New Feminism, Then and Now

McGrath Institute for Church Life

Available on-demand

Dive into a thought-provoking discussion on the past, present, and future of Christian feminism. In a profound exploration of faith and identity, legal scholar Helen Alvaré challenges the premises of “New Feminism 1.0” and calls for a “2.0” version—recentered on each woman discerning her unique role in bringing Christ to the world. Alvaré’s fellow legal scholar and mentee Erika Bachiochi is the respondent to the keynote. This is a crucial conversation for anyone interested in the intersection of faith, feminism, and modern discipleship.

Thirty years ago, in both Evangelium Vitae and his Letter to Women, Pope John Paul II issued a clear call for the genius of women to be “more fully expressed in the life of society as a whole, as well as in the life of the Church” (Letter to Women 10). Throughout his papacy, in fact, he emphasized women’s “prophetic character,” calling on them to be “witnesses” and “sentinels” — guardians of the sacred gift of life and the order of love (Mulieris Dignitatem 29; Homily at Lourdes 2004).

This pivotal conversation re-examines the foundations of Christian feminism, featuring a compelling blend of personal testimony from legal scholar Helen Alvaré and historical analysis from respondent Erika Bachiochi. The discussion moves beyond contemporary debates to ask a more fundamental question: What is the ultimate purpose of a faith-informed movement for women?

The Core Thesis: From “New Feminism 1.0” to “2.0”

Helen Alvaré’s central argument is that the first iteration of “New Feminism,” while valuable, became disproportionately focused on securing worldly justice and recognition for women. This “New Feminism 1.0” spent significant energy affirming women’s dignity, calling for equal pay, and committing the Church to supporting women in every sphere. While necessary, Alvaré suggests this focus sometimes mirrored secular goals too closely.

She proposes a “New Feminism 2.0” that returns to the original, radical Christian idea: a woman’s primary vocation is to discern and fulfill God’s will, bearing Christ into the world in her own unique way. This vision recasts freedom not as secular autonomy or individualism, but as the strength and courage to take responsibility for one’s God-given gifts and mission. As Alvaré states, “a Christian feminism is not primarily about us, it’s about him.”

A Personal “Examination of Conscience”

Alvaré frames her analysis through her personal journey as a self-described “new feminist lab rat.” She recounts measuring her success by worldly standards: an Ivy League law degree, a high-profile job at a big firm, and a public role representing the U.S. bishops. She recalls her pride when her father noted she was “the only person with legs on the altar” during a televised Mass.

Over time, however, she began a profound “examination of conscience,” questioning whether these accomplishments were truly aligned with God’s will for her. The personal cost of mimicking worldly standards became clear, even in service to the Church. She shares an ironic comment from her late husband, Brian, about her exhausting schedule: “you show them Helen… paste yourself together with makeup and Tylenol that is totally taking it to the man.” This powerful detail illustrates the burnout that prompted her to ask if she “didn’t stop nearly enough to ponder thoroughly the central question of Christian feminism”—whether she was first listening humbly and receptively to God’s voice each day.

Historical and Theological Grounding

Erika Bachiochi’s response provides crucial historical context, arguing that Alvaré’s vision is not a novel invention but a return to the movement’s authentic, God-centered roots. She connects “New Feminism” to the deeply religious 19th-century American women’s rights movement, whose leaders like Sarah Grimké grounded their arguments for women’s equality not in secular ideology, but in the theological principle of being created in the image of God (Imago Dei). Critically, these early advocates saw rights as linked to duties, viewing “women’s rights as commensurate with her capacities and obligations.”

Bachiochi also defends the use of the term “feminist,” arguing that Pope John Paul II modeled how a faithful Catholic should engage with the movement. He “took up the challenge posed by feminism,” tested its claims, and, in a process of “separating the wheat from the chaff,” affirmed what was true while rejecting what was false. In doing so, he acted as a true Christian feminist.

The Concluding Vision

Ultimately, the discussion presents a transcendent vision for Christian feminism. The true “glass ceiling” to be broken is not in the c-suite or the chancery, but the one “that separates the visible from the invisible.” The ultimate goal is not merely to occupy positions of power, but to empower every woman to fulfill her unique calling and, in doing so, reveal to the world “things about God that only she can.”

• The Evolution from “1.0” to “2.0” The discussion proposes a crucial evolution in New Feminism. Version 1.0 focused heavily on securing women’s rights and affirming their dignity in “this world,” often in response to secular movements. Version 2.0 represents a radical recentering, shifting the primary goal from worldly justice to the humble, prayerful discernment of and action on God’s will for each woman.

• The Primacy of God’s Will A core principle of this renewed vision is that true Christian feminism is theocentric, not egocentric. Alvaré asserts, “a Christian feminism is not primarily about us, it’s about him.” This reframes a woman’s freedom not as radical autonomy, but as the strength and courage to take responsibility for her unique, God-given gifts and the specific vocation to which she is called.

• Personal Discernment Over Worldly Achievement Helen Alvaré’s personal testimony serves as a powerful case study. Her story cautions that even noble work for the Church can become misaligned if it simply mimics male-coded standards of success and is not fundamentally grounded in daily, humble listening for God’s specific direction for one’s life, family, and unique circumstances.

• Reclaiming the Religious Roots of Feminism Erika Bachiochi’s historical analysis demonstrates that what Alvaré calls “New Feminism 2.0” is, in fact, a return to the movement’s authentic American roots. The original 19th-century women’s rights movement was profoundly Christian, arguing from the Imago Dei for rights that were “commensurate with her capacities and obligations”—a vision of shared responsibility and virtue that contrasts sharply with modern, secular feminism.

• The Ultimate “Glass Ceiling” The speakers articulate a transcendent goal for women that moves beyond professional or institutional advancement. The ultimate purpose is for every woman to break the “ceiling that separates the visible from the invisible,” allowing her to reveal her unique aspect of God to a world in desperate need of that divine revelation.

Helen Alvaré: “I concluded and we’ll unpack here that I think that like so many other really good things Christianity brought to humanity it got started as a genuinely radical idea challenging prevailing norms from the moment it appeared but then got somewhat tamed and reduced through a combination of our laziness sinfulness and limited imagination and will.”
Helen Alvaré: “The radical idea of course is that females image God in a way that men don’t exactly and that Jesus’s great commission incorporates this… a Christian feminism is not primarily about us it’s about him.”
Helen Alvaré: “The glass ceiling we need to break is not the floor of the seauite or the top floor of the chancery but the ceiling of every building in the world the ceiling that separates the visible from the invisible the ceiling that hides the divine sphere which is to say God’s will that every woman in the world is called to reveal to the world things about God that only she can.”
Erika Bachiochi: “I think an apt description of Maryanne can be applied to Helen too she is a radical and a feminist but not a radical feminist.”
Erika Bachiochi: “JP2 was not courting Scandal when he called himself a feminist pope… because he took up the challenge posed by feminism by claims of women’s equality and freedom and he tested feminism just as a good Catholic does separating the wheat from the chaff.”