Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Implications of What We Say

Today in chapel it was announced that "Lament and Repent" groups will be forming. Not a whole lot of information was given, just enough to encourage people to contact them for more, but the idea is that these groups will form around a particular subject to help people cope with that topic. Sounds like healing and/or accountability groups. I was frustrated, however, by what could be inferred from what was said. Ironically Dr. Minger then proceeded to preach on how the words we use as Christians often pose a problem, because of what could be meant by what we say (she highlighted as an example the phrase "And then God showed up.")

Here are the groups that were mentioned (I didn't write them down so I may have the wording a bit off, but they get as close as I can to what was said):
  • A group on abortion: healing from abortion, post abortion care, etc.
  • A group for single men struggling with pornography and addiction
  • A group for married men struggling with pornography and addiction
  • A group for women who have internal wounds that need healing, growing more open to God...
I have a problem with this. I do not have a problem with focusing on men with pornography issues, because we still seem to be the focus population. But the way these groups were listed excludes 1) women, married or single, who have struggles with pornography and 2) men with internal wounds that need healing, or need to open up more to God. Why is it that only women have internal wounds? Or need to grow closer to God? Why is it that only men have sex problems? Well of course that's not true, so the real question is: why is it socially appropriate only for men to have sex/porn problems, and only for women to admit internal woundedness? It appears to me that these group boundaries enforce the idea that only certain things are allowed to be talked about by certain people. They appear to continue supporting Christian social taboos about what we are and are not allowed to admit, which supports ministers of all types and genders from being able to admit their struggles, which supports ministers failing fantastically and creating mass havoc when they do, which supports people ostracizing those with problems from the church, and on and on and on...

I wish they had said:
  • A group on abortion: healing from abortion, post abortion care, etc.
  • A group for those struggling with pronography and addiction. Groups will be formed according to marital status and gender (or whichever term is deemed most communicative here)
  • A group for those who have internal wounds that need healing, growing more open to God... Groups will be formed according to gender (or whichever term is deemed most communicative here)
If the gender comments seem to also be too troublesome, leave them out! Put in something about if you are considering a group, but have questions about format or privacy or support, ask us. These seem more open. The others say: if you have certain struggles, we're here for you. If you have other struggles, sorry, better luck next time. To me the modications say: whatever your struggle is, we're here for you.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Love it! Love you!

april said...

Jerpbo--

I completely agree. While the internal wounds may be of different stripes, and the sexual struggles may manifest differently, i do think both men and women have them and groups should have formed to that end.

And, because i probably do come down on the positivist side of the fence more than post-modern, i agree that how we use language is absolutely important!

Aquajag said...

Hmm, that an interesting split you propose between positivists and post-moderns. Don't both get really wound up about the use of language? Even post-moderns seem to think that our reality is bound by our words and communications, just very differently than that positivists. Maybe I don't grasp them quite right. How would you summarize the two positions on the use of language?