Does attending church threaten a man's masculinity

[Bravus]

I think there's an issue with the way the question is posed: as someone else posted earlier in the thread, there's a difference between having one's masculinity threatened and just simply being bored by something.

I'm with Ed D: one's masculinity is what it is, and external stuff can't (or shouldn't be able to) effect that. But bevin also has some points about competence and frustration and annoyance with the way 'church is done'.

I'm not sure that gender is even the appropriate lens for looking at this problem - and suspect that it's as much a reaction to the existence of 'women's ministries' (and issue we've discussed here before) as an authentic issue.

Making church services more competent and more compelling, with greater life application and more challenge, would benefit everyone, not just men.

As a generalisation, men want to be active and involved, and one of the things some 'contemporary' style church services is doing, ironically, is making church attendance a much more passive experience. The band sings lots of songs and the congregation doesn't sing at all, or only maybe 20%, then there is drama and preaching and offerings and... the main role is to sit there and absorb it. I suspect it's not even so much that this is better adapted to women, but that women are more willing to tolerate it... men tend to vote with their feet.

(the fact that a lot of the songs are pretty content-less and repetitive, and draw strongly on the vocabulary of romantic love from a feminine perspective (to God and Jesus' masculine roles) is likely unhelpful too...)

As I hope I've made clear, fixing church is not about making it more masculine, but about making it more active... and that will help women and youth and kids as well.

[Dr. Shane]

One of my frustrations in being involved in various local churches is having to walk on eggshells. There is no way that we can please everyone. No matter what we do, someone is going to complain. So, often times, the solution is to do nothing. If we do nothing, then there is nothing to complain about.

[bevin]

I agree with Bravus point and details - and Shane is right, it is not solely an SDA problem. Almost all traditional Christian denominations have fallen into this trap.

It starts with a concept of a heirachy, of leaders put there by God and telling the church members what (they claim) God has told them to do.

The advice that "God" is giving these politicians is so blatantly stupid that the thinking members of the congregation reject it.

The leaders can't stand the rejection so they start proclaiming that intelligence and thinking are evil, and that people who are smart and who think are being misled by the devil.

After watching the leadership do stupid things, steal, lie, and after watching the majority of the congregation continue to tolerate this nonsense, EVENTUALLY the men figure out that the whole thing is a waste of time and energy and will never get fixed, and LEAVE.

The women, who have never been enfranchised, and hence don't see themselves as being responsible for or having any control over the mess quietly ignore it and go around it and set up their own areas where they try to be effective.

Curiously enough, these effective areas do NOT have a heirachy, are generally based on NT ideas of supporting each other rather than giving orders, and do not have huge discussions of theology etc.

In short, putting ignorant and illogical people into positions where their stupidity gets published without debate in pulpits, main stream journals, and TV chases men out. Women just ignore them.

Shane wrote: </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

If we do nothing, then there is nothing to complain about

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

In fact that is one of my major complaints about the Nashua SDA Church. I told the pastor the community would be better served if we bulldozed the church and created a basketball court.

/Bevin

[there buster]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

1.On the other hand, the dominant culture, and of course that affects the church, is hostile to masculinity.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

true to my word, I'll pick up where I left off.

The hostility of today's culture to masculinity can be demonstrated in a number of ways. Most of these boiled down to a hypersensitivity to emotions, and emphasis of mercy at the expense of justice, and to the tendency to avoid confrontation with evil if possible.

The O.J. Simpson verdicts are a clear indication of this . The first jury couldn't bring themselves to convict this nice man they saw before the , despite the overwhelming evidence, including DNA , so they found unreasonable doubts. However, the second jury didn't want to see the families of the victims suffer, so they convicted him of wrongful death. Everybody gets something , goes the thinking . This is not unlike the way many mothers settle childhood feuds. But it is not justice.

In the church, we see this over feminization tendency in the lack of church discipline. Time and again, names come up for removal from the church membership list of people who have not attended sometimes for years and years, but we don't want to "hurt their feelings" so we don't act.

Many times I have heard it said that women are more spiritual than men. This is not true. For complex reasons, however, women do seem to be more rouble just the man in general more religious than men in general . And this bears itself out in our religious ceremonies. Most of the portraits of Jesus shall have soft and feminine rather than robust and masculine . I know there are exceptions , but we're talking about our whole atmosphere , and I just wanted to elements . And the fact that the masculine portraits are in fact an exceptional proves the rule .

Scholars recognize that both masculine and feminine characteristics are attributed to god in the Bible . But in our religious services the emphasis is on the famine and traits . In society, we see this acted out in the pacifist of a impulse. sudden we tend to forget that the "prince of peace" also wielded the whip of cords. we ignore or forget that Christ said he came to bring not peace but the sword. the same one who wanted the little children to come to him told Peter , "get the behind me Satan."

in each case that I mentioned , we tend to emphasize the more The feminine characteristic and forget or ignore the more masculine characteristic .

So, from the earliest days of sabbath school, boys are told through means implicit and explicit that their masculine traits are not appropriate for church .

Since these masculine traits are god given, the boys and young men are faced with an impossible dilemma . If they are to come and worship god, they are forbidden to express who got made them to be. Boys and young man cope with this in two different ways . Many of them simply avoid facing the problem. They simply stop coming to church.

Most of the rest sublimate their masculinity into a creepy sort of piety . They never get angry with you. No, no, they claim it's god who gets angry with you . by transforming their own anger into righteous indignation , they find a permissible way to express a lot of their god given male aggression, but at the cost of becoming confused themselves about who god is. eventually, they can no longer tell the difference between personal pique and divine displeasure.

[there buster]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

2.When I do a Men's Retreat, its amazing to watch men responding to messages actually aimed at men, as opposed to "women's retreats" adapted for men.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Typical retreats focus on improving one's prayer life, or getting in the habit of devotional Bible reading, or improving one's marriage. For men, these often end up focusing on what men should be and are not, pressing men to repent of their failures, and so on.

What I do is first go through the absolute biological and psychological differences between men and woment, and show why both are needed. Then, in a series of presentations, I challenge men to beome fully masculine, rather than chide them for not being feminine enough in their habits. I take the Ellen White quote, "The greatest want of the world is men. . ." and show why--although political correctness forces me to say God wants women too-- Ellen White meant exactly what she said in this passage, that men, and only men, can supply this need.

Then I demonstrate how this plays out in practical terms.

"Men who will not be bought or sold." We call people who are bought and sold "slaves." And the Latin word for "slave" is "addict." Real men are men who challenge and break free from their addictions. I don't tell men they have addictions--the typical approach-- I tell them God wants them to be free!

"men who in their inmost souls are true and honest

men who do not fear to call sin by its right name,"

These are the men who have good boundaries. And men with good boundaries will continually confront evil--and call sin by its right name.

"Men who are as true to duty as the needle to the pole,"

Men who build strong, trusting relationships with God and with others. THis trust, and confrontation (accountability) helps keep them true.

"men who will stand for the right though the heavens fall."

These are the men who have found their true purpose and ture identity-- the fully masculine person God created them to become, and the purpose for which He groomed them.

Freed from addictions, with strong boundaries, building durable and accountable relationships, and fueled with true purpose, these are the men God wants-- God and His people need-- for this and every hour. And these are the men that we have the opportunity to become.

[Morning Glory]

Ed,

I have heard it said the the "church" has been "feminized" , however, I am at a loss to really understand what is meant by that. I had hoped that your post would explain at least your point of view, but I was disappointed. Just HOW has the church done this and made little boys to feel that their masculinity is not OK? I know, you used a lot of words, but for some reason they didn't answer this question for me.

I am not trying to stir up controversy or start an arguement, but I don't understand what you are trying to say about women being more spiritual than men, but it really isn't true. Women are more "rouble" than men <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/dizzy.gif" alt="" /> .....the dictionary defines rouble as the Battle of Ruble. But, that doesn't help my understanding.

I am most interested in what you meant by your statement about women being more religious than men, and men being more spiritual esp when they discover that something is a lie. What did you mean by that?

I am trying to understand what you are saying here as I think that it will help me to better understand some of my male family members a bit better.

Thank you,

Morning Glory

[there buster]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

. Women are more "rouble" than men .....the dictionary defines rouble as the Battle of Ruble. But, that doesn't help my understanding.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Sorry, that's a bug in my dictation software, which I had used for the first time on that post. I didn't catch that mistake.

I was just drawing a distinction between spiritual (the matters beyond mere science and senses), and religion (the rituals and ceremonies we use to approach God).

****

I just lost most of an hour's work on a post. I don't have the courage to do it again right now.

[Bravus]

Ouch, sorry to hear that, Ed. Just wanted to drop in and say I'm reading this thread and in particular your posts with interest and enjoyment.

[Morning Glory]

I certainly understand the frustration of losing what has taken a lot of time and care to write!!! <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" /> Thank you for taking me seriously. Will just check in from time to time in case you get the energy to rewrite anything......

MG

[there buster]

At the risk of offending political correctness, I 'll continue.

Women and men differ biologically, and therefore psychologically.

From at least adolescence forward, women are creatures of regularity, security, routine. They are the life-bearers, and the rhythms of their bodies affect everything about them.

Boys are aggressive, looking for action and challenges.

These differences start in utero. During gestation, the boy's brain undergoes a testosterone bath, generally the left hemisphere. That hemisphere physically shrinks. This has two primary effects.

1st. Boys are developmentally behind girls at birth, and stay behind until well into their teens or early twenties.

2nd. Boys and girls brains are organized differently. Males have a more discrete, more left/right hemisphere difference in their brains, whereas females store information and process it more generally.

The brain and physical differences continue. For example, my 4YO grandson has just as much testosterone proportionately, as I do (teenage boys are another matter). Testosterone makes men aggressive; discrete brain function makes men more linear and strictly logical in their thinking.

I could go on and on about the male/female differences, because I'm a teacher and student of child development, I find it fascinating.

These brain and hormonal differences make males naturally more aggressive and risk-taking; but their logical brains, if properly trained, give them the ability to calculate those risks.

Women, by comparison, are risk averse, again preferring regularity. One obvious reason is that a break in routine of menstruation can be a signal of trouble. So slow and steady, regular and safe is just fine. Of course, safety and security also are necessary for pregnancy, child bearing and rearing.

Religion thrives on ritual and ceremony--regular and repetitive. So women like religion, it feeds their God-given need for safety and security.

Whereas the Spirit and spirituality are unpredictable. Men are drawn to the challenge and the adventure, but women are a little unsettled.

Churches and church services are religious exercises. They are festivals of ritual and ceremony. So there is a natural feminine bias there to begin with.

Over the years, religious ceremonies have drifted further and further to the feminine, so that we no longer see them as feminine, just as "church."

For example, sermons often remind us of our sins. Women think of this as "reminding." Men think of it as "nagging." In fact, the role of the pastor has become increasingly as the role of church mother--visiting the sick and elderly, comforting, etc. It's not that men don't have a role in these things, but it's a different role.

Devotions are promoted as quiet time, where we sit and engage in introspection. Men need and benefit from introspection as much as women, but the come at it in a different way.

Let me try to draw some contrasts;

Feminine sermon -- showing us where we've failed, telling us how to improve.

Masculine sermon -- challenging us to become what we might be.

Feminine exhortation -- One-way, like a mother instructing her children

Masculine exhortation -- Dialogue, even debate, challenge

Feminine lyric -- "Jesus I am so in love with you."

Masculine lyric -- "Rise up, Oh men of God."

Feminine prayer -- "watch over us and guide us."

Masculine prayer -- "show us the way, give us the strength"

Is this beginning to make sense?

[Morning Glory]

Yes, it is. Another reason why BOTH the feminine and masculine perspecitves are VITAL to us all!! Thank you.

Morning Glory

[Bravus]

Amen: the examples at the end in particular just encapsulate it so well and make it so real.

[Gail]

Thanks for expounding on that, in response to my request, Ed. That was worth it!

Is there more?

[there buster]

Yes, but not tonight. I've got an early morning with the grandkids tomorrow.

[darlene]

Ed...what do you think of the Wild at Heart series by John Eldridge? I think he is basically saying what you are saying. I just happened to watch the first in the series today. Men's Ministries comes under my Family Ministries Dept. and our coordinator, Greg Wellman, used it in a workshop at our recent camp meeting. A band of brothers whose make-up is basically masculine or wild at heart.

[Aliensanctuary]

ps.

What did Jesus do to attract the sometimes huge crowds following him?

Would there have been crowds if he did not heal people?

Did he stand up in the synagogues and preach sermons every Sabbath?

Did his best teaching occur one-on-one or during his hillside or countryside meetings?

Are we even supposed to attend weekly church services, parked in the pews, dressed in our best, expecting to be entertained?

Is church attendance the main mission of our religion?

Is it not the mission of pastors to train members of his congregation to share the good news with others so that these others would want to join the Kingdom of God, also?

I don't think Jesus' mission was to get people to attend church, but rather, to reach out to others in a way that would awaken faith, hope, and love in those whose paths he crossed. This, I believe, should be our mission, too.

I don't believe our churches will ever be fixed until after they're outlawed. It's the underground church with no name that will triumph. There would likely be few martyrs in today's churches, but in an outlaw church only those willing to die for their faith will attend.

[bevin]

What evidence is there that women prefer regularity more than men do?

• Who has the larger wardrobe?
• Who reorganizes the furniture?
• Who messes with their hair style and color?
• Who chooses the wider variety of food?
• Who talks about the wider variety of topics?
• Who likes to look at the most things in stores?
• ...

Who created these regular and repetitive church services? Not women - they were sitting in the back and told to shut up and listen, and were (and still are) given practically no say in what happens.

Who are the 'linear processors' who are 'developmentally behind' and who have trouble processing several things at once?

Who creates monastries and armies with strict rules for what they can do? Who likes to stand around in neatly spaced formations and walk in step down the street?

Who, when playing a board game like 'Life' insists on following the rules, rather than having fun with the other players?

Don't blame the women for the mess male leadership has made of the Christian church.

/Bevin

[there buster]

I anticipated the politically correct critique.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

# Who has the larger wardrobe?

# Who reorganizes the furniture?

# Who messes with their hair style and color?

# Who chooses the wider variety of food?

# Who talks about the wider variety of topics?

# Who likes to look at the most things in stores?

# ...

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Wardrobe? generally women

furniture? ditto

hair style and color? women, but men spend a great deal of money on keeping or regrowing hair, and for toupees, which are quite expensive. And "Just for Men" hair coloring must make some money. I'd say hair is a draw.

wider variety of food? In my experience, that has little or no gender link.

wider variety of topics? The men I know far outstrip the women on this one.

who likes to look at the most things in stores? In clothing stores, women. In electronics stores, men.

Actually, your whole list simply demonstrates there are in fact differences.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Who are the 'linear processors' who are 'developmentally behind' and who have trouble processing several things at once?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Non-sequitur. I, and my son, and a number of men I know are quite capable of juggling multiple tasks at once. We just tend to focus on different tasks.

Besides, the brain research is really overwhelming on this one. In fact, in this whole area, the research to support my position keeps piling up. And this in spite of the fact that these days research has been so politicized many of these outcomes are virtually forbidden because of funding being funneled into more popular areas. Even Time and Newsweek have featured articles on these differences. The Harvard faculty may have banished Lawrence Summers, but the data just keeps rolling in. And in more than one case, researchers started out expecting to prove the opposite.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Who creates monastries and armies with strict rules for what they can do?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

I've worked with hundreds of families, and this one is no contest. When it comes to rules and controlling others' behavior, women win hands down. In fact, convents are every bit as strict as any monastery. Not only that, but the heyday of cloistered life was also the height of Marian worship. You could look it up. Moms are much more likely to be detail oriented and controlling. Dads are much more likely to give freedom. This one isn't even close.

As far as marching, I'm not certain anyone likes that sort of thing, but I've seen mothers drill children with every bit as much precision.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Who, when playing a board game like 'Life' insists on following the rules, rather than having fun with the other players?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

I have two comments about that. 1. The female tendency toward mercy means they don't want anyone to lose, so they often bend the rules to get their desired outcome. 2. Under the right circumstances, women can be more ruthlessly competitive than men. Not until I had teenage daughters, and saw them interact with other young women their age did I realize what cutthroat competition could be. It's just that they smile when they do it.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Don't blame the women for the mess male leadership has made of the Christian church.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

I haven't blamed anyone. You're the first one to raise that issue. In fact, it seems many of your posts are concerned with blame.

I haven't assigned responsibility at all, simply described what has happened.

In fact, I would make two points. ONe, agreeing with another poster, we need both male and female. The two are different, but complementary.

Two, both sexes have contributed to this situation, for different reasons.

I have two daughters, both as strong and independent minded as any left-wing feminist would desire. In fact, they're so independent, they didn't need the approval of their feminist professors at the colleges they attended.

My older daughter has a degree in psychology. She is nobody's rubber stamp, and she has done some excellent work in the area of mother/child and father/child bonding. It's amazing stuff. But she would be, if anything, more outspoken on these matters than I. She has as much initiative as anyone, having ascended into management rapidly where she works (she's 26, and has been in management for 3 years, owns her own condo). But she recognizes these desires for regularity, and sees just how much they contrast with her brother, brother-in-law, and fiance.

The evidence is everywhere for the seeing eye.

[there buster]

I liked "Wild at Heart," and Eldridge and I have a lot in common. His emphasis on sort of boot camp experiences strikes me as less than universal. There are men whose adventures are in the mind, theoretical physics, mathematics, literature, you name it. So in that sense I think it's a little narrow.

I never finished "Wild at Heart," and have spoken to several other men who had the same experience. Obviously, this doesn't mean he hasn't made a great contribution, just that it doesn't speak to everybody. That's not a criticism at all. After all, we have four Gospels.

Eldridge's strength is that he lives what he believes, and challenges others to do the same. It's very difficult for men to be men in the organized SDA church, because the feminized structure rejects masculine behavior.

Several years ago, as platform elder at a very dysfunctional church, I was called on to have the pastoral prayer. I prefaced my prayer by saying, "I didn't feel like coming to church this morning. I was quite discouraged. But I realized that it was OK to tell God I was discouraged, and that I was glad I belonged to a church where we could come when we were discouraged. My prayer thanked God for such a church.

Well, several men came up to me afterwards and thanked me for my statement and my prayer. But a few of the leaders decided that such discouraging words were inappropriate for an elder to speak, and I was banned from the platform. It didn't make me angry, it just confirmed my decision to leave and plant a church where such things could be said.

Men need and want to be challenged, to be given something to aspire to. And women want such men. But our churches don't.

[cricket]

To no one in particular: sometimes the term "politically correct" carries the connotation that "political correctness" is morally wrong. This is not always the case, and quite often the reverse is actually true.

Each of us has different life experiences. To speak in generalities about one sex or another reflects only the speaker's experiences--not necessarily the combined life experiences of the total human population.

As evidenced by the preceding posts, the life experiences and the conclusions drawn from such life experiences are varied--just as each individual is varied one from another.

[David Koot]

Interesting thread to follow. My observation over a period of some years, has been that many SDA churches are matriarchal. Men may hold formal office, but the churches are still matriarchal, Even in larger churches where there is not a formal matriarch or patriarch, women seem to have the dominating influence, regardless of whether or not they hold office. That is not always true, but more often than not seems to be true.

[bevin]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

I anticipated the politically correct critique.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

As Cricket says, politically correct does not mean wrong.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

I'd say hair is a draw.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Which provides great insight on what you consider a draw

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

I, and my son, and a number of men I know are quite capable of juggling multiple tasks at once. We just tend to focus on different tasks

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

undercutting your argument that women = pleasant repetition

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

In fact, convents are every bit as strict as any monastery

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

undercutting your argument that women = pleasant repetition

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

The female tendency toward mercy means they don't want anyone to lose, so they often bend the rules to get their desired outcome

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Maybe they just don't feel as bound by the rules that came in the box? They are less into mindless repetition than men are...

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Under the right circumstances, women can be more ruthlessly competitive than men

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

undercutting your argument that women = pleasant repetition

In short, your own reply to my inflammatory post weakens your underlying hypothesis that the changes in the church towards repetition and pleasantness is a feminisation.

It isn't. It is an anti-intelligence anti-thinking heirachy-preserving drive by men.

/Bevin

[bevin]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Well, several men came up to me afterwards and thanked me for my statement and my prayer. But a few of the leaders decided that such discouraging words were inappropriate for an elder to speak, and I was banned from the platform

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

and how many of these leaders were women?

/Bevin

[there buster]

Not to Gail, it was just my response to her that I edited.

Agree, disagree, make your own case separately. This is my field, where my graduate work was done, where I have labored and learned for forty years. These things have a proven provenance and track record. I'm not going to defend them against uninformed sniping.

The evidence is everywhere for the seeing eye.

I've put bevin on ignore so that the conversation can continue with a minimum of white noise.

[bevin]

So Ed's own examples discredit the idea that repetition and love are female and more off-putting to males than to females.

Of course there are other people who are also pushing

this idea

Why Men Hate Going To Church

But there are other ideas

Part of the answer will be found by answering the question is "when did the male flight begin and where have they gone"?

My personal reason - I can't think of a good reason to waste a perfectly wonderful morning sitting around doing nothing and being lectured (not debated) by people who are ignorant about topics that are irrelevant.

/Bevin