Christian MGTOW as Pauline celibacy

Dalrock  commenter Emperor Constantine writes:

What is so odd to me as a Roman Catholic is that these feminized, “man up” Churchians completely ignore Christianity’s long, hallowed tradition of single men building a patriarchal Church. This required extraordinary works of mercy, proselytizing, developing doctrine and theology, implementing the sacraments, and on and on. The process began with Jesus Christ himself, who was single. St. Paul emphasized in the New Testament that it is better to be single and celibate, but take a bride if you have to. Being single so that you can focus on your faith is how the faith was built. Combine this with Dalrock’s insights on “Christian” marriage 2.0 (must make her feel loved, denial of sex, and divorce threatpoint, all to enforce female headship), and Christian MGTOW becomes a proper, reasonable response to the current situation.

And I get the feeling he is probably on to something. Here’s why.

And of course, the relevant text:

25 Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.

26 I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress, I say, that it is good for a man so to be.

27 Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife.

28 But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you.

29 But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none;

30 And they that weep, as though they wept not; and they that rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and they that buy, as though they possessed not;

31 And they that use this world, as not abusing it: for the fashion of this world passeth away.

32 But I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord:

33 But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife.

34 There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.

35 And this I speak for your own profit; not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is comely, and that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction.

36 But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.

37 Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well.

38 So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better.

39 The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.

40 But she is happier if she so abide, after my judgment: and I think also that I have the Spirit of God.

The part of this passage that has always struck me as providing the most context is:

 I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress, I say, that it is good for a man so to be.

And qualified in this manner:

But this I say, brethren, the time is short

Under the circumstances, as distressful as they were, Paul was under the impression that the end times were imminently upon them.

As “game” supposedly has a Christian application, (within the context of honorable courtship leading to marriage) does also MGTOW?

I don’t know. I’m just asking. I just know that I have obligations as a husband and father that make a certain level of risk for the Kingdom unacceptable. I try, I really do. This very site is risky in light of what it could cost me if taken the wrong way. But are the MGTOWs the true warriors of the faith?

 

Advertisements

28 thoughts on “Christian MGTOW as Pauline celibacy

  1. When pondering MGTOW in a Christian context or application, I have a beef with the label. Their Own Way is not God’s Way.

    Duh, obvious, yet I think it is not a trivial substitution.

    So by definition, it will not be MGTOW warring for the faith. If they did, they wouldn’t be MGTOW. But the men currently in the ranks of MGTOW could still yet be. That is something to hope and pray for.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Christian men do not go their own way. They go God’s way.

    Paul referred to himself as a “bondservant of Christ Jesus” and a “prisoner of Christ Jesus”. A bondservant does not go his own way, he goes where his master sends him. A prisoner does not go his own way, he goes where his captor sends him.

    For some men, that means a wife and children. For other men, that means receiving the gift of celibacy. Either way, we’re called to glorify God, not to go our own way. Sir Hamster is right. The difference is far from trivial.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. @SirHamster @Oscar

    “Christian men do not go their own way. They go God’s way.”

    Of course, but they have to *choose* to go this Way within the context of the human freedom God has given us. Leveraging a MGTOW mindset to break from our depraved modern culture; the feminine imperatives of abortion, promiscuity, single motherhood, hookups, etc., committing evil to maximize their sexual strategy; and worst of all the satanic “Man Up” wolves trying to scatter and devour the Christian male sheep. This situation requires a determined effort to go your own way, to find the one true Way: following in Jesus Christ’s footsteps.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Your points are moot for the same thing is required of married men, they too must go God’s way. It is therefore trivial to try and stop men going MGTOW for that reason. You don’t mind that they’re single, you mind that they will not do what you want them to do.

    The distinction is the choice, not the wording. MGTOW is just an acronym for what bachelor men have been doing for ages, it’s grown because the risks for married men are massively highly and cannot be ignored anymore. In the end, it’s the bachelor who chooses where his life heads.

    Single men by far have greater ability to put their all into something, married men do not. The point of the scene Scot shows is that Benjamin chooses his family rather than his principles, that is a major distinction and he does so because his responsibility is to his children first.

    Like

  5. @ Emperor Constantine (@TRPConstantine)
    MAY 16, 2017 AT 3:43 AM

    “This situation requires a determined effort to go your own way, to find the one true Way: following in Jesus Christ’s footsteps.”

    If you’re following in Jesus Christ’s footsteps, then you’re not going your own way. You’re going His way.

    @ feministhater
    MAY 16, 2017 AT 9:54 AM

    “You don’t mind that they’re single, you mind that they will not do what you want them to do.”

    Straw man alert.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. For some men, that means a wife and children. For other men, that means receiving the gift of celibacy. Either way, we’re called to glorify God, not to go our own way. Sir Hamster is right. The difference is far from trivial.

    A man has to go his own way, there is no two ways about it. He must decide for himself which is the best path. The two paths you have given him are to get married and have children or to devote himself to God. However, like Paul, until God actually gives that man a purpose, he very much has to find his own way in this world. No one else has dared helped these men and really only bemoan that they are not sacrificing themselves for the good of others.

    You don’t like that men are going their own way, you would prefer it that they go the way you want them to go. You call it’s the way of Jesus but in the end you’ve defined their path for them. You’ve missed the point that they have to choose. Single men should spread the Word but they should also enjoy their lives.

    I don’t see a trivial distinction between Christian MGTOW and a man being single and spreading the word. It’s how the person has chosen to define themselves, that’s the only difference.

    Like

  7. @ feministhater
    MAY 16, 2017 AT 1:37 PM

    “You don’t like that men are going their own way, you would prefer it that they go the way you want them to go.”

    Straw man alert 2.

    “You’ve missed the point that they have to choose.”

    Projection alert.

    Like

  8. Your points are moot for the same thing is required of married men, they too must go God’s way. It is therefore trivial to try and stop men going MGTOW for that reason. You don’t mind that they’re single, you mind that they will not do what you want them to do.

    Married men haven’t created a label for themselves like MGTOW has. I don’t care what the men who choose to identify themselves with the label MGTOW want to do. I mind the self-identity of the label in a Christ-following context.

    This situation requires a determined effort to go your own way, to find the one true Way: following in Jesus Christ’s footsteps.

    This is where I part ways with you. I have found that going my own way is incompatible with following in Jesus Christ’s footsteps, and I don’t find anything in your posts that prove otherwise. Instead, examination of Scripture finds it repeatedly exhorts us to deny the SELF, and Jesus’ own example is “not MY will but YOURS be done”.

    I note also that Men Going Their Own Way is defined not by atomic individuals each selecting their own path, but it is framed as a group of men following a nebulous group of “They”. Are MGTOW only Christian? The group is not defined by following Christ, so neither is a man of MGTOW.

    A Man Going His Own Way (MGHOW) may end up on the path of Christ. At that point, he is no longer going his OWN way, but becomes a Man Going HIS Way. (MGHW)

    OWN and SELF are linked. Let us not deceive our SELF that doing our OWN way is going the Father’s way.

    In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.

    I find it fascinating how closely our modern society can parallel ones from thousands of years ago. With the failure of America and Western Civ’s institutions, and our forgetting of the way of our fathers, we look very much like the Israelites in the time of Judges. Yet, does the Christian lack a King?

    Like

  9. There is inevitable risk involved, for the Kingdom of God, and in this life. It is unavoidable.
    Where is the group of young, single, Christian men taking the nation by storm for God? Granted, there is no group of married Christian men doing it either (Promise Keepers doesn’t count). But where is that group? The alleged reason for singleness, from the perspective of scripture, is to devote oneself for the Lord. Yet, the real reasons usually given are: Not worth it to be married these days, your wife may divorce rape you, you don’t want to be a blue-pilled married beta, etc. I understand those reasons, but please, say those are the reasons. Don’t go into the idea of the Apostle Paul being devoted to God as a single as your reason, because it clearly is not the reason.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. As a younger Christian man, desiring to be married but unsure about the choices involved, I sought some kind of “blueprint” in which God would miraculously instruct me on who, when and how to marry, as well as all other life-choices. It was believed , in the circles that I travelled in, that there was one perfect “God’s choice” that was discoverable for those of faith, while all others were rebellious and “going our own way”.

    Study of scripture and life-experience both seem to show that God does not work that way in our lives.

    The most obvious conclusion of the scripture quoted at the beginning of this article is that Paul is giving RECOMMENDATIONS, not commandments. He is not trying to create a black/white dichotomy between being married, and being a single, world-changing evangelist and teacher. He gives his recommendations in the CONTEXT of a belief that the end-times are coming and the CONTEXT of the fact that the human ability to govern our own will and desires varies. So it is wrong to attempt to make this a revealed-will-of-God-commandment, when in reality it is wise advice.

    Consider also that the New Testament is not full of people asking for miraculous guidance and getting it. On the contrary, they cast lots, base doctrine on “it seems good” and attribute failure to the work of God. What the NT actually instructs us to seek is not some perfect, revealed set of instructions on God’s Perfect Plan for our lives, but WISDOM. WISDOM is the skill of making good decisions, and applies to all circumstances.

    Which means that whether we make a decision not to marry, or simply find that the Providence of God has not brought us to marriage, we are not excused from applying wisdom to other major choices in our lives. There is no false dichotomy between being a husband and being an evangelist. The command to be wise means that as a single man, I still have the responsibility before God to use the talents that He has given me appropriately.

    As I sit here – a single man in his early fifties – I would be stupid to imagine that my own talents are fitted to a Paulian ministry. Ordering my life according to how He seems to have worked it so-far and trusting that that will bring the results that He wants, is more faith-full than presuming that I am another Paul. Or Peter (who was married). Or Billy Graham (also married).

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Pingback: Random Musings and Links- #9 | Donal Graeme

  12. God’s way vs mgtow is a pedantic error.

    Obviously everyone should go God’s way, single men, married men, women, children…

    If you hate the idea of mgtow Vox Day has much stronger arguments than these pedantic ones.

    Like

  13. “As “game” supposedly has a Christian application, (within the context of honorable courtship leading to marriage) does also MGTOW?”

    More than you’d expect. My life experience in Sodom is that the darker this world grows, the more Christ’s followers stand out without even trying to. The idea that a bachelor can save himself from modern corruption, help others do the same and not be doing God’s will is silly.

    “Christian men do not go their own way. They go God’s way.”

    As if it’s that simple. For the married, “God’s Way” is easy. Get married, have kids, feed them, keep your home in order, put your family first before everybody else. Done. For the clergy, “God’s Way” is easy. Know your theology, go through the rituals, be available for emergencies, pay attention to your people’s spiritual health. Done.

    But what is “God’s Way” for a bachelor? What are his checkboxes of accomplishment? The answer is not in Scripture and this makes the easy-path types uncomfortable. They try to cage bachelors in a little box, saying the only reason for Paul’s singleness was being professional clergy.

    What if God has set some of His followers free to do as they will, to explore His creation and become their own sort of creature? It’s not as if God needs our help. Perhaps God simply wants some of us to develop the initiative and character that only comes with near-total freedom. I daresay this last idea frightens a certain kind of believer.

    Like

  14. God’s way vs mgtow is a pedantic error.

    Obviously everyone should go God’s way, single men, married men, women, children…

    If you hate the idea of mgtow Vox Day has much stronger arguments than these pedantic ones.

    How does everyone needing to go God’s way make the criticism of MGTOW’s label a pedantic error? Are you saying the label must not be criticized on the content of its words? Does MGTOW mean MGTOW-who-actually-go-God’s-way?

    I do not hate the idea, but find it important to categorize it as a path that is going in a different direction than the Christian one.

    A label is something that could be considered trivial, yet I see how it invites so much push-back from different commenters. I submit that it is because it is not a trivial thing at all. The Christian who labels himself MGTOW will have to confront whether he actually is going “Their Own Way”. If it is mere lip service – why give lip service to such things?

    It’s the difference between “No Kings!” and “No King but Jesus”.

    Like

  15. The accurate distinction is this:

    ~ “Blue pill” = worshiping women
    ~ “MGTOW” = worshiping yourself
    ~ Christian = following God

    An “MGTOW” Christian is simply a Monk. But no need to call it “MGTOW” when Christians have had such a position for millennia.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. GunnerQ,
    God has never set any of His followers to “do as they will” or “become their own sort of creature.” The fact that you said that is telling. Single Christian men are not bound to be professional clergy. But they should be about the business of the Kingdom. Leading the lost to salvation. Edifying and building up the Body of Christ. Naturally, the day-to-day stuff also…working, paying bills, etc. Doing as they will and becoming their own sort of creature basically means…exploring your hobbies. Which is fine, do with your free time as you will, but please do not cloak it in a veneer of righteousness.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Quote : Single Christian men are not bound to be professional clergy. But they should be about the business of the Kingdom. Leading the lost to salvation. Edifying and building up the Body of Christ. Naturally, the day-to-day stuff also…working, paying bills, etc. /Quote.

    So how does this not apply to married men?

    Like

  18. Quote : An “MGTOW” Christian is simply a Monk. But no need to call it “MGTOW” when Christians have had such a position for millennia. /Quote

    A monk is someone who has withdrawn from normal society to become part of a seperate religious order.

    The Apostle Paul was not a Monk. Jesus was not a monk.

    I am a Christian, living, working and being a witness (a little) in my community, who happens to be single….. if you think that I should join such an order, then please quote me supoirting scripture from the NT in which the question is asked “are you single? If so, go join a monastery “

    Like

  19. It certainly applies to married men. It applies to all. No separate categories. 1 Corinthians 7 tells us singles have more time for this than married, but otherwise, it applies to both groups.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. I’ll also reiterate here, a point I made on Donal’s blog.

    Paul’s advice on this subject was given in the CONTEXT of the approach of the Last Days. It was believed that time was short, and hence that long-term planning – such has expecting your children to grow up, become part of the church, and support you in your old age – was not rational. This is the same context that led the Church in Jerulsalem to attempt a socialist lifestyle by selling property. (Later we see other churches collecting money to support them in their extreme poverty).

    In that CONTEXT the burden on married men and the Liberty of the single was not family time and extra bills, but the additional risk to those you loved. A married man standing for Christ in a time of persecution must need to be wary of getting his whole family killed. A single man may far more easily decide to risk martyrdom.

    Ignoring this context will lead you into error.

    Like

  21. You are half right. Verses 32-35, though, do seem to speak of the extra freetime. Literally, v. 33 says that the married man has to think of pleasing his wife, while the unmarried does not.

    Like

  22. For the Christian, mgtow means men not going womens way. That is where the debate is, and there are legitimate arguments that mgtow is a selfish or sinful choice based on that.

    I’m married with kids, so mgtow doesn’t apply to me. I see all these church guys slapping unhappily at the mgtows and wonder what got under their skin.

    The only thing that makes sense, once you get past the pedantry of labels, is that mgtows are not following the feminine imperative, which as Tomassi says is what passes for the holy spirit these days, so church guys criticise them for that.

    “Man’s way vs God’s way” is also a mistake of binary thinking. The real distinction is man’s way vs womens way underneath the greater umbrella of either going God’s way or not.

    Plenty of mgtows don’t go God’s way. I don’t condone that. But that’s not what Scott’s post is about, it’s about whether CHRISTIAN mgtow is legitimate in some form, and there are interesting arguments for or against that get deeper than labels.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Plenty of mgtows don’t go God’s way. I don’t condone that. But that’s not what Scott’s post is about, it’s about whether CHRISTIAN mgtow is legitimate in some form, and there are interesting arguments for or against that get deeper than labels.

    If one’s Own Way and God’s Way perfectly overlap, you are a God-man with perfect desires.

    For everyone else, those are two masters, of which only one can be pleased.

    Like

  24. Hamster you missed the point.

    If woman’s way and God’s way perfectly overlap, then men shouldn’t go men’s way.

    Like

  25. Crossphased,
    As a married man (my demographic may bias me), I see just as many, if not more, MGTOWs saying how marriage isn’t worth it now, etc, then I see married men shaming MGTOWs.

    Like

  26. Ys–

    For the record you will find no shaming of MGTOWs here. One guy I like a lot– the owner of the FB page “the patriarchy” does this.

    Even some of the “red-pull” women in my circle take this very personally (as if it’s about them) and think I should be giving a big dose of “man up” to them.

    I have 3 boys of my own. The step son is 20, and the other 2 are very small.

    I understand the anger, the frustration and the risk calculus. These men have made an assessment and are not actively seeking wives. I have no judgment for that.

    Like

  27. I have no judgement either. I think it’s a different audience thing.
    I see more MGTOWs being defensive than vice-versa, however, much of my blog reading consists of the Red Pill sphere. Married men like you, Scott, and myself, while married, understand the risks. So there is little shaming on red pill blogs.
    Out there? I am sure the MGTOWs do get it. I never got shamed, but I got married in my early 20s. If anything, I was told I was too young. (totally off-topic: what is the line between too young/when are you going to get married?)

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s