Arts, Faculty of
Sociology, Department of
DSpace
UBCV
Antebi, Lara
Master of Arts - MA
University of British Columbia
Like many religions, Christianity holds a morally prohibitive stance toward suicide. At the same time, the Bible compels people to treat those who suffer with care and compassion. Evangelical Christianity shares certain core tenets that are characteristically stable across time and place. Yet, research suggests that there is greater variability than we might expect in how clergy stand on and address certain contested issues. This slippage raises an important question about the applications of theology into practice: how do leaders understand and respond to suicidality in their communities? Using data from 16 interviews with Canadian evangelical church leaders, I found that pastors draw from two distinct logics when making sense of suicide and their role in responding. First, a person-based logic centers the suffering that might lead people to suicidality, emphasizing pastors' role of compassion and presence. Second, an outcome-based logic views suicide as a failure of duty, and highlights pastors’ role of direction and biblical authority. Put into practice, however, these logics lend themselves to conflicting approaches. This was especially salient for those who held a strong commitment to both logics, who expressed a great deal of tension when facing situations that demanded some kind of response. My findings reveal that between these two cultural anchors, there are a range of positions in leaders’ beliefs and subsequent approaches to dealing with suicidality, either exacerbating stigma and shame, or leveraging the protective potential of faith and community. In turn, how leaders negotiate this tension not only affects the kind of support they can provide, but also addresses a core conflict around Christian identity, contributing to either the persistence or transformation of what suicide means in a faith context.
CRISIS OF CARE: HOW CHURCH LEADERS NEGOTIATE CONFLICTING LOGICS IN UNDERSTANDING AND RESPONDING TO SUICIDALITY by Lara Antebi A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Sociology) The University of British Columbia (Vancouver) July 2024 © Lara Antebi, 2024 ii The following individuals certify that they have read, and recommend to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies for acceptance, the thesis entitled: Crisis of care: how church leaders negotiate conflicting logics in understanding and responding to suicidality submitted by Lara Antebi in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Sociology Examining Committee: Seth Abrutyn, Associate Professor, Sociology, UBC Supervisor Amin Ghaziani, Professor, Sociology, UBC Supervisory Committee Member iii Abstract Like many religions, Christianity holds a morally prohibitive stance toward suicide. At the same time, the Bible compels people to treat those who suffer with care and compassion. Evangelical Christianity shares certain core tenets that are characteristically stable across time and place. Yet, research suggests that there is greater variability than we might expect in how clergy stand on and address certain contested issues. This slippage raises an important question about the applications of theology into practice: how do leaders understand and respond to suicidality in their communities? Using data from 16 interviews with Canadian evangelical church leaders, I found that pastors draw from two distinct logics when making sense of suicide and their role in responding. First, a person-based logic centers the suffering that might lead people to suicidality, emphasizing pastors' role of compassion and presence. Second, an outcome-based logic views suicide as a failure of duty, and highlights pastors’ role of direction and biblical authority. Put into practice, however, these logics lend themselves to conflicting approaches. This was especially salient for those who held a strong commitment to both logics, who expressed a great deal of tension when facing situations that demanded some kind of response. My findings reveal that between these two cultural anchors, there are a range of positions in leaders’ beliefs and subsequent approaches to dealing with suicidality, either exacerbating stigma and shame, or leveraging the protective potential of faith and community. In turn, how leaders negotiate this tension not only affects the kind of support they can provide, but also addresses a core conflict around Christian identity, contributing to either the persistence or transformation of what suicide means in a faith context. iv Lay Summary Many religions hold moral prohibitions against suicide, while also urging people to treat those who suffer with care and compassion. This raises an important question about how beliefs are applied in practice, particularly by leadership. This study asks: how do church leaders understand and respond to suicidality in their communities? Using data from 16 interviews, I found that pastors draw from two distinct views of suicide and their pastoral role: one emphasizing compassion and presence, the other emphasizing duty and authority. When facing real situations, however, these lead to conflicting approaches. This tension was especially strong for those who held absolute beliefs about suicide yet wanted to be there for people who struggle. I found that how leaders negotiated this tension not only had consequences for the kind of support they can provide, but also maintains or transforms what suicide means in a faith context. v Preface This thesis represents original, primary research done by Lara Antebi. Dr. Seth Abrutyn provided substantive feedback and direction in the development of the project and on earlier drafts of the thesis. Lara Antebi was independently responsible for recruiting and interviewing participants during the data collection process and led the data analysis with the support of Dr. Amin Ghaziani (Professor, Sociology, UBC) and Dr. Seth Abrutyn (Assistant Professor, Sociology, UBC). This research received approval from the Behavioural Research Ethics Board at The University of British Columbia [H23-00042]. vi Table of Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iii Lay Summary ................................................................................................................................. iv Preface............................................................................................................................................. v Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... vi List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vii Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... viii Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Evangelical Christianity and suicide ........................................................................................... 2 Pastoral roles ............................................................................................................................... 3 Inhabited institutions ................................................................................................................... 4 Methods........................................................................................................................................... 6 Description of sample ................................................................................................................. 6 Data Collection ........................................................................................................................... 8 Analysis....................................................................................................................................... 9 Limitations ................................................................................................................................ 11 Results ........................................................................................................................................... 12 Two logics: how leaders make sense of suicidality .................................................................. 12 Person-based logic: suicide as an expression of suffering .................................................... 12 Person-based logic: pastoral role of presence ....................................................................... 13 Outcome-based logic: suicide as a failure of duty ................................................................ 14 Outcome-based logic: pastoral role of guidance ................................................................... 15 Strategies for action: how logics translate into practice ........................................................... 16 Strong outcome-based logic: individualizing approach ........................................................ 17 Between logics: maintaining and managing tension ............................................................. 19 Strong person-based logic: relational over religious ............................................................ 23 Discussion & Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 27 Bibliography ................................................................................................................................. 32 vii List of Tables Table 1 Description of sample........................................................................................................7 Table 2 Themes and codes related to how pastors understand and respond to suicidality............10 viii Acknowledgements To my supervisor Dr. Seth Abrutyn and committee member Dr. Amin Ghaziani, thank for your continual encouragement, patience and insight, and for challenging me to learn and grow as a researcher. To both of you, I am grateful for your mentorship, sense of humour, and for all the ways you helped set me up for success. To my peers in the department, thank you for your camaraderie in navigating grad school and the research process. A special thank you to Colter Uscola, Sonali Patel, and my classmates for your input on this manuscript. To my friends and family far away and closer to home, thank you for your continual presence and encouragement through all the highs and lows of the process. Thank you to the wonderful people of Casa Blanca for your support and companionship, and for the countless conversations that have nourished both mind and heart. An additional thank you to Sam Viavant, Mona Yu and Thalia Lang for sharing important insights and offering feedback at various stages. Finally, thank you to my participants, for graciously sharing your wisdom and experience. I am humbled and inspired by the care and commitment you bring to all that you do.1 Introduction The role of religion has been a long-standing interest in the sociological study of suicide (Durkheim 2002). A significant body of research finds that religious affiliation, attendance, and adherence is protective against suicide (Berger 1967; Chen and VanderWeele 2020; Durkheim 2002; Gearing and Alonzo 2018; Gearing and Lizardi 2009; Lawrence, Oquendo, and Stanley 2016; Teo et al. 2021). Some emphasize the social support of religious communities as a key mechanism (Ellison, Burr, and McCall 1997; Pescosolido 1990; Pescosolido and Georgianna 1989). Others focus on the morally prohibitive beliefs religion imposes on suicidality (Alonzo and Gearing 2021; van den Brink, Schaap, and Braam 2018; Dervic et al. 2004; Gearing and Alonzo 2018; Gearing and Lizardi 2009; Teo et al. 2021; van Tubergen, te Grotenhuis, and Ultee 2005). Yet another growing body of scholarship shows no effect or at best a mixed effect of religion on suicide (Alonzo and Gearing 2021; Dyer and Goodman 2022; Gearing and Alonzo 2018; Hsieh 2017; Lawrence et al. 2016; Zhao et al. 2012). For instance, while moral objections to suicide show a restraining effect, they also increase stigma and may deter help-seeking (Caplan 2019; Exline, Yali, and Sanderson 2000; Harris 2021; Moksony and Hegedűs 2021; Peteet 2019; Reynders et al. 2015; Rüsch et al. 2014; Schomerus et al. 2015). Likewise, strongly integrated communities are often assumed to provide a protective social network, however they may, in some cases, aggravate mental and social health, leading to higher risk of negative outcomes like suicidality (Aliverdinia and Pridemore 2009; Beyerlein and Hipp 2005; Kushner and Sterk 2005; Mueller et al. 2021; Mueller and Abrutyn 2016; Villalonga-Olives and Kawachi 2017; Wilkinson and Johnson 2020). To date, much of the research connecting religious affiliation and attendance with suicidal outcomes have used statistical analysis of aggregate populations (Chen and VanderWeele 2020; Lawrence et al. 2016), which overlooks how these 2 structural and cultural forces unfold at the local level in real meaning- and decision-making (Douglas 2015; Gane 2005). Consequently, there is a need to understand the meanings behind the act of suicide as understood and evaluated in-context (Barbagli 2015; Boldt 1983; Douglas 2015). This study seeks to fill this gap by looking at how church leaders understand and respond to suicidality within their communities. Evangelical Christianity and suicide For this study, I focus on evangelical Christianity, a religious context which tends towards strong integration and strong anchoring to shared regulative beliefs (Beyerlein and Hipp 2005; Mannheimer and Hill 2015; Rhodes 2012; Steensland et al. 2000; Stroope 2012; Woodberry and Smith 1998), therefore presenting a relevant site to explore the contested role of religion on suicidality. As a religious movement within the Protestant tradition, Evangelicalism holds several core beliefs that have remained fairly stable across time and place, and that distinguish them from non-evangelicals (Hoffmann and Bartkowski 2008; Ogland and Bartkowski 2014; Reimer 2003, 2023). These include biblical inerrancy (the Bible is the word of God), evangelism (people can be saved through conversion), a personal connection to God (revelation), an emphasis on orthodoxy (correct belief) and on the salvation of Christ on the cross (Bebbington 2004; Dayton 2001; Noll 2001; Noll, Bebbington, and Marsden 2019; Reimer 2003). From a cultural perspective, so long as those central elements are held constant or “anchored”, there is actually quite a bit of latitude and flexibility in applying and interpreting different beliefs (Ghaziani and Baldassarri 2011; Reimer 2023). This allows for substantial variability in how individuals, churches and denominations stand on a range of issues in practice (Bebbington 2009, 2009; Dayton 2001; Noll et al. 2019). For instance, topics which are condemned in scripture like same-sex attraction or abortion are actually viewed and addressed 3 quite variably by leadership across organizations (Cadge and Wildeman 2008; Dozier et al. 2020; Reimer 2003). In the case of suicide, some argue that taking one’s life is a violation of the commandment “Thou shall not kill” (Maris, Berman, and Silverman 2000). Others see it as a taboo subject, with no official denominational statement or position that directs members towards any particular view or stance on suicide beyond this (Mason 2021). Mixed interpretations of these references (Gearing and Lizardi 2009; Potter 2021) suggest that an understanding of theology alone is not enough to predict clergy, congregational or even denominational views. As such, in this study I examine the beliefs and attitudes of church pastors by their own accounts, to better understand how this informs their stance and response to suicidality when it arises. Pastoral roles Pastors fulfill a range of roles within their church organizations (Kuhne and Donaldson 1995). As theologically trained and ordained clergy, pastors are recognized as leaders in their communities, and are influential in applying and interpreting official beliefs (Becker 1998; Cadge et al. 2012; Cadge and Wildeman 2008; Whitehead 2017). Within the Protestant church, the word “pastor” derives from the Latin word for shepherd, which references their responsibility to both guide their “flock” in a religious and moral sense (Lynch 2012), and to support their general well-being (Adams 2016) through a role of pastoral care (Bernau 2021; Leavey 2008). In fact, pastors and other religious leaders often provide counsel for personal struggles, emotional distress and mental health support (Ellison et al. 2006; Taylor et al. 2000) and are a source of guidance in times of crisis (Hendron 2022). Pastoral care may also encompass helping people make sense of grief and trauma (Hendron 2022; Teo et al. 2021), including those bereaved by suicide loss (Andriessen, Krysinska, and Tekavčič Grad 2017). For some individuals with a 4 strong faith commitment, counsel provided by clergy is preferred over other mental health professionals, both because of their high esteem within the faith community, as well as the trust that their counsel will be in alignment with scripture and religious values (Ellison et al. 2006). As such, regardless of pastors’ views of suicide, or how equipped they feel in helping people in these areas, the nature of the pastoral role means they are likely to encounter people who seek some form of support or counsel around suicidality. Inhabited institutions To understand church leaders’ beliefs and practices around suicidality, we can consider their roles within the institutions in which they are embedded, such as their professions, denominations, and church organizations. In occupying these different spheres, pastors draw from multiple institutional logics in interpreting events and making decisions. These refer to the culturally shared values, beliefs, and norms “by which people, groups and organizations make sense of and evaluate their everyday activities, and organize those activities in time and space” (Haveman and Gualtieri 2017). These logics shape where actors focus their attention, what goals and expectations they hold, and provide a blueprint for how to guide their work and vocabulary to make sense of their choices and those of others (Thornton, Ocasio, and Lounsbury 2012). Central to this concept of logics, as opposed to discourse or modes, is the rationale behind practices; “it invites the exploration of what is appropriate or logical to do in some site or situation, and what is not” (Mol 2008). When multiple logics are present, they may interact, coexist, or compete for influence (Thornton, Ocasio, and Lounsbury 2015). Multiple competing logics can also make one’s intended role more challenging. For instance, when school counselors have to manage conflicting professional and bureaucratic logics, it can compromise their ability to fulfill their primary role of providing socio-emotional care to students (Blake 2023). 5 However, logics are more than just constraining influences, but also cultural repertoires that involve choice and change. We can see institutions as “inhabited” by active agents, where logics are much more dynamic: “real people, in real contexts, with consequential past experiences of their own, play with them, question them, combine them with institutional logics from other domains, take what they can use from them, and make them fit their needs” (Binder 2007). This helps us understand how similar logics can play out differently across organizational contexts. For instance, the variable attitudes and responses towards same-sex attraction and abortion may be somewhat influenced by leaders’ personal convictions, but is also shaped by institutional demands and the needs of their congregants (Cadge and Wildeman 2008; Dozier et al. 2020; Reimer 2003). Clergy draw from existing logics, but also create new norms through interaction, such as sermons, individual counsel, or administrative activities, explaining how some churches embrace a multiracial identity, or welcoming attitudes towards homosexuality, while others do not (Becker 1998; Whitehead 2017). Importantly, logics exist and are built in the mundane of everyday and interaction, but critical and unusual events make institutional logics especially “salient and available to actors for sense-making” (Nigam and Ocasio 2010), making suicidality a generative case of investigating these logics at play. In light of these multiple logics, beliefs and roles, how do leaders make sense of suicidality, and in turn, determine their approach to supporting people who struggle? In this article, I propose that evangelical church leaders deal with two core logics around suicide that inform their strategies for action. For some, however, these logics come into conflict when determining how to act and respond appropriately in fulfilling their pastoral roles. In these cases, how leaders negotiate this tension influences the kind of support they are able to provide, and may contribute to either maintaining or transforming what suicide means in a faith context. 6 Methods This study investigates how evangelical church leaders understand and respond to suicidality in their communities, drawing on interview data collected in 2023. Participants were eligible if they identified as evangelical Christian, served in a church leadership role and were comfortable discussing the topic of suicide. I used a snowball sampling approach by first posting and circulating a study flyer at several evangelical schools of theology, including institutions that train and credential church leaders, pastors, chaplains, and other faith-based professionals. I also incorporated a combination of both purposive and maximum variation sampling (c.f., Roth 2012) in order to avoid network redundancy, which included sharing the flyer among my personal and academic networks, and reaching out directly to churches. Participants were eligible if they resided anywhere in the province of British Columbia, however I focused most of my direct outreach around a specific region with a high density of churches and theological training institutions (known colloquially as the ‘Bible Belt’ of the province) to maximize the pool of potential respondents. Within the region, I contacted a mix of urban, suburban and rural churches of various sizes and denominations. Typically, I initiated contact with the lead pastor or head office of the church (c.f., Reimer 2003), where I was sometimes referred to interview another member of their pastoral ministry team. Description of sample The data for this study comprised 16 semi-structured interviews conducted over a 6-month period in 2023 (March-September). Aside from two interviews with faith-based mental health professionals who were female, all respondents serving in leadership were male. Nearly all respondents were Caucasian, with an average age of 41 years old (ranging from 22 to 68 years old; see Table 1 for additional demographic information). 7 Table 1: Description of sample The majority of respondents were church pastors (n=10), six of which were the lead pastors of their congregations, while four served in other pastoral roles, the most common being those serving youth and young adults. In addition to pastors, who are employed by their churches, four respondents were in voluntary leadership roles, consisting of one church elder (lay leadership) and three pastoral ministry students who served in church or campus ministry and who are Role Gender Age Years of experience Highest level of education Pastor M 45 <10 Bachelors Pastor M 41 10-20 Postgraduate Elder M 69 10-20 High school/ Some college Student M 25 <10 Bachelors Pastor M 42 10-20 Postgraduate Student M 22 10-20 High school/ Some college Pastor M 55 20+ Postgraduate Pastor M 50 <10 Postgraduate Pastor M 49 20+ Postgraduate Faith-based mental health professional F 39 <10 Postgraduate Student M 23 <10 High school/ Some college Pastor M 35 10-20 Bachelors Faith-based mental health professional F 36 <10 Postgraduate Pastor M 42 10-20 Postgraduate Pastor M 32 <10 Postgraduate Pastor M 43 10-20 Postgraduate 8 currently training to become pastors. Many respondents specified a denominational affiliation, either one they personally identified with or the affiliation of the church they currently work for. These included the Christian and Missionary Alliance, Mennonite Brethren Church, Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada, Foursquare Gospel Church of Canada, Canadian Baptist Ministries, or not specified. I was also referred by participants to interview two faith-based mental health and spiritual care professionals (clinical counsellor and hospital-based chaplain). These interviews were part of the initial coding, but later diverged from the focus on leadership, and were therefore less central to the current study. Nevertheless, they did provide some important perspective as individuals who hold roles of spiritual care within evangelical circles, yet who are situated within different professional spheres and outside the social structure of the church. Data Collection All interviews were held over secured Zoom video calls (Archibald et al. 2019), except three which were conducted in-person, taking place either at the church or at the research university. The interview protocol consisted of four sections: (i) how respondents see their role in the church vis-à-vis general struggles, mental health, and suicide prevention; (ii) how they recount navigating past cases of providing pastoral care, particularly around suicidality; (iii) their beliefs, attitudes and evaluations of suicide (e.g., whether it’s acceptable, what it means, what causes it); and (iv) how they describe wider evangelical or Christian views of suicide. Interviews were semi-structured to maintain thematic consistency across respondents, while also allowing flexibility to explore emergent themes. The study protocol was approved by the university institutional review board. To further protect participant confidentiality, names were replaced with pseudonyms, and potentially identifying information was either redacted or aggregated. 9 Analysis The interviews were audio-recorded and lasted from 49 to 150 minutes long (97 minutes on average). Recordings were transcribed verbatim using an AI transcription service which I reviewed and corrected manually. This produced 468 pages of single-spaced textual data which were imported into NVivo for line-by-line coding. I created a list of initial codes using a retroductive approach (Ragin and Amoroso 2011), drawing both from concepts in the literature that relate to hypothesized mechanisms and emergent concepts in the data. This yielded 90 initial codes, which were reduced into 35 organizing codes (Strauss and Corbin 1990). I paid particular attention to outliers and extreme cases (Miles and Huberman 1994) where tensions and conflict appeared in some respondents’ accounts or sense-making but not others. Ultimately, this prompted me to shift towards an abductive approach (Timmermans and Tavory 2012), where I refined my coding around emerging surprises in the data. I then re-structured my codes around four organizing themes through which leaders discussed their beliefs, attitudes, and responses to suicidality. Establishing reliability is an important step in social science research, due to wide-reaching concerns of subjectivity and replicability. To assess the reliability of my coding scheme, I trained an independent researcher on the four overarching themes which encompassed the most important codes in the data, with associated examples (see Table 2). The researcher evaluated ten percent of my original data by assigning codes to unitized but uncoded transcripts 10 (Campbell et al. 2013; Potter and Levine‐Donnerstein 1999). All reliability tests yielded a percent agreement of at least 89%, which exceeded the standard threshold (80%) that indicates robust stability (Krippendorff 1980). Table 2. Themes and codes related to how pastors understand and respond to suicidality Themes Definition Codes Percent agreement Response to awareness (or disclosure) of suicidality How leaders respond or react to awareness or disclosure of suicidality from a congregant, either hypothetically or referencing past experiences, situated along the suicidal path (Colucci and Martin 2008). Suicidal thoughts Suicide plan Suicide attempt Suicide death 91.56 Navigating support How leaders discuss supporting congregants in their struggles, including but not limited to suicidality. Triage and referrals Relationship- and community-building Pastoral care and counsel 96.34 Meaning of suicide How leaders discuss their views, attitudes, and evaluations towards suicide (Boldt 1983). Whether it’s justified What causes suicide and suicidality What prevents suicide and suicidality Attribution of responsibility Judgement 89.48 Faith concepts How leaders describe recurring concepts of faith connected to suicidality. Hope Value and worth Perception of God Reference to scriptures Spiritual struggles 93.05 11 Limitations The sample of leaders is non-representative in terms of denomination, geography, and demographics. However, using non-representative samples for studying culture, and how action is tied to meaning, is an accepted practice in several subfields of sociology (c.f., Ghaziani 2014; Swidler 1986). Rather, this range in perspectives is also a strength, as it captures the way in which leaders vary from core evangelical concepts across a wide sample. In addition, pastors who agreed to participate may already be invested in the issue, meaning there is risk of self-selection bias favoring pastors with certain views or who see suicide prevention as part of their role. Aside from mitigating this through sampling strategies, the interviews focus on how leaders reflect on why they do what they do, and how they interpret different situations, which is especially revealing of meso-level culture (Rinaldo and Guhin 2022) across churches. In other words, even if all respondents were highly clustered around a certain set of beliefs, the data can still speak to how this comes to be, and how it is patterned. Moreover, this study does not seek to summarize the views of all leaders within Evangelicalism, but rather to understand how suicidality is made sense of and acted upon across a range of comparable settings. Finally, pastors represent only one piece of the social structure in a given church; they are not all-seeing or all-knowing of other people’s views and interactions. This limitation could be addressed in future exploration by triangulating other perspectives within the church or supplementing these accounts through observation. As it stands, however, the strength of this study is not so much on the composition of social structure within the church, but rather how it is used; leaders’ perceptions of their place within their communities can help us better understand how those networks are used in practice (Small 2017). 12 Results My findings show that pastors draw from two distinct logics when making sense of suicide, informed by contrasting interpretations of scripture and facets of their pastoral role. First, drawing from a role of compassion and presence, a person-based logic centers the suffering that might lead people to suicidality, and sees suicide as a tragic collective failure. Second, through their role as authorities and biblical guides, an outcome-based logic focuses on a morally absolute view against suicide, and lends itself to seeing suicidality as a failure of individual duty. Leaders were all committed to promoting life, thriving and well-being, holding a common desire to prevent suicide, however the rationale and approach to this varied. Logics are blueprints for action (Thornton et al. 2015) and out of each arose a “logical” way to navigate care and counsel around suicidality. To start, I will describe these two core logics, and how they inform diverging interpretations of suicide and distinct expectations of how pastors should respond. Two logics: how leaders make sense of suicidality Person-based logic: suicide as an expression of suffering First, respondents drew from a person-based logic when making sense of suicidality. This logic focuses on the experience of suffering, or the process that might lead someone to think of suicide. According to one youth pastor, Brian, there is a certain view that emphasizes “compassion and empathy…kind of sympathizing with somebody else's perspective.” In turn, “suicide in that context evokes…more of the compassion and what things happened to you…[where] the responsibility can often be shifted to the community.” Francis, a ministry student, describes suicide as “an expression of some very deep pain and deep loneliness and the inability to cope or the ability to hold all that pain by yourself … it is truly hard for someone to bear that alone.” Likewise, James (former lead pastor) shares that to him, the real tragedy of 13 suicide is that “somebody hasn’t had the supports in place to help them process life’s traumas and challenges.” Others echo this view of collective responsibility, saying that suicide happens when “they didn’t feel like they have people that they can turn to” (Matthew, lead pastor) or “when a person is isolated and doesn’t have the support network around them to help them navigate through the difficult seasons that they experience” (Nathan, lead pastor). Similarly, Peter (youth pastor) sees suicide as stemming from experiencing pain and trauma, and is a sign “that they’re broken and hurting.” For instance, when recalling the suicide death of a student in his church, he attributes it to “a burden that he was carrying for a long time that no one knew, no one saw.” From this, he concludes: “I think that we’re trying to stop that suicidal ideation later along the way of that burden and try and carry that burden with them. The Bible tells us we have to carry each other’s burden.” Rather than focusing on the act of suicide itself, this logic centers the long and painful process that might lead someone to that point, and the external factors that might precipitate that. Person-based logic: pastoral role of presence Through a person-based logic, the role of pastor is primarily to be a compassionate and caring presence. When it comes to helping people through life’s joys and hardships, many emphasized an approach of “walking with” or journeying alongside people, rather than telling people what to do. For some, like Francis, “the word pastor simply means to be there…[sometimes] we want to be come saviors, fixers…but that’s not actually our job.” This informed many pastors’ approach to counsel more generally, focusing on creating a space to listen and be present, in an affirming, more than directing, way. Eric (pastor and counselor) sees some resemblances to secular psychotherapy, where “there's a general goodness within all people, there's also a general wisdom within people. And so essentially I just need to be creating 14 a safe space and reflecting back what's going on, because you're gonna come to an understanding of this…apart from my explicit direction.” Through this logic, the pastor’s role is to be present and caring through people’s experiences of suffering, “walking with” people in a way that honors their agency in that journey. When bringing in elements of faith, this typically invokes and affirms God’s unconditional love and care, mirroring this same kind of compassionate presence. This is exemplified well by Martin (lead pastor): When I think about my role in terms of pastoral counseling…I want to be someone who listens and cares and in that I'm seeking to model and reflect the love of God. Because people need to know that God loves them, but so often we need humans to be intermediaries for that, to express that for us so that we can experience that. In the case of struggling with suicidality, this should pose no exception. Pastors are concerned with the well-being and safety of their flock, which includes a responsibility to “pay attention to risks to their harm and…to their life” (Brian). However, this logic reiterates the importance of first approaching this care by honouring the person’s own needs and autonomy. For instance, Francis expresses that “sometimes [in severe depression or suicidality] people don’t actually need you to fix their problems…They just need a friend or a person to be there in a safe space.” Likewise, when asked how he would respond if a student expressed suicidal thoughts, another ministry student, Aaron, said, “I would listen. I would ask questions about the origin of those thoughts…but before any of that I would probably just care for them. I’d probably just sit and listen… People don’t need to be told what to do. They just need someone to sit and just say, I’m here.” Outcome-based logic: suicide as a failure of duty When making sense of suicide, pastors also drew from an outcome-based logic. Rather than focusing on the process or experience of suffering, this logic shifts attention onto judgement of 15 the act, rooted in biblical authority and drawing from an ethos of duty and responsibility. From this angle, suicide is understood, broadly speaking, as an act against God. In the most literal sense, John (lead pastor) says: “one of the commandments is thou shalt not murder. Even if it’s yourself, it is taking of a life prematurely, which is murder.” This stems from a commitment to honouring God’s sovereignty: “God is the one who controls our lives…so we shouldn’t be stepping in to try to end that prematurely…God has given us life as a gift and we need to treat it that way.” Similarly, Francis explains that from a faith perspective, we have a duty to God and to each other: Your life is no longer your own life. You have a very beautiful belonging to Jesus now…to the family of God… Your decisions are no longer just about you, what you decide and what you want to do with your life… It affects both the way you honor the Lord and also the way you love the people around you. This ethos of responsibility is captured well by George (executive pastor). Even if he believes God is forgiving, “in studying God’s word, I know that there’s no justification to take your life…there’s nothing that is happening to you…that would justify suicide. As hard as our lives could be, I don’t think there’s space for that.” In turn, he explains that the role of the church in suicide prevention is: …to help people who might be considering that course of action to reconsider and to…not go that way... So we would, as much as we can, to teach and to love and provide community for people…show them who they are in God’s eyes…to help people steer them away from suicide…so that they don’t go down that course of action. Through this logic, the place of community within the church is one of reminding people of that obligation, and thus helping to “steer” them away from taking that “course of action”. Outcome-based logic: pastoral role of guidance In the context of care and counsel, an outcome-based approach emphasizes the pastor’s 16 role as providing guidance and direction rooted in biblical authority. Where a person-based logic sees individuals as knowing what is good and right, Eric explains that there is also “an aspect of the Bible…saying that we are born as sinners, so we have a propensity towards doing wrong…and so we are in need of some direction then around that.” When it comes to helping people in navigating challenges and struggles, this logic leans more into this role of guidance, with the Bible representing an important source of direction for believers. Pastoral care and counsel might therefore have “a leaning towards biblical counselling, definitely spiritually informed, but maybe even spiritually directed” which can look more like “somebody sitting down…you might open the Bible and here’s some verses, some passages, let me pray with you…and that would be person by person, pastor by pastor, how much it’s like, I’m gonna direct you” (Eric). This logic was salient for church leadership, but notably absent for other professional roles. One of the faith-based mental health professionals expressed: “there's like limits of like what's appropriate for a counselor. Like I can't actually tell anyone to do anything, right? That's not my role as a therapist.” Conversely, it is the expected role of pastors, to some degree, to provide that kind of guidance. Martin describes how he is often approached with “faith-based questions about, like…how do I pray in the midst of this? What’s okay to say? What does the Bible say about this? That kind of stuff.” Strategies for action: how logics translate into practice Through these two logics, we can see how leaders might arrive at different understandings of suicide, and how their expected role can elicit two distinct ways of responding. As Brian explains, these two pieces are intertwined with their faith convictions: “anytime I come to an ethical, moral decision, I filter through, okay, well what do I believe about God and who he has made us to be?” Applying these logics to real situations involving suicidality, however, 17 revealed an underlying incoherence between the two. Leaning on only one logic could jeopardize pastors’ ability to fulfill their role, by either undermining their ability to be effective carers, or by challenging the authority of the Bible. Yet, those who were strongly committed to both logics, such as holding firm theological beliefs about suicide while also wanting to help those who struggle, expressed a great deal of internal conflict. This was especially salient when facing situations that demanded some kind of response, prompting leaders to address this incoherence in some way. Taking this a step further, I found that leaders’ strategies of negotiating these logics had consequences for not only the support they provided, but also and the persistence or transformation of what suicidality means within the church. Strong outcome-based logic: individualizing approach First, through an outcome-based logic, viewing suicide through a lens of duty lends itself to seeing it as an individual failure, or as “decision against responsibility” (Brian). Combined with the pastoral role of directing people, this can translate into an attempt to guide people towards faith as a solution, where struggling with suicidality is due to “not believing enough”. For instance, John says: “I think the role for a pastor, within the life of the church is one of authority…So it’s very important that we root how we lead and how we teach and everything in the Bible.” He explains how if people came in with “very serious, you know…talking about currently having suicidal thoughts…we direct them to the emergency or the proper authorities for them to help those kinds of things.” However, if a person were to express more subtle thoughts, like “having somebody say…some days I wonder what the point is of living,” the focus of his counsel would imply that feeling suicidal is a failure of their own commitment: So first and foremost, we point people to the scriptures… we talk about how our lives aren’t just for us. Our lives are actually for those around us, and we’re supposed to be living our lives for God … So I think having that biblical understanding… even when 18 people get suicidal thoughts, they're able to handle them and dismiss them in a lot of times because of that understanding. While this approach attempts to remind the person of their place and purpose, it risks doing more harm than good. For one, it might discourage future help-seeking, or unintentionally shame and stigmatize the individual, both which can exacerbate the individual’s suffering and risk of suicidality. Suicide prevention is not simply responding to a person in crisis, but also involves providing help to people before they reach that crisis. This outcome-based response might inadvertently limit those opportunities to become involved earlier on. The application of this logic into practice also reinforces a certain view of suicide that some recognized as being historically present in the church, and others saw as still “lingering on, those views of over-spiritualizing or looking for blame” (James). Specifically, this response of judgement conveys that suicide can’t be talked about, because it risks calling into question one’s identity as a Christian. All agreed that within Evangelical theology, suicide is not the unforgivable sin, where “it used to be like [in historic Christianity] we buried them outside the cemetery and they’re not a Christian, we don’t do a Christian funeral” (Brian). Yet, this exclusion appeared to take on a more symbolic form. Put succinctly by Eric, “people who are suicidal have lost hope. And a key tenet of Christian theology is hope, you know?” This is more directly articulated by John, who recalled a recent death in the church. He notes: “when a person gets to that kind of point of despair, the question is, did you have faith really?” Even though suicide isn’t the unforgivable sin, “we would say that there is no unforgivable sin, other than what we call the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit or basically rejecting…Jesus as Lord,” meaning that suicide “adds a cloud of doubt even over a person’s, you know, eternal destination, so to speak.” Although God is understood as forgiving, one’s own lack of faith, exemplified by the hopelessness of suicide, calls into question whether one truly believed at all. Similarly, George 19 notes that “suicide is not a disqualifier from heaven,” but instead, “the qualifier is, where you’re at in your faith… that Jesus Christ is the Lord and Savior of your life. Now here’s where it becomes tricky. If you believe that, then you probably wouldn’t commit suicide.” Whether this view is communicated in direct counsel, or more indirectly in preaching, it can convey the message that suicidality puts one’s Christian identity at risk. Only a couple of respondents in the study appeared to hold this position more decisively, and were comparatively distant from conversations around suicide than others, despite recounting multiple cases of suicide attempts in their churches. This is not entirely surprising that judgement might breed a culture of silence. Aaron (ministry student) notes that “sometimes within Christian communities…there is not a healthy culture of being able to talk about mental issues, that a person could not feel comfortable sharing that because they would feel they would be judged by others if they shared their thoughts [of suicide].” Francis echoes this, recalling: “I've definitely heard stories and know people who have had these kind of experiences where they just felt really unsafe to communicate, like, their thoughts and their struggles with suicidality. It's still not a thing in the church that is talked about often.” These kinds of messages which stigmatize the individual may lead them to withdraw from the very support systems that may be protecting them, albeit weakly. As such, the limits to this view are clear: pastors who wish to meaningfully engage with those who struggle without alienating or silencing them cannot rely solely on this framework. Instead, they have to consider their commitment to a person-based logic, and reckon with the contradictions that arise. Between logics: maintaining and managing tension Most respondents landed somewhere in between the two logics, seeing both as important in guiding their thinking and their actions. In many cases, this positioning between logics 20 generated significant internal conflict around the topic of suicide. These pastors recognized that focusing on duty and judgement in the context of support would be unhelpful, but also felt there is some truth to those beliefs. For instance, Francis agrees that in some ways, suicide is being disrespectful to God, or signaling a shortcoming of faith, “but I just think it's wildly inappropriate to respond to someone who is struggling with those thoughts to be like, oh, you're not honoring the Lord with your body, or, oh, you aren't praying enough, or you're broken.” Yet, many still faced a real internal struggle in determining how to avoid this judgementalism, while remaining rooted to their faith convictions. This tension between beliefs, and a desire to help, is encapsulated well by Peter: I think there's a huge thing that Christians should not commit suicide…it's not your option to choose it, right? … But I think that doesn't mean people don't struggle…I have a faith and I have a framework … But there's also the reality part of it where I also wanna help people who struggle in this. I would hate to be someone who just looks at someone and says, well just be happy, right? Just be happy. What's your problem? … That's not helpful at all. For Peter, even though Christians “should not commit suicide,” the reality is that it does happen, and he wants to be someone who can be there for those people. The solution offered by an outcome-based approach, “just be happy” or “just trust God,” is not enough. Another pastor, Matthew, describes that there is a real tension in talking candidly about suicide with someone who is struggling: There is a theological stream that I believe in that our days are numbered by God. And just as we shouldn't play God to somebody else, i.e. we shouldn't murder, …we shouldn't really be responsible to end our own either… and I do subscribe to that. However, I also feel very tentative to say to somebody who's suffering, you shouldn't do that, it's not allowed. Because who am I to say that to them? … It's not my place to tell people what to do. There's a real ethical, religious, emotional struggle with that. Although Matthew sees part of his role as guiding people, he recognizes that in the context of suffering in suicidality, this would be inappropriate. When probed further on whether he ever had 21 to reconcile this, Matthew noted that he was never in a situation where he was “put in that kind of spot...I really hope I never…have to face that with someone. Because that’s a really tough one.” For many, holding this tension was possible in theory, but became more challenging to maintain when facing situations where their beliefs and roles were put into conflict. When facing these situations where their role did require a response, I found that these leaders were aware that how suicide is talked about matters: “we have to be very sensitive how we talk about this and our views on what we think people should and shouldn't do” (Eric). Rather, when those conflicting beliefs came to the forefront, pastors tended to avoid those contentious areas, instead giving an ambiguous or inconsistent answer. For example, Peter describes how he approaches counseling youth who come to him for help, addressing the core piece around belonging and acceptance: I know that's been a really transitional statement in a lot of crisis that I talk to people about cause they feel that God does not love them because they're thinking of suicide…or anxiety, or because they’re thinking about questioning their gender or…whatever the issue is. I often will start there and there's a real sense of an exhale, and it's like a relief because there is a tension between faith and these things that happen, right? And I believe God's right there in the middle of it with us and caring for us. When it comes to “thinking of suicide”, the approach is similar to discussing other struggles. However, when asked a different question about suicide, his response is much more fraught with tension: If a student is struggling and they ask me, ‘does someone commit suicide go to heaven or hell?’ I don't wanna answer. I actually avoid that answer because I'm not gonna tell them, ‘oh no, you'll still, God will still accept you.’… I'm not sure I can get around looking at that and saying … like [God] doesn't care if you do or not. He's happy with your choice. I don't, I can't get there with suicide. I don’t say it’s a sin, cause again, I want to watch the stigmatization, but I would steer away from it…It’s hard not to stigmatize…but what I usually tell students is…God wouldn’t want you to do that. 22 Rather than having to answer a theological question that might present suicide as acceptable, he instead gives a vaguely directing response, which avoids addressing his beliefs outright. In these cases, even though leaders hold firm beliefs about suicide, those that pose conflict will be obfuscated, and those that are aligned will be emphasized. When responding to suicidality, this means that there might be variability in that support, sometimes affirming and sometimes avoidant, depending on the underlying belief in question. Another example where this variability arose was around the topic of judgement. While pastors certainly have enough Biblical authority to interpret theological issues of divine judgement, there are situations where they might avoid expressing it. For instance, in his church, Nathan (lead pastor) describes how he wants to “remove the stigma where…we slap smiles on their faces and we all need to have it put together because we’re Christians…which I think traditionally has sort of been there.” When addressing the church, “in my preaching, I try to be open to my own struggles…and normalize that, like, we are all human …it’s combating that…just because you’re a Christian doesn’t mean you’re free from these struggles.” However, when it comes to addressing suicide more directly, the response varies. He recalls congregants who “have asked me…like, my friend committed suicide, did they go to hell?”. In these cases, his response was more ambiguous: “my personal belief is that, you know, God does business with individual people…And I just tell them like, that's not a decision we get to make.” By outsourcing judgement to God, so to speak, this avoids broaching a topic that might unintentionally shame individuals, however also avoids a direct answer, creating ambiguity. Again, those who managed these conflicting logics in this way avoided actively stigmatizing individuals, and often sought to cultivate a wider culture of acceptance. At the same time, they also avoided certain topics in direct conversations that could have otherwise be helpful, leaving room for variability. Ultimately, these leaders may benefit the most from 23 evidenced-based suicide prevention training, as while they have strong beliefs, they are disposed to wanting to help. Having the confidence, knowledge, and ability to put their dispositions into action is far more likely to have an impact than those who stake out a strong outcome-based logic. Yet, regardless of their training and familiarity with evidence-based suicide prevention, holding misaligned beliefs continued to pose an underlying strain. While these pastors concentrated on not appearing judgemental, others were able to find a harmonized framework of not holding judgement altogether, moving even closer along the spectrum towards a person-based approach. Strong person-based logic: relational over religious A few respondents were unequivocal in prioritizing a person-based logic, in both how they make sense of their theological beliefs, and in defining their role. This is encapsulated well by Daniel (lead pastor), who describes his approach to ministry as “relational before it's religious… I think what Jesus is about is relationships, so therefore what his church should be about is relationship and not religiosity.” This position puts a person-based focus first, yet pastors had to maintain some anchoring to biblical authority. Those who held this position, or wanted to move in this direction, had to reckon with certain aspects of theology which left alone, tend to point blame around suicide. To access that sense of alignment, I found that these leaders’ biblical interpretations tended to be more flexible and less absolute, which at its core, resolved the core tension between Christian identity and suicidality. In turn, this afforded them more opportunity to enter into affirming and open conversations, by creating a space within the church where it is possible to be both Christian and suicidal. For instance, when discussing scripture, these pastors often highlighted references which emphasize compassion and care, suggesting that the Bible is actually not about judgement, or what Francis calls a “distortion of faith”. He 24 challenges what he sees as “a very negative approach” to looking down on people who “think those [suicidal] thoughts”: Which is so ridiculous to me because when you actually read the Bible, the amount of people in the Bible who literally say like, I want to off myself, I don’t want to live anymore, the amount of people who cry out and lament to God… that isn’t a theological thing, that is a human thing. That is the reality of human life… Language of mental health, suicidality, it’s in the scriptures. By situating suicidality within the Bible, this challenges the idea that there is some direct correlation between one’s faith and suicidality, but rather that it is a human reality. Another view that posed significant tension was that suicide, through a contradiction in faith, could exclude someone from heaven. Daniel (lead pastor) comments that this view is rooted in a certain interpretation of theology: “I do know for sure there are traditions that hold that view. I personally don't have that view. I'm not sure where they got it from. They could have got it from scripture, I'm not sure.” Instead, his personal position is “God's loving, he knows your circumstance…so he would know more than anyone…what took a person to that place. And because I believe God's loving and compassionate, I believe he would welcome that person into heaven and into like home, fully.” Martin similarly describes, “I don’t think God looks at that person [thinking suicidal thoughts] and says like, ah, you gave up hope. I guess that’s it…there’s nothing left for you. Like I don’t think that’s true”. When pastors’ beliefs posed conflict with talking openly about suicide, we saw how this can lead to variability in their response. In contrast, those who felt their beliefs were aligned were able to engage in a support role more consistently and with greater ease. For instance, James describes how early in his career he was afraid of counseling, feeling unequipped to handle those conversations, and avoided that role: “I would not see people for…pastoral counseling…I’d be like, no, I don’t do that. You have to go see a counselor.” However, it later 25 became “one of the most significant aspects of my pastoral ministry,” where in addition to referring people for outside help, he also found success in accompanying people through their struggles. He describes one situation where a congregant confided in him about having suicidal thoughts, where his role in counsel was to help them explore what those feelings mean spiritually: “my premise at the time especially was that suicidal ideation was actually just a spiritual awakening…let’s find out what healing needs to take place there…there’s a reason why you’re thinking or feeling those feelings.” By affirming that it’s possible to hold suicidal thoughts as a Christian, and seeing conversations around suicide as being part of his role, James was able to create a space where people might more readily disclose their thoughts. Importantly, without the additional layer of shame, pastors might be welcomed into conversation earlier on. Martin describes how if someone mentioned thinking of suicide: I tend to ask like, well, what do you mean? Have you made a plan? … So I’m looking for warning signs…I try to do them in a way that’s not pressing and not too obvious. I don’t know if I’m always successful, but people who are going through this…I haven’t had many who aren’t willing to talk to me. If these conversations happen, there is a possibility of finding supports before even reaching a crisis point, but this only works if people are “willing to talk”. Moreover, the contents of these conversations appeared to more powerfully leverage the protective, life-affirming aspects of faith, such as a sense of value, worth and belonging. Pastors who felt that God genuinely is compassionate and unconditionally loving, rather than judgemental, found greater ease in affirming those aspects of faith, even around the topic of suicide, which for others crossed a line. In these cases, their place of religious authority is not a source of struggle, but instead becomes a strength. Martin highlights that there is work mental health professionals do that he cannot, but there are other areas uniquely suited to his role: “Sometimes one of the pieces of someone’s depression is that feeling of like, I’m too far even for God. Which is never true, but we can 26 believe it. And so then… that’s a place where I can walk with someone. That’s where I get to be the professional <laugh>.” By pressing into their roles as faith leaders, and holding beliefs that align with a compassionate rather than condemning God, pastors found success with this strategy. In contrast, those who had to conceal their core beliefs in providing support did not have this similar opportunity. Despite the advantages that can come from this position, there are some limits. Martin says: “I don’t think you’re gonna find an evangelical perspective that affirms suicide.” Although some traditions, like his own, are more flexible than others in “making space for diversity on anything that’s not essential”, there are others where one can be “removed from the denomination” if views stray too far. Likewise, Daniel notes that his own stance might differ “from the denomination I work for. I'm not sure…if they even have an official position…but there are some that do and it would differ from my personal one.” James’ account points to other limitations. He describes how he embraced a person-based focus, but ultimately transitioned outside of pastoral leadership, citing that “[f]aith communities often have a lot of confines, and I found over the years, my view has been more and more expansive and inclusive. And that’s partly why I saw it as probably a good time for me to move outside of the box of the [faith organization] I was in.” Ultimately, there is still some rooting in the authority of scripture that is needed. Fully prioritizing this logic, taken too far, risks being no longer being anchored within the church. Yet those who did find a framework that harmonized a rooting in faith with person-based beliefs and practices appeared to have the most ease and success with being a support to someone around suicidality. 27 Discussion & Conclusion This study explored how beliefs about suicide, pastoral roles, and the tensions that arise between them, matter to how church leaders understand and respond to suicidality in their communities. My findings show that pastors draw from two institutional logics which correspond to core values of faith, and align with pastors’ roles as carers and religious guides (Adams 2016; Ellison et al. 2006; Leavey 2008; Lynch 2012). These logics inform two contrasting interpretations of what suicide means and informs how to respond appropriately if a situation arises. These logics were not equally salient for all respondents, nor would we expect it to be; scholars of culture have long recognized that culture is neither fully incoherent nor fully coherent, landing somewhere in the middle of “thin coherence” (Ghaziani and Baldassarri 2011). There were certainly some stances on either extreme, where respondents held a framework which felt consistent, allowing for a sense of clear action stemming from aligned beliefs, regardless of the outcome or effectiveness of those choices. However, the most revealing were those who landed somewhere between the two, and struggled to prioritize one over the other. These leaders expressed a greater deal of conflict and greater uncertainty in their stance, sometimes complicating their ability to fulfill their intended roles (Blake 2023). Interestingly, these tensions also brought to light contradictions that emerge when making sense of suicide through a faith context, namely that although suicide is technically not the unforgivable sin, it may, in some contexts, be a great enough transgression to challenge one’s identity and belonging. Situating these accounts within inhabited institutions can help us understand some factors contributing to this variability. Each position between the logics has their advantages, but also come at a cost. Those with a strong outcome-based approach maintained fairly traditional beliefs and a certain degree of control, but run the risk of straining the individuals who cannot measure 28 up. Even with the best of intentions, emphasizing duty and responsibility runs a risk of shaming and blaming individuals, which rather than easing suffering, can aggravate it (Wiklander, Samuelsson, and Åsberg 2003). Those who stood in the middle were able to preserve absolute beliefs while embracing their care role but required ongoing management to keep tension at bay. The cognitive and emotional strain needed to maintain this incoherence long-term might be sustainable for some, or might drive others to change, especially when put into repeated situations that demand a clear response. For those with a stronger person-based approach, the underlying incoherence in logics was resolved, but also required a flexibility around scripture that may not be possible, or desirable, by everyone. Leaders make decisions that reflect their own personal convictions, but also respond to their institutional contexts; what makes some leaders preach openly about some topics or emphasize certain roles over others emerges from a process of negotiating institutional demands, personal identities, and strategies for action (Becker 1998; Cadge et al. 2012; Cadge and Wildeman 2008; Dozier et al. 2020; Edwards 2014; Whitehead 2017). Similarly, clergy are not only constrained by culture but are also active in defining that culture, as well as its persistence and change (Binder 2007; Thornton et al. 2015). The views of leadership can be a site where this change occurs. By understanding how leaders deal with these contradictions, such as around suicide, we can see how religious institutions are changing, and the limits to what shape that might take. Specifically, this shift towards pastors’ role of presence and supporting individuals, rather than one of authority and moral direction, has been an ongoing trend, and speaks to how religious groups adapt to changing outside culture (Bernau 2021; Reimer 2023). What drives this change for suicide and for other taboo issues can be further explored, such as how much experience or exposure matters, or what form congregational and denominational pressures might exert on this decision-making process. Likewise, there may be 29 some beliefs that are more easily challenged, or certain shifts in pastoral roles that spur this change. Beyond these wider cultural implications, the logics and strategies used may have more immediate consequences for congregants who struggle. Prior research reports mixed accounts of support within the church, with some reporting stigmatizing attitudes towards suicide and mental health struggles, and others expressing a strong sense of support and healing (Caplan 2019; Harris 2021). The data used for this study did not capture how congregants experienced pastoral care, nor did it track any rates of suicidal behavior across contexts. However, we can see how different approaches to understanding and responding to suicidality can lend themselves better to effective support than others. At the very least, it might make the difference between a church where suicide is talked about, and one where it is avoided, or one where disclosures are met with support rather than shame (Sheehan et al. 2019). Maintaining ambiguity is a common strategy observed within faith communities and other institutions when dealing with controversial social or moral issues (Castuera 2017). Pastors with firm commitments to both logics hoped to avoid the judgementalism that tends to arise from addressing suicidality through an ethos of duty, which blames the individual for their struggles. However, this strategy only partially achieves this. Suicide prevention research emphasizes that silence around talking about suicide can exacerbate stigma and misunderstanding (Binnix et al. 2018). Even in a less direct way, by avoiding entering into certain kinds of support, there are missed opportunities to engage with people in their struggles that could have otherwise been a source of healing and help, leaving gaps in the social safety net. There can also, inadvertently, be a message that suicidality is something that cannot be talked about, let alone experienced, within the faith community (Campbell 2021; Jennings 2017). Conversely, positions closer to a person-based logic were more 30 consistently aligned with evidence-based recommendations, such as talking directly about suicide, building rapport, and paying attention to early warning signs (Dazzi et al. 2014; Stanley and Brown 2012). Interestingly, the harmonized approach also appeared to leverage another advantage: through their position as faith leaders, pastors were able to speak into matters of purpose, belonging, and God’s love that could not have been achieved by someone outside of that role. On a practical level, these insights are essential when considering how churches and faith leaders can become better equipped for handling these conversations for the greatest impact. Suicide prevention efforts must engage meaningfully with theological beliefs, and the role demands on leadership, to be sensible and appropriate to the contexts where they will be applied. For instance, where flexibility of beliefs is not possible, having a robust pathway to outside referrals may be a more feasible approach. In other cases, the harmonized frameworks articulated by some pastors can serve as a model and invitation for theological reflection. Finally, this study seeks to illuminate the mechanisms that might link religion and suicide observed on a larger scale. Research suggests that religion is generally protective against suicide, yet we know little about what drives this. Understanding how church leaders view and respond to suicide is an important and overlooked aspect in understanding variation across church communities towards contested issues such as suicide. Pastors are often an important resource for those who struggle, and their response can be impactful, either positively or negatively, in the support they provide (Acevedo et al. 2022; Ellison et al. 2006; Hays and Shepard Payne 2020; Taylor et al. 2000). My findings corroborate the gap identified by a growing number of suicide scholars (Barbagli 2015; Douglas 2015; Mueller et al. 2021) that local meanings and interactions matter to how religious variables come to bear on suicidality. As seen in this study, some pastors hold a framework that makes affirming God’s love difficult for some, and natural for others. For 31 some, Christian identity and being suicidal were irreconcilable, while for others, this posed no contradiction. Some carved out a safe space to hold conversations in the church, while others signaled that these conversations are better suited elsewhere. Clergy social support is an important metric of perceived community support in the church (Acevedo et al. 2022) and provide a model what wider church attitudes might be (Becker 1998; Cadge et al. 2012; Cadge and Wildeman 2008; Whitehead 2017). Rather than assuming church stances based on denominational views or solely on individual- or population-level trends, taking an institutional perspective can be revealing of the conditions that drive these differences. Moreover, these findings also illuminate how moral objections to suicide can be at once protective and stigmatizing, depending on how they are talked about, where they are strategically brought in or avoided, and importantly, who is held responsible for those moral transgressions. This contributes to a growing recognition of the important, yet complex, role of diverse attitudes towards suicide on understanding its patterns (Lizardi et al. 2008; Moksony and Hegedűs 2021; Mueller et al. 2021). Future exploration of these patterns can give us insight into how faith communities, and institutions more broadly, can be life-affirming to their fullest potential. 32 Bibliography Acevedo, Gabriel A., Reed T. DeAngelis, Jordan Farrell, and Brandon Vaidyanathan. 2022. “Is It the Sermon or the Choir? Pastoral Support, Congregant Support, and Worshiper Mental Health.” Review of Religious Research 64(4):577–600. doi: 10.1007/s13644-022-00500-6. Adams, Jay E. 2016. Shepherding God’s Flock: A Handbook on Pastoral Ministry, Counseling, and Leadership. Zondervan. Aliverdinia, Akbar, and William Alex Pridemore. 2009. “Women’s Fatalistic Suicide in Iran: A Partial Test of Durkheim in an Islamic Republic.” Violence Against Women 15(3):307–20. doi: 10.1177/1077801208330434. Alonzo, Dana, and Robin E. Gearing. 2021. “Suicide Across Buddhism, American Indian–Alaskan Native, and African Traditional Religions, Atheism and Agnosticism: An Updated Systematic Review.” Journal of Religion and Health 60(4):2527–46. doi: 10.1007/s10943-021-01202-z. Andriessen, Karl, Karolina Krysinska, and Onja Tekavčič Grad, eds. 2017. “The Roles of Religion and Spirituality in Suicide Bereavement and Postvention.” in Postvention in action: the international handbook of suicide bereavement support. Boston, MA: Hogrefe Publishing. Archibald, Mandy M., Rachel C. Ambagtsheer, Mavourneen G. Casey, and Michael Lawless. 2019. “Using Zoom Videoconferencing for Qualitative Data Collection: Perceptions and Experiences of Researchers and Participants.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 18:1609406919874596. doi: 10.1177/1609406919874596. Barbagli, Marzio. 2015. Farewell to the World: A History of Suicide. Revised and updated English edition. Cambridge, UK ; Malden, MA: Polity. Bebbington, David 1949-. 2009. “Evangelical Trends, 1959-2009.” Anvil 26(2):93. Bebbington, David W. 2004. Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s. London: Routledge. Becker, Penny Edgell. 1998. “Making Inclusive Communities: Congregations and the ‘Problem’ of Race*.” Social Problems 45(4):451–72. doi: 10.2307/3097207. Berger, Peter L. 1967. The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion. 1st ed. Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday. Bernau, John A. 2021. “From Christ to Compassion: The Changing Language of Pastoral Care.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 60(2):362–81. doi: 10.1111/jssr.12711. 33 Beyerlein, Kraig, and John R. Hipp. 2005. “Social Capital, Too Much of a Good Thing? American Religious Traditions and Community Crime.” Social Forces 84(2):995–1013. doi: 10.1353/sof.2006.0004. Binder, Amy. 2007. “For Love and Money: Organizations’ Creative Responses to Multiple Environmental Logics.” Theory and Society 36(6):547–71. doi: 10.1007/s11186-007-9045-x. Binnix, Taylor M., Carol Rambo, Seth Abrutyn, and Anna S. Mueller. 2018. “The Dialectics of Stigma, Silence, and Misunderstanding in Suicidality Survival Narratives.” Deviant Behavior 39(8):1095–1106. doi: 10.1080/01639625.2017.1399753. Blake, Mary Kate. 2023. “School-Level Bureaucrats: How High School Counselors Inhabit the Conflicting Logics of Their Work.” Sociology of Education. doi: 10.1177/00380407231204596. Boldt, Menno. 1983. “Normative Evaluations of Suicide and Death: A Cross-Generational Study.” OMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying 13(2):145–57. doi: 10.2190/KANJ-0J0V-C49L-8Q7W. van den Brink, Bart, Hanneke Schaap, and Arjan W. Braam. 2018. “Moral Objections and Fear of Hell: An Important Barrier to Suicidality.” Journal of Religion and Health 57(6):2301–12. doi: 10.1007/s10943-018-0573-7. Cadge, Wendy, Jennifer Girouard, Laura R. Olson, and Madison Lylerohr. 2012. “Uncertainty in Clergy’s Perspectives on Homosexuality: A Research Note.” Review of Religious Research 54(3):371–87. doi: 10.1007/s13644-012-0058-1. Cadge, Wendy, and Christopher Wildeman. 2008. “Facilitators and Advocates: How Mainline Protestant Clergy Respond to Homosexuality.” Sociological Perspectives 51(3):587–603. doi: 10.1525/sop.2008.51.3.587. Campbell, Anthony David. 2021. “Clergy Perceptions of Mental Illness and Confronting Stigma in Congregations.” Religions 12(12):1110. doi: 10.3390/rel12121110. Campbell, John L., Charles Quincy, Jordan Osserman, and Ove K. Pedersen. 2013. “Coding In-Depth Semi-Structured Interviews: Problems of Unitization and Inter-Coder Reliability and Agreement.” Sociological Methods and Research 43(3):294–320. Caplan, Susan. 2019. “Intersection of Cultural and Religious Beliefs About Mental Health: Latinos in the Faith-Based Setting.” Hispanic Health Care International 17(1):4–10. doi: 10.1177/1540415319828265. Castuera, Ignacio. 2017. “A Social History of Christian Thought on Abortion: Ambiguity vs. Certainty in Moral Debate.” The American Journal of Economics and Sociology 76(1):121–227. doi: 10.1111/ajes.12174. 34 Chen, Ying, and Tyler J. VanderWeele. 2020. “Chapter 2 - Spirituality, Religion, and Suicide.” Pp. 27–40 in Handbook of Spirituality, Religion, and Mental Health (Second Edition), edited by D. H. Rosmarin and H. G. Koenig. Academic Press. Colucci, Erminia, and Graham Martin. 2008. “Religion and Spirituality Along the Suicidal Path.” Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior 38(2):229–44. doi: 10.1521/suli.2008.38.2.229. Dayton, Donald W. 2001. The Variety of American Evangelicalism. Univ. of Tennessee Press. Dazzi, T., R. Gribble, S. Wessely, and N. T. Fear. 2014. “Does Asking about Suicide and Related Behaviours Induce Suicidal Ideation? What Is the Evidence?” Psychological Medicine 44(16):3361–63. doi: 10.1017/S0033291714001299. Dervic, Kanita, Maria A. Oquendo, Michael F. Grunebaum, Steve Ellis, Ainsley K. Burke, and J. John Mann. 2004. “Religious Affiliation and Suicide Attempt.” The American Journal of Psychiatry 161(12):2303–8. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.161.12.2303. Douglas, Jack. 2015. Social Meanings of Suicide. Princeton University Press. Dozier, Jessica L., Monique Hennink, Elizabeth Mosley, Subasri Narasimhan, Johanna Pringle, Lasha Clarke, John Blevins, Latishia James-Portis, Rob Keithan, Kelli Stidham Hall, and Whitney S. Rice. 2020. “Abortion Attitudes, Religious and Moral Beliefs, and Pastoral Care among Protestant Religious Leaders in Georgia.” PLOS ONE 15(7):e0235971. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235971. Durkheim, Emile. 2002. Suicide: A Study in Sociology. 2 edition. London: Routledge. Dyer, W. Justin, and Michael A. Goodman. 2022. “Religious Affiliation’s Association with Suicidality across Sexual Orientations and Gender Identities.” Religions 13(10):932. doi: 10.3390/rel13100932. Edwards, Korie L. 2014. “Role Strain Theory and Understanding the Role of Head Clergy of Racially Diverse Churches.” Sociology of Religion 75(1):57–79. doi: 10.1093/socrel/srt047. Ellison, Christopher G., Jeffrey A. Burr, and Patricia L. McCall. 1997. “Religious Homogeneity and Metropolitan Suicide Rates*.” Social Forces 76(1):273–99. doi: 10.1093/sf/76.1.273. Ellison, Christopher G., Margaret L. Vaaler, Kevin J. Flannelly, and Andrew J. Weaver. 2006. “The Clergy as a Source of Mental Health Assistance: What Americans Believe.” Review of Religious Research 48(2):190–211. Exline, J. J., A. M. Yali, and W. C. Sanderson. 2000. “Guilt, Discord, and Alienation: The Role of Religious Strain in Depression and Suicidality.” Journal of Clinical Psychology 56(12):1481–96. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(200012)56:12<1481::AID-1>3.0.CO;2-A. Gane, Mike. 2005. “Durkheim’s Scenography of Suicide.” Economy and Society 34(2):223–40. doi: 10.1080/03085140500054602. 35 Gearing, Robin E., and Dana Lizardi. 2009. “Religion and Suicide.” Journal of Religion and Health 48(3):332–41. doi: 10.1007/s10943-008-9181-2. Gearing, Robin Edward, and Dana Alonzo. 2018. “Religion and Suicide: New Findings.” Journal of Religion and Health 57(6):2478–99. doi: 10.1007/s10943-018-0629-8. Ghaziani, Amin. 2014. There Goes the Gayborhood? Princeton University Press. Ghaziani, Amin, and Delia Baldassarri. 2011. “Cultural Anchors and the Organization of Differences: A Multi-Method Analysis of LGBT Marches on Washington.” American Sociological Review 76(2):179–206. doi: 10.1177/0003122411401252. Harris, Jennifer Huang. 2021. “Mental Illness Stigma in Christian Communities.” Pp. 21–36 in Christianity and Psychiatry, edited by J. R. Peteet, H. S. Moffic, A. Hankir, and H. G. Koenig. Cham: Springer International Publishing. Haveman, Heather A., and Gillian Gualtieri. 2017. “Institutional Logics.” in Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management. Hays, Krystal, and Jennifer Shepard Payne. 2020. “Lived Experience, Transparency, Help, and Humility: Four Characteristics of Clergy Responding to Mental and Emotional Problems.” Journal of Pastoral Care & Counseling 74(1):4–11. doi: 10.1177/1542305019872437. Hendron, Jill. 2022. When It Hurts to Care: Clergy Working with Crisis. Common Ground Research Networks. Hoffmann, John P., and John P. Bartkowski. 2008. “Gender, Religious Tradition, and Biblical Literalism.” Social Forces 86(3):1245–72. doi: 10.1353/sof.0.0013. Hsieh, Ning. 2017. “A Global Perspective on Religious Participation and Suicide.” Journal of Health and Social Behavior 58(3):322–39. doi: 10.1177/0022146517715896. Jennings, Mark. 2017. “A Silence Like Thunder: Pastoral and Theological Responses of Australian Pentecostal-Charismatic Churches to Lgbtq Individuals.” Pp. 215–38 in Annual Review of the Sociology of Religion. Volume 8 (2017). Brill. Krippendorff, Klaus. 1980. “Validity in Content Analysis.” Computerstrategien Für Die Kommunikationsanalyse (291):69–112. Kuhne, Gary William, and Joe F. Donaldson. 1995. “Balancing Ministry and Management: An Exploratory Study of Pastoral Work Activities.” Review of Religious Research 37(2):147–63. doi: 10.2307/3512398. Kushner, Howard I., and Claire E. Sterk. 2005. “The Limits of Social Capital: Durkheim, Suicide, and Social Cohesion.” American Journal of Public Health 95(7):1139–43. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.053314. 36 Lawrence, Ryan E., Maria A. Oquendo, and Barbara Stanley. 2016. “Religion and Suicide Risk: A Systematic Review.” Archives of Suicide Research : Official Journal of the International Academy for Suicide Research 20(1):1–21. doi: 10.1080/13811118.2015.1004494. Leavey, Gerard. 2008. “U.K. Clergy and People in Mental Distress: Community and Patterns of Pastoral Care.” Transcultural Psychiatry 45(1):79–104. doi: 10.1177/1363461507087999. Lizardi, Dana, Kanita Dervic, Michael F. Grunebaum, Ainsley K. Burke, J. John Mann, and Maria A. Oquendo. 2008. “The Role of Moral Objections to Suicide in the Assessment of Suicidal Patients.” Journal of Psychiatric Research 42(10):815–21. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2007.09.007. Lynch, Gordon. 2012. The Sacred in the Modern World: A Cultural Sociological Approach. New York: Oxford University Press. Mannheimer, Andrew H., and Terrence D. Hill. 2015. “Deviating from Religious Norms and the Mental Health of Conservative Protestants.” Journal of Religion and Health 54(5):1826–38. doi: 10.1007/s10943-014-9951-y. Maris, Ronald W., Alan L. Berman, and Morton M. Silverman. 2000. Comprehensive Textbook of Suicidology. New York, NY, US: Guilford Press. Mason, Karen. 2021. “Suicide Stigma in Christian Faith Communities: A Qualitative Study.” Religions 12(7):540. doi: 10.3390/rel12070540. Miles, Matthew B., and A. Michael Huberman. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd Ed. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc. Moksony, Ferenc, and Rita Hegedűs. 2021. “Religion and the Stigma of Suicide: A Quantitative Analysis Using Nationwide Survey Data from Hungary.” Religions 12(11):908. doi: 10.3390/rel12110908. Mol, Annemarie. 2008. “Two Logics.” in The Logic of Care. Routledge. Mueller, Anna S., and Seth Abrutyn. 2016. “Adolescents under Pressure: A New Durkheimian Framework for Understanding Adolescent Suicide in a Cohesive Community.” American Sociological Review 81(5):877–99. doi: 10.1177/0003122416663464. Mueller, Anna S., Seth Abrutyn, Bernice Pescosolido, and Sarah Diefendorf. 2021. “The Social Roots of Suicide: Theorizing How the External Social World Matters to Suicide and Suicide Prevention.” Frontiers in Psychology 12. Nigam, Amit, and William Ocasio. 2010. “Event Attention, Environmental Sensemaking, and Change in Institutional Logics: An Inductive Analysis of the Effects of Public Attention to Clinton’s Health Care Reform Initiative.” Organization Science 21(4):823–41. 37 Noll, Mark A. 2001. American Evangelical Christianity: An Introduction. Oxford ; Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishers. Noll, Mark A., David W. Bebbington, and George M. Marsden. 2019. Evangelicals: Who They Have Been, Are Now, and Could Be. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. Ogland, Curtis P., and John P. Bartkowski. 2014. “Biblical Literalism and Sexual Morality in Comparative Perspective: Testing the Transposability of a Conservative Religious Schema.” Sociology of Religion 75(1):3–24. doi: 10.1093/socrel/srt056. Pescosolido, Bernice A. 1990. “The Social Context of Religious Integration and Suicide:” The Sociological Quarterly 31(3):337–57. doi: 10.1111/j.1533-8525.1990.tb00332.x. Pescosolido, Bernice A., and Sharon Georgianna. 1989. “Durkheim, Suicide, and Religion: Toward a Network Theory of Suicide.” American Sociological Review 54:33–48. doi: 10.2307/2095660. Peteet, John R. 2019. “Approaching Religiously Reinforced Mental Health Stigma: A Conceptual Framework.” Psychiatric Services 70(9):846–48. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201900005. Potter, John. 2021. “Is Suicide the Unforgivable Sin? Understanding Suicide, Stigma, and Salvation through Two Christian Perspectives.” Religions 12(11):987. doi: 10.3390/rel12110987. Potter, W. James, and Deborah Levine‐Donnerstein. 1999. “Rethinking Validity and Reliability in Content Analysis.” Journal of Applied Communication Research 27(3):258–84. doi: 10.1080/00909889909365539. Ragin, Charles C., and Lisa M. Amoroso. 2011. Constructing Social Research: The Unity and Diversity of Method. Pine Forge Press. Reimer, Sam. 2003. Evangelicals and the Continental Divide: The Conservative Protestant Subculture in Canada and the United States. McGill-Queen’s University Press. Reimer, Sam. 2023. Caught in the Current: British and Canadian Evangelicals in an Age of Self-Spirituality. McGill-Queen’s Press - MQUP. Reynders, Alexandre, Ad J. F. M. Kerkhof, Geert Molenberghs, and Chantal Van Audenhove. 2015. “Help-Seeking, Stigma and Attitudes of People with and without a Suicidal Past. A Comparison between a Low and a High Suicide Rate Country.” Journal of Affective Disorders 178:5–11. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2015.02.013. Rhodes, Jeremy. 2012. “The Ties That Divide: Bonding Social Capital, Religious Friendship Networks, and Political Tolerance among Evangelicals*.” Sociological Inquiry 82(2):163–86. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-682X.2012.00409.x. 38 Rinaldo, Rachel, and Jeffrey Guhin. 2022. “How and Why Interviews Work: Ethnographic Interviews and Meso-Level Public Culture.” Sociological Methods & Research 51(1):34–67. doi: 10.1177/0049124119882471. Roth, Wendy. 2012. Race Migrations: Latinos and the Cultural Transformation of Race. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Rüsch, Nicolas, Alina Zlati, Georgia Black, and Graham Thornicroft. 2014. “Does the Stigma of Mental Illness Contribute to Suicidality?” The British Journal of Psychiatry 205(4):257–59. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.114.145755. Schomerus, G., S. Evans-Lacko, N. Rüsch, R. Mojtabai, M. C. Angermeyer, and G. Thornicroft. 2015. “Collective Levels of Stigma and National Suicide Rates in 25 European Countries.” Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences 24(2):166–71. doi: 10.1017/S2045796014000109. Sheehan, Lindsay, Nathalie Oexle, Silvia A. Armas, Hoi Ting Wan, Michael Bushman, LaToya Glover, and Stanley A. Lewy. 2019. “Benefits and Risks of Suicide Disclosure.” Social Science & Medicine 223:16–23. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.01.023. Small, Mario Luis. 2017. Someone To Talk To. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Stanley, Barbara, and Gregory K. Brown. 2012. “Safety Planning Intervention: A Brief Intervention to Mitigate Suicide Risk.” Cognitive and Behavioral Practice 19(2):256–64. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpra.2011.01.001. Steensland, Brian, Jerry Z. Park, Mark D. Regnerus, Lynn D. Robinson, W. Bradford Wilcox, and Robert D. Woodberry. 2000. “The Measure of American Religion: Toward Improving the State of the Art.” Social Forces 79(1):291–318. doi: 10.2307/2675572. Strauss, Anselm, and Juliet M. Corbin. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc. Stroope, Samuel. 2012. “Social Networks and Religion: The Role of Congregational Social Embeddedness in Religious Belief and Practice.” Sociology of Religion 73(3):273–98. doi: 10.1093/socrel/srr052. Swidler, Ann. 1986. “Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies.” American Sociological Review 51(2):273–86. doi: 10.2307/2095521. Taylor, Robert Joseph, Christopher G. Ellison, Linda M. Chatters, Jeffrey S. Levin, and Karen D. Lincoln. 2000. “Mental Health Services in Faith Communities: The Role of Clergy in Black Churches.” Social Work 45(1):73–87. doi: 10.1093/sw/45.1.73. Teo, David Choon Liang, Katerina Duchonova, Samaneh Kariman, and Jared Ng. 2021. “Religion, Spirituality, Belief Systems and Suicide.” Pp. 183–200 in Suicide by Self-Immolation: Biopsychosocial and Transcultural Aspects, edited by C. A. Alfonso, P. S. Chandra, and T. G. Schulze. Cham: Springer International Publishing. 39 Thornton, Patricia H., William Ocasio, and Michael Lounsbury. 2012. “Introduction to the Institutional Logics Perspective.” P. 0 in The Institutional Logics Perspective: A New Approach to Culture, Structure and Process, edited by P. H. Thornton, W. Ocasio, and M. Lounsbury. Oxford University Press. Thornton, Patricia H., William Ocasio, and Michael Lounsbury. 2015. “The Institutional Logics Perspective.” Pp. 1–22 in Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Timmermans, Stefan, and Iddo Tavory. 2012. “Theory Construction in Qualitative Research: From Grounded Theory to Abductive Analysis.” Sociological Theory 30(3):167–86. doi: 10.1177/0735275112457914. van Tubergen, Frank, Manfred te Grotenhuis, and Wout Ultee. 2005. “Denomination, Religious Context, and Suicide: Neo‐Durkheimian Multilevel Explanations Tested with Individual and Contextual Data.” American Journal of Sociology 111(3):797–823. doi: 10.1086/497307. Villalonga-Olives, E., and I. Kawachi. 2017. “The Dark Side of Social Capital: A Systematic Review of the Negative Health Effects of Social Capital.” Social Science & Medicine 194:105–27. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.10.020. Whitehead, Andrew L. 2017. “Institutionalized Norms, Practical Organizational Activity, and Loose Coupling: Inclusive Congregations’ Responses to Homosexuality.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 56(4):820–35. doi: 10.1111/jssr.12484. Wiklander, Maria, Mats Samuelsson, and Marie Åsberg. 2003. “Shame Reactions after Suicide Attempt.” Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences 17(3):293–300. doi: 10.1046/j.1471-6712.2003.00227.x. Wilkinson, Dean J., and Amy Johnson. 2020. “A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies Capturing the Subjective Experiences of Gay and Lesbian Individuals’ of Faith or Religious Affiliation.” Mental Health, Religion & Culture 23(1):80–95. doi: 10.1080/13674676.2020.1724919. Woodberry, Robert D., and Christian S. Smith. 1998. “Fundamentalism et al: Conservative Protestants in America.” Annual Review of Sociology 24:25–56. Zhao, Jiubo, Xueling Yang, Rong Xiao, Xiaoyuan Zhang, Diane Aguilera, and Jingbo Zhao. 2012. “Belief System, Meaningfulness, and Psychopathology Associated with Suicidality among Chinese College Students: A Cross-Sectional Survey.” BMC Public Health 12(1):668. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-668.
Thesis/Dissertation
eng
Sociology
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Graduate
Abrutyn, Seth
Crisis of care : how church leaders negotiate conflicting logics in understanding and responding to suicidality
Text