Tonight Colin led a really interesting discussion on the question of why there are so many less men in church than women.It's interesting to remember that a lot of the heroes of the Bible were men. And in the case of the disciples, they weren't softies but big butch fishermen.
Looking at the church today, it could be argued that it has become a place that encourages mainly feminine qualities (relationships, support, harmony, nurturing), with women taking most leadership roles. Even the church's activities seem to have a feminine bias: baptisms, weddings, fetes, creches and suppers.
We questioned whether there was a sense that men wanted to be 'real' men (drinking beer, looking at women and driving cool cars) rather than the kind of men the church encourages them to be (drinking grape juice, looking at Bibles and driving the church van).
There is a theory that there is a 'masculinity bank' which can be depleted by engaging in more feminine pursuits. We discussed whether perhaps men outside of the church are not attracted to come along because they fear they will have to be a different (and somehow less manly) sort of man.
We finished by thinking about how men enjoy being part of a team, forming relationships side by side, whereas women form relationships face to face. We asked whether we need to create opportunities within the church for men to enjoy this sort of relationship. We also questioned whether the church would benefit from a more masculine style of leadership - perhaps a more forceful 'tell it like it is' style.
It was a fascinating evening; a topic I'd not ever considered. Of course I had noticed that there are way more women in the church than men - quite an issue when I was a single lass! (Thank God for Greenbelt)
We concluded that the issue is the same as with kids in the church - if there aren't any there to begin with, new ones just aren't attracted to come along.
Do feel free to leave your thoughts, whether you were with us tonight or not - I'd be keen to hear what you think, especially all you blokes. Thanks Colin for a really interesting and well thought out evening.
11 comments:
What grotty weather? It's beautiful ;o)
I would love to come but sadly won't be there this evening as I am saving my babysitting opportunities for the games night next Thursday!
Hope you all have a good time.
Fascinating.
Is that a way of saying there should be more gay men or TVs going to church ? ;o)
OTOH, I remember the men / women ratio rather gave a good amount of choice ;o)
How many men will talk with great enthusiasm about sport, but when it comes to God, well, it's quiet, hushed, well spoken?
I do concur though that church leadership often (esp. in the media) seems to be run by limp men with no balls, as it were.
Now, the sort of example demonstrated by the Archbishop of York last weekend is something to make you think there is something more stereotypically male about that leadership.
I think gay men would be perfectly justified in not feeling at home in the church given the frosty reception they'd doubtless get, but that's another subject.
I wonder if the church isn't full of feisty, stroppy women and 'limp' men, as you put it. Strange, because there was nothing wet about Jesus, was there?
I wonder too, who wears the trousers in most Christian marriages? Biblically, it could be argued that it should be the man that gets the final say, and that the woman should ultimately be in submission. Doesn't seem to be the case when you observe most Christian marriages (that's how it appears at least).
I really should know what he said or did (I do listen to Radio 4, honest!) but can you fill me in on how the Archbishop of York displayed strong leadership last week?
Archbishop of York - hope this works - see about 3:45 minutes in especially. Andrew Marr's reaction is wondrous!
It won't allow me to embed - but see THIS here.
Top man.
Ooh, see what you mean - snip snip snip... very manly.
It was interesting at the St Stephens Christmas Party (yes...) last night that out of a church hall absolutely packed, I think there were 2 or 3 men in their 30s and 40s - including me. All the others were women of all ages or children. I really felt quite out of place!
Hate going to church? Me and my mate can't keep away!
Sadly, though, most of us men have hearts as hard as Pharoah's which take a lot of breaking down. Nevertheless, we must remember as Paul said that the Gospel is "the power of God unto salvation."
Gunkle - I'm glad you love it so much, and of course many others do too, and that's great.
But we were trying to explore the motivations of a group of people who could come - they aren't set against faith - but don't. And particularly, is there anything that we in the church do that actively puts them off? We are fallen people running churches, and are capable of creating all sorts of additional hoops that we expect people to jump through. Like John the Baptist I think we are called to 'make a straight path for the Lord' and remove man-made obstacles when we see them.
Oh indeed we are to welcome all who will come into our midst.
However, if we water down the Gospel then we do so at our peril as well as theirs.
The church of Jesus Christ is to make disciples of the nations. That isn't necessarily the same as getting bums on seats. Excuse my crudness. Gunkle will tell me off now!
I never said anything about watering down the gospel - we just want to water down those parts of church that are man-made extras.
One small example; pews. The gospel message doesn't specify that followers have to sit in lines, facing the front, somewhat uncomfortably. That is something that people have developed over the years. So getting rid of pews or hard upright chairs is fine in my opinion. Especially if it might make someone feel more comfortable worshipping in surroundings that are similar to their home.
We are basically experimenting to find out which aspects of church are core and which are add-ons, and removing any add-ons that might deter people.
Post a Comment