Naming the Body Rightly: Differential Diagnosis as an Act of Love

Here's the full text to copy:

Naming the Body Rightly: Differential Diagnosis as an Act of Love

A woman in her late thirties comes to counseling at her pastor's suggestion. For nearly a year she has felt, in her own words, "dead toward God." She has stopped attending the small group she once loved. Scripture reading feels like chewing cardboard. She cries without provocation and cannot remember the last time she slept through the night. Her pastor, who cares for her genuinely, has named the problem: she has drifted. The prescription follows from the diagnosis—more discipline, more accountability, a renewed commitment to the means of grace.

He is not wrong to take her spiritual life seriously. He may, however, be wrong about what he is looking at. When her counselor refers her for bloodwork, the thyroid panel comes back markedly abnormal. What had been named spiritual dryness was, in significant part, untreated hypothyroidism—a condition whose somatic presentation includes fatigue, low mood, cognitive fog, and anhedonia (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2022).

The point of this composite case is not that the pastor was foolish or that the spiritual dimension of her life was irrelevant. The point is narrower and more unsettling: a wrong name leads to a wrong remedy. And for the Christian clinician, getting the name right is not a merely technical task. It is an act of love.

The Theological Warrant for Accurate Naming

We do not usually think of diagnosis as a spiritual discipline. We should. The vocation of naming runs back to the garden, where the first human is given the work of naming the creatures (Gen. 2:19–20). To name rightly is part of what it means to bear the image of God—to see a thing as it actually is and to speak truthfully about it. Naming is not neutral; it is a stewardship, and like every stewardship it can be exercised faithfully or carelessly.

This stewardship has a particular weight where the body is concerned, because the Christian faith does not hold the body cheap. The Word became flesh (John 1:14). God did not treat embodiment as beneath his notice or incidental to his redemptive work; he assumed it. A theology that takes the incarnation seriously cannot treat a person's physical condition as spiritually irrelevant noise to be talked past on the way to the "real," interior issue (Richter, 2008). The body is not a costume the soul wears. It is, rather, the very place where the soul's life is lived, and Scripture consistently refuses to let us pry the two apart. The same God who searches the heart also knit together the inward parts (Ps. 139:13–14, 23).

There is also a commandment at stake. The ninth commandment forbids bearing false witness against our neighbor (Exod. 20:16), and we typically read this narrowly, as a prohibition against lying about others to third parties. But to tell a suffering believer that her affliction is a spiritual failure when it is in fact a medical condition is to bear false witness about her—to her own face, about her own interior life. It asks her to repent of something that is not hers to repent of, and it loads onto a body already under strain the further burden of imagined guilt. Few things are more corrosive to a person's relationship with God than being told that her body's betrayal is her soul's sin.

Accurate naming, then, is not a concession to secular medicine. It is obedience.

What the Biblical Counseling Tradition Gets Right

It would be easy, and unfair, to set up the pastor in our opening case as a straw man and to treat any attention to the heart as naïve. The biblical counseling movement recovered something the broader therapeutic culture had lost: the conviction that human beings are moral and spiritual creatures, that not every struggle reduces to chemistry, and that the deepest human problems are finally relational and Godward (Powlison, 2003; Welch, 1998). That instinct is correct. There genuinely are conditions of the heart—bitterness, unrepentant sin, despair that has hardened into unbelief—that no medication will touch and that it would be malpractice, spiritual and clinical, to medicalize.

It is worth noting that the tradition's most careful voices do not, in fact, license the flattening we are warning against. Welch (1998) devoted an entire book to distinguishing chemical and bodily causes from disobedience, precisely because he understood that the two are not the same and must not be confused. He took the brain seriously as part of the body's fallen frailty while insisting that a dysfunctional brain reveals the heart rather than replacing it. That is a careful position, not a reductive one. The problem, then, is rarely the tradition at its best. The problem is the tradition at its laziest—where "spiritual dryness" becomes a default diagnosis applied before any assessment has been done, a label that ends inquiry rather than beginning it. A category meant to honor the soul gets used to avoid the work of actually looking at the person.

We should be honest that the opposite error is equally available, and equally a failure of love. A clinician can reach for a diagnostic code and a prescription as reflexively as a careless pastor reaches for the language of sin—medicalizing what is in truth a crisis of meaning, a grief that needs to be grieved, or a conscience that needs to be heard. To rename every spiritual struggle as pathology is its own kind of false witness. The discipline we are commending is not a preference for the medical over the spiritual. It is a refusal to decide in advance, in either direction, what a person's suffering must be.

Differential Diagnosis as Disciplined Humility

This is where the clinical discipline of differential diagnosis earns its theological keep. To work through a differential is, at bottom, an exercise in refusing to name prematurely. It means holding several possible explanations open and testing each against the evidence before settling on one.

For the believer presenting with "deadness," responsible assessment asks a series of patient questions. Is there a medical etiology that has gone unscreened—thyroid dysfunction, anemia, a vitamin deficiency, a medication side effect, a sleep disorder? Is there a trauma history whose symptoms—numbness, hypervigilance, withdrawal—are being read as faithlessness rather than as the predictable aftermath of harm? Is this grief, which is a healthy and even holy response to loss, or major depression, which has a different course and calls for different help (APA, 2022)? Has anyone simply asked how she is sleeping, what she is eating, and what she has lost in the past year? Each of these questions is a door the careless diagnosis closes before it is ever opened.

The clinician who answers "I don't yet know what this is" is not being evasive. She is being honest—and honesty, in the face of another person's suffering, is a form of love. There is a quiet humility built into the differential. It is the discipline of a clinician who knows that her first impression may be wrong and who would rather be slow and accurate than fast and false. That posture is not in tension with Christian conviction. It is an expression of it. We of all people should be unhurried to pronounce, because we of all people know how costly a false word can be, and how much weight a sufferer will place on the word of someone she trusts to speak for God.

Language for the Referring Pastor

None of this is useful if it cannot be translated into the relationship between counselor and church. Most referrals do not arrive on a clean slate; they arrive with a diagnosis already attached, often a spiritual one. The clinician's task is to honor the pastor's care while advocating for the client's body—and to do so without implying that the pastor was a fool or that the soul is beside the point.

A few orientations help here. First, affirm before you redirect. The pastor who referred this client did something right; he noticed she was suffering and got her help. Name that plainly before you complicate his picture. Second, frame medical workup as collaboration, not correction. "I want to make sure we're not missing anything physical that could be making the spiritual work harder for her" invites the pastor into the assessment rather than overruling him. Third, resist the dichotomy in your own language. You are not choosing between a thyroid panel and prayer. You are pursuing both, because the person is one whole person, body and soul, and her Maker is interested in all of her. Fourth, keep the pastor in the loop without surrendering your clinical judgment. Collaboration does not mean deference; it means that two people who love this client are each doing the work their calling equips them to do, and trusting the other to do theirs.

When a pastor hears that you take the spiritual dimension seriously and that you will not let a treatable medical condition masquerade as a spiritual failure, you have not undermined his ministry. You have strengthened it. You have given him a partner who will catch what he is not trained to catch, and who will hand back to him, healed and clear-headed, a parishioner more able to hear the spiritual counsel he is rightly eager to give.

Conclusion

Return, finally, to the woman who felt dead toward God. Once her thyroid is treated and her sleep returns, the cardboard taste of Scripture fades. It turns out she loves her small group after all. The spiritual life that her pastor was rightly concerned about is restored—not by being scolded into it, but by being named rightly and treated rightly. Had her counselor accepted the first diagnosis on offer, she might have spent another year repenting of a sin she had not committed, growing more convinced with each failed effort that something was wrong with her faith.

Telling the truth about the body is not less spiritual than caring for the soul. For a people who confess a God who took on flesh, it may be one of the most spiritual things a counselor can do.

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed., text rev.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787

Powlison, D. (2003). Seeing with new eyes: Counseling and the human condition through the lens of Scripture. P&R Publishing.

Richter, S. L. (2008). The epic of Eden: A Christian entry into the Old Testament. InterVarsity Press.

Welch, E. T. (1998). Blame it on the brain? Distinguishing chemical imbalances, brain disorders, and disobedience. P&R Publishing.