Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion

Living Edition
| Editors: David A. Leeming

Ultimate Concern

  • Louis HoffmanEmail author
  • M. Shawn Ellis
Living reference work entry

Latest version View entry history

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27771-9_200200-2

The concept of ultimate concern originated in the writings of Paul Tillich (1951, 1957), who was an existential theologian and philosopher that impacted the development of existential psychology in the United States. Tillich viewed ultimate concern as the essence of religion when understood in broad and inclusive terms (Emmons 1999). Ultimate concern is also the essence of faith for Tillich (1957): “Faith is the state of being ultimately concerned: the dynamics of faith are the dynamics of man’s ultimate concern” (p. 1).

Tillich (1951) notes that the use of concernevidences the existential nature of religious experience, which connects ultimate concern to issues of being and meaning. An ultimate concern, though, does not necessitate a particular content associated with that concern nor does it intend that the concern is without questioning or doubt. Rather, the person remains ultimately concerned with the object of faith even if one “is sometimes inclined to attack and reject it” (p....

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Bibliography

  1. Becker, E. (1973). The denial of death. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  2. Cooper, T. D. (2006). Paul Tillich and psychology. Macon: Mercer University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Emmons, R. A. (1999). The psychology of ultimate concerns: Motivation and spirituality in personality. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  4. Gomes, P. J. (1996). The good book: Reading the Bible with mind and heart. New York: William Morrow & Company.Google Scholar
  5. Hart, C. W. (2011). Paul Tillich and psychoanalysis. Journal of Religion and Health, 50(3), 646–655.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-009-9302-6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Hoffman, L., Vallejos, L., Cleare-Hoffman, H. P., & Rubin, S. (2015). Emotion, relationship, and meaning as core existential practice: Evidence-based foundations. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 45, 11–20.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10879-014-9277-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lincoln, J., & Hoffman, L. (2018). Toward an integration of constructivism and existential therapy. Journal of Constructivist Psychology. Advance online publication.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10720537.2018.1461719.
  8. Lockwood, C. E. (2016). Making faith one’s own: Kevin hector’s defense of modern theology. Harvard Theological Review, 109(4), 637–649.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816016000316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Malony, H. N. (2005). Introduction. In R. H. Cox, B. Ervin-Cox, & L. Hoffman (Eds.), Spirituality and pscyhological health (pp. xv–xviii). Colorado Springs, CO: Colorado School of Professional Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  10. May, R. (1973). Paulus: Tillich as spiritual teacher. Dallas: Saybrook.Google Scholar
  11. May, R. (1991). The cry for myth. New York: Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  12. Tillich, P. (1951). Systematic theology (Vol. 1). New York: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  13. Tillich, P. (1957). The dynamics of faith. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  14. Vos, J. (2018). Meaning in life: An evidence-based handbook for practitioners. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Saybrook UniversityOaklandUSA