|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Christian manliness
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
(Top of thread vertigo)
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
My question is-- if those guys felt they had permission to talk about "real stuff" (whatever that might mean to them) with other guys, don't you think they would choose them first?
Yes. Probably.
That, to me , is the front line.
Also-- right there with you on the frilly, over-embellished scripture posters, which only goes to show that people who market such stuff have just as many stupid ideas about what appeals to women as what appeals to men.
[ 08. August 2013, 21:58: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Haydee
Shipmate
# 14734
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
As i said, this is a soteriological passage. There are other passages in the NT that maintain gender distinctions, particularly passages which address family life.
Oh dear. As a single mum, obviously my children and I are not a real family. After all, we have no-one to win the bread and mow the lawn... ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Posts: 433 | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by daronmedway:
[qb]What Church offers is relationships. That's pretty much all we've got when the lights go out. That might not sound 'manly' enough for you, but it's enough for me.
OK. For the sake of argument we'll assume that relationships is the USP of the church. I'm not saying that relationships aren't manly. Of course relationships can be manly.
The problem, I think, is that the church tends to speak about relationships (with God and each other) in a way that appeals to women rather than men. Many worship songs speak of having a "beautiful, intimate and tender relationship with Jesus in the secret place". We speak of opening ourselves to Jesus, being surrounded by his love and being made complete. If the church chooses these types of songs without balancing them with songs of a more objective or declarative nature there will be an imbalance in how the Christian life is perceived and lived out.
[ 09. August 2013, 07:06: Message edited by: daronmedway ]
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that what the church is actually offering is the closest thing to truth this side of the grave. The reason to believe and follow the way isn't because you like it or it helps you or it helps others or anything else. It's because it's true.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
argona
Shipmate
# 14037
|
Posted
If you're out on a limb, ATMF, I'm sitting there with you.
Posts: 327 | From: Oriental dill patch? (4,7) | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that what the church is actually offering is the closest thing to truth this side of the grave. The reason to believe and follow the way isn't because you like it or it helps you or it helps others or anything else. It's because it's true.
The words maybe true.
I think that we see a discord between the words and results. If the words were true then they would also be transformative. Yet we go and see, feel and experience so little change. What we are left with is a repetitive subroutine that goes round and round. Any change seems to take place a glacial speed and we hardly notice it. Or worse still we feel emasculated by the changes we do discover.
What we are looking is for the spiritual equivalent of "Join the Army and See the World" not just the inside walls of St Some-one-in-the-marshes.
The truth shall make ye fret.
--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.
Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Garasu: quote:
So I should sign up to a programme that would make my situation worse?
Paul did.
(bagsie Thunderbird 3)
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688
|
Posted
Speaking as a woman (FWIW my appearance etc. fits a lot of "feminine" stereotypes, like enjoying high heels and make-up for example), I would just like to point out that I don't enjoy all that swirly pink crap either. In fact, I don't know that many women who do.
(Case in point: unless you buy the really expensive branded stuff, women's sportswear is bloody ALL fuschia pink. Go in the men's aisle, there's a whole range of fun stuff, in red, grey, blue... Cross over to the women's selection and it's just acres of fuschia. Ranting about this from me (whether on the interweb or in person) is usually greeted with a chorus of assent from the army of women of my acquaintance who all despise fuschia as much as I do.)
--------------------
Rent my holiday home in the South of France
Posts: 3696 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
The problem, I think, is that the church tends to speak about relationships (with God and each other) in a way that appeals to women rather than men. Many worship songs speak of having a "beautiful, intimate and tender relationship with Jesus in the secret place". We speak of opening ourselves to Jesus, being surrounded by his love and being made complete. If the church chooses these types of songs without balancing them with songs of a more objective or declarative nature there will be an imbalance in how the Christian life is perceived and lived out.
I can't remember the last time I read so many incorrect stereotypes and generalisations in one post.
A beautiful, intimate tender relationship with Jesus in a secret place is sick, not female.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Garasu: quote:
So I should sign up to a programme that would make my situation worse?
Paul did.
(bagsie Thunderbird 3)
No - it always seems to end up flying into the sun. (Or maybe that was just the once and I've seen it too many times.)
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
If the church chooses these types of songs without balancing them with songs of a more objective or declarative nature there will be an imbalance in how the Christian life is perceived and lived out.
Absolutely right! So why do you need to cloud the issue by trying to categorise either as 'masculine' or 'feminine'?
Paradoxically, it tends to be the evangelical churches most eager to stress gender roles, who use the more sentimental songs. Traditional anglo-catholics (and, aside from some of the sugarier expressions of the 19th century) Roman Catholics tend [a] to subordinate any hymns to the objective liturgy, and [b] to use the more objective, scriptural and theological hymns.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by daronmedway:
[qb]What Church offers is relationships. That's pretty much all we've got when the lights go out. That might not sound 'manly' enough for you, but it's enough for me.
OK. For the sake of argument we'll assume that relationships is the USP of the church. I'm not saying that relationships aren't manly. Of course relationships can be manly.
The problem, I think, is that the church tends to speak about relationships (with God and each other) in a way that appeals to women rather than men. Many worship songs speak of having a "beautiful, intimate and tender relationship with Jesus in the secret place". We speak of opening ourselves to Jesus, being surrounded by his love and being made complete. If the church chooses these types of songs without balancing them with songs of a more objective or declarative nature there will be an imbalance in how the Christian life is perceived and lived out.
Of course, "I want to know You" and "This is my desire", which are presumably the two songs to which you refer, Daron, are both written by men. As are most of the so-called "Jesus is my boyfriend" songs.
As an aside, I think that Daron is correct in thinking that there should be a spread of songs which are used in worship; Old hymns, contemporary material, objective, subjective, even just plain tub-thumping fun (think "Days of Elijah", which is pretty risible lyrically, but a great sing.
[ 09. August 2013, 09:11: Message edited by: Jolly Jape ]
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Tangential I suppose, but I find if something's lyrically risible that disqualifies it from being a "great sing".
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398
|
Posted
I thought I would share this quote from BookwomBeauty on Not a very good Christian (Featured in the Depression Lies from Satan Thread)
quote:
Last week I read an article on a popular Christian website that accused feminism of ruining "the art of servanthood," meaning, women have stopped submitting unilaterally to their husbands and therefore women are responsible for the lack of men in the church because they're just so damn bossy. A Christian blaming the fall of society on feminists? Oh, how shocking. How totally unfamiliar that must be.
Ouch! Spot on!
Hey guys, we are not victims. Time to sort ourselves out.
--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.
Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
QUOTE]Of course, "I want to know You" and "This is my desire", which are presumably the two songs to which you refer, Daron, are both written by men. As are most of the so-called "Jesus is my boyfriend" songs.
As an aside, I think that Daron is correct in thinking that there should be a spread of songs which are used in worship; Old hymns, contemporary material, objective, subjective, even just plain tub-thumping fun (think "Days of Elijah", which is pretty risible lyrically, but a great sing.
I haven't found many lads in the youth groups/ my sons peers who will admit to being fans of Justin Bieber and the other latest boy band offerings. There couldn't be a parallel between these offerings for Tweenage girls and the Christian music scene surely? Some seem to love pretty boys singing sickly love songs.
I hasten to add that I know plenty of girls who puke at the sound of that kind of musak too.
--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.
Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
If the church chooses these types of songs without balancing them with songs of a more objective or declarative nature there will be an imbalance in how the Christian life is perceived and lived out.
Absolutely right! So why do you need to cloud the issue by trying to categorise either as 'masculine' or 'feminine'?
Paradoxically, it tends to be the evangelical churches most eager to stress gender roles, who use the more sentimental songs.
I don't quite agree with this. One of the chief differences between charismatic and conservative evangelicals is that charismatics tend to favour the "Jesus is my boyfriend" songs because they stress what they consider to be a vital element of following Christ - encounter and spiritual experience.
I'm not saying that a focus on spiritual experience and encounter with Christ is wrong. I think it's very right. What I am saying is that the language of spiritual experience and encounter in contemporary worship songs seems to be unduly influenced by the language of erotic and romantic love - a language which secular culture (rightly or wrongly) largely associates with heterosexual eroticism and sexuality. This not using the language of femininity and masculinity as a binary distinction between good and bad. I'm simply suggesting that men might find certain elements of contemporary worship spiritually unappealing because it inadvertently apes the sexualised language of secular gender stereotyping.
This is why I think conservatives tend to favour the more declarative and objective style of modern worship song such as those written by Stuart Townend. However, Stuart Townend isn't a "normal" conservative evangelical despite the fact that conservative evangelicals think he's the DBs. He's Newfrontiers, which describes itself as charismatic and conservative and interestingly IME Newfrontiers churches do manage to keep a good balance between experiential and the declarative worship songs in way that other evangelicals don't seem to manage.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Tangential I suppose, but I find if something's lyrically risible that disqualifies it from being a "great sing".
Have you ever been to Glastonbury festival? Most of what you'll hear there is lyrically risible but thousands upon thousands of people sing along with great enthusiasm. Of course drink and drugs play a big role in that but, nonetheless, I think it's very possible to sing complete and utter nonsense and enjoy it a very great deal.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Tangential I suppose, but I find if something's lyrically risible that disqualifies it from being a "great sing".
Have you ever been to Glastonbury festival? Most of what you'll hear there is lyrically risible but thousands upon thousands of people sing along with great enthusiasm. Of course drink and drugs play a big role in that but, nonetheless, I think it's very possible to sing complete and utter nonsense and enjoy it a very great deal.
Indeed. But not, for me, I find, in church.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Tangential I suppose, but I find if something's lyrically risible that disqualifies it from being a "great sing".
Have you ever been to Glastonbury festival? Most of what you'll hear there is lyrically risible but thousands upon thousands of people sing along with great enthusiasm. Of course drink and drugs play a big role in that but, nonetheless, I think it's very possible to sing complete and utter nonsense and enjoy it a very great deal.
Indeed. But not, for me, I find, in church.
Well, that's nothing a shot of JD and line of charlie couldn't solve. ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Earwig
Pincered Beastie
# 12057
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
I'm not saying that a focus on spiritual experience and encounter with Christ is wrong. I think it's very right. What I am saying is that the language of spiritual experience and encounter in contemporary worship songs seems to be unduly influenced by the language of erotic and romantic love - a language which secular culture (rightly or wrongly) largely associates with heterosexual eroticism and sexuality. This not using the language of femininity and masculinity as a binary distinction between good and bad. I'm simply suggesting that men might find certain elements of contemporary worship spiritually unappealing because it inadvertently apes the sexualised language of secular gender stereotyping.
If you add the word "some" before "men" in the last sentance, and add "and some women" after that, I think you're bang on.
Some people like it, some don't. I think that's to do with church tradition, experience, personality, understanding of faith etc rather than gender or sex.
Posts: 3120 | From: Yorkshire | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
originally posted by daronmedway
However, Stuart Townend isn't a "normal" conservative evangelical despite the fact that conservative evangelicals think he's the DBs.
Absolutely. I think that, at one time, he did have an obsession with PSA that seemed to creep into everything he wrote. He now has a much broader theological palette. Check out "Vagabonds", for instance. He's also a great tunesmith, and, as opposed to most contemporary worship songwriters, he writes songs that can actually be sung by people with voices of a normal pitch range.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Earwig:
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
I'm not saying that a focus on spiritual experience and encounter with Christ is wrong. I think it's very right. What I am saying is that the language of spiritual experience and encounter in contemporary worship songs seems to be unduly influenced by the language of erotic and romantic love - a language which secular culture (rightly or wrongly) largely associates with heterosexual eroticism and sexuality. This not using the language of femininity and masculinity as a binary distinction between good and bad. I'm simply suggesting that men might find certain elements of contemporary worship spiritually unappealing because it inadvertently apes the sexualised language of secular gender stereotyping.
If you add the word "some" before "men" in the last sentance, and add "and some women" after that, I think you're bang on.
Some people like it, some don't. I think that's to do with church tradition, experience, personality, understanding of faith etc rather than gender or sex.
I think its largely to do with ecclesiological socialisation. Personally, I'm OK with it. It's become part of my spiritual vocabulary over the years. I sometimes cry during worship and I'm happy to tell Jesus I love him. I don't think that's feminine in any negative sense.
However, I'm not sure my unchurched next door neighbour would be OK with it on a first visit to church.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Tangential I suppose, but I find if something's lyrically risible that disqualifies it from being a "great sing".
Have you ever been to Glastonbury festival? Most of what you'll hear there is lyrically risible but thousands upon thousands of people sing along with great enthusiasm. Of course drink and drugs play a big role in that but, nonetheless, I think it's very possible to sing complete and utter nonsense and enjoy it a very great deal.
Indeed. But not, for me, I find, in church.
Well, that's nothing a shot of JD and line of charlie couldn't solve.
There are plenty of church services where I'd need that to survive...
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
quote:
originally posted by daronmedway
However, Stuart Townend isn't a "normal" conservative evangelical despite the fact that conservative evangelicals think he's the DBs.
Absolutely. I think that, at one time, he did have an obsession with PSA that seemed to creep into everything he wrote. He now has a much broader theological palette. Check out "Vagabonds", for instance.
That's a great song. I think it's one of the best on The Journey album. What I like about is there's invitations made in there to which just about everyone can object. It'd be a brave church that decided to sing it to kick off a Eucharist. I've thought about it...
[ 09. August 2013, 11:38: Message edited by: daronmedway ]
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
Just to throw a cat among the pigeons, is Timothy Dudley-Smith the antidote to the "Jesus is my boyfriend" repertoire?
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
I'm not saying that a focus on spiritual experience and encounter with Christ is wrong. I think it's very right. What I am saying is that the language of spiritual experience and encounter in contemporary worship songs seems to be unduly influenced by the language of erotic and romantic love - a language which secular culture (rightly or wrongly) largely associates with heterosexual eroticism and sexuality. This not using the language of femininity and masculinity as a binary distinction between good and bad. I'm simply suggesting that men might find certain elements of contemporary worship spiritually unappealing because it inadvertently apes the sexualised language of secular gender stereotyping.
I think you're spot on with this, daronmedway. And if people are unhappy with the gender distinction (as earwig has noted), let's just say some people find the 'language of erotic and romantic love' spiritually unappealing and might prefer worship songs with more declarative language about God's nature or with more focus on our mission to spread the good news and bring about God's will on earth.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
quote:
originally posted by daronmedway
However, Stuart Townend isn't a "normal" conservative evangelical despite the fact that conservative evangelicals think he's the DBs.
Absolutely. I think that, at one time, he did have an obsession with PSA that seemed to creep into everything he wrote. He now has a much broader theological palette. Check out "Vagabonds", for instance.
That's a great song. I think it's one of the best on The Journey album. What I like about is there's invitations made in there to which just about everyone can object. It'd be a brave church that decided to sing it to kick off a Eucharist. I've thought about it...
You know Daron, there are times when I just love you, in spite of myself!
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
quote:
originally posted by daronmedway
However, Stuart Townend isn't a "normal" conservative evangelical despite the fact that conservative evangelicals think he's the DBs.
Absolutely. I think that, at one time, he did have an obsession with PSA that seemed to creep into everything he wrote. He now has a much broader theological palette. Check out "Vagabonds", for instance.
That's a great song. I think it's one of the best on The Journey album. What I like about is there's invitations made in there to which just about everyone can object. It'd be a brave church that decided to sing it to kick off a Eucharist. I've thought about it...
You know Daron, there are times when I just love you, in spite of myself!
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
[Stuart Townend's 'Vagabonds' is] a great song. I think it's one of the best on The Journey album. What I like about is there's invitations made in there to which just about everyone can object. It'd be a brave church that decided to sing it to kick off a Eucharist. I've thought about it...
That's a cool song, but I think it would be a bit cheesy for the average church. (But your church may well not be 'average'....) I mean, in many cases you'd be singing at people who aren't there to hear you. It would make more sense at an open air event where there's a chance it might be heard by a good random mixture of 'ordinary' folk, not just churchy people.
Re masculinity/femininity, my understanding is that psychological research highlights certain traits or personality factors that are more common in men than women, and vice versa. There will obviously be a scale, and an individual may be found anywhere on that scale, but in general, certain elements predominate in one sex or the other. (Whether these differences are taught or are innate, or a mixture of the two, is another matter, as has already been said.)
There have been psychological studies of various kinds of clergy and lay churchgoers to see how they compare with the general population (UK). There seem to be a few notable differences between church and public in some aspects. These differences may either help or hinder the mission of the church.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
[Stuart Townend's 'Vagabonds' is] a great song. I think it's one of the best on The Journey album. What I like about is there's invitations made in there to which just about everyone can object. It'd be a brave church that decided to sing it to kick off a Eucharist. I've thought about it...
That's a cool song, but I think it would be a bit cheesy for the average church. (But your church may well not be 'average'....) I mean, in many cases you'd be singing at people who aren't there to hear you.
It may well be my church isn't "average" then, because I'd hazard a guess at there being quite a few people who would personally identify with one or more of the "groups" mentioned in the song. However, might I suggest that it is in fact quite normal and that you've perhaps underestimated the life experience of the average local congregation?
[ 09. August 2013, 13:37: Message edited by: daronmedway ]
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
Just to throw a cat among the pigeons, is Timothy Dudley-Smith the antidote to the "Jesus is my boyfriend" repertoire?
No.
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
Most of what you'll hear there is lyrically risible but thousands upon thousands of people sing along with great enthusiasm. Of course drink and drugs play a big role in that but, nonetheless, I think it's very possible to sing complete and utter nonsense and enjoy it a very great deal.
Surely not?
[...thinks...]
[...starts itunes...]
[...listens to "Wonderwall"...]
Oh. OK then. We'll give you that one.
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Garasu: quote:
So I should sign up to a programme that would make my situation worse?
Paul did.
(bagsie Thunderbird 3)
No - it always seems to end up flying into the sun. (Or maybe that was just the once and I've seen it too many times.)
Girlies the lot of you! Any real man would demand Thunderbird 2!
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
[Stuart Townend's 'Vagabonds' is] a great song. I think it's one of the best on The Journey album. What I like about is there's invitations made in there to which just about everyone can object. It'd be a brave church that decided to sing it to kick off a Eucharist. I've thought about it...
That's a cool song, but I think it would be a bit cheesy for the average church. (But your church may well not be 'average'....) I mean, in many cases you'd be singing at people who aren't there to hear you.
It may well be my church isn't "average" then, because I'd hazard a guess at there being quite a few people who would personally identify with one or more of the "groups" mentioned in the song. However, might I suggest that it is in fact quite normal and that you've perhaps underestimated the life experience of the average local congregation?
Quite possibly!
There are probably also denominational issues here. I think Anglicanism attracts more uncertain people than many other more intentional denominations - or perhaps it's that Anglicanism leaves people in a state of uncertainty for longer, whereas in the more evangelical denominations people are assimilated and become 'insiders' more swiftly. In the Methodist tradition, people seem to feel that their independence of thought is quite normal; it's not something that needs to be sung about. In my experience taking Communion in a Methodist church doesn't seem to induce induce much anxiety.
You make an interesting point, though. My impression is that many people on the Ship attend evangelical churches without considering themselves to be at home in evangelicalism. If this phenomenon grows then it'll be interesting to see how these churches develop. Once all these people have taken Communion, what happens next? Do they remain 'vagabonds' or are they assimilated?
[ 09. August 2013, 14:55: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
argona
Shipmate
# 14037
|
Posted
Seems to me that notions of "masculinity" have still not recovered from the austere influence of the mass militarisation of two successive generations of men during the first half of the twentieth century - sustained perhaps since then (as suggested more than once here) by commerce and the media. In which case, no wonder common expressions of Christian value can appear "feminine".
Posts: 327 | From: Oriental dill patch? (4,7) | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
quote:
originally posted by daronmedway
However, Stuart Townend isn't a "normal" conservative evangelical despite the fact that conservative evangelicals think he's the DBs.
Absolutely. I think that, at one time, he did have an obsession with PSA that seemed to creep into everything he wrote. He now has a much broader theological palette. Check out "Vagabonds", for instance.
That's a great song. I think it's one of the best on The Journey album. What I like about is there's invitations made in there to which just about everyone can object. It'd be a brave church that decided to sing it to kick off a Eucharist. I've thought about it...
Brave? Why? I can't see why anyone would object to any of the invited groups there.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
What I really, really don't get, though, is all the flower arranging.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
What I really, really don't get, though, is all the flower arranging.
Try suggesting the church doesn't need as many flowers and see what happens.
That's why.
I think there's a plastic flower in the ladies' bogs but that's as far as we take it.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
quote:
originally posted by daronmedway
However, Stuart Townend isn't a "normal" conservative evangelical despite the fact that conservative evangelicals think he's the DBs.
Absolutely. I think that, at one time, he did have an obsession with PSA that seemed to creep into everything he wrote. He now has a much broader theological palette. Check out "Vagabonds", for instance.
That's a great song. I think it's one of the best on The Journey album. What I like about is there's invitations made in there to which just about everyone can object. It'd be a brave church that decided to sing it to kick off a Eucharist. I've thought about it...
Brave? Why? I can't see why anyone would object to any of the invited groups there.
There are a number of people in my congregation who might object to their abusers being present.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglo Catholic Relict
Shipmate
# 17213
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglo Catholic Relict:
Very often there is joy; very often there is not. Joy is by no means a constant offering, either from us or from God.
If there's no benefit from signing on to God's agenda, why bother?
Turn it around. If our only motive for 'signing on' is a selfish one, what kind of faith is that?
From my own pov, I am 'signed on' for a relationship; the Lord offers me his unconditional love, and in return I offer him my life, equally unconditionally. I do so knowing that my Lord died on the cross, and that I am called to carry my own cross to wherever he leads me.
I do not ask for any benefits whatever; that is left to him. If joy comes, then all well and good; I have certainly been blessed with more than my share of joy, in some ways. And far less, in others. But joy is by no means guaranteed for any of us.
If any church is selling its message with a guarantee of joy, then it is bearing false witness against our faith, imho.
Posts: 585 | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglo Catholic Relict
Shipmate
# 17213
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by daronmedway:
[qb]What Church offers is relationships. That's pretty much all we've got when the lights go out. That might not sound 'manly' enough for you, but it's enough for me.
OK. For the sake of argument we'll assume that relationships is the USP of the church. I'm not saying that relationships aren't manly. Of course relationships can be manly.
The problem, I think, is that the church tends to speak about relationships (with God and each other) in a way that appeals to women rather than men. Many worship songs speak of having a "beautiful, intimate and tender relationship with Jesus in the secret place".
Do they?
Lord have mercy!!!
quote:
We speak of opening ourselves to Jesus, being surrounded by his love and being made complete. If the church chooses these types of songs without balancing them with songs of a more objective or declarative nature there will be an imbalance in how the Christian life is perceived and lived out.
Oh dear.
I think I had better sit on my hands at this point.
[ 09. August 2013, 17:57: Message edited by: Anglo Catholic Relict ]
Posts: 585 | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
I think we just need a bunch of Sufis to bust into Westminster Abbey and show the world the real meaning of the word MEN! Those guys know how to PRAISE!
Because "objective and declarative" is about the most polar opposite concept from that of "praise" that I can think of. Keep that shit in the sermon.
I'm serious-- that little clip represents everything to me that is good and nourishing and refreshing and fortifying about masculinity. Y'all guys, maybe you can explain it better than me.
(oh, and only read the comments if you want examples of stupid Western male clowning and chest-beating.)
[ 09. August 2013, 18:41: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
Actually I kept reading down, and I was wrong.The chest-beating comments are like cream resting on milk-- they are only on the top. As you read down, guys start expressing interest, respect, even wistfulness.
"say what you like, it looks like a way cooler tradition to be proud of than the beer guzzling we do out here in the west. i'd join in that any day."
And if you are wondering, I am pretty sure all they are saying is "al-la ilaha illallahu" (part of the shadaada- "There is no God but Allah.")
[ 09. August 2013, 18:52: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Earwig
Pincered Beastie
# 12057
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Earwig:
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
I'm not saying that a focus on spiritual experience and encounter with Christ is wrong. I think it's very right. What I am saying is that the language of spiritual experience and encounter in contemporary worship songs seems to be unduly influenced by the language of erotic and romantic love - a language which secular culture (rightly or wrongly) largely associates with heterosexual eroticism and sexuality. This not using the language of femininity and masculinity as a binary distinction between good and bad. I'm simply suggesting that men might find certain elements of contemporary worship spiritually unappealing because it inadvertently apes the sexualised language of secular gender stereotyping.
If you add the word "some" before "men" in the last sentance, and add "and some women" after that, I think you're bang on.
Some people like it, some don't. I think that's to do with church tradition, experience, personality, understanding of faith etc rather than gender or sex.
I think its largely to do with ecclesiological socialisation. Personally, I'm OK with it. It's become part of my spiritual vocabulary over the years. I sometimes cry during worship and I'm happy to tell Jesus I love him. I don't think that's feminine in any negative sense.
However, I'm not sure my unchurched next door neighbour would be OK with it on a first visit to church.
Yes - ecclesiological socialisation. That's the bunny. I think most of my unchurched friends would think it simply creepy, whether they were women or men.
Posts: 3120 | From: Yorkshire | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
And if you are wondering, I am pretty sure all they are saying is "al-la ilaha illallahu" (part of the shadaada- "There is no God but Allah.")
Uh, that's sounds pretty darn objective and declarative to me! But, I have to admit, that looks like a pretty amazing experience. It looks like liturgical dance can be redeemed.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
If, as some people here imply, the 'traditional' (flower-arranging?) lady is a dying or an increasingly irrelevant breed in British churches, then the church in general is going to struggle to live without her. Your church may be in the happy situation of not needing her; the churches I see around me aren't so lucky.
The modern, professional, ambitious woman who hates girly swirly pink, etc., is going to have to take the 'traditional' woman's place if many British churches have any hope of survival, but like the alpha males we're talking about, she's absent from many churches. So perhaps we should consider that changing the temperature/emphasis/approach of church life isn't just about getting more masculine men to attend, but will also create connections with the kinds of women who, outside of certain fashionable congregations, don't feel that church life has anything to offer them that would justify the expenditure of their precious time, or that the professional skills they have would be received with respect.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
A.Pilgrim
Shipmate
# 15044
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
...
Because "objective and declarative" is about the most polar opposite concept from that of "praise" that I can think of.
...
I would have thought that the words of The God of Abraham Praise were pretty objective and declarative, and it's based on a Hebrew Yigdal ,or doxology, which is a hymn of praise. The words aren't like the gushing emotiveness of the 'Jesus is my boyfriend' worship songs, which I would consider the opposite of objective.
But we're heading a little off the main subject here. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Angus
Posts: 434 | From: UK | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
If, as some people here imply, the 'traditional' (flower-arranging?) lady is a dying or an increasingly irrelevant breed in British churches, then the church in general is going to struggle to live without her. Your church may be in the happy situation of not needing her; the churches I see around me aren't so lucky.
The modern, professional, ambitious woman who hates girly swirly pink, etc., is going to have to take the 'traditional' woman's place if many British churches have any hope of survival, but like the alpha males we're talking about, she's absent from many churches. So perhaps we should consider that changing the temperature/emphasis/approach of church life isn't just about getting more masculine men to attend, but will also create connections with the kinds of women who, outside of certain fashionable congregations, don't feel that church life has anything to offer them that would justify the expenditure of their precious time, or that the professional skills they have would be received with respect.
Perhaps a good place to start would be with the gendered notion of "women's work"? Why is it that certain tasks "have" to be performed by women?
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
And if you are wondering, I am pretty sure all they are saying is "al-la ilaha illallahu" (part of the shadaada- "There is no God but Allah.")
Uh, that's sounds pretty darn objective and declarative to me! But, I have to admit, that looks like a pretty amazing experience. It looks like liturgical dance can be redeemed.
When you chant it over and over again while swaying in unison with a hundred other people? Shrieking it out like you would a lover's name at climax? Writing tomes of poetry comparing God to both Beloved and Lover? (and if you are not familiar with Sufi poetry, that is very often the vibe they emit.)
I dislike most "Jesus is my boyfriend" stuff too, but not because it is too passionate-- because it is not passionate enough.
[ 10. August 2013, 06:26: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
Perhaps a good place to start would be with the gendered notion of "women's work"? Why is it that certain tasks "have" to be performed by women?
Because if we want men back in church, we need to make it clear that the jobs with prestige and clout are being held exclusively by men. Because men are biologically incapable of working harmoniously alongside women unless they know they are in charge.
Oh wait,what am I saying?Where did I pick up that weird idea? That has never been true in any church I have attended. Not even the LCMS. Re-read that. I saw men and women working side by side in similar positions even in the LCMS. (Aside from the Pastor job, I mean)
Gardening? Carpentry? Cooking? Serving? Teaching? All done by both sexes, with joy and camaraderie. Maybe it's just California.
The one job that was weirdly gendered in my home church is the Altar Guild--all women. Go know.
[ 09. August 2013, 21:10: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
If, as some people here imply, the 'traditional' (flower-arranging?) lady is a dying or an increasingly irrelevant breed in British churches, then the church in general is going to struggle to live without her. Your church may be in the happy situation of not needing her; the churches I see around me aren't so lucky.
The modern, professional, ambitious woman who hates girly swirly pink, etc., is going to have to take the 'traditional' woman's place if many British churches have any hope of survival, but like the alpha males we're talking about, she's absent from many churches. So perhaps we should consider that changing the temperature/emphasis/approach of church life isn't just about getting more masculine men to attend, but will also create connections with the kinds of women who, outside of certain fashionable congregations, don't feel that church life has anything to offer them that would justify the expenditure of their precious time, or that the professional skills they have would be received with respect.
Perhaps a good place to start would be with the gendered notion of "women's work"? Why is it that certain tasks "have" to be performed by women?
I didn't say that there was such a thing as 'women's work', but you will find that most flower-arranging in British churches is done by women. It would be great to get the men involved in that, and in the other activities that have often been carried out in church by women.
Kelly Alves is fortunate to know of churches where men and women equally participate in all sorts of jobs in church. Maybe this is partly because the USA is simply a more religious culture, with (I presume) a more even gender and age balance in the average church.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
