I’m finished. The dissertation is done. When I walked out of the conference room of the bottom floor of Asbury Seminary’s Beeson Center last Friday afternoon, I felt like I had finished a marathon. Actually, I felt much better and more fulfilled.

• The committee saying yes was similar to me crossing a finish line.
• I will get a diploma instead of a shiny medal.
• My title is doctor instead of finisher.
• It took five years and not three hours.
• And I could even walk without pain the next day.
  

Many of you have asked about my paper. The official title is quite lengthy: The Use of Humor in Preaching and Its Relationship with Ethos, Relational Solidarity, and Affective Learning. In the early chapters I looked at the history, psychology, and philosophy of humor; I investigated the use of humor in the Bible; I developed a theology of humor; and I examined humor as studied in homiletics and communication theory. I discussed my research project in later chapters. In this research, I gathered information from hundreds of participants from five churches who filled out a ninety question survey about their pastor. With the help of a friend who is an actuary and an economist, I quantitatively measured correlations and regressions between the humor of the preacher, the relationship between the preacher and the listeners, the ethos of the preacher, and the affective learning of the congregations. In the final chapter, I made recommendations to preachers based on my written and numerical research. Although the paper is over 150 pages, I drew a pretty simple conclusion:

The review of literature discusses how the effective use of sacred humor can be used to build ethos, relational solidarity, and affective learning. The research project demonstrated what the review of literature suggests: Humor is potentially a very effective way to build a comfortable and unrestrained relationship of mutual confidence between preachers and congregations. The effective use of sacred humor also enables preachers to build ethos with their congregations and move the congregations to deeper levels of affective learning. Although the perceived humor orientation of the preachers and relational solidarity between the preachers and the listeners were important, the perceived ethos of the preachers demonstrated to be the highest predictor of affective learning. No substitute exists for the character, competence, caring, and compassion of the speaker.

I want to thank you as a congregation. You have been so supportive of me (and patient with me) as I worked on this project. I literally worked hundreds of hours on researching, compiling, writing, revising, and editing the paper. This has meant, at times, I have not been able to be the pastor I hope to be someday. Thanks for your understanding and encouragement. I am looking very forward to the next season of my life where I can give more attention to my family and to God’s Church.

Amber, Benjamin, David, and I will be driving to Kentucky next month where I graduate on May 22nd from the Asbury Theological Seminary with a doctorate in Church Leadership and Biblical Preaching. Your prayers and understanding have made this dream a reality for me. Thanks so much!

The best is yet to come…

Craig