Yes, within its proper sphere. Its duty is to observe, arrange, and classify facts, making allowance for all the facts of human personality, including free will. But psychology does not mean determinism. Determinism is a mere theory, and a very dangerous one as well as being false. It is unscientific to deny free will, and philosophical nonsense.
The facts of psychology as such have no more to do with the Church than physics or chemistry. But insofar as those facts of psychology have intimate relationship to human souls, they indirectly concern the Church; and when people wrongly interpret those facts to the moral and spiritual ruin of souls, then the matter becomes of direct importance to the Church. Many psychologists use language in the name of their science which can lead only to scepticism and atheism in their most unblushing forms. They go beyond the sphere of their science, and the Church rightly condemns them.
All depends upon what you mean by "practical psychology." By whom, and by what methods it is to be applied. There is no Catholic view concerning "practical psychology" in itself, and as a merely natural means of improvement. But there are very strong Catholic views concerning what many people understand by "practical psychology." Psychology can be divided into two great divisions - that of rational psychology, and that of practical or experimental psychology. One subdivision of experimental psychology is called medical psychology, and its method is called psycho-therapy, or the healing of the mind of the patient by the mind of the practitioner. No one can doubt the connection between mental states and certain physical and moral disorders. And it is a fact that psycho-therapy has wrought many cures. These cures are not due to magic or any superstitious elements. They are due to the use of his own mind and will by the patient, under the direction of one capable of inducing in him a completely changed mental outlook. No Catholic, therefore, could condemn the practice of psycho-therapy in itself. We would have to condemn, however, any abuses in the name of psycho-therapy. And abuses are certainly present in that form of psycho-therapy which is known as Freudian psycho-analysis.
They may make the fullest possible use of it, provided it remains practical psychology, and does not, through misinterpretation and misdirection, trespass on the province of religion and morals. Unfortunately it often tends to do this; and above all is this the case with psycho-analysis. Though psycho-analysts are gradually improving their system, their principles and methods are not yet sound by any means. And Catholics should avoid psycho-analysis at least for the time being, unless absolutely sure of the Christian and moral principles of their analyst.
I would have to know what form of practical psychology you mean, and the character of the lectures before I could comment upon the wisdom or otherwise of your attendance.
It is impossible to deny the value of a knowledge of sound practical psychology for such a purpose. And there are many excellent Catholic books on the practical training of children. But whether the lectures you have been attending are sound in principle and practice I do not know. Yet from remarks in your letter, I doubt it.
All depends upon what the psychologist meant. If he wishes to deny that original sin has left us all subject to moral weakness, and that heredity intensifies this liability in many, then he is wrong. If, however, he admits this liability, but merely denies that it is necessary to yield to it, then he is right. Some children are more liable to be rebellious and vicious than others by inherited temperament; but certainly this can be counteracted by suitable education, and careful formation.
Heredity is responsible for many mentally and morally weak characters, even though it does not always result in deficiency. This is due to the fact that it has not been countered by a sound environment and a formation directly adapted to children according to their individual needs. It is not possible in any given case to say how much in one's character is inherited, and how much is due to environment. But it is a fact that environment is very important. For people are really but pre-disposed in one way or another by heredity. It is domestic and social environment which is the greatest moulding force, apart from the influence of divine grace and the self-training of each one's personal free will.
I do. And I agree with your well-chosen words, limiting your statement to many cases, and diminishing rather than destroying moral responsibility. For in many cases sinners are entirely responsible for their evil conduct. But Catholic theology acknowledges that heredity and environment can diminish moral guilt.