The Church Impotent

I think its a good read and has shed some light on the topic for me at least. I have wondered why so often the ladies in a church have way more to do with how things are to be run then thier male counter parts. I think this book has some really good points as to the where's, why's and how's of this. db

Worthy read

”Men are largely absent from the Christian churches of the modern West.” That’s the phenomenon that Leon J. Podles addresses in The Church Impotent. It is fairly obvious to those who frequent churches that, while men dominate among the clergy, women predominate in the pews.
There are exceptions among denominations, but overall, men attend church much less frequently and are even less likely than women to pray privately. Women are twice as likely to attend a church service. No matter the yardstick, women exhibit greater commitment to, involvement with, and belief in religion, according to Robert Putnam and David Campbell in their authoritative book, American Grace (2010).

This pattern of feminization is not found, however, in Judaism and Islam, which indicates that men are not by nature nonreligious. Podles seeks to discover what it is about Western Christianity that drives men away. What discourages male involvement? He has a plausible theory.

The Old Testament is clearly patriarchal, and Podles contends that early Christianity also continued the masculine approach. During the Middle Ages, however, changes to church doctrine made Christianity more feminine with bridal mysticism. Erotic language was used to describe the relation of the believer to God, with Jesus the groom and Christians the bride. A modern example is from Bill McCartney, founder of Promise-keepers: “We were created to be in a love affair with Jesus.”

This bridal language has homosexual overtones, suggests Podles, who also thinks the movement of the church to become less condemnatory of homosexuality might deter male participation as well. That latter theory, if true, would not account for the lack of men in church in the decades before the 1990s. He also points out that the clergy is considered a more feminine occupation, along with artists and journalists. This may be because male clergy must appeal to women who constitute the bulk of their flocks.

So what will it take to attract men to the Church? A masculine spirituality must include struggle, such as Abraham bargaining with God over the fate of Sodom, or Jacob wrestling with God. Churches may be going in the wrong direction when they preach submissive obedience and downplay the struggle between good and evil. In addition, the Church should provide opportunities for male comradeship. David Murrow makes similar recommendations in his bestselling book, Why Men Hate Going to Church (2005, 2011).

Some of the approach in this book is simplistic and lacks evidence to back it up, such as the contention that being more accepting of homosexuality drives away straight men. The dearth of men does deserve serious attention from Christian leaders and theologians. Podles doesn’t have all the right answers, but the health of the church requires that they be found. ###

Was not exactly what I expected, thought there would be more substance to the book.

I found the book to be sloppily argued. Some chapters are nothing more than a hodgepodge of different sources strung together to fit Podles' thesis, while others rely much too heavily on his own unexamined assumptions about both Christianity and masculinity. I wanted to learn more about the subject of the feminization of Christianity, but ended up only learning more about Podles.

In "The Church Impotent", Leon Podles takes as his subject the severe gender imbalance in Western Christianity, both Catholic and Protestant. Although I'm not sure about his explanation of the cause, his analysis of masculine religious psychology makes this one of the most enlightening books I've ever read.

It is an undeniable fact that women dominate the ranks of Western Christianity. In the myriad pews across the theological spectrum, women will make up from between 55% to 90% of the congregation. Christianity has come to be seen by the majority of Western man as something feminine or effeminate. Men may not be overtly hostile to a nominal Christian affiliation, but to actually attend church and actively participate in its life is widely considered unmanly and practically unthinkable, especially for single men. Men do make up the vast majority of the clergy (even in denominations where female clergy are allowed), but those men, as well as male churchgoers in general, tend to be more effeminate in character, behavior and interests. In fact, in the study Podles cites, only active homosexuals ranked higher than Christian clergymen on a scale of effeminacy. Indeed, in many Protestant denominations, homosexuality is accepted as an acceptable lifestyle, and in many others open homosexuals can even be ordained. In the Catholic Church, which officially regards homosexual sex as a sin, there grew up in the mid 20th century a "lavender mafia" in the priesthood which is only now being combated by the Vatican. This dominance of the church by women and an effeminate, and often homosexual, clergy has turned the church into something that men regard with indifference or aversion.

Many people claim the reason is that women are simply more "spiritual" than men. Islam and Judaism belie that claim. And in the first 1000 years of Christianity, Podles points out that there was a gender balance in the Church (although of course not in the priesthood). Men were just as observant as women, most saints were men, and the Church emphasized things that spoke to the hearts of men (which I will get to shortly). The problem, he claims, can be traced to 3 causes. The first was the preaching of St. Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153), who used bridal imagery and romantic- almost erotic- language to describe the soul's relationship to God. The second cause was the rise of the women's movement in the Middle Ages, which resulted in greater personal freedom, more female religious orders, more female saints and subsequent devotion to them. The third cause was the Scholastic movement, which applied logic to theology and thus divorced it from mysticism. Take these for what they're worth; I think his explanation bears further study, but that is his starting point. He says that thereafter the dominant attitude in everything from art to devotional practices was that the only way to relate to Christ was as a woman: passive, receptive, obedient. The divine paradigm was either husband/bride or mother/son. He says that the Reformation, with its emphasis on Old Testament severity and patriarchalism, was a reaction to this medieval feminization of the Church, but that Protestantism too quickly fell victim to the feminine spirit of sentimentality.

Even in ages we regard as fanatically religious, the gender imbalance persisted. Where there is extant evidence, Podles cites hard facts. Church membership records from 17th century Puritan New England show that even then women made up the majority of the church. The same was true in 19th century America, where popular literature often derided Protestant clergymen as effeminate half-men. One only has to think of Jane Austen's simpering Mr. Collins for a well-known literary example of the type. Podles cites 19th century Spanish church membership and popular sayings for a comparable Catholic context. He also details the various efforts churches tried to reverse the trend. So, to paraphrase Freud, what is it exactly that men want?

For the answer to this, Podles examines male psychology and the religious paradigms that actually speak to them, and this is, I think, the most profound part of the book. In contrast to girls, who automatically ease into womanhood with puberty, a boy needs to_become_a man through a spiritually transformative action. In the initiation rites, religious texts and national epics of practically every world culture, the story is the same: the boy must separate from the soft, sheltering world of women- of mother- enter the world of danger and challenge, face death, and only then return to the world of women as a protector, having conquered death and been reborn as something new. Through trial and suffering, he undergoes a spiritual death as a boy and a transcendent rebirth as a man. In societies where actual war isn't an option, initiation rites create its moral equivalent. If there's one thing that men across the globe instinctively share, it's the view of the warrior archetype as the purest form of masculinity. And what is the warrior's highest ideal, but self-sacrifice? Masculinity is an infinitely greater and different thing than being "tough", bedding women, or being materially successful. Masculinity is, at heart, a willingness to sacrifice oneself for the "other".

Jesus Christ was the epitome of this masculine template. He left His family, underwent supernatural battle in the desert, defeated the devil, and brought back a great boon of enlightenment to His people. Then, He was tortured and killed_for their sake_, but conquered death itself with His Resurrection, bringing salvation to humanity. Men instinctively relate to this heroic, glorious and masculine aspect of Jesus. He was, and is, everything we want to be as men. Yet, the feminine church has replaced Him with Jesus meek and mild, a woman with a beard in popular iconography, a nurturing bridegroom who walks and talks with me and tells me I'm His own, a mother who kisses my boo-boos and provides a shoulder to cry on. To be sure, men need comforting too sometimes, but a religion that focuses on our weakness rather than our strength will not keep our interest long. And when the search for masculinity is divorced from the spirit, it manifests itself in the faux transcendence of modern America; sports, sex and violence.

Podles gives some examples of the masculine-friendly Christianity which still exist. He says the Holy Week Triduum of the Catholic Church is the apotheosis of the heroic/masculine ritual in Christianity. I can testify to that. The re-enactment of the Passion, the sound of the bare wood clapping on Good Friday, the darkened church, the sense of desolation and eventual triumph effected in me an intimate identification with Christ and a feeling of transcendence. Podles also cites the Catholic Penitentes of the Southwest, who combine initiation rituals with physical mortification. Most well know though, is the conversion spirituality of evangelical Protestantism. Because men tend to think in black and white dichotomies (good/evil, death/life), the stark choice presented by evangelical revivalism between salvation and damnation is very attractive to men. They see themselves in spiritual battle, and make a heroic choice to die to the old and be reborn a new creation. Men have a natural need and understanding for conversion throughout their lives, while it is relatively unimportant in women's lives. Unfortunately for the evangelical churches, once the men convert they find themselves in environments that are the very definition of effeminate. I think of the Promise Keepers, the evangelical "men's movement", which gets men together in football stadiums so they can hug each other and cry. Good Lord! Revivalism does convert a lot of men to evangelicalism, who are then driven away by the normal effeminacy.

Podles recommends that churches emphasize the masculine struggle and victory of Jesus. He says religion which speaks to men will use the language of warfare, of black and white contrasts, of those paradoxes (you must die in order to live) which men automatically grasp, of the transcendence of the self through self-sacrifice. Its worship will be serious rather than happy-clappy. He cites the need for some sort of initiation ritual for young men. If Christianity isn't to become some sort of amiable ladies club, we have to rediscover the masculine heart of our Faith.