CHAPTER 1
A CASE FOR BEFRIENDING
REAL FRIENDSHIP IS HARD.
There are other, less real versions of friendship. The less real versions are "less" because they are less costly, less committed, less disruptive, less scary, less gritty, less gutsy, and less out-of-our-control than real friendship. But here's the rub:
Less real versions of friendship are also less rich. In the short run, they feel better and smoother than real friendship. But in the long run, they leave us lonely and alone. And it is not good to be alone.
Less real versions of friendship take several forms.
Digital Friendship
In today's world of social media, relating to others through screens has become a chief way — and for some of us, the chief way — to seek connection. For example, it is not uncommon for a group of teenagers to be in the same room together as they "chat" through text messaging and social media without having a single face-to- face conversation with each other. On social media, we "friend," "like," and "follow" each other, sometimes without ever actually meeting each other. As a weekly blogger, I have what is called an online "community," but it falls short of being a true community because self-disclosure flows in only one direction: from my keyboard to other people's screens.
There are many positive aspects to digital friendship. But by itself, digital friendship fails as a substitute for true friendship. Unlike true friendship, relating to others through screens makes it easy for us to hide. It allows us to put forth only the best, most attractive, most "together," edited, and screened version of ourselves. When digital friendships become the main way we relate to others, a subtle but significant shift happens. Instead of entering the messiness of having real friends, we settle for having (and being) followers and fans. The chief drawback is that we never really get to know people, and they never really get to know us. Our digital friends are experiencing part of us but not all of us. When online relationships take priority over real friendship, the result is usually more loneliness and isolation, not less.
Transactional Friendship
My friend and mentor of ten years, Tim Keller, describes another less-than-real form of friendship: transactional friendship. Real friends see each other as long-term companions and give to each other the rare gift of long-term loyalty. Instead of using each other, they serve each other. Instead of keeping score with each other, they support, champion, encourage, serve, forgive, and strengthen each other. In real friendship, the flourishing of other people takes priority over our own goals and ambitions.
In contrast, transactional friendship isn't really friendship. Unlike real friendship, transactional friendship treats other people as a means to an end. When we relate this way, we come to view people more as resources than as human beings. Instead of loving and serving them as we would in a real friendship, we use them to advance our careers, build our platforms, gain access to their social circles, increase our self-esteem (I feel important now, because I am connected to her), impress others (Selfie time! Hey, everybody, look at how important I am, now that I am connected to him), and so on. The pitfall of transactional friendships should be obvious. As soon as a relationship feels more costly than beneficial to us, as soon as the presence of the other person in our lives ceases to advance our personal goals, we discard the other person. Or, if the opposite is true, the other person discards us.
One-Dimensional Friendship
Friendships are one-dimensional when they revolve around a single shared interest and not much else. The shared interest can be anything: a hobby, a career path, a common enemy, an educational philosophy, a set of religious beliefs, and so on. One-dimensional friendships prioritize sameness, so views and convictions and practices are never challenged and blind spots are never uncovered. Friendships like these can't offer the natural, redemptive, character-forming tension that diversity brings to our lives. When celebrities limit their friendships to other celebrities, parents to other parents, married people to other married people (single people, too), athletes to other athletes, Republicans to other Republicans (Democrats, too), Millennials to other Millennials (Gen Xers and Baby Boomers, too), Christians to other Christians, white people to other white people (people of color, too), thinkers to other thinkers (feelers, too), affluent people to other affluent people, and so on, a poverty of friendship will be the outcome. One-dimensional friendships, while having the appearance of connection, can also be quite shallow — unless the single dimension that initially attracts us to each other develops into other broader and deeper dimensions.
A Case for Befriending
In his magnificent book on human connection, The Four Loves, C. S. Lewis says that all true friendship begins when one person looks at another and says, "You, too?"
Starting a friendship around a common interest or passion is natural, and it is not in itself a bad thing. Consider David and Jonathan, for example. One was the son of a humble shepherd, the other the son of a king, and they became the best of friends. Though their social and economic situation was very different, their friendship nonetheless began with a "You, too?" And theirs was the most solid "You, too?" that any two people can have. Because David and Jonathan both loved and were sold out to the Lord, they became the best of friends.
Although their friendship began with a foundation of "You, too?" the connection between David and Jonathan grew in depth, breadth, and layers. A shared love for God matured into a reciprocal transparency, vulnerability, love, and loyalty between them that would later move David to adopt Jonathan's son, Mephibosheth, after Jonathan died in battle. Mephibosheth was a young...
