Tag Archives: dating

Perpetually Single

Bashing the Church is all the rage these days, especially from folks within (or who, in some instances, claim to be within) the Church itself.  I’m not a big fan of this trend, partly because it’s a trend.   It’s hip.  It’s cool.  And let’s face it, it’s kind of easy.  It’s incredibly easy to sit back, point the finger at whatever you think you see is wrong in the church, and just be bitter about it.  Grumbling takes little horsepower.  Much more difficult to actually positively spur the Church on to greater love and good deeds (kinda like the fellas who wrote Why we Love the Church did in that book).  I admit I’m a partaker…I just think so much of the critique is no critique at all, but bitter grumbling, and it’s not helpful.

So there’s the caveat to this post.

The other night I was having a conversation with a close friend of mine who is going through a rough time in his life.  Without getting into many of the specifics, he is feeling burned by some of his past experience in the church, and is reacting in rather self destructive ways.  He’ll be the first to admit that the buck stops with him, however I can’t deny that he’s been sold a false bill of goods by some well meaning people in the church.  I’ve actually had quite a few friends go through the same thing recently, and all of them have this one thing in common: their struggle deals with marriage, dating, and singleness.

He made a really good point in the middle of our conversation, one that could pass as grumbling, but at the same time it’s an accurate critique.

“The ‘singles groups’ in churches teach people to be perpetually single,” he said.

I think he’s on to something.

In far too many singles groups, there is no one from the outside, say an older man for the guys or older woman for the gals, exhorting them to be proactively seeking a spouse (which is ok, you know..even good!).  The same could be said about finding a career, though not nearly to the same extent.  Virtually no one is even teaching them how to move towards marriage.  The result is a bunch of people in the same age group reinforcing the same single lifestyle and habits.

You might not think that’s a big deal.  Go ask my friend (as previously mentioned, there are actually more than one in this exact position), though, and he’ll tell you about his struggles after banking for so long on advice from his fellow single peers.   He sorely wishes he had an older man in his life saying, “hey, get off your duff.  Get a job.  Get married.  Church service and ministry are good, but you need to get up and get going…now.”

Now, I’m down with the whole “content in your singleness” mantra.  I’ve seen some go to the opposite extreme and make marriage, sex, and relationships an idol, and I’ve seen them get burned as a result.  After you’ve pursued your idol fo so many years withou success at attaining it, the bitterness that results from that is often worse than all the downsides of singleness put together.  Better to look to Christ for your self worth than a relationship.  Still, though, I think that slogan is over-used as a knee jerk reaction.  Encouraging a single person to actively seek a spouse is entirely appropriate and good.  You can be “content in your singleness” and actively seek at the same time.

I hasten to add that celibacy is a high calling deserving of honor for those that choose it.  These people devote their all to the Lord in a lifetime of service as a single person.  If someone can do that and not be lonely and bitter from it, they deserve praise and honor of the highest degree.  For the rest of us, though, marriage is our calling, and it’s unwise to passively prolong the singleness period.   It’s one thing to be proactive but not meet success; it’s another thing entirely to be passive about it and just wait around, letting the best years for getting married roll by.

Singles groups are doing no one a favor by leaving their attendees uncounseled when it comes to actually moving towards marriage.

A Recommendation

You need to go check out Megan Carson’s blog.  A while back she underwent a little experiment: a year of blind dates.  While she didn’t get a husband out of it, she got a book deal out of it.  Through it all she got some good insight into dating as a Christian woman, and some real funny stories.  For instance, you gotta check out the one (actually, I think there’s more than one) about the stalker…it had my wife and I rolling on the floor laughing! She has a great writing style–very open, honest, and witty.

While I don’t agree with all that she has to say about dating and such, I can definitely give her blog a big thumbs up.

Can You Change Someone You Love?

Can you change someone you love?

A friend of mine on Facebook brought up that question recently.  He saw a book at the store that gave a resounding “yes” answer to that question, so he took a picture and posted it on FB in order to ridicule the concept.  His answer was that it is “simply not possible.”

I know my friend’s hesitancy, for many who get into co-dependant relationships tend to think they can change their significant others.  How many times have we shaken our heads at the girl who gets involved with the loser man-boy because she thinks she can change him into husband material?  It is obvious to us that she is making a losing bet, but not so obvious to her (or maybe it is obvious to her but she’s just in major denial because the sex is good.).

There is another side to the question, however, that my friend and the others who commented on his status missed.   His words that changing someone you love is “not possible” reflects an overly individualistic attitude that is harmful if taken to its logical conclusion.

I replied to his status by noting how my wife has changed me for the better.  She loves me, and has spoken much grace, truth, and love into me, and has made me a better man.  Just the other night I sat and reflected with her on how her giving me grace and bearing with my follies has made me more patient.

What if I really believed that “changing someone you love isn’t possible?”  Chances are, I wouldn’t be open to her influence in my life.  I’d just focus on me improving me and I’d be totally oblivious to how her love could change me, and vice  versa.  It would be a shame if my wife bought into the slogan in question; she then wouldn’t be open to me speaking into her life.  What’s more, she wouldn’t try to influence me for the better, thus depriving me of much goodness and beauty.  If one of us believed, it would deprive us both.

There are many other relationships like this; for example, one job a dad has is to mold his sons into men of character and his daughters into women with inner beauty…in other words, he’s supposed to change them.

The point here is that if either person in a love relationship (friends, spouses, brothers and sisters, etc) buys into the slogan, it deprives both of much joy.

Somewhat ironically, “changing loved ones” is one motivating factor of interventions.  When an addict is out of control and won’t stop binging on his addiction, his loved ones often gather together, with a professional counselor, and stage one last attempt at stopping the destruction.  They all agree to stop enabling the addict and draw a line.  If the addict doesn’t agree to stop the behavior and seek professional help, there are often big consequences such as certain family members cutting off contact.   What else is all this if not an attempt to change the person they love?

Changing loved ones is also a concept built into the 12 steps.  I used to be a part of a 12 step group.  One of the practices built into the group was accountability relationships.  From time to time, the members of the group would make phone calls to “check in” with each other.  If the other person was about to break sobriety and engage in their addiction, the job of the other person on the line would be to talk them out of it.  If one person was rationalizing or making excuses, the other was not supposed to just go along with that: s/he was supposed to hold the other accountable.   Both myself and other guys in the group even, at times, arranged for the other group members to administer certain consequences and boundaries if we couldn’t keep straight.  This was all done with the prior agreement of all involved, but suffice it to say, we were all agents of change in the lives of the others in the group.

In sum, I can recognize my friend’s hesitancy.  There comes a point that if the other is resistant, it is best to let dead dogs lie.  However, contrary to what he said, change is certainly possible and, at times, it is necessary to strive for.

A Good Thing

As I was driving home tonight, I was incredibly joyous.  I had just worked a 12 hour day, I was exhausted, and I had some more work to do when I got home.  I had been up since 5am, and it was 8pm when I walked in the door.  This has been the norm the past 2 and a half months.  You’d figure I’d be dragging my feet in the door, but I skipped in the door with vigor.
Late tonight I asked myself “why”?

 

I think it’s because of my wife.

 

Now, don’t roll your eyes.  Hear me out on this.  Part of my upbeat-ness is, no doubt, from my job, which I absolutely love.  But I can’t ignore the roll my wife has played in this.  Sure, we’ve had to adjust to each other’s quirks and we’ve had some disagreements, but I’m having the time of my life with her.  Sure beats coming home to an empty apartment or coming home to roommates.  Sure, I was friendly with all my roommates and I got along with them great.  But I wasn’t one with them.  None of them was my sole (as opposed to soul…there is a difference!) mate.

 

When I first walk in the door at night, I am greeted with a long, much needed hug.  It is the highlight of my day.  Without it, my energy supply to get through the day would be considerably less.

 

What’s more, not only do I get to come home to a hug, not only do I come home to a home cooked meal, not only does the responsibility of being a husband enhance my own sense of my manhood.  Not only do we get to talk to each other about our day(s), but we get to be goofy together.  That laughter is absolute soul food, and it is giving me quite the unexpected lift in my step.

 

Some who have been married longer (or those who haven’t been married at all) might scoff at this: this won’t last.  Wait until kids.  Then your life will really be over.  Or if kids don’t “end your life,” just….just wait.  Things will change.

 

Perhaps.  Yeah yeah, maybe  we’re still “on drugs” as they say, and we are bound to come crashing down.  But you know what?  I don’t care. It says in the Old Book, “He who finds a wife finds a good thing.”  I am currently enjoying that which I have found and which God has given.

For the Single Ladies (and Guys)

Recently, Boundless blogger Suzanne Hadley Gosselin asked a few interesting questions.  I’m gonna pose them here; who knows, could yield some interesting comments!

If you are a single guy, what do you wish the girls around you knew? If you are a single woman, what do you wish you could tell guys?

One request: be honest!  No need to just parrot what you think makes you sound spiritual.

International Wedding Date Line

I found this funny…and somewhat accurate!

On the East Coast where I live now, at least among most of my friends, getting married is something you do after college, after grad school, after your 30th birthday, after your second solo climb of Mount Everest, after you successfully balance your checkbook for 16 months straight, after, after, after. In other words, getting married at 26 is pretty much like getting married as a fetus.

In the Midwest, at least in the rural Illinois town where I grew up, getting married is something that you do before you begin to think of buying property, before your single-person routines make you stubborn and inflexible, before your metabolism slows enough that a white wedding dress would make you look like a rhinoceros. Optimal marriage age: 20 to 23. Getting married at 26 is like filing your tax returns on April 16.

Have you seen this difference in attitudes about marriage age?  What do you think about it?

HT: Boundless

Better the Second Time Around

For some reason, oftentimes, the second watching of a film is more enriching than the first.

Such was the case last night, as I watched Coyote County Loser at its Orange County premier.

This is not the first time I’ve commented on the film.ccl
To tell you the truth, since I’ve watched it before, I really didn’t feel like going.  It had been a long, tiring day at work, I had another long, tiring day at work to look forward to the next day, and I had a wife I wanted to see.  In the last three weeks, I’ve gotten married, moved into a new place (we still have quite a few boxes to unpack), my wife got a new job, and I got a new job (well, 2 new jobs, sorta).   Add in all the other “to dos” that comes along with a new marriage (getting new bank account, changing insurance, etc), and I’m just flat worn out.  I even told the producer that I’d have to leave before the end of the film.  All this wasn’t because the film sucked (it didn’t…more on that in a minute), but just because I had cashed in my chips long before I arrived.

But I ended up staying the whole time.  I even gleefully (yes…gleefully) stayed for the whole Q&A afterwards.

Why?  There were no Michael Baysian-like special effects for me to visually gorge on.  I was not treated to Lord-of-the-Rings-esque cinematography.  What kept me in my seat was the story.  My soul was enriched from the get-go.  The film caused me to pause and examine my life.  When that happens, I’m hooked in.

One  such “examination” was this: I saw a lot of myself in Jack, the love-em-and-leave-em heart throb from LA.  No, I know I’m no Fabio.  Here’s the deal: for much of the film, he was too busy chasing his next big shot to be able to love anyone.  That would require him to actually slow down and downshift few gears, which he had no intention of doing.  That’s a lot like me; I’ve been so busy lately (actually, it’s not just lately–it’s a constant in my life), for instance, I’ve been desiring but neglecting to write a letter to my grandpa.  I thought a while ago, “That’d be nice.  I need to communicate with him more, cherish him in deeper ways.  A letter would really touch him, I think.” But I keep putting it off.  Like Jack, I’m zipping around with a wink too much to slow down enough, and I’ve been like this well before all the recent change.  If I don’t put people before the process, I’m gonna end up neglecting and hurting those I care for most.

There were a few motifs in the film that I missed the first time around.  Actually, they are so obvious and central in the film that I feel kinda embarrassed to say I missed them the first time around.  I caught the main idea of the film: Jack’s view of relationships is totally based on feeling, while Lauren’s view is based around a list of “must haves.”  Jack thinks love is a game; Lauren thinks love is a savy business transaction.  They find out both their views are horribly wrong–a “legacy” couple–married for 48 years–shows them the main ingredient that starts and keeps love alive: commitment.  Over the years, the commitment and sacrifice the couple practices and embodies transforms Fred, the husband, from a shy, awkward farm boy into a confident, joyous romancer.

Perhaps the most notable thing I missed, though, was the car motif.  Lauren, the female lead, compared men to cars, claiming that just as you must have a list of what you need in a car when vehicle shopping, so you must have a list of requirements for a man.  She called this the “non-negotiable checklist.”

That much I caught the first time, but what I missed was the motif.  Cars are all over the place in the film!  Lauren’s truck consistently breaks down, mirroring the men she takes to task; Jack drives a snazzy sports car that runs out of gas in the beginning of the film; Lauren gets her knowledge of car repair from her dad–when she was young, her dad had a prized antique car (shown in the film), and working on it was the only way Lauren could gain time with him; a car salesman sponsors the radio station Lauren works at, and she visits the salesman when her truck dies; heck, the “loser” himself even sells junk car parts at a salvage yard, and he wins a loaded pickup truck when he wins the “date” radio contest.

Pretty much all the cars in the film, though, leave the characters feeling empty.  Lauren’s truck is a source of constant frustration, and the old car her dad prized is the source of bitter memories.  When the loser wins the truck, it just didn’t feel right–yeah, it was a sweet ride, but Lauren’s heart was crushed in the process of him winning it.  It is not a coincidence, I’m sure, that Jack and Lauren finally connect over a horse-back ride, which is the antithesis of a car.

All this points to the vacuity of Lauren’s view of love.  Her comparison between men and cars is ludicrous, condescending, and leaves both parties feeling empty.  Sure, it keeps women from being hurt, but it keeps them lonely too.  As C.S Lewis once said,

To love at all is to be vulnerable. Love anything, and your heart will certainly be wrung and possibly broken. If you want to make sure of keeping it intact, you must give your heart to no one, not even to an animal. Wrap it carefully round with hobbies and little luxuries; avoid all entanglements; lock it up safe in the casket or coffin of your selfishness. But in that casket- safe, dark, motionless, airless–it will change. It will not be broken; it will become unbreakable, impenetrable, irredeemable.

Lauren’s view, by the way, is not just spouted by frosty psychologist radio hosts in indie movies–it’s all over the place in our culture.  Ever hear someone compare their boyfriend or girlfriend to a car when it comes to sex?  “We need to find out if we are sexually compatible before we get married.  You wouldn’t buy a car without test driving it first, would you?”

So…I’m a car that you must test drive before you commit?  If that’s not condescending, I don’t know what is.

Jack’s view, however, isn’t any more correct or noble.  It is just as vacuous.  The emptiness of his view comes through loud and clear through another motif: women themselves.  This one is not as prominent as the cars motif, but it’s there.  Every woman that Jack “loves and leaves” ends up bitter.  His agent, for example, gives him hell for him doing just that.  Only when he truly commits to a woman can she feel truly loved, as is the case when he cares for his cancer-stricken sister.  Commitment is in him; he just has to apply it in the area of romance to truly embrace what love is all about.

The man in the “legacy” couple reminds me of my grandpa.  After 56 years of marriage, my grandma passed away.  They had commitment down pat, and therefore they had love too.  As the name implies, they left quite a legacy because of that.

When Fred, the husband in the couple, broke down after Maggie’s (the wife) death, I saw my grandpa right there.

Which reminds me: I’m gonna go write that letter now.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

I highly recommend Coyote County Loser.  It is showing at Cinema City Theaters in Yorba Linda until Sept 10.  For tickets and show times, go to Coyotecountyloser.com