I'm actually not too big a fan of Canonical Criticism. I actually have qualms with the canonization process itself. Major problems being that certain books were chosen by the authority (those in power) as the ones that, as you say, demonstrates "the full historical revelation of God. However there was a large pool of wisdom literature called"Christian" that was circulating at the time that was left out. Now I've read some of those books that were left out, such as the Gospel of Thomas, and they've spoken to me almost as much if not more than the Canonical Gospels. So why not add these books, why do we still deny them?

Also, when there are books in the canon in the Old and New Testament that present very negative ideas (genocide, misogyny, etc.) why do we still use them. Why haven't we changed the Canon and added books that offered a more fair view, using wisdom literature that was written and circulated at the same time of those books that were canonized (like the Gospel of Mary)?

These are questions that I really struggle with, and are some of my frustrations with the canon. Does anyone else feel this way, or do you feel I'm way off? Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

I found results for both "psychological" and "psychoanalytic" criticism. They seemed to be used interchangeably (and seemed synonymous with one another) so I will use both and try to show the similarity.

Psychoanalytic Criticism refers to literary criticism that was influenced by Sigmund Freud and his process of "psychoanalysis." In its simplest form, Psychoanalytic Criticism is the application of psychoanalysis processes to a text and its author or character(s). This means that the critic looks for the "unconscious mental processes" in the text and how they affect modes of thinking, feeling and interaction with others (as it applies to the author, character(s) or reflexively to the reader) .

In his book Soul and Psyche, Wayne Rollins discusses Psychological (Biblical) Criticism and that "The goal of a psychological-critical approach is to examine texts... as expressions of the structure, processes, and habitats of the human psyche, both in the individual and collective manifestations, past and present." [1] What this means is that the critic wants to examine the things that influence thought, behavior, and personality (the psyche) of the author or character(s) in the text.

One thing to keep in mind is that there is no one methodology to psychological biblical criticism. Rather it is a procedure that adds its interpretations to the various approaches in Biblical Criticism, be they feminist, postmodern, redaction, or others.

Prominent Scholars of Pychological (psychoanalytic) Criticism include: D. Andrew Kille, J. Harrold Ellens, Wayne G. Rollins, Gerd Theissen, and Albert Schweitzer.

[1] Rollins, Wayne Soul and Psyche: The Bible in Psychological Perspective Minneapolis: Fortress Press © 1999

I tried using diigolet to link the site, but it wouldn't let me. I get a pop up that says "Diigolet does not support this page."

I believe the thought processes behind this assume that our brains now are the same and function in the same way as the brains of those in biblical times. If you buy into evolutionary theory, there has been pretty much no change to the brain of us homo sapiens in the last 200,000 years or so. If your a creationist, then our brains have been pretty much the same since Adam and Eve. They would have had the same functions and processes. The only difference between the ancient (homo sapient or adam and eve) and the modern (us) being a temporal one in which we have gathered more information about the world. So I feel that is probably why they want to focus on the psyches. That is just my guess though, hope that helps.

I own this book, it was one of the required texts in my Methods of Biblical Studies class in my undergraduate. It's a great book and I haven't checked other book lists to see if it was already tagged. But it had a helpful summary on Psychological Biblical Criticism as well as others so I wanted to tag it.

Gives a good history and summary of Psychological Biblical Criticism as well as an example of its application with its analysis of Legion.

I am a big fan of redaction criticism. I think it is both a very interesting and insightful method. To add to the discussion, I feel like I can understand why some fundamentalists would be apposed to such a method. By supposing that the authors were theologians and had agendas, one is leaving the door open to the possibility that the theologian might change or fabricate part of the gospel story to fit his agenda. By acknowledging this one would say that there are parts of the Bible that weren't literally true or that were "made up" and added to divine scripture by fallible man, or that there are places that can be wrong (a contradiction) in the infallible truth of the word of God.

I too, like Schawn, had limited to no experience with Feminism and Feminist Scholarship before I came to Iliff. In fact, the only exposure I had was in an Introductory Theology Class where we were required to read Mary Daly, and that gave me a very negative view of Feminist Scholarship in general (the language of removing the divine phallus disturbed me). Although now I have a much greater respect for Feminism and its contributions to theological and biblical study (e.g. hermeneutics of suspicion) and I try to always remember how "a woman can be empowered by reading a biblical text".

Along with Rollin's Book Soul and Psyche, Psychological Biblical Criticism was the other book that helped to launch Psychological (Psychoanalytic) Criticism to the forefront of biblical scholarship.

An assessment/comparison of three different approaches to psychoanalytic criticism and how they can be useful to biblical scholars(hip).

Discusses psychoanalytic criticism and how it applies not only to religious texts but to religious experiences.

Explains the various types of application of psychoanalytic and psychological criticism used in Biblical scholarship.

Offers a brief outline/history of Psychoanalytic Criticism and lists some of its major developers and proponents.

The application of psychoanalytic criticism to theology (in particular Christology) by Vincent W Wynne. An EBSCO host article so you might need to log into my.iliff to view. Full PDF available.

An essay by Mary Ann Tolbert applying psychoanalytic criticism to the Biblical story of the Prodigal Son. Article is on EBSCO, so you will possibly need to sign in to my.iliff to view. PDF of Full Text available.

Sigmund Freud's Book where he discusses and lays out the analytic interpretive process and psychoanalysis. An interesting read for anyone wanting to look into the origins of "Freudian Criticism" or psychoanalytic criticism. It is the full text.

A good introduction to freudian psychoanalysis that defines key terms and concepts, and then moves to show how they apply to literary criticism.

A collection of essays on the modern forms of psychoanalytic criticism gathered from the Fourth International Conference on Literature and Psychology (Aug 7-9, 1987) hosted at Kent State University.