What Does Your Men's Ministry Look Like?

[Binaca Chugger]

Do you have a men's ministry in your church?  Have you ever been a part of such a ministry that was successful?  What defines a successful men's ministry and how do you get there?

 

[Izdaari]

I don't think we have one. What's the point of gender segregating ministries anyway?

 

[Walt]

Do you have a men's ministry in your church?  Have you ever been a part of such a ministry that was successful?  What defines a successful men's ministry and how do you get there?

All good questions.  We don't have one at the present time.

I've been in churches that had a Men's prayer breakfast, and others that had father-son and father-daughter events.

Really good question about what defines a "successful" men's ministry.

 

[Walt]

I don't think we have one. What's the point of gender segregating ministries anyway?

Not entirely sure... Isaac Asimov one theorized that men remain afraid of women all their lives (growing up, it was typically the mother that ensured that the child "toed the line"), and thus the popularity of men-only clubs.

I do think that women-only groups have a different... uh, atmosphere? feeling?  dynamic? than mixed groups; men-only  groups are different that a mixed group.

Possibly the idea of women's meetings/get-togethers and men's meeting/get-togethers are just part of the process to help people feel more "involved" in the church.

Thanks for a thought-provoking post

 

[Binaca Chugger]

I believe in a complementarian position rather than an egalitarian position.  As such, I believe the church has a responsibility to disciple men and women in their unique responsibilities, roles and ministry in the home.  Thus, a men's group and a ladies' group would be beneficial to meeting this need of discipleship.  I am not in favor of the church hosting social gatherings, especially just for men or just for women.  My question was intended to begin a discussion on how to help men and women be discipled.

 

[Izdaari]

I believe in a complementarian position rather than an egalitarian position.  As such, I believe the church has a responsibility to disciple men and women in their unique responsibilities, roles and ministry in the home.  Thus, a men's group and a ladies' group would be beneficial to meeting this need of discipleship.  I am not in favor of the church hosting social gatherings, especially just for men or just for women.  My question was intended to begin a discussion on how to help men and women be discipled.

Alrighty, that's a fair answer. But I am a very committed egalitarian, and I make a point of avoiding gender segregated gatherings as amuch as possible.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

But I am a very committed eGALitarian....

...couldn't help myself...

 

[Izdaari]

But I am a very committed eGALitarian....

...couldn't help myself...

And now I'm an eGADatarian!

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

We don't have one, but if we did, it would probably look like a bunch of guys.

 

[Binaca Chugger]

I believe in a complementarian position rather than an egalitarian position.  As such, I believe the church has a responsibility to disciple men and women in their unique responsibilities, roles and ministry in the home.  Thus, a men's group and a ladies' group would be beneficial to meeting this need of discipleship.  I am not in favor of the church hosting social gatherings, especially just for men or just for women.  My question was intended to begin a discussion on how to help men and women be discipled.

Alrighty, that's a fair answer. But I am a very committed egalitarian, and I make a point of avoiding gender segregated gathering as amuch as possible.

As an egalitarian, I understand your viewpoint.  As an egalitarian, do you accept Titus 2:3-5?

 

[Izdaari]

I believe in a complementarian position rather than an egalitarian position.  As such, I believe the church has a responsibility to disciple men and women in their unique responsibilities, roles and ministry in the home.  Thus, a men's group and a ladies' group would be beneficial to meeting this need of discipleship.  I am not in favor of the church hosting social gatherings, especially just for men or just for women.  My question was intended to begin a discussion on how to help men and women be discipled.

Alrighty, that's a fair answer. But I am a very committed egalitarian, and I make a point of avoiding gender segregated gathering as amuch as possible.

As an egalitarian, I understand your viewpoint.  As an egalitarian, do you accept Titus 2:3-5?

To a degree. I'm skeptical about the entire book of Titus because I'm pretty sure Paul didn't write it. (The First Paul, by Borg and Crossan makes a pretty good case that he didn't). That passage basically says be good and loving, according to the standards of patriarchal ancient Jewish culture, and I can't argue with that... in that culture, which had never heard about men and women being equal. Well, they'd heard it directly from Jesus, but maybe the author of Titus wasn't paying attention.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

I believe in a complementarian position rather than an egalitarian position.  As such, I believe the church has a responsibility to disciple men and women in their unique responsibilities, roles and ministry in the home.  Thus, a men's group and a ladies' group would be beneficial to meeting this need of discipleship.  I am not in favor of the church hosting social gatherings, especially just for men or just for women.  My question was intended to begin a discussion on how to help men and women be discipled.

Alrighty, that's a fair answer. But I am a very committed egalitarian, and I make a point of avoiding gender segregated gathering as amuch as possible.

As an egalitarian, I understand your viewpoint.  As an egalitarian, do you accept Titus 2:3-5?

To a degree. I'm skeptical about the entire book of Titus because I'm pretty sure Paul didn't write it. (The First Paul, by Borg and Crossan makes a pretty good case that he didn't). That passage basically says be good and loving, according to the standards of patriarchal ancient Jewish culture, and I can't argue with that... in that culture, which had never heard about men and women being equal. Well, they'd heard it directly from Jesus, but maybe the author of Titus wasn't paying attention.

For the benefit of others (I had to dig a bit to find this in an Amazon review), the authors Borg and Crossan break it down this way.  There are 3 "Pauls":

The radical (and real) Paul wrote:
* Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians and 1 Thessalonians, Galatians, Philippians and Philemon (which the authors break down verse by verse)

A person or persons calling themselves Paul wrote the pastoral letters:
* 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus.

A majority of scholars "dispute" the authorship of:
* Ephesians, Colossians and 2 Thessalonians