 |
I've been thinking about modesty a bit.
Partly, it's the season. With summer arriving here in America, so arrive the summer clothes and summer questions. What is modest? Does a tank top qualify? How short makes shorts too short? What about swimsuits? Although I'm eternally grateful for whoever figured out that swim shorts weren't just for men, are my swim shorts and tankini top really modest?
Sometimes I get frustrated on the lack of agreement among believers about what is modest and what is not. Can't we just develop the "Seven Simple Rules of Modest Dressing" so that I can shop and be done with it? Instead, it feels like the Christian attitude towards modesty often mirrors Justice Potter Stewart's Supreme Court argument about pornography: "I know it when I see it." In our case, we can't tell you what's necessarily modest, but we know immodest when we see it.
But I found some clarity on this issue when I read a recent article titled "The Single Woman and the Modesty of Personal Restraint" by Lydia Brownback. In the article, Brownback encourages us to examine the modesty of our actions:
"... [I]mmodesty deals with a lot more than revealing too much skin. We are just as prone-if not more so-to overexpose what's under our skin. Revealing too much about ourselves is immodest too.
Sharing confidences and personal experiences with someone forms a bond... If we share a little bit with someone and all goes well, it seems safe to share more, and before we know it, a bond has formed. This can be a great blessing, but when we allow it to happen in the wrong context, it is unwise, and great hurt can result."
Brownback goes on to offer some practical advice on how single women can relate to single men, to married men and "modesty of speech."
My real take-away from the article, though, came from this section:
"There is a time and place to open up and share our sin struggles and personal concerns, and if we are careful to apply Peter's words about the modesty of personal restraint, we will be wise not only about the time and the place, but also about the people we choose to share our hearts with."
A time and place. That's really, I thought, what modesty is about. It's about a time and a place.
Rather than rules and regulations, that phrase sums up an attitude. An attitude of waiting until appropriate. There is a time and a place for intimate conversation between a woman and a man. There is a time and a place to share the intimacy of our bodies. For both, it's marriage.
Modesty, then, isn't about prudishness or hang-ups or an aversion to sex. It's not about, though I'd still love to have them, rules.
Modesty is an attitude that acknowledges and affirms that intimacy and sex are wonderful in their God-given context. It's women and men who are willing to wait for that time and that place and who refuse to "hint" and "flirt" with that intimacy prematurely.
I was perusing a new blog, Girls Gone Wise, and found a really interesting article by Carolyn McCulley (a frequent Boundless contributor) titled, "Single and Fully Feminine."
In the article, Carolyn shares her struggle to determine exactly what biblical femininity looks like as a single woman. "Because the Lord made the woman to be a helper, the contours of biblical femininity are usually sculpted through relationships with others - as wife, mother, daughter, sister, aunt. Though I am definitely a daughter, sister, and aunt, I am not (yet) a wife or mother. But I know that God created me female in his own image, and that he has given me this gift of singleness in this season of my life. These are not mutually exclusive concepts, but sometimes I still wrestle with how to express them both to the glory of God."
Carolyn writes about how hearing a series on Titus 2 made her realize something -- of the seven qualities that Paul urges older women to teach to younger women in Titus 2, only two of those are exclusively for married women (love your husband and be subject to him) and one for mothers (love your children). "That leaves at least four for all women, married or single. Despite my marital status, I was to be self-controlled, pure, busy at home, and kind."
I could really relate. Because Titus 2 includes instructions about husbands and children, I've often thought of it as instructions to young wives and young mothers. Or, even, as something to learn for a future life as a wife or mother. But, as Carolyn points out, there are instructions there for all young women, right here, right now. Self-control. Purity. An orientation toward and work within the home. Kindness. But Carolyn doesn't stop there. She writes that just because she is not a wife and mother (yet), there are still things to learn in the other three qualities.
"Love your husband": Carolyn points out that "because of all the worldly junk [she] had imbibed on the topics of feminism and relationships," she felt it important to read books and attend seminars on a biblical view of marriage. Not only does this bless a possible future husband, she writes, but it has practical purposes now: "I believe I can serve my married sisters best by shoring up their marriages. In our conversations and with my observations of their lives, I want to be able to help my married friends think biblically about their marriages and to think the best of their husbands. To unbelievers, I want to be prepared to explain the mystery of Christ and the church in the institution of marriage."
"Love your children": Carolyn writes, "Whether or not we actually give birth, women are called to nurture the new life around us in various ways. Before I became a Christian, I was not very interested in children. I assumed I might have children one day, but I was oblivious to the children around me and did not care to spend any time with them. This is one area where God has made a tremendous change in my life. Over the years, I have had rich relationships with many children. The Lord has also given me evangelism opportunities with children."
And though Carolyn doesn't address submission, I know I could have benefitted greatly when single by really wrestling with specific passages in the Word that speak about the different roles of women and men.
The article was an effective reminder that Titus 2 is talking to all of us.
We published an article by Lauren F. Winner this past week that, frankly, does not apply to most of our male Boundless readers. Most of the men who read Boundless Webzine and participate on The Line are on a trajectory toward godly manhood, and don't fit the gamer boy stereotype offered in Winner's article.
Essentially, Winner argued in "Mind The Gap" that the lack of male leadership and involvement evident in colleges and in church is largely the result of the slacker gaming culture. Relevant sentences:
Regardless of what we say we think about women and leadership, when it comes to college-aged and 20-somethings, women are leading in all sorts of areas....
It's not just in the ranks of church volunteers that women are outshining men. According to a recent cover story in The Chronicle of Higher Education, women are outpacing men on college campuses, too. More women than men are attending college, and once they get there, women get better grades and devote more time to civic activities and serving in leadership positions in campus organizations. At graduation time, women also bring home more awards and honors than men....
Men devote far more time than women to playing computer games. Men also exercise more and watch more TV, and are more likely to oversleep and miss class....
I found the article to be both encouraging and depressing: I think it's good news for women, who, studies show, were being edged out by men in college classrooms as recently as 15 years ago. And I think it's good news that female high school students are excelling, taking college prep classes, going to college and doing well once they get there.
But it's not such great news for society that so many in college take video games more seriously than studying....
So, if more women are getting into the habit of working hard, volunteering and leading civic activities, and more men are getting into the habit of applying themselves to Wii, then it's really no surprise that out there in the real world, the grown-up church world, it's women who seem more willing to shoulder responsibility.
In all honestly, if you found Winner's article to be offensive, I'd understand why. It tends to make sweeping generalizations about men and about women. The tone is a bit on the cynical side. It offers few legitimate solutions. Why did I publish it, then? Because the facts remain that percentage-wise, women are more involved than men in community leadership roles, at least in university and church.
I think that's a real problem. And I'd like to see us discuss this.
Our first thoughtful comment is from Mike Theemling, who e-mailed me the following:
* * *
I agree that there is a definite gender gap in both the academic realm and the church realm. I haven't heard much more than anecdotal evidence myself regarding church volunteering, but news outlets have reported the gender gap in academic achievement. I do agree with the author's thesis that the two areas (academic performance and lack of volunteerism) are related.
I sensed this gap when I attended high school. All throughout my HS years, only three males consistently made the High Honor Roll. Myself, a friend of mine, and one other guy we didn't know. The rest on the list included about a dozen women (who also happened to be on student council and involved heavily in extracurricular activities). In my graduating class I was the only male in the top 10.
There's a lot of debate as to the causes of this phenomenon. I believe that there isn't one specific cause, but rather a number of factors such as cultural expectations, economic considerations, and so on. My own personal theory is that the two largest causes of this trend are 1) the lack of strong fatherly role models in a boy's life, and 2) the lack of societal pressure on young males to achieve academically (e.g., oppression whether real or perceived, culture not glorifying academics, etc.).
Up until the last 20 to 30 years, most families were of the "nuclear" sort (two parents and kids). Now, there are many more single parent homes with the usual head of household being a woman, with the highest single parent households in the African American and Latino demographic groups. According to some studies, the most important indicator of academic achievement — regardless of gender or even economics — is whether or not both parents live at home.
True, this assertion is sometimes disputed and there are plenty of counterexamples (I've found many other studies which seem to contradict each other; some say that just having a mother is the most important, some say that the "two parent" benefit is greatly exaggerated, etc.). Indeed it is a complex beast, but very few would outright dismiss that having two parents living at home is preferred and more beneficial to a child's wellbeing than just one.
Consider that since many single-parent households are headed by a woman, conventional wisdom says a boy would lack a "father figure," and thus would tend not to step up and take the lead either academically or culturally (again, some dispute this claim). He does not see within his own household that a man needs to "provide for the family" (he only sees a woman doing it) and thus feels consciously or subconsciously that it's perfectly fine to slack off.
On the flip-side, a girl in such a household may see the difficult situation her mother is in and become more motivated to succeed, not wanting to end up like them.
Of course some would say that there are plenty of nuclear families where the sister still outperforms the brother. That is where the second reason may come into play: there is also a distinct lack of societal pressure on young men to succeed.
Young girls are told all the time to "do everything that a man can do," and role models and news stories tend to be of those who are breaking glass ceilings, something which requires academic excellence. However, role models for young men are either largely absent or emphasize less on academic achievement and more on things such as athletics or music. Sometimes there can also be an incentive to fight the "patriarchal societies" that oppress women and may motivate them to work harder to prove themselves (indeed, issues such as the gender pay gap seem to be legitimate grievances). This should not be interpreted however that "it's all feminism's fault." Just because women are more motivated to succeed does not mean it "caused" men to become less motivated.
Finally, I think also related to this is the delaying of marriage among young adults (it may be a cause or a symptom of the male achievement gap, or both). Because there is less pressure to get married and have kids at an earlier age, there is less pressure on a man to find a career which can provide for more than just himself. Why then does this only affect men and not women? Perhaps because women realize that when a child is born, more often than not they are the ones who will have to provide for the baby, and thus they are more motivated. I admit this is just speculation though.
As to the solution? The author unfortunately is vague on this point but don't knock her; coming up with viable, concrete solutions is difficult. She criticizes guys spending too much time playing video games, but I don't think video games are the core problem. The core problem is controlling what young men do with their free time. Girls may be naturally more inclined to use it productively, but most boys it seems are not.
I believe the most practical and simple solution, at least for the academic realm, is for a parent to exert more of their God-given responsibility to manage their kids' time. That means making rules limiting TV, Internet, video game use, and so on. That also means making rules (e.g., homework done before play) and consequences for not following those rules.
Benjamin Carson, an African American man raised by a single mother, consistently did poorly in school. People thought he was just plain "stupid." His mother didn't know what to do at first, but then began to make and enforce some rules to help his study habits. Rules like "limiting his television watching and refused to let him go outside to play until he had finished his homework each day. She required him to read two library books a week and to give her written reports on his reading, even though, with her own poor education, she could barely read what he had written."
Because of this, Ben realized he wasn't stupid after all — in fact he became one of the smartest kids in school. He eventually went to become a renown neurosurgeon.
If more parents followed what Ben's mother did, raising their children up to be ready for society rather than trying to "befriend" them, this problem of the male education gap wouldn't be as serious as it is now.
* * *
I'd love to hear what thoughts this article, and Mike's comment, have brought to mind for you.
 In today's Boundless article, Elisabeth Adams tells the truth about her singleness:
I want to be married.
Shouldn't that have happened by now?
At first I ask, How do I change this? Then, as resignation sets in, I wonder, How do I survive singleness? In particularly painful moments, I want to know more: Why should I be contented? Why should I stay the course? Does God see me? Does He even care?
I think most singles can relate to Elisabeth's feelings. I recently wrote an article on a similar topic. In it, I considered this question: "Am I valuable to God in my singleness?" The answer yes. Undeniably. I am chosen by God, eternally loved and redeemed for His purposes.
But feelings are another matter. Elisabeth talks about how her mother and grandmother got early starts on motherhood, while Elisabeth's story will be different. Those are the kinds of realities that can distract and discourage us from living in the moment God has for us today. They can make us wonder if our singleness is a waste. The author reminds us that a useful life — a life that glorifies God — is founded in truth. These truths include:
- I am primarily defined as God's child (with all the blessings and responsibilities that entails), and not as a single woman.
- The area of romance is not outside the realm of discipleship: God will use it to test me and refine me and bring me joy, just as He does with every other facet of my life.
- Painful singleness can be godly singleness. God does not condemn me when I am upset. Those feelings have to go somewhere, and His ear and heart are the safest place.
- Though I'm experiencing a different kind of pain than married people, we are all in the fellowship of suffering.
- I can model true love while I'm single. Every day I continue to walk with Jesus, He gives me opportunity to exchange the "I-wants" stored up in my heart for the happiness of others. Because He loves me so outrageously, I can make a sacrifice, say "My pleasure," and find it is the exact truth.
- Waiting won't stop when I enter a relationship. At each stage of friendship, courtship, and marriage, the future is still God's business. Mine is to habitually counter my imagination with the truth: Who this person really belongs to, what our true relationship is — today — and what true love will do for him as a result.
That is only part of the list Elisabeth provides. Truth is so important at any life stage. And, as the author points out, when we're walking in truth — whether single or married — none of our days is a waste ... not one single day.
As I continue to think and pray about my goals for 2009, I'm buoyed by a story about Boy Scout Shawn Goldsmith who did the unheard of: he earned all 121 merit badges in time for his 18th birthday (the deadline). Tuesday's Boston.com reports: It's an accomplishment the local arm of the organization calls "an almost unheard-of feat." Oceanside resident Shawn Goldsmith earned his final badge -- for bugling ... He far surpassed the 21 badges required to achieve the elite rank of Eagle Scout.
He said he took about five years to earn his first 62 badges and then nearly doubled that number in a matter of months. He did it with the encouragement of his grandmother, who died shortly before he reached his goal.
Speaking of buoys, here's another young man who is showing the rest of us what it looks like to do hard things. What hard things are you planning to do in the new year?
 I really resonated with Elisabeth Adams' Boundless article this week, "His Love Stories." Perhaps it was because my own sister also found her love and got married this year. (Quite literally; my sister and her husband weren't even dating this time last year.)
After sharing the wonderful stories of how God brought together some of her married friends, Elisabeth writes:
It was only because of the mercies of God that, after years of wrestling, I finally relinquished control of my love life to Him. Contrary to my expectations, it had nothing to do with ceasing to care about marriage. Instead I learned to become a living sacrifice: regularly, trustfully pouring out all my longings before Him.
And I am certain He hears. After all, God is "the best maker of all marriages," and I'm convinced that He loves to do it! He brought Eve to Adam. He prompted Eliezer's prayer for guidance, and then answered it by matching Rebekah with Isaac. He arranged for Ruth to "accidentally" bump into Boaz, inspired Naomi when she counseled Ruth to consider this man who seemed so beyond her grasp, and fueled Boaz's determination to finish the matter that very day.
This is a picture of God's heart. This is what He wants to do for all His children. This is what He wants to do for me.
 I'm sure it was no coincidence that Ted chose to publish my article next to Elisabeth's. It has a similar theme: trusting in God's goodness.
Something I pondered as I was writing "Vessel of Honor" was this idea that ever since the Garden of Eden, Satan has been trying to convince us that God is withholding something from us — that He doesn't truly have our best interest at heart. This causes us to grasp at what we want, because we don't trust God to meet our needs. This shortsightedness can cause us to base our contentment on present circumstances because we fail to understand the big picture — that ultimately obedience will be rewarded both in this life and the next (Psalm 73:13-17). Shifting our perspective to an eternal one makes a world of difference.
I think singles must feel more acutely than most that we are "aliens and strangers" in this world (1 Peter 2:11). The thing is, all people long for something more because this earth is not our true home.
And so the gap between single and married is not so wide after all. All of us wait eagerly for our ultimate union with our heavenly Bridegroom. And as we live faithfully — single and married — our very lives proclaim Christ to the world.
I recommend reading Elisabeth's and my articles together. Remember your high calling, child of God. The world needs sons and daughters of God who live like they truly believe.
I'm right in the middle of about half a dozen projects. I can speak from experience that the middle is not so glorious. Generally, I start projects with great gusto. Then the pressure to finish sets in. Sometimes I simply lose motivation and the task sits on the back burner indefinitely. In her article, "The God of the Middle" Stephanie Voiland explores the sometimes-frustration of being stuck in the middle:
In the middle, you don't have the freshness—the hope and adrenaline—that comes with new beginnings. And you don't have the sense of completion or the relief of closure that accompanies the end. In the middle, it's often a matter of trudging ahead, one foot in front of the other—too far from the start to turn back, and too far from the finish line to even know how much further you have to go, let alone to see the light at the end.
While this middle malaise may be experienced in a job, living situation, ministry, education or almost anything, Voiland discusses how it middle-itus impacts her singleness:
I imagine the ending of my single status would be easier than this middle segment too. Not because marriage is easier somehow, but because of the perspective that comes when a chapter is closing. And maybe even more than that, because of the relief in knowing that there is, after all, an ending point to this season. Sometimes I think that's what gnaws at me most about this stage: that it might not be a stage, after all—that this is going to be it, indefinitely, till death do I part. Because, of all the good and gracious things God has promised me, marriage isn't one of those guarantees.
In one of my all-time favorite Boundless articles "A Season of Celibacy," author Jenny Schroedel tells her own story of weathering the "middle." She ended up regretting the anxiety that had plagued her single years:
I wish I’d had the wisdom to define myself as temporarily celibate — not available to men until further notice from God. Soon after my boyfriend and I broke up, I headed to Hawaii to work with a missionary organization. A few weeks later, I met a man with a laundry bag slung over his shoulder. He and I struck up a conversation that lasted through sunset, through dusk and late into the night. During that first encounter we each recognized our future spouse in the other person.
Jenny's story may not be typical, but she makes an important point: The ending point of singleness may come unexpectedly and without fanfare. Why not live in utter faithfulness in the meantime? Can that in any way be a bad thing?
Though marriage is not a guarantee for singles who desire it, Voiland points out that singleness is not a permanent state:
Even if I never register at Macy's or wear a flowy white dress or "upgrade" to Mrs.—my single status will have an ending point. Regardless of how things end up from an earthly perspective, I will be a bride someday. After all this time stuck in the middle of awkward, limited human relationships, each one of us—married or not—will experience true, unconditional love. After all this time of waiting, the time will finally come when we will be the bride of Christ.
Don't underestimate the middle. You may look back one day and see that it was one of the most important seasons of your life.
I suppose it's finally time to admit that I am an extrovert. For years I have been telling people that I am an introverted extrovert. That I recharge with alone time. But I'm pretty sure that's not true anymore.
Take this weekend for example. I deliberately made no plans so that I could get some things done — clean my room and bathroom, mop the kitchen floor, work on a writing project. I turned off my phone. I didn't go on Facebook. I drank an entire French press...twice.
By the end of the weekend I was terribly lonely. The absence of people highlighted that empty spot that I suppose is always there. In his article "The Gift of Loneliness," Peter Nadeau describes that gnawing feeling of alone: If there's an organ in the body that causes loneliness, I'm sure it's located near the stomach. When I'm really hungry I'll eat anything—lettuce, ice, dried pasta, frozen peas. The same is true when I'm lonely. I'll look anywhere or do anything to stop the hunger.
I know I'm lonely when I check my e-mail, click on another site, and then check my box again to see if mail came in. Maybe I missed something. Sometimes I dial the voicemail on my cell phone to check for messages, even though the very colorful and accurate display screen reads "no new messages." Maybe the screen messed up. When I get home from work, my first stop is my office to check my phone. Aha! The little green light on my caller ID box is flashing. A new message! I dial into the system. I punch in my code. I wait. I frown. I hang up. Another telemarketer wants to sell me solar heating for my pool.
I can relate. I try to avoid these lonely moments as much as possible. But perhaps loneliness serves an important purpose. Nadeau explains that Adam felt incomplete before Eve, but it allowed him to recognize that God had more for him: I know too many singles who pretend they aren't lonely and pretend they don't care about marriage. At times, I fight the same temptation. It's easier to deny the angst of being without a soulmate than to step into the abyss of loneliness. Stifling a desire makes us feel in control; acknowledging a desire makes us vulnerable. Yet a desire that isn't open can't be filled. Adam's experience reminds singles that loneliness is normal and necessary.
This is affirming to me, because often I grow weary of the single life. I want to throw in the towel because everything seems out of place in my life. I took a wrong turn somewhere. I need a new job. I need to change churches. I need new hobbies. I need new friends. I need to move to a new city. Yet when I calm down and take a good look at my life, I realize I actually like my job and my church. I enjoy my hobbies. I value my friends. I love where I live. I'm just out of sorts because I feel unconnected. But it's okay; I should. Adam had the same feeling until God gave him Eve. We're made for so much more. Loneliness is the wailing siren that doesn't let me forget.
The way I chose to deal with my loneliness this weekend was by reading Ephesians 6 and reminding myself of the need to put on the full armor of God. Nadeau points out that loneliness drives us to God: Loneliness brings me to a place of submission and surrender. The weight of a lonely heart is too great a burden for me to bear. I struggle, strain, and grit my teeth to carry the load, but it becomes too much. I'm forced to lay it at God's feet and let him carry it. Surrendering our desires for intimacy to God isn't the same as stifling those desires. When we surrender our desires for romance to Christ, we admit we aren't in control of this area of our lives nor do we want to be. We heed his call to patience. We wait for his best. When we kneel before our Father with uplifted hands, we have his promise that when we ask for bread, he won't give us a stone.
And ultimately, loneliness isn't a single problem; it's a human problem. God meets our need for community and connection in this life in a variety of ways: marriage, family, Christian fellowship. But our lonely moments also remind us that this world is not our true home. It's good to remember that now and then.
I received an email today from a Boundless reader in response to Mind the 'Single-Minded' Church. She wrote, I loved your article on "Mind the 'Single-Minded' Church." Could we have a posting on The Line about this article so we could open it up for comment? I would really like to ask the Boundless readers the following:
What practical steps are their churches taking to help their singles move toward marriage?
How can churches encourage marriage in a way that does not alienate single men?
Do readers have examples of things from their churches that have "worked" in producing new marriages?
I am in a very pro-marriage church, but the focus is solely on strengthening marriages that already exist. There is almost no focus on creating marriages or in providing help for singles to marry well. My singles pastor even told me recently, "I can only talk about marriage a few times a year, otherwise, people get turned off." Needless to say, I have stopped attending the singles group.
My sense is that even if pastors are concerned that singles are delaying marriage, they don't know what to do about it, and I think that's the next area to focus on. ... It would be great to get other's ideas about what is working out there to help singles marry.
Thanks for all you do.
So what are your thoughts? Do you have a pastor who's helping singles marry well?
A few weeks ago, I bought a new TV. My 19-inch and I were pretty happy together, but there were a few drawbacks. My house is never the place to watch movies with friends—even though I have a cozy TV room. And my college-aged roommate once blurted: "I hate our TV." (She was having a bad day.)
And so, I finally decided to upgrade. With the new TV came the hassle of dealing with the cable company for the right hook-ups. Of course, everything that could go wrong did, and as the cable representative became my new best friend, I found myself thinking, I shouldn't have to deal with this!
Finally, I asked a male friend to stop by after work to take a look at the connecting cables. Predictably, my roommate and I had hooked them up incorrectly. Problem solved.
Several of my single female friends have disclosed their own unwelcome hassles: spiders, car troubles, broken appliances. As single women, we've all had moments where we've had to ask others to bail us out. Author Stephanie Voiland asks: "Does Being Single Make Me High Maintenance?" For the second time in two days, I found myself staring at the contact list on my phone, trying to figure out who would be least inconvenienced by a call from a stranded motorist—or more accurately, a homebound motorist. Thankfully, I found someone who was willing to help me, and the repair was minor (my diagnosis was right: it wasn't the windshield wiper fluid). But mixed in with my gratitude at having wheels again was a certain sense of indebtedness. I couldn't shake my feeling of guilt that once again I'd needed to be bailed out.
I've come to realize that sometimes it's a blessing to others when you allow them to help you. Sure, it might be an inconvenience, but it gives them the opportunity to serve. And it's a two-way street: As I wrestle with my fear of being a burden, though, it occurs to me that maybe the very thing that makes me feel high maintenance—my single-woman status—might be what enables me to be there for my community in ways I wouldn't be able to otherwise. I may not be able to change my friends' tires for them, but I can go to their house at the last minute to watch their kids in an emergency. I can use my vacation days to help a nonprofit organization in a third-world country. I can get involved somewhere in the evening without fear of interfering with the family dinner.
Dependence is a driving force in the Body of Christ. It's the world that tells women they must be independent. Voiland concludes: So I suppose when it comes down to it, I am high maintenance. But then again, in one way or another, maybe we're all high maintenance. And perhaps that's not such a bad thing. In fact, that very well may be how God planned it all along, so we'd have to acknowledge our need for each other and our need to live interdependently. The apostle Paul puts it this way: "We are many parts of one body, and we all belong to each other" (Romans 12:5).
Neediness is good. Everyone is dependent on Christ for salvation, and He has designed us to be dependent on each other as well. So go ahead, let someone bail you out. It will be your turn, soon enough.
Dennis Prager spoke at Focus on the Family last Friday. One of the points he made was that the emphasis of God's work on the second day of creation was in separating. He explained that in the Hebrew, the word for "separate" is the same as the word for "holy." That's why holiness has historically had a context of being set apart and distinct.
Just before going to hear Prager speak, I read a new article in Christianity Today by Marcy Hintz called Choosing Celibacy. That article made an interesting point about how Christian singles can be separate or set apart. Too often, the books and articles I read about Christian singleness seem to seek some kind of hybrid between the single culture we know today and the concepts Paul wrote about two thousand years ago to the church in Corinth.
Unfortunately, those hybrids often seem to err more on the side of accommodating the single culture we know than they do on wrestling with the implications of the fully dedicated celibate life that Paul describes in the book of Corinthians. As a result, we now have a Christian subculture of Paul (and Pauline) the Playboys who wrap their singleness in Paul's statement "it's better not to marry," but then fail to live out the kind of "dedicated devotion" that would distinguish them from their secular peers.
Hintz appears to be seeking a more distinctive life as a Christian single. She writes: Why not call for a vowed, vocational commitment to the church? What would change in our culture of singleness if the church were to reclaim a tradition that reinvokes the memory that we live in the time between the gospel's first announcement and its final fulfillment—a time in which marriage is celebrated, but celibacy is held out as a radical sign of fidelity to Christ and his body?
...
Though some churches may flinch from ordaining a celibate vow, we might still use the word celibacy to rightly honor and rightly name the countercultural life to which singles are called. In doing so, we encourage more than just abstinence from sex. We bless the single vocation. We recall the church's history and remember our true family. We christen singles as called-out ones, with familial gifts that amplify the church and her outward-looking mission.
The valuable point Hintz stirs up is that the Protestant community does not provide a formal path for the kind of dedicated and set apart single living that Paul describes. That's of great disadvantage for men and women who truly feel called to celibacy. It's also a reminder that celibacy is quite different from just being single. When Paul said "I wish you were as I am," he meant much more than just his marital status. He meant a life entirely distinct and set apart from the culture of his day for God's service.
Hintz hints, however, at the difficulty she has faced in promoting celibacy as way for Christian singles to be set apart: Midway through the discussion series, I met one of my best single friends for lunch. After effusing for a half-hour on the overall energy of the class, I turned to her and asked, "How do you think about your singleness?"
My friend is not passive. She's an artist, she's a leader, and her eyes wear the look of someone who sees into the world with meaning. But on this occasion, her eyes looked down. When she raised them, they were skimmed with tears. "I want to be married," she said, and then looked down again.
I appreciate that Hintz included this anecdote because it's a reminder that many men and women who are single do not feel called to celibacy and would very much like to be married. For Christians who know they should be set apart but believe they are called to marriage, the more helpful context is the one Hintz touches on later in the article when she writes, "While chastity binds married couples to a shared intimacy and singles to refrain from sex, both callings are self-sacrificing as well as self-giving, and both rise from an engagement of love and of faith."
"Chastity" is a calling for both the Christian single who will eventually marry and the one who vows to forgo the blessings of Christian marriage for undivided devotion to God in celibacy. This distinction is key because it's a reminder that while all Christian singles are called to be distinctly set apart from the world, only a few are called to sacrifice marriage permanently as a demonstration of that holy distinction.
Have you seen the book Guyland by Michael Kimmel? I just picked up a copy and started reading it. Kimmel is a professor of sociology at State University of New York, Stony Brook. He's far afield from typical Boundless writers -- in fact Gloria Steinem is one of his book endorsers -- but it appears he has written a valuable book.
The cover flap to the book makes this proposition: "Only by understanding this world [Guyland] and this life stage can we enable young men to chart their own paths, to stay true to themselves, and to travel safely through Guyland, emerging as responsible and fully formed men of integrity and honor."
So how does Kimmel define Guyland? Here's an excerpt: Guyland is the world in which young men live. It is both a stage of life, a liminal undefined time span between adolescence and adulthood that can stretch for a decade or more, and a place, or, rather, a bunch of places where guys gather to be guys with each other, unhassled by the demands of parents, girlfriends, jobs, kids, and the other nuisances of adult life. In this topsy-turvy, Peter-Pan mindset, young men shirk the responsibilities of adulthood and remain fixated on the trappings of boyhood, while the boys they still are struggle heroically to prove that they are real men despite all evidence to the contrary.
Kimmel believes that readers of his book (which are most likely to be people who aren't in Guyland) should "appreciate and support individual guys while engaging critically with the social world they inhabit." He goes on to say: In fact, I believe that only by understanding this world can we truly be empathic to the guys in our lives. We need to enter this world, see the perilous field in which boys become men in our society because we desperately need to start a conversation about that world. We do boys a great disservice by turning away, excusing the excesses of Guyland as just "boys being boys" -- because we fail to see just how powerful its influence really is. Only when we begin to engage in these conversations, with open eyes and open hearts -- as parents to children, as friends, as guys themselves -- can we both reduce the risks and enable guys to navigate it more successfully.
Thoughts?
Discipleship Journal (DJ) has an interview with speaker and author Michelle McKinney Hammond in their September/October issue. Two of the questions and answers caught my attention.
Here's the first: DJ: Describe a challenge you've faced as a single.
Michelle: Being responsible for every aspect of my life can be overwhelming. This is where I really appreciate the prospect of having a partner. Though that presents its own challenges, I understand why Solomon said that two are better than one. I've had to learn to ask for help, delegate, and be realistic about what I can commit to.
Being over-committed is something I can relate to as a married father of two, but not as a single. It could be because the majority of my single years were spent as a non-Christian who lived only for myself. So I don't know what it's like for Christian singles who expend themselves fully for God's Kingdom to the point of feeling over-committed.
What about you? Can you relate to Michelle on this?
Here's the other Q&A that I found interesting: DJ: How can married people encourage singles they know?
Michelle: Singles need to see married couples relating in ways that glorify God. Many married people are negative not only about their marriages, but also about marriage in general. This assaults singles' faith. Couples should be honest and keep it real about their struggles and the things they've learned, but they also need to share the rewards of the journey toward becoming one.
Good stuff. But the first step here is getting married couples and singles to interact. Which makes me wonder how many of you have relationships with married couples. Are the married couples in your church intentional about getting involved in your life? And have you been responsive to their invitations? If so, do they model marriage the way Michelle suggests?
The New York Times' blog post "Single, Childless and 'Downright Terrified'" has the forums humming. Lots of folks are debating the notion that getting old without offspring is a frightening proposition. Jane Gross writes, ... having witnessed the "new old age" from a front-row seat, I'm haunted by the knowledge that there is no one who will care about me in the deepest and most loving sense of the word at the end of my life. No one who will advocate for me, not simply for adequate care but for the small and arguably inessential things that can make life worth living even in compromised health.
Those who are intentionally childless insist they have plenty of insurance and other safeguards in place to make sure someone's there to feed them creamed spinach. Others, who still wish their lives had worked out differently in the realm of family, hope they will. But for all the back and forth about getting old alone, there was an omission I found striking. Nowhere in Gross' original post was there any mention of community, religious or otherwise. Most tragically, no mention of a church -- her church, the church, any church.
Instead, she looked to the prospect of an expanded role for friends. "Friends helping friends through illness or old age" is a possible solution, she says, but unfortunately, such "is a luxury of those who can afford to do it with no help from the government or their employers." Why is that? "The handful of benefits available to family caregivers are not available to friends who have taken on the identical role."
Her recommendation: have a "conversation" about "the 'second class' status of friendship in 'the American hierarchy of relationships' and 'grant it legal status.'" Maybe the answer lies in granting friendships the same or similar rights as biological relatives.
I think Gross has stumbled onto one of the reasons God made families, and by default, one of the unintended consequences of our cultural assault on marriage and children. Unfortunately, her proposed solution -- marriage-like legal rights for friendships -- if embraced, would undoubtedly produce more such unintended consequences.
The reality of an aging, childless population is undeniable. How we care for them, however, is yet to be decided. Where some see tragedy, I see opportunity. The church is uniquely gifted to step in with compassionate care not only for the body in this life, but also for the spirit with a view toward the next.
I don't like to wait for things. I would guess that many modern individuals find waiting difficult in an instant-gratification world. In "Work the Wait," Stephanie Voiland gives some very personal insight into the frustration of biding your time:
When will I get my turn to hang a white dress in my closet?" I mumbled as I hung up my fourth bridesmaid dress last summer. A single 29-year-old, I'd watched friend after friend join the ranks of "Mrs."; I couldn't help but wonder, How much longer, God?
As I contemplated my life's many delays, I realized I don't like waiting—and I'm not very good at it. But I wanted to grow during my waiting seasons rather than become bitter or lose faith. So I asked God to show me how he's working through these divine delays.
But God isn't obligated to reveal to us why we're in a holding pattern. In fact, some waits seem like they have no purpose. And perhaps, "the delay is simply the product of a sin-ravaged world." Other times, God is using the wait to accomplish something greater. Voiland uses the example of Lazarus (John 11):
Jesus was good friends with Lazarus and his sisters, Martha and Mary. Christ even crashed at their place occasionally. So surely when he heard Lazarus was ill, he'd rush to his side and heal him! Instead, we read this haunting sentence: "Although Jesus loved Martha, Mary and Lazarus, he stayed where he was for the next two days" (verses 5–6). My knee-jerk reaction is to cry, "Hello! Why were you waiting? That's not love!" Martha and Mary were slightly more diplomatic, but they expressed the same sentiment: "Lord, if only you had been here" (verses 21 and 32).
With our limited vision, Mary, Martha, and I couldn't see God sometimes doesn't give us what we request so he can give us something better. Jesus said the death of Lazarus "happened for the glory of God so that the Son of God will receive glory for this" (verse 4). Granted, a healing would have been amazing. But Jesus had a bigger plan that couldn't occur without Lazarus's time in the grave.
Even when the wait was purposeful, Jesus engaged in the pain it caused. He wept. Voiland ends with some solid, hope-filled advice for those who wait:
I 'd still like a white dress to hang in my closet someday—preferably someday soon. But now as I wait, I'm careful not merely to mark time, so preoccupied with what's next that I miss out on what's now. I'm striving to wait well. And part of waiting well, I've learned, is being open to God's lessons about redemption, trust, compassion, and his higher purposes along the way.
I hope all you Americans had a good Fourth of July. I watched fireworks with friends and thanked God for the freedoms I enjoy in this country. While you were celebrating, you may have missed a little jewel of an article Friday. I did.
In "Looking for Love like a Peasant," and excerpt of A.J. Kiesling's book Where Have All the Good Men Gone?, she considers the need for neediness: Jewish rabbi and relationship expert Shmuley Boteach, known as the "Love Prophet," believes he knows why singles today find it so hard to discover their soul mate. His theory is so sound and makes such sense in our confused world that I wish I had invented it. When it comes to love, Boteach writes, we've become a generation of "aristocrats" in search of the perfect match, when the real secret to lasting love — the attitude of a "peasant" — is available to us all along.
To explain what she means, Kiesling quotes Boteach from his book Dating Secrets of the Ten Commandments: I often ask people, "Aren't you going to get married?" At that point I hear a strange response: "When I meet the right person." Sure, the idea is reasonable, but the sentiments are rarely so. Usually what I am hearing is a person telling me that they are waiting for a person to come along and impress them with their eligibility. This is the thinking of aristocrats, and leads nowhere. In dating, you should always be a peasant.
Ouch. That hits pretty close to home. Sounds a little like what I refer to as "identity baggage." Here's how Kiesling describes the difference: The "needy, beautiful peasant" approaches the possibility of romance from the starting point of "What do I lack?" and looks for someone who can fill that need. Their main asset on the Potential Soul Mate test is their vulnerability.
Need, the rabbi asserts, is the dirty little secret of dating that no one wants to admit. But when you're looking to fall in love — when you're looking for the happiness that comes from giving yourself fully to another — it's all about "opening yourself up, exposing your vulnerabilities, and creating a space where you and a lover can grow together." In short, Boteach says, it's about realizing that need is good.
If you've been single for any length of time, you've probably been coached that it's best to not appear needy — ever. But Boteach's theory seems to contradict that. What do you think? Is need a missing ingredient in finding love?
Speaking of young adults exceeding expectations ...
It came to my attention this morning that two of our authors, teens Alex and Brett Harris, were interviewed by NPR about their passion "to encourage teens to act responsibly, become leaders and change the world."
These young men challenge me, someone who's no longer a "young adult," to resist the low expectations I might have adopted for myself and pursue the Lord's will in all its vibrancy and adventure.
Do you ever get the sense that people you know are reading some kind of book that teaches them how to be jerks and how to live destructively? If so, there's a chance they got a hold of Life's Little Destruction Book that came out back in the nineties. Here are a few entries from that book: Use more plastic.
Stand up your date.
Name drop.
Reserve compliments for people who can do you some good.
Ask her if the diamond ring is real.
Apologize a lot but don't change.
Let your blind date know she isn't up to what you were told.
Ride on the shoulder until you pass all the jammed traffic; then cut in.
Forget the punch line, but don't let that stop you from telling jokes.
Assume the authority but not the responsibility.
Swear this time you mean it -- really.
Overconsume and buy on impulse.
Eat out with friends and "forget" your wallet.
Eat off your date's plate.
Put your feet on the table.
Pretend you're listening.
RSVP on the last possible day.
Show up late and leave early.
Don't replace the toilet paper roll.
Always play devil's advocate.
Go ahead: ask what your country can do for you.
I bought this book (that's clearly labeled "a parody") for material to use in a Freshman Orientation class I taught. The irony is, my students (and I) were more motivated to do the right thing by this book than by the popular Life's Little Instruction book it was based on.
Have you noticed the matchmakers popping up on TV?
Bravo Channel has Patti Stanger, the Millionaire Matchmaker, who helps lonely millionaires find the love of their life. Then, A&E has Patti Novak (what's with all the Pattis?) in Confessions of a Matchmaker, calling her "one of America's toughest matchmakers."
I caught an interview with Patti N. on the late night rerun of Oprah last Friday. What surprised me about her segment was how conservative some of her approaches seemed. She advised Oprah's panel of single gals to beware the "pickle jar effect," meaning that women are so successful, fabulous and content, that they forget to let men open the pickle jar. "The one thing I don't think is ever going to change on this planet," she said, "is men still need to feel like men. So, let them open it." Let men pick the restaurant too, she advised, and pay for it. You could see Oprah squirming in her seat a little, but the message was clear -- let the man be the man.
Over at Bravo, Patti S. is spouting some conservatism of her own -- no sex between clients. According to Patti S., when women have sex outside of a committed, monogamous relationship that's headed towards marriage, it turns men into Peter Pan little boys and ruins it for all the rest of the women.
Unfortunately, both these ladies are still miles from a biblical perspective on dating. Patti N. mocked one client's virginity ("How could this have happened?" she wondered) and, though Patti S. may not allow sex between clients, she still advised one young woman to wear clothing that, uh, showcased her assets.
Still, it seems that these two matchmakers have realized that certain biblical truths (like Ephesians 5 and 1 Corinthians 6) work, whether they understand why or not. And, it seems, there's a growing segment of singles out there who are tired of the hookup culture and are willing to try traditional. Here's hoping that, at some point, they see the Lord's entire picture.
Not one to stop with just half the story, journalist and author Kay Hymowitz presents the other side of the "Child-Man in the Promised Land" problem in "The New Girl Order." The evidence Hymowitz presents is overwhelming: single young females a la Sex in the City are no longer a New York City phenomenon. They're everywhere. Hymowitz writes: Carrie Bradshaw is alive and well and living in Warsaw. Well, not just Warsaw. Conceived and raised in the United States, Carrie may still see New York as a spiritual home. But today you can find her in cities across Europe, Asia, and North America. Seek out the trendy shoe stores in Shanghai, Berlin, Singapore, Seoul, and Dublin, and you'll see crowds of single young females (SYFs) in their twenties and thirties, who spend their hours working their abs and their careers, sipping cocktails, dancing at clubs, and (yawn) talking about relationships. Sex and the City has gone global; the SYF world is now flat.
Is this just the latest example of American cultural imperialism? Or is it the triumph of planetary feminism? Neither. The globalization of the SYF reflects a series of stunning demographic and economic shifts that are pointing much of the world—with important exceptions, including Africa and most of the Middle East—toward a New Girl Order. It's a man's world, James Brown always reminded us. But if these trends continue, not so much.
Hymowitz's research reveals three drivers of this rise of SFYs: 1) women are delaying marriage and childbearing, 2) women are looking for careers, not jobs, and pursuing the degrees that make that possible and 3) women are leaving home and moving to the city.
She describes the shift in the landscape this way: Combine these trends—delayed marriage, expanded higher education and labor-force participation, urbanization—add a global media and some disposable income, and voilà: an international lifestyle is born. One of its defining characteristics is long hours of office work, often in quasi-creative fields like media, fashion, communications, and design—areas in which the number of careers has exploded in the global economy over the past few decades. The lifestyle also means whole new realms of leisure and consumption, often enjoyed with a group of close girlfriends: trendy cafés and bars serving sweetish coffee concoctions and cocktails; fancy boutiques, malls, and emporiums hawking cosmetics, handbags, shoes, and $100-plus buttock-hugging jeans; gyms for toning and male-watching; ski resorts and beach hotels; and, everywhere, the frustrating hunt for a boyfriend and, though it's an ever more vexing subject, a husband.
So what does it all mean? "There's much to admire in the New Girl Order," she says, "but as with any momentous social change, the New Girl Order comes with costs -- in this case, profound ones." Her conclusions are mostly economic; showing the logical outcome of so little marriage and low fertility to be an initial surge in prosperity, followed by dramatic downturns. "Economies will plunge in ways that will be extremely difficult to manage," she says, "and that, ironically, will likely spell the SYF lifestyle's demise. As Philip Longman explains in his important book The Empty Cradle, dramatic declines in fertility rates equal aging and eventually shriveling populations."
But it's not just money that matters. She hints at a deeper concern when she notes that by and large, single American women still want to get married and have babies, due in part to the influence of religion. What remains to be seen is if a lifestyle so focused on earning, spending and partying will eventually lead to marriage and family. And if it does, what those marriages and families will be like.
We often get grief whenever we talk about an article or stat documenting trends among young adults. Our readers often say it's not fair for us to assume that general trends are also true of the Christian sub-set of the population. And that, indeed, should be true. Christians are supposed to be different and various studies by Barna and other Christian researchers do prove that Christians don't neatly parallel a general audience -- although they've found the margin of distinction shrinking in recent years.
It was through this lens that I read an important new article by Kay Hymowitz in City Journal titled Child-Man in the Promised Land. This is not a flattering description of today's young men. Kay makes the point that the values of Maxim magazine that set the standard for so many men aren't even as refined as the values Playboy held out for earlier generations. A core observation appears halfway through the article: We can argue endlessly about whether "masculinity" is natural or constructed—whether men are innately promiscuous, restless, and slobby, or socialized to be that way—but there's no denying the lesson of today's media marketplace: give young men a choice between serious drama on the one hand, and Victoria's Secret models, battling cyborgs, exploding toilets, and the NFL on the other, and it's the models, cyborgs, toilets, and football by a mile. For whatever reason, adolescence appears to be the young man's default state, proving what anthropologists have discovered in cultures everywhere: it is marriage and children that turn boys into men. Now that the SYM can put off family into the hazily distant future, he can—and will—try to stay a child-man. Yesterday's paterfamilias or Levittown dad may have sought to escape the duties of manhood through fantasies of adventures at sea, pinups, or sublimated war on the football field, but there was considerable social pressure for him to be a mensch. Not only is no one asking that today's twenty- or thirtysomething become a responsible husband and father—that is, grow up—but a freewheeling marketplace gives him everything that he needs to settle down in pig’s heaven indefinitely.
Getting back to your comments to us that Christian men shouldn't be judged by general observations, my preference is to believe there is a subset of Christian men who are living transformed lives distinguished from the single young men this article spotlights.
Is that your experience? Are you living/seeing distinctive lives from the "Child-Men" of this article?
Tom makes a good case for his analysis that twenty-somethings are too young for a crisis and ... well, a little bit whiny. But as your comments reflect, the Quarterlife Crisis remains a crisis nonetheless. As many of you pointed out, cultural influences and our families have set us up to expect more -- a lot more -- than we will likely get. And when that realization hits -- it's a blow.
In my article "Set, Go ... Ready," I examined the Quarterlife Crisis and its impact on our generation. One of the discoveries I found most interesting was our loss of an "inner life." A lack of decisiveness regarding career choices coupled with anxiety over achieving financial success is paralyzing young adults. And it's costing them something. Wikipedia reports:
"The era when a professional career meant a life of occupational security -- thus allowing an individual to proceed to establish an 'inner life' -- is coming to a crashing end."
It is troubling that young adults have lost something as valuable as an "inner life." They are delaying some of the most personally satisfying pursuits -- getting married, committing to a church, establishing a home and having children.
Not only do twenty-somethings struggle to achieve the traditional marks of adulthood and establish families, we have also been raised to view both success and self-fulfillment as equally necessary. Speaking of the current twenty-something generation, developmental psychologist Jeffrey Arnett says: "They have grown up as the most affluent generation in American [or world] history, so they have high expectations for life. They all expect to find a job that not only pays well, but is enjoyable, and they all expect to find their 'soul mate.' "
And I know many of you are thinking, What's wrong with that? Nothing ... exactly. Only, affluence is not a requirement for abundant life. How many of us confuse cultural values with biblical ones? ("God wants me to be happy, right?" Wrong. And is that your definition of happy or God's?)
If looking for a person who doesn't exist is keeping you from getting married and accepting the responsibilities of adulthood; if the pursuit of finding a vocation that completely "fulfills" you is holding you back from doing something you're good at and can succeed in; then perhaps you need to ask the Lord for a reality check and start pursuing an "inner life." I said it in the article, and I'll say it again: Get set and go ... you're probably more ready than you think.
Steve's blog on the so-called midlife crisis comes when I've become aware of another alleged time of adversity: the "quarterlife" crisis. Briefly, the quarterlife crisis hits people sometime after college and before they turn 30 when they realize that, well ... life is hard!
I first became aware of it while interviewing Tim Elmore, a protégé of leadership guru John Maxwell. "It's 25-year-old people who are seeing counselors and therapists because they haven't yet made their first million, haven't yet found the perfect career or the perfect mate," Elmore explained. "It's self-imposed stress and pressure."
This age group, dubbed "millennials" by demographers, are "much less attuned to reality" than previous generations, Elmore said.
There's even a book for this phenomenon, called, appropriately enough, Quarterlife Crisis: The Unique Challenges of Life in Your Twenties. (I have struggled mightily not to use the adjective whiny up to this point.) According to the Booklist review, this slim volume talks about "the pressure of coming from a relatively stable environment, such as college, and then being flung into a world where they [the whiny people ... um, sorry ... the 20somethings] have to worry about finding out exactly what they want to do, land the right job, pay the bills, and still manage to have time for friends and family."
I'm sorry. I hate it when someone plays the "wise elder" bit with me, but I'm going to do it here. (Yeah, I also once asked my daughter, "If everyone else was jumping off a cliff, would you?" It happens.) To those people suffering from this self-indulgent "crisis," I want to say, "Welcome to the world!" Whoever told you it would be easy? Oh, I forgot: All your teachers did. You're the "self-esteem" generation who were told you were great even if you never actually accomplished anything or put forth any effort.
It's as though these people are the first to discover that nothing in life is handed to you. It's similar to my generation"s apparent discovery that humans can procreate -- witness all those silly "Baby Onboard" decals during the '80s. (Oh, wait! A lot of Boundless readers probably were those babies onboard!)
Okay, I exaggerate. I know many fine 20somethings who are nothing like this. I work with several of them. In fact, I suspect most 20somethings are nothing like this. But then most men my age are nothing like the stereotypical midlife crisis guy. I haven't bought a Ferrari. (As if!) I don't need a toupee. (Thanks to whoever passed on the full-head-of-hair gene.) And I've never had a mistress. (I love my wife just fine, and we're going on 28 years now.)
But like many 20somethings, I have at times struggled with life: Am I doing what I should be doing? Am I living up to my potential? Does my life matter? And why does Sylvester Stallone keep making dumb movies? Fortunately, I know that God is sovereign, and even through my bumbling His grace sustains me. Those simple truths should be enough to banish any sense of crisis should it try to creep in.
"If You Want Me to Treat You Like an Adult, Start Acting Like One!." That's the name of a new study to be published in the Journal of Family Psychology.
It reflects the way parents see their 18- to 25-year-old sons and daughters these days -- and how many of their children see themselves.
An article about the study done by three BYU professor found that "80 percent of parents do not consider their 18-25 year-old college students to be adults" and added "The students agree."
The article continues: The time period for which parents are responsible for their children is lengthening and parents have new expectations for their children once they reach their 20s.
The study shows evidence that a distinct life stage has emerged between adolescence and adulthood. Larry Nelson, associate professor in the school of family life, and lead author in the study refers to students in this stage as "emerging adults."
"The message parents are sending to their kids is "You may be 18 but that doesn't magically make you an adult. There are things you first need to develop and that hasn't happened yet," Nelson said. "It's not that their kids refuse to grow up, it's that they are still in the process of doing that."
While BYU capped the transitional age range at 25, 30 is the other key age often cited. Comments such as "30 is the new 20" (in the context of maturity) motivated me to write a Boundless article earlier called "Adult Before 30?" that specifically focused on how guys have been underestimated by culture: Expectations are at an all time low. But what changed? Is it no longer possible for guys to become adults during their 20s? ... A 20 year-old man is at the same level of biological maturity that 20 year-olds were generations before.
"By 20, most of the mental and bodily characteristics that have been evolving in the pre-adult years are at or near their peak levels," wrote Daniel Levinson in his classic book from the 1970s, The Seasons of a Man's Life. Levinson marked the period from 17 to 22 as the age that men move from adolescence into adulthood.
But despite reaching their peak of physical development and having the capacity for the demands of adulthood, guys for some reason still aren't making the transition.
Cultural changes can put hurdles in the paths of new generations -- making it more challenging for them to move to the next level of maturity. Then again, cultural change can also give people a pass on taking on the responsibilities of the next stage of life while being free to primarily enjoy the benefits of where they are.
Which change do you think is driving this new stage of development?
In the wake of so many voices writing to defend singleness, I pulled out my weathered copy of Mike Mason's Mystery of Marriage. Now in it's 20th anniversary edition, this highly-respected, yet I suspect not-widely-read-by-twenty-somethings volume has much to teach us. It's unique in two notable respects: it's written by a man; a man who wanted to be a monk. He felt called to celibacy. He even doubted God's call to marry after his wedding.
He writes, As a single Christian I had come to think of myself, rather pompously, as being "celibate," when the truth of the matter was that I was just a hard-bitten bachelor, who had never considered that in getting married one espouses not an institution but a person, not a narrowness but an unimaginable breadth of possibility.
Given the seeming reluctance of so many Christian guys to get married, Mason's book issues a much-needed challenge. Though promoted as a book for married couples, Mystery of Marriage is a powerful resource for singles trying to discern their calling.
In the prologue, he describes two hawks he and his new bride saw as they stood outside a Trappist monastery during their week-long honeymoon. It was a breakthrough moment: When I saw those tow hawks, therefore, I took them as a sign, as a sign of God's pleasure in my marriage. ... It was not just hawks that were flying, but angels that were dancing on account of my marriage, and any yearning I might have had to be in a monastery (besides being ludicrously unrealistic by that point) was nothing less than a temptation from the Devil. Those two hawks were a confirmation that, for me at least, no worship could be more pleasing or acceptable to God than the worship of marital love, of two lives being played out against one another in a covenant of loving cooperation. What happened to me that summer's day was one of those gentle eruptions of grace that the Lord sends so quietly, so nonchalantly, so playfully into our lives. ... Never again would i have excuse to give in to those crippling and agonizing doubts as to whether God had called me to be married, or whether He had called me to be married to this particular woman.
Men, do you feel the tug of adventure? The thrill of winning a maiden? Mason's book is a great place to start.
ChristianSinglesToday.com is featuring an article to help single readers gain perspective on their unmarried state. Entitled Singleness' Seven-Year-Itch, it raises the possibility that maybe singles get to the point in their singleness where it's no longer routine to do the "I love living alone dance."
The author writes, Laying here in the dark [on the floor, listening to a CD], I start to wonder if there's a singleness parallel to the much-discussed seven-year itch married people supposedly get. In the same way that marriages can be good and fine and yet stale and flat if left unnurtured over the years, I wonder if there's a similar phenomenon on this side of the altar.
At one point she describes herself looking up and spying a clock. It's no longer keeping time. She wonders if it's a sign, From my vantage point on the floor, I glance up at the clock on my coffee table and realize it's stopped. It's the second clock in my home that's stopped this week, and it feels downright symbolic. Time standing still. I realize that lately singleness has felt like spinning my wheels. Like being stuck in a rut.
Thankfully, this isn't the end of the article. She encourages single readers to get out of the rut by asking themselves "what am I putting on hold?", "what am I saying about my singleness?", "what am I taking for granted?", and "what of this staleness do I simply need to push through?" The antidotes she offers are embracing opportunities now, stopping speaking negatively about being single, practicing gratitude and contentment, and persevering. All good suggestions based on biblical truths.
What bothers me about this article, though, is the feeling I get that the author is more resigned to being single than she is hopeful for marriage. I know the passage of time, especially a decade or more, can make it that much harder to believe marriage is still possible. But that's the essence of faith. And in addition to faith, we have many practical and biblical reasons to believe God is still in the business of making good matches.
Yes, singles should make the most of life today. But that includes a lot more than not bad mouthing being single, volunteering at a downtown mission and journaling about a great new shade of nail polish. It means "good mouthing" marriage -- speaking highly of and honoring the relationship God designed between the sexes. It means being intentional about the time they do spend dating and befriending members of the opposite sex. It means being a faithful steward and faithful disciple. Doing all this, in the midst of community, has the benefit not only of helping you feel less bad and even content with being single, it makes it more likely that you'll get married.
As much as singles want advice for getting out of the singleness rut, wouldn't it be even better to offer those who still hope to marry, advice for helping it happen?
Forget the pipe dreams, good intentions and big ideas. Let this be the year of no resolutions. Instead, why not spend today thinking about what you'd really like to accomplish in 2008 and then set some goals to help you get there.
Resolutions and goals are not the same. When you make a resolution -- say, to lose 15 pounds by Friday -- you only have one shot at doing it. The first time you slip: one bite (or pound) of chocolate, one meal other than broccoli, your resolution's blown. If you're resolved to run 5 miles a day for the whole year, your resolution only lasts as long as you never miss a workout. But you're human. It's our nature to mess up.
That's why I love goals. If my goal is to lose weight and get in shape, then I can work toward those outcomes with planned steps along the way. And when I mess up, and inevitably, I will, I can still keep working to achieve my goals.
So this year, why not skip the resolutions and set some goals that will find you this time next year, looking back and adding up all you've accomplished.
Happy New Year!
In "The Dreaded Company Christmas Party," Camerin Courtney ponders the moments in life that find us uncomfortably without a date. I have a confession to make: Every year starting in about August, I begin stressing out about my company's Christmas party. Yes, August. Why so early, you may ask. It's got nothing to do with the dinner and play we see every year, the what-to-wear dilemma, or even some of the silly traditions a few of our company's VPs put us through. No, it's the date part that puts a knot in my stomach five months prior to the Big Event.
Courtney isn't alone in her stress over holiday singleness. A friend recently confessed to me that she feels more lonely as a single around Christmas than other times of year. And three months ago, I received a text message from my sister, detailing her holiday wish: a boyfriend by Christmas. The holidays can be a difficult time to grapple with singleness. I talked about this a couple of years ago in "Making it a Merry Christmas": Last Christmas, my brother and his wife celebrated Christmas with us, not only in wedded bliss, but expecting their first child. As the older sister, I found myself dwelling on the inequity of the situation. While I felt content with my life in Colorado — great church, good friends, fulfilling job — being around the happy couple made me feel left out and somehow inferior.
Even if you're not playing the comparison game, someone will gladly do it for you. "I'm sure the single thing will come up again this year," my friend Josh recently told me. "I'm hoping to distract them with the fact that my uncle is expecting a child and grandchild in the same month."
Not all of us are fortunate enough to have a tabloid-like family event to divert the attention, and it's demoralizing when relatives not-so-subtly imply that something might be wrong with you because you're, in their opinion, behind others your age. ("After all, you're 26 and unmarried. Aren't you afraid people might start to wonder if you're gay?") Like playing a game of life where your opponent already has the wife, the house and six kids, and you have — the empty car — differences become glaring.
While these feelings are valid, it's unfortunate that the days we've set apart to celebrate Christ's wonderful gift of Himself can become the source of such discontentment. In my situation, I discovered that the comparison game got to me because I wasn't firmly grounded in my primary identity: Child of God. When I considered the source of last year's post-holiday blues, I realized I was letting other people's comments and actions, instead of my position in Christ, inform how I felt about myself. This shouldn't have surprised me. I'm ashamed to admit it, but I didn't have a single quiet time while I was home. I got out of my spiritual routine and became an easy target for Satan's lies.
Giving Jesus the gift of regular devotional time this Christmas season will reap big benefits. It may even make that party a little less scary.
Whenever possible, don't cook -- or eat -- alone. Or at least sparingly. And if you must, do it well. That's the understated conclusion of Alone in the Kitchen with an Eggplant: Confessions of Cooking for One and Dining Alone.
For all the praise the book heaps on solitude in the kitchen, several themes can't help but emerge in this collection of essays by 26 writers and foodies. Among them: Eating alone isn't natural, or healthy. We were created for nutritious, luscious, edible food. Too often, as the essays reveal, we eat poorly when no one's looking.
Laura Calder says it starkly in "The Lonely Palate": "Eating alone is not nature's way. Babies never eat alone. They can't. Children don't, unless they're in tragic circumstances. Old people eat alone regularly and it's dreadful. No wonder they lose their appetites. My theory (and I have several solo dinners behind me to back it up) is that to compose a happy character, and thus contribute to making the world a nice place to live in, you've either got to be fed (that is, by someone other than yourself who cares about you), which feels good and means that you're part of something larger than yourself; or, you've got to be the person feeding (that is, other people -- not just dogs! -- that you care about). That has the same positive effect."
Laura Dave says it wistfully, humorously, in "How to Cook in a New York Apartment" At times, she says, cooking just for you is unavoidable. But do it well; it may lead to good things: "The following thought will flash through your mind, briefly, before you lose it forever: it's related. The great work victory and this nice meeting with a blue-eyed person have to be related to the many hours you spent cooking the day before. All for yourself. How could it not be? You are wearing it on your face, like a badge. (Literally on your face. You raced out of the house, a little piece of tomato on the side of your cheek, a little piece in your hair.)"
Having read the whole book, I recommend it cautiously (it's not without a chapter or two better left unread). But for its shortcomings, the overall message unwittingly reinforced a universal truth: We were created for relationship and like the One in whose image we were made, we are designed for community. Nowhere is this more evident than at the table.
And so, cook. Cook for your friends and your family and your spiritual family and your boss and his wife. Have people over. Grow skilled at cooking and use your skills to nourish people. You'll fill your belly and your soul. Who knows what doors may open? Aromas and flavors awaken your senses. In its time, they may awaken love.
Good food. It's still the way to a man's heart.
I woke up at 5 a.m. this morning, fully intending to pray, write and then faithfully run on the treadmill. Two out of three ain't bad, right? I just didn't feel up to the run. Too tired. Still a little run down from last week's flu bug. So I spent extra time on the other two. And then Steve told me about a review in the Wall Street Journal that says exercise may not be as useful for weight loss as I thought.
Reporting on an article in New York magazine, the review, titled, "Workout-Weight Loss Link May Rest on Thin Evidence," made me think skipping my run wasn't such a catastrophe after all.
"The idea that exercise produces weight loss is seldom questioned in workout-mad America," I read, "but Gary Taubes says evidence for this belief is, well, thin."
More media myth than scientifically-proven fact, the imperative to exercise for weight loss is, according to Taubes, a relatively recent one. "Until the 1960s," the article says "clinicians dismissed the notion exercise could help shed pounds as naive because light exercise burns so few calories and vigorous workouts stoke hearty appetites."
"Taubes ... suggests that what really determines how fat or lean a person is has more to do with the body's internal programming. He suggests a 'homeostatic' view of the relationship between weight and workouts, one that sees lean people as those 'whose bodies are programmed to send the calories they consume to the muscles to be burned rather than to the fat tissues to be stored.'"
Nuts. Even if I had run, the brownies would be out. For all the health benefits of a vigorous cardio workout, if dropping a dress size is what I'm after, I guess it's back to calorie counting.
If you'd asked me two days ago, "are you a reader?" I would have answered with a robust and confident "Yes!" That was before I read Suzanne's blog post about Dr. Mohler's formidable reading regimen. For all my love of books and reading, I have a long way to go.
Thankfully, at the moment, I do have the fun category well in hand. My latest enjoyable read is a collection of essays called Alone in the Kitchen with an Eggplant. Edited by Jenni Ferrari-Adler, it's about the quirks of cooking and eating for one.
The jacket of the book describes it this way: In this unique collection, twenty-six writers and foodies invite readers into their kitchens to reflect on the secret meals they make for themselves when no one else is looking: the indulgent truffled egg sandwich, the comforting bowl of black beans, the bracing anchovy fillet on buttered toast.
I've only just read the introduction and first chapter, but already it transported me back to my single days when eating for one was routine. I subsisted on cereal. It was filling and fast. The two requirements after a long day at work.
Fast forward to today. For all the supposed "weirdness" of food eaten alone, I think Ferrari-Adler would find my current fare, as a mother of small children, a comical variation on her theme: the untouched crusts of a peanut butter and jelly sandwich; the half-eaten apple; the lone carrot, pretzel or goldfish -- all consumed while standing at the kitchen island with a child in one arm and two more at the table demanding juice.
Maybe that's why her book still speaks to me.
What do you eat when no one else is looking?
On Monday, John Thomas answered a question from a 23-year-old young man who wants to know how to grow into biblical manhood.
Today I found another angle on this question: an answer from Carolyn McCulley who herself often acts as older sister to the single Christian men in her church. Her suggestions for attaining manhood from a woman's perspective are a helpful addition to John's answer.
In her list of very practical steps are: serve when it's inconvenient, cultivate godly ambition and be accountable. Her advice picks up where John's ends. It's a valuable supplement to this week's Boundless Answers: Men.
Thanks to Carolyn for taking the time to encourage and empower the single men in her life, and for modeling such nurture to other single women.
A new report from the Census Bureau shows a smaller percentage of Americans marrying in their twenties. A USA Today analysis of the numbers showed that 73% of men in their twenties have never married (compared to 64% in 2000) and 62.2% of women that age had never married (compared with 53.4% in 2000). The reporter tied this six-year jump to trends we often hear about: The trend toward delaying marriage has emerged over several decades as economic and social forces have made it more difficult for those in their 20s to reach independence. Sociologists and demographers say other factors are also at work, including increasing numbers of cohabiting couples, more highly educated women who have fewer highly educated men of comparable age to partner with, and more choices open to women than in decades past.
This change is not indicative of people giving up on marriage, however. If you look at the age segments in the data, the percentage who have never married drops to 21.6% for men and 16.4% for women by the time they are in the 35 to 44 range. By age 65, only 4.6% of American men and women have never married.
OK, I've picked a handful of year-old (AKA "classic") blog posts to feature during our anniversary week. The first time this hit the Web, you didn't have the opportunity to comment on it. Now you do.
* * *Back in May's Boundless e-newsletter, I listed 10 reasons men don't commit. I think it's worth repeating here.
According to a National Marriage Project study that's a few years old now, men have a hard time committing because of the following reasons:
- They can get sex without marriage more easily than in times past
- They can enjoy the benefits of having a wife by cohabiting rather than marrying
- They want to avoid divorce and its financial risks
- They want to wait until they are older to have children
- They fear that marriage will require too many changes and compromises
- They are waiting for the perfect soul mate and she hasn't yet appeared
- They face few social pressures to marry
- They are reluctant to marry a woman who already has children
- They want to own a house before they get a wife
- They want to enjoy single life as long as they can
The conclusion of the Rutgers study sums up the root of the problem: Men can get many of the benefits of marriage without the commitment to marriage.... Cohabitation gives men regular access to the domestic and sexual ministrations of a girlfriend while allowing them greater legal, social and psychological freedom to lead a more independent life and to continue to look around for a better partner.
Sounds a lot like Steve's conclusion in his blog post "Paul the Playboy?" that too many singles are "enjoying the sexual and companionship perks of marriage without having to take on the responsibilities that go with them."
Is there a specific solution to men's non-committal attitudes? I think so. Women can stop giving their boyfriends the emotional and physical benefits that belong inside marriage. And single marriage-age men can take responsibility, take initiative, take a chance, and do the loving, godly thing.
We talk a lot of singleness theory here at Boundless. We hail the merits of preparing for marriage and family, give tips for getting out of the singleness rut and provide biblical perspective on courtship and marriage.
It's easy to talk theory. For example, God most likely desires for you to marry and have a family or He has equipped you for celibate service. But what about everything in between? What about the woman eager to marry who has no prospective suitors? Or what about the man who feels prepared to lead a family, but has not met the right woman?
Single through most of my 20s, I have struggled with the dynamic of agreeing with God's plan for marriage and family, and yet finding my reality to be different. In these moments, it has been crucial for me to know that God is using me for His glory as I wait. Though Scripture advocates marriage, many godly men and women find themselves single longer than anticipated.
In her article, "A Single Blessing," Denise Morris writes about what she found to be the blessing in singleness: an opportunity to learn to praise God in all circumstances. I always thought that I would meet my spouse in college. We would date for about a year, graduate, get fabulous jobs, and then have a wonderful wedding. Picture perfect. However, since I am currently holding my college diploma in my diamondless left hand, I have come to the conclusion that I was wrong. Very wrong.
This is a sentiment many 20-something singles relate to. What is your response when God has not given what you believe is promised? Denise continues: I told myself: I will not praise God for my loneliness, for the times I've been passed over for someone else. I will not thank God for refusing to provide someone to marry, or someone who wants to marry me. I will not be grateful for the hot tears that escape when the feelings of inadequacy, ugliness and self-doubt overwhelm me. I can praise God for a lot of things, I told myself. But I cannot praise Him for singleness … I just can't.
I was not comforted that night. Although I knew that God was in control, that He loved me, that He was everything He had always been, I did not feel any of those things. I felt like God was mean — that He knew I needed encouragement and yet refused to give it to me. I felt frustrated with God, and I wanted to yell at Him. So I did. Well, I yelled at Him a little bit, but mostly I pleaded. I pleaded for God to give me what I wanted. I pleaded with Him to show me favor in this area. I cried big tears to show God just how serious I was.
A truth about single life is that God has the same expectations for me that He has for my married friends: "To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God" (Micah 6:8). He is just as capable of teaching me and refining me in my single state as He will one day mold me through my marriage. I also have no excuse not to praise Him for what He is doing in my life today. Denise describes her own eventual response: When I verbally praised God for my lack of a boyfriend, I don't know if I meant it. I couldn't fully mean it; my heart hurt too much. I don't know if that muffled exaltation counted as true praise. But I tried to be obedient. I did it, even though I knew I wouldn't be comforted. I did it because I knew that God was who He said He was. And I eventually fell asleep that night.
There is peace in trusting God in your reality — even if it isn't the one you desire. Theory aside, God is for you. He is working in you for His glory. And it is possible to praise Him. Thank you for pointing that out, Denise.
Conservative against liberal. Black against white. Mac against PC. Our culture likes to pit groups against each other. Not surprisingly, the issues we discuss on Boundless regarding marriage and singleness are often perceived as a pitting of one against the other. That hasn't been our intention.
The main distinction we've tried to make is between a popular culture of singleness and the callings to either Biblical marriage or celibacy. There aren't a lot of differences between those on the path to Biblical marriage and those on the celibacy path. Both are called to sexual purity, stewardship of gifts and talents and Christian community. Those on the path to marriage, however, are also called to integrity in dating/courting relationships and preparation for Biblical marriage.
There are, however, major differences between these two paths and what we often call "the third path" of singleness in our popular culture. The third path is marked by recreational hookups, consumer attitudes toward relationships, hyper individualism and sex beyond marriage. I think of "the third path" as a single version of what Paul describes as "the pattern of this world." We think it's essential that Christian singles be set apart from this third path and on either a path toward Biblical celibacy or marriage (even if they don't know how long that path will be).
For a good message on moving beyond pitting marriage against singleness, I recommend "I Do or I Don't?" by Rob Reinow, Family Pastor at Wheaton Bible Church. You can find it on the church's Website by scrolling through the sermon options until you get to the July 23rd message (I found it worked best to download the message instead of streaming it).
I especially enjoyed the excerpt Rob opens with from an older Boundless article by Kara Schwab called "Believing in the Dream of Marriage." I'm curious to hear what you think of Rob's message.
Jill wrote an e-mail to us today, referencing a meal she had last night of "lentils, carrots, and pepperoni." She then went on to ask what kinds of meals we ate during our "hungry years" -- the time in our 20s when we're growing more independent from our folks.
I was 18 years old when a friend and I moved from our parents' homes in Michigan to an apartment in Texas, taking a year off from college to figure out what we'd be doing with our lives. I had never really learned how to cook, so when I went to the grocery store I bought what I figured every kitchen should have: a bag of flour.
I remember standing in my kitchen, pondering what to do with that flour. I mixed it with some water and fried it up with some vegetable oil, another kitchen staple. I think I even ate it.
I didn't know how to boil spaghetti noodles, so instead I would pour some spaghetti sauce over a couple of slices of bread and put that in the microwave for 30 seconds.
I was shopping one day, and as I passed the spice shelves, on a whim I bought some tapioca. It made for some fun experiments, but I never did use it in food.
I was fortunate enough to have a job as an assistant manager at a Burger King up on Westheimer Street, so I didn't starve.
Once I was in college, I began experimenting with Ramen noodles, Campbell's soup, various off-brand cereals (eaten with water, since I couldn't store milk in my dorm room) and bullion cubes. My meal plan enabled me to eat in the cafeteria once a day, so again, I didn't starve.
Years have passed, and while I remember those days fondly (maybe that's not the right word), I'm more likely to make chicken marsala, lamb saag, homemade chili, chicken fried steak or spaghetti a la carbonara in my kitchen nowadays.
What are some of the crazier meals you've prepared for yourself (or, heaven forbid, your friends) during your "hungry years"?
This topic has been hashed and rehashed for centuries, and I hesitate to bring it up again. I don't want to open wounds or incite contention. I don't want to hurt anyone or lead them to feel condemned.
For no particular reason, though, I found myself awake in bed late last night, wrestling with this issue. What is it? Who has it? Is "singleness" a gift? And so on. I believe the Lord laid it on my heart to raise it again in order to dispel misconceptions about it and to stir up hope and renew your motivations.
The term is drawn from 1 Cor. 7:6-9: Now as a concession, not a command, I say this. I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
It is clear that the "gift" refers to a freedom from "burning with passion" in order to focus all one's energies on serving others in a perpetually non-married state, unencumbered by the joyful responsibility of spouse and kids. I can't relate to this gift, but a few (such as Paul, Jesus, John the Baptist, "eunuchs," Manuel Arenas and others) were given this gift so that they might best serve God and others in that capacity.
So what is the "gift of singleness"? It is not singleness itself. If you find yourself single, you most likely don't have the "gift of singleness." Your state is a gift -- but only as much as life is a gift; it may sound harsh, but there's nothing uniquely special about your singleness itself.
The state of singleness is not a sin -- though some singles' motivations for prolonging it are sinful, and the temptations to sin sexually during an extended season of singleness are heightened, often resulting in sexual sin. Calling singleness a "gift" facilitates prolonging this season of sexual temptation, and that contributes to the problems of sexual sin plaguing single adults.
The thing is, just as singleness is not itself "sin," it's also not a "gift."
Too many people say, "If you are single, then you have the gift of singleness." That sounds cute, and affirms those who are single, but it's unbiblical and meaningless and unhelpful. It's just wrong. Again, Paul clearly says that if you "burn with passion," then you don't have the "gift of singleness" and you "should marry." Would Paul command those with the "gift of singleness" to reject that gift and instead pursue marriage? No, he wouldn't. And so "if you are single, then you have the gift of singleness" is pure unbiblical vapidity.
On the other hand, marriage and kids are gifts, things given to us by God and clearly considered blessings by Scripture.
God wants people married. I'm not a "marriage mandate" advocate by any means, but I do see how God expects people to marry. He's commanded it in Scripture (Genesis 1:27-28) and affirms it by putting into the vast majority of us the passionate desire to "know" (in a sexual sense) another person intimately. The only way that desire can be fulfilled in a God-honoring way is within marriage.
If you desire marriage, if you "burn with passion," then you do not have the "gift of singleness." If you burn with passion, take that as a sign from God that you should be preparing for married life. And if you're at a "marrying age," with the blessing of your parents or mentors, you are free -- even encouraged -- to pursue it. As Paul wrote, you "should marry."
(I can hear the complaints already, from women who are "older" and discouraged that they're still single, from men who continue to be rebuffed by women they pursue, by those whose careers inhibit their being able to be in marriage-minded relationships, from those who live in small towns or attend small churches where there are few options. While you're free to express your complaints below, my hope is that you'd instead try to dig into what Paul is saying in the passage of Scripture I referenced above, that you'd humbly and prayerfully examine your heart in an effort to determine what God would have you do now. My intention is to inspire hope -- if you feel that passion, then God is for you, and eager to conspire with you to bring about the end for which that passion exists: marriage.)
I love to travel. I love being immersed in a foreign place, experiencing the peculiar range of a society's "cultural artifacts" -- their food, their language, their architecture, their landscapes, their way of thinking, their parks and markets, their entertainment, and so on. I cherish having been able to spend months in Mexico and Colombia, and weeks in Singapore, Germany, Italy, France, England, Wales, Canada and other places. I think my travels have enriched my life and help me better relate to a variety of people from a variety of cultures and subcultures.
While I advocate travel for the sake of growing in wonder and appreciation of the breadth of God's creativity, one of the most overlooked benefits is to be able to return home with new eyes. G. K. Chesterton said, "The whole object of travel is not to set foot on foreign land; it is at last to set foot on one's own land as a foreign land." T. S. Elliot expressed something similar when he said, "We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we first started, and to know that place for the first time."
Acquiring an awe of God's creation and renewing an appreciation of one's own culture are but two benefits of travel. But travel can also affect people in negative ways.
Some who travel take on a subtle arrogance. As though flying across 1,000 miles of water somehow makes them more of an expert on "matters of significance." Others may speak highly of their having done a week-long overseas missions trip, and how that has been so impactful to the natives and to themselves. Sometimes it is, of course -- my week in Mexico during my early 20s did in fact change my life. But sometimes a week in another country only gives someone a skin-deep excuse to feel culturally relevant.
It can be argued that the most culturally relevant person ever to have lived was Jesus. And Jesus wasn't much of a world traveler, having never gone more than a few dozen miles from his town of birth. His life demonstrates that ultimately how much you travel is irrelevant to how effective your ministry can be and how rich your life can be.
That said, if you've got the opportunity to travel for either a short period or for a semester or more, I'd strongly encourage you to go while you have the flexibility to do so. It will enrich your life tremendously. Just be sure to use your experiences to bless others, and not to puff yourself up.
If you're simply not able to go yourself, I'd urge you to consider experiencing other cultures vicariously through good books or documentaries. While munching on something from your local ethnic restaurant, of course.
I talked about the New Attitude conference for singles and young adults back in November. I brought it up again a month ago. A few days later Suzanne blogged about her experience at last year's New Attitude conference. It was last written about earlier this month by Motte.
Now it's arrived.
Motte, Suzanne and I will be packing up our clothes and hair wax and heading out on Saturday to spend a few days with friends and mentors. We're looking forward to catching up with old friends and being challenged by great speakers like Joshua Harris, Eric Simmons, CJ Mahaney, Mark Dever, Al Mohler and John Piper. Between sessions we'll be manning our very cool Boundless booth; during sessions you may catch us live-blogging.
If you're there, please feel free to stop by our booth to say hi! If you're not going this year, check back over the weekend for the latest from the home of the Kentucky Derby and the Louisville Slugger.
What do you do when you don't like your friend's spouse? In "Friendly Friction," Christianity Today presents the perspectives of six singles. The primary thing to consider when you dislike your friend's chosen (or intended) is what action (if any) is God asking you to take? Must you love unconditionally? Forgive? Humble yourself? If your friend seems to be dating a bad seed, maybe you need to ask some hard questions. Or perhaps you need to release personal preferences and trust God to work out your friend's situation.
I was particularly impacted by Jeanette's testimony. She writes: My sister's always been my best friend. Despite my best efforts (although I have to admit my "best efforts" weren't that impressive), I couldn't find any redeeming qualities in the man she chose to marry. I thought he was an arrogant little hobbit, and I didn't exactly roll out the red carpet to welcome him to the family. Unfortunately, by failing to love him flaws and all (which is how Christ loves us), I ended up building a wall between my sister and me.
Now that the seven-year itch has hit their marriage, my sister is reluctant to come to me for support. My earlier complaints about her husband prevent her from leaning on me during her time of need. The Bible is clear that Christians should support marriages. I fear my words, even those spoken in secret, have in some ways separated what God joined together in my sister's marriage.
I think we would agree that the worst thing we could do would be to render ourselves spiritually useless in our friends' lives. But where's the line? Obviously we are called to offer biblical advice as our friends navigate relationships and marriage. At the same time, our love, support and prayers can be crucial to our friends as they seek to discern the Lord's will.
I remember confronting a good friend of mine after she became engaged months after she had broken off a relationship with another man. I didn't have qualms about her chosen, but I was concerned that she was entering a rebound relationship. I asked her some specific questions. Her answers left me satisfied that she was indeed following the Lord, not her emotions, in her decision to wed.
Don't be afraid to ask hard questions, but don't forget to exercise humility, grace and love as you tread relationship territory with friends. Refrain from hasty judgments or words you may later regret.
And I'm not talking about alcohol. Elena asked me what I meant when I wrote: "I've observed that some of the most intentional men have allowed themselves to be intoxicated by the joy of those already in the next stage of marriage and family." She writes: "Those already in the next stage of marriage and family" — meaning the marrieds and marrieds-with-kids who are helping lead the singles group? Or people from other areas of the church? What situation were you thinking of?
Also... Are you implying that this intoxication is paralyzing to these "intentional" men? Or that the intoxication helps provide an impetus to their pursuits of women in the singles group?
Definitely the latter. I realize the word "intoxication" can be understood to be negative, but I meant it positively. Being exposed to the joy of family life can serve as a catalyst for singles to desire it for themselves, particularly those who have come from broken homes where the benefits of a functional family were not modeled. I have observed that single guys who hang out with married guys and happy families with children are more likely to desire this situation for themselves. While those who only hang out with other singles, may not realize what they're missing.
There is also the issue of modeling, which comes back to the "know-how" piece. When men and women are observing quality courtships, marriages and family relationships on a regular basis, they will pick up on specific ways to be intentional in both pursuit and response. Not only do men need these models of the "next step," women need to recognize how they can respond in a godly and wise way to those who pursue them. When we're constantly surrounded by those in our same age and stage, we miss out on the helpful examples of those in the next life stage.
Motte's post reminds me of a recent conversation. This past weekend, I spoke with a friend who was visiting from Seattle. In true girly fashion, I inquired about her romantic possibilities. She had recently gone on a few dates through an online dating site, but nothing too promising had arisen from that. I asked her what the Christian dating scene was like in her city.
"Well," she said, "I'm in a great Bible Study Fellowship group! There are many quality single guys there who are devoted to Christ."
"So what's the problem?" I asked.
"They don't seem to want to date anyone," she said. "I mean, on any given week they have easy access to a dozen awesome Christian women, so why make a choice?"
Why indeed? This led me to wonder if community groups of singles are anesthetizing the sexes to one another. Think about this: If I see you every week, even if I think you're a nice person — godly, kind, funny — I might not go to the effort of seeking you out in an intentional way. In fact, I wouldn't need to — unless I inexplicably "fell in love" with you. In the article "Quarantining a Generation," I wrote about the marriage confusion caused by homogeneous singles groups: A lack of mentorship may also contribute to the growing confusion in single circles concerning marriage. Bombarded by media that portray marriage as boredom and bondage, single guys have little motivation to pursue a woman and start a family. Instead of being encouraged to develop gentle and quiet spirits, single women are pushed by society to be independent and self- sufficient.
I'm not overly surprised that my friend is seeing little marriage fruit in a seemingly ripe environment. To stick with the metaphor, perhaps these individuals lack the motivation, or know-how, to pick the fruit that's theirs for the taking. I've observed that some of the most intentional men have allowed themselves to be intoxicated by the joy of those already in the next stage of marriage and family. An environment that has the right ingredients isn't necessarily the best place to make marriages. Singles might want to expand their possibilities by seeking out intergenerational contexts.
In last week's Boundless e-newsletter (take a look at it here, and get your free subscription to it here), I asked readers to give us their impressions of their singles groups. How are they doing a great job? How could they do better?
Some 50 of you sent me your stories. Thank you! Some of you told me about the cool things your church offers for singles. Others provided suggestions on how they might improve their singles ministry.
Here are some excerpts: During bible studies and worship services for this age group, it would be great if we sometimes focused on issues that apply specifically to us (and are often neglected during "regular" church services) like being marriage-ready, and how to start and maintain a godly relationship, and what it means to have God at the center of a relationship.
* * *
I think it would be very helpful for singles to be purposely included in groups with married people, whether it's small groups, Sunday school, or whatever form it takes in a particular church. At one church I visited for a couple of months, I became very frustrated by the isolation of the singles, which seemed to contribute to a complete disconnection from the realities of normal family life and relating to other people. Family life forces reality on individuals, and when we singles can escape that reality, we often do--to our own detriment.
* * *
Once a month people from all small groups come together for organized worship and a short Word; and afterwards fellowship and food. We've found a way to combine the small groups through the church, giving opportunity for all the ages, races, sexes, married, and unmarried to interact.
* * *
I hear all the time that this is a time in my life where God wants to use me for his service. So I get called on to do a lot of volunteering, which most of the time is fine. I don't mind. But after years of serving meals at the couples banquet, asked to baby-sit for some function, which I would like to attend, it sometimes gets old.
* * *
I am invited to someone's home every week. The members of the church call regularly to include me in activities such as plays and concerts with their families. I have been enveloped in love.... It doesn't take much to reach out to us. We're single, often lonely, and sometimes far away from our families. We don't need special programs and events, as nice as those things are. We just want love, a safe place to go and be part of a family. You'd be surprised what kind of difference that makes in someone's life.
* * *
There are only a few college students who attend the church I go to while at Penn State. The church's focus is on young families & children -- not college students or singles. There aren't any singles/college groups even though there is a campus of over 40,000 students a mile away. This I think is extremely sad since college aged people are still impressionable.
* * *
What my college/singles group ( in Allen TX) does great is NOT focusing on the fact that we are single! Each week we have prayer time at our Bible study to pray for OTHER people, in OTHER countries, and in our community.
* * *
I honestly wish my church would think about building an improv theatre, coffee house and then hiring some folks with the gift of hosting to run it. This would appeal to singles.... If you don't think their are lots of lonely singles out there, check out the chat rooms and message boards at single sites. They are active every evening, 7 days a week. Folks go their to just have someone to talk to. I think if many of those same folks had a safe, friendly and entertaining environment to go to a few nights a week they may just abandon those computers and online friendships in favor of a real world face to face interaction with other singles.
* * *
My group is a wonderful place where we can be true to ourselves and share in community. Where we fail is in teaching singles appropriate male/female relationships during this season. There are too many "buddies" in my group in friendships that are going nowhere. In addition, our church holds couples cafes for married people each month. A singles seminar is held once every 2 years.
* * *
We have our own service on Saturday nights, and our leaders cook us dinner every Saturday night. So through us eating together on a weekly basis, we are getting to fellowship together. Then we have a bible study and P&W. We do various events, really they just try and get us together as much as possible so that we will get to know one another and create friendships.... They have also allowed us to take ownership of the church. I know for many young people it had to feel like you are contributing to the church. We have monthly "work-days" at the church and we meet at the church at 8 am (you try getting college kids up and working by then) and we clean up the grounds, spread mulch, fertilize, paint, or just pick up trash ... whatever they need done, they just let us know and we do our part in taking care of the church.
* * *
My singles group is very small. I like it that way - I am able to know the people in my group on a deeper level. However, the focus has most often been on having fun and hanging out. It's a little like youth group, but not as silly. I like to have fun, but I desire some depth to our community. I feel very alone spiritually. If I could tell the older people in my church anything, I'd like to tell them to raise their expectations for our group. I think that their expectations, vocalized or not, play a large role in what actually occurs in the group, and affects what we as individuals think we can achieve in our walk with the Lord.
* * *
Here in the UK the issue of singleness among Christians is not always considered important, and many churches do not have singles groups. Singles groups that promote godly values are a rare thing here. Please pray for us UK singles and plant some churches here!
* * *
I am a 26 year-old single young lady. My friends and I have noticed a gap in the church. There is college group... then there is the singles group (typically 30's and beyond) or young marrieds. For singles post-college (23-30ish), we don't really belong anywhere. This time of starting new jobs and relationships requires community. Often college friends have moved away and it is difficulty to get connected. Of course, the best thing I can do is to get something started rather than just complaining!
* * *
If I had to pick one thing that my church could do better to serve the singles, it would be to have a singles ministry. Where I live, there is not a singles ministry around, not within 50-60 minutes of driving.... I have always thought about starting one, but would have no idea how to start it, what to do, and I would be afraid that I wouldn't have the time and devotion to do so (mainly afraid that I wouldn't be successful at it).
* * *
The correct answer then is to have singles in a church social situation or club that promotes dating and moving from the single to the relationship stage!
* * *
One of the best things about being single is being able to serve freely and spontaneously. And it's so much easier to make meaningful social connections in a setting where there is a common goal -- something to do -- that even the most artful social event cannot mimic. I would rather pick up a tool and meet people on the basis of accomplishing a goal and living a mission. It's a great way to be ourselves, not feel self-conscious, and live out God's calling w/sincere joy.
* * *
Multi-generational family is the other crucial element to singles in church. My church is superb about this, and it's the reason I became a member: there are hardly any other singles at the church, but I have a sense of belonging because couples invite me out for lunch with them, for dinner in their homes, for a weekend afternoon, or to an evening to sing around the piano. Multi-generational events are the best. I feel like I belong not when I am with peers, who are just like me, but when I am with people who are different from me who are still willing to call me one of their own--that's God's grace to a stranger, and I know it's Biblical.
* * *
The worst thing a church can do is decide that singles only want to be w/each other, and that we're not interested in eating microwaved meals w/eccentric middle-aged families, giggling teenagers, and spunky elderly folks. Singles are often too transient to maintain roots w/each other, and if we only spend time w/peers, the result can be isolation.
* * *
It really makes me want to go to college group when I know there's going to be free coffee and bagels every time, without fail. Plus I really connect with the worship music that brings us into the presence of God. The key thing for me is a small group where I'm able to be accountable to other guys, lift them up in prayer ... and generally live as a band of brothers. I learn so much from their experiences when it comes to living righteously, figuring out girls ... totally a win-win.
* * *
I think one of the most discouraging things is that my church treats protracted singleness like it is not a problem. The times that I have brought up my desire for marriage I have been virtually ignored or told that it will happen in God's time. In our singles group we never discuss marriage and family. Most of those that attend the study are in their early 20's and I think most of them think marriage is in the far off future and just do not care about preparing for the future. The church does not think there is a problem to address and leaves those who desire marriage to fend for themselves.
What would you add? How is your singles group doing?
OK, I really don't think Dr. Albert Mohler is ever really versus Dr. John Piper, but on the issue of singleness, I can't imagine more diametrically opposed messages.
Take these two quotes for example: Dr. Mohler: "I believe in the Scripture, the default position for adult is married, that it's a responsibility. It's not just an elective. And it's not just so we can engage in sexual relations. It's because God desires that we glorify him in the covenant of marriage and that he made us for that purpose and directs us to His Glory in that covenant. [Scripture] tells us that we should have children and welcome them and raise them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. So there's business to be done in marriage to God's glory!" -- 9 Marks "Biblical Dating with Al Mohler and Joshua Harris"
Dr. Piper: "God promises you blessings in the age to come that are better than the blessings of marriage and children. And with this promise there comes a unique calling and a unique responsibility. It is not a calling to extend irresponsible adolescence into your thirties. It is a calling to do what only single men and women in Christ can do in this world, namely, to display by the Christ-exalting devotion of your singleness the truths about Christ and his kingdom that shine more clearly through singleness than through marriage." -- Desiring God "Single in Christ: A Name Better Than Sons and Daughters"
Based solely on these two excerpts, you could argue that the two views are not inconsistent, saying they're simply unpacking different callings. But any honest examination of the writings and talks of both men reveal somewhat of a rift in this debate. Similar to a point Debbie Maken made, I think the difference here is the emphasis, or de-emphasis, on sexual passion.
Whenever I've heard Dr. Mohler speak about singleness, he stresses that your physical and sexual maturity exists to point you to marriage. And he warns that the delay of marriage will continue to wreak havoc on the Christian community in the form of sexual sin -- masturbation, fornication and pornography. Conversely, Dr. Piper hardly addresses it in the context of singleness and marriage.
In the 9 Marks interview, Dr. Mohler says, "We need to get back to a simple formula I think we can all understand: Adulthood equals marriage, the exception being celibacy." Whatever your take of Dr. Piper's sermon, it would be difficult to make it congruent with that message. But maybe he doesn't want it to be.
I found Carolyn McCulley's commentary on Candice Watters' recent Boundless article, "Misguided Compassion," very balanced.
As a refresher, Candice proposed that some singles groups could do better at preparing and enabling their members for the next season of life, marriage. Sometimes they focus so much on affirming the state of singleness and encouraging their members to simply "wait on God" that they end up discouraging singles from taking steps to move from that state.
Carolyn elaborated on the article, wisely pointing out that it's not either/or -- either you "wait on the Lord" and trust His sovereignty or you take steps to assure a "timely" marriage. Instead, she insists it be both/and -- both place your trust in the sovereign Lord of relationship and intentionally work toward marriage (unless, of course, you sense a calling to sanctified singleness / celibate service).
This reminds me of when I was provoked earlier this decade to bring an end to my years of contented adultescence and pursue marriage.
In the midst of pursuing the woman who ended up telling me "I do," I believe I heard from the Lord. I put it that way because if I've ever heard from Him, it was then. While seeking His counsel and direction and approval, I had the strong sense that He was "conspiring with me to win Ashleigh's heart." Yeah, that's the word -- "conspiring." Instead of Him doing "all the work" which would allow me to be passive, and instead of me "going for it" without depending on the Lord, I felt that He was right beside me like a great Mentor, cheering for me and enjoying watching the relationship blossom.
Our situation was atypical, I think, in that we placed such an emphasis on physical and emotional purity that we both consequently had a keen and uncluttered sense of the Lord's direction. But I think our experience reveals what could take place -- a fine balance of both my taking initiative and our trusting in the sovereign grace of the Lord.
OK, that's misleading on three points. It's not a Boundless conference, it's not sponsored by Boundless, and it's not just a singles conference.
But three of us (Motte, Suzanne, and myself) will be there at New Attitude, surrounded by thousands of twentysomethings, most of them single. Speakers include Boundless authors C.J. Mahaney, Joshua Harris, Al Mohler, Bob Kauflin and Eric Simmons.
So the title is kind of non-misleading.
Some of you've suggested we sponsor a conference or meeting for the Boundless family (that's you!). Until we're able to put something together ourselves, this might just be the best thing out there. I've been to several of the conferences, sometimes spending time on stage, and have never returned home unchanged. I've found myself more in love with the Lord, more in wonder of the cross, and more challenged in my faith every year I've attended. In all honesty, I credit one of the New Attitude speakers for motivating me to bring an end to my own years of extended adolescence, something that led to my getting married within a couple of years.
The event takes place May 26-29 in Louisville, Kentucky; registration is open until May 7.
If you're going, please let us know. It'd be great to meet you there. We'll be giving away stuff at our booth, sitting with other bloggers in the prestigious "bloggers section" during some of the main sessions, and taking naps back on our hotel rooms. Maybe just greet us at our booth or in the bloggers section.
It's better to be single and wish you were married than be married and wish you were single. So says a host of columns, blogs and books for singles. I've seen it stated subtly by many Christian authors and most recently, boldly, in USA Today's "Free as a bird and loving it: Being single has its benefits."
This article, by Sharon Jayson, reports that not only are singles a growing segment of the population, they're increasingly happy to stay that way. But it doesn't stop there.
A new wave of books is making the case that being single is better. Among them are Better Single Than Sorry: A No-Regrets Guide to Loving Yourself and Never Settling, I'd Rather Be Single Than Settle: Satisfied Solitude and How to Achieve It, Naked on the Page: The Misadventures of My Unmarried Midlife, On My Own: The Art of Being a Woman Alone, Singular Existence: Because It's Better to be Alone Than Wish You Were! (Speaking of "naked," I wonder how long these authors would be happily single if they weren't also having sex.)
I realize these authors don't claim to be promoting a biblical worldview. But we should take notice nonetheless. Books like these and articles like "Free as a Bird" are affecting the way we view singleness in our culture. And that does affect believers and non-believers alike.
They're not content to say "single is great" and leave it at that. It seems they're on a mission to tear down marriage in the process.
It's one thing for people who don't profess faith in Christ to talk this way. But as believers, we're called to a higher standard. Hebrews 13:4 says, "Marriage should be honored by all." It's tempting to adopt a stance of moral equivalency: "Being single's hard, but marriage is no picnic either." But that's a far cry from the biblical standard of honor.
Interestingly, all five of those books listed above are by women. It's hard to imagine a man getting away with writing books about how marriage to most women would be "settling." With titles like those, it makes me think they've got a bad case of sour grapes or they simply hate men. (And for the man's part, can you imagine him wanting to date a woman who will likely dump him because to commit to him would be "settling"?)
It's like deciding it's better to walk everywhere than simply drive a car (the car, after all, could need repairs some day).
In his article published yesterday, "Biblical Dating: Just Friends," Scott Croft identifies different types of friendship experienced by single adults. There's the type that unintentionally "invites confusion and frustration," and there's the type that's enjoyed within the "context of community."
He's not trying to pour cold water on the rich friendships singles can share, but rather bring clarity to an area that sometimes invites confusion and "delays the good."
What do you think? Have you experienced these two types of friendship? Are there other kinds of friendship?
I'd love to hear your comments, but request that before you press the "post" button you read what Scott wrote.
Kids do best when they have both a mother and father caring for them, of course, but what about single adults who have a heart for kids and are interested in adoption? Should they really consider adopting a child?
If they have a strong sense that the Lord is directing them to do so, I think it's totally fine.
Though single-parent households experience difficulties that two-parent households don't, the truth is that a child benefits more from being in a single-parent home than in an orphanage or in the foster care system.
There are more than 150,000 children in the United States who need a permanent home, and according to Voice of the Orphan some 143 million worldwide in the same state. To grow up without a mom and/or dad is a heartbreaking tragedy, one that no child should have to endure.
It's our position, then, that if you're single and feel motivated and qualified to explore the option of adopting, you should go ahead and do so. As mentioned above, it will be more difficult for you and will affect your lifestyle significantly (single women, for example, should be aware that raising boys is an extra challenge). But parent-less children stand to benefit from the love parent-minded single adults have to offer. If you feel called to such a ministry, please know that you have our admiration and support.
If you've considered adoption, click over to Voice of the Orphan or get in touch with Focus on the Family for some helpful resources.
(By the way, we unequivocally oppose homosexual adoption, and believe that such living arrangements are inherently immoral and are detrimental to the wellbeing of children. I'd prefer not to even go there in the comments that may ensue.)
Copyright 2009 Focus on the Family. All rights reserved. International copyright secured. The Line and Boundless Line are trademarks of Focus on the Family.
|
Recent Comments