Page 193 - EMCAPP-Journal No. 6

Christian Psychology alive

tion of the research methodology or process. flect primarily a theological perspective rather
Though it appeared to be qualitative rather than than the psychological and sociological ones
quantitative, I was not able to discern a more utilized. After all, why not frame marital disso-
specific design beyond this broad framework, lution as resulting from disordered loves (Au-
and the omission of the measures prevented any gustine), from a deficit of virtue including re-
evaluation of their appropriateness relevant to lational virtues (Aquinas), from a hardening of
the research methodology and constructs. The the heart (Jesus), or from a refusal to unify into
inclusion of these elements would have signi- a male-female imago dei-complement (Barth)?
ficantly strengthened the article. The author does briefly offer an interpretati-
on of the maledictions resulting from the Fall
Much of the article is devoted to a description of from an egalitarian hermeneutic to seemingly
the sociohistorical and theoretical matrices that justify her larger sociohistorical and theoretical
form the lens through which marital dynamics matrices, but does not incorporate any theolo-
are viewed and evaluated; essentially, this lens is gy beyond this assertion. I view this omission
comprised of Parson’s engendered family theo- as the greatest of my concerns, namely that the
ry and Erikson’s epigenetic theory set within a significant reservoir of Christian thought and
broader feminist versus familial matrix. While tradition, even more recent feminist-egalitarian
the relationship of the theories to the broader theology, remains virtually unused in favor of
sociohistorical matrices is somewhat apparent, more secular perspectives.
the rationale offered for utilizing a feminist-
versus-familial perspective is not quite clear, My hope is that Dr. Ranssi-Matikainen’s mi-
though it could be that a historical shift in mari- nistry is wonderfully successful, significantly
tal and gender-role perspectives in Scandinavia strengthening marriages and families and re-
is presumed here. The author does seem to allu- versing the growing trend toward marital dis-
de to such a shift in her pendulum conceptuali- solution in Finland, and my greater hope is that
zation, but, perhaps due to my lack of familiari- they are strengthened toward a distinctively
ty with Scandinavian history, the prominence of Christian vision of marriage and family func-
the sociohistorical matrix is not apparent to me, tioning.
particularly given the title of the article. Howe-
ver, if that historical movement was impactful,
I wonder whether it may have been due to even References
larger historical movements, such as from agra- Carlson, A. (2003). The American way: Family and com-
rianism to industrialism, given the time period munity in the shaping of American identity. Wilmington,
DL: Intercollegiate Studies Institute.
indicated in her pendulum illustration. If so, the
rise of feminism in Scandinavia may mirror a si-
milar historical development here in the United
States, and may be a progeny of industrialism
as the country’s economic engine. As Carlson
(2003) has documented, industrialists of the
latter nineteenth and early twentieth centuries
in the States strongly supported the suffragette
movement and the subsequent entrance of wo-
men into the workforce, and, several counter-
movements, such as the maternalists and the
German familialists, arose to oppose the ear-
ly feminists. It may well be that our countries
share a similar history in that regard.

Since Dr. Ranssi-Matikainen’s discipline is theo-
logy, I expected that the core matrix would re-

192