Is it me or MOST Churches in America will preach about how Men & kids should honor God specifically but no sermons about how Women should act ?

[QuestionQuest74]

I hear plenty of sermons about how children should honor their parents.

I hear plenty of sermons about how men should be respectful and not live in lust and be sexual immorality

But for women………….. I rarely hear anything specifically about them in most church sermons.

I hear more Churches talk about the LGBT community sin more than I’ve heard sermon’s talk about them.

But I could be wrong and it could be me so correct me if I'm wrong and tell me if im right

 

[zippy2006]

To do so in a feminist culture would be a faux pas.

 

[QuestionQuest74]

To do so in a feminist culture would be a faux pas.

What do you mean ?

 

[zippy2006]

What do you mean ?

I mean that Feminism strongly resists the claim that women can be told how they should act, especially by men. Because our culture has now become infused with Feminism, leaders will rarely venture to prescribe how women should act. This is exacerbated by the fact that the majority of pastors are male, and also by the fact that Feminism is specifically suspicious of the Judeo-Christian tradition, which is associated with "the patriarchy".

Birth control and abortion are two concrete examples where Feminism exerts an enormous influence. There is the strict favoring of "the woman's choice," and anything which impinges upon that choice—such as laws, morality, advice, financial burdens—is considered anathema.

For a preacher to preach about how women should act is to take a great risk, and to swim against the current.

 

[PloverWing]

I hear plenty of sermons about how children should honor their parents.

I hear plenty of sermons about how men should be respectful and not live in lust and be sexual immorality

But for women………….. I rarely hear anything specifically about them in most church sermons.

I hear more Churches talk about the LGBT community sin more than I’ve heard sermon’s talk about them.

But I could be wrong and it could be me so correct me if I'm wrong and tell me if im right

For what it's worth, most of the sermons I've heard in Episcopal churches don't separate people by gender at all. Most sins -- selfishness, greed, hurting people with words, being insensitive to people's needs, being lazy about one's prayer life, and so on -- can quite easily be committed by people of any gender. Most virtues also -- being kind, being welcoming, being courageous, persevering through adversity, being faithful to one's spouse, etc. -- can apply to people regardless of gender.

Different churches have different preaching styles, I suppose.

 

[zippy2006]

Most virtues also [...] can apply to people regardless of gender.

Let me address the stronger claim, "Virtues and vices apply to people regardless of gender." This is a fairly modern idea, and it reflects the way we have intentionally shaped our world. In the ancient and Biblical world it was universally recognized that many virtues and vices apply in a special way to males or females. This is particularly true the closer we get to the ground level, and away from abstraction, which is precisely where homilies are supposed to venture. For example, the wisdom and epistolary literature in the Bible often distinguishes men from women for moral purposes. Modern psychological and sociological literature does the same thing, for the same reason.

 

[PloverWing]

Let me address the stronger claim, "Virtues and vices apply to people regardless of gender." This is a fairly modern idea, and it reflects the way we have intentionally shaped our world. In the ancient and Biblical world it was universally recognized that many virtues and vices apply in a special way to males or females. This is particularly true the closer we get to the ground level, and away from abstraction, which is precisely where homilies are supposed to venture. For example, the wisdom and epistolary literature in the Bible often distinguishes men from women for moral purposes. Modern psychological and sociological literature does the same thing, for the same reason.

I agree that the level of gender equality in our present culture is a fairly modern idea, and that it has been intentional. In our present culture, both men and women can care for children, both men and women can work outside the home, both can access higher education, both can own property, both can perform domestic chores, and so on. Given that that is our present culture, it is appropriate for homilies to address the culture that we actually live in. A homily that assumes that I am a housewife, or that my husband knows nothing about child care, or that I know nothing about work in an office, is more annoying than helpful, because it's about a world I don't live in.

Homilies preached in 1823, or in 1123, or in 1123 BC, would presumably -- and appropriately -- be different.

 

[zippy2006]

I agree that the level of gender equality in our present culture is a fairly modern idea, and that it has been intentional. In our present culture, both men and women can care for children, both men and women can work outside the home, both can access higher education, both can own property, both can perform domestic chores, and so on. Given that that is our present culture, it is appropriate for homilies to address the culture that we actually live in.

The problem is that you are misconstruing reality with an excessive dependence on that word, "can". This also occurred often in the thread on whether one should speak differently to men and women.

For example, I did a quick search and found a claim that the maximum safe lifting weight for women is 35 pounds, and for men, 55 pounds. Now we can talk about "can" until we are blue in the face. We can say, "(Some) women can safely lift 55 pounds," "(Some) men can only safely lift 35 pounds." This is misleading at best, and it is masking the fact that there is a real and significant sexual difference between men and women.

Now human women have been the primary nurturers of infants and children for 300,000 years. 60 years ago some progressives decided that men are equally capable of nurture. We have every reason to believe that those progressives were wrong. To ignore this fact is to harm children and distort reality. To therefore harp on the true claim that, "Men can care for children," is more ideology than responsible reasoning. It subordinates the wellbeing of society and children to Feminist ideology.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

I hear plenty of sermons about how children should honor their parents.

I hear plenty of sermons about how men should be respectful and not live in lust and be sexual immorality

But for women………….. I rarely hear anything specifically about them in most church sermons.

I hear more Churches talk about the LGBT community sin more than I’ve heard sermon’s talk about them.

But I could be wrong and it could be me so correct me if I'm wrong and tell me if im right

welcome to america. been going on since the 1970's women are good men are bad.

 

[QuestionQuest74]

I mean that Feminism strongly resists the claim that women can be told how they should act, especially by men. Because our culture has now become infused with Feminism, leaders will rarely venture to prescribe how women should act. This is exacerbated by the fact that the majority of pastors are male, and also by the fact that Feminism is specifically suspicious of the Judeo-Christian tradition, which is associated with "the patriarchy".

Birth control and abortion are two concrete examples where Feminism exerts an enormous influence. There is the strict favoring of "the woman's choice," and anything which impinges upon that choice—such as laws, morality, advice, financial burdens—is considered anathema.

For a preacher to preach about how women should act is to take a great risk, and to swim against the current.

Thank you just making sure this was something I noticed and I thought to myself maybe it was just my church.

 

[seeking.IAM]

I reckon the kind of sermons one hears has a lot to do with the bent of the church one attends.

 

[RDKirk]

The problem is that you are misconstruing reality with an excessive dependence on that word, "can". This also occurred often in the thread on whether one should speak differently to men and women.

For example, I did a quick search and found a claim that the maximum safe lifting weight for women is 35 pounds, and for men, 55 pounds. Now we can talk about "can" until we are blue in the face. We can say, "(Some) women can safely lift 55 pounds," "(Some) men can only safely lift 35 pounds." This is misleading at best, and it is masking the fact that there is a real and significant sexual difference between men and women.

You misconstrue what PloverWing said. Ploverwing's post did not rely on who does a role better. Whether better worse, the situation is as it is, and a homily is intended to address people's situations as they are.

Women are out in the workforce in America in the same workspaces as men (which is different even from the circumstances of women in the workplace 100 years ago), so all the morality that once applied only to men in the workforce does apply to women today. Women are unfaithful at the same rate as men today...sermons about fidelity are just as applicable. Women today are commonly marrying a decade or more after puberty, rather than within a couple of years of puberty...so the homilies of 100 years ago are obsolete.

Things are as they are, whether you like it or not.

Now, I do agree with you that "women cain' be tol' nuthin' no more" in this feminist age. The explicit rejection of the very concept of respectability is actually taught as a college subject these days, particularly by and for black women. That's a problem that few churches will dare confront.

 

[seeking.IAM]

I do agree with you that "women cain' be tol' nuthin' no more" in this feminist age.

That is a quite a generalization. I believe the Christian women I know are just as receptive of the Word as men. Ya'll must have some unusual sermons and some unusual women in your churches. Go figure.

 

[zippy2006]

Women are out in the workforce in America in the same workspaces as men (which is different even from the circumstances of women in the workplace 100 years ago), so all the morality that once applied only to men in the workforce does apply to women today. Women are unfaithful at the same rate as men today...sermons about fidelity are just as applicable. Women today are commonly marrying a decade or more after puberty, rather than within a couple of years of puberty...so the homilies of 100 years ago are obsolete.

Are women incarcerated at the same rate as men? Do women engage in self-harm at the same rate as men? Are women addicted to por.nography at the same rate as men? Do women gossip at the same rate as men? Do women abuse children at the same rate as men? Are women the heads of single-parent households at the same rate as men? Are women the primary breadwinner at the same rate as men?

I could go on. The point is that differences between women and men are still very significant.

 

[WolfGate]

I hear plenty of sermons about how children should honor their parents.

I hear plenty of sermons about how men should be respectful and not live in lust and be sexual immorality

But for women………….. I rarely hear anything specifically about them in most church sermons.

I hear more Churches talk about the LGBT community sin more than I’ve heard sermon’s talk about them.

But I could be wrong and it could be me so correct me if I'm wrong and tell me if im right

Not my experience. My current church (where I attend) and prior church (where I was in leadership) have sermons that address how each segment of our congregation should honor God. Men, women, children. These were churches with a high view of scripture and would generally be considered evangelical in theology (if not culture).

 

[RDKirk]

Are women incarcerated at the same rate as men? Do women engage in self-harm at the same rate as men? Are women addicted to por.nography at the same rate as men? Do women gossip at the same rate as men? Do women abuse children at the same rate as men? Are women the heads of single-parent households at the same rate as men? Are women the primary breadwinner at the same rate as men?

I could go on. The point is that differences between women and men are still very significant.

Sounds like a good reason to have entirely separate services for men and women, and particularly for the youth.

 

[zippy2006]

Sounds like a good reason to have entirely separate services for men and women, and particularly for the youth.

You claimed that men and women are virtually the same, and therefore there is no reason for preachers to distinguish between the two. I proved that your premise is false, and in response you jumped to a new argument, hoping that no one would notice that the former argument had foundered on the rocks.

 

[RDKirk]

You claimed that men and women are virtually the same, and therefore there is no reason for preachers to distinguish between the two. I proved that your premise is false, and in response you jumped to a new argument, hoping that no one would notice that the former argument had foundered on the rocks.

No, I did not claim that "men and women are virtually the same." You are misconstruing my statements the same way you misconstrued @PloverWing.

I said that women are in different situations now than 100 years ago, and thus need different homilies than 100 years ago.

 

[RDKirk]

That is a quite a generalization. I believe the Christian women I know are just as receptive of the Word as men. Ya'll must have some unusual sermons and some unusual women in your churches. Go figure.

As long as it doesn't require them to do things feminism has told them they don't have to do.

 

[zippy2006]

No, I did not claim that "men and women are virtually the same." You are misconstruing my statements the same way you misconstrued @PloverWing.

I said that women are in different situations now than 100 years ago, and thus need different homilies than 100 years ago.

Oh, heavens. I did not misconstrue @PloverWing and I did not misconstrue you. Here is what you said:

Women are out in the workforce in America in the same workspaces as men, [...] so all the morality that once applied only to men in the workforce does apply to women today. Women are unfaithful at the same rate as men today...sermons about fidelity are just as applicable.

This mimicked and defended Plover's earlier claim:

I agree that the level of gender equality in our present culture is a fairly modern idea, and that it has been intentional. In our present culture, both men and women can care for children, both men and women can work outside the home, both can access higher education, both can own property, both can perform domestic chores, and so on.