Challenging Christian Hegemony and Christian Privilege in Academia

  • Warren J. BlumenfeldEmail author
Living reference work entry


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 “regimes of truth,” de Tocqueville’s “tyranny of the majority,” Pharr’s “elements of oppression,” and Watt’s “Privileged Identity Exploration” (PIE) model. Specifically, in this context, the author defines Christian hegemony as “the overarching 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.”


  1. Beaman, L. G. (2003). The myth of pluralism, diversity, and vigor: The constitutional privilege of Protestantism in the United States and Canada. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 42(3), 311–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell, L. A. (1997). Theoretical foundations for social justice education. In M. Adams, L. A. Bell, & P. Griffin (Eds.), Teaching for diversity and social justice (pp. 3–15). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Blumenfeld, W. J. (2006). Christian privilege and the promotion of “secular” and not-so “secular” mainline Christianity in public schooling and the larger society. Equity and Excellence in Education., 39(3), 195–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clark, C., Vargas, M. B., Schlosser, L. Z., & Alimo, C. (2002). Diversity initiatives in higher Education: It’s not just “Secret Santa” in December: Addressing educational and workplace climate issues linked to Christian Privilege. [Electronic version]. Multicultural Education, 10(2), 52–57.Google Scholar
  5. de Tocqueville, A. (1840/1956). Democracy in America. New York: The New American Library.Google Scholar
  6. Eck, D. L. (2001). A new religious America: How a “Christian country” has now become the world’s most religiously diverse nation. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  7. Foucault, M. (1980). The history of sexuality, Part 1 (trans: Hurley, R.). New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  8. Freire, P. R. N. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Harrisburg: Continuum Publishing.Google Scholar
  9. Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks (trans: Hoare, Q. & Smith, G. N.). New York: International.Google Scholar
  10. Kallen, H. (1915). Democracy versus the melting pot. The Nation, 100(2590), 190–194. 217–30.Google Scholar
  11. Lipsky, S. (1977). Internalized racism. Black Re-Emergence, 2, 5–10.Google Scholar
  12. McIntosh, P. (1988). White privilege and male privilege: A personal account of coming to see correspondences through work in women’s studies. Wellesley: Wellesley College Center for Research on Women.Google Scholar
  13. Miller, J. B. (1976). Toward a new psychology of women. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  14. Myrdal, G. (1962). An American dilemma: The Negro problem and modern democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  15. Pharr, S. (1988). Homophobia: A weapon of sexism. Inverness: Chardon Press.Google Scholar
  16. Schlosser, L. Z. (2003). Christian privilege: Breaking a sacred taboo. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 31(1), 44–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Smith, D. J., & Harter, P. M. (2002). If the world were a village: A book about the world’s people. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Tong, R. (1989). Feminist thought: A comprehensive introduction. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  19. Watt, S. K. (2007). Difficult dialogues, privilege, and social justice: Uses of the Privileged Identity Exploration (PIE) Model in student affairs practice. College Student Affairs Journal, 26(2), 114–126.Google Scholar
  20. Watt, S. K. (2009). Facilitating difficult dialogues at the intersections of religious privilege. New Directions for Student Services, (125), 65–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Weinbaum, L. M. (2009). Clash over the crosses: Las Cruces New Mexico – Preserving “Our cultural heritage” or maintaining Christian hegemony. In W. J. Blumenfeld, K. Y. Joshi, & E. E. Fairchild (Eds.), Investigating Christian privilege and religious oppression in the United States. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  22. Young, I. M. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Social Justice Education ProgramUniversity of Massachusetts – AmherstAmherstUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • John M. Heffron
    • 1
  1. 1.The Graduate SchoolSoka University of AmericaAliso ViejoUSA

Personalised recommendations