Biblical Manhood

Imagine this conversation between a man and a woman as to the reasoning behind male leadership -
Man: "But you don't have a penis!"
Woman: "Well...right. I don't have a..."
Man: "Hah! Hah hah! I win!!"

The vaulted Sister (sister of the girl) recently sent me an article having to do with Biblical Manhood. Sounds dirty, doesn't it? Unfortunately there was nothing dirty about the article. No, it detailed the adventures of some dude, Mark Chanski, in quite possibly the worst-titled book in the world, Manly Dominion: In a Passive-Purple-Four-Ball World. Fun stuff, eh? This has nothing to do with an attempt to review the book. Rather, I want to look at some specific quotes from the book that not caught my eye but were also pointed out to me by the sister. In a religion that calls for male authority yet not male domination in a world in which authority is almost tantamont to domination, the issue of male authority is a fine line to walk.

So, clearly, I relish any opportunity to talk about exactly what authority is. Especially in today's society, or simply in my relationship, where authority may take on its true definition but also a delightfully perverted definition which demands an understanding of the nature of equality, duality, and difference. Of course, I like to think that the true defintion of authority is actually that perverted.

But. that's. just. me.

Let's start with what I agree with the cat on. The article's author writes: "In the opening chapters, Chanski...analyzes the unbiblical mindset into which many Christian men have fallen. Many men have embraced the pathetic victim mentality that so thoroughly pervades our modern-day...[and in so doing, they have abdicated their roles as husbands, fathers...and as just plain men]."

I don't believe it's astounding to say that we live in an age of victimhood. Or, rather, we live in an age of realized victimhood. From the dawn of dirty old men there have always been victims. Yet as we begin to shed more and more light into the crevices of our society, we begin to realize more of who and what we are in terms of autonomous individuals. Gone, going, are the days of en masse without the choice of joining the mass. As individualism becomes more important, so too do the issues that individual deals with. Yet the striking realization of this age of self-actualized victimhood is that victims refuse to move past their victimhood. I speak not, surely, of victims who have been truly violated. (In one way or another we must all use absolute definitions, even if it is the absence of the absolute. So, by truly violated I hope you know what I mean.) This phrase seems to be our world's mantra: "I deserve (blank), yet because of (blank) I'm not getting (blank) and so I hate (blank), the bleepity bleepity bleep bleep." [All blanks are not held equal.] Obsessing over victimhood has crippled or threatens to cripple what we are capable of. I fully agree with this Chanski fellow about that.

Yet Chanski seems to feel that this victim mentality is only a threat to men. Yeah it's a threat to men. But it's also a threat to women. Our culture is painting itself in a the corner of mediocrity with the paint brush of unjustified expectations (I think I just gave myself a literary orgasm). As the fabulous Geena Davis said in "A Long Kiss Goodnight" - "Life is pain!" [Her daughter in the film actually repeated the line, but I've repressed the memory...or tried to, damn't!] It's life. So deal with it. And hopefully there are enough of those who love you to help you deal with that thing called life. 'Cause it sucks otherwise.

Chanski continues, or the article continues and Chanksi follows, with some insight into what his theological argument will be in the most horrifically titled book ever. Chanski wants us Christian men to "exercise dominion over creation." Indeed, he goes on to say that "Man is to aggressively dominate his environment, instead of allowing his environment to dominate him."

The worst titler (titleist?) of a book justifies this view with an amazing statment:
"In the Lord Jesus Christ, the Christian finds his ultimate model for subduing and ruling over the opposing circumstances of our sin cursed world."

Christ subdued and ruled over the opposing circumstances in our sin cursed world? Why, yes, I do believe He did. But not quite in the way that Mr. Chanski believes. Christ, I assert humbly, rules absolutely. Yet Christ, the sneaky devil, went about manifesting that absolute rule in a very tricksy way. Christ let the Romans and the Jews subdue Him - God, of all people! - in order to achieve a facet of that absolute rule. It was because Christ let Himself be taken that we have a path of salvation - if you believe that kind of crazy shit. In asserting how Christ subdued and ruled those who opposed Him, I don't think that Chanski is sending quite the message he wants to. You see, the message I take from Christ's Passion is a fundamental reliance upon Faith and submission and not, as I think Chanski wants to have it, the message of "rock with your cock out" - if you'll excuse the vulgarity.

(Domination, leaves a bad taste in your mouth, eh? Yet dominion, not so much. Isn't it incredible how two words with the same root and connected meanings have diversive connotated meanings?)

Chanski continues with "We have been commissioned by God to go out and aggressively assert ourselves as masters over every realm of our lives." He defends such an assertion by declaring that Jesus Christ "provides the ultimate example of one who exercises manly dominion to the nth degree in his life and atoning death." I believe the author wants to intimate that Christ was dominating in His dominion.

Not quite.

Don't get me wrong, Christ was dominating - He is God, He couldn't really not be. Yet the New Testament paints a delightfully complicated picture of how Christ existed in His dominion. Christ questioned His Father and weeped tears of blood as His crucifixion loomed. Funnily enough, I don't quite equate that with domination. Rather, I see Christ's actions as an acceptance of given dominion - rife with metaphors of submission, service, and, yes, authority. In his attempt to paint a simple by-the-numbers "Grow Balls" scheme, Chanski paints an gross picture of what it truly means to be a Christian man (even simply Christian) by following Christ. We are told to have and hold dominion over creation, yet there is only one who dominates. He's God. And He is rather territorial.

Ultimately Chanski advocates some good things (through an article) in a poor, foolish way. Especially in this our world, we must define authority and dominion with words that are equal and do not work in opposition: service, submission, and equality.

Otherwise, when you dumb down Christianity the world in which we live results and words like authority and domination are evil.

I think we've had enough of that. Yeah?


An interesting link: http://www.cbmw.org/rbmw/rbmw.pdf