ringe feminist theology 1

3 MB·

THEOLOGY AND
IDENTITY

TRADITIONS, MOVEMENTS, AND POLLLY
IN THE UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIS!

Edited bey
Daniel 1, Johnson,
Charles Hambrick-Stowe

HE PULGRIM PRESS 1440 NEW YORK
16 DAVID. StOWE

Miler tahebac d aios.r Hlo Se Yor: Ps

3 Charles Haeretewne, Maw’ Vision ef Ca (New Yorks Haxpor & Bethe,
tatty ie "

4. lice North Whitehead, Seu and the Nodow Wild (Sew York: Her
Preis, 1507199,

5: Altec North Whiteheed, Poss aml Realy (NewYork: ie Pres, 1260,
a

1. nnd Tako Sud aching he Lied Chao Glee (aie Chr
so Chic Onis for Churen Lien Leadership (1077 4

Z.Phiip Schall, the great Meicenbarg theukyaet wraid 30 much to
ssrenghen 3 igh view of the curl fo lus Refernel denomination, beled
that the actual chareh fa process. aus loking. and resing Tor
completion” Queted im Lani H_Cosnesiny, The Shaping ie Ute Chach
Uf Ohne A Rae te Hy of Amarin Chon (Now Yk and Palace
ia United Church tess 1977), 188

1 Seound and third stanaas of “God of Eales life Unoiding * Copiaht
{© Rah C Duck. Seto bea origtal aus vale fom Bow 100,Canede
{WT SE01L. Irny he sing Beethoven's "Hn om". 3 ia Und hoch
‘yal: No. 8 Ute gm sal No 2 in The Hya,PsedBy persion

11

FEMINIS| "THEOLOGY AND.
‘THE UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST

SHARON H. RINGE

Feaninist theology appears to have come of age. One dear indication of|
that face ice diversity of thealogiral ethos and agenda tar

renily bear that Inhel Cone are she @ays when one could claim with
assurance to have addressed all of the significant works in the Feld, ot
‘wher our intornal insecurity about the emerging discipline demanded
an uncrtieal echo From each werman engaged in the fl. iy Fat, eoday
the label “feminist theology” cavers a range of perspectives Lroun the
pest Judes-Chrisiam postion wf a Mary Daly or apokeviamen for the
"somarspitit” movements, 2 the “revision” pesiton of many of us
wwly haw iuracles «be aly rome i sorte denomination of the
Uiblical faith. Professional. feminist teclogians approach our rask as
anthropologists, psychologits, historians, ethiest, bibheal scholars,
Iinisters, and theologians,

In the midst of this diversity, itis eewr tha: the United Ghureh of
(Chr ane other pars of the Christin church have been most citcctly
Inlluenced by those of us sill in some fashion within the fold: the
“Christian ferminiss." Thote of us who acksowledge such a label,
however, are genuinely re-visoning and not sinply tinkering wid the
tradidon insofar ac our own vision has been stretched hy the more
ralical expressions of women’s experience of dhe transcendent. (An
analogy might se the way in which the radical statement 0° the black
experience presented by Malcolm X has joined with the explitidy Chris-
tian persperive of Martin Luther Rig. Je. to ground present-day
expressions of black theology) lo attempt a definition of feminist
theology ta give at least mininal common geound, T went propese
the following statement from Rosemary Redford Kiether

‘The er principle of ent thenky x the prmaion ofthe ull
Inaunty uf momen, Wlatner ene, ins, oe det Use Gall

uz
appre as nt adem. ant
eit er an guerre the

Feletin nthe diving ts oe te
of rodemorion and le resage of repens

What this means, firs of ll, is tae Femina 1
titque of “patriarchy.” By patiarehy we rasan ton
‘which men have been dominant ane worn suber
Use this torn to summarize sytem aml altuna
ystems una aides dominance that

‘esult in che strcetures sn: idcoloyies of ris, sexism, dass, ea
militarism, In the second place, our epjamiticn ta such spstevs at
dominance relat co our cise thatthe tage of God it wen
Nanankind was created (Ge. 1:27) anu xc which we ave called (Matt
5:43-/R) gives ws a qeie differen. pienre ofthe mature of pores se
the valu of lun beings. ‘This Gad whoa wr have come be kook
times in the anda of the tradkional church and at times un its edocs
sas nar eels of partpation, mtualigy, and soldarie th
thou: most deeply hurt by che inaitutios and siedetuses of thee eoeld
These models are the proper ‘ocus {ha theclogians of lieraton call
‘ras of a0 sian enaestion and Christa hie

Without eursuing further the complezties of Iemini thcoligy o
speridig rine in retrospective consideration nf the history of lenny

Aheoogy ta, one aight a of fannie tne
Christ, Jet us consid) eee

cology vepresents a
rmesely a history in
rine, Tested ye

ci eal sh erin sf as once
United Church af Grist . zs os

PLURALISM

Wino the Lirmeny wick fn «ic shoud be wo suprise
theres basking af thie Uo be ald hat ome mo ae oe fe
ice Agni une wt analy, fein Uae ogy tee anne
States” lack sen” uF “pee sales” put Oe fone
‘cio canal, in hich nee eortkeyantgentarene Geen
45 inportane ay its 1 begin fll thes ‘eee ae
uric si ined cours ane lly a sane Fe Se
Inxgraton'ot thet cenceres and verre ethene of
cuclam.Hisiniary appropriate expert ha tre soine cess
ial moverens inched in thi baok wil ans ecuine ee ae
coneezn the yer heart ofthe pest toga eee We ee

eS

FEMINIST THEG! OGY aND THT URITEL CUUREM CF CamasT tie

wll End curses revising the very queatio being ated bane war
Treo iden iy

‘One might think, Lot exainple, Cot the historic plaraian a” the
Luited Church of Chris. sould account Loc aa epennee te perspertives
oF feminist thoologins: Ieee, that isthe ease. However. ox ssle oF
pluralsa a # denomiration Inile v9 what» often oely an apparent
Fnpsnness, We wekuane "sean," aod se ith hasan om dip, there
ieasually 20m fr ore more, Also ke baruades, however dese vatious
dion tate affect the core wroerare oF the vee! its eomre. ie

teh are idle smi this ese, Cetnittheolegiant—are when alo
Tan the ride, bt itmay well nat be the journey um whic we intended to
fo. The exprricn of vavious caucuses ad intevest gun wid the

Aenomination tas been one of overt hospitabicy, but ole ef mnie
insluence.* The agenda of feminist theelory challenges the very images
bt Goel a the cote of cur theology and worship, well a he ssters oF
patrisreay by whieh ou sociery and chutch are crganized. The ques
tons poset by feminist theology wo to Ue very heart cf ie eureh's ike,
‘The prevalone style of pleralim may indsed multe that wee i the
very proces of allewinw it x place

emninise choo gy isa is heave saarextual theningy. cause ol our
Mfireaion of dhe portance of womes's experience and the particu
lnvty af ommnea’s conrexts, eminisrthealogians er to be susphious of
suy expresioe of “cusicl orthodox.” Our stsle of theolopieal reflec:
Higa ieclten to hogin nor with the vontent of panticuka dacteine oe
txpression, bac with questions abuse the circumstances that gv rte £0
ie poiiiral and socal issues, sail and economic euler. aad the see
locion of tke principal acirs or speakers. Not only do we regelanly
assume the Pistarea ni cultural rebel y af expressenne af rascal
srtheeecy ie we alin recognize that what aaeee for arthedexy now
se otiginlly highly cotter aut need the pon cl of Ee
‘vinmers in disputes, Eten while askieg what mede these postions per
stidie, ye woul Vain Bethe le won the dss, hich
iso represented a pordon ofthe community af faith,

ECUMENISM

be perspective of feminist dhelogy sslury ehallenges the ecumenical
smvoltements af the Unites: Church of Chit, and prompts thier afr
nations, Firat, shere dere fs. ceice te be mage between advocacy foe
Iusice sad ge sitivity to pur eeumenial partners, a feminist perspective
wale tend e place priority or juste. bor example, te ssue ot Le
Brdination of women is reduce tp le more than a foomore in tae
‘World Council of Churches statement un Bap, Eucharist end Minny
ot SHARON AE RING,

(0882: puny dhe hope of roaring the cosensissevund he
Senn A Fev eae of dat decent wml cep sh
{taioale 4 second afSroation tha fen crue ecogniey
the historical and cultural mui of the ites thal have Iason

vided the church. Infact, is preci et pla vay hat
their theological dgolirance becomes rw Ags, we would fel shay
‘mes newlte tc lten the vations vices inthe Uebates wt an
those ofthe winners in each of the estan geeugs, The enracquence
the Feminist allege isa mre brvadly“eumenia?methodelogy
nore Ful atensve to tte rivera chen vrsy nd to the

Hinslly ge oll oot en the chuseh the challenge of recoxniving tse
te ecunccnical "pe" now being seed in nev was around issues tha
re of theolorealwgnifieance at feast eu a hose that tence i the
Historical divisions cnc uate. Instead 0: foci on sch issues an te
aire fe Triniry or Crit’ "presenein the Chait da set
ical theological isu today tend to relate te the nature Clann
Tie. Steugys around issues 0. rai, sx canis ane iis,
far example, have giveu hints uy bos ew exprassons of uoity acre
histasival visirs and new divisions within denominational ideo Ces
‘nal ais

Th the Uier) Church of Chris: the esi fur unuty and exe vealty of
‘ivsions an plucalsm have recent parked 2 all oe"svundveacng”™
or “Tesching voosensus." Ihe methodological suspicion of feerinist he
logy becomes significant 38 ik recs us to Funcamental questions ef
ricening and underlying auttarity Ine ar theolagieal reflection, Teow
there does the delnition of suund teaching pare? And ‘shac are is
‘sumptions gout how one knows God and dscems the social conse
ences of surh knowing und relatedness= What isthe canon of son
leaching, and what interoretise Revs lla a to move hetwee warous
‘expressions nf the Lath?

LANGUAGE

Caning across every Mheegeal sue that faces she church today is the
Droblen uf the language by whic theology is expresses aly orien
the life oF che auras i easriedforwatd. Inclusive Figuage is clearly «
froncern nf Feminist theclogy ineofir as x regu.tes he reform of al
Fanyuage tat excludes, diminishes, stereotypes, ov other se leutts
brople hecause of their gestler nacido etamie flew, se il iru
Stanres, or physical eondtten, In adiiow w ths ebyious concern with
lumguag refering 0 people, langunge refering 1 Ga and Cr

“The bial wines Kl als eo aevonatasity oF the issue of
tansuage. Faust biblical try tae se Timensos

tenes whi our hun anes would Ted us f sh Hh
MGponae 1 God whose passionate one is alba Tor the outst
TPeppremeds aad hogs enn von the covenant say srenscend:
Pinner stoning of yn Inclusive heyage oles prise “he
IRopnce prem of Ut vocation, We lear about God i the Bile
bute frm nra un of ea’ asi. and rarely vel imaxes
Iie lee hemor, et the biel ca of erankod ie all ts
ovary creed tn God's toe and ot 92 God made in ours AN
{mu plctest fr ming ov nvr Gal met wth warning. 26
face ours are’ astry he sane of Godwin i the tet ease
{ots plonocnee oa fa dscion sen he cominom ceereener
Uifthe word Lon tovefer Gea in mon ngs ranlatons. la shore
Metursfon he Bible tat ahfsens dear of ust corr
ff any inien on ages of od tha wn das of Boeoring
feared into sl ufo van escaton aid onto

Te wo cimensions of inline el, angage sefereng
order Cart snd lngoage referring eo peopl, ae lt ft ies elated
Thtecinich has aval bees verycnefltoatirn rit God exons
all aman taegores, 20 alo tat sich Inman qin Of Fs 0
Rave ashi ovsnes, fs irs cery setng and is ales are
pot ese w is bing the Chris, Whats eaten 1a car ents
St Jesus a8 Chis fin that specie hun ie ve fan eo ae ol,
nd ao im ther human le Gel and huanbind ure rewullee such
iat fc Pal alr nether deal, noe ie, nor angels, oor principal
fies, nor thing to come, nor aowee. nore. or ep, or
Bnvthiny ls al eveaton, al be abe spares rom the Lve of
Gan in Care fn our Lon (Ro, RSH, Hone ts not an
‘atthe cc thinks and afi es, bt hw es, which
Communicate is understusiog of Gata some of the che’
inages an vetaphone for Cod fave tetdenty toward Mera
and Ws ceisolagieal rs osu 34 the Chr pees ve nto an
istry of the tan ous so thes hoon ev yrenean nesta.
ings bsome concrete! sora eusures and elation hie: Vigna
rey Maree rellects on thte ale-human consequences nf
theological language when, she narumatice ber on experience of
tring inthe euccs HE Ga i ali and nage ag Fhe.
Tssead. os Maser. then human usin fhe, and enpliner are
sinlike tat way thes wien mothers, and cnplorce ae pot. Al the
ages ce for explocn ine Vn cuca most evel co ogc
Teflon has of course na uous mah consequences Tien
fathers are not the mestels ay which we are to undbvstand te father
Ihnod of God. Nevertheless, + acts such eonnetions ave rade in
[people's mines and psyches, andthe chur weal tee woudl in which
ve ive]

Lf the preven comments make clear the importance af aeuiveness
ve language in che church’ theology, linras. and ater Teraenre, i
shu it he noted hac the language ot English innslaons of scripture
ras: ibel! be recnsidere, Atabiuites i the tsi of eanshation, il
cen never be a simple itera: rendering of the ancient languages ifthe
resulting teats the comprehensible, ls the inpostance of eomseying
2s accurately as possible the mecning of the hitlical wivness (ith is
‘weation ta aclasseness cm the human phe wd ite deca in finding
human referents w Gad), ceysize that a fresh look be Heke at the
Tngnage in which the hibical stares are rox, lew the werd aul
gpm Hews sex Kian the Biblial vison “he maidste Cor such
Works as Ae fichureLanghage Lecioray? sam thus bw found shia
seriplare ite, adic onirmed im she chynch wocason to Lahn
ness in oor nme and pee

CONCLESION

“Thus ennteonemy thot has centeved of the sue ines langage is
paradigmatic of Lie way ie whi dhe perspretves of fextnise theolng
push che stele of te so rake fundamental questions ae te
Tieait of dhe expression and discussion of wur Fail, aac ct simply to
ald a new sori agenila ur to include a new group in our plurasue
‘mech, udeed, taken 1 its logical limits, Ue eral somscousnes 0
feuinis thenlogy might lead us out 0: the maze of discussions uf the

ferment” ur “Tension” in she chuteh aad enable us to farm the
fprmacy of our yucztion as a “just pesce church” Ay ily Tees om the
aitique of patriarchy, leministhevlogy partipates wits the church,
fn indeed cn help to lead the church, in ils struggle Wo discern the
‘eomsequences of “kn-wing God” for a ie of shalom a. 15-8). By its
‘cutextusl seusity, ferainst theology can sustain dh quest veto
ugg in w the attomot ip iene a meer paint of belt or practice
Yeidh wuld claim © be the nonnegoile baton line uF demomina
ional lend. A posture mone censstent with feminist hockey the
af “preclaraation” or “eontessian,”‘aher thin “iieipline” 7 “xtho:
ddoxs.” In keeping with ne Statemene of Hsith,Zerinist Unley van
Supgont the efforts of che chusch to Fal wether “eowrage in the
Steiger For sie and peace." ene God's "presence in rial ane
sjasing” With the celebration of our diverse gift, ove con miove
‘wget toveard a Fearless pro ammation smd emibodiatet of Hae yop

x we learn ebroughout the civrel sore graciously t0 "hear each other
no speerh,” as ae theologian ats ean ue ingether toned whole
hese it out comeson ie

ores

1 fora eacllent anthology of wrtnge by Clan fem, we ul
didn, Chron Favs: Pub oe Neo Haman New Yorks Harper &
Bie 108)

2 Re the eco a ates 1. Gn, fe My Perv, Ns Oni
cok, 188,

Sr Rovemary Radford Ructher, Sixum esd God (Roxon: Beacon Pres,
1983, 38-1

Tt indebted ro Ywomne Delf di nage ai Cr her earibeaon of
lu experienc playin nthe Unzed Chancho hve.

Se the appeaais in An Puctrne Lanse Fatinary,copsright (956,
1987, Bs byte Divon of Kees nel Miley of the Nate Counc
Atte Churches af hv fn the TSA. Reaigs for eat A, Revie, 269-76
Fendi for Sear B, Rovaed, 217-44; Regs for Yere Gy Revie, 255-02
See tun lie Matus, Mera’ Mesny: Moad of Conteh Langage
{Prien ores Pree, 982), (26, 145-02: and Roker Uterion-Relly
Ue ne Res Doc om Ponce Thing eu Pei: Fess
Pre 979), 1-81,

Te Wingnda Remey Mollenk, “Seas Laageage: The Prablen ard ee
Conte" Language nt Cour Ante Das fr Wire, el, BatLate
fwiuess sew othe Na oa Cina the Clabes of Chet ia che USA

TA exploration of sues of sexism ix tical oognage and of bil
alan begun the cx 904 resled in Toco areynige Leon
Sty Counts apie in 1940 by che Dion of Educa al Minne 0
the Neva Cousel of the Chowehre of Chit ia the US.A. A fhe
langong ester the ee

Nie Move itociced me the yease and the racer ul "esting
edvotler its cee