Candice Watters’ professor just about blew her mind. “I was sitting in class learning about all the ways our country was slipping from its constitutional foundations. And in a moment of exasperation, I raised my hand and called out, ‘So what’s the solution?’” It wasn’t what she expected. Her professor told her to get married, to have babies, and to do government (and in that order, too). Here she was, in grad school pursuing a master’s so she could head to Washington and fight for the traditional family. Yet here she was told that she was going about it all wrong. It all comes down to math. “The people who form families, who raise children and send them into the next generation, are the ones who will influence where our government and culture go in the future.” The conversation soon turned in a different direction, but she was changed; she was transfixed. She began to believe that she, too, could and should be married.
For all the women who struggle as Watters did, she offers this book. “It’s for all the women who long for marriage but are afraid to admit it, embarrassed by their deepest desires, or concerned that maybe they want it too much. It’s for the parents of single women who wonder if there’s anything they can do to help. And it’s for married friends of singles who want to help but don’t want to intrude.” The book’s message is as simple as its title. Get married. That’s the way God wants it.
Watters, who founded the Boundless.org webzine for Focus on the Family and who continues to contribute to it, takes the position that almost everyone is called to marriage—marriage is normative except for a very few. Many Christians, and too many probably, believe that singleness and celibacy are one and the same. But they are not. Celibacy is for the celibate—for those God has specially gifted so they may be set aside for service to Him. Those who desire marriage or who desire sexual relationships are not so called and ought to pursue marriage.
This book offers a way to live like you’re planning to marry. This does not mean clipping pretty dresses out of wedding catalogs, stuffing a hope chest, or entering the Christian equivalent of the myriads of dating shows. Rather, it means making some lifestyle changes and may mean rethinking singleness, marriage, and even men. It means living in expectation of marriage. And do that end, Watters provides a good deal of useful and practical advice.
As a man and as a married man at that, the book was certainly not written for me. Yet I found much in it that was valuable and I enjoyed reading it, and particularly enjoyed the author’s insights into the potential dangers of thinking like our culture thinks when it comes to marriage. The book has many valuable insights and corrections to the way people often think. When writing about a potential danger of aiming too high, of living a long and enjoyable life as a single before settling down, she writes, “Ironically, when you don’t need a man, your expectations for what a husband should be go up.” She deals well with the challenges that may arise when a husband and wife have both become firmly established in their single ways. She also writes well about the concept of “soul mates,” an idea that has brought about a great deal of pain and unhappiness. Too many people become convinced that God has set aside a single soul mate for them and that they will only ever be happy with this one person. Needless to say, this sows the seeds of doubt about whether the person they are with is really “the one.” In a lengthy appendix Watters answers many questions about establishing relationships, choosing a mate, and life planning.
If this book has a weakness (other than describing Mother Teresa as a “heroic single”—Come on, fellow evangelicals, it’s time to get over her!), it is the same one I’ve found in other similar titles (such as Debbie Maken’s Getting Serious About Getting Married—it offers little comfort to those who truly desire to be married but who have not been blessed with a spouse. It may make it seem almost too easy—yet there are many women who will testify that, despite desire and effort, they have been unable to marry. I can see that a book like this might exacerbate the pain some such people may already feel.
Get Married is a book about living like you’re planning to marry. Watters offers biblical wisdom and hard-won experience to encourage women to live like they wish to marry. She shows that marriage is a good and worthy goal and one that may not be too far off. The book will be a challenge and encouragement to any woman who desires to get married.
Comments (27) »
1. Susanna
March 4, 2008
11:32 AM
Just some thoughts after reading the review…How weird that Christian singles have to repeatedly remind one another that marriage really is the right thing for most individuals, almost in a way that seems to take some of the joy and beauty out of the concept, making it seem like more of a duty! And these books all confront the same issues it seems and in the same ways but are they really having a practical impact? It’d be interested to know!
2. David
March 4, 2008
11:41 AM
I think I’ll invest in a few copies of this book and start leaving them around church and in the apartments of my female friends. Mwhahahaha.
3. Jim
March 4, 2008
11:46 AM
Shame on those churches who do not preach the truth about marriage and the rights and responsibility of all men and women to seriously consider this God given institution.
Are christian women really believing the lie that they need to have a career?
4. David
March 4, 2008
11:49 AM
Susanna-
I think that books such as this can help hugely when there actually are issues of theology of marriage to work out. Sometimes people need to think about marriage from a more biblical perspective. But most people I know have a fantastically God-centered view of marriage, they just aren’t quite ready, or haven’t found someone who quite gives them a spark—marriage can’t be reduced to theological affirmations.
I don’t think there is anything wrong with this. It sounds like this book may even address this territory: how to live in expectation of marriage. While singleness (or celibacy as in the language of this book) is a specific calling, I think it is also good to have an appropriate view of how best to live in a season of singleness, in waiting for marriage. It provides more time and space to faithfully pursue things of importance and to serve in the church. And I would argue that any action of faithful service to Christ is something that is preparing you for marriage.
5. JennaHarrison
March 4, 2008
12:01 PM
I recently saw the authors of Princess Bubble on the Harvest Show and think their have the single Christian thing right!
6. Liz W
March 4, 2008
12:10 PM
As one of those single women who hasn’t had the opportunity to be married, I applaud your review for noting that there are those who are still single in spite of following all the advice. However, I’ve also seen evidence among young women that what Candace says is something they need to hear. Honestly, I think this is an excellent book for young women in their late teens and twenties, and maybe even their early thirties. At some point, though, the scale tips (in terms of likelihood of marriage and ability to have children), and the advice for older singles (whether still single or single again) is and should be different than that more appropriately directed to younger singles.
I agree most of the time with Candace’s advice, especially when I put it in the perspective of advice to women (and men) from about 20-35. But as a 40 year old woman, reading these things can hurt, because it sometimes it brings out the self-accusations and they can get really ugly…”If only I’d done XYZ, I’d be married (or maybe I did do XYZ, but obviously didn’t do it right, because it didn’t work for me).” That’s when I have to remind myself that God is the Sovereign Lord, and everything ultimately works out for his glory and my good.
7. Fusion!@letmypeopleread
March 4, 2008
2:28 PM
What is sad is that today, even in churches, people don’t see marriage for what it is. Case in point. Today on my xanga account, the question was asked: is it right to live together before marriage? I gave my answer (I put it on my blog-click on my name to go there if you want) and I read many other people’s responses. The majority of the people said it was ok. We need to preach the truth of what marriage is and how to best prepare. I think with the institution at an all time low, it will be our example, and those of our churches who are teaching correctly, to bring a change. My church actually offers free (biblical) pre-marital counseling. It’s been good to see the results.
-And Jim, I hope you were joking, cause proverbs 31 seems to say otherwise.
8. Jim
March 4, 2008
3:15 PM
Fusion, I think you know what I am talking about. Please keep in mind my comments were made with respect to the content of this post.
But just to clarify for others who question my remark I will elaborate. It seems many women these days are under pressure from society to go into a career at the expense of having a family. I don’t know if this is the main reason so many singles delay marriage but I’m sure it contributes to it.
The context of Proverbs 31 is a married woman who uses her ingenuity and wisdom to provide for the needs of her household. The fact that the author compares her worth to being greater than rubies leads me to suspect there is not an abundance of this kind of virtuous wife.
Do we really believe a woman can be fulfilled and blessed in her calling as a wife and mother or must she also be climbing the corporate ladder to be fully accepted by the christian community today?
9. David
March 4, 2008
3:45 PM
Jim,
I think I understand the tension you are holding. Here’s a question: Should a woman pursue a career actively while she is single? I wouldn’t want my female friends to just sit around and wait for a man to marry them. In fact, I find a woman who is driven like that—who rejects passivity—to be the kind of woman I want to marry, the kind of woman I would want to raise my kids.
10. Candice Watters
March 4, 2008
4:54 PM
Guys (Jim, David, Fusion), I think it’s great you’re being thoughtful about what type of ambition in a single woman will be compatible later, should she marry and have children. This is a critical issue given that upwards of 80 percent of people eventually marry (and 70 percent of marriages include children).
Yes, a woman should be actively stewarding all her gifts and talents during her single years prior to marriage. The problem is that our culture, a woman’s career takes center stage and is typically contrary to even the idea of a future season that is flexible, able to yield to the demanding priority of motherhood. Additionally, it’s not uncommon for a woman committed to career-building in her twenties to overlook what could become a potentially good opportunity for marriage if given some time and attention.
The hope for single women who desire marriage is that it’s God’s will for most of us to marry. The challenge is to take an active and intentional part in helping that happen in a culture that does little to encourage women to marry well. A big part of the woman’s role is to keep marriage top of mind, giving it attention right along with her education, career, financial success, and other priorities.
11. Diane
March 4, 2008
5:09 PM
“This book…offers little comfort to those who truly desire to be married but who have not been blessed with a spouse. It may make it seem almost too easy—yet there are many women who will testify that, despite desire and effort, they have been unable to marry. I can see that a book like this might exacerbate the pain some such people may already feel.”
If there were either a shortage of women or of men (as has been true in some times and cultures), then the pervasive singleness we see today would be easier to explain. I believe our present impasse, with so many of both sexes strangely unable to find each other, is the fruit of some very important cultural distortions.
The good news is that as Christians are able to identify these distortions, we may well be able to move against the tide and restore marrying to its proper normalcy. For my perspective on this process, you may visit my website at www.dyscletter.com.
Diane
12. Yogi Taylor
March 4, 2008
5:40 PM
Fusion, great comment…
Jim, I sorry that nobody wants to play with you…
Candice, very gracefully said…
And me, well I just enjoy commenting on everyone else’s comments
-Yogi
13. gortexgrrl
March 4, 2008
6:36 PM
“it offers little comfort to those who truly desire to be married but who have not been blessed with a spouse. It may make it seem almost too easy—yet there are many women who will testify that, despite desire and effort, they have been unable to marry. I can see that a book like this might exacerbate the pain”
As a single woman (and a somewhat older one, at that), I find Watter’s “what you can do” emphasis to be quite encouraging. What’s painful are those stupid “this-is-God’s-will-for-you” platitudes and overstated contentment sermons that are hopefully becoming a thing of the past, thanks to the “rethinking the gift of singleness” movement of late.
Many Christian women do end up single, more so than Watters lets on, and for reasons she glosses over. Her crunch and spin approach to census figures to make claims that there are more single Christian men than women is incredibly misleading, when we know that the shortage of young single men in our churches is the greatest of all demographics. And we know that we are losing many of them to the world, with all its fleshly temptations. We must resist the disproportionate heaping of blame on the remaining good guys.
Given the high rates of singleness caused by these very human factors, we’ve got to stop equating circumstantial singleness with being “called to singleness”, a phrase that appears nowhere in the Bible — nor does “the gift of singleness”, which is actually an embellishment of The Living Bible. Unfortunately, this erronenous modern interpretation of 1 Cor 7:7 is exactly what has led so many of today’s Christians to believe that singleness and celibacy are one and the same. But, as you rightly say, they are not. Even gifted celibacy is discussed in voluntary terms TWICE in Matthew 19:11-12 (“not all can receive this teaching”, “let those who can receive it, receive it”).
Likewise, as Candice and Tim have said, there is no biblical support for “soul mates”, whereas there’s plenty that points towards personal volition and choice (1 Cor 7: 36 & 39; Proverbs 18:22; 1 Cor 9:5). For this reason, I suggest we also stop using the phrase “called to marriage”, and also because it has created too much confusion about whether it’s a specific call (ie. “this is your soul mate”) or general call to marriage for believers at large.
Indeed, many do not marry, as sure as God is sovereign. However, it is presumptous to believe that we can fill the gap between human free will and God’s sovereignty by declaring everything that does or does not happen to someone as “God’s will/plan/calling for you”, as if we know His secret will enough to presume His intentions and His pleasures. It should be enough to know that it is good pursue marriage, at the very least, “not a sin” (1 Cor 7:36).
14. Gordon Cheng
March 4, 2008
6:56 PM
Thank you for the review, Tim and it sounds like a useful book.
One thing I’m not clear about from what you’ve said, though, is whether the book is offering a Christian view of marriage, or whether it is a book about marriage that happens to be written by a Christian who has occasionally referenced the Bible, if you see the distinction.
I’d be interested, for example, as to whether the challenges of 1 Corinthians 7 have been dealt with. There are plenty of them, but one example is 7:27, which says:
Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be free. Are you free from a wife? Do not seek a wife.
That’s right advice, isn’t it? The people of this world may be very interested in influencing the politics of government, and to some extent Christians are too. But there’s an eternal perspective that renders the idea of influencing government by getting married and having kids slightly peripheral to our concerns.
I suppose Malachi 2:15 might be taken as a parallel argument, but there again I think the concern is for eternal rather than temporal government.
15. Jim
March 4, 2008
8:05 PM
David, Of course I am not insinuating women should wait around doing nothing until Mr. Right comes along.
This is almost an epidemic in our culture today. Young people are delaying marriage until the late 20’s and in many cases the early 30’s. While obviously some people take longer to mature than others, this trend is creating some alarming problems; premarital sex (even amongst evangelicals) is at an all time record high, and as Fusion pointed out earlier the sanctity and holiness of marriage is definitely being eroded.
Ask the average “young person” in a youth group today what God’s will is for their life and they most likely will shrug their shoulders. Even many late into their 20’s don’t seem to have found God’s purpose for their lives and therefore live aimlessly enjoying the pleasures of an increasingly hedonistic society.
Is the Church being salt and light to the world or has society been more effective in conforming our practices to that of our secular neighbours?
16. gortexgrrl
March 4, 2008
9:32 PM
Gordon writes:
“‘Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be free. Are you free from a wife? Do not seek a wife.’…That’s right advice, isn’t it?”
NO!!!!!!!!!!!! Not unless you are living in first century Greece or Rome, with pending persecutions of Christians! (see verse 26).
We are NOT living in times of immediate danger, too dangerous for marriage and children. If anything, today’s abundant creature comforts have resulted in a disincentive for people to marry and have families. “Do not seek a wife” is NOT the message you want to be reinforcing to the masses of young single Christians today, many of whom have mixed feelings about whether or not it’s OK to pursue marriage. Why? Because they have been told by church leaders like yourself that they should have an “eternal perspective”, just “wait on the Lord” (btw- women have a limited time to get married and have children — not an “eternity”), because marriage should be “peripheral to our concerns”, as if it shouldn’t matter to you, if you do or you don’t. Funny how often it’s the married male church leaders who are saying this kind of stuff.
Nevertheless, I am so glad you posted, because it only reinforces the need for books like Candice’s, that endeavour to correct the doubts people have of whether or not it’s OK to make a priority of pursuing marriage.
17. Gordon Cheng
March 4, 2008
10:16 PM
“‘Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be free. Are you free from a wife? Do not seek a wife.’…That’s right advice, isn’t it?”
NO!!!!!!!!!!!! Not unless you are living in first century Greece or Rome, with pending persecutions of Christians! (see verse 26).
I looked quite hard at that verse, and saw no reference to either Greece or Rome. Verses 29-31, however, speak about the passing away of this world. So I wonder if Paul may have in mind the return of Jesus in judgement? A theme he returns to in 11:26, then extensively in ch 15, and at the very conclusion of his letter (16:22). Whereas he says nothing whatsoever about Roman persecution (explicitly) in either 1 or 2 Corinthians, or indeed most of his other letters except Philippians—and there it involves him specifically, and he seems to welcome it.
18. gortexgrrl
March 5, 2008
3:10 PM
“I looked quite hard at that verse, and saw no reference to either Greece or Rome. Verses 29-31, however, speak about the passing away of this world.”
Where were the Corinthians? In Corinth, Greece. First century Greece.
Verse 26 reads: “I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress, [I say], that [it is] good for a man so to be.”
And then 27 and 28 go on to say:” Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife. But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you.”
So the key context is contained in the words “present distress”. Of course, you can debate whether or not Paul is referring to the hardship and persecutions that they were experiencing as they were forming the early church, or if the meaning is purely eschatological. Even if Paul is referring to the imminent return of Christ, is this “time is short” message the appropriate approach to marriage today, when people are not living under such dire circumstances, when life expectancy is so long, AND the median age of first marriage is hovering around the late 20’s, such that most Christians are no longer virgins on their wedding day?
Just because a teaching exists in the Bible, doesn’t mean that it’s appropriate in all situations. We need also to think about the unintended consequences that occur when young believers try in earnest to live by the exact words of our advice.
19. Laura Grace
March 5, 2008
3:14 PM
Gordon, hiya. Good to see you here as well as on Craig’s blog! I agree with gortexgrrl on this one (and, GG, honey, I feel your pain). Let me copy and paste a bit here, if I may, from 1 Cor 7:
Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy. **Because of the present crisis,** I think that it is good for you to remain as you are. [for example:] Are you married? Do not seek a divorce. Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife. But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this.
Bear in mind that Paul, who thinks that in light of the persecution taking place in Corinth, people ought to remain as they are, still says that it’s all right for them to marry. Whatever “the present crisis” was, please don’t take verse 27 out of its context with verse 26.
As a single woman, I have seen too many of my girlfriends suffer the consequences of people taking verse 27 out of context — men who refuse to pursue godly marriage because they are convinced that the Scriptures are telling them not to look for a wife.
20. Laura Grace
March 5, 2008
3:15 PM
Haha… GG and I posted at the same time. :)
21. gortexgrrl@yahoo.ca
March 5, 2008
4:35 PM
Thanks, Laura! It’s amazing how many people have taken bits and pieces of 1 Cor 7 to suggest that it’s “better not to marry”.
Tim had an excellent piece on this several years ago, discussing Richard Ganz’s 2003 book entitled 20 Controversies That Almost Killed A Church, which challenged the traditional view of 1 Cor 7:1, suggesting instead that when Paul says not to touch a woman or not to marry, he is actually saying “it is good for a man not to be involved in sexual immorality”. This interpretation changes the explanation of the “mysterious gift” in verse 7, from celibacy/singleness to something closer to “the gift of self-control”. In other words, Paul wishes that all men were able to avoid the temptations of sexual immorality as he does.
Although Tim’s critique of Ganz’ view was mostly positive, he also wrote:
“There is one thing that continues to trouble me, and that is in the verses immediately following the passage I outlined above. Verses 8 and 9 of the same chapter read “8But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am; 9but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.” It seems that these verses may be easier to understand in light of a traditional interpretation of the first 7 verses.”
But actually, it’s verse 9 that confirms the “self-control as a gift” thesis: “if they CANNOT CONTAIN”. So clearly, Paul is talking about what’s permissible and advisable in terms of singleness and marriage, in consideration of a person’s suitability (particularly in regards to sexual self-containment or self-control). In other words, it’s not about God dividing us into two lines, giving one line the single/celibate state, and the marriage to the other, as some have assumed verse 7 to mean.
Tim also discussed the possibility that these verses were directed to the previously married (as Paul may have been): “To these people he says that it is good for them to remain unmarried but if they are unable to exercise self-control, they should marry instead of burning with passion….In light of the traditional interpretation, we would assume that Paul is instructing these people to place a priority on the Lord’s work - dedicating themselves to that task - freed from the need to dedicate themselves to a marriage. However, if they feel they will be unable to contain themselves sexually, they should marry to avoid sin.”
But you know, I don’t think it matters whether Paul was talking about the widowed, divorced or never married, as far as thinking of this message in terms of “the gift of sexual self-control/containment”, rather than “the gift of singleness/celibacy”. What’s more, these passages do not suggest that the unmarried are anymore beholden than the married to take on any greater priority in regards to the Lord’s work (although the advantages to do so are clearly spelled out in verses 25-35, particularly in the historical context of “the present distress”, as written in verse 26). And, as Tim wrote, “though it may be good for them to remain unmarried, this does not make it the best or necessary decision, and certainly does not insinuate that remarriage is a lesser calling than remaining single”.
Unfortunately, a few modern Bibles (including the Living Bible) interpreted the word “kalos” in verse 8 to mean “better”, rather than simply (and more correctly) “good”. Unfortunately, late 20th century interpretations that singleness is “better” have reinforced the traditional notion of marriage as a lesser state among evangelicals, or just as bad, the idea that singleness is an “equal gift” to marriage, as if people should have no preference about which one they get!
In the end, as much as Tim seemed supportive to Ganz’ challenge to the traditional interpretation, he was reticient to draw conclusions: “Though I hesitate to accept explanations that differ from what the majority of Christian theologians have believed, they cannot be summarily disposed simply because they are new. In the case of this one I do find it satisfying, and more satisfying than the standard explanation. But that, of course, does not make it right. Sorry to defer a decision, but I am going to reserve judgment on this one for the time being while I see what other Christians have to say on the matter.”
Having looked into these interpretations myself, I hope that we would at least consider this: when theologians argue about whether the “gift” in verse 7 is singleness or celibacy, they never arrive at any consensus! They ponder over “the mystery of the gift”, when it’s clear as a bell that Paul declares neither state to be a gift, but is rather offering up a preambulary disclaimer before presenting the meat of his message to the unmarried in verses 8 & 9. His use of the word “gift” seems almost hypothetical, but it makes the most sense that he is modestly alluding to himself as have some sort of gift of self-control (perhaps a rare passion for a mission that exceeds sexual passion). One theologian that supports this view is Kiwoong Son, of London Bible College, who wrote a paper on the topic, that concludes, ” celibacy is not a gift. Celibacy is recommended to only those who have the gift of self-control”.
Hopefully, between Richard Ganz, Kiwoong Son and others who have been rethinking the gift of celibacy/singleness, there will be a more correct understanding of 1 Cor 7, so that singles will stop being told by so many of their leaders that it’s “better not to marry”.
22. Alberto
March 5, 2008
10:56 PM
Amen on the comments about “evangelicals” praising mother Theresa Tim. She is a good example of a caring and self-sacrificing heretic. This type of erroneous thinking seems to run through Focus on the Family members; which makes me ask, why does Al Mohler belong to it?
23. Gordon Cheng
March 6, 2008
3:46 AM
So the key context is contained in the words “present distress”. Of course, you can debate whether or not Paul is referring to the hardship and persecutions that they were experiencing as they were forming the early church, or if the meaning is purely eschatological.
I do debate it! In fact, it is just about the only point I was making.
Much of the other stuff, in practice, we probably agree substantially on. Including thinking the Living Bible makes good mulch.
24. Gina Dalfonzo
March 6, 2008
8:14 PM
Pretty much everything I would have said about singleness and marriage has been covered, so I’ll skip that part. I will, however, take issue with the depiction of Mother Teresa. Is every Christian who isn’t an evangelical Protestant therefore a heretic? Be very, very careful how you answer. It’s possible that you might end up cutting out the majority of heroes of the faith.
I’m an evangelical Protestant myself, but when it comes to following Christ’s commands and having the same priorities He did — well, let’s just say I’m going to be waaaay behind Mother Teresa in the line for heaven. And I’m not advocating works-based salvation at all. I’m thinking of certain statements that Christ made about sheep and goats and how you end up in one group or the other.
With all due respect, I truly hope I never get over admiring the example of what Mother Teresa did for “the least of these [Christ’s] brethren.”
25. Guillaume McDowell
March 13, 2008
2:20 AM
Tim, have you read Carolyn McCulley’s Did I Kiss Marriage Goodbye?? I know that I preferred it to Debbie Maken’s book. I’d be interested to see how it compares to Watters.
26. Ann
March 14, 2008
4:23 PM
As a single woman on the other side of the spectrum—choosing to remain single and devote my life to the church, unless God at some point shows me differently, I appreciate the wisdom of godly men and women like John Piper (in his sermon “Single in Christ: A Name Better than Sons and Daughters, available at www.desiringgod.org) and Elisabeth Elliot (The Path of Loneliness), who recognize the value of the single life. Certainly most people are called to marriage, and I encourage the single women I know who do desire marriage, to seek that and not passively do nothing, but I am discouraged by the number of people who seek to make a case that everyone must marry, or re-explain celibacy and 1 Cor. 7 in ways to make it almost impossible for anyone to ‘qualify’ choose singleness to the glory of God.
27. Nikki
October 26, 2008
7:20 AM
I read Mrs. Watter’s book and in her “What women can do section” I came away with the feeling that she was solely addressing those who already have a Christian male as a boyfriend and how to spur him onto committing to marriage. it seems that her core audience is women who are already dating. This may not be helpful to women who are at a point in their single life without any boyfriend or dates on the horizon. How can women who are desirous of marriage and without any commitment or dates be enouraged especially when it is the Christian male’s role to initiate such? Does a Christian woman just continue praying for a husband? since there seems to be nothing else that she can do to initiate a relationship. How can she learn to give her desire or desperation for marriage to Christ ?