Recent blog posts have swung between these two topics but they are deeply intertwined. A recent post suggested some kinds of people might be found in emerging church. I'd like to add some more, with an eye to what kinds of men & young men we might encounter:
- never-been-fathered
- never-been-initiated
- never-been-mentored
- never-been-believed-in
- etc ...
I wonder if some of those who will be drawn to em.church are seeking those very things ...
I am currently reading and meditating on a very helpful article by Franciscan Richard Rohr about "Father Hunger" - read it here.
Do we recognise any of these lacks in ourselves, as we also identify them in those we encounter? Following a comment in "Mission Shaped Church", the leaders of em.church are going to have to walk the walk before others will respect their talk ... if Richard Rohr is right, then what is needed is less sharing of opinions, roles and so forth, and more sharing our our very selves.
More to come on this I think ...
Yes I'm not quite sure about this either - maybe he is referring to entrenched stereotypes, but I need to read it more deeply too.
Posted by: Richard | September 22, 2004 at 09:19 PM
A very interesting article by Rohr, which I admit I have read quickly. The 'father hunger' of which he speaks is also examined in Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen's "Fathers and Sons: the search for a new masculinity" (IVP) - well worth reading. (See also Susan Faludi's "Stiffed".) However, I am not so sure about some of Rohr's defining of certain characteristics as essentially masculine or feminine - why is it distinctly 'feminine' to be 'willing and submissive'? Why is masculinity 'hard' and femininity 'soft'?....etc
Posted by: mark | September 22, 2004 at 06:55 PM