You can read the original source here.
Many of the men who are in most need of Catholic male fellowship are
in the worst position to make it happen: mid-career, young and growing family,
demands on time to balance everything...anything that isn’t work or family gets
pushed to the back burner.
When my wife and I first got married, we didn’t
have many friends who were practicing Catholics. I had to fish for a college
friend to be the godfather of our firstborn, and I attended a Protestant Bible
study for six years because I couldn’t find a Catholic one. We felt alone as we
slowly turned the boat toward the shores of Catholic orthodoxy.
So, I prayed. I prayed the prayer of St. Francis:
“Lord, send me some brothers.” And, eventually, one by one, He did. A priest in
our area was organizing a winter hike in single-digit temperatures and I got
plugged in with some good, solid Catholic guys. I was very grateful for these
guys; it seemed like the community, the band of brothers, I had been looking
for.
I want to be clear about something here: none of
what I’m about to write is reflective of these guys in particular. From other
male Catholic friends I’ve talked to in other areas of the country, I’ve heard
that they seem to deal with the same issues and challenges that I do here in my
area. So, I think the issue is one of the idea of a Catholic men’s group in
general, not a particular group specifically.
Anyone who has done a group project knows that
some people are naturally “take charge” while others remain more passive and
allow other people to lead. Men’s groups are no exception. In one sense, a
group really needs that one guy (or two, or three) who can play the
project-manager role and bring guys together, put the work in to build some
structure and accountability, and keep men engaged.
The downside to this is twofold: firstly, the
functioning of the group can become dependent on that one man without a
sustainable system in place if and when he leaves, moves, or steps down.
Secondly, the guy stepping into that role (usually because no one else wants
to) can become resentful of the time and work he is putting in to make things
happen, and he can become burned out in the process.
To overcome these obstacles, you could do the
“President,” “Vice President,” “Secretary,” “Treasurer” thing, but then it
becomes much less organic and more like a second job, something you have to do.
Or you could just keep it unstructured and decentralized, with no one really
leading the group. But men being men, it becomes easy to just not do or suggest
anything then. Everyone becomes passive, or, at the very best, they rely on an
organic approach in which things happen as they happen.
In my experience, guys do not just get together to
talk in the same way women do. Men use one-third the number of words women do
in a day, and their time spent together (for better or worse) needs to be
structured around some kind of activity for it to work. This, too, is another
kind of no-win trap. If there is a lack of activity or something to do or
accomplish, men will not naturally spend time together for long. But the
logistics of planning “things to do” often necessitates a point-guy to take
charge and make it happen for the group. (See the previous section regarding
the reticence of guys to step into this role.)
If there is no common vision—something to work
toward or be challenged by, or some string that holds the group together—it
becomes “guys hanging out.” That kind of group is easy to walk away from
because it doesn’t require anything—no work, no accountability, no undertaking
of any kind. Just show up and do whatever. But when you start actually
requiring things of men, you run into the third problem, which is….
Many of the men who are in most need of Catholic
male fellowship are in the worst position to make it happen: mid-career, young
and growing family, demands on time to balance everything…anything that isn’t
work or family gets pushed to the back burner. Which is largely
understandable—and also a reason why many men’s groups peter out or become
inactive. It isn’t a top priority, despite the lip service that is given to the
need for strong men in the Church today. When the going gets tough, the tough
get…busy.
Another issue I’ve seen that goes back to the
problem of needing to “do” or “accomplish” something as men is that when that
“task” is complete, there’s no real reason to stay connected with one another.
I’ve done Exodus 90 twice, and while it is good at challenging men (cold
showers, fasting, prayer, etc.), I hardly have any contact anymore with the men
I’ve gone through the program with. Sure, it appeals to male sensibilities for
a challenge, to be pushed, and to structure fellowship around a “thing” to
focus on (i.e., the 90-day program), which is why it is a relatively successful
Catholic program for men. But what then, on Day 91 and beyond? This is the
challenge for any kind of program-based regimen to build male fellowship—when
the program ends, so does the fellowship, largely.
Parish-based men’s programs suffer from the usual
problem: since you are drawing from a limited scope of men based on parochial
parameters, it skews older and tends to feel forced, inorganic, and
unsustainable. Organizations like the Knights of Columbus do good work. They
are good men. But, as a friend described them, they are largely “a civic group,
and manpower for the parish.” They skew older as well, the uniforms are goofy
(in my opinion), and the insurance thing is annoying. Not my thing. But that
doesn’t mean a lot of men don’t gain benefit from it; just not many from my demographic.
Maybe in another ten years or so I’ll get my second degree. Maybe.
“Virtual” groups have their own issues. I had to
do a Zoom event for work recently; the night before, we had an in-person event.
The energy was totally different. At the in-person event, there was an energy
and buzz; the Zoom event was largely flat and tired. Zoom fatigue is real,
especially when you use it for work. Sure, you don’t have the geographic
constraints, but there is a lot lacking when you are not physically present
with other men.
Virtual life is not real life. I’m going to say it
again so the people in the back can hear: virtual life is not real life. The
more one lives online, debating with internet strangers or going down reddit
rabbit holes, the more underformed one’s character seems to be. For many men
who live in more isolated areas, it’s a temptation for sure, due to being the
“next best thing” to real life and in-person interaction. I get it. But I still
believe social media and the like are a harmful experiment that we will wake up
to years from now with massive societal damage to reckon for.
One of the things I was looking for most in a
men’s group was the least easily found, and that was accountability. Despite
the solidness of the guys in my local group, and our years of knowing each
other, there are virtually none whom I feel I could rely on for spiritual
accountability, nor guys who would trust me with that aspect of their lives.
Maybe that’s just the way it is with men—we hide things easily and withdraw
into ourselves, whether because of shame or how we are trained to be islands of
one.
It’s inevitable that some guys will come and go,
move, or have schedule changes that preclude them from staying involved in one
group for years on end. To the extent that you are not bringing new guys in,
you are failing to grow and may not be in a situation in which you can sustain
the group over the years. It also becomes tempting to be comfortable and
cliquey when you just keep it to a little club.
Every time I see a Catholic guy in a tweed jacket
or bowtie smoking a pipe or drinking whiskey while waxing about Chesterton or
Belloc, I groan a little. Same for the Man Up type marketing for diocesan men’s
conferences—the soldier/military imagery, the baseball Hall of Fame speakers. I
mean, they’re stuck between a rock and a hard place here, so I feel for the planners
of these events.
The fact is, though, a lot of men—like
myself—don’t fit into these boxes, and it doesn’t make us less of a man. They
are shallow, easy stereotypes, so you don’t have to think too much about what
actually makes one a Catholic man.
The thing I struggle with as a Catholic man is
that cognitive dissonance that comes with being told that “men need other men;
iron sharpens iron!” while simultaneously seeing guys who don’t really believe
that. It becomes Catholic, Inc. marketing for things like Into the Breach and
Battle Ready (TM). For most guys, I would wager, they actually feel that work
and family is all a man should really need. And they act accordingly. Why
should I pour into my local group, after a number of years doing so, when I can
just be like most men I know who are content with working and being with their
family?
Most Catholic men’s groups and diocesan
initiatives recognize the need for strong men in the Church, but they are
impotent to exact the change on a sustainable, year-after-year level, in real
fellowship. Maybe that’s just the way things are, the nature of manhood, and to
expect otherwise is…well, misguided expectations. Or maybe it’s a Catholic
problem, since “fellowship” is often seen as a thing for Protestants. We have
the Mass and sacraments—why do we need each other? Maybe we don’t. Maybe it’s
true—work, family, and our local parish community should be enough.
I think what it comes down to is this: to the
degree that men are not growing in virtue, or loving each other sincerely in
fraternal charity, you may be better off not wasting your time.
I think the sad fact is, for many of us men, we
are largely on our own. Sometimes we might actually want more but don’t know
how to go about forming it. Or maybe it’s just me. If we can find one or two
solid men to rely on in our times of need, and be that man to them as well,
that’s a plus. But largely, I wouldn’t count on a Catholic men’s group holding
up for more than a few years. If it does, consider yourself blessed.
.jpg)