J O U R N A L OF P S Y C H O L O G Y & T H E O L O G Y2015, Vo!. 43, No, 4, 2 3 1 - 2 4 2

Copyright 20 15 by Rosemead School of Psychology Blola University, 0 0 9 1 -6 4 7 1 /4 1 0 -7 3 0

The Relationship of Self-Compassion with Perfectionistic Self-Presentation, Perceived Forgiveness, and Perceived Social Support in an Undergraduate Christian CommunityKaitlyn E. Brodar, Laura Barnard Crosskey, and Robert J. Thom pson, Jr.Duke University

Past research indicates that self-compassion is a unique predictor of variation in clergy burnout. Self-compassion may be a relevant and beneficial construct in Christian communities at large, but as of yet no studies have ana­lyzed self-compassion in non-clergy Christians. This study assesses the relationship of self-compassion with perfec­tionistic self-presentation, perceived forgiveness, and perceived support from one’s Christian community. The study sample (N = 129) was drawn from undergraduates at a mid-sized, private, secular university in the southeast­ern United States who self-identified as Christians and were actively involved in a Christian campus ministry'. Par­ticipants completed measures of the variables listed above through an online survey. Results indicated that those with low self-compassion reported more perfectionistic self-presentation, less perceived forgiveness, and lower perceived support from their campus ministry than those with high levels of self-reported compassion. Potential benefits of raising self-compassion among Christians are discussed.

Author Note: Kaitlyn E. Brodar is now at the University of North

Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kait­

lyn E. Brodar, Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University, Dur­

ham, North Carolina 27708. Email: kbrodar@email.unc.edu

Self-compassion, a concept derived from Buddhist thought, has been shown to be an adaptive strategy for constructively processing pain and suffering, especially weaknesses, failures, or other negative self-relevant information (Neff, 2003). Self-compassion has been found to be negatively correlated with anxiety, depres­sion, unstable self-worth, shame, and anger (Barnard & Curry, 2011) and positively associated with happi­ness, well-being, and adaptive coping strategies (Neff, Rude, & Kirkpatrick, 2007). Recent research (Barnard & Curry, 2012) has also indicated that among clergy, low self-compassion is a unique predictor of variation in burnout in church leaders, with low self-compassion as­sociated with higher levels of burnout. Self-compassion may also have adaptive value in the larger Christian community; however, no studies to our knowledge have looked specifically at self-compassion in non-clergy Christians. This study sought to address this gap in the literature and to introduce self-compassion as a concept with potential adaptive value in Christian communities.

In many Christian contexts, the theme of self-denial is heavily emphasized. For example, in Luke 9:23-24 (New Revised Standard Version), Jesus commands, “If any want to become my followers, let them deny them­selves and take up their cross daily and follow me.” Self- sacrificial behaviors are one way in which Christians may live out their faith (Knabb, Pelletier, & Grigorian- Routon, 2014). Beyond self-denial, avoiding self-in-

231

232 COMPASSION IN CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY

dulgence and self-centeredness is another emphasized theme that could lead to an excessively harsh stance towards one’s self. In contrast, however, increased com­passion for the self may allow individuals to construc­tively process their faults and pursue spiritual growth without feeling isolated or experiencing negative ef­fects of self-judgment (Leary, Tate, Adams, Batts Al­len, & Hancock, 2007). The question to be addressed is whether self-compassion is associated with valued aspects of Christian self-presentation and relationships with God and others in one’s Christian community.

Buddhism advocates viewing the self as an object worthy of compassion, just as one has compassion for others (Neff, 2003). In some Eastern Buddhist com­munities, the word used for compassion does not dif­ferentiate between self- and other-compassion. Within a Buddhist understanding, compassion involves feeling moved by and striving to ameliorate one’s own suffer­ing as well as the distress of others. The term was in­troduced to Western psychology by Neff (2003) and involves three major components: self-kindness as an alternative to self-criticism, a sense of common human­ity in which one is not alone in suffering or error, and the ability to hold one’s struggles in mindful awareness rather than avoiding or ruminating on them. The op­posite of self-compassion might be conceptualized as self-condemnation, isolation, and an overemphasis on personal suffering. Self-compassion does not involve self-centeredness, self-pity, or self-absorption, all of which decrease connectedness with others and amplify the extent of one’s own personal suffering (Neff et al., 2007). Overall, self-compassion encourages health and well-being and also helps individuals to find hope and meaning in life (Neff et al., 2007).

Leary et al. (2007) experimentally demonstrated that self-compassionate people can take responsibility for their failures and experience corresponding emo­tions without becoming emotionally distraught or de­fensive. In their study, participants were asked to talk about themselves for several minutes while being video­taped. Later, they were either given positive or neutral (assumed to be perceived as negative) feedback from a confederate posing as an observer regarding their per­formance. Individuals with low self-compassion at­tributed positive feedback to their own performance and neutral feedback to factors associated with the ob­server, demonstrating a defensive attitude that blunts growth from weaknesses or mistakes. On the other hand, individuals high in self-compassion attributed both positive and neutral feedback to their own perfor­mance without becoming emotionally distraught (mea­sured by self-rated anxiety and sadness post-feedback)

or defensive. The findings suggest that self-compassion buffers reactions to negative life events and interper­sonal feedback, allowing individuals to recognize their failures in a mindful way without emotional distress. Furthermore, the researchers demonstrated that level of self-compassion could be changed; specifically, in­dividuals in a self-compassion induction group were more likely to take responsibility for their shortcom­ings without experiencing negative emotions.

Because self-compassion is associated with taking responsibility for failures without becoming emo­tionally distraught or defensive, it is a particularly empowering construct in Christian communities. Many Christians reject the idea of “cheap grace,” that is, “the grace we bestow on ourselves . . . the preach­ing of forgiveness without requiring repentance, bap­tism without church discipline, communion with­out confession” (Bonhoeffer, 1959, pp. 44-45). The idea that cheap grace, or the simple excusing of one’s transgressions, can be deleterious has been empirically supported in the self-forgiveness literature. A recent review by Wohl and McLaughlin (2014) indicates that while self-forgiveness, in some contexts, is associ­ated with enhanced well-being, improved self-image, reduced guilt, and less self-resentment, in other con­texts, individuals with high self-forgiveness continue engaging in the bad behavior they have excused. For example, Wohl and Thompson (2011) showed that smokers were actually less likely to quit smoking if they forgave themselves for their smoking behavior.

Recent work by Woodyatt and Wenzel (2013a) further probes this contextual issue by distinguishing between “pseudo self-forgiveness” and “genuine self­forgiveness.” Pseudo self-forgiveness involves defensive processing of failures, denial of bad behavior, and ex­cusing of transgressions. In genuine self-forgiveness,

T h e offender recognizes th e ir ow n culpability and the

w orth o f the victim , experiences the resulting em otions,

addresses attitudes and behaviors th a t led to th e offense

in the first place, a ttem pts to m ake am ends and, in the

process, restores the ir m oral self. (W oo d y att & W enzel,

2013b, pp. 2 3 1 -2 3 2 )

Self-compassion has much overlap with the concept of genuine self-forgiveness, but lacks its limitations in measurement. It does not entail pseudo self-forgive­ness or simple excusing of one’s faults, but rather al­lows individuals to constructively process their short­comings without over-identifying with them, feeling isolated in failure, or becoming consumed by feelings of inadequacy or even sinfulness. Having a sense of self-

BRODAR, CROSSKEY, and THOM PSON 233

compassion may be associated with Christians con­tinuing to work toward growth in discipleship rather than disengaging from or feeling alienated by God or their Christian communities during times of failure or weakness. Self-compassion is relevant to multiple con­structs that play a prominent role in Christian faith; specifically, perfectionistic self-presentation, forgive­ness, and community support.

Perfectionistic Self-PresentationSelf-compassion is especially important because of

the emphasis many Christian communities place on working toward moral perfection (e.g., “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect,” Matthew 5:48). W hat happens when individuals fail to meet this goal? Reputation as a morally upright person in the eyes of God and others is a valued aspect of self­presentation in many Christian communities. Some individuals may seek to present themselves in a morally perfect way to others in order to feel that they fit in as a member, especially if they lack self-compassion.

Christianity contains a rich history of striving for moral perfection. For example, John Wesley’s influ­ential doctrine of Christian perfection suggested that Christians are perfected by God’s grace as part of a life­long process (Wesley, 1872/2006). Phoebe Palmer, as well as the holiness and temperance movements that followed her, believed strongly that Christian perfec­tion may be attained in this lifetime, calling individu­als to take active roles in the process of sanctification (White, 1987). Christian communities that adhere to this interpretation often view Christian perfection as total abstinence from sin (Warner, 2009). Stringent moral codes lead some Christians to moralize more than others and to place an overemphasis on more prototypi­cal moral concerns like pornography, alcohol use, and sexuality (Daniluk & Browne, 2008; Murray, Ciarroc- chi, & Murray-Swank, 2007; Patterson & Price, 2012). These moral concerns become sanctified as “sins” and thus carry a heavy, if not eternal, weight for this popula­tion. Christians with this sort of emphasis on morality and sinfulness might be more susceptible to feelings of shame, guilt, and anxiety over moral failures.

Seeking moral perfection may be culturally norma­tive in many Christian communities but may become maladaptive in some circumstances. Some Christians experience moral struggle, which is defined by Exline, Pargament, Grubbs, and Yali (2014) as an internal conflict in which “a person wrestles with attempts to follow moral principles or feels intense guilt in re­sponse to perceived transgressions” (p. 209). These individuals might attempt to manage their moral

struggle or to earn the love of God or others in their Christian communities by presenting themselves as morally flawless or by trying to hide their flaws and failures. If such self-presentation is pursued without an understanding and acceptance of grace (a sign of God’s compassion for God’s followers), failures could be associated with excessive self-criticism, doubt, guilt, shame, or other negative affective experiences. For ex­ample, Exline, Yali, and Sanderson (2000) found that among undergraduates, religious strain (alienation from God, religious rifts, religious fear and guilt) was positively correlated with depression (r = .44, p < .01) and suicidality (r = .34,p < .05). Also, individuals with this sort of experience may feel rejected by their Chris­tian community and disengage or distance themselves from it.

In the psychological literature, perfectionistic self­presentation (PSP; Hewitt et ah, 2003) is considered a maladaptive form of self-presentation related to socially-prescribed perfectionism and the ideal public self, representing “an attempt to construct a socially desirable identity and to regulate an often precarious sense of self’ (Sherry, Hewitt, Flett, Lee-Baggley, & Hall, 2007, p. 487). PSP involves three types of behav­iors: actively promoting oneself as a perfect person to others (perfectionistic self-promotion), hiding one’s flaws and failures in public (non-display of imperfec­tion), and avoiding verbal confession of imperfections to others (non-disclosure of imperfection; Hewitt et ah, 2003). A Christian dogmatically pursuing moral perfection may fear appearing imperfect in public and desire to hide moral failures from others, both of which challenge valued Christian practices of accountability and vulnerability, potentially disrupting the spiritual growth of both the individual and the community. Christians with low self-compassion may be more likely to exhibit PSP and to experience internal distress from failing to live up to unrealistic standards as well as interpersonal distress from an unwillingness to share challenges and trials with others. Individuals high in self-compassion, however, should feel less of a need to present themselves in a perfect way to others. Specifi­cally, the self-kindness aspect of self-compassion may be related to greater tolerance of imperfections, while a sense of common humanity may be associated with reduced fears about vulnerability. The ability to hold one’s imperfections in mindful awareness may help an individual to consider others’ perceptions without becoming consumed by fears of rejection. Thus, self­compassion may help to buffer potential negative ef­fects of perfectionistic self-presentation in Christian communities.

234 COMPASSION IN CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY

Perceived ForgivenessThe giving and receiving of forgiveness for moral

and interpersonal transgressions play a prominent role in the faith of many Christians (Krause & Ellison, 2003). Forgiveness is multi-faceted; while it certainly involves acknowledging and forgiving others’ offenses, it also includes the confession of one’s own sins, the seeking of absolution, and the subsequent belief that one has actually received mercy from God and others. When individuals fail to perceive forgiveness, they of­ten experience distress. Exline et al. (2000) show that religion and distress are associated among undergradu­ates who narrowly focus on the sins they have com­mitted, especially sins for which they do not perceive forgiveness. They also found a strong association be­tween suicidality and religious fear and guilt, especially with the idea that one had committed a sin too big to be forgiven (r = .31 ,/ < .05). Similarly, Krause and El­lison (2003) report that in older practicing Christians, a sense of forgiveness by God was associated with fewer depressed affect symptoms.

Prior research highlights the “God-image,” which refers to the way in which individuals view God as a result of their experiences and relationship with God (Davis, Moriarity, & Mauch, 2013; Thomas, Moriarty, Davis, & Anderson, 2011). A Christian who struggles to perceive God’s forgiveness may chronically view God as harsh, critical, and even cruel, and may thus ex­perience a great deal of religious fear, anxiety, or doubt. Exline, Grubbs, and Homolka (2015) found that per­ceiving God as cruel was significantly associated with anger toward God {r = .43,/ < .01) and concern about God’s anger and disapproval (r = .34 ,/ < .01).

Although it can be helpful to think of one’s own flaws in a mindful way, a focus on sin can be detri­mental, leading to a view of God and others as dis­tant, cold, or judgmental (Davis et al., 2013; Exline et al., 2000; Exline et al., 2015). Individuals with low self-compassion may expect harshness from God and others, believing they are not worthy of forgiveness or support, which in turn drastically influences their God-images. Because some Christian teachings em­phasize that sin separates people from God, individu­als focused on their own sinfulness might feel alienated from God as well as from others in their Christian community rather than having a sense of common humanity with other Christians and even with Je­sus himself. Increased self-compassion could involve mindful awareness of sins and the recognition of one’s need for forgiveness without over-identification of oneself as a sinner, and could also be associated with

trusting that God and others have truly forgiven one’s shortcomings.

Perceived Social Support from a Christian Community

Christianity is most often practiced in community; many Christians are members of a church or some type of religious group. All participants in the current study, for example, were actively involved in a Christian cam­pus ministry. Undergraduate Christians seek out these communities in order to gain strength, acceptance, and warmth from others, especially during difficult times.

Church-based support among respondents to the 1998 General Social Survey was associated with posi­tive health outcomes, including lower depression (r = - .2 0 ,/ < .05) and better subjective physical health (r = .11 ,/ < .05; Nooney & Woodrum, 2002). In a study of Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) members, individuals were more likely to use positive religious coping strat­egies when they received spiritual support from other church members (Krause, Ellison, Shaw, Marcum, & Boardman, 2001). Support from a religious commu­nity is also perceived as extremely helpful in times of crisis (Stone, Cross, Purvis, & Young, 2003).

Low self-compassion could be associated with a lack of perceived social support from a faith community. In particular, low self-compassion might be related to chronically viewing God and other members of one’s Christian community as critical or unsupportive. Ex­cessive self-criticism may also be correlated with the be­lief that a person is not worthy of support from others and thus prevent that individual from seeking help. Al­though individuals may continue participating in their Christian communities in spite of these feelings, it may be difficult for others in the community to recognize the ways in which these individuals need support.

Research Questions and Associated HypothesesThe current study addresses two questions: (1)

whether self-compassion is associated with present­ing one’s self in a morally perfect way to others, with perceived forgiveness by God and by others, and with perceived support from members of one’s undergradu­ate Christian campus ministry; and (2) whether those with low compared to those with high levels of self­compassion differ significantly in their levels of per- fectionistic self-presentation, forgiveness, and support. It was hypothesized that (1) self-compassion would be significantly negatively associated with perfectionistic self-promotion, non-display of imperfection, and non­disclosure of imperfection, and significantly positively

B R O D A R , C R O S S K E Y , a n d T H O M P S O N 235

associated with perceived forgiveness by God and by others and with perceived support from one’s campus ministry; and (2) that those with low self-compassion would have significantly higher levels of perfectionistic self-presentation across all three subscales, lower levels of perceived forgiveness by God and by others, and a lower level of perceived support than those with high levels of self-compassion.

Methods

ParticipantsCampus ministers for each Christian ministry

listed on the religious life website at a mid-sized, pri­vate, secular university in the southeastern United States were contacted by the researchers. Each minis­ter was asked to send a short e-mail invitation for the study to all of their active undergraduate members. A total of 164 undergraduate students responded to the e-mail and, of these, 129 completed all questionnaires and constituted the study sample. Sample characteris­tics are found in Table 1.

TABLE 1

ProcedureA hyperlink for an online Qualtrics survey, com­

prised of the four measures described below, was e-mailed to participants by their campus ministers. Participants were instructed to complete a series of questionnaires related to ways they think and feel about themselves, others, and their faith. They were also asked for basic demographic data. Both the order of the measures and the order of the items were ran­domized for each participant. Upon completion of the survey, participants were asked to e-mail the researcher if they would like to be included in a lottery for restau­rant gift certificates ($20 value). Fifteen winners were randomly chosen from those that entered the lottery.

Self-compassion. Participants completed the 26- item Self-Compassion Scale (SCS; Neff, 2003). This scale assesses the three major components of self-com­passion (self-kindness versus self-judgment, common humanity versus isolation, and mindfulness versus over-identification) with self-judgment, isolation, and over-identification items reverse-coded. Participants

Sample Characteristics

n %Gender Female 88 68.2

Male 41 31.8Race White/Caucasian 91 70.5

Asian/Asian-American 17 13.2Black/ African-American 13 10.1Other 8 6.2

Ethnicity Non-Hispanic/Latino/a 118 91.5Hispanic/Latino/a 11 8.5

Year in College First-Year 28 21.7Sophomore 24 18.6Junior 27 20.9Senior 50 38.8

Religious Affiliation Catholic/Orthodox 22 17.1Mainline Protestant 46 35.7Evangelical Protestant 48 37.2Other 13 10.9

Note. For religious affiliation, “Mainline Protestant” consisted of Episcopalians, Lutherans, United Methodists, and Presbyterians; “Evangelical Protestant” consisted of Baptists and Non-denominational Christians, and “Other” consisted of Seventh Day Adventists, Latter Day Saints/Mormons, one Quaker, and those who chose “other Christian.”

236 COMPASSION IN CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY

are asked to respond to each item by stating how of­ten they engage in the behavior “in difficult times” on a 5-point rating scale (1 = almost never to 5 = almost always). Items include statements such as “When I see aspects of myself that I don’t like, I get down on myself’ and “When I’m really struggling, I tend to feel like other people must be having an easier time of it.” Scores are summed to produce a total self-compassion score. Past research indicates that the SCS is well-val­idated when compared with similar measures of self­kindness and has strong test-retest reliability (r = .93) and good internal consistency (a = .92; Neff 2003). In the current study, the self-compassion scale had a Cronbach’s alpha of .92.

Perfectionistic self-presentation. Participants completed the Perfectionistic Self-Presentation Scale (PSPS; Hewitt et ah, 2003). Although the scale does not include the language of “morality,” it offers an ap­proximation for the intensity with which individuals attempt to present themselves in a perfect way to oth­ers. The PSPS consists of 27 items contained in three subscales: perfectionistic self-promotion (SP; “I need to be seen as perfect in everything I do”), non-display of imperfection (NDP; “Errors are much worse if they are made in public than in private”), and non-disclosure of imperfection (NDC; “Admitting failure to others is the worst possible thing”). Participants indicated their agreement with each item by using a 7-point scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree). Higher scores indicate greater perfectionistic self-presentation. The PSPS has been shown to have good construct validity when compared to other measures of perfectionism and has strong internal consistency and test-retest re­liability in diverse samples (Hewitt et al., 2003). For the current study, the perfectionistic self-promotion subscale was modified slightly, primarily by replacing “perfect” with “moral” (Appendix A). This was done for two reasons. First, the current study is specifically focused on moral perfection. Second, “perfect” was used in several items of the perfectionistic self-promo­tion subscale (in contrast to its relative absence in the other two subscales), and the researchers had concerns that questions may be misinterpreted, as the language of perfection carries a heavy weight in many Christian communities (i.e., Doctrine of Christian Perfection). Furthermore, this subscale contains items such as “I don’t really care about being perfectly groomed” that were irrelevant to the current study. The Likert scores were summed to produce total scores for each of the three subscales. Cronbach’s alpha for the current study was .85, .77, and .82 for non-display of imperfection,

non-disclosure of imperfection, and self-promotion, respectively.

Perceived forgiveness and support. Participants completed items taken from the Fetzer Institute’s Multidimensional Measure of Religiousness/Spiritual- ity for Use in Health Research (Fetzer/NIA working group, 1999). The questionnaire contains questions in eight domains of religiosity and spirituality, with a long and short form for each domain. The question­naire was embedded into the 1997-1998 General Social Survey, where it was validated and compared to other items related to religious and spiritual experi­ences. In the current study, two unique items assessing perceived forgiveness by God and others were adopted as the measure of forgiveness and a single item was ad­opted to assess religious support from a campus minis­try (Appendix B). Participants responded to all three items on a 4-point scale (1 = never to 4 = always).

ResultsTo address our first hypothesis regarding the re­

lationship of self-compassion to the other variables, bivariate correlations of each variable with all other variables were obtained. The means, standard devia­tions, and bivariate correlations of the scores for all respondents are presented in Table 2. Self-compassion was significantly negatively associated with two of the perfectionistic self-presentation subscales—non­disclosure of imperfection and non-display of imper­fection—but not perfectionistic self-promotion, and was significantly positively associated with perceived forgiveness by God but not with perceived forgiveness by others or perceived support from one’s Christian community.

Hierarchical multiple regression analysis was con­ducted to determine the relationship of the variables of interest with self-compassion, with the influence of demographic variables and faith tradition controlled. The findings are presented in Table 3. The demo­graphic variables (gender, year in college, race) were entered first and accounted for .049 of the variance in self-compassion; faith tradition was entered sec­ond and accounted for an additional .004 increment in variance. The total amount of variance (5.2%) in self-compassion accounted for by the demographic and faith tradition variables was insignificant. The other study variables (perfectionistic self-promotion, non-disclosure of imperfection, non-display of imper­fection, forgiveness by God, forgiveness by others, and perceived support) were entered third. Over and above the variance accounted for by demographics and faith

B R O D A R , C R O S S K E Y , a n d T H O M P S O N 237

TABLE 2Means, Standard Deviations, and Bivariate Correlations for Study Variables

Variable i 2 3 4 5 6 71. Self-compassion —2. Perfectionistic self-presentation -.09 —3. Non-display of imperfection -.42'" .24" —4. Non-disclosure of imperfection -.28" .20' .49"' -5. Perceived forgiveness by God .22' .11 -.15 -.22' —6. Perceived forgiveness by others .10 .13 -.06 -.05 .23" —7. Perceived support .23” .16 -.06 1 o \D

\ .29" .17 —

Mean 2.94 5.16 3.99 2.84 3.67 2.97 3.15Standard Deviation .64 .81 1.07 .93 .58 .68 .72

Note. *p < .05. **p < .01. " ‘p < .001.

TABLE 3Summary of Hierarchical Multiple Regression Analyses o f Self- Compassion

R 2 AR 1 AF

Model 1: Demographics .049 .049 .886Model 2: Demographics + Faith Tradition .052 .004 .152Model 3: Demographics + Faith Tradition + Other study variables1 .290 .237 6.239'

Note. “ “Other study variables” includes perfectionistic self-promotion, non-display o f imperfection, non-disclosure of imperfection, perceived forgiveness by God, perceived forgiveness by others, and perceived love/support from a campus ministry.7> < . 001.

tradition, these other study variables cumulatively ac­counted for a significant {p < .001) 24% increment in variance in self-compassion.

To address our second hypothesis, a one-way mul­tivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used to analyze whether there was a significant group effect across the variables of interest, that is, whether those with low self-compassion differed from those with high self-compassion in their levels of perfectionistic self-presentation, perceived forgiveness, and perceived support. These two self-compassion subgroups were formed based on standard deviations around the over­all mean for self-compassion (M = 2.94, SD = 0.64), which closely mirrored the mean (M = 3.01, SD = 0.58) for Neff and Pommier’s (2013) undergradu­ate sample. Five individuals were considered to be outliers because their scores fell more than two stan­dard deviations above or below the overall mean and were dropped from the MANOVA and subsequent

ANOVA analyses in recognition of the potential im­pact on small sample sizes. The high self-compassion group ( N = 16; M = 3.88, SD = 0.21) consisted of individuals scoring more than one standard deviation above the mean, and the low self-compassion group (N = 16; M = 2.01, SD = 0.17) consisted of individuals scoring more than one standard deviation below the mean. The MANOVA analysis indicated an overall significant group effect (F[l, 30] = 4.08, p = .005; Wilks’ Lambda = 0.51; partial eta squared = 0.50). Findings from subsequent ANOVA analyses are pre­sented in Table 4. The low self-compassion group had significantly higher (p < .05) levels of non-disclosure of imperfection and non-display of imperfection, but not perfectionistic self-promotion, and had significantly lower levels of perceived forgiveness by God, but not from others, and significantly lower levels of perceived support from a Christian community. These findings need to be interpreted conservatively because 3 of the 6

238 COMPASSION IN CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY

TABLE 4Comparison o f High and Low Self-Compassion Groups on Perfectionistic Self-Presentation, Perceived Forgiveness,and Perceived Support

Self-Compassion

Low (N= 16)

High (N= 16)

M SD M SD F

Perfectionistic self-promotion 5.37 .83 5.25 .69 0.19Non-display of imperfection 4.94 1.10 3.51 .95 15.48"'Non-disclosure of imperfection 3.61 1.05 2.60 .58 11.36“

Perceived forgiveness by God 3.31 .79 3.81 .54 4.32'

Perceived forgiveness by others 2.69 .79 3.13 .50 3.48

Perceived support from campus ministry 2.69 .87 3.44 .63 7.77"

Note, 'p < .05. **p < .01. mp < .001.

variables did not meet the homogeneity o f variance as­sumption: non-disclosure of imperfection, forgiveness by God, and forgiveness by others.

DiscussionThe aim o f this study was to explore self-com­

passion as a concept with potential adaptive value in Christian communities. This study was not designed to account for why some undergraduate Christians have more self-compassion than others, but it can pro­vide insight into a few ways in which self-compassion is associated with other constructs of importance to the Christian experience, including emotional and behavioral responses to moral faults as well as quality of relationships with God and others in a Christian community.

The findings indicate that self-compassion is asso­ciated in the hypothesized directions with other con­structs o f importance in Christian communities. More specifically, self-compassion was negatively associated with dimensions o f perfectionistic self-presentation and positively with perceptions o f forgiveness and sup­port. Moreover, the low self-compassion group had significantly higher perfectionistic self-presentation, showing both higher non-display of imperfection and non-disclosure of imperfection than the high self­compassion group. These findings suggest that indi­viduals with low self-compassion may feel more pres­sure to appear flawless or fear rejection from others if their mistakes are noticed. They may also be more likely to keep their failures to themselves rather than sharing mistakes with others, potentially inhibiting

practices o f confession and accountability, which are often emphasized in Christian communities. O n the other hand, self-compassionate Christians who recog­nize that all humans make mistakes may not feel as em­barrassed or ashamed by feelings of failure and may be more likely to thrive in a Christian community rather than disengage. For example, Barnard and Curry (2012) indicate that self-compassion is associated with less shame and less of a tendency to isolate oneself after failure among Christian clergy.

Perceived forgiveness by God was also significantly lower in the low self-compassion group. Individuals with low self-compassion may feel as though they are not worthy of forgiveness from God. They may per­petually over-identify with being a “sinner,” struggling to see themselves in light of God’s grace. Low self-com­passion Christians may expect harsh judgment from God and struggle to feel they have truly been forgiven for mistakes they have made.

Finally, the low self-compassion group also had significantly lower perceived support from a Chris­tian community than did the high self-compassion group. Low self-compassion individuals have a reduced sense o f common humanity and may feel alienated or isolated from other community members even when the community tries to be supportive. Their struggles with self-kindness may lead to feelings that they do not deserve others’ friendship or kindness, and they may fail to seek support or engage in relationships. Christians with high self-compassion may recognize their flaws but still see themselves as worthy of kind­ness and friendship from others. These individuals

BRODAR, CROSSKEY, and THOM PSON 239

may feel more connected to and engaged in their faith communities.

Strengths and Lim itationsThe major strength o f this study is that it is the first

to analyze some of the functions of self-compassion within non-clergy Christians, and more specifically, Christian undergraduates. It adds to a body of research assessing how psychological constructs function in a specifically Christian context and provides sugges­tions for how self-compassion has adaptive value in Christian communities. One major limitation of the study was its small sample size (N = 129). However, the study was most interested in undergraduate Chris­tians w ith high involvement in campus ministries. Be­cause this population is small at a secular university, the study likely captured the population of interest. Another limitation was the change in wording made in the perfectionistic self-promotion subscale. W hile the scale still showed strong reliability (a = .82), we cannot measure the impact the change had on participant re­sponses, and thus cannot do much in terms o f reason­ing why the self-promotion subscale did not correlate with any variables besides the two other perfectionistic self-presentation subscales. Another limitation is the possibility o f spurious results associated with adopting a significance probability level o f .05, given the multi­ple ANOVAs conducted. Had a Bonferroni corrected value of .008 (j> < .05/6 tests) been used, the only sig­nificant results would have been with non-disclosure of imperfection and non-display o f imperfection. C on­sistent with the exploratory nature of this study, we chose to use a more lenient significance level.

Im plications and Future DirectionsThe findings from this study that those with low

self-compassion have higher levels o f perfectionistic self-presentation and lower levels o f perceived forgive­ness and support have implications both for practices in Christian communities and for future research. W hile this study cannot make any causal statements, the various associations demonstrated between self­compassion and the other study variables indicate multiple avenues for constructive dialogue within Christian communities. For example, while pastors may feel uncomfortable or unsure about how to raise self-compassion in their parishioners, they certainly have the theological and pastoral training to help indi­viduals have faith in God’s forgiveness or give and seek the social support of others in their community via particular emphases in sermons or counseling sessions. By working in tandem to address both faith-related

and psychological constructs, therapists and pastors can work together to promote mental health in those that they collectively serve.

Future research ought to investigate the relation­ship of self-compassion to additional faith-related constructs not measured in this study, such as sacred desecration (Pargament, Magyar, Benore, & Mahoney, 2005), spiritual strain (Exline et al., 2015), and God concept and image (Davis et al., 2013). Another step is to determine whether Christians with low self-com­passion are at risk for a number of negative outcomes previously reported in the literature, including depres­sion and anxiety (Barnard & Curry, 2011). If this as­sociation is supported, work in the area of prevention and intervention could be considered. Even raising self-compassion only slightly could have beneficial effects.

O l particular interest would be experimentally demonstrating whether the faith-related variables measured in the current study, as well as measures of well-being and distress, change as a result o f raising self­compassion. In order to carry out this type of study, culturally-relevant means for raising self-compassion that can be easily utilized by pastors, campus ministers, or even small group leaders ought to be explored. Many churches and campus ministries already have Bible studies and small groups that meet regularly, so some of the potential methods for raising self-compassion mentioned below could be woven into the practices of these groups. This would allow individuals to discuss their failures and shortcomings in a safe space where they are confident that they will be forgiven, affirmed, and supported. Further, they can discuss productive ways to strive for growth with other community mem­bers.

Allegorical bibliotherapy. One method for raising self-compassion may be to use “allegorical bibliother­apy,” in which individuals can find biblical characters or stories to identify with (Thomas et al., 2011). This approach allows individuals to distance themselves from their own problems, but it also permits them to see how other Christians, even those who have been recognized as saints, struggle with similar challenges. Various elements o f the therapy are reflected in self­compassion; in particular, common humanity and mindful awareness (Neff, 2003). For example, individ­uals could meditate on the story of Peter denyingjesus (Matthew 26:69-75). In this story, Jesus calls Peter to be the rock upon which he will build his church, yet after Jesus is arrested by Roman authorities, Peter de­nies their relationship three times out o f fear. He feels

240 COMPASSION IN CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY

distress over having failed Jesus in this way, but Jesus restores him to full participation in the community with kindness and gentleness. Although Peter fully recognizes the gravity of his moral failure, he is not condemned, isolated, ignored, or alienated. Focusing on God’s restorative action in the lives of flawed bibli­cal characters may be helpful for Christians to further develop a compassionate attitude towards themselves.

Compassion-focused therapy and mindful self­compassion. Compassion-focused therapy (CFT) at­tempts to increase self-compassion by helping individ­uals to develop a compassionate inner voice that can soothe them during the times they feel most self-crit­ical (Gilbert, 2010; Leaviss & Uttley, 2015). Through this process, clients learn to show themselves kindness instead of criticism. CFT is especially effective in in­dividuals with high levels of shame and self-criticism. Because CFT seems to work best for clinical popula­tions, Neff and Germer (2013) developed mindful self­compassion as a method for raising self-compassion in non-clinical populations. Mindful self-compassion is an 8-week program that involves meditation, daily self-compassion practices, loving-kindness extended to both self and others, and skill-building for approach­ing failures. The program was successful in raising self-compassion, mindfulness, and well-being. These practices could be easily utilized in a Christian setting, potentially with an emphasis on meditative prayer rather than meditation.

Acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT). Finally, Barnard and Curry (2011) suggest ACT as one of several interventions that may have success in raising self-compassion, as it encourages acceptance of one’s flaws while working toward goals that ex­press one’s values (Hayes, Luoma, Bond, Masuda, & Lillis, 2006). Specifically, clients are asked to experience troublesome thoughts in a mindful way, without be­coming defensive or self-critical. Therapists then help clients to reduce the discrepancy between who they are and who they want to be by orienting themselves in the direction of their values. Clients are reminded that all people struggle to act in accordance with their values at some time. ACT may be particularly helpful for Christian individuals because of its foundation in one’s personal values (Karekla & Constantinou, 2010; Knabb et al., 2014). ACT would allow individuals to at once be cognizant of sin and to work toward Chris­tian perfection without becoming overly self-critical or isolated from their communities.

ConclusionsThe current study found relationships between

self-compassion, perfectionistic self-presentation, per­ceived forgiveness, and perceived social support in a sample of undergraduate Christians, setting the stage for a future experimental study in which self-compas­sion could be raised and the change on other variables could be assessed. The suggestions offered for potential ways to raise self-compassion in Christian communi­ties draw on elements already present in Christian tradition and ritual. Pastors and campus ministers may find interventions such as these practical and rel­evant. Ultimately, raising self-compassion may lead to several faith-related benefits, including greater engagement in undergraduate Christian campus ministries.

ReferencesBarnard, L. K., &c Curry, J. F. (2011). Self-compassion: Conceptu­alizations, correlates, & interventions. Review o f General Psychology, 15,289-303. doi: 10.1037/a0025754

Barnard, L. K., & Curry, J. F. (2012). The relationship o f clergy burnout to self-compassion and other personality dimensions. Pastoral Psychology, 6 1 ,149-163. doi:10.1007/sll089-011-0377-0

Bonhoeffer, D. (1959). The cost o f discipleship. New York, NY: Macmillan.

Daniluk.J. C., & Browne, N. (2008). Traditional religious doctrine and women’s sexuality: Reconciling the contradictions. Women & Therapy, 3 1 ,129-142. doi:10.1080/02703140802145284

Davis, E. B., Moriarty, G. L., & Mauch, J. C. (2013). God images and god concepts: Definitions, development, and dynamics. Psychology o f Religion and Spirituality, 5 ,51-60. doi:10.1037/a0029289

Exline, J. J., Grubbs, J. B., & Homolka, S. J. (2015). Seeing God as cruel or distant: Links with divine struggles involving anger, doubt, and fear of God’s disapproval. The International Journal for the Psy­chology o f Religion, 2S, 29-41. doi: 10.1080/10508619.2013.857255

Exline, J. J., Pargament, K. I., Grubbs, J. B., & Yali, A. M. (2014). The Religious and Spiritual Struggles Scale: Development and ini­tial validation. Psychology o f Religion and Spirituality, 6, 208-222. doi: 10.1037/a0036465

Exline, J. J., Yali, A. M., & Sanderson, W. C. (2000). Guilt, discord, and alienation: The role of religious strain in depression and suicidal- ity.Journal o f Clinical Psychology, 5 6 ,1481 -1496. doi: 10.1002/1097- 4679(200012)56:12< 1481 ::AID-1>3.0.CO;2-A

Fetzer/NIA Working Group. (1999). Multidimensional measure­ment o f religiousness/spirituality for use in health research. Kalama­zoo, MI: John E. Fetzer Institute.

Gilbert, P. (2010). Compassion focused therapy: Distinctive features. New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Hayes, S. C., Luoma, J. B., Bond, F. W., Masuda, A., & Lillis, J. (2006). Acceptance and commitment therapy: Model, processes and outcom es. Behaviour Research and Therapy,44, l-25.doi:10.10l6/j. brat.2005.06.006

BRODAR, CROSSKEY, and THOMPSON 241

Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., Sherry, S. B., Habke, M., Parkin, M., Lam, R. W., . . . Stein, M. B. (2003). The interpersonal expression of perfection: Perfectionistic self-presentation and psychological distress. Journal o f Personality and Social Psychology, 8 4 ,1303-1325. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1303

Karekla, M., & Constantinou, M. (2010). Religious coping and cancer: Proposing an acceptance and commitment ther- apy approach. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 17, 371-381. doi:10.10l6/j.cbpra.2009.08.003

Knabb, J. J., Pelletier, J., 8c Grigorian-Routon, A. (2014). Towards a psychological understanding of servanthood: An empirical investiga­tion o f the relationship between orthodox beliefs, experiential avoid­ance, and self-sacrificial behaviors among Christians at a religiously- affiliated university. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 42 ,269-283.

Krause, N., 8c Ellison, C. G. (2003). Forgiveness by God, forgiveness o f others, and psychological well-being in late li it. Journalfor the Sci­entific Study o f Religion, 42,77-93. doi: 10.1111/1468-5906.00162

Krause, N., Ellison, C. G., Shaw, B. A., Marcum, J. P., 8c Board- man, J. D. (2001). Church-based social support and religious coping. Journal fo r the Scientific Study o f Religion, 40, 637-656. doi: 10.1111 /0 0 2 1 -8294.00082

Leary, M. R., Tate, E. B., Adams, C. E., Batts Allen, A., 8c Hancock, J. (2007). Self-compassion and reactions to unpleasant self-relevant events: The implications of treating oneself kindly. Journal o f Per­sonality and Social Psychology, 92, 887-904. doi: 10.1037/0022- 3514.92.5.887

Leaviss, J., 8c Uttley, L. (2015). Psychotherapeutic benefits of com­passion-focused therapy: An early systematic review. Psychological Medicine, 45, 927-945. doi:10.1017/S003329174002l4l

Murray, K. M., Ciarrocchi, J. W., 8c Murray-Swank, N. A. (2007). Spirituality, religiosity, shame and guilt as predictors of sexual attitudes and experiences. Journal o f Psychology and Theology, 35 ,222-234.

Neff, K. D. (2003). The development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion. Self and Identity, 2, 223-250. doi: 10.1080/15298860309027

NefF, K. D., & Germer, C. K. (2013). A pilot study and randomized controlled trial of the mindful self-compassion program. Journal o f Clinical Psychology, 69, 28-44. doi: 10.1002/jclp.21923

Neff, K. D., 8c Pommier, E. (2013). The relationship between self­compassion and other-focused concern among college undergradu­ates, community adults, and practicing meditators. Self and Identity, 1 2 ,160-176. doi:10.1080/15298868.2011.649546

Neff, K. D., Rude, S. S., 8c Kirkpatrick, K. L. (2007). An examination of self-compassion in relation to positive psychological functioning and personality traits .Journal o f Research in Personality, 41, 908- 916. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2006.08.002

Nooney, J., & Woodrum, E. (2002). Religious coping and church- based social support as predictors o f mental health outcomes: Test­ing a conceptual model. Journalfor the Scientific Study o f Religion, 41, 359-368. doi: 10.1111/1468-5906.00122

Pargament, K. I., Magyar, G. M., Benore, E., 8c Mahoney, A. (2005). Sacrilege: A study of sacred loss and desecration and their implica­tions for health and well-being in a community sample. Journal

fo r the Scientific Study o f Religion, 44, 59-78. doi: 10.1111 /j. 1468- 5906.2005.00265.x

Patterson, R., 8c Price, J. (2012). Pornography, religion, and the happiness gap: Does pornography impact the actively religious differently? Journal fo r the Scientific Study o f Religion, 51, 79-89. doi: 10.111 l/j.1468-5906.2011.01630.x

Sherry, S. B., Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., Lee-Baggley, D. L., 8c Hall, P. A. (2007). Trait perfectionism and perfectionistic self-presentation in personality pathology. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 477-490. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2006.07.026

Stone, H., Cross, D., Purvis, K., &c Young, M. (2003). A study of the benefit of social and religious support on church mem­bers during times of crisis. Pastoral Psychology, 51, 327-340. doi: 10.1023/a: 1022537400283

Thomas, M. J., Moriarty, G. L., Davis, E. B., 8c Anderson, E. L. (2011). The effects of a manualized group-psychotherapy interven­tion on client God images and attachment to God: A pilot study. Journal o f Psychology and Theology, 39 ,44-58.

Warner, J. (2009). Temperance, alcohol, and the American evan­gelical: A reassessment .Addiction, 104, 1075-1084. doi: 10.1111 / j.l360-0443.2009.026l6.x

Wesley, J. (2006). A plain account o f Christian perfection. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers. (Original work published 1872)

White, C. E. (1987). The beauty of holiness: The career of Phoebe Palmer. Fides et historia, 19, 22-34.

Wohl, M.J., 8c McLaughlin, K.J. (2014). Self-forgiveness: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8, 422-435. doi:0.111 l/spc3.12119

Wohl, M.J., 8c Thompson, A. (2011). A dark side to self-forgiveness: Forgiving the self and its association with chronic unhealthy behav­iour. British Journal ofSocial Psychology, 50, 354-364. doi: 10.1111 / j.2044-8309.2010.02010.x

Woodyatt, L., 8c Wenzel, M. (2013a). Self-forgiveness and restora­tion of an offender following an interpersonal transgression. Journal o f Social and Clinical Psychology, 32, 225-259.

Woodyatt, L., 8c Wenzel, M. (2013b). The psychological immune response in the face of transgressions: Pseudo self-forgiveness and threat to belonging. Journal o f Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 951-958.

A uthor Inform ationBRODAR, KAITLYN E. MS. Address: Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University, 417 Chapel Drive Box 90086, Durham, North Carolina, 27708. Title: Master of public health student. Degrees: BA (Psychology) Duke University.

CROSSKEY, LAURA BARNARD. PhD. Address: Crosskey Psy­chological Services, Inc., 1709 Legion Road Suite 221, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 27517. Title: Licensed psychologist. Degrees: BA (Psychology & Religion) St. Olaf College, MDiv Duke Divinity, PhD (Clinical Psychology) Duke University. Specializations: Clini­cal psychology.

THOM PSON, ROBERTJ.,Jr. PhD .Address: Department ofPsy- chology and Neuroscience, Duke University, 417 Chapel Drive Box 90086, Durham, North Carolina, 27708. Title: Professor. Degrees: PhD (Clinical Psychology) University o f N orth Dakota. Specializa­tions: Clinical psychology.

242 COMPASSION IN CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY

Appendix A

Items used for the Perfectionistic Self-Promotion subscale

1.1 try always to present myself as a [moral example for others to follow].Original: I try always to present a picture of perfection.

2. If I seem like a [moral example], others will see me more positively.Original: If I seem perfect, others will see me more positively.

3. It doesn’t matter if others [cannot look up to me].Original: It doesn’t matter if there is a flaw in my looks.

4 .1 must appear to be in control of my actions at all times, (not modified)5. It is important to act [morally so that I can be an example for others in social situations].

Original: It is important to act perfectly in social situations.6 .1 don’t really care about being [an example for others].

Original: I don’t really care about being perfectly groomed.7 .1 need to be seen as a [moral example] in everything I do.

Original: I need to be seen as perfectly capable in everything I do.8. It is very important that I always appear to be a [moral example].

Original: It is very important that I always appear to be “on top of things.”9 .1 must always appear to be [actingin away that others can look up to].

Original: I must always appear to be perfect.10.1 strive to [be an example for] others. Original: I strive to look perfect to others.

Appendix B

Items used for the Perceived Forgiveness and Perceived Support questionnaires

Forgiveness (Responses range from 1 [never] to 4 [always])1. I believe that God has forgiven me for things I have done wrong.2. I believe that when people say they forgive me for something I did they really mean it.

Support (Responses range from 1 [never] to 4 [always])1. How often do the people in your [campus ministry] make you feel loved and cared for?

Copyright of Journal of Psychology & Theology is the property of BIOLA University and itscontent may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without thecopyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or emailarticles for individual use.