I included in my last post a link to a ministry that is connected with Sovereign Grace Ministries they hold the same views as people like Mark Driscoll and the Mars Hill movement. They represent a very virile group of mission minded people, biblically conservative and generally culturally liberal...but these issues seem to bring out their more hard fundamentalist edge.
I and many I pastor and journey with...don't fit to well in these one-size fits all man/woman role perimeters. The language, the look, the perspective, the theological bent, the Complementarianism view of man over women, the "stay at home with the babies only" message...all start to feel very culturally isolated. It sometimes feels like modern folks trying to be Little House on the Prairie. Not that I dont think the values represented aren't often godly...but it always seems to be a way of living that is more comfortable for people who live white, pink and pastel lives. I'm not sure how to translate these ideas, to a people who don't speak that language or have those life experiences. I wrestle with the message itself...if it is even a fair representation of the ONLY way to live out modesty, family and holistic sexuality.
On the 'Girls Talk' site, they give this definition for modesty/propriety:
"The avoidance of clothing and adornment that is extravagant, showy, and sexually enticing.”
The actual dictionary definition is more broad and less narrow:
Modesty: freedom from vanity or conceit
Propriety: correct or appropriate behavior
I see a lot more room to outwork these words in the actual definition. The one they offer, seems to play into the way they see womanhood. Not that I oppose anyone who desires to model or follow that vision. You are free to do so...but isnt there room for creative and moral freedom in those words...maybe an alternative expression of modesty, that would be attainable to the woman represented in the first picture of my previous post?
I think there's a danger in people swinging to far away from their old lifestyles when they come to faith. They imagine that "the opposite" of all they did or was...is the answer for living this new life. It's easy to latch onto legalism or moralism to try to self-clean or self-sanctify....we try to become something different through radical lifestyle changes. We go STRAIGHT-EDGE not as a expression of some true change within but in order to show we are serious about being different. In the end...it might be sad to discover that everything you did to be "moral, good, different, traditional or even biblical...was really vanity. So in the very act of trying to be Modest...you betrayed the very spirit of modesty.
It was the failure of the Jewish leaders that Jesus sought to enlighten...and it is often the failure of moral based religious zealotry.
Many times it can become an act of sowing fig leaves to cover our shame...instead of trusting in the blood of God's ultimate sacrifice.
We find ourselves back in Eden...naked and...and still ashamed.
Painting is "Minerva" by Rodin
24 comments:
"it might be sad to discover that everything you did to be "moral, good, different, traditional or even biblical...was really vanity. So in the very act of trying to be Modest...you betrayed the very spirit of modesty."
...there is much freedom to be had in understanding that :) He really is a God of Love
*Cole
It is a difficult thing to walk the line between what is culturally acceptable, and what you feel is ok in your walk with Christ. We have been conditioned (women especially, I think) to put others above ourselves and consider their needs as more important than our own. I have found in my own walk that as Christ gives me freedom that I have to be very careful how I present that freedom. How frustrating it is to see someone redeemed by Christ placed right back into a religious prison. How do you walk the line between your own personal freedom and the teaching that we are to consider others as better than ourselves? Or is this a false teaching? This discussion draws out questions I have struggled with for a long time and still don't know how to answer. Sometimes because I am not sure which question to ask.
I know I sounded a bit bitter earlier, and I apologize. This is a difficult time for me.
I think modesty, as you said in an earlier post, is defined culturally. It is not uncommon in other cultures to have different ideas of modesty. If you go to some tribes in Africa, the people wear little to no clothing, but if you go to the Middle East, the women dress in Abayas and cover their faces, hands and feet.
I also think it is in an attitude. There is nothing wrong, I beleive, in a woman embracing her sensuality, it is a God-given gift. But I think that women in today's culture have either thown that magnificent power away, or have used it to wield and control.
What I see here is a cultural divide with the church one one side trying to regain ground and society on the other struggling vehemently against it. I wonder if the church has lost the heart of the struggle and is instead trying to pick at the surface. Its as though someone's arm is severed off and the church is running around hollering about how horrible the arm looks, ignoring the person who lost the arm.
Eric, tou bring up a good point. It is almost the very center of this discussion. You refered to eden and the fig leaves and man's nakedness. I think it is important to remember that God's idea was not for us to wear clothes at all but to be naked. I am not saying we should all strip and go through our day naked but the idea of covering our nakedness comes with our shame. It is like our (mankind) prudishness comes from our desire to cover up our sin as you mentioned earlier. So now we take the side of the "holy" and cover our sin despritly or we side with the hethens and embrass our sin in nakedness.
If God made our bodies then what is so unholy about them that we must cover them up or never show them in art or talk about them? You mention other cultures that might define modesty differently than we do. I think it is funny that only a 100 years ago in this very country, people thought that showing some leg or even some neck was perverse and it was even considered porn. So why are we not concerned when even our most conservitive church goers wear dresses that show their ankles?
I can not help thinking of the sheet in Peter's dream that was filled with clean and unclean animals. And of Jesus and the woman caught in adultry.
Let us embrace the freedom that God has given us in salvation but help others see His love not by limiting them with rules to change them but freedom to become who God made them- naked and beautiful before God the Creator.
Joe
Linking sexual abuse, rape and the sex trade to this series of posts misses the point. Drunk driving is a result of someone abusing a God given gift. The issues you bring up are real, tragic and sinful but these posts are focusing on something else. If we continue to link the body to lust and rape and abuse; we continue to strengthen the image of our bodies and desire being evil and bad.
It's the same chain that the whole misunderstanding of the "don't make me stumble" scriptures wrap around sincere people who want to walk in freedom.
I'm pretty sure I know who posted that comment. I'm not sure why you come around here, you know that me and you just end up going nowhere good. Please move on.
Oops. That post was for the "anony-mouse" who posted above. You are missing some ugly blogging history.
I was trying to head something off at the pass before she started going off again. Sorry. The thoughts I expressed have nothing to do with you or your past. You will find lovers and haters around here. Many people read and throw stones from the dark. You watch, I'll say something and boom they descend out out of the upper clouds and will unleash a fury of agressive comments then sweep off again. Kinda like drive by shooting.
I soon recognize the signs of the type of lurker or the actual person. Tone, issues that bring them put of hiding, superiority, talking down to, issue ax to grind, wounded writers who don't speak from a healing journey but anger.
Yeah, I realized that after I checked the links. I took the words at face value and didn't read deeper into them.
Oh geez I didn't mean to not post my name, it's me, Cole (sorry, sleep deprived...) And yikes that you seem so inflamed...I'm, well, I just have a hard time being more consise and I had high hopes my point would be more clear. Some how you think that I want people to be bound down by how things have been. Most certainly not I wanted it to be acknowledged as a symptom of this issue. I hope I didn't offend you also Dream :( Besides rape and other abuses are not really sexual for the abuser at the core (but sort of illustrating a line of thinking towards predominantly the female gender). It is only sexual for the abused. To be candid I have been abused many times, in many ways my whole life. Alot of the women I know personally and casually have been also, so I feel courage to admit this in a semi-public forum. These same abused women I know are almost exclusively the ones that discuss these issues we have been discussing (some are Athiest/Agnostic so it comes in at a different angle but still it is the same issue). I thought it an important link. If you have ever had control taken away from you solely because you are a woman, if you have ever had it implied that what you wore, the way you behaved (etc...) are the reason you were abused, then you may see my line of thinking more. That is still a common viewpoint concerning modesty and I know many believe these ideas on modesty need to change. When someone comments on say, my breast, I feel tired of "them" and I resent being hindered by "them". "Let's see em...", "Put those away." "Get them cut off!", in truth I wish they could just be what they truely are, "breast." (and if you'd think covering them up to the neck would help,it doesn't people stare MORE) Now I don't propose women start walking around naked (unless you've found a christian nudist colony that "gets" you LOL) that in mainstream culture would lack as you brought up, propriety.
Also, women in the Church are urged to cover up because it makes other men lust. That's why I think that lust should probably be analyzed before one can come to a conclusion about modesty and especially propriety as Christians.
The first link I sent had my point in the quote. My post was from a view point of wondering how much of this repression really stems from a long standing inequality concerning women and men. Women should understand deeply their true freedom in all things even if for the sake of men we don't all walk about undressed all the time. So I don't know, Eric now I feel tired of being bold, this subject is a shame to have to discuss. It is also a shame that the American Christian community still is perpetuating certain unchristian ideas on the public. Still I believe that we "1 in 6" women (and in a low income, "minority majority" neighborhood it is most certainly much much much higher) are feeling this subject of artistic expression, modesty, (etc...)deeply.
`But all of us in the development community realize that, unless we make progress in gender equality, we can't make progress in any of these (other) areas.'
- Alanna Armitage UN program officer
*Cole
ps don't worry I am tired discussing the topic since obviously I am personally blinded perhaps. Also I am so long winded and it embarrases me :S(you can expect little to no response in the future lol) I am sorry I took it into a different direction than you were aiming for, I simply saw potential in the convo. to reach many more people than just a small group of women who are familiar with conservative/fundemental Christian groups. I will stop vexing you on this subject and once again look to the secular community to support these issues and try to defend the Christian church in the process, lol. (*sigh* it is often much easier not having an opinion and saving the ones that you do have)
"Many people read and throw stones from the dark...wounded writers who don't speak from a healing journey but anger" lol geez Eric! Seriuosly man, once again I am so sorry that it struck you that way. (I hope that is not how you still feel knowing who it is) I think you should reread what I wrote above but put a much more positive tone to it, most everything I write is intended with a positive tone.
*Cole
*Cole,
I was not offended by what you said. I appreciated your point of view, and your observations of what I had to say. I do think that abuse and whatnot plays a role in this, and I feel frustrated that the burden of modesty and abuse falls upon the shoulders of women. The abused woman invariably feels guilty in some way, shape or form. And the church does not help when it lays down its rules and regulations on modesty.
However, I understand Eric's point of view. He was trying to come at this from an artistic standpoint and whether the naked body, specifically women, should be portrayed in art. I think there are a lot of deep-set issues that float around this topic. I don't think that it is a simple topic, by any means.
I understand what you mean by it being difficult to open up in this forum, and I apoligize for my comment. I just posted a blog on my page that dealt with this and I am a bit sensitive right now. In response to Eric's comment, I thought maybe I was being taken advantage of. But now I am embarrassed and did not mean to run you off. Maybe this topic should be left alone for now.
Please do not hide again. I like what you have to say. You are a very sincere and insightful person, and I would very much like to go this journey with you, as we seem to come from a similar point-of-view.
Whoa whoa my bad folks...I knee jerked thinking coles post was another person that i've tangoed with in the past. I was protective of both you and DC and the great thoughts you were sharing.
Now seeing your post And knowing it was you, I read it in a new light. I'm sorry forgive me. My mistake it's the challenge of this medium. It's not perfect but it's worth it. So don't retreat, I know your heart.
All of you ladies are knocking it out of the park... Don't let my foul ball stop the game.
After reading your previous posts, Eric, and the comments that have gone with them (and after taking a bit of a break, its amazing how cleaning clears the mind, lol!) I have thought of a couple of questions.
First, I think that it is important to ask, what is sin? Jesus was pretty ticked at the Pharisees and Sadducees (sp?) because they kept people bound. I have often wondered if the church today tends along these same lines.
Second, I think that a major heart-issue here is what is women's view of themselves and how they relate to the world around them? Christian women are taught to be ashamed of their bodies. My parents taught me that sex was bad. No, they never said those words, but that was the idea I got. I was constantly told that if I had sex before I got married, I would get pregnant as punishment (what a horrible idea, and what a horrible view of children). Between my history, and what my parents told me, I learned to cover it all up. I wore baggy clothes that were too big for me. Nobody ever taught me how to dress myself or how to to be *gasp* sensual or sexy. I was always taught that this was wrong. Why?
Many women cannot see themselves as beautiful. They have been taught all of their lives that boys only want "one thing". They are taught to view themselves as objects. I think many women who dress in a more risque fashion have given up and believe that that is what will get them a boyfriend, or husband, or whatever security they are looking for. They have overcompensated for the status quo. Other women have learned to blatantly use their sex appeal to get what they want.
All-in-all I believe that the heart of the matter is how women view themselves and how that relates to our sinful nature.
Wow, that was difficult to follow all that. That being said, I agree with the premise that there is a clear Christian idea of what a Christian woman should be. I think this definition is a challenging subject due to the difficulty in sorting through what are the man-made traditions and what are the God given traditions; traditions that are meant to build and sustain family life.
I know from personal experience that I am not living in the same world that my father grew into as a man. How much more difficult it seems to be now that the 2009cultural norms, when applied to the man/woman relationship, have become so decidedly turned upside down in the secular world.
As usual, when it comes to these tough issues, the aggregate Christian community is lagging behind in the debate of this contemporary issue.
I wholeheartedly agree with your point about how new believers feel the need to become the polar opposite of who they once were, as if every part of their "old" persona is tainted. Would like to say more but my wife's breast pump is not working and it must be remedied ASAP.
BTW- are both the paintings Rodin or is the first one Klimpt? I love the one with the Redhead, whichever one that is.
I'm not sure if this is part of what you meant, but I feel that for example those who say it's Ok for people to wear spaghetti strings, but then then you find out they really don't think so, they were just trying to win you over, that's a liar. I'm not convinced this is what Paul meant. You don't have to patronize people to be with them. And if wearing a bikini works for you, then go for it. God would have you wear a bikini.
I have to laugh at the misunderstandings from above. I do so only because one is a close personal friend (and more). I know the seriousness of the issues of abuse against women. I also know how powerfully it influences ones since of modesty and shame. yet, I see the way people mistake things and end up shooting from the hip and causing undue problems. I hope that all parties are ok and we can still discuss these issues together.
You see, I know how nakedness and shame often go together. And I think that the issue of nudity in art like the statue of Eve in the original post (how many posts now?)comes to ones comfort with nudity themselves. If someone is sexually abused, how are they going to view a staue like that? how can they have the freedom to enjoy nudity in themselves or in anyone else. That calls for God's Grace and healing. It also appears to be a subject that is as deep as Eric's. But it is deparatly needed. I think Cole pretty much expressed the need for Godly healing for many women that will embrace the same freedom that Eric mentions. So where to they go? Is this a ministry of the heart of someone reading these posts? Or is God raising up the right one to minister? As a guy, it is hard for me to fully relate but I can say that God has used me to help heal the heart of one such woman. My prayer is that the freedom God offers us can be theirs.
I guess what I am saying is, the point of these posts are not about rape and lust or the like, but can that be the topic of another post for the sake of the victims and the abusers as well? I am hearing that the prudishness of the "church" has left many of the women out there who are suffering lacking for answers and freedom. Can we open that diolog for them?
Joe
Rodin did the first one....
Okay, fine, I'll say more...:)
I believe people need to see more nudity in non-sexualized environments in order to
free people from this concept of naked = sex. Art is actually a very dignified
first step for the mainstream Christian community (aside from how we allow family
members to view each other at home). By covering up any and all nudity we are implying
that the body is what is taboo. But really it is in not the sight but the thoughts
in the mind of the viewer (aside from the actions that result from said thoughts)
which are taboo. Clothing aside from protection from the elements, is a very
symbolic act, here is an interesting quote from one of my
links (lol btw):
Some naturist/nudist venues sponsor "lingerie parties", which many in the movement
frown upon. They feel that this kind of activity strays outside of the
non-sexualized, family friendly environments/contexts they wish to maintain.
>It is noteworthy here that although nudity is regarded as non-sexual, certain
forms of clothing are seen as sexualized, and wearing this clothing in public is thought
to make the occasion a sexual one.<
1 Corinthians 11:13-16 is interesting to note in all this since what he urges
is admittedly based on established customs. Where does that leave us? Most don't
hold to these ideals nowadays. I think in todays society our customs are in a flux.
So it is great time to reaffirm/ rethink your positions on nakedness according to
your boldness and the micro community you live in. Now, anyone who knows me intimately
will know that I already have come to aconclusion on the issue of nudity in public,
private and in all forms of art (be it photography, painting/drawing/sculpture, dance, film...)
other people still wrestle, but ultimately they too must make their own decision
not based on the opinions of others but in the area that matters most: their heart.
If you are making your decision thoughtfully, with loving intent, then be free in it.
(if it's become that oppressive of an opinion in a certain area or group, leave if you can.
This a country/world that you can find or make a place for yourself if you desire) Remember
there is always a way if you are patient and willing. This is the way I believe all things should be done,
calmly and thoughtfully. Don't go into things think "oh no!" One day a burqa, the next day nude,
never forget that ultimately there will always be someone who hates your opinions or behavior (or
in this sense someone will always be there trying to imagine you being sexual,
sadly a burqa won't save you from that lol)
so do not live afraid of hate. 1 John 4:18-20 also 5:16-20
Never before did I get so close to Nature; never before did she come so close to me.
.. Nature was naked, and I was also... Sweet, sane, still Nakedness in Nature! -
ah if poor, sick, prurient humanity in cities might really know you once more!
Is not nakedness indecent? No, not inherently. It is your thought, your
sophistication, your fear, your respectability, that is indecent. There come moods
when these clothes of ours are not only too irksome to wear, but are themselves
indecent.-Walt Whitman
Links to things about nudity in art, "nudism/naturism" which are an illustration of an extreme in this issue
but I do predict that this lifestlye will become a norm in some capacity in the next 50 years
so I suppose it is relevant in many ways. Also the last is another link concerning rape/sexual assault
since I brought it up earlier (it was intended to be a minor connect, illustrating inequality among the sexes):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depictions_of_nudity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Issues_in_social_nudity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_naturism
http://www.scarleteen.com/article/boyfriend/how_you_guys_thats_right_you_guys_can_prevent_rape
*Cole
Wow, that is an interesting perspective, Cole. I spent most of the afternoon reading the included articles. I particularly liked the article on Christian naturism. It is something I have often thought about (not that I am ready to take off all my clothes, lol!) but it is good food for thought. I do wonder, though, about what is sin? I started reading through Romans 7, as Eric had mentioned in another post, and it talks about how we are bound to the law until we die in Christ. I would be interested to read this passage in The Message, but my books are packed away, another story for another time, lol! I think we have to decide what is sin and what is law. And as 1 John indicates, if someone is born of God, he does not sin. I find myself pondering that in light of freedom. Does that mean that, as children of God, if we are truly seeking him and following him that we cannot sin? I am simply asking questions, I do not mean to lead anyone astray. The part of me that has been conditioned to follow the law balks at this statement, so I find myself in a quandary. Again, I am being challenged on my belief set. Perhaps someone who has a better understanding of the scriptures than I can anwer these questions bettter.
I am going to give this a good read, some prayer, and thought (probably run my thoughts by some other people to be sure I'm being clear) before I decide to just spout what I have been told (yeah leagalism does run deep lol) about what sin is. I sort of have started to have a wierd idea of Christianity as of late from some of the scriptures I have been reading, it is boggling my mind (I can hear the sounds of people picking up stones already, lol). Also if you're wanting the Message translation of the Bible (amongst many others) check out http://www.biblegateway.com/
*cole
cool! thx!
Here's a link to a slideshow on Fox News that I thought was interesting. These are pictures of artwork that is under scrutiny for one reason or another. I happened across it this moring in reading the news.
http://www.foxnews.com/slideshow/world/2009/07/30/art-controversies/?slide=8#
Man! I wish I had something to add, anything, but I can tell you it is so good to see Cole and dreamchaser77 speak their minds. These are issues that they obviously have thought a great deal about and I am just fascinated in reading them. I love to hear the differing views on such an important issue, for that matter, I enjoy reading differing views about just about anything, but for Cole and dreamchaser77 I just want to say that I for one appreciate your thoughtful comments as well as the way you present them. Hope to read much more from both of you.
Stay public, great insights,
Fred - Eric's Dad
Thanks for the link, Dream it's always interesting to see what gets people in a tizzy. It sort of reminds me of the hubbub from awhile back over Gunther Von Hagens and his cadaver art (google his name if you aren't too squimish...)
Hope you guys all beat the heat this weekend,
*Cole
Post a Comment