Why Courtship Needs to Get Back to Fundamentals: Part 3

In case you missed it...

Why Courtship Needs to Get Back to Fundamentals: Part 1

Why Courtship Needs to Get Back to Fundamentals: Part 2 

The Heart of Courtship

We have examined and critiqued some of the features which many seem to consider the essence of courtship. So with those gone, where does that leave us? What is left?

Well, first, let us take a look at the most common alternative: modern dating. What does this look like for the most part? Here is my assessment of the situation...

• Children begin facing pressure to couple up and date as early as elementary school. Marriage may be a fuzzy goal off somewhere in the distance, but it is not the emphasis. The emphasis is more on having fun for now—dating for recreation alone—and getting serious later... maybe.

• It is considered normal for teen couples to be getting physical with each other. As one sexual health organization says, “By their late teenage years, at least 3/4 of all men and women have had intercourse, and more than 2/3 of all sexually experienced teens have had 2 or more partners.” (source)

• Children are often left to navigate romantic relationships and sexuality with nothing but “sex ed” class, the knowledge of their peers, and the internet. These may give them information about sex, but do they teach them anything about how to build a long-term relationship? My gut tells me “no.”

For those who value marriage and sexual purity, this does not present a good option. There is little to facilitate the goal that I think we all have: a long and happy marriage. So what is the alternative? I believe one good answer lies in the three principles that I gave in the first post. They are as follows...

1. A Clear Direction for the Relationship

The goal of courtship is to explore the possibility of marriage. This defines the direction for the relationship from the start, which can help to avoid unnecessary conflict, confusion, temptation, and heartache.

Because the modern dating system can involve many different possible goals in a relationship (whether companionship, fun, sex, or simply avoiding loneliness), it can be difficult to judge the commitment level of the relationship at any one point. There may be questions such as: Does he really like me, or is he just trying to avoid being single? Is she interested in marriage, or will she dump me if I broach the subject? Are we going to keep dating forever, or is this relationship going somewhere? With courtship, you can at least be sure that you have the same goal in mind (marriage), and you will see where it goes.

Further, the fact that marriage is being considered makes waiting for romance until an appropriate age (late teen to young adult) the logical choice, which can help a young person avoid all the drama and temptation that is often present during the tumultuous teenage years. I for one was very thankful that there was no pressure on me to have a boyfriend at a young age... I was able just to focus on growing up and coming to a better understanding of who I was and what I was looking for in a mate.

These are a couple of advantages that I believe courtship has due to its marriage-focused mindset.

2. A Commitment to Stay Sexually Pure

Though this ideal can certainly be found elsewhere outside of courtship, sexual purity (i.e., saving sexual activity for marriage) is another one of the underlying goals of courtship. As I said in the last post, this focus does not mean that sexual sin and mistakes—either past or present—make a person or a relationship irredeemable. But it is founded on the belief that God wants what is best for us, and His Word indicates that sexual activity is intended for marriage only. Hence, no matter what our past may include, we ought to do our best to follow Him going forward.

And while this goal can be found in other methods, it is not always something that users of other methods have in common. As we have seen, this is certainly not the case for modern dating. When we're speaking of adults at least, the word “dating” often seems to include sexual activity by implication. The terminology is not the point, though—you can call a method whatever you want. What matters is that the underlying assumptions and expectations are different depending on the method. With courtship, your value of sexual purity, like your value of marriage, is an understood from the beginning of the relationship.

3. Accountability and Mentorship

The final thing I would consider a fundamental value of courtship is the value of gathering wisdom from those who have gone before. Marriage is an institution nearly as old as creation, and yet it seems that a large percentage of our culture has no idea how to do it. Why try to navigate the muddled waters alone? Find someone who has gone before you with a marriage that you admire and find out what they did to make it work.

For many of us, this couple may be our parents. My parents happened to be a great example to me of what a marriage should look like, so they were the natural choice. But for others, parents may not be the greatest example, may not share your Christian values, or may not be the easiest people to talk to. In that case, your mentor could be a friend or someone in your church who seems to have a happy, healthy marriage. Having someone who can give you wise counsel as you walk the road toward marriage (or away from it) can be a great asset.

Now, let me clarify that seeking counsel not only as a couple but also as individuals can be highly beneficial, and may need to be the primary focus before engagement. After all, a large part of the relationship process is finding out who YOU are as well as who your potential mate is. But these are all things that will vary from case to case... The underlying principle is simply to find someone who can help you through the process, giving you practical wisdom and pointing you to Christ all the while.

I think I should also add that if your primary mentors are not your parents for whatever reason, parents generally still have some helpful advice. And though there is no Scriptural command for adult children to obey their parents (another subject for another day), we are commanded to honor our father and mother. (Eph. 6:2) This word “honor” is the same word that is used to describe what husbands are commanded to do for their wives (1 Pet. 3:7): essentially to listen to them and show them respect. So although our parents may not have a final say over a relationship, I believe we at least ought to take any opinions they want to voice into account.

Why Not “Traditional Dating”?

Now that we have an understanding of the fundamentals of courtship (as I define it), let us examine the suggestion that Umstattd makes about “traditional dating.” This term refers to what his grandmother did when she was young. According to his account, she began dating in middle school, but she was not allowed to date the same person twice in a row. This, he says, allowed her to get to know a variety of different guys without making things so exclusive and serious right up front. There was not so much room for temptation and broken hearts when there was not such a degree of possessiveness over a certain guy or girl.

Now, honestly, this system does not seem so bad to me right off. It makes a good deal of sense, and obviously it worked fine for Umstattd's grandmother (and, he asserts, a large portion of the “Greatest Generation,” though he doesn't seem to have anything to back up that assertion). But is this method really superior to the form of courtship I have suggested?

I will not attempt to argue that courtship is the “best” model. As we have seen, it has led to a number of misunderstandings, which has led to heartbreak and pain for some people. I think the “best” model is the one that best fits those who use it, and that determination has to be made between the individuals and God. However, I would like to point out a couple of problems I see with “traditional dating” right off the bat.

First of all, the system of “dating” without any exclusivity sounds more to me like simply building friendships with the opposite sex. While it is not common for users of courtship to do one-on-one activities with the opposite sex, I don't necessarily see a major problem with it (though I would personally prefer group settings until adulthood). My question is, if you are just building friendships, why place the dating label on it? Maybe this was different back in his grandmother's time, but in this day and age, as soon as you call something a “date,” it is assumed to be romantic, not a “just friends” thing. If you want to build friendships with the opposite sex, I'm all for it! But I think it's easier to keep hormones and emotions out of it if it is clear that you are not “coupling up,” even for a limited time.

In addition, the basis of this argument for traditional dating is that you need to get to know a lot of different people before you'll be able to determine what you want in a guy/girl. I can understand that if you're in one of those circles that believes even eye contact with the opposite sex is sinful, then yeah, you could probably use some more exposure! But I don't think it's always necessary to build friendships with a number of different potential mates in order to find the one who is right for you. Again, I have nothing against such friendships! But I don't think they are always necessary.

Take my story, for instance. I had a fine amount of exposure to guys... friends of siblings, siblings of friends, guys that went to my youth group and later my college classes, etc. I enjoyed being around them and conversed with them fairly regularly. But on the inside, I felt awkward and uncomfortable... My personality inhibited me from growing close enough to any of them that I would truly consider them my “friends.”

Then I met my future husband. At first, I had no interest in him, which actually was an advantage... For the first time in my life, I was able to get to know a guy my age without obsessing over what he thought of me and whether he liked me... I didn't really care. As we worked on a church play together, I grew to like him more and more, but I still wasn't thinking of him in a romantic light... I think it finally dawned on me when the play ended and I realized that I missed him. He was really the first guy I ever considered to be my friend. I learned soon afterward that he had feelings for me when he wrote to my dad, and the rest is history. Our relationship has not been perfect by any means, but we have grown over time, and now at 8.5 years of marriage, I can honestly say that our relationship is happier and healthier than ever.

Under “traditional dating” wisdom, however, it shouldn't have worked out that way. I should not have been able to determine who I wanted to marry without spending one-on-one time with several different men. Umstattd clarifies in his second article that he did not intend to create another system of rigid rules for relationships, and that is helpful. But in his first article anyway, he does place a heavy emphasis on socialization with many members of the opposite sex in order to find The One. This is the same view that our culture takes... How can you ever know a person is The One without a great deal of checking out the options?

Let me put it to you in an analogy. If you knew you wanted to find a car, how would you shop for it? One person might have a very vague idea of what he wants, show up at the dealership, and test drive a dozen cars before deciding on the one he wants. Another person might already have a pretty good idea of what he wants, having done a good deal of research beforehand, then head to the dealership and drive away with the first car he takes for a test run. Neither approach is inherently better than the other... it just depends on the personality. And if you try to insist that either person really should follow the other person's method of car-buying, you are likely to end up with a very frustrated buyer.

And of course, the added complication as regards relationships is that not all the “cars” are willing to go for a “test drive”... They have to be interested in you, too. What if, as in my case, you are a somewhat shy, awkward person who doesn't tend to attract a lot of attention? If you live in a world in which everyone else is constantly going out on dates, but you are not, that can make you feel pretty lonely and worthless. It sounds as though Umstattd's grandmother was a pretty popular girl in her time... what about the unpopular girls? I wonder how they felt.

Anyway, the bottom line is, I believe it is a mistake to imply that frequent girl/guy interactions and friendships are prerequisites for a happy marriage. I wish I could have been able to have guys as friends through my teen years, but that just wasn't me. I hope my children have a different experience. But if they don't, I don't want to put pressure on them to make friends of the opposite sex, and I don't want to make them feel that their romantic relationships are bound to be inferior because of it. I think there ought to be more appreciation for the idea that, “You don't need scores of suitors. You only need one... if he's the right one.”

For these reasons, among others, I am personally not a huge fan of the traditional dating that he advocates. If that works best for some people, I have nothing against them! But I believe courtship as I have defined it is at least a very viable alternative, if not a preferable one.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In his post which came out yesterday, one of the points Umstattd rejected was the argument that, “Our courtship worked. Therefore, courtship works.” I agree... this is faulty logic. But he seems to think the opposite is perfectly reasonable: that because courtship didn't work for him and some of his friends, courtship is therefore fundamentally flawed. If either idea is predicated on the success rate, it needs to have some statistics to back it up. Otherwise, it is unprovable... all you can do is debate the merits of the philosophy, as he did a bit, and as I have done here. In my opinion, however, Umstattd's good points in this debate were weakened by blanket statements that didn't have any proof, and were somewhat lost in a sea of advice and proposed solutions. He failed to make a clear case, and (in my opinion) his solutions had their own issues.

Courtship, at its roots, is not fundamentally flawed. It simply needs to lose the problematic additions and get back to the fundamentals.

Why Courtship Needs to Get Back to Fundamentals: Part 2

In case you missed it... 
Why Courtship Needs to Get Back to Fundamentals: Part 1

Common Problems with Courtship (in my experience)

First of all, I want to clear up some terminology issues. Umstattd made the point in his article that the word “dating” meant something different to some people (like his grandmother) than it does to others (like him). I think the same is true for the word “courtship.” Umstattd makes a list of bullet points which summarize “courtship” in his view, and I think he is fair in saying that they sum up the most common view of most who advocate and engage in courtships today. However, I think it is important to point out that these bullet points do not necessarily reflect the basic foundational principles of courtship, at least how I understand it. But because some proponents of courtship (Wilson, for example) espouse these ideas, I want to make sure I address them.

Playing the “Most Godly” Card

One point that Umstattd touched on briefly (under the heading, “But Isn't Courtship Biblical?”) was the idea that courtship is the "most Godly" way to approach romantic relationships. Here I have to agree completely with his (brief) argument and his conclusions. There are many examples in the Bible of relationships and marriages begun by methods that look nothing like courtship. Just because there is an example in the Bible that follows a certain method does not mean it was an example that God intended us to follow. So because there is no clear model for relationship navigation, I would say that courtship is not inherently more “Biblical” than other methods.

Wilson, on the other hand, disagrees, referring people to his book on courtship (Her Hand in Marriage) to back up his points. As I've mentioned, I have not read the book cover to cover, but I've seen enough that I think I can summarize it. Basically, Wilson's view is that children, especially girls, are under the protection and authority of their fathers until marriage. It is the father's job to guard the purity of his daughters, to screen her suitors, and to be intimately involved in her choice of romantic interests.

This, he says, is the “Biblical” way mainly due to a passage in Numbers regarding the vows. Chapter 30 verses 3-5 reads, “When a woman makes a vow to God and binds herself by a pledge as a young girl still living in her father's house, and her father hears of her vow or pledge but says nothing to her, then she has to make good on all her vows and pledges. But if her father holds her back when he hears of what she has done, none of her vows and pledges are valid.” (MSG) Ostensibly, the fact that the passage mentions that the young woman lives in her father's house is proof that all young women ought to remain in their father's house until they are “given in marriage,” a phrase which Wilson also tries to use to support his point. And the fact that the father was given the authority to nullify the young girl's vow supposedly means that he has control over all her decisions.

Granted, Wilson would not put it that way—he tries to soften his argument by saying that a father needs to be understanding and loving, and that's all well and good... but I'm sorry, this passage by no means places any command over Christians of today regarding the way that their lives and relationships need to be conducted. Wilson seems to take the view that Jewish culture had a corner on the market for How God Wants Life to be Lived.

For example, in another of his books (The Federal Husband, which I also haven't fully read), Wilson spends the last few pages pontificating on how we need to make our wedding ceremonies more “Biblical.” One point he makes is that weddings in the Bible typically involve feasting for days on end, and because we usually only have a few hours for a reception, this, in his opinion, is “clearly something we need to work on.” (p. 107-108) Pardon me? Are all Jewish traditions binding on me? Apparently not all, for a page or so later, Wilson admits that no one wants to return the tradition of consummating the marriage on the premises of the wedding (agreed!). So why must we “work on” including feasts in our wedding ceremonies but not follow other Jewish traditions, such as holding the wedding by surprise in the middle of the night? This is also “Biblical” (see Matt. 25, for example), and even contains much meaningful symbolism and parallels to the second coming of Christ. Why wouldn't we want to do that? Simple: because it does not fit our culture, and there is no command over us to follow the cultural traditions of an ancient society.

This applies to the cultural traditions on which Wilson's argument for courtship is based as well. As Umstattd rightly points out, most arguments for the Biblical nature of courtship really offer greater support for arranged marriage. I'm not saying that isn't a valid option for some people (especially in other cultures), but I don't think most fans of courtship are advocating that. So if we are modifying the method anyway, why can't we modify it a little further?

The bottom line is, we may be able to take ideas from Scriptural examples and cultural traditions mentioned in the Bible, but they ought not to be made into hard-and-fast rules of conduct. There are many viable ways of approaching romantic relationships, including several different examples in the Bible. We just have to do our best to trust God to lead us down the path that is right for us.

Overbearing Parents

This point is closely tied in to the last one. I have heard several stories of parents who get far too involved in their childrens' love lives... turning away perfectly good options for suitors, making strict lists of rules for their children to follow during their courtship, even setting out to tear established relationships apart because they've decided they don't particularly like the person their son or daughter has chosen. I can understand why some people, perhaps even Umstattd, have a very bad taste left in their mouths regarding courtship when it involves parents such as these.

Yet Wilson thinks this is not a problem with the system, but the user. As regards courtship in general, I might agree... but as for the level of parental control that Wilson himself advocates over a child's romantic relationships, I would agree with Umstattd that this version of the system, though it may still work for some people, is indeed fundamentally flawed.

As we have seen, Wilson would argue that fathers are guardians of their daughters' purity and are the authorities over their daughters' relationships. While we know that ancient cultural traditions are not binding on us, doesn't the Numbers passage above prove that daughters at least ought to remain under the father's authority until marriage in this way? No, it doesn't. Explaining that in detail is beyond the scope of this post (perhaps another day), but I will summarize.

First of all, you'll see that the verses specifically say that a woman is under this authority “as a young girl.” Several commentaries indicate that this phrase speaks of girls under the legal age (in Jewish culture) of twelve. I think most of us can agree that it is appropriate for preteens to remain under their parents' authority!

After this age, however, it was a different story. John Gill, quoting another author, writes: “[O]ur Rabbins say, [a girl] of eleven years of age and one day, her vows are examined, whether she knows on whose account she vows and consecrates, or devotes anything; one vows a vow that is twelve years and one day old, there is no need to examine them.” In other words, in the case of a girl who was of the proper age (12 or older), any vow that passed her lips would be binding. She was an adult in the eyes of Jewish law and would be permitted to make her own choices without input from her father.

Granted, the fact that arranged marriages were still common implies a certain level of parental control over the match. There is some evidence that the children were able to give their input (also beyond the scope of this post), but ultimately, that is beside the point when (again) you realize that cultural tradition does not equal Biblical command.

I would agree with Umstattd that the role of the parents in their childrens' relationships, at most, ought to be that of an adviser and mentor rather than a guardian or matchmaker. Why? Because, as my dad likes to say, as parents, we are not raising children—we are raising adults. Adults need to make their own decisions, and those who are on their way toward adulthood need practice in making their own decisions. Will they make mistakes? Almost certainly. But so will we as parents! And we cannot insulate them from pain forever. Pain is unavoidable... it is a part of growing up. We cannot allow the fear of our children experiencing pain to stunt their growth. In some cases, our over-protection can cause more pain than their own mistakes ever would have. If we tug at the leash in an attempt to prevent them from making mistakes, they will tend to tug back and may resent us for restraining them. If we allow them the freedom to make mistakes, however, they will tend to come back to us for help.

So, as Umstattd felt the need to clarify in his second post, I am not saying that parents shouldn't be involved. I believe in most cases it is best if the parents are involved—getting to know their child's boyfriend/girlfriend, giving them input on their choice and on how the relationship is going, and generally just being there to give advice and help wherever the son or daughter may need it. But I believe in general (unless there is a blatant sin issue that needs to be confronted), it ought to be more the choice of the son or daughter to come to the parent, not the other way around. No one likes unrequested advice.

High Pressure Situations

Umstattd makes the assertion that courtship is the rough equivalent of engagement. In at least some circles, I would say that this assertion holds true. With the guy asking the father's permission to court, and with the intention of finding a spouse being forefront on the couple's mind, it can indeed feel like a pre-engagement of some kind.

This was actually the one wrinkle I would identify in my own courtship journey. My dad had experienced his older daughters hanging out in co-ed groups, getting to know guys in a friendship environment, eventually expressing feelings for each other, and then having the guy ask after his daughters once they were already significantly interested in each other. I, on the other hand, was rather awkward and uncomfortable around guys my age, and I never really developed those male friendships on my own. When my husband first expressed interest in me, my dad was hesitant to give his blessing because he felt we barely knew each other (he was right). But I pointed out to him that neither of us were the type who would just naturally get to know each other in groups, as he suggested. And besides, in my opinion, courtship did not carry any commitment other than “I want to get to know you better to explore the possibility of marriage.” If it did not work out, it really was not the end of the world. My dad listened to my thoughts, and in the end we came to more of an understanding on this point.

In order to reduce the amount of pressure on courting (or interested) couples, I think we need to realize is that courtships ending in a parting of ways rather than in marriage does not present a “failure” of the courtship system, but rather a success. If a couple can determine whether or not they would make a good match, it is a successful courtship—even if the answer is “no.” (For those keeping score, Josh Harris specifically says this in Boy Meets Girl.)

So anyway, I agree with Umstattd that these things can be taken far too seriously at times. Even Wilson does not deny this. Where I would disagree with Umstattd, however, is that this is a necessary feature of courtship. I will say that most people I know of do include the asking of the father's permission in their definition of the term. From what I recall, Josh Harris is of this opinion, although I believe he allows for circumstances which may make it impossible or impractical. Personally, I think it is a courtesy thing that many parents appreciate, so it is often a good idea. But I don't consider asking for parental blessing to be essential, at least for adults.

On a side note, though, Umstattd has apparently gotten a lot of flack for saying that girls who direct a guy to their dad ought to be left alone. He has his reasons, and I can respect that... but I can't agree. For me, I did somewhat assume at the time of my own courtship that asking the father was an inherent feature of the system. But I also wanted it that way. I trusted my parents and wanted their advice and blessing. If my (now) husband had come to me first instead of my dad, I would have been thrilled... but I absolutely would have told him that I'd like to discuss it with my parents first, and probably would have wanted him to talk to them as well to see what they thought of him. If he really liked me enough, he would have respected my wishes and gone through with it. If not, I would not have considered him worth my time. So potentially, guys who follow through on the "don't ask Dad first" advice might very well miss out on some quality girls who really just want their parents' opinion. Just because parents might want to be involved does not mean they will force their opinions on the two of you. Mine never did.

Too Many Rules

This point is related to abstaining from sexual activity before marriage, and it involves what some people would call the problem with the “purity culture.” Some of you are already very familiar with this idea, but for those of you who are not, suffice it to say that many feel (and I agree) that in response to our sex-saturated culture, some have swung way too far in the other direction. I'm talking teen girls being called “sluts” for merely holding a conversation with a guy, being told that looking a boy in the eye is a form of flirtation, and that ANY physical (and sometimes even verbal) interaction with the opposite sex is “defrauding their future spouse.” I hope I don't have to point out why these things are utterly ridiculous.

Even when these views are tempered to somewhat less ridiculous levels, there can still be such an emphasis on purity that a young person can feel guilty for merely being attracted to someone of the opposite gender. This kind of mindset can cause a lot of problems for someone wrestling to sort out their romantic feelings. Don't get me wrong—I am a big advocate of sexual purity before marriage, and of trying to guard ourselves from getting too attached to anyone too quickly. But I think there are some common misunderstandings about purity that need to be cleared up. Here are a few of the ones I consider most important...

• As I've said above, we all make mistakes. We can't live life in constant fear of pain or failure.
• External controls only do so much. No amount of modesty can prevent a guy from lusting after a girl. No amount of accountability can keep someone from sin if the desire to sin is stronger than the desire to obey God. The ultimate form of problem prevention is self-control, which comes only by the power of the Spirit.
• While it is always better to avoid sin in the first place, God is always there to forgive us, to wash away the stains and scars and make us whole and new again. Sexual sin (or involuntary violation) does not make us permanently damaged goods.
• There is a certain level of contemplation of the opposite gender that is perfectly healthy and normal. Finding a girl attractive does not equal lust.
• Finally, and most importantly, while what we do with our minds and bodies is important, purity is ultimately more about the condition of the heart. We don't need to worry so much about rules... If our hearts are dedicated to pleasing God, doing honorable things with our minds and bodies should flow out of that desire naturally.

In my experience, many users of courtship are not clear on these points, which can result in a lot of confusion, heartache, and hindrance in relationships... even after marriage. Once again, however, I would contend that these strict purity beliefs are not inextricable features of courtship.

Not Enough Fish in the Sea

Another point on which I agree with Umstattd is that, in my experience, the circles in which many users of courtship find themselves do not easily present them with a lot of options for a mate. This could be the case for a number of reasons, but I would say from what I've seen that most of the time it is due more to homeschooling than courtship. Homeschoolers do not always have a large pool of like-minded friends—some are rather secluded.

However, this is no reason to forgo homeschooling. There are plenty of ways to work around this (also beyond the scope of this article, but Umstattd has some decent suggestions at the end of his original post). The problem for some young people is that their parents have such strict rules about parental authority and opposite sex interactions that they are not free to take advantage of these options. Basically, this problem can happen as a result of all of the above issues.

So to sum up, I would agree with Umstattd that the above features and beliefs surrounding courtship—what he seems to believe are the fundamental principles—are indeed fundamentally flawed. I hope I have showed sufficient reasoning to help make it clear why I draw this conclusion. But as I have said with each of these, I do not feel that they represent the heart of courtship itself. More on that in the next post...

Why Courtship Needs to Get Back to Fundamentals: Part 3

Why Courtship Needs to Get Back to Fundamentals: Part 1

The Courtship Controversy

Well, I had intended to make this a fun, mom-oriented blog with occasional delving into more serious subjects, but it would appear that my first substantive post is going to be more of the latter variety. I just can't stop myself from getting involved in debates sometimes. ;-)

An Introduction to Courtship

First, a little about me for those who don't know. I grew up in a community in which modern dating was the exception rather than the rule. What most parents and young people tended to prefer was “courtship,” an older-fashioned approach to romance. There are many different nuances of the term depending on the circles in which you encounter it, but to try to sum it up, I would narrow it down to three basic principles: 1) romantic relationships are intended to explore the possibility of marriage and are hence delayed until an appropriate age; 2) the couple is committed to staying sexually pure before marriage; and 3) parents play a significant role in helping to guide the romantic relationship.

What this looked like for me was that I did not date through my teen years. When I was nearing 20, my (now) husband asked my dad's permission to get to know me as a potential mate. We spent time together, both with my family and just the two of us, grew closer and eventually decided that we wanted to spend the rest of our lives together. (This sounds rather clinical when put this way, but it was more romantic in practice, I promise!) We set certain standards for ourselves during our relationship, including deciding to save our first kiss for our wedding day. We got engaged about 9 months after beginning our courtship and were married about 7 months later.

For many of my friends who may read this, this was the “norm.” I am only explaining it in this much detail because, in the community of which I am now a part, this approach to romantic relationships seems relatively uncommon. I have heard some of my local friends express a desire for something different from what our culture commonly offers our children, and I heartily agree! While there might have been a few things I would have changed about the way our relationship was handled, I was very happy with it overall. I would recommend the kind of experience we had to anyone.

That said, I am aware of some problems that others have experienced with the courtship model. There are stories of failed relationships and broken hearts; there are stories of poorly thought-out marriages that end in disaster. And I cannot deny that courtship—as some people interpret it, anyway—is at least partially to blame.

Dueling Views of Courtship

Now cue a certain article floating around my Facebook feed called "Why Courtship is Fundamentally Flawed." I read the article shortly after it came out last week, and as a few of my friends already know from my comments, I was not a huge fan of it. There were certainly some good points, I thought, but there were both things said with which I didn't agree and things left unsaid (or under-said) which I felt were rather important.

Yesterday I discovered that Doug Wilson, one of the early proponents of the courtship model, has written an article in response. As I read that one yesterday morning, my opinion of it was similar... Some good points, some not-so-good points (or underlying views), and some points I thought were missing.

Now, I don't claim to be a top-notch journalist or an expert on the subject of courtship, nor do I expect to get the sort of audience that either of these two men are getting. But I thought I would at least toss my opinion into the ring as one who has gone through courtship, who has observed and spoken with a number of “courters” about their relationships, and who is the daughter of one well-known advocate of the courtship movement. At the very least, this blog post will serve as an easy link I can share instead of clogging up my friends' comments sections when these articles inevitably make the rounds again. ;-)

For those of you who have read the article, you may have gotten the impression, as I did, that Mr. Umstattd (the author) considers himself an authority on the subject of courtship. He mentions speaking at homeschool conferences, he tells of a courtship-related website he “founded,” and he seems to know a lot about the divorce rate among courtship users. I do not know the guy personally, so I can't say how much of an authority on the subject he really is. But just from a little internet digging, it appears to me that he is not exactly an expert. In fact, I feel that this was one of those articles intended for a much smaller audience that just happened to go viral.

If you are like me, you probably assumed that Mr. Umstattd has gone around speaking to homeschool conferences on the subject of courtship. That would be incorrect. According to his bio he speaks on the the subjects of marketing and technology. You may have assumed that his website, PracticalCourtship.com, is an up-and-coming new site with thousands (or at least hundreds) of people talking about courtship, or perhaps even a new courtship-oriented version of Match.com. Also incorrect. Look it up, and you can see for yourself that it is little more than a blog with a dozen or so posts written about 5 years ago, with the most popular post receiving right around 40 comments. It looks professional... much more professional than this blog, of course! :-) But it is hardly a hub of courtship wisdom.

Now, does this mean I think he has nothing important to say? Absolutely not! As I said above, he has some very good points... things that many people relate to... things that need to be said. Why else would the article go viral? My only point is that he (unintentionally, I'm sure!) made himself sound like he has a lot of authority on the subject when he really seems to be someone with not much more experience than anyone else who came out of the courtship mindset. With the whole article being predicated on the idea that courtship is failing, making such bold statements as, “Courtship leads to singleness more often than it leads to marriage,” I think there ought to be some proof to back up his words. But there are no stats to back him up... not even any personal stories that he shares as examples. By all appearances, he has little more than anecdotal evidence drawn from his personal experience. So I think Wilson's article is quite right in pointing this out.

Furthermore, for an article whose title seems to promise a detailed rebuttal of the courtship model, there is surprisingly little evidence against it (other than the supposedly high courtship divorce rates). He did touch on a few of the points I would have made, but he did little to explain them. Any of us can make broad, sweeping statements about things that are “fundamentally flawed,” but if they are based on nothing but an overview of our limited personal experience, they don't really carry a lot of weight.

On the other hand, the mere popularity of the article ought to serve as evidence that something may indeed be wrong with the courtship model—at least as Umstattd defines it. There I would disagree with Wilson, who asks why we are calling for a solution when there is no proof of a problem in the first place. So while I do not think the problem is necessarily as common as Umstattd makes it sound, my experience (and the popularity of this article) tell me that there are problems associated with courtship. And while I have not read the whole of Wilson's book (referenced in his article), I have read enough of it to know that I have some rather strong disagreements with his views on the subject. In my opinion, however, Umstattd failed to address these sufficiently, which is why I am writing now.

Note: During the writing of this post, Umstattd came out with a new post to clarify his last one, which I think was helpful overall. That said, I still felt it had some holes in it, so I continued with the writing of this response.

Why Courtship Needs to Get Back to Fundamentals: Part 2

Why Courtship Needs to Get Back to Fundamentals: Part 3

Introduction

So I'm starting a new blog...

I must be crazy.

Of the approximately 5 bazillion blogs floating around out there, there are only a handful that anybody cares anything about. I've done started over half a dozen of these "who-even-cares" blogs over the past decade, only to let them get overgrown with cobwebs and disappear into a dark corner of the black hole we know as the internet.

But because I am on an eternal quest for significance I desire an outlet for my musings somewhere other than Facebook and my personal (hidden) paranoid-about-my-privacy blog, I set forth on this new adventure. I may only be spouting more nonsense into the Black Hole, but hey... I am QUEEN of this little planet, and it should at least serve to benefit my personal sanity.

Here I stand, and here I shall stay... at least until such time as I grow tired of this place an move on to a new section of the void.

Anyway... welcome, space traveler.