carried moral weight.
2. Assess whether externalising language displaces the language of sin, or translates it, and argue which reading serves a directee better in a named setting.
3. Examine whether a narrative approach imported from secular family therapy can carry a sacramental or incarnational anthropology without distortion.
4. Compare externalisation with one other practice drawn from the unit, such as reflective supervision or attachment informed accompaniment, and argue which one better expresses your values foundation.

Approved Case Material

Two cases are required, and both must come from your own experience in supervision, spiritual direction, pastoral care, chaplaincy or a related helping relationship. Modify identifying detail so no directee or supervisee can be recognised. State at the head of each case what kind of relationship it was, how long it ran, and the limits of your knowledge of the outcome.

Requirements

1. State the values foundation in the opening 500 words and keep it explicit. A essay that names values in the introduction and never returns to them fails the first criterion.
2. Explain externalisation as a practice before applying it. Say what it assumes about persons, problems, knowledge and change, and cite the narrative literature rather than a summary website.
3. Specify what your chosen anthropology claims about the human person, drawing on the image of God, the person as relational, or a comparable framework, and name the sources you follow.
4. Argue the correspondence rather than asserting it. Point to the exact move in the therapy that expresses the theological claim.
5. Name one point of real incompatibility. Narrative practice deliberately refuses to be normative about what a person should become, and a Christian anthropology does not. Say what that disagreement costs and how you practise in its light.
6. Use at least twelve scholarly sources, eight of them peer reviewed. Two must be primary narrative therapy texts and two must be works of theology or theological anthropology.
7. Write in first person where reflection requires it, and in third person where you analyse theory. Keep the registers distinguishable within a paragraph.
8. Follow Chicago notes and bibliography, 17th edition, with the reference list excluded from the word count. Wikipedia, lecture slides, sermon transcripts and commercial study sites are not scholarly sources.

Required Structure

Section 1: Values Foundation and Thesis

Approximately 450 words. Name the professional values that govern your practice, locate their theological warrant, and state the thesis about externalisation that the essay will defend.

Section 2: Externalisation as a Practice

Approximately 600 words. Set out the assumptions of the practice, the mechanism by which it separates person from problem, and the therapeutic documents and conversations that carry it.

Section 3: The Anthropology You Are Claiming

Approximately 550 words. Define the account of the person you hold, explain its doctrinal basis, and say which of its claims a narrative therapist could accept without conversion.

Section 4: The First Case

Approximately 650 words. Present the case briefly, then show where externalisation expressed the anthropology and where the fit broke down. Quote the language actually used, altered for confidentiality.

Section 5: The Second Case and the Disagreement

Approximately 600 words. Use the second case to test the limits, and argue the incompatibility identified in requirement five rather than smoothing it over.

Section 6: Implications for Supervised Practice

Approximately 150 words. State what changes in your supervision or spiritual direction as a result of the analysis. The reference list begins on a new page.

Assessment Overview

Marking Criteria

Submission, Grading and Feedback

Submit through Canvas. The unit grades on a pass or fail basis, so every task must be attempted and the overall standard reached. Assessment Task 2 must be at least partially completed under supervision in class so the work can be authenticated, and the class task is arranged by the lecturer in charge during the intensive. Extensions follow ACU’s assessment policy and go through the Faculty rather than to the lecturer by email. Feedback returns as a completed rubric with written comment that names one integration move to strengthen.

State the word count on the cover sheet. Work beyond the permitted variance is marked on the words inside the limit. Notes and the reference list sit outside the count, and in text citations sit inside it.

Academic Integrity

Submit original work. Unattributed paraphrase counts as plagiarism in the same way as unattributed quotation. The unit states plainly that AI may not be used, which places generative tools outside the permitted assistance for this essay, and the in class component exists so that a marker can compare the submitted argument with the thinking done in the room. Confidentiality is part of integrity here. Modify case detail so no directee, supervisee or parishioner can be identified, and do not upload unit materials to commercial study sites.

Learning Materials and References

Benjamin, Preshous, Judy Taylor, Brie Turns, and Candi White. 2023. “‘I’m More Than Just a ‘Pastor’s Kid’!’: Externalizing Labels Given to Children of Pastors Through Biblio–Narrative Therapy.” Contemporary Family Therapy 45: 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-021-09591-9.

Gülcan Çakmak, Betül. 2022. “Spirituality in Narrative Therapy: A Review Study.” Spiritual Psychology and Counseling 7 (3): 315–336. https://doi.org/10.37898/spc.2022.7.3.175.

Moschella, Mary Clark. 2024. “Affect in Narrative Spiritual Care.” Pastoral Psychology 73: 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-023-01110-x.

Mufanebadza, Garikai, and Gift Masengwe. 2025. “Imago Dei: A Contemporary Theological and Hermeneutical Reflection.” HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 81 (1): a10719. https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v81i1.10719.

Rennebohm, Samuel B., and John W. Thoburn. 2021. “Incarnational Psychotherapy: Christ as the Ground of Being for Integrating Psychology and Theology.” Pastoral Psychology 70: 179–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-021-00940-x.

Rundio, Matthew A., and Alison G. Wong. 2022. “Writing and Praying Collects as an Intervention in Narrative Therapy.” Contemporary Family Therapy 44: 312–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-021-09586-6.

Verification note. The unit code, title, faculty, online scheduled delivery in Professional Term 2 for 2026, the three learning outcomes, the content list, the two task structure at 2,000 words and 40 percent plus 3,000 words and 60 percent, the two case study requirement, the in class authentication condition, the pass or fail grading basis, and the published statement that AI may not be used are all recorded on the ACU Handbook entry for THSP521. Chicago notes and bibliography and the ten percent variance are inferred from Faculty of Theology and Philosophy convention and should be checked against the unit outline in the first week. The model answer below uses the author and date variant of Chicago for readability; the submitted essay requires notes.

Model Essay Extract: Separating the Person from the Problem

Naming a problem as a thing outside a person changes what a directee can do next, and the change is theological before it is technical. Michael White’s externalising conversations treat the problem as an entity with a history, tactics and effects rather than as a quality of the person, so a woman who has been told she is anxious can instead describe how anxiety arrives, what it recruits, and when it retreats. Christian anthropology makes a parallel move from the other direction, since the doctrine of the image of God locates a person’s worth in an act of divine creation rather than in present functioning, and recent work reads that doctrine relationally and functionally rather than substantially a contemporary theological and hermeneutical reflection (Mufanebadza and Masengwe 2025, 4). Both accounts refuse to let a presenting problem define a person, which is why the practice and the doctrine can be argued together rather than merely placed side by side. Where the two diverge concerns what happens after separation, because narrative practice leaves the preferred identity open while a Christian account names it as already given and already being restored. A supervisor who can hold that difference in view will not smuggle a discipleship agenda into an externalising conversation. The cases in this essay test exactly that risk.

Therapeutic documents show how far the correspondence can be pushed. Rundio and Wong describe the collect, a short written prayer with a fixed five part structure, used within narrative therapy as a document that reinforces externalisation and thickens an alternative story, and they supply a worksheet so a client can compose one with the therapist (Rundio and Wong 2022, 314). Their example names the problem in the prayer itself, giving thanks to a God who gives strength to those suffering under the oppression of Worthlessness, so the document does the double work of addressing God and positioning the problem outside the person. Few practices make the integration so concrete. A directee who writes her own collect is performing an act of worship and an act of re-authoring in the same sentence, and a supervisor can then ask which of the two carried more weight for her. Reading that move through an incarnational account of therapy sharpens the stakes, since Rennebohm and Thoburn argue that the transformative presence of Christ in the therapeutic relationship is what grounds integration rather than any technique added to a secular method (Rennebohm and Thoburn 2021, 183). On that reading the collect is not an intervention appended to narrative practice. It is the practice doing what it was always doing, named theologically.

Documents, Affect and Formation

Mary Clark Moschella’s account of affect in narrative spiritual care gives the integration a second anchor, and it explains why documents work better than explanation alone. She attends to the emotional register of pastoral conversations, arguing that care practices shape feeling and not merely understanding, which fits the narrative claim that a person’s story is inhabited before it is believed (Moschella 2024, 154). A collect read aloud at the end of a session registers differently from a paraphrase of the same idea. Formation happens through the repetition of a small text, which is also how liturgy works. Betül Gülcan Çakmak’s review of spirituality within narrative therapy supports this reading, noting that spiritual resources function as material for re-authoring rather than as content to be debated (Gülcan Çakmak 2022, 322). Both sources together push a student past the claim that narrative therapy is compatible with faith. Compatibility is cheap. What the literature documents is co-operation in the room, with a text, a prayer or a naming that neither discipline owns alone.

Does Externalising Excuse the Sinner?

A question students raise every semester concerns moral responsibility, and it deserves a direct answer. Externalising a problem can look like relocating blame onto an abstraction, which a Christian account of sin will not permit, since sin involves a person’s agency before God and cannot simply be parked outside her. The distinction that resolves the worry is the one Christian tradition already makes, holding that the person is loved while the act is named, and the Reformation formulation of being simultaneously justified and still a sinner carries the same structure. Wai-Luen Kwok makes the argument directly, reading the theology of Law and Gospel as a practice that deconstructs and externalises human problems while restoring relationship, which means the naming of sin and the separation of sin from the sinner belong together rather than in tension (Kwok 2016, 214). Practical illustrations exist in the literature, including biblio-narrative work with young people who have internalised a rigid label and need it externalised before they can negotiate it (Benjamin et al. 2023, 88). Four markers separate a defensible integration from a therapeutic evasion:

1. The problem is externalised, and the person’s own contribution to it is still named where agency is real.
2. Moral language appears in its theological register, with the difference between temptation, affliction, habit and sin stated rather than blurred.
3. No diagnosis is offered in place of repentance, and no call to repentance is offered in place of care.
4. The directee sets the pace at which the theological reading is introduced, and consent is obtained before a prayer or a text is used.

Students who keep those four markers visible in both cases usually find the critical criterion writes itself.

Where the Fit Breaks

Honest integration requires naming the point at which the two frameworks cannot be joined, and the disagreement is about teleology. Narrative practice treats the preferred story as something the person identifies, and the therapist deliberately refuses to supply a norm for what that story should contain. A Christian anthropology holds that the end of a human life is already given in Christ, which means the preferred story has a criterion external to the teller. Rennebohm and Thoburn can ground therapy in the incarnation, and Mufanebadza and Masengwe can insist that the image of God grounds dignity and moral responsibility at once, yet neither resolves who decides what a flourishing life looks like when directee and director disagree. One workable position treats the therapist’s conviction as a limit on advocacy rather than as content for the conversation, so the director holds the norm and does not impose it. Another treats the directee’s own tradition as the source of the norm, which keeps the theological claim inside the person’s community. Whichever position a student takes, the essay has to say what it costs, because a claim that the two frameworks harmonise completely is not credible at this level of study.

Conclusion

Choose the two cases before reading further, because the essay is built around them and a strong case will carry a thinner theory while the reverse never works. Pick one case where externalisation visibly helped and one where it sat awkwardly, since the second is where the critical marks live. Read White on externalising conversations rather than a summary, then read one theological account of the person closely enough to state its claims in your own sentences. Keep the values foundation visible in every section instead of parking it in the introduction. Name the teleological disagreement plainly and say how you actually practise, because that admission earns more than a tidy synthesis. Write the reflective passages first while the memory is fresh, then add the theory around them. Check the Chicago notes, confirm the word count, and remember the unit does not permit AI use, so the argument has to sound like your own thinking in the room.

Externalisation and Christian Anthropology: Separating Personal Identity from Problems

Introduction

Narrative therapy offers a distinctive approach to psychological and pastoral care because it separates people from the problems affecting their lives. Michael White and David Epston (1990) developed narrative therapy around the understanding that people interpret their experiences through stories shaped by relationships, culture and personal history. Christian anthropology offers a related perspective through its teaching that human dignity rests on the image of God rather than personal achievement or psychological functioning. Both perspectives challenge the assumption that a person can be defined entirely through suffering, failure or harmful behaviour. However, their agreement has limits. Narrative practice allows individuals to identify preferred identities, whereas Christian anthropology maintains theological convictions about human purpose and moral responsibility. Examining these similarities and differences helps explain how externalisation may support Christian pastoral practice without reducing theological beliefs to therapeutic techniques.

Externalisation and Human Dignity

Externalisation changes the language people use to describe their difficulties. Rather than treating anxiety, shame or conflict as permanent characteristics, narrative practitioners examine how problems influence relationships, decisions and personal identity. White (2007) explains externalising conversations as practices that separate people from problem-saturated descriptions of their lives. These conversations encourage individuals to investigate the problem’s influence and identify circumstances in which it has exercised less control. Epston’s collaborative approach also places importance on the knowledge people develop through their lived experiences, rather than treating the practitioner as the sole authority on their difficulties (Epston, 2014).

Christian anthropology provides a theological reason to resist identity-based judgments. The biblical account of humanity created in the image of God establishes dignity as a fundamental characteristic of human existence (Genesis 1:26–27). Human worth therefore does not depend entirely on emotional stability, productivity or social approval. Mufanebadza and Masengwe (2025) examine the Imago Dei as a theological foundation for understanding human identity and dignity. Their discussion provides a basis for considering how externalisation may correspond with Christian anthropology when practitioners distinguish a person’s identity from the problems affecting their life.

The correspondence between these perspectives requires careful interpretation. Narrative therapy does not depend on Christian theology, and practitioners may understand identity through secular philosophical or cultural frameworks. Nevertheless, externalisation can support a Christian commitment to human dignity when it encourages practitioners to recognise the person beyond the presenting difficulty.

Spirituality and Narrative Practice

Spirituality can contribute to narrative conversations when practitioners treat religious beliefs as meaningful parts of a person’s life story. Çakmak (2022) identifies spirituality as a potential resource in narrative therapy because religious beliefs may influence identity, relationships and personal meaning. The approach does not require practitioners to introduce religious interpretations into every conversation. Instead, spiritual themes become relevant when they reflect the person’s own values and experiences.

Moschella (2024) extends narrative ideas into pastoral and spiritual care by examining how emotional experience influences therapeutic conversations. Her discussion of affect suggests that spiritual care involves more than intellectual reflection. Feelings, bodily experiences and personal narratives may interact during conversations about suffering and identity. For Christian pastoral practitioners, this observation supports attentive listening rather than immediately interpreting a person’s distress through theological categories.

Rennebohm and Thoburn (2021) approach the relationship between psychology and theology through incarnational psychotherapy, which considers Christ’s presence and the incarnation as foundations for integration. Their perspective differs from narrative therapy’s secular origins, but it offers a theological account of how therapeutic relationships may contribute to human healing. The distinction matters because Christian practitioners should identify when they are using narrative techniques and when they are interpreting those techniques through explicit theological commitments.

A Fictional Case Illustration

Consider a fictional pastoral counselling case involving an adult who repeatedly describes himself as a failure after experiencing employment difficulties. His language suggests that professional setbacks have become a defining feature of his identity. A narrative practitioner might ask how the experience of failure influences his relationships, confidence and decisions. Such questions follow White’s (2007) approach to externalising conversations, which examines the problem’s influence rather than accepting it as a permanent personal characteristic.

The conversation could distinguish the individual from the problem by examining how the experience of failure affects his daily life. The practitioner might explore occasions when the problem exerted less influence, including moments when the individual demonstrated persistence or maintained important relationships. Epston’s (2014) emphasis on collaborative knowledge supports the importance of allowing the individual to identify meaningful evidence from his own experience rather than having the practitioner impose an interpretation.

A Christian pastoral perspective could interpret this conversation through the doctrine of human dignity. The individual’s worth remains independent of employment status, financial circumstances or perceived success. Mufanebadza and Masengwe (2025) provide a theological basis for examining dignity through the Imago Dei. However, the practitioner should avoid imposing theological interpretations without permission. The directee’s religious commitments and understanding of suffering must guide whether explicit Christian language belongs in the conversation.

Limits of Integration

Narrative externalisation and Christian anthropology differ in their understanding of human purpose. Narrative practitioners generally avoid determining the preferred identity that individuals should adopt. Christian anthropology, however, understands human flourishing through theological commitments concerning relationship with God, neighbour and creation. Consequently, the two perspectives may agree about human dignity while disagreeing about the standards that should guide personal development.

The difference becomes important when personal preferences conflict with Christian moral convictions. A spiritual director cannot assume that every preferred identity necessarily reflects Christian understandings of flourishing. Conversely, the director should not use theological authority to control the directee’s decisions. Çakmak (2022) supports the consideration of spirituality within narrative practice, although spiritual integration requires attention to the individual’s own beliefs and experiences.

Responsible integration requires practitioners to distinguish personal convictions from professional responsibilities. Externalisation can help people examine their experiences while preserving their agency. Christian anthropology can provide a theological foundation for dignity and compassion, provided that practitioners introduce religious interpretations transparently and respectfully. Rennebohm and Thoburn (2021) offer an incarnational perspective on psychological and theological integration, but their approach does not remove the need for critical reflection about professional boundaries and the directee’s freedom.

Conclusion

Externalisation and Christian anthropology share an important concern for human dignity. Narrative practice separates individuals from problems that threaten to dominate their identities, while Christian theology grounds personal worth in the image of God. White and Epston’s narrative approach, together with later research on spirituality and pastoral care, provides a basis for examining how therapeutic conversations may support theological commitments. Nevertheless, differences concerning moral responsibility and human purpose remain significant. Christian practitioners must acknowledge these tensions rather than claim complete agreement between the frameworks. Responsible integration depends on theological reflection, professional boundaries and respect for the directee’s freedom.

References

The following references are formatted in APA 7 for this study sample.

Çakmak, B. G. (2022). Spirituality in narrative therapy: A review study. Spiritual Psychology and Counseling, 7(3), 315–336. https://doi.org/10.37898/spc.2022.7.3.175

Epston, D. (2014). Ethnography, co-research and insider knowledges. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy, 35(1), 105–109. https://doi.org/10.1002/anzf.1048

Moschella, M. C. (2024). Affect in narrative spiritual care. Pastoral Psychology, 73, 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-023-01110-x

Mufanebadza, G., & Masengwe, G. (2025). Imago Dei: A contemporary theological and hermeneutical reflection. HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies, 81(1), Article a10719. https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v81i1.10719

Rennebohm, S. B., & Thoburn, J. W. (2021). Incarnational psychotherapy: Christ as the ground of being for integrating psychology and theology. Pastoral Psychology, 70, 179–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-021-00940-x

White, M. (2007). Maps of narrative practice. W. W. Norton & Company.

White, M., & Epston, D. (1990). Narrative means to therapeutic ends. W. W. Norton & Company.