Traditional theology about the importance and function of fathers can show up in all sorts of unexpected places. Take, for example, the John Denver song Thank God I’m a Country Boy, written by John Sommers. A few lines of this song read, “I fiddled with my daddy till the day he died;/ he took me by the hand, held me close to his side./ Said ‘Live a good life; play the fiddle with pride’…My daddy taught me young how to hunt and how to whittle;/ taught me how to work and play a tune on the fiddle/ taught me how to love and how to give just a little”.
The song focuses somewhat narrowly upon the delights of an agrarian lifestyle, but in its words about the songwriter’s father, it touches upon more a universal theme: the role of the father in transmitting timeless values to his family. Through his close interactions with his father, the songwriter learned how to live morally, how to make music, how to support himself, how to love and live generously. In other words, he learned all that he would need to know as a man, and the cultural conduit for these values was the father.
In all this the songwriter’s father was not simply expressing his personal idiosyncratic views about what constituted “a good life”, but rather passing along an entire tradition. C. S. Lewis mentioned this human transaction between fathers and their children in his prophetic little volume The Abolition of Man. Through such paternal teaching the father “was giving the boy the best he had, giving of his spirit to humanize him as he had given of his body to beget him…[This gift] initiated [and] dealt with its pupils as grown birds deal with young birds when they teach them to fly…it was a kind of propagation—men transmitting manhood to men”. This is specific task of fathers to their children within the family.
One might have guessed that mothers would be the main cultural conduit, given the immense amount of Hallmark sentimentality involved in Mother’s Day. And certainly no one should devalue the role of a mother within the family—and certainly not Christians with a devotion to the Mother of God. But life in the last century in the fragmented and fragmenting West has revealed that the role of fathers to be pivotal, so that when fathers are absent, things rapidly go to pieces.
Or, in the words of Mary Eberstadt in her piece The Fury of the Fatherless, “Deprived of father, Father, and patria, a critical mass of humanity has become socially dysfunctional on a scale not seen before.” In particular, she observes that, “Teen and other mass murderers almost invariably have filial ruptures in their biographies. Absent fathers predict higher rates of truancy, psychiatric problems, criminality, promiscuity, drug use, rape, domestic violence, and other less-than-optimal outcomes.”
She goes on to suggest that the violence ripping America apart is rooted in its modern rejection of authority in general, for authority is embodied in the father. Any statue that represents history and authority must be toppled, regardless of whether or not the toppling makes historical sense (such as the anti-racist opposition to a statue of Abraham Lincoln). The war on fatherhood and authority is not driven by a focussed desire for a better society, but by blind rage against the past.
The media has played its part in this devaluation of fatherhood. A complete catalogue of the modern attack upon fatherhood cannot be provided here. Here I can only point to a few things in our culture which are symptomatic of a concerted and systematic attack upon the old ideal.
One is the role played by husbands in ads featuring exchanges between husbands and wives. Almost invariably the men are cast in the role of the witless while their wives are cast in the role of the wise. Where disagreements arise between husband and wife in these ads, the husband usually plays the fool. Switching the roles so that it is the wise husband who corrects his erring and foolish wife would be unthinkable in our modern culture. I suggest this consistent portrayal of men as unthinking, ineffectual, and bumbling is not the cause of the present devaluation of the masculine, but a symptom of it. An old television series was entitled, “Father Knows Best”. No one would dare to produce such a series or offer such a title now. In our present culture, Father never knows best.
We see this too in the reconfiguration of families where the single and authoritative father figure is absent. But this reconfiguration did not come from nowhere, but has deep cultural roots, and is only possible because the notion of paternal authority as the conduit of tradition has already been eradicated. Fathers have not been regarded as knowing best or of knowing anything for some time now. No wonder their role has been so easily replaced. And what is this role? I suggest two things: in a family, fathers play a role in legitimation and in protection.
In her brilliant essay entitled, “Towards a Recovery of the Theology of Patriarchy” (published in the St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 40.4 (1996), Brook Herbert builds upon the work of psychiatrist Karl Stern in his book Flight from Woman. In her essay Herbert says, “Initially, fatherhood represents an objective encounter between two uniquely distinct individuals. Standing outside the child, the father’s reception of the infant into the world constitutes the formatively significant legitimization of the child’s being…authenticating through his own stance as protector and guardian the child’s very ‘right’ to exist…The father also stands between the family unit and the world as mediator and authority…But within the family it is the posture of the father, as affirming and loving presence overarching the family, that circumscribes the protection and nurture of each person”.
In other words, the father is a guardian and a doorkeeper, welcoming the newborn into the family, and standing guard to protect its place there and ensure that it receives the proper nurture. As Sommers and Lewis stated it, the father teaches the child how to live a good life and play the fiddle with pride; he teaches the young bird how to fly, even as he was taught by his father before him, giving his spirit to humanize him.
This being so, we can see how the absence of a father would be catastrophic, for the child then would have no one to legitimate him and nurture him, transmitting the tradition of cultural values. The search therefore must be made for substitute fathers, whether they are found in a gang leader or a ideological guru.
What does this mean for us? It means that we must oppose the lie that all masculinity is necessarily toxic, and that all paternal authority must be resisted and overthrown. Mothers must honour their husbands, supporting their role as fathers, even as husbands must show honour to their wives. Family solidarity must become paramount, for they serve as bastions of freedom and sanity within a mad world. The attack on fatherhood and authority is sweeping the land, like rising and raging tsunami. We must take our stand on the doorsteps of our homes and say with God, “Thus far you shall come, but no farther; and here shall your proud waves be stopped” (Job 38:11).
The anti-male sentiment in our society is at the level where males are beginning to believe that being a male is inherently bad, especially if you act in any manner considered masculine.
I believe that Hillary’s loss was a catalyst that expedited an already present and growing disdain for masculinity. Schools were already trying to force male students to behave more like female students, some schools even going so far as to forbid typically “boy” type activities (running, jumping, screaming) during outside playtime. Some schools have even removed previously typical “boy” type subjects and books from their curriculum.
Some preschools and daycares even going so far as to force boys to play with dolls and “girl” type toys, having removed anything that would be considered typical for boys. They are trying to “reprogram” boys to be more like girls in behavior and thought processes. Sadly, some are based within the church.
The phrase “boys will be boys” is considered toxic and destructive.
While some behaviors should be discouraged, not all “boy” behavior is negative or toxic.
The inmates have overrun the asylum and they are letting free more and more inmates.
Yes, I agree with you, boys and men are told to supress their nature. Likewise, in some countries, like Sweden, girls are not given dolls or girlie clothes and pink is seen as stereotyping girls, some mothers refuse to dress them in it. The feminine principle of nurturing and caring is looked down at, women are told to act like men.
What is all this leading to? Who has anything to gain by this gender neutral ideology? No one, it only cause confusing and division, turning women against men, and fathers against mothers. God help us!
I spent the better part of five years as a prison chaplain in Mississippi. I dealt with thousands of inmates during that time. The one common thread that connected 98% of them was growing up fatherless. A generic life story of these men reads like a tragedy. Neither they or their mothers knew who their fathers were. The mother was on drugs and died early in the young mans life. Most never even reached 9th Grade and lived on the streets getting involved in crimes to get the money to survive. The role of a father in a child’s life is critical. The modern idea that you speak is the poison killing our culture.
So there is a lot to unpack in this post, normally I like your blogs and I was surprised to see something like this come from you.
In your last paragraph you talk about how we must oppose the lie that masculinity is necessarily toxic. You do realize that VERY few people actually believe that. The concept of toxic masculinity doesn’t no imply or teach that masculinity itself is toxic, it is the idea that we should not give toxic traits a pass simply because the person is a man. A good example would be if you had a teenage soon who was constantly getting in fights at school. This fundamentally a toxic behavior ,he shouldn’t be getting in fights. Toxic masculinity would say “boys will be boys” and not address the issue because its just “part of being a man”. Getting in fights isn’t inherently a part of manhood and suggesting that it is would be “toxic masculinity”.
Its better to think of the term as “toxicity masquerading as masculinity” as its more accurate.
All that said though I find the obsession that many people have with masculinity to be unnerving. I’m a man by nature of my birth, its inherent to who I am and cannot be removed. To imply that some outside force in society can threaten my manhood is strange. Society tells us that our gender can be “Chosen”, that if your a man you can be a woman if you choose and vice versa. This is clearly false, so I find it strange that you would borrow from this ideology that a persons manhood (or womanhood for that matter) can be influenced or changed.
I’m in no way saying that its not important for children to grow up with a father in their life, its deeply important. But I think that the idea that society is attacking “manhood” is a bit silly, they can’t make me any less a man than I can make a duck into a dog.
As for the attacks on fatherhood? I think this is less a response against fathers and more an attack on the fact that many men abusing their authority in the family. Should a child whose father is a drug addict who is sexually abusive look to that father as a role model? Of course not. It would be deeply harmful.
If as men we want to be respected, we need to be men who deserve respect. Authority should come through virtue, not by trying to force it on to people.
I suggest that true masculinity is indeed being regarded as toxic in many places, whether or not the word is used: see the comments above from Ananias. Children raised in this environment will eventually produce a deformed culture
I am not a theologian or even a theologist.
I have been a tax collector.
I AM a sinner saved by the grace provided by my heavenly FATHER, through His obedient son, the Lord Jesus Christ.
I scanned the KJV version of the gospel of St. John. The “red letter” edition contains one hundred twenty one (121) occurrences of the word – Father. 121 times in this gospel alone, our Lord is teaching us about OUR Father (Jesus’ AND Ours).
Applying ONLY what little “common sense” I may have, I suggest these attacks are against THE Father, not against you who are fathers. It is all about the prince of this world warring against Father God who has already defeated him. The prince of this world employes his expendable lackies to attack The Father.
May our Father have mercy on all those who are BLINDED by the devil’s lies. May they repent and turn to the Father before the devil “officlally” abandons them.
Boys will be boys! Believe me, I’m a mother. My son grew up without any input from his father who was unfortunately an orphan but developed his masculinity in a boys school where orphans had been educated since Tudor times
My son was a typical teenager of the 1980s and 1990s except for the dishonesty. drugs etc which were also around then.
An idle layabout you would say.. but it was just his age.
Now he is a father of two boys and tells THEM to pick up their toys ,clean their fooms, stop making all that noise and so on. He is a decent father of boys . So maybe men can learn as they grow older. It depends on the innate character, perhaps.
Of course the media had not started their pseudo feminist claptrap then. They just want to break up any group because individuals are easier to influence. Think advertising, which is what electronic and print media are about when it comes to it. Selling!