Page - 78 - in JRFM - Journal Religion Film Media, Volume 04/02
Image of the Page - 78 -
Text of the Page - 78 -
Charivari or the Historicising of a Question |
77www.jrfm.eu
2018, 4/2, 67–79
dorf, exclaimed at the Mannesfest in Herrnhaag that all brothers would now
be sisters because all souls are female, therefore men would only temporarily
be male.44 The body-reflexive45 reproductions of the lyrical expressions of bridal
mysticism – singing is an outermost bodily activity46 – combined with the excla-
mation by Christian Renatus identify and incorporate the depicted masculinity.
Hence, the hegemonic masculinity within the Moravian community can be
defined twice, which is in line with Connell’s plurality of masculinities.47 The pri-
mary hegemonic masculinity is virtual and transcendental – it is the masculin-
ity of Jesus Christ as savior and bridegroom, “ultimately, Christ is the only true
male”.48 He becomes the indicator and center for all constructions of gender
within the Moravian community, for which reason, Peter Vogt suggests, we
should talk of a “gendered theology”.49 The construction of the actual hege-
monic masculinity – not virtual and transcendent like the masculinity of Christ,
but human and immanent – is in direct relation to the transcendental mascu-
linity. It becomes somewhat passive and effeminate by being the bride of the
transcendent masculinity50 but is still hegemonic in relation to femininity within
the community. It is also marginalized – there were recurring accusations of
homosexuality by “white heterosexual males” outside the community51 – by
society’s hegemonic masculinity. The hegemonic masculinity of the Moravians
presented within the lyrical expressions of bridal mysticism is thus an ambiva-
lent and multi-relational masculinity that is and is not hegemonic as well as be-
ing marginalized and effeminate.
CONCLUSION
In this article I have discussed connections between lyrical expressions of piety,
i.e. bridal mysticism, heteronormative constructions like the rite of passage that
is marriage, virtuality, body, and masculinity. Even if heteronormative structures
44 See Peucker 2002, 71.
45 See Connell 2000, 79–85.
46 For the connection between religion, music, and body see Laack 2015.
47 See Connell 2000, 98–102.
48 Atwood 1997, 31.
49 Vogt 2015, 66.
50 Peucker explains: “By remaining passive the individual was playing the role appropriate for a bride”,
Peucker 2006, 58.
51 On heteronormative reactions and attempted regulation by white heterosexual males, see Peucker’s
remarks on Volck, Peucker 2002, 51. Aaron Spencer Fogleman still insists on a “metaphorical, spiritual
homosexuality”, Foglemann 2003, 309. Faull suggests the connection between male Moravians and
Jesus Christ be described as a “mode of performative bi-sexuality” (Faull 2011, 56) and sees masculin-
ity – apparently the Moravians’ as well as Christ’s – as “vulnerable masculinity” (55–56.74.). Even if
this line of thought seems compelling – especially because all human existence might be described
as somehow vulnerable – a binary conception of gender, on which all fluidity in the constructions of
gender in the Moravian community seems to be based, can hardly contain two vulnerable masculinities
functioning as bride and bridegroom.
JRFM
Journal Religion Film Media, Volume 04/02
- Title
- JRFM
- Subtitle
- Journal Religion Film Media
- Volume
- 04/02
- Authors
- Christian Wessely
- Daria Pezzoli-Olgiati
- Editor
- Uni-Graz
- Publisher
- SchĂĽren Verlag GmbH
- Location
- Graz
- Date
- 2018
- Language
- English
- License
- CC BY-NC 4.0
- Size
- 14.8 x 21.0 cm
- Pages
- 135
- Categories
- Zeitschriften JRFM