Related articles and links |  1 of 3

Last week we took note of the January/February issue of Touchstone magazine, which features an important special section, "Return to the Father's House: God the Father and Human Fatherhood." There is much to be grateful for in this issue, and I urge you to pick up a copy of the magazine. But there is also cause for puzzlement and regret, in the prominence assigned to the views of Leon J. Podles, who—with the imprimatur of his fellow senior editors—introduces the special section, framing the entire discussion, and contributes an essay, "Missing Fathers of the Church: The Feminization of the Church and the Need for Christian Fatherhood."

Podles's essay summarizes and builds on his book, The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Western Christianity (1999). Both the essay and the book are exercises in conspiracy theory. The conspiracy is something called "feminization." What this means, precisely, is not easy to determine. Podles cites statistics and anecdotal evidence about church attendance (about which more below) as evidence of feminization. He writes that

Psychological studies have detected a connection between femininity in men and interest in religion. There may even be a physical difference. Among men, football players and movie actors have the highest testosterone level, ministers, the lowest.

What about magazine editors? Perhaps Podles should suggest a test to see if he and his fellows have the right stuff.

He adduces the contemporary crisis in fatherhood as further evidence of the effects of the feminization of the Western Christianity, a centuries-long rot the beginnings of which

can be dated rather exactly. Suddenly, in the thirteenth century, during the lifetimes of St. Dominic and St. Francis, women began to get involved in the Church to such an extent that both Francis and Dominic warned their followers not to spend all their time preaching to women and ignoring men.

What to make of all this? It takes only a minute to splash a can of paint all over a room; cleaning up the mess takes a lot longer. So it is with arguments that are confused, even contradictory, based on selective evidence, and otherwise lacking clarity and cogency. To clear up all the confusions in Podles's argument would require many pages indeed. But here is a start.

It is a commonplace among historians of the early church that women were particularly attracted to Christianity. For a concise summary, see for example chapter 5 of Rodney Stark's The Rise of Christianity. Citing the work of Henry Chadwick and Peter Brown, among others, Stark notes that "ancient sources and modern historians agree that primary conversion to Christianity was far more prevalent among females than among males." So to begin with, there are good reasons to doubt Podles's sweeping historical narrative: the very foundation of his argument crumbles.

But Podles's treatment of the contemporary situation is equally unreliable. He mixes statistics, pseudostatistics, and unsupported assertions into an indescribable mishmash. No one doubts, for example, that in the mainline denominations and, more dramatically, in the church throughout Western Europe, women significantly outnumber men, but this in itself hardly substantiates Podles's "thesis" any more than does the prevalence of women in Russian Orthodoxy today. After all, Podles himself says that fundamentalists are "almost evenly divided" between men and women, and he concedes in his book that among evangelicals there is greater balance than one finds in the mainline. (And what about social class? How does that factor in?)

next page... |  1 of 3

February (Web-only) 2001, Vol. 45