The myth that men matter more than women in churches hurts people.
Yesterday on the podcast I was talking with Beth Allison Barr and Miranda Zapor Cruz about the myth of the 93%, which goes something like this:
The Myth of the 93%
- When dad comes to Christ first, 93% of families will follow.
- When mom comes to Christ first, 17% of families will follow.
- When kids come to Christ first, 3.5% of families will follow.
I don’t believe there is an evangelical alive today who has not heard of the myth of the 93%. It’s often quoted in sermons and in books to illustrate the supposed power behind the unique role men play in leading their families to Christ. Yet, no matter how much digging I do, or how much digging Dr. Barr and Dr. Cruz did, we cannot find a source for these claims.
Is this just a harmless claim? Or is it doing serious damage to the church?
Well, here’s what I’m worried about:
Are churches getting rid of women’s ministries?
I recently asked on social media if anyone could recall witnessing, in their own churches, seeing women’s ministries being removed. My heart broke as I was inundated with stories from men and women alike who told me that, yes, they did in fact see this happen.
But why is it happening?
To answer that question, we have to go back in time to when church culture began to shift in ideology to this idea that it was men who needed to be taught, pastored, and reached by the church, effectively turning women into afterthoughts. Or erasing us entirely.
The message these church leaders center is, “I’m going to pastor the men,” (as SBC megachurch pastor Matt Chandler explicitly said in that clip I shared on yesterday’s podcast), but then, in all too many cases, this turns into, “so therefore we don’t need women’s ministries.” Because when you have a situation where the pastor is focused mainly on reaching men and building men up as leaders, then the message he is communicating is, “I’m not here for the women.” Women are not being shepherded or invested in by church leadership.
In fact, women’s ministries can become a threat to the pastor, because they can raise up strong women who are grounded in Scripture who may prove a threat to the pastor’s vision. So it’s better to make sure the women don’t meet separately. It’s better to not invest in women’s leadership.
Well, then where do the women go if they want some spiritual nourishment, some counsel, or if they just need some advice? Usually, it would be to a women’s ministry leader, but increasingly, churches are getting rid of women’s ministries. They’re getting rid of the places where women usually have been able to use their gifts.
Women no longer have anyone to turn to in their church.
Amanda Cunningham used to run the Women’s Ministries at the Rockwall campus of Lakepointe Church, and she’s gone on the Julie Roys Show to talk about how they got rid of their women’s ministry.
Lakepointe Church had women willing to serve.
They had tons of volunteers. They had qualified women. And they still got rid of it. Because at Rockwall campus, supposedly, they wanted all the campuses to offer the same thing, and so they promised that rather than women’s meetings and frequent get-togethers, instead “we would do one or two big events a year for women,.” Those events haven’t materialized. Women are being ignored and left out of church life.
So these women who had been getting together and who had been able to exercise their leadership gifts, now no longer have those opportunities.
I also received a long testimony from someone who used to work for Christ Church of the Valley, which is a multi-site church in Arizona. But before we get to his story, let me share with you a little snippet from their handbook:
Who are we trying to reach?
- Reach the man so we can reach the whole family.
“When a Mother comes to faith in Christ, the rest of the family follows 17% of the time; but when the Father comes to faith, the rest of the family joins him 93% of the time.”
David Morrow, “Why Men Hate Going to Church” (Page 47) - Reach the younger generation so we have a future.
- Reach our neighbors so we can change our culture.
Do you notice what’s not there? Women. The church’s mission statement is about reaching men; reaching children and youth; and reaching the community.
But women? They’re afterthoughts.
Here’s what a former employee in the graphic arts department told me (used with his permission):
CCV has prided itself on this “reach the man, so we can reach the whole family strategy” going back as far as 2006, when I first came on staff as a Graphic Designer. As part of the onboarding process for new employees, we were given the book by David Morrow, “Why Men Hate Going to Church” – that book is where much often referred to talking point of “When a Mother comes to faith in Christ, the rest of the family follows 17% of the time; but when the Father comes to faith, the rest of the family joins him 93% of the time” comes from.
One of my first major responsibilities as a designer on the MarComm Team was to help establish a “target audience profile” – which was a wholly made up profile of an affluent male in the suburbs of Phoenix AZ.
The only actual data that was used was Salary data from the neighborhood the church was located in. The profile was similar in nature to the old “Saddleback Sam” concept from Rick Warren’s book.
CCV’s target was named Mike Haas.
Mike was a fictional profile we made up, with a stock photo of a middle-aged man, he played golf, wore expensive watches, drove a Land Rover, was married with 2 kids who played sports, was financially successful, but also in debt. Once that profile was created – we used to inform literally EVERYTHING we did as a church. From Marketing Campaigns, to the way services were designed, and even into who we hired – they had to look like, talk, and act like Mike Haas would.
This fictional profile, in addition to the strategy to “reach the man, so we can reach the whole family” permeated every single aspect of ministry for the entire church, but especially the MarComm team. We were instructed not to use feminine colors, fonts, or photography in designed marketing materials. I remember creating a Mother’s Day graphic in my first year on staff and I had to make it look as masculine as possible while still appealing to mothers – it was a lot!
Eventually, the strategy also informed a “narrowing of our focus” by cutting women’s ministry.
Back in 2006 when I started, the women’s ministry was THRIVING. They would do quarterly events where they would attract hundreds of women. They would always use the excuses like ‘we moved women’s ministry into the Small Groups ministry where women can connect more intimately.’
In 2015, after nearly a decade of using the Mike Haas fictional profile as our guiding light as a church, the leadership decided to quietly let that fade into the background. The staff was growing quite a bit and the more staff that found out about the Mike Haas profile, especially the female staff, the more chatter began spreading around about it in a negative way. So in an effort to quell any of further objection to the strategy, it became more of a background thing as opposed to a regularly talked about thing that guided ministry decisions.
In 2017, the founding Pastor retired and passed the baton to one of his younger Executive Pastors, Ashley Wooldridge. Ashley is a massive proponent of the “reach the male, so we can reach the family strategy”
(He goes on to talk about what has happened since, but it involves other people, and I’ll leave it at that.)
Is it a surprise that women are leaving the church faster than men?
I wrote about this recently, but it should be expected. That’s the fruit of this:
- when you tell women that we don’t matter,
- when you tell women that we can fulfill our greatest calling and it still isn’t going to be that influential because it’s only the man that really matters,
- when you deny women any opportunities to use their gifts and
- when you even get rid of the very, very, very limited few places that we could–
why would you expect women to stay?
So let’s do better, okay?
I’d love to leave you all with a quote from one of my guests on episode 253 on embracing women’s equality in the church:
There are churches that do it well. Like, it’s not like this needs to be invented. There are churches that do not use these kinds of statistics and don’t set up men and women in these hierarchies. It’s not actually that hard not to do it.
It might be hard to unlearn it. It’s not reinventing a theology that doesn’t exist or a history that has never existed. It really is returning to what the church used to do and what some churches have always continued to do.
Does this surprise you that churches are getting rid of women’s ministries? What can we do about it? Let’s talk in the comments!
From yesterday, the person who went to a church that prayed that high school seniors will, in college, memorize information just long enough to pass tests and get a diploma, then forget it.
This is so close to a “Calvin and Hobbes” comic that’s scary.
https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1994/01/27
That was me! And, I love Calvin & Hobbes! As a comic. As real life it’s a little disturbing.
One other note. Let’s assume for the moment that the myth is true: Reach the man, and the family follows. Okay, fine. But once you reach the man, and the family follows, shouldn’t the church work to serve all of them? Instead, it seems to be “reach the man, the family follows, then cater to ONLY the man”
Excellent point.
A decade ago I woke middle of the night with a mission statement from God about how to begin and direct a women’s ministry. I met with the pastor (SBC church) to discuss getting started. Was told “we arent a ministry church, we are a small-groups church.” He asked for my statement, and I stupidly gave him my only, hand-written from 3am mission.
Months later, he claimed a shifting of direction of the church and used the words I had written as a large part/basis of that. Sad thing was, it involved work from the person directing, so he never even made real, effective use of it, ha. When asked about it, he said they were God’s words and direction which was why they had been given to me who gave it to him. I guess God just mistakenly gave a mission message to the wrong person? rofl
He even had his wife fooled- she kept wondering why we weren’t doing women’s ministry, When I began telling a few people about it I got chastised for sowing discord. And the real kicker? A few years later, when that pastor turned 50, the church began a 50s and up ministry.
I’m thankful that I’m in a church that caters to everyone regardless of gender. We have 3 female pastors and 2 male pastors. BTW, my husband and I attend a small Nazarene church.
However, I’m not surprised that there are women’s ministries diminishing in many churches. At least, that has not been the case in my hometown, at least, that I’m not aware of. There used to be a church I attended a decade ago where the pastor did not want to have a women’s Bible study because he thought women just gossiped. Thankfully, my friend’s mother was persistent and insisted there be a women’s Bible study which she led.
The reason I’m not surprised about women’s ministries dimishing is due to the rise of the Alpha male mentality that’s been seeping into churches which are influenced by right-wing media. Then there’s the fear of Project 2025 depending on who gets into office next year in America.
No surprise here. Many women are hungry- starving- for real connection, for relationship. Is that any wonder when many of those women have no “real” relationship with their husbands who are emotionally unavailable? They desire to be useful, to serve the Lord.
How do many abusers keep control of their victims? They isolate them. Make them feel worthless. Downplay all the good while up-playing all the bad,
I’m not saying all men in these church spaces are abusive or evil. But I think many of them are obediently following their leaders, and many of those leaders are abusive whether they mean to be or not.
Ok – the thought of getting rid of women’s ministries gave me the question of: If this is happening, what do we do? Here are my thoughts to leave for the stats ladies of Bare Marriage to measure:
In light of this post, I found myself on Christianity today reading from a 2014 article about the Gender Parity Project. There are all kinds of stats and graphs to look at.
When I look at my current church and my home church and a couple other churches I have been part of what do the numbers look like in participation? Visually, I see women in numbers on the Choir, Sunday School Teachers and of course the Kitchen.
The study sites certain Christian traditions – For example, Wesleyans (Free Methodists), the Church of God, the Anabaptist tradition, tend to have more women in leadership. In addition, churches that are intentional and have women called out to lead in their mission statement also excel with women leadership positions held.
These are some quotes I pulled from The article:
“Everybody’s skills and gifts are needed in order to achieve the mission.Men and women have freedom to pursue their gifts and callings without regard to gender roles.”
To me these are some answers to where to start with penetration <—- yes I just wrote that… to over come this.<—- yes I just wrote that too!
Penetrate where? The denominations sited (USA only most likely) are friendly ground to the Bare Marriage Team and US as part of the team. This is a starting point. The Choir for example is where women are found out numbering men… at least that is what I have always seen in every single church everywhere I go. (Ok exception there are sometimes men’s and women's only choirs) They might try to get rid of women’s ministries but they surely wont get rid of their choir! This is where women’s voices can be heard. They can speak up within their already friendly atmosphere for more! Those are my thoughts on a starting page and development of further methods to educate and deliver the message to combat this trend of getting rid of women’s ministries. The hope is to spread it from there I am thinking of the strike at Putney on different terms.
So where in that statement is there room for the single adult who can’t or chooses not to get married? Or reaching the older generation? I’m pretty sure that Jesus is the head of the whole family of God and it’s wider than a husband/wife duo (Paul being a man with no wife or children would likely take issue). Why is it that some evangelical churches really hammer down with Paul’s Epistles while completely ignoring that he was a happily single man? As well as Jesus himself? To put it pretty viscerally, these teachings essentially promote the mutilation of the Body of Christ. They’re cutting off hands and feet and saying the eyes and ears are more important.
Please expand
Hi Phil, I will try.
Their “Who are we trying to reach?” focus negates the influence of a woman/wife and children simply because they are not as (fictionally) likely to bring the other family members to Christ.
In my tiny church growing up, we had single moms, single men, women whose husbands refused to attend, and a number of teenagers who came solo. So if my church had chosen to put their primary focus on a husband/father, how would that lone woman’s husband come to know Christ? Or the teens parents? What about the older generation? When you favor one group of people over another (assuming it’s a church that is attended by a larger diversity of ages and genders as opposed to a college ministry for example), you disregard other “body parts” of the Body of Christ. If even a fictional 3.5% of parents come to Christ because of their kids (I know a family that did) it’s worth reaching them! If a fictional 17% of men come to Christ because of their wives, let’s celebrate that and support women’s ministries! Perhaps those men wouldn’t come to Christ except through their wives’ gracious example. Why not reach THAT man by supporting his wife?
Is that what you were asking to be expanded? Honest question, no sarcasm or frustration.
A lot of excellent points you mention! Why should an unmarried female bother going to church at all when some of these pastors claim they are there to teach the men/husbands only? And do unmarried men fall short because they are not married and thus have no one to “teach?”
It makes no sense.
Women who are being ignored need to vote with their feet. That’s it. Take your whole group, stop going to that church building, and go BE church somewhere else. Let the men minister to the men (why did I just get a flashback to “Let the dead bury their dead”? 🤔).
Women really just need to do their own church body. Yes, some men and some churches are not like this, but it seems like they’re a damn needle in the haystack, and women could get so much more if they stop looking for the outliers and just roll their own communities.
It’s really time to do the Strike at Putney FOR REAL.
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/24874/24874-h/24874-h.htm#The_Strike_at_Putney
Actually Jo, what I am suggesting is a WALK IN, Rather than a Walk Out.
How many more decades do women try to make their voices heard, when the system is set up to disregard thise voices?
Hey Phil,
I get what you’re saying from a few comments up… but a few things. This means that women still have to uproot and leave their entire communities. Many of the churches who have this theology also encourage excommunicatiom. And many of these women have received so many bad messages/sermons that they are simply worn out trying to find a way they can serve and be seen and heard, and one more change is the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. I was almost there myself. A walk out would probably grab the attention of more men who are currently in a blissfully-ignorant middle ground than if they were to simply shift over to a different church. The men seeing no women at church at all would be attention-grabbing and impactful in ways that just changing churches wouldn’t.
Yeah, even the most unobservant of men would notice if two-thirds of the choir, most of the Sunday school teachers, and all of the kitchen workers didn’t show up. 🙄
Well – I don’t disagree. It obviously worked at least once. Here is the problem. There at-least 150 denominations that cant agree on basic theology. The walk out method is what we call a union in secular world. I welcome the idea. Who will organize it? Will it be you? How about Jo? Sheila? I dont believe thats on her agenda. Maybe we should ask? I am not trying to be condescending. I just am trying to see a new way. To me, women in numbers is the path I see. If you have other ideas I am all ears and I will certainly support you.
And in addition who likes unions anyway? Look – the Union saved my Moms job and it kept food on our table. But truly people do not luke unions – even people who are in them. They might get their way and it might work but they are loathed. Does that what women really want? Through education in numbers that is how we do it – with LOVE. Thats what I see.
Then by all means, please organize getting all the hurt women to switch over to churches. Since you are asking if Jo or I will organize that, that must mean you are willing to organize the flip side of it… right?
I usually appreciate your passion but not planning something as huge as, just the opposite side of the coin, a walk out while chastising *us* for not getting it done doesn’t seem fair, kind , or loving this time around. Some of us are still trying to find ANY good in the church and God. Belittling us does not help heal our immense hurts.
Going by the 80/20 rule, 20 percent of the women in a given church do 80 percent of the work done by all the women of the church.
What if those 20 percent stop attending that church and instead, say, meet at the park on Sunday mornings? Or, depending on how many women there are, they could split up into several groups, then each group rotates to the house of a different group member each Sunday morning (to share the burden of hosting).
Their absence from their now former church is going to leave people scrambling to replace all the labor they were providing. The women who remain may be jolted out of their own captivity in a system that uses them while simultaneously disdaining them. (The powers that be will of course label the departed as sinful, rebellious, and on their way to hell for daring to question God’s established order. 🙄 )
If just one church goes viral on social media for such a move, how long will it take for women everywhere to take a hard look at what their churches are doing and teaching? Any men who agreed but felt powerless or were unable to overcome the existing power structures might be welcomed (or not). Those men might be motivated to start their own house churches.
No one person needs to organize it nationwide or worldwide. A group of concerned people in each church can say, “This isn’t working, so let’s try something different.”
Maybe we should all be rethinking what “church” means. I, for one, am thinking that when a group no longer fits into a house, the solution is NOT to build a large building to accommodate the growing numbers. Instead, the group should split into two or more groups and meet at other houses.
Our own families don’t live in one building on Sunday mornings and in a different building the rest of the week. No. They live in their own houses all week long. Maybe God’s family should live the same way.
Not belittling. Nor was I suggesting switching churches. Thanks have a great weekend.
Then what ARE you suggesting, Phil?
I’m very confused, because in your earlier comment you said “Visually, I see women in numbers on the Choir, Sunday School Teachers and of course the Kitchen” and “This is where women’s voices can be heard. They can speak up within their already friendly atmosphere for more!”
First of all, too many churches sply are not friendly to women. They are especially not friendly to those women who get out of line.
Second, MEN DO NOT LISTEN TO WOMEN. If men do listen, they reply that the women are unspiritual, rebellious, sinful, Jezebel, blah, blah, blah.
That’s why women removing themselves from these churches would achieve more in a month than all the talking in the world has done for the last five decades.
But women have to be willing to believe that it’s not sinful to reject being abused, even by “men of gawwwwwdddd.” That women ARE made in the image of God, every bit as much as men and not in some nebulously inferior way. Women will have to believe they’re not going straight to hell for daring to have an opinion or for disagreeing with the pastor or elders or their own husbands. Women need to take their spiritual lives and growth in their own hands, relying on the Holy Spirit instead of relying on some man pretending to be the Holy Spirit.
There are enough resources online for women to be built up, even if such resources are not available locally and in person.
Things simply won’t change for women until women DO something different.
Iirc, Sheila was in the worship band at a church and was verbally reprimanded and a big issue was made of her having said a few words from the stage. I imagine she felt heard in that “friendly” space- until that happened. Perhaps I’m wrong.
I know of other women who are in the choirs and such who have made suggestions only to be shut down and been removed from them- because they felt safe enough to speak in those “friendly” spaces. So yes, contrary to what you said, women do get removed from the choir and worship bands for not toeing the line. In a past church, if a female spoke against the current way of things, somehow it got back to the pastor and he would sit her down to put her in her place and limit her involvement in church activities such as teaching Sunday School. He had his minions everywhere.
I think you mean well but are underestimating the reality of what many women face in churches, even ones they feel/felt are “friendly atmospheres.” In many of their current churches, there are no spaces they can truly speak freely. That’s kind of the point. Which is why I figured you meant to switch churches… because as a woman having been in these spaces, I don’t see what else you could mean as I have listened to too many women do as you seem to think is possible- speak up in the spaces they feel comfortable and heard- and they got shot down and removed from those spaces, and told to know their place and they wouldn’t be allowed back in them until they could “discern and allign” with the “Spirit.”
If you aren’t suggesting women change churches how exactly did you mean the “penetrate … denominations” piece? honest question.
Nessie, to your point that churches seemed safe until the women didn’t toe the line…
This is weirdly parallel to what Zawn (zawnv on Facebook, zawn on substack) recently wrote about not assuming that a man is a good guy, that women should stop giving men the benefit of the doubt. She proposes that men should have to prove they’re safe by a whole parade of green flags before they’re suitable for dating or even just friendship.
At this point in history, it seems like it would save women a lot of time, energy, and heartbreak to assume a church is not safe for women unless there are a whole host of green flags waving all the time: women speak from the pulpit, women’s spiritual gifts are acknowledged and encouraged (even the teaching ones 😱), women give feedback that is incorporated on the regular, etc. There are others, but I’ve only been awake for half an hour. 😁
Here’s the substack, since Facebook doesn’t play nicely with all browsers if you don’t have an account (language warning for both her content and the comments):
https://zawn.substack.com/p/the-most-powerful-simple-tool-for
I agree, Jo R. A church should have a whole bunch of green flags first, and we should all look for green flags before we think about seriously dating anybody.
There’s too much danger out there in bad matches–both in marriage and in church.
This whole thing reminds me of the admonition given in James 2 not to show favoritism in church. The context there is favoring the rich over the poor, but speaks about favoritism in general. The spirit of the world says to seek “more”- more people, more visibility, more money, more influence, more reputation. It relies on worldly statistics, strategies and wisdom. The spirit of Jesus is different. Did he seek out the most powerful, influential people to receive and share the message of his kingdom? The “93-percenters”? (Even if that were true) No. He chose the things that were weak and despised. Choosing 2 women as the first witnesses to the resurrection? Not the wisest marketing strategy! Choosing the Samaritan woman to announce his Messiahship? Unthinkable!
Good point. So many churches have become so very worldly. They judge by worldly standards and they seem to be chasing after worldly strategies (fog machines, big screen televisions). In my experience, it is the irresistible love of Jesus that draws people to him, not the lure of watching football on a big screen TV.
I have two thoughts on this matter: 1st) While out of print, The Tragedy of Compromise by Ernest D. Pickering stoically explains The Origin and Impact of the New Evangelicalism (its sub-title). You can find this book around, however, you will pay to have it. Its seven profound chapters cost me $89.00 – but worth every penny. Clearly, this is a book today’s pastors do not want in the hands of their memberships because if it were, the women with integrity would not be the only ones walking out; men with integrity would be fast on their heels. 2nd) At these churches where women’s ministries are being eliminated – I want to encourage all the women who choose to remain to go against their church leadership and organize their own Bible studies, their own support groups, and their own ministries; name them all with the word “women” in the title somewhere. I am reminded of the Greek play by Aristophanes – Lysistrata. It is a comic account of a woman’s extraordinary mission to end the Peloponnesian War between Greek city-states by denying ALL the men of the land any sex. Great read!
Lysistrata and The Strike at Putney are hilarious and cathartic reads, but they exist in a fictional reality that asks us to temporarily forget how powerful and dangerous men are and how long-practiced they are at manipulating and coercing women.
But we in real life often forget the power of unity. When we work together we can accomplish great things!
I’ve been a part of multiple Evangelical churches and never heard the “93% rule.”
All those churches had vibrant women’s ministries with women leading, but believed in male leadership for head pastor positions. Not every conservative church is guilty of confining or destroying women’s ministry.
Very true, Marie. Not every conservative church does this. But enough do that we have to stand against it, and we have to ask the pastors who are affirming women’s ministries to speak out against those who are destroying them.
Growing up, my mother was the one to encourage us to go to church. My dad sometimes attended with us but wasn’t actively making us go. Eventually us kids stopped wanting to go because my dad stopped going and, after so many years of no support and going by herself, my mother gave up and decided that going to church every Sunday was too much of a hassle and stopped going herself. So, the man who is “supposed to” be head of the household and lead the family to church, instead lead them away from church. There were no churches in our area at that time with women’s ministries so she had no encouragement or support from the church either.
That’s so sad!