The Transgender Phenomenon: Why Mark Yarhouse is Dead Wrong

Last updated on: July 28, 2018 at 2:06 pm by Esther O’Reilly

The Transgender Phenomenon: Why Mark Yarhouse is Dead Wrong 2018-07-28T14:06:19-04:00 Esther O’Reilly

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

As usual, I am approximately two weeks behind the hot issue of the week, but in this particular case, since literally nobody else is out there saying what I’m about to say, I figured what the heck. Might as well get out there and offend someone.

The name “Mark Yarhouse” might not ring a bell with the average reader. He’s a Christian psychiatrist at Regent College who has conducted multiple studies on gender and sexuality and is touted by outlets like Christianity Today and The Gospel Coalition as “the leading Christian scholar” on gender dysphoria. A full bio is available here (which includes other resumee items like the facilitation of various “dialogues” between homosexuals and Christians). Last year, he wrote a long-form piece for Christianity Today condensing the highlights of his book Understanding Gender Dysphoria. A couple weeks ago, he appeared on their podcast to weigh in on the bathroom wars and Obama’s executive order.

Ordinarily, I don’t pay much attention to what Christianity Today is up to these days. They lost me a while ago. But since this recent interview with Yarhouse was highlighted in the newsletter for Summit Ministries, a solid conservative organization for whom I’ve been freelancing this past year, I was curious. As soon as I had clicked their link and realized Yarhouse was the guest, my heart sank, because I knew just what to expect. And it’s hardly “helpful,” “thoughtful,” “useful,” or any of the other milquetoast adjectives that have been used to describe Yarhouse’s work.

First of all, any piece on gender issues that has passed CT’s portals must be taken with a grain of salt. One way you can tell this is by a lengthy “editor’s note” that shows up in the margin of Yarhouse’s long-form piece. If you click here, you can read it yourself. This note informs the reader that “following general journalistic practice,” when writing about a “transgender” person, Christianity Today has decided to use the pronoun of that person’s choice. Aspiring Christian journalists, take note: If working at Christianity Today is your dream job, think carefully about whether you’re willing to concede your professional and moral principles first. Just a friendly word.

Now, on to Yarhouse in particular. One doesn’t have to dig beyond that long-form piece to figure out quickly that his approach to the mental illness of gender dysphoria is hardly conservative or biblical. Right out of the gate, he opens with the story of “Sarah,” born Sawyer, who underwent sex-change surgery and came to Yarhouse for counseling. Yarhouse refers to “Sarah” as “a transgender Christian” and glibly uses the pronoun “she” throughout.

However, Yarhouse also notes that Sawyer came conflicted and uneasy about his choice. This could give Yarhouse an “I’m just urging compassion towards people who are struggling with this, not condoning sin” loophole… if he hadn’t closed that loophole himself in his book.

Read the Amazon sample for yourself: Right from the beginning, he almost defiantly lays out his research with other “transgender Christians,” including a bizarre case where a man transitioned but stayed with his wife and kids because they were “conservative Christians who didn’t believe in divorce.” No, I’m not making this up. And no, of course Yarhouse doesn’t use words like “bizarre,” “disgusting,” “sinful,” or any other sane, manly adjective that should spring to mind when discussing such a case. He just goes on blithely saying “she” this and “she” that, using “her” story as the introductory example of how “complicated” his line of work can get. And if the man had since repented and was actually wracked with guilt over having made such a horrible decision, Yarhouse is hardly going out of his way to let the reader know. It wouldn’t serve his goal, which is to provoke and shock conservative readers.

Yarhouse also writes that he found it “humbling” to listen to the testimonies of these self-proclaimed “transgender Christians” while conducting his study. Again, to be clear: Yarhouse is not just talking about mentally ill people who realize they have a problem. He is including male-to-female and female-to-male “transition” cases, people like the man who apparently still didn’t see a problem with mutilating his body while his wife and kids looked on.

Meanwhile, in his CT article, Yarhouse plods through a tiresome description of “three lenses” through which one can view transgender issues, which I will summarize for the reader who doesn’t feel like slogging through pages of jargon: the orthodox view, the heathen view, and the mushy middle view. Naturally, Yarhouse plants himself firmly in the mushy middle, too squeamish to be either totally heathen or totally orthodox. He says that while he personally does not counsel people to transition, he encourages “management” techniques such as wearing underwear of the opposite sex, wearing makeup, etc. He mentions one male client in particular who controlled the urge to transition by growing out his hair and secretly wearing women’s lingerie. I repeat, this is supposed to be a success story.

Yarhouse wraps things up with a nice round of genteel Church-bashing. Apparently, anyone who doesn’t make transgender people “feel welcome” is just plain mean. He explicitly points the finger at people who are uncomfortable with blatantly “trans” guests and spread “gossip” about such people. Presumably, “gossip” would include things like, “Who is that guy? Does he think he’s a woman? Is he nuts? What’s he doing here?” All perfectly legitimate questions under the circumstances. Naturally, this is where pastors are supposed to step in, collect specifics, and act in the best interests of all concerned. No doubt Yarhouse would think it radically unloving for a pastor to tell “Sarah” that he should cut his hair, bind his fake breasts and in general try to make himself as inconspicuous as possible if he wants to continue attending a church where there are families with children. He would be even more outraged at the suggestion that any guy who wears light makeup and women’s underwear on a regular basis is being enabled, not aided.

This brings us to the “bathroom podcast.” Yarhouse’s attitude is no different now than it was last year. Most of the discussion time is frittered away as he and the hosts bend over backwards to be as inoffensive and “sensitive” as possible, reflecting sadly on how easy it is for “both sides” to get “caught up” in loud, mean culture wars. Yarhouse murmurs at one point, “Christians are at their best in these discussions when they’re more compassionate, more willing to listen, more willing to understand.” The closest we get to something like push-back is when one host suggests that concerns about predator abuse should be given a fair hearing.

But nobody is willing to state unequivocally what the bathroom war is really all about: the facilitation and celebration of perversion, at the cost of societal order and decency. And nobody is willing to state unequivocally that this is not just bad for the rest of society, it’s bad for the “transgender” individual himself. Forget “fake” transgender predators: Anyone who really believes he is a woman when he is a man (or vice versa) is profoundly, dangerously ill. It is the bold, compassionate Christian’s duty to stand athwart his path crying “Stop,” not to show him the way to the ladies’ room.

In his folly, Yarhouse has failed to recognize this. Even if he privately believes something approaching orthodoxy, he hasn’t the intestinal fortitude to say it out loud. That is why no conservative Christian should take him seriously on these matters.

Faith and Culture

Previous Post

May 30, 2016

Questions and Answers, Veterans' Day Edition: Fortunate Sons

Next Post

June 13, 2016 Orlando Aftermath: Between Sentiment and Vitriol

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 3 star 3.5 star 4 star 4.5 star Anatomy of a Song Behind the Songs Blog Stuff Book Reviews CCM CCM vs. SG CD Reviews Christians in Entertainment Christmas Essential 12 Christmas Favorites Christmas Top Fives Concert Reviews Concerts Culture Devotional Thoughts Faith and Culture From the Vault Fun Gospel Singers Gospel Songs Great Music Guest Posts Harmony Master Classes History Holidays Humor Hymns Interviews Marriage in the Movies Monday Morning Humor Movie Reviews Movies Music NQC Odds and Ends Old Movies, New Eyes Old Southern Gospel News Old Stuff Open Threads Other Genres Perfect Tenor Performances Polls Questions and Answers Recently Added SG vs. The Rest of the World Sing It Again Songs Songwriting Southern Gospel Surprise Sunday The Definitive Hymns Theology Toe-to-Toe Top 10 Lists Top 5 Top 5 Lists Two Sisters Review Uncategorized Video Posts Youtube Finds

Select a Month August 2026 February 2025 August 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 October 2023 March 2023 February 2023 December 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 June 2020 March 2020 February 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 April 2018 September 2017 August 2017 May 2017 February 2017 December 2016 November 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What did Lamentations describe happening to Jerusalem?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Its rebuilding Its blessing and expansion Its destruction and mourning Its prosperity