Fundamentalist Hermeneutics and Tradition: Authoritarianism, Gender, and Conformity
Fundamentalist interpretations of Scripture and (often tribalistic) tradition(s) significantly intersect with authoritarianism and conformity in shaping gender roles and behavior within certain conservative Christian circles. Exploring this complex intersection, drawing on historical and sociological factors, we can adequately raise concerns about authoritarian leadership, cult-like tendencies towards conformity, and the devaluation of women's contributions within these spaces, ultimately appealing for a more ethical and Christ-like approach that transcends rigid gender stereotypes and embraces the inclusive nature of the Gospel.
When we examine the intersection of fundamentalism, authoritarianism, conformity, and so-called "biblical femininity" in American conservative Christianity, it becomes clear that fundamentalist cultures impose restrictive gender roles, often marginalizing women with theological training or gifts outside their boundaries. Tracing the historical roots of these roles, influenced by Victorian and Greco-Roman ideals, the American Fundamentalist movement, and broader societal shifts, it becomes apparent that recent critiques leveled at authoritarian leadership concerning enforced conformity and the devaluation of women's contributions are much needed. Those advocating for a more ethical, Christ-centered approach that transcends rigid (and un-Scriptural) gender norms reflect the Gospel's inclusivity and rightly raise concerns about this oftentimes destructive effort to fight what the proponents of the fundamentalist view call "pushing back against the feminization of the church," need to be taken seriously.
Unfortunately, these voices are often stifled, and leaders (and sometimes followers) tell others in the camp to "mark and avoid" them. A prime and current example is the words being used against the podcast "Sons of Patriarchy" in conservative Reformed Facebook groups.
The Podcast, hosted by Peter Bell, describes itself as a place for those who have been abused in fundamentalist circles to have a voice (our words). He asks, "What happens when biblical patriarchy, Christian nationalism, and a theology of authority and submission become the pillars of a movement? Scores of abuse stories in marriages, schools, churches, families, and more."
To tell the truth about your experiences or platform those who amplify these marginalized voice will leave you attacked, silenced, shunned, or even blacklisted. If you are a woman raising these concerns, you are labeled as a "troublemaker" or, sometimes, you are even called a 'secret feminist usurper' and a woman with an 'agenda.' To speak out against the abuses marks you; you can be treated with hostility.
The Rigid Gender Boundaries of Fundamentalism
We interviewed dozens of women who provided personal accounts of rigid gender boundaries, which created a restrictive environment for them within fundamentalism, often limiting their opportunities for service, leadership, and even the freedom to express their experiences without fear of reprisal. Reoccurring themes included:
Women were primarily confined to the roles of housewife and mother: Women were often kept small and placed in the narrow 'housewife and mother' box, which implicitly suggests that this is the only path to godliness. This ideal is contrasted with men who are affirmed and praised to rule wherever they tread.
Discouragement of women in leadership and teaching roles within the church: Women are discouraged from speaking in a co-ed Sunday school class despite their qualifications and experience. Sometimes, their "personality and giftsets" are not welcomed in conservative parachurches and are stigmatized in complementarian churches. This highlights a rigid boundary limiting women's meaningful service within the church.
Overemphasis on male authority and leadership: Men's virtues are seen as ideal, with men positioned as the protectors of orthodoxy and advocates for male leadership within the church. This devalues the significant roles women previously held in mission societies and other ministries.
Suspicion and hostility towards women who deviate from prescribed roles: Women who express their experiences or do not conform to the idealized behavior are often silenced, shunned, or even blacklisted as a 'troublemaker' and treated with suspicion and hostility.
Linkage of women's roles to maintaining social and doctrinal order: Because of the rise of fundamentalist definitions of biblical inerrancy, women's religious activities were viewed with suspicion as potentially threatening the church's doctrinal purity and authority. There was an increased emphasis on slogans (in-camp language) promoting order and obedience. In this context, obedience would have been implicitly (and often explicitly) directed towards male church leaders and husbands in the home.
Idealization of the well-behaved and domestic woman: This figure is presented as the ideal, while women who are "uncontrollable" are not and often were seen as a danger to the church. This reinforces the rigid expectation for women to embody domesticity and specific behavioral norms.
Emphasis on women's responsibility for male sexual desires: Similar to other conservative religions, fundamentalist circles may place responsibility on women to dress and behave modestly to avoid arousing men's desires. If given too much autonomy or authority, women would pollute orthodoxy and destroy what the fundamentalists see as "God's ordained" order for home, church, and society.
These accounts reveal a deeply ingrained system in which women's worth is measured by conformity rather than calling. This reinforces rigid gender roles at the expense of individual gifts and spiritual flourishing. By examining these patterns, we gain insight into how fundamentalist structures limit women's autonomy, silence their voices, and uphold a narrow vision of faith that prioritizes control.
Fundementalist Hermeneutics
The American Fundamentalist movement of the 1800s, born out of anxiety over modernity and a desire to preserve core orthodox principles, significantly shaped gender roles within the church. By the twentieth century, fundamentalism began to define itself in opposition to feminist trends. A key pillar of fundamentalism is the doctrine of biblical inerrancy, which impacts how scriptural passages related to gender and behavior are understood and applied.
Simply stated, inerrancy means the Bible contains no errors and affirms only truth—a doctrine that the majority of Christians can and do affirm. The catch here is that the fundamentalist movement accuses anyone who does not subscribe to their view of women (and their roles) of having abandoned inerrancy, thus putting them not only outside the camp but essentially labeling them apostates.
Authority and Authoritarianism
Fundamentalist faith traditions are now defined by the "militant opposition to modernity" (Ralph & Williamson, 2005, p. 25). Those who are not believers are kept at a distance and perceived as threatening the group's purity. The texts justify all thoughts and actions. Fundamentalists have an authoritarian belief system (Ralph & Williamson, 2005, p. 25). "These movements generally require authoritarian, charismatic leadership and a core of devotees who promote a hard-edged social and moral code among their followers…rules…must be vigilantly followed by everyone. Barriers are continually erected against a common external threat…[the] contemporary life" (Margolis, 2019, p. 8).
Authoritarian groups have traditional views of authority and traditional gender roles and have substantial power hierarchies, which are hegemonies (Ralph and Williamson, p. 2). When a woman steps outside her defined role, she often faces aggression. These authoritarian families will have traditional, conventional morals (Duncan & Peterson). "High scorers on authoritarianism…expect women to be nurturant, submissive, and reliant on men and men to be dominant, aggressive, and provide for women and children. (Lewis 1976, as cited in Duncan & Peterson )." Authoritarian men will perceive women and feminists as having too much influence over society.
Nothing New Under the Sun
Anthropologist Dr. Maxine Margolis analyzes the similarities in the roles and experiences of women within Satmar, Mormon, and Islamic communities. Her work highlights the common themes of gender roles, authority structures, and cultural expectations across these diverse religious groups. The men in these communities oversee women's bodies, activities, and associations. These communities share similar views on women's nature and placement, emphasizing their primary role within the home. In many cases, women are also treated paternalistically, often regarded and treated as if they are children, underscoring the restrictive status imposed upon them (Margolis, M. L. (2019). p s 1, 15-16).
When a society experiences widespread fear and insecurity, it often fosters narcissism and excessive regulation (Desmet, 2022, p. 68), both of which are rooted in human vulnerability and self-preservation. In healthy social systems, individuals are valued and empowered and can thrive without exploitation. Healthy systems cultivate honesty without fear of retribution and encourage intellectual curiosity and open discourse. Conversely, unhealthy systems tend to benefit only a select few and are frequently characterized by grandiosity and exclusionary practices (DeGroat, 2022, p. 111).
Additionally, social media platforms contribute to ideological fragmentation by fostering online silos and echo chambers, which reinforce preexisting beliefs and can accelerate radicalization. Within this landscape, there is a growing failure to recognize and honor individuals as bearers of the divine image, each possessing unique perspectives and intellectual agency. In religious contexts, authoritarianism and cult-like manipulation tactics have increasingly pressured Christian women to conform to an artificially constructed ideal that does not align with authentic Christian virtue.
An Appeal for Better Ethics
Jesus, our ultimate ethicist, strongly condemned negligent spiritual leaders who failed to care for their people. He neither shamed nor excluded the Samaritan woman at the well but engaged her with dignity and truth. He welcomed female disciples, allowing them to learn at His feet—an act that defied cultural norms. Moreover, Jesus did not impose rigid societal ideals on individuals but instead fostered human flourishing, setting an example that believers are called to imitate.
Jesus and Paul employed feminine metaphors to describe pastoral care and divine love toward the church and Israel, demonstrating their comfort with nurturing imagery despite being male. Effective spiritual leadership requires men to nurture and shepherd those entrusted to them by God. While such qualities are often categorized as feminine, Scripture affirms that compassion and care are integral to true shepherding, and men are called to develop these virtues as part of their pastoral responsibility.
Christians are called to embrace the Gospel's inclusive and transformative nature. By avoiding fundamentalism's rigid and reactionary tendencies, we can foster a church culture that promotes genuine spiritual growth and unity. Let us focus on embodying Christ's virtues, which transcend gender and cultural boundaries, to create a more loving and supportive community.
Works Cited of Conculted
Bendroth, M. L. (1996). Fundamentalism and gender, 1875 to the present. Yale University Press.
DeGroat, C. (2022). When narcissism comes to church: Healing your community from emotional and spiritual abuse. InterVarsity Press.
Desmet, M. (2022). The psychology of totalitarianism (E. Vanbrabant, Trans.). Chelsea Green Publishing.
Duncan, L., Peterson, B., & Winter, D. (1997). Authoritarianism and gender roles: Toward a psychological analysis of hegemonic relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(1), 41–49. https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/68388
Hassan, S. (2022). Freedom of mind. Freedom of Mind Press.
Hawley, J. S. (1994). Fundamentalism and gender. Oxford University Press.
Margolis, M. L. (2019). Women in fundamentalism. Rowman & Littlefield.
Owen, D. E., Wald, K. D., & Hill, S. S. (1991). Authoritarian or authority-minded? The cognitive commitments of fundamentalists and the Christian Right. Religion and American Culture: A Journal of Interpretation, 1(1), 73–100. https://doi.org/10.1525/rac.1991.1.1.03a00050
Ralph, W., Peter, C., & Williamson, W. P. (2005). The psychology of religious fundamentalism. Guilford Press.
Singer, M. T. (2003). Cults in our midst: The continuing fight against their hidden menace. Jossey-Bass.