Comparison

The Nurturant Parent interpretation of Christianity has very different consequences than the Strict Father model. First, it presents a completely different view of the proper relationship between human beings and God.

In Strict Parent Christianity, God is a moral authority, and the role of human beings is to obey his strict commandments. The way you learn to obey is by being punished for not obeying and by developing the self-discipline to obey through self-denial.

In Nurturant Parent Christianity, God is a nurturer and the proper relationship to God is to accept his nurturance (Grace) and follow Christ's example of how to act nurturantly to others. There are no strict rules; rather one must develop empathy and learn to act compassionately for the benefit of others, whatever that might require. You learn to become nurturant through receiving nurturance, through accepting the pleasures of nurturance, developing, growing, and following the example of the ultimate nurturer (Christ).

The two forms of Christianity assume very different views of human nature. Strict Father Christianity assumes folk behaviorism, that people function to get rewards and avoid punishments, and that discipline and denial build character. Nurturant Parent Christianity, on the other hand, does not assume folk behaviorism nor the need for discipline and denial to build character. Instead, it assumes that being nurtured builds the right kind of character (nurturant character) and that those who are nurtured will thereby incorporate nurturant instincts into them.

The two forms of Christianity assume different ideas of what a good person is. Strict Father Christianity assumes that a good person is one who is self-disciplined and self-reliant and who can function well in a hierarchy, someone who can obey strict orders from those above and give strict orders to those below – and enforce those orders with pain. Nurturant Parent Christianity sees a good person as one who is nurturant, one who can function well in interdependent situations, where social ties, communication, cooperation, kindness, and trust are essential.

Finally, the two forms of Christianity have very different understandings of what the world should be like so that such ideal persons can be produced. Strict Father Christianity requires that the world be competitive and survival difficult if the right kind of people (strong people) are to be produced and rewarded. Nurturant Parent Christianity requires that the world be as interdependent, nurturant and benign as possible, if the right kind of people – nurturant people – are to be produced.

In short, these two models of Christianity directly reflect the social values of the models of the family on which they are based. What this comparison shows is that there is no neutral Christianity. One can have a Strict Father interpretation or a Nurturant Parent interpretation, or many variants on these, and no doubt many other interpretations. In giving an interpretation of the Bible, one has a choice as to which passages to pay most attention to, or give most weight to, and which passages to ignore or give less weight to.

Thus, one cannot just point to the Bible and say that it, in itself, gives one or the other interpretation. Nor does the Bible, in itself, prefer one or the other moral system or family model. Instead, family models are imposed on the Bible in providing interpretations. Thus, conservative Christians have a conservative interpretation of the Bible because they apply the same Strict Father family model to their Christianity as they do to their politics. Similarly, liberal Christians have a liberal interpretation of the Bible because they, correspondingly, apply the same Nurturant Parent family model to their Christianity as to their politics.