The ongoing review of Foster/Tennant continues and this one will address the first chapter on gravitas entitled “No Gravitas/No Manhood”. A red flag appears when the authors actually get around to defining a term like “gravitas” while avoiding fundamental definitions elsewhere in their book. Why start defining a word nine chapters in? The reason has to do with the plain fact that the Scriptures don’t really have a concept of gravitas that remains vitally important to masculinity given the scarcity of the term in the Bible. In fact, one might question whether masculinity itself is ever a focus of the New Testament more broadly. The authors know they have to offer some kind of explanation as to what they mean when they invoke gravitas as a result. So, gravitas is defined the way Foster/Tennant want to define it in their focus on masculinity in fine postmodern fashion. The Scriptures, however, use a particular word to speak of dignity or the old KJV translation of “gravity” in just a few places like Titus 2:7 and 1 Timothy 2:2 and 3:4. Foster/Tennant are aware of this connection because they cite Calvin’s commentary on Titus 2 but don’t bother to consider application of these passages in any detail.
Oddly enough, one of the things they don’t mention is that 1 Timothy 2:2 invokes the word in question in reference to the whole church leading a tranquil and quiet life with dignity regardless as to a person’s gender. In fact, of the three times the word “semnotes” is used in the New Testament twice the word is used of men specifically, first of pastors with their children (1 Tim. 3:4) and then of Titus in how he should be an example to others with a life characterized by purity in doctrine and doing good deeds (Titus 2:7). A related word is used of older men in Titus 2:2 but not applied to younger men. The old Roman concept of gravitas though is nowhere to be found in the New Testament, however. Interestingly enough, young men are instructed to be sensible or of a sound mind rather than instructed to be dignified right out of the gate (Titus 2:6). There is likely more here to say about the life of the mind (2:1, “the things fitting for sound doctrine”) that seems conspicuously absent from Foster/Tennant’s blue collar red-pilled treatment of what it means to be a man. Regardless, the word translated dignified for Titus and other pastors means the sort of behavior that entitles one to special respect, dignity, or being honest. While the Greek word has certainly been translated as gravitas in the Latin Vulgate, there is no evidence that it’s to be understood the way Foster/Tennant apply it specifically to men.
Another problem for Foster/Tennant is that Titus is the focus of Titus 2:7 in being dignified and not the younger men the authors write the book for in the first place. Further, the gravitas he displays is not merely to provide an example of right living but also purity in doctrine. The same would be true for pastors in 1 Tim. 3:4 but is related only to childcare and capably making sure children are obedient. Younger men are given different instructions in Titus 2:6 but somehow that isn’t even discussed in the book in the first place. What that really means is that Foster/Tennant’s consideration of what it means to be a young man is at best incomplete and at worst unscriptural. However, there is another problem here. Young men are still men and so while an ideal toward dignity and right living is appropriate young men aren’t anything other than men simply because they’re young or immature. Yet, Foster/Tennant would have us believe that having gravitas is a large part of what makes you a man. The claim they offer in this regard demonstrates a false ontology in terms of what a man is and not just what he may become.
So, instead of framing the case biblically the authors resort to something different. Foster/Tennant refer to the old Roman virtues to speak of gravitas as “a man’s seriousness, his dignity, his weight”. Discussion then moves toward the Hebrew term “kabod” particularly in noting the heaviness of who God is along with men and nations that have some level of glory or honor attached to them. But, Foster/Tennant aren’t satisfied to think the Hebrew term and gravitas are exactly the same as the old Roman gravitas or even what they mean by the term. For the authors, one is a matter of grace (“kabod“) and the other works (gravitas), “something that must be earned” and recognized by others. This distinction, however, is artificial especially when we remember that everything a Christian does in terms of works is a matter of grace by faith also (Eph. 2:8-10). The authors then equivocate and say on the one hand that gravitas is something earned but in the example they provide Jesus somehow has it instantly in appearing before a crowd and speaking with authority. What the authors really mean by gravitas is rather vague, “the result of having settled into your Christian identity as a man”. It’s not the glory or heaviness of “kabod” but “when you become proficient at reflecting the glory you were made to reflect” by “becoming more like Jesus”.
Again, the authors invoke the need for spiritual fathers as part of the process because without them you can’t have gravitas. One is bound to ask, however, what men were the spiritual fathers of Jesus given that he had instant gravitas. Our Lord seems to have bested the religious leaders at twelve years old and his earthly father Joseph is completely out of the picture in the gospels once the public ministry of Jesus moves into focus in the gospels. If spiritual fathers aren’t required for Jesus the Second Adam, are they really required for men to be men? One of the lingering problems with this book is its failure to take seriously the work of the Holy Spirit in guiding Christian men to be who they should be. No doubt the church has a communal focus and men receive equipping from pastors, but priestly fathers is not something we see in the New Testament. Foster/Tennant would like to see gravitas but that particular “virtue” isn’t listed among the fruit of the Spirit in Galatians 5:22 with love, peace, gentleness, kindness, patience, and the like.
Foster/Tennant invoking Jesus in Mark 1:22 as “one having authority” exhibiting an earned gravitas to a crowd that presumably never heard him before is playing fast and loose with Scriptures since the better interpretation via Calvin is seeing the power and work of the Holy Spirit in play as Jesus spoke with the divine authority that accompanied him. So, there was no sense in which Jesus earned this by virtue of what he had done previously that a crowd not familiar with him might recognize. This display of speaking with authority is also reminiscent of the divine encounters of Moses and not really the way someone might carry himself as a matter of gravitas. Oddly enough, the strange thing for Foster/Tennant is that just a few paragraphs after saying gravitas must be earned the authors turn around and say “gravitas comes from God”.
All of this confusion points to the fact that whatever gravitas is for Foster/Tennant their considerations are not from the biblical text alone and carry a highly subjective consideration of the subject that ultimately remains framed by something other than Scripture. A reader can certainly speculate where views about gravitas might come from for Foster/Tennant and there is no lack of commentary on it in the so-called manosphere where “red-pilled” secular men and even some Christians are busy thinking they need to carry gravitas to bed women.
Historically and culturally, more broadly gravitas as framed by Foster/Tennant or considered by the so-called manosphere has more to do with ideas about being a man that have floated down culturally into American blue collar life inspired by a British Empire wishing to impart toughness and dignity in its men around the world. The myth of gravitas is also seen in nineteenth century romantic revivals of Stoicism and Roman culture signified by essays about Marcus Aurelius as told by the likes of Matthew Arnold. Freight has also been carried through the undue romanticism of men like G.K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc. We can also see it in a British aristocracy eager to hold on to their privileged life among a new and industrialized England in fine Victorian fashion.
The story of gravitas is told a number of ways but there is nothing in the Old or New Testament that looks to gravitas as a significant feature in being a man beyond having a moral character that others respect and what in any other context would just be called right living. Yet, this sort of gravitas is available and required of women as well. The Queen of England has historically displayed both the glory of her royal office and the exemplary behavior of a benevolent sovereign sufficient to be respected around the world. Someone like former First Lady Barbara Bush carried herself similarly. In fact, Titus 2:3 speaks of older women as needing to be reverent or venerable, seen as worthy of great respect, and carrying themselves in that way. So, overall what exactly is uniquely masculine about the sort of gravitas that it seems both men and women enjoy after a well-lived life?
Essentially, Foster/Tennant engage in special pleading to establish the notion that gravitas is what makes a man a man and something to look toward. There is more to say here as the chapter moves beyond definitional territory into things like fearing God while a second chapter on gravitas goes on to address what Foster/Tennant call masculine virtues. I’ll address these things in the next iteration or two of this continuing review.
Next Review:
The Anti-Technological Stance of It’s Good to Be a Man
No Fatherhood, No Manhood – Part 1
No Fatherhood, No Manhood – Part 2
No Gravitas, No Manhood – Part 1
No Gravitas, No Manhood – Part 2
How Porn & Video Games Hijack Manhood
Two for One Day – How to Bear the Weight/Manhood Through Mission