There has got abroad a notion, somehow, that if you become a Christian you must sink your manliness and turn milksop. – Charles Spurgeon

So is it true? Do you have to check your masculinity at the door when you go to church? Well, yeah, somewhat, argues David Murrow in Why Men Hate Going to Church, but it’s not really supposed to be that way. No one can really dispute the fact that churchgoers are more likely female than male, but does that in itself make church less masculine or is there something that draws women to church?

Taking this and many other questions regarding the church gender gap, Murrow attempts to answer and find practical solutions for many of these problems. His basic argument is that those who are good at church must exhibit qualities that come more naturally to women. They must have good listening skills, be good relationally, enjoy talking in small groups or reading aloud, or possess other more feminine traits. Also, since the church is predominantly female, it markets to a female audience, pushing men even farther away. The more common masculine traits or skill sets (think changing a tire or killing woodland animals) are less useful in a church context. The message seems to be that men aren’t good at doing church, and as we guys know, we don’t want to what we aren’t good at.

Why Men Hate Going to Church is somewhat both a challenge and an affront to me. First of all, I’m a guy who’s “good” at church. I read, I actually like lectures, I’m a teacher. It’s offensive to me to imply that I’m less manly because I’m sensitive and caring. Murrow never states this outright, but he doesn’t do much to discount it either, even suggesting that worship leaders may be “feminizing worship just by being themselves” (p. 76). Murrow resorts to stereotyping without having much evidence to back up claims or without talking about what real masculinity actually is. Because he doesn’t correct the common misperception that real men must be “over-masculine” and never have positive emotions or do anything perceived as womanish, it can leave readers wondering if Murrow’s concentrating on making the Church comfortable for men rather than challenging men to be transformed into new creations and emulate Jesus as the ultimate example of masculinity.

Nonetheless, Murrow makes several great points and offers practical tips on getting men to church. Don’t make men sing love songs to Jesus, use each individual’s personal strengths in a church environment rather than forcing them into unnatural roles, involve men in the lesson…Murrow’s suggestions continue on and most of them are good and accurate. We need to emphasize a Jesus for men—the leader of the kingdom of God we’re called to.

To conclude, Why Men Hate Going to Church is a mixed bag. The advice is usually good, but I think we need to focus on calling men to be real men—not macho men and not guys who cry over puppies—but men who led as Jesus led, weeping over a friend yet railing on the Pharisees. Read this book but know that it’s not perfect.