Fighting Against Feminized Christianity

Authoritarian political movements seeking to incorporate Christianity into their ideology typically try to make a case for the idea that Christianity has become too "feminized" for "real men." It is argued that true, original Christianity was far more "manly" but it has become corrupted by women, liberals, modernity, etc. Key to these arguments is the assumption that there are intrinsically "feminine" traits that can be characterized as weak and intrinsically "masculine" traits that can be characterized as strong and bold.

No More Hornets (via Agnostic Atheism) describes a phone message they received about a "Church for Men." Here's what their web site has to say to women:

Church offers the things women crave: safety, relationships, nurturing, and close-knit community. The rules are: be nice. Be sensitive. Be gentle. We promise a personal relationship with a man who loves you unconditionally.

On the other hand, men need adventure, challenge and risk – but these things are discouraged in church. Change moves at a glacial pace – because it has the potential to hurt people’s feelings. Any man who tries to bring risk into his local congregation will quickly find himself in the gun sights of a longtime member.

Volunteer opportunities in the local church revolve around traditionally feminine roles: childcare, teaching, music, hospitality and cooking. Men who want to serve in church often end up passing out bulletins or attending meetings. Where is the adventure in that?

Men are dying for a leader, but we’ve turned Christ into a lover. Today’s Jesus is sensitive, caring and beautiful. Our praise music has the same breathless feel and romantic lyrics as top-40 love songs. Jesus barked, “Follow Me!” but we’ve softened that; it’s now, “Have a personal relationship with Me.”

Breathless is right — breathlessly condescending, that is. Although the text manages to avoid saying it outright, the subtext is consistently a denigration of anything labeled feminine. Consider, for example, the claim that change is discouraged and moves slowly because it might "hurt people's feelings" — and women want to avoid hurting people's feelings. This claim is contradicted by the fact that changes move slowly in churches because they are interested in preserving orthodoxy. Complaints about changes moving too slowly strike me as hypocritical when they come from people who immediately thereafter complain about how the image of Christ has changed too much.

Here's what they say to men:

How did Christianity, founded by a man and his 12 male disciples, become the province of women? There is a pattern of feminization in Christianity going back at least 700 years, according to Dr. Leon Podles, author of The Church Impotent: the Feminization of Christianity. But the ball really got rolling in the 1800s. With the dawning of the industrial revolution, large numbers of men sought work in mines, mills and factories, far from home and familiar parish. Women stayed behind, and began remaking the church in their image. The Victorian era saw the rise of church nurseries, Sunday schools, lay choirs, quilting circles, ladies’ teas, soup kitchens, girls’ societies, potluck dinners, etc.

Soon, the very definition of a good Christian had changed: boldness and aggression were out; passivity and receptivity were in. Christians were to be gentle, sensitive and nurturing, focused on home and family rather than accomplishment and career. Believers were not supposed to like sex, tobacco, dancing or other worldly pleasures. The godly were always calm, polite and sociable. This feminine spirituality still dominates our churches. Those of us who grew up in church hardly notice it; we can’t imagine things any other way. But a male visitor detects the feminine spirit the moment he walks in the sanctuary door. He may feel like Tom Sawyer in Aunt Polly’s parlor; he must watch his language, mind his manners and be extra polite. It’s hard for a man to be real in church because he must squeeze himself into this feminine religious mold.

Notice how all the bad feminization got started in the modern era — is it just a coincidence that it mirrors the development of the Enlightenment? I doubt it. If the claims above were at all accurate, then before the modern era Christians were not expected to be gentle, believers were encouraged to enjoy sex, tobacco, and other worldly pleasures, and men attending church were not expected to watch their language, mind their manners, or be extra polite. Unfortunately, that's simply not true — the only Christianity that this would accurately describe is that of antebellum American South.

Then again, does its truth or falsity really matter? These are examples of ideology and propaganda, not historical scholarship. They are meant to inspire men to throw off the shackles of a religion that encourages them to be sensitive, polite, and kind in favor of a parallel Christianity that promotes whatever can be shoe-horned in under the label "manly." Early Christianity, which was far more meek, changed dramatically due to the demands of Germanic warriors being converted and who wanted to retain their warrior virtues. Similar patterns repeated themselves in 19th century America, Weimar Germany, and more recently in America with groups like the Promise Keepers.

Assaults on "feminine" Christianity now tend to be primarily an American phenomenon and an American fundamentalist reaction against the modern era of equality and liberty. Muscular Christianity pushes masculinity in part by pushing traditional hierarchies and traditional structures of authority — structures which, naturally, are run and controlled by men. Fighting against the “feminization” of church or society is, thus, a fight against the loss of traditional privileges and power.

Indeed, the development of fundamentalism and later the Christian Right can be described, at least in part, as a reaction against equality and an attempt to defend or restore traditional privileges. Because so many privileges are bound up with traditions which themselves are tied closely with religion, it’s natural that assaults on traditional privileges will be seen as assaults on religion.

In a way, they are an assault on religion — religion is partially to blame for the persistence of unjust privileges in society. Atheist critiques of religion must frequently take this into consideration and, where appropriate, focus on the perpetuation of unjust privileges as one of the chief harms which religion causes in society. As demonstrated by the above, some Christians will try to argue back in defense of a more muscular Christianity which promotes so-called "masculine" values — all ultimately in defense of authoritarian social structures and traditional, unjust privileges.