Home » Posts tagged 'complementarianism'

Tag Archives: complementarianism

If You Want to Lose Men in and from a Church

Statistics and Studies

As of June 2022, thirty-six percent of women said they attended church the last Sunday, but only twenty-four percent of men did (Gallup, 2021).  Those percentages are not the same everywhere.  Statistics or studies show that men are less religious in gender-equal countries. The Pew Research Center says that women have more influence on a family’s religious practices.  Perhaps you are a church leader and you wonder why churches are losing more men than women.

Artificial intelligence, represented by ChatGPT, which culls from the entire internet, says that 60 to 70 percent of women want an egalitarian relationship with men.  In 2019, in a Pew study, sixty-eight percent said that gender equality increased in the United States.  At the same time and in the same study, more than ten percent said religion has a less important place in society (37%) than said it was more important (27%).  Family ties weakened by fifty-eight percent to fifteen percent.  I asked AI whether men or women wanted egalitarianism more and it answered:

In conclusion, based on research findings and survey data, it is evident that women generally want egalitarianism more than men, as they exhibit greater support for gender equality, express higher levels of concern about existing inequalities, and actively engage in initiatives aimed at promoting equal rights and opportunities for all individuals regardless of gender.

In the year 1997, the United Nations did a study on women in authority, published in 2000.  The study said that women in authority often assumed male attributes, even male dress. Contemporary women executives wear “power suits.”  Fourteen percent of men prefer a female boss compared to thirty-nine percent of women.  Another study, August 2022, said that 28 percent of women prefer a female boss compared to 16 percent a male one.

Egalitarianism, Complementarianism, and Patriarchalism

Egalitarianism does not help family unity.  It results in less prominence of religion.  Also, it traces to men less involved in or happy in church.  Almost everything I’m saying I don’t think needs statistics to know.  I’ve seen it myself firsthand.  Most of all, the Bible teaches male authority, a position called “patriarchalism.”  The verse in scripture that best represents the totality of the position of patriarchy is 1 Corinthians 11:3:

But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

“The head of the woman is the man” is axiomatic.  It’s talking about society in general, especially in the context of that section in 1 Corinthians.  I, however, address for this post the place of men in the church.

Many churches today push their egalitarianism right to the front.  They want it.  Others say they are complementarian, but they practice egalitarian.  Few really believe it.  The fewest dare say they are patriarchal.  Even some of those only say it, but practice in a greater way mainly complementarianism.

Patriarchy is biblical.  It also attracts biblical men.  I’m saying masculine men or men who are actually men.  A basic and simple test is whether a church comfortably talks about what this all means.  The church isn’t hiding its patriarchal belief and practice.  It promotes it.

Losing Men by Violating the Man Code

When I talk about losing men, I mean talking about losing real men.  I’m also talking about losing those with the male sex, that might not operate as a real man as of yet.

Today, when I say man code, even men might automatically think of male chauvinism that protects bad behavior.  I don’t mean that.  However, I think of a biblical way that men don’t turn on each other.  They’ve got each others backs.  It’s not unusual for men to capitulate to women and defy the code.  Perhaps in so doing, they give up their man card.

When you read Genesis 3, it looks early on that men want to please women.  Adam did.  He wasn’t deceived by the serpent (1 Tim 2:14).  Instead, he ‘hearkened unto the voice of his wife’ (Gen 3:17) and God cursed him because of it.  Even as I write this, some men today look for something wrong.  Women might too.  This is enough to shut men down and bring a church back to the status quo or a societal norm. Some might call this conventional thinking.

If you want to lose men in the church, you can violate the man code.  When I say that, I mean violate the ways God intends to respect the male role in the church.  If you want to lose men, just do these things.  You’ll lose men fast.

A First Way to Lose Men

Before I talk about a first one, men, understand that you don’t have to push the eject button, just because a man or church violated the code.  Give someone a break.  Talk to someone about it.  That’s manhood.  Don’t leave just because your meter sets off an alarm.  That itself isn’t manly.  Some churches though set off buzzers and keep setting them off.  The men disappear.

You will lose your men if as habit or practice, you address the woman and not the man.  This could occur many different ways and not in any particular order.  All of the following five will apply to this common way for churches and even other institutions for losing men.

Application One

One, in the most simple way, you should walk to the man and talk to the man.  Spend time with him first.  When you hover around the woman, maybe because the interest she shows, the vitality she has toward the organization, that won’t be lost on the man.  He gets it.

The woman exists, but you might need to act like she doesn’t, if you have the temptation to start with her.  Draw a circle around him and head into that circle.  Ask him about his work.  Lead into spiritual things without fear.  Don’t act like those things are unusual, but right down main street for a man.  Talk to him.

Sometimes women automatically start the conversation.  They talk and talk and talk while a man stands in silence.  Everyone watches her.  Instead of looking at her, look at her husband, and when she gives you a break, start talking to the man and keep talking to him, forcing her into some kind of silence.  Learn to talk to him as if he has something to say.

Application Two

Two, when you visit, ask for the man.  The woman might arrive at the door, but you ask, where is the man (husband, etc.)?  If he is sleeping, that doesn’t mean stay and talk to her.  You could ask, “Good seeing you, but when do you think he might be available?”  Get the time and get together with him.

Application Three

Three, make appointments with the man.  The meeting is with him, not with her.  What’s a good time for the man?  “When do you think that you and I can meet?”  “It would be great to have you over for supper.”  “Would like to have coffee sometime?”  Do not ask the woman whether they want to come.  Go to the man about that.  He might ask his wife, but not your asking the wife.  Look at him in the eye and talk to him.

Men still break number three all the time with me.  They ask my wife about something related to me, like going to mom instead of dad, because it’s easier to get a “yes” answer.  Instead of texting me, they text her and ask her if she’ll ask me.

Application Four

Four, don’t talk to the wife about her husband except to say how great he is.  Never undermine him with his wife or significant other.  You will lose the man if you undermine the man.  Even if it looks like he’s got bigger problems than her, you don’t say that to her.  If you want to talk about his problems, talk to him about them, not her.  She easily can look for your approval for putting him down.  Don’t do it.

Application Five

This next one is vitally important.  It’s probably the easiest of these to violate, and you really are violating the man code, when you do.  Five, if the wife or woman wants to talk about something bad about her husband or man, don’t do it without talking to him first.  Part of fake manhood is thinking that you’ve got to rescue some other woman.  You could have the false sense that you’re somehow God’s gift to women and all of them should talk to you. Maybe you will need to rescue a woman, but if you don’t want to lose men, you better go to the man first when his woman, his wife, wants to report something bad about him.

I see men violate this last rule again, again, and again.  Surely it happens in the work place many, many times.  It’s also very much prey for infidelity.  She gains a higher opinion about the counselor or leader than she does about her own man.  That can become a very difficult barrier to solve in the future for her man (husband).  It also brings a possible dangerous closeness with the one listening approvingly.

Even when only the woman is in the church, I want to get close to the man.  I show interest in him even when he isn’t interested.  Obviously, he might say he doesn’t want any attention, but usually this isn’t the case.  He’s a man made in the image of God, so you can respect that about him.

Due Process

I’ve seen church leaders talk to a wife and keep talking to the wife and not include him in the conversation.  They call this counseling.  It isn’t, because something major is missing.  It’s called “due process,” a basic aspect of justice.

A man could have done something very seriously wrong.  He may still be doing it.  Through the years, I’ve seen that as the case.  More times than not, he isn’t and she’s exaggerating or just blaming a situation on him.  Even if he is the one doing wrong, the conversation should not go to her, but go to him.  This should happen as soon as possible.

Almost immediately church leadership must talk to both parties.  “Wait a minute.  Do you mind if I let your man (your husband) know that you’re talking to me?”  I don’t care how persuasive it might be.

Bring both parties together in Solomonic fashion, but starting with talking to the husband and it’s great if you can say, “She didn’t say anything to me.  I told her I wanted to talk to you first.  We should do that, but it would be better if we could get together.”  For sure you can’t enter into the conversation with the man, having believed what someone else said about him without having talked to him.  You can lose men if you won’t do that.  They see it as betrayal.

Falling Short of Patriarchy

Violation of one or more of these five points fall short of patriarchy, God’s biblical intention.  They betray a kind of practical egalitarianism.  Someone reading might say that they allow a man to get away with offenses.  That’s not true.  Instead they will help salvage a situation with a man and really help him, not excuse or cover for something a man is doing or has done wrong.

Churches all over the country lose men because they break these basic standards of decency and respect.  It would be good if they might apologize to men for violating them, and then start over.  It’s much harder to respect men who will not operate this way.  Through years, I’ve had many men not give me the respect of operating this way.  Most of the time, they don’t even know what they’re doing wrong.  Then when they find out, they just make excuses for themselves.  Excuses over this behavior will make it ever more likely to lose a man, sort of the coup de grace in the process.

I’ve found men want you to treat them like a man.  Ironically, men forget or don’t even know how to treat another man like a man.  If you want to keep men, you’ve got to treat men like men.  This first principle for not losing men is a first in the man code.  The five points applying the principle also constitute an important delineation of the man code.

Why Don’t Men Talk to Men?

More to Come

A Useful Exploration of Truth about Christian Nationalism (Part Two)

Part One

Seeds of Christian Nationalism

Scripture teaches nothing about anything remotely Christian nationalism for the New Testament church age.  Christian nationalism must arise at the most from principles through scripture that permit Christian nationalism.  Is that possible?  I think a semblance of that is.  True believers in Jesus Christ, Christians, could hope for that. However, before I write about that, I will deal with the Christian nationalism movement in the United States, as I see it.

The Christian nationalist movement in the United States arises from the false eschatology of postmillennialism and a false ecclesiology of paedo baptism and communion.  I suggest that several factors have contributed to this theonomist style or Christian reconstructionist postmillenial revival.

Recent Embrace of Protestant Theology

Not necessarily in this order, but, one, postmillennialism proceeds from recent new embrace of Protestant theology, some being a new Calvinism, or the “young, restless, and Reformed movement.”  Many factors, I believe and have witnessed, led to the attraction to this faction of professing Christianity.  The Apostle Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 1:22:  “For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom.”  The latter wisdom, one might also call, “intellectualism.”  Perhaps an insipid, superficial evangelicalism swung the pendulum to theological seriousness and the greatest allure to a muscular, Puritanical determinism with heavy historical roots.

Attack on the Male Role in Society

Two, the elimination of and attack on a male role in society and growing egalitarianism pushed young men toward a more masculine view of the world.  Postmillennial theonomy embraces not just complementary roles for men and women, but thoroughgoing Patriarchy.  This also explains the great popularity of Jordan Peterson, who promotes the significance of the Patriarchy and a unique place for men in the culture.

Other Reasons for the Rise of Christian Nationalism Propositions

Three, men responded to the degradation of the culture.  The United States slouches toward Gomorrah.  The weakness all around begs for an answer or a reaction.  Men don’t like what they are seeing.  This corresponds with the decline of the United States on the world stage, a porous border, and decrepit leaders.

Four, the Postmillennials have some effective spokesmen, that contrast with the ineffectiveness of the alternative.  I would compare Russell Moore, now editor of Christianity Today, and Douglas Wilson.  The former capitulates and whine and the latter puts on the battle fatigues.

Five, even though Trump himself is not a Christian, Christian nationalism dovetails with the rise of Trump.  It would take some explaining here, which I don’t think is too difficult, but I’ll leave it at that one sentence.

Premillennialism the Truth

Scripture is plain on the future or how everything will end.  It is not postmillennial.  Premillennialism represents a grammatical, historical interpretation of scripture.  It is how the Bible reads.  Premillennialism does not correspond well to a biblical presentation of Christian nationalism.

Based on this understanding of the future, Scott Aniol has written a different position than Christian Nationalism, that he calls Christian Faithfulness (he further argues here).  I can’t disagree with anything Aniol says about this and generally agree with his criticism of the positions of Stephen Wolf and Douglas Wilson.  I haven’t read Aniol’s new book, Citizens and Exiles: Christian Faithfulness in God’s Two Kingdoms, so I don’t know how far he goes in his vision for the nation.

The Likelihood or Unlikelihood of Christian Nationalism

Without having read Aniol’s book, I’m certain I would go further than Aniol and propose something toward Christian Nationalism without actual Christian Nationalism.  I explained some of this in part one.  In a refreshing way, Aniol calls himself a Baptist.  I am a Baptist.  Baptists as one of their distinctives claim the separation of church and state, even if the United States Constitution does not claim that.  Baptists have taken strongly a very anti church state doctrine.  The Baptists promoted and ratified the first amendment of the Bill of Rights.

Aniol has coined a new position related to the Christian Nationalism debate:  Christian Faithfulness.  My thinking has not yet congealed into a position.  Maybe it won’t get to that and I could hold some version of Christian Faithfulness.  I want to and will explain where I am right now.

More to Come

The Most Indispensable Quality for Manhood

Designed Manhood and Manhood Under Attack

A strange incongruity exists.  On the one hand, the world blurs the distinctions between men and women.  On the other, women want to be men and men want to be women and do so by embracing the natural distinctions between men and women.  The world in which we live produces this incoherence.

“God created man in his own image, . . . male and female created he them” (Genesis 1:27).  When God created the woman, he created her with a different role than the man.  He made the woman to complement the man.  Men and women are different.

Scripture throughout distinguishes men from women in their traits, their roles, their functions, and their appearances.  To do His moral will, God intends for men to be men and women to be women in the way His Word prescribes.

To oppose the plan of God, Satan and the world system attack and confuse biblical manhood and womanhood.  Men become more feminine and women become more masculine.  From this arises sex and gender confusion.  It damages both sexes, but especially the man.

The Loss of Manhood

Mostly today the man loses his identity, role, and function in society.  This occurs either through the feminization of everything or the subversion of God created and ordained male qualities.

The culture now eradicates male qualities by calling them toxic.  When a man acts like a man, he’s toxic, termed “toxic masculinity.”  He receives approval when he terminates male qualities to act more like a woman.  If he goes further to attempt a sex change, more the better.

Even though I don’t believe in toxic masculinity, I believe a fake masculinity exists that replaces the true.  Like every other doctrine, a false one supplants a true one.  Fake masculinity welcomes all the tokens of popular masculinity like beards, tattoos, booze, foul language, and risky hobbies.  These are easier to inculcate then the fundamental traits of masculinity.

What Makes a Man, a Man?

What is it that makes a man, a man?  The Bible evinces the most indispensable quality for manhood as “strength.”  In 1 Corinthians 16:13, the Apostle Paul writes, “Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong.”  “Quit you” in the KJV is “to acquit yourself.”  “Quit you like men” translates a single verb which means, “act like a man.”  Then when Paul defines what it is to act like one, he commands, “Be strong.”

Later, when Paul writes to Timothy in his second epistle, he explains to him ‘how to be strong.’  In 2 Timothy 2:1, he writes:

Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.

Again we read the command, “Be strong.”  Paul starts that sentence with “therefore,” so he bases this command on the content of the previous section.  If anything, its theme is unashamedness.  Rather than be ashamed, be strong.

Not Ashamed

To help Timothy, he gives him portrayals of strength that would make him not ashamed:  the faithful man, the soldier, the athlete, and the farmer.  These all describe this quality of strength.

What is the shame about which Paul speaks?  It relates to telling the truth.  Paul himself had declared in Romans 1:16, “I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ.”  Men should stand on the truth without wavering.  They should say it, which includes firmness about manhood itself.  Satan and the world system want men to back down on the truth and shirk responsibility to tell it, live it, and lead it.

Some might call this, having a backbone.  Men diminish behind the skirts of women.  They look to women for permission for what they can say.  Many times women gladly accommodate or accept that.  This changes everything in society.

Women Rule Over Them

Many times scripture says to the woman, “Keep silence or stay quiet” (1 Cor 14:34, 1 Tim 2:11-12).  This says, “Let the man lead.”  When things aren’t going well for a nation, Isaiah 3:12 describes:

As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them.

This is role, function, and quality reversal.  That means men are not ruling according to God’s design.  Now men accept this quietly.  They know if they say anything, they’re in trouble.

As a first indication of a man deferring his own manhood, he stops standing spiritually.  A common scenario in my lifetime, I go to a door to speak about the gospel.  A man or at least a male sex answers the door, sees who I am, and turns to say this conversation is for his wife.  Men lack spiritual strength or conviction.

When men check with their wives, that might sound happily egalitarian.  Maybe they use their wives as an excuse for their weakness.  I’m not saying men can’t confer with their wives, very often today men can’t decide because they’re weak.  Maybe today a majority of men support the idea of a woman ruling over them.  It would just be easier.

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives