I can’t decide if I want to strangle Mark Driscoll or cheer him on. He has a good point about men in the church – they aren’t really men (generally speaking). I’ve touched on this topic here (briefly). In a nutshell, it seems like this country doesn’t produce honest to goodness men anymore. And that’s very evident in the church. The church is very feminized, and that could stand to change. (One of the reasons, I believe, that I’m still single is that I can’t find a “man” who loves God and is single.)
What I don’t agree with Driscoll on is his extremist, all or nothing, without men we are nothing stance. It sounds like he’s trying to go the opposite of a feminized church to an entirely masculine church. Both are wrong. The church is made up of both men and women and should be reflective of that. I also don’t agree with the condescending manner he speaks…
“60% of Christians are chicks. And the 40% that are dudes are still sort of…chicks.”
How respectful. It’s not that I don’t think he has a point, because I know he does. It’s just that he goes about it in such an offensive way. I would never attend this man’s church even if over half of his church is made up of single men, because I know that I would have no value there.
I hate when people say “make babies” instead of “have children.” He’s right – we do need to reach young men better. However, once that young man is married, if his wife doesn’t like the church they’re at, there will be strife until he surrendurs. I’m not trying to sound feminist, but it’s the truth. Women who aren’t being spiritually fed begin to act out and be manipulative.
Oh yeah Edge. Those darned women and their darned manipulative ways. All thinkin’ for themselves and crap. Wantin’ stuff their way. Who the heck do they think they are, anyway? Men?
Why won’t they just shut up and do what they’re told?!??!
Be-atches.
Ww should just teach men to carry clubs and drag their women around by the hair. I can’t think of anything more manly. ahem.
Haven’t watched the video, but I have heard this type of stuff before. The reason men don’t find relevancy in church is because they have been taught that it’s not masculine by society, not because the women in church have ruined it for them.
He’s looking at the problem from the wrong end of things.
“because they have been taught that it’s not masculine by society”
How? It what ways? Please provide some examples to substantiate that interesting thought.
Oh, that shameless Kate!
Why, just last night, she had the sheer audacity to walk over to the computer and sit down in my chair! It was 6:05 and I had just told her fifteen minutes before that I wanted my dinner on the table at 6 sharp. Can you believe that????
Tell you what I did about THAT! First I made her stand up and take off those hussy shoes, then I slapped her b*tch a$$ back in the kitchen to make me some pie, where she belongs!
I caught her a few days ago makin’ eyes at that shameless neighbor of ours, Grace. Grace is getting divorced (!) and that little cupcake is over there living by herself -WITHOUT A MAN! Trollop!
I think Kate’s secretly having unnatural feelings about Grace. Well I’m not having any of that homo lizzie stuff in MY house, I’ll tell ya’. That crap will lead to all sorts of devilish crap.
First thing y’know, they’ll be wantin’ to be politicians, in charge of stuff. Next they’ll be gettin’ all high and mighty, wantin’ to be Speaker of the House, and then they’ll be one running for frickin’ PRESIDENT! Seriously, could you imagine the gall????
Darned Jezebels. Shoulda never learnt ‘em to read or vote.
Oh, and then they’ll be doin’ all that disgustipatin’ kissin’ in public, too!
eeewwwww.
Stupid wordpress… I just lost this long comment I was writing. *sigh* Okay…here’s round two…
Women who aren’t being spiritually fed begin to act out and be manipulative.
I don’t even know where to begin with this, because it’s wrong on so many levels. First, you’re justifying the behavior. You’re saying that if the husband doesn’t surrender to his wife, then it’s okay for her to “act out” (and that word choice alone bugs me because it’s usually used to describe a child throwing a temper tantrum). It isn’t the husband’s job to surrender to his wife. Yes, the two should submit to each other, but in the end, his choice goes. For a woman to manipulate her husband and make him miserable to get what she wants is so far removed from how it should really be.
Secondly, it is not the husband’s job to spiritually feed his wife. He is the spiritual leader, yes, but just as it isn’t the pastor’s job to feed believers neither is it the husband’s job. We should be feeding ourselves.
Janie – You had way too much fun writing that. Too bad it didn’t make much sense coming from your emotion driven state.
Musicguy,
“specific examples”
I didn’t have in mind any studies.I am just postulating from my own observations and experiences.
The type of man being refferred to in this post is only one type. It alomst seems to be the stereotype of the red-blooded, red-meat eating, assertive, strong leader, master of his own destiny type of man. The conclusion that the church has run these men out is, I think, a faulty one.
I had one other thought about this. If you read through the gospels, you can notice that the women always sought Jesus out. They show up to pour oil on his feet, to touch the hem of his garment, to anoit his body at the tomb, to witness his crucifixion. Whereas many of the men were asked, by Jesus himself, to become followers. He took the initiative to call them out; they didn’t come on their own.
Is that indicative of the nature of Christianity, that women feel more comfortable in seeking God out without being asked? I don’t know. Maybe it’s a stretch. Either way, blaming women, or the men who are already involved in their churches, seems pointless, counterproductive, and sure to drive out one segment of the demographic in favor of the other.
I didn’t want studies- your own observations will be dandy.
It’s all too easy for us (myself included) to make a general blanket statement that we FEEL is right without having a single concrete example with which to back it up. That might work for faith in a supreme being, but these things require a bit more than “Because I said/think/feel it is so.”
Or perhaps it is indicative that mainstream Christianity is coming around to the idea that it’s unacceptable for men to put their boots on the necks of women, and the misogynist cavemen of the world are a dying breed, in full retreat and circling the wagons in the evaporating fundamentalist psycho churches.
Call me an optimist.
Look, it’s OK for a man to be Humphrey Bogart, but damn it it’s just as OK for women to be Kate Hepburn.
If a man expects me to be his subservient field lily, he can just shove it. I like men who are man enough to not be threatened by my strength and independence. Men who have to feel like they are the boss because they have the outdoor plumbing aren’t men at all, they’re small minded cowards and you can have ‘em.
They’re not man enough for me.
Musicguy,
example:
I attended a Chrisitan liberal arts university that also had fraternities and sororities. Of course, they didn’t drink, party, or behave in hooligan fashion. *wink wink*
The three men’s groups were broken down into specific stereotypes. The roughest, partying, weren’t-sure-why-exactly-they-chose-to-come-to-a-christian-school group would have hog-tied any member who actually chose, of their own free will, to take Chrsitianity seriously. The only exception being that they were trying to score with a girl. Then playing the church card was OK.
That’s only one example.
I have more, but how long do you want it to be?
Janiebelle,
oops…my computer cut off my comment while I was typing
Hehe. That’s not a good omen, Terri. I so hate when that happens.
Terri- is that a perception or a fact?
Musicguy,
Well of course all my perceptions are facts!
I have lots of observations in my years as a Christian at a Christian University, within certain denominations, and just generally interacting with people. My main point is only that the “type” of men that people like Mark Driscoll are trying to attract may have many other factors keeping them from church. It is too easy to say that women in church have somehow scared them off.
Janiebelle,
You’re not positing some supernatural computer voodooo is responsible?
Actually, I think it’s IE. I downloaded Firefox, but keep forgetting to switch browsers when I go online.
Trust me terri, i’m not trying to defend Driscoll. The man is clueless as far as I’m concerned. My point is that we get jsut as bad as him when we throw out our perceptions as fact.
As for the feminization problem- I think we should blame soybeans:
Soy is feminizing, and commonly leads to a decrease in the size of the penis, sexual confusion and homosexuality. That’s why most of the medical (not socio-spiritual) blame for today’s rise in homosexuality must fall upon the rise in soy formula and other soy products.
Read the whole twisted mess here:
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53327
I heard somewhere that producing soybeans contributes to global warming. seriously.
Yeah, anything to take the focus away from the gas guzzling SUVs and the like. I think that claim goes down the toilet with the feminization nonsense.