You are here: Home / Archives for Book Talk / Christianity

The Post-Church Christian

March 5, 2013 Leave a Comment

The Post-Church Christian is a book written by father and son, both of whom have served as pastors in Evangelical churches. It addresses many of the reasons why the younger generation is leaving the church, and how the older generation views their choices. It is written in a conversational style, with the son going first, presenting the view of “millennials”, and then the father going next, presenting the “boomer” view. In the final section, they combine their points to discuss the future of the church.

As neither a millennial (I miss the cutoff by a mere 18 months) nor a baby boomer (by, uh, about 15 years), I thought this might be an interesting book to read. I figured that I could hopefully see the value in the points made by each side.

In the first section, showing the millennial viewpoint, Carson Nyquist covers many of the big reasons why his generation is turned off by the church. If you browse through my previous posts, you’ll probably find them all listed, LOL. His first issue is the church’s lack of authenticity in sharing sins. Quoting Jon Acuff, he says,

Have you ever been in a small group with people that confess safe sins? Someone will say, “I need to be honest with everyone tonight. I need to have full disclosure and submit myself in honesty… So you brace yourself for this crazy moment of authenticity and the person takes a deep breath and says… “I haven’t been reading my Bible enough.”

Yes, we’ve all seen it. When my husband and I first started attending The Refuge, we talked about how awesome and also incredibly uncomfortable it was that everyone there was really, truly open with the kinds of sins that you never heard mentioned elsewhere. Even the pastors! It was mind-blowing.

The book goes on to mention Jon Acuff’s idea of “giving the gift of going second”, meaning that if you honestly share your struggles, the ugly ones that no one normally mentions at church, it is much easier for the next person to be honest. I saw this at the Refuge, and it rocked my world. I will never look at faith communities the same, and I now have a much higher standard.

Throughout the rest of his section, Carson addresses other frustrations with Evangelical culture, including the lack of integration of faith life and everyday life, pop culture/copycat Christianity, the fact that Jesus wasn’t a white Republican, and the church’s stance on homosexuality. I found myself nodding along to many of his frustrations.

The second section, written by Paul Nyquist, covers the “boomer” response to the millennials. One of his main arguments is that the millennials need to forgive the boomers and have grace on them, both because we are all part of an eternal family and called to forgive. I found his argument really compelling. He also discusses how the younger generation will make mistakes itself and soon be passing the torch on to their children and be looking for forgiveness themselves. He apologizes for the mistakes made, and tries to explain the boomers viewpoints and why they’ve chosen to run the church in the way that they have.

The final section brings both voices together, with a vision for what the future could bring for the church. Paul asks again for reconciliation and forgiveness, Carson reminds millennial readers that they will also make many mistakes in trying to follow God as best as they can, and that grace is needed for all of us. They both do a good job of wrapping up their points throughout the book and bringing it together in a cohesive way.

All-in-all, I enjoyed this book. It is a quick read, and although I’ve either said or heard many of the general ideas covered in here, the authors took fresh approaches to many of them and kept my attention throughout. I really like the format of the book and felt like it gave me a better understanding of both the generation in front of and the generation behind me. I love the conversation that they’ve started, and I hope that it continues.

Filed Under: Christianity

With by Skye Jethani

September 28, 2011 Leave a Comment

With
Reimagining the Way You Relate to God

By Skye Jethani

It is rare that I read a popular Christian author and see much of anything new. Sadly, the same topics seem to get recycled, repackaged and replayed. I was (very pleasantly) surprised as I read With, because Mr. Jethani gave me the vocabulary to describe so many issues that are common in the church. Until I read this book, I could explain why I disagreed with many of these tactics, but couldn’t pin down the common thread – control and manipulation. The way that he laid it out really impressed me.

Basically, Mr. Jethani describes 4 different ways that we attempt to control the world around us by using God:

  • life UNDER God – where you seek to control the world by securing God’s blessing via rituals and/or morality
  • life OVER God – where you use God as a self-help guide… you employ natural laws or divine principles extracted from the Bible to give yourself a sense of control
  • life FROM God – where you use God to try to acquire wealth, health and popularity so you can insulate yourself from the calamities that happen to others
  • life FOR God – where you try to extract God’s favor and give meaning to your life through faithful service

Mr. Jethani’s descriptions of how these principles are used in the Western Evangelical culture REALLY made me stop and think. I could see myself (both past and present) in so many of the misguided attempts. I thought of all of the sermons that I’ve heard ENCOURAGING these stances, and my little lightbulb in my head kept turning on as I realized why those attempts don’t work.

For the remainder of the book, Mr. Jethani describes a life WITH God, and what that looks like. Unlike the above attempts to control our world and use God, a life WITH God embraces the truth that control is an illusion. Instead of trying to overcome our fears by seeking more control, life WITH God is when we overcome fear by surrendering control to God.

I “clipped” so many quotes out of this book on my Kindle. I am looking forward to re-reading it, because I know I’ll get even more out of it the second time. I highly recommend this book and happily give it 5-out-of-5 stars :)

For fans of InternetMonk, Chaplain Mike recently reviewed With as well:

http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/prepositions-matter

And now some legaleze:

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher through the BookSneeze®.com <http://BookSneeze®.com> book review bloggers program. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255 <http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_03/16cfr255_03.html> : “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

Filed Under: Christianity

Christ and Firing Squads

April 23, 2010 1 Comment

Today I was reading this story:

Condemned Utah Killer Will Face Firing Squad

http://abcnews.go.com/US/TheLaw/wirestory?id=10455328&page=2

I am not sure why I clicked on it… I am guessing that it has something to do with how bizarre it sounds to still have people facing firing squads. As I was reading the article, two things struck me that I wanted to flesh out somewhere.

The article says

…despite Utah’s strong religious roots — it’s the home of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — most here support the use of the death penalty.

“I think in Utah, when it suits their purposes, they go back to the Old Testament and the ‘eye for an eye’ kind of thing,” Kalish said. “These people may be the worst of the worst, but if the best we can do is repeat the same thing, it’s so obviously wrong.”

I am always amazed that the “religious right” is also associated with the death penalty. It just seems so ridiculous. Let me preface by saying that this is a difficult subject for me. I have friends who have had family members murdered, and part of me feels uncomfortable telling them what should happen to someone who destroyed their family. At the same time, I don’t see any way that you can justify it as the “Christian” thing to do. I don’t think that anyone should have a right to have someone else killed just because they did the same. As the quote above says, ‘if the best we can do is the same thing, it’s so obviously wrong.’

As Shane Claiborne says in Jesus for President,

Violence kills the image of God in us… Violence goes against everything we are created for — to love and be loved — so it inevitably ends in misery and suicide, either literal or metaphorical.

When people succumb to violence, it infects them like a disease or poison that leads to their own death. Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus with a violent kiss, ended his life by hanging himself… Columbine, the 2006 Amish school shooting, the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the Virginia Tech massacre — each ended with suicide.

…

It’s in moments like these violent times that grace looks so magnificent. It’s in the shadow of violence that a victim’s grace to a muderer’s family shines so brightly, as in the aftermath of the Amish school shooting. It’s even more scandalous to think of killing someone who kills, for they, more than anyone in the world, need to hear that they are created for something better than that.

The second thing that stood out to me in the article was the fact that the man who was killed was also a pacifist.

“Michael would not be happy at all. Michael would have fought against the death penalty. That’s who he was,” said Temu, 62, a Salt Lake City-area funeral director who knew Burdell through their membership in the Summum church.

A pacifist who was drafted into the U.S. Army, Burdell served in Vietnam but vowed to never use a weapon on another person, Temu said.

To me, this makes it even more heartbreaking. The man who was killed would not have wanted his murderer’s life demanded in return. It is sad that the cycle of violence will continue on, and yet we know that redemptive violence is a myth. You cannot bring peace through violence. This act will ripple on as more are impacted through this execution.

Part of me wants to say that I don’t know what the answer is, but I truly believe that we Christians can see the answer by looking to the Bible. Why is it that the church has politically aligned ourselves with an idea that is so far from the concept of grace?

Filed Under: Jesus for President - Claiborne

A disappointing ending

December 3, 2008 3 Comments

I finished The Powers That Be. Overall, I’d still recommend the book. I really am not a fan of the last chapter, though. I already returned it to the library. That means I don’t have any cool quotes to share, so we’ll both have to rely on my mommy brain to describe what I read.

Basically, he paints a picture of a weak God, IMO. He said that God would like to answer our prayers, but his hands are pretty much tied because the principalities and powers of nations/organizations/etc. are fighting it out in the heavenlies, and there’s not much God can do while they’re in the midst of it.

His theory is based on Daniel 10

12 Then he continued, “Do not be afraid, Daniel. Since the first day that you set your mind to gain understanding and to humble yourself before your God, your words were heard, and I have come in response to them. 13 But the prince of the Persian kingdom resisted me twenty-one days. Then Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, because I was detained there with the king of Persia. 14 Now I have come to explain to you what will happen to your people in the future, for the vision concerns a time yet to come.”

He says that the word used for princes is really talking about angels/principalities/powers, and that when we pray, they are battling it out. He says that God wants to answer our prayers, but has to wait for them to finish wrestling. If you google “Walter Wink Daniel 10″, you should get plenty of results (including the google books result) that will sum up his position quite nicely.

I guess my biggest issue is that it is a really big piece of theology to hang on one chapter from Apocalyptic literature. He might be absolutely right, although I am just not sold on the idea.

I think that ending the book with that particular argument could turn off a lot of people who would’ve been a lot more impressed in his work before that point. I don’t know. Its still a good book, but I didn’t love that chapter.

Filed Under: The Powers That Be - Walter Wink

The Gift of the Enemy

November 26, 2008 Leave a Comment

Continuing on, with my new best friend, Walter Wink.  LOL.  I don’t think that his ideas are that shocking, but I think it is shocking to see how few of them are applied in mainstream Christian circles.

 

So my last entry was about how we need to let go of the thought of ourselves as God’s favored, and our enemies as unloved. God loves everyone, and “is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked”, so maybe we should try a little of the same, eh?  We’re actually pretty sucky ourselves, in our natural state, so its time to get off of our high horses.

On to Mr. Wink (fantastic name, btw.)

Once the spell of the perfectionist reading has been exorcised, we begin to see just how far from perfect Jesus assumed we are.  ”Why do you see the speck in your neighbor’s eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye?  Or how can you say to your neighbor, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while the log is in your own eye?  You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor’s eye.” (Matt. 7:3-5)

I really do love those verses.  I have lots o’ logs.

This is the earliest known teaching of what modern psychologists call projection…  The “splinter” in the other’s eye is a chip off the same log that is in one’s own eye.  We see in the other what we would not see in ourselves.  But why is it a log in the eye of the beholder?  Isn’t that backward?  Normally we say, “I may be somewhat bad (a splinter), but that person is really bad (a log).”  Why has Jesus inverted that conventional way of putting it?

Again, I suck at this.  I totally do this all the time.  God is working on me, and He is changing me, but I am so prone to this type of thinking.  I apparently tend to think that my poop doesn’t stink, because that’s how I act.

Because the log in my eye totally blinds me.  I can see nothing objectively.  Remove the log, and I can see to help my neighbor remove his or her splinter.  

I am super-blinded by my logs.  Its pathetic.

In workshops on this theme I invite people to name an enemy and list all the things they dislike about that person (or group or movement or nation).  Then we ask them to go through that list and ask how many of those characteristics are true also of themselves (or our group or movement or nation).  The common elements identify our projections.  These can be taken into our meditation, prayer, and spiritual guidance, to see what they have to teach us about ourselves.  (Some things on our lists may not be projections.  There are people who are objectively hostile, even evil.  Not every enemy is a gift.  I am focusing only on those enemies that draw our projections.)

OK, so I tried this mentally, and it was pretty disturbing.  This is not my first time doing this exercise.  I remember doing it in college, and have noticed that i am most annoyed by people who have the same faults as I do.  I think this is a great gift in parenting.  I recently did an exercise for a parenting Bible study that asked me to write down the things that frustrate me most in my family members.  My family members are obviously not my enemies, so that part doesn’t apply here, but I did find the list interesting.  The things that I struggled the most with knowing how to handle are also things that I am not so great at handling in myself.  Humbling.

Walter Wink gives some examples of things that frustrate you in others that you need to work on.  Then he says:

Revelations such as these (and they are precisely that) need to be treasured, because that is the gift our enemy brings to us: to see aspects of ourselves that we cannot discover any other way.  Our friends are not good sources of information about these things; they often overlook or ignore these parts of us.  The enemy is thus not merely a hurdle to be leapt on the way to God.  The enemy can be the way to God.  We cannot come to terms with our shadow except through our enemy, for we have no better access to those unacceptable parts of ourselves that need redeeming than through the mirror that our enemies hold up to us.  This, then, is another, more intimate reason for loving our enemies: we are dependent on our enemies for our very individuation.  We cannot be whole people without them.

How wonderfully humiliating: we not only may have a role in transforming our enemies, but our enemies can play a role in transforming us.

What?  I’m not the savior of them?!  They help me?!  Craziness.

As we become aware of our projections on our enemies, we are freed from the fear that we will overreact murderously toward them.  We are able to develop an objective rage at the injustices they have perpetrated while still seeing them as children of God.  The energy squandered nursing hatred becomes available to God for confronting the wrong or transforming the relationship.

I have found this to be true, although I think I am still in my infancy in this process.  Being able to step back and still see those who hurt you as children of God is so freeing, but so difficult (at least for me.)

An understanding of the Powers makes forgiveness of our enemies easier.  If our oppressors “know not what they do,” if they, too, are victims of the delusional system, then the real target of our hate and anger can be the system itself rather than those who carry out its bidding.  ”For our struggle is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places” (Eph. 6:12).  We can pray for the transformation of our enemies, knowing that even the most intractable opponents may be capable of complete turnabout, and that some have actually done so.

Interestingly enough, this was the topic of my Beth Moore study last night.  Once again, when Beth Moore agrees with practically anyone else that I’m studying, then I think that’s a big deal.  I’m pretty sure that pretty much the only thing that overlaps between these authors is Christ, LOL.

Joe and I had a discussion about how all of this relates to America’s position in the world, and it was really good.  We both realize how much we’ve bought into the myth of redemptive violence – the idea that violence makes peace.  Somehow it seems like so much of mainstream Christianity is saying that we can accomplish peace through violence, and yet that was not the way of Christ at all.  Are there times when we must stand up against evil and cruelty?  Absolutely.  Is violence the only way to do that?  Of course not.  

We can look to history to see example after example of nations being healed without violence.  Even our own revolution in America had many non-violent aspects.  We just abandoned them for war.  The problem is that violence breeds violence, and its not like it really even works.  Lets just look around.  Does the world look more peaceful?  Uh, no.  More civilians were killed in the 20th century than in every century before that combined.  Clearly our methods of violence aren’t making for a more peaceful world, and we know its not what Christ taught.  How is it that Christianity in America has become so entangled with the myth of redemptive violence?

I don’t know the answer.  I did find it interesting to try the above exercise with America’s enemies vs. America.  We don’t exactly come out looking like roses.  ;)  We’re not all bad, of course, and we do a lot of things very well.  I also believe that America, on a whole, is trying to do the right thing.  I think it is just easy to get misguided.

So… if I come up with a solution to world peace, I’ll let you know.  Until then, I’m going to keep working on applying these examples in my (much smaller and more manageable) day-to-day life.

Filed Under: The Powers That Be - Walter Wink

God’s favor

November 26, 2008 Leave a Comment

I have two entries mulling around in my mind for tonight. I’m going to give this one a go first and then try the other one if my mind isn’t mush yet ;)

 

OK, so I’ve been reading The Powers That Be by Walter Wink. Fascinating stuff. It was recommended in the footnotes of Irresistible Revolution, and it really develops Shane Claiborne’s ideas of embracing pacifism without being passive. Good stuff.

One of the sections that I’ve really been enjoying in this book is all about God’s favor and the idea of God hating our enemies. Here’s the funny thing about that thought. God is love. He loves everyone. We know this. Let’s take a look at Luke 6.

Love for Enemies

27″But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. 30Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31Do to others as you would have them do to you.
32″If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even ‘sinners’ love those who love them. 33And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even ‘sinners’ do that. 34And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even ‘sinners’ lend to ‘sinners,’ expecting to be repaid in full. 35But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. 36Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

OK, so we’ve all read those verses a thousand times, right? So how is it that the church, and particularly “the religious right”, seem to forget about them when it comes to policy-making? God is “kind to the ungrateful and wicked”, but are we? Ha. So often the church is too busy focusing on a God that will favor the good based on their righteousness. We know from scripture that the rain falls on both the righteous and the wicked. Why does the church forget this so often? Walter Wink talks about it:

God’s all-inclusive parental care is thus charged with an unexpected consequence for human behavior: we can love our enemies, because God does. If we wish to correspond to the central reality of the universe, we will behave as God behaves–and God embraces all, evenhandly.

Well, crap. That’s not something I do very well.

Our solidarity with our enemies lies not just in our common parentage under God, but also our common evil. God “is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked.” We too, like them, betray what we know in our hearts God desires for the world. We would like to identify ourselves as just and good, but we are a mix of just and unjust, good and evil. If God were not compassionate toward us, we would be lost. And if God is compassionate toward us, with all our unredeemed evil, then God must treat our enemies the same way. As we begin to acknowledge our own inner shadow, we become more tolerant of the shadow in others. As we begin to love the enemy within, we develop the compassion we need to love the enemy without.

Let me just say that I have found this to be so true in my life. It is at my most humbled and broken moments that I can love those who hurt me. It is so much easier to have compassion for others when you realize just how much compassion you need.

If, however, we believe that the God who loves us hates those whom we hate, we insert an insidious doubt into our own selves. Unconsciously we know that a deity hostile toward others is potentially hostile to us as well. And we know, better than anyone, that there is plenty of cause for such hostility. If God did not send sun and rain on everyone equally, God not only would not love everyone, God would love no one.

I am finding this to be so true in my life. I have been through a lot of hurt in the past year, and I feel like God has really used this time to show me all of the compassion that I have (undeservingly) received.  He has also helped me to love those who hurt me. I am so far from perfect that it is not even funny, but I am really enjoying the journey. I love serving a God who loves everyone without them having to act a certain way. That’s how I want to be too. Its an amazing journey to try to get there, and I am thankful for God’s unending patience with me. He knows I need it!

I love hearing voices like Walter Wink’s in the Christian community, because I think this is an area where we could really stand to be challenged.  If we think of God as an angry deity who picks sides, then how will we ever see the image of God in those who are our “enemies”?  Its so hard, but we know that we were ALL created in God’s image, even those who hurt us the very most.  It is only when we can see that piece of God in them that we can reconcile and live the kind of life that Jesus told us to live.

Good stuff.

Filed Under: The Powers That Be - Walter Wink

Where is the church going?

February 19, 2007 1 Comment

I just finished Monique El-Faizy’s God and Country: How Evangelicals Have Become America’s New Mainstream, and it contained a lot of different points that I’d like to discuss. It is really interesting to read an athiest’s view of the Evangelical world. She was a Christian until she went away to college and stepped away from the faith. Its kind of nice to be able to hear from someone who was both an insider and now an outsider to Christianity. It makes for an interesting perspective.

I was going to write about her chapter on church history, but I just changed my mind. I want to talk about her discussion of megachurches and their future :) So let’s jump on in:

Despite the continuing success of megachurches, as they get bigger and blander some people are starting to look for a new kind of experience, one more immediate or transcendent. They’re finding it in some unlikely places, in the podcasts of sermons they download from the Internet, in cyberchurches, and in Bible studies at their workplaces, what Barna calls “marketplace ministries.” Many have left the church building and are meeting in parks and houses. In fact, the house church movement, in which several families meet on a regular basis in someone’s home, often to be led by the same person each week, is growing by great leaps.

Even before I read this section, my mom and I were discussing this idea of alternate ways of attending church. I had told my mom that the Bible study group that we led last year in our house was the truest church I’ve ever attended. We were living lives where we could be accountable to each other, learn together, really probe into scripture with debate, and pray for one another. It wasn’t just a matter of showing up on Sunday and checking “church” off of our list. It was non-hierarchical and met in our home, and yet it fulfilled more of the ideas of church than any “church” (what we now consider to be a church) that I’ve attended ever has. Still we feel this pull that it was “only a Bible study” and that if we didn’t attend Sunday services in a big building then we wouldn’t really be in church.

This is a seminal time for the church, a moment of reflection and self-assessment such as hasn’t been seen in decades. Its attempts to germane to society have been so successful that the church is in the midst of an identity crisis sparked by its own achievement. Long accustomed to being on the fringes, evangelical Christianity has become so big, so powerful, and so mainstream that many on the inside are wondering if they’ve lost their flavor and have abandoned what made them distinctive.

I can definitely see this feeling spreading in the church. We are losing a lot of our flavor. We are giving many of our churches over to the pop culture of Christianity and the world. If you don’t attend a mega-church, then the far likelihood is that you attend a church that uses a curriculum from a mega-church. There is no local flavor. It is bland.

The response to these concerns has taken several different forms. Many Christians are looking to put the sanctity back in church and are returning to the traditions that the megachurches abandoned. Where churches such as Willow Creek and Saddleback desanctified the physical church, others are looking to resanctify it, placing new value on incense, stained glass, candles, and other high-church trappings. They are reintroducing liturgy to their services, or moving into denominations that never abandoned it, such as the Episcopalian church (although there they opt for conservative congregations that are on the restrictive side of the split over gay clergy).

I find this to be very true in my own life. I have started searching out more traditional ways of worship. We light candles for the Sabbath like my father’s family did, we recite the same prayers that were recited when I was young (and since the times of the early Jews), I am longing for more liturgy in service. I have even looked at denominations that still use liturgy, although I have generally been more drawn to Messianic Jewish congregations instead of Episcopalian, but the root desire is the same. The desire is to be a part of something deeper… something that isn’t just the flavor-of-the-day. I want a faith and a practice that stands the test of time, not just what gets people in the door today.

Megachurches were invented by baby boomers and designed to appeal to that generation. They rely on the notion of choice and individualization and on the tools of marketing to hone and promote their product. This comes, though, at the cost of the idea that the church is a body, the needs of which supersede those of the individual. Along with defecting boomers, younger generations, which are remarkably religious, are beginning to rebel against the church of their parents’ generation and are looking for more direct encounters with the divine. They don’t need the pat answers megachurches provide but are willing to embark on their own personal spiritual journeys.

The fact is that my parents and my husband’s parents were fundamentalists who switched to a more evangelical route when the tide started to change. They followed what was going on around them. In our attempt to return to a “deeper” spiritual experience, we are doing the same thing. We are doing what our generation feels prone to do. We’re not any different, the trends are just changing.

I have a lot more to say, but my fingers are getting tired, lol. Next time I want to write about what El-Faizy sees as the different options in the post-modern and emergent church. I think you’ll find it interesting to read from the perspective of a woman who is no longer in the church (El-Faizy, not me, lol).

My morning sickness seems to be coming at night, and I am starting to feel a little yucky. I’m relieved to feel a little sick though, because it gives some reassurance that this is a “sticky” baby. I’ve really been trying to put this in God’s hands, but it is so hard. I know I have no control over this little life growing in me, but at the same time I get a sense of control if I am thinking or worrying about it. I am trying so hard to give that up. I really appreciate everyone’s prayers for me, for the baby, and for the rest of our family. You’re the best!

Filed Under: God and Country - El-Faizy

The Proverbs 31 Woman – A real “helpmeet”

January 8, 2007 4 Comments

I would love to blog about this book a million times! It is great! Unfortunately my time is limited with it (it is a library book), so I guess I’ll just have to hit the main points that I enjoyed and that I haven’t seen discussed elsewhere.

Patricia Gundry writes this book so well, and does an amazing job at balancing femininity with strength. She provides a wonderful example for how this can be done, despite what many other books on this passage try to say. She tackles important issues for all women, including being a hard worker, trustworthy, strong, beautiful, not manipulative, a bargain hunter, a planner, an investor, a provider, and praiseworthy. I have read many other books on Proverbs 31, and none of them capture the context and the relevance of what is being said to King Lemuel the way that Gundry does in this book.
Here are some of my highlights from a few chapters.

On women who manipulate (re: Proverbs 31:12 “She does him good and not harm all the days of her life”)

Women manipulate men… I always wondered why women are so tempted to do it… Why would women like Marabel Morgan or Helen Andelin justify it with Bible verses, case histories, and personal examples of their own approach to pragmatism in marriage?

I think they do it because they live in a double bind. Women are the underdogs in the family and society. So they gravitate toward survival methods common to underdogs, methods that are as old as the Fall.

Here’s how it works: the underdog is afraid to approach her superior directly. Though direct approach is effective some of the time, too often it is not. When dealing with a superior power that is also unscrupulous and unfair, being direct is often dangerous. Underdogs learn to manipulate in order to get along–or survive.

Manipulation is demeaning both to the one doing it and to the unsuspecting victim. If you’re a woman, your actions say to the man you victimize, “You aren’t very bright, or honorable. If you were smart, you would see through my tricks. If you were honorable, they wouldn’t be necessary.”

This kind of scheming has further disadvantage. It makes close, honest relationships between people impossible.

Amen. I have read so many books for Christian women that only teach women how to be manipulative. They tell you how to get your way: How to convince your husband to do what you want without him knowing it. Its sick, and it makes me so sad that Christian women stoop to that level.
On the Proverbs 31 woman and when she opens her mouth compared to other women

I think inborn nature has nothing to do with the incidence of shrewish or razor-tongued women. It’s as simple as this: those who can’t fight with their fists learn to fight with words. We develop skill with the weapons we have. We also pick up the skill by observing the skilled practicioners who precede us. It is often passed from mother to daughter with success.

Women tend to practice and gain skill on men who are vulnerable. Sometimes this involves practicing on male children who are extremely defenseless. They grow up to be easy targets for other female verbal assaults.

I found this section really interesting. I have quite the razor tongue. As a matter of fact, even long after dh and I were married, I had never “lost” a fight. My quick wit and tongue allowed me to be a more skilled arguer than any boyfriends had ever been. I ended up thinking I was always right. It was a humbling blow to find out that not only was I often wrong, but I also manipulated situations because I could argue better.

She goes on to address an interesting cycle she has noticed. I have seen this for myself, especially in church, which is so sad.

We women are too easily tempted to vent our anger on male children. I have seen it happen so often. A family who lived near us years ago went through a weekly cycle. Over the weekend the husband harassed his wife. On Monday she terrorized their oldest child, a boy (who looked like his father and had the same name) about a year older than my daughter. On Tuesday the boy was out for blood and my kids got it from him…

It is the old pecking-order sequence: we can’t hit back at those who are stronger, so we find excuses to take out our anger on those who are weaker. I firmly believe that much male hostility to women is a result of this vicious circle. Women are repressed and put down by men or by a male-dominated system. Mothers sometimes take out their resentment on their young sons; and teachers and others over children, on little boys in their charge. Those little boys grow up with an accumulated load of unconscious resentment toward women that has been years in the making. They then pass it on to the women who become vulnerable to them.

I’ve never seen this addressed in writing before, but it makes me think of a family whose son was in the Sunday School class that I taught. I would see the end of the cycle, as the mother would take her aggression out on her son as they would walk through the church. He would then come into the class and take his aggression out on the other children. He would often make the other 2 and 3 year olds so upset that they would physically shake. I would have to remove him from the classroom to protect the other children. It was heartbreaking because he was only acting out on what he knew. He was only 3.

I don’t want to make this too long, so I’ll just give one last quote from the end where she is talking about the translation of “helpmeet.”

This verse has been traditionally understood to mean that God created woman as a kind of glorified girl Friday for Adam. A nice girl, but slightly substandard and needing a man to supervise her work. The words help and meet have been condensed by common usage into helpmeet. We have been taught that this means woman should be a helper to man, not his equal.

But in Hebrew, the original language, the words ezer and neged do not have the connotations we have given them. Ezer means “help” all right, but not secondary help or assistant, as in assistant to the president. It means help in the way God helped Israel. The word is used in the Old Testament to refer to help by a superior force, such as help by God, as in Psalm 121:1,2

I raise my eyes towards the hills.
Whence shall my help come?
My help comes from the Lord, who made heaven and earth.

The word ezer is never used elsewhere in the Old Testament to refer to subordinate or inferior help.

Neged (“meet”) is a preposition in Hebrew and cannot be translated as a preposition in English and still retain the sense. It means “corresponding to,” “fit for,” “meet for.” In other words, God created woman as a real help to Adam, someone who was like him, suitable in every way. There is no hint of inferiority for woman in the original account.

Good stuff.

This book also has a ton of practical advice. She talks about keeping your home, ways to find your passion for a cottage / work-at-home industry, time management strategies, and ways to enjoy your work and bless your family. I really highly recommend it :)

Filed Under: Marriage, Parenting, The Complete Woman - Patricia Gundry

To the Top