What have I done this week?

I'm on vacation this week and have really not done anything to speak of. That's good and that's bad at the same time. It's good sometimes to do nothing, but at the same time I wanted to do something this week.

I have had some time to read, and yesterday, I read about half a book in a few hours time. This time I picked a book from my random stack of unread books. Some of these books were given to me by a friend from a publisher back at a book convention in February. I do have some books from work. I have some books that I've bought or used gift cards to get. (But, no one has paid me for any reviews, in case you were wondering FTC.)

My random selection was When the Day of Evil Comes by Melanie Wells. This is a book that I was given from Melissa at Multnomah. She gave me books 1 & 3 on purpose because now that I have read book 1, I have to buy book 2. (Should I wait to see if I get an Amazon gift card later this month for my birthday?)

Product description:

Bizarre Encounter Initiates Extreme Spiritual Battle

Dylan Foster’s carefully constructed, orderly world begins to fray, thread by thread, the day the eyes of hell turn upon her. After a chance encounter with a creepy, sickly looking stranger, her days become punctuated with disturbing, inexplicable events. Desperate for answers, Dylan seeks not only to extricate herself from the nightmare, but to separate the spiritual from the earthly, friend from foe, angel from devil, good from evil. She’s smack in the eye of the battle with only God-issued spiritual armor and her own wits to protect her.

I saw the first fly alight on the edge of my plate during supper. This was no ordinary fly. It was huge. The size of a small Volkswagen. I could have painted daisies on it and sold rides to small children.

School is back in session, but for psychology professor Dylan Foster, the promise of a new semester is dying in the heat of the late Texas summer. First, there is the bizarre encounter with a ghastly pale stranger. Then her mother’s engagement ring turns up—the same ring that was buried with her mother two years before.

Soon, Dylan’s carefully ordered world is unraveling, one thread at a time. A former patient accuses her of impropriety, putting her career in jeopardy. A suicide plunges her deeper into shadow. Relationships with colleagues start to crumble. And then there are those flies in her house...

Dylan Foster is about to get a crash course in spiritual warfare—and a glimpse of her own small but significant role in a vast eternal conflict. But when the dust settles, will anything be left of her life as she knows it?

My thoughts:

Angels/demons and spiritual warfare are not normally subjects I go for. Some parts might even be considered kind of creepy. However, I think what hooked me more than the storyline was the characters. Dylan kind of reminds me of myself in a way, in a smart-aleck-speaks-her-mind kind of way.

Then there is the funeral home director, David, with a great sense of humor. Actually one the funeral directors I know has a sense of humor - probably have to. One of the funniest characters is fellow psychologist, John. But it's funny at his expense funny.

In the end, there were parts that were still unresolved - thus the need for books 2 & 3, I suppose. I've found a great deal on Amazon for The Soul Hunter, it's just a matter of whether or not I'm going to wait until after my birthday.

Actually, I'm considering going to Dallas tomorrow for the heck of it, so maybe I'll wander by a bookstore. For more info about the author and series, visit www.melaniewells.com.

The Last Song

There are a few authors that I run out and buy their books when they come out - or hope they release close enough to November (my birthday) or December (Christmas) so that someone will buy them for me.

Did you catch that FTC? I bought this book that I'm talking about on my blog. Oh, wait. Technically, my mom bought it when we made a stop at Barnes and Noble in September, and Paige, Peyton and I all got a book that day. I had planned to buy it myself, but Mom paid for it. The point is, someone PAID for this book. (I just have to be sort of snarky about this because some people do buy the books they talk about.)

The story description:

#1 bestselling author Nicholas Sparks' new novel is at once a compelling family drama and a heartrending tale of young love.

Seventeen year old Veronica "Ronnie" Miller's life was turned upside-down when her parents divorced and her father moved from New York City to Wilmington, North Carolina. Three years later, she remains angry and alientated from her parents, especially her father...until her mother decides it would be in everyone's best interest if she spent the summer in Wilmington with him. Ronnie's father, a former concert pianist and teacher, is living a quiet life in the beach town, immersed in creating a work of art that will become the centerpiece of a local church.

The tale that unfolds is an unforgettable story of love on many levels--first love, love between parents and children -- that demonstrates, as only a Nicholas Sparks novel can, the many ways that love can break our hearts...and heal them.

Audra talking again:

Nicholas Sparks rarely writes a stinker. Actually, Message in a Bottle might be the only one. At least I didn't like that one. I didn't read that one for a long time having heard that it wasn't his best.

The Last Song definitely wasn't a stinker. I think that more so in this book than most any of his others, Sparks included characters you loved, characters that were hard to like at times though they grew on you, and characters you hated. While some parts were predictable (you know relationships will work themselves out - and of course someone has to die - you know that 90% of the time either a character or a beloved dog dies) there's some things that work out differently than you would expect them to.

It's a great lesson in forgiveness and things not always being what they seem.

Though every Sparks book is clean, this one had more of a spiritual aspect than any of his previous books. It's more in the lines of Christian fiction than his other releases.

I will reveal one thing that I am so thankful that I did not know before I read this book because it really might have ruined it for me. Tonight as I was getting ready to post, I looked at the author's website to copy and post the book description and get the book cover. The website included some background about how the story developed.

WARNING: If you cannot stand Hannah Montana, stop reading right now.

From the bio section of http://www.nicholassparks.com/:

"In August 2008, I learned that Miley Cyrus was interested in the possibility of working with me, and after meeting with executives at Disney, I agreed to write a screenplay entitled The Last Song. Between those three tours, I worked on the screenplay throughout the fall, completing the first draft in December 2008, and the final polish in January 2009. After that, I immediately began writing the novel of the same name. It's odd, I know. Usually, screenplays are adapted from novels (not the other way around) but since I was responsible for both and scheduling necessitated that the film begin shooting in the summer of 2009, I had no other choice. The Last Song, which is both a love story and a coming of age novel, was completed in June 2009, right around the time that filming began."

And the FAQ section: What was your inspiration for The Last Song?

I hadn’t written a younger love story since A Walk to Remember and, as I was kicking around ideas for my next book, I received a phone call from Jennifer Gipgot, a producer associated with Disney (and the sister of Adam Shankman, who’d directed A Walk to Remember). She said that Miley Cyrus loved A Walk to Remember, and that she wanted to do something in the same vein. After meeting with Jennifer, Adam, and the Cyrus family a few weeks later, I had some ideas about writing a coming of age story where the two lead characters would be forced to spend time together, but I also wanted to include a story that adults could relate to. And somehow, I came up with the idea of sea turtles, so I agreed to write both the screenplay and the book for The Last Song.

Audra again:

I really liked the book, but I don't know that I could have gotten through 390 pages of picturing Miley Cyrus as Ronnie with that goofy slouch and those utterly ridiculous facial expressions. I'm telling you right now, I would have gone nuts.

"The Best of Both Worlds" song is going through my head with the mere mention of Miley Cyrus. A couple of weeks ago I was trying to pick out songs for the girls to listen to from my i-Pod. What I picked for Paige and Peyton were easy for their own reasons. Madison asked me if I had any Miley Cyrus on my i-Pod. I informed her that there would never be any Miley Cyrus or Hannah Montana on my i-Pod. She informed me it was the same person. DUH!

I have got to get some other song into my head or I'm going to have nightmares tonight.

OH, I know what I will do. Speaking of Adam Shankman, I'll go back and watch So You Think You Can Dance from last night. When he did his falling out of his chair thing, I had to go back and watch it over and over again. Now that they have him as a permanent judge, can we please, please, please get rid of Mary Murphy? She and Miley Cyrus out to do a show together so that I can never watch it ever. Her voice gets on my nerves more by the season. I think I'll stick to Tivo when it comes to SYTYCD so that skip right through her critiques.

The Potato Chip Story Part 2

My experience as a juror last week confirmed in a very real way that the world is just filled with some stupid people that do stupid things for stupid reasons.

I'll start by explaining the basic facts, and then go further into the details and how the things got truly ridiculous.

On March 25, 2009 at around 5:30 PM, a 20-something-year-old male African American cashier was working the express check out lane at H-E-B. This is the express lane on the south side of the store closest to 7th Avenue in Corsicana, Navarro County, TX next to the produce. (For some reason the exact location of this particular lane was of the utmost importance.)

An 11-year old girl was in line starting to put groceries up on the belt when her mother catches back up with her to check out. In the buggy, there were more than 20 items, and this was the 10 items or less lane. Evidently, there were items towards the front, and items towards the back of the buggy. A number of items were hidden underneath a large package of toilet paper (so the testimony of the clerk goes). The cashier tells the woman and her daughter that they cannot check out in this line because they have too many items. There are lots of people are in line, so they need to go on to another line.

The woman asks for a manager and while the cashier and woman are yah-yahing back and forth, the woman's "husband" walks up munching on potato chips, and asks what the problem is. The "husband" then allegedly says, "I've got a problem with you #*$$@& (a racial slur)." and then proceeds to throw potato chips in the direction of the clerk.

That's the basic situation. There are two charges filed against the defendant.

#1 is disorderly conduct for what was said. This is not the exact legal language, but basically, anything said that can be taken as offensive or vulgar and bring about a response can fall under the category of disorderly conduct.

#2 is class C misdemeanor assault. Assault can be defined as anyone touching you in a way that you find offensive. If someone taps you, and you take it as offensive because you did not want to be tapped, that can be considered assault. They don't have to injure you in anyway. And, they don't have to even touch you. If something that comes from your hands touches someone else, that can be assault.

So, that's what we are trying to decide - beyond a reasonable doubt - not beyond any doubt (because that would be impossible it is explained to us) - if this disorderly conduct and assault occurred.

First witness - a guy standing in line right behind the woman and her 20+ items. He testifies to the exact location of the express lane, the length of the line and than there were more than 20 items. He did hear the offensive language, saw the chips fly, and then got the heck out of Dodge with his two year old daughter because he knew something big was about to happen.

In cross examination, the focus is mainly on whether or not the chips were simply tossed straight in the air or whether or not they were thrown in the direction of the clerk.

Second witness - a refrigeration worker who is employed by company that contracts to H-E-B to do inspections and preventative maintenance on the freezers. He was also in line - just buying a Dr Pepper for his long drive back home to Ft. Worth. He says that the "husband" said something, but he is not sure what came after "I've got a problem with you" though he did see the "husband's" lips move. This guy is about as nervous as the day is long on the witness stand is thankful to get to leave. This is especially the case since evidently his testimony on the stand did not exactly match what he had told the city attorney earlier in the morning in regards to what he heard.

At this point, I guess I better fill you in on what happened on March 25, 2009 after the "husband" throws the chips. The clerk comes around the checkout counter, punches the chip thrower in the cheek and grabs him around the neck, knocking the guy to the ground. The clerk evidently beat the guy pretty mightily.

Up next - the police officer who was called to the scene to investigate. He testifies that no, he did not witness the actual potato chip throwing because he was not there (at the H-E-B on 7th Avenue in Corsicana, Navarro County, TX) at the time, but did talk to witnesses and review the surveillance tape. Enter exhibit 1.

The court clerk inserts the DVD that she gets from the city attorney into the laptop to be projected on the screen. The defense attorney assumes that it is the same footage that he has possession of and he has no objections to the jury viewing said survellience video.

Evidently you had to have special instructions to play this and it plays at fast speed. We have a short recess to see if we can figure out where the technical guy on staff at the city is to see if he can slow this down because at the speed it is going, you barely see the chip toss, but do see the clerk taking out the "husband".

We finally figure out that we have to watch this stupid video frame by frame by frame. Starting with the clerk checking out a man in a baseball cap that stands there the whole time. (I guess to witness trouble.) We finally get to the toss and proceed through clerk coming around the counter, throwing off his apron and doing his prize fighter thing. They fall onto the ground, out of view on the other side of the counter, and on and on frame by frame until the clerk finally gets up and picks up his apron.

Over and over again we back up and watch forward the chips. Do they fall straight down onto the belt? Do we see that white spot over the clerks head that must be a potato chip? Does that not prove they were not thrown straight up in the air but rather in the direction of the clerk to actually hit him? Of course, we can't see his face.

The police officer says the clerk was just defending himself from the potato chip attack. The "husband" was arrested for the assault because he started all this, but he was taken to the hospital to tend to his injuries.

The defense attorney questions the officer about whether or not the police chief changed his mind about who was at fault and so forth and so on, but was evidently making stuff up at this time because the cop didn't know what he was talking about.

You would think this was Law & Order because the city attorney wants to be able to recall most all of the witnesses if need be. What all this really reminded me of is when I was in debate and high school because this just seemed unreal to be listening to all of this.

After the police officer, the clerk came to the stand. We have to watch the survelience video again. Back and forth, frame by frame, with the potato chips flying over his head.

He does testify that he was fired for his part in hitting the "husband".

The defense attorney gives the clerk grief over the fact that the paperwork he signed had the wrong date on it - that it happened on the 28th rather than the 25th. The city attorney objects. The judge explains to us no less than 4 times by the time it's all over with that it was a typographical error that was corrected and amended on additional filings and the charges before us that day. We go around on this pointless stuff forever.

Then, the defense attorney gets on a kick of why the disorderly conduct charge/accuastation of the slur was not filed in March. Or in April, or in May, or in June, or in July, or in August, or in September. It was filed in October. (The attorney proved three times that he knew his months in order because he did this bit during jury selection, during this part, and again in closing arguments. By the third time my eyes almost rolled out of my head.) Then there was some foggy conversation about who called the clerk and told him he should also get the "husband" for the disorderly conduct and who talked to the clerk's mama and so forth and so on. There were a lot of objections thrown in as well.

Finally, after two hours of listening to all this we get a recess. One of the other jurors was annoyed that all this was eating into her nap time. Since she is now retired after running Corny Dog 7 at the mall for 16 years, she takes a nap every day. She also watches Judge Judy daily.

All I can say is that Judge Judy, Judge Joe Brown, or the late great (great according to my late great Nanny) Judge Wapner would have had this baby sewn up in 12 minutes, including commercials and would not have listened to all this mess.

When we get back into the courtroom, I'm telling the rest of the jury (and the judge because he was talking to us) that I was ready to get 'er done. I even had the judge saying it too since he didn't get to have lunch after the speeding ticket trial.

Up next, the "wife". OK, I know you have all been wondering why I keep referring to the "husband" in quotes. You see, I don't think this couple knew what they were to each other. They've been living together for over three years and have a baby together, but evidently weren't married. Yet, reference kept being made about husband or boyfriend and such, and the whole thing was never really cleared up and the attorneys didn't know what to call them. I think it takes 7 years to be common law in the state of Texas, but what do I know.

The "wife" testifies that she had ordered food at the deli that she didn't want to get cold so the daughter was getting in line. When she came up the daughter was putting stuff back in the buggy, and she asked why she was doing it. She says that the items were divided in two parts. She was just going to purchase 10 items and someone else was paying for the rest. I guess her "husband" that was standing in another line talking to someone at the time.

Why his rear wasn't in line to pay for the other 10 items, I don't know. I guess he was going to cut in in line in front of everyone else. AND if they were married, why were they checking out their 10 items separately?

She seemed to be almost in tears as she explained again she didn't want her deli food to get cold. She wanted to talk to a manager, but the clerk would not get a manager. When the "husband" comes up, he asks what was wrong, and after some back and forth, she says the clerk says, "I'm going to kick your $*&#in' ^$$ old man" and "husband" replies back, "bring it" and proceeds to toss his potato chips in the air, not at the clerk. And yes, the chips did land behind the wall behind the clerk, but they went over his head, not at him. The chips could have gone over his head without being thrown in his face.

I think we had to watch surveillence tape again. This whole time, two other women with two children (one was the "husband" and "wife's" child) were wondering in and out of the room. The judge finally told them to sit down and be still or get out. It took him long enough.

Finally, "husband" takes the stand and pretty much collaborates everything "wife" said. Claims he threw them in the air and admits to saying "bring it."

We did watch the surveillence tape again. And he had to put on his glasses and walk up closer to see it. He also testifies that after his beating, he almost died. I doubt that.

The defense attorney gets on a line of questioning as to whether or not "husband" had any black relatives. He did. Because surely, if he had relatives who were black, he would not use the word in question.

After the final testimony, we finally get to closing arguments. While the city attorney does his arguments, the defense attorney's phone rings again. The judge got after him again (he too has had enough of this entire thing). Then the two attorneys got in an "objection" match over whether or not the city attorney was insinuating that the defense took witness number 2 to lunch since he changed his story along the way.

The defense attorney gets up and talks about rational sanity or something. (Like any of this was sane.) He says, "who has ever heard of assault by a p-o-t-a-t-o c-h-i-p before. That we the jury may be written up for the first case ever. That if we found this man guilty of assualt by potato chip in this county, then he didn't think he would want to live in this county.

At this point, the juror to my left couldn't hold her laughter any longer. Neither could I. I had to disguise snorts of laughter with coughs more than once that afternoon. (All the while my dad kept wondering up the hall from his office and by the windows to see if I was still there.)

After 3 1/2 hours, we were finally able to deliberate. As soon as the judge and everyone else left the room, I said, "I have one stupid question that I have to ask. Did this guy ever pay for his potato chips?"

One of the other jurors replied, "I wondered the same thing."

We had no problem agreeing on the assualt charge. We believed he threw them at the clerk, not simply in the air to litter the place like confetti. While we don't know if "the N word" was used for certain, at the very least, he said "bring it" which would have been offensive and be considered disorderly conduct. Each count could only be charged a $500 fine each, and we didn't recommend the max charge in either case.

When the verdict was read back, defense attorney and "husband" rolled their eyes at the "guilty" to assault, but barely blinked at the "guilty" to disorderly conduct. I tend to believe that the "N" word was said.

I didn't get out of there until almost 4:30. Four hours of testimony and arguments about potato chips. I never want to eat or see a potato chip again after all this.

The next time I am summoned to jury duty and the judge asks about insanity, I think I'm going to claim it and explain, "well, yeah, of course I am. I had to serve on the potato chip trial."

I just pray that I don't get summoned for the district court case for the higher class assault charge against the clerk for beating the crap out of the "husband".

Last night at church, the city attorney told me that "husband" and his TV attorney are suing H-E-B becuase it was their employee that beat him. Neither of us thinks they have much of a case.

The Potato Chip Story Part 1

At long last, I'm finally going to tell the jury duty story that I promised would come.

Saturday before last, Mom checked her mail, and a jury summons for me was included in the stack of mail. It had been forwarded from their old address, but I have no idea why the municipal court had that address for me. I've not had anything (driver's license or voter's registration included) with that address on it for over 6 years. I wish the stupid thing had gotten lost in the mail. It had been sent at least a couple of weeks before, and just got to me five days beforehand. If they had hunted me down for not showing up, I would have been able to explain why I didn't get it since I had not lived at the address it was sent to in that many years and my parents didn't even live there anymore.

Municipal court only handles misdemeanors that are punishable by fine. The last time I had a summons for municipal court, it was for the afternoon, so even though this was for the morning, I really believed I would not be there long. In and out and about my merry way.

So, I show up at City Hall for the 8:15 AM start time. Around 8:30, the court clerk finally starts doing a roll call of jurors and seating them in order. Random order that the computer spit out except for the fact that the first 10 last names she read off started all started with an "A". I was seated in position 15. They were picking two juries of 6 people each. Seat #15 wasn't a very good position to be in if they kicked anyone out during the voir dire.

The clerk read off what had to have been between 100-150 names off her list. She read a lot of names. Of all of those names, 34 potential jurors were there. Actually two said weren't eligible before we were seated, so I guess 36 showed up. While a number of those people probably chose to be irresponsible and not show up, I'm pretty sure quite a few of the people had moved and their summons didn't find its way to them. I know for a fact that two of the people on the list had died. Those were just names I recognized and one of those people died in an accident that everyone in town knew about. I guess no one looked over the list ahead of time.

So, we have everyone seated in order. OK, let's take a break. Why? We haven't done anything. Evidently a new listed has to be printed of just the potential jurors there. Dad works at City Hall and wondered down the hall to see if I had gotten stuck yet.

While I admit, that getting out of work for the day wouldn't have been the worst thing in the world, I had things to do since I am off work this week. I just didn't have time for this knowing what I wanted to get done.

Back into the courtroom/city council chambers we go. They are picking for two juries - first up - for a speeding ticket. No jury shuffle required (crap!). The judge goes throw his deal asking if anyone is insane (I thought about raising my hand since that might be subjective). Potential juror #8 is off the hook because he doesn't understand and communicate English very well.

Then, we go through a series of questions. A woman on the front row (potential juror #5) is the mom of a police officer and she says there's no way she's going to be impartial in all honesty. Potential juror #14 answers that she knows city attorney - he served as her husband's attorney in their divorce. Ms. Speed Demon decided that was cause enough to scratch her from the first jury. I know the city attorney too. I go to church with him. Does that get me off?

Once the first jury is selected, I'm eighth in line and know #5 and #14 in front of me probably aren't going to make the second jury either.

After another break (let's get this thing going already!), we get ready for jury #2 to be selected. The defense attorney for this case was a character. Before selection even begins, both attorneys have to talk to the judge more than once. The defense attorney evidently wanted longer to question potential jurors than the city attorney thought he should have because there were some sticky factors.

Once they finally get their time figured out we endure at least 20 minutes from each side questioning the jury. Potential juror #5 still is the mother to a cop and still doesn't feel that she could be impartial. Potential juror #14 is still divorced, but she could be impartial because she was going to divorce the guy regardless of who is attorney was. The kicker though was that she had already heard about some things from this case in the district courtroom the day before from one of the attorneys. That got her off.

As the questions came out, it was evident what some of the factors of the case were. Because there was a racial slur made in the context of one of the charges, and there were two African American women in the front row, you know both of them would not make the jury because the defense attorney would not allow that to happen. My chances of getting on the jury were pretty good.

As they were asking if we knew any of the parties involved, a woman behind me said she was the cousin of one of the witnesses. She said she couldn't be impartial since it was her cousin. If it were me, it would depend on which of my cousins you were talking about. At this point, I was about ready to claim family (something I don't do often with my real family) so that I could get the heck out of there.

This defense attorney had this loud, obnoxious personality that sitcoms are made of. (I later found out that is a "TV attorney", you know the ones that advertise at 2 AM - that explained so much.) He would lean over in an over exaggerated way to hear what the judge was saying to potential jurors like #14 telling what she had overheard the day before. During the vore dire, he let it out that the alleged assault involved potato chips. I could just tell this whole thing was going to be stupid. After the judge had already told everyone to turn their cell phones off, his rang in middle of selection. That did not go over well. He answers, "I can't talk right now," slams it shut and apologizes to the judge.

Evidently, I didn't roll my eyes enough during jury selection. I was the 3rd member selected on the 6 jury panel.

Jury #2 was dismissed at 11 AM to come back at 12:30 PM for the start of the potato chip trial. I was livid. I didn't want to waste my day on a ridiculous case - and it had to be if potato chips were involved.

I begrudgingly went to get lunch, check emails and prepare for an afternoon I was not excited about.

I promise that part 2 of this story gets funnier. It posts in the morning.

Happy dumbest holiday ever

I hate Halloween. There, I said it. I'm a party pooper, I know.

Maybe my hatred for what I consider the dumbest holiday every started as a young child. In kindergarten, my mom did buy me a Strawberry Shortcake costume. I wore it in 1st grade too. It's the only one I ever remember having. (Other than the one time the whole family dressed up as characters from the Wizard of Oz for a church party.)

And as far as Trick-or-Treating, my brother and I only went to about five houses total. I think that's all we were allowed. Halloween never has been my thing.

I just find it utterly ridiculous that people load their kids up in the back of trucks and on trailers to go to neighborhoods of people they don't even know and drop them off to beg for candy.

When I got home a little while ago, I went out to get my mail. A mini-van came by with three teenagers sitting across the back with their legs dangling out of the back door, prepared to open the back door as soon as the car came to a stop.

If you really want candy so bad, they'll have a great sale on it tomorrow at Wal-Mart so that they can switch out the packaging from orange and black with ghosts to red and green with Santa Claus.

Enough of that for now. I have some more interesting things to blog about over the next few days. Have to finish some other things first.

Sacred Friendships

I was honored to be asked by author Bob Kellemen if I would review his latest book Sacred Friendships as a part of his blog tour. And here, you have arrived at the 30th and final stop of the 40-day blog tour.

Back in May, I met Bob after one of his sessions at the Association of Biblical Counselors conference. The title and topic of the book interested me - friendships, soul care (a term I've become more familiar with as I've worked with counselors) and the stories of women - so I agreed.

I am going to share part of a Q&A with the authors rather than an in depth personal review. I have been short on time lately, and have not been able to read as much of the book as I would have liked to before posting. There is a lot of information, so it's a book that you have to take your time to read through. It took me some time to get going. For people interested in church history and counseling topics, this is book that would definitely be of interest to you.

About the book: Celebrate the incredible stories of over fifty amazing Christian women whose lives will change forever how you view women and their ministries. Sacred Friendships gives voice to the voiceless as it narrates how godly women have provided soul care and spiritual direction for the past 2,000 years. It enlightens readers to the often neglected legacy of Christian women and then equips women and men to apply legacy to their lives and ministries today.

What’s the “big idea” behind Sacred Friendships? What would you like readers to take away from it?

Far too often we build our models of ministry by ignoring over half the Christian world—women. The big idea of Sacred Friendships is to give voice to the voiceless by celebrating the legacy of Christian women and by applying that legacy to our ministries today.

We want readers, men and women, to learn from godly women of the faith how to be powerful spiritual friends. Readers will be enriched by the powerful stories of the heroic sisters of the Spirit to apply proven ways to help people find healing hope in the midst of deep pain. They’ll be empowered to help people to find God’s grace for their sins and God’s strength for their journey.

Who should read Sacred Friendships?

I love this question. First, anyone who loves riveting stories of victory snatched from the jaws of defeat should read Sacred Friendships. Susan and I like to think of our roles as “story-tellers”—we share stories from the lives of over 50 remarkable Christian women. If you like a good, true story, read Sacred Friendships.

Second, people might assume that Sacred Friendships is a book only for women. Not true. Susan and I like to say that Sacred Friendships is a gift to women and a gift from women.

As a gift to women, Sacred Friendships puts to rest the lie of Satan that women in church history have been second-class spiritual citizens! Just one example: the famous Church Fathers were mentored by the lesser-known but incredibly gifted Church Mothers. Sacred Friendships encourages and empowers women to realize that as bearers of God’s image they have equal worth, dignity, value, and giftedness as men have. Women young and mature need the message told by these stories—because the world surely is not the place to turn for validation of worth in Christ.

As a gift from women, Sacred Friendships is for men and women—it’s for anyone who learns best by example. Men and women can read Sacred Friendships and glean life-changing skills to empathize with hurting people, to encouraging people with Christ’s sure hope, to exhort people by speaking the truth in love, and to equip people to tap into Christ’s resurrection power.

You use a historic model of ministry as a map to tap into the resources of women in ministry. That map includes four “compass points” in the personal ministry of the word: “sustaining, healing, reconciling, and guiding.” What do each of these look like in real life ministry?

That question is vital to the main purpose of Sacred Friendships. Some books write about church history. A few focus on women in church history. Some highlight women counseling women. We took the daring and unique step of writing about the history of how women ministered personally to others, and then drawing implications for today. To do that, we followed a church history model of ministry.

In church history, there are four road map markers for what today we call “counseling.” They are known as sustaining, healing, reconciling, and guiding. These four themes become like compass points on a map guiding us toward biblical soul care and spiritual direction.

Sustaining is like modern-day empathy where we say to a hurting friend, “It’s normal to hurt.” I like to use the somewhat macabre analogy of climbing in a casket. When the Apostle Paul was hurting in 2 Corinthians 1:8, he spoke of such agony that he “despaired even of life. Indeed, in our hearts we felt the sentence of death.” Far too often, as Christians we refuse to let people go there—we want to race them to healing before we join them in hurting. Our women forebears climbed in the casket.

Of course, we don’t want to remain in the casket! So healing is the next road map marker. Healing says, “It’s possible to hope.” I like to use the picture here of celebrating the empty tomb. Paul said it this way, “But this happened so that we might not rely on ourselves but on God who raises the dead” (2 Corinthians 1:9). Healing moves with people from casket-like pain to resurrection power. It empowers people to move beyond the suffering to healing hope.

If sustaining and healing move us from hurt to hope, then reconciling and guiding offers us God’s grace for our disgrace. Some models of counseling only focus on suffering, others only on sin. True biblical counseling and historical soul care and spiritual direction focus on both. In reconciling we say, “It’s horrible to sin, but wonderful to be forgiven.” This is where confronting sin, repentance, forgiveness, and grace are all crucial. And the women of Sacred Friendships were not timid about confronting sin!

The final compass point is guiding. With guiding we say, “It’s supernatural to mature.” Here brothers and sisters in Christ help one another to apply Christ’s changeless truth to their changing times. It is the mutual application of biblical principles to daily life issues and relationships. The women of Sacred Friendships were exemplary mentors and we learn so much about spiritual direction from them.

How can people get in touch with you and how can they learn more about your ministry and about Sacred Friendships?

I (Bob) can be contacted by email at: rpm.ministries@gmail.com

A free sample chapter of Sacred Friendships is available at: http://bit.ly/1S1haj
And also can be found at: http://www.rpmbooks.org/documents/Sacred_Friend_Sample_Chapter.pdf

Sacred Friendships is on sale at 40% off for $12.99 at: http://bit.ly/MG1l5
Or simply by going to orders at: http://www.rpmministries.org/

People can also order at Susan’s new website: http://www.eternalcommunity.org/

They can send me an invitation, then we'll see from there

That was actually what a high school classmate said when I warned him there were murmurings of a class reunion. He was not any more excited about the prospect than I was when the subject came up.

I HATED high school. In fact, I say that I could have been voted most hated in my high school class. More on that later. That's a teaser for a future blog entry.

Have to take care of some things right now. Just hold on and I'll tell more, even if it comes whlie I am on vacation next week.