Jesus Didn't Tap: Masculinity, Theology, and Ideology in Christian Mixed Martial Arts

Abstract

This essay analyzes blogs, sermons, videos, and published interviews to examine the religious rhetoric of Christian practitioners of mixed martial arts as well as pastors who promote or reference the sport in their sermons. In the tradition of muscular Christianity (the Bible-based manhood movement of the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries), these fighters and pastors argue that MMA teaches Christian virtues such as discipline and self-control. Linking a healthy physical body with a healthy mind and spirit, they suggest that athletes enact and embody Christian values and ideals of manliness. Some scholars (such as Tony Ladd and James Mathisen) have argued that modern incarnations of muscular Christianity preach a mere “folk theology”—that is, essentially a locker-room pep talk with a touch of Jesus thrown in. Drawing on the field of lived religion, however, I argue that practitioners of Christian MMA experience a close connection between the sport and their religious beliefs. Though the theology may take the language of the “folk,” certain values (discipline and self-sacrifice), theological positions (premillennialism, life as a struggle, Jesus as the focus of religion), and social agendas (addressing masculine aggression and religious and cultural effeminacy) characterize both turn-of-the-century muscular Christianity and Christian MMA today. Athletes strive to imitate Christ and embody Christian values—aided, perhaps, by the bodily practice of their sport. Their focus on Jesus at the expense of doctrine does not indicate a lack of theology. Rather, the image of a manly Christ who will not give up represents a strong, assertive, masculine ideal that fits clearly into an evangelical worldview.

More religious, less dogmatic: Toward a general framework for gender differences in religion

“…Setting aside the question of why religions as social structures first became gendered, it is understandable why something that is gender-imbalanced and potentially seen as more the realm of women-which appears to be the case with many religions, especially Christian ones 4 -could be more appealing to women and less appealing to men (Greve 2014;Schnabel 2017a;Schnabel et al 2018;Trzebiatowska and Bruce 2012). Occupational segregation highlights how institutional spheres become feminine-typed once enough women join them (Levanon, England, and Allison 2009;Reskin 1991).…”

“…Christianity and Christians may be viewed as more feminine and less masculine than nonreligious people, 5 and popular rhetoric-as well as foundational social theory (Marx and Engels 2008;Weber 1963)-suggests Christianity is a feminized "underdog" religion. The "Fight Church" phenomenon-pastors hosting and participating in cage-fights at houses of worship to promote muscular Christianity-provides a vivid anecdotal example of some men's view that Christianity is too feminine, sympathetic, and tolerant (Greve 2014). Therefore, in Christian contexts women who are perceived as insufficiently religious could be socially sanctioned as being insufficiently feminine; likewise, men who are perceived as too religious could be sanctioned as being overly feminine (Edgell et al 2017;Schnabel 2017a;Sherkat and Wilson 1995).…”

“…Scholars have argued that religion appeals to women because it provides the disadvantaged with security and comfort (Marx and Engels 2008;Norris and Inglehart 2011;Trzebiatowska and Bruce 2012;Weber 1963) and is feminine-typed and more expected of women (Brenner 2014;Edgell et al 2017;Schutz and Roth 2014). Other research suggests that gender gaps vary by context, highlighting some men's view that Christianity is insufficiently masculine (Greve 2014), that gendered expectations that women should be more religious are most pronounced among Christians (Schnabel 2015;Schnabel et al 2018), and that Christianity has a strong underdog appeal (Marx and Engels 2008;Schnabel 2016b). Because Christianity is viewed as a feminized "underdog" religion that values compassion and "turning the other cheek" in the face of oppression (Greve 2014;…”

More Religious, Less Dogmatic: Toward a General Framework for Gender Differences in Religion

“…Scholars have argued that religion appeals to women because it provides the disadvantaged with security and comfort (Marx and Engels 2008;Norris and Inglehart 2011;Trzebiatowska and Bruce 2012;Weber 1963) and is feminine-typed and more expected of women (Brenner 2014;Edgell et al 2017;Schutz and Roth 2014). Other research suggests that gender gaps vary by context, highlighting some men's view that Christianity is insufficiently masculine (Greve 2014), that gendered expectations that women should be more religious are most pronounced among Christians (Schnabel 2015;Schnabel et al 2018), and that Christianity has a strong underdog appeal (Marx and Engels 2008;Schnabel 2016b). Because Christianity is viewed as a feminized "underdog" religion that values compassion and "turning the other cheek" in the face of oppression (Greve 2014;…”

From Canopies to Conversations: The Continuing Significance of ‘Plausibility Structures’

“…The focus on practice also means a focus on embodiment. McGuire (2007) turns our attention to gardening, healing, and dancing as spiritual practices, while others venture into more exotic practices such as mixed martial arts (Greve, 2014). We have learned about rituals of birth (Klassen, 2001) and death (Laderman, 1995) that take the unavoidably physical aspects of those human experiences seriously.…”