May 4, 2010

  • Chivalry versus Love, part 2

    I received a large number of thoughtful responses from my earlier post "Chivalry versus Love" (http://tim223.xanga.com/724969192/chivalry-versus-love/).   I thought I'd post some excerpts here.  I've posted them without identifying information for internet privacy, but if you'd like me to attribute your comment with your name, I'll gladly comply.

    • I was reading your post about Chivalry. For the most part I agree with you. Focusing on imitating Christ and our relationship with God is by far the most important thing. And most of Chivalry is outdated and makes no sense in our society where men and women are supposed to be equal. There are some good lessons from it such as honoring your word but those can also be learned from the Bible. However, with in romantic relationships such as courting or marriage I think there is some place for it. Not so much the idea of Chivalry but some of the traditions. I agree that agape love is by far the most important even in these relationships, but not everything done has to be self sacrificial to be important. It is important that in these relationships both the man and the woman feel valued, loved, and cared for. However, as you pointed out men and women are made different by God. For some women little gestures that let them know that their husband is thinking about them and paying attention to them is important. If the way a woman feels loved is by having doors held and her husband help her with her coat I don't think that there is a problem with that. Some women don't care they need other things from their husband to feel loved and cared for and then it doesn't matter. The same thing goes for men. If a man feels loved by his wife because she opens the door for him than that is good too, but I think this is less common. But there are other small things she may do for him that make him feel loved, cooking dinner, watching football with him, making sure the coffee is made, leaving love notes for him. Whatever works for those two people. My point is that the little things matter in relationships, certainly not more than the big things like honoring God, but they do still matter. Have you heard the idea of love languages? Different people need different things to feel loved and you do those little things for that person not because someone told you you have to but because you love them and you want them to know that and feel loved. In some cases the "gentlemanly" behavior may be an important part of a person's love language and I don't think that is a problem as long as the little acts are done out of love and caring.

     

    • Just a comment - what if doing the "chivalrous" thing is received as love by the other person. Sometimes love isn't as clearly defined as we think it could or should be.... I think a lot of women feel loved by having guys do certain things for them. Personally I am kind of weirded out by a guy who would have me sit in the car while he ran around and opened the door for me, but on the other hand, I always unlock my passenger's door first before I open mine. I think it's more about the other person's love language, so to speak, and how they receive love. Giving a girl flowers is a cultural thing, and neutral as far as I know in the Bible, but can make women feel special/loved.

     

    • "Tim, C S Lewis essay: "The Necessity of Chivalry" is a must read. It is one included in the "Present Concerns essays" ... We men need a balance between ferocious protecting and genteel manners. The extremes are barbarians and Joe spineless milk toast..."

     

    • I have quite a different perspective on this coming from the deep South. Southern Antebellum culture was intentionally modeled after books like Ivanhoe, even down to adopting jousting as a hobby. The ideal women were fair and plump because it meant they had a man capable enough, blessed enough, or who loved them enough to provide for them. While expectations have significantly subsided in this post-invasion era, many traditions are still very commonplace. I was taken back initially at [] that women would actually comment that I was "so polite" for making gestures without a second thought including opening doors for women, children, and elderly, removing my hat when indoors, saying Ma'am or miss. I was appalled when I saw a gent get stuck holding the door as very capable men would pass through as if they were entitled to the service. As far as  treating women with respect, it stems from the idea of headship. Men are called to be priest, prophet, and protector of the weaker vessels within their sphere of influence. The number one trait of a good leader is servant-hood. Lavishing upon women is to share in the abundance of blessing afforded us by God.  But like anything, if it is done out of obligation, it is not love. That is difficult to keep in perspective.

     

    • Finally, a conversation with other friends cited the following passage from 1 Corinthians 9: "19 For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may win more.  20To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law;  21to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law.  22To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some."  -  and the application was argued that chivalry is one of those things - that some cultures and regions of the world place a high value on chivalry such that one needs to "speak chivalry as the cultural language" in order to avoid making any unnecessary stumbling blocks for the spread of the gospel in that place.

     

    My previous post argued that chivalry was generally "ok", though most of it was already covered by the Bible's commands about agape love, and parts of it were either completely silly, neutral, or anti-Biblical, and that one ought to seek intimacy with God rather than chivalry.

    In light of all the comments, it seems that most people agree that chivalry is more of a cultural thing than a moral thing, but they caveat that there are times when speaking the cultural language of chivalry might be the morally right thing to do.  For example, if you're married to a woman whose "love language" is chivalry, or if you're trying to share Christ with people whose culture is strongly chivalrous.  1 Cor 9:22 is a pretty powerful verse... it seems to imply that anything cultural pattern that's not actually "Biblically-wrong"/"immoral" is fair game to "wear" for kingdom purposes.

(I use 'tags' and 'categories' almost interchangeably... see below)

Recent Comments