Gospel-shaped masculinity...
On Sunday I
called my Dad to say Happy Fathers’ Day. I’d posted a card too, one of those
Purple Ronnie ones with a silly poem on the front about how he pays for
everything. But of course it was all a bit of a ritual and my bashful message
inside didn’t come close to articulating how fortunate I feel to have such a
supportive male figure in my life, especially as I’d just read a new report by The Centre for Social Justice saying that a million children in the UK are now growing
up without a father.
The
research contains some devastating data about the number of children who have
no male role models, pointing to areas of the UK which have become ‘men deserts’.
These findings inevitably prompt a response from Christians, but the problem is
that the established church is suffering from exactly the same problem. I
explored this phenomenon in a recent article for the Telegraph which argues that, despite accusations
that the decline in male church attendance is due to rising numbers of women in
its public roles, the discrepancy between the sexes isn’t a new issue: men have
always been in short supply at church. One of the key reasons is the fact that
women have always been expected to participate in Christian spiritual practice and
this has always left men feeling disenfranchised.
Now of course it cannot be claimed that women have been
equally included and educated throughout history; the church has been
responsible for horrendous oppression of women and minority groups over the
centuries. However, the basic involvement of women on the Sabbath, worshipping and
being taught along with men, has mostly been upheld since Jesus welcomed both
the sexes as disciples and the Apostle Paul gave instructions to the early
church (essentially mixed communities of believers meeting in homes) for when a
women ‘prays or prophesies’ (1 Corinthians 11:4) and the way in which she
should ‘learn in quietness’ (1 Timothy 2:11) – two of the most controversial
passages about women in Scripture which get interpreted in wildly different
ways depending on which side of the debate you’re on, but suffice to say that they
provide evidence of the active participation of women in spiritual practice.
Perhaps we
could argue that the inclusion of women in the church led to a two-thousand-year-long
crisis of masculinity within Christendom that prefigures the crisis now being
experienced in society at large. Both are characterised by the experience of
men feeling surplus to requirements when responsibilities became shared which
previously belonged exclusively to them. Women entering the workplace is having
the same effect as when women first gained religious enfranchisement all those
years ago.
The Labour
MP and shadow health minister, Dianne Abbott, gave a speech
recently which called on schools and families to promote a broader
understanding of masculinity to counteract what she sees today as a culture of
‘hyper-masculinity’ characterised by misogyny and homophobia, a kickback
against the rapid social change which has welcomed women into public life. Her
speech argued that we need to exchange an outmoded idea of masculinity for
a ‘multi-faceted notion of what makes a man’.
I agree
with Dianne Abbott’s recommendations and in my own article I was critical of certain Christian men’s
ministries which seem to promote a rather more stereotypical version of masculinity.
What I failed to do was praise the good intentions and the hard work that goes
into these ministries as they attempt to reach out to the modern male. I do not
believe that organisations dedicated to men's outreach are motivated in any way by
misogyny but are simply fuelled by a passion to see men transformed by the
gospel; I just don’t happen to agree with their approach, wary as I am of any method
which endorses a version of maleness which mainly celebrates all the things
that make men different to women, especially if it doesn’t spend equal amount
of time finding common ground between the sexes.
The problem
with complementarianism (and the accompanying slogan ‘men and women: equal in
value, different in function’) is that it is argued using only snippets of
Paul’s letters and it seems to ignore the radical, exciting, boundary-breaking
ministry of Jesus himself! The one whose entire ministry was about
destabilising our identity, calling us out of our comfort zones and away from
the things in which we invest security so that we put our trust entirely in
God. You only need to read passages like Matthew 12:46-50 to see how Jesus questions
the monuments we like to hang our hats on:
While Jesus was still talking to the crowd,
his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. 47 Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside,
wanting to speak to you.” 48 He replied to him, “Who is my mother,
and who are my brothers?” 49 Pointing to his disciples, he
said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and
sister and mother.”
(Notice too how comfortable Jesus is with shifting gender designations here, even if only in a metaphorical sense. One can only imagine how these words would have got stuck in the patriarchal filters in the minds of his listeners.)
It’s not about saying that men and women are exactly the
same, or saying we should never hold single-sex church social events which can
be helpful for relationship-building, but it is about spending as much time
celebrating what as men and women – as humans – we have in common; it’s about
investing in the potential we have to learn from and serve each other. It’s this kind of narrative that the church
could use to speak powerfully into some of our biggest social problems – by
encouraging men back into primary school teaching for example. The recent report
shows how around 80 per cent of primary schools have fewer than three male
teachers as men have left what is considered to be a female-orientated
profession in pursuit of careers offering greater status and financial gain.
But the Christian message which says that it’s better to serve than be served,
better to be where you’re needed than where you’re seen to be most powerful,
could help get men back in the classroom as much needed male role models for
young children and bringing a uniquely male perspective which their female
colleagues could no doubt learn from.
For the key difference between the radical picture held out
by the gospel and 21st century liberalism is that the former is
about bringing our gifts and talents together to benefit each other. So much of
the egalitarianism we’re surrounded with is about self-improvement, about
gaining equality to improve one’s own lot in life – and this individualistic approach
will always lead to a battle of one-upmanship between the sexes. The church has
a message which is much more counter-cultural than this, one that offers the
sense of value and usefulness that men are lacking in our society and one that
can satisfy the laudable male inclinations towards protecting the weak,
self-sacrifice and true heroism.
Comments
Post a Comment