The Culture of Death

Concerning the vexing drama unfolding at a hospice in Pinellas Park, Florida, which national religious figure called the decision to remove Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube “unnecessary,” “cruel,” and “immoral”? Was it Pat Robertson? Jerry Falwell? Randall Terry? No, it was that paragon of rightwing jihad: Jesse Jackson.

“I feel so passionate about this injustice being done, how unnecessary it is to deny her a feeding tube, water, not even ice to be used for her parched lips,” Jackson told the press. "This is a moral issue, and it transcends politics and family disputes.”

Jackson, usually not counted as leader of the prolife movement, sees in sharp relief what has become blurry for so many people. Human life is precious, and ending it without just cause is a civil rights issue.

There are many questions surrounding the Schiavo case. On the personal side, did Terri—who left no living will—really tell her husband Michael years ago that she wanted “no tubes”? Why then did he not tell anyone until years and years after she went into the hospital? Why is Michael Schiavo still considered her husband and guardian when he has forsaken his marital vows, shacked up with another woman, and fathered children with her? Even if Michael Schiavo is telling the truth and is trying to do the best he can in a tragic situation, it looks bad.

On the medical side, despite a credible hypothesis from a Mayo Clinic neurologist that Terri may not be in a persistent vegetative state, why are those who want her to die so incurious about her condition? Yes, Michael Schiavo has agreed to an autopsy after she dies, but why not an MRI while she lives? If Terri doesn’t want to live, why has she held on for 12 days so far without food and water?

Another doctor has been quoted as saying Terri could possibly drink water by mouth. If so, then denying it to her would not be an act of compassion, but murder. (According to Michael Schiavo, she said, “no tubes,” not “no water.”) Why then have the authorities arrested dozens of civil rights protesters seeking to get a bottle of water to her parched lips? And if, as Michael Schiavo and attorney George Felos contend, Terri Schiavo’s death process is painless because she is no more than a vegetable, why are they allowing her to receive morphine injections?

And why do they ignore or dismiss examples of people who have recovered their faculties—such as Sarah Scantlin of Kansas, who recently came out of a coma after 20 years? (Schiavo is not even comatose, much less in a persistent vegetative state.)

Before the feeding tube was pulled, Barbara Weller, an attorney representing Terri’s parents, visited her. Sitting at Terri’s bedside, Weller said, “Terri, if you could only say ‘I want to live,’ this whole thing could be over today.” Weller describes what happened next:

“To my enormous shock and surprise, Terri's eyes opened wide, she looked me square in the face, and with a look of great concentration, she said, ‘Ahhhhhhh.’ Then, seeming to summon up all the strength she had, she virtually screamed, ‘Waaaaaaaa.’ . . . At that point, Terri had a look of anguish on her face that I had never seen before and she seemed to be struggling hard, but was unable to complete the sentence. She became very frustrated and began to cry. I was horrified that I was obviously causing Terri so much anguish . . . . I promised Terri I would tell the world that she had tried to say, ‘I want to live.’”

Meanwhile, doctors pushing for Terri’s death assure the world that such responses are random and involuntary. But, just to be sure, why won’t Michael Schiavo allow his wife to be examined one last time? Why the rush?

Why has nearly every court involved moved Terri inexorably toward a slow, painful death of starvation and dehydration—rejecting every plea from the woman’s parents (who would gladly assume responsibility for her care, if only allowed to), Congress, and the president? What is the harm in looking at new facts? And why do judges interpret the law so narrowly in this case—with a narrowness and closed-mindedness to new information that lead to only one outcome: death? Why are they so inclined to give convicted murderers the benefit of the doubt in capital cases, but not Terri Schiavo in this one, when close family members disagree on the facts?

I propose that the answer to all these questions is that we are living in a culture of death, in which death is often seen as the best option—or the only one. In such a culture, the bias is toward death, not life. Of course, the culture of death has been in full view ever since the Supreme Court legalized abortion on demand in 1973, leading to the legal killing of 45 million unborn children so far. But most of those victims have been safely hidden from public view. Not so Terri Schiavo.

As President Bush said when signing the federal law asking the federal court to review the case from the ground up, “In cases like this one, where there are serious questions and substantial doubts, our society, our laws and our courts should have a presumption in favor of life.” In their arrogance, the judges rebuffed this common-sense presumption.

But the culture of death is not just about runaway judges—would that it were that simple! Unfortunately, depending on whether you believe the polls, most Americans look at Terri Schiavo’s pitiful condition and say Michael Schiavo is doing the right thing. They say that the president, pro-lifers, and Terri’s parents should butt out.

According to a survey by USA Today and CNN, 56 percent of respondents said removing Terri’s feeding tube was appropriate. Fully 70 percent said congressional legislation moving the dispute to federal court was inappropriate. Given a spouse in the same condition, 61 percent say they would remove the feeding tube.

Remember, we are not talking about extraordinary medical attention such as a respirator, which is an ethics question for another day. We are talking about withholding food and water, which we all need to survive. As the pope said in a 2004 address to an international gathering of medical professionals, “the administration of water and food, even when provided by artificial means, always represents a natural means of preserving life, not a medical act.” News reports say the pope is practicing what he preaches, receiving nourishment via a feeding tube inserted in his nose.

If America is a Christian nation, as is often claimed, then why this gulf between public opinion and traditional church teaching? Again, the culture of death, heavily influenced by the this-worldly outlook of secularism, has taken over. Our greatest fear is no longer death and judgment in the next world, but suffering in this one.

Writing in his new book, Unspeakable, philosopher Os Guinness says, “Today, . . . many people deny that evil has any objective reality at all. The only evil left, in this view, is the fact that human beings suffer. Put simply, evil was once the source of suffering, but for many people today, suffering—especially extreme and apparently senseless suffering—is the only source of evil.”

Thus, according to this logic, we defeat evil by killing the patient. Welcome to the culture of death.

Author Insight: Tim Stafford on Raising Kids

Tim Stafford, a senior writer for Christianity Today, writes about a wide range of issues—everything from sex to the church in India. Some of the projects he has been involved in include The NIV Student Bible and The Stamp of Glory. InterVarsity Press has published a new volume from Stafford, Never Mind the Joneses: Building Core Christian Values in a Way That Fits Your Family. Stan Guthrie interviewed him about it.

Why did you write this book now?

The youngest of my three kids was about to go to college, so I thought, it’s now or never. I’m probably not going to learn a lot more about this childrearing business, so I better put down everything I know before I forget it.

More seriously, for years my wife, Popie, and I had been giving talks on raising kids with values. Over time we’d developed our ideas about family culture, and it seemed as though people found it helpful. So it was time to write.

This book was really a group effort, wasn’t it?

Yes, very much so. I’m convinced that every family has its own unique personality and culture. It was important to get input from as wide a variety of families as possible, so I quizzed an awful lot of people about their family style. I’m a journalist, so I used my journalist’s craft to try to bring others’ voices into the story.

What was your family like when you were a kid?

I had a wonderful family growing up. My dad was a pastor, my mom a school teacher. I think you could say we were noisy—we talked a lot, and it was okay to disagree, even with your parents. My parents were very godly, and they showed us how to love loving God. At the same time, they weren’t too pious about it. Especially my dad—he hated the stereotype of the meek parson.

What about now that you are a father?

I see a lot of similarities with my family of origin, but differences as well. Popie is from the deep South, and she brought an emphasis on manners that I never had growing up. She also brought great strengths in relating to others. All three of my kids are naturally shy, as I am, but they’ve all learned how to compensate for that very well, so most people would never guess their shyness. Another difference is sports. All my kids played sports, and became serious runners in high school. I’d say sports activities were a big part of our family culture. Popie and I tried to think how we could emphasize godly values through sports, and also what ungodly values we wanted to avoid.

What are some of the key challenges facing Christian parents in America today?

A lot more weight rests on the parents. When I was growing up, my parents could send me out the door reasonably confident that if I went into one of my neighbor’s homes, they would reinforce most of the values that we believed in. Same thing at school—they never dreamed of a public school system that wouldn’t support their values. In those days, even the TV shows more or less underlined qualities Christians believed in. Obviously, that’s not true today, and it falls to parents to make sure that their kids understand basic Christian values. If they don’t do it, nobody else will.

What are some of the key values that nearly every Christian family agrees upon?

I list 14 of them in my book, chapter by chapter: God first, concern for others, hard work, truthfulness, family unity, boundaries, generosity, sexual fidelity, care for creation, submission, thanksgiving, rest, contentment, and grace. I like to say that every Christian family believes in these values. But building these into your family life—that’s hard.

Why is it so hard to raise kids today—or has it always been hard?

It’s always been hard. It’s hard because you’re dealing with real human beings. Children are not machines that we can control. They have a soul, a spirit, and a mind of their own. Raising children—your children, with their own particularities and peculiarities—is an art form. It’s like learning how to dance.

I probably speak for many parents when I admit that it is very difficult in my home to establish consistent habits for things such as family devotions or service toward others. Sometimes we’re lucky to get our kids—all in the third grade or younger—fed and clothed every day. Trying to do more than that can seem overwhelming. You’re not going to lay another guilt trip on me, are you?

Just the opposite, really. I want to liberate you from any notion that there’s one right way to raise kids. The values we want to communicate—God’s values—are non-negotiable. But people find so many ways to get them across. I don’t want anybody wasting time or energy lamenting that they can’t seem to do it like that other family they know—the perfect family. You have a unique style in your family, and the idea is to try to tap into that uniqueness. If one way doesn’t seem to work for you, try another. And if you don’t quite get it all done for some period of your life, not to worry. The idea is to communicate values, to get those values into the souls of our kids. That’s a lifetime project, but it doesn’t stand or fall on how many times you did devotions.

For example, our family never really did a very good job at family devotions. We tried from time to time, but it really didn’t seem to fit our style or our schedule. So? We communicated the same value—God first—in other ways. We made a lot of church involvement. We read the Bible on vacations. We sent our kids to a Christian camp. They got the point. We weren’t perfect, but the message got through in a way that fit us as a family.

Your book attempts to give parents a certain amount of freedom in building a family culture and inculcating values and standards in the lives of their children. You don’t simply give us a simple list of things to do or avoid doing. Why did you approach the book this way?

If there were one way to raise kids with values, don’t you think God would tell us? But there’s no such list of things to do in the Bible.

Part of my perspective on this undoubtedly comes from living in Africa. Popie and I learned, very early on in our married life, that different cultures do things in their own way. Africans don’t raise kids the way Americans do, they don’t conduct church like Americans do. They don’t laugh at the same jokes or celebrate the same events. We can share the same values—in fact, we often do, because many Africans are Christians—but we live them out in quite different ways.

An African expresses hospitality in a very different way than you or I do. That doesn’t matter. What matters is the value of hospitality. In fact, our differences are a glory. God made us all different.

I would like to encourage parents to stop looking for the perfect way to raise kids—which usually only makes them feel guilty—and instead think creatively. It’s great to learn from other people. That’s where we get our ideas. Ultimately, though, we come up with a style that is our own. Just make sure that style is underlining God’s values, and not somebody else’s.

Would you give an example of what this freedom looks like in practice?

Sure. In our family, we are very strong on church attendance. Our kids went to church, they went to Sunday school, and they went to youth group. When we go on vacations, we go to church wherever we are. It’s very inconvenient, but we think it communicates a strong message: At all times, in all places, worshiping God with God’s people comes first in our lives.

I realize, though, that doesn’t work with all families. Some kids are simply too rebellious. Some parents are divided on church attendance—one believes in it strongly and one doesn’t. Some think it’s fine to stay home from church to watch an important football game. So they need to make the value statement “God first” in some other way.

We never presented church attendance as a moral issue. We made it very clear that other families had their own standards, and that didn’t make them less than us in any way. We just said: “This is our family. When you grow up and make your own family, you can decide to do it differently. Right now, though, you’re a member of the Stafford family, and the Staffords go to church. It’s our cultural identity.” There’s a kind of strictness in that, but there’s also a kind of freedom.

Or let’s talk about hard work. I definitely wanted my kids to learn the meaning of work, and I think they all did. Work is a biblical value, underlined in numerous places in Scripture. As a child, I learned hard work delivering papers, picking fruit, and moving irrigation pipe. I always had a part-time job.

My kids, though, hardly ever had part-time jobs. They were taking really hard classes—much harder than I ever had in high school. They were doing sports. They were involved in youth group activities, which also take more time than they did when I was a kid. I wanted them to do all these things, and do them well. So Popie and I never pushed part-time jobs. Frankly, I don’t know how they could have done a job. They were already working hard.

That’s our family. In other families, school has a much lower profile. In other families, sports aren’t a big deal. In some of these families, part-time jobs are just expected. They fit the family, and kids learn hard work through them. My kids learned hard work more from running cross country, and from doing demanding school work. I know some parents would feel really guilty about this, as though they failed their children by not making them learn hard work the way they did. My feeling, though, is that the end product is what matters. They learned hard work.

What are the biggest mistakes many Christian parents make?

A lot of parents want to be their kids’ friends, and they stop acting as their parents. I see this particularly with teenagers. Lots of parents act as though their kids are grown when they’re 14 or 15. They aren’t. They may not like being corrected, but they badly need correction. They need authoritative guidance, because they look big and strong, but they aren’t.

What do you do if your kids reject your values? Is it ever too late?

It’s never too late. You keep praying. You keep living by faith. Of course, you have to respect their choices and love them unconditionally. But that doesn’t mean you let them go their own way without a word. You keep on reminding them of the values God has given us, doing it tactfully and with a sense of the right timing. You can never know when it might sink in. Our God is a mighty God.

Missions in the Third Millennium: New Edition

A lot has happened since September 11, 2001. It's time to update your knowledge of the key issues affecting the worldwide spread of Christianity.

Missions in the Third Millennium, a practical handbook for students, churches, missionaries, agencies, and Christians from outside the West, has just been republished in a revised and expanded second edition.

Missions in the Third Millennium: 21 Key Trends for the 21st Century charts 21 trends–both positive and negative–with continuing significance for the Great Commission community in the coming decades.

The book offers insights to help you grasp the big picture and take practical steps for more effective missions involvement. It contains notes, expanded suggestions for further reading, discussion questions, and contact information for key organizations and resources.

Changes for the Second Edition:

New chapter on evangelizing Muslims;

New chapter on urban missions;

Revised introduction;

New preface;

Updated facts and statistics throughout;

Expanded suggestions for further reading;

New Cover.

Endorsements:

“Since it was first published, Guthrie's insightful book has become necessary reading for anyone who wants to understand the issues that mission agencies and missionaries must face if we are to carry out our work in the new millennium. I greatly appreciate the balance and perspective he offers and recommend the updated edition even more highly than the original.”

Scott Moreau, Chair, Missions and Intercultural Studies, Wheaton College, Editor, Evangelical Missions Quarterly

"Stan Guthrie does us a great service of sketching the panorama of change."

David Neff, Editor, Christianity Today

“Guthrie's delightful, readable little book does what no other book does. It is simple, sane, and sensible as it briefly but very astutely explores all of the major dimensions and issues of missions today–touchy or not!”

Ralph Winter, Founder of U.S. Center for World Mission

Ordering:

250 pages; retail price, $16.99

Click through here to Amazon.com.

For a discount on bulk orders of 10 copies or more, please contact the author: stan@stanguthrie.com.

A Tale of Two Governors

“As a matter of fact, religion should have no effect on politics,” California celebrity Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger told George Stephanopoulos recently on ABC. “If you make a decision, it should not be based on your religious views. It should be based on–what is it–how can you represent the people of California the best possible way.”

Religious conservatives were predictably outraged by the glitzy Republican’s comments. (Few public officials have had the audacity to dismiss religious values in this broadly religious nation outright.) However, judging by the man’s history, both inside and outside politics, the real scandal would have been if Schwarzenegger had said he bases his decisions on his Catholic faith.

After all, despite his stirring personal story of coming to America from Austria and reaching the top in bodybuilding, the movie industry, and now politics, this is a man who manifestly has lived largely by the cult of the self. Schwarzenegger admits he has treated women poorly (to put it delicately). He admits he took steroids to help produce those bulging muscles (and gain an unfair competitive advantage over those who didn’t) on his way to multiple Mr. Olympia titles. And let’s not forget all those violent movies.

Arnold Schwarzenegger says he does not base his decisions on a religious code. I believe him.

Schwarzenegger’s decisions since becoming governor last year provide more evidence of his devotion to the cult of the self. He backed Proposition 71, a voter-approved initiative to provide $3 billion in state funds for biotech firms to produce human embryos for medical research to find cures to help the rest of us.

What supporters don’t talk much about are the morally dubious means to these supposedly noble–and overhyped–ends. Both this referendum and a stem-cell research bill approved in New Jersey involve cloning–producing human embryos that are exact physical duplicates of existing people–to harvest their organs and tissues for medical research and possible cures of diseases such as Alzheimer’s and M.S.

Leave aside the chilling parallels with Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. That, after all, was a work of fiction. What about the parallels with Nazi Germany? Only 60 years after the end of World War II, have we already forgotten the grisly work of the Nazi doctors, who justified their tortures of fellow human beings by classifying them as somehow subhuman?

This happened, for example, at the Dachau death camp, when Jewish prisoners (called in this instance “selectees”) were made to undergo deadly experiments on the effects of high-altitude flight and other scientific questions. “Nearly two hundred of Germany’s most prominent doctors, surgeons, pathologists, and microbiologists sat mute … when, at a scientific conference in Nuremberg, … the results of the Dachau experiment were outlined in dry scientific language,” Ernest Volkman writes in Science Goes to War. “They were shown movie film of ‘L,’ clad in his concentration camp striped pajamas, writhing and screaming in agony as he died in the Dachau chamber.”

Volkman comments, “Eighty Dachau prisoners died and more than a hundred were crippled for life by the experiments, but there were no cries of outrage when the conference attendees heard of these atrocities.”

Thankfully, we are hearing a few cries of outrage in our day, although not nearly enough. Another Republican governor, Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, is taking a firm and costly stand against the pro-cloning culture of the self. Romney, whose wife has multiple sclerosis, is speaking out against a bill introduced by state Senator Robert Travaglini allowing the state government and private firms to fund cloning for research and embryonic stem-cell research. Romney says he and his wife “agree that you don’t create life to help cure our issues.”

Harvard’s medical establishment is shocked at the governor’s presumed obscurantism in the face of scientific progress. Robert Lanza, medical director of Advanced Cell Technology, a firm that will profit handsomely once this Pandora’s Box is opened, called Romney’s position “mind-boggling. He is completely out of step with the scientific and medical community.”

Romney, a Mormon who is perhaps moved by the Judeo-Christian religious code that has undergirded our nation for over two centuries, sees things differently. “Respect for human life is a fundamental element of a civilized society,” Romney said to Travaglini in a letter.

Cloning is not a partisan issue. Last month, Senator Mary Landrieu (D-La.) signed on as a cosponsor of the Human Cloning Prohibition Act, sponsored by Sam Brownback (R-Kan.). Last July, the House passed its version of the bill, 265-162. Earlier this month, the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution opposing all forms of human cloning. (It will be interesting to see if those who usually tout the moral and normative authority of the UN will listen this time.)

When it comes to a fundamental issue like cloning, just because we can do something doesn’t mean we should do something. Time-tested religious values can help guide us into moral choices that protect human dignity–considerations about which the scientific community is silent.

Judeo-Christian values, far from being anti-science, laid the foundation for and provided the impetus for the Scientific Revolution. But they also allow us to transcend the cult of the self and use our knowledge wisely to protect basic human dignity for us all–or, to paraphrase the morally tone deaf Schwarzenegger, “to represent the people the best possible way.”

Certainly one basic value, trampled on during the Nazi years and again under threat in our day, is the principle that you do not define one class of humans as of less worth than another. Another is that you don’t use fellow human beings as sources of spare parts without their consent to satisfy the whims and needs of other human beings. As if it needs to be said, human embryos are nascent human beings and have inherent dignity and worth.

“Lofty goals do not justify the creation of life for experimentation or destruction,” Romney rightly said in his letter to Travaglini. “My wife has M.S., and we would love for there to be a cure for her disease and for the diseases of others. But there is an ethical boundary that should not be crossed.”

A Midlife Confession

People tell me that I look young for my age, but there’s no denying that Father Time is beginning to catch up with me. Wrinkles, the occasional white (or is it gray?) hair, and unexplained aches and pains tell me I’m not the kid I used to be. And that’s OK.

The 40s for me have become the decade of not taking things for granted. This plays out in every area of my life, producing in me both a seriousness of purpose and a deeper appreciation for all that God has blessed me with. Nearly every day, I think about the brevity of my remaining time on this earth. As the writer of Ecclesiastes cryptically says, God “has put eternity into man’s heart, yet so that he cannot find out what God has done from the beginning to the end.”

But while I am acutely aware of my mortality, I don’t think that awareness has made me morbid—or all that unusual.

Lord, you have been our dwelling place
in all generations.
Before the mountains were brought forth,
or ever you had formed the earth and the world,
from everlasting to everlasting you are God.

When I was a pimply-faced teen, I didn’t think about my good health, but just assumed it would continue unabated, pain free. But several broken bones later and after struggling with tendonitis and a touch of arthritis, I’ve learned to be thankful for my physical wellbeing.

And to nurture it. For the past year I’ve forsaken my sedentary lifestyle (an occupational hazard for writers) and been faithfully swimming for exercise. Because there is a history of cancer in my family, I have been more insistent with my doctor about certain issues, and I have begun to take some dietary supplements that might improve my chances.

These actions don’t reflect fear of what might happen so much as a desire to take control of my health and do the most with what I have. And physically, though I will never match my modest athletic accomplishments when I was in high school, I feel better than I have in years.

You return man to dust
and say, “Return, O children of man!”
For a thousand years in your sight
are but as yesterday when it is past,
or as a watch in the night.

There is no guarantee of physical health for any of us. I have seen increasing numbers of friends and colleagues struggle with cancer (sometimes repeatedly). One is coping with a rare, life-threatening blood disorder. Two people I knew and respected died unexpectedly after surgery. I’ve heard heart-breaking stories of neighbors whose children drowned in a bathtub or dropped dead in school. Every day, crime takes the lives of people who deserve to live every bit as much as I do.

You sweep them away as with a flood; they are like a dream,
like grass that is renewed in the morning:
in the morning it flourishes and is renewed;
in the evening it fades and withers.

The numbers can be downright alarming. According to the National Center for Health Statistics, some 2.4 million people died in the United States during 2002, or 845 for every 100,000 in population. (That’s uncomfortably close to one in 100.) For white males in my age range, the news is a little better. The death rate for us is a shade over 287 per 100,000. But in five years, it will be 420; in ten, 601. Then the slope toward death gets awfully slippery. In 30 years, it will be 3,469; in 45 years, it becomes 16,473.

For we are brought to an end by your anger;
by your wrath we are dismayed.
You have set our iniquities before you,
our secret sins in the light of your presence.

When I was young (note the past tense), the future stretched out like an endless horizon. Anything seemed possible—from being a professional football player to an artist. Experience and gifts, however, have taken me in completely different directions, not all of them expected. Yet I have come to trust the hand of Providence in my life, gently but firmly guiding me to places of provision, growth, and service. But while I trust in God’s sovereignty, I freely confess that my path is sometimes difficult. Life is not easy, nor was it meant to be. Thus, the need to appreciate and cherish the things we have.

For all our days pass away under your wrath;
we bring our years to an end like a sigh.
The years of our life are seventy,
or even by reason of strength eighty;
yet their span is but toil and trouble;
they are soon gone, and we fly away.
Who considers the power of your anger,
and your wrath according to the fear of you?

My kids have a sense of limitless possibilities before them. One wants to be a missionary; another hopes to work on railroads. A year from now, who knows what they will contemplate? They often envision multiple careers, not quite grasping that to say Yes to one thing necessarily means saying No to another. We don’t correct them. To do so would only dampen their joy.

My oldest son, who is approaching 7, wakes up each morning with an utterly innocent grin on his face. He’s not afraid of what the day may bring, though at his age tears are common. I seek to emulate his response to each new sunrise, not looking too far ahead and living fully in the present.

So teach us to number our days
that we may get a heart of wisdom.
Return, O LORD! How long?
Have pity on your servants!

Time with our children is not assured. We don’t know whether they will grow up and provide us with grandchildren to bounce on our knee. Each day is a gift to be opened and enjoyed fully on its own terms. Don’t wait for your kids to reach a certain level of maturity before you enjoy them. Relish each moment. Don’t take them for granted.

Teens and 20-Somethings see the future as an unending expanse. Yet that expanse starts to shrink just a bit when you hit your 40s. Instead of having 50 or 60 years ahead to explore the world, choose a mate, find a calling, and raise children, you may only have 30 or 40 (if that)—and many of the big decisions have already been made: college, career, spouse, where you live, children. You have fewer options now; you must make the best of the judgments already made. The 40s bring a new sense of limits.

Satisfy us in the morning with your steadfast love,
that we may rejoice and be glad all our days.
Make us glad for as many days as you have afflicted us,
and for as many years as we have seen evil.

Part of this gladness involves narrowing our choices, discarding the merely good for the essential, given the short time we have. God doesn’t owe us anything, certainly not tomorrow. We are not promised a certain allotment of years. Each new dawn is a gift of grace, to be enjoyed and used for God’s glory.

As I have moved into what is politely called “middle age,” I’ve decided that people—who, after all, are so significant that the Son of God died for them—are of more value than money, status, power, or selfish pleasure. While I still have definite professional goals, in light of eternity, the relationships I have are looming ever larger on my horizon.

When I reach the end of my earthly life, I don’t think I will much care whether I wrote another book or attained a certain income. I will, however, care deeply about the people I am leaving behind. For the rest of my life (however long or short), before I see Him who tasted death for me, I want them to be my focus. And along the way, basking in the rays of my coming sunset, I will joyfully refuse to take my blessings for granted.

Let your work be shown to your servants,
and your glorious power to their children.
Let the favor of the Lord our God be upon us,
and establish the work of our hands upon us;
yes, establish the work of our hands!

(Psalm 90, ESV)