It’s hard to write anything about ministry that doesn’t use the terms we’ve grown accustomed to -almost all of which have a more feminine quality to them. Church-speak, we must admit, is decidely feminine: Care. Nuture. Provide. Children’s Ministry. Commitment. Passion. Love. Compassion. Grace….
Grace after all, is the name of a girl.
So is Faith.
So is Hope.
When was the last time you said OUT-LOUD you wanted to have an “intimate relationship” with another guy?
Probably last Sunday.
Almost everything a church does these days automatically sounds feminine because we have conditioned ourselves to view Church stuff in a decidely feminine way. The good news is, however, church doesn’t preclude man-stuff. For instance, guys like to fix things and solve problems. When we help the poor, we don’t just need love, but tough love that says “C’mon, get out of bed and take responsibility for yourself!”
Sound harsh? Welcome to Man-World 101. That was actually a very loving comment. If spit flew out of your mouth when you yelled it, it just means you care.
When we help those in need that doesn’t just mean giving them comfort, but fixing their car, building an addition to their house, replacing a door…etc…
The problem with Churches, is we have food ministries in every church, but very few “car-fixing ministries.” We go to the poor districts of our cities and steal their kids to take them to some Children’s thing, but rarely walk into the poor districts and start sharing the Gospel or give free financial training. Or start a pick-up basketball game on their turf.
But ultimately, to really do Men’s Ministry you have to take risks. Demand sacrifice. Attempt the impossible. Do something scary. That’s what guys live for. It makes life more fun for us. It’s why most church-guys secretly rented the movie 300 when it came out on pay-per view this week…
6 comments
Comments feed for this article
August 15, 2007 at 6:52 pm
barryweber
The problem of intimate language is a man’s problem, I think..not a problem of the language itself.
When was the last time I talked about being intimate, or wanting intimacy with another man? Last night, at an AA meeting. Which is why the AA meetings I go to (and must go to) are my primary church, despite my leading church every Sunday morning. Vulnerability is the only opening through which healing can flow. And it’s why 12 step meetings are so transformative- they are dependent on as much vulnerability from as many participants as possible. Intimate lanuage flows naturally, with no embarrassment whatsoever.
Part of the big problem is that intimacy connotes physical intimacy first. Emotional intimacy, however, is far more meaningful. I say, help the man be the human God created him to be not the role-player culture has taught him to be.
August 15, 2007 at 7:09 pm
thecrazypastor
I love AA and the ministry it gives so many people. I can’t really disagree with saying that vulnerability is the opening through which healing can flow, because the Bible says we must first admit we are sinners, just as anyone in AA or dealing with an addiction must first admit they are addicted and are powerless to do anything about it.
While these things are good and necessary, I don’t see the other side of the coin enough however. Jesus told his disciples “from now on you will catch men.” He told them they would be brought before rulers and governors, and to go to the ends of the earth. He gave men something greater than themselves to aspire to. He sent them out. He gave them power. He sent them on a mission to save the world. We are pretty good at showing humility, admitting vulnerability in churches, and you’re right, they are necessary. But if we gave men more to aspire to, and more risks to take, we’d be even better. In my opinion.
And regardless of my opinion on anything, I applaud you for your work in AA. It’s an awesome ministry I brag on regularly.
August 15, 2007 at 11:03 pm
rootietoot
I wonder how much of this is that we women prefer men to be ‘like us’ relationally, emotional, open and all, and that translates into church work because, let’s be honest, it’s the women who head the food pantry, the VBS, and the Sunday School. My husband says that when men are having a hard time, and a friend wants to help,they do something to get his mind off his troubles, where women like to TALK ABOUT IT endlessly. Maybe the need is for women to wake up and realize that just because men relate differently, doesn’t mean they do it wrong. I think the idea of a pick-up basketball game or a Car-fixing ministry is wonderful. My husband and 2 friends would go into this isolated, poor community in Alabama and fix things. Porches, a wheelchair ramp, add a bathroom, etc. It wasn’t affiliated with anything, no particular church or civic organization, just 3 guys who liked to fix things. Something doesn’t have to be Offical to be a worthy ministry.
August 16, 2007 at 1:36 am
thecrazypastor
Sooooo true. Sometimes the best ministries are unofficial!
December 25, 2007 at 2:53 am
321Mo
It seems to me that much “curch stuff” is inherently feminine – as you say Faith, Hope and Grace are girls names, turn the other cheek, even maybe love etc. Could this be a reason why 1 Corinthians 14:34 says womem should be silent in church. Because the Bible knew that when women started talking in an organisation (the church) which is already inherently feminine that they will (inevitably) “take over” and accentuate the feminine parts whilst neglecting the masculine parts. Leading to the situation we have today where many church congregations are 60, 70, even 80% female. To the detriment of the church itself.
December 26, 2007 at 2:22 am
thecrazypastor
The Bible goes out of its way to tell guys they should take leadership in the Church. But, I don’t think the Bible is slamming women or blaming them for causing problems. I think we’re missing the point sometimes if we get too wrapped up in rules about women speaking. For one, they DID speak in the New Testament Church, teaching, praying and prophesying. Ephesians and I Corinthians aren’t telling women to be silent because they cause problems. When you look into the context of it, the whole issue comes down to the same thing over and over: Women should show respect to the men, and men should show love via sacrifice for the women the same way Christ showed his love by giving himself for the Church. (In both cases, it especially goes for the husband and wives.)
So when Paul is talking about women being silent in the Church, the context is the Church meeting and the custom during that time of men being allowed to stand up and challenge a teacher or a preacher. Paul didn’t allow women to stand up and challenge the leadership publicly, instead he told them to ask their husband at home if they had a question over something. In fact, when women in the New Testament prayed or prophesied in the Church, they did it with a head covering which signified the authority and respect given to their husband. In other words, in the Church services the women showed respect to the men, especially their husbands. And in everything the men did, they were supposed to be servants, giving and offering themselves in humility for others -and they were especially supposed to show this love and sacrifice toward their wives.
Now that’s how they were doing it then. If we want to keep to the same standard today, we need to first remember that we usually don’t conduct our services the same way. We don’t usually allow either men or women to stand up and challenge the preacher on Sunday morning, so the principle is still there, but we don’t use it the same way.
What we should strive for in my opinion is this: Whatever we do in Church and however we do it, the women should be respectful to their husbands and the leadership of the Church, and the guys should be the leaders God has called them to be, but to lead by serving and showing Christ’s love to the women and the Church. Each church may work out the details differently, but it comes down to those principles and following those principles.
And you know, I think you’re on the right track when it comes to why God may have done things this way. It’s possible God may have set things up the way he did because it just works better this way. When a woman comes to the Lord, her family follows her example about 17% of the time, and when a man comes to the Lord, his family follows something like 93% of the time. I kinda think God called the guys to lead for at least one reason: It makes a bigger impact when guys step up.