I cannot illustrate huge differences between male and female spiritualities except in their starting points, style and fascinations along the way. This is significant, however, and has huge pastoral implications: men must be challenged in the world of doing; women must be challenged in the world of relating.
Interpretation
This quote highlights the different approaches men and women take towards spirituality, emphasizing their unique starting points and challenges.
Richard Rohr reflects on the distinct ways in which male and female spiritualities differ, noting that while both have their unique paths, understanding these differences is crucial for effective guidance and support. He suggests that men often engage with spirituality through actions and achievements, whereas women are more inclined towards relationships and connections, implying that spiritual growth can be tailored to these differing emphases.
In practice
During a workshop on spirituality, this quote could be used to illustrate differing paths in spiritual development for men and women.
My scientist friends have come up with things like 'principles of uncertainty' and dark holes. They're willing to live inside imagined hypotheses and theories. But many religious folks insist on answers that are always true. We love closure, resolution and clarity, while thinking that we are people of 'faith'! How strange that the very word 'faith' has come to mean its exact opposite.
The gift of darkness draws you to know God’s presence beyond what thought, imagination, or sensory feeling can comprehend.
Much of the Christian religion has largely become “holding on” instead of letting go. But God, it seems to me, does the holding on (to us!), and we must learn the letting go (of everything else).
We do not think ourselves into new ways of living, we live ourselves into new ways of thinking.
I've had the good fortune of teaching and preaching across much of the globe, while also struggling to make sense of my experience in my own tiny world.
Church practice has been more influenced by Plato than by Jesus. We invariably prefer the universal synthesis, the answer that settles all the dust and resolves every question even when it is not entirely true over the mercy and grace of God.
Perhaps it is of more value to infuriate philosophers than to go along with them.
No. I cannot expect you to believe it. Take it as a lie--or a prophecy. Say I dreamed it in the workshop. Consider I have been speculating upon the destinies of our race until I have hatched this fiction. Treat my assertion of its truth as a mere stroke of art to enhance its interest. And taking it as a story, what do you think of it?
Our economic approach to food and its distribution reflects our basic moral values.
Even if we accept, as the basic tenet of true democracy, that one moron is equal to one genius, is it necessary to go a further step and hold that two morons are better than one genius?
If the words 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' don't include the right to experiment with your own consciousness, then the Declaration of Independence isn't worth the hemp it was written on.
But still, everything is for Jesus; so like that everything is beautiful, even though it is difficult.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.