JOHN ERB writes:

 After reading this excerpt, I am not so much impressed by Mrs. [Susan Fenimore] Cooper’s conclusions about women’s suffrage, though I am not in disagreement with her conclusion; it is more her comments about Christianity in relation to women that cause me to wonder and question, as the theme she presents about Christianity and women is and has been often repeated, and something about it doesn’t seem quite right to me. This often-repeated theme is that Christianity raised the status of women from mere slaves and playthings for the whims of men, to equality and companionship with men. While this may be generally true, what I have never seen addressed is the necessity of Christianity for women to relate correctly to men. Rather, it is as though we are to believe that women’s disposition toward men is generally always rightly ordered, no matter the religion involved, or any religion for that matter. It seems we must conclude, at least from what is said, that Christianity is necessary for men in order to treat women well, but not necessary for women except to be treated well; that it is quite in the order of nature for women always to treat others well, whether or not this ever true for men in similar circumstances.

Laura writes: 

Interesting comment. You mean Cooper makes no mention, in this excerpt, of the failures of women to submit to men throughout history or to recognize any innate inclinations of women to use men to their advantage and how this leads to a disordered society? There is some anti-male bias in Christian apology of traditional sex roles?  

The contemporary Christian defense of traditional sex roles does focus on the failures of women in embracing feminism. That is a major theme. But when it comes to historical discussion, you’re right there is often the argument that if not for Christianity, women would be exploited, that men are inherently more capable of wrongdoing.

Polygamy, whether historic  polygamy in which one man has more than one wife at once or the serial polygamy of today, is arguably more harmful to men. I think Christians can make a better case for traditional sex roles by recognizing that it has restrained the power of women as well as that of men.

John writes:

It does seem to be so, as you have elaborated in your first paragraph. I am ready to be corrected in my misperception, if it is shown to be so, but in the rare instances that contemporary Christianity does fully recognize feminism for the bane that it really is, never far separated from this recognition is an accusation of men for bringing women, or driving women, to the point where they should embrace feminism. For example, the Catholic Church, to which I converted, and which I love, though often do not understand, speaks principally of feminist ideas thorough the pen of Pope John Paul II (see Mulieris Dignitatem and Letter to Women), that these ideas, though certainly mistaken, are above all, understandably espoused by women, seeing the terrible predicaments they find themselves in at the hands of society as a whole, and particularly at the hands of men. These ideas of feminism are sounded again and again in contemporary Christianity, even if not with the same force as the Pope’s. And so women (and all Christians who adhere) are given the means, quite often put into use, of exclusively blaming men for societal ills, and this consonant with the worst of feminism, all while being able say they reject feminism.

Laura writes:

This is an excellent point. This view is really based on a feminist reading of history, which exaggerates the power of the average man and overlooks his duties and obligations while presenting the average woman as a victim.

Michael S., who is also Catholic, writes:

John Erb writes:

“[W]hat I have never seen addressed is the necessity of Christianity for women to relate correctly to men. Rather, it is as though we are to believe that women’s disposition toward men is generally always rightly ordered, no matter the religion involved, or any religion for that matter. It seems we must conclude, at least from what is said, that Christianity is necessary for men in order to treat women well, but not necessary for women except to be treated well; that it is quite in the order of nature for women always to treat others well, whether or not this ever true for men in similar circumstances.”

He (and others) might be interested in this book. I recommend it highly… even though it is written by a non-Catholic. : – )

Please follow and like us: