Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Overstreet

Man Church

Recommended Posts

dude. I assume your comments can speak for themselves. I didn't go into your post and edit your comment. You said you were unharmed. Are you sure?
Smiley notwithstanding, saying that I didn't understand the subtle differences between the two similar outreaches was pretty low. At least I would have expected you to back up that assertion, just as I have done, without getting off on tangents. Responding to the first half of my assertion but ignoring my reasoning, all for the sake of a smiley, is not something I appreciate.

I'm okay with us agreeing to disagreeing. We probably agree far more on this than most people do. I'm okay with cracking wise, too. But I didn't think the basis for the satirical jibes were based in reality. Which is why I am adamant in my posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Greg P   
For the analogy to hold, and for the prophecy to be true, the pastor behind "man-church" has to be as disconnected with the unchurched guys he's trying to reach as this "white, middle-aged evangelical" was with the whole hip-hop scene. Maybe he is, maybe he's not. Have you heard anything in this person's sermons to indicate how out-of-touch he was?
I don't have to hear anything. I'm stopped at the door by a premise that alone is jarringly out of touch. And very, very gay, btw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SDG   
I don't have to hear anything. I'm stopped at the door by a premise that alone is jarringly out of touch. And very, very gay, btw.

QED.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the analogy to hold, and for the prophecy to be true, the pastor behind "man-church" has to be as disconnected with the unchurched guys he's trying to reach as this "white, middle-aged evangelical" was with the whole hip-hop scene. Maybe he is, maybe he's not. Have you heard anything in this person's sermons to indicate how out-of-touch he was?
I don't have to hear anything. I'm stopped at the door by a premise that alone is jarringly out of touch. And very, very gay, btw.
It very well could be, but I was raised across town from Greenwich Village, and I know quite a few people who have wrestled with, and some who have succombed, to same-sex attraction. And I have also been in men's groups which were anything but. Comparing the two is an apples/oranges thing, even though the components are the same.

Do you call Women's ministries and women's Bible conventions to be lesbian affairs? Just asking.

Nick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SDG   
Smiley notwithstanding, saying that I didn't understand the subtle differences between the two similar outreaches was pretty low.

You misunderstood. "You either see it or you don't" didn't mean "Either you're capable of understanding my point or you aren't." It meant "This is a matter of sensibilities; either you perceive it this way or you don't." I.e., either you perceive one label as a problem in a way that the other isn't or you don't. Likewise, when I said "In my country we say 'Yeah, I don't see it," that's because that's really what I would say -- not meaning "I guess I'm too dull to follow your point" but simply "Sorry, my sensibilities don't react the way yours do."

Incidentally, as far as my point goes, it matters not how or even whether Greg P explains or defends his reaction. My sole point is: Men will react like Greg P did.

Edited by SDG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Smiley notwithstanding, saying that I didn't understand the subtle differences between the two similar outreaches was pretty low.

You misunderstood. "You either see it or you don't" didn't mean "Either you're capable of understanding my point or you aren't." It meant "This is a matter of sensibilities; either you perceive it this way or you don't." I.e., either you perceive one label as a problem in a way that the other isn't or you don't. Likewise, when I said "In my country we say 'Yeah, I don't see it," that's because that's really what I would say -- not meaning "I guess I'm too dull to follow your point" but simply "Sorry, my sensibilities don't react the way yours do."

When you said "In my country we say 'Yeah, I don't see it,'", directly after my truce to agree to disagree--noting that I didn't see a cultural/temporal feminine perception on church equanimous to the permanent feminine perception on purses or cupcakes--were you saying "I" as in me, or in you? Because it can be read as a snide put-down.

Incidentally, as far as my point goes, it matters not how or even whether Greg P explains or defends his reaction. My sole point is: Men will react like Greg P did.
And I would respond like I do. If you have a penchant to sound reasoning, one's gonna have to do a whole lot better than font size, font type, and branding. Further, we do not know the inroads this pastor underwent to launch "Man Church" in his vicinity, what bars he frequented, what conversations he had, what newspapers he lobbied, what surveys he took, what building he holds it in, etc. I think he understands that for a venture like this to take off, advertising and branding is not enough--it has to be relational.

I simply am not going to be quick to judge the merits of a program like this. I'm smart enough to know that I'm more like that middle-aged hip-hop pastor (except I never parodied hip-hop) than a Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Fr Maximilian Kolbe, or even Chuck Norris. All I see are results of past outreaches, and being that an eerily similar program has worked sensationally (different title notwithstanding), I resolve to withhold judgment, (save for the fact that I am very happily involved in my own parish--the one that contains the fullness of truth ya know--thankyouverymuch).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MattPage   

Hmm this thread seems like it's heading for a big manly punch up.

...or does that make it too...never mind.

Matt

Edited by MattPage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, "Man Church" appears to be part of a much larger, co-ed church in Chandler, Arizona. Except for the rather sensational, offputting name, I suspect it could be conveniently viewed as "Men's Ministry." "Man Church" is just a subset of this ministry (the one that meets early on Thursday mornings and eats donuts, apparently), which also includes groups/events called "Becoming a Man," "Valiant Man" (committed to Truth, Justice, and Capes), "Man Camp," "Business Leaders Group," and "Motorcycle Group." It all sounds like a typical suburban megachurch approach to me.

You can go about your business now. Move along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Greg P   
Do you call Women's ministries and women's Bible conventions to be lesbian affairs? Just asking.

If the women are overweight and unattractive, yes.

Man Church is no men's or women's prayer group. It's a church that's distinctly marketed to appeal to people wavering about their masculinity and in that sense it comes off as extremely gay, verging on high satire. The language used on their website is flamboyantly homosexual in nature. The desperate talk of firmly buttressing their manhood with lots of manly things in the company of only men, ring suspiciously like an outreach of Exodus International. To be blunt Nick, I don't know any straight men who need their masculinity affirmed by church.

Do you honestly know men who are so insecure about their masculine identities that they would benefit from attending this?

Edited by Greg P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only manly thing I need in my church is songs with baritone parts. Unfortunately, its all tenor all the time. I croak my praise. Better than a rock, I guess.

SDG--I introduced the Europe trip, recalling that you were over the pond recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man Church is no men's or women's prayer group. It's a church that's distinctly marketed to appeal to people wavering about their masculinity and in that sense it comes off as extremely gay, verging on high satire. The language used on their website is flamboyantly homosexual in nature. The desperate talk of firmly buttressing their manhood with lots of manly things in the company of only men, ring suspiciously like an outreach of Exodus International. To be blunt Nick, I don't know any straight men who need their masculinity affirmed by church.

To be blunt, Greg, it's not straight men who needs their masculinity affirmed, but teenagers on the cusp of adulthood.

From the site:

The topics of discussion will have a definite manly focus - being the best possible husband, father, employee, leader - being a real man.

Our vision is equipping men to walk with Christ, be like Christ and to be the men God designed.

About "Becoming A Man", which is from the MEN's FRATERNITY program I mentioned earlier:

This six week series is designed to be viewed by a group of fathers together with their high school age sons.

Do you honestly know men who are so insecure about their masculine identities that they would benefit from attending this?
It's not about insecurity, nor is it about homosexuality. It's about growing in Christlike character, tailor made to those men whom are attracted to these traits, ultimately affecting the relationships with their wives, children, coworkers and friends.

I did a word-search on "buttress" throughout the site. I couldn't find the page you were referencing. Or perhaps you were turned off by the steel-plated font?

Nick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you call Women's ministries and women's Bible conventions to be lesbian affairs? Just asking.

One might if they were calling it "Woman's Church".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SDG   
Do you call Women's ministries and women's Bible conventions to be lesbian affairs? Just asking.

One might if they were calling it "Woman's Church".

If I heard of something called "Woman Church," I would immediately assume it was at least a radical feminist thing. That's independent of (but not unrelated to) the fact that WomanChurch is indeed the title of a book by radical feminist theologian Rosemary Radford Reuther.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SDG   
Except for the rather sensational, offputting name, I suspect it could be conveniently viewed as "Men's Ministry."

FWIW, I have only ever been concerned here with the "rather sensational, offputting name."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SDG   
When you said "In my country we say 'Yeah, I don't see it,'", directly after my truce to agree to disagree--noting that I didn't see a cultural/temporal feminine perception on church equanimous to the permanent feminine perception on purses or cupcakes--were you saying "I" as in me, or in you? Because it can be read as a snide put-down.

Can I just say it wasn't a snide put-down and let it go at that?

If you have a penchant to sound reasoning, one's gonna have to do a whole lot better than font size, font type, and branding.

One can't engage in "sound reasoning" about font size, font type and branding?

I simply am not going to be quick to judge the merits of a program like this.

I'm not even going to be slow about it. I have no interest in judging the merits of a program at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you call Women's ministries and women's Bible conventions to be lesbian affairs? Just asking.

One might if they were calling it "Woman's Church".

I think it would be "Wymyn church," or something like that, but I think the so-called "wisecracks" about unattractive women (etc.) are just... not cricket. I wish you guys would just let it drop.

Hey, I made no such cracks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SDG   

Is this the part where Nick tells us that some of those Greenwich Village people he knows who have succumbed to same-sex attraction are in fact totally hot women?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can I just say it wasn't a snide put-down and let it go at that?

Poof. It's gone. Forgive me for overreacting.

If you have a penchant to sound reasoning, one's gonna have to do a whole lot better than font size, font type, and branding.
One can't engage in "sound reasoning" about font size, font type and branding?
I can't see how externals can be debated soundly. If people want to act on their gut reactions, that's their right, but the fact is neither of us live in that interdenominational church's vicinity, nor do I know the people in that community. And yet, if such a program was a successful outreach, I would suppose that the font size, font type and branding makes more sense to them than to me.

I simply am not going to be quick to judge the merits of a program like this.
I'm not even going to be slow about it. I have no interest in judging the merits of a program at all.

From a comic I read today: "No, I didn't see the movie or read the book, but I saw the DVD cover art, and I thought it was excellent."

Is this the part where Nick tells us that some of those Greenwich Village people he knows who have succumbed to same-sex attraction are in fact totally hot women?

:D

Edited by Nick Alexander

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SDG   
Poof. It's gone. Forgive me for overreacting.

Who you calling a poof?

No, kidding. Poof, yourself!

From a comic I read today: "No, I didn't see the movie or read the book, but I saw the DVD cover art, and I thought it was excellent."

See, and as a graphic artist I am totally into judging DVD cover art as well as fonts and such. It's a totally different thing from critiquing a movie.

Is this the part where Nick tells us that some of those Greenwich Village people he knows who have succumbed to same-sex attraction are in fact totally hot women?

:D

I was really hoping to get that smilie!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From a comic I read today: "No, I didn't see the movie or read the book, but I saw the DVD cover art, and I thought it was excellent."

See, and as a graphic artist I am totally into judging DVD cover art as well as fonts and such. It's a totally different thing from critiquing a movie.

One request: you've got to add "cover art" to your critical assessments. Rate it from the Mona Lisa (highest praise) to a stick figure (lowest). Just don't involve the "Man Church" steel-plated logo and brand...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SDG wrote:

: "Men's Fraternity" = no branding problem.

Well I, for one, find the redundancy of that brand name rather off-putting. Like, duh, what OTHER kind of fraternity would it be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SDG wrote:

: "Men's Fraternity" = no branding problem.

Well I, for one, find the redundancy of that brand name rather off-putting. Like, duh, what OTHER kind of fraternity would it be?

Don't you think that this title distinguishes it from, say, collegiate fraternities, allowing for men of all ages to participate? That's how I've read it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SDG wrote:

: "Men's Fraternity" = no branding problem.

Well I, for one, find the redundancy of that brand name rather off-putting. Like, duh, what OTHER kind of fraternity would it be?

Don't you think that this title distinguishes it from, say, collegiate fraternities, allowing for men of all ages to participate? That's how I've read it...

Yes, and it probably discourages the "chug, chug, chug" crowd during communion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nick Alexander wrote:

: Don't you think that this title distinguishes it from, say, collegiate fraternities, allowing for men of all ages to participate?

But don't colleges already HAVE men of all ages among their students etc.? Does a Phi Beta Kappa man ever cease to be a Phi Beta Kappa man? Isn't the whole POINT of being a fraternity -- well, one of them, anyway -- that you make contacts for life and that you put yourself in contact with elders who have gone before you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×