Reformed SHEology

Part 1 in the "Men Behaving Badly" Series
Part 2 Part 3 Part 4

Curiosity may have attracted you to this post for the title alone. I acknowledge that it is a title which, on the surface, may appear to disagree with our mission statement. However, in the interest of returning to our original intent for this blog, as outlined in that mission statement, I feel this is an important topic to address. Specifically, I am going to begin a series of posts to address some of the things that men do to upset women and cause them to stumble.

I first discussed this idea with Geraldine well over a year ago. It has been on my heart to address some of these issues because this blog began when a man behaved badly toward me. Part of the repentance process for me was to create this blog in an effort to channel my anger into something positive. I wanted to prevent further conflict between men and women by promoting greater understanding between the sexes. However, when I first came up with the idea for this series, I wasn't confident that I could write from a pure heart. I was still harboring some unforgiveness toward the man whose actions inspired this blog, and I was afraid some of it would come through in my writing.

I decided to hold off until I could write from a pure heart. I know I can not address this subject with a snarky attitude, and let's face it, I have been known to suffer from Snarkolepsy. For me to approach this subject with a bad attitude would undermine the entire purpose of this blog's existence. On the other hand, to continue ignoring the subject would rob this blog of a series of powerful discussions that would propel it toward its very goal of encouraging women to encourage men.

This series is designed not to bash men, but to help men understand where they may be harboring some unholy tendencies which hurt the women around them.The time has come. I am confident that I can approach this topic this year with a clean and pure heart. God has changed me through this blog. He has given me the ability to denounce male-bashing and to embrace masculinity for what it truly is: a blessing to women everywhere. I am truly grateful for the beautiful, godly men that The Lord has placed in my life and there is nothing I desire more than to see men and women working together to bridge the gap between our differences so that we can grow together in Christian unity. Part of this process is to have an open, honest dialogue about sin. This series is designed not to bash men, but to edify them. It is designed to help men understand where they may be harboring some unholy tendencies which hurt the women around them. My desire is to do what I can to help men understand how they can better serve the women in their lives through self-examination and repentance.

For those of you who are new to this blog, I would like to stress that this is the first time ever we will be addressing male shortcomings. We do not make it our practice to focus on male flaws. Since this blog's inception, we have only focused on female shortcomings. This is because our primary goal is to encourage women to be better women. We have not addressed male shortcomings because the Bible tells us to take the log out of our own eyes so we can see clearly before attempting to remove a speck in someone else's. That being said, I want to make it clear that this blog is devoted to removing the logs from the eyes of women. In contrast, this series is devoted to removing the specks in the eyes of men.

This introductory post will be the only one that is filed under "Men/Masculinity." All subsequent posts in this series will be located under the "Conflict" label. Again, this is to keep this discussion in its proper context. "Men Behaving Badly" is not an appropriate discussion for the celebration of the beautiful mystery that is masculinity. We want to communicate that "Men Behaving Badly" is the exception rather than the rule. Male shortcomings do not define masculinity, rather, male shortcomings define conflict (as do female shortcomings).

It is my prayer that whether you are a man or a woman, that you will be blessed by some of the discussion to follow in the next few weeks or so. Men, I would ask that you read with an open heart to see if perhaps you see yourselves in any of the descriptions, and to ask The Lord to change you in those areas. Women, I ask that you pray for the men in your lives who may be weak in these areas, that you would be patient with their sanctification process, and that you will be forgiving toward them when they stumble. Let us not accuse one another any longer. Let us instead love one another, for the Bible tells us that the world will know we belong to Him if we love one another.

Physical appearance is a concern that is commonly designated to women. Yet in our increasingly superficial society, more and more men are feeling the pressure to measure up to the culture's standard of attractiveness. Since our theme this month is true beauty, we thought we'd examine some of the issues surrounding male pattern baldness . . . and see if perhaps the Bible might have anything to say about the subject. In honor of our brothers in Christ, who are more visual, we've decided to go with more images in order to demonstrate that bald is beautiful!

Fact: Adults lose about 100 scalp hairs each and every day.

Scripture Says: The very hairs on your head are all numbered. (Matthew 10:30; Luke 12:7)

Fact: Men begin losing their hair as early as age 20. Therefore, baldness is not a sign of age.

Scripture says: The glory of young men is their strength,but the splendor of old men is their gray hair. (Proverbs 20:29, emphasis added)


Fact: Baldness is commonly regarded by many as a sign of weakness and disgrace. For this reason it is often the cause of great psychological distress in men.

Scripture says: [Elisha] went up from there to Bethel, and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, "Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!" And he turned around, and when he saw them, he cursed them in the name of the LORD. And two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys. (2 Kings 2:23-24)"I bristle when I hear advertisements for hair growth. They make it sound like hair loss is the worst possible thing that could happen to you." ~Michael Chiklis, Actor

Fact: Most men are genetically predisposed to baldness. This is because baldness is caused by testosterone, the primary hormone responsible for both primary and secondary sex characteristics in men. (And I believe, just as long hair on a woman is a symbol of femininity, less hair on a man is a symbol of masculinity!)


Scripture says: For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man is not from woman, but woman from man. Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man. For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord. For as woman came from man, even so man also comes through woman; but all things are from God. Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering. (1 Corinthians 11:3-15, emphasis added).

We here at Reformed SHEology want to encourage our brothers in Christ to not grow anxious over seeing more skin up top. In the spirit of 1 Corinthians 11, we encourage you to say it loud: I'm bald and I'm proud! The world wants so much for us to focus on the flesh. For women, it's usually our weight, for men, it's their hair. Let's encourage one another in brotherly (and sisterly) love by praising one another for the way we strive to look more and more like Christ every day.

The following video features an interview with Patrick Stewart, who began losing his hair at age 19. We hope this video will inspire men to have the right attitude about the way God has chosen for them to look:

Have you ever lied? Ever stolen anything? You may recognize these questions as part of The Way of the Master, an evangelism method made popular by Ray Comfort's ground-breaking book, Hell's Best Kept Secret (HBKS), which focuses on effective, biblical evangelism through the use of God's law, The Ten Commandments.

In the book, Comfort observes that 80-90% of those who initially make a profession of faith in Christ eventually fall away, because they were never given the true gospel to begin with. Comfort observes that in prior centuries, preachers like Charles Spurgeon and Jonathan Edwards would openly issue warnings of the consequences of sin using a four letter word that began with the letter H. But in the modern church, the mention of "hell" is avoided for fear that it will seem offensive to the sinner. So the modern gospel is reduced to three words: "Jesus loves you." With no clear understanding of what sin is and why they will be punished for it, sinners cannot appreciate the magnitude of Christ's love. The point of Comfort's book is that both sides of God's character must be presented in order for an unregenerate sinner to clearly understand the gospel message. It is true that "God is love," (1 John 4:8, 16), but it is also true that God will judge us for our sins, and that He is "angry with the wicked every day," (Psalm 7:11).

So what does an evangelism method like The Way of the Master (WOTM) have to do with masculinity? Could an evangelism method hold the answer to unbalanced gender relations within the local church? I think it can, when you consider that the "soft" gospel described by Ray Comfort in HBKS has not only produced millions of false converts, but it has also feminized the modern church to the point of driving men away.

David Murrow's eye-opening book, Why Men Hate Going to Church encourages the reader to give consideration to some outstanding insights on the modern church and it's tendency to repel men. The book is ground-breaking in its attempts at pinpointing how many aspects of the modern church have become largely feminized, and therefore uncomfortable for many men. Murrow's belief is that a balance between the masculine and feminine should be present within the church, and uses the analogy of a thermostat to illustrate his point. If the thermostat in your home is set too high or too low, you will be uncomfortable. In the same manner, Murrow believes that the thermostat in most churches today are set too high on "feminine" and therefore are stifling to the masculine spirit.

Although Murrow does not ever mention Ray Comfort, HBKS, or WOTM in his book, it can be argued that there is a correlation between his observations about the feminized church and the inadequacy of the false (if not feminine) gospel used by many in their evangelism efforts as described by Comfort. A feminized gospel does not motivate false Christians to come to Christ, nor does it motivate male Christians to come to church. Consider some of the very valid points Murrow makes:

Ignore what is being preached from the pulpit and look what actually happens on Sunday morning. Almost everything about today's church . . . is designed to meet the needs and expectations of a largely female audience. Church is sweet and sentimental, nurturing and nice (p. 14).

What does today's church emphasize? Relationships: a personal relationship with Jesus and healthy relationships with others. By focusing on relationships, the local church partners with women to fulfill their deepest longing. But few churches model men's values: risk and reward, accomplishment, heroic sacrifice, action, and adventure (p. 15).

Jesus had no problem attracting men. Fishermen dropped their nets full of fish to follow Him, but today's church can't convince men to drop their remote controls for a couple of hours a week. The good news is, Jesus is alive today. He wants to speak to men. If only the church will let Him (p. 17).

Murrow describes how much of what Jesus offered the early Christians were principles rooted in men's values: competence, power, efficiency, achievement, skill, competition, challenge, and adventure. The early church was full of opportunities for men to be men. Many of these opportunities are found in proper biblical evangelism as outlined in HBKS. Yet most churches do not encourage their members to evangelize, and when they do, the preferred method of choice is "friendship evangelism." There is no challenge or adventure in establishing a "relationship" with someone for months in order to build up the courage to tell them "Jesus loves you." No, real challenge and adventure is rooted in circumventing the intellect to go for the conscience - to use the law to convict the sinner of their guilt before God. Is it any coincidence that most evangelism circles are dominated by men?

While Comfort has demonstrated the effect of a one-sided gospel on the lost, Murrow has demonstrated the effect of a one-sided gospel on the saved. When the church's values are overtly feminine, men are not the only ones who suffer. Women are at a loss to understand how they can help the men in their lives to cultivate more of an interest in church activities.

Although I disagree with most of the social and anthropological explanations for male and female behavior that Murrow provides, (I believe maleness and femaleness are divine assignments from God not rooted in psychology, sociology, or anthropology), the book is worth the read for the numerous recommendations Murrow gives for bringing the church back into balance. The answer to a healthy, balanced church is a healthy, balanced gospel. As women, we can do our part by allowing the fullness of God to speak through His creation. The Bible says He created them male and female. We should not discourage men from expressing the masculine traits of the Christian faith. Let God be expressed through us in completeness: the perfect balance of love and judgment, nurturing and discipline, submission and leadership.



References




Cameron, K., & Comfort, R. (2002). The way of the Master. Wheaton, Ill: Tyndale.

Comfort, R. (1989). Hell's best kept secret. New Kensington, PA: Whitaker House.

Murrow, D. (2005). Why men hate going to church. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

Rodney Dangerfield is known by millions as the comedian who coined the catchphrase, "I don't get no respect!" Dangerfield's comedy act was basically a series of snappy, self-deprecating one-liners which often illustrated the type of reactions he solicited from women:

"I could tell that my parents hated me. My bath toys were a toaster and a radio.

When I was a kid, I asked my Mother for a Bubble Bath, so she brought the water to a boil!

I'm so ugly - My mother had morning sickness. After I was born.

Are you kiddin'? I know I'm ugly. My mother breast-fed me through a straw.

I have good-looking kids. Thank goodness my wife cheats on me.

The other night I told my kid "Someday, you'll have children of your own." He said "So will you."

I tell ya when I was a kid, all I knew was rejection. My yo-yo, it never came back.

I told my psychiatrist that everyone hates me. He said I was being ridiculous—everyone hasn't met me yet.

I told my wife the truth. I told her I was seeing a psychiatrist. Then she told me the truth: that she was seeing a psychiatrist, two plumbers, and a bartender.

My wife is always trying to get rid of me. The other day she told me to put the garbage out. I said to her I already did. She told me to go keep an eye on it.

The other night I woke up and my wife was saying sexy things. I looked over and she was on the phone.

I don't play hard to get... I play hard to want!

That's the story of my life, no respect, ya know?"

Not every man feels as low as Dangerfield did, but an absence of respect -- or even worse, a blatant display of disrespect -- can make any man feel as though these one-liners were written for him. Respect is the single most important thing that a woman can give to a man. It is the primary way that a man feels valued and validated in his masculinity. In fact, in a survey of 400 men ages 21 to 75, 74% said that they would rather feel alone and unloved than inadequate and disrespected (Feldhahn, 2004). When she got the results back, Feldhahn was shocked to discover a note attached: "A lot of the guys fussed over [that question]. They did not feel the choices were different," (p. 23). Feldhahn notes: "Finally, the lightbulb came on: If a man feels disrespected, he is going to feel unloved. And what that translates to is this: if you want to love your man in the way he needs to be loved, then you need to ensure that he feels your respect most of all," (p. 23).

Feldhahn's findings are evident in the comedy routine of Rodney Dangerfield. Notice many of Dangerfield's one liners involve some form of rejection or abandonment; in particular, many of Dangerfield's jokes involve a lack of faithfulness in the women in his life, especially when it comes to sexual infidelity. Yet how does Dangerfield sum up his plight? He doesn't say, "There's no love for Rodney." He doesn't whine, "Nobody loves me." No, Rodney Dangerfield's chief complaint is that he doesn't get any respect. When we consider respect from this perspective, it is no wonder God's word tells wives to submit to their husbands (Ephesians 5;22), as submission is a sign of respect.

It is important to note that men can feel disrespected by women, but they can also feel disrespected by other men as well. And there is a telltale sign, a surefire way of being able to discern whether or not a man feels disrespected, which is also featured in these scenes. Feldhahn (2004) says that if you want to know when a man feels he has been disrespected, anger is a dead giveaway. Quoting Dr. Emerson Eggerichs, Feldhahn tells us "crying is often a woman's response to feeling unloved, and anger is often a man's response to feeling disrespected," (p. 24). So what is the remedy for all this? It's very simple: unconditional respect.

Feldhahn states that just as women want to be unconditionally loved, men desire to be unconditionally respected. In our western culture, we have adopted one of the most widely accepted fallacies of all time as a way of relating interpersonally, and it is the belief that respect is earned. This mentality is not Christian. As Christians, we are to show our husbands -- and all people really -- respect, whether they deserve it or not.

For male female relationships, this means a woman must submit by respecting a man's judgment and abilities. She should not tell him she has a better idea, or try to tell him how to do something. Yes, this includes letting him figure out how to get there without stopping for directions. It means not expressing your disappointment when he's given you the best he's got. And above all else, it's about keeping your mouth shut when all the other women are telling their favorite "my-husband-is-such-an-idiot-because" stories. What's more important: your ability to tell the best embarrassing husband story, or your ability to protect his reputation in public as a competent, capable, and fantastic man?

As helpers, women should always be sure to obey God's word and offer respect to the men in our lives. Doing so provides men with the security of knowing that they are supported in their endeavors not only to live the Christian life, but to do so with the added weight of having the primary responsibility of caring for their wives and children. Hebrews 13:17 tells us, "Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you," (ESV). Our husbands, fathers, and pastors are doing all they can to watch over our souls. Let's commit to watch over theirs. Let's commit to offer our unconditional respect.


Reference

Feldhahn, S. (2004). For women only: What you need to know about the inner lives of men. Multnomah: Sisters, Oregon.

This little song is called, "The Man Song," but if you listen carefully, you will discover it is more a commentary on women than it is on men (I'd probably put the lyrics at a PG Rating):




"Anytime a husband starts to doubt himself as a man or feels that his manhood has been violated by a woman's expression of strength . . . it's her responsibility to figure out a way to adjust." -- John Piper

Feminism claims that at the heart of its goal is equality among men and women, however, when we trace the history of feminism (starting with the Garden of Eden) we see that it is not a matter of equality at all, but rather, it is a matter of usurping control. While some may see the unbiblical philosophy behind feminism and instead opt in favor of egalitarianism, it must be noted that egalitarianism is equally unbiblical.

An egalitarian view promotes the idea that we are all equal. The egalitarian philosophy therefore concludes that there should be no distinction between men and women other than their biological differences. Egalitarianism, although seemingly benign on the surface, is definitely malignant because God did not appoint women to exist as co-leaders with men. Just as a body has only one head, God has only appointed men to take on the leadership role.

One egalitarian argument is that men feel threatened by gifted women because they're insecure and should just get over it. They say that it's not really about the Bible, but that it is more a matter of feelings and emotions. The position is that because complementarians (those who support the traditionally biblical gender roles) are insecure men who feel threatened by strong women, they continue to make male leadership an issue when it is not (Grudem, 2004).

As explained in earlier posts, masculinity and femininity cannot easily be defined, but rather, there is an innate sense of knowing and distinguishing one from the other. In his book, Evangelical Feminism & Biblical Truth, Grudem (2004) quotes author Sarah Sumner, who criticizes the work of John Piper as follows:

Anytime a husband starts to doubt himself as a man or feels that his manhood has been violated by a woman's expression of strength, Piper says it's her responsibility to figure out a way to adjust . . . My question has to do with why a man's "God-given sense of responsibility and leadership" [quoting Piper] is so fragile and susceptible to offense. A few months ago I explained to five church leaders Piper's definition of biblical manhood . . . all five men . . . responded to me saying, "You know what? We like this definition. And you know why? Because . . . it makes us feel secure. It feels so good to be told what it means to be a man," (Sumner as quoted in Grudem, p. 394).

Sumner's point is that Piper's definition is flawed because it is based on an emotional sense of masculinity, rather than a clearly intellectualized definition. Yet we challenge Sumner to come up with such a definition. If the difference between being a man or a woman rests solely on biology, why chose the genitalia to be the defining characteristic? Why not choose some other identifier, such as eye color? Imagine if we lived in a world that taught us: "Brown eyes make you male, and any other color makes you female. Should you feel threatened by a blue-eyed person being bigger and stronger than you, well, that's just a matter of your feelings and emotions. Blue or green-eyed people should not have to "hold back" in order to keep the brown eyed people from being offended." Truly, biblical masculinity is more than biological. It is a "sense" as John Piper put it. It can only be experienced through feelings.

The reason why a man feels insecure when his leadership has been usurped by a woman is simple: he is insecure! If masculinity is his very essence, then in a sense his very identity, his very self, becomes threatened. Anything that is in danger of being stolen is insecure. If your wallet is hanging out of your back pocket, it is not secure. If you don't lock your doors, your house is not secure. If you trust your heart to someone who possesses no integrity, it is not secure. Of course men are insecure. How else is a man supposed to feel if his leadership role is up for grabs?

Contrary to Sumner's arguments, feelings are often justified. Just ask anyone who has been robbed how insecure they feel after that robbery has taken place. "The Man Song" is a sad but true commentary on how many men feel in the context of their own marriages, the one institution created by God to be the most secure human relationship on earth. Despite the constant chorus: "He's the man! He's the man!" We "sense" that there is someone else in this song who is shoplifting this man's role. And I say shoplifting as opposed to "stealing" because shoplifting is a very specific form of stealing, performed by some of the most gutsy, narcissistic, self-entitled people who don't really need the item that they're stealing, but rather, are most often just stealing for sport.

Women who usurp a man's leadership are shoplifting manhood. They do not need it, but rather, are engaging in an unnecessary competition for the sake of competition. A man's sense of masculinity is so easy to steal. Is your husband falling asleep every night next to a thief? If you are stealing from the men in your life, repent and ask forgiveness from them today. Then start going in the right direction: pay them the respect they are due.


Reference

Grudem, W. (2004). Evangelical feminism and biblical truth. Sisters, Oregon: Multnomah.

In January, I had stumbled across a fantastic article written by Elisabeth Elliot simply titled, “Femininity.” In this piece, she writes: “But what is this man, what is this woman? What are these elusive and indefinable but universally acknowledged qualities on which every culture and society has shaped its existence?” I thought she did a fine job of trying to explain the inexplicable, at least, far better than I could! So when we decided to examine the concept of masculinity this month, I certainly did not consider myself qualified to take on a task such as defining an equally elusive term. Instead, I sought the wisdom of John Piper. The following material has been excerpted from Chapter 1 of Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood:


AT THE HEART OF MATURE MASCULINITY IS A SENSE OF BENEVOLENT RESPONSIBILITY TO LEAD, PROVIDE FOR AND PROTECT WOMEN IN WAYS APPROPRIATE TO A MAN’S DIFFERING RELATIONSHIPS.

“Mature” means that a man’s sense of responsibility is in the process of growing out of its sinful distortions and limitations, and finding its true nature as a form of love, not a form of self-assertion . . . His sense of responsibility will find expression in the ways he conquers self-pity, and gives moral and spiritual leadership for his family, and takes the initiative to provide them with the bread of life, and protect them from the greatest enemies of all, Satan and sin.

Benevolent responsibility is meant to rule out all self-aggrandizing authoritarianism (cf. Luke 22:26). It is meant to rule out all disdaining condescension and any act that makes a mature woman feel patronized rather than honored and prized (cf. 1 Peter 3:7). The word “benevolent” is meant to signal that mature masculinity gives appropriate expression to the Golden Rule in male-female relationships (Matthew 7:12).

Masculinity is a God-given trust for the good of all his creatures, not a right for men to exercise for their own self-exaltation or egosatisfaction. It is less a prerogative than a calling. It is a duty and obligation and charge. Like all God’s requirements it is not meant to be onerous or burdensome (1 John 5:3). But it is nevertheless a burden to be borne, and which in Christ can be borne lightly (Matthew 11:30).

1. Mature masculinity expresses itself not in the demand to be served, but in the strength to serve and to sacrifice for the good of woman. Jesus said, “Let the greatest among you become as the youngest and the leader as one who serves” (Luke 22:26). Leadership is not a demanding demeanor. It is moving things forward to a goal. If the goal is holiness and Heaven, the leading will have the holy aroma of Heaven about it - the demeanor of Christ.

2. Mature masculinity does not assume the authority of Christ over woman, but advocates it. The leadership implied in the statement, “The husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church” (Ephesians 5:23), is not a leadership that gives to the man all the rights and authority that Christ has. The analogy between Christ and the husband breaks down if pressed too far, first because, unlike Christ, all men sin. Christ never has to apologize to his church. But husbands must do this often. Moreover, unlike Christ, a husband is not preparing a bride merely for himself but for another, namely Christ. He does not merely act as Christ, but also for Christ.

3. Mature masculinity does not presume superiority, but mobilizes the strengths of others. No human leader is infallible. Nor is any man superior to those he leads in every respect. Therefore a good leader will always take into account the ideas of those he leads, and may often adopt those ideas as better than his own . . . The aim of leadership is not to demonstrate the superiority of the leader, but to bring out all the strengths of people that will move them forward to the desired goal.

4. Mature masculinity does not have to initiate every action, but feels the responsibility to provide a general pattern of initiative.In a family the husband does not do all the thinking and planning. His leadership is to take responsibility in general to initiate and carry through the spiritual and moral
planning for family life.

5. Mature masculinity accepts the burden of the final say in disagreements between husband and wife, but does not presume to use it in every instance. In a good marriage, decision-making is focused on the husband, but is not unilateral. He seeks input from his wife and often adopts her ideas. This is implied in the love that governs the relationship (Ephesians 5:25), in the equality of personhood implied in being created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27), and in the status of being fellow-heirs of the grace of life (1 Peter 3:7) . . . His awareness of his sin and imperfection will guard him from thinking that following Christ gives him the ability of Christ to know what’s best in every detail.

6. Mature masculinity expresses its leadership in romantic sexual relations by communicating an aura of strong and tender pursuit. This is very difficult to put into words. But sexual relations are so basic to human life we would be delinquent not to at least try to say how masculinity expresses itself here. It is the mingling of tenderness with strength that makes the unique masculine quality of leadership in sexual relations. There is an aura of masculine leadership which rises from the mingling of power and tenderness, forcefulness and affection, potency and sensitivity, virility and delicateness. It finds expression in the firmness of his grasp, the strength of taking her in his arms, the sustaining of verbal adoration, etc. And there are a hundred nuances of masculine pursuit that distinguish it from feminine pursuit . . . But there is a difference. A feminine initiation is in effect an invitation for the man to do his kind of initiating. In one sense then you could say that in those times the man is responding. But in fact the wife is inviting him to lead in a way as only a man can, so that she can respond to him.

7. Mature masculinity expresses itself in a family by taking the initiative in disciplining the children when both parents are present and a family standard has been broken. Mothers and fathers are both to be obeyed by their children (Ephesians 6:1). Mothers as well as fathers are esteemed teachers in the home (Proverbs 1:8; 6:20; 31:1). They carry rights of authority and leadership toward their children, as do their husbands. They do not need to wait till Dad gets home from work to spank a disobedient child. But children need to see a dynamic between Mom and Dad that says, Dad takes charge to discipline me when Mom and Dad are both present. No woman should have to take the initiative to set a disobedient child right while her husband sits obliviously by, as though nothing were at stake. Few things will help children understand the meaning of responsible, loving masculinity better than watching who takes the responsibility to set them right when Mom and Dad are both present.

We should humble ourselves before God for our failures and for the remaining
tendency to shirk or overstep our responsibilities. The call to leadership is not a call to exalt ourselves over any woman. It is not a call to domineer, or belittle or put woman in her place. She is, after all, a fellow-heir of God and destined for a glory that will one day blind the natural eyes of every man (Matthew 13:43). The call to leadership is a call to humble oneself and take the responsibility to be a servant-leader in ways that are appropriate to every differing relationship to women.

It is a call to risk getting egg on our faces; to pray as we have never prayed before; to be constantly in the Word; to be more given to planning, more intentional, more thoughtful, less carried along by the mood of the moment; to be disciplined and ordered in our lives; to be tenderhearted and sensitive; to take the initiative to make sure there is a time and a place to talk to her about what needs to be talked about; and to be ready to lay down our lives the way Christ did if that is necessary.

Masculinity and femininity are rooted in who we are by nature. They are not simply reflexes of a marriage relationship. Man does not become man by getting married. But it is clear that the form which leadership, provision and protection take will vary with the kind of relationship a man has with a woman -from the most intimate relationship of marriage to the most casual relationship with a stranger on the street . . .The point here is that even though a man will not take initiating steps of leadership with a stranger or with a colleague the same way he will with his wife, his mature manhood will seek a pattern of initiative appropriate for the relationship.

The above material was excerpted from "What's the Difference?", Chapter 1 of Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, by John Piper. You can read all of John Piper's works online at www.desiringgod.org.

Recently, one of our readers asked me, "What do you think about women wearing pants?" Anxious to write about some other issues surrounding biblical femininity, I originally told this reader that I'd save that for another time, but I've changed my mind and decided to write about it now. In light of all the discussion surrounding headcovering, it would not be fair for me to postpone writing about this topic as well, especially since it also relates to masculinity.

I personally have never been convicted that pants are unfeminine or unbiblical. Perhaps that will change for me one day, but I currently don't see any biblical reason for women to be made to feel that wearing pants is wrong.

From what I gather, the entire issue surrounds a mandate given in Deuteronomy 22:5, which reads in the NASB as follows: "A woman shall not wear man's clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman's clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God". Other translations will make reference to a woman's cloak or a man's garment, but the meaning is the same from translation to translation -- men should wear men's clothes, and women should wear women's clothes.

The question is, what are women's clothes? Conversely, what are men's clothes? In my lifetime, most people have answered this by saying, "Skirts are for girls and pants are for boys. End of story." I am not so sure about that. I don't think there is anything in the scripture that makes such a distinction between pants or skirts. It just simply says, "clothes." I don't think God is saying "I want women to wear skirts and I want men to wear pants." Rather, I think God is simply saying, "I want women to look like women and men to look like men."

The real issue is that there is a distinction between male and female. God cares very deeply that we adhere to that distinction, because He created two types of people: men and women. When we try to blur that line, we are polluting His original design for the sexes. Things like cross-dressing, and the androgynous look that was so popular in the 80's are definitely examples of things that God is speaking out against in this passage. For example, God would be against this:


One of the things I will never forget is watching an episode of Beavis and Butt-head back in the 90's in which a Boy George video was featured. Upon hearing the lyric, "I'm a man," one of the characters said, "Uh, you're a man? Huh-huh. Huh-huh. Huh." It struck me that even two godless animated characters recognized that Boy George's appearance was unnatural and even confusing. When Boy George first came on the scene in the early 80's, I can remember countless debates in grade school as to whether or not he was actually male. We honestly did not know for sure!

Because God is a God of order and not a God of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33), I think God's intention for mandating how we are to dress is simply about making sure you can actually tell if the person is a "he" or a "she". No "its" or "she-males" allowed! That being said, I believe that women can wear pants, as long as they appear distinctly female while doing so.

There is even more compelling evidence that God wasn't even referring to pants at all, when we consider that pants did not even exist when Deuteronomy 22:5 was penned. In fact, pants are a relatively new fashion, even for men.

Kiltmen.com is a website dedicated to abolishing "Trouser Tyranny." The website does a nice job of advocating for a return to more traditional men's clothing, pointing out that men used to wear tunics all the time. It's true! Picture in your head all the drawings you have ever seen of male biblical characters such as Moses, David, and Paul. Did the artist's rendering ever depict these fellows in a pair of pants?

When I used to work at the Holy Land Experience, the men all wore tunics, even the actor playing Jesus. None of the park guests ever pointed to Deuteronomy 22:5 and cried "foul!" Not once did I ever hear a child ask, "Mommy, why is Jesus wearing a dress?" That's because it is understood by everyone that a tunic was the standard garment once worn by men. In similar fashion, women were also dressed in tunics, but theirs were distinctly feminine. The color, texture, and style of the tunic made it clear that it was a women's garment and not a man's garment.

(Sidenote: Although it is not a Christian site, Kiltmen.com does an amazing job addressing Deuteronomy 22:5 in its proper context. Not only does Kiltmen.com present its point from a historical/cultural perspective quite nicely, but it makes a killer argument from a biological perspective: kilts and tunics are actually better suited for men because they "do not confine the male genitals the way trousers do." Tight jeans have been known to significantly lower a man's sperm count because they create an uncomfortable and unhealthy environment for the testicles. The Bible states that children are a gift from the Lord and that we are to "be fruitful and multiply". The idea of men wearing tunics and kilts becomes even more sensible in light of the fact such garments promote a healthy sperm count and thus increase a man's chances of being a father. In this sense, the kilt is seen as a strong symbol of maleness and masculinity.)

Today, we have numerous examples of clothing being recognized as either men's or women's clothing by the color, texture, or style of those garments. Both men and women wear sneakers. Both men and women wear sandals. Both men and women wear jackets, button-down shirts, watches, sunglasses, hats, coats, and gloves. There is no distinction that says "Men wear sneakers and women wear sandals." The item is appropriate to be worn by either a man or a woman, provided that the man or woman is not wearing an article of clothing designed for the opposite gender. For example, I used to own a pair of pants in high school that were light grey with pink flowers all over them. Nobody asked me why I was wearing men's clothes. It was obvious by the color, texture, and style of my pants that I was wearing clothing designed for a female.

Finally, I will leave you with a cute little anecdote a Baptist preacher once shared with his congregation. It goes like this:

There was a certain pastor who decided once and for all he needed to enforce a strict dress code upon his congregation. He decreed that all women in his congregation immediately go through their closets and get rid of all their pants, because pants are "men's clothes." So all the ladies of the church got together and collected all of the pants and brought them to the church to decide what to do with them. One woman, who happened to be organizing the effort, noticed several pairs of pants that looked as though they were just the perfect size for the pastor. "It would be a shame to throw these away," she thought, so she took them to the pastor's home.

When the pastor opened the door, the woman offered him the pants. He asked her, "What am I supposed to do with these?" The woman explained that she thought the pants might fit him, and wondered if he might get some use out of them. The pastor looked at the woman in disbelief and said, "Surely you can't be serious! I can't wear these! These are women's clothes!"

This little story demonstrates that clothing can be recognized as either male or female, not for what type of garment it is, but for the way the garment looks. The Bible says God created them male and female. Unless your appearance is causing major confusion over your gender, I do not think God is displeased with your choice as a woman to wear pants if you so choose.

This month's feature film is The Best Years of Our Lives, a story which follows three American servicemen as they try to adjust to life after war. Hailed as a classic masterpiece, the film portrays the challenges and crises of masculinity in society, in the home, and in the mind. In spite of the many battles fought and won overseas, perhaps the toughest battle of all is a man's silent fight for respect.

STATS
Year: 1946 (Not Rated)
Robert E. Sherwood (writer), William Wyler (director)
Starring Friedrich March, Dana Andrews, and Harold Russell.
Setting: Post World War II America.

Seven Oscars including Best Director (Wyler), Best Supporting Actor (Russell), Best Actor (March), Best Screenplay (Sherwood), Best Music Score, Best Editing, and Best Picture.

Content warning: Some scenes portray drunkenness. One plot line encourages the deliberate demise of a marriage that no longer seems to be working. This film also warrants a SEVERE KLEENEX ALERT.

WHAT TO WATCH FOR
1. The importance of biblically feminine support in a man's life. A woman can either make or break a man's spirit. In this film, we encounter both types of women.

2. The "Impostor" Syndrome: No matter how many awards and accolades are bestowed upon a man in an effort to acknowledge his greatness, he still feels like an impostor. The fear of being "discovered" as a fraud or failure can drive a man to either work harder or completely withdraw from others altogether.

3. The importance of respect in a man's ability to feel valued. This month's film not only portrays men crushed by disrespectful women, but also by society as a whole.

4. Body image. One man discovers that true love is unconditional, even when presented with a physical disability. One woman's constant dripping completely disfigures her otherwise stunning looks.

5. Perhaps the most valuable currency among men is loyalty. Loyalty to one's country, one's values, and one's family and friends can make even the toughest times we face feel like the best years of our lives.

TRIVIA
Harold Russell is a real life WWII veteran/amputee who lost both hands while serving in the United States Army. William Wyler discovered Russell in a documentary and cast him in the role of Homer Parrish. Russell went on to win the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor.

The film is available for rent at most video stores and it is common for many public libraries to own a copy of it. The movie can also be purchased online.