Separate Church Seating for Men and Women

[CryptoLutheran]

Why is it that Islam has managed to hold onto its traditions better than Christianity has? Is Islam a stronger religion?

I hardly think that mixed or separate gender seating arrangements are indicative of a religion's ability to maintain it's hallowed traditions.

In Lutheranism there is a concept known as adiaphora, Greek for "indifferent things", it refers various things which are neither commanded nor forbidden. Whether or not men and women are mixed or separated would, definitely, fall under this category. It's simply a non-issue. Similar to how Western churches use pews, whereas Eastern churches do not, the presence or absence of a pew would be, at least from a Lutheran view point, excessively trivial.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ebia]

Martha (like everyone else in her culture) thought the sexes should be segregated. Jesus gently admonished her. (Luke 13)

 

[fschmidt]

Martha (like everyone else in her culture) thought the sexes should be segregated. Jesus gently admonished her. (Luke 13)

Could you please quote the relevant part? I don't see this in Luke 13.

 

[.Iona.]

I have been to many different churches, but never have I been to one in which men and women are segregated. I on't like the idea, because it can allow some people to believe that men and women are not equal.

 

[fschmidt]

I have been to many different churches, but never have I been to one in which men and women are segregated.

The Mormon church has a 3 hour service composed of 3 1 hour segments, and the third hour is segregated. This is one of the reasons that I like Mormonism.

 

[CryptoLutheran]

Could you please quote the relevant part? I don't see this in Luke 13.

It's actually in Luke 10,

"Martha, burdened with much serving, came to him and said, "Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me by myself to do the serving? Tell her to help me." The Lord said to her in reply, "Martha, Martha, you are anxious and worried about many things. There is need of only one thing. Mary has chosen the better part and it will not be taken from her."" - Luke 10:40-42

Mary was sitting and listening to Jesus teach, with "the guys" as it were, whereas Martha was likely busy doing housework, making food for the group, etc and Martha gets flustered and complains that Mary decided to join the guys instead of assisting her sister in the "womanly" stuff, to which Jesus says that Mary was doing a better thing (listening and learning).

Many see in this an example of Jesus welcoming women as disciples and co-equal with the men in this regard.

(as an aside, in the Western tradition this Mary is usually identified as Mary Magdalene, who has been venerated in Christian Tradition as "St. Mary the Equal-to-the-Apostles" and "St. Mary the Apostle to the Apostles")

-CryptoLutheran

 

[.Iona.]

The Mormon church has a 3 hour service composed of 3 1 hour segments, and the third hour is segregated. This is one of the reasons that I like Mormonism.

If people like the idea of segregation then it's all good.

 

[fschmidt]

It's actually in Luke 10

Sorry but I don't see this passage as having anything to do with whether the sexes should be segregated or not. All I see is that Christ prefers that people listen to him over other more mundane activities.

 

[CryptoLutheran]

The Mormon church has a 3 hour service composed of 3 1 hour segments, and the third hour is segregated. This is one of the reasons that I like Mormonism.

If you don't mind my asking, why do you seem to be in favor of gender segregation in the context of religious worship? If I recall correctly you mentioned being from the Middle East, so is it just cultural?

For me, I tend to view segregation in church to be counter productive to what I believe to be a central notion within Christianity--the full equality and integration of persons--male, female, circumcised, uncircumcised, poor, rich, black, white, brown or aquamarine--as part of a radically different sort of human polis or community ("a city upon a hill"); what St. Paul describes as "one new humanity (anthropos)" in Jesus. The Church is to be a sort of "colony" of God's kingdom, which is consistently spoken of by Jesus as culturally inversive and radically different than the predominant power structures that dominate the world around us -- "the first shall be last" "the least among you is the greatest" "the greatest among you is your servant" "to live by sword is to die by the sword" "love your enemies" etc.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[CryptoLutheran]

Sorry but I don't see this passage as having anything to do with whether the sexes should be segregated or not. All I see is that Christ prefers that people listen to him over other more mundane activities.

Depends on how you look at it.

Culturally, men were disciples, a woman's place was cooking, cleaning, etc; for Mary to be identified as sitting at Jesus' feet (a man's thing) rather than assisting her sister in housework (a woman's thing) is somewhat culturally subversive.

In cultures where such social and gender stratification isn't normative, such a reading is possibly easy to miss.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[fschmidt]

I am not from the Middle East. I grew up in New Jersey.

I detest feminism. I don't believe that men and women are equal in the sense of being the same. But I do believe men and women should have equal rights and be equally educated.

I prefer segregation because I find women distracting. Most men deny that women are distracting, but I know they lie because I see men change their behavior around women all the time. Men are always conscious of what women think of them and men always seem to control their behavior to impress women. When men aren't around women, they are more honest and direct and focused. That is my experience.

The other obvious benefit of segregation is that it lessens the temptation of sex outside of marriage.

In my ideal world, I wouldn't have to have extended interactions with women outside of my family, and even those limited interactions would only be with women who are modestly dressed.

 

[.Iona.]

I detest feminism. I don't believe that men and women are equal in the sense of being the same. But I do believe men and women should have equal rights and be equally educated.

So, how do you see men and women as being different?

 

[CryptoLutheran]

I am not from the Middle East. I grew up in New Jersey.

My apology, I must have had a major brain fart at some point.

I detest feminism. I don't believe that men and women are equal in the sense of being the same. But I do believe men and women should have equal rights and be equally educated.

I have at some points described myself as a feminist, to what degree that is actually accurate depends a lot on how one defines feminism and to what degree a male can be described as one; specifically if it is possible that I, being a white male living in an historically male-dominated and euro-centric culture can truly free myself from certain cultural bonds of privilege associated with such a culture. Though that conversation alone may belong elsewhere and is far larger than the scope of the current discussion.

I prefer segregation because I find women distracting. Most men deny that women are distracting, but I know they lie because I see men change their behavior around women all the time. Men are always conscious of what women think of them and men always seem to control their behavior to impress women.

Sex and biology are powerful behavioral motivators. Though I'm not convinced that that is enough to justify gender segregation.

When men aren't around women, they are more honest and direct and focused. That is my experience.

Possibly, or it could be argued that when men are around other men they tend to put up a front of machismo. I guess color me somewhat skeptical.

The other obvious benefit of segregation is that it lessens the temptation of sex outside of marriage.

So does living in a cave.

In my ideal world, I wouldn't have to have extended interactions with women outside of my family, and even those limited interactions would only be with women who are modestly dressed.

Which, to be quite frank, sounds a lot more like personal issues with women than anything truly substantive.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[fschmidt]

Which, to be quite frank, sounds a lot more like personal issues with women than anything truly substantive.

Would you say the same about Muslims and Orthodox Jews who share my views on this?

The irony is that Christianity succeeded because it offered a refuge from the sexual decadence of the Roman empire. Christianity today is much like the various religious sects in decaying Rome, while Islam is occupying the same niche today that Christianity occupied in Rome. It seems that Islam is the new Christianity.

I am currently considering Mormonism and Islam as options for my family. If anyone has any other suggestions, please let me know.

 

[CryptoLutheran]

Would you say the same about Muslims and Orthodox Jews who share my views on this?

If they said the same thing. Yes. Same goes for if a Christian said the same thing.

The irony is that Christianity succeeded because it offered a refuge from the sexual decadence of the Roman empire. Christianity today is much like the various religious sects in decaying Rome, while Islam is occupying the same niche today that Christianity occupied in Rome. It seems that Islam is the new Christianity.

That's not a theory I've heard before, nor is it one I think I'd subscribe to from an historical perspective. A major complaint against Christianity in the Roman period was that it was a religion of women and slaves; many converts came from those sectors of Roman society which were generally marginalized; couple that with people seeing in the willingness in which many Christians faced their persecutors to face death and worse who were inspired to join them. Both of those elements were bound to increase Christianity's success in the Empire.

I'd be hard pressed to believe that the secret to Islam's success in the 21st century has to do with being a refuge from the sexual decadence of the West. That might be a motivating factor for some to convert, but--and to be honest here--that sounds like a really lame reason to convert to a religion. I would like to think that Islam has much more to offer a potential convert to the religion than escape from western sexuality.

I am currently considering Mormonism and Islam as options for my family. If anyone has any other suggestions, please let me know.

As an atheist, why not just raise your family with whatever values you happen to hold dear? I don't see any reason to raise your family in a religion that you yourself (or they) don't subscribe to.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ebia]

Sorry but I don't see this passage as having anything to do with whether the sexes should be segregated or not. All I see is that Christ prefers that people listen to him over other more mundane activities.

Because you're not reading the story sensitive to the cultural expectations of the time. Only a loose woman would be in with the men. The women should be separate, preparing the food and having their own conversations (as you would find in much of the middle eastern world through to Pakistan today). But Jesus, against all cultural expectations, affirms that Mary should be in with the men - more than that is in the position of an apprentice rabbi.

 

[ebia]

It sounds like Islam might cater for your personal hang-ups in a way that Christianity can not.

 

[HisHomeMaker]

Many Hutterite colonies insist that men and women worship, work, and eat separately. They certainly do dress conservatively. I don't know that someone who doesn't live on a colony would be welcome to join them in worship or not. The worship services probably wouldn't do you much good, anyway, because most are in German... and in Canada or nearby US states. They are part of the Anabaptist movement.

 

[fschmidt]

Thanks HisHomeMaker, I admire the Anabaptists and quoted them earlier in this thread, but unfortunately there aren't many where I live.

 

[fschmidt]

That's not a theory I've heard before, nor is it one I think I'd subscribe to from an historical perspective. A major complaint against Christianity in the Roman period was that it was a religion of women and slaves; many converts came from those sectors of Roman society which were generally marginalized; couple that with people seeing in the willingness in which many Christians faced their persecutors to face death and worse who were inspired to join them. Both of those elements were bound to increase Christianity's success in the Empire.

Do you realize that everything you listed here applies to Islam today? In the West, more women convert to Islam than men do. And most who convert are from the lower class. Muslims seem more willing than most to face death. It sounds like you are confirming my point.

I'd be hard pressed to believe that the secret to Islam's success in the 21st century has to do with being a refuge from the sexual decadence of the West. That might be a motivating factor for some to convert, but--and to be honest here--that sounds like a really lame reason to convert to a religion. I would like to think that Islam has much more to offer a potential convert to the religion than escape from western sexuality.

Then what do you think it is? I am curious.

As an atheist, why not just raise your family with whatever values you happen to hold dear? I don't see any reason to raise your family in a religion that you yourself (or they) don't subscribe to.

You suggested earlier that I live in a cave. That would work for me, but not for my kids. My kids need a community, and I would prefer whatever community most shares my values. Beliefs don't concern me very much.