Not that feminisation of the church again, don't they know we're educated civilised liberal western christians?

Thanks to Toni I have encountered the phenomon of the Godmen that has been stirring up Christian cyberspace (I'm always late to the party!).  Fernando has done an excellent job (as ever) of pulling the threads together, (including media interest from the LA Times, amongst others) and offering his own insightful comments... I suggest as a balance to the media representation and cries of maturity that readers check out the Godmen blog, whose post in response to the LA Times article seems well, quite mature...

My instant reaction to this sort of subject  is this is just men being, well, immature, beating their chests and playing at some sort of uber machismo misogny... how much of that reaction I wonder is based on my western liberal educated perspective which has drummned into me ever since i was born that anything which is male dominated is bad because when men gather as men history has shown they cook up ways of surpressing women and therefore should be avoided at all costs...

I mean is this just me?  Am I the only conflicted male out there who almost feels I need to rush out a condemnation of groups of this nature (or at least ironic sarcastic disdain) if only to try and prove I am not that sort of surpressing male who wants to do that sort of male thing - excluding women is an age all precursor to running amok, right...?

Then again I am all too aware that church is a very passive environment  - that i'd have a far more spiritually dynamic time climbing a mountain and revelling with God in the beauty of that view as the sweat dries on my face - even as I write that and I feel a longing swell in me, something that says yes there is part of me that responds to the dynamic of action, adventure, of the outdoors, of doing something that makes me sweat and my muscles ache... I'm not trying to claim mountain walking or wilderness viewing as exclusive male preserves, merely saying that I recognise that I am wired in certain ways which may or maynot be gender related...

In a church dynamic there is a certain way of behaving and a certain style - people (that's men and women) raise their eyebrows about the oft quoted thought that men don't like singing love songs to Jesus - after all men happily sing with other men at rock concerts or sports games, right...  Yes absolutely right and I don't want to turn church into a sports event or a rock concert but I do want to sing more than juist love songs to Jesus about how beautiful he is just as I want to to tell my wife more than she is beautiful and I love her or here her tell me how much she loves me for what I do for her as well as how good I look...

I wonder how women feel about this - when I posted some hotly debated  thoughts on why men don't go to church one of the significant reactions, it seemed to me, was fear - that this is the pre-cursor to male oppression, men being masculine causes significant disquiet - understandable I think when you look at the history of male supression of women in and outside of church - but I think fear is not a good enough reason to not think through why groups like Godmen appear...

Our western intellectual mindset may dislike/fear such overt male displays, we have been c0nditioned to do so, but I do not think we should create bogeymen to scare us with 'be male in this way today and you will surpress women tomorrow.'  Nor do I think should we just write this off with a well this is just men who have read 'wild at heart' and are now playing tarzan... as if that helps us by creating yet another male/female charicature...

I do feel terms like feminisation of the church are unhelpful, they provoke conflict, polarity and really allow us to duck the issue... the problem is not some feminisation agenda and the solution is not some return to a male dominated subservient female environment - as if anti-feminisation would or could indeed be the solution - no thanks - I like women and I like women in the church, I don't want less of them, I want more of them, living and expressing their faith to the fulness of their calling and abilities...

However, what if wild at heart, Godmen, et al are a reaction to something of the soul rather than of the rational interlect?  Maybe yes it is an overreaction in some cases/some people but in most cases it is not so much about anti-female or pro-male hiearchy/dominance but some desire on the behalf of men to express their faith as men?  We want men to follow Christ and I for one applaud anything that helps men connect with God... it will not work I am sure for all men but for some it might well be the dynamic they need.  Of course there is danger that some men might trip over learning maturity but then again there is a danger with doing nothing, some christian men I know are so wet that you could tumble dry them for a year and they'd still come out dripping...

I should know as I have lived at both these extremes meekness with  passive anger is just as bad as over dominant supression - in fact my desire to avoid being passive christian male and escaping the life I saw male model figures lead led me to making a vow that shaped my whole sexuality, character and nature... not good!

I would suggest then that something that is helpful in men exploring their masculinity rather than expressing one stereotype or another (the christian nice guy vs the christian authority leader man) is something that should be encouraged... if that involves men gathering as men then so be it, even if they do swear a few times and play loud music... if that helps make them better followers of Christ and therefore better men as a result.

I said in this post on my telling/interpretation of the good news/gospel story that I think the story is about God continuing the creation project and restoring us to full humanity - such a tale of restoration for me as meant me learning something of dying to myself , as a husband I have found it supremely challenging to love Debs in a way that is about giving rather than getting - it means that I cannot do what I want when I want but it also means learning to become emotionally aware, able to express my feelings and struggles not just with her but with my faith community...

So whilst we are consigning stereotypes to the dustbin of history may I also make a plea for the lone christian self sufficient silent type to go in there as well - I have gained nothing from not being honest and open with people about my struggles, sins, dreams and triumphants and so much from doing so...

Enough of my ramblings...what do you think?

Comments

[Makeesha]

hmmm...I think that Christianity needs to regain its sense of adventure and emerge organically from within a cultural construct for the benefit of all Christians, male and female alike.

If chest beating and cussing is the result of an organic body of Jesus followers coming together, then so be it I guess.

I always feel like things like GodMen are contrived and artificial ways of sticking it to whatever institution one reports to be "less than ideal" instead of being natural, holistic and organic.

I have no problem with men being stereotypically "manly" if that's what tickles their fancy. If acting like a neandrathal happens to bond men together so that they can better advance God's kingdom on earth then who am I to argue? (I do doubt that kingdom advancing is the result of that in and of itself though - just for the record)

I just have a problem when it's presented as some sort of godly ideal that produces no fruit. I also do not appreciate things like GodMen because they seem to condescend to any man who doesn't want to perpetuate the american stereotypical caricature of the "manly man".

[molly]

I wonder if it's not so much feminine/masculine issues, but is rather that the church as a whole has completely lost touch...it's a whole other world from the rest of the world, but not in a good way...and consider, if the leadership is a heirarchy-type, and there's only room for 3 strong male leaders to be "on staff," then do you REALLY think that they are going to do anything to promote MORE strong male leaders, to promote MORE strong men (who would then be threats to their position )?

I guess I react a little bit to the "feminization" word because I'm feminine, but I hate what's going on too. It does a big fat NOTHING for me, that's for sure, and I look in my Bible and see so many things being done that are in direct opposition to what I see in there (not necessarily outward things, but the spirit in which things are done)...

So, in my eyes, it's NOT "feminine," it's some other animal entirely...some weird creepy thing. I don't really know what. But I admit to thinking that the feminine/masculine stuff throws us off it's scent and gets us focusing on the periphery of the actual problem.

I agree--the church should be a place where we can be HEALTHY men and women...that it is not friendly to men is a big hug warning sign. But as for saying the problem is feminization...that's where I differ. I wonder if one of the big gaping holes is in our lack of comprehending the incarnational-ness of the gospel---that it comes into real time, into real people, men and women...we have it in such a dichotomy, you know, the "spiritual realm" and then us earthlings. Whereas the incarnationality (new word) of it all DEMANDS that you be a man, that you be what you are, but be filled with the Life of Another in so doing. When we divorce Christianity from the earthiness of incarnationality, we all lose...men, women, and children...

And now, I'm going to bring this big ramble to a close...

:)

[Paul]

thanks Mak... did my sarcasm metre twitch btw when reading your comments?

I think its hard with groups like Godmen - i mean i doubt i'd join but then again I don't feel that i should join to feel like a man. Of course i also haven't spent a lot of time with them to really make a judgement call on whether they will make fine fruits of men or not...

I guess I just resent my own liberal mindset that wants to gun these guys down instead of saying great, well done you for trying to address a gap that you may feel some men feel and can find healthy expression...

maybe this is one form of organic expression (amongst many) and the chest beating is just our liberal fears spilling out???

From their blog it sounds like the cussing was much more understated, wusses! lol

[Paul]

Molls - I agree with you, I don't think it's feminisation of the church that is the problem - as i said on Fernado's blog I don't find it a helpful (it is far too loaded)and when women outnumber male church goers then it's not some sinister plot it's just a simple % - if the stats are to believed then it's somewhere between 2:1 and 3:1 so of course it's gonna feel like there are more women around...

I think we can also point to what I call 'my uncle Jack' syndrome - which is whenever a health person says don't smoke it causes cancer, then someone else says well my uncle Jack spoked 100 a day and he lived to be 97... so we read in our own church experience i.e. lots of men in my church or my church has real strong male leadership as if our church was the norm... it might well be, I have no idea on that front...

Personally I think men have been offered to unhealthy alternatives - one where they have to be some semi-divine authority figure and the other where they have to be nice boys like Jesus (and yes that is a generalisation)...

I wonder rather than either of these polar alternatives (or indeed any position in between) whethere there is not something to think about what lies above that line in terms of the sweep of God's will/wish for male and female... what is godly masculinity and femininity? God created both male and female and both are good so what is healthy expressions and what are unhelpful ones..?

[molly]

To be way too simplistic in answering the entire problem (lol), I think it's the way we "do church" itself that's the problem.

There's no adventure, no mystery, no demanding exploration needed. Just come, sit, and go. Whoopteedooda...

In that sense, it's not even about healthy masculinity or femininity, though I think that's in there somewhere...but in a bigger sense, it's about human beings just wanting something REAL.

[Makeesha]

I wasn't really being sarcastic - I actually DO think that if it's organic and fruitful then who am I to say it's weird? Although, I do think it's weird hehe....but I recognize that it's mostly my sensibilities talking.

I think country western style worship music and a pastor dressed like a cowboy is weird too...but again, that's only because I'm an urbanite.

And I agree with molly, it's not a gender issue anyway. So again, if men want to get together and act like Neanderthals then good for them - just don't suggest that you all are real men and every other man is a wuss and that chest beating and stereotypical caricatures is representative of a godly man....as long as they're not doing that then I don't really care. However, the quotes I've seen seem to indicate they are doing a bit of that.

[makeesha]

I'm not sure I see the need to focus on "godly masculinity" or "godly femininity". I would rather focus on godly humanity and godly relationships and how to be a godly person within a relationship (godly wife, godly husband, godly friend, godly boss) rather than focus on being a godly man or woman.

I honestly am not sure there is much Biblical guidance in a redeemed/New Covenant context in how to be a godly man/woman that is separate from being a godly human.

[Helen]

Paul, I think you're extremely generous to say "I don't think this would work for me but maybe it works for them".

That's one of the things I like about you!

[Paul]

Yes Molls, I think we have lost the sweep of the narrative, the excitemente of the epic and the adventure we are meant to be on - or maybe we just want to be entertained, like watching it on the cinema rather than living it out in reality?

[Paul]

Mak, sorry for the faulty sarcasm detector, must get that darned thing looked at - not been the same since i soaked it with eggnog latte!

I agree with you that it does weird out my sensibilities but then again i probably do/say a lot of things that have the same effect on folks :)

I think you are right in the sweep of godly humanity but I wonder whether we can't ignore gender completely - i mean on the one hand i'd like too but on the other i think there is something we would loose if we did...

but maybe i'm just thinking too much and chest beating too little, lol

[Paul]

Thank you Helen, much appreciated... i'm not sure i can say it any other way, have got far too much baggage of my own to start shooting down other people just cos they do things differently to what I would...

[molly]

On focusing on "godly masculinity," and "godly femininity," I've been going through the Scriptures trying to find sharp distinctions between the two genders, and there really are only very few. Women give birth and nurse babies as a female-only activity, and men go to war as a male-only (99.9% of the time, anyways) activity. Apart from that, there are very few "distinctions," in that sense.

Btw, I agree with Helen. :)

[Paul]

Thanks Molls... interesting thought too, makes me wonder why God bothered to make 2 sexes then?? Any thoughts anyone?

[molly]

My husband says the same thing. I confess to having a hard time not wincing when he says it, though I try, but after living through patriarchy, I'm just a little sensitive, I think... He says what you just did, but what I hear is, "why would God bother to make 2 sexes if one wasn't supposed to be in charge of the other one."

So I'm not sure I'm really at a place to even ask that question yet and really really really seek to give it an honest answer, you know? I've got some raw spots that need covered over by skin first, so that I don't jump everytime someone's finger comes close.

[molly]

(The other difficult thing, btw, in going through the Scriptures is that it is a patriarchal society, as were most. Previously, I judged that as being God's intention, not considering that the patriarchal nature of it all was simply a product of the curse...just as sin runs through the text, and just as I do not therefore consider sin to be God's divine intent, but rather a thing that is there, a fact that infiltrates everything humanity touches. A sad consequence of the fall is what sin is, and I think men ruling women is the same way.

So, in Scripture, we do not see women taking primary seats in government, at least not very often. Yet, does that prove that women shouldn't and/or can't, or does that simply prove the existance of male-rule as promised in the Fall in Gen. 3.

Wisdom, personified as a woman, stands in the city gates (government) and instructs men. How can God personify Wisdom as a woman if in so doing, He breaks His own rules about female subjection, if He breaks His own plan for women to have nothing to do with governing affairs?

To me, the answer is that it's not breaking God's rules because those rules aren't Gods. Those are effects of patriarchy, plain and simple.

So, all that to say that it's hard to go through the Scriptures to find distinctions, because one isn't entirely sure what are real distinctions and what are simply products of patriarchy.

*shrugs and grins*

[Paul]

Molls, i'm gonna toss your comment about hearing that differene = domination of one over the other into a post for the front of this place, thank you for inspiring as ever...

As for your 2nd comment, I think it is interesting that patriachy was certainly a strong form of society for OT and NT - one thing that I find fascinating is that conservatives should be applauded for trying to keep the tradions of the bible alive, unfortuantly in doing so we swallowed a lot of the context as well rather than rethinking the principles for today... which is the opposite of liberals who were very contextual to modernity, great, but had to discount a lot of what happened as ancient context... so can we reinterpret the will/wish of God without falling into either of these traps and/or reacting against one to push us the other way?

I think the feminist movement has been an awesome external critique for the church and we have a lot to learn about rebalancing men and women as being of equal worth and not having gender roles forced on them - but aware of the personal context/affect of gender as well...

well that's my thought, any others?

[Makeesha]

molly - I hear ya. I think the thing I like to remember is what Bell said in Velvet Elvis, to paraphrase, that the church universal has always wrestled with theology and practical application of the words of God, and they have done it together and as best as they could - WITHIN THEIR CULTURAL CONTEXT.

We need to do the same. Not isolated "oh I think this verse means xyz to me today" but communal wrestling always keeping in mind the character of God and ontology of the individual within the metanarrative as we examine our cultural context.

Jesus was a revolutionary in a myriad of ways, but at the same time, he was functioning within a certain cultural context and had to simultaneously contend and link arms with it. That's what we do today...and it's not supposed to be easy :)

I don't have a problem with chest pounding lumberjack patriarchists as long as they recognize that we are all just doing the best we can while seeing through a lens dimly. What I generally find however, is that fundamentalists by definition do not extend those kinds of graces to others because it would mean they are no longer actually fundamentalist. When you cease being pragmatic about everything, you are no longer a pragmatist and fundamentalists pride themselves in their pragmatic view of "truth".

[Tim]

Do you think we're still missing the point though with any agenda we try to set out?

Paul says it best in Galatians 3:28 - "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" - and he's one of those big scary patriarchal figures of the bible (women, get your heads covered now!).

So before we start bitching with all the ‘he says she says’ divisionism rhetoric, how about we start from a point, as Paul (of his Mayerness) says above of love and tolerance. If I want to pound my chest as a display of manliness, then I can – but I can’t tell anyone else that this is the be-all and end-all of Godly interaction. How about a bit of trust amongst the community of believers – (1 Corinthians 8, 1 Corinthians 10 23:33 other places Paul talks about being true to our conscience)? We need to remember we are all responsible as MATURE Christians before God for ourselves – nobody else.

Sorry, that's messing a few ideas and concepts that are probably mutually exclusive, but it seems to make sense to me.

[molly]

Coming from the fundamentalist world, no, you can't trust the broader community (don't you know that's why we have pastors?), and yes, you DO need to tell them that your way is the be-all, end-all .

*rolling laughing sigh*

Good thoughts, both of you--thanks. :)

[Paul]

I think you are right Mak that we should look at this within a context... i'd rather have people try and interact their faith with their life, even if it's messy and not my style than to keep the 2 things seperate, disconnected etc...

As for fundamentalists, having been one (still am one, lol?) i think it is a process, confrontation doesn't work well so maybe i need to take a leaf from Jesus parable approach and try somethings that allow different perceptions of 'the truth' to sneak in round the back?

[Paul]

Thanks Tim, love your thought mashing, always good stuff... I agree with you about taking responsibility for ourselves and owning our own stuff and maybe trying to be generous and gracious towards others, whether chest beaters or fundies or worsr chest beating fundies, lol. Of course that is difficult, which is where I came in on this post as my own sensibilities are offended and I feel the need for disdain, which is not that helpful really as it sets me up as someone better rather than someone different...

I think the danger though of what you suggest for me is some form of glorious isolationism where i just care about me - i think there needs to be some form of involvement with others which i guess for me would be going over to Godmen blog and engaging them there - that is quite a radical idea, actually going and hanging out in a different community and engaging in conversation, maybe sharing my reactions and finding out more about their hopes, dreams etc...

But heh that all takes time so maybe i shouldn't say anything negative about them if i am not prepared to put in the effort - a standard i guess i ask people to apply to the emerging church so should try and live by it myself...

[Paul]

Molls, you give fundamentalists a good name :)