Book Review: The Toxic War on Masculinity

Nancy Pearcey is one of the premier Christian thinkers of the modern age. At one time a student of Francis Schaeffer, she has extended and elucidated the thought of Schaeffer into the current cultural morass, particularly Schaeffer’s analysis of the secular idea of upper- versus lower-story truth. Also like Schaeffer, she does an excellent job of tracing the evolution of cultural trends through history, providing numerous footnotes—no less than 775 in The Toxic War on Masculinity. This excellent volume demonstrates that she does not shrink back from confronting both secular and Christian cultures with the sharp edge of her intellect.

Pearcey begins with full disclosure as to why she wrote the book. Her father lived two different lives: in public a respected university professor and in private an angry, abusive father. After initially rejecting Christianity because of her father’s hypocrisy, a sojourn at L’Abri showed her what true Christianity looks like, resulting in her conversion to genuine Christianity. The book serves as her way of tracing the cultural and psychological factors that produced an abusive man like her father and the current broad-brushed societal tendency to attribute such bad behavior to all men.

Chapter one is devoted to exploring where the modern culture is with regard to its view of men. Pearcey brings forward a contrast she’ll use in the rest of the book: “real men” versus “good men.” So-called real men kowtow to twisted cultural expectations of men (such as the expectation and encouragement of bad behavior), whereas good men pursue the best and most noble aspects of masculinity.

Exploding the myths begins in the second chapter, in which she quotes suprising statistics regarding men and abuse and divorce. Pearcey examines the studies more closely and reveals that while nominal Christian men score in the highest category of abuse—which is what is usually reported in the media—committed evangelical Christian men actually score in the lowest (which you will never see in the media).

In the third chapter, Pearcey unfolds what a truly biblical marriage looks like, along with biblical concepts of headship and submission. She demonstrates that it doesn’t look anything like the slanderous stereotypes of the secular culture.

The second part of the book (nine chapters) traces “how the secular script turned toxic.” In these lavishly-documented chapters, Pearcey follows the progression—and destruction—of family life from the original agricultural model of every family member working together at home, through the Industrial Revolution that took men out of the home, thus weakening or eliminating the father’s beneficial influence. The absence of fathers (who were now working long hours in the factories) meant that they were not home to teach their sons skills and moral discipline and to mold them into responsible men. Absence from home and hearth left men open to temptations (particularly illicit sex and alcoholism) that before had been under better control. Men began behaving badly with the result that, comparatively, women were placed on a moral pedestal of righteousness. Men behaving badly, i.e. “real men,” became the expectation and somewhat of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Men lost interest in attending church, with the result that most of the attenders in the average church were women.

Pearcey points out that one of the consequences of this terrible trajectory is that Christianity came to be seen as a religion of women. Men wanted nothing to do with it because it seemed feminized. The image of the “real man” became stamped in the culture; the “good man” was something no self-respecting man wanted to be part of.

In chapter ten, Pearcey examines the reaction against feminized Christianity that developed in some quarters. A so-called “muscular Christianity” was promoted in order to redeem “manliness.” Churches began to host events of interest to men (fight clubs, gun giveaways, etc.) in an attempt to draw men back into the sanctuary. Fundamentalism got involved, with macho preachers engaging in violent antics on stage to assert that Christianity was for real men. Just as a pendulum that swings in one direction soon returns to the other, this began a backlash against women. Whereas in the 19th century women were thought of as superior, in the 20th century they began to be thought of as inferior—weak creatures whose primary responsibilities were bearing children and being subservient to their husbands.

Secular culture rejected the polarizing fundamentalism. In chapter eleven, Pearcey unfolds the path that led to men (dads in particular) being presented by Hollywood as dimwits. Feminists poured gasoline on the fire: “men are unnecessary,” they claimed. Out of the resentment that developed on the male side came the playboy and pornography culture.

It’s easy to critique culture—but advocating solutions is harder. Nancy Pearcey does a great job on the solution side in chapter twelve, entitled “Bringing Fathers Back: Fix the Workplace, Fix Your Family.” She gives many creative ways to bring the unity of the home, father and mother together, back to the fore.

The third section of the book is basic triage: how to fix the problems that develop when “Christian Men Absorb the Secular Script.” Two excellent chapters are devoted to fixing broken marriages and dealing with abuse in Christian homes.

Pearcey is the real deal: a Christian and biblical thinker, a scholar, and one who has suffered under an abusive father. She brings her intellect, her scholarship, her faith, and her experience to the table and shares it with the reader. The book includes a study guide at the end, suitable for individuals or groups. Nancy Pearcey’s The Toxic War on Masculinity is an outstanding book and well worth your time. 

Five stars—highly recommended.

Why Richard Dawkins is wrong

Dawkins recently made the claim that, because facts are facts, if we put aside the moral questions, eugenics would work. Presumably what he means by ‘work,’ is that a program of eugenics would create superior specimens of human beings, in the same way that it creates superior beef cattle.

“It’s one thing to deplore eugenics on ideological, political, moral grounds,” Mr. Dawkins tweeted to his 2.8 millions followers. “It’s quite another to conclude that it wouldn’t work in practice. Of course it would. It works for cows, horses, pigs, dogs & roses. Why on earth wouldn’t it work for humans? Facts ignore ideology.” [“Richard Dawkins slammed for saying 'of course' eugenics would work,” by Jessica Chasmar in The Washington Times digital edition, Monday, February 17, 2020]

Putting aside the moral argument (which cannot be truly set aside, because we are morally accountable beings), there are two blazingly obvious ways in which he is—factually—wrong.

1) Dawkins is operating from a purely evolutionary paradigm, in which advances happen in spits and spurts, sometimes moving forward a step, sometimes backward a step. Natural selection eventually eliminates inferior models. But in advocating eugenics, Dawkins is suggesting that each specimen is an advance over the last one. But that is not how evolution works. Good Specimen A unites with good Specimen B, to produce Specimen C. But Specimen C does not always completely reflect the genetics that produced it. Things go wrong, whether it might have been a hidden weakness in the genes of A or B, or perhaps an [evolutionary] mutation that went in the wrong direction.

In order for Dawkins’ eugenics to truly work, it must be—has to be—tied to euthanasia, so that inferior Specimen Cs can be gently, lovingly, mercifully… killed. Otherwise, they will continue to pollute the gene pool.

And how are we to evaluate Specimen A’s or B’s genetic potential? Must their DNA be studied to evaluate their reproductive value? How good is good enough, in order to license them to reproduce?

2) Dawkins is also wrong in that eugenics is the worst form of materialistic reductionism. People are far more than their genes. Perhaps the best illustration of this is his fellow atheist Stephen Hawking. Would Dawkins’ endorsement of the usefulness of eugenics have denied the world Stephen Hawking, or say, Helen Keller, or the numerous artists and brilliant people who are on the autism spectrum, or wrestle with manic-depressive disorders? The world is full of the accounts of people born with disabilities who rise far above their limitations to contribute mightily to human flourishing.

There are many other refutations to Dawkins’ eugenic fantasy—these are just two that are obvious no matter what worldview or ideology you hold to. Facts are indeed facts. And Dawkins is conveniently ignoring them.

Review of Dean Inserra’s The Unsaved Christian: Reaching Cultural Christianity with the Gospel

The Unsaved Christian is a great book, and is going to be discomfiting for many people who view themselves as right with God, but whose views on that score are wholly without warrant.

First, a bit of historical perspective: parts of the United States were swept by revivalism in the 18^th and 19^th centuries. Much good came out those revivals, but there were also some results that were not particularly praiseworthy. One of them was a reductionism of redemption: in many cases it was reduced to a “decision” rather than a whole-life reorientation around repentance and faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Master. Salvation is not less than a decision, but it is much more than that.

Add to that an unbalanced emphasis on eternal security (especially in the mid to late 20th century), virtually separating the doctrine of assurance from the “new life” aspect of regeneration. And add to that a sort of “second-blessing” theology that teaches the decision to yield to Jesus as Lord and Master is separate from the decision to trust Him as Savior, and what you wind up with is a culture that views salvation as little more than checking the right boxes. Salvation becomes a cultural inheritance of white, conservative, flag-waving Americans, something akin to joining the Republican party.

Dean Inserra’s book is a gentle but firm expose of that problem: cultural Christianity is not biblical Christianity, and it is decidedly not a “Christianity” that saves. He deals with a variety of flavors of it: moral theism, watered-down mainline Protestantism, the Bible Belt cultural ambience, the confusion of patriotism with Christianity, and so on. One particularly good chapter explores the Christmas and Easter attendance phenomenon and yields some rather surprising observations.

Inserra is not swinging a club—he’s not browbeating. He’s quite gentle, in fact, and includes questions at the end of each chapter for self-evaluation. But he also pulls no punches. Chapter 3 is entitled “Civic Religion: Generic Faith that Demands and Asks Nothing of Its Followers.” His view of the true gospel, biblical faith, salvation, the effects of regeneration, and so on are fully orthodox.

Buckle your spiritual seatbelt, put on your crash helmet, and read this book. Here at Bible Fellowship, we’re going to go through this book in Sunday School. It’s too important to leave sitting on the shelf. For some, it might make an eternity of difference. Five stars, highly recommended.

Book Review: When a Nation Forgets God

Erwin Lutzer’s When a Nation Forgets God: 7 Lessons We Must Learn from Nazi Germany is a book whose time has come. Lutzer combines painstaking research detailing Germany’s tortured path to National Socialism in the 1920s and 1930s with biblical insight, producing a clarion call for faithfulness addressed to today’s church. In each chapter he traces the cynical machinations of Hitler’s Nazis and the failure of Germany’s Christians, and then brings the lessons learned to bear on modern-day American Christianity.

The first major lesson has to do with what happens when God is separated from government. When a nation scrubs clean from its market places, courthouses, and legislatures any references to God and His rule, judgment inevitably follows. It might not be the immediate judgment of some cataclysm, it may be condemnation to a slow, inevitable decay but nonetheless, divine wrath follows.

The second lesson concerns the economy. Lutzer shows that when economic disaster strikes, whether through manipulation or unintended events, a nation will trade freedom for economic safety even if it means accepting totalitarian control. Germany’s roller-coaster economy in the 20s and 30s left the people ready for a dictator.

The third major lesson reveals the consequence of eliminating God as the ultimate source of law. Lutzer pursues the telling adage, show me your source of law, and I’ll show you your gods. He demonstrates that when the principle of law is unhooked from belief in a divine lawgiver who sits in ultimate judgment over mankind, all hell breaks loose in a society.

Fourth, the power of propaganda is exposed. Lutzer explains Hitler’s penchant for big lies as opposed to small ones, and shows how a society can be conditioned to accept the most outrageous propositions as truth. Through media, through setting the terms and tone of a national conversation, through the promise of acceptance and approbation combined with the threat of mockery and scorn (and worse), the German people were transformed from a normal nation into one that perpetrated horrors unspeakable.

Compulsory public education was another major channel through which the primacy of National Socialism was inculcated into German society. The author exposes the methods (and goals) of secular “Values Clarification” and demonstrates that this methodology is the dominant feature in American public education. He who controls the education of children controls the future.

In chapter six Lutzer lays down a positive lesson: people make a difference. He speculates that history might have been different had German pastors and Christians stood firm against the secular darkness of that era. The writer shares stories of Christians who have made a difference in their time, even at great cost to themselves, and he calls on the church to once again be such a witness.

Finally Lutzer challenges the modern church to exalt the cross in the gathering darkness. The gospel message must not be confused, diluted, or corrupted with a false message of prosperity, psychological comfort, or even good causes. We must preach the cross and live the suffering to which it calls us, keeping our eyes upon Christ.

If I have any criticism of this book, it is a mystifying failure of Lutzer in chapter three. The chapter is an exposition of its title: “That which is legal might also be evil.” After tracing the changes in law in Nazi Germany that made possible its pograms, Lutzer looks at America and finds two flaws that have weakened the impact of Christianity on American law. He cites the onset of evolution and theological liberalism and makes a good case for the destructive tendencies of both. But nowhere does he even mention American Christianity’s acceptance of slavery in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. There was probably no greater damage done to the influence and credibility of the church than its failure to stand against the scourge of human slavery. Like Nazi Germany, many of the arguments made in favor of slavery centered around the question of whether African blacks were subhuman. As I was reading this chapter I was expecting Lutzer to say something, anything, by way of critique on this subject. If he said it, I missed it. It is a crucial failure that ought to be corrected in the next edition.

That criticism notwithstanding, this book combines three great qualities: first, it is firmly anchored with excellent research in a faithful representation of both history and the modern day. Second, the insights it contains are profound and thoroughly biblical. Third, it is brief and accessible. Every person concerned about the direction of our nation, and our churches, should read this outstanding book.