eNews

It is all over the tabloids; Mel Gibson's wife of 28 years is divorcing him. Twenty years ago, when Gibson was best known for playing men bordering on insanity, his divorce would have simply been another tidbit of Hollywood marital drama. But since Gibson produced the vastly successful The Passion Of The Christ, his divorce is no longer just a Hollywood tragedy; it's a Christian tragedy. It reminds us that celebrities who come out to glorify Christ have massive bulls-eyes painted on their chests, politically, culturally, and especially spiritually, and they desperately need our support through prayer.

Willie Aames is another recent casualty. Aames is perhaps best known as "Tommy" on the 1970s sitcom Eight Is Enough, or as "Buddy" on the 1980s sitcom Charles In Charge. In the mid 1990s Aames, a Christian, was asked to play the role of Bible Man. From 1996 to 2004 Aames took on the role of a Bible-wielding super hero who wears the Armor of God and teaches children to use the Word of God as their primary spiritual weapon. Bible Man appeared on stages in hundreds of cities, putting on high profile skits that were made into a line of videos that kids love.

In 2007 Aames and his wife Maylo Upton-Aames wrote a book Grace Is Enough about their early troubled lives and their journey to learn about the power of God's grace. Soon after, their lives tumbled downhill. Aames ended up declaring bankruptcy, his car was repossessed, and Maylo left him after 22 years of marriage. Thanksgiving of 2008 he picked up a bottle of whiskey for the first time in two decades and tried to commit suicide. At the end of March, 2009 he was selling his belongings at a garage sale.

Christian leaders have the responsibility to conduct themselves above reproach and to set examples for those who follow them, to be humble and transparent, and to give the Enemy no foothold in their lives. Yet, Christian leaders are also humans, subject to temptations and passions, and are only as strong as their walk with Christ each day. It is easy to fall from spiritual heights and succumb to old habits and wild emotions. Satan is going to use any means he can to drag these leaders down and smear the name of Christ.

That is why it is vital that we pray for those in leadership of our churches, youth groups, home groups and families. (It's also vital that we pray for our leaders in local and national governments. They too need God's guidance and protection.)

Christians in Hollywood are particularly vulnerable. They are not official leaders, and they do not necessarily have church bodies praying for them and supporting them. They are surrounded by people and groups who, at best, don't understand Christianity and, at worst, are virulently anti-Christian. They may not consider themselves spiritual leaders, and yet they represent Christ to millions simply because they are in the public eye. Mel Gibson has consistently considered himself a human wreck in desperate need of God's mercy. Yet, The Passion Of The Christ made him famous as a Christian, and primed him for attacks that have successfully knocked him down over and over again.

We need to pray for Mel Gibson and Willie Aames and their families.

We also need to pray for those still standing, to hold them up and pull out the true "weapons of our warfare" in their defense. Kirk Cameron, long known as Mike Seaver from Growing Pains, recently made huge waves as the lead role in Fireproof, a movie about a marriage restored through one spouse's demonstration of Christ's love. As far as the world knows, Kirk Cameron's marriage is currently strong and healthy. But, we know the Enemy of our souls would love to tear down Cameron's relationship with his wife and shame the name of Christ.  The Camerons need prayer.

There are many others.  Stephen Baldwin, the youngest of the Baldwin brothers, has become well known as a Christian – a sharp contrast to his older brothers. He needs prayer as he presses on in Christ despite the controversy it causes among his family members and coworkers, with all the eyes of the world ready to watch him fall.

We as a Christian community must pay attention to potential battle areas and seek God's protection and help for these and other Christians whose necks are stuck out in Hollywood. We cannot leave these exposed sheep all alone in a land of wolves. The world may look at them and call them hypocrites when they stumble, but we call them brothers and sisters.  We must come alongside them and support them in prayer. When part of the body suffers, we all suffer.

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. -Ephesians 6:12

For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds; Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; -2 Corinthians 10:4-5

In 2001, Melanie Blocker Stokes leaped from the 12th floor of a Chicago hotel. Stokes, a happily married pharmaceutical sales manager had given birth to a cheerfully anticipated baby girl in February. As soon as the baby was born, though, everything changed. Stokes became depressed and paranoid, and her health deteriorated. She was hospitalized three times in seven weeks and was given a mixture of four different anti-depressants, anti-psychotics, and anti-anxiety drugs. She even underwent electroshock therapy. In the end, she took her own life, leaving her brand new little girl without a mother.

In response to cases like this, the US government is seeking to expand research on the scope and possible treatments for Postpartum Depression (PPD). Many mothers who have suffered from PPD are delighted that more publicity will be given to this often overlooked disorder. Others, however, are wary of potential efforts to force screening and treatments on women without their informed consent.

On March 30th, the US House of Representatives passed HR20, the Melanie Blocker Stokes MOTHERS Act, by a vote of 391-8. It's purpose? "To provide for research on, and services for individuals with, postpartum depression and psychosis." The next day the bill was sent on to the Senate for consideration.

On the surface, this seems like a great thing. Too many women have faced serious depression and even paranoia and suicidal thoughts after giving birth and have not received the care they needed. Too many have been told, "It's just the baby blues," and have not had their suffering taken seriously. For those who experience it, PPD is very real, and those who have gone through it wish that more people understood how devastating this disorder can be.

HR20 encourages the Secretary of Health and Human Services to "continue research to expand the understanding of the causes of, and treatments for, postpartum conditions" by doing research on PPD's causes, by doing studies on the frequency and natural history of PPD, by improving screening and diagnostic techniques, by developing new treatments through clinical research, and by increasing the public's awareness of the condition.

Many who have suffered from PPD support HR20 saying, "Good! The government is addressing this. They want to find new treatments! They want to raise awareness so that other women can get the help we didn't get!"

Others, though, like former therapist Lisa Bazler are concerned that HR20 is badly written and could force women into taking dangerous anti-psychotic drugs.

"What is being done currently, if you look under the hood and at the legislative history of the bill and all the front groups pushing it, is a movement towards universal mental health screening – including mandatory screening of women as they do in New Jersey – and preventative drugging during pregnancy or postpartum," she said.

Bazler, as well as the group at AbleChild.org, are especially concerned that HR20 contains no provision for informed consent – that is, there is nothing in HR20 to make sure women are warned about the potential dangers of the drugs used to treat PPD, nor to ensure that women are told about alternative treatments.

The concerns are not unfounded. New Jersey already has legislation that is similar to what is proposed in HR20, and new mothers are routinely screened as part of the program. The problem is that anti-psychotic and anti-depressant drugs are often used to treat women with PPD, and women who are diagnosed with PPD may be pressured into taking these medications. Yet, drugs certainly did not help Melanie Blocker Stokes, and many of the women who have famously killed their children, like Andrea Yates, were on anti-depressants.

UNITE founder Amy Philo began to hallucinate while on the anti-depressant Zoloft and pictured herself throwing her newborn son from the top of the stairs. When she tried to get her prescription changed, she wasn't allowed to leave the hospital for three days. "There was no counseling or anything. I was locked up like a prisoner..." She began to get better after she just stopped taking the drugs.

Women who enter into severe depression after giving birth don't need drugs to make them feel and act crazy. However, it is easy for the medical community to push new mothers into taking drugs, especially if the result of HR20 is that women are routinely screened before leaving the hospital. Educating women and their families about PPD is one thing. Subjective mental health screenings of new moms is another.

The answer to PPD may be fairly simple. It may best be treated by counseling and plenty of care and nurturing for new mothers. In many Latin American countries, where women are commonly allowed to rest and recuperate for a 40 days after birth, PPD is hardly a problem. In fast-paced America, where working women may only have two weeks off from work, or where housewives are expected to resume their normal busy schedules shortly after giving birth, PPD is far more common. The answer to the problem of PPD may lie in promoting respect for the new mother. Motherhood itself has been demeaned in many ways since the 1960s, and PPD may be a reflection of that.  Fixing the problem may be as simple as making sure our wives and daughters and mothers and sisters have consistent help and support after giving birth.  New moms need support and they need time.  They need to know they are free to relax during these precious weeks - to just sit and enjoy their new babies.

Bible instruction in public schools has concerned groups devoted to the separation of church and state, and even many Christians wonder if Bible classes are constitutional. The Supreme Court, however, has ruled that objective Bible instruction is appropriate in public schools, especially in light of the huge impact it has had on U.S. history and culture.

While the United States has had its share of atheists, agnostics, and members of a variety of world religions, America's heritage is deeply rooted in Judeo-Christianity. The Declaration of Independence depends on inalienable rights - inalienable because they were given by God. Our national motto "In God We Trust" goes back to the time of the Civil War, when it was first printed on American currency. It actually stretches farther back than that - to the War of 1812, when the Star Spangled Banner was written. The fourth verse of Francis Scott Key's song is less well known than the one we sing at baseball games:

"…Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the heav'n-rescued land
Praise the Pow'r that hath made and preserv'd us a nation!
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: 'In God is our trust!'..."

In fact, the very first governing document of the new world, The Mayflower Compact, gave stoutly religious reasons for sailing across the Atlantic and forming a government:

"Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia; do by these presents, solemnly and mutually in the Presence of God and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick…"

To deny America's religious heritage is not a separation of church and state, but is a rewriting of America's history.

This includes the way we educate our children. Several Supreme Court rulings have recognized the importance of the Bible in United States history. Federal and Supreme Court judges have stated that there is nothing unconstitutional about teaching the Bible in schools, as long as the instruction is approached in a religiously neutral manner.

In Zorach v. Clauson (1952) the Supreme Court recognized that, "[We] are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being…"

Later, in Abington Township v. Schempp (1963), the Court affirmed that sentiment, and stated that,

"The fact that the Founding Fathers believed devotedly that there was a God and that the unalienable rights of man were rooted in Him is clearly evidenced in their writings, from the Mayflower Compact to the Constitution itself. This background is evidenced today in our public life through the continuance in our oaths of office from the Presidency to the Alderman of the final supplication, 'So help me God'…"

Justice Lewis Powell, in his Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) concurring opinion wrote:

As a matter of history, schoolchildren can and should properly be informed of all aspects of this Nation's religious heritage. I would see no constitutional problem if schoolchildren were taught the nature of the Founding Father's religious beliefs and how these beliefs affected the attitudes of the times and the structure of our government. Courses in comparative religion, of course, are customary and constitutionally appropriate. In fact, since religion permeates our history, a familiarity with the nature of religious beliefs is necessary to understand many historical, as well as contemporary, events.

Not only is the Bible valuable for its influence on history or ethics or law, but the Bible itself may be taught. As the Supreme Court said in Schempp, "the Bible is worthy of study for its literary and historic qualities."

In Wiley v. Franklin, one federal judge wrote that the Bible is "replete" with material valuable for secular study, including "history, both ancient and modem, literature, poetry, music, art, government, social customs and practices, values, behavioral sciences."

The district court in Wiley wrote, "Thus the constitutional issue…is not the Bible itself, but rather the selectivity, emphasis, objectivity, and interpretive manner, or lack thereof, with which the Bible is taught."

The basic rule of thumb for religious instruction of any kind in the public school is that it be informational and not devotional in nature. Students can learn about Buddhism, but not be encouraged to meditate in the Buddhist fashion. Bible curriculum must be neutral in the way it presents Jewish or Christian history, presenting it in neither a worse nor a more favorable light than the Bible does itself. Public schools are free to take students through the Bible, to teach about its history and literature, its influence on modern law, or its allusions in modern literature, without either encouraging students to believe or disbelieve what it says. Public schools not only may, but should offer students courses on the Bible, since familiarity with the Bible is necessary for a well-rounded American education.