Chick-fil-a makes everyone better...

Chick-fil-a makes other restaurants better in Clemson! Recently, we had a new Chick-fil-a open in Clemson. Excitedly, and with my coupon for a free sandwich in hand, I went on opening day. It is both a brave and a stupid thing to go on opening day!!!

What did I find? I found an incredibly crowded new Chick-fil-a, BUT one that was friendly to everyone, prepared for the hoards of coupon carrying chicken lovers, and delivering a timely, well-prepared product. It was impressive!!!

I went back last week to the new Chick-fil-a, and I still found a tremendous emphasis and execution of over-the-top customer service! They are friendly and helpful. For instance, their staff, not only greets you @ the door, but comes around asking if you would like a refill, and then, getting it for you if you wish. YES, this is a "fast-food" restaurant! Impressive!!!

Well, at the end of last week, I rode through McDonald's in Clemson. Unfortunately, it has become a last resort for the last year. Between sub-par food (yes, even for McD's), and lack of customer service, I really have avoided going to the McDonald's in Clemson, but I went by there quickly...

It was interesting to find a somewhat better emphasis on customer service... I felt like the person at the window copied Chick-fil-a!!! I remember thinking that they were better than they had been in recent past. The food even seemed a little better... for McD's...

My next thought was this: Chick-fil-a is causing other restaurants in the area to perform better. The kind of quality service and food @ Chick-fil-a has challenged other restaurants to be better. Chick-fil-a makes you feel like they really want your business, not tolerate your presence...

NOW, thinking of this in a spiritual sense... Do we as Christians make others around us better? Do we live at a higher level than most people? Do they "step-up" because of us? Do they perform at a higher level because of us? Do we live out our faith in such a way that others would want to be a Christian?

OUCH! If I'm honest then I would have to say, "In some areas of my life, 'Yes,' and in some areas of my life, 'No.'" I don't really enjoy admitting that, but I know that it's true. Hopefully, as the Lord works in my life, I can become the type of person that will propel others to greatness!!!

How to be an Encourager

***I had a great experience @ Riverside this past weekend!!! These are my sermon notes from the Sunday morning sermon service.

How to be an Encourager

Various Verses from the Book of Acts

INTRODUCTION
Attention: Anyone can be a DIS-COURAGER, but it takes a special person to be an EN-COURAGER. The good thing is that anyone who is here today and a believer in Jesus Christ can be an encourager! I want to speak for a few minutes this morning on "How to be an Encourager."

Need: This is Pastor Appreciation Sunday @ Riverside. Your pastors attempt to be encouragers to you, and you can be encouragers to them as well. All pastors have heard it said, "Pastors only work 2 days a week." BUT, that is a myth!!!

Pastors pour out their lives serving God by serving God's people. They are on the frontlines of spiritual warfare. They need encouragement, and you can be a source of encouragement for them.

Background: The book of Acts was written by Luke, who also wrote the Gospel of Luke. Originally, these two books were put together as a set.

Just to give a quick overview of the story. In Acts 1, after his crucifixion and resurrection, Jesus ascends to heaven. The "Eleven" wish to be the "Twelve" again, so they chose Matthias to replace Judas, the betrayer who hanged himself. In Acts 2, the Holy Spirit comes at Pentecost; Peter preaches an incredible sermon; and the church begins. In Acts 3 and 4, the ministry of Peter continues with healing, preaching, an arrest, and release that ends with the believers' praying and sharing their possessions.

So, we come to Barnabas, the son of encouragement. In Acts 4.36, it says, "³⁶Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means Son of Encouragement)". We learn several things about Barnabas. First, he was a Levite by birth. The Levites were the one tribe of the twelve from which temple staff were drawn. Second, he was from Cyprus, not Palestine. Some argue that he was a Hellenistic Jew. Third, his name was "Joseph," but because of something about his character, the apostles named him "Barnabas," which means "son of consolation" or "son of encouragement."

Barnabas seems to be the right person from which to learn how to be an encourager. When a person is renamed by the Twelve Apostles because of his character, we need to look to him for instruction.

BRIDGING SENTENCES
Textual Idea: Barnabas was an encourager to others.
Sermon Idea: We can become encouragers to others as well.
Interrogative: What are the characteristics of an encourager?
Transition: There are 4 traits of an encourager.

BODY
1. Purpose: God-driven - Encouragers are God-drive in purpose
Explain: What is the purpose of an encourager? It is God-centered! In Acts 11.22, Scripture says, "²²News of this reached the ears of the church at Jerusalem, and they sent Barnabas to Antioch." Also, in Acts 13.1-2, it says, "¹In the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. ²While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them." ³So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off.

Barnabas followed God! He followed the Lord's will given through the apostles, and he followed the Lord's will given through the prayer meeting when the Holy Spirit spoke. An encourager is a person whose purpose is God-directed!

Illus: This young man comes to this great master with a desire to learn from him. The master leads him down into a pond, grabs him, and holds him under water. The young man is struggling and the master pulls his head up out of the water.
The master asks, "What do you want more than anything else?"
The young man replies, "I want to be your disciple."
The master pushes his head under the water again. The master holds him under a little longer this time, and then, he pulls his head up out of the water.
The master asks, "What do you want more than anything else?"
The young man replies, "I want to be your disciple."
The master pushes his head under the water again. The master holds him under a lot longer this time. The young man thinks that he is going to drown!!! The master finally pulls his head up out of the water. The young man gasps for air.
The master says, "What do you want more than anything else?"
The young man says, "AIR!!!"

What do we want more than anything else? Do we want to know God and love Him completely? Is God the #1 priority in our lives?

Argue: In thinking about committing to following God's will, the Apostle Paul says, "Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God – this is your spiritual act of worship. Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is – his good, pleasing and perfect will" (Romans 12.1-2).

Have we committed to following God's will? Encouragers are committed to God's will because they want the best for themselves and others.

In order to be God-driven, encouragers want to hear God's voice. Jesus says, "I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me- just as the Father knows me and I know the Father – and I lay down my life for the sheep. I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice…" (John 10.14-16).

Believers are Jesus' sheep. We belong to Him. He speaks to us, and we recognize his voice. When we hear, we obey His voice.

Apply: First, we must have personal relationship with God by receiving Jesus Christ as our personal Lord and Savior. We are sinners in need of forgiveness and cleansing. God provided that for us by sending his one and only Son to die on the cross for our sins. We can have a relationship with God through Jesus Christ.

Second, we must commit to following God's will and purpose for us. God not only wants to save us, he wants first place in our lives! He wants our relationship to him to be the most important part of our lives. Scripture says that if we love Him then we will obey Him. So, if we are in a love relationship with God, then are we committed to following God's will and purpose for us?

Third, we must listen for God's voice. God speaks to us in a variety of means: His Spirit and Scripture being two of the primary ones. A basic principle is that what His Spirit speaks to us subjectively will NEVER contradict his written word.

Are putting yourself in a place where you can hear God's voice? Do you spend time with God regularly? Do spend time not only in prayer and reading Scripture, but in silence before him?

Transition: First, encouragers are God-driven in their purpose.

2. Personal: Good - Encouragers are "good" people
Explain: In Acts 11.22-24, Scripture says, "²²News of this reached the ears of the church at Jerusalem, and they sent Barnabas to Antioch. ²³When he arrived and saw the evidence of the grace of God, he was glad and encouraged them all to remain true to the Lord with all their hearts. ²⁴He was a good man, full of the Holy Spirit and faith, and a great number of people were brought to the Lord."

Barnabas was a "good man." How does Scripture define his being a "good man"? I want to mention this because all too often we think that someone is "good," but we do not think of it in biblical terms.

First, he could be trusted! The Jerusalem church hears about what's happening in Antioch, and they send Barnabas. They trust him! Second, Barnabas was a spiritual man! He saw the "evidence of the grace of God" and celebrated it with them! He was a spiritually- minded person. Third, Barnabas was "full of the Holy Spirit and faith". He was full of the Spirit and faith!

These are important descriptors of Barnabas! Biblically, this describes and defines what a "good" person. What do people usually mean by he/she is a "good" person?

Illus: We might mean that they only drink two beers instead of a six pack.
We may mean that they haven't been arrested lately.
We may mean that they can generally hold down a job.
We may mean that they don't beat their wife and kids.
We may mean that they haven't wrecked their car again.
We may mean that they only do drugs on the weekends.

Argue: People generally go one of two ways in their thinking. First, we think in terms of a "good 'ol boy" type theology. Everybody is alright. They are good people. Given the opportunity, they will help out people.

What does that mean?

Does that mean that they are going to heaven?

Does that mean that they are saved?

Does that mean that their sins have been forgiven?

NO!

Second, when people think of someone being good, we may quote the Scripture, "There is no one righteous, not even one…there is no one who does good, not even one" (Romans 3.10a, 12b). SO, how can Barnabas be "GOOD"? We see in these verses why Scripture calls Barnabas "good."

Apply: What kind of person is an encourager? There are several things that the Scripture says about Barnabas and apply to us as well. First, encouragers are trustworthy people! Are you trustworthy?

Second, encouragers are spiritual people. While they love you and have your best interest in mind, they love God and desire for his glory to shine through your life. Are you a spiritual person?

Third, encouragers are filled with the Spirit and faith. Christians can live without being filled with the Spirit. This is why the Apostle Paul commanded (imperative) the Christians at Ephesus NOT to get drunk with wine, but to be filled (passive) with the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 5.18). This command to be filled with the Spirit is for all believers (plural).
Also, we are to have "faith." Scripture says that the righteous shall live by faith (Hab. 2.4; Rom. 1.17; Gal. 3.11). Our righteous comes by living by faith! They tell us what Scripture means by saying that he is a "good" man!

Transition: First, encouragers are God-driven in their purpose. Second, encouragers are good people.

3. Position and Possessions: Generous - Encouragers are generous with their position and possessions
Explain: First, Barnabas was generous with his position. Generally, and admittedly there are exceptions, after Acts 13.7, it says Paul and Barnabas (13.42, 43, 46, 50; 15.2, 22, 35).

Concerning Acts 13, I. Howard Marshall says, "Luke shows how Paul came to assume the leading position in the mission; whatever Barnabas's excellences in other ways (especially as a Christian teacher), he had to recognize that Paul possessed in an unusual measure the gifts of an evangelist" (Acts, Marshall, 217). Paul took over the leadership, and Barnabas willingly steps aside from the primary leadership position!!!

Second, Barnabas was generous with his possessions. In Acts 4.37, it says, "³⁷[Barnabas] sold a field he owned and brought the money and put it at the apostles' feet." Let me ask this question: "How does an encourager deal with his or her possessions?"

Barnabas, the son of encouragement, was generous with his possessions. If we are to be encouragers then we must be generous with our possessions!

Illus: Some of the greatest success stories of history have followed some expression of encouragement from a loved one or trusted friend. David Jeremiah tells the story of Nathaniel Hawthorne:
Had it not been for a confident and encouraging wife, Sophia, we might not have listed among the great names of literature the name of Nathaniel Hawthorne. When Nathaniel, a heartbroken man, went home to tell his wife he was a failure and had been fired from his job in a customhouse, she surprised him with an exclamation of joy.
"Now," she said triumphantly, "you can write your book."
"Yes," replied the man, with sagging confidence, "and what shall we live on while I am writing?"
To his amazement, she opened a drawer and pulled out a substantial sum of money.
"Where on earth did you get that?" he exclaimed.
"I have always known you were a man of genius," she told him. "I knew that someday you would write a masterpiece. So every week, out of the money you gave me for housekeeping, I saved a little bit. So here is enough to last us for a whole year" (Jeremiah, Encouragment, 85-86).

What an incredible encourager!!! She believed in her husband and saved the money so that he write his book. She took the lower position. YET, he may have never of written it without her encouragement! Her encouragement gave Nathaniel position (great novelist) and possession ($$$ to write). We revere him, but how often, do we even consider her?

Argue: Jesus' has something to say to both of these. First, when it comes to position, Jesus says, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. ²⁶Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, ²⁷and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— ²⁸just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many" (Matthew 20. 25-28).

WOW! You mean to be great that I have to be servant! You mean to be first that I have to be a slave! WHY? That's the way Jesus did it!!!

James says, "¹⁰Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up" (James 4.10).

When it comes to position,

Do we follow Jesus' instruction?

Do we follow Jesus' example?

Do we trust the LORD to exalt us?

Do we humble ourselves before Him?

Do we place ourselves in a position with GOD to be exalted?

Second, concerning possessions, Jesus says, "¹⁹"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. ²⁰But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. ²¹For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also" (Matthew 6.19-21).

How much more should we hold on loosely to those things which will perish… rust, rot, ruin, runoff… WE should be a good steward of what is entrusted to us and be willing to give it to God and His service! God owns it; we manage it!

Apply: First, encouragers are willing to give up position for the cause of the Kingdom of God. Paul would go on to become the greatest evangelists in church history and to write approximately 1/3 of the New Testament! Encouragers build up others and urge them to fulfill their potential for God, even if it costs them their position.

Second, encouragers are willing to give of their possessions for the Kingdom of God. How do you view your possessions? Are they yours to do with as you want, OR are they God's and you are to use them and take care of them? Who owns your stuff? Encouragers see it as God's stuff and understand that it is only as valuable as its use for God's purposes.

Transition: First, encouragers are God-driven in their purpose. Second, encouragers are good people. Third, encouragers are generous with their position and possessions.

4. People: Gracious - Encouragers are gracious with people
Explain: We are going to briefly look at 2 passages of Scripture concerning this point. These are each important because they show how an encourager deals with people.

First, in Acts 9.26-28, Scripture says, "²⁶When he [Saul/Paul] came to Jerusalem, he tried to join the disciples, but they were all afraid of him, not believing that he really was a disciple. ²⁷But Barnabas took him and brought him to the apostles. He told them how Saul on his journey had seen the Lord and that the Lord had spoken to him, and how in Damascus he had preached fearlessly in the name of Jesus. ²⁸So Saul stayed with them and moved about freely in Jerusalem, speaking boldly in the name of the Lord."

Let's get the picture here. Saul, the zealous Pharisee, was persecuting the church. He consented to Stephen's death. He was heading to Damascus to arrest more followers of Jesus, and he meets Jesus on the road to Damascus. When Saul returned to Jerusalem, the apostles did not trust him and did not wish to see him! WHY? They were scared!!! AND, they should have been scared of Saul. Barnabas is gracious in his dealings with Saul.

Second, because of a prophesied famine, the church in Antioch sent a financial gift to the Jerusalem church (Acts 11.27-30). After Paul and Barnabas had delivered this gift, they took John Mark back with them to the Antioch church (Acts 12.25). On their first missionary journey, John Mark deserted Paul and Barnabas in Pamphylia. In Acts 15.36-40, it says, "³⁶Some time later Paul said to Barnabas, 'Let us go back and visit the brothers in all the towns where we preached the word of the Lord and see how they are doing.' ³⁷Barnabas wanted to take John, also called Mark, with them, ³⁸but Paul did not think it wise to take him, because he had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in the work. ³⁹They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company. Barnabas took Mark and sailed for Cyprus, ⁴⁰but Paul chose Silas and left, commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord.

GET THE PICTURE: Paul sees John Mark as a deserter, a traitor of sorts. He adamantly refuses to take him with them. On the other hand, Barnabas wants to give John Mark another chance! He is gracious in his dealings with John Mark.

How do encouragers deal with people? They deal with them graciously! They believe the best about them and are willing to give them a second, third, fourth chance when they fail!

Illus: Are people going to disappoint you? Are your ministry partners going to disappoint you? Are your family members going to disappoint you? Are your fellow employees going to disappoint you? Once again, quoting from David Jeremiah:

One of the greatest tools any leader has in his tool box is the tool of encouragement. In the book Raising Self-Reliant Children in a Self-Indulging World, H. Stephen Glenn and Jane Nelsen make this point emphatically:

Children feel encouraged when we see them as assets rather than objects, see mistakes as opportunities to learn rather than as failures, and invite participation and contributions rather than directing and demanding compliance.

Jonas Salk, the great scientist and the discoverer of the vaccine against polio, understood the concept of being encouraging. He was once asked, 'How does this outstanding achievement, which has effectively brought an end to the word polio in our vocabulary cause to view your previous 200 failure?'

His response was, 'I never had 200 failures in my life. My family didn't think in terms of failure. They taught in terms of experiences and what could be learned. I just made my 201^st discovery. I couldn't have made it without learning from the previous 200 experiences.' (Jeremiah, Encouragement, 92).

What an incredible difference in perspective! Jonas Salk's family had a great perspective on encouragement, so did Barnabas.

Barnabas could have seen Saul and thought like the other apostles.

He's really NOT changed!

Barnabas could have seen John Mark and thought like Paul.

Once a deserter; always a deserter! BUT, Barnabas chose not to think that way!

Failures DO NOT have to be FINAL!!!

We must view failures as learning experiences.

Failures are REDEEMABLE with the grace of God.

Encouragers bring that grace to others!

Apply: How do we deal with people? Specifically, people who are feared or people who have disappointed us.

First, we may choose to do what the apostles were doing and stay as far away from them as possible! We may distance ourselves from them! We may not want to have anything to do with certain people because of who they were before they came to Jesus Christ.

Second, we may do what Paul did with John Mark and not give them another chance! "They made a mistake, and I'm done with them!" We may want to write people off. "Once a failure; always a failure!"

Third, we may act graciously toward them! We can show them the grace and love of God in their failure. We may have to show it constantly and consistently, but it could produce a great evangelist/church planter/theologian/NT author like Paul, OR a missionary/Gospel writer like John Mark.

Transition: First, encouragers are God-driven in their purpose. Second, encouragers are good people. Third, encouragers are generous with their position and possessions. Fourth, encouragers are gracious with people.

CONCLUSION
Closing Illustration: According to the Pastor Care Network:
80% of pastors believe ministry has negatively affected their families.
33% say that being in ministry is an outright hazard to their families.
75% report a significant stress-related crisis at least once in their ministry.
50% feel unable to meet the demands of the job.
70% say they have a lower self-image now than when they started.
40% report a serious conflict with a parishioner at least once a month.
70% do not have somebody they consider a close friend.
50% have considered leaving the ministry in the last three months.
50% of those who go into full time ministry drop out in five years.
94% of clergy families feel the pressures of the pastor's ministry.

And according to the Jan/Feb issue of The Christian Examiner, between 1,400 and 1,600 Christian leaders leave the ministry every month. {2004}

The Alban Institute estimates that 17% of pastors are experiencing burnout. A study of one major denomination concluded that less than one-third of its pastors were happy in their work. Another 30% were "deeply ambivalent" about ministry. And 40% described themselves as "heading for burnout."

Closing Application: Encourage your pastors! Can you think of some ways that you can encourage your pastors? This morning I want to invite you to take a couple of the small pieces of paper at the end of your pew and write a short, simple encouragement to Pastor Bob and Pastor Kevin. I am going to ask Pastor Bob and Pastor Kevin to come and stand up front this morning. I want to invite you to come and give your note of encouragement to them this morning.

Christians need to learn to laugh more...

Here is some more of the fruit of my "creative borrowing." You will find some of these silly, some offensive, and some just plain funny! Just to give proper credit, this is a recent post on Scot McKnight's Jesus Creed blog: http://blog.beliefnet.com/jesuscreed/

McKnight says: These are random notes from one student in one class of one professor (:mic) AND IT'S NOT MY CLASS OR NOTES FROM MY CLASS ... and it's hilarious.

Taken from the 8:30 AM Bible and Religion 111: Biblical Literature and History class, completely out of context and in no particular order:

"God, Jesus, Bible--all banned."

"The iPhones are banned because I don't own one."

"I've been condemned to Hell so many times, it just doesn't phase me anymore."

"We have 12 here, our own remnant--so I will just name you after the disciples. Do you want to pick or shall I assign names as I see emerging personalities?"

"Any time you can drive a Fundie nuts, it's probably worth it."

"We all went into pottery class preparing to create some small version of Michaelangelo's David, and we all came out with some sort of ashtray."

"They used to throw animal intestines down and read those. I'd like to see that come back."

"There are days when a pope is really handy."

"Now some of you are thinking we should just stick to Judaism."

"I wish more preachers would listen to that and think about what they preach. But then we wouldn't have a whole channel devoted to them on cable."

"...and Jesus is going to come back, hopefully not before the wedding night--oh, come on, you've all thought it!"

"Otherwise, you're left with the idea that God screwed up and I don't want to go there. I like what God has done. I think it's very nice."

"That's theologically lame."

"It's like 'Dude, my blind dude was so right!'"

"I learned this from an actual Hispanic."

"The one who's coming in May will be named Natalie which means 'born at Christmas.' But Jesus was born nowhere near Christmas and probably sometime in the spring. I think it works. It makes a great pseudo-historical statement."

"That and 'No, my eyes were closed because I was praying.'"

"I like to think of them on the beach. It's very relaxing. I hate the ocean."

"And I'm just like 'That ain't a cow.'"

"Mary herself said 'All generations--except Protestants--will call me blessed.'"

"And the Philistines collectively change their pants and leave."

"Yeah, it's about love, but so is everything else."

"900 at him every day. Many men buckle living with one woman. It's only a matter of time. But I digress."

"Thus the term chick flick--totally predictable."

"Once you learn people are stupid, you're almost out of here. You might have earned a psych degree."

"I'm not saying women are evil. I'm saying that some women are evil, and she exemplifies the category. Some men are evil, and she does not exemplify that category. She comes close, though."

"He girded his loins! That's what we all want!"

"You all get oxymorons, right? Deafening silence. Jumbo shrimp. Country music."

"We all like you, and I'm sure God is quite fond of you."

"We're just hoping this guy isn't going to be a jerk-butt-face like Samson."

"People tell me I ruin the Christmas story. I think I make the Christmas story."

"Bless you, little Shlomo. Bless you, little Shmooly."

"You start preaching repentance and even San Francisco will run you out."

"It was a significant factor in the decline of Roman civilization. So is American Idol, but we don't get on it."

"Hey, people tattoo 666 on themselves and then claim they're following Jesus. So, anything's possible."

"Because everyone knows when you get drunk you start speaking intelligible languages."

"Then we're in Pentecost! Which goes on for ever. Some people just give up and go into something called 'ordinary time.'"

"It's like enrolling at St. Mary's of the Woods and then complaining there are no guys."

"There are some students who can't find their way out of a wet paper sack, but can finagle every loop hole in a community life agreement."

"Someone accused me of telling them to tear this page out of their Bible. That is completely false. If you did that, you would lose the beginning of Luke and I would never condone that."

"Jesus doesn't want it to be there either." [reference to the longer ending of Mark]

"Nothing against the King James. It's just a piece of garbage."

"So we all started praying for him. Not that his faith would be strengthened, but that he would love stupid metaphors."

"They will know we are beast followers by our T-shirts."

The Benefits of Practicing the Daily Office

This blog post is a follow-up to my earlier one on Practicing the Divine Office. I was brainstorming on the impact of practicing the daily office. How is practicing the daily office beneficial for me?

1. Desiring God first – every day, I have to plan to spend time with God at least twice a day (morning/evening) and if possible three to four times a day. In keeping it constantly in my thoughts during the day, this makes God and spending time with God a priority for me.

2. Dying to Self – in practicing the daily office, we submit our will to God and surrender our body for His service. This produces greater spiritual sensitivity and insight in our lives. When we deny our fleshly desires, we can see God and life more clearly from a spiritual perspective.

3. Discipline in living – daily practicing the daily office helps develop consistency in my personal relationship to God. A personal relationship with God is an ongoing, every day thing. It is not meant to be a sporadic, on-again-off-again relationship. The discipline of practicing the daily office provides a consistency to that relationship.

4. Discerning God's Voice – spending regular time with God places us in a position to hear God speak to us through His Spirit and Scriptures. In practicing the daily office, we give God our attention for those few minutes throughout our day. In giving God our attention, it provides the opportunity for God to speak to us.

5. Direction for prayer – sometimes, I am at a loss for how to pray. It seems that I have prayed the same prayer over and over and over. The psalms and written prayers of the divine office can bring a freshness to my prayer life. Often, there is great spiritual insight in the written prayers that I never would have perceived if that believer had not written it down.
   

These are just a few thoughts on the benefit of practicing the daily office. If you practice the daily office and/or have other comments, I would like to hear your thoughts.

More Baptist Humor

So yeah… I was born a Southern Baptist and "got saved" when I was about 13 years old. While I am no longer a Baptist, I still have a great love and respect for the Baptist tradition, but I'd be lying if I did not admit to enjoying a Baptist joke now and then… After my earlier post (Guide to American Christianity), Pastor Kerry decided to contribute with this bit of Baptist humor…

"Here's my Top Ten Baptist denominations (with smart-aleck comments):   

10. Old Regular Baptists (as opposed to 'new', 'irregular' ones?)

9. Primitive Baptists (also called "Hard-shell Baptists) (as opposed to 'modern' ones?  Hard-shell crabs?)

8. Separate Baptists in Christ (as opposed to 'Unified'?)

7. Seventh Day Baptist General Conference (actually, perhaps the hardest thing for us to defend in our theology is why DO we worship on Sundays anyway - the Sabbath law was never repealed in the N.T., and essentially it is simply tradition, dating back many centuries.  A retired Pastor here did his Master's thesis on this and he is quite a scholar.)

6. General Association of Regular Baptist Churches (sounds pretty politically correct to me)

5. General Six-Principle Baptists (why six?)

4. Interstate and Foreign Landmark Missionary Baptists (quite a mouthful - are they located only on Interstates or by landmarks?)

3. Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists (as opposed to 'rude' and 'discouraging' ones?)

2. Old Time Missionary Baptists (do they still do everything the old ways?)

1. National Baptist Evangelical Life and Soul Saving Assembly of the U.S.A. (now THESE guys have a full business card)

 ...and my personal favorite - Two-Seed-in-the-Spirit Predestinarian Baptists (also called 'Anti-mission Baptists'; couldn't resist doing some research on these guys...pretty interesting; quote 'Elder Daniel Parker wrote Views on the Two Seeds (1826). Parker taught that all persons are either of the 'good seed' of God or of the 'bad seed' of Satan (the children of the good seed are roughly equivalent to the 'elect' of Calvinism, and those of the bad seed similar to the 'non-elect'), and were predestined that way from the beginning; therefore, mission activity was not only unbiblical but, as a practical matter, useless since the 'decision' was already made prior to birth.' unquote...So I give them credit for being consistent at least."

Preaching @ Riverside Baptist in Graham, NC

I am so humbled and thrilled to have been invited to preach for the Pastoral Appreciation Sunday @ Riverside Baptist Church in Graham, NC on Sunday, August 2, 2009 in the Sunday morning worship service @ 10am and in the evening worship service @ 6pm. For more information on Riverside, check out their website: http://www.rbch.org/

We are excited! My family and I have not visited the Graham, NC area since leaving from Carolina Christian Church in August, 2003 and moving to SC in January, 2004. WOW! Time flies by so quickly! We are so looking forward to visiting with our good friends Kevin, Tracy, and their family as well as many other special friends in the area.

Please be in prayer for me as I seek God's leading on the messages that he would have me bring to Riverside!

Guide to American Christianity

I am blatantly borrowing this from Dr. Ken Schenck's blog (http://kenschenck.blogspot.com/)… as a former Baptist; I found this to be hilarious! In all honesty, I think that this may actually represent the Baptist view…

Baptists - American Christians

Pentecostals - Baptists who speak in tongues

Methodists - Insecure Baptists

Anabaptists - Baptists who don't fight back

Presbyterians - Baptists who read

Reformed - Elect Baptists

Lutherans - Baptists who baptize infants

Episcopalians - Baptists who completely disagree with everything Baptist

Catholics - European Christians who came to America

Orthodox - European Christians who didn't come to America

Growing in Love: Relating Holiness Theology to a Biblical Model of Spiritual Growth

***NOTE: This paper was written for my Theology of Holiness course. This is a seminal attempt to blend a model of spiritual growth that I have been developing with Holiness theology. It has a long way to go, but I think that this is a beginning.

Thesis statement: This paper intends to relate holiness theology to one possible biblical paradigm of spiritual formation.

1. Introduction
1. The need to understand the process of spiritual formation
2. Scriptural evidence of our need for holiness
2. Love is the essence of holiness
   
   1. Love of God
      
      1. John Wesley
      2. Scripture
   2. Love of neighbor
      
      1. John Wesley
      2. Scripture
   3. Considering love of self in holiness
3. Relating holiness to one biblical model of spiritual formation
   
   1. The 1 John 2.12-14 model
   2. Two ways that holiness theology could improve this model
4. Conclusion
   
   1. Postmodern context
   2. Rejuvenation of holiness theology

Growing in Love: Relating Holiness Theology to a Biblical Model of Spiritual Growth

This paper intends to relate holiness theology to one possible biblical paradigm of spiritual formation. It is a common experience of pastors and churches to see an individual respond to Jesus in the following way. An individual encounters Jesus Christ in an emotional salvation experience, and prays a "Sinner's Prayer" at the altar, but he never develops into a complete disciple of Jesus Christ. They follow the words of the Apostle Paul that "if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved" (Rom. 10.9). Yet, there is a noticeable lack of response to Jesus' words, "Follow me" in a consistent, ongoing manner which results in a long-lasting transformation of the entire person (Luke 9.57-62).

Yet, we are called to holiness. Quoting the words of the Old Testament, Jesus says, "Therefore, you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Lev. 19.2; Deut. 18.13; Matt. 5.46). The Apostle Peter quotes the Old Testament as well saying, "You shall be holy, for I am holy" (1 Pet. 1.16; Lev. 11.44; 19.2; 20.7). Those who claim to live in a relationship with God should live a holy life. This holiness is not simply an outward attainment which results in a static state of holiness. It is an inward desire and change of heart that results in outward action. Once again, Peter says, "…like the Holy One who called you, be holy yourselves also in all your behavior" (1 Pet. 1.15).

There are three important aspects to holiness. The first aspect is to love God. John Wesley's scriptural Christianity brings the issue of holiness into proper focus. In quoting from his work, "The Character of a Methodist," John Wesley said, "A Methodist is one who loves the Lord his God with all his heart, with all his soul, with all his mind, and with all his strength. God is the joy of his heart, and the desire of his soul, which is continually crying, 'Whom have I in heaven but thee? And there is none upon earth whom I desire besides thee'" (Wesley 16). The Great Commandment says, "You shall love the LORD your God with all of your heart and with all of your soul and with all of your might" (Deut. 6.5; Mark. 12.30). This commandment was given in the Old Testament and repeated in the New Testament by Jesus Christ. The central theme in holiness is the love of God with one's entire self.

A second aspect of holiness is a love for one's neighbor. John Wesley said, "And loving God, he 'loves his neighbor as himself'; he loves every man as his own soul. He loves his enemies, yea, and the enemies of God. And if it be not in his power to 'do good to them that hate him,' yet he ceases not to 'pray for them,' thought they spurn his love, and still 'despitefully use him, and persecute him'" (Wesley 17). Jesus confirms this Old Testament command for New Testament believers as well by saying, "The second [greatest commandment] is this, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.' There is no other commandment greater than these" (Mark. 12.31; Lev. 19.18). John Wesley's emphasis on the love of neighbor is a direct reflection of Jesus' teaching. The commands to love God and love your neighbor are central to the concept of holiness. Scripture clearly demonstrates this relationship.

Both the love of God and the love of neighbor are scripturally connected to holiness. These two commands are complimentary. When Scripture speaks of being perfect before God, it speaks of it in connection to loving our neighbor. Jesus relates perfection with love for our neighbor by saying, "But I say to you, love your enemies... you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matt. 5.44, 48; cf. 43-48). In the Apostle Paul's blessing for the Thessalonians, he says, "… may the Lord cause you to increase and abound in love for one another, and for all people, just as we also do for you; so that He may establish your hearts without blame in holiness before our God and Father at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all his saints" (1 Thess. 3.12-13). He connects growing in love for our neighbors with having our hearts established in holiness before the Lord. There is a vital connection between loving God and loving your neighbor.

A third aspect of holiness is that of loving oneself. In this verse, we are told to love our neighbors as we love ourselves. How are we to love our self in a scriptural sense? In one of the primary passages on consecration in Romans 12.1-2, the Apostle Paul continues in the next verse by instructing believers, "For through the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think more highly of himself than he ought to think; but to think so as to have sound judgment, as God has allotted to each a measure of faith" (Rom. 12.3). In order to love God entirely and our neighbors, we must think of ourselves in a right manner. We need to love ourselves in an appropriate manner. Jesus tells us, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it" (Matt. 16.24-25). How can we give to Jesus something that we do not own? We must possess a sense of ownership about our lives in order to freely give over that ownership to God. Properly loving ourselves results in giving up ourselves to God and giving of ourselves in loving our neighbors. So, the central idea of holiness is to love God, love our neighbors, and to love ourselves.

How can this be related to one biblical model of spiritual formation? A common passage that is used as a model of spiritual growth is 1 John 2.12-14 (Bennett 23-32; Koessler 73-75). This model is a spiritual growth model that is based on a human development. Because we are all personally aware of normal human growth, this model provides an accessible model that we can immediately relate too. The missing element, of most of those who use this model, is a focus on the love of God, of our neighbors, and of ourselves. From our Wesleyan tradition, we can bring to this model an emphasis on the Great Commandment. This gives direction to this model of spiritual development.

There are two ways in which holiness theology can directly enhance this model of spiritual formation. In Table 1, there is a paradigm of how this might look. First, the Wesleyan emphasis can bring a more specific direction to this spiritual growth model (see Table 1). Directly from 1 John 2.12-14, there are three levels of maturity: child, young adult, and parent. Also in Table 1, I have added conception to the beginning of the process and grandparent to the end of it. Each of these levels of maturity needs to be considered in relationship to the Great Commandment.

Second, holiness theology brings to this model an event other than the conversion event. This leads to the process of child development, which in turn leads to the sanctification event. To live in the victory of young adulthood, a believer needs to consecrate themselves and experience the love of God more fully. The sanctification event leads to the young adult experience of having "overcome the evil one" (1 John 2.13, 14). These are two suggestions for how holiness theology might be integrated into this spiritual formation model.

In our current postmodern context, relationships and relational connections are embraced as giving meaning to existence. In his summary of relating the Gospel to postmodernism, Stanley Grenz says, "…we must remind ourselves that our faith is highly social. The fact that God is the social Trinity Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – gives us some indication that the divine purpose for creation is directed toward the individual-in-relationship" (168-169). Therefore, this may provide an effective model to encourage spiritual growth among believers in this generation. Instead of holiness theology being a thing of the past, a vibrant, relationally-focused Wesleyan theology can exist, and needs to exist, in order to promote a godly, living theology of spiritual formation in the present and for future generations.

Table 1 (Unfortunately, the table did not remain intact when I made this into a blog post, but hopefully, you can still get the gist of it.)
An Integrated Spiritual Growth Model incorporating the Great Commandment (Mark 12.30-31) from Wesleyan Theology and a commonly used spiritual growth paradigm from 1 John 2.12-14.

Mark 12.30-31 1 John 2.12-14	Love God	Love Neighbor	Love Self
Grandparent
Multiplication
Parent
Reproduction
Young Adult
Consecration
Young Child
Conversion
Embryo

Works Cited
Bennett, Ron. Intentional Disciplemaking: Cultivating Spiritual Maturity in the Local Church.
Colorado Springs: Navpress, 2001.

Grenz, Stanley. A Primer on Postmoderism. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.

The Holy Bible: Updated New American Standard. Anaheim: Foundation, 1995.

Koessler, John. True Discipleship: the Art of Following Jesus. Chicago: Moody, 2003.

Wesley, John. A Plain Account of Christian Perfection. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2007.

Midlife Crisis: Proven Fact or Popular Fiction

***NOTE: The Midlife Crisis concept is a hellish pill that most contemporary Americans have willingly swallowed, BUT in reality (to give away the conclusion before you read my paper), it is only a placebo that provides our culture with another excuse to SIN. While I am not condemning the sinner, this concept is a persistent, destructive myth which deceives the masses and destroys families, and yes, it makes me angry.

Midlife Crisis: Proven Fact or Popular Fiction

A research paper on the concept of "midlife crisis" is a timely project. Brim (1976) comments, "To have many middle-aged men in society is practically a modern phenomenon. In earlier times, 90 percent of the species were dead by age forty." Another researcher commented, "Midlife as a distinct stage of life is a recent phenomenon…" (Perrig-Chiello & Perren, 2005). In our current context, Lachman (2004) expresses the need for research into middle age in general and the midlife crisis in detail. He says, "The U.S. Census Bureau (2000) report shows that there are 73.6 million middle-aged adults, between the ages of 40 and 59, comprising about 26% of the population" (Lachman, 2004). This group represents a significant cohort in the United States. With the size of this group, Lachman (2004) says, "It is not surprising, given this large bulge in the middle-aged population, that interest in research on the middle years of the lifespan has also increased dramatically during this same decade." As the baby boom generation has moved into middle age, researchers state, "The lack of data is especially true for research on middle age" (Perrig-Chiell & Perren, 2005). With this increased interest in the middle age comes an increased interest in an associated concept of middle age, the midlife crisis.

The concept of the midlife crisis is a commonly accepted idea in the culture of the United States (Wethington, 2000). Popular periodicals continue to publish articles on the midlife crisis concept that define it, explain its symptoms, suggest causes for it, and treatments of it, and generally continuing to popularize the concept (Psychology Today, 2006). This paper investigates the soundness of this idea by exploring the theoretical background, definition, research, and misconceptions pertaining to it. These various components will aid in understanding and evaluating the truth of this concept. From this appraisal, we will then draw our conclusions in relation to its viability and explanatory properties. The starting place is to examine the theoretical foundations of the midlife crisis concept.

Unfortunately, this task is part of the problem in researching the midlife crisis construct. While I will mention two of the most referred to theorists, whose work laid the foundation for our understanding of the midlife crisis concept, some researchers will mention one and neglect the other or vice versa. This lack of consistency has created an uncertain foundation for the midlife crisis concept (Rosenberg, Rosenberg, & Farrell, 1999). Yet, the midlife crisis concept usually begins with two well-known and important psychological theorists: Erik Erikson and Carl Jung (Kail & Cavanaugh, 2007; Lachman, 2004; Rosenberg, Rosenberg, and Farrell, 1999). Lachman (2004) says, "The classic models of midlife are based on Jung's and Erikson's theories." It is generally thought that these two psychologists provide the basis of many ideas concerning the midlife generally and the midlife crisis specifically.

Since both Erikson and Jung were considered psychoanalytic, it is interesting that Erikson and Jung would be considered the forefathers of the midlife crisis concept because the psychoanalytic school generally does not recognize significant changes in personality after adolescence (Brim, 1976; Lowenthal & Weiss, 1976). Yet, they are often referred to as the theoretical basis for it. Rosenberg, Rosenberg, and Farrell (1999) comment, "By the late 1950s and 1960s, Erik Erikson emerged as the most articulate codifier of this view of selfhood and adult development, and the midlife crisis model was cast in Eriksonian (Erikson, 1950, 1959) terms." While Erikson and Jung are commonly the ones mentioned, other theorists (Jaques and Levinson) are commonly associated with midlife crisis theory and will be referred to in the content of this paper (Brim, 1976; Rosenberg, Rosenberg, & Farrell, 1999; Wethington, 2000). Daniel Levinson is considered an important theorist, but "Levinson's approach was the most singularly rooted in Erikson's (1950) conception of crisis in development" (Rosenberg, Rosenberg, & Farrell, 1999). Levinson primarily utilizes Erikson, but he also incorporates Jung. In noting significant issues of the "Mid-Life Transition," Levinson, Darrow, Klein, Levinson, and McKee (1976) say, "The Jungian concepts of purer and senex as archetypes that play a significant part in the mid-life individuation process are important here." In considering this theory historically, Erikson and Jung seem to be the most commonly referenced theorists in relationship to the origin or the midlife crisis idea (Kail & Cavanaugh, 2007; Lachman, 2004).

Erik Erikson's stages of development provide a foundational struggle at each stage of development. These stages lay the foundation for the concept of a midlife crisis. Lachman (2004) notes, "At each stage there is a crisis, in the sense of a transition or turning point." Concerning Erikson's theory, Wethington says, "Erikson (1963), using a developmental task perspective, saw midlife at the period when there would be a 'struggle' between generativity and stagnation." Kail and Cavanaugh (2007) explain that "theorists such as Erikson believe that adults face several important challenges and that by struggling with these issues people develop new aspects of themselves." Erikson's theory includes a crisis or transition idea at midlife which provides a foundation for the idea of a midlife crisis. Also, Erikson's concept of an adolescent identity crisis is used to refer to the midlife crisis experience. Rosenberg, Rosenberg, and Farrell directly refer to this usage of Erikson's theory, "The midlife crisis was often explicitly described as a kind of second adolescence. Erik Erikson is not the only theorist whose concepts support the idea of a midlife crisis.

Carl Jung's theories also possess this idea of a midlife struggle. Rosenberg, Rosenberg, and Farrell (1999) make an interesting comment concerning Jung's influence, "Various writers have either emphasized or ignored Jung's (1923, 1950/1959) theory of adult developmental change as a point of embarkation for midlife crisis theory." Kail and Cavanaugh (2007) explain, "Carl Jung … believed that adults may experience a midlife crisis." Jung believed that "adulthood consists of alternating periods of stability and transition that people experience in fixed sequence" (Kail & Cavanaugh, 2007). In speaking of Jung's theory, Lachman (2004) says, "A major goal of midlife according to Jung (1971) is reflected in the individuation process. Individuation involves the integration or balancing of all aspects of the psyche." Accordingly, an individual struggles to further integrate their personality and adjust to the physical changes of middle age. In Jung's theory, the intensity of this struggle could be a midlife crisis. Summarizing Jung, Becker (2006) says, "Jung…theorizing that highly significant changes take place, which are universal and emerge from inner sources." Jung's emphases that these changes are universal and interior are key components of the current popular thinking about midlife and what occurs in it (Lachman, 2004). Through Erikson and Jung, the midlife crisis concept gained the attention of researchers and the general populace.

A highly problematic issue in examining the concept of "midlife" or "middle age" is definition. The first question to consider is: "What is midlife or middle age?" Kail and Cavanaugh (2007) define middle age as forty to sixty years old, but as Lachman (2004) indicates, "The boundaries of midlife are fuzzy, with no clear demarcation." The general definition of midlife is that it begins at forty years old and ends at sixty years old, but there is a ten year range on either side (Lachman, 2004). In defining middle age, there exists a general idea of what constitutes it, but the definition continues to remain somewhat unclear, because as Americans live longer and healthier lives, what is considered middle age continues to extend further into the sixties and even the seventies (Lachman, 2004).

The second, and even more problematic, concept to define is "midlife crisis." Wethington (2000) says that "researchers and middle-aged Americans hold very different notions of what midlife crisis means." Becker (2006) notes that the "term 'midlife crisis' itself is generally attributed to Elliott Jaques (1965), who suggested that its principal theme is coping with the realization of one's own mortality." The typical crisis events associated with the midlife crisis are: physical illness, divorce, job loss, financial problems, menopause, and becoming a grandparent for the first time, but many other life events are also mentioned (Lachman, 2004; Wethington, 2000). Wethington (2000) notes another problem with defining the midlife crisis, "Another complication is that researchers and theorists have proposed and used different definitions of midlife crisis." The lack of a clear, consistent definition of midlife crisis in popular culture and among researchers is a major issue when it comes to proving the existence or absence of such a phenomenon. Wethington is not the only one who recognizes the difficulty of defining a midlife crisis. Rosenberg, Rosenberg, & Farrell (1999) comment that "there seems to be less than perfect agreement as to what the 'midlife as crisis' model consisted of; what its conceptual roots may have been, and what sort of empirical tests were required to confirm or disconfirm its validity." In seeking a definition of the midlife crisis, Wethington (2000) says that "a midlife crisis is a difficult transition occurring at about the age of 40." This broad definition allows one to consider the entire body of research on the topic. Yet, it does not necessarily help to resolve the problem of definition, and it seems that this problem of definition has allowed the midlife crisis to prevail in the United States. Almost any kind of stress at or around middle age is often considered a midlife crisis.

There is a widespread acceptance of the midlife crisis concept in the United States. Lachman (2004) says, "If you ask people of all ages to free-associate to the word 'midlife,' usually a large percentage will quickly offer the word 'crisis.'" This concept is prevalent in our culture. Kail and Cavanaugh (2007) say, "In part, this belief is fostered by descriptions of personality development in adulthood that have appeared in the popular press." Rosenberg, Rosenberg, and Farrell (1999) refer to the midlife crisis as a persistent "collective fantasy" of our culture, and comment that "despite this apparently negative evidence, both popular and scientific writers continue to employ the midlife crisis as a descriptive and explanatory construct." In addition to these popularizations, the theorists (Erikson and Jung), and the lack of definition (Wethington, 2000) have made it possible for this concept to enter into common usage. Wethington (2000) comments, "The term 'midlife crisis'… remains ubiquitous in popular culture (Wethington, Cooper, & Holmes, 1997)…". It is a concept that has broad acceptance. This paper seeks to question the validity of the midlife crisis concept in Americans psyche.

While it seems that the majority of Americans have some understanding of the midlife crisis concept, research does not support that the majority of Americans experience a midlife crisis (Kail and Cavanaugh, 2007; Lachman, 2004; Wethington, 2000). Kail and Cavanaugh (2007) summarize this point, "For several decades the bulk of the research evidence fails to support the idea that most adults experience difficulty at the level of a crisis in midlife." Quoting Brim's research (1992), Wethington (2000) states that "about 10% of adult males experience the intense period of turmoil, called the midlife crisis, and concluded that serious emotional disturbance is the exception rather than the rule for most middle-age men (and women)." In Wethington's (2000) own research, she found that 26% of respondents, whether male or female, experienced a midlife crisis. She accounts for the difference between her research and Brim's by stating, "One likely reason for the wide discrepancy is that study participants were using a wider, less precise definition of the midlife crisis than what researchers typically use" (Wethington, 2000). The research not only disproves the universal experience of a midlife crisis, it also provides corrections to the generalized concept in our culture. Rosenberg, Rosenberg, and Farrell (1999) summarize this by saying, "The midlife crisis does not pass empirical muster as a psychiatric syndrome, a biologically determined event, nor a developmental inevitability." Perrig-Chiello and Perren (2005) find a basic stability between our early adolescence, young adulthood, middle age, and old age. Generally, it seems that our basic personality does not drastically change in midlife.

In relation to the midlife crisis concept, several common misconceptions should be mentioned. First, there is a common misconception that the midlife crisis occurs at or about the age of forty years old (Wethington, 2000). Using the research that 26% of Americans experience a midlife crisis, Lachman (2004) says, "… most of the reported crises occurred before age 40 or after age 50. This raises the question of whether a crisis is unique to midlife…." In Wethington's (2000) research, she found that "52.6% of reported midlife crises were classified as 'off time.' The age boundaries chosen as 'on-time' for the midlife crisis were generous." Wethington defines "off-time" as before age thirty-eight and after age fifty. Therefore, over half of the 26% reported midlife crises were not in the commonly accepted age category for the midlife crisis. Lachman (2004) suggests, "Entering the thirties may be more disruptive than turning 40." Kail and Cavanaugh (2007) report, "Reanalysis and extension of Costa and McCrae's data, specifically looking for evidence of a midlife crisis, revealed only a handful of men who fit the classic profile, and even then the crisis came anywhere between the ages of 30 and 60." Research supports that "psychological distress in adulthood does not suggest that midlife is a time of out-of-the-ordinary distress, for either men or women" (Wethington, 2000). Having a midlife crisis during one's forties is not the normal, common experience of most people, but of only a small percentage. This lends itself to considering the midlife crisis concept as a "social myth" (Rosenberg, Rosenberg, & Farrell, 1999). This common misconception leads to another common misconception.

A second common misconception is that males are more likely to experience a midlife crisis than females. This misconception to have become prevalent because the primary theorists focused their attention on men and a majority of the subsequent research also focused upon men (Kail and Cavanaugh, 2007; Levinson, Darrow, Klein, Levinson, & McKee, 1976). Wethington (2000) states, "The raw data from the intensive study (PTP) indicate that 26% of respondents (25.4% of the men and 26.3% of the women) report having had a midlife crisis in the past." The popular, stereotypical midlife crisis is generally conceived of a male experience (Kail and Cavanaugh, 2007). Wethington (2000) summarizes her research by stating, "The second hypothesis was that more men than women would report having had midlife crises. This was not the case. Men and women were almost equally likely to report having had midlife crises." Research shows that the idea of midlife crises being a male developmental issue is false. A midlife crisis may be reported equally by either gender.

A third misconception of the midlife crisis is that it occurs because of major internal stress over the transition to midlife. Exterior events were not the cause of the midlife crisis. Rosenberg, Rosenberg, & Farrell (1999) state the general idea, "The midlife crisis was not a professional crisis, nor a marital crisis, nor an economic crisis, although these surface manifestations could certainly signal its presence." Of course, which is the cause and which is the result is the very essence of the problem. Kail and Cavanaugh (2007) state, "The evidence indicates that for most people, midlife is no more or no less traumatic than any other period." Midlife itself is not the cause of the crisis. Rosenberg, Rosenberg, and Farrell (1999) comment, "The intrusion of the awareness of death, of personal finitude, was the triggering mechanism of the midlife crisis not only in Jaques's seminal thesis, but also in the major conceptualizations and empirical studies that followed." Lachman (2004) says, "Jacques (1965) thought the midlife crisis was driven by a fear of impending death. More recent research shows the usual sources of the crises are major life events such as illness or divorce…." Ignoring all current research on the midlife crisis concept, Daniel Becker (2006) accepts past theory concerning it and addresses the midlife crisis with Existential Therapy. This is not to say that people do not experience some type of transition in midlife (Kail and Cavanaugh, 2007), but it does not necessarily mean that it is a crisis brought on by "the awareness of impending death or shortened future" (Wethington, 2000). It seems that the external major life event is the cause and not the internal existential event. Wethington (2000) states, "In general, Americans' definitions of the midlife crises were much more diverse than this conceptualization implies. Only a few responses explicitly mentioned the awareness of impending death…." It seems that major life events tend to be the cause of perceived midlife crises. In stark contrast to the midlife crisis model, many researchers find that the midlife is a time of "peak functioning and responsibility" (Lachman, 2004).

These common misconceptions often shape our view of the midlife as a time of turmoil, stress and crisis, but based upon the number of Americans who actually experience a midlife crisis and at what point they experience it, a midlife crisis is not an inevitable, negative experience that all must endure and hopefully survive. Quoting Neugarten's research into the middle age, Miller and Lachman (2000) suggests that "midlife as 'a period of maximum capacity and ability to handle a highly complex environment and a highly differentiated self.''' During the middle years, most individuals function at their highest level (Miller & Lachman, 2000). Embracing a positive view of ageing in midlife does contribute positively to our lives, including our physical health status (Wurm, Tomasik, & Tesch-Romer, 2008). The midlife period may be a time of integration of earlier learning and life lessons which results in unparalleled creativity and productivity. The Midlife Crisis concept is popular fiction.

References

Becker, D. (2006). Therapy for the Middle-Aged: the Relevance of Existential Issues. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 60 (1), 87-99.

Brim, J. O. (1976). Theories of the Male Mid-Life Crisis. Counseling Psychologist, 6 (1), 2-9.

Kail, R. V., & Cavanaugh, J. C. (2007). Human Development: a Life-Span View (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

Lachman, M. E. (2004). Development in Midlife. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 305-331.

Levinson, D. J., Darrow, C. M., Klein, E. B., Levinson, M. H., & McKee, B. (1976). Periods in the Adult Development of Men: Ages 18-45. Counseling Psychologist, 6 (1), 21-25.

Lowenthal, M. F., & Weiss, L. (1976). Intimacy and Crises in Adulthood. Counseling Psychologist, 6 (1), 10-15.

Miller, L. M., & Lachman, M. E. (2000). Cognitive Performance and the Role of Control Beliefs in Midlife. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 7 (2), 69-85.

Perrig-Chiello, P., & Perren, S. (2005). Biographical Transitions from a Midlife Perspective. Journal of Adult Development, 12 (4), 169-181.

Psychology Today. (2006, April 17). Midlife Crisis. Retrieved March 18, 2009, from Psychology Today: http://www.psychologytoday.com/conditions/mid-life.html

Rosenberg, S. D., Rosenberg, H. J., & Farrell, M. P. (1999). The Midlife Crisis Revisited. In S. L. Willis, & J. D. Reid (Eds.), Life in the Middle: Psychological and Social Development in Middle Age (pp. 47-73). San Diego: Academic Press.

Wethington, E. (2000). Expecting Stress: Americans and the Midlife Crisis. Motivation and Emotion, 24 (2), 85-103.

Wurm, S., Tomasik, M. J., & Tesch-Romer, C. (2008). Serious Health Events and Their Impact on Changes in Subjective Health and Life Satisfaction: the Role of Age and a Positive View on Ageing. European Journal of Ageing, 5, 117-127.

Accreditation or NOT – What should I choose?

In a recent blog, I mentioned IWU's Seminary and Accreditation. Those thoughts were initiated by reading an old post from Keith Drury's website and reflecting on my current experience with this question. In honor of Dr. Drury, I am posting this on Tuesday. In considering the question of accredited or non-accredited theological degrees, whether or not you choose an accredited school depends on the reason for which you want to earn the degree. People have different reasons for choosing to earn a degree, and these need to be thought through thoroughly.

First, some people choose to earn a degree for personal enrichment. They wish to grow in their faith, and a degree from a particular school can help them accomplish this purpose. If your primary reason is personal enrichment then accreditation is not the primary issue. The convenience, the delivery method, the cost, or the quality of the program may be the all important considerations, but accreditation is less important. The major drawback is that if you choose this route, and later wish to pursue more formal education at an accredited school, you should not expect these courses to transfer because they probably will not.

Second, some people choose to earn a degree for ecclesiastical approval. They wish to receive the approval of their denomination to practice ministry as a lay, licensed, or ordained minister. There are several routes that a person may choose to accomplish this purpose.

Most denominations, like the Wesleyan Church, have an in-house program for credentialing people for ministry. In my contact with several denominations over the years, I find that most denominations have these types of programs. These courses are for denominational credit only and could not be transferred to an accredited college or seminary. These programs are especially effective for those persons already involved in ministry at the local church level and second career pastors. The drawback is that churches will often overlook those who choose this path for those who have a bible college or seminary degrees unless you build a great track record in ministry, but even then, someone with a better education and an equal track record will probably get the call.

Another route would be to attend a bible college or seminary that is approved by your denomination. These may be accredited or unaccredited. It depends on the standards of your denomination. Generally, these schools are either regionally (there are 6 regional associations) or nationally (Association of Theological Schools) accredited. Still, the question is whether your denomination recognizes the degree or not. Most denominations have a list of recognized schools on their website. Also, I would speak with denominational officials about which schools would be most appropriate. Of course, they will often tell you to go to the school that they attended… yes, that happens regularly – it's not the most objective way to choose a school…

Third, some people choose to earn degrees for teaching. If you wish to use your degree(s) to teach, especially if you wish to teach at an accredited school, then you will need a degree with the broadest possible recognition. As a general rule, if you wish to teach at a regionally accredited school then you need degrees from regionally accredited schools, or if you wish to teach at an ATS school then you need degrees from ATS accredited schools. If you wish to teach at a secular regionally accredited school then you should earn degrees from regionally accredited schools because these schools do not generally respect ATS schools unless it is Harvard, Princeton, etc… you get the idea.

Of course, there are always exceptions… if you wish to teach at Bob Jones University then it would be best to earn a degree from Bob Jones University or another compatible independent type school. Also, even with accredited degrees, if you earn an accredited degree from Harvard or Yale (yes, I'm tickling the Ivies) and are still an evangelical when you finish, then it will be more recognized than a degree from Liberty, Regent, or yes, even Wheaton. That's just the way it goes! Another exception is that if you write a few books, they are well received, the scholarship is there, then forget the degrees because if a school wishes to hire you to teach they could justify it based upon those works instead of degrees!!!

If you've read my entire blurb on this topic then you may have further questions, you may be laughing hysterically, you may be mad because you've never heard this stuff and earned 5 degrees from unaccredited schools, or you may be so sleepy that it's time to cut it off. Let me know…

Blessings, Chris