fbpx
Articles

5 ways the church can help someone facing mental illness

/
June 8, 2015

Facing mental illness is not an easy process. Regardless of how informed we are, this process is not easy. Trying to walk this difficult journey by yourself only makes it harder. Often, in the arena of mental illness, what the church has to offer are not superior answers—if the problem is biological or environmental, the church should provide very similar advice as our secular friends in the mental health field.

While the initial guidance the church provides would, in many cases, be the same, the church should always provide a superior context of living out those answers—a sphere of relationships where everyone acknowledges we are broken people in need of redemption, thereby, negating the stigma that makes overcoming these struggles so painfully isolating. Counseling is never merely principles and suggestions; it is also a context that facilitates a journey.

That is the ideal; a stigma-free, redemptive community. But the question remains, “How do we produce more of that reality in our churches?” Unfortunately, as Amy Simpson says in her book Troubled Minds, mental illness is often the “no-casserole illness” in Christian circles; a form of suffering from which the church, uncharacteristically, moves away from suffering people instead of towards them.

One of the reasons we move away instead of towards people is confusion and uncertainty about what we should do. When we don't have good answers, it is often easier to just avoid the people who generate the questions. It is unlikely the church will offer the unique care of a redemptive community if its people are uninformed about and intimidated by mental illness.

A particular individual or church does not have to be able to do everything in order to do some very significant things powerfully well. Consider the example of someone in need of knee surgery. There is a surgeon who repairs the ligament; a physical therapist who helps the individual regain a full range of motion; family and friends who care for day-to-day needs and provide encouragement; and a physician who oversees the pain medicine management. A similar set of roles can exist in the struggle with mental illness.

This metaphor is not meant to imply that the church only plays the “friends and family” role. A given church, pastor or friend may be well-equipped to provide various levels of intensive soul care. But it is their responsibility to know the limits of their ability to help and be willing to invite other members on the care team with needed, supplemental expertise.

With that in mind, let’s consider many things that the church—as a corporate entity or through its personal relationships—is uniquely equipped to do. Many of these functions have little-to-no secular alternative; ongoing gatherings of adults for mutual encouragement and instruction are rare in our culture.

The church, corporately or through individuals, can:

1. Teach a balanced view of mental illness as a part of an ongoing education process. A church has many venues through which this education can occur. Mental health does not need to be the “focal point of the church” in order for the church to effectively disciple people in the care of their interconnected mind, soul, and body.

As you can see in the examples above, a church is a unique context for allowing people to become progressively known, instructed, and loved. Where else in our culture could each of these levels of education and connection be provided within a context of ongoing community?

2. Befriend those who are struggling with mental illness with multiple people so no one person carries the full weight of responsibility. We often fail to realize that no professional qualifications are required to be a friend. As Amy Simpson in Trouble Minds wrote, “When churches have antibiotic-like expectations for mental health treatment, they communicate, ‘go get treated, then you can come back and you can be a growing Christian with us.’”

3. Have a relationship that includes but transcends the struggle with mental illness. In a purely professional setting, a struggle with mental illness is why an individual is known and cared for. This adds to the stigma and results in a mindset that says I have to be “all better” to be known authentically. With a professional counselor or recovery group if you get better, you “graduate” from having people who know and care for you.

4. Help people sort their struggles into categories of sin, suffering, and identity which can be caused by biology, environment, or choice. Emotional unrest and embarrassment make it difficult to sort out how to best categorize struggles. One of the main goals for this presentation is to equip people for these conversations. The more these conversations can be had effectively in natural relationships the earlier people will receive care, the longer they will stick with their care, and less ashamed they will be to embrace the care God wants for them.

5. Attend a counseling session with your friend, take notes, gain an understanding of their struggle, and serve as an echo of key truths or practices recommended by the counselor. This would require the permission of your friend and the cooperation of the counselor. But many counselors are willing to cooperate with this kind of counseling-advocate model, and it can greatly enhance both the short-term and long-term effectiveness of counseling.

This list is not exhaustive. Instead, it is meant to be the beginning of a brainstorming exercise. But there is a danger in thinking through what the church could do: our personal initiative gets lost in the corporate possibilities. For instance, we think “the church ought to mentor underprivileged students,” but we don’t take the step of volunteering at the nearest school.

As you brainstorm possibilities, I would encourage you not to begin with programs your church could run or staff position that could be filled. Instead, begin with, “What conversations could I have about this material with someone I care about?” It may be as simple as following up on something they shared with you or seeking their help in sorting through a struggle you’ve not talked about.

Undoubtedly, mental illness is a difficult subject to address because of its complexity and highly personal nature. Everyone is affected by mental illness; either personally or someone they love. As a result, it is a subject that must be discussed and addressed in the church. Let’s not let our silence hurt people by leaving them to struggle in isolation.

This post is an edited excerpt from “Towards a Christian Perspective of Mental Illness,” which available for free in its entirety in both video presentation and PDF article formats.

Brad Hambrick

Brad serves as the Pastor of Counseling at The Summit Church in  Durham, North Carolina. He also serves as Instructor of Biblical Counseling at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, a council member of the Biblical Counseling Coalition, and has authored several books including Do Ask, Do Tell, Let’s Talk: Why and How Christians Should Have Gay … Read More

Article 12: The Future of AI

We affirm that AI will continue to be developed in ways that we cannot currently imagine or understand, including AI that will far surpass many human abilities. God alone has the power to create life, and no future advancements in AI will usurp Him as the Creator of life. The church has a unique role in proclaiming human dignity for all and calling for the humane use of AI in all aspects of society.

We deny that AI will make us more or less human, or that AI will ever obtain a coequal level of worth, dignity, or value to image-bearers. Future advancements in AI will not ultimately fulfill our longings for a perfect world. While we are not able to comprehend or know the future, we do not fear what is to come because we know that God is omniscient and that nothing we create will be able to thwart His redemptive plan for creation or to supplant humanity as His image-bearers.

Genesis 1; Isaiah 42:8; Romans 1:20-21; 5:2; Ephesians 1:4-6; 2 Timothy 1:7-9; Revelation 5:9-10

Article 11: Public Policy

We affirm that the fundamental purposes of government are to protect human beings from harm, punish those who do evil, uphold civil liberties, and to commend those who do good. The public has a role in shaping and crafting policies concerning the use of AI in society, and these decisions should not be left to those who develop these technologies or to governments to set norms.

We deny that AI should be used by governments, corporations, or any entity to infringe upon God-given human rights. AI, even in a highly advanced state, should never be delegated the governing authority that has been granted by an all-sovereign God to human beings alone. 

Romans 13:1-7; Acts 10:35; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 10: War

We affirm that the use of AI in warfare should be governed by love of neighbor and the principles of just war. The use of AI may mitigate the loss of human life, provide greater protection of non-combatants, and inform better policymaking. Any lethal action conducted or substantially enabled by AI must employ 5 human oversight or review. All defense-related AI applications, such as underlying data and decision-making processes, must be subject to continual review by legitimate authorities. When these systems are deployed, human agents bear full moral responsibility for any actions taken by the system.

We deny that human agency or moral culpability in war can be delegated to AI. No nation or group has the right to use AI to carry out genocide, terrorism, torture, or other war crimes.

Genesis 4:10; Isaiah 1:16-17; Psalm 37:28; Matthew 5:44; 22:37-39; Romans 13:4

Article 9: Security

We affirm that AI has legitimate applications in policing, intelligence, surveillance, investigation, and other uses supporting the government’s responsibility to respect human rights, to protect and preserve human life, and to pursue justice in a flourishing society.

We deny that AI should be employed for safety and security applications in ways that seek to dehumanize, depersonalize, or harm our fellow human beings. We condemn the use of AI to suppress free expression or other basic human rights granted by God to all human beings.

Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 8: Data & Privacy

We affirm that privacy and personal property are intertwined individual rights and choices that should not be violated by governments, corporations, nation-states, and other groups, even in the pursuit of the common good. While God knows all things, it is neither wise nor obligatory to have every detail of one’s life open to society.

We deny the manipulative and coercive uses of data and AI in ways that are inconsistent with the love of God and love of neighbor. Data collection practices should conform to ethical guidelines that uphold the dignity of all people. We further deny that consent, even informed consent, although requisite, is the only necessary ethical standard for the collection, manipulation, or exploitation of personal data—individually or in the aggregate. AI should not be employed in ways that distort truth through the use of generative applications. Data should not be mishandled, misused, or abused for sinful purposes to reinforce bias, strengthen the powerful, or demean the weak.

Exodus 20:15, Psalm 147:5; Isaiah 40:13-14; Matthew 10:16 Galatians 6:2; Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 John 1:7 

Article 7: Work

We affirm that work is part of God’s plan for human beings participating in the cultivation and stewardship of creation. The divine pattern is one of labor and rest in healthy proportion to each other. Our view of work should not be confined to commercial activity; it must also include the many ways that human beings serve each other through their efforts. AI can be used in ways that aid our work or allow us to make fuller use of our gifts. The church has a Spirit-empowered responsibility to help care for those who lose jobs and to encourage individuals, communities, employers, and governments to find ways to invest in the development of human beings and continue making vocational contributions to our lives together.

We deny that human worth and dignity is reducible to an individual’s economic contributions to society alone. Humanity should not use AI and other technological innovations as a reason to move toward lives of pure leisure even if greater social wealth creates such possibilities.

Genesis 1:27; 2:5; 2:15; Isaiah 65:21-24; Romans 12:6-8; Ephesians 4:11-16

Article 6: Sexuality

We affirm the goodness of God’s design for human sexuality which prescribes the sexual union to be an exclusive relationship between a man and a woman in the lifelong covenant of marriage.

We deny that the pursuit of sexual pleasure is a justification for the development or use of AI, and we condemn the objectification of humans that results from employing AI for sexual purposes. AI should not intrude upon or substitute for the biblical expression of sexuality between a husband and wife according to God’s design for human marriage.

Genesis 1:26-29; 2:18-25; Matthew 5:27-30; 1 Thess 4:3-4

Article 5: Bias

We affirm that, as a tool created by humans, AI will be inherently subject to bias and that these biases must be accounted for, minimized, or removed through continual human oversight and discretion. AI should be designed and used in such ways that treat all human beings as having equal worth and dignity. AI should be utilized as a tool to identify and eliminate bias inherent in human decision-making.

We deny that AI should be designed or used in ways that violate the fundamental principle of human dignity for all people. Neither should AI be used in ways that reinforce or further any ideology or agenda, seeking to subjugate human autonomy under the power of the state.

Micah 6:8; John 13:34; Galatians 3:28-29; 5:13-14; Philippians 2:3-4; Romans 12:10

Article 4: Medicine

We affirm that AI-related advances in medical technologies are expressions of God’s common grace through and for people created in His image and that these advances will increase our capacity to provide enhanced medical diagnostics and therapeutic interventions as we seek to care for all people. These advances should be guided by basic principles of medical ethics, including beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, which are all consistent with the biblical principle of loving our neighbor.

We deny that death and disease—effects of the Fall—can ultimately be eradicated apart from Jesus Christ. Utilitarian applications regarding healthcare distribution should not override the dignity of human life. Fur- 3 thermore, we reject the materialist and consequentialist worldview that understands medical applications of AI as a means of improving, changing, or completing human beings.

Matthew 5:45; John 11:25-26; 1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Galatians 6:2; Philippians 2:4

Article 3: Relationship of AI & Humanity

We affirm the use of AI to inform and aid human reasoning and moral decision-making because it is a tool that excels at processing data and making determinations, which often mimics or exceeds human ability. While AI excels in data-based computation, technology is incapable of possessing the capacity for moral agency or responsibility.

We deny that humans can or should cede our moral accountability or responsibilities to any form of AI that will ever be created. Only humanity will be judged by God on the basis of our actions and that of the tools we create. While technology can be created with a moral use in view, it is not a moral agent. Humans alone bear the responsibility for moral decision making.

Romans 2:6-8; Galatians 5:19-21; 2 Peter 1:5-8; 1 John 2:1

Article 2: AI as Technology

We affirm that the development of AI is a demonstration of the unique creative abilities of human beings. When AI is employed in accordance with God’s moral will, it is an example of man’s obedience to the divine command to steward creation and to honor Him. We believe in innovation for the glory of God, the sake of human flourishing, and the love of neighbor. While we acknowledge the reality of the Fall and its consequences on human nature and human innovation, technology can be used in society to uphold human dignity. As a part of our God-given creative nature, human beings should develop and harness technology in ways that lead to greater flourishing and the alleviation of human suffering.

We deny that the use of AI is morally neutral. It is not worthy of man’s hope, worship, or love. Since the Lord Jesus alone can atone for sin and reconcile humanity to its Creator, technology such as AI cannot fulfill humanity’s ultimate needs. We further deny the goodness and benefit of any application of AI that devalues or degrades the dignity and worth of another human being. 

Genesis 2:25; Exodus 20:3; 31:1-11; Proverbs 16:4; Matthew 22:37-40; Romans 3:23

Article 1: Image of God

We affirm that God created each human being in His image with intrinsic and equal worth, dignity, and moral agency, distinct from all creation, and that humanity’s creativity is intended to reflect God’s creative pattern.

We deny that any part of creation, including any form of technology, should ever be used to usurp or subvert the dominion and stewardship which has been entrusted solely to humanity by God; nor should technology be assigned a level of human identity, worth, dignity, or moral agency.

Genesis 1:26-28; 5:1-2; Isaiah 43:6-7; Jeremiah 1:5; John 13:34; Colossians 1:16; 3:10; Ephesians 4:24