First up I apologise if I am not on the same page as you gents as I do struggle with your culture/language. My first language is English but I struggle with a lot of your terminology. Post modernism for example is not something we use at all in this part of the world even though I know the definition of it.
Secondly, therapy and the different types of therapy is very big in your culture where as here we tend to come from a ‘bring the power of God and it sorts it all out’ angle. Not dismissing the need for people to talk through issues.

What I do find interesting in your discussion is more on the tradition side. I would not class myself as a traditionalist but what is interesting is if one looks at the back-bone (so to speak) of the African culture. The verbal ‘passing forward’ of history, experiences and philosophies has always been a huge part of Africa’s culture. There is great strength in this, both in a positive sense and a negative one. For example, good values passed down from one to another provide a strong moral foundation. On the other hand the passing down of superstitions and beliefs in witchcraft are negative. One is based in truth and the other in error. Tradition when it is not based in truth is bondage. But tradition that is based in truth can have a particular power to it. Tradition for the sake of tradition is stubbornness and folly, but tradition based in truth and experience can be liberating and can prevent people from recreating the errors of the past. I feel that God used this throughout scripture to ensure that the power of the testimony was passed down the generations.

People tend to relate the bible (which is not bad) but they have no personal testimony of a relationship with God. Therefore it becomes just topical education instead of a powerful relating of actual; reality. You see it when you look at the children of Christians and the sound ones have a testimony passed down of a reality based life in Christ as opposed to the sharing of someones view point.

In the constant search for something new and different the past is lost and in particular the first hand experiences past down by word of mouth from generation to generation. This is sad. In Africa this is being eroded by ‘westernised’ thinking and practises (excuse the term.) The result is a ‘thin’ or ‘shallow’ belief system.

Finally. I think this is highlighted by the difference seen in a lot of ‘traditional’ Christians vs ‘charismatic’ ones. A traditional Christian tends to have an unshakeable belief in God. It is not a question of whether He exists or not. He does…end of story, (my wife is like this.) A lot of charismatic Christians run from experience to experience like surfing but when these run out so does the assurance of God.

What am I saying? Simply…good traditions provide good foundations.

Sorry, if I have missed the mark here, but anyway.

I do recognize your version of narrative therapy, and having looked back at my book, Atonement For A ‘Sinless’ Society, it is closer to my understanding and application back then.

I’ve perhaps been guilty of blurring some subtleties and playing with ideas to make a point, which I think still stands for this particular discussion, rather than being faithful to the actual methodologies of Narrative Therapy.

Sorry if this has annoyed you.

However, your application here is fairly wide of the mark. Narrative therapies, and the constructivism on which they are based, aren’t very interested in our rootedness in the past, and don’t see great helpfulness in metanarratives, but rather are interested in the way we select certain elements of our personal histories to construct — and make sense of — the present. Healthy persons tend to use certain grids or frameworks or lenses that allow them to see even difficult, confusing and painful events as shaping a positive future. When this isn’t happening the therapist conducts a historical interview with the intention of finding dissonance.. elements in the personal history that don’t fit the current (dysfunctional) grid but offer the possibility of building an alternative story that can lead to an alternative future. He/she then uses the dissonant elements.. no matter how small.. as levers to break the person free of the cement, reframing the story and offering a new lens with which to view personal history. This may or may not include a metanarrative. The process has some close ties to the “meaning making” activity seen as essential in the leadership paradigm of Drath and Paulus.

right - and provided they are personal. I agree with your idea of story telling.

I’m finding this clarification process helpful - and it reminds me of something I’ve written elsewhere.

We live in a sea of stories - and because many people are no longer wedded to one particular narrative (except the one that says no narrative should be given priority over and above others) they are open to stories - even ones that have previously been associated with truth-claiming metanarratives - provided they are allowed to encounter them as stories by which they can live their lives and not statements of fact.

What we need to do is become story tellers not proclaimers of proposition. That way, we leave people free to encounter the Christian story in ways that it can become meaningful and sufficient for them and so recognise its ‘truth’ without us having to state it as such.