I believe this is reflected in the books that are marketed to Christian women. These numerous volumes are long on subjective experience and stories and short on objective doctrine. Thus dubious content can find cover under emotional appeal and perceived personal rapport with the author. They are also driven by application, usually related to the home sphere, rather than theology. But these books are theological in nature even if they want to avoid that label. If the author intends to shape the reader’s view of God and interpretation of the Bible, she is teaching theology and should be critiqued as such.

At first glance, this video is an over-the-top parody of traditionalist ideas from the 1950’s, but it may be closer to the truth than we would like to believe:

It was widely believed in the nineteenth century that “while sinful man was controlled by his brain, delicate woman was controlled by her reproductive organs.” Women had wombs that were used for physical creation; men had brains that were used for mental creation… From this belief derived not only the notion of woman’s irrational, unpredictable, and mysterious “feminine” nature, but also the idea that childbearing was every woman’s ultimate fulfillment while intellectual pursuits were the fulfillment of the masculine nature. A woman who pursued intellectual activities therefore assumed for herself a masculine nature, such women of the nineteenth century were often accused of being “hermaphrodites in mind.”

Much was made of the supposed smaller size of the female brain and the dire effects (everything from disease to insanity) that would befall a woman who undertook to receive a “man’s education.” Education for women was feared, lest it induce women to abandon their divinely ordained profession of motherhood. The term “strong-minded, which had been formerly been use to praise men who had vigorous and determined minds, began to be used in the 1850s to describe women who, because of their vigorous and determined minds, were not really women… A strong-minded woman was the opposite of a true woman, who was weak-minded.”¹

Given recent blog posts (here and here) about Christian women’s books and their ofttimes questionable doctrine, how much has this traditionalism discouraged women from using their brains and thinking wisely for themselves? Have we been relegated from the life of the mind to the realm of subjectivity and emotion based on the Victorian ideal of the true woman?  The first step to being a Berean is critical thinking, but if that is squelched and considered contrary, even an aberration of a woman’s nature, what is left? Is the solution to have “someone older and wiser” telling us what to do?  But what if that person is wrong?²

As I’ve said before, we are shaped by the philosophers and cultures that have gone before us, and Victorian traditionalism has had a lasting influence.³ You can form your own opinion, but I believe we are reaping traditionalist fruit today. There would have been tremendous pressure to conform to the culture in the 1800s. For women of a certain class, marriage was their only option. ⁴ You had to fit the bill or be rejected in favor of the competition. Given the high stakes of financial security, how long would it take before this romanticized ideal became accepted as fact? Even today, we accept without question that men are more cerebral and women are more emotional. Is this really true or is it the result of deeply entrenched stereotypes? I believe it is the latter. Rather than recognizing the individuality with which God has created us, that we are human beings with emotions and intellects, we’ve been molding ourselves for decades to a pattern that is cultural rather than Biblical.

Based on my hypothesis, I believe this is reflected in the books that are marketed to Christian women. These numerous volumes are long on subjective experience and stories and short on objective doctrine. Thus dubious content can find cover under emotional appeal and perceived personal rapport with the author. They are also driven by application, usually related to the home sphere, rather than theology. But these books are theological in nature even if they want to avoid that label. If the author intends to shape the reader’s view of God and interpretation of the Bible, she is teaching theology and should be critiqued as such. But alas! Traditionalist ideas of how women tick are so ingrained that our main question is “How does it make me feel?” rather than “Is this true according to the whole counsel of God?” Critical analysis isn’t well received and often rejected as personal criticism of the author and the reader.

The traditionalist fruit we’ve reaped has not nourished us spiritually. If anything, it has weakened us. We’ve abdicated our minds for too long. It’s time to take them back for the glory of God and the health of the Church.⁵

1. Women Caught in the Conflict: The Culture War between Traditionalism and Feminism, Rebecca Merrill Groothuis, Baker Books, 1994, pg. 6.
2. I’d be wary of Rolf’s fascist leanings, Liesl. You had better find another guy, or better yet, start cultivating your own mind.
3. This is confirmed in Chapter 12, How Women Started the Culture War in Total Truth, Nancy Pearcey, Crossway, 2008.
4. The poor were not represented in this ideal. To assume it is feasible for all women is rather classist both in the past and today.
5. For the record, there are pastors and church leaders who are equipping both men and women to be Bereans. My pastor is among them. Are they the majority or the minority? That is the question.

Persis Lorenti is an ordinary Christian. You can find her at Tried With Fire and Out of the Ordinary. This article appeared at her blog and is used with permission.