Dan J. Brennan

Mothers Say No to Freud: Reclaiming Closeness with Sons 2

Kate Stone Lombardi and I have something in common.

We have both explored this question in our books: Is there a healthy love between the opposite sexes which is passionate, deep, tender, close, vulnerable, and physically affectionate which is not sexual?

In a Freudian world, there is no such love.

To answer the question with a yes is to go against our sexualized world and the sexualized evangelical sub-culture.  Those of you who are regular readers of my blog know this territory. Page by page, as I read Lombardi courageously exploring the deep connection between gender, sexuality, and closeness, my respect and admiration toward her grew. She argues that mother-son closeness is healthy in her book, The Mama's Boy Myth. The book is getting some good press. 

Just like the conventional wisdom via thru Freudian prohibition, says it is wise to avoid close cross-gender friendships, cw also says raising a mama’s boy is never a good thing. Lombardi and I both challenge the conventional wisdom of Freud.

Mothers Say No to Freud: Reclaiming Closeness with Sons

"The only cultural image we ever see of mother-son closeness is a negative one" observed Kate Stone Lombardi. She has written a throught-provoking book, The Mama's Boy Myth: Why Keeping Our Sons Close makes Them Stronger. It is getting a lot of press. CBS here. NPR reviewed it.  New York Times also provided some space toward it. 

This book drew my attention because I have developed a passion for researching emotional closeness between men and women. The winds are blowing. Even though Freud is in the air, men and women in the twenty-first century are gaining some distance from a man who has inspired so much anxiety about closeness. 

Since Freud sexualized closeness in imaginations of the Western world (including evangelicals who ironically stresss we are not to be conformed to this world) the romantic relationship is the only relationship where you could not freak out or be uncomfortable about expressing mutual deep tenderness. Of course, for many contemporary evangelicals, Freud holds sway. 

The transformation from Freud for evangelicals is not going to happen overnight but it's happening in mother-son closeness and cross-gender friendships. Freud has so much power in the evangelical community and inspired much discomfort and anxiety over closeness. 

But God is raising up men and women from a variety of places to debunk Freud.

Inappropriate Relationships and Evangelical Therapists Pt. 6

So, resistance from the evangelical community toward me has been part of my experience ever since I intentionally chose intimacy in a dyadic cross-gender friendship as something good and beautiful from God.

The resistance has only confirmed my unique calling God has for me in this season.

It’s the majority that holds power. I didn’t expect the majority of evangelicals to suddenly surrender in light of the sex and power embedded in the romantic myth. But evangelicals are committed to wrestling with the scriptures and there is wide ranging diversity among evangelicals over complex issues.

I wanted to explore in this series the deep confusion, posturing, nuancing, and diversity between evangelicals on the issues of marital intimacy. What Scot McKnight calls “face-to-face exclusivism,” or emotional intimacy between men women who are married but not to each other, as well as dyadic interpersonal intimacy between men and women.

Inappropriate Relationships and Evangelical Therapists Pt. 5

So, I could be mistaken, but I have never seen Scot McKnight ever express concerns or warnings about how the expression of deep emotional intimacy between a therapist and her married client threatens “face-to-face” "exclusivism."

One of the main objections, cautions, fears, and so on that I hear among the evangelicals who express the danger of intimate cross-gender friendships is the “face-to-face” exclusivism that Scot raised up.

Even my friend David Fitch, believes such a friendship should not be “normative” in the church.  I respect him, but in the missional church he’s planted it still is shaped by sex segregation and the romantic myth values. Dave encourages small groups (triads) to meet but they are all sex segregated like groups born out of the Promise Keepers in the 90s. It's not that same sex groups are wrong, but if that is all that is presented and encouraged, it keeps the wedge driven by Freud in there. 

In my book, Sacred Unions, Sacred Passions, I note the powerful influence of the romantic myth among evangelicals.  

This series is fleshing out though there is so much more to the conversation than evangelicals claiming "face to face exclusivism." 

Inappropriate Relationships and Evangelical Therapists Pt. 4

Robert Watson, an evangelical, relational psychotherapist who was actually on staff at Wheaton graduate school. For those evangelicals unacquainted with relational psychotherapy, this small excerpt clearly reveals the deep stuff between the therapist (Watson) and his client ("Rebecca"). 

For those who think "face to "face" intimacy, (or any kind of signficant emotional depth/intimacy) should be reserved for marriage only, this clip shows the emotional engagement in a session: "The focus of our conversations moved gradually in the direction of sexuality, love, desirability....particularly valuable in recent months have been our conversations about sexuality and intimacy."  

The link: http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/Z5210J.pdf

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

Provoketive Magazine's Article

Alise Wright, editor at Provoketive Magazine covered  the Sacred Friendship Gathering this past weekend. It was great to meet Alise. 

Friendship Between the Genders