Biblical Feminism

A feminist exploration of The Bible. This was/is a VERY EARLY piece. I posted it, merely to post it. I have a longer/revised version, without so many mistakes.

 

         It is easier to teach rituals of faith than it is to teach the experience of faith. Growing up in the United States, Christianity exists in the mind of most as the only wholly acceptable religion and its constructs seemed just as permanently engrained. It is a faith so completely received by the general American public, that the modern constructs of Christianity have created rigid boundaries that many followers believe cannot be crossed. These boundaries establish a stumbling block for those whose natural spiritual tendencies do not easily meld with these conventional truths. In my experience, preconceived Christian concepts alienated me from religion and impeded my spiritual growth. Simply stated, Christianity just didn’t sound right to me. It didn’t sound like the Truth and I couldn’t find myself within the traditional rituals of Christianity. After many years of rejecting Christianity, studying a wide range of other faiths led me to discover that I could find a means to develop spiritually. Ironically, I ultimately found my spiritual home between the covers of the Holy Bible.

          Spirituality is a difficult thing to encapsulate; some would say a true spiritual experience transcends words. There are no ‘rules’ requiring individuals to be spiritual per se, but most interpret their faith within the accepted boundaries created within society. societies are flawed and many times entire races of people are marginalized. Even in modern society, females are characterized as second class citizens. Therefore, religions propagated in this environment can impede the spiritual development of girls, especially. Until I recognized these specific hindrances, I was one of those girls.

            The subject of spirituality is a slippery one. People disagree over the need for spirituality as fiercely as they disagree about how practice their faith. Humans exist with varying degrees of spiritual awareness. C.S. Lewis explained that humans cannot conceive of what God is, only what God is not. Most spiritual traditions acknowledge that humans are unique because we embody important aspects of the Creator. God exits inside as an inseparable part of humankind. Although spirituality remains an incredibly individual experience with various manifestations, in my encounters many people rarely teach or encourage the individuality needed to develop true spiritual growth. As I grew up, I lost myself in the grand scheme of structured religion. Nothing in the male dominated Christian tradition appealed to my soul, much less my femininity. Ultimately, discovering the feminine side of Christianity became a key part of my spiritual identity..

           Unfortunately, Holy Scripture, historically, has been used to enchain people instead of liberating them. Early human history has been written by men and succeeded in the abject slavery of women. Religion has often been crafted to give men the moral authority to abuse women. The Bible has been widely used and misrepresented to facilitate slavery and abuses against females. Women have been marginalized as deficient, deformed humans undeserving of personal freedom or dignity. The “astonishing fact of human history is that religion, philosophy, political, social and economic thought have been preserved as the prerogatives of men” (Miles, 14).  

         A universally accepted, feminist interpretation of Scripture sounds radical; in fact many conservative women distance themselves from the feminist movement because of the more radical ideas and beliefs expressed by some feminists. Unfortunately, feminism tends to be defined by radical standards. To the contrary, a feminist interpretation may serve to conserve traditional roles as well as allowing all interested people to more fully know the God of the Bible in a more complete way. Interpreting scripture to the honest feminist does not mean haphazardly rewriting the messages and the stories of the Bible. The task of delivering an authentic translation is more complicated than changing pronouns. Basic perceptions and assumptions underlying feminist critique include acknowledging that gender is a social construction that oppresses women more than men, and this social construction is shaped by patriarchy. Patriarchy is the name commonly given to sexist social structures. Coined from the Greek pater/patros (father) and arche (origin, ruling power, or authority), patriarchy is a form of social organization in which power is always in the hand of the dominant man or men, with others ranked below in a graded series of subordination reaching down to the least powerful who form a large base. (Johnson, 23) Although it is easy to dispute the more radical views of feminists, the fact remains that men have always been in charge and it has had an impact of degrading the status of females in varying degrees throughout history.

         Translations of the Holy Bible have been adopted in order to open the Word of God to the entire world throughout generations. I believe a text that considers gender equality in our time is needed. The New International Version (NIV) of the text was needed as predominant characteristics of our language changed and the NIV version makes certain gender considerations. More than changing a few nouns around, basic concepts of Christianity must be reexamined. The Bible must be critiqued from a feminist perspective to fully validate the feminine experience and to firmly establish equality for all females, especially in the United States. Contrary to many assumptions, the Bible does use a female name to identify God. Her name is Sophia. Sophia is the Greek word for Wisdom Thus Wisdom (Sophia) is a grammatically feminine noun, personified as "she" in the Old Testament book of Wisdom, between the Song of Songs and Ecclesiasticus.

        Religious feminists who have taken an interest in the Bible have felt that something should be done to suppress its most patriarchal aspects and accent such feminine concepts.  Most Americans consider themselves to be Christian or endorse a Christian moral code but most Americans exercise their faith in a way that prohibits girls from fully identifying themselves spiritually, with a God that assigns no importance on the feminine. This is traumatic to the spiritual growth of a woman seeking spiritual growth from the Bible. The United States is also the most influential country in the world and remains a patriarchy with little sign of future change. If Americans would take real initiative and advocate alternative, more inclusive, references to speak about God, the trend could possibly affect people on a global scale. Changing the language of the Bible would be a huge step toward making the line between male and female less distinct.

            The most popular translations of Scripture are by no means gender-neutral. It presents from beginning to end a thoroughly "androcentric" perspective, and it often leaves it to the reader to decide what application to women or what inclusion of women is implied. Androcentrism originates from the Greek aner/andros (male human being), is the name commonly given to the personal pattern of thinking and acting that takes the characteristics of ruling men to be normative for all humanity.(Johnson, 23-24) Since the writers of the Bible were men, this perspective is a common throughout the text, but many of the themes contradict such a limited inclusion of women.

               The Bible, for the most part, records the names and actions of men, uses male examples, assumes a male audience, and in general focuses on men and their concerns while leaving women in the background. For instance, in Genesis 3:23-24 we read that God sent Adam out of the Garden of Eden, but the text says nothing about Eve being driven out. Obviously we must understand that both were exiled, but the writer sees fit to describe this event in terms of Adam's exile. The genealogies of the Old Testament rarely mention wives or mothers. Often when a woman does appear in a narrative she is not named, but is referred to only as the wife of a certain man (e.g. Noah's wife).               

              The tendency of the Bible writers to address males in particular is seen in the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20). It states,” You shall not covet your neighbor's wife." Deuteronomy 29 reads, "Moses summoned all Israel and said to them ... you are standing today all of you before the Lord your God ... your little ones, your wives, and the sojourner who is in your camp ... so that you may enter into the sworn covenant." Much of the book of Proverbs is addressed to young men, with warnings against getting involved with prostitutes and adulteresses (Prov. 7:5), but there is no similar advice directed to women, specifically.      

           Also when people are numbered in the Bible, it is the men who are actually counted. In Matthew 14:21 we are told that "those who had eaten were about five thousand men, beside women and children," and likewise Matthew 15:38 states "four thousand men, beside women and children." In Acts 4:4 it says "many of those who heard the word believed, and the number of the men was about five thousand." These phrases, in particular, echo the historical role women occupied in society as property, before they had any rights as human beings. The practice of treating women this way is inhumane and outdated. The way we view the roles of women in the Christianity is similarly outdated.

          Modern Feminists were not the first to refer to God in the feminine.  The first woman known to have written in English, the fourteenth-century Christian mystic Julian of Norwich has inspired generations of Christians with her reflections on the "motherhood" of Jesus, and her assurance that, despite evil, "all shall be well." Julian's Book of Showings, in which the author records a series of revelations she received during a critical illness in May 1373, contains her  recollection of feminine charged visions of divinity resulting from delirium but, to the devoted female Christian, her revelations bring forth a hopeful message to those struggling with life’s imperfections.    

          The choice to change unjust structures and distorted symbol systems creates the possibility of a new community in church and society possibly, liberating community of all women and men characterized by mutuality with each other in relative harmony. Most people respond to this vision of wholeness; of the equality and freedom celebrated in this Scripture: in the oneness of Christ Jesus “there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor free, neither male nor female” (Gal 3:28).

              Because the Bible represents the nature of God for so many, Elisabeth Johnson begins her book, She Who Is, with the insight that "the symbol of God functions." The fact that the symbol God works in faith communities, regulating behavior and contributing to the regulations of existing social constructs, is the reason the theological task of naming God is so vital and why feminist critique,(or lack thereof) of the Bible effects so may:

 

"The symbol of God does not passively float in the air but functions in social and personal life to sustain or critique certain structures, values, and ways of acting…a religion’s symbol system, the moods and motivations it establishes, its concept of the general order of things, and the aura of 'factuality' that surrounds both the moods and the concepts" (Johnson, 36).

             Since the symbol of God is the focal point of the whole religious system, the classifications of the world and our entire world view are wrapped up with its nature.  Specific ideas of God support certain kinds of relationships and condemn others. The Bible is the literary vehicle for the symbol of God. History proves that when God is spoken of in exclusively male terms, the symbol of God functions to advocate the sexist subordination of women in the faith community. She asserts that feminine symbols, as they emerge from the community and find acceptance can “…not only say something about who God is but also serve as signs of God's grace, calling forth communities based on mutuality and equality”(Johnson, 90).  

            The purpose of a female perspective about God "within the contours of Christian faith" and an integrated critique of the Bible is to promote the flourishing of human beings and the earth. Christianity is a hugely popular, globally spread religion. Historically, Christianity has been presented from a patriarchal perspective with an overtly andocentric overtone. The Bible has indeed been used to subordinate many millions of women but many millions of women have been comforted by the words in the text as well. Johnson draws on three sources- feminist theology, Scripture, and the classical tradition. The author seeks the most important intentions behind Scripture and classical theology in order to represent them more faithfully than their own andocentric history has done.

         The creation story in Genesis refers to creatures called “men” created in God’s own image. “He created them both: male and female,” (Gen.5:1-2). The Bible teaches human beings, male and female, are created in the image of God, and that in the power of the Spirit members of the community, men and women, are transformed according to the image of Christ. Emphasis on the equality of women would be ideal. However, a deep ambiguity has afflicted the imago doctrine throughout the Christian tradition. While affirming that human beings generically are created in the image and likeness of God, theology also adopted the hardy form of gender dualism found in Hellenistic thought, (Johnson, 70). Feminist ideological critique points out that the Bible has been written by men from the perspective of men, and the final list of books that were included in the canon was likewise decided by men (Johnson, 130-31).  It is therefore not surprising if the Bible itself reflects the patriarchal worldview of biblical and post-apostolic times.

                Solving this barrier lends to discussion surveying the sovereignty and literalness of the words in the Bible. Religious people indeed use different means to interpret the Holy texts. The first regards a text as whole including contextual incidents. The meaning content has thus been defined by the author and the conditions of its production (author, socio-cultural context, etc.). This interpretation sees the text as separate from and independent of the reader. The meaning of the text is thereby fixed throughout history, and one cannot derive anything more from it than what has been put there by the author. A second way of conceiving the text views the text not as a semantic vessel but as a medium through which the subject matter is communicated. Meaning is not found in the text itself, but is viewed as an event of understanding that happens in the encounter between the text and the reader. This means of interpretation especially serves those who believe in a truly personal base relationship between God and worshiper. Scripture indicates very clearly, Christ advocated this kind of relationship with God and doctrine.

          Women's experiential knowledge will provide the basis for a future non-sexist society. All women's experiences are valid- not just wealthy, educated white women. There is a connection between women's experiences and the social, religious and political structures that produce gender boundaries. The ultimate goal of gender sensitive theological concepts is to change how we think about gender and thus eventually change society. The Bible is a unique text that influences all aspects of American life, Christian or not. How society ‘talks’ about God effects how that society sees the world.

             The God of The Bible is a God who acts in human history. God's presence and revelation are ongoing. It is logical to suggest that `women's experience' also should legitimately be thought to have a certain revelatory quality if “carefully discerned and interpreted,” (Johnson, 62). Women and the uniquely feminine experience can be restored. The importance of the validation of the feminine being cannot be understated. This experience with God allows women to exist wholly. They are free to seek a unique and validating spiritual experience with out needing a man to intervene. Women can find validation in the text after sifting through patriarchal filters. Knowing God on a personal level is empowering to all who experience it. The relationship is a loving one, powerful and equalizing.                 Feminist biblical scholars assert that people must gather assets from women’s expressed experiences, from Scripture, and from classical theology, which can serve as resources for an `emancipatory’ pattern of speech about God. Emphasis on the image of God that humans are created in and Christ’s relationship with the women in his life help validate the feminine experience.

            Jesus showed unprecedented care for women. He was the first religious leader to elevate women to equal status with men. He was a feminist revolutionary. Examples of Jesus' care for women are seen in the story of the widow's mite (Luke 21:1-4, 15:8-10), the forgiveness of the prostitute who has faith (Mark 14:3-9), the healing of the woman with the bloody flux (Luke 8:43-48), and the defense of Mary's right to discipleship (John 4:16-30). Jesus first revealed the Good News of His resurrection to the important females in his life.

            Using the previous established resources, She Who Is explores a biblical feminist theology of God exploring speech about each of the “persons” of God’s Trinity in a feminine light. Although a drastic change in traditional ways people talk about God, relating the Trinity in female concepts helps solidify the complete experience of a feminine relationship with the biblical Christian God. She tests the capacity of female images to bear and disclose what Christian truth testifies to as the blessed action of God in the world, and call upon the language of classical theology to give these images density. (Johnson, 13)

             The books of Wisdom, the Sophia books, do more than name the creator God in the feminine sense. Those passages were traditionally interpreted as references to the Christ, the Word born of the Father before all ages. Many feminist biblical interpreters suggest that Wisdom (Sophia) is a scripturally accurate & appropriate name for God, inseparable from God in all It’s forms. Because a self-perpetuating second-class female status, Sophia was put on a proverbial shelf, as an inferior feminine aspect of God, clearly not a complete interpretation.

           The Spirit is an easier feminist leap for many to make because of its established `feminine’ qualities. Further in her commentary, however, Johnson links the feminine concept of God in all It’s manifestations, including associating a feminine personality to the masculine Christ. This is a huge leap but, in my opinion, she lands on her feet again. Putting God in the context of female experience allows for new interpretations of the Bible. When God is spoken of in the personal sense of relationship rather than in philosophical abstractions, and when the collective personal experience is based on a woman's rather than a man's experience, suffering and power do not have to be seen as mutually exclusive. Rather, the suffering God empowers resistance and "facilitates the praxis of hope." The experience of women over history has allowed a special bond between God and woman kind. In order to best understand the potential and divinity of suffering and pain in life, one must only compare life to the birthing and child rearing process to appreciate the promise and wisdom suffering diversity facilitates. 

           Language is only a symptom of a more deeply ingrained problem; in changing the language alone, therefore, we run the risk of merely disguising the biases which are inherent in the text and its cultural stance. Unrecognized, and unrecognizable, those biases become even more insidious, even more powerful. This is particularly dangerous with a text such as the Bible which has played a foundational role in the formation of our own culture to the extent that its influence is so subtle and pervasive that it goes unrecognized in a culture that believes itself sophisticated and free of such influence.

       Frequently, women with strong religious backgrounds have the most difficulty in accepting that the violence against them is wrong. They believe what they have been taught, that resistance to this injustice is un-biblical and unchristian. Tradition persists to teach that Christian women are supposed to be meek, and claiming rights for oneself is committing the sin of pride. The result is an insidious horror, as soon as battered women who hold rigidly traditional religious beliefs begin to develop an ideological suspicion that violence against them is wrong, they react by ignoring the "suspicion" & chose to adhere to church tradition.

             One remedy against such aversions includes a revision of the Bible, in which the new "dynamic equivalence" method of translating would be employed so as to conform the text to the same stylistic guidelines which had lately been imposed on the seminary, and to otherwise obscure the "patriarchalism" of the Bible. By this means the Bible might be exhibited as an example of political correctness to all who heard it read in the churches. “For patriarchy has run its course, and now not only fails to serve the real needs of men and women, but with its inalienable racism, militarism, hierarchical structures and rage to dominate and destroy, it threatens the very existence of life on earth,”(Miles, 14).More than helping females change social and personal concepts, contrary to traditional standards, humanity in general will benefit, from this change in God-talk.

         The critique of sexism implies a fundamental principle of judgment. This critical principle of a gender inclusive theology is the affirmation of and promotion of the full humanity of women. Whatever denies, diminishes, or distorts the full humanity of women is, therefore, to be appraised as not redemptive. Theologically speaking, this means that whatever diminishes or denies the full humanity of women must be presumed not to reflect the divine or authentic relation to the divine, or to reflect the authentic nature of things, or to be the message or work of an authentic redeemer or a community of redemption. “This negative principle also implies the positive principle: What does promote the full humanity of women is of the Holy, does reflect true relation to the divine, is the true nature of things, and is the authentic message of redemption and the mission of redemptive community." (Russell, 115)

         At first, the bible seemed the last place I would find a spiritual identity but with further consideration, I found a piece of myself. Regardless of its history, the Bible is still considered sacred to many women. Conservative American Christians would do well to consider changing the wording of the Bible to be gender considerate, more than merely validating the feminine experience, changing the language and the way God is presented at the American pulpit would be liberating both male and female perceptions of God. Contrary to this traditional role, Scripture itself contains parables that support the equality of women and references to God in the feminine sense. Careful critique of the language and emphasis on human equality will result in the ultimate positive application of the Christian Bible.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

 

A Reader’s Guide to the Holy Bible King James Version. Camden, New Jersey: Thomas

            Nelson, 1972.

 

Chadwick, Whitney. Women, Art, and Society 3^rd ed. New York, NY  , Thames and      

              Hudson Ltd.  2003            

              

 

Johnson, Elizabeth. She Who Is: The Mystery of God in Feminist Theological Discourse.           

             New York NY. Crossroad Publishing 1992;

 

Leitch, Vincent. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism1^sted. “The Madwoman 

              in the Attic.”. New York, NY W.W. Norton & Co. 2001.

 

Letty, M. Russell, Feminist Interpretation of the Bible Philadelphia, PA Westminster  

             Press, 1985

 

Miles, Rosalind. The Women’s History of the World; New York, NY: Harper Row,1999                       

            p.p.xi-36

 

Richter. Falling Into Theory 2^nd ed. “The Female Swerve”; Gilbert and Gubar, 290 

            New York, NY. Bedford/St Martin’s. 2000.

 

 

Author's Note

This was/is a VERY EARLY piece. I posted it, merely to post it. I have a longer/revised version, without so many mistakes. This is merely a first draft. I have yet to make proper revisions. Constructive praise/criticism is welcome.

Reviews

[Carol Cashes]

P.S. I can't believe that no one has reviewed or addressed this since its arrival in what...2012?! This piece screams for discussion, debate, exchanges of ideas and ideals. Hmmph.....

[Carol Cashes]

I agree that the current version, from which the NIV is based, was heavily edited and its subsequent translations were influenced by King James, a notorious misogynist. However, as the Bible is the Word of God, its essence can never be removed or perverted by man. A rewrite is not necessary, but opening ones' heart, through prayer and study, will bring understanding of God's true intent.

As well, Paul's letters to the churches of the New Testament stem from his own feelings regarding marriage and women: stay chaste, but failing that, then marry. Understanding that one fact will change how you read the Corinthians and the Ephesians and you can know that the focus is on how the "church" should act as the Bride of Christ.

As for the strict "guidelines" that some Christians adhere to, humanity has historically clung to ritual and rules to help them to stave off evil thoughts that lead to evil deeds. As well, some of the early churches used these to control and subjugate (The Pope/Vatican). Some Christians are uncomfortable and insecure in the strength of their faith to keep them in God's favor. Having rules and rituals comfort them, much as a child needs boundaries and stability.

In the Old Testament, there were 978 rules the Jews were required to keep. The birth of Jesus, the son of God, changed those rigid parameters by his inclusion of Gentiles to be numbered as God's children. It was one of the reasons the general Jewish population resisted his claims and clung so fiercely to their way of life that had existed for hundreds of years. Too many then, as now, mistake obedience to law as proof or guarantee of grace.

As for women and their place, men are instructed to "honor and cherish" their wives. It is an unfortunate fact that some men have never understood the full meaning of that: Honor = Respect, Cherish = Love. When "honor" is replaced with "respect", then the meaning and the commandment is broadened to include acknowledgement of equality and value. So goes with "Love": true love does not require subservience, or absolute obedience.

Too many will always cling to their belief that rigid rules mean righteous in God's eyes. However, I have attended many women's studies that stress how valuable women are to God's plan(s) and that encourage women to step up and take their places as strong leaders in the Christian community. I have been blessed and encouraged to study the Bible with an open heart that understands how much God values me, and how he wants me to use that value to promote and do his will.

AAGGGHHH!! I'm typing in this little bitty box and while I would like to touch on more, I would really have to just print your piece, write my response in Word, then copy and paste, not as a "review", but a separate writing. In any case, I wanted to acknowledge the validity of many of your arguments and to offer some alternatives to others.