Dan J. Brennan

Inappropriate Relationships and Evangelical Therapists Pt. 3

So what would have happened had Scot McKnight asked how his blog readers would have felt had their married adult daughter come to her parents to say, “I’ve been going to a therapist. He’s been helping me work through some issues.”

Would any of them raised issues about emotional boundaries? Would anybody have expressed deep concerns about the daughter meeting alone weekly with another man who is not her husband?  Would Scot have warned about the emotional boundaries and safeguards of “exclusivism” in marriage?

Let’s hit the rewind button for a second. Scot McKnight, a friend, a theologian, one of evangelicalism’s most prolific and respected bloggers graciously introduced my book to his readers when it first came out. I am grateful for Scot’s generosity even though we have differences on male-female friendship, oneness, and marriage.

“Inappropriate Relationships and Evangelical Therapists” provides an opportunity to revisit those differences. You can read parts one and two here to catch up.

Within this series, I am highlighting some significant aspects of an expanding conversation among evangelicals. There are several things to explore with this series: ambiguities, contradictions among evangelicals about emotional depth and fidelity, two-tiered elite/lay system, the “unholy trinity,” and redemptive oneness in marriage and friendship.

Let’s start where Scot and I agree.

Inappropriate Relationships and Evangelical Therapists Pt. 2

As it turns out, if you read part one in this series on “Inappropriate Relationships and Evangelical Therapists” I have something in common with thousands of evangelical therapists which would shock some of them:

If you’re married, it is not inappropriate for you to be alone with a member of the opposite sex (married or not married) with whom you share an intentional dyadic relationship when no one else is present. It’s not inappropriate to nurture shared vulnerability, mutuality, authenticity, deep empathetic connection, and tender, meaningful touch when no one else is around.

That’s it.

Inappropriate Relationships and Evangelical Therapists Pt. 1.

First, let me begin by stating that I have great respect and admiration for evangelical therapists. This is not intended to be a critique against those therapists who welcome clients of the opposite sex. I definitely support that practice.

What I wish to explore are several themes currently embraced by a number of evangelicals and their fear of intimate cross-gender friendships. In particular, where do evangelical therapists stand on issues such as inappropriate relationships, emotional adultery, emotional intimacy, sexual attraction, emotional fidelity, and talking about intimate matters of the heart with no one else present? 

There are evangelicals who are critical of professional therapy as a matter of general principle, and they would not be the focus of my exploration. That’s another post, another time.

Creative and Integrative Fidelity

Priest, spiritual director, and author Francis Wade on cross-gender friendships beyond marriage:

"Remember that the covenant of marriage includes a healthy engagement with the wider world. The possibility of physical adultery need not keep one from having close relationships with the opposite sex. Nor should the possibility of emotional adultery keep one from developing compelling interests, demanding responsibilities, or important friendships. The solution is to integrate those relationships into the life of the marriage." 

The Art of Being Together

Moving Beyond Sexism

"By sexism I mean any outlook that privileges sexual activity as the root metaphor for our being-in-the-world...Now it is one thing to observe the importance of physical attractiveness in all types of social bonds and the notion that an individual's sexuality and desires are a necessary part of the total person, which may not be and probably should not be ever completely suppressed.  But sexist vocabularies incorporated as part of any sexual identity can construct others primarily as naturalized objects of sexual desire, as opposed to social beings that may be known, befriended and/or loved for reasons and attributes that transcend sexual relations."  William Rawlins

When friendship is grounded in Love

Wow....Jean, I decided to make your response an entire blog post worthy of its own post.  You made my day as I checked my inbox.  What a delight to hear from you and for you to understand the wonderful communal depth of friendship between a man and woman. 

Dan - What a wonderful blog. I have only just begun to explore it but am thrilled by what I have discovered so far. My closest spiritual friend - we are Catholic - is a grandfather many times over, married for almost 33 years to the love of his life and I am a very happily single (divorced) woman in discernment of consecrated religious life. Our friendship is not without temptation (LIFE is tempting!) but our friendship *is* wholly without risk. I found your mention of "this statement about friendship by Anne E Carr and how it does parallel with our relationship with God: 'A friend is one whose presence is joy, ever-deepening relationship and love, ever available in direct address, in communion and presence. A friend is one who remains fundamentally a mystery, inexhaustible, never fully known, always surprising. Yet a friend is familiar, comforting, at home. A friend is one who urges human freedom and autonomy in decision, yet one who is present in the community of interdependence. And this friend in fact, continually strives to create community'."

A Thought-Provoking Article

I love new articles like this one by Luci Taylor.  In talking about the fear of opposite sex friendships among those who are married,  she opines: 

"This unhealthy possessiveness is just about forgivable when you're in school or in your 20s, when you can still get away with the excuse of chronic insecurity, but supposedly mature adults should know better. A partner should never be treated or regarded as a possession.

Of course the fear of cross- sex friendships is understandable. Numerous sexual relationships have resulted from people, often married, insisting they're 'just good friends' with someone, usually a work colleague.

But the solution isn't for every single person who's attached to batten down the hatches and avoid all close relationships with members of the opposite sex, unless gay, in case there's a possibility of sexual frisson.

It's such an infantile approach, a bit like forbidding a child to enter a sweet shop for fear he or she is going to scoff everything in sight. "

Here is the entire article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1210077/Why-women-need-male-friends-stop-sex-getting-way.html

The Double Bind: Transparency/Secrecy

Close cross-sex friendships may discover the double bind of transparency and secrecy--especially in some evangelical communities.  Whenever these cultural binds take place, social complexity or relational depth is challenged.  Double binds always attempt to force the relationship into false dichotomies.  Either this or that, but one can't be in the deep middle between the either/or. 

For male-female friendships, one often hears about the need to practice the friendship out in the open.  This popular counsel is especially helpful for those who are married.  On the other hand, if the friends intentionally practice transparency within their community they risk facing social disapproval and suspicion--and a backlash if they don't conform to powerful stereotypes in the evangelical community.   The backlash reinforces the pressure to conform to current evangelical fashions defining morality (the Colorado Springs variety, maybe).  The fact of the matter is that healthy, good, flourishing, intimate male-female friendships are counterstereotypical: they challenge many deeply-held prescriptive stereotypes that some Christians embrace concerning men, women, gender, faith, friendship, community, and social order.  

Is there hope for progress?

Red, Blue, or Purple?

In some Christian circles those colors are metaphors for one's deep political convictions--red of course, is currently conservative, blue is your liberal version, while purple purports to be something in the middle towards praxis rather than ideology.  There was no question this time last year there were some pretty intense debates going on between Christians in the presidential campaign. 

In the grand scheme of things, political affiliations in America are preferences we choose, not ideologies forced upon us by government.  There are Christians on both sides of the spectrum who don't view their choices as merely preferences.  They consider them to be deeply held convictions about a way of life, a way to live.  Some even to the point of calling the other side evil. Yet, I have seen Christians who have intense disagreements about political issues worship side-by-side and participate in church community amongst each other--even with opposing passionate convictions about a way of government. 

Now that I have been studying male-female friendships for over five years now and have written a book about it, and having participated in close friendships for several years, I can easily categorize the reactions I have from Christians when it comes to social sexuality and friendship into those three broad camps, er, colors: red, blue, and purple.   There are people with pretty intense views of sexuality and friendship from the conservative angle.  There are also people who are intense from the more liberal side when it comes to close friendships between men and women.  Then there are people in between who want to see it worked out in praxis and fleshed out in life and community. 

Cross-Sex Friendship Quote of the Week

I love this quote.  This is from an ordained monk, Guibert of Gembloux and his friendship with Hildegard of Bingen.  Although ordained, he opened his life, ministry, and heart to her.  Also, his language reveals an intimate bonding that was nonromantic but yet deeply passionate.  At many layers, this friendship goes beyond the shallow When Harry Met Sally dialogue, beyond simplistic gender roles, beyond sex-segregation.

"I live with her in the beauty of peace and of all delight and sweetness, I am directed by her counsels, supported by her prayers. I press forward by her merits, I am upheld by her kindnesses and daily I enjoy conversation with her."

Guibert of Gembloux regarding Hildegard of Bingen