Erratum to: J Relig Health DOI 10.1007/s10943-008-9173-2

The phrase on lines 6–9 of the abstract printed incorrectly. The phrase should have read:

“highlights the Handbook’s lack of attention to spirituality per se, which—if not inseparably linked with theism but, rather, related to the self-transcending, meaning-making dimension of the human mind—could provide an explanatory breakthrough in the field of the psychology of religion and of the social sciences overall;”

Also, punctuation on lines 1–3 of the abstract printed incorrectly. The entire corrected abstract is printed below:

Abstract Presuming Rayburn’s (2006, Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 28, 86–92) review of Paloutzian and Park’s (2005, New York: The Guilford Press) Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality and sketching an alternative paradigm, this review focuses on the Handbook’s virtual conflation of religion and spirituality; relates this conflation to the hegemony of Protestant theology in North American psychology of religion; highlights the Handbook’s lack of attention to spirituality per se, which—if not inseparably linked with theism but, rather, related to the self-transcending, meaning-making dimension of the human mind—could provide an explanatory breakthrough in the field of the psychology of religion and of the social sciences overall; and sees Handbook’s advocacy for a “multilevel interdisciplinary paradigm” as a regrettable acceptance of the failed, long-term strategy of the field of psychology in general.