Why Men Hate Going to Church

[Pale Rider]

Why Men Hate Going to Church

By David Murrow
Reviewed by Jamie Dunlop


Why do men hate going to church? Even for this reviewer—who attends a church with no discernable gender gap (48 percent male)—the topic is pressing given the female-preponderant membership of many churches. Why Men Hate Going to Church, by David Murrow, explores the elements of American church life that discourage attendance and engagement of men.

His conclusion? Churches have shifted toward a style that is comfortable for the stereotypical woman—at the expense of the stereotypical man. And by men, Murrow is referring to masculine men: "Tough, earth-working guys . . . high achievers, alpha males, risk takers, and visionaries" as set against "the quiet, introspective gentlemen who populate the church today" (6).

Arguing from data and anecdote, Murrow describes the elements of today’s church that are unattractive to unchurched men, and then prescribes a solution.

AN ENLIGHTENING DIAGNOSIS
Murrow’s description of church elements that are foreign and uncomfortable to men is enlightening and useful. And some of the changes he calls for turn out to be quite biblical—including changes largely derided by more theologically "progressive" denominations such as the Presbyterian Church (USA) in which Murrow serves as an elder.

Murrow points to four categories of church elements that clash with the temperament of most unchurched men.

1. Church makes men feel uncomfortable because it emphasizes feminine values

Murrow states that many elements of modern churches—from music to vocabulary to the dress code—emphasize values that are more easily associated with femininity than masculinity. For example, sentimental songs that celebrate the intimacy of relationship with Jesus Christ bring a more feminine style of worship. As Murrow writes, "Think of the mental gymnastics that must take place inside a man’s subconscious mind as he sings lyrics like these. He’s trying to express his love to Jesus, a man who lives today, using words no man would dare say to another, set to music that sounds like the love songs his wife listens to in the car" (139).

A second example of overemphasis on feminine values in the church is a desire for comfort at the expense of risk. Murrow writes in chapter 4, "Velvet Coffin Christianity is the real cancer in the church today. Its key characteristic is comfort. Everyone is so nice to each other. And we choose a church based on how comfortable it makes us feel . . . Men gag on this kind of religion" (27).

Murrow’s reaction against this overemphasis is one of the high points of the book: "Today’s church is all about safety. What’s our top prayer request? ‘God, keep us safe. Keep our kids safe. Watch over us and protect us.’ God’s job is to keep our well-ordered lives flowing smoothly" (162). Churches that focus on their own comfort will cease to attract men, Murrow warns, and churches without men are prone to turn inward, away from their call to change the world.

2. Church forces men to do things that they find uncomfortable

From asking men to sing in public, to sermons that are longer than the space between television commercials, Murrow showcases elements of church life that are uncomfortable for most unchurched men.

3. Men assume that church will require them to give up masculine traits

Murrow lists a number of men’s misconceptions about what they must give up to become part of a church. They assume church will make them "dorky" and "nerdy"—the equivalent of the evangelical Christian Ned Flanders from the Simpsons cartoon.

4. Church does not present a compelling model of leadership

One assumption that underlies much of Murrow’s thinking on leadership is that "If men are to return to Christ, they need strong, godly laymen to help them in their walk . . . For too long we have asked men to follow our teaching, our methods, and our theology. Men do not follow these things. I’ll say it again: men follow men." It is difficult to argue with the premise that visionary leaders are the source of much change in this world. As a result, Murrow castigates the church for its inability to inspire men to greatness.

http://www.alliancenet.org/CC/articl...279238,00.html

[Nienna]

I think this is a good perspective, and I think that the "meekness" of Jesus is overemphasized in many churches. Jesus willingly submitted his will and his rights; he treated hurting people with gentleness and compassion. But there are lots of stories in the Bible that show Jesus willing to FIGHT (at least verbally) for the Father, stories that show Jesus' POWER. The Christian faith is dynamic and HARD, not for the weak-willed. Men would be more attracted to it if they understood these aspects.

[Pale Rider]

I think this is a good perspective, and I think that the "meekness" of Jesus is overemphasized in many churches. Jesus willingly submitted his will and his rights; he treated hurting people with gentleness and compassion. But there are lots of stories in the Bible that show Jesus willing to FIGHT (at least verbally) for the Father, stories that show Jesus' POWER. The Christian faith is dynamic and HARD, not for the weak-willed. Men would be more attracted to it if they understood these aspects.

Although Jesus was a man, he was also a GOD! He knew what he was here for. It was easy for him to appear or portray himself as "meak". He had an ace in the hole.

I agree with the article. Even though I think about going to church more, I'm always uneasy sitting through it. And actually, the only reason I think of going to church is that Jesus said, "where two or more are gathered in my name, there is power."

[Nienna]

Although Jesus was a man, he was also a GOD! He knew what he was here for. It was easy for him to appear or portray himself as "meak". He had an ace in the hole.

I agree with the article. Even though I think about going to church more, I'm always uneasy sitting through it. And actually, the only reason I think of going to church is that Jesus said, "where two or more are gathered in my name, there is power."

I don't think church should be so much about going and listening to a sermon. I think the early church was mostly a gathering of people, sharing stories about their lives with each other, offering suggestions to each other, pitching in and helping and SERVING wherever they were needed. And teaching and communion and singing were thrown in. I think the early church experience was more about LIVING LIFE than filling a pew once a week. People were ACCOUNTABLE to each other. If you were a believer, but refused to live the life (ie, stop sinning), you were to be expelled from membership and not allowed to meet. There was the expectation that you had to LIVE this stuff.

[avatar4321]

I think those points highly depend on what Church you are going to.

[Guernicaa]

I think those points highly depend on what Church you are going to.

I agree.

I always hated church because A)I didn't believe most of the stuff and B)It was very boring.

[Pale Rider]

I think those points highly depend on what Church you are going to.

They're pretty close to right on for any church I've ever been too...

I once went to a tent revival down in Tampa, Florida. Not THAT was fun.

[Hugh Lincoln]

Although Jesus was a man, he was also a GOD! He knew what he was here for. It was easy for him to appear or portray himself as "meak". He had an ace in the hole.

It's funny/sacriligeous, but imagine Jesus walking through the 'hood. A tough bumps him. "Yo, faggot, what's up with the robe?" And then, after enough, Jesus decides to employ a miracle of some kind.

I always HATED church as a kid. Vomit. I was dragged to Catholic church in my itchy wool pants. It was so gay, sitting there singing the gayest songs imaginable. I'm sure there are ways to make it better, but just look at who runs most American churches these days... lesbians, gays, meek males. I once read that the lowest levels of testosterone in any man were found in preachers.

[Pale Rider]

It's funny/sacriligeous, but imagine Jesus walking through the 'hood. A tough bumps him. "Yo, faggot, what's up with the robe?" And then, after enough, Jesus decides to employ a miracle of some kind.

Word.

I always HATED church as a kid. Vomit. I was dragged to Catholic church in my itchy wool pants. It was so gay, sitting there singing the gayest songs imaginable. I'm sure there are ways to make it better, but just look at who runs most American churches these days... lesbians, gays, meek males. I once read that the lowest levels of testosterone in any man were found in preachers.

I had to go to "Sunday School" as a youngster. I HATED it! But I understand why my parents made me do it. I did learn about my religon, and I'm a stronger Christian now because of it. Still... I HATED it...

[Guernicaa]

I present Debatepolicy with example #1 on how conservatives misrepresent Christianity to form their politics:

Too bad. Maybe you wouldn't be a liberal had you believed.

If Jesus were alive today, Jesus would not agree in cutting social programs to help the poor, nor would he agree with invading a country that never harmed us in any way, shape, or form. Calling gay people "queers!" and "fags!" is not what Jesus stood for. Degrading minorities, and making racist statements because of an ethno-centric redneck ignorance would not be condoned Jesus.

The only issues you guys have a fucking leg to stand on with Jesus is abortion, not being having sex with the same sex, and not having sex in general unless your married.

Everything else is your own evil spin on Christianity.

[5stringJeff]

1. Church makes men feel uncomfortable because it emphasizes feminine values

2. Church forces men to do things that they find uncomfortable

3. Men assume that church will require them to give up masculine traits

4. Church does not present a compelling model of leadership

IMO, the solution for Christian men is to fix these problems where they exist, not to quit going to church.

[Pale Rider]

IMO, the solution for Christian men is to fix these problems where they exist, not to quit going to church.

I agree. There's still a lot of times I think of going to church but don't.

I'm not even sure churches are aware of these problems, but if they were, I can't imagine if being much of a problem to "man up" the church a little bit. Less songs, a little more hell fire and brimestone in the sermon, something to eat...

[avatar4321]

Wanted to try again to get on the topic of the thread because its interesting.

1. Church makes men feel uncomfortable because it emphasizes feminine values

Murrow states that many elements of modern churches—from music to vocabulary to the dress code—emphasize values that are more easily associated with femininity than masculinity. For example, sentimental songs that celebrate the intimacy of relationship with Jesus Christ bring a more feminine style of worship. As Murrow writes, "Think of the mental gymnastics that must take place inside a man’s subconscious mind as he sings lyrics like these. He’s trying to express his love to Jesus, a man who lives today, using words no man would dare say to another, set to music that sounds like the love songs his wife listens to in the car" (139).

A second example of overemphasis on feminine values in the church is a desire for comfort at the expense of risk. Murrow writes in chapter 4, "Velvet Coffin Christianity is the real cancer in the church today. Its key characteristic is comfort. Everyone is so nice to each other. And we choose a church based on how comfortable it makes us feel . . . Men gag on this kind of religion" (27).

Murrow’s reaction against this overemphasis is one of the high points of the book: "Today’s church is all about safety. What’s our top prayer request? ‘God, keep us safe. Keep our kids safe. Watch over us and protect us.’ God’s job is to keep our well-ordered lives flowing smoothly" (162). Churches that focus on their own comfort will cease to attract men, Murrow warns, and churches without men are prone to turn inward, away from their call to change the world.

Comfort is a feminine value? The desire to protect is a feminine value? Seems to me its a natural instinct of a man to want to protect his wife and childre and others he cares about.

Is love a feminine value as well? Ive never seen compassion or love as non-manly. In fact, brotherly love is the epitome of true manly virtue.

What other feminine values does he think Churches are teaching us? Because I hardly see how these are feminine values. What are these manly values that he thinks Churches are neglecting to teach?

2. Church forces men to do things that they find uncomfortable

From asking men to sing in public, to sermons that are longer than the space between television commercials, Murrow showcases elements of church life that are uncomfortable for most unchurched men.

Forgive my language, but any man who is afraid of something like singing is a pussy. What the heck kind of man is he if he cant do something he finds uncomfortable. Work sure as heck isnt comfortable, yet we are expected to do it all the time.

If the Church cant ask us to change our lives, even when its uncomfortable, what is the point of it?

3. Men assume that church will require them to give up masculine traits

Murrow lists a number of men’s misconceptions about what they must give up to become part of a church. They assume church will make them "dorky" and "nerdy"—the equivalent of the evangelical Christian Ned Flanders from the Simpsons cartoon.

What "masculine" traits do religious men give up? As far as I'm concerned, Jesus Christ is the epitome of a man. He is the man. Modeling our lives after him will make us better men, not worse.

4. Church does not present a compelling model of leadership

One assumption that underlies much of Murrow’s thinking on leadership is that "If men are to return to Christ, they need strong, godly laymen to help them in their walk . . . For too long we have asked men to follow our teaching, our methods, and our theology. Men do not follow these things. I’ll say it again: men follow men." It is difficult to argue with the premise that visionary leaders are the source of much change in this world. As a result, Murrow castigates the church for its inability to inspire men to greatness.

This is probably the most valid criticism. Probably more so in protestant/evangelical churches because of the decentralized nature of the Church. But I think its probably existant in all Churches. However, I think that this is because of a failure to adequately teach the principles of the Gospel. Because adherence to the principles creates leaders.