Part of the late Billy Graham's legacy is something called 'the Billy Graham rule.' What is that rule? It is described in a recent article from The Independent (click here for the article).
Actually, there were a few rules that were made by Billy Graham and fellow Christian associates, not just one. These rules were made to protect traveling preachers from falling to some common temptations that fellow traveling Christian preachers were prone to fall to because of their jobs. The two most prominent temptations dealt with by traveling evangelists were with the mishandling of money and perceived opportunities to commit adultery. So the Billy Graham rule, or should be rules, was meant to prevent traveling evangelists from falling to temptations that were part of the territory of being traveling evangelists.
The rule itself states that Billy Graham, and others who followed his example, did not dine, travel, or get together alone with any women other than the wife. And though that rule has received much scoffing from non-Christians, it makes sense for those for whom the rule was made. After all, the rule was made for those evangelists who could be more easily tempted because of the time they spent away from their wives. In addition, in terms of personal integrity and protecting the reputation of the Gospel, it is far better that these evangelists be mocked for following what seems to be an archaic rule than to fall to temptation.
But how should Christian men who are not traveling evangelists react to the rule? Must they follow it as well or are they allowed to do what these traveling evangelists were prohibited from doing? The answer lies in the context of the making of the rule itself. The rule was made for those who are fairly vulnerable to give in to sexual temptations. And here, each Christian man must judge himself and only himself. If he feels that he is fairly vulnerable to falling to sexual temptation for whatever reason, then following the Billy Graham rule makes sense.
But not all Christian men are so vulnerable. Must those who are not as vulnerable follow the Billy Graham rule too? And should those who follow it judge those who don't? The obvious answer to both questions is 'no.' They could choose to follow the rule if they want but there is no merit in doing so. In fact, feeling compelled to follow it can indicate that they have, for whatever reason, mistakenly believe that women want to have sex with them. Thus, the rule itself can communicates a false message about women to the men who follow the rule and others; for it could communicate projection by some men of their own desires and thus a transfer of blame from themselves to women.
Now what is missed in following the rule? What is missed are opportunities to learn from women and our friendships with them. My own experiences tell me that we men have much to learn from women. We have much personal support to gain from female friendships. We also have opportunities to give personal support to female peers by not following the Billy Graham rule. In addition, there is far more to male-female relationships than sex. We have much to offer to each other outside of sex. And perhaps, that lesson will help prevent some of the pent-up sexual tension that comes merely from false expectations. But perhaps the most important lesson that can be learned by those for whom it is appropriate to break the Billy Graham rule is with nonsexual, mutually supported relationships between men and women, men are more likely to learn that women are our equals.
Non-Christians who scoff at the rule show a certain ignorance. A man can be more vulnerable to fall to sexual temptation when a man is alone and has been away from his wife for, what seems to him to be, long periods of time. And those Christian men who think of their following of the rule as a badge of honor share some of that same ignorance. At the same time, they also miss out on what female friends can teach us with their examples and wisdom.
No comments:
Post a Comment