Item Details

Justifying Gender Inequality in the Church of England: An Examination of Theologically Conservative Male Clergy Attitudes towards Women’s Ordination

Issue: Vol 14 No. 1 (2019)

Journal: Fieldwork in Religion

Subject Areas: Religious Studies Linguistics

DOI: 10.1558/firn.39231

Abstract:

Despite being a national institution, the Church of England is legally permitted to discriminate against its ordained female clergy in a number of ways, a phenomenon that is at odds with wider societal values in England. It is argued that this makes the gender values of this institution’s representatives worthy of examination. This article explores the gender attitudes of theologically conservative male clergy and the psychological processes that shape these attitudes. In order to do so, semi-structured interviews were conducted with fourteen evangelical priests in one diocese within the Church of England. A thematic narrative analysis was employed to interpret the data using descriptive, focused, and pattern coding. Three themes in particular emerged from the data, namely: “Theological parallel between the Church and the family”, “Created order of male headship and female submission”, and “Separation between Church and society”. The content of these themes reveals significant overlap with the contents of system justification theory, and so this was used to interpret the themes further. In light of this it is concluded that a perceived loss of social privilege and control shape participants’ traditionalist gender values.

Author: Alex D. J. Fry

View Original Web Page

References :

<!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"MS 明朝"; mso-font-charset:78; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:1 134676480 16 0 131072 0;} @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-536870145 1107305727 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:Cambria; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-536870145 1073743103 0 0 415 0;} @font-face {font-family:"Palatino Linotype"; panose-1:2 4 5 2 5 5 5 3 3 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-536870265 1073741843 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:"MS Mincho"; mso-font-alt:"MS 明朝"; mso-font-charset:128; mso-generic-font-family:modern; mso-font-pitch:fixed; mso-font-signature:-536870145 1791491579 134217746 0 131231 0;} @font-face {font-family:SimSun; mso-font-alt:宋体; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 680460288 22 0 262145 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:justify; text-justify:inter-ideograph; line-height:17.0pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; color:black; mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-fareast-language:DE;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; color:#0563C1; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; color:purple; mso-themecolor:followedhyperlink; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} p.MDPI21heading1, li.MDPI21heading1, div.MDPI21heading1 {mso-style-name:"MDPI_2\.1_heading1"; mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; margin-top:12.0pt; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:6.0pt; margin-left:0cm; line-height:13.0pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; mso-outline-level:1; layout-grid-mode:char; mso-layout-grid-align:none; font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Palatino Linotype"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; color:black; mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-fareast-language:DE; mso-bidi-language:EN-US; layout-grid-mode:line; font-weight:bold; mso-bidi-font-weight:normal;} p.reference, li.reference, div.reference {mso-style-name:reference; mso-style-unhide:no; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Cambria; mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"MS 明朝"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} @page WordSection1 {size:595.3pt 841.9pt; margin:70.9pt 76.55pt 53.85pt 77.95pt; mso-header-margin:51.05pt; mso-footer-margin:42.55pt; mso-paper-source:0; layout-grid:16.3pt;} div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;} -->

Aldridge, Alan

1987. In the Absence of the Minister: Structures of Subordination in the Role of Deaconess in the Church of England. Sociology, 21(3): 377-392.

 

Allport, Gordon

1979. The Nature of Prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.

 

Ammerman, Nancy T.

1987. Bible Believers: Fundamentalists in the Modern World. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

 

Appleby, R. S.

2011. Rethinking Fundamentalism in a Secular Age. In Rethinking Secularism, eds. Craig Calhoun, Mark Juergensmeyer and Jonathan VanAntwerpen, pp. 225-247. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

 

Aune, Kristin

2006. Marriage in a British Evangelical Congregation: Practising Postfeminist Partnership? The Sociological Review, 54(4): 638-657.

 

Bagilhole, Barbara

2006. Not a glass ceiling more a lead roof: Experiences of pioneer women priests in the Church of England. Equal Opportunities International, 25(2): 109-125.

 

Balmer, Randal. H.

2016. Evangelicalism in America. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press.

 

Balz, Horst. & Schneider, Gerhard, eds.

1990. Exegetical dictionary of the New Testament, Vol.1. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

 

Bebbington, David

1989. Evangelicalism in modern Britain: A history from the 1730s to the 1980s. London and New York: Routledge.

 

Becker, Julia. C.

2010. Why do Women Endorse Hostile and Benevolent Sexism? The Role of Salient Female Subtypes and Internalization of Sexist Contents. Sex Roles, 62(7-8): 453-467.

 

Boone, Kathleen. C.

1989. The Bible Tells Them So: The Discourse of Protestant Fundamentalism. New York: SUNY Press.

 

Braun, Virginia & Clarke, Victoria

2006. Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2): 77-101.

n.d.. About thematic analysis. https://www.psych.auckland.ac.nz/en/about/our-research/research-groups/thematic-analysis/about-thematic-analysis.html. Accessed 30 November 2018. 

 

Brierley, Peter. W.

2005. Pulling out of the Nosedive: A Contemporary Picture of Churchgoing; What the 2005 English Church Census Reveals. Swindon: Christian Research.

 

Brown, Andrew and Linda Woodhead

2016. That was the church that was: How the English church lost the English people. London: Bloomsbury.

 

Bruce, Steve

2008. Fundamentalism. Cambridge: Polity.

 

Bryan, J.

2016. Human being. London: SCM.

 

Burman, E.

1994. Interviewing. In Qualitative Methods in Psychology, edited by Peter Banister, Erica Burman, Ian Parker, Maye Taylor, and Carol Tindall, pp. 49-71. Buckingham: Open University Press.

 

Cikara, M., T. L. Lee, S. T. Fiske, and P. Glick.

2009. Ambivalent Sexism at Home and at Work: How Attitudes toward Women in Relationships Foster Exclusion in the Public Sphere. In Social and Psychological Bases of Ideology and System Justification, edited by. C. Kay, H. Thorisdottir and J. Jost, pp. 444-462. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

 

Clarke, V., V. Braun and N. Hayfield.

2015. Thematic Analysis. In Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods (3rd ed.), edited by J. Smith, pp. 222-248. London: Sage.

 

Dilmaghani, M.

2018. Importance of Religion or Spirituality and Mental Health in Canada. Journal of Religion and Health, 57(1): 120-135.

 

Ellison, C. G., and A. M. Burdette.

2012. Religion and the Sense of Control Among US Adults. Sociology of Religion, 73(1): 1–22.

 

Flying Bishops.

2010. In Church of England Glossary. Accessed 29 January 2019.  http://www.churchofenglandglossary.co.uk/dictionary/definition/flying_bishops

 

Francis, Leslie and Mary Robbins.

1999. The Long Diaconate, 1987-1994: Women Deacons and the Delayed Journey to Priesthood. Leominster: Gracewing Publishing.

 

Gallagher, S. K.

2003. Evangelical Identity and Gendered Family Life. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

 

Gallagher, S. K. and C. Smith.

1999. Symbolic Traditionalism and Pragmatic Egalitarianism: Contemporary Evangelicals, Families, and Gender. Gender & Society, 13(2): 211-233.

 

Glick, P. and S. T. Fiske.

1996. The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating Hostile and Benevolent Sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3): 491-512.

 

1997. Hostile and Benevolent Sexism: Measuring Ambivalent Sexist Attitudes toward Women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21(1): 119-135.

 

2001. An Ambivalent Alliance: Hostile and Benevolent Sexism as Complementary Justifications for Gender Inequality. American Psychologist, 56(2): 109-118.

 

Glick, P. et al.

2000. Beyond Prejudice as Simple Antipathy: Hostile and Benevolent Sexism across Cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5): 763-775.

 

Grady, M. P.

1998. Qualitative and Action Research: A Practitioner Handbook. Bloomington: IN: Phi Delta Kappa International.

 

Guest, M.

2007. Evangelical Identity and Contemporary Culture: A Congregational Study in Innovation. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers.

 

Halualani, R. T.

2008. How do Multicultural University Students Define and Make Sense of Intercultural Contact?: A Qualitative Study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32(1): 1-16.

 

Hoffman, C., & Hurst, N.

1990. Gender stereotypes: Perception or rationalization? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(2): 197-208.

 

Jones, I.

2004. Women and Priesthood in the Church of England: Ten Years on. London: Church House Publishing.

 

Jost, J. T.

2001. Outgroup Favoritism and the Theory of System Justification: A Paradigm for Investigating the Effects of Socioeconomic Success on Stereotype Content. In Cognitive Social Psychology: The Princeton Symposium on the Legacy and Future of Social Cognition, pp. 89-102.

 

Jost, J. T., M. R. Banaji and B. A. Nosek.

2004. A Decade of System Justification Theory: Accumulated Evidence of Conscious and Unconscious Bolstering of the Status Quo. Political Psychology, 25(6):  881-919.

 

Jost, J. T., C. B. Hawkins, B. A. Nosek, E. P. Hennes, C. Stern, S. D. Gosling, and J. Graham.

2013. Belief in a Just God (and a Just Society): A System Justification Perspective on Religious Ideology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 34(1): 1-26.

 

Jost, J., anhd O. Hunyady.

2002. The psychology of System Justification and the Palliative Function of Ideology. European Review of Social Psychology, 13(1): 111-153.

 

Jost, J. T. and A. C. Kay.

2005. Exposure to Benevolent Sexism and Complementary Gender Stereotypes: Consequences for Specific and Diffuse Forms of System Justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(3): 498-509.

 

Jost, J. T., B. W. Pelham, and M. R. Carvallo.

2002. Non-conscious Forms of System Justification: Implicit and Behavioral Preferences for Higher Status Groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(6): 586-602.

 

King, N.

2010. Research Ethics in Qualitative Research. In Doing Qualitative Research in Psychology: A Practical Guide, edited by A. Forrester, pp. 98-118. London: Sage.

 

Maltby, Judith

1998. One Lord, One faith, One Baptism, but Two Integrities? In Act of Syn