On X Pastors and Being a Real Man

When Pastors Major in the Minors

“Go I must to all who appear to know, and find out the meaning of the oracle. And I swear to you, Athenians, by the dog I swear! – for I must tell you the truth – the result of my mission was just this: I found that the men most in repute were all but the most foolish” Socrates, Apology.

One of the most challenging choices facing a young man today is which X Pastor to follow.  For their part, X Pastors try to make it easier by presenting a constant stream of hot takes about social issues.  Recently, this has meant arguing about whether a husband can command his wife to wear the same red dress every day for a year.  These X Pastors tell us that the biggest problem young men will face is feminism, and so they need to be equipped by knowing what a husband can and cannot command his wife to do.  It is a winning strategy.

There are a few problems, however, that cast a disturbing shadow on this otherwise merry landscape.  The most noticeable is that for a group of X Pastors professing to be concerned about feminism, they have allowed the feminists to choose the battlefield and determine the rules of the conflict.  They do this by 1) making gender the defining issue of our day, and 2) telling us that a patriarch, when given authority, uses it tyrannically and arbitrarily.  For their part, the X Pastors respond by talking nonstop about gender and confirming that patriarchs will indeed command their wives to do arbitrary things just because they can.

These feminists, following failed psychiatrists like Alfred Kinsey and John Money, insist that gender is the defining feature of each individual.  These X Pastors respond by promoting themselves as the ones who can tell young men what it means to be a real man.  And what is that?  Besides commanding your wife to wear a red dress, it usually involves learning to be handy and take responsibility for yourself.  The only problem is that the feminists dominate the field again, and these young men are told that all of the problems in the modern world and their lives are due to feminists and things like the 19th Amendment.  

So, what is a “real” man? Matt Walsh has gained significant attention for exposing the inability of many on the radical left to define “woman,” even as they claim to be fierce advocates for women’s rights. Astonishingly, this inability often comes from professors with Ph.D.s in gender and women’s studies—experts who have spent their careers writing dissertations, books, and peer-reviewed articles on the topic. Yet when Walsh asks for a straightforward definition of the term, they either evade the question or resort to labeling him as some kind of “phobe.” Walsh’s critique highlights a foundational point that resonates in any introductory philosophy or critical thinking class: if someone makes a declarative statement, they should be able to define the terms they are using. Asking “What do you mean?” is not only reasonable—it’s essential for meaningful dialogue and understanding.

Young men are hungry for meaning. Over the last several years, writing a book about how to be a man has become a lucrative business model. Both secular and Christian authors have jumped on this trend, producing works that often emphasize personal responsibility. Much of this advice is practical and helpful: clean your room, learn valuable skills, get a job and build a career, find a wife and start a family. Taken at face value, this is good counsel for structuring a disciplined and productive life.

However, some of these books—whether intentionally or not—also feed into a male grievance culture that undermines the very personal responsibility they claim to promote. The message “Take responsibility for yourself” doesn’t sit well alongside “Feminists have ruined your life, taken away all self-determination, and they must be stopped.” These two ideas are fundamentally at odds. When young men are taught to blame external forces for their struggles rather than face their own shortcomings, they are left directionless and embittered.

The young man who is asked to pick an X Pastor is right to ask, “What is a man?”  In order to know what is good for a man, we need to know the nature of a man.  What distinguishes a man from a non-man, or a man from an animal?  It can’t be “handiness” as there are many talented animals.  It can’t be having a family or building a home because the animals do that.  But whatever activity a man engages in is shaped by his nature.  The X Pastor candidate who knows what is good for a man is the one the young man should follow.  Let’s think about how the interview for X Pastor will go:

Candidate: I want to be your X Pastor and teach you what it means to be a real man.

You: What is a man? 

Candidate: Someone who commands his wife and children.

You: How do we know that? 

Candidate: God’s Word says so.

You: How do we know God exists to have a Word?

Here is where it gets wobbly.  There are a few typical answers you will see time and again.  Keep asking questions to understand their meaning.

Candidate: Everyone knows God exists.  We all have innate knowledge of God.

You: How do we know this innate knowledge is accurate rather than mistaken?

Candidate: Because God made us with it.

You: How do we know there is a God to make us with innate knowledge?

You see, we are right back where we started.  You have now been given two circular arguments by your X Pastor candidate.  Or, it might go this way:

Candidate: We must presuppose God to make sense of a theistic moral law and God’s purpose for us.

You: But why would we want a theistic moral law or God’s purpose for us?

Candidate: Because those are the only ones consistent with God’s existence.

Now you’ve been given another circle. The X Pastor candidate may give you a sound argument, in which case you know what to do–follow him and like his posts.  But if instead he gives you one of these circles, run don’t walk away.

These dialogues illustrate the problem in the conservative Christian approach to “what is a real man.”  In many cases, the Candidate wants you to listen to their confidently asserted hot takes but won’t be able to show the truth about God’s existence.  They can’t show that the eternal power and divine nature of God are clearly revealed in general revelation.  Instead, they jump right to Scripture and want you to follow along with only a circular argument.  They aren’t faring any better than the gender studies professors Matt Walsh asks to define “woman.”

A man (and here I’m using this as the universal “mankind”) is distinguished from animals in having a rational soul with which he can know his Creator.  A man can use reason to see what is clearly revealed in the creation about God’s eternal power and divine nature.  An X Pastor candidate who is not able to show that God is real needs his own X Pastor.  Such a person should withdraw his candidacy and find himself an X Pastor who can show God exists. 

Even the best practical advice, though, falls short if it doesn’t address the deeper question of the meaning of life. If the essence of manhood is reduced to fulfilling external duties and checking off boxes of respectability, it ultimately leads to a respectable kind of meaninglessness. While these men may succeed outwardly, their lives lack the ultimate purpose and fulfillment they were created for—knowing and glorifying God. This is evident in the rampant struggles with alcohol, marijuana use, gluttony, and pornography addiction, even among men who appear successful and disciplined. These habits reveal an inner void, a longing for something more than respectable achievements. Even the most respectable man can find himself aimless and empty without grounding their identity in God and His purpose.

And yet, our X Pastor candidate could not show that God is real.  And that is what leads to meaninglessness.  He has based his life on a story and commanded his wife to wear a red dress every day of the year because of this story, but then it turns out the story is built on fideism and unproven assumptions.  His wife, in her red dress, sees this meaninglessness.  She loses respect for her husband because he isn’t using his mind to understand the basic features of the world, but he is instead debating the X Pastor who has his wife wearing a blue dress.

“To be meaningless” can have two meanings.  It could mean “no purpose”–a lack of teleology.  Ultimately, in a theistic religion, all teleology aims at knowing God.  Man’s chief end is to glorify God and enjoy him forever.  When blind belief (fideism) and circular arguments are all, an X Pastor has to show God exists, and then that X Pastor does not have knowledge.

This first kind of meaninglessness leads to the second and more devastating kind.  It means “without cognitive content”-beliefs with no meaning.  The words might all be English words, so the sentence gives the appearance of meaning but organized as they are, they don’t mean anything.  For instance, “the ‘circle with four corners’’ is green.”  Meaning is lost when there is an undefined term or a self-contradiction.  

Our X Pastor candidate is now in an even worse predicament.  Let’s take a look:

XPC: Wife, wear a red dress every day for the next year.

Wife of XPC: ok, but why?

XPC: Because I said so, and that’s what God means when he says “submit in all things.”

Wife of XPC: How do you know there is a God?

XPC: We must presuppose God, or our theistic morality makes no sense.

Wife of XPC: You know that’s a circular argument, right?

XPC: No talking back.

We should leave them now before it gets heated.  He’s got a problem on his hands.  His wife needs meaning in her life.  She isn’t content with X squabbles about making wives wear red dresses.  She wants more out of life, and our X Pastor candidate cannot deliver.  He only has fideism and voluntarism.  By that standard, he isn’t a “real” man.  He exists.  But he can’t provide for his family in the most important way conceivable: he can’t provide them with meaning.  He only has fallacies and fideism.

Our first father failed at this same point.  The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.  And because he failed, his wife was not equipped. I’m not excusing her; she also had a rational soul and could think through arguments, but our X Pastor candidates emphasized that her husband was to lead her.  She was tempted to believe 1) God lied, and 2) she could be as God by determining what is good for herself.  Adam went along with her.  Adam’s first son didn’t believe that vicarious atonement is necessary for redemption.  He got into some problems over that.  Adam’s failure in leadership was rooted in his failure to know God as he should have and teach this to his family.

By contrast, Christ our Lord did provide for his bride.  He was ready to respond when he was tempted by the Devil or tested by the Pharisees.  He was able to answer challenges from any and every angle during his ministry.  And he provided his church with the bread of life.  He told us that eternal life is to know God.  He understood that the Messiah must first suffer and then enter his glory.  He taught this to his bride.  He conquered the enemies of his bride by demolishing every argument raised up against the knowledge of God.  Matthew Henry, on John 3:2, puts it this way, “He that was to be the sovereign Ruler came first to be a teacher; for he would rule with reason, not with rigour, by the power of truth, not of the sword. The world lay in ignorance and mistake; the Jewish teachers were corrupt, and caused them to err: It is time for the Lord to work. He came a teacher from God, from God as the Father of mercies, in pity to a dark deceived world; from God as the Father of lights and fountain of truth, all the light and truth upon which we may venture our souls.” 

I am encouraged that young men are seeking more. Their dissatisfaction with the emptiness of a godless culture and the radical leftist university system reveals a hunger for meaning and truth. The statistics showing the declining number of men attending university highlight how these institutions have abandoned young men, failing to provide education that serves or equips them for life. Many men are no longer willing to pay for an education that offers little more than ideology wrapped in debt, and that rejection is an important step in exposing the illusions of feminism and other harmful cultural narratives.

These institutions fail the young men in the same way that our X Pastor has done.  They fail to provide the young man with meaning.  If you are a young man in this situation, don’t hire our X Pastor candidate.  He will be able to speak confidently about his controversial opinions but he won’t be able to show you that God exists.  The first step in being a real man is using reason to show that God exists. 

This awakening among young men will not last if it doesn’t lead to sound answers. These young men, who refuse to accept the falsehoods of feminism and the shallow promises of modern culture, are still at risk of being let down. Without a vision of manhood grounded in knowing God and finding meaning, they may trade one disillusionment for another. Practical advice, personal responsibility, and rejecting feminist ideology are not enough on their own. If the deeper questions about what it means to be a man are left unanswered, these young men will inevitably find themselves just as disillusioned as they were before, only now with the added weight of unmet expectations by X Pastors.

The challenge before us is to offer young men more than reactionary critiques or temporary fixes. They need a vision of manhood that centers on knowing God, fulfilling His purpose, and reflecting His image in every area of life. If they cannot show God’s eternal power and divine nature from creation, they will not be able to do these things.  Without that foundation, their search for meaning will remain incomplete, no matter how outwardly successful they may appear.  That foundation begins by showing that general revelation clearly reveals God to all.  If you’re a young man auditioning X Pastor candidates, ask them to show that God is real.  If they give you a circular argument, keep looking.

---

Image Credit: Unsplash

Share This