The present study tested a hypothesized model of the degree of belief in penal substitutionary atonement (PSA) predicting a negative association with a sense of responsibility for reducing pain and suffering in the world. Gender complementarian beliefs were hypothesized as a mediator of this association based on theological frameworks within the “New Calvinism” movement connecting PSA, gender views, and the positive spiritual significance of pain and suffering. The sample (N = 225) was comprised of masterslevel students at an Evangelical seminary in the Midwestern United States. Results supported a mediating role for complementarianism in the negative association between PSA and responsibility for reducing pain and suffering in the world. Implications of the findings are discussed in terms of theologies of suffering in connection with social ethics. This study highlights the potential interdisciplinary value of empirical research on specific theological views.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmmermanN. T. (2013). Sacred stories, spiritual tribes: Finding religion in everyday life.Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
2.
Anselm of Canterbury. (1998). St. Anselm basic writings: Proslo-gium, Mologium, Gaunilo's in behalf of the fool, Cur Deus homo. (S.N. Deane, trans.). Peru, IL: Open Court Publishing.
3.
ArbuckleJ. L. (2013). IBM SPSS Amos 22 user's guide.Chicago, IL: IBM.
4.
BeilbyJ., & EddyP. R. (2006). The atonement: An introduction. In BeilbyJ., & EddyP. R. (Eds.), The nature of atonement: Four views (pp. 9–22). Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.
5.
BenjaminJ. (1988). Bonds of love: Psychoanalysis, feminism, and the problem of domination.New York: Pantheon Books.
6.
BensonP. L., DonahueM. J., & EriksonJ. A. (1993). The Faith Maturity Scale: Conceptualization, measurement, and empirical validation. Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion, 5, 1–26.
7.
BlogowskaJ., & SaroglouV. (2011). Religious fundamentalism and limited prosociality as a function of the target. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 50, 44–60. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2010.01551.x
8.
BoydG. A. (2006). Christus Victor view. In BeilbyJ., & EddyP. R. (Eds.), The nature of atonement: Four views (pp. 23–66). Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.
9.
BrownT. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research.New York: Guilford.
10.
BurkD. (2010). Editorial: Gospel priorities and complementarianism. The Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, 15, 2–4.
11.
ByrneB. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
CampbellJ. M. (1999). Nature of the atonement.Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers. (Original work published 1856).
14.
CarsonD. A. (2004). Atonement in Romans 3: 21-26: God presented him as a propitiation. In HillC.E., & JamesF.A.III (Eds.), The glory of the atonement: Biblical, theological, and practical perspectives (pp. 119–139). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
15.
ColanerC. W., & GilesS. M. (2008). The baby blanket or the briefcase: The impact of evangelical gender role ideologies on career and mothering aspirations of female evangelical college students. Sex Roles, 58, 526–534. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9352-8
16.
ColanerC. W., & WarnerS. C. (2005). The effect of egalitarian and complementarian gender role attitudes on career aspirations in evangelical female undergraduate college students. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 33, 224–229.
17.
DuncanL. E., PetersonB. E., & WinterD. G. (1997). Authoritarianism and gender roles: Toward a psychological analysis of hegemonic relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 41–49. doi:10.1177/0146167297231005
18.
GillisM. S. (2006). Resurrecting the atonement. In PauwA.P., & JonesS. (Eds.), Feminist and Womanist essays in Reformed dogmatics (pp. 125–138). Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press.
19.
GreenJ. B., & BakerM. D. (2000). Recovering the scandal of the Cross: Atonement in New Testament & contemporary contexts.Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
20.
HairJ. F.Jr.BlackB., BabinB., AndersonR. E., & TathamR. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
21.
HansenC. (2008). Young, restless, and Reformed: A journalist's journey with the New Calvinists.Wheaton, IL: Crossway.
22.
HaydukL. A., & LittvayL. (2012). Should researchers use single indicators, best indicators, or multiple indicators in structural equation models?BMC Medical Research Methodology, 12, 159–176. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-12-159
23.
HayesA. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach.New York: Guilford.
HuiC. H., Wai NgE. C., Ying MokD. S., Ying LauE. Y., & CheungS. (2011). “Faith Maturity Scale” for Chinese: A revision and construct validation. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 21, 308–322. doi:10.1080/10508619.2011.607417
26.
JankowskiP. J., SandageS. J., & HillP. C. (2013). Differentiation-based models of forgivingness, mental health and social justice commitment: Mediator effects for differentiation of self and humility. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 8, 412–424. doi:10.1080/17439760.2013.820337
27.
JefferyS., OveyM., & SachA. (2007). Pierced for our transgressions: Rediscovering the glory of penal substitution.Nottingham, England: InterVarsity Press.
28.
KeatingB. (2015). Violence against women: A disciplinary debate and challenge. The Sociological Quarterly, 56, 108–124. doi: 10.1111/tsq.12075
29.
KlineR. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford.
30.
Manganelli RattazziA. M., BobbioA., & CanovaL. (2007). A short version of the right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) scale. Personality and Individual Diferences, 43, 1223–1234. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.03.013
31.
MastM. (2005). Interpersonal hierarchy expectation: Introduction of a new construct. Journal of Personality Assessment, 84, 287–295. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8403_08
32.
McArthurJ. (1995). First Timothy: MacArthur New Testament Commentary.Chicago, IL: Moody Press.
33.
McKimD. K. (2001). Calvin's institutes (abridged edition).Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox.
34.
McKnightS. (2007). A community called atonement.Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press.
35.
OyamotC. J., BorgidaE., & FisherE. L. (2006). Can values moderate the attitudes of right-wing authoritarians?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 486–500. doi:10.1177/0146167205278308
36.
ParkA. S. (2009). Triune atonement: Christ's healing for sinners, victims, and the whole creation.Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox.
37.
PetrescuM. (2013). Marketing research using single-item indicators in structural equation models. Journal of Marketing Analysis, 1, 99–117. doi:10.1057/jma.2013.7
38.
PiedmontR. L., & NelsonR. (2001). A psychometric evaluation of the short form of the Faith Maturity Scale. Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion, 12, 165–183.
39.
PiperJ. (2002). Counted righteous in Christ: Should we abandon the imputation of Christ's righteousness?Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books.
40.
PiperJ. (2006). A vision of biblical complementarity: Manhood and woman defined according to the Bible. In PiperJ., & GrudemW. A. (Eds.), Recovering Biblical manhood womanhood: A response to Evangelical feminism (pp. 31–59). Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books.
41.
PiperJ. (2007). Foreword. In JefferyS., OveyM., & SachA.Pierced for our transgressions: Rediscovering the glory of penal substitution (pp. 13–16). Nottingham, England: InterVarsity Press.
PiperJ., & GrudemW. A. (2006). Charity, clarity, and hope: The controversy and the cause of Christ. In PiperJ., & GrudemW. A. (Eds.), Recovering Biblical manhood and womanhood: A response to Evangelical feminism (pp. 403–424). Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books.
45.
PreacherK. J., & HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptomatic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.
46.
RayK. D. (1998). Deceiving the devil: Atonement, abuse, and ransom.Cleveland, OH: Pilgrim Press.
47.
RuauD., LiuL.Y., ClarkJ.D., AngstM.S., & ButteA.J. (2012). Sex differences in reported pain across 11,000 patients captured in electronic medical records. Journal of Pain, 13, 228–234.
48.
SandageS. J., & JankowskiP. J. (2013). Spirituality, social justice, and intercultural competence: Mediator effects for differentiation of self. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 37, 366–374. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2012.11.003
49.
SandageS. J., JankowskiP. J., CrabtreeS., & SchweerM. (2017). Calvinism, gender ideology, and relational spirituality: An empirical investigation of worldview differences. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 45, 17–32.
50.
SchreinerT. R. (2006). Penal substation view. In BeilbyJ., & EddyP. R. (Eds.), The nature of atonement: Four views (pp. 67–117). Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.
51.
ShultsF. L., & SandageS. (2003). Faces of forgiveness: Searching for wholeness and salvation.Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing.
52.
SorensonR. C. (1981). Evangelical seminarians philosophies of human nature and theological beliefs. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 20, 33–38.
53.
TrelstadM. (Ed.). (2006). Cross examinations: Readings on the meaning of the cross today.Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress.
54.
Van DykL. (2003). How does Jesus make a difference? The person and work of Jesus Christ. In PlacherW.C. (Ed.), Essentials of Christian theology, (pp. 205–220). Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press.
55.
WanousJ. P., & HudyM. J. (2001). Single-item reliability: A replication and extension. Organizational Research Methods, 4, 361–375.
56.
WilliamsD. (2006). Black women's surrogacy experience and the Christian notion of redemption. In TrelstadM. (Ed.), Cross examinations (pp. 19–32). Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress.
