Please Don’t Boomchikawahwah On The Clock
I know churches that have policies on dudes and chicks being alone together.
I know churches that don’t have policies on dudes and chicks being alone together.
I know dudes and chicks who got their boomchikawahwah on under both “the law” and “no law”
I understand the reasons for both arguments.
Church (A) is trying to avoid boomchikawahwah at all means possible.
Church (B) is trying to promote boomchi…just kidding…is saying that boomchikawahwah is going to happen weather or not you have rules.
2 Questions for you astute late night Ragamuffins.
Answer them both please…
1. Where do you fall in these 2 camps?
2. Can men and women actually be friends without one party leaning towards boomchikawahwah in their minds?
I just want to type that again…
Boomchikawahwah,
Los
RAIN IT DOWN
1) we have the rule. but our former senior pastor had an affair while he enforeced this rule. the rule is more lenient now.
2) gosh i sure hope so. or i'm screwed. wait, what?
Oh no you didn't…
i have a whole post about this from the perspective of a single woman. it is a rough life being a woman in ministry. but add into the equation singleness and being young… and a whole mess of rumors, opinions and prejudices get thrown.
I LOVE YOUR POST!!! Everyone. Go read it.
I'm of the opinion that we can be friends that are never alone together. In some instances, I will meet a female co-worker or student (Im in campus ministry)in a very public place like a food court. Other than that, it's just unwise. At least for me. Why include the temptation?
true.
flee from sexual immorality. 1 corinthians 6:18
as bill clinton would say, i suppose it depends on your definition of the word "flee".
to me, it's simply not worth it. to make it easier for something inappropriate to happen. to give people something to talk about. to put the credibility of the ministry God has entrusted to me at risk.
does that mean everybody's a sketch ball and being alone with the opposite sex means somebody is thinking dirty? no. but it does mean we're human. and the minute we think we're immune to falling, we're gonna find ourselves flat on our face & probably have taken others with us on our way down.
and to me, that makes a gray issue much more black & white.
Do you think that being alone with the opposite sex and thinking something dirty means one is a sketchball. Because if that's the case, men in general are sketch balls. Um, er, sketchy men with, um, er, nevermind.
I get it.
Yeah, Solomon did a great job of this.
you actually said boomchikawahwah. ahahaha.
Yes…but as a Marriage and Family Therapist and pastor, let me say, rarely are there healthy boundaries…and it's not about intent, but opportunity. You can decide all you want to never have an affair, but enough hazy boundaries plus opportunity/time/hanging out together, etc….can equal disaster. I'm not dogmatic either way…but just know what you are getting yourself into…and are you both being clear.
rhett
will you be my counselor
haaaa…i would rather be your friend than counselor
gotta keep away from those "dual relationships." that's what I told @human3rror, haaaaa. love to meet you sometime…great post
Thanks man
thumbs up.
cool……
1. Its going to happen with or without a 'rule'
2. Yes, in the correct context. It is all about perception, though.
true
But should it be about perception? Are we just settling to live less full lives because we are so worried about perception?
I have this argument all the time. People "percieve" that I spend all day long blogging. When in reality they are just WEB 2.0 inept. What takes me 2 seconds takes them 5 hours.
Man, it's hard, no matter how far apart men & women are. It's in the air sometimes. So thick, you can cut it with a knife. Glad I'm not there anymore, but I do have a 22 y/o daughter who is finding out how hard it can be. I am grateful she serves a Lord she understands (most of the time) and can go to if Mom & Dad don't have the all-knowing answer. Sometimes I don't know how I survived until 28 (yes, 28). It can happen!
For me – it doesn't even get as far as the boomchickawahwah – but the appearance – or lack thereof. For the sake of my marriage, for the sake of the church, I won't be alone with any woman other than my wife. Not in a car, not in my office, not in the church. The rest of our staff shares this mindset. We value the church too much to allow any inkling of impropriety take root. I'm sure this is no news to anyone – but sometimes the accusation is just as bad if not more damaging than the act itself.
1) gotta have the rule
2) can't be buddy buddies. obviously can be friends. but unwise to be spending one on one time.
there's an extreme where guys are rude to gals and they pay them no attention – and they are just plain jerks. so don't be a jerk… but don't do the jerk either!
This is where I am at too . . . bu without the jerk part (s) though!
every group has spoken and unspoken rules. no doubt you get a bunch of rowdy folks together and there's a good percentage of horn-dogs in both parties. i listen to my wife on these issues. I've worked a lot of years in companies with some good looking women and I've had to keep these things in mind. I'm into keeping my marriage and if that means the wife and I need to talk more then so be it.
I agree.
yeah, what Rhett said…
he's so over my head sometimes, i've got to go to about.com or go see a shrink to figure it out…but I'm still subscribed to Rhettsmith.com…we all have something to learn over there.
we have the rule
yes they can be friends, but the relationship has to be held accountable- by the spouse. For instance: I have a colleague (and yes, I work for a church) that I went to middle school with. We have history in that sense, and we get along well. Her husband is one of my better friends & a key person on my team (he's head of security, and a black-belt-ninja-MMA-prison-guard; I'm serious, he really is a prison guard, & he taught martial arts in the Navy). My HOT wife & my colleague have a blossoming friendship as well.
That's the background. Here's the beef: We have a better WORKING relationship with each other than we do with other staff members. Is that wrong? No. Do we hate the other people we work with? No freakin way.
The accountability: Our spouses set it. The other staff members, heck, any bro or sis in Christ can hold us accountable- but our spouses have the final say.
To sum it up: No- we are never alone, it's against the rules. Yes- we are friends, even outside of work, but we're friends with each others spouses as well.
~NjS
Thanks for that. Really good stuff there.
wow,do you need another blogatical?
1. no rule that i know of. but most of my married guy friends have the rule anyway.
2. it's possible, but very very rare, and those friendship have very clear boundaries. or we look at each other and think "you're awesome but EW!"
and in my mind, this is kind of different for singles and married peeps, no? b/c a little alone time (sans boomchickawahwah) for single dudes and chicks is called dating. which is a good thing, in my book.
and i'm sorry but you couldn't find a better photographic example of "platonic friends" than MJ and Liz Taylor?! seriously?
And here I I thought they were an example of boomchickawahwahing on the clock .. .
Me too!
HAHAHA. I looked for 30 minutes for a pic of what I thought it was. LOL
When I worked a church in Alpharetta, GA that had this "rule" – I refused to follow it and made sure everyone knew I was going to refuse to follow it.
It isn't just the idea that "men and women are going to do it anyways." It goes beyond that. The church does a horrendous job of demonstrating how life should be lived. Instead they put up ridiculous rules to keep people away from "temptation" but instead they just create a culture that is afraid to live life to fullest in fear of making a mistake.
To answer question two: yes
AMEN BROTHER!
Wow. That will preach.
1- no official church policies. I'm a senior/solo pastor, so any time a woman stops by the church I'm in that situation. So I'm careful to keep my office door open, and when possible if I know ahead of time I will try to meet somewhere more public. But it is a tough situation that is new to me, because where I've previously served on staff there were other people around all the time.
2- I think men and women can be friends, but I think in many/most cases there is a period at the beginning that is more vulnerable to something happening. If I've been friends with a woman since high school, and we haven't been intimate, we're pretty unlikely to begin now. That doesn't mean it can't happen, but it's not likely.
3- If you are married, make sure you are getting your freak on so often that your spouse has nothing left for anyone else. Problem solved.
boomchikawahwah
boomchikawachikawachickawahwahwahhhh! — it's the extended mix
I know a church that is in the middle of huge crud because there wasn't a hard and fast policy about this and a cross-gender friendship blossomed that was eventually deemed "too close for appropriateness" on the staff. No Boomchikwhatever but appearances caused rumors or something. The mess that ensued has had a broad reach.
So I think if there's gonna be a policy it should be BEFORE something happens and not after. I personally am a firm believer in not allowing even the appearance of Boom, let alone chika, and DEFINITELY not wahwah.
What is this boomchikawahwah?
1 Corr 6:12 "Everything is permissible for me"—but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible for me"—but I will not be mastered by anything.
It is hard for me to say. I've had some great relationships with girls that wouldn't have been allowed under this rule. No boomchikawahwah or anything close to inappropriate but I wonder if it was always beneficial to tie yourself to someone of the other gender in that way. I know for me it was a crutch not to have to develop the godly relationships with other men that I should have been building.
1. Our church has the "rule". There have still been some slip ups though. Rule wont stop it if both want it.
2. I can tell myself every time that I will be a "gentlemen" or its just a friend thing, or whatever. Thats rarely the case though. I'm a dude, and my mind just goes there. Ive found its just easier to set up some kind of boundaries, ESPECIALLY when I dont want to.
1. Our church has a strong suggestion against being alone with someone of the opposite sex but not a set rule. Personally, I've seen too many people taken out by not taking this seriously so I set my own boundary at no alone time with the opposite sex.
2. I don't think men and women can be really close friends without one or both contemplating taking the relationship to the next level. I don't know if there's anyway to avoid this as a human. I think it's wise to avoid any opportunity to turn those thoughts into action.
I have lots of guy friends and colleagues. The boundaries are very clear. Boomchikiwawa doesn't even enter the stream of consciousness.
It doesn't enter YOUR stream of consciousness! Not checking in you, just warning you that guys minds work differently than girls!! (Hope that wasn't a spoiler for anyone
)
I quit worrying about these thins a LONG time ago when I realized that despite what I was taught at McChurch for eighteen years, the Bible really isn't mostly about sexual ethics. At all.
And yes, men and women can be friends without sex getting in the way.
I miss you around here. That was awesome.
I hold a theory that has seemed to work with some amount of success that men and women who aren't married to each other can be friends, as long as the other spouse (or spouses) is at minimum fully aware of the interaction. Therefore, the spouse's (or spouses') involvement helps provide a protective environment for the broader friendship. Now, creating circumstances where the people who aren't married to each other are alone for massive, unchecked amounts is unwise and unhealthy.
But I think we miss out on learning from each other if we don't allow some space for genuine cross-gender fellowship. I think there are ways to make it happen without endangering marriages, but it has to be handled with integrity, honesty and care. Darkness is where infidelity breeds and grows.
I lean towards this…
1. I think you have to use wisdom and discretion. If a male and female co-worker are often alone together on errands, or driving to/from meetings, etc., that doesn't look good, regardless of whether or not something is going on. If it can be avoided without being ridiculous at avoiding the situation, then do so.
2. I am no longer qualified to speak to this question. My best friend and I got married almost 10 years ago. We went from being best friends to engaged in a matter of moments. Before this, I would have said absolutely SINGLE men and women can be 'just friends'. But come to find out, we both had thoughts/feelings for the other, but never expressed it, or had them at coinciding times.
That said, re: #2, I do think MARRIED men and women can be 'just friends' with someone of the opposite sex without sexual under currents. Do I think 100% no thoughts of any kind in that area will ever happen? No. I think we all do some level of 'assessing' the people we are around. How else do we know 'Eewww! The thought of me and (insert name) is just gross. (or wrong, etc.)'
Eewwww is the safety zone. I think.. Love it
1. Personally, I've never been part of a church which had the rule, and also never been part of a church where boomchikawahwah was an issue. I know, I'm blessed. I really don't even have an opinion about it (this coming from someone who serves on the church board) and just think you need to do what is necessary for the church to run. Each body is different.
2. Yes, they can. In the same way I have the power within me to walk on water should I manage (choose) to surrender completely and entirely to the Holy Spirit, I have the power within me not to let my instincts rule. 'Course, Jesus is the only human who's ever done this consistently – which is good, cos He's my role model.
I think if When Harry Met Sally is any indication….trusting men and women to just be friends isn't the smartest thing.
Was waiting for someone to bring up When Harry Met Sally!
1: I don't think there should be a rule and my church doesn't have the rule. I've seen people discuss this before and the first time I saw the question I couldn't believe that the rule is in place in some churches! I mean seriously… if you can't keep it in your pants and act like a professional… should you be working in a church in the first place?!?! Secondly… my boss is female. When we do our staff reviews… It's just the two of us. That's just the way it is! Her husband is also on staff… I work with him very closely. We all get along great!
2: I absolutely think men and women can be simply friends without there being anything more to it. That is the case with me and many of my female friends!
I'm sorry… but this is one subject that I just really have a problem with…
[rant over]
Oh and one more thing…
Boomchikawahwah! (I just wanted to type it… haha)
"rarely are there healthy boundaries"
so, so true. great answer.
I work for a church with the rule in place. At first I was pretty peeved about it, but as I have seen the damage that assumptions can make to a church's reputation and in turn how that affects people's view of God I have learned to understand where our management team is coming from in enforcing the rule. I understand it, but I'm no apologist.
That being said, I think rules such as this get in the way of our potential to have fully redemptive relationships, and no I am not talking about bowchikawowwow (sp?). I am talking about our potential to live in genuine, authentic, transformed community without having to worry about assumptions, or how something is perceived.
Case and point – before I was married I had a 3 bedroom townhome all to myself – 2 of my closest friends, a married couple needed a place to live – my heart was to help friends in need. There was no doubt in my mind this is what I was supposed to do. So we made plans, they were grateful and I was thrilled to be able to provide a need. Needless to say, wind of the plan crossed one wrong person's desk who happened to be a lover of all rules. They proceeded to run the info up the structural ladder and before you know it I am being "talked to."
I was mad. We'll leave it at that. Here I was being told what I could and couldn't do in my personal life. And for what? The chance that I could do something wrong? There was no level of trust involved. Here was a chance to live in community with some of your best friends, to actually be the church, and for the sake of policy two people had to scramble to find a new place to live. Bogus!
Mmmm, guess I'm still no apologist for such rules/policies.
dude… that is wickity wack… and I'm not just talkin about the regular type (wack). That stinks that you had to quit being a witness for God just so you could continue being a witness for God by keeping your job. It's all backwards what's with that?!
1. I grew up in a very small church ethnic church where everyone knew who you were and who your parents were. It was one big extended dysfunctional family. When i was working with teens, sometimes I would meet up with them (guys and girls), usually is a public place just to talk (i'm a dude). I would often drive them home as well. Because we were all like family there was never any concern.
2. I think men and women can be friends. I think it's has to do more with the over sexed North American culture. Some cultures greet with a kiss. I love some of the girls in my church like sisters even though they are eligible. Any thoughts of a relationship with them would be incestuous.
I think rule are put in place to take away the decision where common wisdom would have done just fine. Sadly, common wisdom is no longer that common.
you are doin' too much by typing that long crazy word that many times!
1. rules on it? ah, there's rules on everything isn't there? =0) and…
2. dudes and chicks can be only friends and it NEVER pass that. i've done it more than once. here's the kicker tho. i think it only works when one party (usually the chick probably) is NOT even sorta attracted or into the dude. if this dude accepts that and doesn't want to lose the "cool friend that's super hot" (because it makes him look cool with the homies) then it'll always stay -just friends-. only if one of those two things doesn't happen…then there's a chance of the boom boom happening sooner or later!! ahaha how's that for ya?
Thought 1 – Are we only talking in the context of the church?
Thought 2 – Are we only talking in the context of "America / North America?"
Thought 3 – Are we only talking about the hetero people?
Short answer to question 1: Not sure which camp (if any) I fall into
Short answer to question 2: yes
I've served in both kinds of churches. The church I'm in now doesn't have this rule, but I do. It's an agreement that my wife and I have and following it honors her. End of debate for me.
Funny thing is that I interviewed at a church a while back and this came up while my wife and I were meeting with the pastor over lunch. My wife literally got into a heated fight with the pastor about it. Talk about awkward… but it's funny now. Needless to say, I didn't get that job.
We've got a policy I've used for years. None of the pastors are to be alone with another woman unless it's a family member. This is for in and out of the church and church related activities. It's not really a precaution for any lack of self-control (although every human is susceptible to temptation) but rather a precaution against any accusation of wrong doing. So I guess we take the far above reproach approach.
I have several friends who are female, but I don't interact with them on any sort of emotionally intimate level though. I have chosen to reserve that for my best friend…my wife. She deserves the entirety of my emotions, my heart and my struggles. If I were to share my intimate feelings about church, God, people, ministry and anything else with a woman besides my wife, I would be letting that woman in to a deeper and more private part of my life where the lines can be much more easily blurred. Just my thoughts!
Good thoughts. So what do you do when you have a married couple that needs to live with you for a few months?
Well, I've seen situations like that before. Some are handled well, some very poorly. For my wife and I, if there were a couple who had absolutely no other option to living with us, than to go on the street, then we would take them in. But, there would be some very fine boundaries set up front.
The boundaries would most likely be something that would keep me and the other woman, or my wife and the other man from being alone together in the house at all, even for a short period of time. This would probably mean that sometimes, one of us may spend some time running errands, sitting at Starbucks or staying at the office til their spouse or the other spouse could join them at home.
Can this be inconvenient? Absolutely. And I know that a lot of people may see this as a ridiculous paranoid and legalistic, but my thought's have been that it's always far better to be safe than very sorry. I take Ephesians 5:3 quite literally and quite far when Paul says that there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality. To a lot of Christians and non-Christians alike having two married couples living together, and not taking any precautions like this, could be easily seen as a hint of immorality.
Thoughts?
1. So we are not so much part of a "church" but rather the only people permanently [until more arrive] on the mission field with our organization. So with teams coming and going and with the local peeps…we kinda made this rule up for ourselves. My husband and I have seen what even a small rumor can do to tear apart a marriage and within the local community here and when "you" are working in such a tight community of people, there really is no room for compromise. We are working with kids so not only the temptation of an affair comes into play but the rumor of bad things with children are also the rumors that we have heard… so we are never alone with kids either. I believe that it is wise to protect yourself and your family and if it means going to the extreme and being a little inconvenienced sometimes…then that is what it means. For us anyways.
2. When I was single I only hung out with hott guys so that was always a problem for me. Dang.
HA!!!.
Good thoughts. I get nervous when I'm in a restroom and a 7 year old kid comes in alone. I run out. Isn't that horrible?!!!
I do know of situations where 'man mentors women who is not his wife and is also 10+ years younger' and thats just wrong. Friends, ok i can handle that, but mentoring? ouch, danger danger, high voltage……………..
Someone said above about being accountable to your spouse which is kind of where i am with this whole thing but in general it makes me uncomfortable having seen the bad stuff happen at Church, the rumors etc etc I mean, if i was meeting up with someone who was female, which isn't often, its always in a public place, coffee shop whatever and that makes it seem ok BUT then you know what, someone from Church walks in, "hey, ally is having coffee with a girl who isn't his wife, oooooh, whats that about? So, i dunno if we have a definitive answer that keeps everyone safe & comfy
and every situation is going to be different
truth from Ireland
dude, dont tell them all i have truth or im screwed (not literally, or at least not literally by someone who isn't my wife)
No one that I have seen has addressed the issue of gender disparities in church work places. In general in most evangelical workplaces there are real gender disparities. There are several reasons. 1) men are more likely to be pastors than women in most evangelical settings, 2) Women are more likely to be young and single because in general women are more likely to stay at home with children when they have them than men are. 3) There is a real power issue in many affairs.
So my broad generalizations. Many affairs happen with younger women and older more powerful men in church settings. Policy alone will not solve this. Policy may hurt the careers of the less powerful women because they are more easily disposed of when questions arise. Men that have power and are willing to have an affair will use their power and influence to have the affair. (I am not talking about rape, but rather about influence, the sex will most likely be consensual but wildly inappropriate.)
On a similar issue from a different side, these types of policies often prevent good interaction. If men and women are prevented from interaction, there will be a results of men in charge not hearing from and appropriately responding to the gifts of women that they are not hearing from. So women will be marginalized, get frustrated and leave their jobs.
I think it's best to avoid the temptation. Plus, there can be a perception problem too.
1. I think when you get down to the issue at hand, rules or no rules, it doesn't really matter. Rules are going to be broken. (However, locks do tend to keep honest people honest.)
2. Great question. I have no idea. Although, Tyler did beat me to it (When Harry Met Sally):
Harry Burns: You realize of course that we could never be friends.
Sally Albright: Why not?
Harry Burns: What I'm saying is – and this is not a come-on in any way, shape or form – is that men and women can't be friends because the sex part always gets in the way.
Sally Albright: That's not true. I have a number of men friends and there is no sex involved.
Harry Burns: No you don't.
Sally Albright: Yes I do.
Harry Burns: No you don't.
Sally Albright: Yes I do.
Harry Burns: You only think you do.
Sally Albright: You say I'm having sex with these men without my knowledge?
Harry Burns: No, what I'm saying is they all WANT to have sex with you.
Sally Albright: They do not.
Harry Burns: Do too.
Sally Albright: They do not.
Harry Burns: Do too.
Sally Albright: How do you know?
Harry Burns: Because no man can be friends with a woman that he finds attractive. He always wants to have sex with her.
Sally Albright: So, you're saying that a man can be friends with a woman he finds unattractive?
Harry Burns: No. You pretty much want to nail 'em too.
Sally Albright: What if THEY don't want to have sex with YOU?
Harry Burns: Doesn't matter because the sex thing is already out there so the friendship is ultimately doomed and that is the end of the story.
Sally Albright: Well, I guess we're not going to be friends then.
Harry Burns: I guess not.
Sally Albright: That's too bad. You were the only person I knew in New York.
Please tell me you copy and pasted that.
Haha.
Go-Go-Google search!
I like having guy friends. I am often just one of the guys and prefer hanging out with guys over girls because I like less of the drama that comes with women. I do have some great friends that are girls and do hang out with them. I personally hate the rules that says girls and guys can’t be alone together.
I understand this rule for married people, but for singles this is a little crazy. I have been under that rule and with or without the rule I have seen people still go beyond boomchikawawa.
We were given free will and so people even with the rules enact their free will.
I 100% believe that girls and guys can be friends and good friends especially since when you are one of the guys become more of a sister than a possible girl to “date” or think about it that way. At least that is my experience.
We do not have the rule on staff at my church.
We have communication.
And I spend time alone with my friends regardless of their gender.
Communication!
I dont think the rule is needed for single people. I’m not married so I can’t speak for them.
Yes, I have many female friends and neither of us are leaning towards boomchikawahwah (as far as I know)
First of all, the thought of Elizabeth Taylor and Michael Jackson getting it on is disturbing.
Second, I do think that men and women can be purely platonic friends. That’s not to say though that both parties shouldn’t be extremely cautious about what they talk about, where they talk about it (i.e. hanging out with your now-married former highschool g/f at a dimly lite coffee shop is probably not the best idea), etc….
So to answer your question it’s probably best for a guy and a gal to avoid being alone. I say this simply because 1) intimate topics (and I don’t necessarily mean of “adult” nature) tend to come up over time when two people are alone and that could just be a downward spiral; b) two people being alone would likely be a place of greater mental temptation (especially for the dude). Consequently, these situations should be avoided.
Concerning the argument that two people being alone might “look bad” to other people. Screw them (no pun intended
). There are going to be plenty of other situations that come up that “look bad” but are totally legit. This comes back full circle to part of your post. People are going to get it on whether the situation “looks bad” or not. The important thing is that you keep your heart and motives clean before God and you stay accountable to others.
I like what Anne Jackson said, “We have communication.”
I am going to be on staff at a church with male and female staff. It is foolish to think that I am going to run out of the office if I am alone in the building with a female staff member. If I come into the office early and a female staff member is already there I’m not going to turn around and go sit at Starbucks until another male is there (who would then also be a male in the building alone with a female staff members??!!).
I am going to communicate: I am going to communicate often that my wife is the most precious gift I’ve got – both to her and to the staff I work with. I am going to communicate often with God so I never wander with my mind or my feet. I am going to communicate with my wife and never hide it if I happen to be in the office alone with a female staff member. Communicate. Communicate. Communicate.
Lester Sumrall once said “it is not hard to live right.” It really isn’t if we communicate well, and love Jesus with our whole heart, and love our spouses/significant others with selfless abandon.
I'm from Church A
and…
No way jose! (that says ho-zay…not…joe-see haha).
Never been in a church with that rule (to my knowledge). I think it's different for everyone to be honest. I think it's a good idea to make your staff aware of the dangers, and provide accountability partners, but I'm not sure rule enforcement is necessary.
Personally, any female friends I have generally have a better relationship with my wife. Any socializing I do with female friends is with my wife by my side. It hasn't been intentional, just the way it works out. And vice versa.
Sometimes time alone with someone of the opposite sex is unavoidable – especially in business situations. We need to be aware of the dangers and use wisdom. Easier said than done I'm guessing.
I am the type in the second group, and i think it is the matter of self-control. Yes, there will be temptation there, but that doesn't mean you can't control yourself. I think the people in the first group think kids my age and some older don't have ANY boomchikawahwah self-control; they just can't control their desires… but that is so untrue. Yes, there is always those instances where something happens, because of whatever reason. But that should be handled differently than putting up my hand and saying "No one will ever be alone with another girl ever again!" just because one person did something…
Hasn't anyone ever seen 'When Harry Met Sally'?
It's impossible for the opposite sex to just be "close/best friends"…without one having liked or going to like to liking the other.
Trust me. I've done it enough times to finally concede to the truth.
If you find someone of the opposite sex who is your "best friend", you're supposed to marry them.
You have to be careful with guy/girl friendships…that's all I'm sayin'.
from a guys perspective, and more so when I was younger (ok I am not that old, not even 40)
there is just no way that a guy and girl can be alone for long extended times without the guy and even the girl (but esp the guy) thinking about some kind of boomchikawahwah thing.
and it has a lot to do with looks, dress etc, sorry – it just does, no way past it.
It you allow it you are playing with fire.
they can be friends – but under certain rules – for their own protection.
that's what I think at least
A nice rump is a nice rump. Even on a friend. Ya know what I'm sayin?
Phauahaha
Rump, may be that is what I will be having in about 2.5 hours at Maestros with my Community Group for dinner. Ya know what I'm sayin?
IMO, the rule doesn't exist to prevent Boomchikawahwah, but to prevent the accusation thereof. If someone is going to Boomchickawahwah, they're gonna do it. No rule will stop them. But for those who aren't going to, the rule makes it impossible for anyone to accuse them of it.
I used to be a little more relaxed about this – but we DO have the policy in our church. I think it's a good policy – it's just not worth it, and of course you can be friends w/ the opposite sex – it's just not spending "alone time" together – even if you aren't physically attracted. That makes it hard for me – whether it's trying to schedule studio sessions w/ a female artist and having someone else around, or even working from my home office w/ a babysitter downstairs watching the kids so I can get some work done while my wife teaches a fitness class or runs a race.
I even drew the line there when one of my pastor friends got accused of some sexual stuff towards some minor girls who were babysitting for him – his wife had to go out of town, and while she was gone, the pastor friend of mine had these girls "nanny" and help out during the day. They made some accusations against him (which I believe are lies). He's now spending a long time in PRISON – you heard me right, PRISON … leaving his wife and children to face it without him. His reputation is gone forever, tarnished, no church would ever hire him again. The girls testimony was so ridiculous, contradictory, and full of lies in the civil trial (where they were trying to get money) that it was thrown out, but then they took it to criminal courts, and got their stories together, and sent him "up the creek".
Sorry to post such a long comment – but after witnessing that happen to my friend, I'm just way too cautious about it now. Do I worry about my own intentions? HECK YEAH, who of us would lie and say we haven't had those thoughts. But I'm even MORE WORRIED about the appearance of something inappropriate.
If Billy Graham survived all the scrutiny for all these years … and HE has the rule .. well, dang, I'm keeping it, too. I don't even book worship leading or conference gigs w/o taking my wife or a friend along w/ me.
I agree, the rules need to be a bit more flexible for us single folks.
i think the rules are a good idea but pointless.
i could lust after that girl (which is adultery according to JC) that i don't know and ain't even close enough to smell. doesn't matter how "close" you are.
i say, know YOUR limitations because the limitations are case by case.
Could it be that by making it a 'rule' our human nature wants to combat the 'rule' rather than see the wisdom of establishing safe boundaries to avoid appearances that could affect others walk or to avoid the temptations that come from being too personal with someone outside of our marriage commitment? My pastor uses the term "soul bond" when two people begin to share intimate, personal thoughts or struggles and that the "soul bond" can lead to activities that don't line up with God's standards. When I was younger and single it would have set me off on a tangent if someone told me I couldn't have intimate friendships with males because honestly, men have been better friends to me than women. Now that I'm older
and married, I definitely see the wisdom in using caution in how much time, how personal and in what circumstances you spend time with someone of the opposite sex. Common sense….it isn't dead….it's just underexercised.
My wife really is in charge of my boundaries…she has a better feel for ladies than I do! Anyway we are in the early stages of a plant, and policies are being established. My feeling is this: "I will never MAKE PLANS to be alone with a woman that's not my wife, and those UNPLANNED events, I will let God sort out." Thanks for the great convo, Los!
Absolutely men and women should be allowed to be friends and even allowed to be alone. I am a therapist and can say there are times when it wouldn't be conducive, especially if your marriage is hanging by a thread. I've heard so many horror stories of rigid rules and churches who spent inordinate amounts of time deciding whether new church offices should have windows. The the church is built and lo and behold they find two staff members in the janitor's closet. We need to teach men and women how to handle feelings of attraction and give them safe places to go, if an inappropriate attraction is happening. Temptation is not the problem. We don't teach people what to do when temptation hits. More legalism is certainly not helpful. We cannot learn everything God wants us to know by hanging out with our own gender. Caution and appropriate boundaries, those are the keys!
"…how to handle feelings of attraction and give them safe places to go…" Ironic how we spend more time deciding how big to make the office windows than listening and mentoring people in how to really live. I'm all for accountability, but sometimes having a safe place to share the struggle is all that's needed to move past it.
I completely agree. See my comments below.
wow. That is rad.
DAAAAAAAANG. LOL. If that meant what I thought it did.
But goes to the point of communication
That is exactly how my hubs and I operate. It's amazing how freeing it is and allows us to be free within our marriage while honoring one another.
I get that 'the rule' is often more about perception than prevention. However, I've been a part of 2 churches with the rule. At one I couldn't ride alone with a girl in a car or even meet in a public place for coffee alone. Like Crystal, the enforcer of that rule broke em all and more. Rules don't matter much in that sense.
Which is why I wonder about churches finding a way to scratch the rules to avoid appearance, and finding a way to address the issues of the heart. I've been on staff at churches with those rules. I've yet to be on a church where there was a strong effort to make sure our hearts were continually connected to Jesus. Maybe that's cause churches think it should be assumed, but shouldn't we be a lot smarter than that by now?
That was brilliant.
My wife and I went through Jerry Jenkins "Loving Your Marriage Enough To Protect It" several years ago with a couples small group. During the study my wife and I agreed on several "hedges" to protect our marriage. This is certainly one of them.
If you are married, then this isn't about church rules. It is about proactively protecting your marriage.
Casting Crowns has a song titled "Slow Fade". The song speaks to this issue directly:
It's a slow fade when black and white are turned to gray
Thoughts invade, choices made, a price will be paid
When you give yourself away
People never crumble in a day
Daddies never crumble in a day
Families never crumble in a day
I love my family and if putting a hedge up in some areas will help us stay together for the long term, then I'm willing to do so.
I don't work in a church, but I spend all kinds of one on one time with guy friends. There have been situations where I found it uncomfortable (see also: I know/felt there was an ulterior motive) and I fled, never to return. In most cases – and especially in my industry (technology, media) I'm working with men one on one all the time and hanging out with friends, I think nothing of it. I feel nothin', want nothin' , think nothin'. It's not until someone puts the thought in my head that I become uncomfortable and feel "icky".
This conversation reminds me of something I was told in a Covey class once about illegal dumping. Company X posted a "no dumping" sign next to their building, following which they suddenly had people dropping bags of trash there. They hadn't had a problem before they put the thought in the head of people who hadn't previously dropped bags of trash on their property.
Just sayin'.
"“I don’t know who discovered water,
but I’m pretty sure it wasn’t a fish.”
~ Marshall McLuhan (1911-1980),
media critic & writer"
When rules have to be laid down it makes me wonder: who is setting the rules/who is uncomfortable and why are they setting the rules? More times than not, it's a cheater who accuses the cheatee of wrongdoing. IME. Just sayin'. Guilty consciences breed rules for others that the maker has already broken.
IMO/IME
OK. Best one so far.
So tell me this Ragamuffins……
I know of an AMAZING church. The 2 KEY SENIOR LEADERS in the church are of opposite sex. God has called each to that church and position. These 2 MUST have interaction that would break most rules discussed on this board. They could not do their jobs.
I think as more women are allowed into leadership positions in the church (which NEEDS to happen) this rule will begin to get in the way more than help.
Thoughts on THIS EXAMPLE?
We had the same set up. It ended with a hidden 5-year affair between them. BUUUUUUUUT – you're right. If women are ever going to get leadership positions, this scenario is going to come up. The rule does get in the way. But as my post says, the problem starts at home. A “rule” isn’t going to stop what is already in motion. Reverting back 20-30 years in ministry maturity, and go back to oppressing women in ministry leadership, just to prevent affairs from occurring… isn't going to teach anyone anything. We have to promote healthy relationships, healthy marriages and healthy work environments.
Indeed, when will the church learn that there is no way to innoculate against sin and failure – the scandals will always still happen (wether the details get out or not), what ever the rules are, the only decent (not fireproof-nothing is fireproof) prevention for this thing is really accountablity (now i'm not suggesting shepherdingor anything that mad) but we have to submit our selves to peers and elders that we trust (i would suggest more regularly with peers) and learn to ask and be asked the really , really awkward questions.
And we have to get out of the scapegoating of women with this thing, this happens because of both men and women, and sometimes just men or just women. Women in leadership or co-leadership does not encourage ment anymore than male-male co pastoring precursores homosexual relationships. And Pastors don't need someone to be on their leadership team to enable them to have an affair (ted haggard case in point) Male pastors have been going for the women in their flock for years (and some flockers have been gearing for their males pastors for years two) maybe having Women in leadership will help ballance things more sexually in our churchs and make this less easily happening bring a understanding of how both sex's work to Pastoral and leadership teams.
i hate to err on the side on the side of legalism, but ive seen two churches now that ive been on staff with burned & deeply wounded by sexual sin of pastors.
Ive also worked in a church with the 2 key senior leaders were man & woman. What worked for them was having their meeting times set through secretaries who also kept their calendars. The meetings were known about by other people, they always happened in the church office where all the doors have windows (seems like a silly thing to put windows in all the doors, but it frees them from the possibility of accusation!). If they had to go to a meeting offsite they drove separately.
It's all about being cautious & keeping communication open. Maybe it's an inconvenience, but I think the inconvenience is worthwhile to protect personal reputations, the church, marriages, family, etc.
Very interesting point on who makes up these rules in the first place. If this kind of thing does happen we don't want that type of personality working on staff at a church in the first place. But the thought also has to be put in their heads too. Sometimes the thought never crosses your mind because you're so excited about the work you're doing for the church. If we aren't busying ourselves with the work of the Lord… then our mind has time to wander.
Thank you!
Crystal, how can I read your post? I'm technology-impaired…
here you go…. hope Los doesn't mind
http://www.pinkhairedgirl.net/?p=2659
1. We don't have a "rule", but there are "expectations". I'm sure at somepoint, probably AFTER someone makes a major mistake will there be a "rule". I will note that just yesterday I had a friend stop by the office because SHE needed help with a project. It didn't really sink in until after I hung up the phone that "Hey, I'm here all alone today. I probably shouldn't be doing this." came across my noggin. In hindsight, I would prefer to meet somewhere else or wait until someone else was in the office.
2. This is tricky. I have a lot of things that come to mind. Some of those things it seems I can't control. So if the thought of boomchickawahwah comes to mind 1. is it there because I consciously made the choice to think it? Or is it something that just came to mind because I am a fallen soul whose tendency is to take beautiful things and make them ugly? 2. Just because it has come to mind does that make it wrong? I completely understand that it is a very very short trip indeed from thinking a thought to carrying out an action. But it still requires a step.
I like having guy friends and hanging out them. I still practice boundaries, some spoken, some unspoken.
As a single woman, I hate being treated like some sort of temptress though. Some people are little ridiculous with their boundaries..but who knows…maybe they need them.
I'm single and 28. If it were nightfall and I needed a ride home, would I have to turn down getting a ride from a sweet 80 year old male deacon from my church because there was no one else to ride with us to keep us accountable? Just throwing that extreme out there to say perhaps it's all about the situation and the individual.
I'm a big "Guard Your Heart" guy. I have some admittedly extreme personal boundaries, but I'm not legalistic in pushing my boundaries on others. That said, I think it is critical in ministry (as others have said) to avoid the appearance of impropriety. Also, the line between professional friendship and personal relationship can blur pretty darn fast.
I have friends that are women – but never outside of my marriage relationship. In other words, I don't hang out with my friends of opposite gender unless my wife is with us, or some other form of relational accountability is there.
To be brutally authentic (I hate it when I do that), I had a relationship that started at work and turned into something more…while I was married. It was before Christ, but that experience has taught me how critical it is to guard my heart against any potential problems.
My relationship with my wife is far more valuable than any friendship. Just my $0.03!
You guys are the PERFECT example. Love it.
I am more prone to get into trouble emailing someone or ichatting with them than meeting with them at a Starbucks. That is why my husband and good friend have passwords to EVERYTHING. you don't have to be hanging out with someone to have sex with them. it can all happen in that little noggin of yours.
I couldn't agree more! As is the case with my example on page one of the comments. My boss if female… her and I meet one on one for evaluations and other coordination throughout the year. It's just the way it has to be. It would be an unproductive waste of someone else's time if we called another staff member to sit in on those meetings. It's 2009 people! Get with the program!
if there are people in your church, boomchikawahwah is an issue. there may not be sexual sin happening right now, there may never have been sexual sin that has had to be brought to light yet, but… without caution & boundaries, i truly believe it's only a matter of time. there is a reason that sexual sin is so prevalent in church culture, and i believe it's the "we dont talk about sex" "sex isnt an issue here" "that would never happen to us" mentalities.
ps. i truly didn't mean any disrespect to you or your opinion. i pray God continues to bless your church with freedom from sexual sins.
No disrespect taken…and it's not that we don't talk about it. I think part of the reason a rule isn't in place officially is that we talk about it all the time. ALL the time. Fully aware that any sin could happen, and likely will happen at some point. I just don't have a strong opinion that either having a rule or not having a rule is something to be dogmatic about.
For the record, very few of the leaders choose to do anything alone…that's the culture that's been nurtured. I know as we grow it needs constant review and leadership in this area…as it does in all areas where humans are allowed to be
Los, this is both a timely and painful topic for me. My pastor, who is also my friend and one of my accountability partners, resigned this past Sunday. I had known this was coming since he called me last Tuesday. He began that phone call by confessing to me that he had been lying to me during our accountability conversations for the past five months, and he then confessed to having an adulterous relationship with a church member.
I am not sure I can answer this question with complete objectivity. Would such a policy have prevented boomchikawahwah? Not sure, but it might have. After all, it didn't start off that way. Like many of these relationships, it began with flirting that grew more inappropriate as time went on. I wish that my pastor had someone there to call him out the first time it happened, but he didn't.
As a result, his family is deeply wounded and trying to pick up the pieces. The other family is as well. His bride of more than twenty-five years is devastated. Our growing church is hurting and without a senior pastor.
Would such a policy have prevented it? I don't know, but I wish it had been in place.
i think by presenting the rule you only place the desire more in peoples minds to want to do it more. (we're humans when we're told not to do something we only want it more) but by not having it you run the risk of people thinking its okay. there needs to be a middle ground. trusting them not to do it, but letting them know how you feel about it.
when i think back, my parents trust is what kept me from doing a lot of things i shouldn't. we need to trust people but make sure they're aware how we feel about it.
and yes i think guys and girls can be friends with no boomchikawahwah. some of my best friends over the years have been guys. its refreshing to have guy best friends with no interest. but as soon as one wants the boomchiawahwah its certainly still possible but things will definitely change and the one who doesnt want the boomchickawahwah most def needs to be safe and make sure they're not leading the other on.
sry if any of this is repeated i didn't have time to read everyones before posting this.
welcome back los!
My thought: this was a rule made by a church, by man. Not by the first eccumenical council (let's not go there), and not by Jesus or the apostles.
Did Jesus ever say that men and women couldn't be friends or work together?
*My* God (potentially yours too but we won't get into that here either) created us equally, and with free will.
Man creating rules has never/will never stop people from doing anything. Your parents set curfew and your broke it. You weren't supposed to hit your sister and you did…etc. Low impact examples but just the same they prove my point.
Frankly, I'd be insulted working in a place that thought so little of me that they had to make a rule about this.
The church showing respect for the intelligence of their employees and their capability *not* to behave like a bunch of sex starved monkeys in a cage could go a long way – not just with the rest of the staff but I'm sure with the parishioners.
Did we learn nothing from Jesus? Lead by example, not by rule. Trust. Do the right thing.
Love me some of you right now. BTW, when can we meet for coffee?
3/27 after 10am (it's my day off I have to give a quick presentation @ 8:30)
Yeah! When it comes to working together…it takes coming off of that gridline and looking at the big picture of the gospel.
We talked about this all weekend at the Synergy2009 conference in Orlando the other weekend. The topic was "Recovering the Blessed Alliance"
This was the basis:
- We believe the image of God shines brightest when men and women serve God together as a Blessed Alliance.
- Synergy2009 focuses on building strong relationships with our Christian brothers as we partner in ministry to advance God's gracious kingdom throughout the world.
http://synergytoday.org/conferences.html
1 Cor 6:12
1. I believe Scripture indicates we have to have the personal rule FIRST. So while my church might not have a written rule, the expectation is that we know what is profitable to us in our walk individually. In other words, the church shouldn't need to tell me what I know already to be true in my relationship with God, whether it's my consumption of alcohol, relationships with brothers in the Lord or in attitude/behavior in the world. I know what I can and can't do to stay focused on Christ.
2. Yes, but I think it is very, very difficult for most people. If already married, shouldn't you already have that relationship with your spouse? And if single, I would ask if that time spent would be moving towards a marriage? If so, get someone to keep you accountable!
Great question
Crystal…you should be a speaker or host a workshop at the next Synergy conference.
I've had and have lots of friendships with women that have been completely platonic. That's not to say that maybe my first thought when I met them was to notice their attractiveness. I think that about a lot of things that are probably not good for me. That doesn't mean that I'm going to pursue them. God's given me free will and part of that is to choose NOT to sin. I made a commitment to my wife so it doesn't matter how hot I think a person is, I'm not going there. I can't control my thoughts but I can control my actions through His guidance. That being said, I can understand a church not wanting to have to deal with unnecessary talk and innuendo. Especially "innuendo." Get it? I'm an idiot, sorry. I like what Anne said about the way they do things at CP. Glad to have you back Los, you were missed!
Hi Carlos! It's been years since I've been involved in any sort of ministry in the church, or even in the church itself. Honestly, I think that when the subject is brought up it plants that seed where it might not have been planted. Nookie will take place if it's gonna happen. It's the same in the "secular" world.
Now that I work as a bartender at a bar where I am predominately surrounded by men, I've been involved in only one fling (in the 6.5 years that I have been employed there) and that was a big mistake. It's not like I have a "policy" and the restaurant sure doesn't, but mixing "bowchikawowow" and the workplace (which in my mind, ministry is) is not a good thing. Oh no.
SO GOOD TO SEE YOUHERE!!!
Speaking as someone that has had people living with us several times, I can't imagine a time that your rules would really work for us. Seriously, I am not going to question your marriage, but given my experience with people living with my wife and I, I would not be able to be in my house. It can already be hard enough to find some quiet time in my house. If I had to leave my house every time my wife left I would go nuts. I understand appropriate boundaries, but if you trust people enough to live in your house what does it communicate to them that you don't trust them to be in your house with you.
Well, for me it's not about a lack of trust. I trust my wife completely. She trusts me completely. It's about the appearance to others. Not just the appearance of something inappropriate, but the appearance of an opportunity for something inappropriate to take place. I have seen and heard of too many false accusations and failures in this area to be loose with my boundaries.
Part of it has to do with the length of time another couple would stay with us. For me, it wouldn't be anything more than a short term thing. 6 months…probably too long in my opinion. I would see the situation as us helping another couple get back on their feet with the expectation that as soon as they do, they fly free. I think there's a difference between helping another couple out in the midst of extreme hardship and choosing to live with another couple when we don't have to. The only way another couple would live with my wife and I would be if it were a short term situation and that living with us was the only other option. In that case, making inconvenient sacrifices would be bothersome, but worth it. I can see how those sacrifices would become less probable in a long range living arrangement. But for my wife and I, we would choose not to be in that long term situation.
I'm a youth pastor, and there's a lot of things I choose not to do in my personal life. Are a lot of those things acceptable for Christians to do? Sure, but I choose not to do them so that no one (in my neighborhood, at my church, in my youth group) would be able to accuse me of something inappropriate.
The way my Sr. Pastor puts it is with more accountability and boundaries, comes more freedom. I would much rather live more restricted and know that I can prove my integrity at any given moment to anyone, than to live how I could live, and open myself up to the possibility of trouble later.
This is why, I choose to keep records of my email, text, MySpace and Facebook communications with my students. This is why I don't keep other women as close, personal friends. It's why we have windows on all our office doors. It's why I make all my volunteers stay until all the students are picked up. Is it overboard? Probably, but if a student/parent/church member decides to throw out an accusation, I will be able to cover my tail.
I know that there are many other opinions on this, and I sure as heck don't expect everyone to abide by what I believe to be the best way to handle things. These are just my thoughts and my experiences on this most complicated issue.
How much of this issue has to do with maturity vs. immaturity. I completely understand the reasoning behind making rules. But I think a lot of rules are made up out of convenience – meaning we'd rather not have to deal with questions than use the "potential" for issues as teaching moments. Rules make us feel better. They help us to hide behind a curtain and continue to believe everything's ok – even when it's not. That's immaturity. Maturity realizes there will be issues and decisions made regardless of whether or not there's rules in place. Maturity looks for teachable moments. My .02 cents. Have a great day.
So suddenly this has become a convo about women in leadership and not about being sanctified in Christ? WOW! They're separate issues. And the former is not central to the Gospel. They both are significant, but will not be handled well in an environment like this.
From the stories of failure posted on here, it seems that no rule will ever stop this train wreck. This is a heart issue, NOT a rules issue, and certainly not a gender equality issue. Each one knows his or her own weaknesses, and will be held accountable for their life and, if they are a leader, the people they are given to lead.
An "intense debate" about women in leadership can happen elsewhere, and probably should. Will anyone come to Christ because we proclaimed and touted our gender policies?
Just a thought…
~NjS
Haha, this is a funny question!
Although my church does not have a rule against two people of the opposite sex being alonetogether, it's kind of an unspoken rule. Expect under unforseeable and unavoidable circumstances, two people of the opposite sex are not alone together ever.
I do think it's probable that if I was alone with someone of the opposite gender that "boomchickawahwah" would not even cross my mind. But I still follow that unspoken rule, and not just for that, but because of lust and temptation. Even causing that temptation maks it slightly more easy to think about it next time, and the time after that is even easier, and the time after that, until you eventually go and do it.
My husband notices other women because he has eyes and a penis. I notice other men who are funny and smart. We love each other deeply, but the fact remains that it's dangerous out there. Our church has rules in place, and I'm grateful for them. However, like any rule, it's there for our safety.–Having a rule doesn't make me pure, you know?
I think it's arrogant to think you don't need rules, and it's stupid to think that rules will ensure that no one has an affair.
Someone close to me had an affair with a married man for four years. While working at a church. Now I'm the stay-at-home mom who watches her husband go off to "ministry" every day, to pray with crying women, and to play with beautiful SoCal assistants…ugh. I want to fight for my marriage but most days I just end up fighting with my husband, out of jealousy and fear.
It's hard for me to trust, knowing how other women flirt and dress and, forgive me…PREY.
Personally I think churches should have rules, and I'm glad mine does. Those rules aren't there to be legalistic or to hinder friendships…they're there to offer safety and protection. Isn't your friendship with your spouse more important than a job? than a friendship with a coworker?
I think this is the point. Sin exists, we can't stop that. We can encourage appropriate accountability. Sex is not women's fault. Women are probably more likely to bring about proper balance in a leadership team than bring about sin. Men in general are much less likely to be inappropriate (in all kinds of ways) if women are around. That will be the case in church as well.
Alternate solution: get rid of the men! VIVA LA REVOLUTION!
No?
Eh. Worth a shot.
<—– grabbing samurai sword…placing over heart…
"I refused to follow it and made sure everyone knew I was going to refuse to follow it"
Seems to be dripping with arrogance.
So what you are modeling for the world to see is blatant disregard for the rules, and reckless violation of them? Am I right? Honestly asking.
No not in the least. What I wanted to make sure was that I didn't passively agree to a standard that I knew I wasn't going to follow. It might have been a tad arrogant, but I was more concerned about keeping my integrity.
They could have fired / let me go if they wanted. They had no moral obligation to keep me in the ministry.
In addition to maintaining my integrity, I also felt obliged to stand up for what I thought was actually a damaging rule. I didn't – and still don't – feel churches who have this rule are enabling their people to being living life to the fullest. Given that conviction, to say and model to the contrary would be wrong.
So I have some perspective on this as a member of a housechurch community where there are several married couples who share homes with each other and singles. This inevitably puts folks of opposite gender together sometimes.
My thoughts on this have been heavily influenced by 1 Tim 5:2 – "Treat older women as mothers, younger women as sisters, in all purity." Interesting how what the model he puts forth is not "build a wall", but treating women as "sisters". This tells me there is some active positive thing worth pursuing between men and women beyond forsaking all for the sake of perception. So I look to brother-sister relationships for cues here. I think we're missing out on a whole dynamic in the Body when we forsake this.
In fact, I honestly believe that by keeping women in my life at arm's length, it introduces intrigue about them since they are "unknowns" to me. Contrast that with a church community where I know the other women well enough to know that the "grass isn't greener." I see this as a safeguard actually.
Practically, my wife and I do it this way: lunches, phone calls, etc are all fine, but this is always stuff we talk about, and with people that we both know and trust intrinsically. People who we'd functionally call "spiritual family". I think in a healthy spiritual community, there has to be a framework for everyone to know each other well enough for genuine spiritual interaction to take place, i.e. if my wife is praying for a brother in our community and gets some revelation or encouragement for him from God, I will often encourage her to call him and tell him. But not always. Sometimes I'll encourage my wife to go talk to another lady instead of doing it myself. Ultimately we have to walk by the Spirit and this is why sometimes for us things are cool and sometimes they are not. Maybe I'm naive but I think this type of pursuit of God would mostly protect you from the perception/gossip issues.
Well our church has kinda unspoken rules. If I have to stop by anyones house that is the opposite sex when the spouse isn't home we meet outside for .5 seconds (drop off/pick up) or talk on the front porch… With my pastor I'm so retentive I won't even park in his driveway if he is home alone. I care too much about him to have anyone even QUESTION it. I used to be a "big sis" to a number of younger dudes. I always get along with dudes better than women for some reason but have had to make sure there are 2 or more when we go somewhere together… (like concerts, as hubby doesn't like my music). Thing is… hubby trusts me and knows I have boundaries and enforce them. With my pastor, he is madly in love with his wife (who I'm friends with and love dearly as well) and I LOVE them being so in love! I encourage everyone to respect that and not just show up at their house! Problem being people have no boundaries with pastors sometimes… yes, I'm closer to my pastor than his wife, but we do most of our conversing via email or phone, or in person at church. We all try to not be alone together, as a kinda rule. It's happened where someone has to work at the church and someone else shows up but anyone can show up at any time and doors are open.
I'm not giving anyone a reason to even think… but answer to #2… YES they can. I refuse to think of anyone but my hubby that way. Take every thought captive! Period!
I will defer to "When Harry Met Sally"…
Harry Burns: You realize of course that we could never be friends.
Sally Albright: Why not?
Harry Burns: What I'm saying is – and this is not a come-on in any way, shape or form – is that men and women can't be friends because the sex part always gets in the way.
Sally Albright: That's not true. I have a number of men friends and there is no sex involved.
Harry Burns: No you don't.
Sally Albright: Yes I do.
Harry Burns: No you don't.
Sally Albright: Yes I do.
Harry Burns: You only think you do.
Sally Albright: You say I'm having sex with these men without my knowledge?
Harry Burns: No, what I'm saying is they all WANT to have sex with you.
Sally Albright: They do not.
Harry Burns: Do too.
Sally Albright: They do not.
Harry Burns: Do too.
Sally Albright: How do you know?
Harry Burns: Because no man can be friends with a woman that he finds attractive. He always wants to have sex with her.
Sally Albright: So, you're saying that a man can be friends with a woman he finds unattractive?
Harry Burns: No. You pretty much want to nail 'em too.
Sally Albright: What if THEY don't want to have sex with YOU?
Harry Burns: Doesn't matter because the sex thing is already out there so the friendship is ultimately doomed and that is the end of the story.
Sally Albright: Well, I guess we're not going to be friends then.
Harry Burns: I guess not.
Sally Albright: That's too bad. You were the only person I knew in New York.
Late to the party. Post number 2 on this…
LOL
"Tim 5:2 – "Treat older women as mothers, younger women as sisters, in all purity."
I love this, and I love that you found it and could share it with me…not only b/c of what it contributes to this convo but b/c it's what I want to say to men who are aggressive w/women in public (traffic, what have you): "would tolerate a man doing to your sister what you just did to me?!?"
"In fact, I honestly believe that by keeping women in my life at arm's length, it introduces intrigue about them since they are "unknowns" to me"
I think this is well stated reinforces what I said above. Tell the kid he can't have a cookie and all he can think about is getting to that jar.
likewise, my wife thinks i'm an idiot when i do this.
I work at a church that has the "rule". It's not really an issue to me because I made the same promise to my wife. My ministry assistant is female and we have to work together, but I'm very purposeful about never being completely alone with her. We do have closed-door conversations and music sessions, but my door has a big freakin' window in it that the entire office can see in… also a very good idea for the workplace.
For a long time (in ministry and otherwise) I was all about the rules. Then I discovered rules don't always keep the worst from happening. Which then "inspired" me to abandon all rules for a while (not a good idea). Still working through the discussion, but I know …
1. Legalistic arrogance can destroy relationships and team synergy just as easily as b-wah in the office
2. Relationships come with loads of responsibility. Regardless of the gender.
3. The entire discussion requires a serious ability to do raw, honest self-eval. Don't know many people who are all that great at it.
Both sides of this debate (as usual) have good points. I think the best way to follow rules is humbly. If one is willing to humble themselves and lower themselves for the sake of others, it is a self-less act that helps that person mature in Christ and/or manifest the fruit of "getting over thyself." The problem with rules is pretty obvious to all (not a good explanation here, but: they can become a subtle substitute for the Spirit and somehow the person trying to follow them attempts in their own strength to keep it, and that can be a far cry from that "abundant life" we were promised).
Someone I know was posing this same question and the consensus around here was "no," but it was brought up about two people in this church they attend (one of which was on staff). The concern was brought up and, unfortunately, the situation had gone past "appearances" into an 18-month long affiar. Big mess and damage. Lots of people involved trying to bring healing and restoration. This all happened with the "rule" in place, but apparently wasn't followed or enforced by other staff members — just the senior pastor — or lower-tiered staff members were too afraid to enforce it horizontally or vertically to "higher" staffed positions. I dunno, but when something like this happens so close to home, you look at the "avoid the appearance of evil" rules in a little more appreciative light…
How much of "the rule" is prevention and how much is organizational deniability? I think many churches may think that by having "the rule" in place, if something scandalous happens they can say, "yeah, well, we have a rule" and try to sever the tie between the scandal and the church as an organization.
I seriously think that for a lot of organizations, "the rule" is more about perception than prevention.
All this chatter about boomchikawahwah has gotten me thinking…I am heading home!!!!!! I got a hot wife…we have great intimacy.
On another note…Yes I have boundaries with people of the opposite sex, but if your (assuming married) relationship with your spouse is lacking emotionally, spiritually, mentally, and sexually…DUDE you are a time bomb waiting to go off. Inevitably you are like a lost puppy looking for love in anything. So even if you have boundaries when that right person comes by and gives you the right amount of affirmation/attention the boomchikawahwah could be right around the corner!
ON MY WAY HOME!!!!
everyone is bringing up ephesians 5:3 so i just went and read that passage… my honest question is, do you think it tells us to 'flee from sexual immorality' so that OTHER PEOPLE don't think badly of you, or so that YOU will not have sexual immorality in your life? so often in churches we are more concerned about what other people will think than what is best for us. the two main people on my church staff that i work with are men. if i never had any alone time with them, if i didn't have deep friendships and healthy working relationships with them, there is a lot of ministry that wouldn't get done. because we have personal integrity and communication and are completely upfront about our relationships, nobody has questioned that. do you need to be honest and transparant with your spouse? absolutely. do we always need to make arbitrary rules just so we 'look good' to the outside world? what exactly does that communicate anyway?
I just spent 2 hours (THIS morning) with an amazing Godly woman who you would NEVER guess slipped on this very slippery slope while head of a ministry. She is 10 years out, in a healed and restored marriage and she CONVINCED me of the necessity of this rule….better safe than sorry I say.
What does it hurt to be cautious when the consequences are so dire?
I don't think it hurts anything to be cautious of sin. But what scares me about this rule is that what happens is that people become cautious of the opposite gender. That prevents open community and growth. You may save a few people from affairs, but you may prevent others from finding healing community because your community is scared of the opposite gender…after all it is better to be safe than talk to a 5 time divorcee that is in need of God (woman at the well reverence there people).
cookie…nookie
Bring it dont sing it.
yowza … which INCLUDES ME. have lots of questions. no answers. can't pretend otherwise.
I would definitely say that there's room for healthy inter-gender relationships, without the potential for bowm chicka wow wow… My best friend, and closest friend is a girl, same age as me, single… and we have been close friends for years. But we've never had any kind of issue or stumbling block because I'm a guy and she's a girl. We both work for a youth group, and on trips we respect the rules the kids respect, regarding boy/girl pairing (against the rules) not because we aren't in control, but just because it shows a good example to the kids.
I think there's a lot to be said for where the Bible tells us to avoid even the appearance of evil. It's one thing to hang out alone with a member of the opposite sex, it's another thing to be ALONE with a member of the opposite sex. Honestly, it's a fishy subject. I have been at least "good" friends with my previously mentioned friend for a long time, many years, and I've had two serious relationships in that time. Obviously during those relationships I took some degree of separation, as I believe at some point, it becomes inappropriate to have a close female friend at the same time as a girlfriend/significant other. That doesn't mean you can't have female friends at all though.
There are other female friends who I might hang out with, and if we spent any extended period of time alone, there would immediately be rumors spreading. However the people I'm close with tend to be aware of how my relationships are viewed by me… people I don't know wouldn't necessarily.
So, to make things simple… I think it's very possible, and even easy to maintain a healthy relationship without it being questionable, or with either side looking for something shady, BUT… people outside of that relationship will probably at some point question what's going on. That puts unfair, but necessary pressure on the 2 people to make sure they don't give off an appearance of shadiness. It's just a simple fact in a world of sin. It shouldn't have to be that way, but it is.
I used to work in our church office, and while there was no written rule, everyone on staff made every effort to avoid the "appearance of evil". If the youth pastor (I was his secretary) and I needed to meet, we would never meet on his floor, in his office, alone. We would meet down on the secretarial/counseling floor in an open office where others were near but not necessarily present. And because of that I always felt safe and respected. To know that my pastors respected me (and others) so much as to protect my reputation and the reputation of the church only increased my level of respect and trust for them.
This has carried over into my marriage, as my hubby and I make every effort to avoid the appearance as well. Bri will meet for business in a public place with women. If men stop by the house to drop something off and I am alone at home (or even if the kids are napping), we will chat on the porch where we are visible. We talk openly about our schedules and who we are meeting with, where and when. That openness (not to mention my Bri's amazing love for me) has only strengthened our marriage and my trust in his loyalty. For us, it's about doing everything to protect the name of Christ and avoid temptation.
I reckon for me it's about seeing how far I can run from the line rather than how close I can get.
The Gloved One and Liz T.? That just fills my mind with all sorts of wrongness…
What are your thoughts Los? It'd be great to hear what you think, particularly because you're so involved in the ministry – what are your personal opinions and/or boundaries that you've set to avoid anything?
Ya gotta love the phrase "cross-gender fellowship". Let's see, what was the question again? Oh yeah, is temptation gonna get you if you duck sooner rather than later? Up rather than down? Sideways instead of back and forth?
I can't help it. You kids are funny when you do this stuff. Do the "emotional adultery" thing next. That one's a real hoot. The picture choice rules on this one. I'm not worthy. (grin)
My dad told me of a covenant he made with my mom soon after they were married.
The deal was that if he ever found himself thinking how attractive another woman was (we are talking as innocent as "man she is nice") then he would tell my mom about it right away. He said that the allure of the other woman disappeared after the simple step of 'confession'.
Note it was not the fear of having to confess that drove the temptation away, it was the confession that killed the temptation. They are still together and there has never been a hint of anything untoward in their marriage.
Sorry not really answering the question
Didn't Andy have a story once about how he had a rule to never be alone with another female? I think the key here is to discern what limitations God might be placing on your own heart. They're not the same for everyone.
As far as a church enforcing rules like this on the job, it makes sense. It's not a lack of trust necessarily, it's an avoidance of unnecessary scandal / gossip / rumors. I can't really think of a time where I've *needed* to be alone with another woman while working at a church. But, my wife is almost always with me anyway. =)
Thank you! Thanks also for posting about this… I have been wanting to post mine for a while now.
I am probably the most liberal person that is a lay-leader at my church. I am not employed by my church but I am very glad they have that rule. I've seen to many guys fall, and women, I think it's just wisdom on the part of the church.
I have seen first hand what can happen when we let our guards down. My pastor husband let his much older secretary get to close. There is NO SAFE ground when Satan wants to destroy what God is trying to do.