How the eastern orthodox attracts its men

[T-Shirt Ninja]

Personally, I love being Orthodox and I understand why men are so attracted to it. One aspect I love is the music. I was an evangelical Protestant for a long time and went to plenty of modern worship services. I ended up not liking the songs and found the lyrics to be a lot of "Jesus is my boyfriend" which I felt probably connected well with women but not so much with me as a man. The hymns in the Orthodox Church connected with me on a deeper level that just made a lot of sense.

[Just Some Dude]

Seems like we got a lot of complaints about modern hymns and such in this topic.

[Wilkowsky]

This has been a revelation to me. Just a few days ago I thought that Orthodox church is just Catholic Church for Russian people. Now I'm fascinated by it.

Thank you for this bit of information.

[One Bad Pig]

This has been a revelation to me. Just a few days ago I thought that Orthodox church is just Catholic Church for Russian people. Now I'm fascinated by it.

Thank you for this bit of information.

You're welcome! I think this is the website for the Polish Orthodox Church.

We just recently celebrated the life of a Polish Orthodox saint, the martyred priest Vasily Martysz.

[johngalt1]

I think there this particular issue especially that the relationship with Jesus takes erotic overtones due to the innovation of some catholic writer in the 12th century:
http://podles.org/files/Church-Impot...t_Chapter6.pdf

[Jedidiah]

I think the article tends to set up a false antithesis between the 'feminine' and the 'masculine' while conflating the emotional with the feminine- all of course viewed from a highly Americancentric perspective.

Some of us take the intellectual route.

Discipleship is all about "action verbs", like....
James 1:[22]*But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

I don't see these two as mutually exclusive. Doing does not needfully involve getting "dirty." It will at times but I see women active as well as men. I am inclined to see the "divide" as "balanced v. feminized." I am with Sparko on that.

[johngalt1]

On one hand its action but masculinity also involves risk. You will notice that the more riskier the profession the more male-dominated it is.

[Buzzword]

I think the article tends to set up a false antithesis between the 'feminine' and the 'masculine' while conflating the emotional with the feminine- all of course viewed from a highly Americancentric perspective.
Some of us take the intellectual route.

Agreed.

I personally reject most of the assumptions regarding male preference and behavior in the OP, especially regarding any and all military reference.
As a descendant of Bible-Belt Evangelicals, I've already seen far too much reference to military behavior and warlike attitude in non-Eastern Orthodox churches to support any kind of militancy in an Eastern Orthodox setting.

Where is a God of agape in all this marching and standing at attention and us-against-them mentality?
Where is a Christ who comes to redeem us, to as John Wesley put it, "bring us into better relationship with God, each other, and God's created universe"?
Where is a Spirit to lead us into all truth and a familial unity of spirit?

I don't see it in this depiction of Eastern Orthodoxy.
Which, of course, is just a small study group's depiction of it, so it's not to say that Eastern Orthodoxy can't answer my above questions.

But in my experience as an American Christian who was raised in a series of evangelical churches, the spirit of militancy in no way helps us reach out and connect with people.
The military is there to stand the wall, defend the home, what have you.
Its purpose is not to bring in, but keep out.

How can there be any reconciliation between US, much less between us and the Father, if our mindset is entirely militaristic?

[One Bad Pig]

Agreed.

I personally reject most of the assumptions regarding male preference and behavior in the OP, especially regarding any and all military reference.
As a descendant of Bible-Belt Evangelicals, I've already seen far too much reference to military behavior and warlike attitude in non-Eastern Orthodox churches to support any kind of militancy in an Eastern Orthodox setting.

Where is a God of agape in all this marching and standing at attention and us-against-them mentality?
Where is a Christ who comes to redeem us, to as John Wesley put it, "bring us into better relationship with God, each other, and God's created universe"?
Where is a Spirit to lead us into all truth and a familial unity of spirit?

I don't see it in this depiction of Eastern Orthodoxy.
Which, of course, is just a small study group's depiction of it, so it's not to say that Eastern Orthodoxy can't answer my above questions.

But in my experience as an American Christian who was raised in a series of evangelical churches, the spirit of militancy in no way helps us reach out and connect with people.
The military is there to stand the wall, defend the home, what have you.
Its purpose is not to bring in, but keep out.

How can there be any reconciliation between US, much less between us and the Father, if our mindset is entirely militaristic?

You seem to be focusing on a particular bit of the article you don't like, and misreading that. The "military" language in the article is more in line with Paul's - we fight not against flesh and blood. It's not an "us against them" mentality at all.

[Buzzword]

You seem to be focusing on a particular bit of the article you don't like, and misreading that. The "military" language in the article is more in line with Paul's - we fight not against flesh and blood. It's not an "us against them" mentality at all.

The problem is not Paul's choice of military language, given that he was writing to people living in and under the control of a militaristic society but the overemphasis upon it, in both the article and in too many individual congregations in our now non-militaristic (at least in its more enlightened moments) society.

Especially the implication throughout the article that all men automatically prefer militaristic settings and practices (again, the focus on physical extremity mentioned several times in the OP).

This in addition to the false dichotomy, or really false opposition, between masculine and feminine which Paprika pointed out, in addition to the implication that male = masculine and female = feminine, at all times, all places and all circumstances.

I would contend that many men are not leaving Western churches because the procedure has been "feminized," as much as they are leaving because a greater sense of individuality has gradually pervaded Western congregations (at worst leading to a constant "come to Jesus" orientation in church services with no room for growth, at best leading individual Christians to work out their own salvation and not worry so much about the splinter in their brother's eye), and many heterosexual males prefer a pack-oriented setting in which they can find their place in the pecking order and work from there.

Which may explain the increase in male attendants of Eastern Orthodox churches, if those churches are successfully bringing those men into the communal worship experience and giving them a sense of their place within it.

And more power to them.


Of course, this avoids the overall issue of PEOPLE of all genders abandoning traditional church attendance in record numbers, especially the 18-35 set.
Obviously needs are not being met across the board and/or believers and seekers are being alienated.

[pancreasman]

That is why this country is so liberal today. Too little Christ and too much feel good stuff.

Your country is SO liberal with republicans gaining a majority in both houses in the mid term elections.

[Darth Executor]

Your country is SO liberal with republicans gaining a majority in both houses in the mid term elections.

Republicans are the less liberal party. They're in not conservative in any meaningful sense of the word.

[Cow Poke]

Republicans are the less liberal party. They're in not conservative in any meaningful sense of the word.

Still trying to parse that second sentence, but, yeah.

[pancreasman]

Still trying to parse that second sentence, but, yeah.

So Republicans aren't real conservatives. Ok. Does the US have a real conservative party? Maybe the Tea Party?

[Cow Poke]

So Republicans aren't real conservatives. Ok. Does the US have a real conservative party? Maybe the Tea Party?

It's interesting... there used to be a lot of conservative democrats, and liberal republicans, but it seems GENERALLY the democrats are more consistently liberal, and the republicans, as DE said, are less so. There certainly are some conservative republicans, but I try not to use the labels interchangeably.

If I mean conservatives, I try NOT to use the label "republican", and if I mean liberal, I try NOT to use the label "democrat".

My Dad is about as conservative as they get (he's 95 now) but was a democrat for the first half of his life, because that was the "God and country" party.