The Larger Story: Encouraging a man to commit

I think that all of us single men who have been desired by a woman at some point have faced the question: "Will he commit [to marriage]?" I understand that, completely.

So, for those of you single women who are involved or want to be, here's a little tip. Just follow the "Golden Rule" -- "Do unto others what you would have them do unto you."

In other words, if you want him to commit to you, you need to commit to him.

Now, that's a little more problematic than it sounds. It's more than simply cooking his favorite meals and accepting his friends, family and faults, though those certainly help. You see -- and this is especially the case for Christians -- a man needs to know that his woman is behind him.

So why do I say this? Well, the most important thing for a man is understanding his vision and finding his ultimate purpose on this earth, and a man who doesn't have one simply isn't worth a woman's time as it is -- and I'm not just talking about making a lot of money, either. So, frankly, she should ask him what that is and what steps he has taken toward it. If it seems plausible and reasonable, she can proceed.

Basically, it's what John Eldredge calls the Larger Story. All such relationships have to have an overall context or theme; when God calls a couple together it's always for a specific reason. Some are called to pastor churches; others to the mission field; others do music together. And that theme is what will keep the marriage together when things threaten to fall apart (as things eventually will).

But what if that "vision" doesn't square with your hopes and plans? Well, you have a choice to make -- either bend to that or leave the relationship. That may sound cruel, but it really is the best way because the man does have the responsibility of being the leader of the family.

I know that from painful experience. My last girlfriend, who occasionally complained about my unwillingness to "commit," nevertheless pretty much planned out our entire future together but without even once asking me where I felt God was leading -- and, in retrospect, it completely conflicted with her agenda. Most importantly, she expected me to attend her church, which God Himself told me from the outset not to do, giving me three specific confirmations in the process. Eventually, I had to leave when she refused to listen. (And she's probably still resentful toward me, even after over eight years -- proof that breaking it off was indeed the right thing.)

My late stepfather was a man who knew who he was, what he was about and where he was going (well, not so much the last because he retired just before he married my mother). That's the kind of man that every woman needs and every man needs to be, because a man who cannot commit to his Larger Story has no business committing to a woman.

Love and confusion

My most recent book purchase was "Loves Me, Loves Me Not: The Ethics of Unrequited Love" by Laura Smit; I was interested because I'm personally quite acquainted with that extremely painful subject -- mostly on the receiving end. And as I read, I was reminded of some of the horrendous mistakes, not just in commission but in attitude, that I've made over the years in trying (and generally failing) to date.

I haven't read through the entire book, but one thing I see missing: Hope.

As virtually everyone knows, dating is difficult at any age; nearly 30 years ago the then-girlfriend of a fraternity brother nailed it when she called it "depressing." It's not clear to me so far who Smit's target audience is or what she wants it to learn; I hear from her, "When in doubt, don't." That may be fine for persons from their teenage years up to their 30s.

Of course, I'm nearly 50, would like to be married and have peers, including my younger brother, who are grandparents. And part of me today really does feel immature because I don't have the responsibility of a spouse and children, and it's really tough to come to and leave church alone.

But here's the issue: We men are supposed to be the pursuers, the initiators, the leaders; paradoxically, often we don't have much of a clue when a woman is interested or simply naturally kind. And I think that leads to the misunderstandings that often happen when folks get their wires crossed. Such a situation was the catalyst for my leaving my last church (although God was clearly calling me out), and with my last major heartbreak nearly three years ago I was depressed for nearly three weeks!

Going further, I've recently been reminded of God's great love for His children and how we nonetheless often ignore him (and I confess that I'm guilty of such). During that time of admitted self-pity three years ago I got a message from Him, "Now you know how I feel." And the Scripture reminds us that we didn't choose Him; rather, He pursued us. (Indeed, from the time I first heard the Gospel to when I actually received Christ was about eight years.) Now, I realize that the comparison cannot be taken too far because He's divine and we're not; still, we're not supposed to sit on our butts and wait for "her" to show up.

And therein lies the confusion over Smit's thesis. I understand and accept that she has committed herself to singleness. However, building a relationship requires risk; while I think realism is necessary, so is vulnerability. Besides, if your goal is simply "possessing" another person, which is less and less the case with me, you ought not to be in a relationship in the first place.

Single men in the church -- what single women can do

Thirty years ago, during my senior year in high school, a newspaper reported a very touching story about two high school basketball teams that had developed somewhat of a bond while participating in the Pennsylvania state playoffs. The girls' team from Indiana Area ended up being paired with the boys from Valley, so the girls began writing notes of encouragement to the boys. As both teams went deeper in the tournament, the girls eventually became the boys' biggest cheerleaders outside of their district. The girls lost in the semifinals, but the boys ended up taking the championship. (I don't know if any relationships started from that, but I'm sure the boys appreciated the support.)

I was reminded of that story upon reading "Where have all the single Christian men gone?", yet another article, this one on ChristianityToday.com's "Christian Singles Today" page, about the major gender gap in the church, especially among singles. Please excuse my cynicism, but I sometimes wonder why many of these women want men in the church -- so that the pool of marriageable men can increase? Which leads to my point: Rather than bellyache about the dearth of single men, it seems to me that they can and should reach out to the guys who are already there.

Anyway, I have some observations on the singles "gender gap" in the church. Others have stated more eloquently and with more hard evidence than I that the church often comes across as a "girls' club" and that the Gospel is often cloaked in feminine language, often turning away men. That may be true, but I think part of the gap also has to do with the unrealistic expectations Christian women have of men.

I began to notice this in the campus ministry I was a part of in the 1980s. Much of the leadership fell to a number of physical therapy students, almost all of them attractive, spirtually mature -- and female. Gradually I realized that they (possibly without realizing it) had become fairly unapproachable, especially when it came to men, because of their status. In that fellowship women chased the strong guys and ignored the "weaker" ones.

Another thing to consider: Most of the strong Christian men I knew especially in those days grew up with godly fathers in solid marriages, which probably most of us "converts" who comprise the majority of never-married Christian men simply cannot appreciate. My own trouble in relating to other men at that point had to do with their relative unavailability -- until I was in my mid-20s I honestly did not know any spiritually mature yet unattached men. At that point it doesn't really matter how well you know and can apply the Scriptures, because people still need relationships. This is where the women can lend a hand.

Of course men should have their primary formative and discipling relationships with other men, but any man will tell you that gets dull after a while. You see, a note, phone call or any unsolicited attention from a woman can really make a man's day.

For that reason I think we also ought to encourage dating among Christian singles, not primarily to find a spouse or because they may find each other attractive but simply to learn how to relate to the other gender in more appropriate ways. Remember, at some point a man may become a husband and need to take responsibility for the well-being of his spouse and any children, and that can be done effectively only with practice. Back in the 1990s a then-future, now-former girlfriend of mine got involved in a church -- that turned out to be a cult -- in which one of the unspoken "rules" was that singles were supposed to go out on dates every Saturday. With all the institutional dysfunction in that church, nevertheless it got that one right.

My advice to single women who don't want to be: Don't just hope and pray that God will bring the "right man" into your life. While you're waiting for him, employ Jesus's "do unto others" priniciple and find a way to build up that single brother sitting right next to you. You'll both be blessed in the process.

'Gay marriage' -- what's really behind it

If you haven't heard, two more states -- Iowa and Vermont -- have this month legalized same-gender matrimony. And unlike the last few years, it hasn't caused much of a stir among Christians (at least from what I've seen). Which is probably a good thing.

I say this not because I support "gay marriage" (I certainly don't) but because perhaps we need to rethink the whole marriage enterprise.

The problem, since the last few hundred years, is the way marriage is conducted in Western culture. How are partners chosen? Really, primarily based on physical attraction in the hope that the inside matches the outside; even in evangelical churches, where we should know better, we routinely engage in what I refer to as "spiritualized lust." This being the case, it was only a matter of time before persons similarly attracted to the same gender demanded the same rights. You may notice that even the way the issue is framed focuses on the sexual -- "gay marriage," as if marriage is primarily about sex.

When people "fall in love," they put on blinders as to the faults of the partner, as though pure, overwhelming passion is the only thing that matters. And while I know from personal experience even as a single man just how intoxicating romance can be, at some point it does wear off. With such a poor foundation you either have to find ways to continue to "pump it up" -- which can lead to affairs and/or pornography -- or else split with the partner because "the magic is gone." (That's one reason why divorce is so prevalent even in the church.) Such same-gender relationships by definition fit into this category.

Moreover, David Blankenhorn of the Institute for American Values, who describes himself as a "liberal Democrat," considers same-gender matrimony a bad idea -- but for a surprisingly different reason than normally argued. In an op-ed published in the Los Angeles Times, he mentioned that he had spent a year studying marriage and wrote in response, "Among us humans, the scholars report, marriage is not primarily a license to have sex. Nor is it primarily a license to receive benefits or social recognition. It is primarily a license to have children." Blankenhorn believes that "For healthy development, what a child needs more than anything else is the mother and father who together made the child, who love the child and love each other."

For that reason, marriage in Eastern culture even today is never left to the persons involved -- they are arranged, usually by parents, to strengthen families and communities. And romantic love has little or nothing to do with it. (And those unions last.)

I know what you're thinking: Doesn't the Bible strictly forbid homosexual marriage? Not really -- just homosexual conduct, as marriage between "one man and one woman" is considered propositional truth that doesn't require defending. And that's fine with me.

I've heard some apologists for same-gender marriage say "Can people help whom they love?" That's not the point, because, as I said earlier, that kind of "love" is often blind. I'd like to be married someday and I will probably do so in the traditional way, but I will make that decision not so much on how she makes me feel but on issues of character and maturity. If enough people did that, "gay marriage" will be exposed as the oxymoron that it is.

The 'teddy bear' gives up -- for now

Yesterday I made a decision. I'm suspending my six-year search for a spouse, at least for the time being.

This is not to say that I've given up on marriage, even at my advanced age (48 next week) because I still believe I have something to offer a woman. But I was reminded earlier this week why I don't see myself doing things in the normal way. So I won't be going on any Internet introduction sites or approaching a woman I'm attracted to but don't know.

What happened? Well, I took a Facebook quiz, "What do people think of you at first sight?" -- and came up with a shocking answer, "You are cute," complete with a photo of a kitten with its head cocked to the side, indicating vulnerability. That may not sound like much until you consider my relationship history.

Weeks after I entered the fifth grade in a Christian academy in suburban Pittsburgh, a first-grade girl, apparently starved for attention, became very attached to me and treated me like a teddy bear (and never having experienced that, I didn't know how to respond). And she was not the last one to do that -- over the years dozens of women, mostly younger, have similarly demonstrated that they felt extremely, extremely safe around me. Cheerleaders fawned over me as an eighth-grade basketball player; during my senior year as an otherwise unpopular member of the high school band I won a school instrumental award and the first people who gave me a standing O were younger majorettes; once while having dinner in Pitt's dining hall during my junior year a freshman woman I had not previously met invited herself to sit with me. I've got stories galore about those kind of experiences.

Yet all that attention has rarely translated into dates -- it's almost as though I'm not a normal guy supposed to be attracted to women. One other woman I met during my immediate post-college days in the mid-1980s who would sleep with someone else at the drop of a hat loved curling up with me but said that she would slap me if I "tried anything." Even to this day women I'm friendly with display some surprise when I ask them out -- even as an escort for just one evening.

So what do I plan to do? Well, nothing, and that's the point. I think there's a message in it for me -- that, even with my frustration, I'm still obligated to treat women as princesses. After all, they are created by God in his image and not my toys to be thrown away when I'm done with them. I could be actually ahead of the game when it comes to marriage, which does require warmth, tenderness and communication -- all of which I do well.