Friday, November 4, 2011

Death to Courtship

[More of my thoughts on courtship can be found here and here]


I learned of yet another instance of legalistic and intrusive parents destroying a beautiful relationship involving adult children this morning. Sad. Breaks my heart. Makes me want to speak some pointed words toward the courtship concept, and those who practice it, once again.


I've written at length about courtship in the past. I'm not sure I'll really be plowing new ground in this post, or introducing many new thoughts. I might be getting into "Department of Redundancy Department" territory. I'm gonna write it anyway. It's an emotional subject for me - for obvious reasons. Buckle up.


I'd like see courtship die a gruesome death - equal to the pain and emotional dysfunction it's inflicted - then be buried in a shallow grave marked only by the urine of feral dogs and cats.


I still hear from people occasionally who tell me "but we didn't do it legalistically". SMH. There's no other way to do courtship. If you tell me that you're planning to practice courtship, or if you defend your decision to have practiced courtship in the past, you're telling me a lot about yourself. Here's your profile (probably 95+% accurate)...



  • You're the product of Christian homeschooling. (homeschooling isn't the problem - "Christian homeschooling" is)
  • Your family is/was likely involved in ATI, Vision Forum, or Sovereign Grace Ministries.
  • If you're a full-blown courtship-er, you're probably currently involved in ATI or VF.
  • If you practice a "more reasonable, less legalistic" version, you may have been involved with ATI or VF in the past, but now you're probably involved with SGM or are a fan of the Calvinistas (Piper, Driscoll, Mahaney, Harris, Dever, et cetera - translation: You aren't entirely out of legalism).
  • You're probably very supportive of the Religious Right.
  • You've probably read books like "The Way Home", "So Much More", or "I Kissed Dating Goodbye", and other Christian homeschooling world literature, whether from homeschooling periodicals, or from Christian homeschooling authors like Harris, Pride, McDonald, Lindvall, the Ludys, the Botkins, et cetera.
  • You bristle at the idea of anything "liberal", while not really knowing what it means.
  • You're socially and emotionally many years behind your age, having been indoctrinated to avoid "the world" and to view your emotions as "evil and deceitful", to the point that it's rendered you naive about much of life and the way it works.
  • Your information has been filtered tremendously.
  • You've been indoctrinated to only view life through a "biblical worldview".


This doesn't mean you're a bad/dumb/unintelligent person. Chances are you're a great person with a bright mind. You're just a product of the religious cult that is Christian homeschooling.


It's a free country, so I respect your right to choose the courtship model - but I don't respect the choice - at all - and I pity you. If you're a parent who's chosen courtship for your children (forcing this legalistic, emotionally dysfunctional mess on them), indoctrinating them to believe it's the right way, or even a good way, frankly, I have more respect for some Caribbean strains of halitosis than I do for your parenting. To parents of minors, I respect your right to be heavily involved in their lives and relationships - but their hearts DO NOT belong to you. Teach them the importance of discernment and self-discipline, not legalistic concepts of control. You aren't the mediator between them and God. If you think you are, here's a bombshell for ya - you're anti-Christ, and that's all there is to that.


Occasionally, I hear from a person who still insists, "but me and my spouse practiced courtship and it worked wonderfully for us"... SMH again. If your marriage is flourishing, it isn't because of courtship, but rather in spite of it. Courtship in no way, shape, or form prepares you for marriage. Nothing that courtship is supposed to provide or prevent can't be provided or avoided in dating. The only thing courtship "reveals" is controlling parents. In the dating world, we call that "meddling" - something which, ironically, 1st Peter 4:15 lumps in there with murder and thievery. In a few states, including my own, there are actually LAWS - civil statutes - against meddling in engagements and marriages.


Bottom line: You can't practice courtship in a manner that isn't legalistic, that exercises SELF-control, or than doesn't compromise your maturity. It just isn't possible. Courtship is, and ever will be, legalistic and immature. There's no way around it.


It's just one of several poisons that wouldn't even exist if Christian homeschooling, and the paranoid/legalistic ideas within it, hadn't created it and served it up in its Kool-aid.


Definitely toxic. I hope it dies. Soon. The longer it lives, the more loving, happy relationships it'll kill. 

56 comments:

  1. Ain't that the truth. Courtship broke my heart to smithereens and had me weeping myself to sleep for a solid 365 days. I wisely dated around after that until I accumulated enough experience to know what I was looking for in a mate, and kept my eyes and options open so I wouldn't MISS IT when he came along! God blessed me with a wonderful husband and all that experience I got along the way has enriched my marriage greatly. I am always saddened by those young people who miss out on those learning grounds and set themselves up for years of heartache my marrying the wrong guy.... 'cuz they were too afraid/brainwashed to shop around.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I HATE courtship. It gave my parents leave to dictate the parameters of our relationship -- when I saw him, how I saw him, what we did, what we didn't do. In fact, they saw this as their DUTY: if they didn't make sure I was under their thumb, they weren't doing right by me. My mom called this love. Apparently love means placing your daughter between a rock and a hard place by telling her she will either do as mommy and daddy say or leave. Which, translated in my language, meant either making this relationship about my parents or about us. I hate that they made me make that choice. No daughter should have to choose between the man she loves and the family she loves, yet so many are compelled to do under this courtship/christian homeschooling/reformed baptist crap. I have no doubt that courtship tore apart our family.

    For people on the fence about this: PLEASE DON'T MAKE YOUR CHILDREN DO COURTSHIP. It is an awful thing to force your children to choose between their loved ones and their loved one. For the love of all that's holy, HAVE MERCY ON THEM. You were in love once too (I hope). Forgive. Understand. Love.

    ReplyDelete
  3. So well said, Lewis! i'd like to know more about the law in your state that can bring about civil statutes. That sounds fascinating.

    ReplyDelete
  4. @Erika...The law is "Alienation of Affection", known in NC as "the meddling law". 7 or 8 states have a similar law. Had I pursued it, I'd have had a slam-dunk against my former future in-laws and a handful of their cohorts (and there have been settlements in NC of upwards of 250k). Even though they were on the other side of the continent, there was a solid means of establishing local jurisdiction.

    The critical mass of the law is that any person, be it an in-law, an accomplice in an affair, or a person at large, who interferes in a "contract" relationship (marriage/engagement) in such a way as to bring about its resolution can be held liable in civil court.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "If your marriage is flourishing, it isn't because of courtship, but rather in spite of it." Couldn't say it better.

    As more families turn back to "dating" or as their kids enter permanent spinsterhood and bachelorhood, we'll see the death of courtship and betrothal. I'm sadden to see the older Botkins girl gain weight and waste away her best years like so many others. We're coming close to the end. I'm sure of it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Courtship keeps you from developing the necessary emotional, relational, and self-control skills that you NEED to develop to make a marriage work. It stunts your growth.

    My best friend was in a courtship which eventually came to an end. Any time she and her courtship partner were having problems, the parents would step in and work the problem out for their kids. I often wondered what the pair would do once they finally got married and had their first fight (luckily they never made it to marriage, b/c they decided they weren't compatible--I was surprised their parents let them interact enough to figure that out about each other!)

    I have definitely known many young women who wanted to get married, but couldn't, because there were no prospects for them--their parents kept them away from guys, and any guys that did get through the fence were scared away by the impossible rules of courtship. Sadly, the girls were taught to believe that this was because "you wait for God to bring the right guy to you." Well, whatever. I dated around, and lo and behold, getting off my butt and taking some initiative led me to a Godly man who is my best friend.

    Isn't that a head trip.

    ReplyDelete
  7. When you get married in the Catholic church, the priest you go to for premarital counseling is required to go through a series of questions with each of you separately. One of the questions asks if anyone (parents, partner, etc...) is coercing or forcing you into the marriage. If someone says yes, the church will not perform a ceremony. My guess is that if a priest sees any hesitation in answering that question, he is going to ask more questions, too. You also each declare in the ceremony that you are making the commitment of your own free will.

    ReplyDelete
  8. amielou31, I remember studying that in Colonial Latin American History. It's tied to the idea of free-will. As Calvinism gained more popularity in some parts of Europe, and as the Roman Catholic Church lost its political influence in other parts, parents started gaining more control over their kids marital choices. I guess you could say that marrying for love is medieval, and marrying because your parents told you to is modern.

    ReplyDelete
  9. And even if you don't call it courtship it still could be one. My boyfriend and I were "dating" but our relationship was almost micromanaged to death by my parents even as they claimed it was all about what we wanted. Examples, pressure to either get married soon or break up. (I was a freshman in college and he a senior in high school.) Also, we got caught kissing and had to make a list of "guidelines" a la Josh Harris in "Boy Meets Girl."

    Anyhow, even if you're not in a courtship, take a look at your relationship dynamics. It is driven by your and your partner's desire to find out if you love each other and want to be together? Or is it intended to please your parents and pastors and based on rules and principles rather than people? Bullcrap by any other name still smells awful.

    -L

    ReplyDelete
  10. Problem is, no matter what people *say* about courtship, the results always speak for themselves.

    I once dated a guy who wanted to get serious right away---wayyyyyyyy faster than what was healthy---because he didn't believe that 'casual dating' was proper behavior for a Christian. In order to avoid the big bad monster of "dating" as taught in Joshua Harris books, he was ready to rush into a serious relationship (with marriage in mind) with someone he barely knew.

    Also, once we did start 'dating,' there were so many rules and regulations and worries (set up by him) that the relationship was completely squelched. We were both anxious, and I was extremely unhappy. Our relationship didn't flourish until I got him to let go of some of the rules. Then it became much healthier.

    I could go on with other examples from other couples. It seems that whatever courtship is meant to do, it actually does something different. I'm not sure how you can get around that. I know I can't.

    ReplyDelete
  11. @Jenny--I'm a Catholic convert and I was married in the Catholic church. In the modern church this is essentially about the meaning of marriage and its status as a sacrament. In a Catholic wedding, the couple confers a sacrament on each other, the priest just oversees it. For the marriage to be sacramentally valid (thus not open to annulment) both partners must enter the sacrament freely and of their own desire. If either of them has been coerced or pressured, it can be deemed not of their own volition and invalid. That is also the reason that even though a father may escort his daughter down the aisle (mine did), he does not "give her away" and there is no option of a "who gives this woman" question in the ceremony.

    In fact, I recently caught a call in show on Catholic radio when a priest was asked by a caller about courtship in the Harris style and he vehemently opposed it and did suggest that the ensuing marriage could very well be invalid if the parents exerted that kind of control.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I am a parent & had heard some about courtship & about "kissed dating goodbye" and I thought it sounded good. I appreciate you (and other blogs I have come upon recently as I learned about VF-type homes & their survivors) helping me to see the problems with "courtship". However, I must say that I disagree with your broad brush strokes that paint Christian Homeschooling as a cult- or at least that I do not understand why you say this? I am a Christian and I homeschooled my daughter for 2 years in middle elementary (because she begged me to get her out of the emotional dysfuntion in school). When I first joined a local homeschool support group I was really scared I was going to find myself in the midst of a group of denim-jumper-wearing-grow-my-own-wheat-and-grind-it-for-bread women, but the opposite was true. The vast majority of Christian homeschool families I encountered were mainstream "normal" Christians who were simply trying to help provide a better education for their children, and were *not* using homeschooling as a tool for sequestering and/or controlling their children. Are you sure that you are not making an overly broad generalization when you call Christian Homeschooling wrong?

    ReplyDelete
  13. @Lisa...

    Are you sure that you are not making an overly broad generalization when you call Christian Homeschooling wrong?

    Completely sure.

    The problem isn't homeschooling, or Christians who choose to homeschool. Both of those things are great. The problem is the Christian homeschooling movement. It's total poison and it's in all cases legalistic, and in most cases cultic.

    Anything with dominionist roots, or which offers only external solutions to internal issues, is gonna be legalistic and cultic. The Christian homeschooling movement matches both of those characteristics in spades.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with Lisa, -you're speaking as "THE" authority, literally LABELING Christians who homeschool as being part of the "bad" "Christian Homeschooling Movement" you experienced. Problem is, the "Christian Homeschooling Movement", mainstream as it is (compared with its roots, which have long been cut off, much like mainstream LDS who no longer practice polygamy but have to constantly overcome the stygma), no longer exists in a dominionist, legalistic, cultic bubble. And just as you believe Christian homeschoolers "bristle at anything liberal" while accusing them of not knowing what the word, liberal, means (gee, thanks for setting them straight,...gag), I would suggest your view regarding Christian homeschooling is equally as narrow-minded, formed by your personal experiences which occurred WITHIN the model you speak of, and I would suggest you be "liberal" minded enough to recognize that change can, does, and DID come to the Christian Homeschool movement, to the extent that, in the mainstream vast majority, it hardly resembles the label you have forced upon it here. Seriously, do you not get that what you speak of is no longer the "cult" norm? Wow, just wow.

      Delete
    2. "literally LABELING Christians who homeschool as being part of the "bad" "Christian Homeschooling Movement" you experienced."

      Never, EVER, have I done this. You're the person failing, miserably, to differentiate - due to your emotions being riled up. I differentiate.

      As for the rest...

      Visit a homeschooling convention, say a Great Homeschooling Convention (which seems to be touted by you "mainstreamers" as good and normal), take note of the language used, the exhibits present, the material presented, and then get back to me when the whackadoodles are no longer in charge.

      I think you'll see that I'm only "wrong" out of your desire for me to be wrong and not out of substance.

      If you're a Christian, and you wanna homeschool your kids, and you're capable as a teacher, having the resources to meet their educational needs, then homeschool the hell out of 'em (not literally, of course, of then you'll be a Christian homeschooler).

      BTW, mainstream LDS isn't really a good comparison. Even "liberal" Mormonism is whack.

      Delete
  14. As a home school mom of 14 years, and a Christian, I want to say that I agree whole-heartedly with Lewis!

    Home schooling is about education, family relationships, and our place within the larger society as a whole. Home education, as education, is about academic freedom, room for creativity, individuality, and expanded opportunity. As to family relationships, it should be about parents creatively supporting their children in the nurture of their own intrinsic strengths and person dreams. As relating to society, it should be about expanded opportunity to explore the community and make more connections with a broader range of people than is possible with days spent inside educational institutions.

    *Christian* home schooling promotes just the opposite. I have heard so many excuses for poor academic performance in the Christian home school community, from "character matters more than academics" to "my kids don't do tests well but they are learning" to "why should my kids be trained to be wage slaves" meaning "I'm aware my kids will be largely unemployable but I'm putting a good spin on it." I have heard so many excuses for dominating and controlling family relationships, with strong emphasis on gender roles, so that their children are never free to find out who they are or what they might want in life. Instead they are TOLD who they must be and what they must want in life. And far from creating more social opportunities, the Christian home school spreads the lie that the home is the end-all, be-all, and that venturing outside the home is dangerous. (I think mostly because your kids will discover they are being robbed of an education, and that their family is way outside the norm for happy families.)

    All Christians who home school are not part of the Christian home school business machine, but the ones who are really do suck that bad.

    Mary Pride, Vision Forum, Above Rubies, Ken Hamm, HSLDA, and so many others are robbing children of education, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and in the case of Pearlites, sometimes life itself.

    Shame.

    ReplyDelete
  15. As an avid reader, can I throw in yet another comment to answer Lisa's question?

    Lisa, I believe what Lewis always says on the blog is that there is a difference between Christians who home school and the Christian Home School Movement.

    Many Christians choose to home school for all the reasons you suggest, and that is a cool thing for those families!

    However, there is a movement (full of Christians) who view home schooling as a way to keep their kids from experiencing the wider world, so that they can exercise tighter control over their children. This movement often scares Christians into home schooling by telling them that public school is NEVER a Godly option, no matter how wholesome the district and the teachers are. In other words, if you REALLY love your children...and you REALLY want to put God first...then you will home school. And you'll make your kids wear denim jumpers while doing it.

    That is what he means by the Christian Home School Movement.

    ReplyDelete
  16. And, sometimes, it might not entirely fit the denim-jumper mold. My ex and some of her siblings wore jeans, and a couple had worked at jobs outside the home (so a lot of the P/QF crowd might consider them somewhat liberal on a few things), but they had all the other symptoms coming out their ears. Courtship, P/QF (and its rigid gender roles), home-childbirth, holistic healing, no television, the SOTDRT (that's "School of the Dining Room Table"), and other traits of a homeschool cult - they practiced and believed in, religiously (literally), all of those things. Those things were the source of the perpetual "What the...?!" bubble above my head.

    ReplyDelete
  17. All I can say is wow. At least from your well constructed sentences and correct grammar it appears that you graduated from high school. I do wonder if you've ever been out of the town you live in - forgive me if I assume its somewhere in the rural US. My first comment is "U mad bra?".

    Now to the post-trolling real thoughts (sorry if it jaded you, got to have a little fun right?). My first question would be, were you raised in what you call the "Christian Homeschool Cult" (CHC)? If so can you really write something that's not jaded and is truly objective? The other question: how's your relationship with your parents? I do know a couple of wise Christian pastor/couples who offer counseling (for free even if you're strapped for cash)! Man. Sorry there's just so much of what you write that reminds me of those angry immature 16 year olds (we all know a few..) I'm not sure where to start.

    Last one of your bullet points. About the Christain/Biblical world view. I would understand that to be a God centered world view, based on what we learn from the scriptures (God here meaning the triumvirate represented in traditional/historical/real Christianity, God the Father, Spirit, and Son, eternal). If this is what you mean by God's world view, and claim to be a Christian - literally meaning "little Christ" who is our living example - why would we ever want to NOT have such a world view? Help me out, a little confused there (I'd love a response based on why - based on scripture - we shouldn't).

    I agree with you that if "courtship" is a forced union, its almost assuredly not going to work in modern western society. Ironically, over 1/6 of the WORLDS population does things by arranged marriage. Most of the time not even seeing their future spouse till the wedding day. And their divorce rate? Almost non-existent. I think that says something about the accepted values of society, and what we as humans are willing (or not willing) to do because society says its OK or unacceptable (divorce).

    If you can't tell, this is my first time on your blog. Had one last question for you (and if you already wrote an article on it I'm sorry I'll go looking after this. What's your view on the importance of having a right relationship with God. Of discipleship (mentorship/etc) by older more mature believers, the importance of holiness and right living (not condemning others, but living like James (the apostle) encourages?

    Cheers.

    Oh, how extensively have you traveled? More just a curiosity question :)

    ReplyDelete
  18. If you can't tell, this is my first time on your blog.

    Wasn't too difficult to tell.

    Oh, how extensively have you traveled?

    *chuckle*

    ReplyDelete
  19. Okay, first rule: don't feed the trolls.

    But how can anyone read Anonymous 11:18 and not want to comment? Especially on the huge gap in logic between three and four (the only parts of the post not fully intent on character assassination?)

    Anon starts off applauding a Christian world-view (which he undoubtedly really means a right-wing, guns-god-and-glory-greed in capitalism-unblinking patriotic war-mongering "christian" world view, not one that in any way resembles the actual words and life of Jesus), then opens his next paragraph claiming courtship is okay because 1/6 of the world indulges in it!

    Uh, yeah, and that 1/6 would not be the Christian nations, but Hindu, Islamic, and tribal religions. So whose "world-view" are you applauding here?

    This is another one of those over-confident (arrogant) home school graduates that pop over all cyberspace. They were told that they were superior all their life, and they have come to believe it. There is no humility in their character, no trying to understand the point of view of others, because their pampered ego exults in its alleged superiority.

    Another "fine" produce of the Christian home school business. :[ Now do you see what we mean, Lisa?

    http://shadowspring-lovelearningliberty.blogspot.com/2011/08/home-schooled-boys.html

    ReplyDelete
  20. One thing about the divorce rate in those countries being non-existent-- it has nothing to do with whether or not the married partners might want to get divorced. If divorce is forbidden, you don't get divorced. That's all there is to it.

    Not to mention that in many of these cultures, a woman or girl who tries to get free will be stoned to death. . .

    ReplyDelete
  21. Not to mention that in many of these cultures, a woman or girl who tries to get free will be stoned to death. . .

    ...which, ironically, would be okay with some of the Vision Forum crowd.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Another great post that will likely be ignored by those who need it most. Keep screaming it from the mountaintops! It needs to be heard.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Hey! I really hope you'll listen and not attack me for what I have to say.


    First of all, I am genuinely sorry for the actions of a few who have really hurt you and I totally understand why you would now be sceptical to a lot of their 'backgrounds' or 'ideas.' From having skimmed over your own story it seems your ex's family had some really big issues that I don't think would have been agreed on by some organisations such as Vision Forum (if all is correct).

    Having said that if our goal as christians is to honor Christ with our lives, I think it might perhaps be a better idea for you to not grow bitter towards these people, which will ultimately only damage you. Or be harsh towards genuinely good willed people (which a lot of people involved in these movements/organisations are). I am sure there are those who are a part of certain movements or Vision Forums who are interested only in legalism and feel their goal should be to live life according to a set of standards and hold anyone/everyone to those standards.
    We know that is not what loving God is about. We are all still sinners trying to please God and I do think that for some of these people their desire to please God has allowed growth of idols as they strive for perfection from their children particularly in the area of courtship. A geniunely healthy desire for their children not to be hurt in the dating game can grow into a monster.

    Courtship, at the root of it, was suggested (not forced) as an alternative to an unhealthy habit of recreational dating. Lots of people who I know personally, have implemented this idea in different ways. Courtship in itself is just a word and a lot of people have used it as an excuse to exercise bad 'dating' habits, as shown in a lot of your examples. There are also a lot of people who have understand what people such as the Ludys, Joshua Harris and a few others have said as a call to honor the Lord with this area of our lives. There is nothing wrong with that idea, it puts the Lord in His rightful place in our lives. Now if it is a set of rules that need to be followed then I agree with you that is wrong. However as I said, I know of many people who would say they 'courted' but every courtship looks different.

    Some families do have stricter guidelines as to how they feel it would be best to try and honor God with this area of their lives. This stems out of geniune goodwill toward their children unless proved otherwise. (Remember we are all sinners - which is where this goes wrong) It may seem legalistic, but I don't it starts out that way (with a few exceptions). If it does then the people involved may need to reevaluate a lot more things in life than their dating habits. The guidelines laid out are there to help prevent harm as a guy and a girl prayerfully and wisely consider if marriage would be appropriate for them. This was not out of the ordinary for purity to be held to such a high standard even in the modern world as little as 50ish years ago. It may seem strange in our culture today, but I don't think as Christians we are going to be seen as normal a lot of the time in our culture.

    I would plead with you not to assume that everyone who 'courts' has the same standards or hidden motive that some of the people you encountered have. I am truly so sorry you were treated poorly.
    We are all sinners just trying to live life as best we can bringing honor and glory to God.
    How about encouraging each other instead and learning to be dispensers of grace, allowances for each others faults.

    Love in Christ,
    Another Sinner

    P.S. I did not grow up in one of these families (just so you know)

    ReplyDelete
  24. L...Courtship is poison. If you practice or promote it, you're dabbling in legalism. Nothing you're saying here alters that.

    This isn't an attack on you. Just a response to some of your comments.

    "There are also a lot of people who have understand what people such as the Ludys, Joshua Harris and a few others have said as a call to honor the Lord with this area of our lives. There is nothing wrong with that idea, it puts the Lord in His rightful place in our lives."

    That's over-spiritualization.

    "...but every courtship looks different."

    At its core, not really.

    Courtship, in practice or as a concept, is legalism and poison.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I think you missed my point, I don't see how courtship is poison when at its root you are trying to honor the Lord. I mentioned before that we are all sinners and when sin is involved then legalism can play a part. But I don't see how all courtship is wrong because of sin twisting it.

    I would like you to explain what you mean by over-spiritualization, if you would. I love the Lord very much and desire Him to be in the center of my life, He deserves nothing less. I don't see that as overspiritualising things but rather loving the Lord to the best of my ability.

    ReplyDelete
  26. @L...

    "I think you missed my point"

    I didn't. I've heard every possible pro-courtship position there is, and heard them many times over. I just seldom argue the merit of something (courtship) that has no merit. I usually go right to the conclusion.

    "I don't see how courtship is poison when at its root you are trying to honor the Lord."

    Because courtship doesn't honor the Lord. God hasn't asked for it. It's a ritual. The "how" of courtship being poison is right there in your sentence.

    "But I don't see how all courtship is wrong because of sin twisting it."

    Courtship encourages and thrives on immaturity and a distinct lack of emphasis on SELF-control, a fruit of the Holy Spirit - which happens to be the missing ingredient in religious formula, and the primary missing ingredient in the culture of the Christian homeschooling world.

    "I would like you to explain what you mean by over-spiritualization, if you would."

    I will as I go on...

    "I love the Lord very much and desire Him to be in the center of my life, He deserves nothing less."

    Then allow Him to be. That's between you and God. It has nothing to do with courtship or any other religious formula or ritual. God doesn't require courtship of you. Pretty sure He's never mentioned it AT ALL in any biblical text or ancient religious text I've read. YOU are adding weight to your load that you don't need to carry.

    I don't see that as overspiritualising things but rather loving the Lord to the best of my ability.

    It seems you're convinced that courtship will win you some kind of favor with God. It won't. If you think practicing courtship demonstrates a love for God, or is necessary to demonstrate love to God, you might want to take your belief system out, lay it on the table, and examine it scrupulously. If you're from the Christian homeschooling movement, I'd strongly encourage you to do so.

    God really, really, really, really doesn't care if you do everything the "godly" way or not. He really doesn't care.

    ReplyDelete
  27. More on the idea of over-spiritualization...From your earlier comment...

    "We are all still sinners trying to please God and I do think that for some of these people their desire to please God has allowed growth of idols as they strive for perfection from their children particularly in the area of courtship."

    And you signed it as..."Another Sinner"

    If you're a sinner, you can always accept Christ ;)

    Do you see what I'm getting at? Why beat yourself up, continually trying to please a demanding God? Do you mean you WERE a sinner - and then you accepted Christ, and although you may still sin, you're no longer a sinner, but are accepted, reconciled to God as His righteousness in Jesus Christ?

    Accept who you are in Christ Jesus, and refuse to live as if you aren't who you are in Christ Jesus. That doesn't mean rules, rituals, and formulas. That means freedom.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Taken from 1 Tim 6:
    11 But you, man of God, flee from all this, and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, endurance and gentleness. 12 Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called when you made your good confession in the presence of many witnesses. 13 In the sight of God, who gives life to everything, and of Christ Jesus, who while testifying before Pontius Pilate made the good confession, I charge you 14 to keep this command without spot or blame until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 which God will bring about in his own time—God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16 who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen.

    We ARE called to live our lives differently. I don't do anything to try to win favor with God, I stated I am a sinner and Praise God HE ALONE has redeemed me. Redeemed me to be free from sin! Not to continue in it. His grace does not give me freedom to sin as I please. We are clearly called to be lights in darkness, which is DIFFERENT from the way we were.

    You have missed my point, which is far greater than an issue about courtship or whether or not you agree with Vision Forums. I am going to gracefully bow out as you seem to refuse to hear truth. (About a basic relationship with God issue, legalism aside)

    I would love to say it's been fun, but it hasn't. My heart hurts for you. I will be praying for you.

    ReplyDelete
  29. "His grace does not give me freedom to sin as I please."

    I never said it did. What it does is it introduces you to the Holy Spirit - which in turn allows one to grow in SELF-control and personal and spiritual maturity and discernment.

    From my perspective, no mature and truly free Christian will practice courtship.

    1st Timothy 6 has nothing to do with courtship. If you think it does, you're definitely adding weight to your load, weight which you shouldn't be carrying.

    ReplyDelete
  30. "I will be praying for you."

    To be frank, I'd probably rather you didn't. I don't pray condescending prayers for others, and I'd prefer they weren't prayed for me.

    ReplyDelete
  31. 'I don't pray condescending prayers for others, and I'd prefer they weren't prayed for me.'

    Are you sure? Because it sounds like you feel very condescending towards the groups of people you are talking about in your post (eg vision forum, ATI, etc).

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anon 5:09...I make no bones about the fact that I have NO respect for their belief system.

    Your statement has nothing to do with my statement. What I write here isn't my prayer life. It's a blog.

    Start thinking before you type up a comment - because you aren't typing from any form of logic or common sense. You're typing from emotion and religious addiction and just being a general religious jackass. Stop it - or you won't be commenting here anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  33. 'I make no bones about the fact that I have NO respect for their belief system.'

    Well ok, but how about the individuals from each of those organisations? Shouldn't a person be given a chance and not attacked based on the actions of a few? Can we not be gracious to others in their walk with God?

    I don't appreciate being accused of not thinking or the name calling, Sir.
    Am I not allowed to take your lead and also challenge thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
  34. Well ok, but how about the individuals from each of those organisations?

    There are no "individuals" in the P/QF or courtship world. The belief system strips them of personhood. They literally become part of the collective.

    Shouldn't a person be given a chance and not attacked based on the actions of a few?

    A few? There is no few. There isn't a "right" way to practice the belief system.

    Can we not be gracious to others in their walk with God?

    Sure. But P/QFers aren't "walking with God". He got left at a truckstop somewhere back in the 70s. And you certainly weren't "walking with God" in trolling my posts. Don't start throwing around useless Christianese to play out a Jesus-juke.

    I don't appreciate being accused of not thinking or the name calling, Sir.

    Your appreciation wasn't a prerequisite to what I typed.

    Am I not allowed to take your lead and also challenge thoughts?

    You are. But you haven't challenged any thoughts. You've only parroted the thoughts of the collective, and shown symptoms of religious addiction in doing so.

    ReplyDelete
  35. If I may add my two cents...

    It seems to me that Lewis is not attacking a *true* biblical worldview, or *true* "spiritualization" (as "truth" is defined by God Himself), but rather the counterfeit versions of them. He is picking up on the doublethink that occurs when we think we are putting God first, but really we are putting our human leaders' teachings about God first.

    Personally, I don't think this confusion rules out good-faith progress toward *truly* putting God first. But it can make it difficult to use words like "biblical," in some communities, without triggering associations with idolatry.

    I have learned that there is a difference between God, my conception of God, and a brother/sister's conception of God. They are different things. Only God Himself is strong enough to hold onto all of us, and make up for our faulty conceptions.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I understand what you are saying Verity3 and appreciate your input. I completely agree with you in saying there is possible doublethink on the part of some of the people involved in the courtship movement. I agree with you on what you have written =) Thanks for your 2 cents =)

    I don't however feel that is what Lewis is clarifying in his responses. I have felt anger in the responses for reasons I am unsure of and been judged before even getting to know who I am. For this reason, I won't be visiting again.

    ReplyDelete
  37. "I won't be visiting again."

    Yes you will. Even you don't totally believe your reason given.

    ReplyDelete
  38. "I once dated a guy who wanted to get serious right away---wayyyyyyyy faster than what was healthy---because he didn't believe that 'casual dating' was proper behavior for a Christian. In order to avoid the big bad monster of "dating" as taught in Joshua Harris books, he was ready to rush into a serious relationship (with marriage in mind) with someone he barely knew."

    OK, I'm going to ask a question that's been bugging me for a very long time now. And it's a worldview question (sorry, Lewis :)) - kind of OT, but as an Australian, I find it really hard to follow the discussions on courtship because I just don't understand wat people are saying, so I'm trying to figure out if there really is a fundamental difference between the way Australians and Americans date, viz: is it seriously impossible to be friends and get to know each other *without* dating in America? Because, to me, that *is* getting way to serious before it's healthy - but maybe here in Oz we don't actually do what you guys call 'casual dating' or 'dating around.' Maybe you guys don't get as serious as quickly (once you start dating) as we do? I'd appreciate it if someone could help me understand what you all mean by the term 'casual dating'. Thanks.
    (NB I do also think heaps of Australians get way too serious too quickly because they *don't* get to know each other first. In fact, you often hear people say they wouldn't go out with a friend because they wouldn't be willing to 'risk the friendship'. That is a worldview difference between me and them...)

    ReplyDelete
  39. Shadowspring, I want to extend some positive intent to the troll. They obviously came to the blog with no idea what Lewis is talking about. They jumped to some silly and insulting conclusions. That was rude.
    BUT they may just be ignorant, not actually stuck in the paradigm. For example, I learned the term 'worldview' when I did a missiological sort course, where we were supposed to be learning how to get to know people so we could communicate better. As my PP shows, differences in worldview can make understanding one another very difficult. As part of our course, we were expected to interview someone in-depth, with starter questions provided, over three weeks, to 'unwrap the onion' of their worldview. We also looked at some of what the Bible had to say about those questions - thus examining part of the 'biblical worldview' (which didn't include any of the things you listed, strangely enough ;)). If Anonymous read the post with this sort of definition of worldview in mind, I can understand him/her being confused and asking the question they did. Also, he/she may be a homeschooled Christian with little or no experience of the CH Movement and again not realise what Lewis is talking about.
    Of course, I do have a tendency to believe the best of people even when the evidence is against them, but I did feel you unfairly condemned them without trial :)

    ReplyDelete
  40. @Claire...I'll see if I can answer your question...

    I don't think many Americans are concerned about casual dating. More specifically, I'm not (and I think I'm fairly safe in speaking for most of us). We generally date people we're attracted to, and if we have fun with the other person, and we connect, we keep dating them and perhaps it grows into something more serious. If we don't have fun, or we don't connect, we stop dating the person. We don't really look at dating, in and of itself, as the basis of a relationship. It's just dating.

    The courtship crowd confuses the issue. They don't understand emotion, and don't equip their children to understand emotion, and they view any emotional involvement prior to marriage as dangerous ground. Regarding emotion, they're seriously like cavemen with fire - "Fire bad!" Unable to understand it, they fear it.

    Also, they confuse casual dating with casual sex - essentially thinking they're one and the same.

    They treat the entire issue as if it's impossible for two people to exercise responsibility, connect emotionally in healthy ways, exercise self-control, and avoid sex in dating. They're really idiots about it, frankly.

    I'm all for people dating whomever however they want. They should enjoy themselves, exercise discipline and self-control, treat the other person with respect, and roll with the punches. If that means dating 15 different people before finding Mr or Mrs Right, so be it. If that means dating 30 different people and never finding Mr or Mrs Right, so be it. It's just dating. It isn't "a relationship" in and of itself.

    The courtship crowd puts a lot of ill and misinformed connotations on dating. Aside from their lethal inability to understand emotion, a lot of it stems from their worship of the "institution of marriage".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Curious

      Let's pretend that you had children who were nearing their adult years, and they were not showing you the maturity it takes to make wise decisions in relationships. Would you allow them to date? Do you think that the right course is to let them have at it, even though... lets say you have a daughter who for some reason is starved for male attention and would do anything to please a guy and get him to go out with her again.

      btw-it was my personal experience that dating WAS synonomous with fornication, even when it came to dating christians. And in my circle of christian friends, well, they were all having sex too, even if they did not want to. They would fail and then have horrible guilt afterwards. ..only to fall into the trap again.

      shrug.. hormones

      I lean away from courtship, because of this blog and some families that I know in real life who had bad experiences, but I also wonder if a total hands off approach is exactly the right thing just because it is the most non-controlling thing.

      Do you believe that parents should have any control over their adult children's relationships-especially if they are living with their parents.

      Delete
    2. "Let's pretend that you had children who were nearing their adult years, and they were not showing you the maturity it takes to make wise decisions in relationships. Would you allow them to date? Do you think that the right course is to let them have at it, even though... lets say you have a daughter who for some reason is starved for male attention and would do anything to please a guy and get him to go out with her again."

      If they haven't demonstrated a certain level of responsibility and self-control, and if I couldn't trust them to respect the other person, then no, I wouldn't let them date as teens. I should note that this doesn't mean I'd go the courtship or formulaic route, either. If they're so immature, irresponsible, and lacking in self-control that I'd need to go the formulaic route, they have no business being in a relationship at all, and a formula won't make them any less immature, irresponsible, and lacking in self-control. Once they turn 18, they can do what they want.

      "btw-it was my personal experience that dating WAS synonomous with fornication, even when it came to dating christians. And in my circle of christian friends, well, they were all having sex too, even if they did not want to. They would fail and then have horrible guilt afterwards. ..only to fall into the trap again.

      shrug.. hormones"


      Self-control is important. What you're describing isn't a sex issue. It's a self-control issue. Personally, I've found this to be a bigger problem within the Christian community than outside of it. In the Christian community, no one is taught about self-control, only about sin sin sin - and offered formulas in place of self-control. Hence, the failure and corresponding guilt. In the purity-driven conservative Christian world, "responsible" parents stress the sin angle and usually introduce a lot of emotional baggage. In secular society, responsible parents stress respect. There are irresponsible parents in both spheres, to be fair.

      "Do you believe that parents should have any control over their adult children's relationships-especially if they are living with their parents."

      Absolutely not. Setting house rules is one thing, but extending that reach beyond the walls of the home and into the personal life and relationships of an adult child is meddling.


      To me, much of the problem comes from the way the Christian community handles the issue of sex - making it the big bad boogeyman, the unpardonable sin. It's also the product of making the "institution of marriage" into an idol. I don't condone or promote sex outside of marriage or committed relationships, but sexual sin is no greater or worse than any other, that I can see, and no one should find the basis or measure of their self-worth in their past, present, or future sex life, and no one should EVER be considered damaged goods because of past sexual acts or indiscretions.

      Delete
    3. To add to where I said this above...

      If they haven't demonstrated a certain level of responsibility and self-control, and if I couldn't trust them to respect the other person, then no, I wouldn't let them date as teens.

      I'd also want to see evidence that my teen has self-respect. If you don't learn to respect yourself, you'll struggle to have healthy respect for anyone else, and you'll make allowances in behavior that you otherwise wouldn't make.

      Delete
    4. Thank you for your perspective.


      I appreciate it.

      Delete
    5. One more question.

      Let's say your daughter is a pretty awesome respectable person, but a guy who is not good news is coming around and she is interested in him.

      Do you warn her, or do you stay back and let her find out for herself?

      Just curious.

      Delete
    6. If she's a minor, I have a little talk with Billy-Bob and tell him to get lost.

      If she's an adult, and I've raised her to be a responsible, self-respecting, and aware person, she should be able to figure it out on her own. I'd only intervene if she were in some kind of serious danger, same as I would for anyone else.

      Delete
  41. Thanks, Lewis, I think you've cleared up my confusion. I think the brick wall I keep knocking against (and I've suspected it before, but the evidence is not always clear) is that Australians don't, in fact, date. Or I've never seen anyone in that middle ground you seem to be describing. You're either in 'a relationship' or not. Or that's been my observation/experience. In that context, a lot of the courtship stuff makes more sense. Not the crazy parental control/don't get involved enough to get to know each other/never spend enough time with the opposite sex to become friends bit. That's all very stupid. But I really do watch people play with fire by entering serious relationships with people they hardly know... (and the same person who says 'I'd never go out with a friend' later says 'I'd never have gone out with him if I'd known what he was like.' *eyeroll*). This isn't everybody, btw. Plenty of us do become friends first, but I've never observed 'casual dating'. Anyway, enough about me... Thanks for your help.

    ReplyDelete
  42. My husband and I didn't court - we were engaged without my parents knowing about it (which is normal!), and they were upset with me/us pretty much through the whole thing, and then just threw us away once we got married.

    However, my siblings have experienced things like a one year "break" from talking with their romantic interest, so they would get emotionally unattached. It makes me weep. They are still all at home, one married (she still lives at home, too).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I find it interesting that Patriarchal Quiverfull children, when they rebel from their parents, tend to rebel by getting engaged and married.

      Run of the mill evangelicals tend to rebel by having a lot of sex with a lot of different people.


      Broad generalization I know, but it just seems to me that this is the way it is. Maybe it is because the evangelicals let their sons and daughters have friends of the opposite sex, and lots of freedom with those people, and patriarchal quiverful folks come from a background where family is essentially worshipped. The rebellion looks different.

      Delete
    2. Emily, I get the impression that what you are saying is less than true.
      The there are so many stories of patriarchy children rebelling by getting married not because patriarchy children are different from others, but because, in normal homes, getting married is not rebellion.

      What is normal is seen as rebellious and terrible by those parents, and that is why the majority of their rebellion stories are of normal behavior.

      By comparison, ordinary Christian parents complain of fewer rebellious children, because they have a more realistic definition of rebellious.

      Delete
    3. hmm.. good point!

      I think it sort of helps my point a little.

      My point though was that their "rebellion" is not really rebellion, but marriage.. It's a good thing generally, even if their parents do not agree.

      Delete
  43. Hello ,
    I am a Christian mother that home schools . I just wanted to add to this that you missed "Bright Lights" in your list . I was a little hurt at your comments towards Christian home schoolers. My husband and I are Baptist . We refuse to allow our kids to "court" . We feel pressure and even anger from other parents that follow these practices. I want my children to fall in love , I want them to have a broken heart . I want them to make their own choices . If I am making choices for them when they are old enough to get married I have failed . We want them to be able to fall madly and deeply in love the way that we did and still are today . Not all Christian home schoolers are like this !

    ReplyDelete