Posted by Dave on 04/30/06 at 09:22:10 am
Categories: Theological Ravings, Religious Right, Feminism

I really have no clue how I survived a year at Biola, especially after I read articles like this.

I came across Biola's alumni magazine Connections which featured a cover story titled The Feminization of the Church. One of my co-workers attended Biola, and brought the magazine to show me.

The article was fairly typical of what you would expect. You have your standard stereotypes and sexist remarks, things like serving opportunities (such as nursing, hospitality, teaching children, etc) are "feminine." You have people desiring to sing songs with "warrior-type lyrics and more masculine things that men identify with." Funny - because I don't identify with being a warrior. Then you have claims like this:

Mike Erre (M.A. '04)-- the director of a men's ministry of over 400 men at Rock Harbor Church in Costa Mesa, Calif. -- said feminine expressions of spirituality are more validated than masculine expressions.

Seriously? Really...this guy cannot mean that. How often does Mr. Erre hear anyone even mention the feminine expressions of God? The church is dominated by masculine attributes and expressions of spirituality.

And then they have a section titled "Girly-men Pastors." Yes, you read that correctly. According to the article, a feminized church attracts "gentle, sensitive, nurturing" pastors. Because those are "feminine" traits, right? It would be so much better to have rough, abrasive, and callous pastors, eh?

I just find it incredibly ironic that an institution that represses (and has done so for many, many years) women is complaining about the feminization of the church. Of course, even the concept of "feminine" and "masculine" deserve their own discussions. I am pretty sure that I have a different understanding of what these terms mean than the author of this article (ironically a female).

The church's is not being "feminized." The opposite is true. The Church is so clearly dominated by men that the concept that it is not "masculine" enough is amusing. I have talked about this before, specifically when I recently read Is it Okay to Call God Mother. We have a current church that only uses masculine terms and imagery for God. We have a church that is dominated by male leadership. Yet people complain about it becoming too feminized? You have to be kidding me.

It is simple. The church does not repress men, or "masculinity" (at least as defined by these people). The church represses women, and represses female attributes of God.

| Permalink