Book Review: 5 Paths to the Love of Your Life edited by Alex Chediak

October 4, 2005 Posted by Roger Overton

With so many books currently on the market on dating, some
might ask themselves why we need another one. Perhaps the greatest attribute of
this book is that it explains and advocates five different perspectives, so
reading this one will eliminate the need to read many of the others. In 5
Paths to the Love of Your Life, Alex Chediak has brought together a select
group of leading thinkers to make the case for their perspectives so that the reader
can decide for them self.

The Counter-Cultural Approach is the first path proposed by
Lauren Winner. She calls on couples to counter the culture by shifting the
focus of dating away from themselves to Christ. Community also plays an
important role in this approach for feedback and accountability. Despite
Winner’s excellent writing style (the best in the book in my opinion) and
intriguing explanation of the history of dating, I was ultimately disappointed
with the position she advocated. For instance, her standard for physical
intimacy in a dating relationship is basically to only go as far as you’re
comfortable going in public. Unfortunately this principle would lead to sin for
some couples.

Douglas Wilson advocates The Courtship Approach. Fundamental
to this approach is the involvement of some sort of parental figure, either the
actual parents or the headship of the church. Additionally fundamental is that
the courting relationship be conducted with marriage in mind. Wilson also
emphasizes the headship of the male in the relationship, which, while not
necessary to a courting model, does reflect the biblical order. He does make
some comments about platonic relationships being impossible without adequately
substantiating the claim.

The third approach is the Principled Approach by Rick
Holland. Distinctive to this path is that the rules of “dating” or “courting”
aren’t significant. What is significant are the general principles for
relationships given by the Bible, such as each individual being a Christian,
each of good character, and each finding contentment in God. Holland’s argument
against dating and courting is that the rules for each system distract from the
biblical principles. This is a fallacious argument since it presumes that the
rules aren’t biblical principles, which is what the advocates of each position
hope to convince us of. The pertinent question is whether the rules do reflect
biblical principles or not.

Jonathan Lindvall puts forward the Betothal Approach. There
is not dating or courting; when a guy is interested in a girl he seeks the
advice and permission of his parents first, then her parents, then asks for her
hand. The betrothal period is much like engagement, except that it is a
committed covenant that cannot be broken (like marriage) and no physically
intimacy whatsoever is allowed. While there are some good qualities to this
approach, it an incredibly faulty application of a theological analogy- that
Christ is betrothed to the church. The Bible does offer certain principles about
how marriage relationships should persist, such as husbands loving their wives
as much as Christ loved the church, but to apply these principles to
pre-marital relationships is to step outside the indications of scripture and
if followed to their logical extent would result in absurdities.

The final approach is offered by Jeramy and Jerusha Clark-
the Purposed Approach. Contrary to most of what the others said, the Clarks are
fine with dating for couples who are not likely to pursue marriage any time soon,
such as high school students. The key factors are that romantic relationships
are pursued within the guidelines of holiness, trustworthiness, and the support
of family and friends. Heavily discussed in this approach is dependency on the
Holy Spirit, especially by way of listening for his “still small voice.” Aside
from this unbiblical principle, this path seems to approach romantic
relationships with too much frivolity.

Alex Chediak closes the book outlining the major agreements
and disagreements between the approaches. Several of the points made in this
section are helpful for better understanding the big picture of the book as
well as the individual paths.

My one major disappointment with the book is that the
contributors don’t interact with each other, which is usually a feature of
books advocating multiple perspectives. I would have really liked to see how
Winner would respond to Holland saying that her standard for purity is too
subjective, or how Lindvall would respond to Wilson citing the theological
absurdities of his position. Defending one’s view under criticism is one of the
best tests for correctness.
Even without interaction between the authors, the book
is generally helpful for mapping out the various perspectives with their
strengths and weaknesses. For those who’ve been brought up considering only one
or two of the perspectives, this will expand their knowledge to some relatively
new ones, such as betrothal. I would recommend this book to anyone who is
interested in deciding upon a formal approach for their romantic relationships.