SELF-PROFESSING AS CHRISTIANS ENABLES MENTAL DISORDERS (inspired by Malloy & Kincaid)
Verse and a look at American exceptionalism, research on religious beliefs and mental health with quotes galore
Today I wrote a verse inferring that there might be a connection between the mental health of those espousing ultra religious views particularly in the operation of our government. With the new US House Speaker in mind, we all expect his attempts to force his religiosity upon policy decisions in congress. It’s a given it will occur from all that we have learned about him. For an outsider trying to maintain an open mind, it can not seem like insanity to witness the recent displays by the Christian Nationalists at the highest levels of our government. It is my prediction that the public will quickly tire of all this delving into the outskirts of theocratic control, and soundly reject it in our 2024 election. But anything can happen in these times, considering that the right wing billionaires and their media apparatus will be fully behind these efforts. I have referenced Mike Malloy and Robyn Kincaid in my title. Bot of these podcasters have helped shape my understanding and have pointed out the obvious danger to this American phenomenon. Here is my verse.
A thought came to my mind about the concept of “American exceptionalism” in regards to the right wing Christian mindset in America. Now this consideration of our nation as special is not to be found only among the right wing, but perhaps Christianity may be of more importance in this group in this seemingly universal trait of ours. Here are the results of a term search on X.
I found an interesting abstract on a scholarly writing on American exceptionalism online. In this case it’s specifically dealing with moral exceptionalism. I have not read the document in full, not having the resources to do so, but this short summary indicates the historical connection of the term to Christianity in the form of Puritanism and Protestant religious beliefs. It’s worth a read in my opinion.
CHAPTER 2
Eric Luis Uhlmann, T. Andrew Poehlman, John A. Bargh
Published: May 2009
Abstract
The judgments and actions of contemporary Americans reflect the implicit influence of America’s Puritan-Protestant heritage. Americans valorize individual merit, a residue of the Protestant emphasis on a personal relationship with God and earthly rewards and punishments. The United States has remained deeply religious and traditional in the face of enormous prosperity, at least in part attributable to the founding influence of the Puritan-Protestants. Americans, but not members of comparison cultures, implicitly link work and divine salvation and display other judgmental biases consistent with implicit Puritanism. As predicted by theories of implicit social cognition, which hold that the influence of traditional cultural values is strongest at an implicit level, less religious and non-Protestant Americans are just as likely to display such effects as devout American Protestants.
And another little bit written about American Exceptionalism from a German political scientist. This is general information alluding to America’s religious institutions to be a factor in belief in the term by some. Interestingly democracy by immigrants played a major role in Alexis de Toqueville’s apparent coining of the term. Neither of these factors appear to resonate with right wing Americans. Democracy is of course incompatible with a theocratic form of government which all indications point to as an end game of the modern Republican MAGA movement.
American Exceptionalism – Conceptual Thoughts and Empirical Evidence
Johannes Thimm*
2007
2 “American Exceptionalism” in the literature
On the most general level, ‘American exceptionalism’ refers to the belief “that the United States differs qualitatively from other developed nations, because of its unique origins, national credo, historical evolution, and distinctive political and religious institutions” (Koh 2005, p.225). As John Winthrop (1996 [1630]), one of the first settlers of the Massachusetts Bay colony, reminds with the famous phrase of the city upon a hill, the discourse on American exceptionalism goes back a long way, even predating the birth of the United States as a nation state. The phrase has ever since held a firm place in the American collective memory exemplified by its more contemporary resurrection in Presidential speeches. The term “American exceptionalism” is attributed to Alexis de Toqueville, who noted that the United States held a special place among nations, because it was as a country of immigrants and the first modern democracy (Tocqueville 1954). As Deborah Madsen (1998, p.1) concludes, the phenomenon has been with us ever since: “American exceptionalism permeates every period of American history and is the single most powerful agent in a series of arguments that have been fought down the centuries concerning the identity of America and Americans.”
Winthrop’s quote also shows that the Puritan settlers who founded the Massachusetts Bay colony regarded their social experiment not only as “different”, but also as exemplary. Malone and Khong (2003) describe exceptionalism as “the widely held belief in the United States that its values and institutions are the best yet devised, the conviction that the world needs to adapt itself to American ways rather than vice versa.” The belief in the superiority of the American model is reflected in the perception inside the US of America’s role in the world. That American foreign policy is based on moral principles is a consistent theme in the American discourse – a phenomenon recognized even by those who are skeptic of such an assessment.
*Political scientist Johannes Thimm doesn't see much chance for US President Trump to legally influence the outcome of the election. He believes in the independence of the American judiciary, he says on WDR Morning Echo. From Twitter a post in German on 11/05/2020
I wanted to address mental health and religiosity a little as far as research goes. I’m uncertain if the studies I show excerpts from fully back up any argument one way or another. But I found it interesting enough to share today. And my own honest opinion of the Christian Nationalists among us is that they are spiritually very unwell, and they couldn’t be convinced of this by mere words. They are the antithesis of the teachings of the Rabbi Jesus Christ. Note that some might feel it improper to criticize religion and equate it at times to mental disorders. I did not find too much on research in this area and what seems to have been completed in recent years comes for countries other than the United States.
Klara Malinakova, Peter Tavel, Zdenek Meier, Jitse P. van Dijk, and Sijmen A. Reijneveld
Published online 2020 Jan 13
This study was funded by the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic, project Biological and psychological aspects of spiritual experience and their associations with health (Contract No. 19-19526S) and by the Sts Cyril and Methodius Faculty of Theology of the Palacký University Olomouc internal project Determinants of Health from a Spiritual, Psychological, Social and Biological Point of View (grant number IGA-CMTF- 2019-006).
Our findings support the idea that the heterogeneity of findings in associations between religiosity/spirituality and mental health could be due to measurement problems and variation in the degree of secularity. A shift towards religiosity could be expected to be seen in a substantial part of non-religious respondents in problematic times.
Most studies report a positive association between religiosity and spirituality (R/S) and aspects of mental health (MH), such as a higher life-satisfaction and meaning in life, a lower prevalence of anxiety and depression, suicidal tendencies and substance abuse, and better cognitive functioning. Some authors even present spiritual health as a fundamental dimension of people’s overall health and well-being, permeating and integrating all other dimensions of health. However, a small proportion of such studies report either mixed or negative associations. Understanding why these findings deviate may add to our understanding of the underlying process.
The aim of this study was to contribute to our understanding of the heterogeneity of findings in the associations of religiosity with MH [Mental Health]. We found that different approaches to assessing religiosity (i.e., a different categorisation of respondents based on other related concepts) led to different findings. Unstable non-religious respondents and converts who perceived God as distant were more likely to experience anxiety in close relationships. Furthermore, we found higher risks of worse MH for unstable non-religious respondents, for converts who perceived God as distant and for stable religious respondents who perceived God as distant.
We found that the unstable religious respondents (i.e., the non-believers who reported that their attitude could change in case of need and distress) were more likely to report a higher attachment anxiety compared with stable non-religious respondents. Therefore, their religious instability could already be a symptom of worse MH, associated with the inclination to search for some external source of strength and support in times of need. This religious instability may subsequently manifest itself in a shift towards religion. This agrees with the findings of other authors who mention attachment insecurity as one of the factors in the conversion process. Moreover, these respondents showed higher risks of seven BSI [Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI-53)] symptoms and the BSI GSI score compared with the stable non-religious respondents. These findings are in line with the study of Zinnbauer and Pargament, in which the convert group showed more pre-conversion perceived stress and a greater sense of personal inadequacy and limitation before the conversion. Our results could also be supported by studies which reported more adverse health outcomes among respondents who were inconsistent in their religiosity and spirituality —that is, spiritual non-believers. This suggests that religious instability related to a more general instability in attachment may provide some explanation for the heterogeneity in the findings regarding S/R and mental health.
We also found that converts who perceived God as distant were more likely to experience anxiety in close relationships. These findings further support the idea of the association between one’s attachment style and religious conversion. Moreover, these respondents showed approximately a four-times higher risk of worse MH than stable non-religious respondents. These findings contrast with those of other authors, who, for example, associated conversion with a decrease in symptoms of depression and hopelessness and positive personality changes. Nevertheless, as 70% of our respondents reported that a difficult life situation played an important role in their conversion, our results are consistent with the idea of conversion as a search for security in a difficult time. In addition, in secular countries, a stronger impulse (e.g., a worse psychological condition) might be needed for conversion. The fact that this concerns only the converts who perceive God as distant suggests that the subgroup with better MH may represent respondents with a secure attachment style, while the other respondents have an insecure attachment style, as some other authors have also suggested. Alternatively, spiritual experience is often associated not only with the perceived closeness to God, but also feelings of peace, happiness and meaning of life. This may in turn lead to better mental health.
Since Attachment Anxiety is referenced in the study above, I found an article on it. Childhood apparently plays an important role in this. I am curious about the feelings of Donald Trump by some as an attachment figure. Further one might consider Donald Trump in relation to attachment anxiety. I have no training, but this seems on the surface likely relevant to Donald Trump and his MAGA followers.
Attachment is the legacy of early experience.
Posted November 2, 2015
Shahram Heshmat Ph.D.
Psychology Today
One of the challenges of being human is to achieve a balance between conflicting desires for independence (individuality and freedom) and the desire for intimacy and acceptance by significant others. The need for affiliation is rooted in our attachment system. Attachment is an inborn system that motivates an infant to seek proximity to a caregiver, especially in dangerous and uncertain situations.
The attachment system plays an important role in emotion regulation allowing individuals to deal with distressing events. When individuals (infants, children, or adults) are threatened or challenged, the attachment system becomes activated and triggers efforts to alleviate distress and restore felt security. In response, the attachment figure provides comfort and reassurance, thereby allowing distressed individuals to regain a sense of calm.
A sense of felt security provides confidence that one is worthy of others’ love and that important figures in your life will be responsive and supportive when needed. This sense of security is a resilience resource in times of need and a building block for mental health and social adjustment. Secure people perceive themselves as valuable, lovable, and special. They feel understood, validated, and accepted by their attachment figures.
Repeated interactions with the attachment figures are mentally formed as “if-then” strategies for stress management: “If I turn to my partner, then I will feel safe.” As a result of conditioning, the person providing the comfort becomes a cue for a sense of safety and relief. That is, simply thinking about the attachment figure, even in the absence of the attachment figure’s actual presence, can help one feel calm and safe.
But when a person’s attachment figures are unreliable or rejecting, the person may become chronically insecure with respect to close relationships. An insecurely attached individual doubts the availability and support of others and worries about one’s social value. Consequently, they adopt different strategies for dealing with threats and negative emotions. These insecure patterns of behaviors are known as defensive avoidance and anxious attachment.
Avoidant style involves denying attachment needs, suppressing attachment-related thoughts and emotions. An avoidant person distrusts relationship partners’ goodwill and tries to maintain emotional independence and distance. The avoidant individual feels trapped when they are too close to others.
In contrast, a person high in attachment anxiety worries that a partner will not be available in times of need. An anxious person makes insistent attempts to obtain reassurance and love from others, partly because of the person’s self-doubts about his or her worthiness. Anxiously attached people are preoccupied with rejection fears. These fears may motivate them to use sex, which is a prominent route for seeking proximity, to serve their unmet attachment needs (for example, achieving intimacy, approval, and reassurance).
Early attachment interactions sometimes shape people’s attachment patterns later on in adult life. For example, a secure adult has a similar relationship with their romantic partner, feeling secure and connected, while allowing themselves and their partner to move freely. On the other hand, the loss of a romantic partner may trigger depression among people high on attachment anxiety, because their anxiety relates specifically to separation and abandonment.
From many of the same authors from the above study the abstract of another study which may be applicable to the discussion. This study concentrates on childhood trauma and religious and spiritual difficulties. Donald Trump’s childhood cannot be ignored in the discussion. I suspect a considerable number on the hard right may have had difficult childhoods, leading to dysfunctionality in their spiritual lives. I did not read this study in full, but the connection between childhood trauma and demonic struggles I found rather fascinating.
Associations of childhood trauma experiences with religious and spiritual struggles
Anna Janů, anna.janu@oushi.upol.cz, Klara Malinakova, and Peter Tavel
First published online August 23, 2020
Abstract
Childhood trauma is associated with many interpersonal and psychosocial problems in adulthood. The aim of this study was to explore the associations with a spiritual area of personality, namely religious and spiritual struggles (R/S struggles). A nationally representative sample of 1,000 Czech respondents aged 15 years and older participated in the survey. All types of CT were associated with an increased level of all six types of R/S struggles, with the highest values for demonic struggles. Thus, the findings of this study might be important for clinical practice and pastoral care as well as further research.
Although not totally equivalent, I find the following quote on the distinction of religion from theology to be similar to my ideas of the distinction between my nomenclature in the words religiosity and spirituality. I find this quote by this rabbi to be close to my own personal understanding, better than the others I read from the book Forty Thousand Sublime and Beautiful Thoughts published in 1914.
“Religion is universal; theology is exclusive, -religion is humanitarian; theology is sectarian, -religion unites mankind: theology divides it, religion is love, broad and all - comprising as God's love; theology preaches love and practises bigotry. Religion looks to the moral worth of man; theology looks to his creed and denomination. Religion is light and love, and virtue and peace, unadulterated and immaculate; but theology is the apple of discord, which disunites and estranges one from another.”
- Dr. M. Lilienthal
Max Lilienthal (November 6, 1815 – April 6, 1882) was a German-born adviser for the reform of Jewish schools in Russia and later a rabbi and proponent of Reform Judaism in the United States. Lilienthal served as a rabbi for several years after his arrival in New York City in 1845, including at the Anshe Chesed Synagogue. He opened a Jewish school in 1850. In 1855, he moved to Cincinnati to become an editor of The American Israelite and serve as rabbi of Congregation Bene Israel. As a rabbi in Cincinnati, he promoted Reform Judaism. He wrote for several publications and was an advocate for both Jewish and secular schools, teaching at Hebrew Union College and serving on the Cincinnati board of education. Lilienthal was later an active supporter of the movement to abolish slavery in the United States, though a minority of American Jews, primarily those in the South, were themselves slaveholders and disagreed strongly with his position.
A quote below describes the Christian nationalist and his ‘faith,’ in my opinion, quite well. This quote is also in the same book as the quote above.
“Many people make their own God; and he is much what the French may mean when they talk of le bon Dieu, -very indulgent, rather weak, near at hand when we want anything, but far away out of sight when we have a mind to do wrong. Such a God is as much an idol as if he were an image of stone.”
- J. C. Hare.
Augustus John Cuthbert Hare (13 March 1834 – 22 January 1903) was an English writer and raconteur. A raconteur is one who tells anecdotes in a skillful and amusing way. Hare was the author of a large number of books, which fall into two classes: biographies of members and connections of his family, and descriptive and historical accounts of various countries and cities…This last [book written] included a number of accounts of encounters with ghosts. A reviewer in the New York Times concluded that "Mr Hare's ghosts are rather more interesting than his lords or his middle-class people".
This is what I have to offer the reader for this Sunday in October. I hope I raised some interest and curiosity in my wanderings for today.
105th posting, October 28, 2023