Given the adverse mental health consequences of the COVID‐19 pandemic, it is important to examine whether faith communities continue to provide social and emotional support to members during the pandemic. This study focuses on a particular mechanism through which congregations may help members’ mental health––talking to fellow congregants about private problems. Data for this study come from online surveys conducted between October and December 2020 in 12 congregations (Christian, Jewish, and Hindu) in Washington, DC, Maryland, Virginia, and Texas (N = 1609). Using two measures of mental health (overall assessment of mental health and an indicator of COVID‐19‐related mental health worsening), we find that greater levels of problem sharing are associated with better overall mental health and with lower chances of COVID‐19‐related mental health worsening. The beneficial effect of sharing problems is especially pronounced when the frequency is very high and remains statistically significant net of passive social support and other controls. However, we find that levels of problem sharing in congregations are relatively low on average. Our study thus highlights that the practice of problem sharing should be counted as a mental health resource in congregations and raises the need to better understand its underutilization.

Many religious congregations in the United States have adapted to COVID-19 lockdowns by offering religious services online. This study aims to understand whether congregants from a diverse set of faith traditions expect to attend online or in-person religious services after the pandemic. First, it examines how members of different religious traditions vary in their expectations of future attendance. Second, it explores whether respondents’ habituation to online attendance during the pandemic might result in greater preference for future online attendance. This study draws on a non-representative sample of 1609 members of Christian, Jewish, and Hindu communities in four US states surveyed in late 2020 and employs logistic regression models. The findings first suggest a divergence between congregation types that require in-person attendance for certain rituals versus those that do not. Second, habituation of the practice of online attendance may cultivate the desire to sustain this practice into the future. Online religious services have been well received by most congregants, and online services will likely play a useful role across congregation types, albeit at differing levels and with different audiences. Our finding that marginal congregants were more likely to prefer online religious services, while more engaged members preferred in-person attendance, is of relevance to faith leaders.