Why is the Evangelical church today so effeminate? Why do we have pastors in skinny jeans with V-necks deeper than their theology pandering to feminists, leading woke lament sessions and singing Jesus-is-my-boyfriend style songs? Why is it that the vast majority of congregations today are heavily skewed towards women and increasingly, faith and religion are seen as a “woman’s domain”? Is it possible to have a masculine Christainity? Is this just how it’s always been or is there something wrong with the Evangelical church today that is pushing manly men away from it?

The book Masculine Christianity by Zachary M. Garris makes a compelling Biblical case for the desperate need to recover a masculine Christianity today.

The Growth of Feminism

I think that many Christians today don’t realize just how much feminist ideology has infected the church.

Yet, it’s pretty easy to illustrate. We don’t even have to bring up the non sequitur of a “woman pastor” being like a square circle to illustrate it.

Things like women’s sufferage (voting), women in the workplace and in positions of public leaderships (such as politics) are taken for granted. Not many today even think twice about these things, yet in the scope of history—and especially in terms of Christian tradition and theology—they are novel innovations.

Yet sadly, many Evangelical Christians today are so theologically and historically unaware that they don’t even notice that something’s off. The fact is that feminism is so deeply intrenched into the culture we live in. It’s as invisible to us as the air we breathe. Unless one intentionally takes a step back to critically examine many of the assumptions of 21st century society, we assume that this is just how things always were, or perhaps think that they are sure signs of positive progress away from the dull Neanderthals of yesteryear.

Garris notes that feminism makes two core errors:

1. It confuses equality with sameness (meaning that men and women must be able to do the same things)
2. It assumes that most of the differences between the sexes are imposed by culture and posits a functional androgyny instead

Carolyn Graglia noted in her book, Domestic Tranquility: A Brief Against Feminism, that feminism’s “long-term goal” has been to “create a society in which women behave as much like men as possible” so that women will “hold equal political and economic power with men.” Androgyny has always been the end goal—a flattening of the God-created differences between the sexes.

B.B. Warfield (1851—1921) of the old Princeton Seminary, noted that feminism viewed the individual rather than the family as the basic unity of society. He goes on to note that the apostle Paul viewed humanity as made up of families, whereas the feminist movement saw the woman as just another individual next to the man, and saw no reason to deal differently with the two. In our hyper-individualistic age, individualism is just the default way of thinking. However, the Bible brings needed balance—emphasizing that while individuals matter, they are not disjointed atoms, but rather convenantally related and interconnected—both in terms of their relationship with God and each other. Feminism is just one of the postmodern ideologies that has fragmented this covenantal view of mankind.

Many Christians today don’t realize that the feminist movement, even from it’s first-wave was at root an anti-Christian movement and driven by secular progressivism (together with a bunch of occultic connections we aren’t going to have time to explore here). First-wave feminism stemmed from the most radical wing of the Enlightenment—the Jacobins of the French Revolution, who carried out the Reign of Terror (1793—1794). Feminism’s founders and leaders were heretics and radicals such as Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucy Stone, and Susan B. Anthony.

Stanton, for example, who was an apostate from the Presbyterian church, was not just trying to achieve women’s right to vote, but also wanted to overthrow the traditional and biblical practice of male leadership in every sphere, inlcuding the church. Stanton even published The Woman’s Bible which was a commentary that dismissed clear biblical teachings she didn’t like and described the Bible’s teaching on a woman’s subordination as “evil”, writing that, “We have made a fetish [sic] of the Bible long enough. The time has come to read it as we do all other books, accepting the good and rejecting the evil it teaches.”

The French Revolution spread egalitarianism which was used by feminists to undermine male leadership in the home. The Industrial Revolution made domestic work easier and drove men out of the home to work in factories. Then the Sexual Revolution, enabled by the pill, encouraged women to abandon the home, embrace promiscuity and take up the same tasks as men. With the rise of the Nanny State, government has displaced the role of fathers—with many expecting government to provide for them from cradle to grave. Other policies such as no-fault divorce, financial handouts to unmarried mothers, decriminalizing adultery and homosexuality, legalizing same-sex mirage and other things have contributed to the breakdown of the family.

However, even with all these cultural movements, the feminization of Christianity was a problem well before the Feminist movement. While, we don’t have time here to explore it, others have noted how monastic movements, pietism and mysticism moved the faith away from its masculine orientation and feminized it. A great book that tracks the historical trend is Leon Podle’s book, The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity. In it, he notes that when divorced from masculinity, the Church emasculated fades into universalism and quietism, the effects of which run rampant through the Western Church of today.

Feminism and the Church’s Failure

So, why highlight this brief history of feminism’s growth and impact?

Because all of this happened under the nose of the Church and her watchmen. Instead of sounding the alarm and warding off the wolves, they let them in.

Garris is correct when he points out that,

“Feminism is a colossal failure, and I am going to point the finger primarily at men. Men have failed to lead women, including their wives and daughters, to the detriment of us all. Women still deserve blame, but responsibility ultimately goes to the men—that is how God has ordered society. As rulers, men have to take responsibility. Both men and women have rebelled against God’s design, but it is the men who have allowed it. Men, including Christian men, have stood by and failed to respond biblically. They have been passive and effeminate rather than strong and masculine. Women have been misled by bad actors, and those bad actors have left us with an effeminate church.”

If you look around most modern Evangelical churches today, it is plain to see just how effeminate it has become.

From the leadership and volunteer rosters, to the emotional worship music, to the flowery covers of books in the library, to the overall flavour of “winsomeness” which usually ends up being an effeminate instinct to never want to challenge or offend anyone—Evangelical Christianity today is repulsive to many manly men.

Perhaps this is why there is a growing departure of young men away from Evangelical Churches to more ‘traditional’ churches like the Eastern Orthodox Church. One article in The Telegraph writes that “Young, single men are flocking to the Orthodox church after discovering the “masculine” Christian religion through online influencers…”

Another article in The New York Post quotes from a young man who converted to Orthodoxy, “I think there are a lot of Protestants who want a more traditional, grounded, historical faith, and I think for young people especially, it makes sense because so much else in our life is changing all the time.” He goes on to note that because many churches are predominantly female, the services are dominated by emotional songs, swaying, uplifted hands, and eyes closed in ecstasy. “Men are much less comfortable [in those settings], and they have voted with their feet, which is why they’re minorities in these forms of worship,” he said. “Our worship forms are very traditional and very masculine.”

The article notes that “A survey of Orthodox churches around the country found that parishes saw a 78% increase in converts in 2022, compared with pre-pandemic levels in 2019.”

This may surprise many Evangelical leaders who still think that young people want modern services that are made to look like the latest Taylor Swift concert or are full of seeker-sensitive content.

They are astonished that things like catechisms, deep liturgy and historic confessions are actually a huge draw to a Tik-Tok generation who only knows of a shallow virtual culture of 3-second attention spans and novelties that fade away in less than 24 hours.

Yet, many Evangelical churches today are still serving up soft-serve theology and liturgy lite with repetitive mantras set to three major chords that will be forgotten before next the Dove Awards.

We must unapologetically recover the masculine nature of our faith.

Christianity is Inherently Masculine

As Garris rightly notes,

“Christianity is a masculine religion. Men have authority, and as go the men, so go the women and children. Yet we are facing a crisis of masculinity in the church. Men have failed to lead, including our pastors, and now our women are acting like men and our men like women. To recover from this crisis of masculinity, we must start with God the Father. We must start with worship. Christianity has a masculine message of a husband who laid down His life for His bride. But we have an effeminate church preaching an effeminate gospel, proclaiming Jesus as Savior while ignoring His command for male rule in His kingdom.”

It’s staring us right in our face every time we open our Bibles, yet many Christians—blinded by the impact of cultural feminism today—miss the obvious.

Jesus was a man—and a manly one at that!

He was not only the gentle Jesus meek and mild of Thomas Kincade paintings and Max Lucado books. He was a man with testosterone and aggression. The fact that saying this makes some Christians nervous only serves to illustrate just how much feminism has made us uncomfortable with asserting anything masculine about Christ. Yet we don’t find the soft-spoken pandering of many pulpits coming off the mouth of Jesus. His masculinity was pure and sinless, but not impotent and effeminate. He shows us how godly masculinity can be stewarded and used, yet without falling into the sins of chauvinism and bravado that today’s secular Red Pill—man-o-sphere Movement often does.

All the apostles were men. Pastors and elders are supposed to be men. God has ordered His Church and the family with male leadership.

Why then does the worship of so many churches feel so feminine? Could it be that it’s because the majority of attendees are female and leaders are not wanting to offend their primary donor base? Possibly. Yet often, it’s not even recognized because of how deep feminism has seeped into the church.

Masculine Worship

If you’ve ever been to a church that embraces God’s design for masculine Christianity—one that sings Psalms and hymns, has manly leadership, compels and prepares men to lead their homes, confronts sin, rejects pietistic theology and is focused on its Kingdom impact—you know how powerful it can be. There is no way to adequately explain how transformative it is to stand in a room full of hundreds of men belting out an imprecatory Psalm in a low register or singing the hymn:

The Son of God goes forth to war,
a kingly crown to gain;
His blood-red banner streams afar!
Who follows in his train?
Who best can drink His cup of woe,
triumphant over pain,
who patient bears his cross below,
he follows in His train.

These are songs that men can sing with bold chests. They’re not like the fluffy love songs of today’s contemporary worship music. The Psalms are God’s inspired worship hymnal, and in there you’ll find songs of lament, imprecation, praise, and thanksgiving. The songs of the Psalms contain enemies—something altogether absent from today’s contemporary worship music—and perhaps that’s why the modern effeminized Church does not sing them.

Today’s effeminized church cannot fathom how the Psalmist can sing in one line,

“How precious to me are your thoughts, O God!
How vast is the sum of them!
If I would count them, they are more than the sand.
I awake, and I am still with you.”

And then follow it up with:

Oh that you would slay the wicked, O God!
O men of blood, depart from me!
They speak against you with malicious intent;
your enemies take your name in vain.b
Do I not hate those who hate you, O Lord?
And do I not loathe those who rise up against you?
I hate them with complete hatred;
I count them my enemies.

Yet, I contend that if we are unable or unwilling to sing the songs that Scripture gives us—it is us and not Scripture that are out of order.

God’s Word gives us songs to sing in every season of life and the Psalms give inspired words to every facet of human experience. They are powerful.

They are manly prayers and songs and we should use them.

Manly Traditions

There is another reason why more “traditional” churches like the Orthodox and Roman Catholics (and traditional Reformed Churches) are seeing a resurgence of young men entering their ranks. This reason also baffles Evangelical leaders who have been indoctrinated in the seeker-sensitive and Church Growth Movement of the 20th century. It is simply that churches which have a culture of historically rooted tradition appeal to the masculine sensibilities because they are immovable.

The typical Evangelical church today does everything it possibly can to cater to those it is trying to attract.

Don’t like stuffy liturgy? No problem, we’re “spontaneous” and go with the flow. Can’t be bothered to memorize Creeds and Catechisms? Neither can we! Hymns and Psalms have too many words you don’t understand and melodies that take a little more effort to learn? No problem! Our skinny jeans worship leader will throw in a few repetitive choruses with a maximum of 4 chords and a minimum of 26 bridge repetitions—plus we’ll put the 5 words we repeat ad nauseum up on a big projector in huge font just in case you forget the lyrics while posting it on your Instagram story.

This instinct to be super-accomodating is an effeminate one, and it ironically repels many men.

However, when you go to a church that embraces strong tradition—it’s not something that bends to you. Don’t like it? OK, go somewhere else. We’ve been doing this for centuries and it’s not changing for you.

There’s something about that which resonates with masculine energy. Also, I there’s something deeply Biblical about utilizing creeds, confessions and traditions too—and that’s NOT limited to just Orthodox and Catholics. Protestants have a great history of tradition as well! (Read Carl Trueman’s book, The Creedal Imperative for a full argument about that).

So, let’s embrace time-tested, Biblical tradition and reject the shallowness of modernity.

The Damnable Sin of Effeminacy

For men, to be effeminate is a damnable sin.

As Garris notes,

The Apostle Paul sometimes uses strong language regarding gender roles.

At the end of his first letter to the Corinthians, he commands men to “act like men” ἀνδρίζεσθε [andrizesthe] (1 Corinthians 16:13). This is the only use of the verb ἀνδρίζομαι (andrizomai) in the New Testament, but it is also used in the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament, for the command to “be strong and courageous”—which is used by Moses (Deuteronomy 31:6-7), Joshua (Joshua 10:25), David (1 Chronicles 28:20), and God (Deuteronomy 31:23; Joshua 1:6 [LXX]).

The verb… can mean ‘conduct yourself in a courageous way’ and in this sense also has application for Paul’s female readers. However, not only does the prefix of the verb [andr-] have an “emphasis on maleness,” but courage in Scripture is often associated with masculine behavior (Judges 20:22; 1 Samuel 4:9; also the above commands to Moses, Joshua, and Solomon). Men in particular are to express courage because it is a masculine virtue.

Paul says unambiguously in 1 Corinthians 6:9—10 that “effeminate” men “will not inherit the Kingdom of God.” Some translations (like the ESV) unfortunately obscure the Greek text—translating two terms [malakoi and aresenokoitai] simply as “men who practice homosexuality”. However, if we look at these two Greek terms, malakoi has the general meaning of meaning “soft” or “effeminate” and arsenokoitai combines two words meaning “men who sleep with other men” or “homosexuals/sodomites”.

So, Paul not only condemns homosexual behaviour, but also male effeminate or soft behaviour in its entirety. Christian men must not be soft/effeminate.

This choice to soften the blow in these translations is yet another instance of the effiminate instincts active in the Church today that is so averse to offending anyone—especially any class deemed “oppressed” by our neo-Marxist woke culture.

What does it mean to be soft/effeminate?

It means running away from responsibility—such as owning up to your sins and mistakes. Many pastors during the COVID lockdowns made a lot of poor judgements and mistakes. Yet many of them cannot own up to it and publicly repent. This is effeminate. It means being willing to confront and offend when necessary. Elders are charged to contend for the faith and rebuke those who proliferate unhealthy doctrine. It means not talking straight and instead hedging your language in ambiguity around issues that really should be clear. It means not making excuses for Scripture’s hard truths and actually exercising discipline (both in the Church and home). It means not being passive when you see injustice or things that need to be addressed, even if it costs you to do something about it.

Basically, softness/effeminacy is the opposite of biblical masculinity. This is why the qualifications for eldership are not just that a person be biologically male—they must also be a man.

Christian Men Must Be Manly

Garris notes that,

“We know from the rest of Scripture that a man is supposed to protect, provide, and lead. A man who does not do these things is effeminate. He is not acting like a man. A man who refuses to work and provide for his family and leaves that task to his wife is effeminate. A man who does not protect his wife and children from harm is an effeminate man. A man who leaves spiritual leadership to his wife is effeminate. Such men will not inherit God’s kingdom.”

As Doug Wilson has said, “Simply put, masculinity is the glad assumption of sacrificial responsibility.”

This is a message that is sorely needed in today’s Evangelical churches yet sadly absent from pulpits led by women of both genders. The task of preaching is a manly one because it necessitates confrontation and a head-on collision of people’s wrong ideas with the truth of Scripture. In an effort to be nicer than Jesus, many pastors have forsaken Biblical fidelity. As Garris continues,

“…the Bible does not call for men to be nice. Men should be kind and gentle at appropriate times, as these are fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23). But kindness and gentleness are not the same thing as niceness. Niceness is weakness. It is people-pleasing. Niceness is men trying to keep peace when there is no peace. [emphasis mine]

This is a life of conflict, and there is a time to fight and a time to confront. Nice men are yes-men in a world that needs to be told no. No one fears nice men, but nice men are full of fear. The best example of this today is when men apologize for something just because someone was offended. But when a real man does nothing wrong, he does not apologize just to appease critics. Niceness avoids conflict and for that reason it can never overcome challenges. Nice men produce nothing of lasting value.

Niceness is a form of effeminacy and is at odds with biblical masculinity.

Sometimes Christians want to be nicer than Jesus. But let’s not forget, if we’re going to be like Jesus, it would seem that flipping tables and fashioning a cord of whips and driving people out is within the realm of possibilities given the appropriate situation. Dale Partridge’s short book, The Manliness of Christ: How the Masculinity of Jesus Eradicates Effeminate Christianity, gives a concise overview of just how manly Jesus was to balance out the “gentle and lowly” image that is fixated on today.

Dealing with the Difficult Texts

Garris doesn’t shy away from difficult passages in Scripture. He tackles them head-on with pinpoint precision and skillful argumentation. He demonstrates how many passages which have been twisted to obscure the Bible’s patriarchal orientation or misinterpreted to support feminist ideologies.

Texts such as 1 Timothy 2:15 that say that “the woman shall be saved through childbearing” are exposited clearly by this capable exegete—making use of the original language, quality scholarship and historic commentaries that have not been infected by modern feminist sensibilities. Garris also tackles the usual Evangelical feminist arguments about characters such as Deborah, Phoebe, Junia, Esther, etc. and favourite “proof texts” in their proper context.

The “Red Pill” Movement

Now, I think it necessary to make a quick note about the so-called secular “Red Pill” Movement.

One of the most famous influencers is Andrew Tate, who is a womanizer and convert to Islam. His bravado and hyper-masculinity (which in my opinion is simply over-compensation), has a confrontational message that sometimes can seem like “real manhood”, but is actually just immature adolescence packaged in a boy who can shave. Some of the titles associated with this movement are things like, How to Get Any Girl to Like You or 10 Ways to Be Alpha, which were popular in “pickup artist” communitiies and has a special appeal with impressionable teenage boys seeking answers about relationships and masculine identity.

Unfortunately, because of the lack of actual godly men and guidance on true masculinity in many Evangelical churches, young men have turned to these self-proclaimed (often fatherless) gurus—similar to why young men turn towards gangs—seeking a sense of brotherhood, masculine affirmation and belonging. Instead of teaching young men virtues such as compassion, respect, self-sacrifice, responsibility for others, protecting the weak or emotional intelligence, these gurus often reduced relationships to manipulative tactics and transactional dynamics. They teach that women are inherently deceptive or shallow, and that the key to “winning” them over lay in dominance, detachment, and control—encouraging boys to never fall for the “trap” of marriage and instead live that “player” lifestyle. Their rhetoric often shifts from merely providing dating advice to endorsing and encouraging outright hostility toward women.

This is not what true, godly masculinity looks like. Ironically, it too is effeminate at its core.

It is an outward over-compensation for deep insecurities and a lack of real manly guides. Sadly, its success in luring young men from churches is due to the issues of effeminacy and fatherlessness we’ve been exploring in this article (and the books linked here).

At its core, true godly masculinity is oriented towards fatherhood because it is modelled after the Fatherhood of God. Thus, movements like the secular Red Pill manosphere that discourage young men from maturing into godly fathers are at odds with godly masculinity. Godly fathers act as protectors, providers, prophets and priests to their people—a reflection of Christ’s offices of Prophet, Priest and King.

Wherever godly fathers are absent, you can be sure to find lost boys seeking male rolemodels. This is why this issue is so important for churches to grasp and devote energy to raising the next generation of men and equipping the current generation of men to be godly fathers—leading and discipling their homes—not doing their job for them and allowing them to abdicate that responsibility to the church’s programs. Yet, if we look at how many churches budget their time and resources—this is sadly not prioritized appropriately.

Exposing Complementarian Compromise of Masculine Christianity

Garris also takes aim at the Evangelical Complementarian Movement spearheaded by John Piper and Wayne Grudem—two giants in Evangelicalism who have done much good. However, he shows how the compromises inherent in the movement weakened the historic, traditional, and Biblical position of what is now commonly called Biblical Patriarchy. (A related book by Michael Foster, It’s Good to Be A Man, is a great contemporary read on the topic).¹ Patriarchy simply means “father-rule”

While the Complementarian Movement did a lot of good in pushing back against the rise of Evangelical Feminism, it focused its emphasis almost solely on the home and the church—to the neglect of society at large—and thus unwittingly advocated for a sort of functional androgyny outside the church and home. Complementarianism expressed discomfort in using the traditional terms of “authority” and “hierarchy”, while introducing confusion by using the word “equality” and failing to root gender roles ontologically—that is, in the difference of our created natures as men and women.

For example, John Piper and Wayne Grudem explicitly wrote in the preface to their book that,

“[W]e certainly reject the term ‘hierarchicalist’ because it over-emphasizes structured authority while giving no suggestion of equality or the beauty of mutual interdependence.”

Yet, the Greek term the Bible uses for a wife’s submission is ὑποτάσσω [hupertasso]—which encompasses hierarchy. In fact, Greek dictionaries note that every New Testament use of the word hupertasso involves some sense of hierarchy and that the term was originally a hierarchal term that stresssed the relation to superiors.

Christ has authority over the church and the Bible compares the husband’s headship over the wife to that of Christ over the Church (Eph. 5:23). Male leadership and authority are realities in the Bible and should not be obscured because our current cultural moment is squeamish about it.

Garris is not alone in critiquing Complementarianism. D. Michael Clary’s book, God’s Good Design: A Biblical, Theological, and Practical Guide to Human Sexuality, is also a great read on the topic!

By failing to root the roles of men and women firmly in our different created natures, Complementarianism made God’s design seem arbitrary. It wasn’t that God actually designed men and women differently for different roles and responsibilities. Instead, Complementarianism implied that men and women were the same but that God arbitrarily assigned certain duties to each sex, irregardless of their created natures.

Even the phrase popularized by Tim Keller, that “a woman can do anything an unordained man can do” screams of androgyny and compromise. Really? An unordained man can go into combat. Should a woman? Biblically, no. But today’s Christians often cannot even see what’s wrong with that—biblically, historically and naturally. This is because pietistic theology has become gnostic—ignoring what is plain to the nature of our created reality. Men are made strong with natural aggression to fight, protect and give their lives in the service of others. Women are made to nurture and care. This was nothing shocking to previous generations. It was simply common sense that even pagans would acknowledge.

This is an important point we cannot miss.

If the gender roles are not rooted in the differences between our created natures, then that means that once we step outside of those very specific spheres that God has defined roles in, it’s all fair game. So, you step out of the home or church, and it’s an egalitarian playground. However, if the roles and duties are tied to our design and nature, then you take your maleness or femaleness wherever you are—in the home, church, government, school, business, etc. That has implications that make many Christians today squeamish to even think about.

However, we must wrestle with whether our squeamishness is because of Biblical convictions, or because of cultural influence.

Masculine Christianity is a Must-Read

Zachary Garris goes on to demonstrate how Christianity is patriarchal to its core from its inception, how gender roles and hierarchy are rooted in the creation order, how masculine authority starts in the home, why pastors and elders must be men, why typical interpretations of difficult passages like 1 Corinthians 14:34—35 about women keeping silent in church are in error, what masculine authority in the church and beyond should look like and how to leave a manly legacy. He also deals with the question of all-male elders, pastors and deacons.

His arguments are thoroughly Biblical, rooted in careful exegesis and handling of the original languages. He makes compelling use of older sources and tradition to help modern readers realize that our current Evangelical landscape is not and should not be the norm. As both a trained lawyer, theologian and experienced pastor, Zachary Garris is the perfect author for this book. His writing is compelling, lucid, logical and clear. It is a welcomed and well-needed book in our confused age.

If you’re interested in the historical argument for this view, I would highly recommend Garris’s sequel—Honor Thy Fathers: Recovering the Anti-Feminist Theology of the Reformers. Honor Thy Fathers is a compelling read surveying the views of the Protestant Reformers on the issues of gender and sex. It’s available in print through New Christendom Press (US), Thousand Generations Print Co (Canada), or on Kindle eBook. I’ll be writing a review of Honor Thy Fathers (hopefully soon) in the future.

There’s a big reason why I put it on my top-10 list of 2022 and I’ve been meaning to write a full review on it for a while. Even in this article, there’s so much in it that I could continue writing about—but I think it’s better you read it yourself.

Masculine Christianity is a MUST-READ for every Christian and especially for church leaders today.

Get your copy today at:

• Amazon
• Thousand Generations Print Co (Canada)

Soli Deo Gloria.

Footnotes

• 1
  Patriarchy simply means “father-rule”