In spiritual matters, kids take their cues from Dad by David Murrow
You've heard it said that fathers are the spiritual leaders of the home. Now there's a study to prove it.
Researchers from Switzerland examined whether parents' religious habits were transmitted to their offspring. They studied different variables, but one critical factor towered above the rest: the practices of the father determine whether children grow up attending church or not. And here's the shocker: the habits of the mother have almost no influence over their kids' future devotion.
Consider these findings:
When Mom is a regular churchgoer but Dad attends infrequently, just 3 percent of their kids go on to become regular churchgoers. When Mom is regular but Dad never attends, just 2 percent become regular attenders.
Now, let's flip the chart. What if Dad is faithful?
When both Mom and Dad attend church regularly, 33 percent of kids grow up to attend regularly. When Dad is regular but Mom only goes once in a while, the figure jumps to 38 percent. Here's the real bombshell: when Dad is faithful but Mom never attends, 44 percent of the kids end up as regular church attenders!
Bottom line: in spiritual matters, kids take their cues from Dad. If Papa doesn't go to church, chances are very slim that his children will become regular worshippers. If the kids see religion as "Mom's thing" they are more likely to become disenchanted. But if Dad leads by example, children are twenty-two times more likely to become lifelong churchgoers.
This trend is present in U.S. churches as well. Curtis Burnam, a 20-year veteran of youth ministry has seen it time and again. "Kids who are taken to church by Mom but not Dad are harder to keep in church. They tend to drop out at higher rates when they reach adolescence. They are also harder to engage when they do come to youth group. This is true for girls as well as boys."
Why are these findings so alarming? Because men are dropping out of America's churches. Consider this:
In 1952, the typical U.S. protestant worship service drew an adult crowd that was 47 percent male. Today that figure is 39 percent -- and falling. On any given Sunday there are 13 million fewer men than women in U.S. pews. Almost a quarter of married, churchgoing women attend services without their husbands each Sunday. According to Barna Research, men lag behind women in every area of Christian endeavor (except the senior pastorate). Few churches can establish or maintain a viable men's ministry. The majority of churchgoing men do nothing midweek (other than pray) to grow in faith.
Two obvious questions come to mind: why are Christian churches losing their men? And why are churchgoing men so uninvolved? Jesus enthralled men. Rival faiths such as Islam inspire fanatical allegiance from young men. What's the difference?
I studied this phenomenon for five years, and wrote my findings in a book titled, Why Men Hate Going to Church (Nelson Books, 2005). If I had to summarize my conclusions in one sentence it would be this: The modern church system is not designed to do what Jesus did: reach men with the Good News.
No, today's churches, without even realizing it, create an environment where women and tots thrive, but men feel hesitant and restrained. How so? Without even realizing it, modern churches default to a feminine spirituality. For instance, we focus almost exclusively on Christ's gentle side. A good Christian is always soft, sweet, and sentimental, focused on family and relationships instead of goals and achievement. Common church practices such as handholding, sitting in a circle and sharing your feelings, public reading and singing make men feel uncomfortable or incompetent. Today's praise songs present Christ as lover rather than leader. I could go on.
So men depart (or go passive). This in itself is a tragedy. But the greater loss comes years later, when the next generation turns its back on church, despite their mothers' superhuman attempts to grow them into spiritual champions.
It's time to face the truth: if we're going to pass a lifelong faith to our children, we must re-engage men. No amount of Sunday school, VBS, or youth group will do the trick. We might as well fold up our flannelgraphs and go home. In fact, we might reach more kids by canceling the entire children's ministry and focusing our efforts on men. This strategy would, in the long run, produce more lifelong followers of Jesus.
Kids need one thing: to see their fathers following Jesus. The question is: do we have the courage to transform the local church into a place where your average guy can connect with God?
John Chaney
"having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith . . ."Colossians 2:7
Interesting indeed. David Murrow was a guest on last Sunday's White Horse Inn broadcast. You can still listen to the broadcast here until they post this coming Sunday's edition. Then you can listen to it in the archives. This is a very interesting discussion. He has written a book Why Men Hate Church which I have not read. Maybe a Highway member with some time will read it and offer a review in the Book Nook forum.
I haven't read the book but I've heard this discussion on the White Horse Inn and Murrow's experience is not my experience. I'm wondering if there are others here on the-highway who can relate to the woman dominated church he describes.
I think he makes so good points about the influence women can have on a church if they are allowed to dominate. I've listed some of these quotes below...
He says fundamentally what we offer in church is:
Singing Socializing Sermons Nice soft tender nuturing environment. Top priority is to make people feel accepted. Good church goer is very verbal, relational, nurturing, and good with children.
He points out that these are all feminine qualities. Men are more interested in:
Competition Adventure Exitement Challenge
That's quite a contrast from the list above. Murrow credits this to the theraputic sentimental obscession of our culture. He goes on to say, "the metaphors we use today are very relational. People use the term "personal relationship with Jesus Christ". It's a term that is not in the Bible nor in the words of Jesus. Jesus said follow me. So in this sense the Gospel has been taken from a masculin context to a very feminine one."
He discusses the songs we sing in our worship services with some irony. "Many songs say - Hold me close, let your love surround me, I'm so in love with you are hard for men to sing. Women are more relational than men. They aspire to these romantic terms while men are turned off. He says, he has a number of men in his life that he loves, that he looks up to and respects, but he would never go up to them and say Paul I'm so in love with you. Men are not about personal expression. They like salty frank discussions."
I've tried to capture some of his views in the above quotes and I'm wondering if others here are battling these kinds of gender battles in their church or if they are in the group that he identified as turned off and no longer attend.
He concludes with some comments he's been recieving about his book. Interestingly Murrow says that women are thanking him for finally explaining their husband to them. They say, thank you for finally explaining why I can't get my sons to go to church with me now that they are 17 or 18. Most of the opposition to his book are from older men entrenched in church hierarchy who like the female dominated churches and fear a church run by men.
Is this guy hitting on a real problem? I think it's more than just a problem with masculinity.
I frankly find these findings appalling. Any attempt to synthesize that which is “suppose” to be spiritual and make of it a “gender” issue is pure heresy. He is merely viewing the church as a social organization. Look at the things he points to (1) socializing, (2) nurturing, (3) verbal, relational, nurturing, and good with children, etc. Where is God in all this? Where is “true worship” toward the true Saviour? His evaluation is “merely” looking at the external and not the internal. He is looking at the unkempt grave instead of the decaying person which lies beneath. The real problem is the soul, not so much the other.
If men desire, (1) Competition, (2) Adventure, (3) Excitement, and (4) Challenges then they can come to Church and God can for their sin and lead them to a repentant life-style. Once the inside is dealt with the outside will manifest that which is of God, which includes, socializing, nurturing, relational, etc. with the people of God ... Real men love the Church because they are (1) born again of the Spirit of God and (2) living godly lives. If they love not, then they are violating (1) and/or (2) above.
I frankly find these findings appalling. Any attempt to synthesize that which is “suppose” to be spiritual and make of it a “gender” issue is pure heresy. He is merely viewing the church as a social organization.
Exactly! In an interview Murray had with a Wall Street Journalist she came up with the term "spiritual sorority." He said that term was "right on" and he wished he has used that term in his book. Which goes to show you that his view is made up mostly of social distinctives.
Wes
When I survey the wondrous cross on which the Prince of Glory died, my richest gain I count but loss and pour contempt on all my pride. - Isaac Watts
I think you have hit on something that the article doesn't. If Church was just a social club, then it would probably be spot on. Unfortunately however, because in many cases Churches have designed their Churches as social clubs (sometimes with out realizing it) I think there is merit in what it says.
Unfortunately however, because in many cases Churches have designed their Churches as social clubs (sometimes with out realizing it) I think there is merit in what it says.
What is a social club that is called a Church? A social club. Merely calling something a Church does not change the truth of what it is. If you do not even understand what you are attempting to treat (i.e. Church vs. social club), how will it be healed? Tom, the problem is spiritual and thus their solution is from the pit of hell.
What about the stat that children are more likely to attend church when grown if their father attended church? Even more so if the father attended and mother didn't?
I can see where both parents influenced future church attendance in their children, but cannot comprehend the higher rate if only the father attended. Wouldn't a divided house deter future attendance?
John Chaney
"having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith . . ."Colossians 2:7
I agree that it is a spiritual problem, but then so is all sin. I think Murrow's criticism, particularly of the music, is valid. Although music is not to be equated with Word and sacrament, it does indeed have an influence on the worship service. Maybe I sense it more acutely because in our church the Music Director (now called "Worship Leader") has chosen almost exclusively the sentimental variety of praise songs and largely jettisoned traditional hymns.
Yes, the issue is much deeper than simply the worship style or the emasculization of evangelicalism. It is our image of God that is at stake.
Curiously, the Issues, Etc. journal had an article some months ago with very similar observations. I believe the title of the article was "Church is for Girls." Although I am not a Lutheran, I subscribe to Issues, Ect. because it has some excellent articles.
I agree that it is a spiritual problem, but then so is all sin. I think Murrow's criticism, particularly of the music, is valid. Although music is not to be equated with Word and sacrament, it does indeed have an influence on the worship service.
The question is not if music has an influence on the Church—of course it does. This thread is entitled, “Why Men Hate Church” and not “Why the Church Hates Men.” My answer is based on the question of Why Men Hate a “Biblical” Church. I assume that if a Church is “biblical” then it will have godly music? If the Church presents forth godly worship then a man is without excuse and thus “it is a spiritual problem with him.” Of course, if the Church is corrupt in worship, Word, the Sacraments, etc. then you have different issues at stake.
Worship is relational. You cannot escape this fact. It is relational with the Trinity, with other members of the congregation, and with the body of Christ as a whole. Why would a godly man be “turned off” by “romantic terms?” Was David? Are we to say that Jesus, a man, was “not about personal expression?” When the Bible says God is love, does it not ring forth a relational truth and reality? Your problem is what you are classifying as masculine and famine. You begin with the idea that man is not relational, however Scripture states that Adam walked with God in the Garden! How much more relational can we get? If any man is redeemed he will walk with God! Redeemed man who is “godly” will not have a problem with such a relation! The Puritans captured the idea of what a godly man is and yet in many of their writings they use “relational,” and “emotional” terms (read, The Puritan Vision of the Christian Life)! Edwards consistently used the Augustinian mutual love model. Furthermore, he developed social themes within the mutual love model.
Are these men less men, (though they suffered the ravages of famine, war, and death) because they engaged in realizing that God is a relational God? Thus, the question is not what is masculine and what is feminine (which depraved man has distorted), but what is godly—what is biblical? If men have a probelm with "public reading and singing making them feel uncomfortable or incompetent" they have deeper issues. When you deal with the question, "Do Men Know the God They Profess?" they will attend church, have true true worship, fellowship, etc.
Maybe this quote will help.
Quote
The weakness in pastoral counseling in the last century contrasts with the profound strength of the Puritan’s pastoral counseling. These pastors in the 17th and 18th centuries, such as Richard Baxter and Jonathon Edwards, were known as "physicians of the soul." They serve as excellent examples for us as we seek to develop distinctly Christian responses to life’s perplexing problems. Powlison writes:
The Puritans developed a massive and profound literature on a wide range of personal and pastoral problems. They wrote numerous, detailed case studies. They had a sophisticated diagnostic system that penetrated motives. They had a well-developed view of the long-term processes, the tensions, the difficulties, and the struggles of the Christian life. They carefully addressed what the twentieth century would term addictions to sex, food, alcohol, and anger; perfectionism and the drive to please other people; interpersonal conflict; priorities and the management of time and money; unbelief and deviant value systems. (Powlison, 1992)
Timothy Keller wrote:
The Puritans would find many biblical counselors are being far too superficial in their treatment of problems by merely calling for surface repentance and behavioral change. But they also would be quite uncomfortable with the ‘inner healing’ approaches that virtually ignore behavior and the need for mortification …Above all, the Puritans’ ‘spirit’ would differ quite a bit from other counselors today. Most modern evangelical counselors simply lack the firmness, directness and urgency of the Puritans. Most of us talk less about sin than did our forefathers. But, on the other hand, the Puritans were amazingly tender, encouraging, always calling the counselees to accept the grace of God ..... (Keller, 1988).
We can learn a lot from the Puritan’s scholarship, methodology, astuteness and genuine concern for those they counseled. Real men, real relationships.
J_Edwards said: Tom, the problem is spiritual and thus their solution is from the pit of hell.
AMEN! That is why I despise such "surveys" since then rarely deal with the "real" problem and the question(s) asked reflect that. In this particular case, the reasons are sought in the psychological and/or sociological areas. Methinks a more correct approach would have been to ask two questions:
1. Why do unregenerate men attend church?
2. Why do regenerate men not attend church?
To ask why unregenerate men do not attend church is rather inane, IMHO, because the answer is a given. It makes no difference what kind of church is in view, although if solid, conservative churches are under consideration, there is but one answer. [Three guesses and the first two don't count!] <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/giggle.gif" alt="" />
Men (and women) hate feminist churches. Feminist churches violate the order of creation by permitting women to speak publicly in the Church, teach men, and hold offices which exercise authority over men. The affects of women doing what God has not called them to do go beyond the feminist churches. They contribute to the breakdown of the family and tear at the very fabric of society.
More women than men attend church because most churches are feminist and most feminists are women.
Though I would agree with most of what you posted, I must disagree with the portion of your statement which states, “More women than men attend church because most churches are feminist.” To make such a matter-a-fact statement you would have had to visit every Church in the world and do an analysis!—you haven’t! I am sure most of the women here, if not all of them, are offended at such a statement, for you claim that most Christian women are feminists! In addition, there is an extreme difference in a Christian feminist (an oxymoronic phrase) and a godly women who has mistakenly embraced some false theology from the feminist movement. Moreover, the trend in the feminist movement at present is a move toward witchcraft and other New Age religions and away from the Church. Radical feminists believe that the traditional church must be dismantled (Feminism and the End of Traditional Religions, Naomi Goldenburg).
Though stats can be argued, Barna states;
Quote
• 49% of women have read the Bible in the past week, compared to 38% of men who report reading the Bible in the past week. (2004)
• Women are more likely than are men to attend church on a given Sunday (47% to 39%, respectively). (2004)
• Women are more likely than men to attend a Sunday school class at church (25% to 18%) or to participate in a small group (22% to 18%). (2004)
• In general, women pray more often than do men, with 89% of women versus 77% of men reporting that they have prayed in the past week. (2004)
• Women are more likely than men to be born again: 62% of women have accepted Christ as their savior, compared to 38% of men. (2004)
• Women are 62% of the adult born again population. (2004)
• Women are more likely than are men to believe that the Bible is totally accurate in all of its teachings. (51% versus 36%). (2004)
• Women are more likely than are men to believe that God is the all-powerful, all-knowing, perfect creator that rules the world today (76% to 62%). (2004)
• 78% of women compared to 66% of men say that their faith is very important to them. (2004)
• 3 out of 4 women (75%) see a closer relationship with God as very desirable for their future, a belief held by only 65% of men. (2000)
• 66% of women describe themselves as “deeply spiritual” compared to 57% of men who say that “deeply spiritual” describes them accurately. (2004)
Though there are feminist Churches their number is relatively few. Though there is feminist beliefs within some Churches this does not make the majority of Churches feminist! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/3stooges.gif" alt="" /> Apparently, somewhere along the line you have been misinformed about godly woman in the Church today!
Thank God for women. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bravo.gif" alt="" />
![[Linked Image]](http://www.emotipad.com/newemoticons/SmackBottom.gif)
for their sin and lead them to a repentant life-style. Once the inside is dealt with the outside will manifest that which is of God, which includes, socializing, nurturing, relational, etc. with the people of God ... Real men love the Church because they are (1) born again of the Spirit of God and (2) living godly lives. If they love not, then they are violating (1) and/or (2) above.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/pilgrim/pil_sig2.gif)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/pencil.gif)
