Ideas

Revisiting (a Disturbing) ‘Carousel’

Columnist; Contributor

Apparently, if you love someone enough to let him beat you, you’ll never walk alone?

"Carousel"

"Carousel"

Christianity Today September 23, 2014

Alissa's note: This reflection is part of a series on "Watch This Way" called "Rewind," in which movie critics and film buffs reflect on a film from the past and what it means today.

Carousel was famously cited by Time magazine as the best stage musical of the 20th century. Composer Richard Rodgers allegedly called it his best work. The film version earned nominations for its director (Henry King) and writers (Phoebe and Henry Ephron) from the Directors Guild and Writers Guild respectively. It has a lofty 7.0/10.0 rating from nearly 4,000 viewers at IMDb. In other words, it is one of the most esteemed musicals of all time and one of the most beloved films from the 1950s.

Huh?!

Watching Carousel today, at a time when football players are being suspended for domestic violence and documentarians are striving to give a voice to our some of society’s most vulnerable members, is a bit like taking a Shakespeare class and trying to convince yourself that The Taming of the Shrew is not misogynistic or that The Merchant of Venice is not anti-Semitic. One wants to avoid charges of ethnocentrism at all costs, but it is hard to look at the film and feel anything but embarrassment that our society once countenanced such tripe.

The film opens with Billy Bigelow (Gordon McRae) at a way-station outside of heaven. He has not been judged too harshly for a life lived beating his wife, Julie (Shirley Jones), and sponging off her aunt or for dying while attempting to rob a rich man at knifepoint. If I didn’t have larger complaints, I might be tempted to examine more seriously the theological implications of this purgatorial setting, but other than a brief mention that Billy’s partner-in-crime Jigger didn’t even make it “this far,” the film doesn’t invite us to take seriously the notion that our status in the afterlife contains any sort of judgment of our life on earth.

"Carousel"
“Carousel”

One of the rules of this way station is that each person has the “right” (odd word, that) to return to earth for one day. Billy long ago waived that right but now he has heard that the wife he left behind and the daughter he never met are in need of his help. (She never needed his help in the 18 or so years he’s been lounging about polishing stars?) Before he can go, though, he needs to tell his story, so we flashback to the beginning.

The story, while long in the telling, is pretty thin. Billy, a carnival barker, woos a pretty girl from the mill. She impulsively agrees to marry him—did they just meet?—and he is fired by his jealous boss. Despite Julie’s best attempts to be a submissive, cheerful, and supportive wife, Billy does everything in his power to make her (and everyone around him) miserable. He refuses a job on a fishing boat because he doesn’t like the smell and thinks the work beneath him.

He protests that he doesn’t “beat” Julie, he only “hits” her.

When asked why he strikes his wife, he says that there comes a point in every argument where he realizes she is in the right, so that’s when he hits her. He hesitates to join his pal, Jigger, in a larceny plan, but then he promptly gambles away his stake in the robbery over five minutes of blackjack.

When he finds out his wife is pregnant, Billy burst into song about how great it will be to have a son. Then it occurs to him that the kid might be a girl. Oh, no! A son can be a playmate and a source of pride. A daughter is just one more burden; the reason you have to embark on a life of crime so that you can afford to give her pretty things.

The most common defense of Carousel is that while the story may be dated, the music is beautiful. Certainly the dance around “June is Bustin’ Out All Over” is great as a showpiece, right up there with some of the routines from Seven Brides for Seven Brothers.

But to the extent that they are actually integrated into the narrative, the songs either reinforce the problematic themes (“What’s the use of wondering / If the ending will be sad? / He’s your feller and you love him / There’s nothing more to say”) or are ironically undercut by them. The film’s anthem, “You’ll Never Walk Alone,” is inspiring outside of the context of the play, but the reality is that Julie is left alone, both to walk and to care for her daughter.

Okay, Billy is a jerk, fine. What’s a redemption story without a hero that has been brought low? But the last act of Carousel is the most mind-boggling. Billy returns to earth to find his daughter, on the verge of graduation, unhappy and looked down upon by her rich neighbors. He appears to her—he is visible only when he want to be—long enough to try to give her a star and (yep, you guessed it) pop her a good one when she refuses to accept it.

By the time his daughter comes out of the house with Billy’s widow, he has retreated to invisibility. His attempts to alleviate his family’s distress have failed miserably, but it’s okay because Louise reports wondrously to her mother that when the mysterious stranger struck her, it didn’t hurt at all. “Is [that] possible?” she asks her mother.

“It is possible dear, for someone to hit you, hit you hard, and it not hurt at all.” That’s the film’s thesis, delivered by Julie to her daughter, and it’s hard today not to see the results all around us, every day, of young girls being taught that physical pain and humiliation is an acceptable price to pay for a little attention from (I won’t say “the love of”) a not so good man.

You’ve come a not-so long way, baby. We no longer think it is your fault if he beats you. It’s only your fault if it hurts.

Kenneth R. Morefield is an associate professor of English at Campbell University. He is the editor of Faith and Spirituality in Masters of World Cinema, Volumes I & II, and the founder of 1More Film Blog.

News

Christian Pundit Dinesh D’Souza Sentenced to 5 Years Probation

Former president of The King’s College avoids prison time for campaign finance violations.

Dinesh D'Souza will release his new film, America, this summer.

Dinesh D'Souza will release his new film, America, this summer.

Christianity Today September 23, 2014
Courtesy: Dineshdsouza.com

Update, Tues., Sept. 23, 2014

Dinesh D'Souza isn't going to prison. The famed conservative writer and now filmmaker was in US District Court in New York this afternoon for sentencing after his May court appearance in which he pleaded guilty to a single count of violating campaign finance law.

In court, Judge Richard Berman sentenced D'Souza to five years of probation, starting with the defendant living in a community confinement center for eight months. Judge Berman also fined D'Souza $30,000 for illegally passing cash donations to a GOP senate candidate using third party "straw donors." Federal law limits the amount each individual can give to someone standing for national election.

Since his May guilty plea, D'Souza has published a new book and released a related film. The New York Times notes:

Even with his fate hanging in the balance, Mr. D’Souza plowed ahead with his thriving career as a right-wing provocateur. Over the summer, while awaiting his sentencing, he published the book America: Imagine a World Without Her, which reached No. 1 on The New York Times’s nonfiction hardcover best-seller list, and a companion documentary film that has made $14.4 million at the box office.

Via Twitter, D'Souza today said, "A great calm comes over me when I remind myself that there is a higher power that is sovereign and remains in charge."

The attorneys for D'Souza in their court filing prior to today's sentencing maintained that their client was being singled out for "more vigorous prosection." For years, D'Souza has been a harsh critic of President Obama and laid out a case against Obama in the book, The Roots of Obama's Rage.

+++

May 20, 2014

In federal district court in New York this morning, Christian political commentator Dinesh D'Souza entered a guilty plea to one count of violating campaign finance law.

His case was scheduled to go to trial today in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. But this morning, he pleaded guilty, suspending the trial. His sentencing will occur at a later date. A second count against him of making false statements could be dismissed after sentencing.

Earlier, D'Souza through his attorney alleged that the government was engaging in "selective prosecution" of him due to his "consistently caustic and highly publicized criticism" of President Obama. But a judge dismissed this allegation last week.

Back in January, federal prosecutors charged D'Souza with making campaign contributions to a New York Republican senatorial campaign through the use of "straw donors." It is illegal to give money to a private individual with the intention of getting around federal campaign contribution limits. He was additionally charged with making false statements about these contributions. Individuals are limited to contributing $5,000 to a particular candidate per election cycle.

D'Souza, a conservative author, filmmaker, and former president of The King's College in New York, has a strong following among religious conservatives. In 2010, he wrote The Roots of Obama's Rage, which explored President Obama's family and the political views of his late father. In 2012, a film version of the book was released. Called 2016: Obama's America, this film drew a huge audience for a political documentary.

Earlier, his 2007 book, What's So Great about Christianity? endeared him to conservative Christians, both Catholic and evangelical. He served as a columnist for Christianity Today for about one year in 2009.

In 2010, King's College in New York City named D'Souza as its president. But his tenure was short-lived. Questions surfaced in the media about D'Souza's troubled marriage. He was in the process of divorce, but had become engaged to someone else, who was also reportedly married at the time. The controversy and scandal resulted in D'Souza resigning from the college presidency.

D'Souza will be releasing a new book and film in coming weeks.

Books

Working For Justice Will Make You Uncomfortable

Eugene Cho wonders whether we’re willing to go beyond paying lip service to social change.

Feng Images

Eugene Cho, founder of Seattle’s Quest Church and the One Day’s Wages antipoverty nonprofit, is known for his zeal for justice. Yet he’s deeply doubted the sincerity of his and his generation’s commitment—doubts best expressed in the title of his debut book, Overrated: Are We More in Love with the Idea of Changing the World Than Actually Changing the World? (David C. Cook). Bethany Hoang, founding director of International Justice Mission’s Institute for Biblical Justice, spoke with Cho about rooting our pursuit of justice in the gospel.

Overrated: Are We More in Love with the Idea of Changing the World Than Actually Changing the World?

What prompted you to write this book?

I went to a basketball game a couple years ago, and the crowd was screaming, “Overrated! Overrated!” at the other team. It’s not that I’ve heard people scream that when I’m preaching, but the possibility of being “overrated” myself is something I’ve sensed throughout my life.

For example, I’ve been speaking, writing, blogging, and preaching about justice. It’s easy to fall in love with the idea. But something gets lost in the actual practice and application. When I started sensing this, I personally felt exposed and began to see the problem in the larger church.

This book began for me when I went to Burma on a research trip. I had thought I would come home with a conviction to write a sermon, maybe a blog post. But instead I sensed the Holy Spirit convicting me to give up a year’s worth of pay.

The conviction was really uncomfortable. It took about three years to come to terms with it, simply because I like stuff. I like money. I like being able to provide for my family. Eventually I came to realize that I really am more in love with the idea of changing the world than actually changing it. When there’s a personal cost to justice, we back off.

You suggest that working for justice is evangelism. What concerns you about the way Christians understand the relationship between justice and evangelism?

I understand the concern that justice can distract from evangelism. We have to be careful, because any ministry can become idolatry. You can idolize justice. You can idolize evangelism. You can idolize the Scriptures. Ultimately, everything needs to be a response to the gospel.

It’s important to speak to people who are apathetic about justice, but also to people who are saying, “Let’s stick with preaching Jesus.” Justice is part of the full scope of the gospel—it’s part of who Jesus is. Jesus’ words are more credible when his followers live them out, including God’s call to do justice, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with him.

You discuss a season in life when you worked as a janitor at a Barnes & Noble. How did this prepare you for your work today?

I don’t like to share stories about God humbling me. I was so angry. I was so hurt and broken. I never departed from my relationship with him, but I felt I had lost control of my life. It’s beautiful that I can look back and say, “Wow. That was a holy time.”

Being a janitor was difficult, not because of the work itself but because it was the last thing I thought God had prepared me to do. I was supposed to be planting a church. I had a full flow chart written out. Working as a janitor was not part of the plan.

But when you’re cleaning a 40,000-square-foot space all morning, you’re confronted with something called silence. And that season became a gift, because God resurrected my prayer life. I came to see silence not as an enemy, but as a necessary companion. It was a time to pray not for the sake of productivity, or because I was speaking at a conference or preaching a sermon, but because my soul desperately needed to encounter the Holy Spirit again.

What can prevent us from, as you put it, “sizzling out” from justice work?

There’s a wisdom and power in naming the reasons we don’t get involved, or the reasons we don’t feel sustained and thus quit and back away. One reason is that there is such brokenness in our world.

Recently I was chatting with a couple friends, and I started tearing up. We were talking about the situation in the Middle East and Palestine, about Nigeria, about the situation at the border in the United States. I felt paralyzed. I couldn’t move. It was a powerful reminder that brokenness can easily lead to paralysis. When this happens, we need to name it.

It’s also important to be aware of our savior complex. Not everything is contingent upon us. Our culture loves heroes. This isn’t bad in itself. But if we’re not careful, we can make ourselves into messiah figures, and that’s unsustainable.

I don’t think that being “overrated” is a foregone conclusion for this generation. The jury is still out about our larger culture, and the jury is still out on my life. I think we could be the most overrated generation in history. Much has been given, and much is to be expected.

This book is, in many ways, my prayer for myself. My hope is that others will read this and that it will bless them, challenge them, rebuke them, and encourage them to think of their lives not as the sprint of one good idea, but as a marathon. It’s certainly not an exhaustive book on justice, but I hope it will encourage people to live a deeper, more faithful life in response to the gospel.

Church Life

My Non-Christian Best Friend

How a pair of interfaith friends acknowledge their differences and still love one another.

Her.meneutics September 23, 2014
femme run / Flickr

Editor’s note: Last year, CT called it the craziest statistic you’ll read about North American missions: One in five non-Christians in the U.S. and Canada do not know a single Christian—with first and second-generation immigrant families (many of them Hindus, Buddhists, and Muslims) the least likely to have Christian friends.

Courtney Humphreys and Nishta Mehra, whose journal-style reflections appear below, are beating those odds. They are a pair of best friends who recognize the real-life differences in their beliefs, but still have learned and grown from a decade-plus of cross-cultural friendship.

Courtney realizes their relationship seems convoluted on paper: “I’m a white, evangelical Christian, married with two young children. She's brown, non-Christian, and raising a two-year-old son with her partner, Jill.” Yet, Courtney sees Nishta as one of one of her truest, most steadfast friends on this earth.

And Nishta, a regular Her.meneutics reader, says their connection, ever since they unexpectedly became friends during Diet Coke-fueled calculus study sessions back in Christian high school, has “forced me to push past every assumption I had made about her, and to realize how much I had done the same with others. It has been, from the start, a humbling and grace-filled friendship.”

Many of our friendships with people of other faiths and lifestyles get by because we ignore or don’t bring up the great diving factor, the belief that for Christians shapes everything else: Christ is Savior of the world. I’m struck by the openness these two friends have about their differing convictions and how God has used them to serve each other.

Those of us who have close friends with different beliefs know how sometimes we will find surprisingly deep connections formed amid deep divides. (And if you have a friend like this in your life, I’d love to hear your experience in the comments!)

Thanks for reading.

– Kate Shellnutt, Her.meneutics editor

Nishta: I was raised in a Hindu family, I attended an Episcopal school, I majored in religious studies, and I now work at a Jewish school; I’m one of those 30-somethings whose beliefs are hard to quantify. Most of my explicit religious practices are anchored in tradition and my family’s roots; I see my whole life as a spiritual experience. I strive to live consistently with my values, to be honorable and generous and loving, which is something that Courtney and I share.

Courtney: Nishta is the kind of person who knows the right thing to do and just when to do it. She sent me a massage gift certificate when I was overcome with post-partum depression; she mails me poems that always seem to say the exact right thing (I keep them all in special places in our house); she is one of the most loving, sacrificial people I have ever known. Her life is vibrant, full of people she loves well and who love her in return. Sometimes, if I’m brutally honest, I struggle to come to terms with the fact that even with all the good in her life, she doesn’t have Jesus, the one good thing I believe matters most.

Nishta: I’m not a Christian. I don’t believe in all the same things Courtney does. While we share deep values, it’s important to be clear about what we don’t share; too many people try to “kumbaya” difference into nothingness. I respect Courtney’s faith way too much to imply, “oh, we basically believe the same thing”—we don’t. She believes that Jesus is the Son of God. I don’t. She believes that the Devil is real. I don’t.

Courtney: As a Christian, God’s word is the defining Truth in my life. I believe the Bible is the authoritative word of God and that he reigns over all of creation. Nishta and I know that our belief systems are vastly different. But the reality is that our friendship strengthens my faith in ways I never could have imagined and forces me to grapple with questions I maybe wouldn’t have asked otherwise

Nishta: To me, Court lives like a true Christian, as close to it as anyone can get. As a scholar of religion, I feel like I have a pretty good understanding of what it means to actually follow the teachings of Jesus, and that, in its essence, is radical love. Never once in our friendship have I felt proselytized to or made wrong for believing differently; never once have I felt like she was waiting for me to change, or that she thought less of me because I see the world differently than her. I know that she respects me, and I figure that, if she’s worried about the salvation of my soul, she’s decided to act on it by loving me instead of badgering me.

Courtney: My friendship with Nishta changes the way I think and talk about homosexuality. I recently read on Jen Hatmaker’s blog, “We don’t get to abandon the theology of love toward people; the end does not justify the means…As a faith community, it is time we relearn what ‘speaking the truth in love’ means…If the beginning and end of love is simply pointing out sin, we are all doomed.” When the theology of love gets abandoned, people get hurt. As Christians, we are missing the point if we are spending time bemoaning the decline of morality, but not also sitting around the dinner table with people who aren’t like us and breaking bread with them, digging deep into life with them despite our differences.

Nishta: It’s funny, of all our friends with kids around the same age as our son (he just turned two), Courtney and her husband McKee are the ones that my partner Jill and I feel most closely aligned with when it comes to parenting. Our philosophies are incredibly similar, despite our lives looking so different. We check in regularly about issues we’re facing, share advice, help hold the context for the values we want to live by and raise our children within.

The power of knowing—really knowing—someone who belongs to a radically different social category than you, whether it’s race or class or religion or sexuality, is that the abstract suddenly becomes very personal. It’s culturally acceptable among so many to mock true believers or imply that you can’t be smart AND believe in God—Courtney is an example that I can hold in my mind and heart and also share with others: a faithful, thoughtful, loving Christian.

Courtney: My friendship with Nishta is unconditional. I love her because she is God’s workmanship, His beautiful creation—and reducing her down to only her identity as a lesbian would be ludicrous. She is a lesbian, and she is a lot of other things: a devoted mother, a steadfastly loyal friend, a gifted writer and teacher, a probing question-asker, a thoughtful listener, a gift-giver. She is beautiful, and being her friend is one of the greatest gifts of my life.

Nishta: I can speak to Court about faith and grace and God in ways that I can’t with most other people, regardless of whether they believe like me or not. During the toughest seasons of my life—following my father’s very sudden death, in the midst of Jill’s battle with cancer, as we waited to adopt a child—Courtney has been the first person I turned to for prayer and comfort. Her faithfulness is a blessing to me.

Courtney Humphreys is wife to McKee and mother of two young children, Tucker and Heloise. A graduate of Vanderbilt University, she lives in Memphis, Tennessee and works for the Memphis Teacher Residency.

Nishta J. Mehra is a high school English & humanities teacher, and the author of The Pomegranate King, a collection of essays. She lives in Houston, Texas with her son, Shiv, and partner of twelve years, Jill Carroll.

Visions of Vocation

Choosing to be “implicated.”

Books & Culture September 23, 2014

The word "vocation" is loaded. It elicits a spectrum of strong opinions within the church; ranging from the angst-filled young adult in despair over the future to the steadfast theologian certain of the idea of calling and how it should work for everyone. As an office which walks with college students in search of resolute answers to questions of "calling," amid the spectrum there is one thing we are certain of: if everything is vocation, nothing is vocation. If everything is part of one's calling, how does one see the forest for the trees? Yet, if vocation is reduced to one's 9-5 existence, then the authentically holistic nature of our lives is not appropriately considered. The resulting compartmentalized view of work fails to provide the coherent and seamless understanding we long for in understanding the ramifications of our lives. One thing the church should be able to agree upon is that vocation implies that our lives are initiated and called by God. Beyond this, there is much debate.

Visions of Vocation: Common Grace for the Common Good

Visions of Vocation: Common Grace for the Common Good

IVP

256 pages

$17.48

Fortunately, there are a number of books emerging on the issue of calling. Consider Tim Keller's Every Good Endeavor: Connecting Your Work to God's Work; Kingdom Calling, by Amy Sherman; and Skye Jethani's Futureville, in which Jethani devotes major portions to the subject of vocation. Around the same time as Futureville's release came Visions of Vocation: Common Grace for the Common Good, by Steven Garber, founder and principal of the Washington Institute for Faith, Vocation, and Culture.

If you have ever heard Garber speak in public, you know that he does so with a soothing, lyrical style that tips his audience to his fondness for music and poetry. He often notes that "the artists get there first," and his writing reflects this inclination, weaving in stories that begin as seemingly separate strands. Yet in Garber's chapters they are woven together to form a tapestry that reveals how vocation is integral to the mission of God.

This book is not for the faint of heart. Despite Garber's poetic style, his words pack a punch, challenging the reader to consider what it means to be "implicated." Garber quotes Byron: "They who know the most must mourn the deepest." Living with a full understanding of vocation means choosing to see the wounds of the world and responding with a heart of flesh rather than a heart of stone. It means choosing the better but not the easier.

This willingness to know and see is, to Garber, the beginning of vocation. It is an echo of what Wendell Berry explores from his Leavings collection:

I go by a field where once I cultivated a few poor crops. It is now covered with young trees, for the forest that belongs here has come back and reclaimed its own. And I think of all the effort I have wasted and all the time, and of how much joy I took in that failed work and how much it taught me. For in so failing I learned something of my place something of myself, and now I welcome back the trees.

Implication and learning forms the theoretical framework for the book, which gives the reader a primer for further reading on the subject of vocation. Garber himself is a prolific reader, and he tells compelling stories from the realms of art, law, education, history, and social justice to implore readers to see the world with the eyes of the heart; a concept he refers to as "words becoming flesh."

Garber makes his point by asking a question central to the book: Can you know the world (in all of its good and evil) and still love the world? It's a valid question, and Garber powerfully explores the connectedness of relationship and responsibility while warning against the temptation to avoid implication. He posits: "we are called to be common grace for the common good," a simple idea to assent to but a much more complex idea to embody. Nonetheless, placed within the context of the everyday life, Garber shares vignettes of people who have lived their lives in this noble pursuit.

Each story attempts to reinforce Garber's point that vocation implicates, in spite of the grief and hurt we find. Yet, Garber's central question is unlikely to be what readers will find to be most difficult. What is more difficult for the reader to grasp is: Will you choose to live "implicated" in the midst of what you know—the glories and the shames—for the balance of your life? In Garber's sixth chapter, titled "Vocation as Implication," he writes, "When we take the wounds of the world into our hearts—not just for a day, but for a life—we long to see the work of our hands as somehow, strangely, part of the work of God in the word, integral to the missio dei, not incidental to it." This extends the question beyond the present day to cause the reader to grapple with the "implications" of what it means to live implicated. This resonates with Eugene Peterson's argument in A Long Obedience in the Same Direction. There, Peterson argued for a long view of discipleship in the midst of an "instant" society. Garber too points the reader to an abiding and comprehensive view beyond the faddish and trendy causes that we may support to appease our conscience.

Visions of Vocation invites readers into what feels like a fireside chat with poets, musicians, and artists of all kinds on living a life of significance. It is a chat that feels preliminary but substantive; the kind of conversation you leave looking forward to the next one. While Garber weaves this myriad of voices together well, some may struggle with the broadness of his own "vision" of vocation. This frustration should not prevent the reader from recognizing that, while broad, Garber's book also provides a sorely needed depth to the issue of vocation. His hopeful use of "implication" counters its common use and invokes a sense of called responsibility that inspires. It places the issue of calling properly in the brokenness of humanity, thwarting idyllic notions of saving a country, or a people, simply with the gumption that comes from being "called" to the task.

If angst-filled young adults are looking for a formula to discern their future, it cannot be found in this book. Likewise, if theologians are looking for a systematic treatise on vocation, they too will be disappointed. However, what they will find is probably more valuable: a book that causes readers to think about their lives in new and challenging ways, exploring questions which, when answered in good conscience, comprise a fabric of faithfulness.

Drew Moser is Associate Dean of Students and the Director of Calling and Career at Taylor University. Jess Fankhauser is the Assistant Director of the Calling and Career at Taylor University. Jeff Aupperle is Director of Indiana Employer Relations at Taylor University. Together they are the primary researchers of the Vocation and College Project, which studies vocation in the undergraduate experience.

Copyright © 2014 Books & Culture. Click for reprint information.

Pastors

It’s All in Your Head

Scripture places emormous emphasis on the renewal of our minds.

It's all in your head.

That phrase is typically used derisively—a dismissive diagnosis of someone's ailments. A man totters into his doctor's office, complaining of deep angst, sharp pains, lingering aches. Spasms twitch down his leg, his belly is on fire, his dreams are troubled. He's tormented by a host of symptoms. The doctor runs a battery of tests, asks a barrage of questions. Then he says this: "There's nothing wrong with you medically. It's all in your head."

That's not what I mean here. I mean our deepest problem before we got saved—the hostility between ourselves and God that took no less than the death of his Son to heal—was all in our heads. And I mean our deepest problem now that we are saved—the way we keep falling prey to old lies, succumbing to old habits, bowing before old idols, manifesting old attitudes—is all in our heads, too.

I best explain myself.

The Greek word for repentance means, at root, to change your mind. Think differently. See it otherwise. Reframe the picture. That change of mind, of course, is measured by a change of ways. We produce fruit in keeping with repentance. We think differently. Then we act differently. But what comes first is changing our minds. It's all in our head—or at least starts in our head—so we deal first with that.

The New Testament puts enormous emphasis on both the depravity and the renewal of our minds (there are several Greek words that English translations render into the single English word mind). Paul claims that our estrangement from God is first and most a battle in our heads: "Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior" (Col. 1:21), and traces the problem way back, when God gave the entire human race over to a "depraved mind" (Rom. 1:28). Jesus rebukes Peter—calls him Satan, no less—because "you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns" (Matt. 16:23).

The Bible says the renewal of our mind is key to newness of life: we now have "the mind of Christ" (1 Cor. 2:16), and so each of us have been "taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; to be made new in the attitude of your minds." (Eph. 4:22-23). Before anything truly and deeply changes in us, first our minds must change: "be transformed by the renewing of your mind" (Rom. 12:2).

These few biblical references barely scratch the surface. This theme runs throughout Scripture. It soaks through its pages, and once you see it, it's impossible to miss: that what happens in our minds affects everything. As we think, so we are. Thinking is destiny, at least as far as a Christ-like life is concerned.

The implications of this for pastoral ministry are huge. It means that the main work of discipleship is transformation through the renewing of our minds.

There are two bedrock disciplines here.

The first is to keep in step with the Holy Spirit, living a life of ongoing infilling by the Spirit. Invite him daily, hourly, to guide us into all truth; cultivate deep sensitivity to his promptings; hone reflexive quickness to go where he leads. Where the Spirit of the Lord is there is freedom. So walk with him!

The second is to fix our eyes on Jesus. It is living a life of adoring contemplation of Christ. Paul says it best: "We all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit" (2 Cor. 3:18). The more we look to Christ, the more we look like Christ. His ways of thinking invade ours, so his ways of being pervade ours.

So look to him.

Our mind changes as we walk with Jesus, talk with Jesus, look to Jesus. And then—without hardly trying—everything else about us starts to change, too.

I guess I always knew this. I just had to change my mind.

Mark Buchanan teaches pastoral theology at Ambrose Seminary in Calgary, Alberta.

Copyright © 2014 by the author or Christianity Today/Leadership Journal. Click here for reprint information on Leadership Journal.

Pastors

A Holy Experiment

Aaron Niequist and Steve Carter discuss launching a new initiative at Willow Creek.

Leadership Journal September 23, 2014

When Willow Creek Community Church was founded in 1975, it emerged as one of the most innovative congregations in the country. Seeking to reach a culture full of "Unchurched Harrys and Marys," Willow re-imagined how the church did worship, preaching, outreach, and discipleship. Other church leaders have been eager to learn from Willow's innovative model ever since.

Forty years later, many of the ideas Willow Creek pioneered are now commonplace, but the church has not lost its innovative impulse. A new generation of pastors is building on Willow's heritage of leadership by experimenting with forms of worship and discipleship never before tried at the church. Aaron Niequist, a worship pastor, and Steve Carter, a teaching pastor, are beginning an 18-month experiment at Willow Creek called The Practice. Leadership Journal editors Drew Dyck and Skye Jethani sat down with Niequist and Carter to discuss their holy experiment.

Most ministries tend to think about innovation or change when they notice their existing plan is no longer effective. Was that the case for Willow Creek?

Steve Carter: Not at all. The conversation emerged from a place of opportunity, not fear or decline. We've been humbled and surprised by how God has been working at Willow, and we wanted to be open to what he wants to do next.

Aaron Niequist: And that is what is exciting for me about the culture at Willow. We don't settle. There's a sense that there is still ground to be taken. There are still ways to grow. There are still things we don't know and ways we can learn. I think Bill [Hybels] and the executive team have modeled that attitude.

Carter: That culture of innovation is even reflected in the church's operating budget. We have a fund called Winds of the Spirit. A small percentage of every dollar that's given goes into that fund which is reserved for unplanned opportunities. When God moves and we want to be able to inject resources into that opportunity, the funding comes from the Winds of the Spirit.

Knowing that fund was available, last year the executive team began having conversations based on our Reveal research. We were asking, "How do we do more for people who want to dive deeper and become more committed disciples?"

Aaron, were you aware of those conversations happening among leaders?

Niequist: Not at first. I was having my own conversations with ministry friends about wanting to experiment with new models, but then when I spoke with leaders at Willow I starting hearing overlapping themes. These weren't official meetings, just casual conversations with friends in leadership reflecting on what was working well at Willow and what wasn't.

Willow does a million things well, but I've really respected the ability of leaders to be honest and say, "You know what? We need to work on this." Or, "We're not doing this as much as we wish we could." And, "What would it look like to try that?" That openness and honesty is where the whole idea for a new experiment emerged.

It also emerged from a presentation at last year's Global Leadership Summit by Vijay Govindarajan about innovation. What influence did that have?

Niequist: Honestly without Vijay's talk at the Summit, the Practice experiment could not have happened, because it gave us the language to navigate and frame what we needed to do. He spoke about his book, Beyond the Idea, and his three-box strategy. Basically, every organization, he said, has three boxes. Box One is about managing the present. It's everything the organization is doing to maintain itself. Box Two is about making minor improvements to make Box One even better. But Box Three is about creating the future. It's all about innovation.

Vijay said that without a Box Three, without a space to experiment with new ideas, even the best organizations will not last. He also kept talking about how important it was to create space between Box One and Box Three. Otherwise, he warned, you'll just be creating little copies of Box One. Box Threes have to have different goals, a different culture, different people, and different metrics in order to create real innovation.

Carter: What I love about what Vijay's model is how it allows Box One to not be about innovation. It doesn't have to change, which is a pressure we always feel. Instead Box One can focus on what it does well, and improving that incrementally. He provided a model for innovation that didn't require deconstructing what was still working.

But if Box One is doing well, as it appears to be at Willow, why bother with the cost and headache of creating a Box Three?

Niequist: Because there's no guarantee Box One will keep working forever. Sustainability for the future will require discovering new models. That's what Box Three is for. That's where you experiment and try new things without knowing for sure what's going to work.

Can you give an example of how this has worked outside the church?

Carter: Gore-Tex is a company where employees are allowed to use 10 percent of their time to dream and experiment with Box Three ideas. One Gore-Tex employee was a fisherman and he started a Box Three experiment to create the strongest fishing line possible. But as the project developed, they discovered what they created wasn't very good fishing line but awesome guitar strings. That's how Elixir guitar strings were created.

That's the benefit of experimentation, but what are the risks?

Carter: If there isn't profound relational warmth, and a desire for connection between leaders in Box One and Box Three, then it quickly becomes deconstructionist. That's when you create splits and divisions. That's the big risk from Day One for a church trying a Box Three experiment.

Niequist: There are a lot of stories about "church-within-a-church" experiments that started with a desire to be new and innovative, but they ended up creating tension, and then disunity, and it eventually splits off. That's not always a bad outcome, but it is one of the real risks.

Carter: I think at the core there must be trust. Box One has got to trust that Box Three is not trying to destroy or replace it. At the same time, Box Three has got to be gracious and thankful to Box One for providing the opportunity to do its experimentation. All of that requires leaders in both boxes to be warm, gracious, and in a humble posture of learning from one another.

Tell us more about what your Box Three, which you call The Practice, is hoping to achieve?

Niequist: We talk a lot about a gymnasium metaphor. Teaching is important for growth, but sitting in a classroom can only take you so far. When we look at what we do in most church gatherings it's centered on a lecturer. It's a classroom. But if I want to learn how to run a marathon, I wouldn't want to go hear a lecture about a marathon. I'd want to train with a coach. And so we asked, "What if a church was more like a gymnasium than a classroom? What if the church gathering was a time when we came together to practice rather than just listen?" It's a different kind of learning. That's why we're calling our experiment "The Practice." The focus is on the disciplines of the Christian life and the different practices that train us to go out and practice what Jesus said Monday through Saturday.

You have limited The Practice to an 18-month experiment. Why have an end date? Why not just launch this project and see how it goes? Who knows, maybe it will go for 20 years and be fantastic. Why stop it at 18 months?

Niequist: Because the goal is not to launch a new ministry. The goal is learning. We know from the Reveal research that getting people involved in more church programs doesn't necessarily lead to more mature disciples. So we weren't interested in just creating new services or activities for people. What we wanted was a space to experiment and learn. People keep asking me, "What's going to happen after 18 months?" And I always answer the same way. "I'm trying to think about that as little as possible." I feel that if we put together a five-year plan or a set of clear goals for The Practice then we'll lose the experimental nature of it. Once you focus on sustainability you stop taking risks and trying new ideas.

You might set the goal to develop fishing line, but God intends to give you guitar strings.

Niequist: Exactly. And we need to be open to that possibility.

When you say The Practice is only an 18-month experiment, does that cause anxiety for anybody who's interested in being involved or is it freeing?

Niequist: I think it's been freeing because then they're not being expected to switch services or completely abandon the Willow they know. They're being invited to explore something new with us on Sunday nights. It makes participating easier.

For some Christians "innovation and experimentation" is code language for heresy. What boundaries are in place to ensure The Practice doesn't wander off into unsafe territory?

Niequist: In the proposal we drafted for the executive leadership team, I said we will joyfully submit to the authority of Willow's elders, to the church's statement of faith, and to our governing documents and bylaws. We're not interested messing around with any of that stuff. We want to experiment with how those beliefs get expressed and fleshed out in the lives of our people; how do we get formed into them?

So far is seems that The Practice is adapting old models, including liturgical and sacramental practices. How does that fit with being innovative?

Carter: Liturgy and sacrament may not be new, but they are for many people at Willow.

Niequist: We're not really creating anything; we're rediscovering. My hope is to draw from many traditions of the church to rediscover what forms and practices can help us grow as disciples. I'm squarely evangelical, and there is a lot to affirm in my tradition. Being a worship leader for the last 10 year, first at Mars Hill and then at Willow, I've realized that four Tomlin songs and a hymn every weekend for 52 weeks is helpful up to a certain point. There is a lot to learn from other models that can be very helpful.

Can you share an example of how the experimentation at The Practice is already influencing Willow's Box One?

Carter: During Holy Week, on Wednesday, we invited leaders from The Practice to lead the all-staff meeting. We gathered everyone in the chapel, which is where The Practice meets on Sunday nights, and they led us through the same liturgy and practices they did the previous week. We used Matthew 11, "Come to me all you who are weary," for a time of Lectio Divina. What church staff member on the Wednesday of Holy Week isn't weary? After that we did five minutes of silence. Imagine 350 Type-A megachurch staff member during Holy Week sitting for five minutes in silence listening to Jesus say, "Come to me." That led into communion. It was really beautiful.

Niequist: I hope that time was a gift to each staff member during Holy Week, but the other huge benefit was that The Practice was no longer just a theory. That staff was no longer saying, "What are you crazy guys doing on Sunday nights?" After the all-staff meeting more of them understood what we were doing and how it can help. It offered Box One and glimpse into Box Three.

What advice do you give to church leaders who are not in a place to create an entirely new Box Three to experiment with? How can they still make space for innovation?

Niequist: I used to be responsible for 52 Sundays a year. It was totally overwhelming, as all pastors know. During that season I realized I wasn't creating anything. I was never dreaming. I was just planning on a six-day cycle. So I started using every Wednesday afternoon just to create. Everyone knew no meetings could be scheduled for me during that time. It was just for creation and exploration. I used Wednesday afternoon to read a new book or write a song—but nothing that had to do with planning the weekend services. Nothing related to Box One. I did that for seven years.

Carter: A lot of us cannot control the church systems we are a part of. We cannot create a Box Three for the church or get the funding they need. But we usually have more control over our schedules then we think. We can create our own Box Three.

Editorial Note: We are staying connected with Aaron Niequist and Steve Carter as they continue The Practice. We will have another interview about half way through the 18-month experiment to see what Willow is learning from the experiment. Stay tuned!

Copyright © 2014 by the author or Christianity Today/Leadership Journal. Click here for reprint information on Leadership Journal.

Ideas

Oy With the Poodles Already

Columnist; Contributor

With its Netflix debut imminent, it’s time to talk about “Gilmore Girls.”

Lauren Graham and Alexis Bledel

Lauren Graham and Alexis Bledel

Christianity Today September 22, 2014

Today over at the New York Times’ “Op-Talk” page, Hanna Kozlowska takes a look at what made Gilmore Girls so popular—and what’s behind its continued appeal.

Lorelai, Rory, and the elder Gilmores (Kelly Bishop and Edward Herrmann)
Lorelai, Rory, and the elder Gilmores (Kelly Bishop and Edward Herrmann)

This is, of course, prompted by the recent announcement that the show will be streaming in its entirety, beginning October 1. That announcement exploded the Internet in a good way (something we don’t see all that often these days, what with the NFL and the Middle East and the outrage-of-the-day), as Kozlowska points out.

In case you lived under a rock in a prior decade, Gilmore Girls was a WB (and CW) dramedy that aired from 2000 to 2007. In it, Lorelai Gilmore (Lauren Graham) was a single mother who raised her brainy daughter Rory (Alexis Bledel) in the small Connecticut town of Stars Hollow, populated by quirky, lovable characters, especially Luke (Scott Patterson), the gruff guy who owned the diner and Lorelai’s on-and-off love interest, and Lorelai’s best friend Sookie (Melissa McCarthy!), a chef. The show was funny, noticeably fast-talking, and mostly friendly enough for parents and teens to watch together; it grappled with some very big themes in both Lorelai’s and Rory’s coming-of-age stories, and it did it without seeming like a Story About Growing Up.

In today’s piece, Kozlowska (by the way, apologies to her for reusing her last line for this title; I couldn’t think of a greater one-liner) talks to a number of people who offer reasons for why the show was so popular: its mix of relentless pop culture and literary references, smart writing, and great characters; its central character of Rory, who was an instant best friend of all bookish, slightly nerdy girls (like, let’s be honest, myself) who nonetheless found herself struggling into adulthood; its focus on a family that didn’t look like the typical American TV family, but did look a lot like many actual American families; and, of course, its cast of weirdo characters and litany of quotable lines.

Paris Geller (Liza Weil), Rory's type-A nemesis and eventual friend
Paris Geller (Liza Weil), Rory’s type-A nemesis and eventual friend

I started watching the show about a year before it ended and binged through it on DVDs. Turned out the impetus was my husband. He’d watched it with family, and loved it, and knew I’d love it too. I won’t lie: I was a hard sell (at the time any show with “girls” in the title seemed dubious to me; things have changed), but they hooked me right off the bat with the writing, and continued as I was drawn into the struggles that Lorelai and Rory and everyone else encountered. I was in the middle of a crisis of career and a new marriage, and trying to figure out who I was now.

The show gave me a safe place to see other people think about that, make mistakes (some very big) and learn from them, without all the sap and sentimentality. And I could laugh, too, and care about these people. And though its sole depiction of religion is somewhat caricatured (see below), I felt like a lot of what it dealt with were universal matters, no matter your religious background.

Last week on Twitter, I asked a very similar question, inquiring of my follower list why they thought the show was so important. And I got a bunch of interesting answers. Here’s a few of the things I’m still thinking about, days later, and some of my own thoughts. (Maybe some mild plot spoilers below, but the show’s been over for seven years, so, tough.)

Sam Phillips did all of the music, except the theme song. Sam used to be a CCM artist, once upon a time, and was married to the extremely well-known music producer T. Bone Burnett (of Oh Brother, Where Art Thou? fame) for years as well, and he produced some of her albums. Our friend Jeffrey Overstreet (author of that piece on Dead Poets Society last week) interviewed her for the faith-based arts journal IMAGE a few years ago. Go read it.

Luke (Scott Patterson) and Jess (Milo Ventimiglia), his nephewGILMORE GIRLS "Say Goodnight Gracie" (Episode #320) Image # GG320-0309 Pictured (left to right): Scott Patterson as Luke Danes, Milo Ventimiglia as Jess Photo Credit: © The WB / Justin Lubin
Luke (Scott Patterson) and Jess (Milo Ventimiglia), his nephew

— One of my friends—the YA novelist Sara Zarr, author of Story of a Girl and others—tweeted to me that part of its appeal was “Rory as a recognizable human girl. Smart, insecure, cared about family & the world. Not just an object for romantic storylines or teen drama object lessons.” She also pointed out that Lorelai, “as selfish as she can sometimes seem . . . is always TRYING to love Rory sacrificially.”

— So here is something interesting: I did run across some violently negative reactions to the show. All were from men (thoughtful friends of mine!), who generally viewed the show as either presenting unrealistic or shallow characters. I argued (and I still think they’re wrong): I viewed Rory’s struggles, particularly in later episodes, as the most realistic thing about her, and their plethora of bad choices along with the good ones as being part and parcel of what I’ve experienced as I’ve grown up. I’ll be honest: this particular response astounded me (and, for her part, Sara Zarr, who characterized it as “unintentional/unaware devaluing of female perspective & experience.” What do you think?

Lane's (somewhat awkward) wedding
Lane’s (somewhat awkward) wedding

— Lane Kim, Rory’s childhood best friend, doesn’t come up much in discussions of the show. But I found her fascinating. Lane was from a strict Korean Seventh-Day Adventist home, with a mother who seemed especially caricatured as strict and foreboding. But as the show wore on, it became clear that we’d seen Mrs. Kim through the teenager’s eyes. Lane wound up being in a successful band, with her mother acting as her agent and basically forcing her not to quit when things got tough, even after Lane dropped out of the Seventh Day Adventist college and was living with bandmates. She also—possibly uniquely, on TV comedies—tells her boyfriend that she wants to be a virgin until she gets married, and then holds to that unashamedly. But then! There’s a uniquely realistic and humorous take on the ins and outs of that choice, something I suspect that a lot of people like me can relate to. It was remarkable to see, and refreshing.

— Several people pointed out that the witty writing was part of it for them—but, even more interesting, the show is populated by a lot of female characters and frequently passes the Bechdel test. One person pointed out that in Gilmore Girls, the normal parent/child roles are richer than we often see on TV, especially in comedy: “having the adult be more than just an annoying buzz kill and the child being more than just a prop was huge.”

Rory with Jess, the best of her boyfriends (don't argue)
Rory with Jess, the best of her boyfriends (don’t argue)

— And this bears repeating: part of the appeal of Gilmore Girls was that it was a show that expected its viewers to be smart and savvy, and not just up on pop cultural references. Rory was forever reading a book; there were references to journalists and celebrities and politicians and thinkers left and right, which not only lent the show a certain amount of gravitas, but also implied, strongly, to viewers that it was completely cool to be smart. I don’t know about you, but I have been in several life situations in betraying that you Knew Things was seen as a foible or a quirk, but Gilmore Girls said, no: it’s totally normal, and probably good.

— Totally taking authorial privilege here: Jess is my favorite of the boyfriends. I defy you to prove me wrong. (Though obviously she should have ended up with Marty.)

Enough about me. What about you? Did you watch the show? Did you like it? And what made it important?

News

1 in 4 Pastors Have Struggled with Mental Illness, Finds LifeWay and Focus on the Family

Family ministry has LifeWay Research examine how well (or not well) churches address mental health.

Christianity Today September 22, 2014
LifeWay Research

[Updated with Ed Stetzer quotes]

Your pastor is just as likely to experience mental illness as any other American, according to a LifeWay Research survey commissioned by Focus on the Family.

Nearly 1 in 4 pastors (23 percent) acknowledge they have “personally struggled with mental illness,” and half of those pastors said the illness had been diagnosed, according to the poll (infographics below). One in four U.S. adults experience mental illness in a given year, according to the National Alliance on Mental Illness.

Recent deaths by suicide of high-profile pastors’ children, including Rick Warren’s son Matthew and Joel Hunter's son Isaac, have prompted increased attention to mental illness from pastors’ pulpits and pens. Warren launched “The Gathering on Mental Health and the Church” this past spring. High-profile pastors, including NewSpring Church pastor Perry Noble, have publicly documented their struggles with mental illness.

“Here’s what we know from observation: If you reveal your struggle with mental illness as a pastor, it’s going to limit your opportunities,” Ed Stetzer, executive director of LifeWay Research, told CT. “What happens is pastors who are struggling with mental illness tend not to say it until they are already successful. So Perry Noble, running a church of 30,000 plus, just last year says ‘I have severe depression.’”

“We have to break the stigma that causes people to say that people with mental illness are just of no value,” he added. “These high-profile suicides made it okay to talk about, but I think Christians have been slower than the population at large to recognize what mental illness is, let alone what they should do."

The majority of pastors (66 percent) still rarely or never talk about mental illness in sermons or before large groups, the survey found. About one-fourth of pastors bring up mental illness several times a year, and 7 percent say they tackle it once a month or more.

Struggling laypeople wish their churches dealt with the issue more; 59 percent of respondents with a mental illness want their church to talk more openly about it, as do 65 percent of their family members.

“Our research found people who suffer from mental illness often turn to pastors for help,” Stetzer noted in a news release. “But pastors need more guidance and preparation for dealing with mental health crises. They often don’t have a plan to help individuals or families affected by mental illness, and miss opportunities to be the church.”

Other “key disconnects” uncovered by the study:

  • Two-thirds of pastors (68 percent) say their church maintains a list of local mental health resources for church members. But few families (28 percent) are aware those resources exist.
  • Only a quarter of churches (27 percent) have a plan to assist families affected by mental illness, according to pastors. And only 21 percent of family members are aware of a plan in their church.
  • Few churches (14 percent) have a counselor skilled in mental illness on staff, or train leaders how to recognize mental illness (13 percent), according to pastors.

The disconnect isn’t because of a lack of compassion. Most pastors (74 percent) say they aren’t reluctant to get involved with those with acute mental illnesses, and nearly 60 percent have provided counseling to people who were later diagnosed.

Instead, pastors can feel overwhelmed at times with how to properly respond to the mental health needs of members of their congregation; 22 percent said they were reluctant to do more because it took “too much time.”

“Pastors are trained for spiritual struggle. They’re not trained for mental illness,” Stetzer told CT. “And so, what they will often do is pass someone off. I don’t think what that 20 percent says is ‘Forget you,’ but ‘I can’t handle this.’”

The silence at church can lead to a reluctance to share, Atlanta-based psychiatrist Michael Lyles told LifeWay. “The vast majority of [my evangelical Christian patients] have not told anybody in their church what they were going through, including their pastors, including small group leaders, everybody,” he said in the release.

In fact, 10 percent of the 200 respondents with mental illness said they have switched churches after a church’s poor response to them, and another 13 percent stopped going altogether or couldn’t find a church.

But more than half of regular churchgoers with mental illness said they stayed where they were, and half also said that their church has been supportive. One way churches can be supportive, Stetzer suggested to CT, is regular meetings between pastoral staff and the person suffering from mental illness, even as the individual continues to receive consistent medical treatment.

“The Bible is filled with people who struggled with suicide, or were majorly depressed or bi-polar,” said Focus on the Family pyschologist Jared Pingleton in the LifeWay release. “David was totally bi-polar. Elijah probably was as well. They are not remembered for those things. They are remembered for their faith.”

Researchers focused on three groups:

They surveyed 1,000 senior Protestant pastors about how their churches approaches mental illness. Researchers then surveyed 355 Protestant Americans diagnosed with an acute mental illness—either moderate or severe depression, bipolar, or schizophrenia. Among them were 200 church-goers.

A third survey polled 207 Protestant family members of people with acute mental illness.

Researchers also conducted in-depth interview with 15 experts on spirituality and mental illness.

LifeWay's full release is copied below.

CT frequently addresses mental health, including how pastors can guard against mental illness, the spiritual side of mental illness, how Facebook can affect your mental health, and how nothing, not even suicide, can separate people from the love of God. CT also covered Saddleback Church senior pastor Rick Warren’s mental health ministry launch after his son Matthew took his own life in 2013.

—–

Mental Illness Remains Taboo Topic for Many Pastors

By Bob Smietana

NASHVILLE, Tenn. – One in four Americans suffers from some kind of mental illness in any given year, according to the National Alliance on Mental Illness. Many look to their church for spiritual guidance in times of distress.But they're unlikely to find much help on Sunday mornings.

Most Protestant senior pastors (66 percent) seldom speak to their congregation about mental illness.

That includes almost half (49 percent) who rarely (39 percent) or never (10 percent), speak about mental illness. About 1in 6 pastors (16 percent) speak about mental illness once a year. And about quarter of pastors (22 percent) are reluctant to help those who suffer from acute mental illness because it takes too much time.

Those are among the findings of a recent study of faith and mental illness by Nashville-based LifeWay Research. The study, co-sponsored by Focus on the Family, was designed to help churches better assist those affected by mental illness.

Researchers looked at three groups for the study.

They surveyed 1,000 senior Protestant pastors about how their churches approaches mental illness. Researchers then surveyed 355 Protestant Americans diagnosed with an acute mental illness—either moderate or severe depression, bipolar, or schizophrenia. Among them were 200 church-goers.

A third survey polled 207 Protestant family members of people with acute mental illness.

Researchers also conducted in-depth interview with 15 experts on spirituality and mental illness.

The study found pastors and churches want to help those who experience mental illness. But those good intentions don’t always lead to action.

"Our research found people who suffer from mental illness often turn to pastors for help," said Ed Stetzer, executive director of LifeWay Research.

"But pastors need more guidance and preparation for dealing with mental health crises. They often don’t have a plan to help individuals or families affected by mental illness, and miss opportunities to be the church."

A summary of findings includes a number of what researchers call ‘key disconnects’ including:

That silence can leave people feeling ashamed about mental illness, said Jared Pingleton, director of counseling services at Focus on the Family. Those with mental illness can feel left out, as if the church doesn’t care. Or worse, they can feel mental illness is a sign of spiritual failure.

"We can talk about diabetes and Aunt Mable’s lumbago in church—those are seen as medical conditions,” he said. “But mental illness–that’s somehow seen as a lack of faith."

Most pastors say they know people who have been diagnosed with mental illness. Nearly 6 in 10 (59 percent) have counseled people who were later diagnosed.

And pastors themselves aren’t immune from mental illness. About a quarter of pastors (23 percent), say they’ve experienced some kind of mental illness, while 12 percent say they received a diagnosis for a mental health condition.

But those pastors are often reluctant to share their struggles, said Chuck Hannaford, a clinical psychologist and president of HeartLife Professional Soul-Care in Germantown, Tennessee. He was one of the experts interviewed for the project.

Hannaford counsels pastors in his practice and said many – if they have a mental illness like depression or anxiety—won’t share that information with the congregation.

He doesn't think pastors should share all the details of their diagnosis. But they could acknowledge they struggle with mental illness.

"You know it’s a shame that we can’t be more open about it,” he told researchers. “But what I’m talking about is just an openness from the pulpit that people struggle with these issues and it’s not an easy answer."

Those with mental illness can also be hesitant to share their diagnosis at church. Michael Lyles, an Atlanta-based psychiatrist, says more than half his patients come from an evangelical Christian background.

"The vast majority of them have not told anybody in their church what they were going through, including their pastors, including small group leaders, everybody," Lyle said.

Stetzer said what appears to be missing in most church responses is "an open forum for discussion and intervention that could help remove the stigma associated with mental illness."

"Churches talk openly about cancer, diabetes, heart attacks and other health conditions – they should do the same for mental illness, in order to reduce the sense of stigma," Stetzer said.

Researchers asked those with mental illness about their experience in church.

LifeWay Research also asked open-ended questions about how mental illness has affected people’s faith. Those without support from the church said they struggled.

“My faith has gone to pot and I have so little trust in others,” one respondent told researchers.

“I have no help from anyone,” said another respondent.

But others found support when they told their church about their mental illness.

Mental illness, like other chronic conditions, can feel overwhelming at times, said Pingleton. Patients can feel as if their diagnosis defines their life. But that’s not how the Bible sees those with mental illness, he said.

He pointed out that many biblical characters suffered from emotional struggles. And some, were they alive today, would likely be diagnosed with mental illness.

“The Bible is filled with people who struggled with suicide, or were majorly depressed or bi-polar, he said. “David was totally bi-polar. Elijah probably was as well. They are not remembered for those things. They are remembered for their faith.”

LifeWay Research’s study was featured in a two-day radio broadcast from Focus on the Family on September 18 and 19. The study, along with a guide for pastors on how to assist those with mental illness and other downloadable resources, are posted at ThrivingPastor.com/MentalHealth.

LifeWay Research also looked at how churches view the use of medication to treat mental illness, about mental and spiritual formation, among other topics. Those findings will be released later this fall.

Methodology:
LifeWay Research conducted 1,000 telephone surveys of Protestant pastors May 7-31, 2014. Responses were weighted to reflect the size and geographic distribution of Protestant churches. The sample provides 95% confidence that the sampling error does not exceed plus or minus 3.1%. Margins of error are higher in sub-groups.

LifeWay Research conducted 355 online surveys July 4-24, 2014among Protestant adults who suffer from moderate depression, severe depression, bipolar, or schizophrenia. The completed sample includes 200 who have attended worship services at a Christian church once a month or more as an adult.

LifeWay Research conducted 207 online surveys July 4-20, 2014 among Protestant adults who attend religious services at a Christian church on religious holidays or more often and have immediate family members in their household suffering from moderate depression, severe depression, bipolar, or schizophrenia.

Only a quarter of churches (27 percent) have a plan to assist families affected by mental illness according to pastors.And only 21 percent of family members are aware of a plan in their church. Few churches (14 percent) have a counselor skilled in mental illness on staff, or train leaders how to recognize mental illness (13 percent) according to pastors. Two-thirds of pastors (68 percent) say their church maintains a list of local mental health resources for church members. But few families (28 percent) are aware those resources exist. Family members (65 percent) and those with mental illness (59 percent) want their church to talk openly about mental illness, so the topic will not be a taboo. But 66 percent of pastors speak to their church once a year or less on the subject. A few – (10 percent)—say they’ve changed churches because of how a particular church responded to their mental illness. Another 13 percent ether stopped attending church (8 percent) or could not find a church (5 percent). More than a third, 37 percent, answered, “don’t know,” when asked how their church’s reaction to their illness affected them. Among regular churchgoers with mental illness, about half (52 percent) say they have stayed at the same church. Fifteen percent changed churches, while 8 percent stopped going to church, and 26 percent said, “Don’t know.” Over half, 53 percent, say their church has been supportive. About thirteen percent say their church was not supportive. A third (33 percent) answered, “don’t know” when asked if their church was supportive. “Several people at my church (including my pastor) have confided that they too suffer from mental illness,” said one respondent. “Reminding me that God will get me through and to take my meds,” said another.

News

Pew Surprised by How Many Americans Want Religion Back in Politics

Fresh stats on who thinks churches should endorse candidates, whether homosexual behavior is a sin, and has it gotten harder to be an evangelical.

Christianity Today September 22, 2014
Pew Research Center

More Americans want more religion in politics, according to a new Pew Research Center study exploring the "growing appetite" for churches endorsing political candidates and other intersections of church and state.

While three out of four Americans (72%, a record high) believe that religion is "losing its influence on American life," a majority of Americans (56 percent) also believe this shift has been for the worse. White evangelicals are the most likely to view the change negatively (77 percent), but the majority of white mainline Protestants (66 percent), black Protestants (65 percent), and Catholics (61 percent) feel likewise.

Gregory Smith, Pew’s director of U.S. religion surveys, previewed a number of what he called the study's "surprising" and "interesting" findings at the Religion Newswriters Association’s annual conference on Thursday.

Fewer Americans now believe churches (and other houses of worship) should stay out of politics. A narrow minority (48 percent) agree with this in 2014, versus a narrow majority (52 percent) in 2010, according to the study. About half (49 percent) also now believe that churches should express views on social and political questions, an increase from 43 percent in 2010.

While white evangelicals are most likely to support churches voicing political opinions (66 percent in 2014, versus 56 percent in 2010), support increased most among white mainline Protestants (49 percent in 2014, versus 35 percent in 2010). Support among black Protestants—two-thirds of whom are evangelicals, according to Smith—increased from 53 percent to 58 percent, widening the gap between how black and white evangelicals view the question.

While most Americans still believe churches should not have the legal right to endorse candidates, support for such pulpit endorsements has notably increased—including one-third of Americans overall, and a roughly 50-percent increase among the religiously unaffiliated, or so-called "nones." In 2010, 26 percent of the religiously affiliated and 15 percent of the “nones” said they would favor churches publicly backing candidates; in 2014, the percentages increased to 35 and 23 percent, respectively.

In the one statistic to combine evangelicals across ethnic groups, one in three evangelicals said it has become harder to be an evangelical in recent years.

On the increasingly prominent question of whether business owners opposed to same-sex marriage should be required to provide flowers, food, or photography for such weddings, Pew found that Americans are evenly split over the answer: 49 percent believe all businesses must serve same-sex weddings; 47 percent believe business owners should be allowed to follow their personal religious convictions. White evangelicals were the lone group where the majority sided with conscience of the business owner (71 percent); in contrast, a minority of white mainline Protestants (49 percent), Catholics (40 percent), and black Protestants (37 percent) agree.

Despite occupying opposite sides of this particular debate, white evangelicals (82 percent) and black Protestants (77 percent) were both more likely than other religious groups to believe homosexual behavior is sinful.

And overall, the number of Americans in agreement has actually risen slightly: 50 percent in 2014, versus 45 percent in 2010. "The change is statistically significant," said Smith. "What is harder to answer is if it is a substantively important change. It's too early to say if this is a reversal or a leveling off of current trends [in increased support of homosexuality and same-sex marriage]. That is not the conclusion I would reach yet."

Pew conducted the study of a national sample of 2,002 adults from Sept. 2-9. The margin of error for the general sample was 2.5 percentage points; among Protestant groups, it was 5.8 for white evangelicals, 6.2 for mainline Protestants, and 9 for black Protestants.

CT has covered evangelicals' favorite same-sex marriage laws, the court ruling which ignited debate on servicing same-sex weddings, asked whether Jesus would bake a cake for a same-sex wedding in Arizona (depends who you ask), and considered whether the Supreme Court will ultimately decide the national legalization of same-sex marriage.

CT also looked at a “theatrical” movement that encourages pastors to speak out on political issues and call the IRS’ “bluff.”

Past coverage of Pew Research studies includes perspectives on interfaith marriage, the morality of suicide, and global religious liberty issues.

Apple PodcastsDown ArrowDown ArrowDown Arrowarrow_left_altLeft ArrowLeft ArrowRight ArrowRight ArrowRight Arrowarrow_up_altUp ArrowUp ArrowAvailable at Amazoncaret-downCloseCloseEmailEmailExpandExpandExternalExternalFacebookfacebook-squareGiftGiftGooglegoogleGoogle KeephamburgerInstagraminstagram-squareLinkLinklinkedin-squareListenListenListenChristianity TodayCT Creative Studio Logologo_orgMegaphoneMenuMenupausePinterestPlayPlayPocketPodcastRSSRSSSaveSaveSaveSearchSearchsearchSpotifyStitcherTelegramTable of ContentsTable of Contentstwitter-squareWhatsAppXYouTubeYouTube