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.