O'Briend would do well to remember the Christ who overthrow the money changers and the warrior God of Scripture. Maybe read Revelation and see some of the attributes of Christ in there as well. Balance people, balance.

Men will be men...isn't that what got us into this mess in the first place?

I never really understood this concern so many people talk about...there are plenty of men in my church, and they all don't have to walk around ,"swing'n pipe" to prove they're men.
The problem is not that a large segement of American men are turned off to this mythical "sissified" church, lord, were it so simple!
No, the primary problem is that American male is far more interested in his mastabatory pursuits of self-indulgence than he is about anything dealing with G-d, eternity, and his place in the cosmos.

So, the real truth is not that the Church is being ruled by women (and I know there has got to be a lot of women saying, "really? we rule in the church? When do we get the keys!"), but that the men can't be bothered with the whole "church thing" when they're busting waves, or clay pigeons with their new toys; or, more likely, poping a beer or two at the games.

"be not conformed to this world, but transformed by the renewing of your minds..."

Now, go ask all those men with those excuses about the "sissified" church how they're able to transform their minds with their "I don't like church because [fill-in-blank-with-convenient-excuse]"
I bet most of them will be asking, "uh...why do I need my mind renewed?"
You want men back in the church...start with the basic message of Jesus...G-d will take care of the rest.

More and more I find the whole "manly" thing more and more sad. It's sad that we have such a problem just modeling the humble warrior Christ in the gospels that we have to resort to crap like this. I'd venture to guess that most guys don't fit into the latte drinking model of O’Brien any more than they fit into the stereotypical model that is preached all over the place. It's all just so stupid.

What kind of "service" are you going to start to reach people like me? I don't care to watch sports, but I'll play a game of rugby with you anyday, I'm not a fan of beer, give me a glass of wine or a girly drink, fighting is stupid but war movies are cool, I actually do like to shop, but I also love chainsaws and tools :) , I don't hunt but given a choice, I'll spend the rest of my life in the woods. Oh yea, Lattes are yummy!

Read the book of 1 Peter if you want to know how to attract men.

I think interpretation of Scripture takes center stage here. I appreciate what Lee is saying above, but the problem is that Revelation is written to a bunch of Jesus-followers DYING by the sword and being asked not to take it up (you know, Romans 13)--vindication has come through Jesus, though it won't be fleshed out in present-day military might. Imagery needs to be taken into account on this one. If not then we need shepherd church where Jesus is portrayed as an injured lamb...Revelation as well...

I agree with O'Brien's sentiment and Lee's sentiment as well--regarding balance--but does balance necessarily mean that Jesus has to be something that He is only referred to as in a book filled with apocalyptic genre-style imagery?

What if growing a pair in discipleship really means having the fortitude to become a servant? Is that humility possible in all the "taking up of the sword?" Are we really ready to turn the Prince of Peace away for the sake of gaining audience a certain segment of the population? Do we have to become immersed in hyper-violent images to "do battle" with evil? Is it really battle in the "Braveheart" sense?

I don't have the answers, but simply a troubled feeling. Obedience, submission, humility, sacrifice are all characteristics of Christ and I'm not so sure enhanced testicles will make those qualities any more available. Just a thought.

grace and peace

The problem is that we spend sooooo much time in church talking about our feelings. Most men's groups are nothing but extended sessions where we yak about our innermost beleifs and feeling. Gaaak. I'd rather have a root canal. Men don't LIKE to talk about their feelings.

Well, if we define manliness as suffering for the sake of Christ and his church and treating wives and women likewise then great. But manliness as our culture defines it, our culture of war and militarism, well now that is an entirely different proposition. That is not gospel. That is not Jesus.

Now don't hear me wrong. I watch Ultimate Fighting and I like to hunt and fish, but I don't think doing those things makes me a "man." So when Mark Driscoll says something to the effect that we need to get our men watching ultimate fighter and to drink beer and not be sissys I am repulsed. His reasons for saying those sorts of things are assbackwards. And they are counter gospel.

The guys I know just want a place where you can talk about God with guys who accept you. And where do don't feel out of it if you don't have a college degree.

They find many churches way too intellectual when talking about the Bible and what it means to follow Jesus. These guys just want buddies who'll "get 'er done" with God.

The thing that churches need to do is to point out the masculinity in Scripture. It is not necessary to "inject" any masculinity into it, it's all right there already. The difficulty is in bringing this out and changing the attitude of a religious culture which has grown to accept men not being the head of their family and sees "manliness" as being sinful. Imagine what Christianity would be like if the Church was always having to beg Jesus to be involved when all he wants to do is sit at home and watch the Angels game. Obviously that's not going to work.

It is a useless argument of the chicken and the egg to try and figure out what led to what, but there are basically two problems. One side is that men don't take up their role first as a Christian to study, pray and grow in the faith, and then as husbands to love their wife and children and seek to lead them as they grow in the faith as well. Because men have abandoned their responsibilities the church has sinfully turned to accepting women in inappropriate roles just to have someone there filling the spot.

The second side of it is having a church whichdemonizes all the "manly" aspects of behavior and makes the process of sanctification distinctively feminine. Sometimes anger and agression are appropriate responses to a situation (hence Paul saying "in your anger do not sin" (Eph. 4.26), it's not the anger, it's the execution). As well, as much as Jesus, Peter, and Paul were "highly spiritual" people, let's not forget that they were also a carpenter, a fisherman, and a tent-maker, all three "manly" jobs. Not to beat a decaying horse, but I think one of the things which perpetuates this today is our confusion over what 'meekness' and 'humility' look like.

Am I in favor of "a guy church"? No, that's wrong. But I do think that the Church needs to make more of an effort to connect men into the Christian life in an appropriate way, not trying to neuter them at the front door.

What's the big deal about talking about feelings? It's as if men are fearless risk-takers except when it comes to their own soul.

I'm with Sheerahkahn on this: the church doesn't need to cater to a broken version of masculinity; we need to call men to the full life of Jesus.

Eldridge started this fad with "Wild at Heart". (Besides some glaring theological deficiencies, I thought it was ridiculous to declare one personality type as the ONLY Godly one.)

I think more than anything, this reflects our Western Church's extreme shallowness theologically. We are so easily swayed back and forth by the teaching de jour...

I think O'Brien has given a very helpful article on this.

May I share a woman's viewpoint? Since we could walk, we've been taught that they world was our oyster, we could do anything we put our mind to, and we didn't need a man. Many of our husbands, on the other hand, were taught to be kinder and gentler than men in the past, to mind their mother and respect their sister. For many, their only example of family leadership was a woman. It seemed great at first, when we got married. We wives went to work exercising all the leadership skills we had learned, and our husbands let us. It was, after all, what we each had been raised to do.

Before long, though, we began to resent feeling responsible for everything. We joked that having a husband was like having another child, and secretly wondered what benefit there was to having a husband. We grew irritated with the way they withdrew and resisted doing even the smallest things we asked. When mothering didn't work, we turned to controlling, cajoling, criticizing, and complaining--and hated it. We became the very dominating beasts we were so afraid our husbands could be if we let them.

This pendulum swing from husband dominance to wife dominance is in evidence all over the world, from the most progressive, modern city, to the most impoverished third world village. I believe it is this that we are struggling against, not whether a fighting man or a reading man is more godly. Those are just attempts to try to grasp what has gone wrong and where men have lost their way. But in order to answer that question, we have to also look at the women.

God works on men most when they are leading their families, but a man can't take leadership. True leadership can only given by someone willing to follow, and a man isn't leading if no one is following. A wife, therefore, has the power to give or take away her husband's leadership; but she has very real fears about relinquishing that leadership. Most men haven't been taught how to be godly family leaders. How is she supposed to follow a husband who isn't leading, or isn't leading well?

We were right to reject old fashioned, unbiblical submission; but we have replaced it with self-righteous, self-protective, controlling, and unbiblical wife dominance. Churches need to help women see where we, too, have lost our way. Not by calling us back to the submission of the past, but by pointing the way forward to a new biblical understanding of submission that focuses on working with God to help our husbands be the men...whatever type of men...God designed them to be.

As women, we've become so intelligent, so strong, and so capable, that we need to learn how to step back and give our husbands the opportunity to practice leading, without critiquing their methods or their results. We need to have the courage to let them make mistakes and let them turn to God for answers when the fearsome responsibilities of a family bring them to their knees. We need to stop trying to be our husbands' mothers or worse, their Holy Spirit, and start having faith that God is powerful enough to work through our husbands to bless us.

I appreciate this article. I know many men who are tired of the "Wild at Heart" fad and want to get to the "Heart of Jesus" instead.

Perhaps the true issue at the heart of this discussion is that there are two distinctly different perspectives of what a "Godly" man looks like: (1) The biblical perspective and (2) The world's perspective. I am not, in the least, convinced that the two can coexist; or even that you can compare them as if both are simultaneously attainable. To illustrate my point, I offer homosexuality (perhaps the world's supreme example of "unmanliness"). Is it possible for a gay man to be "manly" in the sight of biblical perspective? It is if you consider homosexuality a sin as the New Testament does. There is no greater a war for a warrior to fight than the war that rages within his own heart against the powers of sin, whatever they may be. (This is assuming of course that the man views his homosexuality as sin!). So, I echo the remarks of earlier bloggers: There must be a renewing of our minds. This includes the renewal of these worldly perspectives that so cloud our ability to see through biblical perspective.

You know, Jesus never went on and on about masculinity like the macho taco Jesus crowd does, not that his words mean anything in some parts of the church these days - and I'm including the conservative wing in that remark. Anyway, guys like the ones in this article seem to be really insecure, and instead of going to God for healing, they pull verses out of context to prop up their self-esteem. They become the "me head, you submit" guys. Mutual submission? Forget about it!

For some reason the description I'm seeing of the "guy church" reads very much like a description of a gay bar. And I do not think it is a coincidence.

Kudos to Brandon, both for his original article and his comments in USA Today. I'm one of those men who's a latte-sipping bookworm, and I'm often amused and offended by the attempts of Mark Driscoll, Brad Stine and company to make their versions of masculinity a prerequisite for man to be living a godly life. I often read about some men's discomfort by "all the talk about feelings" and feeling "neutered" at church. There's another side that needs to be told. Do you really think artistic and intellectual men in many contemporary evangelical churches feel any more at home around a group of men at church? Part of this may begin in middle school, when you may get called a sissy (or worse) for being on the honor roll or taking piano lessons instead of being athletic or enjoying "manly" outdoor activities. Then, as an adult, unless you're around like-minded men, you may always feel like you can't bring up an important part of yourself- a love of books, ideas, and art, things that really enhance your spiritual and not just your intellectual life- for fear of ridicule from men who don't share your tastes. I find nothing wrong with men who prefer agressive sports, who'd rather hunt than read, and who cringe at the thought of talking about their feelings. I don't intend to force my tastes on other men. But please, don't think that traditional ideas about what makes a "real man" are essential for a man to live a godly life.

I am curious how anyone could miss the fact that Biblical masculinity (as modeled by Christ), is all about self denial. And Christ imitating self denial requires a level of strength and courage that most modern men can only dream about.

God made men in such a way that self interest is a very difficult opponent to overcome. I don’t mean the split second decision to throw yourself in front of a speeding car to save an innocent life – that is easy compared to the daily grind of thinking of your wife and children before you think of yourself. It is in battling this nature love for self that a man develops true Christ-likeness – and Christ, as the ultimate man, is the definitive picture of masculinity.

There is nothing wrong with Christian men getting together to barbecue game, play golf or watch the big fight on T.V. Indeed, it should be encouraged. But to build a church around that sort of thing is foolishness.

By the way, I’m a big husky guy who loves the back country. I grew up hunting and shooting and participating in contact sports. I’ve worked in construction, lumber mills and warehouses. I enjoy a good cigar while drinking whiskey laced coffee – especially after a good steak dinner. I’m also a “book-worm” who enjoys poetry and the beauty of wildflowers. It’s foolish to say that a real man must fit into a certain mold. Many of the most “manly” men I know according to the “guy” criteria are self centered jerks. Again, the core of true manliness is self denial and all that flows out of that.

I am a women and I have a couple of things to say. I have always felt that most evangelicals feel that God is a little bit more male-than he is female. Sort of a 60/40 ratio-a little more testorsterone, and after all Jesus was a man. That seemed to entitle them to rather certain privilieges denied to woemn.I personally do not believe God is either-but we are created in the image of God. Second, my husband is a kind gentle man who cries who more often at movies than I do. At one church we attended, the leadership used to somewhat make fun of men like him-and elevate men who carried guns (police). The funny thing is-my husband was stronger physically, emotionally, and spiritually than all of them-but he had no need to "show off' his masculinity the ways they defined "real men". I think Jesus is very pleased with a man who can cry at the state of the world, be touched a homeless man, be grieved at the news of a sickness, and who can see the homosexual as a man just like him-not as a danger. Grow up guys-the church needs all the different kinds of men that God has created-we need all their different gifts, different styles, different outlooks, and different ways of reaching the lost.