You make a point that I have felt for several years. Good job,


og

We are agreeing to something?

Seriously though, we all seemed to be concerned about our own needs, vs the whole. Families are extremely busy in this world today, with little time for the whole, so I would be much more supportive of 'real' Family Ministry.
I have a feeling spouses would like to the men more involved in their family life, but going to a mens group or doing men things together seems a little backward to me.

One of the problems with that is that, even in the church, not all men and not all women are in families, at least not traditional nuclear families. Singles Ministries tend sometimes to be seen as a dating club, which is not fair and which can be seen as a turnoff in itself, but if we remove ministries to Men and Women and replace them with Families then the Singles are short on options. (this is by no means to say that there's not a place for Family Ministries and parenting support/education - just that it doesn't neatly replace ministries to men and women)

I think part of the problem I see with Men's Ministries, and many of our other programs, is that they tend to be about serving the participants. As Shane said, men tend to like to think they don't need to be served, whether it's true or not, but they do have a calling to serve others. So a Men's Ministry program that involves the men in ministering to others, in whatever ways, including working together to help people in the community, is probably going to be more attractive than something that just tries to focus on the needs of the men themselves. Guys might be uncomfortable with 'bonding' for its own sake, but will naturally bond as they work alongside one another. (The same may be true for Women's Ministries or the needs may be different - I feel less qualified to comment!)

I know for me I do really value our Home Group because it has a bunch of men in it who I really like and am comfortable with. We do a variety of things together as a home group, and I'd like to spend more time with them, just playing golf or chatting, or working on some project together.

It could be a good year

Bravus, I don't see them as needing to be replaced, men and women ministries, but that we need family ones also. I get the impression that the existing ones feel they are taking care of the 'family'.

That's not a bad idea, but I think if they had ideas, they would have said already. People are not going to be apathetic if the ministry is meeting their needs. Maybe the men are getting their needs met with another ministry, and that's fine. Just because they are apathetic about Men's Ministry doesn't mean they are apathetic about church. You can't expect everyone to be involved with everything. Not these days. And if they are active in another ministry, they are probably already bonding with others. Bottom line is, look for people who are not involved in any ministry - men, women, children - and get them ministering.

Family ministries exists in most conferences. The local church nominating committee just needs to nominate a Family Ministries Director and the ministry comes alive.

The sad fact is that most men are not getting their needs met primarily because they don't know what their needs are. Most men live in isolation. The friendships they have with other men are superficial. Men in good marriages have a intimate communication with their wives in a way that they bare their souls but many men don't even have that. Many men have built walls around themselves.

I contrast this with what I experience in AA. In AA men hug each other after most meetings. We confess our shortcomings and struggles to each other. AA friends call each other when something great happens or when they get terribly frustrated. They trust in each other with full knowledge that they risk emotional pain as a result. To me that is manhood. That is courage. That is being real.

Building walls and hiding in isolation is cowardly but it is what most men know. They are not intentionally choosing to live in isolation. Work, family and routine have placed there. This is even more true Christian men that do not go to the bar or join bowling leagues or the like. Many of these men are dying inside and do not even know what they are missing.

OK, I'll defer to you on most of that since you're a man and I'm not. But isn't that why we try to meet "felt" needs? It's pretty difficult to minister to people who don't feel a need. I think you have 2 options if you want things to change: 1) Meet needs they feel, instead of needs they don't feel, or 2) Create a situation in which they feel their need of what you have to offer.

Yeah, this is one of the challenges I face with teacher education and professional development: do we address only the perceived needs, or try to help people perceive new needs too? I try to do both, though with humility, not saying "you don't know what's good for you and I do!"

I still think a big part of the problem is the language of 'meeting people's needs', which tends to focus us, actually, on their wants. What people *need* is to be turned around to focus on meeting the needs of others: happiness lies in service, not in being indulged. Real leadership will give men a vision of a better world and equip them to help build it. And discussion might be one valuable step toward that, but discussion is not an end in itself.

Well said. "Christ's method alone...", you know, about meeting people's felt needs before inviting them to listen to you. I agree some people think their wants are needs, though. I'm thinking of a church who wanted a particular kind of pastor (babysitter/cheerleader), but that's not what they needed. I don't know...maybe the answer was to give them a babysitter/cheerleader to meet their felt needs and then lead/educate them to a higher level.