Is Catholism "Manly"

  • Thread starter Thread starter sergius89
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

sergius89

Guest
I have noticed several comments lately in the media and on some obviously non-Catholic websites that seem to imply that Catholism is a religion of the weak and is not “Manly”. I am required to believe that the people who make these comments feel that personal strength or more likely physical strenght is a key aspect of how they judge themselves and others. I guess my question is: Is Catholism “Manly”? Any thoughts on this topic are welcome as I am currently debating this with a non-Catholic friend of mine who has this belief.
 
I think it used to be. I don’t know that it is anymore. Two articles come to mind to better explain my thoughts, the first about Catholicism, the second about Orthodoxy:

The New Catholic Manliness

Why Orthodox Men Love Church

I think Catholicism has lost a lot of it’s challenge. The Eucharistic Fast is only an hour, Lenten fasting is pretty much just not eating meat on Fridays, and fasting on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday, and there’s a lot of sitting during the services. It’s hard for me to put into words, but the language used in the Mass seems very feminine to me, though I can’t say why exactly. More often than not your traditional vestments have a floral design.

So in my opinion, yes, Roman Catholicism is a very feminine religion.
 
I have noticed several comments lately in the media and on some obviously non-Catholic websites that seem to imply that Catholism is a religion of the weak and is not “Manly”. I am required to believe that the people who make these comments feel that personal strength or more likely physical strenght is a key aspect of how they judge themselves and others. I guess my question is: Is Catholism “Manly”? Any thoughts on this topic are welcome as I am currently debating this with a non-Catholic friend of mine who has this belief.
It depends on which definition of manly one uses. The real one or the worldly one.

In my opinion there is nothing more manly then teaching your kids and wife to praise God in truth, no matter how many people tease or persecute them.

I believe the martyrs would all say that Catholicism is manly…😃
 
I have noticed several comments lately in the media and on some obviously non-Catholic websites that seem to imply that Catholism is a religion of the weak and is not “Manly”. I am required to believe that the people who make these comments feel that personal strength or more likely physical strenght is a key aspect of how they judge themselves and others. I guess my question is: Is Catholism “Manly”? Any thoughts on this topic are welcome as I am currently debating this with a non-Catholic friend of mine who has this belief.
The spirituality of St. Ignatius of Loyola is based around military language. Ignatian Spiritual Exercises retreats for men, like the ones led by Miles Christi priests, are both very Catholic and very manly.

The ideal of a Catholic man helping his wife and family attain holiness and heaven may not be “butch”, but it’s very manly! There’s a difference.

I’m actually surprised to hear of this argument from a non-Catholic Christian. My non-Catholic friends talk about the music and language at their services being very feminine. “Your love is extravagant”, etc. I’ve heard, at least person-to-person from my friends, that there is a growing need for a counter-reaction to such language in the non-demoninational groups.
 
It depends on which definition of manly one uses. The real one or the worldly one.

In my opinion there is nothing more manly then teaching your kids and wife to praise God in truth, no matter how many people tease or persecute them.

I believe the martyrs would all say that Catholicism is manly…😃
👍👍
 
When facing a firing squad to be executed for being a Catholic priest, Blessed Miguel Pro bravely refused a blindfold, looked down the barrels of the guns and shouted out “Long Live Christ the King!”

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/RkxFSRhHEnU/TOvPmeu8WuI/AAAAAAAABe4/BuFcw9Xwnis/s1600/Miguel_Pro%2527s_execution%25281927%2529.jpg

Doesn’t get much more manly than that!
 
When facing a firing squad to be executed for being a Catholic priest, Blessed Miguel Pro bravely refused a blindfold, looked down the barrels of the guns and shouted out “Long Live Christ the King!”

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/RkxFSRhHEnU/TOvPmeu8WuI/AAAAAAAABe4/BuFcw9Xwnis/s1600/Miguel_Pro%2527s_execution%25281927%2529.jpg

Doesn’t get much more manly than that!
Epic.
 
I have noticed several comments lately in the media and on some obviously non-Catholic websites that seem to imply that Catholism is a religion of the weak and is not “Manly”. I am required to believe that the people who make these comments feel that personal strength or more likely physical strenght is a key aspect of how they judge themselves and others. I guess my question is: Is Catholism “Manly”? Any thoughts on this topic are welcome as I am currently debating this with a non-Catholic friend of mine who has this belief.
Catholicism is a religion of the weak? Ahhhhh…last time I checked Jesus founded His church for sinners (who are weak spiritually) so what “manly” religion are they engaged in? The Church of Zeus and Hercules?
 
I agree with both of the articles posted by Rawb. My RCIA class was run by a woman (albeit under the direction of and with frequent visits from our priest), and there does seem to be a certain woman-focused bent to Catholic worship. I don’t want to think of myself as a “bride” of Christ, though the whole Church is.

And might I say that the manliness that the Catholic Church attempts often seems quite forced and only appealing to a certain kind of man, e.g., “Crossing the Goal Line” or whatever that stupid football-themed show on EWTN is called (y’know, in between show-transitions filled with soft, Renaissance-style paintings of St. Mary). I don’t care about football in particular so much as committing to something challenging, then doing that thing until it’s done. It seems like modern Catholicism is the exact opposite of that. The believer’s spiritual life is one of craven emotionality because that is what is offered through various devotions that come to us through the visions of little girls and young women, rather than to-the-point, basic instructions from the saints and Fathers themselves.

The brethren came to Abba Anthony and said to him, “Speak a word; how are we to be saved?” The old man said to them, “You have heard the Scriptures. That should teach you how.” But they said, “We want to hear from you too, Father.” Then the old man said to them, “The Gospel says, ‘if anyone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also.’” They said “We cannot do that.” The old man said, “If you cannot offer the other cheek, at least allow one cheek to be struck.” “We cannot do that either”, they said. So he said, “If you are not able to do that, do not return evil for evil”, and they said, “We cannot do that, either.” Then the old man said to his disciple, “Prepare a little brew of corn for these invalids. If you cannot do this, or that, what can I do for you? What you need is prayers.”

The moral of the story is that you need to be able to DO SOMETHING. Many Catholic devotions, which tellingly have very flowery names like “adoration” (babies are adorable…), don’t involve any sort of challenge in this way, but instead involve sitting there, being introspective and considering the Lord as a partner or whatever. Bleh.
 
When facing a firing squad to be executed for being a Catholic priest, Blessed Miguel Pro bravely refused a blindfold, looked down the barrels of the guns and shouted out “Long Live Christ the King!”

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/RkxFSRhHEnU/TOvPmeu8WuI/AAAAAAAABe4/BuFcw9Xwnis/s1600/Miguel_Pro%2527s_execution%25281927%2529.jpg

Doesn’t get much more manly than that!
Amen! Viva Cristo Rey!

Peace, Graubo
 
I agree with both of the articles posted by Rawb. My RCIA class was run by a woman (albeit under the direction of and with frequent visits from our priest), and there does seem to be a certain woman-focused bent to Catholic worship. I don’t want to think of myself as a “bride” of Christ, though the whole Church is.

And might I say that the manliness that the Catholic Church attempts often seems quite forced and only appealing to a certain kind of man, e.g., “Crossing the Goal Line” or whatever that stupid football-themed show on EWTN is called (y’know, in between show-transitions filled with soft, Renaissance-style paintings of St. Mary). I don’t care about football in particular so much as committing to something challenging, then doing that thing until it’s done. It seems like modern Catholicism is the exact opposite of that. The believer’s spiritual life is one of craven emotionality because that is what is offered through various devotions that come to us through the visions of little girls and young women, rather than to-the-point, basic instructions from the saints and Fathers themselves.

The brethren came to Abba Anthony and said to him, “Speak a word; how are we to be saved?” The old man said to them, “You have heard the Scriptures. That should teach you how.” But they said, “We want to hear from you too, Father.” Then the old man said to them, “The Gospel says, ‘if anyone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also.’” They said “We cannot do that.” The old man said, “If you cannot offer the other cheek, at least allow one cheek to be struck.” “We cannot do that either”, they said. So he said, “If you are not able to do that, do not return evil for evil”, and they said, “We cannot do that, either.” Then the old man said to his disciple, “Prepare a little brew of corn for these invalids. If you cannot do this, or that, what can I do for you? What you need is prayers.”

The moral of the story is that you need to be able to DO SOMETHING. Many Catholic devotions, which tellingly have very flowery names like “adoration” (babies are adorable…), don’t involve any sort of challenge in this way, but instead involve sitting there, being introspective and considering the Lord as a partner or whatever. Bleh.
Understandable,and no offense meant at you,but one person’s views and experiences does not represent an entire church. As for woman-focused bent? How many of the 12 Apostles hung around during the trial and Passion? :hmmm:
 
I agree with both of the articles posted by Rawb. My RCIA class was run by a woman (albeit under the direction of and with frequent visits from our priest), and there does seem to be a certain woman-focused bent to Catholic worship. I don’t want to think of myself as a “bride” of Christ, though the whole Church is.

And might I say that the manliness that the Catholic Church attempts often seems quite forced and only appealing to a certain kind of man, e.g., “Crossing the Goal Line” or whatever that stupid football-themed show on EWTN is called (y’know, in between show-transitions filled with soft, Renaissance-style paintings of St. Mary). I don’t care about football in particular so much as committing to something challenging, then doing that thing until it’s done. It seems like modern Catholicism is the exact opposite of that. The believer’s spiritual life is one of craven emotionality because that is what is offered through various devotions that come to us through the visions of little girls and young women, rather than to-the-point, basic instructions from the saints and Fathers themselves.

The brethren came to Abba Anthony and said to him, “Speak a word; how are we to be saved?” The old man said to them, “You have heard the Scriptures. That should teach you how.” But they said, “We want to hear from you too, Father.” Then the old man said to them, “The Gospel says, ‘if anyone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also.’” They said “We cannot do that.” The old man said, “If you cannot offer the other cheek, at least allow one cheek to be struck.” “We cannot do that either”, they said. So he said, “If you are not able to do that, do not return evil for evil”, and they said, “We cannot do that, either.” Then the old man said to his disciple, “Prepare a little brew of corn for these invalids. If you cannot do this, or that, what can I do for you? What you need is prayers.”

The moral of the story is that you need to be able to DO SOMETHING. Many Catholic devotions, which tellingly have very flowery names like “adoration” (babies are adorable…), don’t involve any sort of challenge in this way, but instead involve sitting there, being introspective and considering the Lord as a partner or whatever. Bleh.
evidently you believe the worldly definition of manly. I’ll take Eucharistic adoration and be “bleh” with my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.👍
 
Understandable,and no offense meant at you,but one person’s views and experiences does not represent an entire church. As for woman-focused bent? How many of the 12 Apostles hung around during the trial and Passion? :hmmm:
Which “one person” are you referring to? Me? St. Anthony the Great (and, through him, all of the monks)? The 100 men interviewed by Frederica Mathewes-Green?
evidently you believe the worldly definition of manly. I’ll take Eucharistic adoration and be “bleh” with my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.👍
I believe, as I wrote, in being challenged, as that is the example of the apostles, the disciples, and the monks.

There are times to sit and be quiet with God (in fact, in today’s modern world many have observed that this is a great challenge), and to be introspective, and to cry, and all that business. But those times alone cannot be your spiritual life. Emotionalism is not spirituality. Flowery language and emotions are nothing. We are not trying to “woo” God.
 
Catholicism is quite Manly. We serve God. We obey Him. We defend His Truth. We live with the consequences. We know when we’re wrong. We aren’t too proud to ask for forgiveness.
 
Which “one person” are you referring to? Me? St. Anthony the Great (and, through him, all of the monks)? The 100 men interviewed by Frederica Mathewes-Green?

I believe, as I wrote, in being challenged, as that is the example of the apostles, the disciples, and the monks.

There are times to sit and be quiet with God (in fact, in today’s modern world many have observed that this is a great challenge), and to be introspective, and to cry, and all that business. But those times alone cannot be your spiritual life. Emotionalism is not spirituality. Flowery language and emotions are nothing. We are not trying to “woo” God.
Whether it is you or 100 or 1,000 or 100,000 men/monk still does not reflect an entire church for the last 2,000 years that is my point. Finally,where is this mentality it has to be “manly” or less 'feminine" coming from? That is not focus of our faith. That is a human trait and tought,not a Godly attribute.
 
Which “one person” are you referring to? Me? St. Anthony the Great (and, through him, all of the monks)? The 100 men interviewed by Frederica Mathewes-Green?

I believe, as I wrote, in being challenged, as that is the example of the apostles, the disciples, and the monks.

There are times to sit and be quiet with God (in fact, in today’s modern world many have observed that this is a great challenge), and to be introspective, and to cry, and all that business. But those times alone cannot be your spiritual life. Emotionalism is not spirituality. Flowery language and emotions are nothing. We are not trying to “woo” God.
What are you talking about…adoration is “trying to woo God”???
 
Whether it is you or 100 or 1,000 or 100,000 men/monk still does not reflect an entire church for the last 2,000 years that is my point.
Okay. I agree, but my point was more that it is much more than one person’s viewpoint. We might also likewise say that those who prefer soft, sentimental Christianity also do not reflect the entire church of the last 2,000 years, either. I don’t really know what approaching this topic with that kind of viewpoint is meant to show.
Finally,where is this mentality it has to be “manly” or less 'feminine" coming from? That is not focus of our faith. That is a human trait and tought,not a Godly attribute.
It’s the topic of the OP… :confused:🤷
 
There are times to sit and be quiet with God (in fact, in today’s modern world many have observed that this is a great challenge), and to be introspective, and to cry, and all that
Some might say to cry is a sign of weakness and not manly.

Peace, Graubo
 
Okay. I agree, but my point was more that it is much more than one person’s viewpoint. We might also likewise say that those who prefer soft, sentimental Christianity also do not reflect the entire church of the last 2,000 years, either. I don’t really know what approaching this topic with that kind of viewpoint is meant to show.

It’s the topic of the OP… :confused:🤷
I totally understand your position,but like I said,people can go back and forth and say the church has been “soft-sentimental” or “manly” the last 2,000 years. But all of that has nothing to do with the santification of the church and salvation. I could careless if one thinks the church is woman-centered or not. My faith is based on God,not gender based or issues.

Peace and Amen my friend.
 
What are you talking about…adoration is “trying to woo God”???
No. I used adoration as an example in another post. I did not mention it in the post you are replying to. My point is that a mature spirituality cannot subsist on emotions and flowery language, let alone grow by them. Furthermore, I question the point of such an approach to Christianity in the first place. I considered writing that last line as a question, but I figured it would be self-evident that this is not why we approach God, whether in prayer or through fasting, or what have you. But that leads me to ask: Why have such particular displays evolved in and come to be so central to Western Christianity? As we are not trying to woo God, why is the dominant expression of apostolic Western Christianity now seemingly in the mold of (for example) Therese of Lisieux and her caressing and yearning and whatnot? That’s sensual/emotional language, and not befitting Christian devotion. Luckily, it is also entirely unnecessary in other models of the Christian faith, hence the distinction being made between “active and challenging” Eastern/Oriental Christianity, and “passive and emotional” Western Christianity (to leave male/female dynamics out of it). To my way of thinking, it’s kind of hard to yearn and pine when you’re busy doing things.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top