Is the American Church Too Macho?

Standard

Gunplay between brothers?If there’s been a clarion call in churches the last few years, it’s the alarm of people decrying the feminization of the Church in America. We hear over and over how there’s no place for men in the local church anymore.

But the more I think about this, the more I wonder if it’s the presence of too much femininity that is driving out the masculinity, or have men traded-in genuine Christianity for a macho fake?

Consider this…

Your church decides to start two new “ministries” that meet on different nights:  an intercessory prayer group and a fantasy football group primarily for church attendees.

Here’s my bet: In the vast majority of cases, men who claim they have very little extra time outside of work and home will flock to the fantasy football group and shun the prayer group. Well, that’s obvious, you say. Let me fine tune it, then:  If you remove the fantasy football group from the mix and start just the intercessory prayer group, in most churches the attendance for that prayer group will still be 75 percent women and 25 percent men. And in some cases, it will be even more lopsided in favor of the women.

Is this the result of a feminized Church, or a Church where men dropped the ball on genuine Christian masculinity?

Men are typically hopelessly outnumbered by women in many churches in the following areas:

Children’s ministry

Visiting the sick & shut-ins

Visiting the elderly

Intercessory prayer

Christian education

Ministry to the disadvantaged

What gets me is that none of those ministries is intrinsically feminine.

But if the church sponsors a barbecue cook-off, you can bet that 80-90 percent of the cooks in that competition will be men. They’ll be in the church parking lot at dusk with their slow cookers, camping out all night, ready and eager to display their masterpieces in pulled pork by noon the next day.

In fact, it seems to me that men come out in droves for stuff like church-sponsored softball games, fishing trips, men’s retreats, and all the stuff that smacks of being the caricature of manliness. Meanwhile, in actual ministry-related work that supposedly favors neither male nor female, it’s the women doing most of the heavy lifting.

And don’t say it’s because of the 3:2 numerical advantage women have over men in the American Church. I don’t buy that cop-out.

Case in point…

I was part of a church at one time that had about 3,500 attendees. That church had a fairly level ratio of men and women. At that time, the church had groups for motorcycle-riding, gun-shooting, and many others with a  “just for the fellowship” emphasis that would appeal to men. Fine by me—I’m all for fellowship groups. The only problem was that this same church had one men’s Bible study and about a dozen women’s Bible studies. I was painfully aware of that inexplicably lopsided ratio too. Why? Because I was the men’s Bible study leader. When I asked why there was only one men’s Bible study group, the answer I usually got was that they’d not been able to maintain more than one or two for any length of time. (What made it even nuttier was about half of the ten or so men that filtered through my group on a regular basis didn’t even attend the church.)

It seems to me that men will show up for church stuff when they have a chance to show off their machismo, but flex some spiritual muscles? Not so much.

So I don’t think it’s as much of a case of the Church being feminized as it is a case of men surrendering their God-appointed roles as spiritual leaders within the Church. They’d rather watch March Madness than bow their knees at  a 24-hour prayer meeting for the soul of the nation. Meanwhile, elderly grannies are keeping the devils at bay.

So the next time I hear some guy whimpering about how women are taking over the church, maybe a swift kick to the ‘nads will get him to wise up.

Or some spiritual equivalent. 😉

Still Looking for a Few Good Men

Standard

When I was growing up, it seemed like men were different.

I can’t put my finger on it exactly—and maybe it’s a rose-colored glasses thing tinted by youth and inexperience—but men seemed more serious back in the 1960s than the men of today. Back then, if a man who lived nearby said he’d meet you at 6 p.m. Friday in a neighborhood park to toss a baseball, he would

—actually show up

—actually show up on time

—show you something you didn’t know, like how to throw a curveball or a sinker

—possibly bring you a ball to keep

—tell you, in passing,  why alcohol and cigarettes were bad for your health

—watch his language like a hawk

—not even consider any “funny business”

And your parents wouldn’t think twice that you were out alone in a park with a man who was not a relative.

I don’t know if men changed or our ability to trust changed, but it’s not that way anymore.

When I was growing up, there was a sense among all the men that they had a responsibility to boys, even those who were not their own sons. Call it that “tribal” feeling—that men, all men, were charged with ensuring the next generation grew up straight and true, into better men than the generation that spawned them.

God help us—what happened to that ideal?

Back when I was at Wheaton, I wrote a paper on a thesis of my own devising concerning the implications of the loss of rites of passage within the Church. I grew up Lutheran, and to be a full voting member of the church, we had to go through catechism and then be grilled on the Faith by the pastor. Real men from properly trained boysThese were not lobbed question, either, but stuff like What is the nature of Man? and How does Man relate to His Creator? (Today, you’d be hard pressed to find a kid in your youth group who could thoughtfully answer those questions.)

That rite meant something. When you successfully navigated it, the world changed. Adults expected more of you. You could sit on church boards and make decisi0ns along with the rest of the adults. And the men in the church treated you like one of their own.

Today, we have too many churches who have abandoned rites of passage. And it shows, especially when you consider that some polls have 80-85 percent of Christian teens renouncing their faith by the time they graduate from college. Too many of those “enlightened” graduates go on to be brain-dead party boys who screw everything that moves and live in perpetual childhood. Back when America was largely agrarian, children meant something: the survival of the family. But today, children have no genuine purpose except to be children. So why should we be surprised when today’s child-men never outgrow that perception, never developing into the kind of men some of us older guys still remember. Now, asking callow youth to grow up seems like trying to blow out the sun, given that for 21+ years no one bothered to model for them what a real man, a real Christian man, looks like.

I’d like to think that I was one of those old school guys, like the kind I used to know. But I’m not really. I realize that the ideal started fraying with my generation, that we were the first boys that had an uncertain manhood awaiting us. Feminism was on the march, the drug culture was firing up, and so was the culture of privilege and entitlement. Somewhere along the way, manhood did a nosedive and has not recovered.

Not convinced? Need an example?

I don’t think a better example exists than with the current financial meltdown. If you were to go back to the founding of the investment houses, like Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, and Merrill Lynch, those companies were run by real men. If some smart-aleck tried to run subprime-mortgage-backed derivatives  past Mr. Goldman, Mr. Sachs, the Lehman brothers, or Misters Merrill and Lynch, he’d have one of those founders burying a foot about 18 inches deep in his backside. Why? Because those founders were men, and their names meant something. Getting involved in such tawdry schemes violated their ethics and their sense of who they were as men. Today? Most of what passes for men today would trade their reputations for a quick killing in the market, no matter who got slaughtered in the aftermath. And that’s exactly what we saw exposed last year.

This isn’t an appeal to go kill a bear with a pointy stick, as has been epitomized by much of the Christian men’s movement, but to start getting serious and singleminded again about how we turn boys into men, real men, not the poseurs masquerading as  men today. We need to see genuine rites of passage return to our churches, a passage not into Spartan-like manhood but into proper handling of  the Scriptures, women, children, the work world, and on and on.

My fear? That my generation is so compromised that we won’t be able to reconstruct what it is that we have lost so we can pass on something of worth to the boys following us.

And trust me, that’s something that should make men everywhere genuinely afraid.

Revival Then and Now

Standard

I wrote about systems the other day, and this systemic difference between a hundred years ago and now came to mind:

Then, when revival came after times of diligently seeking the Lord, everyone dropped whatever he was doing and local churches were filled to capacity 24/7 for weeks and sometimes even months.

Now, after many years of prayer by intercessors, the first hints of revival break out in your church one Sunday night, with massive repentance, people weeping before the altar, and the Holy Spirit thick upon each person. Meanwhile, you’ve got a sales conference call early Monday with Spacely Space Sprockets,  a dinner meeting with the boss, and you fly out on Tuesday morning for your presentation to the folks at J. Peterman later that afternoon. And on Wednesday…

If you want to know why revival does not come to this country, this then and now difference is a good place to start. And the problem is systemic.

If this country is ever to experience a Third Great Awakening, smart Christians better start speaking to systemic issues.