The third column.
written by Julie R. Neidlinger 15 comments link this postI have this idea that I've nearly ruined myself thinking there are only pros and cons.
"What do I think of this choice before me? Let's see...let me list the pros and cons into two columns and make a decision."
Fine, perhaps, when considering the best cut of beef or selecting a pair of shoes. But, for choices involving people, there is a third column.
Quite simply, I, like every other person, am more than a list of pros and cons. Even if I were only an either/or summation, in about twenty minutes, my pros could suddenly become cons and vice versa. The things that attract quickly become the things that annoy. That's a lot of column-switching and list-changing for the cautious person who decides on people based on some kind of personality abacus. Pros and cons for people are notoriously, hilariously, sadly, generally, completely off the mark.
I don't wonder at the rash of single people in the world today, particularly in the Evangelical world. We're so used to being taught that "it's OK to be single" and "it's OK to wait for the right one" that we feel no discouragement to stop waiting and start doing, but instead keep busy adding to our list what qualifies as the right one and never stop to think about that third column: the column that makes us human. The column that relies on our perfection coming through Christ and putting the trust in Him instead of the person.
During my first year of college (which was a Bible college), there was a girl named April who firmly believed that she was so special and unique in God's sight -- this had been drummed into her head by well-meaning parents, teachers, and youth pastors trying to protect their young flock -- that her list of qualifications for a guy was incredibly long and incredibly impossible. Nothing but the best for her, she insisted, pointing out that God wanted the best for his daughters. April did not have any comparative list of such actual qualities in herself. Perhaps God desires second or runner-up best for his sons, since I can't seem to figure out how the math will work when all the dust settles and the lists are tallied.
Too often the phrase "God has called me to be single" is a Bible-laced excuse to continue being selfish, fearful, proud, and content with smooth sailing. Many beautiful books and web sites by lovely men and women discuss singlehood as if we were all Paul, mysteriously and unfairly going through life without the healing of our affliction. Relationships and beyond become some kind of mythical realm of flighty, whispery whims that we must divine our way through in order to find that one we've dreamed of. We're told we're worth waiting for in regards to abstinence and we stupidly believe it to apply to all areas of life, and so the waiting becomes it's own trap as each person that comes along becomes a list of pros and cons and is set aside so that the one God "truly intended" might come along.
"He's a nice guy, but...too many cons. I'm worth more than that. He's just not the right one for me. See my list?"
The Evangelical world should stop having singles ministry that encourages singles to stay single and get their weekly relationship fix over pizza or coffee with the rest of the group -- sans any icky side effects from commitment -- and instead tell them to quit waiting for "the right one" and get over themselves and get married to a good and decent one. All the lessons and books and conferences that have taught single people mass amounts of complex rules and cautions, and insistence that everyone has to be compatibly matched or else the world ends, has done nothing but create vast herds of terrified, lonely, confused people insisting that good people right beside them simultaneously moving in the same direction are not the right people without realizing the irony. We've been so over-taught on the matter that we're all hamstrung and not sure what to do, so we refer to our own list as a map. A map made by a lost, blind man, essentially.
What kind of weird, modern world is it that is filled with lonely people who regularly meet together in a church settings due to their classification of being single and nothing comes of it? It's a world where there are only two columns, not three. We don't forgive each other that third column and so remained trapped in the cycle of waiting for perfection.
That third column is filled with things like previous relationships, divorce, kids by another relationship, wacky family, physical imperfections, race, culture, strange personalities, embarrassing habits, different intelligences or gifts, differences in opinions and other likes/dislikes, less than ideal careers, bad breath, the wrong hair color, too tall, too short, too fat, too thin, too extroverted, too introverted -- the third column seems like cons when all it is, is evidence of a jar of clay. God has a funny way of making that imperfect pot perfect in time.
When did relationships and marriage become such a business transaction? All science and personality matches and safety ropes. Leap-taking into a trust that says there's work involved, that says there's no perfection, and that says there's always God to help us through is left out. No wonder there's as much or more divorce in Evangelical marriages: that third column that we pretended wasn't there when we finally found "the right one", the column we never put into the equation, somehow turned into ammunition.
I imagine April is still looking. She probably goes around wondering again and again if "he's the one" but always finds a reason why he isn't. She's probably 20 pounds heavier, maybe a little bit bitter, but she still won't settle for less because she's some kind of Christian Clairol ad.
She's worth it. She's worth the best. As she defines it, anyway.
CAVEATS: 1Now, for those of you prone to being unreasonable by using extremes, I grant you that there are some cons that are to be considered. For example, a person who is a raging drug addict has a serious mark in the con column. A person, however, who used to be a raging drug addict not necessarily so. Another con for Christians is the Christian/non-Christian factor. 2 Admittedly, there are some cons I don't foresee as overcoming on my own, and they would require a miracle from above to do so, if that were the requirement. I would have a problem if a man had, for example, eight children by as many women. Far too many ladies. Solomon may have been wise, but he was a fool. 3 I do not feel this conflicts with an earlier post about praying specifically.
Labels: essay, relationships, religion
Copyright (c) Julie R. Neidlinger 11/15/2007 12:02:00 AM
Like this post? Subscribe to the feed.
Help support this site.
Facebook |
Stumble It! |
Del.icio.us |
DiggIt! |
Technorati |
Blinklist |
Furl |
reddit |
Newsvine
15 Comments:
Wow.
Yes.
Nailed.
By 
Keith Schooley, at
15/11/07 06:09
I appreciate your post on the matter, too. I was momentarily terrified by the word "fisk" ("oh great. here it comes.") but you've added to this discussion a great deal by what you wrote in your own post. I'll probably be printing and saving that.
By Julie R. Neidlinger, at
15/11/07 11:53
"Relationships and marriage became such a business transaction" when
a) The earlier model of being less picky ended in 50% divorces even among evangelicals plus all the unhappy marriages that didn't divorce, and seared the souls and hearts of those who witnessed such relationships, inclining them to prefer to be too careful rather than to be reckless towards those whom they are supposed to love above all others, as perhaps the perceived benefits of a relationship started to outweigh its drawbacks for everyone involved; and
b) At the moment after the third date when somebody brought up the question "so what's our status" (also known as the DTR or "determining the relationship" talk), which, in effect, made that date the first business meeting of the relationship, complete with negotiations and a concrete bottom line.
By 
, at
15/11/07 12:15
I'm not sure I follow you, Marie. Care to explain yourself a bit further? Either I'm misinterpreting what you're saying (for it doesn't seem to make sense to me in light of what I was trying to say), or I'm just not familiar enough with things like DTR, etc.
Some of your last point sounds like part of the discussion that went on in an earlier post about relationships, but if that's what this post seems to either echo or contradict, I've failed.
This post was about something else entirely.
I hope you take time to flesh out your comment so I can understand it better.
By Julie R. Neidlinger, at
15/11/07 13:32
I totally agree with what you wrote. I remember having to write a 'what kind of man I want to marry' list as a class exercise in a high school family living class. My list was seven pages long.
The best advice I ever got about that was to try to be the kind of person I wanted to marry.
The second best advice I ever got was when I got married, to keep my eyes focused on the good things about my partner. Honestly, I think it's saved our marriage from both our standpoints.
I think part of the reason for marriage is for different people to learn to live together. It's a difficult refining process that helps us become perfect like Christ.
By Dakota Lifestyle: Beyond the Weather, at
15/11/07 13:35
I am really not sure if I am following you, and if I understand what the "third column" is.
Things you mention - too thin, too fat, race, baggage from the past, etc. show up in the cons column all the time, but are you saying people, Evangelicals in particular, ignore those things when they look for a partner, hence the alarming divorce rate?
But at the same time, Evangelical singles (i.e. April) are too picky in their never ending quest for "the one?" Then what exactly are under these people's pros and cons columns? Perhaps some vague spiritual qualifications which nobody can quantify in concrete terms (that I totally understand).
My reading comprehension today must be way off today.
By David Cho, at
15/11/07 15:15
I probably didn't write clearly enough, David.
No, I'm not saying what you surmised.
I'm saying that "April" was really picky in making a list of what a guy should have. Like April, we often make a list of pros and cons about people we meet and decide based on that. We forget there is not just two categories (pros and cons), but a third which may seem like "cons" but is really more a category that lists what it is to be human.
Imperfections, in other words, are often seen as a "con" when we are looking for the perfect Mr./Ms. Right. Imperfections, however, are the rule and not the exception.
My point was that we needed to stop expecting perfection and start expecting a person to be human. And accept that without holding these things (too short, bad breath, etc.) against them as simply "Well, that's a negative point against her; she'll never do. Bring on the next one."
Evangelical youth are often brought up thinking that they are incredibly special and worth this Mr. Right. This was done because parents and pastors were trying to find a way to teach them to abstain from sex by telling them they were worth enough as a human being that they didn't have to just sleep with anyone. However, I've seen that the idea that "I'm worth so much" gets taken to a weird next level by youth and adults in that they think they are worth so much that they don't have to get stuck with a person who has imperfections, but rather, they are going to wait for the Perfect Person that they just know God has for them.
There are no perfect people. No absolutely perfect matches. So, a person will be waiting a long, long time. Or, worse, they think, according to their listing of pros and cons, that they've found the perfect person according to what they need now, and find out it isn't so. Not being ready to be married to an imperfect person, which is what we all are, means a nasty little surprise and a quick trip to the lawyer's office. After all, surely he wasn't Mr. Right, after all, because he wasn't perfect and there were problems!
Does that make sense? Keith's post has some good thoughts, too.
By Julie R. Neidlinger, at
15/11/07 15:27
I love this post, Julie...it's such a refreshing attitude.
To me, the main problem I've seen going on in my friends' (Christians, all) is exactly what you state, coupled with the idea that marriage is somehow going to be sunshine, butterflies, and puppies all the time. So the instant they hit a snag in dating (i.e. the first disagreement, let alone fight) then all the sudden, that person is not longer marriage material. When did the church stop emphasizing the point that marriage is hard. It takes work. But it's the most fulfilling work you'll ever get to do.
If the church is the bride of Christ and we use that relationship as a mirror for Christian marriage, how do we get it in our head that marriage between two fallen, broken humans is going to be anything other than difficult,yet rewarding?
That, then, seems to feed into the divorce rate. Because if you're expecting balloons and ice cream cake every day and instead you get scraped knees, stress, and all the other little heartaches that are just part of life, then it's really easy to think that it's clearly your spouse's fault.
Anyway, sorry so long winded - I should probably have just stopped after the first statement - I really liked this post.
By beth, at
15/11/07 18:54
"Fisk" was an unfortunate term. I've seen people use it to mean "a point-by-point response," not necessarily positive or negative. That's how I meant it. But I guess it's a misuse of the term.
I do get Marie's second point, but her first one I'm having trouble with as well. What I understand I disagree with, specifically, "The earlier model of being less picky ended in 50% divorces...." No. That's the problem--thinking that problems in marriage are a result of being "less picky" and marrying The Wrong One. That's what leads to 50% divorces. Because if the problem is that you married The Wrong One, then what recourse is there, really, except to cut your losses?
"Dakota Lifestyle" and Beth definitely get it. Maybe their husbands are almost as lucky as I am.
By Keith Schooley, at
15/11/07 20:14
Nicely done, Julie.
A few thoughts:
1. It wasn't until I scratched a few things off my list that I met my wife. Funny how that happens. Funny, too, how the monster list keepers are still single.
2. Churches need to do a better job training their young people to be godly husbands and wives by giving them solid marriage preparation classes and reinforcing biblical manhood and womanhood.
3. That said, much of this dilemma of "what to do with the singles" would go away if churches encouraged solid young people to marry sooner. Prolonging the wait in today's society is hurts more people than it helps.
4. Our attitudes toward the necessity of a college education right out of high school hurts #3 and #4. Most of our young people succumb to temptation in college because of poor prior training and the sexually charged atmosphere that is college today. Perhaps we need to rethink college. Perhaps our churches should encourage young people to marry BEFORE they go to college rather than after. Perhaps we should offer an alternative to college.
5. Few people in our churches are thinking outside the box on this issue, unfortunately.
By DLE, at
15/11/07 21:02
You've raised some points in your list, DLE, that have me thinking, particularly #3, and #4.
Blog posts in their own right, they would be.
Good stuff.
By Julie R. Neidlinger, at
15/11/07 21:40
Now it makes a lot of sense.
Far be it for me to say anything about dating, but I think the principle applies to how we relate to people in general.
We tend to categorize and label people into the little boxes we have elaborately built in our heads. It gives us control and also the illusion of making sense out of what we see in people. Neatly painted boxes make sense,so we create them and put people in them. And we put ourselves in them as well.
"I am a Bible believing conservative Evangelical in the mold of RC Sproul and Charles Spurgeon."
Dating is no different. The box is the list of pros and cons. And we attempt to squeeze the prospect into the box, and when they don't measure up, we move onto the next candidate for the box. And if people do end up getting married, they spend most of the time trying to "change" their partner and mold them into the box.
By David Cho, at
16/11/07 00:31
Nicely put, David.
Seems like there is a short story in there struggling to get out. Something about a box that functions as a Procrustean Bed, and ends up more and more like a coffin.
By Keith Schooley, at
16/11/07 06:57
Bad breath. That can be cured.
By , at
19/11/07 11:29
Thanks for putting into words what I'm sure many people out there have subconsciously thought of, but somehow never managed to compose into something coherent.
I agree with you now, though if I had read this article a year or two ago I probably might not have. But having come a full circle, I feel you have encapsulated what is most important is life: balance. Things are never one way or the other all the time. The grey areas are too large for us to be able to dichotamise everything as we would like to. In the end, we have to consider things case by case, taking into account the factors that make each situation unique in itself.
By pearll, at
19/9/08 01:25
