|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: .....because the church needs more misogyny.
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Is this a joke?
Man tips!
Part of me really hopes it is a joke, even if it's a really bad one.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Well, of course some of the advice for services where you want to enable a contact with visitors after the service is entirely appropriate. Short, relevant sermon, keep the service within the advertised length, use well known and singable carols (or other hymns at other occasions), focus on the ministry of Christ. Of course, none of those are gender specific.
The rest of the suggestions? Bin them.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Is this a joke?
Man tips!
Part of me really hopes it is a joke, even if it's a really bad one.
Seems to me entirely good advice. This is a valid and serious issue. The accusation of mysogyny is entirely misplaced.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Humble Servant
Shipmate
# 18391
|
Posted
Hmm, macho Jesus. I wonder if there are any contradictions there...
quote:
Finally, Jesus said to his disciples: “I will make you fishers of men.”
Not in my translation. He said something about catching people if I recall...
Posts: 241 | Registered: Apr 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
This is a valid and serious issue. The accusation of mysogyny is entirely misplaced.
Yes, I have to agree. The whole point is to attract men specifically, not women and children (who are already there in droves), as permanent churchgoers.
Most parents labor under the mistaken notion that other people are as interested in their children as they are. A Christmas eve service featuring photogenic cherubs will guarantee that first-time male visitors won't return. As will playing a video clip -- the vicar is mistaken in thinking that church should be a multi-media event.
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
Ditch 7 & 8. The events promoted at 6 might be dire too. Otherwise it looks good for any service.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Charles Read
Shipmate
# 3963
|
Posted
The problem with this as with much 'ministry to men' is it runs with a stereotypical view of men and also comes dangerously close to lapsing into patriarchy.
Why not go for the truly Biblical approach which is that the Gospel is for all? So have men and women appear at the front of church leading things and use a variety of images for God - as the Bible does.
The misquote of Jesus is heinous and should not have got past the diocesan editors.
--------------------
"I am a sinful human being - why do you expect me to be consistent?" George Bebawi
"This is just unfocussed wittering." Ian McIntosh
Posts: 701 | From: Norwich | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Read:
The misquote of Jesus is heinous and should not have got past the diocesan editors.
do you mean misquote or partial use of the quote in support of what Jesus didn't mean?
I'd go along with saying "he said men but didn't mean just men" but the quote "Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men" is straight out of the Authorised Version.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
the famous rachel
Shipmate
# 1258
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Read:
The problem with this as with much 'ministry to men' is it runs with a stereotypical view of men and also comes dangerously close to lapsing into patriarchy.
This!
If someone posted an article about attracting young women to a church service which said "Use analogies which involve make up and pretty clothes to capture their attention", many people would be outraged. We should thus be equally outraged, on behalf of men everywhere, at advice that one needs to "Play a video clip from an action film". The article isn't misogynist, but it is sexist, and in places it is men who are the victims of that sexism.
Best wishes,
Rachel.
--------------------
A shrivelled appendix to the body of Christ.
Posts: 912 | From: In the lab. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
I wonder what action films he has in mind? Given the large number of young children at the Christmas Eve service, it would have to be a child-friendly clip from an action film.
Also, wouldn't this be an example of bait and switch? Come to church! We show clips from action films! Er, except that we don't, usually.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Read:
The problem with this as with much 'ministry to men' is it runs with a stereotypical view of men and also comes dangerously close to lapsing into patriarchy.
Why not go for the truly Biblical approach which is that the Gospel is for all?
So don't you want any 'stereotypical' men in the church, then?
The irony is that although we claim that the gospel is 'for all', most churchgoers are women. We complain about patriarchy in the church, but in ordinary mainstream churches only the men at the top of the hierarchy seem to benefit from this. It's rather like polygamy; only the alpha males benefit. Other males are expendable!
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Read:
The problem with this as with much 'ministry to men' is it runs with a stereotypical view of men and also comes dangerously close to lapsing into patriarchy.
Why not go for the truly Biblical approach which is that the Gospel is for all?
So don't you want any 'stereotypical' men in the church, then?
The irony is that although we claim that the gospel is 'for all', most churchgoers are women. We complain about patriarchy in the church, but in ordinary mainstream churches only the men at the top of the hierarchy seem to benefit from this. It's rather like polygamy; only the alpha males benefit. Other males are expendable!
Are you saying alpha males aren't stereotypical males?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Gwai
I think the point is that churches unconsciously do things that only appeal to a particular kind of personality.
Men obviously come in various types, as do women, but most churches clearly do poorly when it comes to attracting men who have a particular understanding of masculinity. (Of course, it could be argued that they find it difficult to deal with broad understandings and experiences of femininity too.)
Whether it's possible for a single church to appeal to the whole range of personality types and understandings of masculinity and femininity is a good question. But the consistently lower numbers of men in church suggests that there is an issue here that seriously needs to be addressed. This vicar may not be addressing it as everyone would choose, but he's trying.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Are you saying alpha males aren't stereotypical males?
Most men aren't alpha males, but it would seem that a great many of them would stereotypically like to be alpha males. In that sense, a church that discourages those inclinations rather than working with them in some way is likely to be at a disadvantage.
It has been said that alpha males are very much underrepresented in church congregations.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by Charles Read:
quote:
The problem with this as with much 'ministry to men' is it runs with a stereotypical view of men and also comes dangerously close to lapsing into patriarchy.
I think it's more than just a stereotype; it's actually in the realm of self parody, even if it be unwitting. Makes for very humorous reading though.
I would also say it doesn't run dangerously close to lapsing into patriarchy; it is patriarchy. We've had almost two thousand years of ministry by men to men. It seems to me most clergy are still male regardless of denomination. Most vestry members, session members, panels, parish councils etc tend to be men. Most of the stuff we sing was written by men and the liturgy tends to be constructed by men. We've made the women do the sowing circles, prayer groups, bun fights and flower arranging. There may be a statistic that suggests that currently more women are actually 'in' church on any given Sunday morning, but as a man who will freely admit that even outside of church I live in a man's world that tends to largely pander to me and my needs, the fact (or otherwise) that there are more women in church doesn't actually threaten my hairy chested arse scratching manliness to the extent that I require a 'special' ministry to me that involves such profundity as Jesus the superhero, movie clips of fight scenes and sermon illustrations with boxing.
I genuinely thought this whole thing was a bit of a wind up, but now I'm wondering if the world and the church is actually in a far worse state than I originally thought. I'm so confused that I will have to build a man cave for myself, grow a beard and swill beer through it while watching Jeremy Clarkson.
[ 02. December 2015, 14:14: Message edited by: fletcher christian ]
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
We've had almost two thousand years of ministry by men to men. It seems to me most clergy are still male regardless of denomination. Most vestry members, session members, panels, parish councils etc tend to be men. Most of the stuff we sing was written by men and the liturgy tends to be constructed by men. We've made the women do the sowing circles, prayer groups, bun fights and flower arranging. There may be a statistic that suggests that currently more women are actually 'in' church on any given Sunday morning, but as a man who will freely admit that even outside of church I live in a man's world that tends to largely pander to me and my needs, the fact (or otherwise) that there are more women in church doesn't actually threaten my hairy chested arse scratching manliness to the extent that I require a 'special' ministry to me that involves such profundity as Jesus the superhero, movie clips of fight scenes and sermon illustrations with boxing.
But if the church didn't have men doing all this stuff in the church it's possible that there'd be even fewer of them turning up. This has been given as a reason as to why women in some churches tolerate a largely (or exclusively) male ordained ministry or theological culture.
As responses on the Ship indicate, one problem with focusing on 'stereotypical' physical aspects of masculinity as the vicar has is that it may alienate the mostly middle class white collar men who attend church these days. That could be counterproductive.
[ 02. December 2015, 14:34: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
This isn't the only place on t'internet that people have been giving this article a kicking. And what do you know, the article has been taken down...
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
I can't access the article (I get "page not found" even when I searched the site for "ten tips for a man friendly")
When I was a kid in TEC only males could do anything active in church - clergy, usher, a few years earlier only men and boys could be in choir. Did a higher proportion of men attend because they had specific place, purpose? Or just because it was socially required to go to church to be thought a good person?
When women became active in those roles, did that affect male interest? If so, why?
Where I live, the switch to lovey-dovey songs lyrics came after the men started staying home Sunday mornings, so I don't know that choice of music/prayers/sermon topics is a cause.
One man friend quietly stopped coming a few months after he quit leading the kids choir; he's formed a kids choir outside the church and throws his energy into that. Another has recently gotten involved in little theater instead of church. A third does volunteer reading books recorded for the blind Sunday mornings, another does trash pickup along a nature trail Sunday mornings, when it's quiet on the trail.
The men I know aren't dropping out to be passive but to be more happily and productively active than they find in church.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
Well, their director of communications is a woman ...
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
There is a distinct trend, observable over many fields and careers over the ages, that lowers the status of any job or calling the moment women predominate in it. Nursing is a good example, or knitting -- there was a time when knitting stockings was solely a male activity, beyond the feeble female intellect.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I think the point is that churches unconsciously do things that only appeal to a particular kind of personality.
Definitely agreed, but I don't think that has much to do with gender. I find whole kinds of ways of doing church very off putting, and I find they make assumptions about me that really bother me, so I get why this is objectionable. But as you will have guessed, I am not male, so I don't think this is a gendered issue.
Men obviously come in various types, as do women, but most churches clearly do poorly when it comes to attracting men who have a particular understanding of masculinity. (Of course, it could be argued that they find it difficult to deal with broad understandings and experiences of femininity too.)
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Whether it's possible for a single church to appeal to the whole range of personality types and understandings of masculinity and femininity is a good question. But the consistently lower numbers of men in church suggests that there is an issue here that seriously needs to be addressed. This vicar may not be addressing it as everyone would choose, but he's trying.
He is trying, and trying is good, but he's making a host of assumptions that I think are likely to make the problem worse. As someone noted in the comments on the response I posted above, it's not at all clear that the more "feminine" theory of church isn't a response to men leaving. (I don't see church as a feminized place at all, but be that as it may.)
Men have been dropping out of the job market too, at least in this country, so I suspect the issue isn't related to men and the church, but more men and society. I think we have been teaching boys and men how to lead, but have not been teaching boys and men how to cope with hard times. Because of patriarchy, we have been teaching girls and women how to cope with hard times. So when things like job loss and other depressing hard things happen, girls and women are less likely to drop out of society.
--------------------
A master of men was the Goodly Fere,
A mate of the wind and sea.
If they think they ha’ slain our Goodly Fere
They are fools eternally.
Posts: 11914 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I can't access the article (I get "page not found" even when I searched the site for "ten tips for a man friendly")
When I was a kid in TEC only males could do anything active in church - clergy, usher, a few years earlier only men and boys could be in choir. Did a higher proportion of men attend because they had specific place, purpose? Or just because it was socially required to go to church to be thought a good person?
When women became active in those roles, did that affect male interest? If so, why?
Where I live, the switch to lovey-dovey songs lyrics came after the men started staying home Sunday mornings, so I don't know that choice of music/prayers/sermon topics is a cause.
One man friend quietly stopped coming a few months after he quit leading the kids choir; he's formed a kids choir outside the church and throws his energy into that. Another has recently gotten involved in little theater instead of church. A third does volunteer reading books recorded for the blind Sunday mornings, another does trash pickup along a nature trail Sunday mornings, when it's quiet on the trail.
The men I know aren't dropping out to be passive but to be more happily and productively active than they find in church.
IIRC it wasn't really talking about those who have dropped out. It was talking about those who never come except when they're dragooned into it at Christmas - and this is the one chance to talk to them.
Many have of course raised the perfectly reasonable point that it's also a chance to talk to all sort of people that only come then, not just men. But I suppose the point needs to be made (as I did on the concurrent Hell thread) that it was written by the "Diocesan Missioner (Unreached Men)."
You could argue about whether a diocese needs such a person. But if you're going to have one, and Oxford has clearly decided that it is, then surely it's to be expected that they write articles focused on reaching unreached men during services?
Whether the content is up to much is a different question admittedly, but I'd reiterate that I think there's something in the diagnosis even if not the remedy (and my experience of the non-churched rather than the unchurched is that some of my acquaintance do think it's "something for women/old ladies/children apart from the man in the dress" (CLEARLY I don't agree with them)) and I think it's good of Oxford to have a go.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
The link does not work.
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
I think it also depends on what you think evangelism is.
We we talking Saddleback or Willow Creek here?
Based on what I picked up in seminary, the Saddelback approach is to use statistical research to figure out a target demographic, build a reasonable scarecrow of a typical member of that demographic, and market to it very aggressively.
Willow Creek, so the story goes, goes door to door talking to people, figuring out what they want, and providing it. I think the emphasis in that case is less on using a simple model as making a mix of things that people say they like.
The two are similar, but I think it's an important nuance.
I think the list is going on a Saddleback model, though I wonder what, if any, actual research went into his list.
I'd also like to see, at least, anecdotal evidence of results before putting weight on or behind any of these "suggestions."
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lowlands_boy:
This isn't the only place on t'internet that people have been giving this article a kicking. And what do you know, the article has been taken down...
Aha, explains why I got a "page not found."
I found it via Google's cache.
Not a bad article. I agree with "use masculine imagery" - not exclusively, but Christmas often seems overly feminine and child oriented in spite of the fact that by far most characters in the story are adult males. Maybe the author should have worded it "recognize the masculinity in the story." It's not all about a sweet Mom and a cute baby.
Similarly with the rest, I don't get the sense he meant "cut out the women" but rather "stop cutting out the men." In announcements be sure to announce "male" interest upcoming events as well as the usual female interest events (the repair a poor person's house work project as well as the pot luck to sign up what dish you'll bring - and don't address either of these specifically to "men" or "women" as if the other gender isn't welcome.)
The point being you have this one Sunday to dangle a few enticing reasons people might want to come back, don't waste that opportunity.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
This response is interesting and quotes each of the suggestions in the original article (in brief) so it can give people an idea of what the original suggested.
The comments are interesting, too.
Brenda's point about the lowering of the status of a job when women come to predominate in it could be read alongside the point in the blog about research showing that when there are women present performing a task, while still in the minority, the situation can be seen as being over-run with women. (I remember some similar research about conversations in mixed groups, comparing comments from participants with actual recordings. Women might contribute only a little, but be perceived as interrupting and talking too much by the men.)
What about emphasising the shepherds, who were outsiders in society, despite the many skills and the knowledge they needed? Quite recently in this country, a shepherd would be buried with a wisp of wool in his hands so he would not be judged for having missed church services.
[ 02. December 2015, 15:52: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Are you saying alpha males aren't stereotypical males?
Most men aren't alpha males, but it would seem that a great many of them would stereotypically like to be alpha males. In that sense, a church that discourages those inclinations rather than working with them in some way is likely to be at a disadvantage.
It has been said that alpha males are very much underrepresented in church congregations.
Most men will never be alpha males, alpha males represent a very small percentage of the population and have through recorded history and what can be inferred by study of prehistoric humans. We are not wolves anyway.
The problem, ISTM, is not your churches, but the societies they live in.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by Svitlana:
quote:
But if the church didn't have men doing all this stuff in the church it's possible that there'd be even fewer of them turning up. This has been given as a reason as to why women in some churches tolerate a largely (or exclusively) male ordained ministry or theological culture.
I'm not sure where to even begin unpacking this. Has the church in the Diocese of Oxford become so gender defined that it is actually effecting men's sense of manliness? Sometimes it's when these things are put into words that it highlights how daft it really is - I can't quite believe I posited that question on this forum. Quite apart from anything else if the Gospel as taught in any given church in Oxford cannot be easily distinguished from the Christmas wrapping whatever faction or lobby wants to cover it in, then surely we have already lost the plot entirely.
quote:
As responses on the Ship indicate, one problem with focusing on 'stereotypical' physical aspects of masculinity as the vicar has is that it may alienate the mostly middle class white collar men who attend church these days. That could be counterproductive.
I have no notion whatsoever in my head why it should all boil down to middle class white men in church. Is this just a statement of fact based on a poll somewhere?
Overall the Gospel will never actually be popular or fashionable. I can never see the point in pretending that it is.
Edited to add:
And what on earth is an alpha male? I mean, what is it really - preferable in a recognised scientific, sociological sense and not some frustrated male who feels emasculated by all this 'wimmens stuff' everywhere? Most of the people presented as 'alpha male' look to me to be either pathetic and looking to create a front to their crumbling interior life, or some kind of sociopath.
[ 02. December 2015, 16:23: Message edited by: fletcher christian ]
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
As someone noted in the comments on the response I posted above, it's not at all clear that the more "feminine" theory of church isn't a response to men leaving. (I don't see church as a feminized place at all, but be that as it may.)
Men have been dropping out of the job market too, at least in this country, so I suspect the issue isn't related to men and the church, but more men and society.
True, it may not be the case that feminisation has caused men to leave the church. It's probably more complex than that - but we're still left with a church where men are in the minority.
It may be that women have always been relatively quite active in the church. It's noticeable how many women get involved in the early church in the NT, when compared with women's contribution to the religious life in the OT. Women in the NT weren't socially free to become too involved in Jesus's wandering evangelistic life, but as the religion became more settled they had more to offer. This has also been true in more recent times; men often participate enthusiastically in the founding of churches and church movements, but then the contribution of women becomes more prominent
as routinisation occurs.
As I said in the related thread in hell, Christianity may be a feminising religion with regard to our constructs of femininity and masculinity. We may preach that everyone should be a servant, should deny self, should live a life in submission to God, should turn the other cheek; but in human culture, in our existence as mammals in a hostile world, these are not normally considered to be useful, desirable masculine ways of being.
If we absolutely want to defy and subvert these culturally defined ways of being masculine then we need to be absolutely open and clear about it. But I agree with you and lilBuddha that our culture is currently confused about how our ideas about masculinity should change.
Middle class mainstream churchgoers are also confused, wanting to welcome the poor and working classes, yet sensing that stereotypical working class male culture and the stereotypical masculinity of poor (and frequently unemployed) men is potentially unsuitable for the caring, sharing church environment. Some would like the church to claim these people in other to reform them, but it's hard to see how mainstream church culture, marginal and genteel as it is, is going to have much success with that.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Most of the people presented as 'alpha male' look to me to be either pathetic and looking to create a front to their crumbling interior life, or some kind of sociopath.
Without being flippant, aren't they basically the sort of people then that might benefit from a bit of church outreach (at least the former)? Or are we not interested in things that might appeal to those who are pathetic and looking to create a front to their crumbling interior life?
Possibly even by showing them they don't need to create a front and aren't pathetic?
First though, you've got to speak to them, get a hearing, which (however badly expressed) was kind of the point of the article...
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
quote:
Middle class mainstream churchgoers are also confused, wanting to welcome the poor and working classes, yet sensing that stereotypical working class male culture and the stereotypical masculinity of poor (and frequently unemployed) men is potentially unsuitable for the caring, sharing church environment. Some would like the church to claim these people in other to reform them
Am I reading this right? Is there an underlying notion that working class males might largely be apes?
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
I am continually reminded of the parallels between the Labour Party and the Church (specifically, Church of England, but in this case I think it is wider). The Oldham West by-election tomorrow is, allegedly, touch-and-go because the predominantly (white) working-class who always voted Labour in the past have been alienated by the metropolitan (and metrosexual?) Labour of today: whether in its right-wing New Labour incarnation or its Corbynite left-wing version (as someone has said, they are two sides of the same Islington coin). I suspect there is enough truth in this analysis to make the result far from a foregone conclusion.
For much, much longer, white working class people and especially men have been largely estranged from the church. But whether it is HTB-style charismatic evangelicalism, or 'radical' liberalism, new movements appeal even more to university-educated middle-class people and probably make working-class folk ill at ease. 'Inclusive Church' is good at including LGBTs but less confident with other groups, especially ethnic minorities or the unemployed.
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by Betjemaniac:
quote:
Without being flippant, aren't they basically the sort of people then that might benefit from a bit of church outreach (at least the former)? Or are we not interested in things that might appeal to those who are pathetic and looking to create a front to their crumbling interior life?
Possibly even by showing them they don't need to create a front and aren't pathetic?
First though, you've got to speak to them, get a hearing, which (however badly expressed) was kind of the point of the article...
Yes, absolutely. But I'll shy away from creating a Gospel in their image, and really, which one of us isn't pathetic with a crumbling interior life, putting on fronts for others and projected images of what we would like people to see and occasionally taking a little trip into the world of the sociopath, fortunately or unfortunately with all the grace of a two year old holding an epic tantrum? But I think the Gospel is like that and has a keen tendency to strip away all our crap and the great news is it does it for everyone. Problem is, not everyone wants to hear that and no amount of twisting it around to package it up to look 'manly' is going to change it.
[ 02. December 2015, 16:42: Message edited by: fletcher christian ]
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Has the church in the Diocese of Oxford become so gender defined that it is actually effecting men's sense of manliness?
It's probably more the case that the men aren't around in order to be affected.
quote:
I have no notion whatsoever in my head why it should all boil down to middle class white men in church. Is this just a statement of fact based on a poll somewhere?
Overall the Gospel will never actually be popular or fashionable. I can never see the point in pretending that it is.
I'm not making 'statements of fact', nor 'boil[ing] down' the issues to one single thing, , but studies do show that churchgoers tend to be of a higher social status than the population at large. CofE vicars will mostly be from middle class backgrounds as well. Which means that if a vicar is talking about attracting men with videos of boxing, etc., he's probably not talking about men like himself or like most of his congregation!
It's not news that most church folk want church life to be familiar. They want to be friendly to outsiders, but they don't really want things to change significantly in order to get people through the doors. So it seems obvious that too much 'pandering' to men who like boxing is going to be threatening to the middle class folk who are already there.
quote:
And what on earth is an alpha male? I mean, what is it really - preferable in a recognised scientific, sociological sense and not some frustrated male who feels emasculated by all this 'wimmens stuff' everywhere? Most of the people presented as 'alpha male' look to me to be either pathetic and looking to create a front to their crumbling interior life, or some kind of sociopath.
I could go and find an acceptable sociological definition of the term, but so could you. I'm not sure if it really matters. The point is, they're not in church. But to be fair, neither are the 'sociopaths' or men with a 'crumbling interior life'.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
quote:
Middle class mainstream churchgoers are also confused, wanting to welcome the poor and working classes, yet sensing that stereotypical working class male culture and the stereotypical masculinity of poor (and frequently unemployed) men is potentially unsuitable for the caring, sharing church environment. Some would like the church to claim these people in other to reform them
Am I reading this right? Is there an underlying notion that working class males might largely be apes?
No, you're not reading it right.
I'm not reading you right either, I suspect. On the one hand you don't think churches should pander to potential male visitors who don't behave as you deem proper, but on the other, you don't think the church should make any effort to reach out to them so they can be transformed by the gospel.
So what are you saying? That the church should just carry on as usual and simply ignore these people?
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by Svitlana:
quote:
I could go and find an acceptable sociological definition of the term, but so could you.
The point is I've never found one. Google will turn up pages and pages of stuff from ever so reliable websites that range from totally opposing definitions to papers suggesting it's a whole crock of nonsense that belongs in the self help section.
quote:
No, you're not reading it right.
Well, can you let me know how to read it right?
[ 02. December 2015, 16:54: Message edited by: fletcher christian ]
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
I found myself remembering a Rogationtide sermon in the village church some time ago, in which the vicar (sorry, Rector) mused about the procession Beating the Bounds with the choirboys, observed by the labourers in the fields. And I sat there and mused about where those labourers would have been of a Sunday, down at the chapel (or one of the chapels, since each of them would have one they didn't go to, along with the parish church) taking note of the long and convoluted sermon so that they could take up the minister on their way out on something they thought he had wrong. (One branch of my mother's family put up their own tin chapel.) I think the class thing has been more complicated in the past. But the Rector hadn't an inkling about that.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Fletcher Christian
You're the one who's implying that men who don't behave in the approved fashion should be abandoned by the church. This doesn't mean that such men are 'apes'.
Working class men are not 'apes'. They may be great guys. But they may well have attitudes or interests that nice, middle class, caring, sharing Christian men won't like or relate to. The question is whether the church should do anything about this chasm. Your answer to this question seems to be no.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
I know the speciality of the CofE often seems to be either stating the bleedin' obvious or putting the collective foot in the mouth, but ![[Eek!]](eek.gif) .
Preaching advice is nonsense: the fact is that if you haven't got the kernel of your message over in 5 minutes you're wasting your time. And point 5 (suggesting a sermon about a martyr) is going to go down a storm at Christmas, especially since it is going to be completely at variance with the readings.
Points 2 to 4 are just bizarre. First, a service length is bound to be variable if it depends on the number of communicants. Second, are we really going to have sidespeople saying to women and children "Sorry, you can't sit in the front pew, its reserved for the men" - I can see that going down a storm, especially at something like a Christmas service with a nativity tableau. As for the "familiar" carols - its highly unlikely that the trad carols will be unfamiliar, and the key for the music is likely to be suitable for all. Dare I suggest that many clergy won't be too helpful when it comes to decisions on tessitura.
Points 6 and 7 are too stupid for words.
I can see a certain frisson being possible if one adopts Point 8 and shows a clip from, say, one of the Die Hard films - but is the sight of Bruce Willis, bloodstained and in a filthy vest really the overriding message we want people to take from a Christmas service?
Whoever thought that promoting a service series on Christmas Eve would be a good idea either has no experience of the average Christmas Eve service or is a fifth columnist from some other organisation (Richard Dawkins' militant atheists perhaps?) tying to sabotage the little goodwill that the general population shows towards the CofE at Christmas.
As for presenting Christ the Man at Christmas - difficult when the whole thing is about marking and celebrating his arrival as an infant.
Yes, I too would hope that the whole thing was put up as a joke, but I suspect this has been dreamt up by some cleric with "gifts" for "communication". Its enough to make the (soon to be born) Baby Jesus not only weep but gnash his gums with rage.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by Svitlana:
quote:
I'm not reading you right either, I suspect. On the one hand you don't think churches should pander to potential male visitors who don't behave as you deem proper, but on the other, you don't think the church should make any effort to reach out to them so they can be transformed by the gospel.
So what are you saying? That the church should just carry on as usual and simply ignore these people?
No, you not reading me right.
I see the church as there for everyone - period. I don't think this is a difficult concept to grasp. If you are male or female, Gentile or Jew......I've heard this before somewhere but he said it much better. The point I was making was that the article seemed a wind up. It dealt in the most outrageous stereotypes of men (and inversely, of women) that were really just laughable until you realise that it was a 'serious' article on a diocesan website no less, that is actually kind of insulting regardless of your socio-economic and educational background.
I dunno maybe I've been reading my Gospels all wrong. Maybe Jesus preached the sermon on the mount between wrestling bouts. Maybe when he hung out with the women - surely men weren't there at the same time - he did knitting and baked little breads. Maybe he preached about gender definition and distinctive dividing roles. Maybe he acted all camp with the women and all butch with the lads. Thing is, I just don't recall ever reading anything like that. See, at heart I think the topic of the thread - which is the website page we can no longer see - is a farce, and I'm afraid I've responded in the same vein.
Edited to add:
Ok, I do apologise. I've just seen one of your previous posts and understand you don't do irony.
[ 02. December 2015, 17:12: Message edited by: fletcher christian ]
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Whether the content is up to much is a different question admittedly, but I'd reiterate that I think there's something in the diagnosis even if not the remedy (and my experience of the non-churched rather than the unchurched is that some of my acquaintance do think it's "something for women/old ladies/children apart from the man in the dress" (CLEARLY I don't agree with them)) and I think it's good of Oxford to have a go.
I agree there is a problem.
But as I said more snarkily in the Hell thread, AIUI we are talking about men who only show up for the Christmas Eve service, but who do so year after year. They don't turn up and dislike the content so much that they never cross the threshold again. There is something about the Christmas Eve service that attracts them and that they don't expect to find in any other church service. Prima facie, the best approach would seem to be to leave the Christmas Eve service intact, and try to infuse the other services with whatever magic is present in Christmas Eve. It isn't to go fixing what is apparently the only service that isn't broken.
Also, the majority of women aren't churchgoers either, which suggests to me that the problem isn't a male/female divide as such - it's that church is only attractive to a specific personality type that's more prevalent among women than men. You could argue that that amounts to the same thing - but I think if we express the problem in terms of personality types rather than gender, we can answer it without reference to gender stereotyping.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Women in the NT weren't socially free to become too involved in Jesus's wandering evangelistic life...
{tangent alert}
Here is Luke 8:1-3 quote:
Soon afterwards he went on through cities and villages, proclaiming and bringing the good news of the kingdom of God. The twelve were with him, as well as some women who had been cured of evil spirits and infirmities: Mary, called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out, and Joanna, the wife of Herod’s steward Chuza, and Susanna, and many others, who provided for them out of their resources.
Not only were these women free to follow Jesus, they had resources of their own to help support his ministry.
{/tangent alert}
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Thanks for that. Mary Magdalene did come to mind.
By 'support' I was thinking of people who were actually wandering with him, though some were supporting him with financial help from the comfort of their homes. I'm asking myself whether the wandering women were quite poor people with little to lose, while the women who offered material help generally were settled women who were well-off. Or was there some kind of overlap?
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
It's been pulled as if it never existed.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I'm asking myself whether the wandering women were quite poor people with little to lose, while the women who offered material help generally were settled women who were well-off. Or was there some kind of overlap?
My impression is that the same women followed him and supported him. The wife of Herod's steward must have been well-to-do.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baker
Shipmate
# 18458
|
Posted
The link doesn't work anymore. Anywhere else it can be found?
--------------------
Ad astra per aspera
Posts: 108 | From: Tottering-on-the-Brink | Registered: Aug 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
