Part 2: On Authority
We’re on part 2 of a response to a blog post titled Why Courtship is Fundamentally Flawed. The original post was lengthy, covering a lot of ground, so I decided more than one post was needed in response. I’ve now “sketched it out,” and it looks like there will be seven parts, total. I’ll try to remember to come back and update this table of contents later with links.
Part 1: Introduction
Part 2: On Authority (the post you’re reading now)
Part 3: The Importance of Defining Terms
Part 4: Why “Traditional Dating” Isn’t a Viable Solution
Part 5: Misconceptions, or Concerns That Aren’t (Always) Legitimate Concerns
Part 6: Principles of Courtship
Part 7: Legitimate Concerns
So with that said, let’s get on with part two.
Appeal to Improper Authority
The first authority-related concern I have with Umstattd’s post is a fallacy known as an “appeal to improper authority.” This particular fallacy is a little bit subjective, because it isn’t always clear who is or isn’t an appropriate authority on a subject. Sometimes it’s concrete and obvious; other times not so much.
But in this case, we’re talking about a question of how best to carry out God’s instructions or God’s plan. That means any Bible-believing Christian should consider God the appropriate authority on the subject. Not our culture. Not what “worked” for someone else (in a completely different situation). Not even the counsel of elders, if it isn’t informed by Scripture in the first place. God’s Word is the authority on the subject.
(A secondary authority on this particular subject would also be those who have courted, although the most rational thing to do would be to consult those for whom courtship worked or, failing that, to consult the full spectrum of those embracing courtship.)
But God is not the authority to whom the author appeals as “evidence” for his position of how we should find spouses. (In fact, he essentially says that God is more-or-less silent on the subject.) Neither are those who successfully courted – or even those who successfully married following any method from within our current culture. Or even a long historical precedent. Who does he appeal to as his authorities?
“My grandmother grew up in a marginally Christian community. …And yet her community of friends all got married and then stayed married for decades and decades. So what on earth were they doing that worked so well? Over dinner, my grandmother shared her story about what dating was like back in the the 30s and 40s.”
His grandmother is the primary authority we see him appealing to. Now, it is wise for him to give heed to her counsel for him, as she’s an elder God placed in his life. But to use one woman’s experience as the authority for every Christian’s life choices is rather absurd.
If you consider it in broader terms, he’s appealing to the “majority experience” from one brief period of American history that isn’t now. No long-term precedent – just a few decades out of centuries of history. No breadth of precedent – just American pop culture. And no specifically current precedent.
“I don’t see Arranged Marriage taking off in Western Culture.”
It should be noted that arranged marriage is differentiated from courtship in the post; however, the author claims that most moral arguments for courtship are actually arguments for arranged marriage. The more relevant point here, though, is that the author is implying that popularity within the culture is a high priority. That is inherently not a biblical concept.
We aren’t told in Scripture that we have to buck trends purely for the sake of bucking trends, but we’re definitely not told that we should go along with what’s comfortable for the culture at large. In fact, the Scriptural precedent is for God’s people to be notably different from those around them. So whether or not a particular model is likely to “take off in our culture” is, frankly, irrelevant.
“Traditional Dating fits our culture like a glove.”
Again, we have an appeal to the culture at large. From a biblical perspective, this is a completely irrelevant point. Or potentially even a red flag alerting us that we should look more closely, because “culture at large” is not really known for being godly. (To be clear, I am not saying that something being comfortable to our culture necessarily means it’s unbiblical. I’m saying that something being comfortable to our culture definitely doesn’t prove that it’s biblical and it may be wise to dig deeper into anything the greater culture is embracing before we embrace it along with them.)
Polytheism fit Athenian culture like a glove, but that didn’t prompt Paul to preach polytheism there. Rather, he started with what was familiar to the Athenians and showed them a better way.
“Do what your grandparents did and go out on dates with lots of different people before going steady with any of them.” (bold added)
Here again we have an appeal to what some other fallible humans did as the basis for what we should do. Why these particular fallible humans? If this is all about appealing to someone whose methods worked, there are lots of other options. Some of us courted and it worked. Many people around the world had their marriages arranged and it worked. The point is, people are unreliable, and you can’t just rely on one person’s – or a few peoples’ – experiences as the whole basis for defining a system that should work for everyone.
Bottom line: the Bible says that we’re to be holy (1 Pe. 1:15-16; 2:9) – that is, set apart. “Fitting the culture” or doing something because “previous generations did it” or “it worked” are not biblical reasons.
Disregard/Disrespect for God-Ordained Authority
I was also very disappointed with the attitude and tone demonstrated toward parents throughout the article. The Bible does teach that parents have authority over their children – especially with regard to fathers and daughters. (More on that in a later installment.) But parents are treated with derision throughout the article – especially daddies who take the time and trouble to protect their daughters.
It is a bit ironic that while he laments the fact that early on, he rejected the counsel of elders in his own life in favor of the immature counsel of his peers, he strongly encourages readers to reject the counsel of the elders God has placed in their lives and given direct authority over them – namely, their parents. (I don’t know what the situation was with his own parents. They were never mentioned.) No attempt is made, either, to differentiate between the interaction of, say, a 30-year-old daughter with her father and a 16-year-old daughter with her father*. Meanwhile, it is automatically assumed that every parent in question is a complete control freak.
“Young people whose parents often maintain veto power on all of their decisions are then expected to make this most important decision without any experience in good decision making.”
To begin with, this comment – along with its implications in context – doesn’t even make sense. It isn’t really clear what he means by “veto power.” To my mind, parents having “veto power” means that young people are expected to make decisions on their own, and parents will only intervene if they believe their young people to be making egregious, life-changing mistakes. Like when you’re teaching your kids to drive: you have to let them do the driving, but if they’re about to drive off the road, you might have to momentarily grab the wheel. In that case, the “effect” portion of this “cause-and-effect” situation doesn’t follow.
Given the context, I don’t really think that’s what he’s saying. I don’t think he means “veto power” at all. I think he means the parents just make all of the decisions for their young people in the first place. Which I totally agree is foolishness. But in that case, the “effect” of the “cause-and-effect” situation here still doesn’t follow. Why? Because the young person then is not being “expected to make this…decision.” It’s being made for him.
So this whole argument simply doesn’t hold water.
More significantly, though, the tone here is concerning. Misleading terminology is used to imply that one type of parent is like a different type of parent. The very use of the term “veto power” suggests that parent who will grab the wheel to keep his child from running off the road. But then the situation described is actually that of a “helicopter parent” who can’t give his child any space to grow.
These are two very different things, and it is dishonoring to the body of Christ to accuse conscientious, caring, involved parents of being overbearing and harmful.
Moving on…
In his suggestions to young men, the author says that:
“If she says you need to talk to her dad first, just move on to the next girl. Don’t let the fact that some women have controlling fathers keep you from dating the girls with more normal families. There are a lot of fish in the sea and some dads are nicer than others. Remember that this man would have become your father-in-law, and controlling people tend to control everything they can.”
This is not exactly about attitudes toward our own fathers, but…WHOA. I think somebody needs to take a step back or a deep breath, or something. I could practically write a whole post just about this single paragraph.
First of all, it is not fair to a girl to measure her by her dad. Let’s just get that out of the way.
Second, it is really stretching things to say that expecting to talk to a young man before he takes your daughter off without any oversight is “controlling.” Have you read any news lately? Been within a mile of a local high school? It is a wise parent who will know the people his children are with. And especially when that parent is a father who is responsible for the safety of his daughter.
Daddies make sure they know and are comfortable with the men who are taking their daughters places because they love them, not because they’re control freaks.
Traditionally, it has been considered good manners to ask a girl’s parents for permission to take her on a date. Any man who is offended by this probably won’t pass muster. Let me be blunt: That’s not because dad’s controlling; it’s because the guy is a jerk.
Any girl who truly values herself will be thankful to have a loving father take a few minutes to chat with a guy who shows an interest in her and say, “He seems like a good guy. Have fun.”
Are there some fathers who are controlling? Undoubtedly. But the “dividing line” between controlling and not controlling is not wanting to know who the heck you are before you take his precious daughter off someplace.
“Being a parent does not make you a Pope for another adult.”
Um, no, obviously not, but again, parents have a responsibility to their children. Yes, even to their adult children. We may not all agree on the correct interpretation of what that responsibility is to our adult children, but taking responsibility does not equal playing personal Holy Spirit. The choice of wording here is arrogant, disrespectful, and offensive.
“Allow your daughters to say yes to first dates from Christian guys you don’t know.”
This is the author’s idea of (part of) how to not be controlling. Seriously?! So being unwilling to let some guy I don’t even know take my daughter out alone is being controlling? If that’s the case, I’ll wear that “controlling parent” badge with pleasure.
Any young man who finds it “controlling” that a girl’s parents want to know who he is before they let her go off with him either has a serious complex, or is up to no good. A well-adjusted young man who values a young lady will appreciate her parents’ concern for her honor and safety as demonstrated by their wanting to know him a little bit before they send the two young people off somewhere.
“Realize that many of their rules were created out of fear.”
Really? How does he know that about someone else’s household? Maybe they were. Maybe they weren’t. Maybe he’s merely assuming everyone’s rules are based on fear because that was his experience.
It is appallingly arrogant to presume to tell a young person you don’t even know what her parents did or why they did it. And has the extremely dangerous potential of setting up a rebellious young man or woman against perfectly sane, reasonable parents who have his best interests at heart.
“Share this post with your parents and talk to with them about why courtship is flawed and why you are going to start going out on dates.”
In other words, just flat-out refuse to submit to their authority. And if that doesn’t work, manipulate them:
“If all else fails, play the grandchildren card.”
*Mr. Umstattd has since posted a follow-up, where he clarifies that his original article was intended for an audience of single adults. I still disagree with his assumptions/conclusions regarding women who defer to their fathers, but the clarification is crucial, and the tone of the post is far more gracious/respectful.
Hi Rachel,
Before you continue writing your next posts, you should read Thomas’ Q&A. He responds to several of your misunderstands above (and in your previous post):
http://www.thomasumstattd.com/2014/08/courtship-fundamentally-flawed-qa/
He responds to the 16 year old vs. adult daughter – he is writing to Adults and makes that clear in the Q&A (where I could see the misunderstanding from the original article).
I’ll post some more later, but I think you need to go look at Thomas’ Q&A and read it before you continue – some of your arguments aren’t actually about what Thomas is trying to say.
Thank you, Stephen, for bringing this to my attention. I actually have already written the rest of this series, and I don’t plan to rewrite it, because I’m writing about what he did say (as that’s what everyone else read, is passing around and, in many cases, was influenced by). However, I will be sure to make a note and add a link to the follow-up to be sure my readers are aware of it.
Rachel,
Part 2 was excellently written. As a parent and father, I don’t feel the followup Q&A from Thomas cleared up any of the issues I’ve sensed that parents have expressed with his attitude, tone, or solutions. I still think that somewhere along the way, he must have had a very bad experience, now is somewhat bitter about it, and letting the world know. I don’t find it helpful.
I’m anxiously looking forward to reading your remaining posts.
Here is a link to what I believe is a “very objective” response to the original article by Thomas. Though I don’t know the author, I feel it was written by a “loving and caring” father, outlining how he views his responsibility towards his daughters…and young men seeking their hand in marriage. He provides some excellent scripture passages that you might want to consider, and a link to a sermon series on the topic of courtship.
http://1689nut.wordpress.com/
For your future thinking on this matter, here is another “common wedding ceremony term” we traditionally/casually use within our society, to relay our thinking regarding the manner in which the transition is made in marriage. “Giving of her hand”. This action and language is a “very real and visible” demonstration of transfer from the father to the husband, and has some very significant meaning from this father’s “biblical point of view”.
Thanks for all your writing efforts on this subject. It has brought reading pleasure!
That post was great; thank you so much for sharing it! (It’s also much more concise. I’d be inclined to just scrap mine and send readers over there except that I think folks are appreciating hearing a daughter’s perspective on the subject.) His looks like a great blog in general, so I’m glad to have been introduced to it!
Rachel, how do you personally feel about the distinction between how a father/daughter relationship should work for a 16 year old daughter vs. a 30 year old daughter? I know you mentioned Umstattd’s later differentiation. I am a 24 year old single woman who does not live with my parents, so I read Umstattd’s original article through the lenses of my current experience. In other words, I interpreted the article to be talking about adults, and you originally interpreted it for girls still in the explicit care of their parents. I personally agree that such precautions as you describe would be considered controlling when applied to an adult daughter, but I’m curious how you feel on the subject.
That is a really good question! It’s going to depend on circumstances, and there will be a greater variation among young women in their 20’s as opposed to young women in their mid-teens, as far as that goes. (You’re not likely to encounter too many 16-year-olds living away from home, for instance, while that’s going to be pretty common among those in their 20’s.)
I think it’s ideal, personally, for young women to live with their fathers until they’re married, unless there’s a specific reason – typically ministry-related – for her to be elsewhere. (I know not everyone will agree with that, and that’s okay, but it’s beyond the scope of this post to tackle that. And I’m not referring to short-term situations, but permanent moves.) I’m aware, though, that not only does not everyone agree that this is the ideal, not everyone has this option. So it’s going to depend.
If a young woman is still at home, I’d say the conversations are going to look a lot alike in terms of content, but differ in their flavor. At this point, if a young woman is still under her father’s oversight it’s because she has chosen to remain in that position. So I think Dad can still make pretty definitive decisions – because everyone involved recognizes that the daughter has essentially asked for that – but the tone and such is not going to be the same kind of, “Because I said so and I’m the dad, and you will have to deal with it, young lady,” that you might have with a teen. (That sounds harsher than I intend, too. It’s a hard thing to put into words. I guess what I’m saying is that there is a transition from more of a hard-and-fast instruction to more of an advisory tone, but still just as much involvement.)
If a daughter is living away from home, it’s going to depend a lot more on what she asks for, because the same degree of involvement is not practical, whether it’s desired or not (especially if she lives a long distance away). In that case, she’s more likely to have chosen someone near her that she trusts – perhaps a pastor or someone in that capacity – to provide counsel in the early stages of relationships, and call for dad’s involvement farther through the process.
I have an older sister who would have much better input, as she lived away from home for many years! I don’t have much personal experience, so my own thoughts are based on secondhand observation and extrapolation of principles. (So take them with a grain of salt. 🙂 ) I do know that my sister consciously chose to put herself “under” my dad even after moving away by, for instance, deciding that she simply would not marry anyone he wasn’t okay with. She trusted him and knew that he would only look out for her.
In terms of that secondhand observation, though, we have a broad range in my own household (that I grew up in). I have a single sister who lives with Mom and Dad and one who married from within Mom and Dad’s house in her mid-20’s, plus the sister who lived away for most of her adult life and married in her late 30’s, besides my own experience. So when I read the article, I wasn’t thinking only of 16-year-old girls – just recognizing that he didn’t clarify a distinction.
Why can’t a woman move out and have a career? Why does it have to be ministry related?
It’s not about “why can’t…?” It’s more about “why should…?” I believe Christians are to live our lives based not on “what is acceptable?” or “how much can I get away with and not be sinning?” but on “what brings glory to God?” and “how can I most please God?” I don’t believe it’s most glorifying to God for women to default to flaunting their independence and pursuing separate visions from the rest of their households. God built us to function as family units, and those family units lose something if every part is off doing its own thing, independent of the others, rather than all working together.
Yeah and what always happens is nobody is good enough for Daddy’s princess so princess is still single and living at home at 45. No thanks.
We r parents of a 17 yo son in the middle of courtship for one year now. His girlfriend’s parents r the rule makers and so we r kinda flying by the seat of our pants. Most of the rules we would agree with but maybe not all of them. We tell our son to respect their rules if he wants to spend time with their daughter. We r trying to figure out if the rules should or will change once the kids r both 18 and graduated. So basically we r trying to figure all this out
Wow. Thank you for writing this. I did read the previous article, and was actually looking for it to prove me again how wrong I was for doing what I KNOW God has placed on my heart when I stumbled upon yours. This initial article troubled me, as I felt like my wait was getting longer. Although I know that casual dating would not be a good thing for me, I was ready to compromise with the convictions that God has put on my heart.
We are all different, and God leads us according to who we are, and the plans He has for us. No individual’s choice (whether it’s to date or not to date) should be made a rule for everyone else. The Word of God and the Holy Spirit should, in everything, be our ultimate guides. Thank you again for that reminder.
I’m glad it was the right message at the right time. 🙂 Don’t lose heart!