|
"Men,
Promise Keepers and the Church"
Now one of the charming aspects of Dan Ivins is that he is not an "on the other hand" kind of guy. He tells you straight out where he is coming from, and leaves the nuances for you to work through. I, on the other hand, tend to be curious about the success of such a movement and wonder what it really means. While, frankly, agreeing with Dan's overall conclusions. The question I must ask is why is this happening? What needs in men are being recognized, if not being fully met, by such groups as "Promise Keepers" and perhaps being overlooked in local churches? I believe this group is responding to real concerns and even though I may not approve of what the Promise Keepers are doing, they need to be taken seriously for what they have recognized. There are, of course, many complicated issues involved here. Here I speak for myself and welcome further discussion with you. Let me start with men. Many men are hurting today. They feel isolated from women and from each other. Their feelings are bottled up because they do not trust that others - men or women - can really understand how they feel. I am not necessarily talking about so-called "angry white males" as much as men who feel genuinely burdened by what they feel is expected of them and under-appreciated for what they do. They are not so much angry at women as mystified by them. Such men feel detached and incompetent as fathers and in family life. Sometimes they just withdraw. I suspect that most men in their hearts identify less with football coach superstar Bill McCartney, and more with Fred Flintstone or Homer Simpson - that is, the incompetent bumbler who has, in fact, relinquished all power to his wife. Strong women threaten them not because such women represent a threat to their power, but because such women only put them in touch with how powerless and inadequate they already feel. They sense somehow that what they really need is to be built up, and instead they feel torn down. Since they can't ask for what they need, they withdraw. What is the answer to this? The answer that "Promise Keepers" offers is a return to what could be called a "benevolent patriarchy." To its credit Promise Keepers talks about men assuming responsibility, about ending spouse abuse, about becoming better fathers, about treating their wives with sensitivity and compassion, and about becoming truly vulnerable with other men. That is a very good agenda and who could criticize it? And if men are able to gain these goals by connecting with Promise Keepers, I say so much the better. Success stories and personal testimony are hard to argue with. If a husband has been behaving irresponsibly and Promise Keepers helps him to assume his share of responsibility in a marriage, to the appreciation of his wife, and both of them affirm that they have been helped, then God bless them. After all, Jesus criticized his own followers who worried about another healer who was helping people in need. Jesus said to them that the real issue was that people were being healed, not whether or not it was our people doing it. I would have to say that some of the more strident criticism of Promise Keepers has a touch of sour grapes about it. Some of it has the sense of starting from the assumption that when a bunch of men get together, nothing good can come from it. But the problem for me with Promise Keepers goes deeper than this. My problem is the tacit right-wing political agenda and the clear Christian fundamentalist theology. In preparation for this sermon, and out of some determination to be fair to the movement, I studied the Promise Keepers web site at some length. To their credit, they are very clear about their theology. However, they are not clear and in fact very evasive about their Politics. Promise Keepers maintains that men should reclaim the so-called traditional role of head of household, spiritual leader of the family, and primary responsible person. Despite much talk about helping with the dishes, non-involved husbands are called to come home and take charge. They cite this model as rooted in God's word and sustained by the Bible, the inerrant word of God. Together with this, a wife's role is supportive, as cited in Genesis 2 as man's "helpmate." It is no coincidence that one of Promise Keeper's women's auxiliary organizations is called "Suitable Helpers." Promise Keepers spokespersons refer to scriptures such as Genesis and the Epistle to the Ephesians in which a hierarchy is described: Christ as head of the husband, husband as head of the wife, with (incidentally) slaves at the bottom. The writer of Ephesians is at pains to stress that the real issue is respect, tenderness, mutual submission, and compassion. But the hierarchy is taken for granted. My view is that, ultimately, such scriptures do us very little good today and perhaps much harm. Scholars tell us that the Apostle Paul was probably not the author of this text. But even if he were, I would still say that this text is not relevant to us. Old Testament people took it for granted that men were entitled to many wives. That was traditional. Slavery was widely accepted as God ordained and traditional. Yet few people today would advocate returning to such societies. Perhaps such a hierarchical Christian family made sense in some historical settings. I don't know. But today it just doesn't. Anyway I don't believe it to be a "God ordained" model in any way. Today I believe that men and women are called to live in partnership; that is, the sharing of responsibility with mutual accountability. I suspect that men and women are different from each other in profound and mysterious ways, some innate to gender, and some culturally acquired. Nobody can tell for sure and I doubt if that will ever be possible. In some ways the sexes will always be a mystery to each other. How you feel about that depends, I guess, on how you feel about mysteries, especially those that cannot be solved, perhaps explored, but ultimately accepted and lived with. The traditional stereotypes of the strong silent man and the passive compliant woman are rapidly becoming archaic. Men need not be threatened by strong and assertive women. I don't care for aggressive, hostile women - but I don't care for aggression and hostility in men either. That is not a gender issue, but a human issue. I was having breakfast the other morning with the executive director of Silver Spring Community Vision (an african-american woman), another board member, and a prospective board member (a chinese-american woman). And I thought to myself, these are three of the strongest, smartest, clearest women that I know. And I became aware of how non- threatening they were to me. I found them enjoyable, even bracing to be with. Somehow we were equals, partners. On the other hand, I wonder how many men feel that they have to be tough, macho, strong silent types to be attractive to women or make friends with other men. I steadfastly do not believe that the answer is for men to become more like women and women more like men. My guess is that male vulnerability and assertiveness is different from female assertiveness and vulnerability, and that both are different from the stereotypes. I believe the same is true, incidentally, about gay and lesbian stereotypes. To assert, as Promise Keepers does, the benevolent patriarchy of family life, is, I think, a cop-out. It is an escape from the complexity of human relationships and the ultimate uniqueness of individuals. Benevolent patriarchy represents an attempt to deal with the frustrations and tensions inherent in any intimate human relationship by retreating into some structure that is somehow seen as "divinely ordained." It is an escape from freedom and responsibility. For myself, I believe that all God has "ordained" is that husband and wife come together, as one flesh, in mutual love, support, responsibility, and accountability. And in fear and trembling they work out a partnership based on who they are and the realities of their time and place. And I think the same applies for same sex relationships, relationships which Promise Keepers clearly condemns. In one of the testimonies of success written up in a recent article, after attending a Promise Keepers meeting, the husband came home and requested that he, for the first time, take over the handling of the family finances. His wife fully and appreciatively handed the checkbook over to him. If he had been uninvolved in so important a family matter and was so because he felt indifferent or inadequate or overpowered by his wife, then such a change, in that context, clearly helped. It was perhaps a serious new step toward responsibility. All well and good so far. We'll see. Lois and I came to our marriage having both been, for a time, heads of single parent households. Now in a new marriage, how to do finances? We talked it through and worked out a process. I pay most of the bills out of a joint account, which I don't mind doing. We both shop for food from the same account as needed. And she, with input from us both, does our overall budgeting because she really loves planning and doing spreadsheets on the computer. I don't think there is anything divinely ordained in our system. It seems to suit our partnership and we are both happy with it for the moment. And it is fun working together. How do the issues raised by Promise Keepers impact on us here at CCC. First, if any man here is inclined to attend the Promise Keepers rally next weekend, I hope that he would and come back and tell us about it. Second, it happens that coincidentally this weekend is our fall men's retreat at the Retreat House. That group meets every Tuesday evening. Any man is welcome to join it. Together with that, I think we could be doing more for and with men in our congregation. It has been a long time since there was a large men's fellowship group, a group that comes together for mutual support and also has a mission in our church and community. I would love to work with anyone interested in exploring that. Third, what helps men and women both is learning about men and women together - in relationship. Right now we have two ongoing couples groups: Marriage Enrichment and Couples Communication. In the near future Lois and I are planning to present another introductory series. The emphasis is on communication, understanding and compassion. While stressing the gaining and use of special skills, the process is really very spiritual, very biblical. Finally, what do you see as the issues? What would you like to see happen and how are you willing to lend a hand? Amen. Back to Table of Contents. |