When Jesus was a young boy, the Gospel of Luke indicates that he traveled to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover with His family. As they were returning, his parents did not realize Jesus stayed behind in the Temple listening and asking questions of the teachers. His wisdom and knowledge amazed those in the Temple. As a young twelve-year-old lad, Jesus was developing intellectually, physically and socially. Although he was the immutable God, he was also fully human and subject to the developmental aspects of humanity. In studying the life of Christ, one is able to see certain milestones that are common to everyone. Evaluating one’s own cognitive and social maturation can prove a healthy experience. It allows one to introspect as well as evaluate according to the universal milestones. Modern theories of developmental psychology assist in this endeavor. For the Christian, balancing these theories against the backdrop of scripture is crucial. God has created a developmental process that is common to all humanity; nevertheless, Christians find themselves in the social, intellectual, and spiritual tension that exists between this world and the world that is to come.
Erik Erikson is a neo-freudian known for his research in the field of psychosocial development. His studies of children led to conclusions that identity is formed through a series of personal psychosocial conflicts. Erikson felt that the inherent drives within people caused them to confront certain developmental conflicts between positive and negative alternatives. He concluded there were at least eight stages from birth through old age in which individuals seek to achieve balance between two opposing alternatives. “Each conflict has its own time for emerging as dictated by both biological maturation and the social demands that developing people experience at particular points in life” (Shaffer 2005, 40). Erikson felt that one could not bypass any of the stages; rather, each stage was preparatory for the next.
The first stage of Erikson’s developmental order is trust versus mistrust. This conflict happens in the first year of life and is directly related to the experience of the child to their primary caregiver. In this stage, the maternal relationship is primary. Erikson believed that children whose basic life needs were consistently met would have a stronger sense of trust of others and the world around them. Conversely, children who had basic life needs erratically met were more likely to be distrusting of family, peers and society. The second stage is autonomy versus shame and doubt. This stage occurs between the ages of one and three when children are learning to assert their independence. A healthy sense of autonomy can develop in this stage if children are encouraged to make choices and begin caring for themselves in appropriate ways. Shame, doubt, and low self-esteem develop if the child is overly criticized for choices made or feels inadequate in their ability to survive.
The third stage of Erikson’s developmental theory is initiative versus guilt. Children usually work through this conflict between ages three and six. They are able to utilize their imagination and intellect to develop games, imitate adult vocations, and plan social activities. “Successful resolution of this crisis requires a balance: the child must retain a sense of initiative and yet learn not to impinge on the rights, privileges or goals of others” (Shaffer 2005, 41). The fourth stage is industry versus inferiority. During this stage of life, which begins from age six through puberty, the child seeks to develop skills to see projects and ideas to completion. Parents, teachers and extended family will find encouragement and support will help children achieve a sense of confidence in their abilities. Children who are not encouraged will find themselves grappling with issues of inferiority and may not reach their full potential.
During adolescence, children encounter the fifth crises in Erikson’s model: identity versus role confusion. This turbulent time in the child’s life includes many different chemical and biological changes. Lasting until the early twenties, children in this stage seek to form an individual identity. It is during this time that individuals struggle with life goals and vocational direction. This stage leads into the intimacy versus isolation crisis encountered from the twenties through ones early forties. Erikson theorized that during this time-period individuals most often struggled with forming a few significant relationships. In this stage, people marry, have children and develop life-long friendships. If one fails to develop significant bonds with others they may perpetually struggle with isolation.
The crisis of generativity versus stagnation occurs during middle adulthood. Those who face this stage are often seeking to contribute to younger generations. They have already established meaningful relationships and are now seeking to leave an honorable heritage. It is in this stage that one most often encounters the “mid-life crisis.” The final stage of Erikson’s model is ego integrity versus despair. This stage is highly-contemplative and can yield significant satisfaction if one feels they have lived a successful life. Those who are overcome with a sense of guilt for past failures often find themselves feeling despondent and hopeless.
According to chronology, I am currently in the intimacy versus isolation psychosocial crisis. In studying Erikson, I can identify with his thoughts and theories for this stage of adult development. In western culture, sexual intimacy is the seen as the primary, if not only type of intimacy between two people. Erikson, as well as many modern developmental theorists, realized that intimacy requires more than sex. Personally reflecting on current and past relationships, I have found myself to seek a deeper bond of biblical intimacy with the Lord, my wife and significant peers in my life. While this process has been occurring over the last few years, it seems to have intensified in the last several months.
It is noteworthy that Jesus’ life-work primarily occurred when he was in the age range in which one wrestles with this particular crisis. His words to the Pharisees in response to their questions about the greatest commandment were poignant. he said, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, you shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 22: 37-40). Eriksonian thinking submits that a healthy identity is formed in the young adult years through significant relationships. Understanding this in light of Jesus’ statements on the greatest commandments, one can conclude that relationship with God, self and others is the primary means by which one can successfully emerge from the intimacy versus isolation crisis.
The scriptures indicate that man’s understanding of God is limited, yet evolving. God is consistent and never changing even though the revelation of the fullness of His glory to an individual is usually progressive. This concept is borne out in the Old and New Testaments. At this stage of life, I am currently in the midst of vocational and geographical transition. Having served almost eight years as a secondary leader in the local church, I have learned much about the body of Christ and ministry. Nonetheless, the Lord has desired for me to pursue a deeper relationship with him. In some respects, I allowed full-time ministry to isolate me from experiencing zeal for communion with Christ. The Lord has asked me to relinquish some personal relationships, service in an amazing local church and living in an area in which I enjoy in order to more passionately pursue him. While this major life transition seems significant, the renewed intimacy with the Lord has had profound implications on my spiritual life.
Jesus understood that for one to love God and others effectively, one must possess a healthy self-love. Modern-day Christians often seem to struggle between the extremes of self-abasement and prideful ambition. Often individuals wrestle with both of these opposites in various areas of their life. Through reading the scriptures and the ministry of the Holy Spirit, I have seen how often I would strive to achieve intimacy in relationships through pleasing others instead of pleasing the Lord. In speaking with the Pharisees, Jesus indicated that their belief in him as the Messiah was impossible because they did not seek glory from God, rather they sought glory from men. he said “How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God?” (John 5:44). If one desires to please others before the Lord, ones life essentially lacks belief in him as Creator and Sustainer.
Jesus’ words in Matthew 22 addressed one’s self-perception, one’s perception of God and one’s relationship with others. As one matures, primary relationships often narrow. Whereas a teenager may have many friends, someone in their thirties usually will have a narrow base of significant relationships. God has provided my wife as the foremost relationship I have. As our marriage has matured, we have grown closer in our walk with Christ and one another. God has given us similar hopes and dreams from which to build intimacy and a strong family. Erikson felt that through this stage of life one would seek to “achieve a sense of love and companionship” (Shaffer 2005, 41). God has provided for my wife and me to progressively achieve this unity through spiritually, socially and intellectually sharing one with another. We have established a high-level of intimacy in that we feel safety with one another.
Erikson felt that intimacy was also developed through relationship with one’s peers. God has provided two other ministers with whom I can discuss and share personal challenges and successes. Most of our conversations are electronic or via telephone. While this has proved to be an adequate means of developing significant peer relationships, there are limitations because we are not in geographical proximity. In local church ministry, I have found it sometimes challenging to develop personal relationships wherein open sharing is routine. Serving in a secondary leadership role, I often feel pressure from those over me in leadership not to share certain challenges of ministry and feel pressure from those to whom I minister to be open about difficulties. As the Lord transitions us into another phase of ministry, I trust this limitation will be minimized.
The Nation of Israel was destined to be in the promised land. God’s goal was to move them out of Egypt, through the Red Sea, across the Jordan and right into Jericho. The only bottleneck was when they failed to believe. For them, the distance between their deliverance and eventual unbelief was only a few weeks at most. How often are we forced to remain in the wilderness of discontent because we have lost the hope of promise of God?
