Bring a Man Sunday – Rev. Dr. Daniel ÓConnell, October 2, 2005
Some of you may be wondering why today is "Bring a Man Sunday." At the end of last month– at the end of August, we had a "Bring a Friend Sunday." That we can understand. We may know some folks who might be interested in what Eliot Chapel is all about. But– Bring a Man Sunday?
Come on. Religion is a man's world, right? The Pope is a man. Most founders of world religions have been men. Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, the 12 disciples– all men. Catholic priests are all men. 95% of senior Protestant pastors are men. We've heard for years that western religion is a male dominated patriarchy.
And yet. In our context, most UU ministers are women. Most UU ministry students are women. More and more women are entering senior pulpits. Why, I've even heard that the president of one of our UU seminaries is a woman.
In many churches, most of the staff are women. Imagine our staff meetings here at Eliot. We typically have 8 people, and I'm the only male.
I used to bring news articles to meetings. One day I brought a bit about the government of the Netherlands deciding whether or not to charge a special tax on men– since– the idea went– men were responsible for crime, wars, what-have-you. Immediately the staff began chanting with a certain glee: Man tax! Man tax!
At church, most of our RE teachers are women. Most of our lay leaders are women. Drop in at Eliot during the week, and most of the people you meet will be women. Most of our volunteers are women.
Speaking in a hasty generalization– in large measure it is the women who keep this place running. Men built the church, men fix the church, but women keep it going. Women's Weekend is a huge event for our church. Many of our classes have a majority of women.
We have a big Women's Alliance group– they have 3 meetings a month– but all the men in the Retired UU Men's group have retired from that group.
Could church function without men? Imagine you showed up here on Sunday and there were no men. Could the church function? Sure. Could the church function without women? Not a chance.
Mainline Christianity has more of a problem with men in church, so they've spent more time studying this issue. Many Christian churches are– as one man put it– are Women's Clubs with a few male officers. As one writer asks:
How did a faith founded by a Man and His twelve male disciples become so popular with women, but anathema to men? The church of the 1st century was a magnet to males. Jesus' strong leadership, blunt honest, and bold action mesmerized men.
Today's church does not mesmerize men; it repels them. Just 35 % of the men in the US say they attend church weekly. In Europe male participation rates are in the neighborhood of 5%. (Murrow, Why Men Hate Going to Church, 7).
By way of contrast, male and female participation is roughly equal in Judaism, Buddhism, and Hinduism.
What is the ratio of women to men here at Eliot? I went through the first 10 pages of our 3 year old photo directory and came up with the following: we are 57% women and 43% men. That gives our congregation a slightly higher percentage of men than is true for most of mainline Protestantism. It's also true that you can't really judge participation by who's in a family photo in the directory.
Because Eliot is large, we have more than our share of rough-and-tumble men, high achievers, alpha males, risk takers and adventurers, and that is a good thing. But men like that are largely missing from churches.
When I talk of "male" qualities today I don't mean to force a stereotype. The qualities I'm talking about are of course found in men and women, but they often exist more especially in men.
Why would men find church difficult? You have to be pretty comfortable around and with women to do church well. And not all men are. In various surveys, men give lots of reasons why they don't find "church" useful.
Some men say they aren't interested in church because they don't have time, it's boring, it's irrelevant, they don't like the minister, they don't want to talk about it; it's too long; they ask for money too much.
But– here's something interesting– women don't tend to have these same attitudes. Maybe those are just excuses hiding other reasons. Men don't like to feel incompetent.
Some men would rather play bad golf than go to church, because that's how incompetent they can feel in church. Men fear being singled out & embarrassed. That's understandable. Other men are afraid to sing in public. We have two choirs and the Wednesday night choir is short on men. But guys, I gotta tell you, singing in a group can be fun, even if you're not pro.
Other men say churches are out of touch. Why has the rest of the world moved along, while in most churches it looks like it's 1870? Men realize the churches could function better with modern technology. One religious pollster says that for men under 50 "information conveyed through the use of technology often has a higher degree of believability than does information coming directly out of a speaker's mouth." (Barna, Second Coming of the Church, 58).
Some men say they feel they have to check their manhood at the church door. This is because of the emphasis on the feminine aspects of religion, and sermons which preach humility, relationships, & communication. Also, that the hymns fits the sensibilities of women and children– there are lots of hymns with feminine imagery but no mens hymns) and that it all boils down to the idea that to be religious is to be like your mom.
Men who do find their way to church sometimes find their gifts and styles don't make a good fit. Church can feel alien to them. As one wag put it: "the church and the Titanic have something in common: it's women and children first."
So, let me ask you this: if you had to pick– is church a man's world or a woman's world?
Some men won't go to church for the same reason they won't wear pink– it's "unmanly." Of course, that's a short sighted view, but it's out there.
And you and I know that all our volunteer positions are open to either men or women. Why would some men think there's not much for them to do at church?
Many jobs in church stress verbal and relational skills men may feel they don't possess. "They demand proficiency with children, music, teaching, hospitality, or cooking, areas where women typically have more experience."
Because men don't usually possess the soft skills needed for spiritual work, they tend to gravitate toward practical ministries: building, finance, usher[ing], and committee work. But [this kind of work] may seem incidental to the "real" work of the church".
Fortunately, lots of liberal religious men rise above that. I have seen Eliot men visiting others in the hospital. I have seen Eliot men working at our Room at the Inn program where we house the homeless right here in church 3 Thursdays a month. I have seen Eliot men who are not fearful about their masculinity do the various ministries that make up the church.
But I also know that the culture outside our walls is different than the culture inside it. And the outside culture can make it tough for men to discover us, to find a spiritual home.
Men avoid church, and they are worse off because of it. How do I know this? Statistics tell me so.
Men are more likely than women to be arrested, die violently, commit and be victims of crimes, go to jail, and be addicted. They die more often on the job, have more heart attacks, commit suicide in greater numbers, and live shorter lives than women. I could go on.
If men want to avoid these pathologies, they could go to church. One study found that churchgoers are more likely to be married and express a higher level of satisfaction with life.
Church involvement is the most important predictor of marital stability and happiness. It moves people out of poverty. It's also correlated with less depression, more self-esteem, and greater family happiness.
Religious participation leads men to become more engaged husbands and fathers. Teens with religious fathers are more likely to say that they enjoy spending time with their dads and that they admire them.
So, men are a minority in church, and we've heard some reasons why. We have also heard some ideas on why participating in a religious community is good for men.
Is what we might call "male energy" good for church? That energy can promote church health:
An expansionist outlook (they seek to grow our influence)
Orientation toward risk (risk is what produces reward)
Focus on the outside world (some of the work of the church is like manure: keep it to ourselves, and it begins to stink; spread it around outside and it makes things grow)
Concern with rules and fairness
Pragmatism brings innovation to the church (how we can do things better)
Men bring strength to the church
Men bring money to the church
Men bring women to the church
Men bring their families to the church
Let's just highlight two of those: money and families. One pastor put it this way: "When she comes to church and he doesn't, you get the [pledge] off the grocery money. When they come together you get the [pledge] off the paycheck." I have to say, that for heterosexual couples I have found that to be true; it seems less true for gay and lesbian couples, in my experience.
As far as families go, the indications are pretty clear: "when a mother [becomes active in church] the rest of her family follows 17% of the time. But when a father [becomes active] the rest of the family follows 93% of the time" (47).
We might not like that statistic. We might say it's sexist. But it is reality. We'll talk about "make believe" versus "reality" next Sunday. But if it's true that the family follows Dad to church 93% of the time, then this has implications for us.
Here's another thing I didn't expect in researching this topic. An evangelical writes:
If you want your church to attract men, you must put a high prioirty on developing leaders, especially male ones. Men are not looking for theologians, teachers, or facilitators. They are looking for men who will lead them to greatness.
Whoa! That last sentence got to me. I know that I look to men in this church to lead me to greatness. That language sounds a little strange but I think it rings true for me.
I look to my elders in this church for the big picture, and for patience.
I look to my peers in this church for new perspectives & for solidarity.
I look to those younger than me to remind myself of where I used to be, to remember to minister to boys, youth, and young adults in their journey.
I look to some Eliot men to lead me to greatness. In the UU tradition, there is not just one exemplar we should all follow. We are a community of all souls– if not all saints– and we each have something to offer each other. All of us have different strengths to model.
Of course, I learn things from women too. For example, my spouse is a constant source of illumination. Oh yes.
When we think about attracting people to church– which frankly– is not something we speak of very often– we sometimes think about the complexity of explaining who we are & what we're about. Sometimes there is an inclination to make it as easy as possible for people to fit in.
But that may not always be the right way to go. Consider Antarctic explorer Ernest Shackleton. He posted this announcement in 1913 for his expedition:
Men wanted for hazardous journey. Small wages. Bitter cold. Long months of complete darkness. Constant danger. Safe return doubtful. Honor and recognition in case of success.
More than 5,000 men applied for 26 positions.
I must admit, I would not have been one of them. But contrast that message with the idea that if we want to recruit for the church, we have to market our religion like Tylenol: an antidote to spiritual suffering.
The depth oriented path to Unitarian Universalism requires something of us. It requires us to really think about what we believe and why we believe it, and what difference it makes to us and the people around us.
Unchurched men and women wonder: what are we about? If we're not heading to the Antarctic, where are we heading? What is our mission? "Eliot Chapel, a Unitarian Universalist community, gathers to foster free religious thought, nurture spiritual growth, and act for social justice". That's our mission in life.
In some ways, UUs have it harder than creedal religions. We don't get the certainty of a creed. We don't get the velvet coffin, the velvet coffin of a sealed revelation. Our revelation is still open.
To be perfectly honest, Unitarian Universalism, properly practiced, can be– dangerous.
Our religion is not an insurance policy for the after-life. Our religion is a ticket to spiritual adventure.
Unitarian Universalism affords the danger that cherished notions will be called into question. That old religious wounds will be re-opened (to be cleaned and more fully healed). That routines will be replaced with adventures into the unknown.
Unitarian Universalism is dangerous. Let's face it. We are a minority. There are more truck drivers in Missouri than there are Unitarian Universalists in the whole world! And our UU ideas are heretical. Still! Even today.
The Challenge
Because we are so small, our dreams must be big. This is our history. Our spiritual forebearers had big dreams– to abolish slavery, to get women the vote, to get civil rights for everyone. These were all goals thought impossible at one time that we take for granted today.
It is in that spirit, that I offer some of you a challenge. It is a 7 month challenge. The details of the challenge are in 4 (at first service or 6 at second service) sealed envelopes.
In a moment, I am going to ask everyone to bow their heads and close their eyes. I will ask our accompanist to play a little something and while the music is playing, if you feel you would like to take this challenge, then with your head down and eyes closed, raise your hand into the air. I will select a few of you at random and place an envelope in your hands.
Those who accept an envelope agree not to open it until they get home. They will have between now and May Day, 2006 to complete the challenge. And, it being a Unitarian Universalist challenge, they can work on it as much or as little as they wish.
To accept this challenge, you do not have to be male. You do not have to be a member or friend of this church. You do not have to be "from around here". You do not have to be an adult nor a child, nor a youth; neither rich nor poor; only a desire to use whatever skills & energy you can muster to take the challenge to help a stranger. And then to write one page about your experience. That page is due to me on May Day, 2006.
This is a spiritual journey. There are no wages. Neither excessive cold nor heat. Seven months of occasional thought and action. No apparent danger. Honor and recognition in case of success. It is a journey to an unknown land. But you will not be alone.
Even if you don't get the envelope, you may hear of the challenge, and decide to take it anyway. Life is like that sometimes.
And now, let us bow our heads, and listen to the music. And if you are up for a challenge, raise your arm in the air.
Very good.
Even though you may not have received an envelope, once you learn of the contents, you may want to take the journey too. Because more than
"Once, to every Soul and Nation, comes the moment to decide, in the strife of truth with falsehood, for the good or evil side: Then to stand with truth is noble, when we share its wretched crust; 'ere that cause bring fame and profit and 'tis prosperous to be just.
Let's rise and sing it, shall we? Once to Every Soul and Nation, #119
No comments:
Post a Comment