Why did I help organize a new men’s event? Well, the short answer is that it’s needed. Much contemporary Christian life is dominated by women, for good and for ill. One of the ill parts of this is that there is a certain feminized quality to many events that turns men off.
Our catchy name is The ATF: “Alcohol, Tobacco, and the Faith.” Though if that makes men’s wives or girlfriends nervous, they are welcome to call it “Apostolic Tradition and the Faith.” Because it is that, too. Several friends and I are starting up a new men’s event for Catholics in the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis that will run once a month or so during the fall, winter, and spring. We hope to have talks and debates that will be educational, entertaining, and spiritually formative.
Why a new men’s event? Well, the short answer is that it’s needed. Much contemporary Christian, and indeed Catholic, life is dominated by women, for good and for ill. One of the ill parts of this is that there is a certain feminized quality to many events that turns men off. Here I must be careful, but one way of describing what I mean by a feminized quality to such events is that they have emphases on sharing one’s feelings and intimate life experiences, getting along together, and being emotionally comforted in ways that, while not bad, are certainly not appealing to most men.
It is not that men do not want close friendship or a life of the spirit. But, generally, they pursue it in different ways. They are attracted more to the intellectual reality of their faith than they are to emotional experiences of it. They are just as likely to bond spiritually with each other over arguments as anything. Because they want to be strengthened, they often feel more comfortable in their faith when they are challenged. A spiritual kick to the backside is often more comforting to them than a hug.
The ATF will not involve any sharing, though it might involve stories. It will approach Catholic and Christian faith as not a matter of sentiment or temperament but of truth. It will deliver intellectual content about what they must believe about and do for the faith. On subjects in which there is no direct teaching—prudential decisions in politics and personal life—it will allow men to argue for their positions. And it will deliver those shoes to the posterior by reminding men of Christ’s challenge to live a life of self-sacrifice at home, at work, and in their communities.
A Noble History
The ATF is new, but it is inspired by the work of a Twin Cities guy named Kent Wuchterl, who started a similar group called the AOTM—Argument of the Month—twenty years ago in the back of the St. Clair Broiler, a now defunct local diner. In the beginning it was just a bunch of guys in the back room hashing over Catholic topics. What does the Church actually teach about X? What is to be done about nominally Catholic institutions that hurt the Church’s witness? How do you respond to challenges to your faith coming from Christians who are Evangelical Protestants or from people outside such as Muslims and that most evangelical of all groups—no, not vegans—atheists?
The group found a home for a few years in a Minneapolis parish and then for most of its existence in South Saint Paul at the Church of St. Augustine, where the Old Testament scholar, Air Force chaplain, and celebrant of the Traditional Latin Mass, Father John Echert served as pastor.
Father Echert is a shepherd who is not afraid to call out when the sheep are wandering or being misled by others. The self-proclaimed “Pope of South Saint Paul” is also a man of tenderness and a hilarious sense of humor. At each event held in the parish basement, after an hour of appetizers, beer, and wine, Fr. Echert moved to the front of the parish hall. Like a stand-up comedian before the big show, he warmed up the crowd of men of all ages, races, and socio-economic groups with his own rapid-fire commentary on the topics of the moment, questions about who came the farthest and who was a veteran, and anything else on his mind. Woe to the smart-alecky guy who thought he could beat Fr. Echert in the repartee department. After this display and the dispatching of the smart-alecks, Father would then invite another priest to bless the food and direct the crowd—sometimes (it is rumored) large enough to require appealing to the spirit rather than the letter of the fire code—to the tables of manly meat, vegetables, and a starch. While wine, along with beer, was available, there were no dainty hors d’oeuvres or finger sandwiches. On the evenings when there had been cigar smoking out on the parish lawn beforehand, it could require a bit more wrangling to get everybody inside.
The food, the booze, and even the cigars are a big part of men’s events, but there is something more to it. Kent Wuchterl was rightly convinced that the Church was in crisis. He was also right that one of the reasons for that crisis was a failure to speak openly. The modern world of the universities and schools, bishops, priests, and other representatives of “official Catholicism” too often speak in ways that are diffuse, jargon-laden, and meant to evade. Too often the failure of Catholicism is that people come away from parishes and classes thinking not that they dissent from Catholic teaching or practice, but that there is nothing from which to dissent and that thus faith has nothing to say to any actual issues. Mr. Wuchterl gathered around him a number of men to help him think through what topics the AOTM should cover, generally organized under a number of different rubrics including faith and science, Protestant-Catholic debates, men’s spirituality, Catholic history, and Islam. I not only debated a good many times for the group, but spent about seven years helping organize events for that group.
Debates
As the title of the group indicated, the emphasis was put on debates: debates on “sola scriptura” with Protestants and whether God’s existence is rational with atheists; political debates on what Catholic teaching says to us about immigration policy, healthcare reform, economics, religious liberty, and even the figure of one Donald John Trump; and intra-ecclesial debates about liturgy, the death penalty, communion for the divorced, end-of-life care, and just war.
Many of the debates were very good, but they are very hard to do, and not all of them came off. Sometimes debaters end up agreeing and the debate is boring. Sometimes they disagree so much that the conversation is a matter of two people who seem to be debating invisible others. Sometimes the fiery character comes more from the heat of ad hominem burns than intellectual flame. Sometimes the debater who is clearly in the right is no match for the out-sized personality with the wacky idea. (Cue a debate on “geocentrism.”) And sometimes getting the debater to show up is a trick in and of itself.
I arranged a debate between Duke-trained New Testament scholar Leroy Huizenga and a tent revivalist-cum-atheist-propagandist from the Freedom from Religion Foundation on whether the Gospels “give us the real Jesus.” After all sorts of negotiations about flights, hotel rooms, and all the rest had been resolved, I received a message from our Fearless Free Thinker about his girlfriend traveling with him. When I said that we would be glad to have somebody’s wife host her for the evening if she didn’t want to hang out in the hotel or discover the town on her own, he indignantly told me that she would be attending. When I reminded him that this was a men’s group meeting, he suddenly discovered that, in this godless universe with its limitless freedom, a Kantian categorical imperative had been discovered: no woman should be excluded from any event. He would have to cancel his appearance.
I think this former fundamentalist thought he would be facing some well-meaning priest or kind and ineffectual seminary professor. When he discovered that Dr. Huizenga was somebody who had written and edited books with the distinguished European publisher Brill, he determined that his schtick—which I might summarize from having read a bunch of his articles and one of his books as “Hey, look at the weird stuff in the Bible! Ain’t God weird and creepy here?”—might not be as impressive in contrast.
No matter. Dr. Huizenga is a compelling and lucid speaker—pretty remarkable for the kind of New Testament scholar we’re talking about—and gave a fantastic talk about how to answer people who say the Gospels are just confused first-century Palestinian politics and mythmaking.
Talks Are Fine
Some of the best events the AOTM had were not debates at all but historical talks. Christopher Check, president of Catholic Answers, was one of the most popular speakers, giving spellbinding lectures about the real history of the Crusades, the war of the Vend e, the Cristeros and the martyrs of the Mexican Revolution, and the Battle of Lepanto.
Similarly popular were the talks on men’s spirituality. Those kicks to the posterior included talks such as “Pornography and the Catholic Man” and “To Mortify or Not to Mortify.” Men really loved the fact that these events got down to brass tacks on topics that are too often ignored by parishes and other groups. And they weren’t shy about pushing back on the speakers if they thought they were either wrong or too squishy on some topic.
Every talk or debate had an open-mike time so that men out in the audience could ask the questions or bring up points they thought had been missed in the main event. There was always a carnivalesque atmosphere to the meetings. Or perhaps the sound and image I’m looking for comes from the rowdy British House of Commons. Many liberal Catholics and Protestants likely shied away from the events because they felt a bit intimidated, but I know that there were a number of Protestants and even non-Christians who loved to come. The AOTM was so successful because the questions at hand were considered important—and important questions raise the emotional temperature and sometimes occasion a bit of bellowing.
Reviving the Rowdy
Indeed, the rowdiness of the event was a big part of its success. When men sense that others take truth seriously, they are attracted. And they were for many years. The ATF will not be exactly like the AOTM meetings. Yes, there will still be beer, wine, meat, and cigars. Yes, there will be the kind of rowdy fellowship and argument that is not simply reduced to quarrels. Yes, there will still be the same devotion to truth.
We are hoping in this new group to make some practical changes—shorten the schedule a bit, change the way the food is served, and make things go a bit quicker. Most importantly we will focus more strongly on making sure that each event has not only entertainment and information but also some direct edification. The word sounds dull to modern ears, but to edify is to build up. We want every meeting to be an opportunity not just to tear down the nonsense that pervades so much of our society, even among Catholics and other Christians, but to build up men to be better brothers, sons, husbands, fathers, co-workers, and neighbors. We want them to be better Christians.
Men crave friendship and Christian brotherhood that matches the way they operate. We’re going to give it to them. Join us this fall if you make it to the Twin Cities. But don’t expect to eat finger sandwiches or share your feelings.[*]
The Imaginative Conservative applies the principle of appreciation to the discussion of culture and politics—we approach dialogue with magnanimity rather than with mere civility. Will you help us remain a refreshing oasis in the increasingly contentious arena of modern discourse? Please consider donating now.
[*] The first one will be on October 12 at Holy Family Maronite parish in the St. Paul suburbs: it’s about why we might want to defend Western Civilization. You can find out more about it here.
The featured image is “The Smokers” (circa 1636) by Adriaen Brouwer, and is in the public domain, courtesy of Wikimedia Commons. It has been brightened for clarity.
As a female I like this idea for men. My son debates and runs all his intellectual inquiries thru me and it is excausting. He has no male counterpart other than perhaps the podcast world like Jordan Peterson which is a one way learning experience. I myself find the women groups or churches intellectually bankrupt. Almost as leaving your brains at home to join a cult of lots of emotionalism. It shows also playing out into politics etc. Balance, balance, balance. Maybe some day my son finds a group where he will be challenged and give me a break. Lol
Maria,
With the utmost respect for your desire to be a sounding board for your son, I would encourage you to give him good counsel to seek another sounding board. Even suggest a man or two who might be a good guide. We’re I close, I’d be more than happy to spend time with a bright, challenging young mind! (As a matter of fact, I find that those kinds of young men introduce themselves to me seeking advice, and my satisfaction is high when they tell me how much they have benefitted.)
Jordan Peterson would give your son advice along the lines of… “Go young man, and find a man who can help you find your way. Your mother loves you beyond your imagination. But she cannot know the way your mind and your spirit are driven. Your testosterone alone drives your thoughts , your attention, your emotions in a way that her comfort and protection cannot understand. Have courage to seek someone who will challenge you rise rise against all the adversity that you might face in life. Be fearless in taking charge of your life, in putting yourself out there, to be challenged by a man who understands your aspirations and your fears so that you can overcome them.”
I will keep your son in my prayers this weekend, that he may find courage. And I will do the same for you! Your son is blessed to have a caring mother like you.
This is great. How I wish there were something like ATF in my area.
I was invited to join an every Wednesday evening dinner a while back, attempted lockdowns not withstanding. Ten to twenty faith-filled Catholic men very week, not excuses except for an occasional feast day or extremely rare extenuating circumstance. After attended almost a year, I discovered a Jewish gentleman to be one of the most informed of the “Catholics” as well as a Protestant who listens and contributes keen insight from time to time.
Informal but passionate debate, topical rants about “what they’re trying to do to us this week”, discussions and lectures on history, classical literature, Latin/Greek/Hebrew translations, morality and Austrian economics. Argument and laughter are often heard and enjoined.
Why wait and wish someone would start one near you? It’s as simple as sending an email to a friend and let it grow organically. I brought in a friend one evening who lives 4 hours away. He started his own group back home and it is thriving.
Whether well organized or a small, informal group that gets together once a week for breakfast. It’s spiritually invigorating, calming to the soul, and magnetizing to one’s moral compass.
What a wonderful counterbalance to the ills of social media, isolating technology and guberment, and the loneliness that too many men around us experience. My wife has noted that I come home more like the confident, devoted man with whom she fell in love. I feel more manly too.
This is the best news I’ve heard in a long time!!! BIg Fan of the AOTM and miss it dearly. I’ll be there with friends.
Long time AOTM attendee. See you there!!
Sounds like a cool men’s group but why can’t you uplift men without putting down women?
I’m not sure what you think is putting women down in this essay. My wife edited the essay and did not think it offensive. I noted that the feminine qualities are not bad but merely not appropriate or attractive to groups of men–or, for that matter, mixed groups.
By the way, when some women in the Twin Cities started a group similar to ours called The Argument Club for Women, they asked me to come in and describe our events. When I described what we did and how we did it, I was told by a roomful of women that though this was good, they would certainly have different kinds of events even if they wanted to do debates.
I too wondered how any part of your piece “put women down”. There is a growing understanding in men that popular culture has desensitized society to the destruction of all that is positive about masculinity. At the same time, the “micro aggressions” against those in the “ hierarchy of the oppressed” include any comment that makes them uncomfortable or challenges their preordained safe spaces.
Now, I’m not accusing anyone in these comments of falling into the morass of political correctness, but I used to observe on social media a propensity of extrapolating meaning onto comments that had neither expression nor intent to which a writer was accused.
Don’t overlook the fact that there are many women who do not like these so called feminised meetings either. I am a woman more into apologetics, debate and all the things you list above. I think the kind of fellowship you describe women having above stems not so much from the fact that women are running the sessions now, but became more prominent when we moved into a highly emotional worship style in previous centuries, which triggered the abandonment of an intellectual faith, and a shift to overly emotional displays of worship and. ‘testimony sharing’ rather than teaching – by men as well as women. Men were as much at fault in this regard as women in terms of letting this shift happen. But to say that this type of fellowship/gathering appeals to women is too broad a brush stroke in my opinion. I am one of many women who have dropped out of church attendance and meetings precisely because of the type of fellowship you describe and sadly men are still leading those fellowships. I’d love to run a group such as you describe for women – but I think as brothers and sisters in Christ, there is still a need for us to also be able to do this together in our regular worship – but we badly need a restoration of worship in spirit and Truth with an emphasis in our pulpits on an intellectual Christianity founded in fact and historical events – women also need this. It is not just a male thing.
Kezza, see my reply to Patti below. I agree with you largely, but I still think there are differences in what kind of event, on average, women want even if it has intellectual content.
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my comment David. Much appreciated. I think you might be quite surprised as to how many women don’t like the kind of event you describe as being what women ‘on average’ like. I’m not the only female I know who cannot stand that type of thing – there are many of us out there, craving the rich fellowship you describe for your men. But I am totally on board with the idea that men do need their own spaces as you describe above, as do women. But the idea of mixed sessions also appeals – I have been part of some boisterous mixed sessions in my time and, having experienced them, those other wimpy ‘feelings’ and ‘sharing’ meetings pale in comparison . I want to hang out with people who are noisily excited about God, and who can’t stop talking about Him, debating about Him, reading about Him, arguing about Him in pursuit of a better knowledge of him. Passion fires passion. I am firmly convinced that there are many many women who would much prefer the kind of meeting you describe above for men as opposed to sharing and talking about feelings. I love a great debate – participating as well as watching. I pray your men’s sessions will be mightily blessed.
Thank you, Kezza. I agree that overly feminized stuff doesn’t really appeal even to a lot of women–and that women want content. Perhaps the Argument Club for Women has the right balance of content, debate, and in a manner that is perhaps not quite as raucous as our gatherings and without meals that are mostly hunks of meat.
Not all women want the huggy feely stuff either. Just because I like flowers and own a LBD doesn’t mean I’m also totally irrational and driven by my emotions. The lecture and debate topics mentioned above sound fascinating. If I could find a women’s group (or coed group!) that offered this kind of food for the soul I’d be all in, but unfortunately, most church offerings are dumbed down and rarely challenging.
Agreed that not all women like the huggy feely stuff either. But I think many women don’t like the idea of arguments either. A good friend of ours is a good example. Very strong Catholic woman but she said that if she has a free night, to her an argument is not what she wants to do. For info on the women’s group, see here: https://sites.google.com/site/argumentclubforwomen/
This idea sounds intriguing to me. I have from time to time been convicted of being closed in on myself with little outreach to others. Upon reflection I keep coming to the conclusion that I don’t define fellowship as coffee, donuts and chit chat. If I give anyone my attention I want one of these outcomes. Be entertained, be enlightened, be challenged or be inspired.
Talking cars and sports and other such drivel bores me to no end. If you can’t improve on silence then don’t try.
Silence and being alone are not synonymous with being bored or lonely. I think many just aren’t comfortable with themselves and seek distractions.
To me fellowship would look like men of common convictions united in a common noble purpose to which sacrificing oneself for the greater good would be an honor. This group idea sounds like a winner to me!.
Outstanding article and very inspiring to say the least. And true and to the point. much as meetings and group should be.
Forwarded to me from a female friend in our Parish as we are starting a monthly mens group, albeit a morning one. Booze and cigars might be a stretch.
Still and again, inspiring and also motivational. Will bring this to our table of discussion this Saturday.