Challenging Christian Hegemony and Christian Privilege in Academia 104 Warren J. Blumenfeld Contents Introduction: Inequalities and Social Identity .................................................. 2388 Christian Privilege .............................................................................. 2391 Challenging Christian Hegemony and Christian Privilege: A Case Study .................... 2392 Background: Christian Chaplain for University’s Football Team ............................. 2392 Religious Symbols in Student Union Chapel .................................................. 2393 Textual Analysis ................................................................................ 2394 A Brief History of the Student Union and Chapel ............................................. 2395 Common Element of Oppression: Defined Norm ............................................. 2395 Christian and Christianity as THE Defined Norm ......................................... 2395 Christianity as Defined Norm: Conflating Patriotism with Christianity ....................... 2400 Christians as Victims ........................................................................... 2403 Solution: Privatize Education .................................................................. 2405 Compromise: More Religious Symbols ........................................................ 2405 Compromise: Other Rooms Available ......................................................... 2407 Threat and Use of Violence .................................................................... 2408 Lack of Prior Claim ............................................................................ 2409 Religious Symbols as “Artistic Expression” ................................................... 2411 Christian Hegemony as Business Model ....................................................... 2411 Blaming the Victim ............................................................................. 2413 Conclusion ...................................................................................... 2414 References ...................................................................................... 2415 Abstract The chapter serves as a case study focusing on the impact of a pervasive Christian culture and climate at a large Midwestern state-supported land-grant university. The chapter is founded on the conceptual organizers of McIntosh’s concept of dominant group “privilege,” Gramsci’s notion of “hegemony,” Foucault’s W. J. Blumenfeld (*) Social Justice Education Program, University of Massachusetts – Amherst, Amherst, MA, USA e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 2387 R. Papa (ed.), Handbook on Promoting Social Justice in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14625-2_113 2388 W. J. Blumenfeld “regimes of truth,” de Tocqueville’s “tyranny of the majority,” Pharr’s “elements of oppression,” and Watt’s “Privileged Identity Exploration” (PIE) model. Spe- cifically, in this context, the author defines Christian hegemony as “the overarch- ing system of advantages bestowed on Christians. It is the institutionalization of a Christian norm or standard, which establishes and perpetuates the notion that all people are or should be Christian thereby privileging Christians and Christianity, and excluding the needs, concerns, ethnic, and religious cultural practices and life experiences of people who are not Christian. Often overt, though at times subtle, Christian hegemony is oppression by intent and design, but also by neglect, omission, erasure, and distortion.” Keywords Christian privilege · Hegemony · Pharr’s oppression · Patriotism · Violence · Watt’s PIE model Introduction: Inequalities and Social Identity Each semester, an associate professor at a large Midwestern tax-supported land-grant university taught a course in Multicultural Education in the Educational Studies department. (All names and other identifying characteristics have been deleted to ensure confidentiality.) That professor based the course on several key concepts and assumptions, including how issues of power, privilege, and domination within the United States center on inequitable social divisions regarding race, ethnicity, socio- economic class, sex assigned at birth, gender identity, sexual identity, religion, nationality, linguistic background, physical and mental ability/disability, and age. They addressed how social identity issues impact generally on life outcomes and specifically on educational outcomes. Virtually all students enrolled in this course, which is mandatory for students registered in the Teacher Education program, are pre-service teachers, future guidance counselors, and school administrators. Throughout the course, the professor discussed the concept of social identities and toward the beginning of the course asked students to turn the spotlight and mirror inward by developing an awareness of their various social identities and their social group memberships. The professor discussed the ways in which each person holds concurrent “social identities” (consciously or unconsciously) based on “socially constructed” categories and how these identities are ascribed to us by others, sometimes at our birth, how sometimes we self-identify, or how we achieve identities throughout our lives. Many students showed surprise by this assignment since most of them grew up in largely homogenous small rural communities where the clear majority descended from European-white and Christian (primarily Protestant) backgrounds and where most people look like themselves. Of interest were the writings of two female undergraduate students who, though they enrolled in different courses during different years, seemed to arrive at the same 104 Challenging Christian Hegemony and Christian Privilege in Academia 2389 conclusion. On a final course paper, one student wrote that, while she enjoyed the course, and she felt that both the professor and the graduate assistant – who had defined as “gay and Jewish” and “lesbian,” respectively – were very knowledgeable and good professors with great senses of humor, nonetheless, the student felt obliged to inform them both that they will be going to Hell for being so-called practicing homosexuals. Another student 2 years later wrote on his course paper that homo- sexuality and transgenderism are sins in the same category as stealing and murder. This student not only reiterated what the earlier student had asserted that the professor and graduate assistant will travel to Hell if they continued to act on their same-sex desires but went further in amplifying the first student’s proclamations by self-righteously insisting that they will not receive an invitation to enter Heaven, especially the professor who defined also as “Jewish,” if they do not accept Jesus as their personal savior, regardless of their sexual behavior. Anyone who doubts this, “Only death will tell!” Alexis de Tocqueville, French political scientist and diplomat, who traveled across the United States for 9 months between 1831 and 1832, conducted research for his epic work, Democracy in America (de Tocqueville, 1840/1956). He was astounded to find a certain paradox: on one hand, he observed that the United States promoted itself around the world as a country separating “church and state” (which itself is a Christian term since primarily Christians refer to their houses of worship as “churches”), where religious freedom and tolerance were among its defining tenets, but on the other hand, he witnessed that: “There is no country in the world where the Christian religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America.” He answered this apparent contradiction by proposing that in this country with no officially sanctioned governmental religion, denominations were compelled to com- pete with one another and promote themselves to attract and keep parishioners, thereby making religion even stronger. While the government was not supporting Christian denominations and churches, per se, religion to Tocqueville should be considered as the first of their political institutions since he observed the enormous influence Christian denominations had on the political process. Though he favored US style democracy, he found its major limitation to be in its stifling of independent thought and independent beliefs. In a country that promoted the notion that the majority rules, this effectively silenced minorities by what Tocqueville termed the “tyranny of the majority.” This is a crucial point because in a democracy, without specific safeguards of minority rights – in this case minority religious rights – there is a danger of religious domination or tyranny over religious minorities and non-believers. The majority, in religious matters, have historically been adherents to mainline Protestant Christian denominations who often imposed their values and standards upon those who believed otherwise. Social theorist, Gunnar Myrdal (1962) , traveled throughout the United States during the late 1940s examining US society following World War II, and he discovered a grave contradiction or inconsistency, which he termed “an American Dilemma.” He found a country, founded on an overriding commitment to democ- racy, liberty, freedom, human dignity, and egalitarian values, coexisting alongside 2390 W. J. Blumenfeld deep-seated patterns of racial discrimination, privileging white people, while subor- dinating peoples of color. While racism continues, this contradiction has been powerfully reframed for contemporary