I'm one of those never married childless men who has become more socially isolated over time. I'm 53 and constantly struggle with depression, lack of purpose, regret, and anger.
I've been blessed with some wonderful opportunities to minister out of my singleness, particularly in an ongoing mentoring/father like relationship with an ex-girlfriend's son and also, to a lesser degree, to the son of a friend who died. But both of those boys/young men live far away from me now, so my relationship looks more like writing letters and periodic visits, so I'm alone most of the time.
I hate going home to an empty house and often stay out, going to stores and spending money I shouldn't because I don't want to go home and I get some pleasure from buying things (like books or clothing).
I've been in several relationships throughout my life, the last was 12 years ago with the woman whose son I mentor, but dating and relationships have always been excruciatingly hard and painful for me, partly because of some of the ways I was treated, partly because of wounds going back to at least middle school, and partly because I have OCD. The last relationship 12 years ago took everything I had and a lot of what felt like divine intervention for me to even try, and I was an internal wreck the entire time. When it failed, I was devastated and lost, and often feel like I still am.
I'm now stuck between the rock and the hard place of being lonely and sexually frustrated and wanting someone with the desire not to ever try again because it's always such a painful, nerve-wracking experience and I'm absolutely terrible at navigating the ins and outs of dating (when do I call?, How fast or slow should I move? How do I express interest without being needy, overbearing, or creepy? etc.). It's a miserable, overwhelming experience that ends the same way every time. I look at people who easily get into relationships and am amazed at how they do it. You might as well ask me to build a rocket and fly myself to the moon.
Anyway, I'm joining a new church in an attempt to overcome my social isolation, and even though I haven't given up all hope of ever meeting someone who I click with, I very much feel like my ship has probably sailed and there's not a lot to look forward to. It stinks.
"All of these men will make up the fabric of our future culture. They will live in our communities, vote in our elections. They will require public help as they age, with few friends or family to fulfill the role of elder care. They will be the old men sitting alone by themselves at the diner, if by the grace of God there are still diners to speak of."
Taylor's almost wistful piece on the loneliness epidemic coming for "future childless cat guys" is true enough. The situation will be made even worse by smaller families. Those guys can be great uncles and included in family functions. Will be less and less true in the future. Perhaps there will be a renaissance of men's fraternal organizations to fill that very need.
The story from Christianity Today on the First Christian Reformed Church leaving the denomination is a well-written and interesting.
In 2018, the church tried hard to split the difference and find a reasonable middle ground:
"...acknowledging that we are in a place of uncertainty, we move to invite all members of First Church to full participation in the life and ministry of the congregation...."
This is one of those half steps that is meant to just be a waystation on the way to full liberalization, but can be sort of cloaked in plausible deniability:
" 'We interpreted this as an inclusive but not affirming stand,' he [Jacobs] told CT. 'We never said that we interpret Scripture to say that God affirms same-sex marriages....' "
The pattern is the same: "discussion" --> "inclusion" (perhaps with fig leaf orthodoxy) --> affirmation --> celebration --> mandatory affirmation.
But it didn't work out that way:
“ 'They thought they were taking the lead and the denomination would come around,' he [Compagner] told CT. 'They presumed it would go like women in ordained office, and they were shocked when it didn’t.' "
-----------------------
The initial step of inclusion without full affirmation seems to be an inherently unstable equilibrium.
- Do you think that anyone really thought that would be the lasting solution?
- Does anyone have examples of institutions that have successfully found a way to manage the "inclusive but not affirming" settlement to avoid schism?
"The initial step of inclusion without full affirmation seems to be an inherently unstable equilibrium."
Arguably it is an unstable equilibrium, but depending on what you mean by "inclusion" I think it's the correct one. Regarding same-sex attraction as being akin to, say, having a bad temper--that is, recognizing that the person having it will have a natural tendency towards a certain sin that may or may not be taken from them, while still recognizing that what they have a natural tendency towards is still a sin--both upholds biblical orthodoxy and avoids judging people for things that are beyond their control.
I agree with the way you describe things here concerning the inclusion of every kind of person with different sinful tendencies (as long as they are genuinely seeking holiness), but I'm not sure that is what some people mean by "inclusion". I think what it refers to in this case, is the idea that we can have a church that includes both people with affirming views and people with non-affirming views. In that case, it truly is an unstable situation because eventually beliefs have to be lived out and that is hard to accommodate when people with diametrically opposed views are both pushing for practical applications of those views.
I'm one of those never married childless men who has become more socially isolated over time. I'm 53 and constantly struggle with depression, lack of purpose, regret, and anger.
I've been blessed with some wonderful opportunities to minister out of my singleness, particularly in an ongoing mentoring/father like relationship with an ex-girlfriend's son and also, to a lesser degree, to the son of a friend who died. But both of those boys/young men live far away from me now, so my relationship looks more like writing letters and periodic visits, so I'm alone most of the time.
I hate going home to an empty house and often stay out, going to stores and spending money I shouldn't because I don't want to go home and I get some pleasure from buying things (like books or clothing).
I've been in several relationships throughout my life, the last was 12 years ago with the woman whose son I mentor, but dating and relationships have always been excruciatingly hard and painful for me, partly because of some of the ways I was treated, partly because of wounds going back to at least middle school, and partly because I have OCD. The last relationship 12 years ago took everything I had and a lot of what felt like divine intervention for me to even try, and I was an internal wreck the entire time. When it failed, I was devastated and lost, and often feel like I still am.
I'm now stuck between the rock and the hard place of being lonely and sexually frustrated and wanting someone with the desire not to ever try again because it's always such a painful, nerve-wracking experience and I'm absolutely terrible at navigating the ins and outs of dating (when do I call?, How fast or slow should I move? How do I express interest without being needy, overbearing, or creepy? etc.). It's a miserable, overwhelming experience that ends the same way every time. I look at people who easily get into relationships and am amazed at how they do it. You might as well ask me to build a rocket and fly myself to the moon.
Anyway, I'm joining a new church in an attempt to overcome my social isolation, and even though I haven't given up all hope of ever meeting someone who I click with, I very much feel like my ship has probably sailed and there's not a lot to look forward to. It stinks.
"All of these men will make up the fabric of our future culture. They will live in our communities, vote in our elections. They will require public help as they age, with few friends or family to fulfill the role of elder care. They will be the old men sitting alone by themselves at the diner, if by the grace of God there are still diners to speak of."
Taylor's almost wistful piece on the loneliness epidemic coming for "future childless cat guys" is true enough. The situation will be made even worse by smaller families. Those guys can be great uncles and included in family functions. Will be less and less true in the future. Perhaps there will be a renaissance of men's fraternal organizations to fill that very need.
The story from Christianity Today on the First Christian Reformed Church leaving the denomination is a well-written and interesting.
In 2018, the church tried hard to split the difference and find a reasonable middle ground:
"...acknowledging that we are in a place of uncertainty, we move to invite all members of First Church to full participation in the life and ministry of the congregation...."
This is one of those half steps that is meant to just be a waystation on the way to full liberalization, but can be sort of cloaked in plausible deniability:
" 'We interpreted this as an inclusive but not affirming stand,' he [Jacobs] told CT. 'We never said that we interpret Scripture to say that God affirms same-sex marriages....' "
The pattern is the same: "discussion" --> "inclusion" (perhaps with fig leaf orthodoxy) --> affirmation --> celebration --> mandatory affirmation.
But it didn't work out that way:
“ 'They thought they were taking the lead and the denomination would come around,' he [Compagner] told CT. 'They presumed it would go like women in ordained office, and they were shocked when it didn’t.' "
-----------------------
The initial step of inclusion without full affirmation seems to be an inherently unstable equilibrium.
- Do you think that anyone really thought that would be the lasting solution?
- Does anyone have examples of institutions that have successfully found a way to manage the "inclusive but not affirming" settlement to avoid schism?
"The initial step of inclusion without full affirmation seems to be an inherently unstable equilibrium."
Arguably it is an unstable equilibrium, but depending on what you mean by "inclusion" I think it's the correct one. Regarding same-sex attraction as being akin to, say, having a bad temper--that is, recognizing that the person having it will have a natural tendency towards a certain sin that may or may not be taken from them, while still recognizing that what they have a natural tendency towards is still a sin--both upholds biblical orthodoxy and avoids judging people for things that are beyond their control.
I agree with the way you describe things here concerning the inclusion of every kind of person with different sinful tendencies (as long as they are genuinely seeking holiness), but I'm not sure that is what some people mean by "inclusion". I think what it refers to in this case, is the idea that we can have a church that includes both people with affirming views and people with non-affirming views. In that case, it truly is an unstable situation because eventually beliefs have to be lived out and that is hard to accommodate when people with diametrically opposed views are both pushing for practical applications of those views.