Book Review: WCWBF, Part II-What Exactly is She Proposing?

Screenshot-2018-07-18-08.35.52

Earlier I wrote that one basic problem with Mrs. Byrd’s new book, Why Can’t We Be Friends,  is she does not prove that the problem she is addressing, that of men and women in the church not being friends because the church has adopted a worldly mindset, actually exists in large enough numbers and is taught by a large enough group of leaders to be a major issue in the evangelical church. As I read, I found it hard to nail down exactly what she wanted us to do or think. The book meandered a bit and much of what she said, especially in the second half, all parties agree with. So this post is a bit boring, but my goal is to state clearly what I think she is trying to accomplish.

Here is what she cannot be proposing:

First, she cannot be proposing that men and women should become friends in group settings. Most men and women, even when married, are perfectly fine having friendships that are social and public. Couples having dinner together or groups meeting together in a social setting would not violate anything I have read from those opposed to Mrs. Byrd’s suggestions. Most men I know are happy to talk to women in a  public, social setting.  Our church is super-patriarchal, yet we talk with opposite the sex after church, at church picnics, etc.

Second, she cannot be proposing that men and women should work together vocationally. Again, who is saying that men and women should not work together? Perhaps there would be  (and should be) some discussion when there are late nights at the office or road trips. But the idea of men and women working together, even a pastor and female secretary alone at the office for eight hours, is rarely if ever opposed.  I would be overjoyed if work places were a lot less coed. But no doubt I am in a very, small minority.

Third, she cannot be proposing that singles should have opportunities to meet one on one, such as a date. (One of the problems with this book and at least one review I read is they equate developing opposite sex friendships when single and doing the same thing when married. They are different for one obvious reason: the person is no longer single.) There are courtship advocates who may go so far as to say a single man should never be alone with a girl. But that is not the norm. Most of the evangelical church, reformed church, and even courtship advocates are fine, to varying degrees,  with singles being alone with each other on dinner dates, going to movies, driving, etc.

Fourth, despite Douglas Wilson’s tweet about not helping a woman unless her bone was sticking out, I think most men, including Doug, would gladly help a woman if she needed it. I doubt the main point of this book is that men should help women who have flat tires or need their groceries loaded in their trunk.    Continue reading

Book Review: Why Can’t We Be Friends, Part I- Houston, Is There a Problem?

WCWBFWhen one writes a book addressing a specific problem instead of a general overview of a subject they must first prove that the problem exists. For example, if I am writing a general book on how a Christian should approach his vocation,  I might address the Biblical view of work, key passages such as Ephesians 6, some common workplace problems, etc. But if I think there has been a decline in manual labor among Christians and I plan to write a book addressing that decline, I must first prove that such a decline exists, then I must prove that it is a bad thing, and only then can I offer solutions.

Aimee Byrd’s latest book is not general, but specific. She believes there is a problem between men and women in the church. She believes that Christians are being taught by the culture that friendship between men and women is bad. She believes we have adopted the mindset of Billy Crystal in When Harry Met Sally where we let the threat of sex get in the way of friendship. Continue reading

The Beauty Myth

Broken Face

Last week I posted from Dr. Schaumburg’s book Undefiled one indicator of the sexual problems here in America. Here is another problem he has encountered regularly in his thirty plus years of counseling. He calls it “the beauty myth.”

For men and women, “beauty” has become nearly synonymous with “sexy.” The beauty myth, an obsession with physical perfection, holds women in bondage to hopelessness, self-consciousness, and self-hatred. It intertwines sexuality and beauty to create the idea that a woman must be “beautiful” to be sexual and desirable in a relationship. Women say they “feel sexier” when they lose weight, but female sexual pleasure doesn’t multiply with weight loss.  Compared with sexual sin, the obsession with beauty  may seem like a minor issue. In reality, the impossible-to-achieve desire to secure an external “flawless beauty” destroys a woman’s sexuality and spirituality.

The “pornography of beauty” reshapes female sexuality. You see this in everyday magazine ads and in women’s magazines. Users of Photoshop have taken the picture of a three hundred pound woman in lingerie and turned her into a sex goddess. There is little that is real about such an image, but men and women will worship it. The image altering software easily creates the perfect hair, skin, and figure. The message is clear: “Look like that if you want to fee like that.” 

Why does a woman go under the knife for numerous facelifts in a desperate attempt to look younger? Why are girls much more self-conscious about their appearance today? Why did my mother, in her early nineties, still dye her hair? The beauty myth has obscured what is truly beautiful in a woman…Today we are easily duped into thinking that external beauty is all there is to woman.

More and more women believe they must have that face and look to have their needs met. Like sexual pornography, the pornography of beauty is based on a myth and both types of porn make a woman an object. If a man’s image and understanding of sexuality is distorted by pornography, I suggest there is a parallel effect on a woman’s image and her understanding of sexuality in the beauty myth.

Unfortunately, the beauty myth is winning the battle against sexual purity. In reality the ads don’t sell sex; instead they sell discontent, shame, and guilt. A woman will say, “I hate my body, my hips, my thighs, and my stomach.” This is at the core a deep sexual shame, which is destructive both relationally and spiritually. And this focus on external beauty is in direct contradiction to what Scripture teaches-that authentic beauty come from inside a person:

Do not let your adorning be external-the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear-but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious. For this is how the holy women who hope in God used to adorn themselves, by submitting to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. And you are her children, if you do good and do not fear anything that is frightening. (I Peter 3:3-6)

Signs of Sexual Rot: Diminished Masculinity & Femininity

Gender Roles 1

If you are looking for a book that will help you counsel someone with sexual problems or work through your own sexual problems then I would recommend Dr. Harry Schaumburg’s Undefiled.   Dr. Schaumburg at the time of this book (2009) had counseled almost 1,500 couples and has been counseling over thirty years with eighteen years devoted exclusively to sexual issues.  In one of the early chapters of the book he discusses how prevalent sexual sin is in the church.  He says that some research puts the number of church members watching porn at 50%. One mission organization told him that 80% of their applicants voluntarily indicated a problem with porn. One seminary professor said we no longer ask, are you using porn. But rather how bad is it? Dr. Schaumburg closes with this statement, “This rot in the church must be addressed or the devastation will be incalculable.” He then gives nine indicators of the problem. I will quote the first here and give the other eight in an subsequent post. Why quote the first one in full? It gets at one of the roots of our sexual malaise: rejection of created ordered and a failure to rejoice that men are men and women are women. Here are the two paragraphs under that indicator.  Continue reading

Mere Sexuality

cbmw

The Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) released the Nashville Statement this week.  I have had more disagreements with the CBMW over the years. Initially I was enthralled by them. But more reading, in particular historical reading, has led me away from them. However, this statement is good. It lays out mere sexuality, as in basic, very basic, Biblical sexual ethics concerning marriage, sodomy and transgenders. Initially, I thought the statement was too basic to be worthwhile. But the response by many progressive Christians has vindicated the need for it. Surprise, surprise many Christians are not as firm on the basics as they let on.  Continue reading

Calvin on Men as Heads in General

Recently I got in an online discussion about patriarchy. I was told that “Patriarchy is NOT the historic teaching of the church.”  Whether this is right or wrong depends to a large degree on the definition of patriarchy. In the discussion patriarchy was defined as women submitting to men in general. It was assumed that wives should submit to husbands and that women could not be pastors. But men do not have a headship over women in general. By the logic put forth in other discussions, if this was the case, we would find men ordering women around everywhere they went.

There are several issue at play here. But in this post I simply want to quote John Calvin who clearly does assert that men are heads of women in general. And I doubt this led to the men in Geneva ordering all the women around.  This quote comes from a sermon on I Corinthians 11:4-10.

Now St. Paul is not speaking here of individuals, or of particular households. Rather he has divided the human race into two parts, as was indicated in the previous sermon. So there is the male, and the female. I say this, because even though a man may not be married, he still has this privilege of nature: he is a head. Of whom? Of women, because we are not merely to examine one house, but the order that God has established in the world. In the case of a widow, or of a young woman who has yet to marry, the subjection of which St. Paul is speaking still pertains to them. Why? Because it applies to the entire feminine sex…From this we see the stupidity of some who have expounded this text of St. Paul as if it referred only to married women. For, as I have already indicated, he is not dealing with each individual in particular, but with the general order.

You may disagree with Calvin. I do not. However, that is not the point. The point is a historical one. Calvin clearly did hold to the general submission of women to men. He did not restrict it to wives and husbands only. He says the same thing in his commentary on this passage.

Does this make women less than men? Are they not also made in the image of God? Does Christ relate to men in the same way as women? See this blog post where Calvin affirms that women are made in the image of God and salvation is fully their’s in the same way it belongs to men. In Christ, we are equal and all are made in the image of God. But “in this passing life” [Calvin’s term] there is a need for order. And God created men to rule.

 

Thin Bodies, Iron Yokes

chain-breaking
This is a re-post, with a few edits, from last summer. 

When Christ and His gospel are preached in all their fullness men and women are set free, not from rules and obedience, but from man’s rules and from obedience as the road to salvation. The gospel says that satisfaction has been made for all our sins. There is nothing we can do, say, think, implement, or learn that will take away our sins. Our sins are completely taken away in Christ. We now have an easy yoke and light burden. Our King is not a tyrant.  His laws are not burdensome.

But bondage is always out there stalking us like a pack of wolves. There are always men and women rattling chains, but claiming they are keys, slave traders promising freedom. They say, “Our yoke is better than Christ’s.” But the yokes of men are always iron. Continue reading