Courtship and Dating: Definitions and General Observations
Definitions of courtship often blind us to the root of the issue. We can fall in love with a definition without understanding its premise.
So, let's talk about dating, shall we?
It's the topic evangelical churches dread to discuss because they believe pastors should stay far away from individual families' relational concerns and priorities. Well, that ship sailed for me when I accepted the prophets Malachi and St. Matthew into my heart. Add the Kuyperian DNA in my bones, and I am all about getting into your business. But I get into your business on these relational issues because I care in a real fatherly way. And since I have this position, I try to use my platform wisely and discerningly, and those who disagree are free to do so, though they won't escape my hugs and kisses.
Before I delve a bit into dating, I want to be an equal opportunity offender and do my share of scolding the courtship culture for creating some real monsters. And it's important to note that if I were to step on that scale, I would fall heavily on that side of the aisle. Still, my concerns are many. Among them is the concern that the gods of courtship in our evangelical culture have come and gone and left a trail of destruction on their way. They treated courtship as the solution to the world's problems because that's how Grandma did it, and they turned out all right. The standard should be just a bit higher on the Richter scale.
But still, courtship culture, with all its good, has provided a host of tendencies that lead to a town near Mayberry. This all means that on the outside, it looks fine and neat, but on the inside, it's full of dead man's bones. Part of this is that fathers leading such a culture have been so pugilistic that they fought every battle hard, and the last battle they had was with their daughters and sons who now don't call or talk to them, and many who no longer talk to Jesus either. So, yes, they have won the ideological war but lost their soul in the process. And to me, that is no victory at all.
Many fathers cherish courtship and have found a happy moderation that is exercised charitably and beautifully. They have trained their daughters (and sons) to love the principles so much that as they grow, the relationships they form are pure and deeply engaging in the community. I applaud and support those efforts.
Courtship Defined
Several years ago, as I was thinking through this issue of courtship and preparing for some writing, I called a prominent figure of the courtship movement in America, inquiring how he would define such a term. I thought he would have had a list of six things without which courtship shan't be! But in a spirit of succinctness, he spoke of courtship simply in terms of intentional parental involvement. The methodology could differ at several stages, but the principle was clear: this was something that Dad and Mom would engage with gracious enthusiasm. I have kept that in my mind ever since.
One of the great evangelical sins is the sin of idolizing definitions more than the joy in the definition. In other words, if we hold to this particular term, therefore, all these things will be added unto you.
Use whatever term you find most appealing, but I want to know what that term means practically. The difference is that the dating cultural definition has a fairly universal appeal. The idea of teenagers having romantic relationships with or without the approval of parents is the mode of operation throughout evangelicalness. It's unhealthy and almost always leads to relational danger that does not form beautiful communities. It removes covenant patterns from the centrality it deserves in the life of the Church.
Additionally, we need to be quite aware that most teenagers growing up in this pornographic and de-biblicized culture have absolutely no category to think through the role of relationship and love in the overall structure of God's purposes for families. Most--fathers and children--have never sat to think through the role of marriage in society and its fundamental role in reshaping the context of decay in our society.
Through Parental Eyes
Parents should be very careful to preserve a biblical sense of innocence among their children and not release them unprepared for environments that are not ready to cultivate. The dating culture has led to unimaginable damage to husbands and wives who have had to play catch-up with the mature language and rituals of household life. They would have loved to have these insights inculcated into their minds before they treated their own relationships with the triviality of a daydream.
Parents should not have to ask, "Why were you guys alone between the hours of 6-9 pm?;" but they must communicate very effectively why such concepts of aloneness are not appropriate for such a tender young age. Now, at this point, someone out there is wondering whether I am opposed to young ladies hanging out with young men in casual group environments outside the home, and the answer is, "Of course they should!" Safe contexts for interaction allow young ladies to decipher and decide whether certain young men are cultural barbarians or cultural renovators and develop a high existential view of what qualifies as the good, the bad, and the ugly.
I also understand that the scale of involvement may change as teenagers become young adults. Still, the general principle is that as long as they are under your physical and economic roof, they must be under your tutelage and in constant communion in word and deed with the father and mother concerning any relationship with the opposing sex. And if they are entirely independent, I would be deeply saddened if they are not constantly seeking your counsel.
Grabbing Their Hearts
I conclude that a biblical ideal is a group of engaged human beings--parents and churches--invested in the well-being of two young people seeking marriage as their end goal. These conclusions about whether a young man wants marriage can be achieved with a few questions to a young man— questions that will indicate very quickly what the real intentions are.
This means that dads need to have the heart of their daughters really close when they arise and go to sleep. Keep the coffee and ice cream dates essential to your weekly schedule. Keep your boys always looking towards the goal of marriage, which is to protect, preserve, and proclaim Jesus as the Lord of marriage.
However you define things, don't lose sight of what truly matters: the purity of your children and the integrity of their hearts as they prepare to give themselves to another.
Nuntium
You can now pre-order my new book here. I am hoping to send five free copies to paid subscribers.
My traveling schedule will be available this Friday. I hope to meet some of you in one of the many locations.
Notations
My slow but fruitful continuation through Life in Conflict has yielded some gems. Among them is the capacity to understand more clearly the theological quandaries facing the theological universe in the days before and after World War II. Barth makes some astounding observations, but they fail when looking more closely at his meaning. For instance,
Christendom that is not completely and totally eschatology has completely and totally nothing to do with Christ (129).
But for Barth, eschatology pertains to another world, and that world does not enter into the equation of ethics in the present. He views the divine life as set against history. Ethical concerns cannot come from revelation because God is not interested in revealing himself in that manner. Nevertheless, as critics noted, “When Barth negates historicity of the revelation, the concept of God loses all content” (130). By viewing God as distant and unreachable in discourse, he was emptying anyone of the concept of God himself. Further, theologians argued Barth lived in this paradox of speaking of God but was unable to. Barth’s theology was an attempt to make sense of this dialectical problem (129-136).
Athanasius’ work On the Incarnation is almost synonymous with orthodoxy. It is the “defining exposition of Nicene Theology” (19). The introduction by C.S. Lewis notes that his first work, Against the Gentiles, sets the stage for the nature of idolatry, and On the Incarnation is the resolution to the problem presented. Athanasius argues that “the cross was not the ruin but the healing of creation” (21). It is in the cross of Jesus that idolatry is overthrown. But the incarnation of Jesus is already the beginning of death for idolatry. The birth of Jesus demonstrates the power of the cross; it overcomes the separation of God and man after the Fall. In this sense, Athanasius responds to Barth’s central thesis. While Bart argues that to speak of God understandingly is to profane the nature of transcendence, Athanasius argued 17 centuries earlier that the incarnation makes all conversations about God, through the Logos, meaningful.
I am beginning a series through II and III John. Here is my summary of John’s concern in addressing the Elect lady in II John 1:
Epiphany Cheers,
Uriesou Brito