www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Feminine and Masculine, East and West

1. Yeah, they do.
2. As a high tenor priest once said to me, "I think we eat too much chicken, you know, with those hormones and stuff".

And wearing lace isn't exactly masculine either.

All the lacy stuff was introduced into the Latin Church during the Baroque and Rococo period. Latin clerics ca. AD 600-1100, would have looked a lot like Byzantine clerics; i.e., their vestments were largely derived from late Roman court dress.

As to why frilly stuff on dudes became popular in the 16th-17th centuries, that's something for psycho-historians to figure out.

I notice that Protestant converts to Rome tend to be some of the more... militant? And also traditional. I personally believe it's due to the fact that our attraction to the Church was stoked by the fathers, orthodoxy, rigor, and traditions/rituals. Probably why a lot of us are astounded and/or infuriated by the abandonment of "the ways of old." We come into the Church thinking "LATIN! LITURGY! THE ANCIENT FAITH!" and instead we walk headfirst into a wall of guitar amplifiers XDDDD

Dead languages do not good liturgy make, nor does vernacular imply poor liturgy. I have seen both good and bad liturgy in Latin, Slavonic, Greek and English. It's what you do and say, not the language in which you say it, that makes the difference.

This is very interesting. I am not sure if I agree with the idea that Western Christianity is more femenine or less masculine than Eastern Christianity.

I for sure do not feel any less of a man when I attend or serve at Mass, nor I feel any more masculie when I attend a Divine Liturgy.

Personally, I do not like lace on men or women, but then again, I do not like poor personal grooming on either gender.

I do believe that Christianity in general has a distinct femenine ethos. After all, aren't we as Church the bride of Christ?

I do not feel that idea poses any threat to my masculinity. On the contrary, I find this "dialectic tension" very helpful in distinguishing between masculine and macho.

But do not pay a lot of attention to me. After all, I wear a pink shirt or polo at least once a week (yes, I also own a few whites, grays and blues and I even like some of them).

Shalom,
Memo

I suggest you read Podles, to understand fully what he means by the feminization of Western Christianity--including the Latin Church. Remember, Podles himself is a Latin Catholic.

Podles.org [podles.org]
Free PDF Version of his book. [podles.org]

That's why I posted the link. Pick it up. Read it.

You've just put into words something I struggled with after I underwent my own conversion experience, but had trouble expressing. I'll have to remember that term: Suburbianity! I've been down some pretty dark roads in my life, but after converting suddenly found myself in an affluent parish feeling as though I had not much in common.

Those of us who've come to faith from a life of radical sin see Christianity as a radical calling to repentance and sacrifice. It took the movie "The Passion", to put me over the edge in my conversion. But then if someone with a similar experience ends up in a modern, suburban parish of bake sales and "teen masses", where parish "water park outings" and "Catholic Caribbean cruises" are announced right after receiving the Eucharist, one can become quickly disillusioned.

This is a good quote from Blessed Cardinal Newman that nails it on the head:

"We are cherishing a shallow religion, a hollow religion, which will not profit us in the day of trouble. The age loves an exclusively cheerful religion. It is determined to make religion bright and sunny and joyous......we take what is beautiful and attractive, shrink from what is stern and painful."

I believe that's even more true today!

my computer's "back" button was broke

I just browsed through a couple of chapters and all I can say is that I do not agree with the author.

What he says might have been true about Western Christianity in the middle-ages, but it is certainly not true about Western Christianity today.

His main complain that Western Christianity requires all souls to be femenine (passive, receptive, obedient) is ludicrous. As a side point, if the author believes all women are passive, receptive and obedient, he must be unmarried.

Yes, with respect to God we are passive, receptive and obedient, but Christianity is not merely a relationship with God. The true Christian disciple, regardless of gender or geographical positioning is called to reach out to the community in ways that certainly involve action, assertion and leadership.

Yes, we do receive the Body and Blood of the Lord in the Eucharist, but not to keep for ourselves. We receive so we can fulfill the commandment to "do this in His memory" and give ourselves fully and thoroughly in loving service to others.

I believe that Christianity, both Eastern and Western can only be fulfilled if we let ourselves balance out our beings. As St. Paul says, "there is neither male nor female". This doesn't mean we are all supposed to become asexual or hermaphrodites; it means that Christianity both allows and demands that you put your identity as a human, a child of God above your gender identity (and your race, national origin, culture, etc.) in your scale of values.

Shalom,
Memo

Don't browse, Memo--read closely.

Thank you, Stuart. I'll pass this time.

I said it interested me the fact that there are people thinking about a gendered religion, but I am certainly not one of those.

Moving on...

Shalom,
Memo

This isn't what he says, though. You forget the author himself is Roman Catholic.

I was recently crowned, and I can assure you that my wife and I were reminded very clearly that our gender roles were very prominent in the sacrament.

Yes, we are Christians before we are male or female, but our gender (among other things) helps determine what types of Christians we will and should be. To distort this is to distort Christianity.