A Good Man is Hard To Find
28 July 2006“What in the world am I doing?”
I’ve had this thought many times while planning this blog project. Why me? I’m certainly no great example of Biblical manhood. I fall so far short, so often, that although I’m trying to live as a Godly man, I would never want to hold myself up as an example.
I have many heroes who display a sound awareness of what it means to be a man. They support and love their wives and wisely parent their children. They are humble and willing to listen to correction. They are bold in evangelism and diligent in their work. They rejoice in the Cross and mourn their sin. I want to be one of them.
But as Godly and genuine as these men are, they are sinners nonetheless. What distorts and mars true manhood is simply this: Sin. What is wrong with men these days may have something to do with bad upbringing, stupid psychology, faux science, feminism, and our debauched culture, but it all traces back to the Fall.
When Adam stood by and watched his wife take the apple and eat it, and then listened to her when she offered it to him, he abdicated his responsibility to lead, care for, and protect her. Manhood has never been the same. The failure of our father has been passed down through countless generations, and the human experience of manhood since then has always been horribly distorted by sin and its effects.
Where can we look for an example?
You’ve probably guessed where I’m going with this, but that’s ok. Since Jesus was the only man who never sinned, his way of life and character ought to be a perfect example for us imperfect men to follow.
Consider the humility of the only man who had a right to be proud of himself. Consider his zeal for the glory of God, and his unconditional love toward sinners. Consider the Man who suffered every temptation, yet never sinned. He was never proud or hateful; never lusted; never disrespected his parents; never stole; never lied; never even laughed at a dirty joke. He was always faithful to his Father’s will; always seeking the interests of others; always laying his life down, for us.
This is the Man we follow; this is the God we serve. May our lives, and this blog, glorify and exalt Him alone. SOLI DEO GLORIA!
Amen! What a great way to start this blog off. I’m looking forward to future posts.
And in regards to your title…what do you think about that story? Have you read it? Where is the grace that is supposedly always apparent in O’Conner’s stories? And does that tie in to your theme at all?
I assume you’re referring to Flannery O’Connor? I haven’t read the story–if I had I probably wouldn’t have named the post after it. I refer you to our resident Irish literary critic, Jonathan K.
In an earlier comment, I urged the writers of this blog not to circumvent the more basic question of “what manliness is” before proceeding to the more elaborate question of “what godly manliness is.” Perhaps I am too quick to judge, but I fear that, with this post, this blog has gotten off to a bad start. Forgive me if I sound antagonistic in this comment; I believe, though, that one element of manliness is a love of competition, so it fitting that a blog devoted to the subject of manliness should have a vigorous commentator.
Peter’s post is a platitude that offers no real insight into manliness. In saying that Jesus was the perfect “man,” Peter fails to distinguish Jesus qua man versus Jesus qua person. Is true manliness the same as being a good a person, i.e., is a good woman manly? Or is there a virtue unique to men (or at least predominantly possessed by men as opposed to women)? If the latter is so (–and your blog hinges on this point being so; otherwise be Kantians and call it “Reclaiming Personhood”–), then in what way did Jesus exemplify it? That is, what does it look like? What does it mean to be manly ( i.e., to possess the virtues of being a man)?
***
A note on style: I appreciate that the writers of this blog desire to be humble. No doubt many readers wish I would follow suit. I caution, though, against equating humility with timidity. I grant that there is a thin line separating confidence from arrogance, but, as men, we ought to be confident (though not arrogant). This is a bold project you undertake; so, be bold. Argue carefully; assert confidently. Don’t be timid!
I would like to see some discussion related to David’s question(s) — “That is, what does it look like? What does it mean to be manly ( i.e., to possess the virtues of being a man)?”
What ARE the virtues of manliness? In my research on the general topic, I found it much easier ( both for me, and for the authors of most of the articles / books I surveyed ) to simply suggest that men be manly in a general sense… rather than taking the time to define masculinity and its accompanying traits for the purpose of application.
However, I think this blog must endeavor to do the latter. I’d suggest Mansfield’s Manlinesss tons of Esolen, and Dr. Root’s Notes on the Times article on mama’s boys ( which referenced Mansfield extensively ) as a few good starting research points. If you begin to define what manliness IS, in its purest sense, I believe you’ll find you’re already defining “Christian” manliness…
Yes, Jesus was the perfect man, and yes, you should choose to emulate him, but what specific traits should YOU emulate that I, as a woman, should not?
I’ll be interested to see where you guys take this subject.
And Peter, you should read some O’Connor. : )
Thanks for your opinion, Jennifer and David. I really will consider it!
Please try to understand that at this point I want to set parameters for how I’m going to look at what it means to be a man. I really want to start with the Lord. He made men and so he has a pretty good idea of what manhood is. I’m not quite ready to launch into specifics. Although you bet I want to get there, for my own benefit as much as anything else.
I’ll certainly read Root, Esolen, and Mansfield. (Wow, he even has “man” in his name! That’s what I’m talking about!)
But folks – you gotta understand that I’m a theologian, and so I’ll be hitting the topic from that angle a lot of the time. Ben and Jonathan will have different perspectives, maybe even [gasp!] conflicting views!
Also, to clarify – I think true manhood IS Christian manhood. Anything else will inevitably be distorted by sin, although it may still carry the Image to some degree.
Hope that helps!
Still not what you’re looking for? Hold out for Ben’s post, okay? Thanks!
Clearly we will be requiring a post on boldness as an essential element of manhood.
A serious danger to this project is the notable tendency of all three editors to look at things in a broad, all-encompassing, theoretical light — “from thirty thousand feet.” I will be making a deliberate effor to zoom in on specifics in (some of) my future posts; hopefully my co-contributors will do the same. But we also need other people, gifted in particularity, to write about specific events, stories, books, elements of manhood, and so on.
If any of you would like to contribute in that way, e-mail us.
Heh, thanks for the edit, Peter. I did have to send David J. an email notifying him of my mistake, that he might rejoice… : )
I did want to say that I am looking forward to what you guys offer here! This kind of exploration is lacking and necessary… may it continue, and always, of course, be based around a Christ-like standard. As Peter has said, He’s definitely the best working example.
I have no doubt y’all ( my accent has come back, I’m afraid ) will delve beneath surface discussion… I hope my comment didn’t come across as discouraging or disappointed! I only meant to selfishly point you guys towards a few topics I’d like explained and encourage a few particulars. Can’t wait to see what comes next.
-Jennifer
Allow me to clarify: my critique of Peter’s post is not that he attempts to approach the subject theologically or that he does it from too high a vantage point, but rather that he fails to address the issue of “manhood” or manliness at all. His discussion is gender neutral. To illustrate my point, examine this paragraph of Peter’s, slightly rewritten:
“I have many heroes who display a sound awareness of what it means to be a WOMAN. They support and love their HUSBANDS and wisely parent their children. They are humble and willing to listen to correction. They are bold in evangelism and diligent in their work. They rejoice in the Cross and mourn their sin. I want to be one of them.”
Or consider:
“I have many heroes who display a sound awareness of what it means to be a PERSON. They support and love their SPOUSES and wisely parent their children. They are humble and willing to listen to correction. They are bold in evangelism and diligent in their work. They rejoice in the Cross and mourn their sin. I want to be one of them.”
Even with the words substituted, the meaning of each remains essentially unchanged. So, in what way does Peter’s post contribute to our understanding of “manhood” or manliness, i.e., to the difficulties, virtues, or vices unique to being a man as opposed to being a person? How does it set parameters relevant to the discussion?
The point of my critique is not to be antagonistic or hypercritical, but to challenge the writers of this blog to deal not in pious platitudes but solid, rigorous argumentation.