140 replies to this topic

[Greg P]

Nick Alexander, on 20 July 2010 - 09:37 AM, said:

That, my friend, is a failed evangelical outreach.

And that sir, is a redundant sentence.

A few years ago, a white, middle-age evangelical pastor I know started "Hip Hop Church". I sh*t you not. I had to do a double take on the Man Church site and look at the ministers involved, because it sounded so... like him. Alas, my friend has nothing to do with Man Church. But without question, Man Church will meet the same speedy death as Hip Hop Church. And for that we can all praise Jesus.

[Buckeye Jones]

SDG, on 20 July 2010 - 09:47 AM, said:

Buckeye Jones, on 20 July 2010 - 09:14 AM, said:

Dude, are you still jetlagged?

I am always jetlagged. But that has nothing to do with the attempted Zen humor of my closing line, if that's what you're referring to (it was meant to be a sort of "Wherever you go, there you are" thing). If you don't find it funny, it isn't because I just got back from Europe. If you were referring to anything else, I'm out of explanations (and starting to feel like I'm the only one in the room who appreciates my sense of humor, which is a good sign that it's time to fall silent).

Referencing the Europe trip crosstabbed with the voluminous dissertation on Man Church. Like killing an ant with a sledge hammer.

[Nick Alexander]

Greg P, on 20 July 2010 - 10:09 AM, said:

Nick Alexander, on 20 July 2010 - 09:37 AM, said:

That, my friend, is a failed evangelical outreach.

And that sir, is a redundant sentence.

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. There have been many successful evangelical outreaches throughout the last century. Time will tell.

Quote

A few years ago, a white, middle-age evangelical pastor I know started "Hip Hop Church". I sh*t you not. I had to do a double take on the Man Church site and look at the ministers involved, because it sounded so... like him. Alas, my friend has nothing to do with Man Church. But without question, Man Church will meet the same speedy death as Hip Hop Church. And for that we can all praise Jesus.

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?

A very successful program right now is "Men's Fraternity", which seems to employ this exact same model. More people attend this particular church in Little Rock, AR, on a Wednesday early morning (6am), than Sunday mornings. All men. No singing. It has been copied and disseminated to hundreds of churches across the country, and through talks available for free in iTunes. Basic Christianity, but tailored (to the best of their ability of understanding) men's longings. Although I did not subscribe to every theological tenet shared in this program, I thought it quite strong. Hearing from those who had never set foot in a church, how this appealed to them, and taking the radical steps that they have been doing, signify that this is an outreach that has actually outreached.

If not for you, no prob. Welcome to the free market. Would you be interested in going to a Catholic liturgy that has been around since Christ instituted the church on Peter?

Nick

[SDG]

Buckeye Jones, on 20 July 2010 - 10:16 AM, said:

Referencing the Europe trip crosstabbed with the voluminous dissertation on Man Church. Like killing an ant with a sledge hammer.

Maybe I am still jetlagged. When did I reference the Europe trip? My initial comments were meant as idle stones tossed at an anthill. Nick kept saying, "No, you missed!" and I went with bigger and bigger rocks until finally it came to sledgehammers.

Nick Alexander, on 20 July 2010 - 10:22 AM, said:

A very successful program right now is "Men's Fraternity", which seems to employ this exact same model.

And which does not have the branding problem of Man Church. "Men's Fraternity" = no branding problem. "Man Church" = branding problem. It is a subtle point. You see it or you don't.

[Nick Alexander]

SDG, on 20 July 2010 - 10:26 AM, said:

Buckeye Jones, on 20 July 2010 - 10:16 AM, said:

Referencing the Europe trip crosstabbed with the voluminous dissertation on Man Church. Like killing an ant with a sledge hammer.

Maybe I am still jetlagged. When did I reference the Europe trip? My initial comments were meant as idle stones tossed at an anthill. Nick kept saying, "No, you missed!" and I went with bigger and bigger rocks until finally it came to sledgehammers.

That's okay. I'm not harmed. Embrace the suck. Then all will be well.

SDG, on 20 July 2010 - 10:27 AM, said:

Nick Alexander, on 20 July 2010 - 10:22 AM, said:

A very successful program right now is "Men's Fraternity", which seems to employ this exact same model.

And which does not have the branding problem of Man Church. "Men's Fraternity" = no branding problem. "Man Church" = branding problem. It is a subtle point. You see it or you don't.

I see it, but I agree to disagree. Because I don't see Church = Woman's Purse, or Church = Cupcakes.

Edited by Nick Alexander, 20 July 2010 - 10:31 AM.

[SDG]

Nick Alexander, on 20 July 2010 - 10:30 AM, said:

That's okay. I'm not harmed.

You're okay, but the vicinity around the anthill is battered to hell.

Quote

Quote

It is a subtle point. You see it or you don't.

I see it, but I agree to disagree.

In my country, we say "Yeah. I don't see it."

[Nick Alexander]

SDG, on 20 July 2010 - 10:43 AM, said:

Quote

Quote

It is a subtle point. You see it or you don't.

I see it, but I agree to disagree.

In my country, we say "Yeah. I don't see it."

Smiley notwithstanding, you snipped off my last statement. Which is the crux as to why I have the sledgehammer at the ready.

[SDG]

Nick Alexander, on 20 July 2010 - 10:49 AM, said:

you snipped off my last statement.

I didn't snip off the last statement. I included the bit I wanted to comment on. Cheers.

Edited by SDG, 20 July 2010 - 10:56 AM.

[Nick Alexander]

SDG, on 20 July 2010 - 10:55 AM, said:

Nick Alexander, on 20 July 2010 - 10:49 AM, said:

you snipped off my last statement.

I didn't snip off the last statement. I included the bit I wanted to comment on. Cheers.

Like faith and works, both were needed, or else my comments are misconstrued. Family Ties.

[SDG]

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?

[Nick Alexander]

SDG, on 20 July 2010 - 11:07 AM, said:

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.

[Greg P]

Nick Alexander, on 20 July 2010 - 10:22 AM, said:

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.

[SDG]

Greg P, on 20 July 2010 - 11:20 AM, said:

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.

[Nick Alexander]

Greg P, on 20 July 2010 - 11:20 AM, said:

Nick Alexander, on 20 July 2010 - 10:22 AM, said:

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

[SDG]

Nick Alexander, on 20 July 2010 - 11:18 AM, said:

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, 20 July 2010 - 11:44 AM.

[SDG]

Edited for additional clarity.

[Nick Alexander]

SDG, on 20 July 2010 - 11:37 AM, said:

Nick Alexander, on 20 July 2010 - 11:18 AM, said:

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.

Quote

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).

[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, 20 July 2010 - 12:08 PM.

[Andy Whitman]

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.

[Greg P]

Nick Alexander, on 20 July 2010 - 11:25 AM, said:

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, 20 July 2010 - 12:18 PM.