What do you think?
Rate this book
The Meaning of Singleness: Retrieving an Eschatological Vision for the Contemporary Church
Is Christian singleness a burden to be endured or a God-ordained vocation? Might singleness here and now give the church a glimpse of God's heavenly promises? Dani Treweek offers biblical, historical, cultural, and theological reflections to retrieve a theology of singleness for the church today. Drawing upon both ancient and contemporary theologians, including Augustine, Ælfric of Eynsham, John Paul II, and Stanley Hauerwas, she contends not only that singleness has served an important role throughout the church's history, but that single Christians present the church with a foretaste of the eschatological reality that awaits all of God's people. Far from being a burden, then, Christian singleness is among the highest vocations of the faith.
336 pages, Paperback
First published May 9, 2023
44 people are currently reading
506 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews
Read
January 15, 2025Last week in a second-hand shop, perusing the used books on offer, my eye caught a title that instantly gave me the irrits: ELIZABETH'S BEDFELLOWS. In the light of what I'd been learning about historical views of sex, marriage, and virginity in Danielle Treweek's THE MEANING OF SINGLENESS, I thought that title - used for a book about England's much-vaunted "Virgin Queen" - probably told much more about our own modern perspective than it did about Elizabethan times. I looked up the book and found that the title is more provocative than assertive: the historian who wrote it doesn't state a definitive opinion on the state of Elizabeth I's body and instead studies the queen's relationships with the ladies in waiting who guarded her - and her reputation. The important thing is the reason for the title, which is provocative precisely because so few twenty-first century people are capable of believing that a healthy person in possession of their full agency could possibly live an entire life without having sex.
Both within the church and without, as Danielle Treweek demonstrates in her book, romantic and sexual relationships have become our culture's ultimate measure of personal fulfilment, individual self-expression, earthly happiness, and cultural health. This is true whether we're talking about conservative influencers adopting cottagecore tradwife aesthetics while lauding "family values" or whether we're talking about hot-headed young progressives questioning a bisexual person's queer credentials if they haven't actually been in a same-sex relationship. In such a worldview, it's far more plausible to imagine Elizabeth sneaking off for a tryst with one of her favourites, as happens in the Cate Blanchett film, than to simply take her at her word. But in Elizabeth's time, despite the ways in which the Reformation was already changing the world, romantic/sexual essentialism had not yet gained the stranglehold it does on the modern imagination. Humans being what they are, lifelong virginity might not have been so common in practice as it was in theory among those consecrated to the church - but previous to the Reformation, there could have been few who did not believe the ideal to be both practically achievable, and personally fulfilling. Beyond that, virginity was also considered to be blissful in itself - not so much because of neoplatonist influences in the early church, as I had presumed while reading St Augustine, but because until the Reformation, the church had a well-developed theology of earthly virginity as being a foretaste and foreshadowing of humanity's eschatalogical state, "like the angels, neither marrying nor given in marriage."
Treweek's study roams over church history to retrieve an eschatalogically motivated appreciation of singleness for the modern evangelical Reformed church, and I found it endlessly fascinating and a wonderful complement as it pushes a bit deeper on light bulbs that had already gone off for me while reading Aimee Byrd's THE SEXUAL REFORMATION, which indeed Treweek quotes at one point in her own book. I particularly loved her insights as to how unusual it is for a culture, like ours, to consider sexual self-expression to be central to self-fulfilment, and how abstinence and celibacy need not be viewed as a renunciation or repression of sexuality but an expression of it.
What sets Treweek's book apart from the late-antique and medieval church's perspective on the dignity of virginity, however, is her view that both marriage and singleness are equally good and equally important states of being before God. Moreover, she insists that temporary singleness is no less dignified than consecrated or committed singleness. In Treweek's view, singleness at any stage of life - whether while seeking marriage, after divorce or widowhood, or lifelong and intentional - all singleness simply by virtue of its nature embodies the life of the new creation and foreshadows a humanity which will one day have no other means of support than God and will be equally sibling to all other people. This stems from the Reformation doctrine of divine vocation as being simply the work and station of life in which God has seen fit to put us. And the rather liberating effect is that the theological significance of our singleness isn't something we have to perform - it's simply something that we ARE. I think this applies far beyond singleness (it also applies to marriage, as well as to sexuality - being male or female isn't something we have to perform, either) but it was illuminating and helpful to see the point made here.
There are critiques I could make of the book. For one thing, the writing style is heavily academic, given that the book was originally Treweek's Ph.D thesis, and I'm sad that the academic language might prevent this book's theological riches from reaching a wider audience.
For another thing, I would have some differences, perhaps merely of emphasis, with Treweek's thesis. For example: while I agree enthusiastically with her point that singleness by nature is a sign that participation in the family of God is more important than participation in an earthly family, since the church is the only earthly institution that will carry on into eternity; nevertheless in this world all of us are members of families - and also citizens of earthly states. The kingdom of God is greater than just the institutional church, and serving that kingdom as a single person very much can be expressed via service in the family and the commonwealth, not just the institutional, visible church. Take me, for instance - my time as a single Christian has mostly been taken up creating art for a broad, public audience and also donating my time primarily to families, not by service in the insitutional church, and yet I sometimes struggled to see my own various vocations in Treweek's concept of Christian singleness.
Similarly, I also felt that the book prioritised the collective body of Christ over individual fulfillment. This might be an unavoidable result of the book's debt to Stanley Hauerwas, and I completely agree that an emphasis on service to the collective Body may be a helpful corrective as against individualistic streams of thought in the secular world. However, in my own life within the church, I actually experienced an emphasis on marriage and against singleness that was VERY collectivist in nature, and which was quite happy to ignore, dismiss, or trample the individual. For instance, I once wrote an article on making the most of one's single years and received an email from a very peculiar man who stated his intention of writing a public response accusing me of sinfully avoiding marriage. I read some of his website and found that in his view, any woman who got to the age of about 20 in a state of singleness ought to get married to the nearest thing in trousers, regardless of the parties' respective character, personalities, gifts, or callings. No one else I knew was this extreme, but I had friends and mentors remind me that there was no such thing as compatibility, I just needed to find someone with a modicum of Christian character. I was repeatedly advised to marry men up to 15 years my senior despite my own staunch aversion to such a match. Whatever this signified - and it certainly signified a lot of things - it wasn't too great an emphasis on individual self-fulfillment; at least not for the woman in the scenario. And actually, I don't think that collectivism treats men very well either. I wonder whether Treweek has met the Sad Reformed Boys. They congregate on dating sites by the dozen. When talking to a woman they usually say something like this: "Oh, you're a novelist? Well, I don't actually have any time to waste on fiction. On Monday I have men's meeting, on Tuesday I have outreach, on Wednesday I have bible study, on Thursday I have prayer meeting, on Friday I have worship team practice, on Saturday I have leadership training, and on Sunday I have to be at church at 5am to set up for the three services which keep me busy until late in the evening. Also, I don't know why, but I'm bone-tired and deeply depressed all the time and I don't know why I can't find a wife." Let me tell you, if I had a dollar for every time I've spoken to one of them...
My own view is that in the divine Trinity, both individual and collective are equally ultimate and equally important. It's all very well to insist that marriage and singleness alike must be directed towards service of the Body of Christ, but at least in my experience, one does not get either happy marriages or happy singles unless the Body is itself directed towards the service, empowerment, and fulfilment of the individual members that make it up.
Again, I acknowledge that these may well be more differences of emphasis than opinion. In sum, this is a wonderfully rich book which I've done little more than scratch the surface of. In writing it, Treweek has rendered an invaluable service both to Christian singles, and to the whole Body of Christ.
Both within the church and without, as Danielle Treweek demonstrates in her book, romantic and sexual relationships have become our culture's ultimate measure of personal fulfilment, individual self-expression, earthly happiness, and cultural health. This is true whether we're talking about conservative influencers adopting cottagecore tradwife aesthetics while lauding "family values" or whether we're talking about hot-headed young progressives questioning a bisexual person's queer credentials if they haven't actually been in a same-sex relationship. In such a worldview, it's far more plausible to imagine Elizabeth sneaking off for a tryst with one of her favourites, as happens in the Cate Blanchett film, than to simply take her at her word. But in Elizabeth's time, despite the ways in which the Reformation was already changing the world, romantic/sexual essentialism had not yet gained the stranglehold it does on the modern imagination. Humans being what they are, lifelong virginity might not have been so common in practice as it was in theory among those consecrated to the church - but previous to the Reformation, there could have been few who did not believe the ideal to be both practically achievable, and personally fulfilling. Beyond that, virginity was also considered to be blissful in itself - not so much because of neoplatonist influences in the early church, as I had presumed while reading St Augustine, but because until the Reformation, the church had a well-developed theology of earthly virginity as being a foretaste and foreshadowing of humanity's eschatalogical state, "like the angels, neither marrying nor given in marriage."
Treweek's study roams over church history to retrieve an eschatalogically motivated appreciation of singleness for the modern evangelical Reformed church, and I found it endlessly fascinating and a wonderful complement as it pushes a bit deeper on light bulbs that had already gone off for me while reading Aimee Byrd's THE SEXUAL REFORMATION, which indeed Treweek quotes at one point in her own book. I particularly loved her insights as to how unusual it is for a culture, like ours, to consider sexual self-expression to be central to self-fulfilment, and how abstinence and celibacy need not be viewed as a renunciation or repression of sexuality but an expression of it.
What sets Treweek's book apart from the late-antique and medieval church's perspective on the dignity of virginity, however, is her view that both marriage and singleness are equally good and equally important states of being before God. Moreover, she insists that temporary singleness is no less dignified than consecrated or committed singleness. In Treweek's view, singleness at any stage of life - whether while seeking marriage, after divorce or widowhood, or lifelong and intentional - all singleness simply by virtue of its nature embodies the life of the new creation and foreshadows a humanity which will one day have no other means of support than God and will be equally sibling to all other people. This stems from the Reformation doctrine of divine vocation as being simply the work and station of life in which God has seen fit to put us. And the rather liberating effect is that the theological significance of our singleness isn't something we have to perform - it's simply something that we ARE. I think this applies far beyond singleness (it also applies to marriage, as well as to sexuality - being male or female isn't something we have to perform, either) but it was illuminating and helpful to see the point made here.
There are critiques I could make of the book. For one thing, the writing style is heavily academic, given that the book was originally Treweek's Ph.D thesis, and I'm sad that the academic language might prevent this book's theological riches from reaching a wider audience.
For another thing, I would have some differences, perhaps merely of emphasis, with Treweek's thesis. For example: while I agree enthusiastically with her point that singleness by nature is a sign that participation in the family of God is more important than participation in an earthly family, since the church is the only earthly institution that will carry on into eternity; nevertheless in this world all of us are members of families - and also citizens of earthly states. The kingdom of God is greater than just the institutional church, and serving that kingdom as a single person very much can be expressed via service in the family and the commonwealth, not just the institutional, visible church. Take me, for instance - my time as a single Christian has mostly been taken up creating art for a broad, public audience and also donating my time primarily to families, not by service in the insitutional church, and yet I sometimes struggled to see my own various vocations in Treweek's concept of Christian singleness.
Similarly, I also felt that the book prioritised the collective body of Christ over individual fulfillment. This might be an unavoidable result of the book's debt to Stanley Hauerwas, and I completely agree that an emphasis on service to the collective Body may be a helpful corrective as against individualistic streams of thought in the secular world. However, in my own life within the church, I actually experienced an emphasis on marriage and against singleness that was VERY collectivist in nature, and which was quite happy to ignore, dismiss, or trample the individual. For instance, I once wrote an article on making the most of one's single years and received an email from a very peculiar man who stated his intention of writing a public response accusing me of sinfully avoiding marriage. I read some of his website and found that in his view, any woman who got to the age of about 20 in a state of singleness ought to get married to the nearest thing in trousers, regardless of the parties' respective character, personalities, gifts, or callings. No one else I knew was this extreme, but I had friends and mentors remind me that there was no such thing as compatibility, I just needed to find someone with a modicum of Christian character. I was repeatedly advised to marry men up to 15 years my senior despite my own staunch aversion to such a match. Whatever this signified - and it certainly signified a lot of things - it wasn't too great an emphasis on individual self-fulfillment; at least not for the woman in the scenario. And actually, I don't think that collectivism treats men very well either. I wonder whether Treweek has met the Sad Reformed Boys. They congregate on dating sites by the dozen. When talking to a woman they usually say something like this: "Oh, you're a novelist? Well, I don't actually have any time to waste on fiction. On Monday I have men's meeting, on Tuesday I have outreach, on Wednesday I have bible study, on Thursday I have prayer meeting, on Friday I have worship team practice, on Saturday I have leadership training, and on Sunday I have to be at church at 5am to set up for the three services which keep me busy until late in the evening. Also, I don't know why, but I'm bone-tired and deeply depressed all the time and I don't know why I can't find a wife." Let me tell you, if I had a dollar for every time I've spoken to one of them...
My own view is that in the divine Trinity, both individual and collective are equally ultimate and equally important. It's all very well to insist that marriage and singleness alike must be directed towards service of the Body of Christ, but at least in my experience, one does not get either happy marriages or happy singles unless the Body is itself directed towards the service, empowerment, and fulfilment of the individual members that make it up.
Again, I acknowledge that these may well be more differences of emphasis than opinion. In sum, this is a wonderfully rich book which I've done little more than scratch the surface of. In writing it, Treweek has rendered an invaluable service both to Christian singles, and to the whole Body of Christ.
August 18, 2023
This is the most academic book I've read in quite some time. It's a thorough examination of the significance of singleness through the church's whole history, and what that means for us today. One of her driving points is that singleness emphasizes that the Family of God is formed not by shared DNA, but in our unity with Christ. My words of summary feel inadequate, so instead I'll leave you with some quotes:
"There can be no more radical act than [singleness], as it is the clearest institutional expression that one's future is not guaranteed by one's family...but by the Lord" p. 210
"However, baptism makes all adult Christians parents and gives them the obligation to help introduce these children to the gospel. In their public baptismal vows the whole gathered community of God promises to parent those children who have just been welcomed into their family." p. 210
"...those who have proactively embraced lifelong singleness are able to model unwavering confidence in the indubitably relational abundance to be found within the eschatologically constituted people of God. Those singles who remain desirous of marriage are able to testify to their intimate knowledge of the relational hope which grounds them as authentic members of a believing community as being by no means wistful or uncertain, but rather sure and steadfast. Those who are single again are able to exemplify the difficult reality of earthly marriages inevitably transitory bonds, alongside the church's eternally secure teleolosocial bonds which, in Christ, are immune to the curse of death or tragedy of divorce." p. 238
"The embracing of sexual celibacy for anyone who is not currently married is not a call to gallant self-denial. Rather, it is a call to ordinary Christian obedience--that to which is most beneficial for the single person themselves, most loving towards others, and most honoring of God." p.263
"There can be no more radical act than [singleness], as it is the clearest institutional expression that one's future is not guaranteed by one's family...but by the Lord" p. 210
"However, baptism makes all adult Christians parents and gives them the obligation to help introduce these children to the gospel. In their public baptismal vows the whole gathered community of God promises to parent those children who have just been welcomed into their family." p. 210
"...those who have proactively embraced lifelong singleness are able to model unwavering confidence in the indubitably relational abundance to be found within the eschatologically constituted people of God. Those singles who remain desirous of marriage are able to testify to their intimate knowledge of the relational hope which grounds them as authentic members of a believing community as being by no means wistful or uncertain, but rather sure and steadfast. Those who are single again are able to exemplify the difficult reality of earthly marriages inevitably transitory bonds, alongside the church's eternally secure teleolosocial bonds which, in Christ, are immune to the curse of death or tragedy of divorce." p. 238
"The embracing of sexual celibacy for anyone who is not currently married is not a call to gallant self-denial. Rather, it is a call to ordinary Christian obedience--that to which is most beneficial for the single person themselves, most loving towards others, and most honoring of God." p.263
May 1, 2023
Hey, Dani, thanks for this. It's nice to have a book about singleness that's not framed as self-help (especially as someone resistant to being told what to do or think!).
Thanks for reframing both marriage and singleness within the context of spiritual family as the deeper, truer, and more real family that biological ties are meant to reveal. Thanks for reorienting my singleness toward the community of this family rather than toward expressive individualism, and exploring the subtle essentialization of certain types of relationships. Thanks for showing your work and encouraging me to think critically, even when it means scribbling notes of protest or disagreement in the margins. As a newer student of theology, this book was educational not only for the topic at hand, but instructive of how to undertake such a study; examining the various facets of systematic theology, biblical hermeneutics, and church history to illuminate and clarify the whole prism.
I have so many more thoughts on this topic than make sense to share here; I'm still thinking about this book days after finishing it. Being left with a lot to chew on is the best compliment I can imagine giving a work of this nature.
Thanks mostly, though, for giving eschatology a new place in my discipleship. I hadn't noticed its absence until I found myself reflecting more and more on eternity in the weeks since finishing this book, in ways both related and unrelated to my human relationships. It wasn't what I came to this book for, but I think it might have been a sneaky bit of your goal nonetheless! While I pre-ordered this book hoping eschatology would reorient my conception of singleness and marriage (which it certainly did), the lens of singleness opened a door to consider the practical implications of resurrection in a way I hadn't before, a much more foundational space to explore over the coming season.
Thanks for reframing both marriage and singleness within the context of spiritual family as the deeper, truer, and more real family that biological ties are meant to reveal. Thanks for reorienting my singleness toward the community of this family rather than toward expressive individualism, and exploring the subtle essentialization of certain types of relationships. Thanks for showing your work and encouraging me to think critically, even when it means scribbling notes of protest or disagreement in the margins. As a newer student of theology, this book was educational not only for the topic at hand, but instructive of how to undertake such a study; examining the various facets of systematic theology, biblical hermeneutics, and church history to illuminate and clarify the whole prism.
I have so many more thoughts on this topic than make sense to share here; I'm still thinking about this book days after finishing it. Being left with a lot to chew on is the best compliment I can imagine giving a work of this nature.
Thanks mostly, though, for giving eschatology a new place in my discipleship. I hadn't noticed its absence until I found myself reflecting more and more on eternity in the weeks since finishing this book, in ways both related and unrelated to my human relationships. It wasn't what I came to this book for, but I think it might have been a sneaky bit of your goal nonetheless! While I pre-ordered this book hoping eschatology would reorient my conception of singleness and marriage (which it certainly did), the lens of singleness opened a door to consider the practical implications of resurrection in a way I hadn't before, a much more foundational space to explore over the coming season.
November 23, 2023
This is a book that all vocational gospel workers, in particular, should read. It is a helpful analysis of how the church has viewed singleness in the past, what has changed, and how we move forward to uphold singleness, as we do marriage, in light of eternity as Scripture does. Definitely worth reading whether married or single.
June 17, 2023
Dani offers a refreshing and needed challenge to the contemporary Christian narrative of singleness as lacking and its experience as othered. The book outlines how singleness, when lived out as intended, puts God’s sufficiency to fill and satisfy the human heart (in a way that nothing/no one else can) on beautiful display. What’s more, it disciples us into understanding that we all can and should have deeply meaningful, committed relationships with others that are not sexual in nature (this is how we will relate to each other in eternity, after all), as well as the idea that all of us are called to spiritual parenthood, be that through biological parenting or not.
This work has the potential to ignite a needed change in:
1. How the Church thinks about singleness and whether God is truly sufficient
2. How single people may think of themselves and whether God is truly sufficient
3. The lack of healthy interdependence on one another within our collective congregations and individual lives.
If any of this intrigues you, I challenge you to order yourself a copy of this book and read it through.
You will not go unchanged.
This work has the potential to ignite a needed change in:
1. How the Church thinks about singleness and whether God is truly sufficient
2. How single people may think of themselves and whether God is truly sufficient
3. The lack of healthy interdependence on one another within our collective congregations and individual lives.
If any of this intrigues you, I challenge you to order yourself a copy of this book and read it through.
You will not go unchanged.
Read
July 7, 2024This book is timely, especially as Treweek points out that "not only are citizens of Western nations consistently choosing to wed later in life (and thus spend a far greater proportion of their lives unmarried), but the proportion of those who never marry at all is steadily increasing" (17).
Treweek intends to address a perceived imbalance in the church. She cites ways the modern church favors married people over singles. She traces church attitudes about singleness from the early church until now, the role the Reformation played in relegating singles, and how the church has taken up secular romantic narratives and attempted to Christianize them. I was shocked and disgusted by the quotes Treweek produced from prominent Christian figures past and present who suggest that singleness is aberrant, and should only be intentionally undertaken by a specially "called" few. Church fathers past and pastoral figures present both have explicitly denied the power of the Holy Spirit to empower Christian singles to live in content, obedient chastity, and have said the only suitable recourse is marriage (27, 28). Barf. Shame on those men.
The second part of the book is a defense of the intrinsic value of singleness. Treweek says that we value marriage in and of itself: "the ultimate good of marriage is seen to be located in the actual construct of marriage itself" such that we can recognize marriage as good even when particular marriages are hard or bad (80). We should see singleness the same way: something that is good, even while particular instances are more difficult than others. Treweek cites the tendency in churches to only value singleness when it is seen as a thing to be utilized or instrumental. Like, your singleness is OK because you use your free time to serve others in ways married parents just don't have time to, that's so valuable to us! Treweek emphatically declines this conditional, works-righteousness type of acceptance, saying "an exclusive focus on the utilitarian value of the Christian single life has resulted in several problematic theological and pastoral consequences that affect not only the single Christian, but also the wider believing community. [...] A second troubling consequence had been the construction of a false dichotomy between the expectation for *both* single and married Christians to live a life of godly devotion to Christ in response to their salvation" (81).
She goes on to emphasize that participation in God's family is for singles "be they never married, divorced or widowed, spiritually "gifted," seasonal, same-sex attracted, or simply not married, and indeed, all sorts and conditions of people, as full and joint members of the one new family in Christ" (86-87). Baptism and discipleship mean that kingdom life has family, even parenthood roles for every Christian. Where our church communities are not reflecting God's kingdom reality, they need to be corrected.
The final business of the book is Treweek's process of retrieval, where she attempts to bring balance to the modern church's treatment of singleness by looking to history for mistakenly discarded virtues. She does this in three categories of church history, biblical exegesis, and Christian theology. This was the wildest part of the book, where you too can learn all about prelapsarian and postlapsarian perspectives on marriage, a debate I wasn't even aware of before (basically, did God institute marriage pre or post fall? Is it part of the order of good creation, or a concession to fallen man), among other fun tidbits.
All in all, this is a clunky phD dissertation which failed to be easily understandable. For all this book's merits, Treweek isn't able to clarify (at least for me) the exact eschatological significance she thinks singleness holds, beyond a vague idea that it foreshadows heavenly life a la Matthew 22:30. But being "like an angel" doesn't really resonate with me. The greatest value this resource holds for me is that it pulls together a good deal of research and perspectives on singleness into one place.
Treweek intends to address a perceived imbalance in the church. She cites ways the modern church favors married people over singles. She traces church attitudes about singleness from the early church until now, the role the Reformation played in relegating singles, and how the church has taken up secular romantic narratives and attempted to Christianize them. I was shocked and disgusted by the quotes Treweek produced from prominent Christian figures past and present who suggest that singleness is aberrant, and should only be intentionally undertaken by a specially "called" few. Church fathers past and pastoral figures present both have explicitly denied the power of the Holy Spirit to empower Christian singles to live in content, obedient chastity, and have said the only suitable recourse is marriage (27, 28). Barf. Shame on those men.
The second part of the book is a defense of the intrinsic value of singleness. Treweek says that we value marriage in and of itself: "the ultimate good of marriage is seen to be located in the actual construct of marriage itself" such that we can recognize marriage as good even when particular marriages are hard or bad (80). We should see singleness the same way: something that is good, even while particular instances are more difficult than others. Treweek cites the tendency in churches to only value singleness when it is seen as a thing to be utilized or instrumental. Like, your singleness is OK because you use your free time to serve others in ways married parents just don't have time to, that's so valuable to us! Treweek emphatically declines this conditional, works-righteousness type of acceptance, saying "an exclusive focus on the utilitarian value of the Christian single life has resulted in several problematic theological and pastoral consequences that affect not only the single Christian, but also the wider believing community. [...] A second troubling consequence had been the construction of a false dichotomy between the expectation for *both* single and married Christians to live a life of godly devotion to Christ in response to their salvation" (81).
She goes on to emphasize that participation in God's family is for singles "be they never married, divorced or widowed, spiritually "gifted," seasonal, same-sex attracted, or simply not married, and indeed, all sorts and conditions of people, as full and joint members of the one new family in Christ" (86-87). Baptism and discipleship mean that kingdom life has family, even parenthood roles for every Christian. Where our church communities are not reflecting God's kingdom reality, they need to be corrected.
The final business of the book is Treweek's process of retrieval, where she attempts to bring balance to the modern church's treatment of singleness by looking to history for mistakenly discarded virtues. She does this in three categories of church history, biblical exegesis, and Christian theology. This was the wildest part of the book, where you too can learn all about prelapsarian and postlapsarian perspectives on marriage, a debate I wasn't even aware of before (basically, did God institute marriage pre or post fall? Is it part of the order of good creation, or a concession to fallen man), among other fun tidbits.
All in all, this is a clunky phD dissertation which failed to be easily understandable. For all this book's merits, Treweek isn't able to clarify (at least for me) the exact eschatological significance she thinks singleness holds, beyond a vague idea that it foreshadows heavenly life a la Matthew 22:30. But being "like an angel" doesn't really resonate with me. The greatest value this resource holds for me is that it pulls together a good deal of research and perspectives on singleness into one place.
September 17, 2024
Treweek has pulled together a rich and thorough examination of singleness as interpreted by the church across its existence until the present day, landing with a compelling and Biblical vision for singleness in the present eschaton. She begins with a summary of singleness as viewed in society broadly, as well as specifically within contemporary church discourse. She then considers how this shapes our definition of singleness: both its nature (what it is like) and meaning (what is its [theological] value). A large part of the book is then a deep dive into how singleness has been characterised in Christian consciousness in antiquity, the Middle Ages, Reformation, and the 20th century through the lenses of church history, exegesis, and theology. Surprisingly to me, virginity (and by implication singleness) had for a long time been largely valued over and above marriage, to the point that in some ages past, even those who were already married were obliged to live in celibacy due to the expected teleological rewards. (A wild interpretation of the "100/60/30-fold multiplication" of the 'sower' parable relates these explicitly to virgins/widows/spouses.)
I think Treweek did a great job of revealing how current perspectives were derived, and elucidating a vision of singleness in light of both creation and the telos by retrieving useful discourse from the past. I also value her exploration of meaning within corporate theology of the church body, rather than for isolated individuals which is the tendency of our contemporary culture. Ultimately she lands on a compelling meaning for singleness (alongside marriage): that singleness, along with marriage, are both partial but ontologically significant pointers towards our ultimate end of Christ being united to his church. I had few drawbacks except the density of the language (to be expected as the book is pitched at a solidly academic audience). Would recommend!
P.S: I wrote a topical talk on singleness earlier this year, before which I only had a chance to read perhaps the first chapter of this book. I was glad upon finishing the book to note that my reflections were on a similar line to Treweek's (although of course she explored them with far greater depth and richness of thought). She also provided greater clarity to me on the question of singleness as a meaningful gift for those who are divorced, widows, or for whom otherwise singleness is particularly painful; namely, that singleness is not valuable merely for its utility, but for what it is
I think Treweek did a great job of revealing how current perspectives were derived, and elucidating a vision of singleness in light of both creation and the telos by retrieving useful discourse from the past. I also value her exploration of meaning within corporate theology of the church body, rather than for isolated individuals which is the tendency of our contemporary culture. Ultimately she lands on a compelling meaning for singleness (alongside marriage): that singleness, along with marriage, are both partial but ontologically significant pointers towards our ultimate end of Christ being united to his church. I had few drawbacks except the density of the language (to be expected as the book is pitched at a solidly academic audience). Would recommend!
P.S: I wrote a topical talk on singleness earlier this year, before which I only had a chance to read perhaps the first chapter of this book. I was glad upon finishing the book to note that my reflections were on a similar line to Treweek's (although of course she explored them with far greater depth and richness of thought). She also provided greater clarity to me on the question of singleness as a meaningful gift for those who are divorced, widows, or for whom otherwise singleness is particularly painful; namely, that singleness is not valuable merely for its utility, but for what it is
October 19, 2023
Wowza, this book is good. It’s a lot of work to get through and think through, but it is deep and rich and challenging. The middle bits were more of a harder read at points (more dry and academic, generally) but it really picks up when she does some theological retrieval and then her last section is straight fire.
This book was genuinely challenging and encouraging to me on a lot of fronts. It put a lot of courage in me and made me love both singleness AND marriage more. As she argues, I think a good theology of singleness and marriage honors both vocations and don’t elevate one at the expense of the other. The higher view you have of one should naturally complement the other. Both are radically ordinary and eschatologically meaningful, and you simply cannot have one without the other.
She didn’t just confirm what I already thought, and the Lord used this book to convict me on several fronts. It was real good. It’s definitely academic in nature, but in my opinion, it is worth the work it takes to get through it.
I hope she writes a more accessible version of it for laypeople! The theology here is robust and deep and rich and good, but it’s definitely geared toward the pastoral/academically-inclined types.
A closing line:
“These two wonderful, intricate, meaningful tapestries [marriage and singleness] were designed by their Creator to hang alongside one another. They were created to be equally enjoyed. Each one was made to directly compliment the other, even as they each inestimably point to that which is greater than themselves—to Jesus Christ, and so also to our telos in him.”
This book was genuinely challenging and encouraging to me on a lot of fronts. It put a lot of courage in me and made me love both singleness AND marriage more. As she argues, I think a good theology of singleness and marriage honors both vocations and don’t elevate one at the expense of the other. The higher view you have of one should naturally complement the other. Both are radically ordinary and eschatologically meaningful, and you simply cannot have one without the other.
She didn’t just confirm what I already thought, and the Lord used this book to convict me on several fronts. It was real good. It’s definitely academic in nature, but in my opinion, it is worth the work it takes to get through it.
I hope she writes a more accessible version of it for laypeople! The theology here is robust and deep and rich and good, but it’s definitely geared toward the pastoral/academically-inclined types.
A closing line:
“These two wonderful, intricate, meaningful tapestries [marriage and singleness] were designed by their Creator to hang alongside one another. They were created to be equally enjoyed. Each one was made to directly compliment the other, even as they each inestimably point to that which is greater than themselves—to Jesus Christ, and so also to our telos in him.”
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 15, 2023
Couldn't decide between 2 and 3 stars.
Pros:
- Raises helpful questions about current evangelical teaching on singleness
- Points out eschatological marker that singles represent in the church
- Exposes some very one-sided teaching that demeans singleness
Cons:
- Only about 10% of a roughly 300 page book is devoted to exegesis of Scripture
- Odd dependency on Medieval/RC teaching/examples that surely distort views of virginity and abstinence through it's unbiblical commitment to the celibate priesthood and works righteousness orientation.
- Disagree with her critique of creation based ethics.
- seems strangely sympathetic to Side-B Christian thinking.
- unnecessarily dense language. I know it's an academic work but you don't have to say things in such a convoluted fashion.
Pros:
- Raises helpful questions about current evangelical teaching on singleness
- Points out eschatological marker that singles represent in the church
- Exposes some very one-sided teaching that demeans singleness
Cons:
- Only about 10% of a roughly 300 page book is devoted to exegesis of Scripture
- Odd dependency on Medieval/RC teaching/examples that surely distort views of virginity and abstinence through it's unbiblical commitment to the celibate priesthood and works righteousness orientation.
- Disagree with her critique of creation based ethics.
- seems strangely sympathetic to Side-B Christian thinking.
- unnecessarily dense language. I know it's an academic work but you don't have to say things in such a convoluted fashion.
August 24, 2023
An extremely helpful read, providing sound biblical understanding of how the church should embrace 'singleness' as well as marriage as two vital and not competing expressions of faithful, eschatological-focused Christian discipleship. Not an easy read, but an essential one.
January 17, 2024
I would give it 10 stars if I could.
March 27, 2024
It’s been a long time since I’ve read a book that, from cover to cover, knocked me on my butt and helped me see something in a completely new light. In one sense, I am not at all surprised this was Danielle’s PhD dissertation. The book is loaded with exemplary research and discussion, carefully engages arguments made by many different kinds of Christians, and ultimately makes its own argument that is very fine and nuanced yet explosive with immediate implications. On the other hand, I’ve read dissertations before (some better than others), and yet almost all read like dissertations! Not so here in “The Meaning of Singleness.” In a word, this is a book for the Church. A book that’s so remarkably necessary because of the moment in which we live—one that centers romance and sexuality as the centerpiece upon which a meaningful, happy life is built. Danielle Treweek displays here a wonderfully deep engagement with the swoop of Scripture, the witness of Church history, the particular socio-cultural challenges of the present day, and does so with a prophetic impetus that is marked by gentleness and humility. The book floored me.
I don’t know that I’m persuaded by absolutely everything in here. I’ve got a lot of thinking, reading, and praying to do. But I am absolutely certain Danielle’s voice is a gift to the Church. Read this book!
I don’t know that I’m persuaded by absolutely everything in here. I’ve got a lot of thinking, reading, and praying to do. But I am absolutely certain Danielle’s voice is a gift to the Church. Read this book!
July 23, 2024
This reads quite academic, and therefore took quite some time to get through, but it is packed with research and insight. Unique to Treweek’s treatment of singleness is her argument for the value and meaning of singleness in its variant forms—whether widowed, temporary and unchosen, chosen as a life-long commitment, etc. I found part three on The Retrieval of Singleness to be the richest and most beneficial section, covering church history, biblical exegesis, and Christian theology. By filling in a lot of gaps in historical teaching and meaning of singleness pre-Reformation (and how we arrived to contemporary understandings), this book gave me reasons for hope for the mutual benefit and need of singles and marrieds in the the church, and ultimately hope for the church’s eschatological future that both contribute to a foretaste of now in the “meanwhile.”
I’ll particularly be thinking about the argument for the recentering of discipleship in the church for awhile:
“Indeed, for Hauerwas "there can be no more radical act than [singleness], as it is the clearest institutional expression that one's future is not guaranteed by the family, but by the church"—even as the church's future is itself only guaranteed by its Lord…There is only one good reason to get married or to stay single, namely, that this has something to do with our discipleship.”
I’ll particularly be thinking about the argument for the recentering of discipleship in the church for awhile:
“Indeed, for Hauerwas "there can be no more radical act than [singleness], as it is the clearest institutional expression that one's future is not guaranteed by the family, but by the church"—even as the church's future is itself only guaranteed by its Lord…There is only one good reason to get married or to stay single, namely, that this has something to do with our discipleship.”
January 7, 2025
Great book to read with a friend and discuss the fascinating ideas presented by Treweek as she dives into the past and invites us to reconsider what singleness can mean for the positive growth of the church in the future. Really enjoyed the analysis of how singleness and marriage have been viewed in Christian and secular societies throughout time and how this impacts where we are today. Definitely a scholarly read, but Treweek also provides clear explanation of the topics so whenever I got lost, either my friend Emily explained things or Treweek simplified complex concepts. Really enjoyed this reading experience and appreciated the encouragement from Treweek that guides the reader through the entire book. It’s very clear this was written with an appreciation, love, and hope for all people within the church.
November 30, 2025
This is the best book on the meaning of singleness I have ever read with thorough research and true biblical basis. I really liked the logical flow of the book and the theological and historical retrieval. Discussing this with my friend has been really helpful and interesting for both of us. I liked the arguments and the eschatological outlook. This has given the single life a true and theological grounded meaning which I always thought was there somewhere but has never been taught to me.
September 25, 2023
This book, coupled with conversations on friendship, sexuality, and humanity, has given me a feeling for the temperature of the water we are swimming in as the contemporary Church. I want every pastor to read this book. A thick, textured theology of singleness is vital not only for singles, but also for marrieds and our churches.
November 15, 2023
Treweek is not speaking merely, or even primarily, to the Singles in the Church. She is recasting a vision of sexuality to right-size the relationship between singleness and marriage through biblical, historical, and theological lenses.
I don’t know who you are, but you should read this.
I don’t know who you are, but you should read this.
May 25, 2024
A book I wish all my pastors would read
Read
February 10, 2024It’s great, but it definitely reads like a PHD. I’d love to see an abridged version that’s a bit easier to read and less technical 😊
September 9, 2023
This is a true gift and prod to the current evangelical thinking. I found some of the technical and lesser-known words a challenge (thankfully kindle makes it easy to hit ‘define’) but it IS an academic book.
I came away excited for the possible future our churches. The greatest value a book like this is able to give is in its drive to remind the church to be the CHURCH. THE Body, THE family.
Thanks for your hard work, Dani. You’re a treasure.
Also, if you’re looking for simple, quick proof texting, you won’t find it here. If you have a deep appreciation for the Biblical story, the informing of the now by the revelation of the eschaton, and our rich Christian tradition, you can’t help but be convinced by her arguments.
I came away excited for the possible future our churches. The greatest value a book like this is able to give is in its drive to remind the church to be the CHURCH. THE Body, THE family.
Thanks for your hard work, Dani. You’re a treasure.
Also, if you’re looking for simple, quick proof texting, you won’t find it here. If you have a deep appreciation for the Biblical story, the informing of the now by the revelation of the eschaton, and our rich Christian tradition, you can’t help but be convinced by her arguments.
May 12, 2023
“Ironically and wonderfully, it is the unmarried form of life which most closely resembles the intrapersonal character of the heavenly bride… Whether it be undertaken willingly or unwillingly, be it seasonal or lifelong, each and every unmarried Christian’s situation is embedded with the essential honor of bearing witness to a vitally important aspect of God’s teleological purposes for humanity as they have already been, and will finally be, accomplished in Christ” (232-33).
This book is erudite, well-researched, and clearly outlines an historical exegetical argument for how the modern church should regard singleness through an eschatological and teleological lens.
My key takeaways:
1) It’s not just in my head that the evangelical church (wrongly) considers singleness to be not only abnormal but aberrant.
2) In addition to serving as a beautiful reminder of God’s covenant, marriage exists on earth bc with death comes the need for life; in heaven, there will be no more death, ergo no need to create new life, ergo no more marriage (Matt 22:23-33).
3) Singleness, then, necessarily reminds the church of the hope that a time of no death is coming.
I need more people to read this book so I can discuss it with them. 📖
This book is erudite, well-researched, and clearly outlines an historical exegetical argument for how the modern church should regard singleness through an eschatological and teleological lens.
My key takeaways:
1) It’s not just in my head that the evangelical church (wrongly) considers singleness to be not only abnormal but aberrant.
2) In addition to serving as a beautiful reminder of God’s covenant, marriage exists on earth bc with death comes the need for life; in heaven, there will be no more death, ergo no need to create new life, ergo no more marriage (Matt 22:23-33).
3) Singleness, then, necessarily reminds the church of the hope that a time of no death is coming.
I need more people to read this book so I can discuss it with them. 📖
November 21, 2023
2.5 stars, rounded up.
This book came out months ago, and I should have already reviewed it, but it took me forever to get through it. This is partly due to personal matters, but also because the book is extremely academic and dense. Because there are comparatively few books about singleness that focus on the value and merits of this state, rather than just giving dating advice or encouragement for coping, this book will appeal to average Christian laypeople, not just to scholars and theologians, but it cannot speak to a popular audience effectively. This book is extremely high-level and dense, and I would only recommend it to academics.
I read hundreds of books every year, including many academic titles, and I found it very difficult to follow this. The author writes in a stuffy, convoluted way, making even simple, straightforward points in complicated language. This critique applies to academic writing generally, but I found it especially egregious here, with sentences like this one: "The perceived inadequacy of singleness's defining characteristics is also explicated by an assumed dearth of fulfillment as being indigenous to that life." That kind of tortured phrasing is completely unnecessary, even for academic contexts.
Despite that, the book starts out strong, with a careful, nuanced exploration of singleness in history and how people have viewed singleness in different eras. I was already familiar with a lot of these themes, since I had picked them up from other historical studies, but it was helpful to see it all synthesized in one place, and this material will be new to many readers. There's a lot of depth here, as Treweek explores how social and cultural changes have altered people's concepts of singleness over generations. She also works on defining singleness today, exploring data and cultural perceptions related to the many different ways you can define this term.
After this, Treweek explores negative sentiments surrounding singleness in the contemporary church. She quotes from mainstream, generally accepted sources and some more extreme ones, unpacking the assumptions behind teaching that denigrates singleness and focuses on marriage to an unhealthy, idolatrous degree. Much of what she says resonates with general cultural critique that I've been hearing for about fifteen years, but she takes a particularly in-depth approach to the topic, and her systematic, thorough exploration can enlighten some readers and be a useful jumping-off point for further research.
However, I also felt that she quoted some things unfairly and out of context, like when she takes something positive that Tim Keller wrote about marriage as a negative statement about singleness, without exploring what he actually wrote about singleness. I also wished that she had done more to acknowledge the kernel of truth in some of the critiques about singleness that she unpacked here. She sometimes did this, but she also made sweeping statements at times that I thought misrepresented average people's positions. This book could better persuade skeptical audiences if Treweek had further acknowledged the partial validity to some of the ideas she critiqued.
Next, Treweek focuses on retrieving a better vision for singleness from church history. I ended up finding this section frustrating, because she had made all these lofty claims about reclaiming a profound vision from the past, but the past views are just from the opposite extreme, with people considering virginity to be a superior state and devaluing marriage. Treweek draws out theological ideas from this that have value and relevant application for today, but she also spends a great deal of time exploring extreme views and additional beliefs that have no basis in Scripture. On that note, only a small section of the book actually deals with biblical teaching, and this is mostly a cultural and historical survey of the beliefs Christians have ended up with, biblical or not.
I was already aware that many historic Christians idolized virginity as a spiritually superior state, devaluing the sexual union of marriage as only necessary for procreation, and only necessary for people who didn't have the strength of character to remain celibate. Treweek doesn't sign on with this extremely dim view of marriage, but she keeps emphasizing that we need to recover treasures from this history, and I was like, "What treasures? I just see a different unhealthy extreme, creating a different problematic hierarchy in the church." Of course, Treweek acknowledges harmful elements of these historic beliefs, but because she knows how foreign and shocking they will be for most of her readers, her primary effort is to make them seem plausible.
The study in contrasts is helpful, and Treweek draws out some beneficial ideas from historic beliefs. For example, she highlights how the lives of single Christians signify the future state of all believers in heaven, where we will not be married or given in marriage, and she explores how the single life can testify to the adequacy of Christ and the community of the church for human fulfillment. However, the good beliefs and takeaway points that she highlights here could have been a blog post. As a whole, this book is a thorough academic treatise, with great value to the academy and very little value for ordinary churchgoers.
The Meaning of Singleness is academically rich and full of insight, and Treweek shares a lot of information here that many readers won't be familiar with, but this is mainly for academics, not for Christians who want to enrich their lives or their church communities with practical insights or new ways of seeing singleness. Certainly, there are helpful ideas here that are relevant to all Christians, but the same fundamental concepts are available elsewhere at a popular reading level, without pages and pages of abstract, convoluted language and in-depth, academic breakdowns of esoteric concepts.
I received a free copy from the publisher in exchange for an honest review.
This book came out months ago, and I should have already reviewed it, but it took me forever to get through it. This is partly due to personal matters, but also because the book is extremely academic and dense. Because there are comparatively few books about singleness that focus on the value and merits of this state, rather than just giving dating advice or encouragement for coping, this book will appeal to average Christian laypeople, not just to scholars and theologians, but it cannot speak to a popular audience effectively. This book is extremely high-level and dense, and I would only recommend it to academics.
I read hundreds of books every year, including many academic titles, and I found it very difficult to follow this. The author writes in a stuffy, convoluted way, making even simple, straightforward points in complicated language. This critique applies to academic writing generally, but I found it especially egregious here, with sentences like this one: "The perceived inadequacy of singleness's defining characteristics is also explicated by an assumed dearth of fulfillment as being indigenous to that life." That kind of tortured phrasing is completely unnecessary, even for academic contexts.
Despite that, the book starts out strong, with a careful, nuanced exploration of singleness in history and how people have viewed singleness in different eras. I was already familiar with a lot of these themes, since I had picked them up from other historical studies, but it was helpful to see it all synthesized in one place, and this material will be new to many readers. There's a lot of depth here, as Treweek explores how social and cultural changes have altered people's concepts of singleness over generations. She also works on defining singleness today, exploring data and cultural perceptions related to the many different ways you can define this term.
After this, Treweek explores negative sentiments surrounding singleness in the contemporary church. She quotes from mainstream, generally accepted sources and some more extreme ones, unpacking the assumptions behind teaching that denigrates singleness and focuses on marriage to an unhealthy, idolatrous degree. Much of what she says resonates with general cultural critique that I've been hearing for about fifteen years, but she takes a particularly in-depth approach to the topic, and her systematic, thorough exploration can enlighten some readers and be a useful jumping-off point for further research.
However, I also felt that she quoted some things unfairly and out of context, like when she takes something positive that Tim Keller wrote about marriage as a negative statement about singleness, without exploring what he actually wrote about singleness. I also wished that she had done more to acknowledge the kernel of truth in some of the critiques about singleness that she unpacked here. She sometimes did this, but she also made sweeping statements at times that I thought misrepresented average people's positions. This book could better persuade skeptical audiences if Treweek had further acknowledged the partial validity to some of the ideas she critiqued.
Next, Treweek focuses on retrieving a better vision for singleness from church history. I ended up finding this section frustrating, because she had made all these lofty claims about reclaiming a profound vision from the past, but the past views are just from the opposite extreme, with people considering virginity to be a superior state and devaluing marriage. Treweek draws out theological ideas from this that have value and relevant application for today, but she also spends a great deal of time exploring extreme views and additional beliefs that have no basis in Scripture. On that note, only a small section of the book actually deals with biblical teaching, and this is mostly a cultural and historical survey of the beliefs Christians have ended up with, biblical or not.
I was already aware that many historic Christians idolized virginity as a spiritually superior state, devaluing the sexual union of marriage as only necessary for procreation, and only necessary for people who didn't have the strength of character to remain celibate. Treweek doesn't sign on with this extremely dim view of marriage, but she keeps emphasizing that we need to recover treasures from this history, and I was like, "What treasures? I just see a different unhealthy extreme, creating a different problematic hierarchy in the church." Of course, Treweek acknowledges harmful elements of these historic beliefs, but because she knows how foreign and shocking they will be for most of her readers, her primary effort is to make them seem plausible.
The study in contrasts is helpful, and Treweek draws out some beneficial ideas from historic beliefs. For example, she highlights how the lives of single Christians signify the future state of all believers in heaven, where we will not be married or given in marriage, and she explores how the single life can testify to the adequacy of Christ and the community of the church for human fulfillment. However, the good beliefs and takeaway points that she highlights here could have been a blog post. As a whole, this book is a thorough academic treatise, with great value to the academy and very little value for ordinary churchgoers.
The Meaning of Singleness is academically rich and full of insight, and Treweek shares a lot of information here that many readers won't be familiar with, but this is mainly for academics, not for Christians who want to enrich their lives or their church communities with practical insights or new ways of seeing singleness. Certainly, there are helpful ideas here that are relevant to all Christians, but the same fundamental concepts are available elsewhere at a popular reading level, without pages and pages of abstract, convoluted language and in-depth, academic breakdowns of esoteric concepts.
I received a free copy from the publisher in exchange for an honest review.
June 15, 2024
This book is great if you want a very deep educational understanding of singleness from a Christian eschatological perspective. My only issue is that it gets really hard to understand the book. I think the book Doesn’t make it fully readable for those that may have not gone to seminary school for example. I also believe that although this book is suppose to give a historical lens and gives that, there isn’t a balance of what we can learn from a contemporary lens. It gives very little of that.
September 8, 2023
Summary: A theology of singleness, rooted in a vision of the future, offering meaning, significance, and dignity in living as a single person within the Christian community and in the world.
Singleness. The very word carries for many a negative connotation. A single person is not married. Especially within the church. In the culture, it may mean “anything goes” and “utter freedom”, both in terms of sexuality and more generally in how one lives one’s life. For the church, singleness is often problematized. One’s sexual longings were considered so powerful that self-control and a chaste life is not thought possible for any length of time, and therefore, singles better get married. Along with this, marriage is treated as this relationship where one is “completed” in a combination of romance and sexuality, and all licitly with regard to Christian morality. Singles are just in a holding pattern, waiting for “the one.” Choosing to remain single is even perceived as an attack on marriage.
Danielle Treweek believes both marriage and singleness express important truths that anticipates the union of Christ and his church. Marriage offers a picture of that union and when the reality comes about, marriage will be no more. Likewise, singleness anticipates this future in which we all will be the bride of Christ, forgoing marriage now to live chastely and missionally, and to proclaim the future community where none of us are married but all loved by Christ.
Treweek first analyzes the contemporary context of both society and its expressive individualism of “anything goes” and the church’s context that problematizes singleness. She then proceeds to what she calls a “retrieval of singleness.” She does this by looking at singleness throughout church history, in biblical exegesis of Jesus’s interaction with the Pharisees on the resurrection and no giving in marriage in heaven, and Paul’s instructions to the Corinthians about singleness, and in Christian theology through the ages. Among many other things:
We discover that in the church, virginity was thought possible for both men and women, and an honorable state, and that also spoke to the married to living continently.
Marriage is not the remedy to burn with lust! That is not the “burn” Paul had in mind.
The “gift of singleness” is not some spiritual booster that means the single no longer wants sex or has supernatural self-control. Rather, whatever state you are in is God’s gift and if you are single, you have that gift and are called to live godly in our sexuality and other aspects of life.
Theologically, we set singleness and marriage within the movement from creation to new creation, the already and not yet in which we live our lives.
In the concluding section, Treweek works out the implications of what was retrieved. She envisions the church as a “teleosocial” movement” in which both singles (both never and formerly married) and the married recognize that Christ has formed a new society, living into its destiny, its end. It means we think of growth not only through procreation but also though discipleship of new believers in which singles (and married) can be spiritual parents. Singles also attest to our sexuality being about far more than genital experience, over and against the culture and the church’s capitulation to it.
All of this is good for the meaning of marriage as well, freeing Christian marriage from the culture’s romantic-sexual fantasy to be seen as portraying Christ’s and the church’s love and union, something far richer than what the culture has on offer. It also means re-thinking a church not formed around nuclear families, but functioning as a larger, more diverse family of singles, marrieds, widows, and children.
This is a scholarly rather than inspirational treatment of singleness, an adaptation of Treweek’s doctoral dissertation. That means working through some dense material at points. Rather than offering comfort while one “waits,” exhorts to marriage, or simply says “suck it up,” Treweek takes us on a deep dive of thinking critically about both contemporary and church culture, explores historical, biblical, and theological resources through history to retrieve riches suggesting a much richer set of resources than our culture offers. She offers a vision of singleness as whole persons with a purpose within God’s story and among God’s people.
________________________________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher.
Singleness. The very word carries for many a negative connotation. A single person is not married. Especially within the church. In the culture, it may mean “anything goes” and “utter freedom”, both in terms of sexuality and more generally in how one lives one’s life. For the church, singleness is often problematized. One’s sexual longings were considered so powerful that self-control and a chaste life is not thought possible for any length of time, and therefore, singles better get married. Along with this, marriage is treated as this relationship where one is “completed” in a combination of romance and sexuality, and all licitly with regard to Christian morality. Singles are just in a holding pattern, waiting for “the one.” Choosing to remain single is even perceived as an attack on marriage.
Danielle Treweek believes both marriage and singleness express important truths that anticipates the union of Christ and his church. Marriage offers a picture of that union and when the reality comes about, marriage will be no more. Likewise, singleness anticipates this future in which we all will be the bride of Christ, forgoing marriage now to live chastely and missionally, and to proclaim the future community where none of us are married but all loved by Christ.
Treweek first analyzes the contemporary context of both society and its expressive individualism of “anything goes” and the church’s context that problematizes singleness. She then proceeds to what she calls a “retrieval of singleness.” She does this by looking at singleness throughout church history, in biblical exegesis of Jesus’s interaction with the Pharisees on the resurrection and no giving in marriage in heaven, and Paul’s instructions to the Corinthians about singleness, and in Christian theology through the ages. Among many other things:
We discover that in the church, virginity was thought possible for both men and women, and an honorable state, and that also spoke to the married to living continently.
Marriage is not the remedy to burn with lust! That is not the “burn” Paul had in mind.
The “gift of singleness” is not some spiritual booster that means the single no longer wants sex or has supernatural self-control. Rather, whatever state you are in is God’s gift and if you are single, you have that gift and are called to live godly in our sexuality and other aspects of life.
Theologically, we set singleness and marriage within the movement from creation to new creation, the already and not yet in which we live our lives.
In the concluding section, Treweek works out the implications of what was retrieved. She envisions the church as a “teleosocial” movement” in which both singles (both never and formerly married) and the married recognize that Christ has formed a new society, living into its destiny, its end. It means we think of growth not only through procreation but also though discipleship of new believers in which singles (and married) can be spiritual parents. Singles also attest to our sexuality being about far more than genital experience, over and against the culture and the church’s capitulation to it.
All of this is good for the meaning of marriage as well, freeing Christian marriage from the culture’s romantic-sexual fantasy to be seen as portraying Christ’s and the church’s love and union, something far richer than what the culture has on offer. It also means re-thinking a church not formed around nuclear families, but functioning as a larger, more diverse family of singles, marrieds, widows, and children.
This is a scholarly rather than inspirational treatment of singleness, an adaptation of Treweek’s doctoral dissertation. That means working through some dense material at points. Rather than offering comfort while one “waits,” exhorts to marriage, or simply says “suck it up,” Treweek takes us on a deep dive of thinking critically about both contemporary and church culture, explores historical, biblical, and theological resources through history to retrieve riches suggesting a much richer set of resources than our culture offers. She offers a vision of singleness as whole persons with a purpose within God’s story and among God’s people.
________________________________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher.
January 6, 2025
or 3.75
What a needed, thorough, nuanced, and edifying book!
Notes and Thoughts:
-Buddy read! Thanks Rachel!
-I felt very motivated to underline and write notes in the margins: things that stood out to me, things I agreed with, things I disagreed with/wasn't so sure about, challenging statements, etc. That was kinda cool!
-Aimed at Protestant evangelicals (although interacting with Catholic theologians as well)
-Both very readable and also at times not as readable given the academic and theological jargon! Dani is a great writer, and it probably helps that I am interested in both this topic and the way she chose to delve into this topic. But I was grateful for the few theology and church history classes I took in college, as they helped me a bit in understanding some of the concepts (but I still had to look some things up. Also, it's probably good for me that I've read some books this year where there were multiple words I had to look up the definition).
-This book is probably the perfect length. The topic needed this level of detail, but it was also good that it wasn't drawn out any longer and sometimes we got close to too much repetition. AND YET it is absolutely (and supposed to be) only the beginning of this sort of discussion around the topic of singleness, and specifically, Dani's view of the meaning of singleness. That's not necessarily a negative about the book, but at times there were topics or concepts that were mentioned and definitely needed more exploration.
-Ultimately very edifying and encouraging for the celibate single Christian, whether their singleness is temporary, committed, voluntary, involuntary, etc.
-Loved the exploration on spiritual parenthood, and the challenge that ALL Christians, whether biological parents or not, are called to be spiritual parents.
-Something of note about certain points in the more beginning sections of the book when Dani was analyzing (especially modern) evangelical views on marriage and singleness: her analysis, although not ALWAYS negative or always explicitly negative, was often a critique of modern evangelical assumptions. But at times I felt that she sort of assumed her readers would also simply agree with her critiques. Now it's true, I often agreed with Dani when she implied that the Protestant authors and leaders she was referencing had views on family/marriage/singleness that were unhealthy for the Christian single and the Christian church in general. But that was mostly because I already agreed with her. But people more ensconced in certain evangelical Protestant subcultures may not be convinced. So, just an observation that her book may not helpfully convince as wide of an audience as one might hope?
-Yet another author/work of writing that makes me yearn for what the local church can and should be! But I worry that this yearning won't be easily satisfied due to our modern shallow-roots society (where close local long-term community living is very difficult), our modern Western church culture/goals, and even moreso my own limits and flaws as an individual. But still, even with the unique handicaps and flaws of the church today (and the church throughout history), the church is still the bride of Christ, and there is still the call to pursue its flourishing and health, and subsequently, its witness to the world.
-And part of its witness has to do with ESCHATOLOGY according to this book!! So yeah, if you read this book, be ready to read a lot about eschatology :)
-Last thing, I appreciated Dani's philosophy of retrieval, and specifically that theological retrieval does not simply mean blindly accepting what early and medieval Christians believed. Although she certainly had more of an open mind when discussing some early and medieval Church beliefs than I might have been tempted to be, but that was probably good! It can be too easy as a modern Protestant to write off some of these beliefs as simply being cray cray with nothing to learn from.
-OH actually ONE last thing, I appreciated her (especially concluding) thoughts about how important getting our views of singleness, and consequently singleness and marriage, right is vital to the health of singles, married people, and the whole church!
What a needed, thorough, nuanced, and edifying book!
Notes and Thoughts:
-Buddy read! Thanks Rachel!
-I felt very motivated to underline and write notes in the margins: things that stood out to me, things I agreed with, things I disagreed with/wasn't so sure about, challenging statements, etc. That was kinda cool!
-Aimed at Protestant evangelicals (although interacting with Catholic theologians as well)
-Both very readable and also at times not as readable given the academic and theological jargon! Dani is a great writer, and it probably helps that I am interested in both this topic and the way she chose to delve into this topic. But I was grateful for the few theology and church history classes I took in college, as they helped me a bit in understanding some of the concepts (but I still had to look some things up. Also, it's probably good for me that I've read some books this year where there were multiple words I had to look up the definition).
-This book is probably the perfect length. The topic needed this level of detail, but it was also good that it wasn't drawn out any longer and sometimes we got close to too much repetition. AND YET it is absolutely (and supposed to be) only the beginning of this sort of discussion around the topic of singleness, and specifically, Dani's view of the meaning of singleness. That's not necessarily a negative about the book, but at times there were topics or concepts that were mentioned and definitely needed more exploration.
-Ultimately very edifying and encouraging for the celibate single Christian, whether their singleness is temporary, committed, voluntary, involuntary, etc.
-Loved the exploration on spiritual parenthood, and the challenge that ALL Christians, whether biological parents or not, are called to be spiritual parents.
-Something of note about certain points in the more beginning sections of the book when Dani was analyzing (especially modern) evangelical views on marriage and singleness: her analysis, although not ALWAYS negative or always explicitly negative, was often a critique of modern evangelical assumptions. But at times I felt that she sort of assumed her readers would also simply agree with her critiques. Now it's true, I often agreed with Dani when she implied that the Protestant authors and leaders she was referencing had views on family/marriage/singleness that were unhealthy for the Christian single and the Christian church in general. But that was mostly because I already agreed with her. But people more ensconced in certain evangelical Protestant subcultures may not be convinced. So, just an observation that her book may not helpfully convince as wide of an audience as one might hope?
-Yet another author/work of writing that makes me yearn for what the local church can and should be! But I worry that this yearning won't be easily satisfied due to our modern shallow-roots society (where close local long-term community living is very difficult), our modern Western church culture/goals, and even moreso my own limits and flaws as an individual. But still, even with the unique handicaps and flaws of the church today (and the church throughout history), the church is still the bride of Christ, and there is still the call to pursue its flourishing and health, and subsequently, its witness to the world.
-And part of its witness has to do with ESCHATOLOGY according to this book!! So yeah, if you read this book, be ready to read a lot about eschatology :)
-Last thing, I appreciated Dani's philosophy of retrieval, and specifically that theological retrieval does not simply mean blindly accepting what early and medieval Christians believed. Although she certainly had more of an open mind when discussing some early and medieval Church beliefs than I might have been tempted to be, but that was probably good! It can be too easy as a modern Protestant to write off some of these beliefs as simply being cray cray with nothing to learn from.
-OH actually ONE last thing, I appreciated her (especially concluding) thoughts about how important getting our views of singleness, and consequently singleness and marriage, right is vital to the health of singles, married people, and the whole church!
August 1, 2023
This book was stimulating and well worth reading, but I don’t think it succeeded.
This is a very good book for its summary and synthesis of historical material in the Christian theological tradition and of Western society more broadly. Treweek also offers robust correctives to some of the saccharine and sappy accounts of marriage that have been bandied about in evangelical discourse in the last few hundred years.
However, I wasn’t convinced of the “teleosocial” meaning of singleness that Treweek develops. In part, this is owing to Treweek’s “definitionally organic approach” to the definition of singleness, but it frequently resulted in features of virginity being superimposed upon widowhood, for example. The unmarriedness of a widow has a very different shape than that of a virgin, the former probably continuing to live within the social matrix of her previous marriage as she relates to and depends upon her own children.
The single person as described seems to live in a way that is utterly unconditioned by temporal relationships whatsoever: while the Christian married person is precluded from appreciating egalitarian siblinghood with an unmarried Christian, that unmarried Christian is apparently not at all precluded from enjoying egalitarian siblinghood even with that very same married person. But surely it takes two to do a teleosocial tango! The single person as described seems to look at other Christians from behind a one-way mirror.
I also thought that Treweek’s take on natural law, at the very least, left some serious questions about how creation grounds marital ethics more generally. If the resurrection discloses the natural order so as to abolish the norm that people should marry, then it should be asked why it doesn’t have that same effect on the features of marriage itself (e.g., male and female, sexual exclusivity). You could ground these solely in Scriptural imperatives, perhaps, but the relationship of these imperatives to the created order would then be quite attenuated. I also wondered whether Treweek would affirm that a nation has a natural obligation to continue itself into future generations. If so, that would necessitate a marriage norm.
While I didn’t expect every last passage on singleness to be addressed in detail, this book was begging for an exegetical or historical treatment of 1 Timothy 5, which is highly relevant on these questions of vowed vs “unvowed” celibacy, natural familial duties, the extent to which the church displaces the natural family, and the circumstances and reasons for which St Paul would advise marriage. The closest we get to any engagement with that passage is in Treweek’s discussion of some tweets by Michael Foster, in which Foster briefly exposits and applies that passage—and, remarkably, Treweek describes that view as “lamentable”. She also finds Augustine’s appropriation of this same apostolic instruction concerning widows to be a “significant limitation” to his theological usefulness. To be blunt, her thesis seemed not to be able to account for one of Paul’s most straightforward and practical teachings on this issue.
Though I frequently disagreed throughout my reading, I think Treweek made a decent case in this book, and it certainly deserves careful reading and engagement by anyone who’s halfway interested in this topic. Unfortunately, I don’t think the argument in its current form succeeds.
This is a very good book for its summary and synthesis of historical material in the Christian theological tradition and of Western society more broadly. Treweek also offers robust correctives to some of the saccharine and sappy accounts of marriage that have been bandied about in evangelical discourse in the last few hundred years.
However, I wasn’t convinced of the “teleosocial” meaning of singleness that Treweek develops. In part, this is owing to Treweek’s “definitionally organic approach” to the definition of singleness, but it frequently resulted in features of virginity being superimposed upon widowhood, for example. The unmarriedness of a widow has a very different shape than that of a virgin, the former probably continuing to live within the social matrix of her previous marriage as she relates to and depends upon her own children.
The single person as described seems to live in a way that is utterly unconditioned by temporal relationships whatsoever: while the Christian married person is precluded from appreciating egalitarian siblinghood with an unmarried Christian, that unmarried Christian is apparently not at all precluded from enjoying egalitarian siblinghood even with that very same married person. But surely it takes two to do a teleosocial tango! The single person as described seems to look at other Christians from behind a one-way mirror.
I also thought that Treweek’s take on natural law, at the very least, left some serious questions about how creation grounds marital ethics more generally. If the resurrection discloses the natural order so as to abolish the norm that people should marry, then it should be asked why it doesn’t have that same effect on the features of marriage itself (e.g., male and female, sexual exclusivity). You could ground these solely in Scriptural imperatives, perhaps, but the relationship of these imperatives to the created order would then be quite attenuated. I also wondered whether Treweek would affirm that a nation has a natural obligation to continue itself into future generations. If so, that would necessitate a marriage norm.
While I didn’t expect every last passage on singleness to be addressed in detail, this book was begging for an exegetical or historical treatment of 1 Timothy 5, which is highly relevant on these questions of vowed vs “unvowed” celibacy, natural familial duties, the extent to which the church displaces the natural family, and the circumstances and reasons for which St Paul would advise marriage. The closest we get to any engagement with that passage is in Treweek’s discussion of some tweets by Michael Foster, in which Foster briefly exposits and applies that passage—and, remarkably, Treweek describes that view as “lamentable”. She also finds Augustine’s appropriation of this same apostolic instruction concerning widows to be a “significant limitation” to his theological usefulness. To be blunt, her thesis seemed not to be able to account for one of Paul’s most straightforward and practical teachings on this issue.
Though I frequently disagreed throughout my reading, I think Treweek made a decent case in this book, and it certainly deserves careful reading and engagement by anyone who’s halfway interested in this topic. Unfortunately, I don’t think the argument in its current form succeeds.
Read
August 27, 2023From the sample chapters I read as part of a pre-publication group - it was alright and it had me at the word eschatological. Though the opening chapter was somewhat narrow in it's focus - US, UK, Australia with a hint of Europe. More could have been said too about working class women who perhaps never stopped working as their wealthier, leisure pre-occupied sisters did and where urban and to an extent rural relationships existed outside of formal marriage until children entered the picture. Would have liked some more interrogation about reasons for decline in marriage - is hook-up culture really a common-place thing (beyond evangelical and conservative influencers losing their minds on social media? Is it not more that access to housing has become more and more expensive and perhaps people move from relationship to relationship more easily (generally)? Or wait a lot longer for a relationship, being more reluctant or emotionally sensitive to being with a person they connect with? Would really have liked a more global sweep to come in here (not just 'the West') and if the author felt unqualified, to work alongside some other authors on this. I.e. the pressure within certain cultures to be married by a certain age even now.
Intrigued to see what comes next and kudos to the author for including an 18th century quote which made me howl with laughter - 18th century satirists not holding back. Intriguing too to learn that spinster comes from a popular unmarried female occupation - spinning! More could have been mentioned that with the rise of conspicuous consumption and showing your taste in household goods and management, that an unmarried man was as equally ridiculous socially as a woman. (See Amanda Foreman's excellent 18th-century research). Wish the elite educated females and married household managers of the 16th and 17th centuries had been mentioned. Ditto the comment about the split between educated pursuits and non-'educated - nursing was seen as more manual labour than for respectable ladies, also the split between governesses and teachers/tutors, botanical art vs artists, domestic crafts and accomplishments vs full education as their brothers and fathers had. I think it was much more complex than presented here. Again it's all very class based - just read elsewhere that working class girls and boys didn't always get lessons in full literacy in 19th century London. Overall a learned and readable work, but would have liked a bit more interrogation of the facts being stated, as they often seemed left to stand alone. I.e. sexual liberation was mentioned in the 1960-70s - but more access to reliable (within limits) contraception which allowed a woman for the first time to choose if, when and how many children she might have, but also put pressure on her to be the one to manage this. Again would have liked a bit more discussion around this, than just being thrown out there as a fact. What a shame that the book was published before the current Barbie movie as stereotypical Barbie somehow achieves the feat of being both the ultimate single lady and in relationship.
Given that books with single anything in the title make me flee, the fact that I want to read on and hear more is high praise indeed!
Intrigued to see what comes next and kudos to the author for including an 18th century quote which made me howl with laughter - 18th century satirists not holding back. Intriguing too to learn that spinster comes from a popular unmarried female occupation - spinning! More could have been mentioned that with the rise of conspicuous consumption and showing your taste in household goods and management, that an unmarried man was as equally ridiculous socially as a woman. (See Amanda Foreman's excellent 18th-century research). Wish the elite educated females and married household managers of the 16th and 17th centuries had been mentioned. Ditto the comment about the split between educated pursuits and non-'educated - nursing was seen as more manual labour than for respectable ladies, also the split between governesses and teachers/tutors, botanical art vs artists, domestic crafts and accomplishments vs full education as their brothers and fathers had. I think it was much more complex than presented here. Again it's all very class based - just read elsewhere that working class girls and boys didn't always get lessons in full literacy in 19th century London. Overall a learned and readable work, but would have liked a bit more interrogation of the facts being stated, as they often seemed left to stand alone. I.e. sexual liberation was mentioned in the 1960-70s - but more access to reliable (within limits) contraception which allowed a woman for the first time to choose if, when and how many children she might have, but also put pressure on her to be the one to manage this. Again would have liked a bit more discussion around this, than just being thrown out there as a fact. What a shame that the book was published before the current Barbie movie as stereotypical Barbie somehow achieves the feat of being both the ultimate single lady and in relationship.
Given that books with single anything in the title make me flee, the fact that I want to read on and hear more is high praise indeed!
December 17, 2024
There's a lot to think about after reading this book. It was especially revealing to me about comments that I, as someone who married quite young, would just brush off about marriage and singleness, but that would have a huge effect on someone who was single. It's especially helpful in thinking through reaching out to the singles in my own church.
I agree with Treweek's main thesis, that singleness has value, not just because of what is done with it, but on its own, as a way to point forward to the final state (but still, just as with marriage, there are good and bad reasons for choosing that path, in the circumstances when singleness is a choice). She makes a good argument there, and it's a point often neglected in the church. The retrieval she does of the early church in particular here is very moving and inspiring. And her comments on how evangelicals often idolize sex, marriage, and family are spot on. Definitely pondering a lot as well on how sexuality can be biblically expressed in singleness.
However, I think her creational theology is lacking. While I agree that the "end" does influence how we interpret the beginning, I still have a lot of questions about how she handled this. Specifically, even though the place of marriage shifts in the NT, why does Paul teach to marriages and families specifically and not to singles? Why does he urge the younger women not to marry? Why was marriage the normative pattern till the NT, and how much does the legitimacy of singleness now shift that from being a necessary heavy emphasis? These questions may have been answered had there been more space devoted to exegesis (and the exegesis been more than retrieval). Also, she is almost entirely uncritical of the idea of "chaste marriages" in the early church era, which I am not quite sure what to make of.
I wish I'd had a hard copy to be able to flip back and forth better as I often wondered if I'd missed something, but from other reviews, think my difficulty following at times may not have been due to reading an eBook, but due to the book itself.
I agree with Treweek's main thesis, that singleness has value, not just because of what is done with it, but on its own, as a way to point forward to the final state (but still, just as with marriage, there are good and bad reasons for choosing that path, in the circumstances when singleness is a choice). She makes a good argument there, and it's a point often neglected in the church. The retrieval she does of the early church in particular here is very moving and inspiring. And her comments on how evangelicals often idolize sex, marriage, and family are spot on. Definitely pondering a lot as well on how sexuality can be biblically expressed in singleness.
However, I think her creational theology is lacking. While I agree that the "end" does influence how we interpret the beginning, I still have a lot of questions about how she handled this. Specifically, even though the place of marriage shifts in the NT, why does Paul teach to marriages and families specifically and not to singles? Why does he urge the younger women not to marry? Why was marriage the normative pattern till the NT, and how much does the legitimacy of singleness now shift that from being a necessary heavy emphasis? These questions may have been answered had there been more space devoted to exegesis (and the exegesis been more than retrieval). Also, she is almost entirely uncritical of the idea of "chaste marriages" in the early church era, which I am not quite sure what to make of.
I wish I'd had a hard copy to be able to flip back and forth better as I often wondered if I'd missed something, but from other reviews, think my difficulty following at times may not have been due to reading an eBook, but due to the book itself.
October 11, 2025
Heavy-going but a really helpful historical-theological angle, basically applying Oliver O'Donovan's eschatological-ethical framework to marriage and singleness, saying that the contemporary church has had a myopic focus on a creation-based sexual ethic rather than an eschatological one. One of the key questions she raises is whether singleness has inherent value, rather than just an instrumental one (i.e. 1 Cor 7- undivided devotion), to which she answers yes because the church is now fundamentally defined not by blood ties but by union with Christ, indwelt by the Spirit and oriented towards the life to come, such that the single Christian has a sacramental value; a visible reminder to the church of her teleological future. Theologically this is quite persuasive, esp after recently writing a college essay on the centrality of union with the risen Christ as a key motif that Paul uses to describe the believer's new status, and so that reality defines the new covenant believer more than (or at least as much as) Gen 1-2.
Would've liked more on 1 Cor 7 and the Matthean texts as she mainly surveyed other commentators and didn't give her opinions on some of the details, but I guess that wasn't her main focus! Lots of interesting insights from Augustine as well, and a helpful pushback on some unhealthy contemporary church culture, esp the 'marriage as remedy for lust (which even the HS has no power over...)'. Will be interesting to read her new book which sounds like a simplified version of this...
Would've liked more on 1 Cor 7 and the Matthean texts as she mainly surveyed other commentators and didn't give her opinions on some of the details, but I guess that wasn't her main focus! Lots of interesting insights from Augustine as well, and a helpful pushback on some unhealthy contemporary church culture, esp the 'marriage as remedy for lust (which even the HS has no power over...)'. Will be interesting to read her new book which sounds like a simplified version of this...
December 18, 2024
I found this book a very mixed bag, with some helpful insights and theological perspectives, and also some significant holes and troubling implications. For the former:
Treweek does a good job arguing that singleness can (my emphasis, not hers; more on this in a moment) have an intrinsic value as a way of pointing to the eschatological reality of the body of Christ. That is, our married status is not ultimate, but penultimate. And singleness in the church reminds us of that.
But there are holes, even there. Treweek rejects an "instrumental-good" view of singleness, in which it is only valuable if it serves the kingdom, etc., and wants to replace it with an "intrinsic-good" view. But that runs afoul of a challenge she addresses early on: "singleness" is not one thing. And, in my judgment, just as the instrumental view is an error when absolutized, so is the intrinsic view. Singleness, rightly defined and pursue, can appropriately relativize marriage. But not all singleness is created equal - and rightly defining those parameters requires more theological work.
I think there is also an aversion throughout the book to creation order or natural law (which usually appears in scare quotes) proposals that relates to this weakness - by jettisoning those theological tools, it becomes hard to make sense of why not all singleness is created (or recreated) equal.
All told, not a paradigm altering book, but still a helpful read.
Treweek does a good job arguing that singleness can (my emphasis, not hers; more on this in a moment) have an intrinsic value as a way of pointing to the eschatological reality of the body of Christ. That is, our married status is not ultimate, but penultimate. And singleness in the church reminds us of that.
But there are holes, even there. Treweek rejects an "instrumental-good" view of singleness, in which it is only valuable if it serves the kingdom, etc., and wants to replace it with an "intrinsic-good" view. But that runs afoul of a challenge she addresses early on: "singleness" is not one thing. And, in my judgment, just as the instrumental view is an error when absolutized, so is the intrinsic view. Singleness, rightly defined and pursue, can appropriately relativize marriage. But not all singleness is created equal - and rightly defining those parameters requires more theological work.
I think there is also an aversion throughout the book to creation order or natural law (which usually appears in scare quotes) proposals that relates to this weakness - by jettisoning those theological tools, it becomes hard to make sense of why not all singleness is created (or recreated) equal.
All told, not a paradigm altering book, but still a helpful read.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews