Monday’s Ministry Musing: Post-Preaching Depression

Have you ever been mightily used by God, get a spiritual high, and then the next day feel like a schmuck? Have you ever been running on a spiritual high for quite some time only to be blown away by an equally crushing period of depression and dryness? If so then you might be experiencing Post-Preaching Depression; or as Archibald Hart has termed it, “Post-adrenaline Depression”. Hart describes it this way:

“…what I was experiencing was a profound shutdown of my adrenal system, following a period of high stress or demand. It was as i my adrenal system were saying, “That’s enough abuse for now; let’s give it a break,” and shut down so that I had no choice in the matter.”

Sometimes we experience this because we are adrenaline junkies. Sometimes we experience this because there are seasons in our life when we must rely upon adrenaline (God gives it for a reason). The problem is that we often abuse adrenaline. We get addicted to the “high’s” and become pleasure-seeking adrenaline junkies. So, whether you are addicted to adrenaline or you just crash after big events there is wisdom in understanding post-adrenaline depression.

For me almost any time I preach I am totally spent afterwards. I typically preach on Wednesday evenings. After youth group is over I am exhausted. On Thursday I am drained for a little while but usually back up and running by Thursday evening or Friday morning.

This past week I was the Camp Director/Camp Pastor. It took a few weeks of late nights, stressful planning, and tons of adrenaline even to get ready for camp. Then there was a week of actually speaking twice per day and being responsible for over 100 people. Needless to say at the end of the week I was fully exhausted. I actually felt depressed at youth camp on Wednesday and Thursday and am only now beginning to “see the light”. I am having difficulty writing, preparing sermons, speaking to others, as well as battling feelings of worthlessness.

So, what do we do when we crash? How do we fight post-adrenaline depression? Hart’s suggestion may seem surprising: “cooperate with it”. He further explains. “When the adrenal system crashes its need for rejuvenation far exceeds my need just to feel good. In fact, the mood that it creates is deliberately designed to slow me down so that recovery can take place.”

Rather than fighting this feeling it is best to listen to its message. Try to relax. Do not try to find more adrenaline by ski-diving on your day off, just rest, do low-grade activity. As a pastor it may be wise not to take your day off on Monday (or me on Thursday) but rather do “easy” things in the office to recover. Take your day off when you could actually enjoy it.

Hart offers a few more helpful suggestions for dealing with this:

• As soon as possible after the activity is over, go aside and relax for a while.
• Allow the low mood to come over you, welcoming it as your friend.
• Pay attention to what the “healing” process feels like in your body; it’s not really unpleasant if you interpret it as something good.
• Continue to relax for as long as possible, without tackling any task awaiting you, giving priority to your recovery.
• When you feel like it, mark time by doing routine, low-adrenaline demand activities”
• If you are feeling depressed, accept the feeling as part of the recover process—it has no other significance, so don’t try to interpret your feeling or believe any of the negative self-talk that always accompanies it

What do you think? Good advice? What are areas where this thought can be developed further? How might this be difficult to follow? If you are interested in what Hart has to say I would suggest these two books: Unmasking Male Depression, Adrenaline and Stress.

Going to the Zoo

After a week of church camp and all the planning prior to it I am exhausted.  My wife, son, and I will be going to the St. Louis Zoo today.  Regular blogging will continue tomorrow.  Thanks for being patient.  Be sure to subscribe via Google Reader.

This Week in Blogworld 07/03

In the midst of a changing culture in Baptist life, Todd Benkert offers Things to Avoid in Baptist Disagreements. 

I’ve linked to these before, but now the entire list is compiled:  Ligonier Ministries has done us a great service by giving the Top 5 Commentaries for each book of the Bible.  Check out the list.

Michael Spencer steals all of my ideas about youth ministry.  Not really, but it’s nice to know that I’m not alone.  The iMonk gives his “model” of youth ministry.

It has been interesting to follow this “debate” between iMonk and Frank Turk concerning Mark Driscoll’s need to publicly repent.  See Turk’s Part 1, iMonk Part 1, Turk Part 2, and iMonk Part 2.  Be sure to read the comments on each of these. 

Bill Mounce answers a really good question: “How Rude Was Jesus?”

This is a very insightful point by David Fitch on Christendom evangelism.  (HT: Milton)

Not sure if I’ve linked to this before or not.  Pretty cool testimony from Korn’s Brian Welch:

Thinking Through the Deliberate Church: Chapter Four

As always If you are just joining the discussion then please check out the foreword, intro, and chapter one. You can catch up pretty easily. If you have yet to buy the book I would suggest buying it for a paltry 9 bucks, here.  

Quick summary:

If you want a healthy church then it is quite obvious that before anything else the church’s members need to be regenerate.  But, how do you ensure that every person accepted into membership is truly converted?  That begs a question though.  Is “church membership” even a biblical concept?  Dever will be the first to admit that “evidence is not abundant”, but there are examples in Scripture and thereby he also says, “it is clear, and it is consistent”.  I believe with Dever that church membership is biblical—perhaps not in its current form—but if defined as“a means by which we demarcate the boundaries of the church”, then I have to agree that it is indeed biblical.

The question is now asked, how do we make certain that those we consider “members” are indeed regenerate?  Dever’s first suggestion is to hold a new members class.  He also suggests having members sign a church covenant.  Sometimes it may even be beneficial to have members use the church covenant before partaking in the Lord’s Supper, or perhaps read corporately before business meetings. 

Another suggestion, and perhaps the most important, is a membership interview.  During this interview the “primary purpose is to gather” spiritual information.  A few things to look for are: 1) an explanation of the Gospel 2) previous church experience and why they left 3) are they biblically baptized 4) have they ever been disciplined by a church? 5) their personal testimony.  Dever also provides a helpful sample church membership interview form in the Appendix. 

This chapter closes with a couple words of caution.  First, caution is to not encourage the new members to “jump right in”.  For one we do not know their previous church experience.  There could still be serious misunderstandings of the Gospel.  Consider 1 Timothy 5:22.  Secondly, we have to realize that at the end of the day wheat will grow with the tares.  Even still we must be careful to not use this as an excuse.  “Don’t leave the front door unlatched”. 

Quotables:

“…it is surprising how careless many Christians and even pastors have become about the spiritual security of the local church.”  (59)

In regards to being intimidated when asked to explain the gospel in 60 seconds, “it is better for them to stutter in front of you now than to stand speechless before the Lord on the last day.”  (64)

“…if membership is a local church’s external affirmation of a person’s spiritual conversion, then the most unloving things we can do is mislead condemned people into thinking they are saved by conferring membership upon them too hastily”.  (65)

Questions:

• Dever’s church does a new members class before membership.  When does your church do such an interview?  Why might it be beneficial to do it before?  Why after?
• Do you know your church covenant?  How does your church use it?  Do you even have one?
• What do you think about the issue of church membership? 
• What are we communicating as a church when we have ~650 members but only 150 actively attending?

The Need for Covering with Love in the Blogosphere

I am following a discussion at SBC Voices.  Todd Burus asks “why are so many in the SBC afraid of Calvinism”?  Perhaps, he chose a poor title; Calvinism: The New Racism?, nonetheless, I am convinced that the discussion has went a direction Todd did not intend.  Truthfully, there has been very little helpful interaction on this particular thread.

However, in following this discussion I think the Lord revealed to me something of my own heart.   When someone disagrees with, argues against, or even attacks something that I hold dear I tend to respond by nit-picking.  You actually see this quite a bit in the blogosphere, and I probably do not help the problem—I’ve been guilty of adding to it.

You see this quite often in comments about Mark Driscoll (whether for or against).  Person A leaves a comment that is not 100% accurate.  Rather than dealing with the 97% that is accurate Person B address the 3% that he/she can deal with.  Then the thread spirals out of control because Person B was also not 100% accurate with his comment about Person A’s 3%.  So, Person C comments and picks out how Person B was inaccurate.  By this time Person A rejoins the thread, defends himself and deals with Person B’s inaccuracies.   The whole time there is probably only 1% of the discussion that is actually helpful or useful. 

I will not pretend to judge your own heart.  But, allow me to be honest about my own.  The reason I deal with the 3% instead of the 97% is because it’s much easier to stay in my own comfort zone than to actually engage in a meaningful discussion.  At the same time I can look knowledgeable and not deal with the issues raised, what a perfect plan. 

Furthermore, this is a reflection of my heart that wants to be perceived as right (regardless of whether it really is true).  I am convinced that when I pick at the 3% (or even 43%) I am not truly loving the person I am talking with.  “Love rejoices in the truth”.  Doesn’t that at least mean that I am so happy for the 97% that is true that I am able to cover over the 3% with love? 

I understand there is another side to this.  If we let 3% of heresy slide then a little leaven will work its way through and that 3% will turn into 30% and then that 30% will turn into 90%, etc.  I’m just not convinced that such a slippery slope is true. 

The disciples and people surrounding Jesus often said some pretty dim witted things.  Sometimes, Jesus rebuked them.  Sometimes, he just let it slide and proclaimed truth without picking at the error.  So, I understand this is a difficult task to discover if something should be covered with love or dealt with.  But we ought to a least mull it over before ripping on someone’s error.  Most error is not intended to be malicious but only a result of being fallen.  I am convinced that actually engaging with gentleness, love, and respect looks quite different than what you see from us “truth warriors”.

Lord, change my prideful heart.