As I noted in the first part of this series, many young people want to get married and have children, yet they feel discouraged and doubt they will find a mate. Last time we focused on the problem of finding a spouse from the male perspective. In this installment and the next, we will consider the problem from the female point of view.

Men Are Not Monsters

When we use the word men in the generic sense—for example, “all men are created equal”—we are referring to both sexes. As Reformed believers, we know that all people, male and female, are equal in at least one sense: since the fall warped human nature, all are capable of monstrous sin. Neither sex is uniquely sinful.

One of the many problems of second- and third-wave feminism, however, has been that those movements have tended to demonize men as males. As previously noted, the axiom “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle” is catchy but also laden with bad premises that lead to bad outcomes. The truth is that, in certain ways, both the Victorians and the feminists were wrong about men and women. The feminists were wrong about women not needing men, and the Victorians were wrong about what women can and cannot do.

As a matter of fact, we knew during the Victorian era (named after Queen Victoria), as we knew before then, that females can govern. Queen Elizabeth I (1533–1603) certainly governed the British Isles, and Calvin accepted the legitimacy of her rule, even if with some reluctance.¹ In his January 15, 1559, dedication of a second edition of his commentary on Isaiah, he wrote most respectfully to Queen Elizabeth I:

And now, most noble Queen, if you shall be graciously pleased, as I trust you will, not to disdain this testimony of my respect for you, which some would perhaps reckon to be trivial and of little value, I shall esteem it to be no ordinary kindness, and will endeavour through my whole life to testify my gratitude by every means in my power.

May the Lord guide you, most illustrious Queen, by the Spirit of wisdom, uphold you with invincible courage, protect and enrich your Highness with every kind of blessings! GENEVA, 15th January; the day which, it was reported, had been fixed for your coronation; on which account I more gladly set myself to write, having partially recovered from an attack of quartan ague.²

Women can lead companies; they can be astronauts, lawyers, physicians, EMTs, firefighters, cops, and more. We should not confuse Victorian mores with the creational order, and, as I have been arguing in this series (as in the previous series), there is a creational order. Woman was drawn out of man (Gen 2:20–25), and the man needed the woman (Gen 2:18) and delighted in her (Gen 2:23). They were meant to be together, to complement one another.³ Man and woman were intended to leave their parents and to be together, to be one flesh (Gen 2:24–25). After the fall, wives were to submit to their husbands, and husbands were to love their wives and even lay down their lives for them (Eph 5:22–35). The fall frustrated the creational pattern so that after the fall, the woman’s desire would be “for” her husband, and “he shall rule over you” (Gen 3:16b).⁴ One way this has been understood is that it reflects the corruption of the self-giving/submission relationship established in creation.

Women, contrary to what you may have heard in freshman orientation at your university, there are pious, spiritually and emotionally mature Christian men looking for spiritually and emotionally mature, godly women. They want you to be their complement, and they want to love, serve, and protect you and to have a family.

The MRS Degree

Christian women complain to me that they do not know where to meet mature Christian men whom they might marry. There are demographic and other social reasons for this, but sometimes it just might be that Christian women miss the fish because they are focused on the sea, as it were.

There are women who go to university not primarily to get an education but to get a husband. Those who succeed are said to have earned their MRS degree. Some female students have complained that these women make it difficult for more serious female students to be taken seriously. This is a legitimate complaint, but female students can do both: take their studies seriously as they prepare to fulfill their vocation after graduation, whether that is primarily in the workforce, at home, or in both worlds simultaneously. There is nothing wrong with taking the opportunity that comes with being in a college or university setting to find a spouse while also getting an education.

It is also true that in some settings (e.g., Christian colleges), there can be undue pressure on female students to “get a ring by spring” (of their senior year) or, as it was at Wheaton College, to “go up the [Blanchard] tower” to announce their engagement. Still, from the perspective of finding a mate, a Christian college is a target-rich environment. There are relatively more Christian men with spiritual interests in a Christian college than perhaps anywhere else. Meeting people and forming lifelong relationships (including meeting a husband) is a part of the educational process.

There are Christian men at state universities and other secular schools.⁵ College ministries are a great place to meet other Christian people. Schools with a Reformed University Fellowship (RUF) are particularly blessed.⁶ There are other campus organizations worth investigating—for example, InterVarsity Christian Fellowship. There are some indications that, post-pandemic, some young people, including men, are turning to trade schools in lieu of university.⁷ Indeed, one trend to consider is the declining number of young men on American college campuses. As of the 2020–21 academic year, females made up 59.5 percent of all college students and men just 40.5 percent.⁸

As I have already suggested, there is a natural tension in attending college with a twofold purpose. Setting priorities mitigates the tension. In 2026, young women face pressure to get on the career ladder and postpone finding a husband, marrying, and starting a family. There is nothing wrong with a career, but the idea that one can “have it all” and “do it all” simultaneously is false. One thing will come before the other. Family is a more important priority than career. Few people look back over their lives and wish they had spent more time in the office or at the job.

As one who is on the other side of the career ladder, I can say that as much as I enjoyed aspects of having a professional career (e.g., ministering the Word, serving students and others), I am deeply grateful that the Lord gave me a wife and children. These are more precious to me than all the books, articles, conferences, deadlines, and professional accomplishments. To tell the truth, I started working before I turned fifteen and worked full- and part-time through university. After a couple of years of full-time work, I saw the future, and it was lonely. When we met, my future wife was on the career track. She was a brilliant student (much better than I), but as we dated, she began to reconsider her future. She could have had a very successful professional career in a competitive, high-pressure field, but she gave it up to become a math teacher, a job she worked while I was in seminary. As she worked full-time, she realized that was not how she wanted to spend her life. She chose to stay home, and in time, we started a family. After the children left the house, she did go back to work, but she has never regretted prioritizing family over career.

In short, finding a husband is a matter of prayer, but it is also a matter of being proactive. It is not something to be put off to a later time, after you have achieved your personal and professional goals. If you make that choice, you will also have chosen to make finding a mate more challenging.

Notes

1. In May 1559, Calvin wrote to Sir William Cecil, advisor to Queen Elizabeth II: “Two years ago, John Knox in a private conversation, asked my opinion respecting female government. I frankly answered that because it was a deviation from the primitive and established order of nature, it ought to be held as a judgment on man for his dereliction of his rights just like slavery—that nevertheless certain women had sometimes been so gifted that the singular blessing of God was conspicuous in them, and made it manifest that they had been raised up by the providence of God, either because he willed by such examples to condemn the supineness of men, or thus show more distinctly his own glory. I here instanced Huldah and Deborah. I added to the same effect that God promised by the mouth of Isaiah that queens should be the nursing mothers of the church, which clearly distinguished such persons from private women. Finally I added in conclusion, that since by custom, common consent, and long-established usage, it had been admitted that kingdoms and principalities might be by hereditary right transmitted to women, it did not seem proper to me that this question should be mooted, not only because the thing was odious in itself, but because in my judgment it is not permitted to unsettle governments that have been set up by the peculiar providence of God. Of the book I had not the slightest suspicion, and it had been published a whole year before I was aware of its existence.” He was distancing himself from Knox’s Monstrous Regiment of Women, which quoted Calvin to this effect and greatly offended Elizabeth. Letters of John Calvin, ed. Jules Bonnet (Logos Bible Software, 2009), 4:47.
2. John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Isaiah, trans. William Pringle (Logos Bible Software, 2010), 1:xviii. See also Wulfert de Greef, The Writings of John Calvin, Expanded Edition: An Introductory Guide, trans. Lyle D. Bierma (Westminster John Knox Press, 2008), 86.
3. See R. Scott Clark, “Rescuing Complementarianism,” Heidelblog (April 18, 2022).
4. This is how the ESV translated Genesis 3:16b in 2001. In 2016 the editors revised it to read, “Your desire shall be contrary to your husband, and he shall rule over you.” The text of Genesis 3:16b, as it appears on the ESV website today, reads, “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.” For more on the history of the English translation of Genesis 3:16b, see R. Scott Clark, “A Chronological Comparison Of Some English Translations of Genesis 3:16b,” Heidelblog (September 11, 2016).
5. I met the future Mrs. Clark at a secular university.
6. Reformed University Fellowship, accessed October 15, 2026.
7. American Consortium for Equity in Education, “Trade School Enrollment Surges Post-Pandemic, Outpacing Traditional Universities.” Accessed October 19, 2026.
8. Douglas Belkin, “A Generation of American Men Give Up On College: ‘I Just Feel Lost’,” The Wall Street Journal, September 6, 2021.

©R. Scott Clark. All Rights Reserved.

RESOURCES

• Subscribe To The Heidelblog!
• Download the HeidelApp on Apple App Store or Google Play
• Browse the Heidelshop!
• The Heidelblog Resource Page
• Heidelmedia Resources
• The Ecumenical Creeds
• The Reformed Confessions
• The Heidelberg Catechism
• Remembering the Reformed Confession: Our Theology, Piety, and Practice (Heidelberg Reformation Association, 2026).
• The Heidelberg Catechism: A Historical, Theological, & Pastoral Commentary (Lexham Press, 2025)
• Recovering the Reformed Confession (P&R Publishing, 2008)
• Why I Am A Christian
• What Must A Christian Believe?
• Heidelblog Contributors
• Support Heidelmedia: use the donate button or send a check to

Heidelberg Reformation Association
1637 E. Valley Parkway #391
Escondido CA 92027
USA
The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization

Post authored by:

• R. Scott Clark

  

  R.Scott Clark is the President of the Heidelberg Reformation Association, the author and editor of, and contributor to several books and the author of many articles. He has taught church history and historical theology since 1997 at Westminster Seminary California. He has also taught at Wheaton College, Reformed Theological Seminary, and Concordia University. He has hosted the Heidelblog since 2007.

  More by R. Scott Clark ›