Monday, 16 January 2012
-
Chivalric or Christ-like?
I've recently seen a lot of posts about chivalry. Chivalry was originally the practice of knights -- you know, courtly love and romance and all that. People want it, complain about it, debate about it today, but something that trumps chivalry and something that we can strive for as Christians is being Christ-like. We should strive for our men to be Christ-like, and the chivalry will come.
For instance, Christ laid down his life for others. He was in service to others. A godly man will hold doors open, walk on the outsides of sidewalks, give up jackets or other comforts, etc., for women not based on some medieval moral compass but because it's what Jesus would do.
Do you think Jesus calls men to be chivalrous? What, to you, is the difference between being chivalrous and being Christ-like?
RecommendRelated Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to revelife's Revelife Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in revelife's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
About the Author
-
- From: scrittore@xanga
- Name: Lori
- Location:
- About Me: I'll admit, I'm only here whenever I need to rant about something, then I post it to get feedback on the issue.
Stats: This Week All Time Posts: 0 10 Views: 0 19180 Comments: 0 242 View all posts by scrittore@xanga
Comments (26)
"A godly man will hold doors open, walk on the outsides of sidewalks, give up jackets or other comforts, etc., for women not based on some medieval moral compass but because it's what Jesus would do."
If that's the case, a godly woman should do the same, too, because that's what Jesus would do... right?
@QuantumStorm@xanga - Well, you're right. I considered mentioning that in my post but decided to emphasize the fact that women expect chivalry from men and not the other way around. Also, yes, women should do things to serve men, but I wanted to be in line with the "commandment" from the bible that men should lay down their lives for their wives like Christ laid down his life for the church.
@scrittore@xanga - Laying down my life for my wife, and opening a door for a date, are two very different things.
@scrittore@xanga - Ephesians 5:21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.
22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her
@QuantumStorm@xanga - agreed! I open the door for anyone, it is nice! But when it comes to opening my car door or getting a chair, those are things to do for a date, fiancee, or wife. But I dont do those because Jesus would, I do them because in our culture and for myself, it shows how special I think SHE is to me.
Okay it's bugging me, so I have to say it...I'm pretty sure "chivalric" is not a word.
That said, I agree. We should serve one another in love, just as Christ showed us by example.
If I ask myself 'what would Jesus do in this situation' I think he would open a door for someone because they needed it opened, not because he felt they deserved to have it opened because they were a man or a woman. Jesus would see them as a person first, a person who needed a door opened second, and a person who just happened to be a man or a woman third.
Oh and @LaBellaMorena@datingish - Here ya go. I looked it up. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/chivalric lol
This is good...chivalry oddly popped into my head just the other day and here's my thought...b/c I loved those old tales of knights as a kid and embraced Chivalry...and honestly was confused by much of the relational response to my attempt at chivalry as a young man.
Chivalry is a system or code of conduct, ie law or rules. So I say no I'm not called to live under the law any longer...Chivalry or otherwise. And what I've experienced as helpful in relationship is to actually feel my own feelings and see the other person. So if I want to open a door for a woman I do...and not if I don't. I find the most life in relationship when I look at others and engage them right where they are...and where I am...and not in some hypothetical universe.
And as I allow myself to enjoy my masculinity in relationship with a woman who enjoys her femininity I can be surprised that its really awesome...and that's any opposite sex relationship: momentary, friendship, even marriage I imagine (and that last one I've experienced is not a no brainer).
I live this way when I feel connected to the living God...and myself.
Equality is morally superior to chivalry.
As a christian woman I like the door opening but I don't neccessarily enjoy the chair pulling out because Im clumsy Lol. Howevern its just all based on preferences. If those two people prefer to do that or not. its just common curtesy though not to let the door slam in someones face *smiles* even ikve opened doors for guys and females alike just because some of were raised that itks the socially acceptable thing to do. Chilvary really doesn't always reflect a persons heart though. some guys showed chilvary and then became very ill mannered in other areas like making fun of handicapped people. Then too the men at my church are prayerful and live holy lives but they all stood there and let this young woman carry some bags into the church without offering to help. when I asked lwhy they didnt help, one said that because she was a young woman he felt more hesitant to help her because he didnt want her to get the wrong idea that she liked him. why? because once again the media usually depicts chilvary type acts like that towards people you are romantically interested in. So even if a guy doesn't have chilvary, i still wouldn't say that it takes away from him as a man of God.
I meant to say he didnkt want her to get the wrong idea that lhe liked her." (typing on cell phone and touch screen makes me spelling and stuff crazy!)
The difference would be in the intention, although intent may not always be explained or known. To be a gentleman, you are taught and behave so but when you act Christ-like, you behave so in order to live a life like Jesus. It doesnt end with just being a gentleman but its shown through your beliefs, actions, and words. :)
I don't see the diff. In Ephesians, St. Paul compares marriage of husband and wife with Christ and His Bride. I'd like to think that chivalry's impetus is Christlikeness. Whether that is historically or theologically supportable, i guess I don't have the academic cred to make a weighty argument. I'm told that Dante's exalted love of Beatrice was the pebble in the water, as it were, that culminated in the ever-growing humane treatment of women in Western culture.
Contrary to what some feminists and secularists insist, I see Judeo-Christianity as the engine behind the gradual upward incline of wonmen's status. I see things like the witchcraft hysteria of the Renaisance, the baroque courtly love that stipulated a mistress in addition to a wife, and assinine laws forbidding women to inherit property as tragic aberrations, steps backward, that need constant redressing.
The popular concept of history is one of gradual enlightment and benevolence, like the upward growth line of a company's financial performance. The tragic truth is that there are periods of sliding back. War, conquest, plague, all these things can cause a regression. And, as a confessing Christian, I don't think it's humanity's basic goodness that is the cause of this gradual upward progress. Like health, and a clean house, it demands constant attention; and the sovereign sustaining of God's grace. things like human trafficking and repressive religious regimes threaten to revive slavery and persecution in a big way.
Perhaps I wandered far afield of the pertinent topic.
@QuantumStorm@xanga - I only clicked on this post to see your comments. :D
@WaitingToShrug@xanga - Hehe, I see my reputation (good or bad) precedes me
Or does it follow me? Dunno. Haha.
But in all seriousness, chivalry, until recently, hasn't been much of a sticking point for me. But nowadays... yeah, I have my thoughts on the matter
@QuantumStorm@xanga - I read your thoughts on chivalry recently, so when I saw this, I assumed you'd have something to say. :)
I don't usually give it much thought. I appreciate and thank men when they do things like open doors for me, but at the same time, I don't blame them when they don't. I've heard a lot of women get bitchy about receiving courtesies from men.
I guess I think that if you expect traditional gender-role courtesies from guys, you'd better at least act like a lady and be nice and sincerely grateful. I don't think that women as a group have the right to that kind of behavior from men, because women as a group treat men worse and worse as time passes. However, on an individual level- I can say that an expectation of chivalrous behavior may or may not be appropriate.
Sidenote: this is reminding me that I need to pick up some sort of after-work treat for my husband soon. I think we're a good example of reciprocal chivalry. I pour some beer in a frosty mug and make a snack for him... he brings me flowers... works out well! :D
@WaitingToShrug@xanga - Well what I know about chivalry is that it's a double-edged sword. Although it started as a code of honor for men, it had elements directed towards women, such as, what you stated, how to act like a lady. For example, it would have been a violation of said lady-like behavior if women were sexually promiscuous; in effect, a large part of a woman's value at the time chivalry was prevalent, was her sexual purity. But in the modern day and age, casual sex is tolerated in both genders.
There are other elements of chivalry that restricted women in other ways, specifically due to the idea that women were allegedly weaker and more delicate, so it strove to protect them. The system was unequal, but it was EQUITABLE for both the genders; it kept the women safe, and it enabled the men to protect the women as well.
So, when women expect chivalry from guys, but impose no such restraints on themselves, it becomes inherently inconsistent. What I say is that if you're going to be in a relationship and/or treat your SO nicely, it should be because you care for them, not because they're of a certain gender. They did nothing to "earn" that gender, but I'd imagine they earned your love and respect by the way they treated you.
I like your idea of reciprocal chivalry
@QuantumStorm@xanga - That is exactly what I think! I hope this isn't too crude, but really... if you're boffing the guy before you even know his name, how does that inspire noble gestures in a man? People want to think that their sexual promiscuity has nothing to do with who they really are, and especially, how other people see them.
You and I could probably have some pretty good discussions about women and their double standards.
@WaitingToShrug@xanga - Well, I think that the inconsistencies with modern-day chivalry, the double-standards set women up for a lot of pain. I maintain that if we teach women that chivalrous men = good, trustworthy men, then what happens is that it allows men to abuse the system. I know a lot of guys who are very capable of being the PERFECT gentlemen... just to get in her pants and abandon her later. Somehow, I don't think women would appreciate that, ya know?
The reason people don't want to link sexual promiscuity (or sexuality in general) to character, is to justify the promiscuity in the first place. What they don't get is that it DOES matter, and it's also a major reason why guys don't bother with marriage (as crude as it sounds, the old saying, "why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?" is so true). Actions have consequences.
I think there are a lot of double-standards - that both guys AND girls operate under - that we could probably discuss
I feel Jesus doesn't call us to be chivalrous but how we're raised determines whether or not we perceive it to be the right behavior. Although we may do a good deed every now and then, it'll never be equal to Christ-like qualities. It should be noted that being chivalrous and trying to get laid are two different things. Man men only display "chivalrous" behavior to their love interest which is not the true meaning of the word. It's those who offer to help anyone without any concern are the ones who display true chivalry.
Wow this is a great post and it makes someone think. I keep hearing people say that chivalry is dead, and I think that a lot of young guys today they just get caught up in their head or their own world and they don't offer to help a lady struggling with a heavy load, or they don'tt open the door for a lady, or they dump her by text machine (yikes). I think it is a process of getting guys mastering their basic needs so they can pay attention to the lady in their lives. And please, don't give up on guys just yet! Certain guys, it just takes a little longer to pull their head out of their butts.
@QuantumStorm@xanga - No, because God created men and women with different societal and relationship roles. He didn't create us to behave the same...but to all behave in love.
@NightCometh@xanga - The flip side of chivalry for men was the chivalry for women, which dealt with how to act like a lady. Part of that had a strong emphasis on modesty and restraint, particularly sexual restraint. Not just abstinence, but refraining from any sort of sexual activity whatsoever. Women fighting in the name of "gender equality" have eschewed such principles.
When women decide they want to act like ladies in the chivalric sense, I'll consider giving them my jacket then. Until then, if they want equal treatment, I'm more than happy to grant their wishes. *Wraps up in jacket*
so, does that mean i should offer to wash my date's feet? because i don't see that going over well.
I really don't know.
What I do know is this. I'm a christian and I know lots of christian guys and, most of them, are like this. I don't mind that at all. However, my husband doesn't always open doors for me, give me his jacket (usually, I have my own anyway, lol). I don't know. I don't mind it. I'd rather someone do something nice for me because they want to, not based on my gender and vice versa. That's just how I feel.