Attendhg to the Other: Feminist Critiques of Theological Method in a Postmodem Era
Loraine Fay MacKemie Shepherd
to the Faculty of Emmanuel College and the Theology Department of the Toronto School of Theology
in partial fülfïlmeni of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology awarded by the University of St. Michael's College.
Toronto. Ontario June 12,1998
Wopyright by Loraine MacKenzie Shepherâ, 1998 Acquisitions and Acquisitions et BiMbgraphi SeMces services bibliographiques 395 wemngton Street 395, nie wel(ingtori OtCawaON K1AW Ottawa ON KIA ON4 Canada Csnada
The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exchsive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distriiute or sell reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microfoxm, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfïche/fiJm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique.
The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantid extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. Attendhg to the Other: FemhUt Critiqua of Theoiogical Method in a Pwtmodern Era
Submitted by Loraine Fay MacKenPe Shepherd, Interdisciplinary Studies in Systematic Theology and Feminist Theory, Department of Theology
in partial fidfïhent of the requirements for the degree of ~octorof Philosophy awarded by the Universify of St Michael's Coilege
Abstmct
Contemporaiy theology has arriveci at a aitical moment Marginalized voices are king heeded more than ever before and are cding for a radical shift in theological methd The fiberal, modem paradigm which has 1argeIy governed theologïcal method in this century has tended to support the status quo at the expense of the margînalized,
Characteristics of this paradigm which have been deemed problematic include the assumptions that impartial interpretations can be achieved through objective analysis, that accurate and complete representations of our own reality or that of othm can be made, and that a universal essence or truth lies beneath ai1 texts and theories.
From the many alternative theological methods which address the inadequacy of this liberal, modem approach and attempt to include the full diversity of voices, I will consider four femlliist approaches: Elisabeîh Schüssler Fiorenza's critical modem, Mary
McClintock Fuikerson's poststnichiral, Kwok Pui-lads postcolonial and Kathryn
Tanner's postiiberal. My critical examination of each of these positions will unwver similarities and differences amongst them. 1will then suggest aspects of each of their theological methods which might contnaue to the development of a feminist theological mahod that more adequately addresses issues of diversity and marpinaiization within Protestant churches.
In order to determine these elements, 1 wïll contrast their theological methods with the liberal, modem approach which The United Church of Canada has taken to address questions of unity ami& diversity and the inclusion of marginalized people. 1 will focus upon the theologicai methods used in particular sexuality documents of the United
Church which deal with issues of gender and sexual orientation. My examination will consider the adequacy of the liberal, modem approach used in these documents, and explore the alternative possibilities presented by these four feminists.
To conclude this thesis. 1 will sueelements of a feminist theological method that seriously consider the use of scripture and Christian tradition while addressing issues of rnarginaiization and divenity for Protestant churches in a postmodem era. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am deeply appreciative of the Graduate Student Assistantships hmEmmanuel
College. as weli as the support fiom Emmanuel Coilege faculty and students. 1 am also deeply appreciative of the scholarships which 1 received fkom Emmanuel College. the
Toronto School of Theology. the Division of Mission in Canada and Saskatchewan
Conference of The United Church of Canada, and the Ontario Goveniment.
My CO-directors.George Schner and Mary Ellen Sheehan, have offered valuable time. energy, extensive editoriai work, critical suggestions, wisdom and support for which
I am very gratefu. My heartfelt gratitude also extends to my parents, Colleen and Roy
Shepherd, for their loving support. and to many fiiends for their listening ears and prayers. Of these fnends I am particularly appreciative of Nan Hudson and Elizabeth
MacDonald's emergency computer support. and the willingness of Cora Krommenhoek.
Sue Jackson. Barbara Pdecmy. Marion Pope. and Catherine Rose to cnticaliy examine this thesis. Most importantly of all. I wish to acknowledge and give thanks for the untinng encouragement. daily support. constant love and decadent gifts of chocolate fiom rny beloved parnier. Nancy Pinnell.
To love. chocolate and prayers! Table of Contents
TABLEOFCONTENTS ...... v
INTRODUCTION ......
PART ONE: FEMIMST THEOLOGICAL METHODS ...... IO
Chapter 1. Critieal Modern: Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza ...... Il Critique of Modernity and Liberdimi ...... 13 Impartiality ...... 13 Positntism ...... 16 ïndividua~ismand the Logic ofldentity ...... 18 Theological Method ...... 21 Community and Diversiw ...... 22 Authority and Revelution ...... 30 Rhetorical Reading Strategies ...... 42 Conclusion ...... 49
Chapter 2- Poststructural: Mary McClintock Fukerson ...... 52 Critique of Modemity and Liberalism ...... 54 Represenfational FalZacy ...... 54 Universalism ...... 57 Historical Appeals ...... 59 Identity Politics and Individualism ...... 61 Theological Method ...... 66 Cornmunity and Diversiîy ...... 67 Aiifhori@ ...... 70 Cunonical Sysrem ...... 79 Conclusion ...... 86 Chapter 3. POSfc01oniai: Kwok Rii-ian ...... 90 Critique of Coloniaiism ...... 93 Hkton'cal-Cn'tical Method ...... 94 Identïty Politics ...... 99 ThmlogidMethod ...... 101 Theologïcal Sources ...... 102 Tmth adAuthority ...... 105 Community rmd LXversity ...... Il5 Dialogical Imagilzafilzafionand the Perfomance of the Taiking Book ...... 118 Conclusion ...... 125
Chapter 4. Postiiberak Kathyn Tanner ...... 127 Critique of Modernity and Liberaiism ...... 129 Decontextuakztion and Referentiality ...... 131 TotaIitanananism...... 135 TheologicalMethod ...... 138 Ruïes and Se...... 138 PluinSenseofSmptwe ...... 148 Authority ...... 154 Communiiy. Dbersity and Solidarty ...... 159 Conclusion ...... 164
Chapter 5. Critical Cornparison of Feminist Theological Methods ..... 168 Responses to Modemity and Liberalism ...... 168 Alternative Theologicai Methods ...... 170 Historical Adequocy ...... 171 Scriprural and Doctrinai Agency ...... 178 Subjecthood and Community ...... 181 Revehon and Author@ ...... 187 Conclusion ...... 195 PART TWO: THEOLOGICAL METHOD IN THE UNITED CHURCH OFCANADA ...... 198
Chapter 6. Theologid Method and the Other withh Uded Charch SexualityDocpments ...... 199 United Church Sexuality Documents ...... 201 Toward a Christian Understanding of Sex. Love . Mmiage .. 202 In God f Imge... Mde ami Fernale: A Sh CONCLUSION: TOWARD A MORE ADEQUATE FEMINIST THEOLOGICAL METHOD ...... 268 Presuppositions ...... 268 Communal Beginnings ...... 271 Revelation and Authority ...... 174 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 283 INTRODUCTION In my work as a United Chinch minister, and more often as an academic theologian, I have oknfelt daunted by the use of scripture. I have also found that 1 am not alone in this intimidation. Many of us who are not well versed in the latest historical- critical conclusions feel inadequate in our use of scriptureptureAs Christian theologians and pastors, however, scriptme is integral to our theologies and ministries This dilemma prompted me to explore the use of scriphire within theological methods. 1 have also become increasingly concemed about the use of scriptme and traditionai doctrine for oppressive ends, and the inadequacy of modem, liberal theologicai approaches to address this. Because of these concems, I have chosen as my thesis topic the development of a feminist' theological method that seriously considers the use of scripture and attends to issues of margindization and diversity within a Protestan? context. The following fhree incidents, which occurred within the last ten yean, illustrate my concems and raise further questions which will be addresse. in uiis thesis. About ten years ago a woman approached me with a concem that was weighmg heavily upon her. I1 am using the term "feminist" to descnbe an approach that is attentive to multiplicative sources of domination within church and society, only one of which concems gender. In this thesis 1 have concentrated upon issues of gender and sexual orientation, while making some connections with colonialism. This use of the term "feminist" implies a liberative approach that sets as two of its criteria the liberation of the oppressed and the respect of divenity. %y Protestant 1 follow the Oxford English Dictionary's definition of churches and sects "separate fiom the Roman Catholic Church in accordance with the pnnciples of the Reformation". 1 include in this definition the Nonconforrnists, such as Congregationalists, Methodists, Quakers and Baptists. See The Oxjt?ord Dictio~tyof the Christian Chwch. ed by F. L. Cross, and E. A. Livingstone, Revised edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985): 979, 1 135- 1 1 36. How could she continue rrading the Bible when she felt violated by it? 1 was her minister in a niral pastoral charge of The United Church of Canada and she was hoping that 1. as another woman, had found a way to read the Bible without king upset. She had just read one of the biblical passages which PhyIIis Tnble bas aamed a text of terror. The violence portrayed against women, which appeared to her to be wndoned in this passage. distressed her. She was in the habit of reading scripture every day, but was fmiding that the Word of Life was becoming the Word of Death. She had corne fiom another denomination which equated scripture with the lÎteral Word of God. and had used passages such as these to justify the subordination of women. She questioned if there was any other way to read these passages. How codd United Church feminists, such as rnyself, still read the Bible? The second incident occurred within the sarne year as the first At a pastoral charge meeting to discuss a United Church document on sexual orientation. some people quoted verses out of scripture, and out of context. to support their abhorrence of homosexuaiity and insinence that the United Church was abandoning its faith traditions. Others replied with different quotes, also taken out of conte* to empheslle the inclusive. nonjudgmental nature of Jesus' message, and the importance of heeding modem scientific findings instead of antiquated church traditions. Lesbian and gay people who were present were silenced. Later one man confided to me that the underlying problem with homosexuality was its hinhce to the propagation of the white race. This experience led me to reflect upon the foilowing questions. Did one have to abandon church tradition in order to support lesbian and gay people? How could scripture be helpful when its diversity allowed people to choose passages that supported their pre-fomed opinions? Everyone was welcomed into this discussion, but a simple inclusion of all voices did not provide Iesbian and gay people the detynecessary to risk speakhg. Did we need to move beyond a liberal mode1 of inclusion in order to dow d voices to be heard? The racist comment indicated that connections needed to be made with other sources of oppression. How couid mdtipIicative oppressions be addressed? The third incident happened more recentiy. A colleague within the doctoral program of the Toronto School of Theology began to tell me of her pain, exhaustion and loneliness trying to think the way Canadian academics do. She was a foreign-exchange student from Korea. and was finding it difficult to work Ui a Western mind set. She asked why theology must be done fiom a linear perspective that isolates the muid nom the body, the individuai hmcommunity, and Christian beliefs from the other religious traditions. Why has Christian theology so readily adopted western, abstract, philosophical traditions while rernaining uneasy with the use of eastem, holistic, philosophical traditions? These incidents raise questions that illuminate the growing diversity of our Canadian society and the need for churches to address questions of marghalization and diversity within their own faith communities and traditions. These questions also indicate the need for systematic theologians to take biblical interpretation seriously. Theologians who are not familiar with the latest findings of biblical studies ofien ignore the scriptures. for fear of displayhg their ignorance. In addition, the incfeasing specialization within academic disciplines leads to an Marseparation of disciplines. Interdisciplinary studies are becoming more difncult and more suspect of superfïciality. Without such an intedisciplinary approach, however, theology will becorne increasingly irrelevant It is for this reason that 1 am risking a multi-disciplhary interconnection of systematic theology, feminist theory, ethics, Literary theory, history, and biblical interpretation. 1 am pdcularly hopefd that this work will contriibute to a dialogue with biblical scholars in the search for an adequate theological method. Contemporary theology has arrived at a critical moment Marghlized voices are king heeded more than ever before and are calling for a radical shift in theological method. The liberal. modern paradigm which has largely govemed theological method in this cenwhas tended to support the status quo at the expense of the marginalized? Characteristics of this paradigm which have been deemed problematic include the assumptions that impartial interpretaîions cm be achieved through objective analysis. that accurate and complete representations of our own reality or that of others can be made. and that a universal essence or truth lies beneath al1 tex& and theories. Among the many alternative theological methods which address the inadequacy of this liberal. modem approach and attempt to include the full diversity of voices, 1 will consider four: critical modem. poststructurai, postcolonial and postli berai .4 Vario us 'In the introduction to Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza's critique of modernity and liberdism. 1 wil1 be Merdefining the tems "modem" and "liberal". I realize that these words have multiple meanings. but wil1 restrict their use to these definitions for the purposes of this thesis. 'Categorization always risks oversimplification because there will be overlap arnongst categories, ceriain works defy classification, and other works are in transition between categories. However, such categorization aicis clarification, cornparison and critique amongst the di fferent methods. feminist theologiaas are beginning to adopt one or auother of these four perspectives in their search for a theological meîhod tbat more adequately addresses issues of diversity and marginalization.. - They are realizbg that their earlier attempts to deai with the margioalization of women withui male theological discourseS have themselves marginalized third world women6 and women of colour. As ferninists hope to berter "attend to the othern7hm each of these four perspectives, they also provide a corrective to other theorists from the same perspectives who tend to ignore gender analysis and its impact upon divenit. and marginalkation. Because of this feminist potential for deeper analysis, I will focus upon the foliowing four ferninist theologians who each represent one of these four perspectives: Elisabeth Schihler Fiorema as critical modem; Mary McClintock Fulkerson as poststruchd; Kwok Pui-lan as postcolonial; and Kathryn Tanner as postliberal. I will now give a brief demiption of these fou alternative 'rhe term "discourse", in postmodern fashion, refers not only to academic writings, but also to the context of these writings and the ways in which they interact with the everyday world. See A.K.M. Adam, Wzat is Postmodem Biblicul Criticism? New Testament Senes (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995) p. xiii. 6"Third world" is the term used by most thkd worid theologians in part to emphasize their economic situation in relation to the rest of the world. The tenn "two- thirds world", while indicating their proportion of the world's population, does not seem to be used by many in these countries. Therefore, 1 will use "third world". '1 draw upon Mary McClintock Fulkerson's use of the phrase "attending to the other" to infer that those of us in positions of privilege are in as much need of liberation as is the oppressed other. See Fulkerson, Changing the Subject: Women's Discourses und Feminist Theology (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994):4-5. By the term "attending" mean to listen, learn and be changed by those who are marginalized as we act in solidarity with them. I also recognize that the multiple forms of oppression, in some situations, place us outside of the circles of privilege as the oppressed, and in other situations place us inside. Thus, the lines of demarcation between privileged and oppressed, the other and the dominant. are blurred. approaches and explain their association with these four feminist theoIogians. 1 am na-g the nrst alternative %iticai modern" to ddbethose who continue to use a modem approach, in contradistinction to postmodem, hma critical stance. Friedrich Niebsche, Sigmund Freud and Kari Marx, commonly referred to as the masters of suspicion, began to question critically the basic pruicipla of the modern era. These critiques were more Mydeveloped by the Frankfurt School of Social Critical Theory, whose members were particularly concerned about ideological conûol and reification of the masses. They argued that the identities of those who were marginalized from positions of power within society were subsumed into the identity of the dominant culture. I will consider Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza as a representative of this critical modem approach. Schibsler Fiorenza has taken a critical stance while retaining the use of modem tools and methods. She questions many of the above-mentioned difficulties with liberal modemism. but also rejects some of the more problematic aspects of postmodemism. Although she is drawing much more upon postsaucturalism in her later work a critical modem approach remains for her the most politically viable in the respect for diversity and stmggle against multiple oppressions. Posistrucniralism. as the second alternative, emanated fiom France primarily through the works of Michel Foucault. Jacques Derrida Jean-François Lyotard, Jacques Lacan, and the French feminists, Hélène Cixous, Luce Irigaray and Julia Kristeva Although poststructuralism by its very nature resists definition, there are certain elements held in cornmon by most poststnrcturalists~They raist the foundationalism of modernism, suggesting that foundaîions are social cotl~t~ctionsand context dependent. They also resist modernity's totaliPng attempts to explain and contain every aspect of an issue hmone perspective? A God's eye view that can capture ail of reaiity is hurnanly impossible. Io Mary McClintock Fulkerson foliows this second poststsvctural alternative. She is concemed about the feminist dismissai of women whose biblical interpretations or political goals are not overtly ferninia Ln this respect she argues that modem feminism occludes difference. Fuikenon suggests that poststnictud views can best attend to "the otha"within particular faith communities. Postcolonialism. the third alternative, asks similar questions in reference to the effects of colonization by addressing issues of representation, multiculturalism and Western imperialism. Postcolonialists suggest that Western represenbtions of colonized people may say more about the West than about the colony. The works of Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Trinh T. Minh-Ha, Edward Said, and Rasiah S. Sugirtharajah have 8~ostmodernismis another, perhaps even more, elusive term that is often used interchangeably with postsfnicturaiism. Because the terni "postmodemism" has ken used to describe both poststnicturalism and postliberalism, which I am attempting to contrast, I prefer the term postmucturalism. This is also the terni of preference for Maty McClintock Fulkerson, whose work 1 will be examining in this thesis. 'For a helpfid introduction to poststnicturalism within biblical studies (named postmodemism in this reference), see Adam, Postmodern Bibiical Criticism. 'O~ornyJoy uses the phrase "God's eye view" in reference to postcolonid critique. See "Beyond a God's Eyeview: Alternative Perspectives in the Study of Religion," presentation, Canadian Society for the Study of Religion, Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, May 1996. been formative for this approsch, in addition to that of poststructuralists. Kwok Pui-lan identifies her work as postcolonial and draws upon postmodern thought to question the authority and unïversaiïty of truth4aims within colonialist discome. She proposes a multifaith hermeneutics that she believes best honours the cultural and religious complexity of the saiptures themselves, as well as the multiple identities of Christian communities. Postliberalism is a more recent development, particuiar to Christian theology. It is bsxd primarily upon the work of George Lindbeck and Hans Frei, who in tum give significant reference to the work of Ludwig Wittgenstein, Karl Barth, and Reinhold Niebuhr. Postiiberds seek to move beyond the historical-critical methods of modernity and reclaim traditional theological methods and types of biblical interpretation. " Emphasis is given to the literal sense of scriptrire and traditional Christian doctrine while honouring the diversity of voices within the biblical text and the interpreting communities. Ka- Tanner is one of the few feminists who has taken a postliberai approach. She draws upon the work of George Lindbeck and Hans Frei to recommend an intemal, self-critical approach to Christian faith. This allows traditional Christian beliefs to critique the dominant, oppressive practices of Christian faith communities. Although she is moving away from postliberalism in her later work, and is relying more upon poststructuraIism, she remains committed to the intemal critique of traditional Christian "For this reason some postliberals refer to themselves as postcntical. See Peter . Ochs, "Scriptural Logic: Diagrams for a Postaiticai Metaphysics," Modern ~eology,1 1, 1 (January lWS):65-92. beliefs within thek diverse uses and meanings. My Cntical ex aminacion of each of these positions WUuncover similarities and differences amongst them. 1 WUthen determùie aspects of each of thek theological methods which might contribute to the development of a feminist theologicai method that more adequately addresses issues of diversity and marginalization within Rotestant churches. In order to determine these elements, 1 will con- th& theological methods with the libemi. modem approach which The United Church of Canada has taken to address questions of unity amidst diversity and the inclusion of margindized people. The United Church has recently experienced hirmoil over its documents on sexuality which have supported the ordination and commissioning of lesbian and gay candidates. Many of the concems with these documents pertain to the types of theological rnethod and biblicai interpretation that were employed. Some believe that the documents' liberal and modem approach hindered the hill inclusion of gay and lesbian people. Others believe that this approach emd in its depamire fiom United Church traditions. 1 will demonstrate that both concems are valid for particular sexuality documents, and cd1 for an alternative theological method that cm more adequately attend to the other while respecting diversity. To conclude this thesis. 1 will suggest elements of a feminist theological method that can more adequately address issues of rnarginalization and diversity for Protestant churches in a postmodern era PART ONE: FEMINIST THEOLOGICAL METHODS In the first four chapters of Part One 1 will be desfnbing the theological methods of each of the following four feminist theologians: Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, Mary McClintock Fulkerson. Kwok Pui-lm. and Kathryn Tanner. Within each chapter I will first examine their critiques of modernity and liberdism. Following this, 1 will summarize their alternative theological methods, with particular attention given to their use of scripture and tradition, their location within cornrnunity. their attention to marginalization and diversity, and their sources of authority and revelation. In chapter five 1 will give a critical comparison of these approaches in light of their purposes and the communal foci of their theological methods. Chapter 1 Critical Modem: Ebbeth Schhler Fiorenma "A feminist critical herrneneutics of suspicion places a warning label on al1 biblical texts: Caution! Could be dmrgerous to your health cmd survivaL"' Elisabeth Schùssler Fiorenza was born in Germany in 1938, on the same day as the Kri~talhacht.~Her family became fugitives in Austria during the war, and later resenled in West Gennany.) These experiences conûibuted to her comrnitrnent to the liberation of the oppressed, as shaped by her Christian faith. Schiissler Fiorenza felt drawn to ministry within the Roman Catholic Church, but was mistrateci by gender restrictions. In her doctoral studies at the University of Miinster she also encountered closed doon because of her gender? Mer she moved to the United States in 1970 to 'Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorerua "The Will to Choose or to Reject: Continuing Our Critical Work." in Feminist Inierpretation of the Bible. ed. Letty M. Russell (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press. 1985). 1 30. 'The coincidence of her birthdate with Kristallnacht has increased her awareness of the violence instigated in the narne of Ciuistianity. of the need to inciude the voices of others in biblical scholarship. and of the responsibility for religious studies to contribute to a more humane world. See Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, "Biblical Interpretation and Critical Cornmitment" Studiu Theologica 43. no. 1 (1989): 6. 3Elisabeth Schiissler Fiorenza. The Inside Stories: Thkteen Valiant Women Chullenging the Church, interview. ed. Amie Lally Milhaven (Mystic, Ct.: Twenty-Third Publishers. 1 987), 43. 4 Ln spite of completing two theological degrees summa cum luzide and publishing a book. Schiissler Fiorenza was refûsed a scholarship because, as a woman, she "had no future in the academy". See Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, "Changing the Paradigms," "How My Mind Has Changed" Series, The Christian Ce- 107, no. 25 (September 5- 12 1990): 797. accept a teaching position at the University of Notre Dame, these previous experiences together with the burgeoning women's iiionmovement sparked her interest in feminist biblicd studies.' From the outset Schbler Fiorenza has been concemeci not only with the liberation of those who are oppressed but also with the complicity of Christian theology in this oppression. In order to address these concems, she has dram upon liberahon theology, as well as feminist and politid critical theones in her development of a theological method and approach to biblical interpretation. For most of her work she has used the descriptor "critical"to indicate her indebtedness to Jürgen Habermas. a social critical theorist whom she connects with the Frankfbt SchooI. The tenn "critical"also distances her work hmliberal hermeneuticd As outlined below. she has found that certain elements indicative of liberal and modem approaches to theology and biblical studies contribute to the oppression of the marginalized. At the same time. she still finds aspects of modemity and Iiberalism helpfül. It is for this reason that I refer to her approach as cntical modem. This also serves to distinguish her method fiom postmodem. postliberal, and postcolonial approaches.' '~lisabethSchüssler Fiorenza "Biblical Interpretation in the Context of Church and Ministry," Word & World 1 0. no. 4 (Fall 1990): 32 1. 'Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza Disci'eship of Equals: A Critical Feminist Ekklesia-Logy of Liberution (New York: Crossroad, 1993), 54. 7 In a recent paper, Schiissler Fiorenza identifies her work as postcoloniai. However, she still utilizes modem historical-criticai rnethods which are resisted or ignored in most postcolonial w-riting. This is one of the reasons I am not categorizing her work as postcolonial. See Elisabeth Schiissler Fiorenza, "The Ethos of interpretation: Biblical Studies in a Postmodem and Postcolonial Context." presented at The Association Critique of Modernity and Liberaiism Modemity, arïsing hmthe eighteenth cenhny Enlightenmen&introduced a sorely needed critique of doctrhd and ecclesiai authority through its emphasis upon reason and scientific method. Liberaiism, evolving from a nineteenth cenwrise in historical consciousness, heralded human rights, quality, individual &dom and dem~cracy.~ While Schüssler Fiorenza acknowledges the importance of these contributions? she addresses certain problems which have emerged hmmodern and Liberal approaches: claims to impartiality, positivism, individualism, and the logic of identity. Impmriafify Early modern thinkers beiieved that rational critiques were best accomplished by researchers who were detached emotionally and politically hmtheir object of studylO. The intent was to prevent biases. values and interests hminterferhg with the collection of Korean Theologians, October 26, 1996. at Usong, Republic of Korea. * Elisabeth Schiissler Fiorenza and David Tracy, "The Holocaust as Interruption and the Christian Retum Into Histoiy." in nie Holocaust as Intemiption. ed. Elisabeth Schiissler Fiorenza and David Tracy. Conciliurn Series (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark Ltd., 1984). 83. For an excellent overview of the rise of modernity and the critiques given by critical theory and postrnodemism. see Sheila Greeve Davaney, "Problems with Feminist Theory: Historicity and the Search for SUR Foundations." in Embodied Love: Semualify and ReZationship as Feminist Values. ed. Paula M. Cooey, Sharon A. Farmer and Mary Ellen Ross (San Francisco: Harper & Row. 1987). 79-84. 9El isabeth SchüssIer Fiorenza. But She Said.: Ferninist Practices of Biblical Interpretation (Boston: Beacon Press. 1992). 132. 'OSchÜssler Fiorenza describes this as "the transcendent abstract subject of Enlightenment reason positioned outside time and space who has privileged access to buth and knowledge". See Elisabeth Schiissler Fiorenza, "Text and Reaiity-Reality as Text: The Problem of a Feminist Historical and Social Reconstruction Based on Texts," Studio Theologica 43 (1989): 26. of data and interpretation of results. However, Schfisler Fiorenza points out that a declaration of impartiaiity, objectivity, and disinterest is problematic for three rûisons. The nrst is that it serves malyto mask hidden ideologies, political commitments. relationships of power and interests of the biblical interpreter." She refers to Albert Schweitzer's Obsenration that historical-mitical scholars seeking the historiai Jesus will inevitably find him to be "fashioned in their own image and likeness"." She also draws upon the work of womanist, mujerista and Asian women theologians who have revealed the economic. institutional, cultural, racial, and colonial interests embedded within dominant biblical interpretations.13 This pretense to impartiality prevents biblicd scholars and theologians fiom realizing that their own methods and interpretations are socially con~tructed.'~It ignores the political pressures of audiences. publishers or places of employrnent. It also ignores the political implications of the work.15 The Holocaust, slavery, the denigration of women. colonization and global economic disparity have dl been justified by particular "Schüssler Fiorenza adopts the postmodem definition of ideology, described by Teresa L. Ebert. as "the organiration of material signifjing practices that constitute subjectivities and produce the lived relations by which subjects are comected to the dominant relations of power in a dominant social formation". See Schüssler Fiorenza, But She Suid. p. 243-44. Ant. 2. "~lisabethSc hCissler Fiorenza Jesus: Miriam !s Chi24 Sophia 's Prophet: Crirical Issues in Feminist Christology (New York: Continuum. 1994), 83. '3Schüssler Fiorenza But She Said, p. 37-39. ''Sc hiissler Fiorenza Jesur, p. 29-30. "Schiissler Fiorenza. "Text and Reality," p. 2 1. -14- Christian theologies and bibiid interpretations. To ignore the poiitical Ïmpkations of one's own scholdy work may well be to implicitly support dominant structures of oppression. The second problem with a declaration of impartiality is that it procures a fdse confidence in universaily valid conclusions. Without realizing the effect of their own social location, presuppositions and privileges on their work, theologians and biblical scholars witl assume that their objective rdtswill be valid and applicable globdly. When a pariicular biblical interpretation is understood as a discovery of histoncal reality hmwhich reveIatory truth daims cmbe derived historicdy Iimited experiences and values in scripture are posited as uni~mal.'~ The third problem with claims to impartiaiity concerns unitq thought. Men historical-critical tools are used to unearth hidden facts and discem the one. true meaning of the text any alternative meanings are either collapsed into this one. or are shown to be false. Schüssler Fiorenza insists that a supposedly objective and empirical study ody produces one amongst many sociaily determineci interpretations. If one acknowledges that conclusions are informed by the socio-political location of the interpreter, the diversity of interpreters will necessitate a diversity of interpretationd7While Schiissler Fiorenza l6 Elisabeth Schiissier Fiorenza. Bread not Stone: nie Chdenge of Feminist Biblical Interpretation (Boston: Beacon Press. 1984). 1 1. Schlissler Fiorenza faults ferninist theologians, such as Rosemary Radford Ruether and Letty Russell. for using this same universal logic in their elevation of biblical principles or normative biblical traditions. See Bread Nol Stone. p. 12-1 5. "~tisabethSchiissler Fiorenza "The Politics of Othemess: Biblical interpretation as a Criticai Praxis for Liberation." in The Future of Liberution Theology: Essays in Honor of Gustavo Gutiérrez, ed. Marc Ellis and Otto Madm (New York: Orbis Books, wants to afhn this diversity of interptations, she also resists absolute relativisn, as sixdi be discussed later. This last problem of unitary thought is cornecteci with the modern tendencies towards histoncal and tnmml positivism. Positivism Schiissler Fiorenza notes that modem approaches to biblical intqretation have relied upon histoncal criticai methodç to uncover the historiai reality bebdthe texts. These texts are understood as reflections of "how it really wa~".'~such an approach ignores the rhetoricai nature of the text in its social con- and construction It also ignores the fact that history was written by the "winnersl',thereby reflecting their perspective.19 This leads to a fdse assumption that those marginalized or absent in the texts were also marginalized or absent in historical reality. Schüssler Fiorenza demonstrates that this rnethodology has caused women to have ken mistakenly erased from biblical history. Although she recognizes that most contemporary biblical scholars have acknowledgd the "referential fdacy" of historical positivism, they still abide by a "modified positivist value-neunal stance" and overlook the ethical implications of their work." Historical positivism also removes the text nom the contemporzuy world. making '8Schüssler Fiorenza translates this fiom the famous expression of Leopold von Ranke: wie es eigentlich gewesen. See Schiissler Fiorenza, Bread Not Stone. p. 168, M. 9. '9Schüssler Fiorenza Bread Nol Sfone. p. 102. 'OSchüssler Fiorenza But She Said. p. 82-83. it an "artifact of mtiquity", accessible only through histoncal-scientific research? Such an understanding contriiutes to the sepadon and conse~uentialisolation of bibbcal and theological disciplines" Schüssler Fiorenza notes that this approach restricts anyone who does not have use of historical-critical tools hmaccessing the biblical texts. Biblical scholars defend this restticted access through their supposition that the original meaning, assumed to be accessible ody through historical-critical methods, is dennitive. As a correction to historicd positivism, SchüssIer Fiorenza points to hermeneutics and the sociology of knowledge which question the objective fanicity of historical criticisrn.'l In her later writing she ad& critical theory to this lia of corrective^.^^ Hermeneutical theory, such as that of Paul ~icoek,proposed that meaning cannot be found behind the text. but in front of the text. What is of primary importance is not the histoncal reality revealed by the te% but the meaning inherent within the text itself. distmced fiom the author and the onguial context. Schüssler Fiorenza refers to this as textual positivism, still enmeshed in the modem elevation of rational, objective. apolitical and neutml methods." No cntical or rhetoncal questions are asked of the text itself. The "Elisabeth Schiissler Fiorenza "The Bible. the Global Contexî, and the Discipleshi p of Equals." in Reconstructing Christian Theology. ed. Re becca S. C hopp and Mark Lewis Taylor (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1 994), 84. "Schiissler Fiorenza "Church and Ministry," p. 320; Schüssler Fiorenza Discipleship of Equals, p. 284. "Schüssler Fiorenza Bread Not Sme. p. 25. '4Sch~slerFiorenza Discipleship of Equuls, p. 285. ?3ch~sslerFiore- "The Bible, the Global Context," p. 83. text is absolute. Another concem Schiissler Fiorenza has with hermeneutcal theory, and later developments in literary theory, is its disregard of history. As the primary focus is with the text i~lf,and reafity is constructed by the language of the text, acnial historicai reality is deemed both inaccessible and irrelevant Schüssler Fiorenza is troubled by both the radical difference between text and reality posited by tedpositivism, and the radical identity between text and reality posited by historïcal po~itivism.'~ ïndividuaiism and the Logic of ldentty nie modern problems of impartial claims and positivisn are accentuated by the liberal emphasis upon the emancipation of the individual. Schüssler Fiorenza suggests that this has encouraged the privatizing of particular interpretations. This relativizes them even as they are still dependent upon the objectivity of historicalcritical studies in order to be universail y credible." In contrast to the universal absolutism of the empincal scientific method liberalism tends towards absolute relati~isrn.'~However, its particular relativism is confbsed with its dependence upon the universal validity of its objective fmding~.~It claims both particularity and universality. The liberal emphasis upon the individual also informs the liberai cornmitment to %chÜssler Fiorenza "Text and Reality," p. 20-22. "~chlisslerFiorenza gives as an example of this the recent proliferation of books on the historical Jesus. See Schiissler Fioren Jesus, p. 9. "Schiissler Fiorenza Bui She Said, p. 190-9 1. '9Schitssler Fiorenza Jesus, p. 73. equal nghts. However, in her discussion of democracy, SchüssIer Fio- suggests that the liberal movernent for quai rights merely reinforces the "patri-kyriarchal" Greco- Roman origins of democracy because the structures of domination are not addressecLMBy not challenging the interlocking systems of racism, sexism, classism, colonialism and heterosexism, equality cannot be achieved. nie "patnmhal politics of otherness" remains entrenched. Another difficulty with the liberal movement for equal rights is that its standard measme for equality is "elite white men". It has coopted the dualistic Western gender system which has positioned woman as "the other" of mm3'In her later work,j2 30 Schùssler Fiorenza Jesus, p. 16-1 7. Schüssler Fiorenza has understood patnarchy early in her work as "a cornplex political- economic-legal system that found its classical expression in Athenian democracy and its systemic articulation in Anstotelian philosophy". See Schiissler Fiorema Discipleship of Equals, p. 2 13-4. She does not want to limit patriarchy to the dualistic gender hework of sexism and androcentrism. but defines it as "a shifting pyramidal political structure of dominance and subordination. stratified by gender. race. class. sexuality, religion, nation. culture, and other histoncd formations of domination". See Schüssler Fiorenza Discipleship of EquaZs, p. 34 1. In her later work she coined the term "kyriarchy ". rneaning master-centred. to clariS this classical definition of patnarchy, and to hdicate that not al1 men dominate al1 women. Rather. "elite. Westem-educated, propertied., Euro-Amencan men" have benefited fiom the exploitation of women and other men. See Schüssler Fiorenza Discipleship of Equafs, p. 363; Schüssler Fiorenza, Jesus, p. 14. 3 1 Schüssler Fiorenza Discipleshi' of Equals, p. 360. "1n a 1990 article Schüssler Fiorenza recognized three distinct periods of her own writing, corresponding to the decades of the 60's. 70's and 80's. See Schüssler Fiorema "Changing the Paradigms," pp. 796-800. However, I have discemed a shift in her writing in the late 80's. Beginning with articles published in 1989.1 have found an increasing sophistication in Schüssler Fiorenza's analysis. With the help of critical feminist theories, she attends much more explicitly to issues of diversity and begins to incorporate aspects of poststructural theory. For the purposes of this thesis, 1 will refcr primarily to two pendof her writing: the iate 70's until the Iate 80's, which I cal1 her earlier work, and the late 80's through the 90's. which I cal1 her later work. Schüssler Fiorenza analyzes this through the "logicof identity", in which ail difference is subsumed into the identity of those in p~wer.'~The creation of miversal interpretations and noms is based upon a common essence, particular to the dominant group (usually white, European men) and assumed to be descriptive and relevant for dl. This essentialism corresponds with the &ive for unitary thought and eliminates as many variables (and hence huma. merence and diversity of biblid interpretation) as possible in its attempts to contain reality within a total system." Schiissler Fiorenza refers to Sirnone de Beauvoir's analysis of women within this system as the "other" of men. She then refers to global feminist discourse which describes women of subordinated races, classes. cultures and religions as the "others" of the "others"? Global feminisrn has critiqued white, middle-class ferninists for continuuig the same essentializing discourse about women which subsumes the diversity of women into a unitary Io& of identity." Although Schüssler Fiorenza takes issue with a number of elements associated with modemity and liberalism, she does note her appreciation for the modem methods of empincal research, analytical scholarship and cntical abstraction? She herself employs such methods in her historical-criticai studies. She also notes her appreciation for the '3The term "logic of identity" was coined by Theodore Adorno. a member of the Frarikfurt School. but she does not credit him accordingly. "Schiissler Fiorenzo But She Said, p. 139-40, 145, 147. 3SSchiisslerFio- "Politics of Othemess," p. 3 1 1. 36SchikslerFiorerua But She Said, p. 135-36. "~chüsslerFiorenza Discipleship of Eqds, p. 284. liberaI emphasis upon Mom,equality, justice and dwoaacy, ail of &ch are centrai in her own work It is not with modemïty or Iiberaiisrn per se with which she has difficdty. Ratber, it is an uncriticai adoption of these appmaches and principles that have Ied to the above problems. By not submitting its own work to ideological critique, the modem approach fails to abide by its own critical principle of the Enüghtenment3g Theologhl Method Elisabeth Schiissler Fiorenza describes hamethod as "a feminist criticai theology of ~iberation"~~or "a critical ferninist rhetorical interpretation for liberation"'? As indicative of liberation theology, she intentionally takes an advocacy position on behalf of the oppresse& rather than assuming neutrality. "Intellectual neutrality is not possible in a historicd world of exploitation and oppression"." She calls for a paradigm shift hm "valuedetached scientism" to "public rhetoric". from a "hemieneutical model of conversation" to a "practical model of collaboration"." Her goal is to establish a new paradigm for biblical interpretation that will more adequately address the expenences and '8Schiissler Fiorenza. "Bi blical Interpretation." p. 8. j9See Introduction to Bread Nor Sfone. p. xvi. " Schiissler Fiorenza, But She Said, p. 47. 4'Schüssler Fiorema Bread Not Stone, p. 45. "Schbsler Fiorenza, Discipleshi@ of Equals, p. 278. concems of worne~~~~In her later work she also includes concem for men who are outside of the dominant white, elite, Westem-educated, male purview, although her emphasis still remains with women, Community and Diversity Schüssler Fiorema maintains a "critical cornmitment to the Christian comrnunity and its traditi~m".~In contrast to postbiblical feminists, she insists on working within the Christian tradition because it continues to be influentid on the lives of women throughout the world She is able to find signs of hope within the Bible and Christian tradition that resist the patriarchal overlay of the texts. However, she does not view the Bible as an authontative source in itself. It is only a Rsource in which evidence of women's struggies for liberation cm be found? In order to reconstruct these marginalized stories of women, she draws on the biblical texts as well as extra-canonical materid, Questions and commitments that anse out of contemporary women's liberation movements around the world inform this reconstruction and provide both guidance and the means for the celebration of these re-membered stories. Thus. her critical feminist "~chüsslerFiorenza bases her cal1 for a paradigm shift upon Thomas Kuhn's work in which "a paradigrn represents a coherent research tradition created and sustained by a scientific community". She believes that the feminist paradigm has created and is sustained by its own academic institutions and comrnunities which need to be both strengthened and taken seriously by the patriarchal institutions. However, it is to the women's movement. not the academy. that Schüssler Fiorenza wants to be accountable. See Schüssler Fiorema Bread Not Stone, p. xxi-xxii. "Elisabeth Schiissler Fiorenza In Memor-y of Her: A Feminist Theological Reconstruction of Christian Origins (New York: Crossroad, 1 983), xxii. 45SchilsslerFiorema Bread Not Stone, p. 1 4. hermeneutics begins with the experiences of contemporary and histoncal women stniggling agaiast priarchai Central to this process of biblical interpretation is the ekkiësïa of wolmea4' Schûssler Fiorenza bas an evolving definition of ekklësia of wo/men, which may yet take on ww dimensions. Her original 1982 term, "ekkl&ia of wornen"? was based upon the Greek word for church, which was the common word for the assembIy of fÏ=ee citizens gathering to decide their own spintuai and political affâirs. SchIissler Fiorenui qualifies ekkleia with the phrase "of women" to indicaie that the chiach will never be the complete democratic assembly of the saints until women are fully included." The ekkleSia of women is inclusive of al1 women of the past and present who have acted and continue to act in the "life-giving Sophia-Spirit". It overcomes patriarchal dualisms between Jewish and Christian women. lay and "nun-women", homemakers and career women active and contemplative, Protestant and Roman Catholic, married and single, physical and spintual mothers, heterosexuai and lesbian, the church and the world, the sacred and the sec~lar.~The ekklBiu of women is not an end in itself. but seeks to 16SchlisslerFiorenza. Discipleship of Equals, p. 254- 255. 47 Schiissler Fiorenza Bread Nol Stone. p. xiv. '*~tfirst Schûssler Fiorenza altemated between the terms eWEsia and synagogé. However, after realizing that this obscured the differing relationships of power between Christians and Jews, as well as the history of genocide of the Jewish people, she used only ekkleia. See Schüssler Fiorenza Discipleship of Equals. p. 327, fbt. 16. 49SchüsslerFiorenza Discipleship of Equals, pp.1 96. w~chüsslerFiorenza Bread Not Stone, p. 344,349-50. m0-a "women'sheritage as churchn and to Wonn the patriarchal church into a discipleship of eqdas part of the basileia of Gd5'Patterned after the Jesus movement, the ekkleia of women is committd to the Irikmîïon of dl who are marginalized from society." Schksler Fioraiza's definition of the ekklësiu of women was onpiaally exclusive of men. She believed that women first had to meet alone. without men, in order to "reclaim their spiriniai powers and to exorcise their possession by male idolatry" before muniality with men would be p~ssible.'~Within a year, however. she used the ternis "ekklesiagynaikon", "women-church", and "ekklesiuof women" interchangeably to mean "the movement of self-identified women and women-idensed men.. .as the didogical community of equals in which critical judgement takes place and public freedom becomes tangible"." Men were now included if they were "women-identifed"? This ' Schüssler Fiorenza Discipleship of EquuZs, p. 229-330. S'Schüssler Fiorenia In Memory of Her. p. 14 1.343-46. S3~~hüsslerFiorenza In Mernory of Her. p. 347. " Schüssler Fiorenza Bread Nor Stone. p. xiv. For a conference of Roman Catholic. American women in 1983, Diann Neu translated eWiagynaikh as women- church. which Schüssler Fiorenza then used in Bread Nol Stone, published the following year. See Schüssier Fiorenza But She Said. p- 127. Schlissler Fiorenza has always avoided the singular and essentialist tem "woman-church". See Schüssler Fiorenza, Disci'eship of Equals. p. 2 1 2. "In a 1990 address and an article published in 1994 she omits the qualifier "of women" altogether, speaking only of ekW&ia. See Schiissler Fiore= Discipleship of Equals, p. 290-306;Schüssler Fioremi, "The Bible, the Global Context," p. 79-98. These seern to be the only instances of this, however, as other articles and books written during the same period use the phrase ekkl&ia of women. See "A Democratic Feminist Vision for a Different Society and-Church," published in Spanish in 1991; "The Ethics expmàed definition of eKRIeFia of women invites men to iden@ with womeds struggle for equality, authority and citizenship in the church-6 She wants to keep the focus on women in order to raïse consciousness about their absence hmpartidar ecclesial circles and to allow women a space where a ciiffirent theology can be envisioned and ui one of her most recent writings she uses the terni "ekklësia of wo/menWto indicate the instability of the terms "woman" and "~ornen".~~"Wo/men" denotes the multiple identi ties of women, foreclosing a unitary essence, while still enabling Schrissler Fiorema to use "women" as a political category. It aiso indicates a concem for men of subordinated races. classes, countries and religions. Thus, the ekklësia of wo/men now and Politics of Liberation: Theorizing the EW&a of Womeq" published in Dutch in 1992; Schiissler Fiore- Discipleship of Equals, p. 332-52,353- 372; Schüssler Fiorenza, Jesus. 56SchiisslerFiorenza Discipieship of Equals, p. 293. 57SchiisslerFiorenza Discipleship of EquaLF, p. 328-29. 58~orthe use of the term "ekklësia of wolmen" see Schüssler Fiorenza Jesus. In the Introduction to Searching îhe Scriptures Vol. 1. Schüssler Fiorenza uses the term "woma[e]n" in order to intentionally jar the reader into realizing that the ternis women and woman are culturaI1y constructed and need to be destabilized. See Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, "introduction: Transfonning the Legacy of The Woman's Bible," in Searching the Scripures: Volume 1: A Feminist Introduction, ed. Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza (New York: Crossroad 1993). foomote # 12, p. 22. However. Schüssler Fiorenza is inconsistent with her use of "woma[e]nW.at times within the same sentence, creating more confushg instability of the text than 1 think she intends. See particularly p. 20. Most confusing is her use of the term "everywoman"in the concluding paragraph, p- 2 1. I cannot think of a more essentializing term for women. Schüssler Fiorenza also wants to problematize the term "ferninist". although she continues to use it without alteration because of its political impact thmughout the world and its continued use by some Third World women (p. 16- 18). Myincludes aü people, women and men, who are oppresed? One of the diBdties Schûssler Fiorema encountered with her evolvuig construct of the ekklësia of wo/men was the concept of women's common experience. In her earlier writing, she speaks of "a cornmon experiencewwhich "women as a group sharen while acknowledging the diversity of individual perceptions and interpretations of this " Schüssler Fiorenza Jesus, p. footnote #1, 19 1. By broadeniug the term "wohnen" to now include al1 of the oppressed men and women, one could question whether or not she has retained women as subjects. However, in changing the definition of women to include al1 of the globally oppressed, she has subsumed wornen into a larger, generic category of the oppressed. Just as Donna Haraway has been crïticized for subsuming women into her cyborg and obliterating their subjecthood, Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza could be accused of obliterating the subjecthood of women. Susan Wood makes an interesting observation that Schiissler Fiorenza1stheological method, "begun in an experience of gender oppression, ultimately tmmcends gender". See ("Review of Discipleship of Equals," Modern Theology, 1 1 (April 1995): 28 1-282). See also Donna J. Haraway, "A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s." Feminism/Postmodernism Thinking Gender Series (New York: Routledge, 1990); Manha A. Hewi~"Cyborgs, hgQueens, and Goddesses: Emancipatory-Regressive Paths in Feminist Theory," Method h Theory in the Srudy of Religion 5. no. 2 (1993): 135-154. Schüssler Fiorenza could dispense with the notion of women-church and simply refer to diverse, emancipatory faith communities. Her explicitly feminist critena would still allow cnticd analysis of multiplicative oppressions. including those based on gender. 1 suspect that one of the reasons she retains the ekklësia of wo/men is that she is unwilling to relinquish her earlier statements that women's perspectives give a more accurate account of reality. Thus, women's communities are given normative status not only becaw of their political commitments, but also because of their epistemological privilege as women. For a critique of women-church as a "gynecentric reversal of androcentric ecclesiology" see Rosemary Radford Ruether, "Review of Bread Noi Stone" Jownal of the American Academy of Retigion 54, no 1 (Spring, 1986): 143. For merelaboration upon Schüssler Fiorenza's ontological grounding, see Sheila Greeve Davaney, "Problems with feminist theory: historicity and the search for sure foundations." Embodied Love: SemaIity and Relationship as Feminist Values, ed. by Paula M. Cooey, Sharon A. Farmer, and Mary Ellen Ross (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987: 88. For a response to Davaney and defense of Schiissler Fiorenza's method. see Carol P. Christ "Embodied niinking: Reflections on Feminist Theological Method," Jomai of Feminist Stdies Nt Religion 5, no. 1 (Spring, 1989). experiend Elsewhere, Schüssler Fiorema wmte at the same time that raw, common experience does not exist. It is only the particular and individual eqerience, shapecl by historicd and cdturai conditions, that existsbl The foilowing year Schüssler Fiorenza tries again to reclaim the notion of common experience, suggesting that it is not derived hmbiologicd sex nor essential gender Merences, but hmthe meagainst patrïarchyb' In her later work she eventuaily abandons dtogether this essentialist notion of women's common experience. Speaking "as a woman", she explains, introduces a problematic notion that al1 women share a cornmon, essential nature. She draws upon g1obz.J feminist theories to wam against the construction of a unitary identity of women. This essentialism only perpetuates the lqriarchal politics of otherness." In the acknowledgement of differences, however, Schiissler Fiorenza cautions against reinforcing the patriarchal stahis divisions that are established on the basis of inequality of class, gender, race, ethnicity and age. A celebraiion of difference, she wam, cminadvertently reinforce these divisions. Biological, social and cultural diversities should be recognized within their historical and geographical limitations. Differences *Schlissler Fiorenza In Memory of Her, p. 3. 6'~lisabethSchüssler Fiorenza, "Response to 'hm Study to Proclamation' by Walter J. Burghardt," in A New Look ut Preaching, vol. 7,ed John Burke, Good News Studies (Wilmington, Delaware: Michael Glazier, Inc., l983), 44-45. "~lisabethSchiissler Fiorenza, "Emerging Issues in Feminist Biblical Interpretation," in Christian Fe&ism: Visions of a New Numaniiy, ed. Judith Weidman (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 19841,s 1. "Schlissler Fiorenza, "Transformingthe Legacy of The Womcm's Bible," p. 15. should be "denahnalized"in order to avoid essentializing them in a male-fde dualism or ontologizing them with inherent cplities- This deco~ctionwill prevent a reification of differences by emphasizing their historiai and cultural construction." It will also reveal the histoncal muitiplicity of every person, even within their own groups of identity. Lesbian women, for instance, do not form a monolithic, undifferentiated group." Because of this. she suggests it is problematic for women to form pupson the basis of a shedvictimization or a homogeneous identity of "woman". It is also problematic for women to form noncornpetitive, structureless collectives which discourage self-critique or responsibility for their own roles as oppres~ors.~~When such groups are formed around these common experiences, identities or protectionkt attitudes. they follow the logic of identity and exclude or obliterate differences amongst women. This. she admits, has been the case for women-church, which has remained a "homogeneous white women's rno~ernent".~' To counteract this. she joins with Chandra Talpade Mohanty to cal1 for a ~IiticaI 'Schüssler Fiorena Discipleship of Equals, p. 344-45. 65~chiisslerFiorenza, "Transforming the Legacy of The Woman'k Bible," p. 20-21. '%c hiissler Fiorenza, Discipleshi' of Equals, p. 345-47. " Schüssler Fiorena But She Said, p. 127. Partially in response to the critiques of womanist, mujerista and Asian feminist theologims, Schiïssler Fiorenza has expanded both her definition and naming of the ekklësia of wo/men. Although she acknowledges that women-church gatherings have been primarily white and middleclass, she doesn't acknowledge that her original essentidia definitions of women-church may have conaibuted to its homogeneity. common ground upon which commuaifies, including the ekki* of wo/men, be formed and alliances be made.68She believes that the ekklësïa of wo/men cm be a coalition of diverse women's groups which fom an alIiance of solidarity around the common cornmimient to the vision of G*~'s~~bmiIeia and to the stniggle against the multiplicative structures of patriarchal It is hmwithin the ekklêsia of wohen that biblicai interpretation shouid take place. Schiissler Fiorenza fadts biblical scholars for king accountable to the academy, but not to the community of faithm7'She lifts up the example of liberation theology, which forms its biblical interprebtion prirnarily fkom the experiences of its members instead of European academic scholarship. Base communities study the Bible in orda to gain strength and vision for their struggie to achieve liberation. Schüssler Fiorenza stresses the "Schiissler Fiorenza, "Transformingthe Legacy of The Wman's Bible," p. 19. O qnher most recent writing Schlissler Fiorenza uses the constnict "G*d" to indicate the inadequacy of our language about G*d She had used G-cl in Discipleship of Equals and BU She Said, until Jewish feminists complained that the spelling "Gd" suggested to them a conservative and reactionary theological frame of reference. See Schüssler Fiorenza Jesus. p. 19 1 bt3; Elisabeth Schtissler Fiore- "Feminist Liberation Theology as Cntical Sophialogy," in The Power of Naming: A Concilium Reader in Feminist Liberation Theology, ed. Elisabeth SchüssIer Fiorenza, Conciliurn Series (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1996). 70 Schüssler Fiorenza Discipleship of Equals, p. 33 1,347-52. Even in Schüssler Fiorenza's earlier work, she is sensitive to the diversity of women and the problem of speaking for al1 women. She refers to the double triple oppression of poor women and women of colour. See Schiissler Fiore- Brecrd Noî Stone, p. 5,7. In her later work she notes that oppression is not merely multiplied (doubled or tripled), but is multiplicative (one oppression multiplied by another, multiplied by another). See Schüssler Fiorenza But She Said, p. 1 15. 7'~chiisslerFiorem Bread Not Stone, p. 30-33. importance of this pinrpose for biblical hermeneutics. As the Bible is a document of bibIica.1 communities, it must be interpreted -fo themen Authority ond ReveZation The authority of the eWdësia of wo/men rests upon Gfd's presence revded in the struggles against dehumanization and injustice, with particular empbans upon women's überation? Auihority is not located in the experïences of &l-women, but is Limiteci to those who were part of the Jesus movement, as well as ail others throughout history who have worked for justice." The goal of SchSssler Fiorenza's critical feminist hermeneutics is to make present as histoncal actors those whom the biblicd texts have marpinaiized or excl~ded.~~On this basis, "the persondly and politically reflected experience of oppression and liberation must become the criterion of appropriateness for biblicd interpretations and evaluation of bi blical authority claims"." These reflections are not meant to be individualistic. but to be situated within a community patterned after the Jesus movement. Even though Schüssler Fiorenza resists positing Jesus of Nazareth as the authoritative nom, as shall be discussed later, the Jesus movement is central for her. The Jesus traditions do not attribute misogynist statements to "Schüssler Fiorenza, Bread Not Borie, p. 143. "Schüssler Fiorenza Jesus, p. 28; Schüssler Fiorenza, "Feminist Liberation Theology as Cntical Sophialogy," p. xxx, xxxiv. 74 Schilssler Fiorenza Bread Not Stone, p. xvi. "Schüssler Fioren= But She Said, p. 96. 76 Schüssler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, p. 32. Jesus, which is remsdrable, she notes, since the gospels weze written after the patrkuchakation of Christianity was weii under way. hstead, these Jesus traditions reflect the ernancipatory attitude of Jesus towards women, as well as his recognition of female disciples and leaders*" They also reflect the emancipatory commitment of the Jesus movement The eady church therefore provides gümpses of the discipleship of equais. It is this communal experience of G*d's basileia to which Schiissier Fiorenza gives authority. She therefore reverses the second century shift fiom charisrnatic and communal authority to institutional patnarchal leadershipn Although Schiissler Fiorenza watlts to honour the authority and diversity of religious communities in their interpretations of scripture, she is careful rrot to lapse into absolute relativism. Authority is given to those Uiterpretations which meet certain criteria which she believes are universdly applicable for al1 communities. She expands upon David Tracy's criteria to cd1 for an adequacy to the historical-literary methods of interpretation and appropriateness to the struggle of the oppressed for bberation? To be adequate, histoncal research must submit to public testing in tbree areas: it must use relevant sources and current research; it must reach plausible conclusions that are "fitthg" Schüssler Fiorena Discipleship of Equals, p. 174-79. Schüssler Fiorenza is carefùl to describe the Jesus movement as one amongst other Jewish renewal movements, so as not to place it in opposition to Judaism. *Sec Schüssler Fiorenza In Memory of Her, p. 286-7. 79 Schüssler Fiorenza Bread Nor Stone, p. 49. David Tracy suggests that an approach must be adequate to common human experience and appropriate to Christian tradition, especially the Christian texts. See David Tracy, BIessed Rage for Ordec The Nav Pluralism in Theology (Minneapolis: The WinstodSeabury Press, 1975),70-73. to its rhetorical con- and it must be logically rigomus, consistent and coherent? To be appropriate, it must evaluate critidy the patriarchai formaton of the biblical texts, and the ideological distortions of bibiical interpretatiion which have contributed to the oppression of the marginallleb8' These two criteria of adequacy and appropriateness coincide wîth her double ethics of historical resning and of accountability. An ethics of historicai reading uses historical-critical tools to disceni and prioritue the aoriginal meaningsF of a text over later editions. This allows the text to retain its critical distance hmthe reader and not be subsurned into the reader's world. The text and the reader enter into a relationship of mutual critique." h ethics of accountability stresses the responsibility of the reader for the particulas interpretive mode1 chosen, and for the ethical consequences of the biblical texts and their interpretation." Schiissler Fiorenza later added to these criteria an ethics of solidarity. The diverse social locations of feminist theology wi1I produce diverse, sometimes opposing, interpretations that will require adjudication. The authoritative basis for this judgement would depend upon the above criteria within "responsible debate and practical ?3chiissler Fiorenza, Bread Not Stone. p. 104; Elisabeth SchTissler Fiorena "Rhetoncal Situation and Histoncal Reconstruction in I Corinthians," New Tesfamenf Sfudies 33, no. 3 (1987): 393. "~chüsslerFiorena Bread Not Stone, p. 58- 67. =EIisabeth Schûssler Fiorenza, "The Ethics of Biblical Interpretation: Decentering Biblical Scholarship," Journal of Biblical Literature 107, no. 1 (March 1988): 14-15. '%chiissler Fiorenza, "Ethics," p. 14- 15. deh'berationn? The ekklësia of dmenmust therefore be open to continual selfaitique and Wormation as an act of solidarity. MethodoIogies mast always be open to more adequate ways to address multiplicative oppressions and visions of G*d's barileiu. In order to avoid a "paraiyzhg pluralism", an ethics of solidarity operates with "radical democracy". Attention is given to the dencing and welcoming of different voices and to strategies for analyzing and critiquing dmdmes of d~mination.~So as not to perpenüite the modem drive towards unity, Schiissler Fiorenza stresses that the tmth claims emerging fiom these debates be relative, not absolute, because they are historically and culturally conditioned. However, in order to avoid relativistic nihilism, emancipatory discourses are privileged over patriarchal ones? The strategies and theories of feminists who speak fiom the experience of multiplicative oppressions must also be privileged in this debate." In this respect, she supports the hermeneutical priviiege of the oppressed." Because the Bible and Christian tradition have contributed to the abitse and silencing of women, Schüssler Fioreoza cannot trust or accept either simply as divine revelation." She understands both to be deeply imbued with the patriarchal attitudes of the authors and editors. With the support of historical criticism, she insists that biblicai "Schüssler Fiorenza Discipleship of Equuis, p. 349. a5SchiisslerFiorenza Discipleship of Equais, p. 348-52. '?Sch~isslerFiorenza But She Said, p. 134-5. ''Schlissler Fiorenza But She Suid, p. 132. 8aSchlisslerFiorenza Bread Nor Stone, p. 50. "Schüssler Fiorema Bread Not Stone, p. x. -33- texts are not verbally iaspkd revelation but are historical constructions within religious communities. However, she beliwes that the Bible and exffa-canonicd writings can be used as resources which can provide ches to the erased experiences of womea Revelation and tnith can be fotmd in bibiical texts which transcend their paüiarchal fhmeworks and reveal the historical agency of womed' "The litmus test for hvoking Scripture as the Word of God must be whether or not biblical texts and traditions seek to end relations of domination and exploitationn? Schüssler Fiorenza compares the views of revelation taken by differing theological approaches throughout the last few decades. In contrast to the doctrinai, historical, or hermeneutical-contexhial paradigms, she prefers the pastoral-theological paradigm. in her Iater wrïting she names this'the rhetoncal-emancipatory pafadigm? Schiissler Fiorenza suggests that the docainal paradigm declares revelatory. according to the regulafidei, those texts which support particular ecclesial doctrines. The historical paradigm declares the earliest historically verifiable traditions to be true and therefore revelatory. Schüssler Fiorenza's definition of the hermeneuticai-contextual paradigrn is less clear. as she attempts to group literary theory together with various liberation WSchüsslerFiorenza In Memory of Her, p. xv. "This does not mean that a revelatory essence be abstracted from its accidental. socio- politicai formations. Rather, women's struggles against oppression can oniy be understood within their patrïarchal context. See Schüssler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, p. 30. "Schiissler Fiore- Bmd Not Stone, p. xiii. 93SchüsslerFiorenza, Bui She Said, p. 10 1. theologies. However, she suggests that these 1- approaches all base their judgements upon the fixed canon and the nom of a canonid principle or of Jesus Christ. She rejects the christological nom because the historid Jesus is inaccessi'ble, and she resists positing a male nom for women? Alternatively, the pastoral-theological paradigm declares revelatory those te- which are deemed by emancipatory Christian communities to contrhte to our salvatiod5 Schlissler Fiorenza understands dvation in the biblical sense as pertaining to the welfare of the whole person, and not simply to their soul. Correspondingly, sin is not lunited to the personal, but includes the structural sins of domination." As her primary concem is the liberation of the oppresed, she recommends that soteriological discussion of this nature take priority over christoiogical concerns?' Schüssler Fiorexna notes that this concept of revelation, dependent upon the " Schüssler Fiorenza Bread Not Stone, p. 58-6 1. It is di fficult to follow her logic on these two points. Fiathe historical Jesus is no more inaccessible than are the women of the Jesus movement. Conversely, Jesus is just as accessible as the women through rhetoncai analysis and reconstruction. Indeed she does describe aspects of Jesus' emancipatory life and minisûy in order to support her claims for the emancipatory cornrnitments of the Jesus movement. Secondly, she suggests that feminists who dismiss the importance of Jesus' masculinity ignore and therefore reify the kyriarchal sedgender system. See Schüssler Fiorenza, Jesus, p. 75. However, her elevation of Jesus' gender as a reason for his dismissal is itself a fixation and therefore a reification of the sexlgender system. 95SchüsslerFiorenza Bread Nof Stone. p. 39- 40.4849. %~chiisslerFiorenza. "Response to Burghardt," p. 5 1-52. mSchüssIer Fiorenza, Jesus, p. 89. This division of soteriology fiom Chnstology is problematic. If she derives her soteriology fiom the Jesus movement, she cannot avoid Christological discussion. The very separation of Christological fiom soteriological discussion may have contributed to the abstract Chnstological debates which she rejects. salvitic devance of texts to an ecclesial commimity, is more familiar for Roman Catholics than for Protestants? She refers to Vatican Es document on divine revelation in wtiich revealed thand inerrancy is limited "to matkm pertaining to the salvation of the Christian and human communityn. Scripture mntains revelation but not al1 of Scriptme &- revelation? Accordingly, Schiissler Fiorenza's concept of biblical revelation posits the Bible as a prototype or formative root mode1 of how religious communities respond to their historical situations. Understanding the Bible as a prototype resists its reduction to universal principles or certain inspired passages. Rather, it honours the plurifonnity of biblical texts and encourages their critical tramforxnati~n.'~"It does not ignore or silence the more oppressive passages, nor does it read the more Liberative passages in an anti- 98 Schiissler Fiorenza In Memory of Her, p. 34. *Schiissler Fiorema, "Response to Burghardt," p. 5 1-52; Schilsçler Fiorenza Breod Not Stone, p. 40. This position may be closer to traditional Protestant beliefs than Schüssler Fiorenza realizes, particularly regarding the distinction between the revealed Word of God and the biblical texts. Foremost Protestant theologians in the earlier part of this century, such as Paul Tillich, Emil Bmerand Karl Barth, ail agree that the Word of God is not to be equated with Scripture but with Jesus Christ. The Word of God is contained in and revealed through Scripture, but is not Scripture itself. While Schüssler Fiorenza would differ on her view of the Word of God and its normative equation with Jesus the Christ, her warning that the biblical text not be viewed revelatory in itself would be similar to these Protestant theologians. See Paul Tillich, Systemutic Theology: Rem and Revelation; Being and God, Vol. 1 (London: SCM Press Ltd., 195 1), 34-36, 122-26, 157-59; Emil Bnmner, The Christian Doctrine of God, Vol. 1, trans. Olive Wyon (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1949), 22-34. 'MSch~slerFiorema, Bread Not Stone, p. xvi-xvii. Jewish mannedo' She contrasts this with the traditional understanding of the Bible as an archetype of unchanging pattan and ideal f~rm.'~A normative archetype cmody be received or rejected, but not criticaily waluaîed. It takes histoncally Luniteci experiences and posits them as imiversals authoritative for all cultures and times.'03 Understanding the Bible as a fopxmtive prototype, according to Schlissler Fiorenza, is also in accord with the early Church. The early Christian cofl~llunities believed that revelation "happened decisively in Jesus ofNazarethn and continues to happen through the Holy Spirit. The New Testament writings were not intended to be universal. revelatory noms. Rather, they were intended to interpret this dialectical understanding of past and present revelation according to the ne& and particularities of each community.'" Revelation, therefore, should not be located in the androcentric tex& but in the Jesus movement and the subsequent Christian communities. Li Schüssler Fiorenza's later writing, she suggests that "whitemale"biblical hermeneutics and white ferninia hermeneutics are preoccupied with the normativity and 'OISchüssler Fiorenza. "Transforming the Legacy of The Woman's Bible," p. 8. Kwok cautions against the use of the Bible as a prototype when linle mention is made in the biblical texts of non-Jewish, pwr slave women. See Kwok hi-lm, Discovering ~he Bible in rhe Non-Biblicai Worfd.The Bible and Liberation Series (Maryknoll: Orbis Books. 1993,404 1. 103SchüsslerFiorenza Bread Not Stone, p. 10. lWSchiisslerFiorema, Bread Not Stone, p. 35. authority of scripture because they opnate out of the Eurocentrïc logic of identity.IMThis unrelenthg urge towards imitary thinhg atternpts to elimioate dl uncertahty and unpredictability, thereby subsuming otherness into itself.'06 Schüssler Fiorenza suggests that revelation should not be derived out of a logic of identity but out of a "logic of democracy". A logic of identity understands truth to be a hidden, metaphysical given which mut be uncovered. A logic of democracy, on the other hami, understands tmth to be a moment in the process of global emancipatory and democratic struggles. It is constituted through communicative practices, not as a hidden essence to be discovered but as a point of rdization to be determined.'" Revelation is thus located within the experiences of religious communities, as they define their own canons of authority. Schiissler Fiore- is carefd not to endow the paaiarchal church wi th revelatory status, however, by clarifying that revelation is found '05SchüsslerFiorenui refers to Afncan-American critiques of white anxiety over biblical authority. Afncan-Amencan women avoided their own subsumption into the logic of identity by claiming the authority of their personal experiences of God's liberation within the context of slavery. Only as a secondary source of authority wouid biblical stories be invoked to illuminate their experiences. See Schüssler Fiorena But She Soid. p. 152-54. While Schüssler Fiorenza' s assessrnent of a white preoccuparion with biblicd authority may be mie in certain circles. 1 have found biblical authority to be of utmost importance for many Korean, Chinese, First Nations and Afncan Canadian Protestant churches. The preoccupation with biblical authority may well be more a difference between Protestant and Roman Catholic traditions. than cultural. From a Protestant perspective, it is dificult to study or preach fiom biblical tem without addressing their authority. Interestingly enough, in Schüssler Fiorenza's latest work, she still continues not only to address issues of biblicai authority, but also to recommend a revised defuition of biblical and canonical authonty. Obviously the authority of scnpture is stiil of concem to her. 'MSchüsslerFiorenza, Buî She Said, p. 13 8-39. '"~chilsslerFiore- But She &id, p. 150. in the stniggles of all women against ptrîar~hal~ppressioa'~ nius, it is specifidy the ekklësia of wo/men as a religious comunity, that is revelatory. Revelation is fomd elsewfiere only to the extent that the liberation of all the oppressed, includmg women, is =ught This understanding of dationresists the distorted use of scriptme for oppressive means. Ifrevelation is located in scripture, debate is focused upon the normativity and authority of the biblid texts. Ifrevelation is located in the justice- seeking community, debate is focused upon their struggles against oppression. The latter option would prevent opposing sides both claiming scriptural authorif~regarding women's full ecclesial participation, slavery, economic equity and the rights of lesbian and gay pe~ple.'~ Schiissler Fiorenza's concept of revelation necessitates a critical examination not only of the biblical texts, but also of their canonical formation. The canon was chosen by the winners of the debates over orthodoxy and heresy. Centrai to these debates was the question of women's leadership. Those who emerged the winners disputed the validity of women's leadership and equated it with heresy. These beliefs were reflected in the choice of books both rejected, such as The Acts of Paul and Thecla, and included in the canon.' Io "By claiming to be the only 'orthodox' word of God, the canon scripturalized traditions of '08SchüsslerFiorenza Bread Not Stone, p. xv. '09~chcisslerFiorema, But She Sciid, p. 137-38. "OSchÜssler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, p. 53-56. -39- subordination and dominationn.*'' Schlissler Fiorema addresses these problemaîic aspects of the canon by redefinùig and expanding the notion of canon. She does not want to dispense with the traditional canon, for even withiia these patnarchal, canonid books evidence can be found of earlier egalitarian traditions welcoming women's leadership."2 Rather than understandhg canon as a limiteci set of revelatory texts that cast a negative judgement on other ear1y Christian writings, Schiissler Fiorenza suggests that canon be viewed as an inclusive collection of diverse models of Christian community and life."3 This wodd preclude the search for a revelatory canon within the canon, whether that be the historical Jesus, the earliest apostolic witness, or a liberating theological principle. Such a search operates out of a logic of identity in its attempts to find an authoritative essence underlying scnpture. The establishment of a canon within the canon reduces the historicai particularities and pluralities of the biblical texts and images into one unitary nom.' " By understanding the canon as an inclusive collection of texts, she wants to protect the diversity of these texts and break open the boundaries of the traditional canon. She expands the functional definition of canon beyond tex& to include the liberation "'Schüssler Fiore- "Transforming the Legacy of The Woman's Bible," p. 9. ' '*SchÜssler Fiorenza In Memory of Her, p. 53-56. "'Schbsler Fiorenza Bread Not Srone, p. 36. "4Schüssler Fiorenza, Buf She Said, p. 138-43. -40- mesof aii women? She also intentionally transcends the boundarïes of the traditional bïbiical canon to include extra-canonical writings and commentaries hm Jewish and pst-Christian perspectives. This transgression of canonid boundaries protests the heretical branding and dismissal of women that occurred through the formation of the canon.''6 Schiissler Fiorenza's intention is not to produce an aiternate, ferninia canon. She wants to deconstnict, not reconstmct, the canon in order to destabilize canonical authority and its continuing historïcal impact upon women. Relationships of people with their sacred scriptures is her central concem, rather than the authority and normativity of a fixed canon. Thus, she does not support the Protestant notion of a revealed canon.L" In this deconstruction. however, she proposes an alternate and more fluid dennition of canon. She suggests that the canon be perceived as the "open, cosmic house of divine Wisdom". Its authority is based upon the original meaning of the Latin word for authority. augere/auctoritas: to numire creativity and foster growth. In this respect, Schüssler Fiorenza does not eschew biblical or canonical authority, but redefines it as fostenng creativity, strength and fkedom. ' " ' "Sch~slerFiorenza Bread Not Stone, p. 92. "bSchüssler Fiorenza, "Transforming the Legacy" of The Womon's Bible." p. 9. "'~erpreference for the word "scripture" over "Bible" in the title of a book indicates her dismisd of the "Protestant notion of a revealed text or a canon of books that serve as the primary locus of authoritative teaching". See Schûssler Fiorenza, "Transforming the Legacy of The Woman3 Bible," p. 8-9. "'EElisabeth Schiissler Fiorenza, "htroduction: Transgressing Canonical Boundaries," in Searching the Scripwes: Volume II: A Feminist Cornmentary, ed. Rhetorical Reading Strategrès In order for Schüssler Fiorennt to ascertain both the liberative and patriarchal aspects of the biblicd texts, she adyzes their socio-political contexts with the help of historical-critical methods, literary criticism, liberation theologies and feminist critical - - theory. She is particularly interested in traces of the silenced or marginaùzed voices, and draws upon rhetoricd criticism to reconstruct their histories. Her intent is not to search for the "true7pristine, orthodox begïnnhgs" which were later cormpted by the established church. The Jesus movement not only struggled against patriarchal views, but was also steeped in them. Nor is she aîtempting to consûuct a more accurate account of historicaf reality. Rather, she seeks to reconstmct a different account of history fiom the perspective of the marginali~ed."~Within this reconstruction, she can discover glirnpses in the early church of the egalitarian vision in the midst of struggles against patriarchal d~mination."~ Her goal is not only the liberation of women but also "the emancipation of biblical religion fiom patriarchal mctures and ideologies".'" Schüssler Fiorerua proposes four reading strategies for emancipatory biblicai Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza (New York: Crossroad 1994), 1 1. 119 Schüssler Fiorenza has often been criticized for seeking a tmer account of a purely egalitaiian Jesus movement. Indeed, her earlier work could be interpreted as such. even though she States otherwise. It is not until her later work, particularly with Jesus, that she refines her rhetorical method and clearly refbtes these critiques. She relies upon a poststruchual understanding of language not as a representation of reaiity, but as a sociocultural linguistic system comtructed through discourse. See Schüssler Fiorena Jesus. p. 94-96, 107-09, 161-62. 12'SchüsslerFiorena Bread Not Stone, p. 87. Uiterpretation. Biblical texts should be critically anal@ through a hermeneutics of suspicion, proclamation, remembrame and creative actualizatiodn In her later refinement of this approach, she notes that these strategies should not be undertaken lïnearly or progressively hmone step to the next Rather, each movement inforxns the others in a "dance of bibtical interpnztation".lf) A hermeneutics of suspicion entails an ideologicai critique of patnarchal elements in both contemporary interpretatiom and the texts themselves. It reads the biblical texts against their ideological grain and positions them within the historiai, early Christian debate.'24This strategy is based upon four presuppositions: 1) Texts and historical sources must be read as androcentric te-; 2) The glorification, denigration and rnarginalization of women must be read as patnarchal social construction or projection; 3) Formal patriarchal laws are generally more restrictive than the acîuai interaction of men and women; 4) Women's actual social-religious status must be determined by their economic autonomy and social roles rather than by ideologicai or prescriptive statements.'3 Schüssler Fiorenza compares this strategy to the work of a detective or sleuth. '" A hemeneutics of evaluation and proclamation assesses the Bible's theologid '"~lsewhere, Schüssler Fiorenza has simplified this process into two elements: suspicion or critical evaluation and te-vision or reconstruction. She suggests that a hermeneutics of suspicion searches texts for evidence of patriarchal oppression while a hermeneutics of re-vision searches for liberative values and visions, See Schiissler Fiorenza, "Transforrningthe Legacy of The Woman's Bible," p. 1 1. 'USchüssIerFiorenza But She Said, p. 52-53. '24SchiisslerFiorenza But She Said* p. 2 14- 2 15. lzSchiissler Fiorenza In Memory of Her, p. 108- 109. 126SchüsslerFiorena But She Said, p. 54. and ethical significance for the contemporaty commimity of fisith. Texts deemed m~hdby the ekklësia of wo/men shddbe eiiminated fiom worship and Christian in~luded.'~Masculine language shodd be perceiveci as generic, unless specifically stated otherwise. This strategy is likened to a health inspecter checking food and medicine for hmfbi ingredient~.'~~The quote at the begimung of this chapter would belong to this strategy. Christian movement. Schiissler Fiorenza refers to Johann Metz's concept of a dmgerous or subversive memory that reclaims the visions and derings of the dead.'" This strategy involves imagination, but Schiissler Fiore- is quick to distinguish this imaginative histoncai reconstruction. based upon histoncal-critical evidence, hmfiction.'" An "'Schüssler Fiorenza Bread Noî Stone, p. 18- 1 9. "'Schüssler Fiorenza But She Said, p. 54. '29SchüsslerFiorenza, Bread Nor Stone, p. 19-20. '30S~hiisslerFiorema, Bread Noî Stone, p. footnote #39, 171. Schüssler Fiorenza seems most unconvincing to many readers on this point. They suggest that she needs more plausible suppon to distinguish certain aspects of her work fiom fiction. See Rosemary Radford Ruether, "Review of Bread Nd Stone. "p. 142; Frank Witt Hughes. "Feminism and Early Christian History," Anglican TheoIogicuI Review 69. no. 3 (July 19 87): 287-99; Ross S. Kraemer, "Review of In Memory of Her," Religious Siudies Review 1 1. no. 1 (January 1985): 6-9; Ross S. Kraemer, "Review of In Memoty of Her," Jo~rnalofBiblicaZ Literafure 104, no. 4 (December 1985): 722-25; M. H. Micks, "Revîew of In Memory of Her," Christiani~and Crisis 43 (October 17 1983): 388-89; Leopold Sabourin, "Review of In Memory of Her," Religiouî Studies 4, no. 2 (May 1984): 102-04; Beverly R Gaventa, "Review of ln Memory of flr," Lexington Theological a new, and more plausible, de~ign.'~' Lastiy, a hermeneutics of diveachialization, Mer referred to as a hermeneutics of liberative vision and imagination, dows women to celebrate this reconsûucted history through artistic recreation and liturgy. This celebration makes present the dering and victories of biblical forernothers, and actualizes their emancipatory vision^.'^' The hermeneutics of suspicion and of remembrame both depend heavily upon the rhetorical method. Although Schiîssler Fiorenza uses the rhetorid method in her earlier writing, she has given greater emphasis and refïnement to it in halater work.'" She distinguishes the popular use of rhetoric as "mere talk" fiom her use of the ancient prafùce of rhetoric as a "comrnunicstive practice that involves interests, values. and Quarterly 20 (Apd 1985): 58-60; Janice Capel Anderson, "Review of In Memory of Her," Critieol Review of Books in Religion (1991 ); Leonard L. Thompson., "Review of Revelation: Vision of a Just Wodd,," Catholic BiMical Quarterly 55 (Juiy 1993): 576-78; Esther D. Reed. "Review of Jesu: Miriam's ChiM Sophia's Prophet," Ex-pository Times 106 (September 1995): 380-8 1. 131SchüsslerFiorenza, But She Said, p. 54; Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, "The 'Quilting7of Women's History: Phoebe of Cenchreae" in Embodied Love: Sensualiry and Rel~tiomhipas Feminist Values, ed. Paula M. Cooey, Sharon A. Farrner, and Mary Ellen Ross (San Francisco: Harper & Row. 1987). 132~chüsslerFiore- Bread Nor Stone, p. 20-22; Schüssler Fiore- But She Said, p. 54-55. '"Randy L. Maddox suggests that Schüssler Fiorenzats earlier work still reflects some modern disdain for rhetorical strategies. It is not until But She Suid that the rhetoncal method becomes central to Schiissler Fioreclza's work. See Randy Maddox, "Review of But She Said," Christian Scholm's Review 24, no. 3 (March 1995): 323-25. viSiomn .'34 Rhetorical niticism asks how meaning is constmcted, whose interests are serve& wbt values, visions, duties and roles are advocated, which communities and socio-political practices are considered authoritative, etc. In short, rhetoncal criticism is concemed with issues of power. As Schiissler Fiorenza appiies rhetoncal cxiticism to texts, she seeks to determine how the text worked in its complex historicd, culnaal, socid, and religious contexts. This use of rhetorical crïticism purports that the context is as important as the te= that our social location will determine how we view the world and interpret biblical texts, and that historical sources can only reveal perspectival discourses and not historical reality. Thus. a text will have multiple meanhgs, according to the interpreters' varying fhmeworks. With this understanding, the rhetoricd method is les interested in determinhg a text's meaning as it is in detennining how the text operates within socio- historical contexts. Rhetoncal criticism is particularly helpful in detemiining the ideological constructs of the text which include or silence others. 13' Questions fiom ferninists. liberation theologians, third world theologians, and others who have been marginalized in biblical hermeneutics are therefore central to this analy~is."~ Schüssler Fiorenza delineates four stages in her use of the rhetorical method. Firsf she identifies the rhetoncal interests and models of contemporary interpretation. 'Y~chüsslerFiorenza. But She Said, p. 46. '35Schüs~1erFiorenza, "Biblical Interpretation," p. 1 1. The increasing use of critical theory, reader response criticisrn, and poststructurai analysis, al1 of which have sirnilar çocio-political concems. underlies the contemporary revival of ancient rhetoric. '"Schiissler Fiorenza, "Biblical Interpretation," p. I 1. Secondy, she delineates the &etoncal arrangement and interests of the author of the text. Thirdly, she establishes the rhetorical, socio-political situation of the text My,she seeks to reconstniic: the histoncd situation of the author and audience.'" Throughout this rhetorical analysis Schkler Fiorenza employs feminist standpoint epistemologies. Because women are both participants of and outsiders to the patrïarchal cuiture, their worldview mers nom the dominant worldview. This renders an episternologicaliy priviieged standpoint of women, as they must understand the patriarchal culture in order to Iive in ït, and at the sarne theunderstand their own rnarghaiized space. Thus, they are able to give a "mer, more adequate account of a 'real' world and human history". Although Schüssler Fiorenza wants to avoid an essentialking of wome~she does not accept postmodem critique of feminist standpoint theory. Women must still be politicai subjects and must resist complete relativization of their experiences. Thus. Schiissler Fiorenza stresses that standpoint theory is informed by global feminist theones and diverse experiences of women within a partisan cornmitment to socio-political emancipation. Standpoint theory will help first to deconstnict the politics of othemess within the biblical texts and then to reconstmct the texts in order to constmct a different socio-historical reality and empower women. "' 137~eranalysis of 1 Corinthians is an exarnple of this rhetorical analysis. See Schüssler Fiorema. "Rhetorical." p. 386403. '38Sch~slerFiorema, "Text and Reality," p. 26. '"Schlissler Fiorenza, "Text and Redity," pp. 19-34; Schüssler Fiorenza, "Politics of Otherness." WecoIlSiStetldy eschewiag a modem assumption of uiiversaUy valid conclusions, SchüssIer Fiorenni is unwilling to relia-h universal nom. Her aiteria of adequacy and accountability, her ethics of solidarity, and her Iibtive principle of textual adjudication fomi the basis of her critique of other bibiical interpretationdm These are normative for her own work and provide standards of judgement for di others. Schüssler Fiorema does stress the importance of multiple, often competing readings arising fiom diverse social locations in order to best respect the diversity of the biblical texts and diversity of the interpreters. However, she has long pdedcritics who point to both her avowed opemess and her subsequent critique and disrnid of competing interpretations. 14' 1 suggest that it is the method of bibiical interpretation with 'MSchiissierFiorenza accuses Rosemary Mord Ruether of submitting to a logic of identity with her prophetic biblical principle. Schüssler Fiorenui reasons that this principle universalizes particular biblical experiences, and collapses the diversity of biblical texts under one biblical principle. However, Schlissler Fiorenza derives her own principle of liberation fiom the biblical experiences of the discipleship of equals in the Jesus movement, In this sense, both Schiissler Fiore- and Ruether submit biblical texts to the judgement of biblically denved noms of justice. For a debate on this point between Schüssler Fiorenza and Ruether, see "Review Symposium," Horizons, 11, 1 (Spring 1984): 146- 150. 154- 157. I4'~sexamples, see Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite, "In Memory of Her: A Symposium on an Important Book." Anima 10, no. 2 (Sp~g1984): 102-05; Kristine A. Culp, "Review of But She Said," Theology Todw 50 (January 1994): 6 IWO+; Marie Anne Mayeski, "Review of Jesus: Miriam 's Chi24 Sophia !s Prophet," Theological Studies 57 (March 1996): 167-69. Another related critique is that Schüssler Fiorenza dismisses most of her critics with the accusation that they have misread her work. If such a large number of intelligent readers are indeed guilty of misreading, then her work must surely lend itself to this confusion. I believe that this conhion results hmher refïnement and subtle shih between her earlier and later work Unfortunately, she adds to this confusion by insisting that she has not change& but is simply elaborating upon her eatlier work. See Schilssler Fiore- "Changing the Paradigms," pp. 796-800. its accompanying criteria which she pogts as univdyvaüd. She welcomes diverse interpreîaîions that operate within this same rnethod, and resists univemaiking any one particuiar interpretatioa In this maRIler she attempts to respect the diversity of wmunities with their own diverse interp&ons while retaining universal cnteria and avoiding postmodemism's tendency towards absolute relativity. Conclusion Schlissler Fiorenza has consistentiy worked fiom a liberation perspective. Through personal experiences and her involvernent with Roman Catholic women's organizations, she has been paiddly aware of the church's marginaluation and silencing of women. Early in her work she became aware of the need for a paradigm shift in theological method that would address this problem. She came to see that the modem and liberal paradigrns, which were originally developed to address the hegemony of church authority, have unwittingly perpetuated the hegemony of white, male Eurocentric thought In her critique of modem and liberal approaches, however, she hesitates to abandon this paradigm altogether. Rather, she uses modem histoncal-critical methods critically, avoiding their claims of impartiality and universalism, while guarding against their tendencies towards unitary thought, historical and textual positivism, individualism, essentidism. and the collapse of the other into the logic of identity. The rhetorical method has proven vital in Schiissler Fiorenza's attempts to avoid and critique the problems of modernity and liberalism. Her ongoing refinement of the ancient practice of rhetonc within her own work has allowed her to focus upon the socio- political contexts and communities of the biblical texts whüe reconstructing the voices . . that have been marginalized within these texts. As part of this rhetorical method, she bas developed reading strategies that focus on a hermeneutics of suspicion, prochation, .. remembrance and creative actmkaûon. Schiissler Fiorema intends these reading sûategies to be conducted not by individuais, but withio faith communities. In order to raise up the voices of the marginaiized, Schiissler Fiorenza focuses upon the ekklësia of wo/men, ratfier than institutional churches. Her goal is to establish a new emancipatory paradigm for biblical interpretation that will seek the liberation of al1 oppressed peoples, with particular concern for women. For this feason. she privileges the interpretations of faith communities of oppressed peoples stnigghg for liberation and political solidarity across the world, and considers these part of the ekklësia of wo/men. Schüssler Fiorenza notes that the diversity of these communities and their members is essential if the Bible is mily to become Scripture again for the comrnunity of faith. Although Schiissler Fiorenza addresses her writing in part to the academy. it is to the ekklësia of wo/men, rather than the academy, that SchSsler Fiorenza chooses to be primarily accountable, and to whom she grants authority. In the interaction of these diverse communities with the biblical texts diverse meanings ate constnicted and evaluated according to a triple ethics of historical reading, accountability and solidarity. Those texts and readings which resist patnarchal or kyriarchal structures of domination are deemed revelatory according to her pragrnatic, ethical cnteria. However, she also insists that revelation is Iocated not in the text itself, but in its interaction with the comrxnity in the mi& of ex~mucipatorystruggles. This concept of revelation relates to her understanding of the Bible as a prototype or formative mot mode1 for communities of faith. Such an understanding resists the reduction of the biblical texts to miversai principles and honours its diversity and multiple rneanings for different commimities. It also dlows critical evaluation and reconstruction of the bibtical texts and the canon, while focusing authoity not on the Bible. but on the interpreting commutlity. In the following chapter we will see both similarities and diffefences between Schiissler Fiorenza and Fulkerson. They have similar critiques of modemity and liberalism, and both draw upon poststructural theory to varying extents in order to respect the diversity of the biblical texts and faith communities. They also propose pmgmatic, 1i berative criteria that rnove bey ond the apolitical impasse of postmodemism. Thei. methods differ according to their dif5erent purposes. Fulkerson is interesteci in the women whom Schthsler Fiorenza dismisses. To honour their voices and biblical interpretation, Fuikeaon proposes a different approach. Chapter 2 Poststructurrl: Mary McClintock Fuikenon "Those whose eXpenence differs hmthe mode1 of 'women's exmence' are mt accounted for, or consti~ea lobotomized Casualty of patriarciiy."' Mary McClintock Fulkerson is keenly aware of various groups of women whom feminist theologies either ignore or consider lobotomized. She mentions that her mother. a white. affluent housewife in a mainiine churchwoman's organization belongs to one of these ignored groups.' Fuikerson is troubled by the discountkg of particula.wornen's experiences that do not match feminist descriptions of %omenls experiences". For this reasoa she has ïntentionally studied some of these groups, such as Presbyterian housewives. Appalachian Pentecostal women. and women of Jehovah's Witness. In these studies. Fulkerson maintains a feminist, liberationist cornmitment to the andysis of and resistance to gender oppression. She tries not to impose feminist understandings of resistance that are foreign to these groups. however, but to honour their own particular understandings of resistance to pnder oppression. Rather than appealing to expenence as the basis of feminist theology. which inevitably excludes non-feminist wornen's groups. she tries to explain expenence. Fullcerson acknowiedges that her persona1 experiences of privilege as white. upper-middle class and heterosexual have limited her awareness of oppression on the t Mary McClintock Fulkerson, Changing the Subject: Wonzen5 Discourses and Feminist Theology (Mimeapdis: Fortress Press, 1 994)' 1 14. 'Fulkerson Changing heSubject, p. 3. basis of race: class or sexdpreference. Withlli her chdwoman-church and academic communities, Fulkerson is primarily aware of the construction of dependency based upon gender? Therefore, her anention in Changing the Subjecf is focused upon issues of gender? although she does give considerable attention to class analysis. Elsewhere she has examined the issue of sexuality. including homosexuality, within Rotestant churches? Fulkerson has fomd that poststnicttd analysis best helps her attend not only to the ciifferences amongst women, but also to the production of these ciifferences. She disputes any notion of prefomed prelinguistic experiences by drawing upon poststructural explmations of their social location and construction. At the same the. Fulkerson resists poststnictural tendencies of endless signifjhg. nihilist relativism. the potential erasure of women as the subject and the rejection of the metaphysical.' She conducts her analyses from a theological perspective because of the faith commitments of herself and of the diverse women to whom she is attending! Although Fulkerson has some of the same concems with poststnicturalism as has Schûssler Fiorenza. Fulkerson has even greater concems with modemity and liberdism. Much of her writing addresses modem and liberal problems, some of which she believes '~ulkersonChanging the Subject. p. 3 78- 3 79. 'Mary McClintock Fulkerson, "Gender-Being It or Doing It? The Church. Homosexuality, and the Politics of Identi ty." Union Seminary Quarterly Review 47. no. 1-2 (1 993): 29-46; Mary McClintock Fulkerson. "Church Documents on Human Sexuality and the Authority of Scnpture," Interpretation 49. no. 1 (January 1 995): 46-58. or merelaboration see Fulkerson Changïng the Subject, p. 64-66. 6Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. viii-ix. Schüss1er Fiorenza does not escape. In this chapter 1 will be exploring the specific concems she has with modeniity and iiberdism, foilowed by an outiine of her own alternative thedogical approach. Critique of Modernity and Liberaihm Fulkerson believes that feminist theologies derhm the sarne modem and liberal problems that they fmd within malestream'' theology.' In her critique of modemity and liberdism. she shows how modem theologies, including feminist. contribute to the obliteration of the other. Using poststructurai theory, she describes modernity's representational fallacy which Ieads to false claims of neutrali~and universalim. Modemity also encourages historical appeals to a pre-discursive reality. These appeals contribute to identity politics in which texrual diversity is subsumed in a unitary theme or principle. Li beral tendencies toward essentialized individualism also result from a politics of identity. These problems arising fiorn modernity and liùedism will be Merelaborated in this section. Representarional Fallucy Along with Schiissler Fiorenza. Fulkeaon resists the concept of a text's "real" meaning that can be unearthed through objective analysis. Both believe that an adequate. historical. contextual Chestian interpretation cm be ascertained through construction. but that this does not constitute the real or originai meaning of the text. An interpretation is 7The term "malestream' originates with Dorothy Smith and is also used by Schüssler Fiorema. considered adequaîe by locating its production within an historical community. There is no objective textg There is also no singular te- If the meaning of the biblical text is consmicted within multiple co~nrnunalreadings, the text itseIf is destabillleci? Fuikerson notes Schbsler Fiore~lza'semphasis upon the constructive nature of biblical interpretatioi?, and the danger of hist~ricaland biblical positivism. Fulkerson is not convinceci. however, that Schiissler Fiorema has completely abandonecl representational thinking. 'O Ferdinand de Saussure's work. as developed by poststnicturalists. reveals the representational fallacy. Fuikerson refers to his argument that "language constructs meaning out of relational differences rather than reference to extra-linguistic reality"." If langage is not a correspondence between words and things, then language cannot reflect extemal reality. Fuikerson also refes to Charles Pierce's semiotics which. dong with Saussure's work. produced sign theones. uistead of looking for meaning in the referents of language. *Fulkerson refen to Stanley Fish's work at this point. See Mary McClintock Fulkerson. "Contesting Feminist Canons: Discourse and the Problem of Sexist Texts," Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 7. no. 2 (Fdl 1991): 59-60. %dkenon Changing the Subject. p. 67. 'O Fulkerson. "Contesting Feminist Canons," p. 66-67. See Schüssler Fiorenza's response in Elisabeth Schiissler Fiorenta But She Suid: Feminisf Pructices of Bibl icui Interpretation (Boston: Beacon Press. 1992). 133- 134. ht5. Fulkerson responds to tàis response in Changing the Subjec~Later in this chapter this debate will be discussed more fully. "Mary McClintock Fulkenon, "Sexism as Original Sin: Developing a Theacentric Discourse," Journal ofthe American Acudemy of Religion 59. no. 4 (Winter 199 1): 654. sign theones suggest that meaning Û found within language itseLf:in the relation of sïgns to each other." Signs do wt reflect the Rai world, but create id3Therefore. there is no d meaning of a text outside of discourse. Lan~anguage about God is only meaningfîd when it refers not to an external divine reality, but to other theological ternis within the discom.l4 In order not to reduce everything to language, Fulkerson follows critics of Saussure to suggest that discoinse, not simply language, produces meaning. Discourse encompasses practices, contexts, material reality, bodies, and social relations as well as language." Fulkerson suggests that the very process of research is a discursive construction of reality. It is therefore impossible to step outside of our social location and discover a histoncal reality that can be disthguished fiom fiction. Attempts to uncover a pre-discursive reality inevitably reproduce the interpreter's own reflections as a fdse univemal. l6 Representational thinking therefore leads to the positing of false univers&. "Fulkerson, Changing the Subject, p. 69. '3~emiosis.the making of meaning, studies the process of signification. A sign is a combination of signzfier. a sound or image. with signified, a meanhg or concept. A sign's value can only be determined in its pattern or system of use. See Fulkerson. "Contesting Feminist Canons." p. 55. '4Fulkerson3"Sexism as Original Sin." p. 654-55. "Fulkerson, "Sexism as Original Sin," p. 655-56; Fukersos Changing the Subject, p. 164-65. i6Fulkerson. Changing the Subject, p. 1 15. Fulkerson argues that theologians who ernploy ideological critique and are suspicious of neutral, impartial claims may still produœ fdse imiversals. As an example, she cites the work of David Tracy, Edward FarIey and Schubert Ogden, whom she cdis critical modemists. Their appeal to the abstract notions of "structures of intelligibility" and "ecclesial universals" attempts to jus@ their work in relation to other disciplines." They suggest universally valid aiteria to legitimate truth claims. This necessitates "universal conditions of access".'' They also neglect the usefùiness of these criteria for faith corn~nunities.'~Even though Tracy, Fariey and Ogden are aware of their own theories' fallibility, they seem unaware of the discursive formation of these themies and of thernselves. One aspect of this discursive formation entails the role of dl academic theologians in the professionai managerial class, and their contribution to the professionalization of knowledge. This creates a universal standard =d control of knowledge. Mead of a "dialogicd heterogeneity of discourses", unity is urged through a retention of modemity's "culture of ~ertainty".'~Theologians of al1 stripes. including feminist, contribute to this universal standardization and professionalization of knowledge. Fulkerson is also critical of feminist theologies which employ universalizing "Fulkerson Chunging ~heSubject. p. 36. "Fulkenon Changing the Subject, p. 3 1 0. '9Fulkerso~Changng the Subject?p. 304- 1 2. 'OFulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 3 13-18,322,338. -57- strategies. A critique of gender dominrrtionlsubmission that is unmodifieci hughhistory and inattentive to the particularity of discourse assumes pre-discursive agency and events." It umally appeals to women's expaience(s), positing experience as a pre- discursive authority which "implicitly grants that experience the status of a universal shared c~nsciousness".~By appealing to a generalized experience instead of a particdar discourse. a fdse universal is established. Such an appeal is also oblivious to the embeddedness of this experience in dominant foms of power relations? Women who do not have the same experience of gender domination are considered by many feminists to be lobotomized by patriarchal distortion. unable to recognize their own oppression. This view strips such women of al1 agency, rendering them utterly pa~sive.'~In short. it universalizes particular experiences of feminists. thereby failing to account for "the other". Fulkerson recognizes that a rehisal to look beyond the particular towards global implications will result in a depoliticized myopic vision. For this reason she does not dispense entirely with universality. In order to develop a feminist liberation theology that is based upon particular discourse, Fulkerson suggests that the global and hi~toncal accumulation of sexist discourses points towards the pervasivenes of sexism and its possible, even Iikely. universal reoccurrence. This "new universal" of sexism. a "Fuikerson. "Sexism as Original Sin." p. 668. "Fulkerson Changing the Subject. p. 56. If Fukerson Changing the Subject. p. 102-03. '4Fulkerso~Changing the Subject, p. 56-5 7. -58- "genderùabon of ~bility",arks out of historicai particularities as a field of risk, a likely possibility, rather tban a generalired clah inattentive to diversity? in this sense she appcals to the construction of discourse throughout history. Historicul A&s Although Fulkerson is skeptid of attempts to discover historkal reality. she sûll insists on historically embedded di~course.~~Christian faith, by its very nature, must be interested in the past. However, as we explore it, reconceive it, critique it, celebrate it and are accountable to it, we must acknowledge our impact on this historical reconstruction." Fulkerson draws upon reader-response theones to demonstrate this unavoidable impact She supports Schilssler Fiorenza's rhetoncal rnethod of histoncal reconstruction. and her refùtation of historical positivism. However, Fulkerson suggests that by refemng factually to these reconstructions. such as the egalitarïan Jesus movement. Schüssler Fiorenza continues to represent prediscursive historical reality extracted fiom false conscio~sness.'~While Schiissler Fiorenza wants to avoid histoncal and textual positivism, she still appeals to readings which best fit or do justice to historïcal settings. Fulkerson notes that this constitutes an appeal to a prediscursive hinoncal reality which contradicts Schilssler Fiorenza's insistence that dl interpretation is . . --. . - . 2sFulkerson, "Sexism as Original Sin," p. 671-73. Z6Fulkerson,Chging the Subject, p. 29. "Fulkerson, Changing the Subject, p. 128 ftnt 20. '8Fulkerson, Chunging the Subject, p. 129. -59- rhetoricai constniction-* Fuikemn is concenieci when appeals to the authois intention, the community of origin, or particular stages in a history's tradition, are emted hmtheir historical discourse to represent incorrigible data These appeals represent natmal. unsbaped facts that are removed hmtheir formative relations of power and situational knowledge. The subject position of the historian is also effaced. Fulkmn explains that wheri descriptions of Jesus or early Christian communities are gieaned hmthe text. the interests of the interpreter in the selection of these descriptors is ignored. It is assumed that anyone with the same historicalcntical tools could hdthe same descriptions. This, of course, poses a problem for those to whom historical-critical tools are not a~ailable.~*Would their readings and historical interpretations be any Iess adequate? Reliance upon historical- critical methods would dismiss these potentially liberative readlligs from marginalized people." These histoncal appeals, according to Fulkerson, contribute to the modem "sins" as elaborated by Stephen Moore. a poststructural biblical cntic. He suggests that modemity bnngs a premature closure to the text in its search for 1) a transcendentalized textual content of ideas that can be extracted from the text and exist independently; 2) an '9 Fulkerson. "Contesting Feminist Canons." p. 66.1 am not convinced that Schüssler Fiore- in her later work, is appealing to a pre-discursive historical reality. Her ethics of histoncal reading limits the number of interpretations according to historical documents which have ken constructed rhetoncally within historic communities. 3"Fulkerson, Chnging the Subject, p. 126-29. "Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 133. original situdon with self-cotltained meanings aprt hmits conte= 3) an authorid intention that will yield the secret of the ted2Fulkerson suggests that al1 historid- critical inquiry must be lmderstood as fietorid construction, as developed in Schüssler Fiorenza's later work, if it is to avoid these sins of modemity. Identiîy Politics adIndivduulim Such modern assumptions are implicated in textual, as well as historical, appeals. If a theme or principle is identifieci in scripture, and becomes the unimg nom for the entire Bible. it has been separated nom its contextual discourse. It consti~esMoore's hst sin of traascendentalized textuai content where ideas are removed hmtheir Sir. im ~eben.'~The theme or principle also subsumes the diversity of the biblical texts into the identity of the unimg nom. Fulkemn is in agreement with Schüssler Fiorenza on this point. The politics of identity refers to subjects as well as texts. Fulkerson refers to the concept of the Cartesian subject which has figured prominently in modem thought. This concept connects with Moore's first sin by presurning the possibility of a neutral. autonomous and therefore transcendentalized subject." Based on this presumption. one can assume that the description of a subject. such as "woman", will remah a constant regardless of context. This would preclude multiple identities of "'woman" formed fiom different social locations and systems of meaning. This reasoning also assumes that our 3ZFulkersonChanging the Subject, p. 1 24. 33Fulkerson,Chunging the Subject, p. 1 30-32. "Fukerson Chunging the Subject, p. 1 12. -61- knowledge of out~e1vesmflects our tnie or real selves, apart bmthe influences of our social kition." It is this universalizing Cartesian subject which Fukeison suggests both structurajists and poststnictura/ists çeek to "kW. Contrary to many critiques. Michel Foucault's understanding of =death of the subjea" does not indicate the disappearance of the subject, but rather the instability of its multiple identitie~.~~SSimilarly, Fulkerson attempts to destabilize the singular subject of ÿvoman" in order to honour women's multiple identities and social locations." In Fulkerson's investigation of American Protestant church documents dealing with sexuality, she questions the assumptions made by both sides of the debate about the stability of identity. She refers to Foucault's explanation that personal identity detemined by sexuality or sexual orientation is a modem creation of science and therapy." With reference to feminist theories which have long argued that masculinity and fernininity are social constructions. she ~imsto Judith Butler's postmodem argument that "woman" is aiso an unstable co~ctioo.Lf our sex and correspondhg gender are considered the core of our identity, then we are defined according to our oppositional gender differences. When our sexual orientation or desire is added to this fornative core. our identity is defined out of oppositional heterosexuai desires. By problematizing ''woman" with j5Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 27-28. 36Fulkerson Chunging the Subject, p. 79-8 1. 37Thisis sirnikir to Schiissler Fiorema's use of the constnict 'Wmen". 38~ulkerson,"Church Documents," p. 58 A 6; Fulkerson, "Gender," p. 30. -62- multiple identities, Butler attempts to break out of this fixed, binary gender system which produces compulsory heterosexuality. Fuikaon uses Butler's argument to resist the absolutized, sexed identity that enforces heterosedity. She shows that both the liberal inclusion and consenrative exclusion of lesbian and gay people are bssed upon this fked, oppositional understanding of sexual identity. An oppositional bioary gender systern wEU inevitably create heterosexual nomagainst which lesbian and gay people wiIi be measured. She 41sfor a new. literal interpretation of Galatians 3:28 in which sexual identity is irnmaterial to the requirements of membership within the Christian community. She also gives a curious appeal to history by stating that identity defineci by sexuality is inconsistent with the original, biblical worldviews." lntimately connecteci with the politics of identity is essentidism. Fulkerson notes that if our core identity is defined by our sex~aiity~our essentid self must be gendered. There must be a sexed essence that could be identified as masculine or ferninine. heterosexual or homosex~al.~Fulkerson resists this assumption that women or lesbian and gay people share a naturai essence based on uncoded aspects of their identity. Attaching natural meaning to women's bodies. as with pariicular racial groups. has had horrendous histoncal consequences." Fulkerson points out that even essential anatomical 39Fulkerson, "Gender," p. 29-46. QFulkeaon, "Gender,"p. 33. 4 1 Fulkerson Changing the Subjecf, p. 8-9. -63 - dekitions of semdïty are Mgcontested today. She insists, thdore, th& dity. as we11 as other aspects of our identity, must be understcxxi as socidly constmcted Fulkerson's intent is not to eliminate the subject of woman or the biblical text, but to destabilize it with the recognition of its multiple identities and discursive formation. She is challenging not the existence of a subject, its "thatness", but the fixed character of its meaning, its "whatness"." Destabilizing the subject of woman and the text will honour the diversity of women's readings of scripture as well as women themselves. Fulkerson wants to resist a feminist tendency to essentialize scripture, Christian tradition and particular views of oppression and liberation. Unlike Schiissler Fiorenza. who identifies the biblical texts as patriarchal, Fulkerson States that biblical texts are not containers of fixed meaning that can be labelled oppressive or liberative. Rather, their meanings are dependent upon the way in which comrnunities. in their pariicular social locations. read the scnptures. Non-feminist women may read a passage of scripture that has been declared sexist in a non-sexist wayU By setting the interpretation of biblical texts within a discursive context Fulkerson pmblematizes the notion of private. individual interpretations. Individuals are not as autonomous as liberal thought would suggest. Neither are they purely passive victims of oppressive texts. Rather. individuals are discursively constructed, unstable "Mary McClintock Fulkerson, "Women, Men, and Liberation: Old Issues, New Conversations." plarterly Review 8, no. 4 ( Winter 1988): 86. 53 Fulkerson Changing the Subject. p. 88. *Fulkerson Changing the Subjecf, p. 9,41, 105. subjects in a dynamic relationship with the multiple fimctions of an unstable text Fuikenon explains tbat the instability of the subject is caused by various subject positions formed by social location and the impact of global hfktmcnires, such as capitalism? Every person is shaped by many social identities that are sometimes connicting and shifting. This perspective challenges the Enlightenment's notion of a prediscursive subject with fRe. individudistic agency . Wherwis pre-Enlightenment thought understood people only corporately, in relationship to commmity without separate individual identities* and liberal thought understands people individually, fkee from corporate control. postsmictural thought understands people discursively, in relationship to communities with multiple individual identities. The liberal concept of prediscursive autonomy has established experience as "an event of consciousness that precedes language and is a source of knowledge"~' Fdkerson notes that without a recognition of the social construction of individuals. the liberal solution to the exclusion of particular people is simply to include them. Inclusionary logic is based upon the equality and essential "sameness" of dl people.48However. multiple identities and social locations are erased and structural systems of domination are ignored. --- - 45 Fulkenon, "Contesting Feminist Canons," p. 56-58. "Fulkenon, "Gender," p. 33. '7Fulkerson, "Sexism as Original Sin*"p. 654. 48 Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 5-6. -65- Fulkerson contends tb f&st theology cim be emancipatory only to the extent that it shifts its emphasis fiom women's experïence to "women's faith practices in discursive totalities"; hma politics of identity to a socid construction of multiple, shifting identities. Only then will it be able to move hma Ralist representation of its own ''ruminations" to analysis of the embeddedness of discourse in powed9 ThmlogicaI Method Mary McClintock Fdkerson's intended audience for her work is the theological academy? She hopes to challenge feminist appeals to experience, liberal inclusionas, politics and the modern elevation of historical-critical methods." By uncovering the emancipatory work of women who are ignored in these processes which she is challenging, she hopes to more adequately anend to the "concretely social other". This phrase indicates that subjects are produced in pariicular social locations within a paaiarchal and capitalist social order and that liberation must be social. The social aspect also suggests that the purpose of feminist academics is not to liberate the oppressed other. but to "liberate ourselves in relation to the oppressed othe?." Fulkenon raises up women who do not share feminist agendas. nor are located within academic circles. as mirron for those of us who are academic feminists. These mimrs reveal the exclusionary aspects of '%l kerson Changing the Subject, p. 1 1 2, 1 15. '°Fulkerson Chonginging the Subjeci?p. viii. "Fulkerson, Changing the Subjeci, p. 4,355,389-90. "Fulkerson, Changing the Subject, p. 3-4. -66- our own practices, such as the professiodzation of theology, which are hidden by our social location." Her goal is therefore to liberate feminsts in order to mate affinities between feminist communities and women in other c~mrnunities.~This goal is "authorized" by a vision of God's realm of justice in which ail fonns of domination and hierarchy are misted and transformed? Community and Diversiîy Fulkerson draws upon feminia poststnictural, Mhst, and literary theories in order to help her andyze differences in wornenfs readings of scripture. She intentionally seeks out readings that are at odds with traditional feminim interpretations but are located within sites of resistance to male hegemony. Mead of referring to the difTerent experiences of women or of women-church. she refers to the faith pmctices of women and their communal contexts that produce particular interpretations of scnpture. Fulkerson agrees with Stanley Fish's insistence that the community of interpretation, not the text itself. creates meaningS6By refushg to categonze the whole of scripture or particular passages as either oppressive or li berative, Fulkerson destabilizes the text. However. communal readings place historical and culturd conditions upon it which stabilize it within their contexts? A community will also have desfor reading or S3FulkersonChanging the Subjecz. p. 389-92. Y~ulkersonChanging rhe Subjecr. p. 4. 5s~ulkerso~Changing the Subjecf. p. 25. 56FuIkerson,"Contesting Feminist Canons," p. 59. nFulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 122. -67- performi~g'~scriptme that include formal henneneutid regulations as well as implicit, institutionalized practices. These will provide stable patterns of meanhg and explain interpretations thaî seem to contradict the domhant interpretations of that particular community of faith.59These rules will be discussed firrther in the section on canon. Along with postiiberals, Fulkerson contests the monopoly of historicaicriticd studies over "'correct" interpretation by focusing upon the ecclesial comrnunity's reading of scripture." In distinction to a formal communal henneneutic, however, she wams against the uncritical acceptance of ecclesial readings. Dominant ecclesial interpretations may well silence the marginalized voices and readings within that community. She also challenges the tendency of communal hermeneutics to ignore the wider social formation of that cornmunity and to view the community as a stable, unified constant- This would consti~erepresentationai thinking.6' Fulkerson appreciates both Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza's and Rosemary Radford Ruether's concept of women-church. It emphasizes the discursive construction of community and the communal performance of scripture. while negating the possibility of '8Fulkerson uses the phrase "performing scripture" to acknowledge the communication of scnpture by those who are illiterate. as well as to indicate that different social practices produce different texts. See Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 147. S9~~lkerson,Changing the Subject, p. 1 68. 60Fulkerson identifies scripture as "the sacred text of a community". See Fulkerson Changing the Subject. p. 148. "Fuikerson Chgingthe Subject, p. 148-50. a neutrd Rada or objective text? Witfiout destabikg the snbjea or the tex& however, the full diversity of both cannot be appreciated. Poststructuralimi places a check on all attempts to tmifv a text or subjeft* The social location of a reader will determine not only the meaning but the type of the biblical text brought into king. Someone studying the Bible as a literary classic will read a different text than someone studying it as scripture within a faith community. According to Fulkemn. the Bible therefore is not a singular text, but a mdtipiicity of diverse texts produced through diverse discourses. Its instability "evokes an intùiitely open number of readingsW? Fulkenon similady suggests that the subject "women" must also be destabilized in order to address the concerns of women of colour and niird World women. They protest the monolithic identification of "women" with a universal state of victimizationb5 Even attempts, such as those of Schüssler Fiore- to recognize the multiplicative interstructuring relations of race, class, colonialism, and sexual orientation on gender fail to destabilise the unifjmg subject of wornanM These attempts still hold ont0 a prediscursive notion of women that is then impacted by other sociopoliticai systems of "~ulkerson. "Contesting Feminist Canons." p. 63. 63Fulkerson Changing !he Subject. p. 65. "Fulkenon Changhg the Subject- p. 14-47. 65FulkersosChanging the Subject, p. 63- 64. 66This is not necessarily the case with Schiissler Fiorenui's later work, as 1 have previously argue& unless Schüssler Fiorenza does indeed retain her earlier belief that women's perspectives give a more accurate account of reality. domination?' The same unifjring problem occurs when 'bvomen's experience" is used to describe power relations. This description may be hadequate for the situation of dl women and may thereby disempower the "other" womena What is liberating for one group of women may not be liberating for another? Fulkerson considers the danger of prediscursive descriptions of reality so great that she names representations of the "other" as "inevitable acts of violence? Instead of attempting to represent the other. Fulkerson suggests that a theo/acenaic agape cdls us to mediate difference. We are cdled to attend to differential relations. not representations, by recogninng that ou.accounts of difTerence are discursive productions. fomed out of our varying social locations. We are also called to .-speak for" the other through establishing affinities. not shared identities or solidarities.'' A urhori@ Fullcenon' s critique of representational language extends into her understanding of authority and political judgements. She is aware of the apolitical tendencies of poststructuralism. but insists that aspects of poststnicturdism, such as its critique of 67Fulkenon."Contesthg Feminist Canons," p. 66. 68 Fulkerson, Changing fhe Subject. p. 107. 69 Fulkerson Changing lhtr Srrbject . p. 1 77. nFulkerson Chonging rhe Suhject. p. 377. "~ulkersonrefes to this calling to "speak for" the other as a cal1 to represent the other without aîtempting philosophicd or cultural representation. This positive sense of representation is based upon the teachings of others that are received through political afinities. It enables a certi@ingdiscourse that has %e power to say what the other is in a way that the other does not have". See FuIkerson Changing the Subject, p. 383-85. nanualized language and its analysis of power, contnbue to a political praxis. She also employs additional critical theories, including particdar theories about ideology and feminist standpoint theory, in conjunction with poststnicturalimi in order to sharpen her political edge. Poststnicturai critiques of representational language allow her to critique naturalized language, which is one fiinction of ideology. By combining theories on ideology with poststructural andysis of power she is able to identi@ social sin and faithful Christian resistance. Feminist standpoint theories add a Mergender specific aspect to resistance. Fulkersonwsunderstanding of authority and limitations to endless signi&ng is also enhanced by her location of tnith and doctrinal agency within particular faith cornrnunities. 1 will now elaborate upon each of these points. By refusing a representational meaning of language, postsûucturalism removes the basis for the naturalized descriptions of reality." Destabilizing both subjects and texts prevents the establishment of dominant discourses which presume to represent natural realiv and constitute the nom against which marginalized discourses are measured. A poststructural refusal of representation is thus able to challenge underlying ideologies that are dependent upon naturalized language." Fulkerson explains how naturalization is one function of ideology. When beliefs are assurned to reflect actual reality. they are naturalized. The assumptions are themselves invisible. leaving only assertions that appear as irrefutable facts. The unnaturalness of homosexuality and the subordination of women are two examples of such assertions that - -- "Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 67. "~ulkersonChanging fhe Subject, p. 67. flow from the idedogy of naturalization." ùi a 1991 article, Fulkerson bases her account of ideology upon the work of Louis Althusser, a Marxist theorist who has developed ideolo@cal criticism. She follows him by defining ideology as "a fdse understanding of one's ûue situation" regarding social reality which has oppressive resuIts? She recognizes the problem of this definition hma poststnicturai perspective and assures the reader that a 'bue situation" is dl1 constnicted out of sipifiers and is unavailable outside of discourse. However. she is unwilling to give up the concept of ideology altogether, because it provides poststnictural feminists the political bais for judging oppressive situations.76 Fulkerson defmes oppression as a configuraùon of discourses which contain or suppress fears and manipulate utopian desires. Thus. oppression is derived not fiom a specific content of a text. but from a configuration of discourses that ideologically manipulates fears and desires. By giving some cornpensatov fùnction. such as containing or managing fears. an ideological configuration can convince women. such as those of Jehovah's Witness. to support their own submissive roles through a --false"account of their situation." Possibly because of the problems inherent with a poststructural defense of true and false situations. Fulkerson relies on a slightly different account of ideology in 74 Fulkenon Changing the Subject, p. 67. 75 Fulkerson. "Contesting Ferninist Canons." p. 57. 76 Fulkerson. "Contesting Ferninist Canons." p. 57. "Fulkerson. "Contesting Feminist Canons," p. 58. -72- Changing the Subject. She gives more of a pragmatic dennition of ideology that depends upon the oppressive effects of discourse Meadof a description of true or false reality. For this account. she draws on Teny Eagleton's analysis of ideology as it hctioned within the Nazi era of Gemany. He suggests that ideology accounts for the massive self- deception and legitimation of hurnan bmtality that occurred. This ideology was fomed not only from misinformation but also out of a complex rnix of pleasures and wants. fears and guilt Eagleton also points out that it was not absolute in its pervasiveness because of the resistance of a few people." Fulkerson adds a theological dimension to EagIeton's account by consmiing ideology as social sin marked by hurnan finitude. and resistance as fàithful practice in the remembrame of Jesus. Fulkerson is careful to distinguish her account of sin from the privatized. modem account of individdistic finitude. Sin is socially constructed. as are individ~als.~The concept of resistance becomes central to Fulkerson's analysis of non- feminist women's discourses. In order to anal- gender oppression and resistance to this oppression arnongst different groups of women Fulkerson combines this understanding of ideology with poststructural theones on relations of power. Discourse theory refuses to separate ideas or ideologies from the forces of production. and leads to the identification of two forms of power. Fulkerson notes that while patriarchal capitdism exudes a hegemonic power over a11 women. resulting in their cornmodification and creating their dependency. local forms 78 Fulkerson Chunging fhe Subject. p. 1 9-20. 79 Fulkerson Changing fhe Shjec~p. 20-25. of this oppression will vary. These particuiar construals wiii offer benefits to particdar womes, explaining their acceptance of oppression and the variation in its effiupon different groups of women and men. Moreove&these! locdized forms will dso tap into fears and desires. enabling potential resistance." Fulkerson connects this theory with the work of Michel Foucault. She refers to Foucault's description of modeni. disciplinary power that has replaced pressi ive. j uridical power. Disci plinary power has substi~edsurveillance for repressive force and violence as a means of enforcement The success of surveillance is dependent upon its intemalization. which causes women to promote their own oppression. Key to this argument is the insistence that power is not only in the han& of the oppressors but is pervasive. Everyone participaies in the web of dominant power relations and carmot step outside of it to make judgements. In this sense. Fulkerson agrees with Foucault that knowledge and truth are relations of power. Fulkerson points out that this also means that the marginalized are neither without power nor are situated outside of power. Therefore. the complex interstructuring of power relations for particular groups of women includes the potential for both oppression and liberation. cornpliance and resistance? In theological terms. Fulkerson suggests that these multiple discourses provide the "1 have highlighted the words "potential" and "possibility" to emphasize Fulkenon's insistence upon the local. discursive formation of oppression and liberation. sin and grace. She still retains these concepts as universals, but only as universal potentials. This allows the retention of overarching noms and definitions of sin and -ce. while insisting that the particulmities of these noms and potentialities be defined within local comrnunities. Thus. tmth is relativized without being abandoned to nihilist relativism. pssibilitv for the social manifdonof both sin, the hami and denial of goodness of creation, and grace, the recognition and transgression of hegemonic po~er.~In order to make judgements about the presence of sin or grace, issues ofauthority and nommust be addressed Fulkerson adds explicit gender andysis to this deconstruction of power with the help of feminia theories. One of these is feminst standpoint theory, also used by Schiissler Fiorema. It promotes the epistemological pxivilege of the oppresse4 reasoniog that 'Wie position of oppression gives women...a special vautage on reality"." Ferninia standpoint theory provides an interpretive grid which constructs reality out of a woman's pariicular context." Fulkerson finds this compatible with poststructuralisrn because of its location within specific discourses. Elsewhere. however, she distances herself fiom feminist standpoint positions because of their reliance on women's experience as a natural wamint for their clairns.ls Her ambivalence over standpoint theory may also be attributed to poststructural resistance to the privileging of one particular discourse over another. In order to provide some means of feminist evaluation that does not transgress poststnictural theory. Fulkerson has develo ped what she calls 'feminist stipulations of "Ful kenon Changing the Subjecr. p. 99- 106. 83Fulkerson Changing the Szhject, p. 53; Fulkerson, "Women, Men, and Liberation." p. 83. "Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 54. 85 Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 85. reie~ance".~These stipulations allow assessrnents of particular discourses to be made conceming their ability to resist the social sin of patnarchal capitdism. They are produceci, not imposed, by an "intertextual e~onorny".~They can take the fom of questions regarding the effects of a particular ordering of discourse upon the marginaiized, inciuding women As with Schüssler Fiore- Fulkerson's evaluative Cnteria are based upon pragmatic judgements within cornmimal contexts. Unlike liberal extratexnialism. Fulkerson's intertextual approach acknowledges its own embeddedness in relations of power. Unlike postliberal intratextualism it examines the discursive impact of the socio- politicai context upon a cornmunity's reading of scripture and even upon scripture itself? Instead of basing an assessrnent upon extemal noms or a particdar way of reading scripture. Fulkerson asks how a particular performance of scripture resists and transfomis the sinful distortions of the lives of certain women. thereby widening the realm of God." Fulkerson acknowledges that her position makes it difficuit for past traditions to wFulkerson uses Stanley Fish's phrase "stipulations of relevancë. See Fulkerson Changing the Subject .p. 1 5 5. 87 Fulkerson notes that the tenn -intertextual" was coined by Julia Kristeva to indicate that one structure of meaning is generated in relation to another structure. The phrase "intertextual economy" therefore indicates an exchange of relations between two structures of meaning. See Fulkerson Chunging the Subjecr. p. 156-57- 88 Fulkerson. Changing the Subject. p. 156-64. Fulkenon refers to Kathryn Tanner's description of the plain sense. As with other intratextualists, Tanner supports the notion of a core biblical text that remains unchanged and retains agency over and against the reader. Fulkerson resists this notion. because it places the text outside of discursive construction. See Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 162-63. "Fulkerson Chging the Szibjecf, p. 164. -76- "cormxtn our present und-. Any accoimt of the past, including scripture, the events of Jesust and doctrinal statements, has been constructa thereby losing its critical de. This also maka it impossible to distinguish between histoncal reality and fiction? Fulkerson does bring some stability and agency to scripture, however, by Iocating it within fàith practices. She argues that the auîhority of scripture cmexia within the relationship of the biblicai text to the faith comrnunity. In conjunction with a communal location of scriptural agency, Fulkerson suggests that trutb can only be found within local, discursive relations of knowledge and power. Truth is situationai. according to Fulkerson, and not absolute. It is dependent upon its consmiction within a faith cornmunity and cannot be adjudicated according to its correspondence to a total system. Totalities mate closures and c losura create outsider^.^' What constitutes a liberative. and therefore tmthfûl, practice for one cornmunity may constitute an oppressive, and therefore sinful, practice for another. However, Fulkerson insists that her concept of mah does not lead to absolute relativisrn. Neither does it support the absolutizing of particular communal values or beliefs." Fukerson acknowledges that she posits a 'oradically situational j udgment about meaning". As an example. she states that she mut rely upon the daim of a community as to whether or not it is Chri~tian.~~At the sarne time. she posits a universal nom of agapic care for the other. gOFulkerson Changing the Subjec~.p. 369. "FUIkerson, Changing the Subject, p. 370-7 1 . "~ulkerson, Changing the Seect, p. 3 72-74. "FUI kerson, Chunging rhe Subject, p. 3 65 Rnt 7. -77- and suggests a new UJLiversalisn of potentiality." A community's Christian identity will help its members to be self-critical and to discem the tnnh within their reasoos, desand values on the basis of pragmatic and teleologicd nom. Demonsirations of "visions of the good", in spite of our fractured finitude. usher in a moment of truth and grace that can identify and resist hegemonic powers. It is within these events of grace that Fullcemon locates revelation. Revelation cannot constitute any special privileging of a particular discourse, but can only be found within an event or testimony of liberation? in that situation Fulkerson finds a Iheo/acentric tran~cendence".~Fulkerson is cautious, however. of intimations of extratextual disclonires of revelation. While she clearly articulates her belief in God." she resists the possibility of mith that could be revealed outside of our social relations. Theological inquiry should be materiaiisf not idedist, by focusing upon practice. not "Fulkerson Chunging the Subject. p. 25. "FUI kerson. Changing rhe Subjecr. p. 372-77. %Fulkeson Changing the Subject. p. 36 1 fcnt 3. "~ulkersondeclines an apology for her references to God. acknowledging that any reference to the metaphysicai is at odds with poststructural denial of extratextual reality. Even her use of the term Zheology" sets her against certain poststruchimlists and postmodemists. Thus she concedes that her critique "is not directly postmodem". See Fulkerson, Changing the Subject. p. 63. Without a fuller development of her concept of revelation, however, it is dificult to ascertain how her belief in God informs her theological method. One reviewer recognizes this theological lacuna and hopes that she will develop her concepts of revelation and theological realimi in fiirther work. See Graham Ward. "Review of Changing the Subject," Modern Theology 1 1, no. 4 (October 1995): 478. Cmonicd System Because Fulkerson locates authorimtive criteria, truth and revefation within particular faith cornmunities, it is crucial that she have sorne method of understanding and analyzing the faith practices of these communities. Fulkerson has therefore developed a brilliant system that dows scripture and doctrine to have agency within a faith community and also analyzes both oppression and resistance in terrns of the community's own faith system. A Christian cornmunity's fàith practice is centred around particula. rules or canons of tradition that constitute a dingregime. Fulkerson defiw a regime as the actual way in which scripture is practised. It will entail explicit desof reading as well as implicit constraints and institutionalized assumptions. This creates a set of noms and stabilization of meaning which comprises the community's canon. Fulkerson proposes that the Christian canon be understood as a Christian community's allegiance to theological noms, creeds or doctrines. as well as to a broader. denominationai tradition." This tradition establishes legitimate translations and interpretations as well as experts. such as feminist theologians. who produce certifjhg discourses. The canon also includes the goals of the comrnunity's practice. such as saving souls or creating justice. This canonical system is the primary organizer of the biblical text.'"'' As such it creates an ideal reading regime. Fulkerson contrasts the ideal regime 'Fulkerson, Changing the Subject, p. 26. "9Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 167. 'OOFulkerson,Changing the Subjecf, p. L 67-73.303. -79- with the resisting readïng regimes of women, which are iduenced by theu social location. The intertextual weaving of the ideal regime with the resisting regime produce meaning and stability.'O1 While Fulkerson wants to initially destablize subjects, such as women and the biblical text. she prevents the endess process of signifling by temporarily re-stablizing these subjects within particdar communities. The interstructuring of the canonicd systern with the resisting regime is the means by which this stability occurs. Fulkerson uses Lama Donaldson's term grczjf(Gt,@h)ringto indicate how women produce meaning as they read te~ts.'~'This new meaning mates a new te* bringing a temporary closure and stability within the discourses of a particu1a.r group of women. Let us recall that Fulkerson is interested in women's subordinated discourses which identim particular problems of gender oppression and render some resistance within their faith communities. An analysis of their canonical system interacting with the social location of the women provides a means for determining: 1) the pattems of meaning created by a faith cornmunity; 2) subordinated and resisting discourses to the dominant patterns: and 3) the relation of these patterns of discourse with the hegemonic social ordenngs of patriarcha1 capi ta1 ism. 'O' 'O'~ulkersonChanging the Subject, p. 173-75. '"Donaldson derives this term fkom the Derridean expression engraI(ph)ting, which combines graphion, meaning stylus, with the horticulture term graft. This evokes the material creation of a text written anew within the relation of text and context. See Fulkerson Changing the Subject? p. 152-1 53. '03~u~kerson,Changing the Subject, p. 167. Fuikeson suggests that canonicd systems both limit the possibilities of resistance and provide desfor ordering this resistance. A feminist analysis shodd therefore not begh with a pre-fonned notion of sexist texts or practices, but examine the change or challenge of a faith practice within the htsof a particular canonical system.Iw In order to identifjr moments of resistance. she recommends dispensing with traditional indicaton of feminist liberation theology. Instead she suggests looking for practices supportesi by their Christian faith that reject certain dependencies generated by patnarchal capiralism. These rejections will appear as strains or contradictions within their discursive situation. They may not be oamed by the women as resistance or as femini~t.'~~However. feminists '"Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 173-77. 'O5 Fulkerson Changing the Subject. p. 177. Although Fulkerson's intent is to respect the diversity of women who do not identie as feminist, her analysis of the discourse of these women thmugh her feminist grid. and her naming their discourse as feminist at one point is problematic (Changing the Subject, p. 179, fhit 87). Her feminist analysis appears to challenge. not respect. their objection and possibly antagonism to feminism. She also narnes their liberative actions as resistance. even though she also acknowledges that they, themselves. may refuse to see these actions as resistant to male hegemony (Changing the Subject, p. 1 77). One woman responded to the results of a shdy which Fulkerson uses: "1 was afraid sorneone like you. ..an outsider... would misunderstand." (Fulkerson bases her analysis of Pentecostal women on different studies. one of which was conducted by EIaine Lawless. a folklorist. Lawless recorded the reaction of the women to her study. and this quote is one of the reactions. (Chunging rhe Subject, p. 289 ftnt 89). Fulkerson justifies this "misunderstanding" by explaining that she is analyzing their discourse. not the women themselves wi-th their intentions and self-interpretations (Chonging fhe Subject. p. 1 79. fint 87). Y et how cm an intertextual analysis. which asserts the historically and culturally grounded character of discourse, ignore a cornmunity's intentions and self-interpretations? This has implications for Fulkerson's cal1 for a representation of the other through political afinities. How can one represent the other without concem for their intentions and self-interpretations? Granted, the interpreter's own grids will produce a different picture of a people than the people's own interpretation. Yet, is there no critena that will encourage the interpreter's picture to more closely resemble that of the people? Otherwise. how can there be any bais for her must recognize these practices as hiberative. Because Fulkerson's study of the Presbyterian WomenIMhas ciïrect implications on United Churcit documents on sexuality which I wiIl be examining in the second part of this thesis, I wül give a brief outline of the Presbyterian Women's canonical system and misting reghe. Fullcerson fkt explains the canonicd system of Reformed confessions. Central to this system is the belief that the Protestant Bible is foundatiod for faith doctrine and Iife. This belief is based upon Luther's emphasis upon justification by pce through faith according to the rule of sola scnptzira. Because this ernphasis was meant to refute the authority of the Catholic Magisteriun, Fulkerson identifies this as an iconoclastie and evangelical reading regime. These characteristics, together with the Reformed motto "the church reformed and always reforming", lead to a refutation of any absolute authority other than the living Word. While scriptare done provides communal noms. bibliolaûy is condemned. Fulkenon notes that Calvin. in contrat to Luther. held the entirety of scripture to be revelatory for the purposes of individuai and societal salvation. The underlying conviction of both Calvin and Luther was that scnpnire was to be read by believers for salvific purposes. Anything that was unclear in scripture was to be interpreted by other parts of scripnire which were deemed clear.'" More recent Presbyterian confessions. based on histoncal Calvinist Confessions. political representation or affinhies? 'metem "Presbyterian Women" refers to an officia1 organization of women within the Presbyterian Church (USA). See FuIkerson Chgingthe Subject. p. 183. ftnt. 1. have proposed seuen des for interpreting scriptme: 1) Jesus Chnst is the central subject and herrneneutical key; 2) the plain text, with its historical mhg?is to have precedence; 3) the Holy Spirit confirms scriptme; 4) doctrines offer guidance; 5) love for God and neighbour is another hermeneuticai key; 6) study and scholarship are importantz and 7) scripture should be interpreted in light of scriptme.'" Fulkerson notes that these pinciples provide flexibility for the interpretation of specific passages of scripture. She also notes that the deregarding plain sense can either support or refute women's subordination in the ch~rch.'~Influentid in this decision are the other intersecting discourses. such as the certiwng discourses produced by "'readïng experts" hmthe church administration and the seminaries. Mer giving a brief histoncal overview. Fulkerson shows how the formal Presbyterian theology "ordered the authority of God's Word as a written chnstological. and transfonning presence of God through the Holy Spirit, by its doctrine of justification by grace through faith."' Although these elements allowed for change and sel f-critique, they were joined by less explicit rules for reading. such as the proper way for reading the Bible. who has the power to declare its meaning, and who may speak or read publicly. These mles discouraged any change which might be liberative for women. Gender discourses of the early twentieth century were also influentid. They proposed a gender "'*Thesep~ciples were developed out of historicd Cdvinist confessions by the Presbyterian Church of the U.S.A. See Fulkerson Changhzg the Subject, p. 190. '"%dkerson Changing the Subject. p. 190-9 1. ' '°Fulkenon Changing the Subject, p. 196. wmpiementarity wtiich justifiai the restriction of wornen to domestic spheres. The formal theology, together with the infoddes and gender discourses. contributecl to the Presbyterian monid system." ' When the fornial theology began to change, the des for reading and gender discourses remaioed enûmched for a much longer period. explainhg the Presbyterian WomenFslate acceptance of gender prohibitions. However. even though the women did not protest their prohibition fkom authontative readug by the canoaical system. they were able to resist their subordination through their own reading regime. This resisting ~gime was ordered by the biblical injunction of love for God and neighbour. This injunction allowed them to provide 'women's work for women", expanding their desbeyond domesticity into mission work.' " In order to better understand the ways in which particula.readings of scripture offer resistance within a canonical system. Fulkerson referç to the concept of register. According to semiotic analysis. register indicates "that what is said and how it is said are inseparable"."' Three variables constitute a register: field or subject matter; tenor or quality of social relations; and mode or medium of communication. They demonstrate that register is ?he content function of language. its interpersonal or social function. and ' ' ' Fulkerson Changing the Subject .p. 196-200. ' f'Fulkerson Chunging the Subject. p. 229-3 8. ' "Fukerson Changing the Subject, p. 178. -84- its rhetorical or textuai bction" which together produce rneanir~g."~As an example Fulkerson discusses the register of a mothefs game-playing with her child. The field is the ideas discwed, the tenor is the tone of the dominant-subordinate relationship, and the mode is the spoken, dialogicd form of communication."' Employing this concept of register in an analysis of discourse unites form and content and explains how variations in the tenor or mode of a readkg-performance of scripture can alter its meaning. This refbtes the notion of a fixed text that has one "correct" meaning, and moves beyond authorial intention as the source of this meaning. It will also better enable the judgement of non-feminist women's reading-performance regimes as resistant within their omfaith ~ommunities."~ "" Fulkerson Changing the Subject. p. 178. Fulkerson divides tenor into four types: 1 ) personalized mutuality. found in face-to-face conversations: 2) objective. egaiitarian didacticism, found in field-dominant registers; 3) authorhian or benevolent patriarchy. found in expert addresses; and 4) interrogation. See Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 2 1 7. '" Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 178. Along with the identification of the types of register employed. Fulkenon also examines which variable is given more weight by the community. The Pentecostal women whom Fulkerson studies appear to emphasize the tenor and mode of their faith practices more than the field or subject of their preaching. A wornan's choice of words. intensity of presentation, gestures, and personalized address are crucial for her success as a preacher. In contrast, she suggests that feminist theology is a field-dominant register in which its ideas and subject are much more important than its mode or tenor of presentation. 1 mut note that, while some feminist theologies are field-dominant, others intentionally focus upon the mode and tenor of embodied theology. See Fulkerson, Changing the Subject, p. 282-85,301 -02. ' '6Fulkerson, Changing the Subject, p. 178-79. Conclusion The overd1 goal of Mary McClintock Fulkmon's feminist theological method is to take seriously the multiple fomis of gender oppression and mistance withui diverse faith communities. By destabilinng both the biblical text and subject, she hopes to honour their diversity and recognize their social construction. Fuikerson also hopes to demonstrate the impact of one's social location upon one's description of "the other7. This will aüow her to better attend to the other. helping her to fullil1 the Christian vision of agapic care for the stranger."' We have seen that Fullcerson seeks to accomplish these objectives with the help of poststmchusil dysis.There are several implications of this approach for feminist theology. One is that critiques of either the biblical text or the subject position of women with faith communities cannot be made apart from these comrnunities and their intertextual formation. An extemal analysis that does not take into account the multiple "differential networks"' l8 of a comrnunity, including its interaction with the wider social reality, cannot honour the women or their readings of scripture. This intertexnial approach abandons the notion of insider/outsider. In opposition to postliberai intratextual ' I7Fu1 kerson Changing the Subjecf. p. 7-8. It must be remembered that Fuikenon's phrase "attending to the other" indicates a willingness to listen to and be challenged by the other. It does not mean a patronizing atîitude of help that can be given fkom a place of privileged stability. See Fulkerson, Changing the Subject, p. 4-5. ' "~ulkersonprefers the phrase "diflerential networks" to ''system", because system implies a cohesiveness and totality of discursive relations that may not exist. On the other hand. diffierential networks indicates an openness to the signifying process. She does. however, use the term "system" in reference to a cornmunity's functional canon (its canonical system). See Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 78. approaches which try to maintain a closed discourse, Fuikerson insists that discourses that shape cornmimal readings are intenected with those of the larger so~iety-"~ A second implication is that the boundaries between disciplines are blurred through this intersection. Theological and scientific howiedge cannot be correlated, as each does not exist as a pure entity. Although Fulkerson iidmits that distinctions cm(and shouid?) be made between discourses, they cannot be completely disjuncfive. Rather. they fmd meaning withui their intertextuai or dialogid relati~nship."~ Thirdiy. a poststructuraI approach also helps to identie both the dominant and the resisting discourses within a faith comrnunity. These can be describexi theologically as discourses conceming sin and grace. Fulkerson departs hmFoucault by insisting that discourses of power and knowledge demonstrate not only human finitude and fallibility. but also provide space for practices of resistance."' A fourth implication of poststructuraiism is that accounts of human finitude and sin must be thickened to Uiclude the embeddedness of social relations in ideologies. Fulkerson emphasizes that everyone. including women who resist their own oppression. is intricately situated within these social relations. Thus, even resistance constituted as a faithfid remembrance of Jesus can only be panid. Fulkerson is careN to note that this account of human finitude does not support an "'essential humanness" but only the ' '9Fulkerson Changing the Subject. p. 362-65. "OFulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 362-65. "' Fulkerson Chnging the Subject, p. 366-67. -87- potentid for sin and redemptiodn The pariiaüty of and potentid for redemption has an eschatalogical emphasis upon the %ut yet". It acknowledges the need for us to help create God's realm of justice, while knowing that our finite role in this creatioo will always b~gpotential distortion. For this reason, both our present interpretations and pst traditions must not be given absolute statu, but understood as contribukg to "a redernptive traditionhg pruces~".'~ This leads to a fifth implication regarding the place of tradition. Since Fulkerson does not believe that there is a correct, and therefore authoritative, reading of scriptwe axid tradition, she insists that the past is to be re-membered and recon~tnicted."~In fact Fulkerson states that 'without our interests and their conflicts with hegemonic discourses. there is no scripture7- .125 This statement does not indicate a rejection of scripture. but an acknowledgement that scripture produces meaning oniy through its use and temporary stabilization within faith ~ommunities.'~~She also acknowledges that this stabilization of scripture and tradition within a cornmunity's canonical system grants both agency. In this sense. the biblical text makes claims upon the community."' Sixthly, resisting regimes must be judged liberative for women not by outside '"Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 19-2 1. '"Fulkerson Changing the Subject. p. 369. '24Fulkenon,Changing the Subject. p. 369-70. IZIFulkerson Changing the Subjecf, p. 369. '26Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 3 70. 'nFulkenon, "Church Documents," p. 50-57. -88- feminist standards, but by the extent to which they protest patnarchd capitalist hegemony withh their own canonid system. The concept of redster helps Fuikerson to identiQ the connections between the reading-performance regUnes and the canonid system, and to understand how variations in the tenor or mode of an interpretation of scripture can provide a resisting, altered meaning. A fdimplication of postsauctural analysis is that Fulkerson is not aitempting to represent the women whom she studies. She is well aware that her own feminin grid affects her analysis. Rather, she is attempting to "mediate difference" in her production of the other that challenges herself and other feminist theologians. She hopes that this will lead to a respect of differences based on a theology of afinity."' "8Fulkerso~Changing the Subject, p. 377-86. -89- Chapter 3 Postcoloniak Kwok Puï-lan "Feminist theology in Asia is not written with a Pen, it is inscribed on the hearts of msny who feel the pain. and yet dare to hope."' Kwok Pui-lan was bom and rai~din Hong Kong. Although she grew up within the Confician tradition. as an East Asian she was also influenced by a dynamic interaction with Taoism and folk Buddhism.' When she was a teenager she attended the Anglican Church in Hong Kong. which fiiaher extended her religious diversity. Today she identifies hmelf as an Anglican, a Chinese. a woman, a mother. a Christian theologian and a participant in the ecumenical movement3 This multiple identity connibutes to her feelings as an -outsider-within" regarding her relationship with both her non-Christian family of origin and the Christian cornm~nity.~The complexity of the ' Kwok Pui-lan. "God Weeps with Our Pain." in New Eyes for Reading: Biblical und 7beologicaZ Reflections by Wornenfmm the 7lrird World, ed. John S. Pobee and Btirbel Von Wartenberg-Potter (Geneva: World Coudof Churches, 1986). 90. '~wokPui-lan. "The Emergence of Asian Feminist Consciousness of Culture and Theology," in We Dare tu Dream: Doing Theology as Asian Wumen, ed. Virginia Fabella and Sun Ai Park. Lee (Hong Kong: Asian Woments Resource Centre for Culture and Theology, 1989). 97. 'Kwok Pui-lm. Discovering rhe Bible in the Non-Biblical World. ïhe Bible and Liberation Series (Maryknoll: Orbis Books. 1995), ix, 6; Kwok Pui-lm, "The Global Challenge." in Christianity and Civil Society: Theulogicol Education for Public Life. ed. Rodney L. Petersen (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1993,138. 'Kwok borrows the term "outsider-within" fiom Afncan American feminist theorkt Patricia Hill Collins. See Kwok Pui-ian, "Speaking fiom the Margins," Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 8. no. 2 (Fail 1992): 103-04. construction of nafionai, religious and cultural identity is thus demofl~tfafed.'It is hm these margins that Kwok approaches the Bible, articulates her theology, nourishes her faith and conwcts with other Christian feminists who also live in the margins! Kwok has an ambivalent attitude towards the Bible. It has been used as a colonking twl to legitimate Eurocenîric superionty. It has also been a resource for Asian Chridans struggling against oppression. Drawing upon an extensive Asian hermeneutical tradition, and utilizing new paradigms for biblical interpretation, she hopes to honour liberative readings and confront hegemonic readings of the biblical tes' Kwok's approach has been deeply affected by the colonization of Asia and especially of Hong Kong where English was the only official language until 1971."ut of this expenence of colonization she draws upon postmodernists. such as Foucault Demda. and Lyotard. as well as postcolonialists. such as Gayatri Chakravorty Spiv& Trinh T. Minh-ha and Edward Said to deconstnict "Eurocentric hegemony and the colonization of the mind"? 'Kwok Discovering the Bible. p. 6. Kwok. "Speaking from the Margins." p. 104. Kwok refers to herself as a feminist in spite of its association with white. middle-flass Western women because of its political significaace in the Chinese language. She also doesn't think any group should have a monopoly on the use of the term "feminist". See Kwok Pui-lan, "The Future of Feminist TheoIogy: An Asian Perspective." in Ferninisr Theologyfiorn the Third World. ed. Ursula King (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1994). 65. 7Kwok Discovering the Bible. p. 1-2. 8 Such legislation forced most residents to rely on others to interpret governrnent documents and file tax foxms. See Kwok Discovering the Bible, p. 4. 9Kwok Discovering the Bible. p. 4. Kwok's critique of colonialisn encornpasses a &tique of modemity and its elevation of the historicai-criticai method. She is interesteci in the development of theulogical methods that offer an alternative to the western male approach, particularly regarding biblical interpretation and its traditional reliance upon historical criticisrn. She hopes to give greater attention to the voices of those marginalized by Euro-Amencan scholarship, eçpecially Asian women living in poverty. Along with Fulkefson, she wants to honour biblical interpretation conducted in communities where there is little or no access to western. acadernic tools of analysis. In addition to Fulkersoa she exposes the destructive colonialist implications of these tools. in order to best honour the multiple identities of marginalized people, Kwok takes an interfâith. interdisciplinary approach. Within the Asian context boundaries between cultures and religions are blurred. Kwok suggests that this ingrained resistance to rigid separation is helpfùl in overcoming the dichotomy between East and West. and the increashg isolation amongst academic disciplinedo This has led her to develop a rnultifaith hemeneutics fiom a postcolonial perspective. ' ' She insists that this hermeneutic is valid not only for Asian Christians but for al1 Christians with a globd I0Kwok Discoverhg the Bible. p. 3. "Postcolonid does not refer to a period after colonization, notes Kwok but to a period since colonization began and has continued into the present. It indicates the cultural practices and reading strategies emerging in colonized societies. See Kwok Pui-lm, "The Sources and Resources of Feminist Theologies: A Post-Colonial Perspective," in Sources and Resources of Feminist Theologies, ed. Elisabeth Hartlieb and Charlotte Methuen. Yearbook of the European Society of Women in Theological Research, vol. 5 (Kampen: Kok Pharos Publishing House, 1997), 6. Critique of Colonllüsm While Schüsster Fiorenza and Fuikerson focus their critiques upon modemity, Kwok critiques modemity within a broder critique of colonialism. The debates between modemity and fundamentalism were transported by missionaries to ~sia''These debates argued about what was tnie and what was nominal for Christian belief, thereby introducing concepts of doctrinal exclusiveness. In an Asian context exclusivity was an anornaiy to their "muitiscriphuai ethosY'." Adoption of Christianity according to these modem understandings therefore meant adoption of this narrow and exclusive, western interpretation of doctrines and scnpture that conflicted with a more inclusive Asian culture. The majority of the missionaries in Asia were ethnocentric. believing both western culture and Christianity to be a superior form of evolution fiom the less developed eastern culture and religions.15 The eastem oppression of women was given as an example of eastem inferiority. and yet Kwok notes that fedemissionaries sent to "Kwok Discovering rhe Bible. p. 8. "~wokhi-lan. "Mothers and Daughters. Writers and Fightea," in Inheriting Our Mofhers' Gardens: Feminist ïheology in Third WorId Perspective, ed. Letty Russel 1, Pui-lan Kwok, Ada Maria Isasi-Diaz and Katie Geneva Cannon (Louisville: The Westminster Press. 1 988). 3 1. I4lCwok Discovering the Bible. p. 23. "Kwok, "Ernergence of Asian Feminist Consciousness," p. 93. Asia achieved an independence and power denied them in westem society.16 She also notes that some Asian cultures aEorded women higher status before the introduction of As a result of this ethnocenaism. it was assumed thai Christianïty codd best be studied or adopted through western philosophy and languages. This assumption created a dependency upon western scholarship and westem churches, and largely neglected the critical contributions that eastern philosophy and culture codd have made to the study and practice of Christian beliefs." Thus. Christian debates within Asia replicated western modern concem within an overdl hegemony of Eurocentrism. The following section will elaborate on the colonial impact of modernity with its historical-critical method. der which I will explore the identity politics of modemity and liberdism. Kwok acknowledges the contribution of the historical-critical method in its challenge of the dogrnatic interpretation of scripttue. However. she questions iü usefulness for racial and ethnic minority churches. Afncan Amencan biblicai scholars. she notes. explain that the readings of marginalized communities are judged superfluous and biased against the more objective. and therefore normative. historical-cntical '%wok. "Emergence of Asian Feminist Consciousness." p. 93-94. "~wokrefers to Mary John Mananzan's assertion that Philippine women received a higher societal status before the introduction of Catholicism. See Kwok Pui-lm. "The Image of the 'White Lady': Gender and Race in Christian Mission," in The Special Nature of Women? ed. Anne Carr and Elisabeth Schüssler Fiore- Conciliurn Senes (London: SCM Press, 199 1), 25. "~wok."Mothen and Daughters," p. 30-3 1. reading~.'~Kwok refers to R S. Suggtharajah's observation that Asian teadings of the Bible involve intuition, imagination and fkassociation of ideas. These approaches are ofkn dinnissed when mdagainst logid, sophisticated and interndly coherent western scholar~hi~.~Kwok notes that such evaluation is based upon the nomand standards of western biblical criticism which elevates abstract deductive. one- dimensional thought indicative of the west." By viewing the Bible as objective, value-neueal history accessible only through "sophisticated technicd analyses", academics view the Bible as past history, limit its contemporary power for liberation, and keep it locked away nom faith communities." Kwok joins with Schüssler Fiorenza to reveal the partiality of historical criticism and to suggest that. while it cm still be taken seriously. it is necessary to move beyond it to a dialogical relationship with conternporary cornrnunities." Along with Fulkerson. she presses for the recognition of communal readings of the Bible that may not draw upon modern methods. The historicalsritical method was developed in the midst of the rise of white I9ICwok refers to Renita Weerns and Brian Blount. See Kwok Pui-lan. "Jesus/The Native: Biblical Studies fiom a Postcolonial Perspective," in Readingfi-orn This Place. vol. m. ed. Fernando F. Segovia and Mary Ann Tolbert (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, Forthcoming), 8. %wok Discovering the Bible. p. 27. "Kwok Discovering the Bible, p. 27. %wok Pui-lan, "The Feminist Hermeneutics of Elizabeth Schüssler Fiorenza: An Asian Response." East Asiu Journal of Theology 3, no. 2 (October 1985): 148. "~wok."The Feminist Hermeneutics of Elizabeth Schiissler Fiorenza," p. 148. supremacy and territorial expansion. Kwok refers to Edward Said's connection of western thought with an underlying colonialisi consciousness.'4 Kwok contends tbat the nineteenth century search for the historical Jesus was a quest both for Jesus and for land and people to conquer? She argues that this quest was grieatly influenced by Europe's "empire-building ethos" and the European projection of 'hati~es".'~Assumptions of the superionty of the Greek language and the ensuing development of western thought were held by biblical scholars into the 1970's." This was contrasted with the supposedly more primitive language and thought of "natives". Modem approaches attempted to dives Chnstianity of myth and miracle in order to present it as a more highly evolved rational religion. This too was conaasted with the bb~perstitiousprimitive beliefs" of colonized people, thereby justifj6ng their need for Christian conversion and western "ci~ilization".'~ Kwok joins with Schüssier Fiorenza to critique the newest quest of the historicai Jesus. arising during the Reagan-Bush era The images of Jesus arising out of this newest quest are described by Kwok as the "Noble Savage par excellence". Jesus is portrayed as foreign and yet tameable. similar to the European descriptions of North Amencan aboriginal people. Kwok suggests that the historical positivism of this quest must be "Kwok. "JesudThe Native." p. 12. "Drawing upon Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak's work. Kwok uses the term "natives" to mean a "Eurocentric construction imposed on peoples Europeans had conquered or colonized." See Kwok. "Jesus/T'he Native." p. 3. "Kwok. "Jesusmie Native." p. 6-8. "Kwok. "Jesusmie Native." p. 1 6. viewed in light of the anti-immigrant ethos and beiittbg of "natives" who live within the borders of western society. Kwok notes that the Enlightenment's quest for common identity (i-e. the Aryan race) and objective facticity was fuelled by anxiety over identity in the midst of a rapidly changing Europe. As a parallel, she observes that the contemporary emphasis on objective factcity is accompanied by an identity crisis of middle-class. white herica3 Kwok does not want to reject entirely the historicai-critical method but rather to view it with suspicion as a modem projed It is the interpretive communities which must judge the historical-critical method and not vice versa. While this method may be inconsequential to illiterate Third World women primarily concerned about their survival. it is of some help to Third World and Afilcan Amencan biblical scholars. However. even for them it is limited because of its refisal to entertain certain questions or perspectives." Kwok insists that the European positivist approach to history and historiopphy not be the sole nom of hterpretation. The contrashg Asian view of history together with the readings of local religious communities offer additional noms and critiques of biblical interpretation. While Kwok acknowledges that her critiques of modernity have been enhanced by feminist and postmodem critiques. she remains suspicious of both. She has recently become aware of the need to view European and North American feminist biblical '9~wok."lesusmie Native." p. 23-24. 30K~ok"Jesus/The Native." p. 27. "~wokDiscoverhg the Bible. p. 86. -97- scholarship CriticaIly. WeAsian women theologians have rralued the need to develop their own theologies apart from westem feminist theologies, they have often depended upon westem feminist biblical scholarship. "There is the assumption that Asian women can analyze our socio-politicai situation, whereas western feminia scholars can tell us what the Bible me an^."^' If questions concernhg colonization and white suprernacy are not addressed by western feminists and postmodernists. they remain as Eurocentric as the modem historical-critical method. 'The postmodem emphasis on deconsûucting the subject the indetemiinacy of language, and the excess of meaning will not be helpful at al1 if it does not corne to grips with the colonial impulse and white supremacy which make 'modernity' possible in the first place."33 Kwok recommends a reading strategy of "paralle1 processing" by which various western methods, including historicai-critical and pstmodem, be read simdtaneously with postcoloniai, literary, sociological. and reader-response cnticisms." She stresses that theological professors must "catch up with the times" and teach students both '-the master's texts" and the tools to critique them." As these various methods are explored. she suggests that another time-frame on the margins of both modernity and postmodemity mut be entered in order to attend to the differentiations of gender, race, class. ethnic ''~wok Diseovering the Bible, p. 2-3. "Kwok, ''Jesusmie Native." p. 27. "Kwok takes the term "pamllel processing" fiom cornputer systems. See Kwok, "Jesus/The Native," p. 22. 3SK~ok,"Jesusmie Native." p. 23. groupings, sexuai orientation, age, and disabilities." Identity Politics Kwok suggests that in its contact with the Easf western Christian thought posited Asia as the essence of the Other. Asian women and men were defined by Western constnrctions?' Coionization enforced this essentialized merence between westerners and Asians which objectified colonized people and constnicted them as appendages to western hi~tor~.~~Kwok refers to Truih T. Minh-ha's thesis that hegemony separates the colonizer fiom the colonized by superimposing irreconcilable essences of differences while not acknowledging the diversity of social construction. This is an "ideological construction of sameness and difference" that does not 'kspect diversi- in terms of race. gender, class. culture. and religi~n".'~As a result artificial polanty between women is enforced while diversity is flattened.lo Kwok notes that this prevents female bonding and masks white privileges and power. thereby supporting white male supremacy." The converse side of essentializing differences is the western liberal notion that al1 humans are eqdand the same. This notion discounts power and pnvilege afforded "~wok."Jesus/The Native." p. 28-29. "~wokDiscovering the Bible. p. 24-25. "~wok."The Image of the 'White Lady'." p. 25; Kwok Discovering the Bible. p. 25. '%wok Discovering lhe Bible, p. 79. %wok. 'The image of the 'White Lady'," p. 26. '"Kwok. "The Image of the 'White Lady'." p. 26. pdcular pups. It overlooks the critique of ideological domination and socio-politicai differences between people. "The sad tmth is that a small group of white people have always been the spokespersons for aKw In order to develop their own theologies, Asian theologies must deconstruct these Western views and claim their own identities. This includes "shared colonial history. multiple religious traditions. rich and diverse cuihues, immense dering and poverty. a long history of patriarchal control, and present political struggles"." Kwok notes that these definitions are contextualized within political engagement and are not concerned with a particdar essence of gender or culture. She locates the essentialist debate within Greek metaphysics, universalizing colonialist discourse and the present western controversy with language and representation. These are culturaily specific for the West. and have linle relevance for Asia. Instead. she defines an Asian wornan with multi- layered fluid descriptions that are partial. siniated and context-bound. This ailows her to retain gender, race and culture as political categories without reverting to universalizing. objective disco~rse.~It also necessitates the weaving of various different nanatives arising out of multiple identities. She refea to Jean-François Lyotard's observation that as our roles shift in each narrative. their interaction produces new meanings. and altemate narratives. Thus. Kwok challenges the concept of an isolated. monolithic identity. Rather. "Kwok, "Jesusmie Native." p. 25. "3Kwok. Discovering the Bible. p. 24. *Kwok, Discovering the Bible. p. 25-26. - 1 00- multiple subject positions produce multiple identities within multilevei discourses." With this understanding of political identity, Kwok demonstrates that feminist biblical interpretation is based upon white western male scholarship and white feminist theory. and emerges within the western women's movement and women-church rnovement In con- she calls for the development of uidigenous Asian biblical hermeneutics that will honour the multiple identities of Asian women and expose the intersection of anti-Judaism. sexism, and cu~hiraiand religious impenalisrn in historical interpretations? Theoiogical Method K wok Pui-lan proposes a multi faith hermeneuùcs appropriate for the multiple identities of Asian Chri~tians.~'Because of their mukifaith context, Asian people are more apt to incorporate a variety of faith traditions within their own perspectives and beliefs. This is particuiarly true of adherents of Chinese fok religions, such as her parents? Asian Christians therefore realize that the Bible must be interpreted for people of other faith traditions. When the Bible is studied in cornparison with other scriptures. new insights into the biblical texts and ourselves as Christians will be gained. In order to ?Cwok Discovering the Bible. p. 38. "Kwok Discovering the Bible. p. 26-27,79. "Kwok has borrowed the expression "muitifaith hemeneutics" fiom Sugirtharajah. "Kwok. "Mothers and Daughten," p. 21.3 1. receive "divine disclosure" fmm other faith traditions. Kwok stresses the importance of Christian humility and radical opemesd9 Mer exploring the multifaith and multicultural data used by Kwok I will examine its implications for tndh and authority. Following this, 1 wiil look at Kwok's proposais for new faith cornmunities. dialogicai imagination. and the performance of scripture. 7lreotogzkat Sources In her article defending the "syncretism" of Chung Hyun Kyung's address at the World Council of Churches in Canberra Kwok points out Rudolph Bdtmann's assertion that Chnstianity is a syncretic religion, formed out of a synthesis of Judaism. Gnosticism. Greek philosophy. and Hellenistic religion^.^ Western philosophies and religions contributed to the formation of early Christian doctrines and biblical interpretations in the western world. Thus. Christianity has always been a syncretic mLu of various western philosophies and religions. In a similar syncretic manner, Kwok draws upon eastern philosophy and religions to discem the Gospel within eastem contexts. The reference to eastem philosophy and religions for Asian Christians is unavoidable in the transIation of certain biblical words and doctrines which rnust use terms and concepts from Asian religions. As an example. Kwok cites the 300-year Chinese Christian controversy over the name for God. One of the difficulties missionaries encountered was the translation of a monotheistic. masculine and transcendent God into a 49Kwok Discovering fhe Bible. p. 92-93. MKwokPui-lan, "Gospel and Culture," Chrislianity und Crisis 5 1, no. 1O/ 1 1 (hly 15 1991): 223. pldistic, polytheistic socieîy which accepted both fedeand male principles within the deities. In contrast to western perceptions of God as supreme over creation indigenous Chinese thought perceived cosmogony as dynamic and continuous with no creator standing outside of it. Different Chinese ternis for God reflected diffe~ntaspects of the divine. none of which fdly captued the western concept, and al1 of which gave difTerent additional meanings. The missionaries' choices of Chinese terms reflected theu contrasting doctrinal emphases and cultural bises, differentiating between British and American cultlrre. as well as amongst Roman Catholic. Protestant and evangelicai traditions.*' Kwok notes with irony that by adopting the philosophy of the West and iponng that of the east. Asians have been "busy solving other people's theological puzzles-and thus doing a disservice to our people and the whole church by not integrating our own culture in our theology'? If Asian cultures were used as sources for Christian theology. sorne of the mon heated debates within westem Christianity, such as homoousia and the presentday controversy over female images for the divine. might be avoided." Thus. Kwok emphasizes the importance of Asian theological sources for everyone. not just for those within Asian contexts. With reference to Chung's presentation in Canberra. she lauds the contribution of Asian theologians to "intrafaith" dialogue. rnoving fiom insular "Kwok hi-lan. Chinese Women and Chrisfianity: 1860-1 92 7. ed. Susan Thistlethwaite, Amencan Academy of Religion Academy Series, No. 75 (Atlanta: Scholars Press. l992), 3 1-38. ''~wok. "Mothen and Daughters," p. 3 1. ')Kwok. "Mothers and Daughters." p. 3 1 . Christian introspection to a "survival-hîberation centred ~yncretism".~ For these reasons Kwok &es a variety of Asian resources as "theological data"? She suggests that "Asian cultural and religious symbols are adequate vehicles to express the divine."%Ln addition to Asian philosophical and religious traditions. including Confucianism Taoism. folk Buddhism, and goddess-worship, she also uses songs, performances, writings and experiences as sources for her theological method. These include lullabies. poems, dances, rituals, songs, myths, stories, Ietten fiom political prisonen, historical events. and obi- notices." Kwok notes that the legends and the social biographies of Asian people have provided theological data for many Asian theologians." Kwok intenveaves both Asian and western sources of theological data into a ho listic fnunework of "correlative thinking". By this term she refers to the Chinese belief that everything is comected with the whole, a belief which challenges the western dualistic separation of immanence fiom transcendence. materid from spirituai. and 5464 Survival-liberation centered syncretism" is Chung Hyun Kyung 's term used in her book Struggle to Be the Sm Again. quoted by Kwok. See Kwok "The Global Challenge," p. 142. 5S~wok"Mothers and Daughters," p. 27. 56~~okhi-lm. "The Mission of God in Asia and Theological Education." Ministerial Formation. no. 48 (Janii;uy 1990): 21. "Kwok, "Mothers and Daughters." p. 27-30; Kwok "Emergence of Asian Feminist Consciousness." p. 97-98; Kwok Discovering fhe Bible, p. 14. "~wokgives examples of these sources wdby C. S. Song, Archie Lee, Padma Gallup, Nantawan Boonprasat Lewis, Cyris H. S. Moon, Ahn Byung Mu and Lee Sung Hee. See Kwok Discovering the Bible, p. 13-1 6. human hmcosm010gical.~ However, at the same time she does not advocate indiScTiminate use of these resources, nor of western traditions. She does not waat to romanticize Asian culture by overlooking socio-political stniggles and patriarchal biases." Like Schüssler Fiorenza. she approaches al1 theological sources with a hermeneutics of suspicion. Tdand Authorii'y The use of mulbfaith and multiculturai theological data for interpreting Christianity has important implications for the concepts of truth and authority. some of which 1 will now explore as they relate to revelation, the characteristics of Asian scnpture, the bibliml canon. the diversity of biblical texts and global authoritative criteria Kwok states that western missionaries assumed there was an essence of Christianity contained in particular doctrines and biblical teachings that could be extracted fiom western traditions. The challenge was to present this "body of theological tmths" in ways acceptable to Asian people. Attempts to introduce the Gospel "Asian style", however, have ken unable to escape the imposition of particular westem imperialist assurnptions and standard^.^' ïhese methods of accommodation. according to Kwok, view scriphire and the --tore symbolism of Christianity" uncritically, without a realization of the androcentric bias inherent within these western sources. They also view '9~ui-lanKwok "Meditation," One Worfd, no. 1 55 (May 1990): 15. %wok Discovering ~heBible, p. 67; Kwok, "Emergence of Asian Feminist Consciousness," p. 98. 6'Kwok Discovering the Bible, p. 57-58. -1 OS- Asian cultures mcrîtically, adopting cultural expressions without a makation of theV paîriarchal In addition, they assume that western traditions contain the truth, while eastem traditions are mere vehîcles for this truth!3 Wother people can only define truth according to the western perspective, then chnstianization really means ~esternization!~ As an altemative, Kwok suggests that the primary concem should not be the presentation of a fixed Gospel, but the discemunent of a living Gospel within the contemporary life and struggies of Asians. "Instead of adapting a colonial, western Christianity to Asia, [Asian theologians] now see the task of theology as reconceptualiPng and reformulating the meaning of Christian faith.'*' As previously noteci, this task draws heavily upon Asian resources, including indigenous Asian religions, in the discemment of the Gospel and euth. In her later work, Kwok forms a more complex analysis of truth with the help of Michel Foucault's "political economy of tmth". Foucault co~ectstruth with power in his study of the societal production and repression of truth. From this analysis, Kwok asks what ûuth is, who owns it and who is given authority to interpret it. Kwok also draws upon the work of Charles Peirce to explain the ciifference between eastern and western perceptions of truth. Peirce proposes three ways of 62~wok,"Emergence of Asian Feminist Consciousness," p. 98. "~wok,"Mothers and Daughters," p. 29-30. %wok, Discovering the Bible, p. 1 1. "Kwok Discovering the Bible, p. 57-58. - 106- theorizing language: relating it to the world (semantics); relating it to itself(syntax); and relating it to its social context (pragmatics). Kwok explains that "Chinese philosophy focuses more on pragmatics - on the correct use of language to provide guidance for action, to shape social relations, and to transmit a moral vision of society.* Because of its pragrnatic and relatiooal emphasis, Kwok refers to Chinese thought as "correlative- Iogic". In contrast, western philosophy has tended to focus upon existentid issues relating to semantics. For this reason, Kwok refers to the "identity-logic" of the West!' Postmodemisrn demonstrates nich western biases. Kwok suggests that postmodem concem about the representation of language, its thclaims and the relation between the language sign and its referent are indicative of western anxiety and mistrust about language. They arise out of a separation of the transcendent fiom the immanent, the hurnan from the natural, and the historical hmthe cosmological. Chinese philosophicd traditions do not acknowledge such separations. The purpose of leaming is not to grasp an intellecrual concept of abstract, etemal truth. Rather, according to Confucius, the purpose is for the "selfcultivation" of the individual within an ordered society of "hurnan relatednessy7.mead of searching for absolute truth, Chinese hermeneutics seeks "wisdorn for practical In contrast with postmodem concerns about language, the concem of Chinese philosophen, such as Confucius, is with the abuse and distortion of language arising out -- - -- %wok Discovering the Bible, p. 35. 67Kwok, Discovering the Bible, p. 34. 68Kwok,Discovering the Bible, p. 35-3 6. -107- of selfish and ulterior motives. Kwok notes that this approach welcomes dialogue, difference and rnulti~licity.~~It also provides an alternate understanding of tmth fimm that of the west. Within Chinese traditions, truth is constituted by the "integral relationship between knowing and doing". Therefore, pater emphasis is placed upon "mod and ethical visions of a good society" than upon metaphysical or epistemological questions.70 Kwok extends this analysis to biblicd revelation. Mead of accepting the Bible as the revealed Word of God, Kwok suggests that revelation be discerned by the mamer in which the biblical tradition is emcted within the Christian community. She refers to Katie Geneva Cannon's questioning of a Christianity which supported the rape, lynching and castration of Black people whose basic hurnan rights were denied. Along with Aûïcan Ameicans, she States that people of the Third World are more concerned about God's tmth that is revealed through an enacted biblical tradition, than about a hidden, metaphysical tmth contained within the Bible. "The politics of tnrth is not fought on the epistemo 10 gical levei."" A contexhial approach to the Bible in Asia will dismiss not only an abstract, western metaphysics but also an exclusive concentration upon the Bible as scripture. To demonstrate this, Kwok examines the use of the Word of God as a traditional, Protestant hermeneutical key. A logocentric interpretation of scripture assumes a univocal Word of God that can be found withÏn the biblical text and which establishes a foundatiod tmtb 'i(wok, Discovering the Bible, p. 36. "'Kwok Discovering the Bible, p. 11. %wok Discovering the Bible, p. 12. -108- or meeniog. Kwok develops Demida's critique of this Wse assumption" of a prior, mediateci presence behind the textR Instead of taking a logocentric approach, she suggests viewing the biblical text as one language system amongst others that designates the sacted. Rather than viewing different scriptures as sacred in themselves, Kwok understands them as interplaying signs that point towards the sacred." This necessitates a multifaith hermeneutics. Kwok's Chinese multiscriptural context has taught her that "scripture is a ver- fluid and dynamic concept". This has led her to foin observations about the character of scripture. The first is that scripture is relational. A text only becomes scripture through its partïcular relationship with a community. Its status may also change over time. As an example, she explains the shifting views towards the Confucian classics throughout the centuries. Secondly, within China one encounters many different scriptures, each with their own claims to author*. The Chinese are accustomed to weighing the authority of "~wokinsists that it is in the interaction between text and community where truth is found. God's revelation occurs not within the Bible itself, but within the enacted biblical tradition. She therefore dismisses a logocentric positionhg of the Word of God within the text and agrees with Demda's rejection of a prior unmediated presence behind the text. If one agrees with her premises, however, is this conclusion necessary? If divine tmth can be found in the interaction of text with community, 1 assume that there must be a prior unmediated presence behind both the text and the community. Demda may well dispute this because of his atheistic stance, but from a Christian perspective revelation ca~otoccur without this unmediated presence. If the Word of God is understood as the preexistent logos of John 1, with reference to both Sophia and the Christ, it is not equated with the text. It can, however, be found withia the text AND the community as they engage in dialogue and faithflll response. As one language system amongst others, the biblical texts point towards the sacred that exists not as a separate entity apart fiom the scnptures and humanity, but within both. The sacred is then revealed through faithful performances of scripture. "~wok,Discoverhg the Bible, p. 16- 17. one tradition against mother, thereby relativizing all daims, and dowing for dve, new syntheses. This enabled the birth of Zen BuddIiism and Ndonfucienism. Thirdly, there are no rigid canonid boundaries of srriphne. Because the car-1011~are immense, few have access to ail of the tem. There are also few Asian religions which have a regdative body to uphold the authority of a particular canon? Lastly, scripture is not necessarily Limited to a written text. Kwok dernonstrates the importance of the oral tradition within Hinduism, Confucianism, Buddhism, as well as Christianity. AIong with Fulkerson, Kwok notes the importance of the performaace of scripture, especially amongst poorer communities which have lesaccessibility to the wrïtten texts. Kwok also notes that the performance of scnpture places less emphasis upon a canonical body of texts and more upon oral and aura1 interpretation~.'~Further discussion about the oral transmission of scripture will occur later in this chapter. These four characteristics of scnpture withthe multiscriptural Chinese context have made most Chinese people suspicious of any religious group, such as the Christian missionaries, who claim that their scriptures alone contain the truth and hold ultimate auth~rity.~~Kwok refers to the late nineteenth century missionary movement, epitomized by John R Mott, as an example of an exclusive, bibiîcai clairn for tnrth and revelation. She States that such a claim posited the Bible as a "signifier" of the superiority of western beliefs and the deficiency of "heathen7' culture. This construction made western culture "Kwok Discovering the Bible, p. 2 1-23. "Kwok Discovering the Bible, p. 44-56. 76Kw0kDiscovering the Bible, p. 23. -1 10- normative and inherently supaior. Kwok draws a parallei between this and Jacques Lacan's poststnichual description of the phdus sigifjhg fdedeficiency. This parailel is emphasUed through rnissionary fiteratme describing its work with words such as "aggressive", "intrusion", and "penetrati~n".~ Kwok quotes Zhao Zichen who questions this exclusive view of revelation. There is no time or place when God has not ken breaking into the world, nor can it be denied that God has inspired eastern sages." As an exampie she mentions the Beijing massacre where she discemed God's presence with the st~dents.~~Kwok equates revelation with tnah in her insisteme with "many other" Chinese Christians that the Bible is not the only source of truth, nor is the biblical canon closed." Kwok's discomfort with the closed biblical canon echoes Schüssler Fiorenza's concems about the factors in the formation of the canon. She notes the particuiar voices which were excluded both hmthe texts and fkom the process of transmission of the n~wokDiscovering the Bible, p. 9. "Kwok Discovering the Bible, p. 10. 79(wok, Discovering the Bible, p. xiii. " Kwok, Discovering the Bible, p. 10. Kwok is also uncornfortable with traditionai descriptions of Christian revelation as unique or special. These descriptions contain hperialist overtones which implies the superiority of Christian revelation over other religions. See Kwok "The Sources and Resources of Feminist Theologies," p. 15; Kwok, 'TheFuture of Feminist Theology," p. 68.1s it not possible, though, to refer to Christian revelation as unique while resisting any exclusive claims to revelation or imperiaiist overtones of supenority? DifYerent religions do consist of beliefs that are unique in their content and practice. Kwok wodd not want to deny any religion its unique difirance. mentext8' In order to rewthis, the biblical canon couid be opened to include otha te* and traditions. She refers to Bo Chenguang who argued in 1927 that,just as the Bible contains the Jewish classics which preceded Jesus, the Chinese Bible should contain Confucian, Daoist rnid Buddhist classics." The definition of canon could also be expandeci, as both Schiissler Fiorema and Fulkerson have suggested. However, Kwok is considering dispensing with the concept altogether. She points out the connection of canon with power. It is formed by those who are dominant within a religious cornmunity and it is used to control those who are marginalized within the community and those whose cultures Merhm the domhant Out of Kwok's personal experience she notes that the biblical canon has been used to control and denigrate Asian cultures and women. Under the pretext of protecting the truth, the closure of the biblical canon has fuactioned to repress t~th.~ While Kwok rejects the canon and the sacrality of the bibiical text, she still emphasizes the importance of the Bible for minjung communities." It is not the biblical text which she rejects, but the authoritative status given it As with Schüssler Fiorerua, she does not accept the normativity of the Bible or of biblical criticai principles. She Kwok, Discovering the Bible, p. 1 7,49. "Kwok Discovering the Bible, p. 10. "Kwok, Discovering the Bible, p. 1 7-1 8. 84 Minjung is a Korean term coasisting of two Chinese characters which mean the common people, or the masses, who are subjugated or ded. By focushg on the minjung communities, Kwok is able to highlight the biblical interpretations of women and ethnic minorhies. See Kwok, Discovering the Bible, p. 15-1 6, 18-1 9. agrees with both Schiksler Fiorema and Fulkerson that authoritative criteria must lie within the faith communities as they each arrive at their own biblical interpretations." "Biblical truth cannot be pre-packagecl ..[but] must be fond in the actual interaction between text and context in the concrete histoncal situation."86 One of the reasons she locates audioritative criteria withiu faith conmiunities is because the meaning of biblicai texts is dependent upon communai performance. Like Schiissler Fiorenza and Fulkerson, she believes that a biblicai text has multiple meanings that are constructed within the community. Because of her use of the Chinese theory of language, with its emphasis upon a pragmatic, dialogical approach, she is not interesteci in a &-floating text whose meaning cm be traceci to divine or authorid intent, or to the onpinal context. Rather, "multiple meanings are created in public discussion, aeative dialogue and sometimes heated controversy."" The more diverse the interpretive communities, the ncher and fdler the interpretive dialogues can be. As communities become more inclusive, the voices of the Other wiil be able to contribute to these dialogues and not be subsurned into dominant voices.'' Along with Schiissler Fiorenza and Fulkerson, Kwok is carefid to honour the diversity of the biblical tem. It is for this reason that she does not want to posit any biblical critical principles as the nom. This would create a coercive hierarchy of truth %wok, Discovering the Bible, p. 18- 19. "Kwok, Discovering the Bible, p. 11. %wok Discovering the Bible, p. 39-40. "ICwok Discovering the Bible, p. 40. -1 13- that would oblitaate the pIufalitY of the texts under the guise of unity. She recognizes that different communities will establish different nomfor inmtation according to their owu situations. She also recognizes the importance of intercommunal relationships and suggests that each commUI1ity must be accolmtable to others, tested through public disc~urse.~~ Although Kwok is wary of universal nom, she also realizes the need for global criteria that can assist in the public accountability of each comrnmity. She insists that Chridans must be accomtable not just to the world-wide Christian community, but to the global human community. 'The question shifts fiom how the Bible can be normative for the Christian community to how it cmbear meaning for the sunrival of human beings and the planet.* Instead of extracting biblical principles as prescriptions for this task, she suggests drawing upon the particularity of biblical stories with their insights into common human issues. These insights can then be contrasted and enriched by stories and insights arising out of other faith traditions. The criteria by which these insights can be tested concem the lessening of human suffering, the resistance to oppression within the chwch, academy and society, and the liberation of the disadvantaged, particularly women and children? More specifically, Kwok gives a number of theses to guide biblical interpretation. It must not be anti-Semitic and must not oppress or discriminate against any race or ethnic group. Further, issues of racism, ethnocentrism, sexism, and the 8%wok, Discovering the Bible, p. 19. qwok Discovering the Bible, p. 23. 91Kwok, Discovering the Bible, p. 3 1. -1 14- politics of difference must be examinecl by everyone, not just Third World or minority women. Also, the cultural complexity within the bibiicd texts shodd be exarnined in order to better understand contemporary cross-culhrral interpretations. My7the Bible must be interpreted through a rnultifaith hemieneuti~s.~~In sum, Kwok posits ethical criteria, as do Schüssler Fiorenui and Fuikerson, to judge biblical uiterpretations and theological methods. They must contribute to the liberation and humanization of the global community, emphasizing &dom, justice, peace and reconciliatiod3 Cornmtinity and Diversie Kwok's ethicd critena contain one significant diflerence f?om those of Schiissler Fiorema and Fdkemn in relation to the rninjung communities. WeKwok is carefiii to honour groups of people who are rnost vulnerable and silenceci, she takes issues with the epistemological privilege of the oppressed and feminist standpoint theory. In her later workg4she challenges the belief that Third World people, the poor and the marginalized have an a priori priviiege of biblical interpretation. This concept of epistemological privilege assumes that the marginalized or contemporq "natives" share common experiences with the marginalized or "natives" of the biblicd texts, thereby increasing the ability of today's marginalized to understand and identie with these texts. Kwok suggests that such identification faiis to appreciate the construction of the 'kative", overlooks the %wok Discovering the Bible, p. 84-95. "KWO~, "Mothem and Daughters," p. 32-33. M~eginnlligwith Discovering the Bible, Kwok takes a more explicitiy postcolonial approach in her work. See also Kwok, "Jesusmie Native"; Kwok, "The Sources and Resources of Feminist Theologies". dissbdarities between the histoncal development of the Pdestinian societies and oui- own, assumes that only authentic "naîives" can understand the Bible, and cl& a fidamental distinction between Empeanlwhite American societies and "native" societies. These problems "commit the sin of Orientalism" by collapsing %ative9' hto one category and ignoring the varied social and histoncal constructions of each society. They also perpetuate the sharp and false distinction between European/white American and d other societies. Although Ewpeaa and white Arnerimn cultures constructed white supremacy, they are not C'fûndamentailydifferent" nom all others. This assumption only serves to strengthen the 'îwe-they dichotomy which gives white people power"? The epistemological privilege of the oppressed aiso assumes that one is either the oppressed or the oppressor, without realizing that multiple identities mate a mix of privilege and marginalization. "The Other is never a homogeneous group; there is dways the ûther within the Other.'"% Full appreciation of the diversity of the marginalized means that we wili need to move beyond this type of identification. As a.alternative, Kwok cails for new faith communities which will honour inclusivity, rnutuality and solidarity. Together with Rebecca Chopp, she challenges the church to mode1 such commmities for the sake of the world? These communities are not to remah isolated in their diversity, however. Kwok refers to John S. Pobee's process of 95~~ok,"JesudThe Native," p. 25-27. %Kwok, Discovering the Bible, p. 82; Kwok, "The Sources and Resources of Feminist Theologies," p. 78. 97K~ok,"The Global Challenge," p. 14 1. building a community of communities. In order to have a dobal consciousness, diverse communities must also envision and work towards a wider commimity constituting the body of Christ? Thus, the plurality which her method celebrates serves not to thwart Christian UILity, but enrich it with more genuine authenticity.* According to Kwok, solidarity is one of the means by which this global comrnunity cm be formed. Through an etymological study of the word "solidarity", Kwok demonstrates the combined influence of western and eastern co~otatioasof this term. The French wod, soIidm'té, originally meant a nahiral bonding of peuple from the same background. Marx introduced a political twist by defining it as the selfhrganization of the oppressed. European and North American usages have continued to stress its connotation of justice. The Indonesian term means "faithfd to a fkiend". In Korean it means "binding everyone in a circle" and in Chinese it means "identifjhg as the same". Thus. the Asian usages have stressed the interconnection of everything. Building upon these Asian usages, Kwok calls the Church to be in solidarity with the people and ail of creation. At the same time she cautions against the "clichéd rhetoric of solidarïty" which does not put speech into action.lM With her cal1 to solidarity, she stresses that the Church and theological institutions must shifl their theologicai orientation fiom ecclesial-centered to pe~~lecentered.'~'In a '%wok, "The Global Challenge," p. 141. %wok, "Mothers and Daughters," p. 32-33. 'qwok,''The Sources and Resources of Feminist Theologies," p. 13. 10'~wok,"The Mission of God in Asia," p. 21,23. Iater writing Kwok shifts her position slightly by suggesting that Christianity should move hmanthropocenîrism to bio-centnsm.'"%wok chailemges the Church to enter into an ecological soiidarity which will observe the goals of the World Council of Churches' Ecumenical Decade of Chmhes in Solidarity with Women. and the WCC's cal1 for justice7 peace, and the integrïty of creation. Through these goals diversity will be recognized and mutual responsibility will replace scapegoating and victimization. The intercomection of multiple oppressions and identities will also be made, thus envisionhg the wity of the global Christian comrnunity amidst the diversity of the local communities, Diatogical1,gination and the Per$onnance of the Talking Book Within these justice-seeking faith communities, Kwok proposes a mode1 of biblical interpretation. With reference to the critical role Schiissler Fiorenza gives ekklësia of wo/men, Kwok locates the 'tritical principle of interpretation" not in the Bible, but in the comrnunities of women and men who are reading the Bible with "diaiogical imagination" for their own liberation.'O3 Influenced by M. M. Bakhtin's Diatogic Imagination, Kwok has coined the term "dialogical imagination" to describe her method of biblical interpretation that honours ha-and intercommunal dialog~e.'~The 'OZKwokhi-lm, "Ecotheology and the Recycling of Chnstianity," in Ecotheotogy: Voicesfiom South olrd North, ed. David G. Hallman (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1994), 11 0- 1 1. Io3KwokDiscovering the Bible, p. 19. laSee Chapter Three, especially footnote 1 1 of Kwok Discovering the Bible, p. 32-34, 108. Chinese cbatacters for dialogue impiy "mutuality, active listening, and opcnoess to what one's partner has to ~ay".'~' By imagination Kwok meam "a consciousness of conflict.a pause, the finding of a new image, the repatteming of reality, and interp~tation"."'~ Conflict is inevitable for Asian Christians because of the clash between the western imbued biblical interpretation that they have hherited and their own Asiau reality. Therefore new images and interpretations forged through a diaiectical process between biblical traditions and people with other religious and cultural traditions are nece~sary.'~ Kwok's process of dialogical imagination considers not ody the written text, but the discussion of it in difEerent dialects. It invites dialogue with many, different scriptures and takes a "multiaxial" approach that analyzes the intersection of race, class, gender, culture and history. As Kwok takes a more explicitly postcolonial approach in her later work, she defines this rndtiaxid approach as one that exposes and investigates %e intersection of anti-Judaism, sexism, and cultural and religious imperialisrn in the history of the text's interpretationY7.'O8 This approach emphasizes a democratic process that welcomes the voices of the marginalized and works towards a just and inclusive '05~wok,Discovering the Bible, p. 12. Io6Kwokderives this process of creative imagination nom Sharon Parks. See Kwok Discovering the Bible, p. 1 3. '07~lthoughKwok uses the term "dialectical" here, she remmrnends replacing it with the term "dialogical" in another chapter of the sarne book, as I indicate in the foUowing paragraph. This confusion may have resulted because the chapters were written at different times as separate articles, and later complied into one book. See Kwok Discovering the Bible, p. 12-1 3,37. 'O8~wok,Discuvering the Bible, p. 79. commdty.'" Bakhtin's work on diaIogism and heterogiossia gives a helpful bask for this approach. He explains that the intenial divisions of one language into social didects are dependent upon class, religion, generation, region and profession. His terni "dialogism" refers to the mWng of the speakers and listeners' intentions within the mix of social didects. ' 'O %y expanding this concept to the church and biblicd interpretation, a dialectical approach, indicating discourse between polarities, is replaced by dialogid, indicating multiple discourses which are both convergent and disparate."' Kwok suggests that a dialogical model of biblical interpretation will examine the multipücity of interpretations that arise out of particular communities which in tum are differe~ltiatedby identities such as race, class, culture and sexual orientation. She refers to Fulkerson's insisteme that certain groups of people, such as women, do not speak with one voice.'" A dialogical model listens to marginalized voices and insists that dialogue must take place not only amongst Christian communities but with human communities of al1 faiths. This wiH more accurately reflect the multiple identities of al1 people, and particularly Asians who live in a multiscriptural context Instead of approaching biblical interpretation from a singuiar perspective, such as gender, race or class, Kwok insists that the intersection of multiple '09(wok, Discovering the Bible, p. 36. ' '%wok, Discovering the Bible, p. 37. "'Kwok refers to Evelyn Brooks Kigginbotham's extension of Bakhtin's work to the church as a dialogic model. See Kwok Discovering the BibZe, p. 37. ' 12Kwok,Discovenng the Bible, p. 37. identities and contexts be considd In sum, her dialogid model "emphasizes plurality of meanings, multiplicity of ndvesand a multiaxial heworkof analysis".'l3 Based on this dialogicd model, Kwok suggests viewiog the Bible as a "iallcing book". She borrows this term hmHenry Louis Gates who uses it to describe fican American literature. He demonstrates how AfXcan Americans used the same language and books, inctuding the Bible, as the white %astersm use& but changed the signiSing practices in a subversive way. By refhgto the Bible as a takgbook, Kwok emphasues the subversive and imaginative readings of the Bible by marginalized and colonized communities. ' l4 Kwok distinguishes this image of the Bible fiom others that have ken prominent at Merent times. The doctrinal mode1 views the Bible as the Word of God emphasinng verbal inspiration and the revelation of God speaking through the text. Interaction with the Bible becomes a monologue of Listening and obedience with no allowance for histoncal and communal constructions of meaning. Another image given by the historical-critical method views the Bible as an historic document which allows dialogue, but is more concemed with the past than the present. It focuses more upon "diachronic dialogue" than "synchronie". Elisabeth Schiissler Fiorenza's image of the Bible as an historical prototype recognizes the historical context of the Bible while shifting concem to a conternporary liberationist reading. However, Kwok wonders if her debate with historical positivists and apolitical posûnodernists is relevant for people hmother ''3Kwok Discoverhg the Bible, p. 37-40. I4Kwok Discoverhg the Bible, p. 42. -121- culîurai contexts. Asian peopies have been more interesteci in religious and moral insights gieafled hmscriptures than historical td.fiam Arnerikm women have been more concemed with the relation of the Bible to their daily lives than its historical conte% Kwok also questions Schüssler Fiorenza's inattention to the participation of poor women and slave women in the 6'discipIeship of eq~aIs".~I~Without this information, Kwok cautions against using the Bible as a histoncal prototype.'16 In contrast to these images of the Bible, the concept of a talking book emphasizes the oral transmission of scripture. Kwok notes that this mode har been prevdent not only in Asia but, until the last two centuries, in the West as weLH7Before Gutenberg's invention of movable type, accessibility to the biblical text was restricted to ecclesial leaders who alone produced its meaning within the interests of their privileged positions. While the cornmon people engaged in oral transmission of the texts, the official and thereby correct interpretations and meanings were produced apart fiom these cornmon transmissions. The people would also have ken limited in their aura1 reception of the text by the liturgical readings. They would only hear parts of scriptme chosen to support parricular doctrines or principles. '"~wok,"The Ferninist Hemeneutics of Elizabeth Schiissler Fiore-" p. 147-53. 1'6K~okDiscoverhg the Bible, p. 40-42. "'~wok suggests that the oral transmission of scripture bas yielded to the written text because of the rise in the western iiteracy rate durhg the last two centuries. However, 1 have found that the more liberal western Protestant churches are reveaing back to the oral transmission of scripture as the primary mode in part because of little interest in Bible Study. Kwok's term ^taiking book" intentionally shitts auihority away hmthe written text to the interpretive community. They now control the production and evaluafion of its rneaning. Emphasis upon the oral transmission of the taiking book also better enables margllialized voices to contnâute to its meaning and evaluation."' Along with Fulkerson, Kwok reaiizes the importance of the performance of scripture through oral transmission for marginalized communities. Kwok is not rejecting a focus upon the written te* but simply wants to afnrm the importance and validity of oral transmission. She observes a class diBirence in the particular approaches Asiau women take towards the Bible. Women who have received theologicd training tend to focus upon the written text and western henneneutical methods while the majority of Asian women focus upon oral transmission, using ''fk association and creative retelling of biblical stories to appropriate the Bible in their life situations".'" Kwok acknowledges that both approaches are important. Acadernic study of the wrïtten text helps to unveil its androcentnc bias, while a recognition of oral transmission and perforxnative reconstruction of scripture allows the interpretations of the minjwzg communities to be heard. In order to honour the oral reading traditions of Third World people who have little access to the written text, Kwok develops three strategies of oral hemeneutics for "*Kwok, Discovering the Bible, p. 42. ' '%wok Discovering the Bible, p. 5 1. "%wok, Discovering the Bible, p. 48-49. -123- Asim womed2' Ail require a "passionde spirihiality" that is ernbodied, poütically active, erotic, and awe-stnick before the wonders of Gd's CTe8tioninThe first stxategy is to re-imagine and dramatize women of the Bible as speaking subjects. Another strategy is to expand upon these stories and reconstmct them. This is common for folk tdïtions in India, in which epics put to song add characters and incidents to the stories in the Sanskrit texts. The third strate0 blends different narratives to constnict a new meaning. Biblical nories are read simultaneously with other narratives. Kwok gives an example of her ~spositionof the biblical stories of women in Jesus' ministry and passion with the story of the students massacrecl at Tiananmen Square. These three strategies of oral representation retell the story "in one 's own wordr, tdorming an extenial authoritative dixourse into an intemaily persuasive disc~urse*.'~ Along with SchGssler Fiorenza, Kwok names this approach as rhetorical. She agrees with both Mieke Bal and Schüssler Fiorenza in theV insistence that the text is not a window to reality, but is a narrative construction. The goal of biblical hermeneutics is therefore not to uncover historical reality and the truth, but to detemine colonialist biases and uplB interpretations that have emerged hmminjung cornmunities. From these marginaiized interpretations cornes the radical caU to discipleship and to the transformation of our global comrnunity. Third World women and men who have heeded "'Kwok Discovering the Bible, p. 52-56. I2)ICwok describes this process in Bakhtin's tem. See Kwok, Discovering the Bible, p. 55. this biblical cdand endured tremendous dering ask all of us: "What price have you paid in your study of the Bible?'"24 Conclusion Kwok convincingly demonstrates the colonizing impact olmodemity, especially through its historical-critical method, and of liberdimi, both of which have contributed to identity politics. As an alternative she proposes a multifaith hermeneutics that can best address the multifaith context of Asian people. This involves the use of multicuitural and multifaith theological data, impacting the conception of truth and authority which in turn impacts her understanding of revelation and the biblical canon. Kwok prefers the eastern, prrigmatic conception of tmth over against the western, ontological controversies. By extension, she suggests that revelation be understood as God's tnah revealed through an enacted biblical tradition, rather than as a hidden, metaphysical tmth contained within the Bible. She dso suggests that revelation be centred on the interpretive community, rather than the biblical text. This emphasizes the interaction of the community with the Bible as well as with the scnptures fiom other faith traditions. Because of her concem with the margindized voices excluded from the formation of the biblical canon, and with historical use of the canon to control and denigrate Asian cultures and women, she suggests dispensing entirely with this concept. At the same the, she recognizes the importance of the Bible for minjmg communities. Thus, it is not the biblicai text which she rejects, but the autboritative status given it. '24KwokDi~covering the Bible, p. 95. Kwok draws on postcolonial and postmodem theones to underscore the multiple, shifting identities of faith communïties, and the diverse, multiple meanings tbat each commmity constnicts out of their interaction with Scnpture. While she respects the diversity of the communities and the texts, she is crÏticai of an absolute relativity of their faith practices and intapretations. She reaiizes the need for globai, ethical criteria that can assist in the public accountability of each community to work towards solidarity for the liberation and humankation of the global community. Within these justice-seeking cornmunifies, Kwok proposes a mode1 of dialogical imagination that will engage the multiple identities of people and communities around the world with their multiplicity of biblical interpretations. She suggests that the Bible be viewed as a talking book in order to highlight the subversive and imaginative readings of the Bible by marginalized and colonized coxnrnunities, and to emphasize the importance of its oral transmission and performance. Like Schiissler Fiorenza and Fulkerson, Kwok is dancing on the edge of modemity and postmodernity. She is calhg for a new time fkme on the margins of both that will more adequately address postcolonialist concems and bring forth a plurality of rneanings, a multiplicity of narratives and a mdtiaxial framework of anaiysis. Chapter 4 Postlibeml: Kathryn Tanner The Modems quta~elwith the Ancietcts because of what now seems to be the latter's intolerabIe and offensive penchant for the dark density of ambiguous and polysemous discourse, for the concentric circularity and random inclusiveness of orderings according to resembIauce-..Thetask of the new philosophy is to shear through with quick, clean strokes the 'cunning cobweb wntexhrre~'which traditional leaming spins, circle iriside circle."' Kathryn Tanner is an American Episcopahn theologian who studied and taught at Yale University before moving to her cunent teaching position at the Divin* School of the University of Chicago. Her work shows influences of the "Yale SchooIn~as espoused by Hans Frei and George Lhdbeck whose works have been descnoed by many as "p0dikra.l"~or in one case as upost-postmodem".JAs with posth'berals, Tanner is primmily concerned with mainStream Christian beliefs as they are practised within faith 1 Kathryn E. Tanner, Gaiand Creation in Christic112 Theoiogy: Tyrunny or Empowennent? (Oxford: Blackweli, 1988), 126. Tanwr refers to John Webster's Academurim fiamen in this quote. merswho have noted this same Yale schooI influence in Tanner's work inciude Randy L. Maddox, "Reviewof Gad and Crearion in Christim Theology: Tyrartny or Empowennent? " Christian Scholm's Review 2 1, no. 2 @ecember 199 1): 2 16- 17; John E. Theil, "Reviewof God and Creution in Christian ïïieology: Tyranny or Empuwennent? " Theologicai Shdies 5 1, no. 1 (March 1990): 140-41. 'For a helpfbl explmation of the postl1'bera.l attriiutes of Frei and Lindbeck's work, see William C. Placber, "Paul Ricoeur and POStljberal Theology A Codict of hterpretations?" Modern Theology 4, no. 1 (1987): 33-52. "pad Schwartzentxuber, =TheModesty of Henneneutics: The Theological Reserves of Haris Frei," Modern 7ReoIogy 8, no. 2 (April 1992): 181. - - communities- She entertains an internai crïtiqye in which she uses certain Chnstuin beiiefs to critique other Christian beliefs and pracfices. To conduct this inted critique, she employs the use of grammatical des,as developed by Lindbeck buseof these nmilarities with postli'beralism, 1 have called Tanner's approach postlibera, even though she does not use this tenn to descnii her own wok In some of Tanner's more ment work, she has distanced herself fiom postliberals, and nom her own use of desto detemine proper Christian belief? Although she is begllming to iden* herselfmore closely with postmodern approaches, 1 am stilI retaining postli'beral as a description of her work in order to distinguish her from the other three feminists, and to highlight her continued emphasis on an intemal critique within maitlstream Christian beliefs. As with Schiissler Fiorenza, Fulkerson, and Kwok, Tanner brings a deep wncern for justice and li'beration to her work. Unlike SchUssler Fior- and Kwok, her focus is not on commmities rnarpuiaiized fiom the dominant Christian traditions, nor is it on Fulkerson's emphasis on commuaities marginalized by femuiist theologies. Raîher, she has made a political choice to concentrate on mainstream Christian traditions in order to 'Sec in particuiar Kathryn E. Tanner, "SocialTheory Conceming the New Social Movements' and the Practice of Feminist Theology," in Horkom in Feminist Theology- Identi~Tradition, and Nonn,ed. Rebecai S. Chopp and Sheila Greeve Davaney (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997); Kathryn E. Tanner, Ineories ofCuhure: A New Agenda for T%eology,Guides to Theological Inquiry (Minneapolis: Fortress Ress, 1997); Kathryn E. Tmer, "Scripture as Popular Text," Modent Theology 14, no. 2(April 1998): 278-297. These are the works to wtiich I refer when 1 distiaguish her later work fiom her earlier work. The one exception to this diachronie ordering is an article of Tanner's published in 1997 which retains her previous use of postl1'beral grammatical desto judge the coherence and proper interpretation of Christian beliefs. See Kathryn E. Tanner, "Jesus Christ," in The Cambridge Coqanion to ChrLviian Doctrine, d Cotin E. Gunton, Cambridge Cornpanions to Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997)- demonstrate their radical, hieptential in cballenging the political status quo. Her own personal involvement in the feminist and gay Iiionrnovements attests to her politid cornmitment. One of Tanner's conceras is with the tendency of modern theologies to misinterpret Christian beliefs. As a resdt minority opinions have been sacrinced and colonialist theology has been perpetuated Aithough she recognizes the history ofabuse accompanying the Christian tradition, she is convinced that a Christian theology advocatuig social justice is best supportecl by using Christian traditions to critique the abuses instead of rwising the traditions themselves. If Christian beliefs are interpreted and enacted "properly",6 Tarnier suggests they will be "seK-critical, pluralisiic, and viable across a wide range of geographical differences and historical changes of circ~rnstance".~The role of Christian wmmunities and respect for their diversity of identities and beliefs is integral in this interpetive task. in order to examine this role, Tanner emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary analysis, giviag particular attention to sociology and anthopology. Critique of Modernity and Liberaikm Tanner believes that modem approaches to theology have contniuted to the apparent incoherence of traditional Christian beliefs, as well as factiodsm between 6~athrynE. Tanner, The Politics of Gd:Christian Theologies dSociai Jzatice (Minneapolis: Fortress hss, 1m), 7,2&3 1. 'Kathryn E. Tanner, '"Thogy and the Plain Sense," in Scripturai Azcthority and Nmtive Interpretatzon, e& Garrett Green (Philadelphk Fortress Press, 1987), 60. Protestants and Roman Catholics.' DiEerences of belief have becorne a contest amougst the most objective end therefore the most factual and true account. By exposing axtain modem assumptions as historically and cdturally wnditioueci, Tanner hopes to tecover the coherence and "correct essessment* of Christian traditions7 and establish their political support for diversity and the Li~tioaof the oppressed She does not want to "repristinate"theology, as she believes that pre-modern theology should not be priviieged, nor viewed as pure.'' h fàct she speaks strongîy against the &uses which pre- modem theologies have promulgated. While recovering the coherence of traditional Christian theology, she wants to challenge both the closure of modern viewpoints and the common premodern alignment of traditional beliefs with conservative politics of domination, In the f3st part of this chapter, we will see that one of the difficdties with modernity, according to Tanner7 is its tendency to decontextualïze beliefs and view them as referential descriptions of reaiïty. Two Consequences of referentdity are positivism and reification, the latter of which involves essentialism. Essentialism is particuiarly problematic with reference to minority identities- leading to totalitarianism and colonialism. The unacknowledged power differential in relations of domination also I papetuates individuatism. Each of these modem and Lii1 problems will now be elaborated. -- - - '~amier,God and Creation in Christian Eheology, p. vanner. God d Creation in Christim Theology, p. '%mer, God and Creation in Christian Theology7p. 8. -130- Tarnier takes issue 6thmodem philosophicd tendencies to isolate a particular belief "for identification of hmeaning or reference7expientiai expressiveness, rational justification, or evidentid support"." The assumption behind these tendencies is that it is possible to remove oneselfand the subjecî matter from prejudice and past traditions. Tanner believes, dong with Schüssler Fiorema, Fulkerson and Kwok, that this is impossible and undesirable. She, too, reveals the fallacy of a neutrai and objective Cartesian standpointu By separating individuals hmtheir "social, cosmic and divine re1atiomhipsn modem appraaches set them against their social and historïcai contexts. "Persans are no longer essentidy parts of a whole society, no longer reflections of a world fomied by repeated patterns of resemblance."" The intent of the modem interpreter, strongly influenced by Descartes and Locke, is to strip away the incidentals and unCover "the facts" or core elements. It is to discover and represent the world in itself, as it really is, free fkom the biases of traditionai beliefs and extenial authorïties. The desire to control and predict phenornena encourages universal generalizatiom and principles, and rninimizes or eiiminates varying pidcularities. Subjects of inquiry are stratified into primary essences and secondary variables of human afktion, volition and IL Tanner, 'Theology and the Plain Sense," p. 61. Tanner is carefùi to note even in her earlier work that postrnodern philosophers are also concerned with these modem philosophicd approaches. In this respect, she intimates some afinity with Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, and Richard Rorty. See Tanner, "Theology and the Plain Sense," p. 60. 12Tanner. Gdad Creation in Christian Theology, p. 7. 13Tanner,God adCreaïzon in Christian Theoiogy, p. 124-25. reiatiotls. Clear, linear7stdfied &tractions replace cornplex, holistic arnbiguitïes. In these empincal abstractions modem methods of anaIysis are also deemed neutral. " Tanner suggests that these characteristics of the modem scientific method have contniuted to the distortions of Christian theology. These include mind/body, fdvalue dualisms and the belief that certain domains are autonomous and sepanite hm divine power. Divine order is separated kom the natural order, and individuals are considered independent hmexîemai powers and constraints. Traditional desabout the sovereignty of God and hman agency are subverted They can no longer be held together, belief in one can only be affirmeci at the expense of the other. l5 When theoIogical rules are decontextualized, their historical and geographical location, as well as their communal use are ignorexi Statements of belief tend to be viewed as simple references to reality, rather than rhetorical responses to particular situations. In this aspect, Tanner supports Schiissler Fiorenza's rhetorical approach to early Christian texts. Rather than providing a simple description of reality, theological statements reflect the concems of a particdar cummunity or theologian They oflem &se as a corrective to theological trends deemed heretical. Tanner suggests that if these staternents are separated fiom this conte* thqr camot be held in tension with the opposing trends, and may well become heretical in themselves. For instance, if an emphasis made upon God's sovereignty is absolutized as an ontologid, referential description and removed fkom its rhetorical tension with human agency, it may never be ''Tanner, God rmd Creation in Christian Theology, p. 124-32. ''Tanner, God and Creation in Christian Theology, p. 129, 134, 143-44, 152-53. -132- possible to speak coherently of human fieedom and power.16 Two COtlSeqlIences of refefenfiaiity are positivism and reification Tanner defines positivism as the identification of defacto nomis (acceptable behaviour within a particular situation) with de jure noms (what is genuinely right). l7 Little attention is given to the social location of nom, leading to universai pronouncements that may prove injurious in other locales. Humanly created, situation-specific statements become Gd-given ontological descriptions that are then comidered beyond critique. Moral realists have attempted to avoid positivism by basing universals noms upon areas outside of hman varïability, such as the cfeafed order or natural law. However, Tanner notes that these areas are also influenced by humanity. '*Moral realists simply conmibute to positivism by identirjing certain orders of human relations, such as the family or the state, or certain bbnatlrralhuman tendencies" with diviaely-created reality. l9 The second consequence of referentdity is reification When certain norms, relations, behaviours or theological mtements are undersfood as ontological descripons of divinely-created reality, they are separated fkom other aspects of bumm existence. By lTanner.God und Creation in Christian Theology, p. 155-56. l7 Kathryn E. Tanner, "A Theological Case for Human ResponsibiLity in Moral Choice," Journal of Religion 73(October 1993): 592-6 12. For Tanner's mer distinctions between de facto and de jure norms see Tanner, 7Ee Politics of Cod, p. 54-55,86. I8~anner,"A Theologicd Case for Human Responsibility in Moral Choice," p. 598-99. 'vanner, "A Theological Case for Human Responsîbility in Moral Choice," pp. 592-6 12. isolating prticular elements as independent units ofdysis, modern theology tends to rei@ these elernents into dalizedcategories. Each category is viewed as complete in itself ami only secondarily related in a iinear faonto the others- Thus, creatures are understood as independent beings related only extemally to Goci. They are identifmi by their core essence and roles, and are only secondanly affecfed by God's actions. As an example, Tanner cites a Protestant tendency to separate the utterly corn@ human order fiom God's tramcendent reaIm? She also refers to the common "distortion" of modem theologians who daim that Gdworks alongside hum- as a partial, not complete, cause. Both of these examples are instances of Pelagian distortions c1-g some degree of independence hmGd2' When theological statements are understood as ontological descriptioas of a reified essence, combining the two problems of referentiality and reification, theological distortions are intensifid If hmanity's sinfiilness is understood as an outological statement of the essence of human nature, humanity will be essentially corrupt. No remedy is possible even by God, as the removal of sin will remove a wcessary part of that which defines humanity as human? %le this was indicative of some of the early refomers, lï'beral Protestantism has countered this with an elevation of human goodness. In both cases, however, there is a tendency to separate the human domain fiom the divine. 2'Tamer. God and C~zonin Christian Theology, p. 156-60. Essen.tialism is pmtidarly problwatic regardhg divefsiîy and domination. Uoiversaiism and essentialism ne* the diverse identities of min~rities-~~Standards posited as universals reflect the idenfity of the group positing hem, which is usually straight, white, middle-class and de.This becornes apparent when other groups, such as people of colour, gay men, or women, need to deny their own piuticularity in order to appropriate these standardsdardsAnything deemed characteristic of margïdized identities is considered peripheral at best Thus, an inner essence of human quality is distinguished nom non-essentid qudities, which al1 but the original group need to renounce. Oniy the original group's particularity converges with the inner essence that they have reified and raidto a univenal standard Others are accepteci oniy when they conforni to this identity of the dominant group. Any differaice between them and the dominant group is absolutized and devalued deciifferences amongst the nondominant groups are ignordz4Tanner names this as a "peculiar dialectic of idenMy and diffem~e;~or more specifically as totalitanani~m.~~This is similar to the identity politics and the logic of identity descnid by Schüssler Fiorenza, Fulkerson and Kwok. %mer refers to the postcolonialist work of Edward Said, and Tzvetan Todorov, as weH as the feminist work of Elizabeth Minnich, Martha Minow and Elizabeth Spelman in her elaboration of this point See fwtnote # 1 1, Tanner, The Politics of Gd,p. 204. '6T8nner7 "A Theological Case for Human Responsibility in Moral Choice," p. 603-09. One aspect of this Mectic of identity and diffcrrnce that Tanner examines is w1onialisx.n She mggests that the li'beral, pldstapproaches to inter-religious dialogue &ers face the same problems arising nom universalized nom. Bath emphasiP wnformity to universal standards and devalue difference. 30th arise out of particd interests and identities of a dominant group, but are assumed to represent all people and their religions around the globe. Even though piuralists attempt to choose stan* of respect that are found in every religion, their choiw is influaid by theV own historid, religious and cuiturax location Commodities which should ody arise out of didague are preformed as conditions for dialogue with no attention to power imbalauces between dialogue partners. Tanner notes that this is pmtïcularly problematic for Christians, as we have been most at fdthistorically for imposing our assumptions and will upon other~, thus contriiuting to imperialist and colonialist abuses? Edward Said, whose work has been instnmiental for postcolonialists such as Kwok, is ais0 influentid in Tanner's work. Accordin&, Tanner's postcolonid critique of hiberal, modem approaches is similar to Kwok's. Tanner echoes Kwok's conceni that western Christian proposais of universal standards of respect for dialogue force others to confonn to these standards, thereby "meeting a condition of samenes or identity". Any divergence fkom these standards is consequently ignorecl or dïspqpi People and their opinions are diffemtiated on the basis of these standards and thus on their similarity to nKathryn EsTanner, "Respect for Other Religions: A Christian Antidote to Colonialist Discourse," Modem Theology 9(January 1993): 3-4. those dohave pposed them. We are dI forced iato ris" and "them" categories, which absolutizes particular clifferences and ocdudes others. Assumeci commonalities are essentiaiized Such an approach also justifies -0% based upon moral supenority, towards those who do wt exhibit these particular standards- Beneath the guise of moral supaiority lies a superiority of power that enables dominant groups to establish universai standards agaïnst which othm are measlired" This unacknowledged power differential is characteristic of wWTanner refers to as "a Li'beral theory of rights"." An emphasis on equal treatment of every individual assumes everyone has quai access to this mentIt assumes that oppression dlbe eliminated if the pemnal spaces of the oppressed are protected fiom willfuI interférence. Such assumptions ignore the institutionalizedsources of oppression and its intemalued perpetuation within the lives of the oppressed They also ignore the diversity of the oppressed and the oppressor. In addition, they ignore the impact of social relations. Liberal approaches emphasize the individual at the expeme of the community." Whiie Tanner emphasizes eqdrights due each individual as a creatme of God, she is careful to avoid these liberal pitfails. Her theological method attends to the divenity of hdividuals as well as their communal identitia. Their social location and welfare are integral to her theological claims. vanner, "Respect for ûther Religions," p. 1 - 18 Tanner, fie Politics of God, p. 62, 194. %.mer. nie Polilzcs of Gd,p. 184. vanner, 7he Politzcs of God, p. 169-70, 180-8 1, 184; Tanner, "A Theological Case for Human Responsibili~in MdChoice," p. 606-07. As with Schibsler Fiorenza, Fuikexsan and Kwok, Tmer takes an explicitly liberationist tact in her work By incorporaîing Christian beliefs into a 11hdontheology, she couuters the alliance of mainStream Christian beliefs with right- wing agendas and the patriarchal status quo.3' Should she be accused of "tampering with the faith for political ends" she can "claim to be at Ieast as waservative of that faith as they are."* Thus, Tanner seeks to demonstrate the radical political import of tradtional Christian doctrine. Wethis goal is not new, as evidenced by the socid gospel movement, Tanner's approach attempts to CO- the modern and hirdfdacies of previous prophetic challenges to injustice." RuIes and Style There has been a noticeable shift in Tamer's work conceming the method by which she examines traditional Christian doctrine, In her earlier work she recommends doctrinal rules by which the proper interpretation of Christian belief and practice can be assessed. In her later work she questions this postliiral approach and suggests that the style or marner in which Christian materid is used replace the concept of des. Mead of focushg on the meaning of fimdamental beliefs or des, she is now beginning to focus on the marner in which these beliefs are incorporated with other beliefs and practices. in order to dernoilstrate this shift, I will first descrii Tanner's earlier emphasis upon des. 'Tanner. ï?ze Politics of God, p. ùL '*~anner.nip Politics of Gd,p. viii. 33Tanner, The Politics of God, p. x -138- FoUowing this, 1 will descnïbe her shift to style. In Tanner's earlier work, she upholds two doctrines that she considers "finidamental" to the Christian nuth and social justice: God's transcenderice and God's universal providential agency. She agrees with lan Ramsey, Beniard Lonergan and George Lindbeck that there are additionai Tnnitarian and Christological niles from the earty chmch's cTeeds and conciliar fonnulas but she chooses to Mt her focus to these two des."She chooses these because she considers them to be p~upposedby most other Christian beliefs and because they have great practid potential for challenging the Tanner takes a pragmafic approach to the recovery of fhdamentd Christian beliefs. Her concern is les with the referents of these beliefs than with their coherence and pnrgmatic implicationsx She does not deny îheir referentiality to God, for '%kt vanner, Gad und Creation in Christian Theology, pp.50. Throughout Tanner's work she emphash the tramcendence of Gdthe Creator with little mention of the incarnation Perhaps this is to counterbaiance modemity's overemphasis on the immanence of God at the expense of God's transcendence. However, in an attempt to recover a coherent core of the Christian tradition in support of social justice, it seems strange to ignore Christological beliefs. 1s Chnstianity coherent without the centrality of the Christ? Clthers have made this same critique. See Carter Heyward, Rewiew of The Poiîtics of Gd: Chrisrian Theoiogzes and Sociuf Jwtice, " Journi of Church and State 36, no. 1 (Winter 1994): 166-67; David F. Ford, Review of God and Creation in Christian Theology: Tyranny or Empowement? Reiigiow Srudes 26, no. 4 @ecember 1990): 550-52; Theil, Review of God ond Creation. Perhaps in cespo~~eto these critiques, Tanner has given more emphasis to Jesus, the Word of God in Theories of Cuitwe. She has also written a recent article on Chnstology. See Tanner*"Jesus Christ". Ymer draws on the philosophical "linguistic tum" to non-referentiality as expressed in the 1960's and 7û's by people such as Richard Rorty, Rudolf Carnapt Willard Van Orman Quine, David Burrell and Victor Relier. See Tanner. GGodnd would be the point of cioing theology ifone were not dytallong about God?"n Howevert her argument is less mncemed with what ûod is like than with the practid effects of certain beliefk within Christian communities. A theologian's phaqtask is not to quibble about the ontological veracity of particular be1iefs7but to reflect and correct a commrmity's practices. It is to organke in coherent fonn their taik about God and the world It is to provide "a logic or grammar covering Christian bguistic cornpeten~y".~~ This gr- is not to be constNcted in isolation fkom the wider Christian community. Ratheq a local commety's pwcfices must be viewed in light of its historical traditions. This enables Christian tradition to provide a critical role in theological reflection. Such a role will help to identify four problems common to Christian wrnmunities: 1) misstated Christian beliefs; 2) the inappropriate use of well- formed statements of belief; 3) the inability to articulate beiiefs in novel Ncumstauces; and 4) the Uicompatibility of Christian beliefs." in order to discem and rectify these problems, Tanner suggests following two linguistic desfor the construction of staternents of beliefq The first concem God's Creatzon in Christian Theofogy,p. 1 1, 17 1, ftnt 3-6. 37Tanner,God and Creation in Christian ï?zeofogy,p. 12. '8Tanner. God and Creation in Christian Theology, p. 1 5. 3Tanner. God and Creatzon in Christian Theology, p. 16-1 7. vanner follows George Lindbeck's nile theory of doctrine, as elaborated in his book The Natwe ofDuctrine: Religion and Tieology in a Postiiberai Age. transcendence. Languege about God must not idemGod with prticulzif -butes, nor contrast the divine with nonanrine predicates. God's transcendence lies beyond identity and oppositioa The second deconcems God's mative agextcy- No limitations in the scope or marner of God's creative agency must be made. God's creatïve agency is universai and immediate? Tanner also offers derivative niles that uphold the coherence between these two foundational des. She suggests that every cfeated cause is ultimately determined by God as the primary cfeative agent, There is, therefore, no created cause that is outside of Wsagency, as this wudd compromise God's transcendeme and pose opposition between dMne and nondivine agemcy. Thus, God is not a secondary agent, influencing and changing human direction into God's direction. Rather, hman monalways operates within God's overall direction At no time have created causes been separateci fiom God's overall intent and influence. Conversely, no created cause, as an outside elernent, can influence GdGod cmody be influenced by causes that are already predeterrnined by Gd." These ccmeta-level"logical des restrict and direct the formation of theological statements, but allow a diversity of statemeats according to theu context With reference '"Tanner, God and Creation in Christian The0l0g-y~p. 47. 42 Tanner, Gdd Creation in Christian Theology,p. 90-1 04- Tanner outlines these derivative rules with extensive referace to Kari Barth and Thomas Aquinas in order to demonstrate that representative Protestant and Roman Catholic positions can both adhere to the same rules. That Karl Barth is used as the representative of Protestantism may give some Protestants a cause for concem. to the fimctionalist socio~ogicalappruach of Emiie Dilrkheim,43Tanner suggests tbat divene, men con£licting, theo1ogies formed in ciifSerient contexts according to these des will be fiaictionally equivalent: they wiU ali "show the cohiereace of Christian talk about God and don.'4 Ow aspect of these niles which encourages theologicd diversity is their tw* sided character. They can be expressed positively and negatively. Positively, aeatures could be viewed as everything with God. Ail that we do is an importaut part of God's overall plan for the world God has bestowed upon us immeasurable gifts and capacities through our depeudence upon GdWe are value6 Negatively, creatures are nothing without God. Weare dispensable in God's realm and MMot change what God has ordered. Different contexts will determine which side of the ruies should be empbasïzed. In order to retain the coherent balance of these des, Tanner suggests that theologians assess current "illicit" tendencies and stress the opposite side. For instance, if a community or culture emphasïzes divine sovereignty at the expense of human capoicities, the theologian shodd stress the positive side of the rules." In the modern context, Tanner suggests that modern theologies have perpetuated rather than corrected modem illicit tendencies to oventate human power and needom. They perpehiate the PelaGan heresy of human autonorny, and exclude it from Gd's ''%muer. God cmd Creation in Christian ïïzeoiogy, p. 27-32. ?amer. me Poi&lcs of Gd,p. 83. 'sTaruier, Gdand Creution in Christian Theoiogy, p. 105- 19. - 142- sovereignty? In order to protect this rniscoastnial of k,hmnan agency, the transcendence of God is also wmpromised- Thus, Tanner concludes that modernity has rendered God's transcendeme and human agency inwrnpati'bie. If the closure rendered by modemity's verdict of incoherence is opened, and modern approaches are understood as fdlible, these two fimdamental des may once again coexlst coherentlyy4'Tanner believes that if Christians reclairn the "ded relations" of Christian tradition, an intd coherence of Christian theology, marred by modern approaches, wiil be regaineda In her later work, Tanner does not dispense with her two fimdamental beliefs or with her emphasis on coherence. What changes is the form in which she presents these as guidelines. With the help of postmodem theory she gives greater emphasis to the discursive construction of meaning for traditional Christian doctrine. Thus, the çame doctrinal statements used within diverse communities throughout history will have different meanings7according to the relation of the statements to other Christian materials and varying culture^.''^ This disrupts postliïberal proposais of grammatical des that remain constant in meaning, underlie Christian traditions and provide cohesive regdation of correct interpretations." No such consistency in meaning exists, nor cm Tanner, God and Creatzon in Christian Theology, p. 120-23. 47Tanner, Gdand Creation in Christian TheoIogy7p. 6-7. 49 Tanner. Theories of Culture, p. 105. This position is simïlar to Fuikerson's intertextual approacb vanner. Theories of Cuitzue, p. 74=15,78-79. - 143- such intemal orgmhtion and unÎty ammgst the diversity of Christian materials be found acn>ss space and time?' Tanner achowledges that posUi~rules were origiaaIly socidly constnicted within Christian communities, but by raishg them to universais, postliis iift them nom %e ongoing historical processes that fonned the- as if, once pmduced, they couid not be altered by the same pn>cesses in the firturer>.52She dso points out the danger of desusurping the Word of GdU Another dinicw Tanner has with postliberal desconcems what Fuikerson casthe professionalization of knowledge. By suggesting that desallow Christian consensus, postliids infer that those trainai in and knowledgeable of the niles are best able to judge correct interpretaîion. With the proper training, they assume that people will corne to the same conclusions. This understanding negates postlcbed attempts to refl~Christian practice and instead privileges the evaluation of a minority of %el1 trainedr) Chnstians to decide what al1 Chridans shodd practice? I will add that it ais0 commits the same modem frillaçy associated with the historicalcritical method: with the propex training and methodology it is possible to tind the singular. correct meanings of ''Tanner. irheories of CJwe, p. 76. " Tanner, Theories of Cube,p. 139. Fdkerson also makes a similar critique of postliberalism. See Mary McClintock Fulkemn, Chnging the Szhjecrt Wumen's Discourses and Femznist Ineology (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994), 162-63. " Tanner, Theories of Culture, p. 149-5 1. Tanner identifies the Word of God with the person Jesus Christ, but wams that %e Incarnate Word is only at best uidirectiy identifiable with even those human words of the Bible that Christians believe effectively witness to him". See Tanner. Theories of Culture, p. 126. historical tem. Thus, scadwic training is pmiileged over cummdpractice. In addition, this postiii appmach subsmnes the diversity of Christian inteqmtaîions into meta-level des. Any interpretabions which Wer with the des, no matter how inteprai they are to a particular community's traditions7are dismissed as incorrect or incoherent Tanner makes this same modem fallacy in her earlier wo* particddy in the development of her derivative rules. Even though her intent is to allow diversity within the overarching guidance of meta-level des, she aiienates many diverse traditions and theologies. This is apparent fiom the multiple critiques of this aspect of her work" As an alternative to des,Tanner suggests in her later work that style be used to identi@ Christian practices and uses of materials Mead of detennining a common "For example, by stressing that humanity can aever act outside of God's pervasive will, she limits human &dom and incorporates human acts of atrcity into the overall purpuse of GdAny theologies which insist on human freedorn, however partial, and separate human sin from God's will are accused by Tanner of incoherence and interpreting Christian beliefs improperly. Such judgement effectively condemns many theologies across the centuries that have contri'buted to our Christian traditions. Although Tanner suggests that doarinal statements should be held in tension with their originating rhetorical context, she does not keep in dialectical tension the theologies which uphold human fieedom. Nor does she hold the radical transcendence of God in dialectical tension with God's radical immanence.To have Qawn upon the immanence of God through the person of Jesus may have helped to deviate her difficulty with the concepts of evil and sin. Many of Tarnier's reviewers have taken issue with her subsumption of sin and evil into God's will as a corollary of God's traoscendence. For Merdimission see WiHiam Hasker, David BumeIl, and Thomas Tracy in The God WhActs: Philosophical mrd Theological Exporatzons, ed Thomas F. Tracy (University Park, Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1994). See also Maddox, "Review of God ami Creation in Christian ï7teologyiWpp. 2 16-17; Ford, "Review of God and Creation in Chrisfiun 7%eoIogy7"pp. 550-52; Incandela, "Review of God and Creation in Christim Theology," pp. 66-69; Tracy* "Rewïew of GoddCreation in Christian TheoIogy,"pp. 120-24; Tracy*"AcknowledgmentsYn p. vii; Tracy, "Divine Action, Created Causes, and Human Freedom," pp. 77-102; Wiles, "Review of Gdand Creutzon in Christian TheoI~gy,~pp. 322-24. me- of Christian materials, as postliberal des -Pt, Tarnier proposes a common use of borrod Christian materials to determine Christian identity? Christian identity is based not on agreement of abut agreement of b- of particular materials and practicescesnFor example, Christians rnay share cornmon matenal and practices, such as the Bible, creeds, ba- and co~~ll~lUIl]ion,but they may also differ widely in their selection and orgsnization of matenai, traditions and practices. A cornmon use of materials also indicates a common purpose for their use, such as the worship of Gd,the discernment of the Word of God, the recognition of the crucial significance of Jesus, and the ritual celebration of biblical stories. It is the cornmon use of materiais, practices and beliefs, and not their common meaning that distinguishes Christian identity? Does Tanner's revised methodology radically subvert her earlier work? Has she removed the possibility for traditional Christian doctrine to retain agency and critical distance fiom contemporary Christian Mie6 and practices? The preceding description of her use of style indicates that this may be the case. However, she uitenveaves into this revised methodology aspects of her earlier work that reveal a greater consistency. When ?amer stresses that there is nothing inherently Christian about materials Christian share in common The materials are a hybrid mixture of various cultures, religions and philosophies. in this sense, they are borrowed materials. What identifies them as Christian is not a common Christian resernblance of the materïals, but wmmon of the materials, such as a reference of al1 materials to God in se~ceof the Word. See Tanner, Theories ofCuhne, p. 106, 1 14, 144-5 1. ''Tanner, Theories of Culnae, p. 125. 58T~er.Theories of Culture, p. 152-53. characterizhg the Christian use of maferials7Tanner equates the mamer in wbich they are used with her etsrlier deof God's traascendence: a Christian use of matends refm all things to God, ttiereby refativiziag them However, instead ofelaborating derivative niles that must be followed in order to dowcoherence with other traditional Christian beliefs, she now suggests that common theological purposes can be descrii ody in very general tenns." Even when agreement has been reached on the mamer in which Christian materials are use& such as their reference to Go4 and the purpose for their use, such as a concem for mediscipleship, these points of agreement must remain intentionally vague and undefind' Awther consistency within Tanner's work is her emphasis upon contexhiality and pragmatic ethical criteria Theology properiy formulated must aitend not only to traditional Christian doctrine, but also to its historical, cultural and geographical location. nie practical effécts of theological statements will also help to determine their validity. Thus, their hction with pariicular commuzilties must be considerd in this sense, Tanner, Schiissler Fioreriza, Kwok and Fulkerson share a similar pragmatic orientation in their methods. In the following sections 1 wiU explore the implications of both her earlier and later approaches as they affect doctrinal and scriphiral agency, authoritative criteria, revelation, and the diversity and soiidarity of fath communities. -- 5%rmer, meories of Culture?p. 145-46. Tanner, 7heorie.s of Ctrlrure, p. 152-54. -147- Pluin Seme of Scriptme Tanner's analysis of scripture &es evidence of hapragrnatic, fhctiod conwms. She takes a socio-cultural approach in order to heighten the importance of the communal reading of scripture. It is not the tes itself upon which Tanner focws, but the way in which a text is read by a particular community. This is similar to Fulkerson's pststructural emphasis upon the communal use of Scnpture. In fact Tanner refers to Foucault and Demda in support of her the si^.^' One of the factors pertaining to the use of scriptrire is its plah sense. She deh this with reference to David Kelsey's hctional definition of mipture and canon. There is no inherent property of the biblical text thai makes it scripturai or canonid. Ratha"a text becomes scripture through its fimction within community to "shape, nurture and refonn" the church's identity." A set of texts becomes a canon when these texts alone are declared sufnctent for these pinposes. Likewise, the plain sense is not an inherent characteristic of the bibiid te- It canwt be descri'bed by philosophicai, ontological statements such as "what the text simply says", "the text's own immanent sense"', "the text's sense when the expositor is a purely passive or transparent recorder of objective meaning", or "the text's sense without the imposition of extratextual categ~ries".~ Rather, the plain sense is %e obvious or direct sense of the text" according to communal agreement. It is the basic, traditional, normative sense of the text as established by . . 61~annery"Theology and the Plain Sense," p. 64. 62~anner,"Theology and the Plain Sense," p. 62. *~anner,"Theology and the Plain Sense," p. 62. - 148- consensus. It is the exposé tbat needs no additîonal wanants for its ahntyIt is the fdarand therefore auttioritative meaning according to a @cular co~~l~llunity's conventions for reading When a text is read as Scnpture, its plain sense is the nomiatve and dennitive meaning which shapes, nurtures and reforms the community's identity." This fimctiod definition does not imply that a community agree with the nom established by the plain seiise. Tanner suggests that commuaities usually do 4- agree with these nom, even though they agree that they represent the familiar, traditionai reg.However, in order to introduce alternative redings and mm,they must chaileuge the nomof the plain sense and give additional warrants for their altenianves. Such a challenge would orily be necessary if the traditional reading was considered authoritative for the community." The use of key phrases by a community may help to idenfify the plain sense within their conventions of reading. These include %e sense the author intended", "the verbal or grammatical sense", "the sense for the writer's public", %e sense that God inteuds", "the sense a text has when included in the canon", "the sense Church authorities designate", and "what the text itself says'? Tanner is not equating the plain sense with these phrases. For instance, she wouid not want to equate the intention of the author with the plain sense. Nor, as already mentioned, would she want to mate an ontological definition of %bat the text itself says". What the phrases indicate is the (?&mer, "Theology and the Plain Sense," p. 63. 6S~anner,"Theology and the Plain Sense," p. 65. qanner, "Theology and the Plain Sense," p. 65,69. - 149- com~n~ty'sunderstanding ofthe traditional mhgof the text. Because the plain sease is not -& "proper" meaning, but is one amongst many that is privileged by a ptuticdar commuuity, it will vary across communities as weli as within the same community across a span of the. Tanna even suggests that not al1 communities form a plain sense. For some communities the plain sense may uot ex& However, she assumes that ail Christian communities do appeal to the plain sense?' Tanner's understanding of the plain seose, as descn'bed up until this point, coheres with her later work It also complemeats and enhances Fullcerson's notion of the ainonical system. However, Tanner gives additional descriptions that wnfke and possibly contradict this initial undefstandinggmAlthough Tanner acknowledges that the plain sense "is itself the produa of an uiterpTetive traditi~n".)~she distinguishes it as the exposition of the text fkom subsequent interpretations. III other words, she separates the text and its plain seose from interpretations and applications in order to allow the text and its plain sense to stand against the community as a source of intemal critique. In order not to privilege wnservative, traditional interpretations over hirative ones, yet still retain the normative power of the plain sense.)Tanner prefers the plain sense to remain vague. Even though she equates the plain sense with the traditional meaning of " Tanner.)"Ineology and the Plain Sense," p. 64-65. 68~lthoughthis summary of Tsulller7sappmach to scripture is based only upon one article, the article is divided into two sections. Tanner's understanding of the plain sense, as described so far, comprises the first section (p. 59-66). The second section (p. 66-75), which we will now be looking at, appears to be a respome to critiques of the first section and an incorporation of some of these aitemative views. Tanner, "Theology and the Plain Sense," p. 64. the text, she is uncumfortabIe with its expIicit association wiîh any particular meaning In this way, she can sepanue plain sense hminterpretation and say that the text and its plain sense do not change, while inteqxetation does. She can also acknowledge that any attempt to fornulate the plain sense will, in itself, consthte an iatmon,thereby nulIifying its privileged status. Even though she suggests that a plain sense can only be fomd within communal practice, she tries to ntain the notion of plain sense that is "irreducible to the wmmunity's specifieatïom of itn? It is only the text itselfand its accompanying, undefined plain sense that retains normative, critical scatus:" The general consequence of such a radical distinction between text and in-tion is an authoritative plain sense that is unavailable in any fonn distinct fiorn the text itself. The plain seose of the text becornes an independently rmspecifiable locus of meaning, something that transcends any and all aifempts to reformulate it. As such it fimctions critically even with respect to consensus readings of a text; it works to evacuate the pretensioas of communal discourse generdly." Although Tanner has not wrïtten finther on the plain sense, 1 suspect that she would distance herself in her later work nom this tmdefïned, pre-discmive notion of the biblical text's plain sense. if the plain sense is understood as the communal consensus of a text's traditional meaning, it cannot exist apart hminterpretation. Rather, it constitutes one traditional interpretation preferred over others. It will also differ amongst 7('Tanner, "Theology and the Plain Sense," p. 75. 71 Tanner, "Theology and the Plain Sense," p. 66-75. Ifthe plain sense constitutes a normative standard which uui never be articulateci, it becornes an undefined entiw, whose elusive quality lessens its critical impact n~anner,"Theology and the Ptain Se=," p. 72. coheres with halater work, as she associates the plain sense with nanative and canon- In order to give a more concrete7criticai force to the text and its plain sense, and be able to challenge rigid, codveUniforrnity in cornminnty Me, Tmerleans heavily upon Hans Frei's emphasis on narrative and canon. She beliewes ?batif the plain sense is identified in light of the biblical canon as a narrative, especially the story of Jesus Christ, it will dlow numerous variations of the material specifications of Christian identity. To understand the Bible as a set of texts Nfncient "in ail hesand places for the formation and regdation of commimity life is to force a certain degree of interpretive license in the use of themn? In some respects Tanner posits the canon against the plain sense, if plain sense is taken to be the traditional reading of scriptme, because the universal relevance of the canon calls for innovative interpretations that may challenge prwiously established ones (Le. the plain ens se).'^ Tanner still insists on the priority of the plain sense, but she gives it a fiirther definition that identifies it with %e narrative depiction of the identity of Jesus Christ''." This new definition hints at a Christological nom against which communai practices can be measured Because the gospel narrative does not prescribe univocal communal beliefs, "~anner,"Theology and the Plain Sense,"p. 73. 7~atlller,"Theology and the Plain Sense," p. 73. "~hisdefinition is taken fiom Hans Frei's The Eclipse ofBiblicai Narrative. See Tanner, "Theologyand the Plain Sense," p. 59. attitudes and behavioras, a diversity ofinterpretation and appIication will &t Tanner refm to tbis chamcteristic of riafiative as "structurai indetemhq in Christian conventions of appeahg to texts"? In a later article Tanner -ds this notim of stmctmd indeterminacy to the tex& themselves. She pposes that the Bible be viewed as a popular, common te* and. not as a "high-culture work of literary artistry". She then draws upon a poststnicturai insisteme of the texî's indeterminacy to emphasize the multiple m&gs of the text as constructeci by reader responsellSeRAs with Fulkerson, Tanner beiieves that the text becornes stabilized or determinative for a particuiar community only in its interpretation and application within that community. The structural indeterminacy of the text mpks "exegetical ingenuity" within the particulanty of a communal context for this to happen. As this ingenuity will differ amongst communities, so wiU the resulhg readings. Thus, the universal application of such a "narrative plain sense of scnpturen will promote Christian wmunities open to change and welcoming of Merence." The multiple, disparate meaning of the Bible will also challenge any particular meaning fiom chhhg singuiar authority. It would challenge those who "dissolve the Bible into thern~elves".~~ 'qanner, "Theology and the Plain Sense," p. 74. "~anner,"Scripture as Popular Text," p. 294. Tanner, nTheologyand the Plain Sense,"p. 74-75. Yanner, "Scripture as Popdar Text," p. 289-9 1,294. -153- Aurho~-ity In this tension amongst competuig Uiterpretations and cornmimal practices, Tanner is aware that traditional readings of scriphne and adherence to traditional Christian beliefs have ohpromoted conservative preservation of the status quo. In order to counteract the auihoaative status of codvein&xpt&ions of traditionai doctrines, she suggests that ''proper'' interpretations will challenge their consemative support of the status quo of injustice. WMe Tanner acknowledges that these doctrines have beem used to support oppressive actions, she remin& her readers dong with Fulkerson that the hirative potential of these doctrines is partially dependent upon the way in which they are interpreted in a parcicular context. Unlike Fukemn, however, Tanner insists that their l~htivepotential is not completely context dependent Tanner argues that the doctrines themselves necessitate "progressive" interpretations if they are understood "pr~perly".~She draws on socioculturai theory and philosophicai logic to in& that, aithough attitude and action cannot be separated fiom religious belief, ùiey are a logical consequence ofbeliefg'Certain Christian beliefs "with a definite meaning'ypzwill there fore necessitate "proper attitude and action". This premise is clearly at odds with the poststnictural opposition to a fixe& universai meaning of any text or tradition. Tanner avoids such Ianguage in her later work. However, Tanner ad& a spin tu her premise which accolmts for a belief s variation in ?amer. The Politics of God, p. 1-8. ''Tanner, The Politics of Gd,p. 8- 17. "2Tanner. The Politics of Gd,p. 20-2 1. -1 54 meanhg without removing its political irnport, a goal shared with Schtjssier Fiorerva Tanner agrees with Fulkecson that a number of contextual variables determine a subject's specific meanhg 1) The meaning ofa beiïef s central terms may vary in their usage. CCM&g whether of religious beliefs or otherwise, is-..aproduct of language use by real people in the course of historically specific and politidly charged interactions. 2) The selective combination of one belief with otbers will privilege certain meanings. 3) The life situation of those considerhg the belief dlaffect their consideration. 4) The socio-political situation will deterniine the scope of the belief s application" Tanner interprets the latter two situation-specific variables in terms of relations of power in order to emphasize the belief s political implications .= Tanner admits that variation in meaning is endless. However, she suggests that certain Christian beliefs about God and the world only uphold a limited range of variability. in themselves they have "a geneml practicai import" that poses guidelines restricting this variability? For instance, actions and attitudes which provide "active 83Tanner. 7ke Politics of God, p. 19. vanner. nte Politicr of God, p. 17-22. '%mer, The Politics of Gd,p. 27. 86Tanner. nte Politics of Cod,p. 30-3 1. -155- resïmnce to a stahis of injusticemwould be considered pperresponses aleother bL~omemative,oppressive, and passive" responses would be improper." Tanner's later work can be used to critique this earIier notion of the general practical import of Christian beliefs. As she more closely aligns herselfwith postmodernism, she resists any sense of a pre-discursive mmeaning contained within Christian beliefs. It is not the beliefs, themselves, which carry a generd practicd import, but the mamier in which thqr are selected adorgamzed with other beliefs and practices. Their endess variation in meaning is limited not by their own internal meanings, but by their particular placement dongside other Christian materials and cultural contextsexfS Again, we find similarities with Fulkemn's stabilization of meaning within a canonical system. Tanner still upholds the criteria of coherence in her later work, but uses it in a different way. Mead of measuring the coherence of a particular belief or practice with certain fimdamental des, she now measures its coherence with its relation to the selection and orgiinization of other Chridan materials. A belief cm be judged correct or proper if it coheres not with particular nilesi but with a variety of different configurations of Christian rnatends. While this is similar to Fulkerson's canonical system, Tanner does not limit the judgement of Christian practices to particular faith comrnunities. She suggests that academic theologians can interact with popular theologies to introduce Christian materials or practices not previously consided In other words, the selection and organization of Christian materials is not fixai within particuiar Christian commuaitie~~but is continuaüy evolving m their interaction with other hith communities, Vanous cultures and academic theologiess With Tanner's postmodern wrrections in min4 we cudd look at her earlier work not as definitive prescriptions governing aU Christian belief and pctice, buî as an example of a certain selection and oqpnkïion of Christien materiais that produces a general practical import. If Christian practice is viewed in Light of Tarnier's two h&mental beliefs, what would be the pgmatic outcorne? Such an approach to her earlier work would also leave open the possibility of contrasting meanirtgs and conclusions within a different ordering of Christian materials. Althou& this was wt her intention in her earlier work, Theorzes of Culture encourages this reading. As noted previously, the two primary beliefs &ch Tarnier emphasks in her earlier work are the tramcadence of God and God's providentiai agency. If Gd's transcendeme is understood in the marner specified by Tanner, any equation of socio- ecoaomic political orciers with God's intent 1s dedout. Natuml forces and human roles are distinctly separate from the divinity. This means that they motbe placeci beyond critique through divine justification. Divine transcendeme fiords a critical distance fiom both. It also allows a distinction between "a social worid and a world of individual e~perience".~In other words, individuals do not have to go through a particular social order or have a particular social identity in order to enter uito a relationship with God. Lady, divine transcendeme enables a distinction to be made between ideal values and vanner. Theorles of Culturet p. Chp. 4. ?amer, The Politics of God, p. 68. -157- social noms, uitimate reality and the appearaace of reality, truth and the perception of truth? This distinction insists that human ideas, proposais and nonns are limited, finite, fdlible and socidy 10cafed within history9' metranscendence of God €imctioos as a protest against dl absolute and unconditioned claims? Tarnier suggests tbat this protest is particulady relevant against religious clah. Belief in a trameendent God will necessitate critique of non-religious and religious claims7including one's own Tanner does admit that this critical potential of God's transcendeme is ambiguous. While it prevents anyone fiom establishuig their own beliefs or values as absolute, it also inhibits the political impact of standards that are potentiaily falh'ble or lirnited by their social location. It is on this point that Tanner's second belief in God's intimate involvement with the world is helpfùi. As the world's creator, guide and redeemer, God is actively working in the world as it is dependent upon GdGod's presence can be found in the contirmous process of "moral ordering", but not in a static "moral order". The specifics of this moral ordering can be suggested by b~ilicalinjunctions and "Chisuian moral heritage7', but these must be interpreted in light of contemporary events. Such interpretation must be viewed as fallible, as humm-ty's sinful nature permeates all decisions, social structures and moral vanner refers extemively in this ares to Jürgen Habermas' concept of transcendent tniths in his Theory of Commzînicutive Action. See Tanner. The Politics of Go4 p. 51-60. "~anner,"A Theological Case for Human Responsibility in Moral Choice," p. 604. 92Tanner, The Politics ofGd, p. 69. orders Thus, decûioas and standards aui only be tentative and relative- Specific, universal pronouncwents of judgment are niled outmTo move beyond general proposais into specifics reguires a recopnition of their potential falli-biiity and limitations. It also requins interdisciplinary work, including political and ecouomic analysis." Commity. Diversi& and Sofihity The general guideLines and directives emerging fiom belief in Gd's tranxendence and providential agency have a tremendous impact upon human As God has created creatures in al1 their divetsity, each creature requires respect based upon its creatinehood Humans are not to be respecteci because of any defining feature other than their created status. This places all creatures, including humans, on a level plane? In light of this, Tanner calls for an opposition to fixed hierarchies of subordinates and superiors, oppressive relations of domination or exploitation and intolerance of others. Mead, equal respect for others within their diversity should be promoted* These guidelines entail a nurnber of rÏghts due ail creatures: to be oneself in al1 one's diversity; self-development; 93Tanner. The Politics ofcod, p. 98- 107. %Tanner. The Poli~zcsof God, p. 120. 95AlthoughTanner focuses primarily upon human relations, she has written an article which extends this concem to al1 creatures on earth. See Kathryn E. Tanner, "Creation, Environmental Crisis, and Ecological Justice," in Recomtnrcting Christian 7heology, ed Rebecca Chopp and et. al. (Minneapolis: Fomess Press, 1994). %Tanner. The Politics of Gd,p. 165-70. 97TannertThe Politics of God, p. 130-3 1. minimum standards of well-being participatim or Muence in social processes that govem one's fate; access to neceSSary sources for developmentN These rights are aot based upon a Ii'beral theory of individualism, but entail a social dimension in relationship with others. They are also not ûased upon a 11- toleration of largesse, wfiere evqone is permiaed to be without interference.." Rather, they are based upon a toleration of respect for all creatures of GdThis creates a liberty of conscience, in which attitudes or behavioun that promote intolerance are not tolerated '00 Toleration based upon this respect also aUows for better understanding of the other. The negative traits one sees in the other must also be seen in onesetc and the positive traits one sees in oneself one must also see in the other. Tanner calls this "nonidolatrous esteexn: where humble acknowiedgement of sinfùl finitude is balanced with self-affinnation of creaturely value. loi The inflated self-esteem of oppressors prevents hem from acknowledging how they benefit fiom oppressive insriMiooal structures. The lack of self-esteem of the oppressed prevemts them from acknowledging how they are deprived by these structures. Tanner suggests that both are guilty of sloth in 9%imer, The Polirics of God, p. 179; Tanner, "A Theological Case for Human Respomibility in Moral Choice," p. 6 10- 1 1. vanner, "A Theological Case for Human Responsibility in Moral Choice," p. 606. '@?amer, The Politics of Gd,p. 195-205. '"Tanner. The Poiitics of Gai, p. 228-29. their cornplacent acccptance of the status quo.'q Ifthe oppressors accepteci their own finitude and fdibility and the accepteci their own value, both would have a nonidolatrous esteem. This wodd enable the oppressor to forego privileges and the opprrssed to clah basic rights.'O.' A nonidolatrous esteem would also comtetact a tendency to reify the other as utterly different nom oneself It will respect the actuai differences that exia and work against assimilation of the other into one's own identity. Beiief in the creanirehood of humanity will allow the other tu be genuinely other- Tanner notes some sirnilarities of this relatioaship of othemess to our relationship with God as genuinety other.lW Tanner concfudes that a commun@ founded upon values of creaturehood wiil be pludistic and radicaily inclusive. It will allow a solidarity of respect for diversity within and outside particular groups. It will discourage any essentialking tendencies of communities to ignore their own diversities in the midst of particular identities. los If any comrnmities are formed around collective identities such as gender, they must be particularly sensitive to the divenities within that identity. In order to respect the padculanties of each person within the community, Tanner eschews cornunitarian goals which sacrifice individuai needs for the sake of the larger community. For instance, ImIt may well be more a lack of energy and resources, rather than sioth, that prevents the oppresseci fiom actively resisting their own oppressive structures. '03Tanner. nePolitics of God, p. 23642. '@%rmer. The P olitics of God, p. 208- 19. lqanner. The P ditics of God, p. 2 19-23. the consensus model of decision-making often dctsthe fke expression of diff=ee'O6 Relationships with others will focus upon understaadhg the other and will avoid -ive forms of interaction such as debates and persuasion. The least powerfiil will have the greatest nght to be hd'" As evexyone, opotessed and oppressor alike, is a mature of God, al1 should be accorded value and respect AU should also realize their own finitude and fallibility. Activists will admit that they also may be mistaken in some ways; that they, too, may oppress others. This will allow a solidarity even between oppressor and oppressed as activists forgive and refuse to demonize those they oppose. 'O8 Up to this point, this discussion of Tanner's views on cornmunity, diversity and solidarity has concentrated on her earlier material. Her later material does not argue with these views, but rather understands them as logical, coherent results of her particular ordering of Christian material. She continues this discussion with additional thoughts on solidarity that have emerged from her more explicitly posmiodern approach. One of her concerns in this later matenal is with the implications of the diversity of Christian belief and practice for solidarity. She is only too aware of the divisive and destructive results of L06KathrynE. Tanner, "The Care That Does Justice: Recent Writings in Feminist Ethics and Theology," Journul of'Keftgiuuî Ethics 24, no. 1 (Spring 1996): 184-85. '"Tanner. The Politics of'God, p. 2 19- 213. '" Tanner. The Pulitics cfGod, p. 246-50.Tanner's cal1 for soiidarity with the oppressor, her analysis that both the oppressed and the oppressor are guilty of the same sin of slothfulness, and her cal1 to forgive the oppressor will be questioned by many. Kwok's definition of solidarity will help to refine Tanner's understanding. By stressing the interconnecrion of multiple oppressions and identities, simple identification as the oppressor or oppressed is no longer possible. A recognition of the multiple sources of oppression will also challenge Tanner's gross characterizations of sloth and premature calls for forgiveness. Christian disagreement that ofien impact margmalized people, such as lesbian and gay Chnstians and people of diverse cultures and faiths. At the same tirne. she mgnùes the inevitability of disagreement on the variable meanings of Christian materiais. Tanner's solution to this dilemma is to cal1 for a solidarity based upon fomal agreement of the use and purpose of Christian materials without requiring agreement on their rneaning '" For instance, al1 could participate in a communal meal without requiring consensus of belief as to its meaning. There could be a unity of task, such as a cornmon reference of al1 things to God or the proclamation of Gd's Word, without requïring agreement on the content of the task ' " Instead of uniting around mies that spi@the shape of Christian belief, Tanner suggests that the creeds, in vimie of their ambiguities "are the grounds around which opposed factions unite in argument". 'Il Tanner does not dismiss the possibility of agreement on meaning. As a.example, she says certain practices, such as slavery, can be mled out of bounds when these practices are clearly considered to contravene Christian beliefs. ' '' However, she cautions against efforts to decertain controversial practices out of bounds and thereby silence opposition. ' '"orced cornpliance often subsumes the marginalized into the dominant '()Tanner. Theories of (.'uiture, p. 1 36. Il1Tanner. Theories of Culrure, p. 140. "*~uchagreement on uncontrovenial issues could be considered part of the regdu fidue. ' "Tanner. Theorzes of Culture, p. 173-74. identity. Only on the bisof such a "weak" consensus on form, and not content, does Tanner believe solidarity to be possible amongst the widest diversity of people. "' Solidarity can also be finthered by honouring, and not preventing, disagreement in order to avoid divisiveness. Tanner encourages "a genuine community of argumentn that is "marked by mutual hearing and cnticisrn among those who disagree, by a cornmon cornmitment to mutual correction and uplifl, in keeping with the shared hope of good discipleship, proper faithfulness, and pur@ of witness". Il5 Conclusion Ka- Tanner's theological rnethod exhibits similar concenis to those of Schüsder Fiorenza, Fulkenon and Kwok. Issues of social jusrice, community, diversity and solidanty are central in her work and she critiques elements of modemity and liberalism which present obstacles to these issues. In addition, Tanner is concemed about modemity and liberalism's distortion of traditional Christian belief. Modem decontextualization, according to Tanner, has produced the fallacies of neutrality and referentiality. Two consequences of referentiaiity are positivism, with its identification of de fucw noms with de jure noms, and the reification of rhetorical noms into ontological descriptions. When the two problems of referentiality and ' "~anner.Theories of< irlr ure, p. 123-24. While this seems to contradict her earlier statements eschewing coercive fonns of interaction such as debates and persuasion, 1 believe tbat she is primarily concemed about manipulation. She encourages argument and debate only if they are respectfiil and give voice to the voiceless. reification are combined, theological statements are understood as ontologicai descriptions of a reified essence. Essentialism is piuticularly problematic regarding diversity and domination It leads to totaiitarianism and coloniaiism in which marguiaiized identities are subsurned into the dominant identity. This uaacknowledged power differential also results in a liberal individualism which fails to acknowledge institutionalized oppression. As an alternative method to modernity and liberalisrn, Tanner presents a revision of postliberalism with the help of postmodem theory. She chooses to speak not fiom the margins, but frorn the heart of the Christian tradition 1n order to challenge politically conservative Christian movements, Tanner convincingly demonmates the support of traditional Christian beliefs for social justice. Her exposé on the transcendence of God precludes any theological or political position from self-justification by identifjmg iwlf with the divine. Rather, the transcendence of God should remind a11 of us of the limitations and fallibility of our positions. Il" The creative agency of Gdprovides incentive to respect the divenity of al1 creation. In order to distance herself fiom the problems of the postliberal use of niles, she prefea the use of style to detemine the common usage, rather than common meaning, of Christian materials. This allows her to have a pragrnatic focus on the results rather than ''mis is reminiscent of Paul Tillich's Protestant Principle which 'kontains the divine and human protest against any absolute daim made for a relative reality". Indeed, Tillich names as demonic any attempt to claim uitirnacy for a human construction. See Paul Tillich, The Protestant Eru. originally published in 1948, trans. by James Luther Adams, (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 163; Sysfematzc Theologv: Llfe and the Spirit: Hlsrory and the Kingdom of Go4 vol. IiI (London: SCM Press Ltd., 1963). p. 98. the ref-ts of Christian beliefk This concept of style ~spectsthe diversïty of doctrine and scripture as weil as faith communities by emphasizing theîr social co~l~t~ctionwithin the diverse culturai contexts of the communities. It also allows their multiple possibilities of meanings to be limitai by their organkation with other Christian materials. including the cornmunity's traditional interpretation, or plain sense, of scriptme. The use of style has implications for solidarïty. It encourages Christian cornmunities to Mite over the use and pinpose of Christian beliefs and practices rather than their meaning. It also allows them to enter uito a commrmity of argument that unites them in their disagreements. Tanner proposes a "politics of solidarity"' " not only amongst Christian communities, but dsc amongst Christian theologians. Although her theological cntique is drawn fkom within the boundaries of traditional Christian doctrines. she does admit that these boundaries are not fixed. Perhaps in an indirect reference to the work of Schiissler Fiorena she acknowledges the importance of historicaily marginaiized voices and Christian discourse. Because these have ken excluded fiom mainstream Christian tradition, Tanner does not deal with them in her intemal critique. However, she does suggest that, "in the service of greater justice". her internai critique could supplement other methods of anaiysis which explore these marginalized traditions and experiences.' '* Tanner lists a number of ways in which interna1 critique, as a supplement to ' "Tanner. The Politics of God, p. 257. "%umer, The Politics ofGod, p. 257. -166- revisionist theologies, could strengthen their political impact. First, an inted critique could help these alternative rnethods avoid malong totalistic critiques of the mainstream Christian theology. Secondly, it could help them to be more attentive of dive*. Whe~ zheir commrmal values might exclude individuals who do not hold those values or where their emphasis on consensus might be at the expense of ethnic and racial diveaity, an intemal critique might check this tendency towards "totalistic holism'. Thirdly, it provides a reminder that al1 methods are fdlible and must be open to critique and constant review. Thus, it keeps theological rnethods fiom identifjmg their noms and beliefs with divine will and merely refl ecting in theology what one already believes. It also warns against a thmlogicd identification with political recommendations. Mead, it necessitates the need for interdisciplinary, sociopolitical analysis to flesh out theological analysis. Tanner believes that if different theological methods committed to social justice work together, critiquing and therefore strengthening each other, they will afford a much more effective coalition of solidarity in the struggle for justice. '19 ' 'Tanner. The Politics of Goci, p. 150-257. - 1 67- Chapter 5 Criticai Cornparison of Feminkt Theologid Methods Each of these four feminist methods critiques modem and liberal approaches to theoiogy and offers an alternative attentive to diversity and liberation of the marginalized within Christian comrnunities. In this chapter I wilI compare these methods criticdly by ushg each appmach to critique the other three. Fim 1 will sudetheir similarities of responses to modemity and liberalism. ~6llowin~this, 1 will highlight four primary aras in which their alternative theological methods differ. historical adequacy, scriptural and doctrinal agency, subjecthood and community, and reveiation and authority. I will niggest ways in which these four different methods. with their similarities and differences, cm complement and strengthen each other. I will also indicate the type of community that is best served by each method. As will be seen in Part Two. these areas are important in the development of a feminist theological method that more adequately addresses divenity and marginalkation within Protestant denominations. Response to Modernity and Liberalisrn Each of the four feminists disputes the impartial objectivity claimed in modem methods. They challenge modem assumptions that reality can be discovered with the proper histoncal-critical tools. Singular meaninp of biblical and historical texts are contested. Universal claims made on this basis only serve to hide the interests and ideologies of the modem researcher. These claims are decontextualized and assumed to represent the reaiity and interests of others in different social settings and power relations. Instead of representing the other, however, these claims subsume the identity of the other into the identity of the researcher. Certain ciifferences are essentialized and others are occluded Power differentials are ignored, Merrnarmg those who are colonized or dominated by multiple, systemic structures of oppression. Liberal attempts to include without addressing these power relations merely perpetuate the oppressive status quo. A liberai emphasis upon the autonomy of the individual ovedooks their social construction. Individual interpretations of scripture are not as individual as they fim appear, but are formed out of a complex web of significations within their social location. These points of agreement conceming the problem of modem and liberal appmaches leads each of the four feminists to develop alternatives. which share some similarities. They each use the rhetoncal method to explain the formation of the biblical and doctrinal texts ancilor to reconstmct these texts with contemporary faith communities. AI1 draw upon poststnictural theory to acknowledge the divenity of texts and communities. and to explain how the multiple meanings of texts and multiple subject identities can be Iimited and stabilized by their use within faith communities. Christian texts cannot be disrnissed in a totalistic critique that collapses this diversity. They each believe that different liberative strands within the biblicai texts and Christian traditions can be found by different Christian communities. To varying extents they aiso recognize the limits of postsrnicturaI theory. In order to develop an emancipatory edge. additional methods are needed. Schüssler Fiorenza relies upon historical criticism fiom a rhetoncal perspective as well as social cntical theory. Fuikerson depends primarily upon poststructuralism with the addition of narrative theory. Kwok refers primarily to postcolonid theory. Tanner combines postmodemism with a revised postliberdism. Within each of these approaches, they each establish pragmatic, liberationist nom. 1 will examine the similarities and differences of these nom later in this chapter. Alternative Tbeologid Methods in order to contrat the difierent theological methods that the four feminists propose as aitematives to modem. liberal approaches. it is helpful to review their purposes, communal foci. and overail method. Schüssler Fiorenza wants to recognize the women and men who have ken marginalized in historical and contemporary Christian communities. Therefore. she concentrates on the faith cornmunities of marginalized women and men who stmggle against oppression. Her rhetorical reading strategies allow her access to the marginalized and silenced voices within the early Jesus movement. Fulkerson wants to recognize women whose faith traditions and cornmitments place them outside the reaim of traditional ferninist practice. Therefore. she concentrates upon the women who belong to politically and religiously conservative faith communities. Her intertextuai andysis and the notion of a canoaical system enable her to attend to the liberative aspects of their faith practices within their own faith traditions. Kwok wants to recognize the women and men who have been colonized by western Christian traditions. Therefore. she concentrates upon Asian Christian communities with their multifaith and multiculhval context. Her mukifaith hermeneutics and process of dialogicd imagination reveal the multiple, shifting identities of Asian Christians that shape the multiple meauings of scripture and Christian traditions. Tanner wants to recognize the liberative potential and diversity of traditional Christian beliefs. Therefore. she concentrates upon historically dominant Christian cornrnunities and their use of Christian matenals. Her analysis of style allows her to constnict liberative guidelines hmher selection and organization of Christian doctrines. while recognizing the fluidity and diversity of these constructions within different Christian traditions. These differences in purpose, cornmimal foci and method have implications for their approach to history. for the critical force which they give to scripture and Christian doctrine. for the social construction of identity. for their choice of community. for their authoritative criteria and for their understanding of revelation. Each of these areas will now be discussed. Historical A dequacy Although dl four feminists resist textual and historicai positivism. the! rr each attempt to take history and the Bible seriously. The extent to which they do so without fdling into modem positivist faliacies is debated amongst them. Histoncal and textual positivism. according to Schiissler Fiorenza assumes one can uncover the hidden reality behind and in the biblical text. Once uncovered. these established facts help ascertain the original meaning of the text. Schüssler Fiorenza suggests that these assumptions ignore the rhetorical nature of the texts. They are not a direct correspondence with reaiity, but a reflection of the power and privilege of the wrïters. Her rhetoncal appmach to the text takes this bias into consideration. Through rhetoric, she feco~l~sllctsthe text's &O-historid context to more adequately represent a margioalued historicai perspective- FuIkerson agrees with Schüssler Fiorenza's critique of historical and texnial positivisme but argues that Schüssler Fiorenza's historical reconstruction commits the same modem fallacy. Men Schiissler Fiorenza refers to her own reconstruction as a facnia- more adequate representation of reality* she assumes that a pre-discursive reality exists and can be uncovered with the proper approach. Fulkerson's critique is only valid for Schüssler Fiorenza's earlier work. In her later writing Schüssler Fiorenza is carefid not to refer to her reconstructions as factual accounts of histow. She does not propose histoncal accuracy or representation. Rather. she emphasizes the rhetorical nature of her own work much more explicitly. However. she is unwilling to dispense with her criteria of histoncal adequacy.' Even though one can never discover what reall y happened, there are enough literary and archeological dues that render sorne historical reconstructions more adequate than others. These dues can also declare certain reconstructions illegitirnate. For instance. historical accounts that deny the genocide of the Beothuk Nation in Newfoundland or the extermination of Jewish. lesbian and gay. and mentally and physically disabled 'iindesirables" in the Holocaust must be discounted. By insisting on historical adequacy, Schüssler Fiorenza takes history seriously, especially in honour of those who have suffered. Her pnmary 'See in particular Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, But S'eSaid: Feminisl Pracfices of Biblical Inferpretotion (Boston: Beacon Press, 1992), 90. concem is reconstructing history hmthe peffpective of the margllialized, and it is against îhese groups that she measures her histoncal adequacy. PostmoderaiStS, she argues, are unable to take history seriously because they deem it iaaccessible. She insists that biblical texts must not be locked away in ancient times by historical-critical scholars. nor removed hmtheir historical contexts by poststructuraiists and literary theorists. nor ahistorically adopted by literaiists and postliberafs. Fulkerson is aware of the ahistorical tendency of her poststructurai approach. To countemct this she acknowledges that it is possible to have an adequate historical interpretation discemed through construction. What makes it adequate is not its accurate representation of reality, but the location of its production in an historical community. Fulkeaon underscores the importance of historical occasions that are formative for a particular community. It is of Iittie significance whether or not these historical mernories acnially happened. What is crucial is the authoritative weight the community gives them. For the Presbyterian women. reformed doctrine and practices are cmcial. For the Pentecostal women. holiness traditions and practices are paramount Tanner's detailed account of medieval theological positions would have little, if any, affect upon both groups. as these traditions are not consciously part of either group's canonicd systems. Thus. Fulkerson3 primary concem is with historical doctrines, events and practices that are deemed formative and given meaning by particular faith communities. In this respect she acknowledges that Christianity must explore, reconceive. criticize, celebrate and be accoimtable to the past.' Kwok bdds upon both Schüssler Fiorenza and Fulkerson's approaches. She rhetorically reconstructs the histones of Asian Christians. with emphasis upon the women, using popular sources and eastern philosophy. Like Schüssler Fiorenza she is primarily interested in those who have been shut out of the domioant Christian traditions. Like Fulkerson, she focuses upon historical aspects particular to certain groups. She recognizes the value of Schüssier Fiorends use of historical-critical tools. She also acknowledges the indebtedness of postcolonialism to postmodern theory. However. she questions their usefûlness for rnarginalized communities. She notes that Asian and Anican-Arnerican Christian communities are less concerned with the historical reality of the Bible than with the application of the Bible's religious and mord insights in their conternporary [ives. Kwok is more interested in the history of colonized peoples than in the history of Western faith communities. In her historical reconstruction. she focuses upon the interaction of Asian people within their own multicultural and multifaith traditions as they struggle against the multifaceted oppressions of coionizahon. She wams that the debate between modemists and postrnodemists tends to be more interested in abstract concepts than in the concems of colonized peoples. Historical reconstructions mut therefore be judged not by particular rnethods. but by the communities themselves as to their adequacy. In some measure of contrast to the other three, Tanner bases her measurernent of 'Mary McClintock Fulkerson, Changing the Subject: Wornen's Discourses and Feminist ir31eoIogy (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994), 128 ftnt 20. historical adequacy primarily upon traditional Christian doctrines? She judges the acciwcy and coherency of pddarbeliefk and @ces by their adherence to firnhental Christian beliefs. Tmeracknowledges that certain Christian beliefs have proven oppressive, but she refbses a totalistic critique of dl Christian beliefs. Even in her later work when she challenges the fixed meazilngs ofany theological staternent. she admits that some beliefs that have been too closely associated with patnarchy should be suppressed and deemphasized."However, she is convinced that other traditional doctrines are liberative and she attempts to reclaim them for the benefit of those strugghg against oppression. She wants to break the dualisrn between corservative Christian traditionalists and liberative Christian revisionists. Ifshe can offer a convincing argument that the fundamentals of the Christian faith cal1 for a radical. liberative response. she will remove the faith basis for the conse~ativeprotection of the stanis quo. The other three feminists are wary of such an approach that does not question oppressive power relations embedded in these accounts of history. Ecclesiai pronouncements of heresy and right belief benefit dominant Christian groups at the expense of those shut out of power. Although Tanner explores contemporary and historical contexnial readings of these statements that allow for widely diverse, '~lthoughthe other feminists do not emphasize the coherency of their methods with traditional Christian doctrine. they do draw upon partïcular Christian beliefs to support their emancipatory concems. Schüssler Fiorenza refers to the basileh of God. Fulkerson refers to agapic ideais. and Kwok refen to the unity of the body of Christ. "Kathryn E. Tanner, "Social Theory Concerning the 'New Social Movementsf and the Practice of Feminist Theology," in Horizons in Ferninisr Theologyr Idenfity, Tradition, and Norms, ed. Rebecca S. Chopp and Sheila Greeve Davaney (Mi~eapolis: Fortress Press, 1997), 189. sometimes contradictory inteqmtatïons, she does not question the statements themse1ves. Schüssler Fiorenza insists that dl Christian doctrine be viewed suspiciously as patriarchal constructs. Only as they contribute to emancipation can they be reclaimed. Kwok agees, adding that western Christian traditions are deeply embedded in a complex web of impenalist western cultures. While Fulkerson is less willing to make such totdistic critiques of Christian traditions. she is uncornfortable with Tanner's judgement of correct communal readings and faithful practice. What may be considered correct by one community may be considered heresy by another. To make extemal judgements of Christian comrnunities is to commit the sarne fallacy of the "liberal economy": one person is given the power to name correct belief or faithfûl practice for everyone else.' Since postliberals name the judges of correct belief as the saints. Fulkerson asks if they recognize any saints in the Pentecostai community? As repeated church schisms prove. there is no doctrinal unity among the saints! These criticisms rnay have influenced Tanner's move away from postliberalism towards postmodemism in her later work. She no longer refers to correct or proper interpretations. but emphasizes the divenity of interpretations according to their selective use of Christian materials. She still stresses the importance of traditional Christian beliefs and their persuasive influence in contemporary theological arguments. In fact. she urges feminist theologians to remain traditionai by appealing to Christian materials. This would 'Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 162. 6Fulkerson Changing the Subject, p. 162.364. - 176- ptlyenhance their politicai impact and credi'biiity within Christian theology: "the more traditional the matexid with which it works, the greater the influence of feminst theology".' In Tanner's later work she seems more concemed with the coherence of particular arrangements of Christian material than with their proper interpretation according to fundamental mies. Instead of appealuig to historical continuity with past Christian tradition she focusses on pdcular selections and arrangements of the diverse. multiple Christian traditions that will best support liberative practices.' In sum. each feminist recognizes the importance of historicai traditions. cultures. events and faith practices. They aiso agree that they ca.only be accessed through rhetorical reconsmiction. Where they differ is in the partïcular historical materiai considered as it relates to their focus upon particuiar communities. Schüssler Fiorenza concentrates upon the materiai, both canonical and extra canonical, that best allows her to reconstmct silenced and marginaiized voices fiom the early Christian communities. Fulkerson concentrates upon material which is most formative for particular Christian cornmunities. Similady. Kwok concentrates upon material which is most formative for colonized Christian communities- Tanner's focus is much broader as she concentrates upon traditional doctrines that have been formative for different Christian cornmunities throughout history. Her latest work concentrates on the manner in which different Christian cornmunities appropriate historical doctrines. 7Tanner, "Social Theory Conceming the 'New Social Movements'," p. 192. 'Tanner. "Social Theory Conceming the 'New Social Movements'." p. 188. Smpttuui und DoctrttrtllO1Agency In this section we will discuss how each feminist enables Scnphue and doctrine to have agency within their particular communities of interest Fulkerson's poststructural approach insists that bibücal texts and Christian traditions do not have inherent patriarchal or liberative meanings. Rather, their meaning is constmcted within the pdormance of the faith community. Thus, texts that are Rad as patriarchal in one community may be understood as liberative in another. Because Fulkerson resists granting any subject pre-discursive reality and agency, she views biblical texts and theological statements as unstable in themselves. They contain the potential for lirnitless meanings and are only stabilized withùi a particular community's performance of them. Stabilization occurs when a particular community's own ideal and resisting reading regimes ptbiblical texts meaning and limit their number of possible interpretations. T~LIS.it is not Christian traditions or the biblical texts per se that have agency to limit and direct proper interpretations. Rather, it is hou& their appropriation and use by the cornmunity, as the cornmunity understands them in Iight of their own historical traditions. that scriptural and doctrinal texts gain agency to limit and adjudicate particular interpretations. Particularly in her later work. Tanner agrees that the biblical texts and Christian doctrine are stmcturally indeterminate. They only become stabilized through communal use. In her later work she suggests that it is their relation to each other. as selected and organized in different patterns. that stabilizes their meaning. She also suggests that some doctrines. through established histoncal use, are more stabilized than others, but even these meanings cm be shaken apart by fùture uses? The community's assumecl sense of scripture will also influence the reading and pracfice of other Christian materials. Essentially, Fuikerson and Tanner, in her later wo* agree that scripture and doctrine gain meaning and critical force through their use within faith communities. an example of the critical force of certain arrangements, Tanner suggests that if biblical texts are read in light of the gospel narratives, proper interpretation will privilege inclusive Miefs. attitudes and behaviours over corservative, exclusive practices. If Christian traditions are understood in light of God's transcendence aud God's creative agency. Iiberative interpretations will be prefemd to those supporting the stanis quo. Through their relationship with each other. biblical texts and doctrines provide a "generai practical import" of guidelines which resist the oppressive status quo. but still allow a diversity of particular micro-level applications. Schiissler Fiorenza grants agency to the biblical texts and limits their multiple meanings through grammatical and histoncal criticisms. Even though she has adopted many poststructural critiques in her later work. she still utilizes modem historical criticism to prevent an endless play of significations. However, although she suggests that histoncal criticism also allows the biblical tex& the distance needed to challenge us." she gives little atîention to this. Instead. her primary interest is the emancipatory impact 9Kathryn E. Tanner, ïheories of Culture: A New Agenda for Theology. Guides to Theological inquiry (Minneapolis: Fortress Press. 1997), 78. 'O~lisabethSchihsler Fiorenza. "The Ethos of Interpretation: Biblical Studies in a Postmodem and PostcoIonial Context," Presentation, The Association of Korean Theologians at Usong, The Republic of Korea October 26, 1996, p. 17. which scripture has within communities. In the interaction of the commmity wÏth scriptme both have impact on each other. Kwok is even less concemed than Schiissler Fiore~lzawith the need to limit scriptural readings. Rather, she focuses upon the need to multiply the* possible interpretations in juxtaposition with Asian scriptures. Like Fulkemn and Schüssler Fiorenza. she is interested primarily in the meanings found in the performance of scripture. As with Schüssler Fiorenza, Kwok ernphasizes the munial impact that scripture and comrnunity have on each other. Her primary concem is the enactrnent of the biblical text within the practice of faith communities as they discern the living Gospel. This concept of living Gospel has some fitieswith Tanner's plain sense and her later reference to the Word of God. It is the connection of diverse faith communities with the Living Gospel or Word of God" that provides theological unity and correction to unjust practices and readings. The living Gospel or free Word of Gd"rather than the Bible. stands against us. From this overview we can see affinities between Fulkerson and Tanner. and between Schüssler Fiorenza and Kwok. Fulkerson explores the formative influence of scripture and doctrine within the canonical systems of particular communities. Likewise. "Kwok would be uncornfortable with rny identification of the Living Gospel with the Word of God. However. 1 believe that it is more a matter of disagreement over the meaning of the constnict "Word of God" than with the association of the Living Gospel with God's incarnated presence and ongoing revelation in the world. "Tanner uses the descriptive b-fi.ee" in order to emphasize that our language and actions can only approximate and not contain the Word. In our judgements, we must always "remain open for new movements of faithfiilness to a heWord". See Tanner. Theories ofculture, p. 155. Tanner examines their critical force within particular patterns of use. Schiissler Fiorenza and Kwok are less concemed with doctrine than they are with Scnpture. T'eV interest in scnpture is foc& primarily on the Liberative impact it has witbia marginalized communities. Thus, they locate scriptural agency in the interaction with community. in which saïphire and community act upon each other. Tanner and Kwok also share a certain de- of affùiity in their insistence that the Living Gospel or Word of God is the uitimate source of critical agency. Subjecthood and Communiiy Closely comected with scriptural and doctrinal agency is personal agency and subjecthood. In this section we will examine how each feminist retains political agency for discursively consmicted subjects within particular communities. In her later work. Schüssler Fiorenza afT~rmsthe poststructural notion of the discursively coostnicted subject. Identities such as woman or lesbian are not stable essences of identity. but the sites of conflicting disco~rses.'~Her use of the tem "wo/men" indicates that women do not constitute a unitary group, but are hgmented and fiactured by multiple identities? Schiissler Fiorenza is, however, unwilling to relinquish woman as subject or politicai unit. She takes issue with postmodem tendencies to erase the subjecthood of women and other marginalized groups. She notes that colonized others 13SchiisslerFiorenza Biri She Said. p. 108. ''E lisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, Jesusr Miriam 's Chi24 Sophiu 's Prophet: Crit ica1 Issues in Feminist Christologv (New York: Continuum, 1994), 24. cannot afford to abandon the notion of subject nor the possibility of defining the world." Fulkerson defends postmodern theorists, inciuding Foucault and Judith Butler. by explaixiing that they are only destabilizing, not destroying, the subjecî. Constitution of wornen or lesbian and gay people outside of discourse essentializes them. Fukerson notes the horrendous historical consequences of gender or sexual orientation understood not as a social construction but as a naturai essence. Although Schüssler Fiorenza recognizes the multiple identities of women Fulkerson accuses her of still retaining a prediscursive notion of woman undemeath the social constru~tion.'~ Fulkerson does acknowledge the difficulty of the postsûuctuml destabilization of the subject. Taken to its logical end deconstruction renden communication impossible. if subjects can only exist within the context of each one's unique discursive context there would be no basis for intercommunication across discourses or for social change. Similarity or identity associations. as well as common langage construction. could not occur. In order to bridge this impasse. Fulkerson recommends rhetorical narrative. Stones about a God of justice within a particular situation and about the occlusion of people hm this situation will allow connections to be made and social change to be engaged. It is at this point that Fulkemn concedes that she is --net finally a po~ts~cniralist".'~She finds "Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza. Discipleship of Equols: A Criiical Feminisl Ekklesia-Logv of Liberarion (New York: Crossroad. 1993). 284. 16Mary McClintock Fuikenon "Contesting Feminist Canons: Discourse and the Problem of Sexist Texts." Journal of Feminist Studies Ni Religion 7, no. 2 (Fall 199 1): 66. "Maq McClintock Fulkerson, "Contesting the Gendered Subject: A Feminist Account of the Imago Dei," in Horizons in Feminist Theology: Identity, Tmdition, and Norms, ed. Rebecca S. Chopp and Sheila Greeve Davaney (Minneapolis: Fortress Press poststructuralism to be the best method for breaking apthegemonies, but agrees that it is insuffiCient for cornmimication and social change.'* For thiis reason. she also defends the need for new univeds of structural sin. While she resists universalking a subject or category, such as gender, she suggests that systemic violation based upon gender can be universdized. "Gendered fallibility" is based upon storïes of the corruption of gender relations. and is therefore context dependent and discursively embedded. When taken together, these stories indicate sexuality to be a site where suiful response is a '-likely po~sibility".'~Thus. actions of discursively located subjects can be narrated to project Iikely funue actions of subjects yet to be located The fine line Fukerson draws between prediscunive and sociaily constructed subjects has becorne precariously thin. Kwok suggests that western debates between essentialists and poststnicturaiists focus on ontological rather than political identities." She uses identity terminology. such as Asian and woman. ody as a political description of position. and not as an ontologicai depiction of essence. She would resist any attempt to define subjecthood outside of multiple discourses. Along with Fu1 kerson. Kwok insists that even within discourses identities remain unstable and fluid. Multiple subject positions produce multiple identities '8Fulkenon. "Contesting the Gendered Subject" p. 1 13. '%ary McClintock Fulkenon. "Sexism as Original Sin: Developing a Theacentric Discourse." Journal of the Arnerican Academy of Religion 59, no. 4 (Winter 199 1): 67 1-73. "See Kwok Pui- tan, Discovering the Bible in the Non-Biblical World, The Bible and Liberation Series (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1995), 24-26. within multilwel discourses. It is not subjecthood that offers agency for change. but political affinities. Tanner agrees that subjects are discursively constructed and offers a theological critique of essentialized subjecthood. Her conviction that ail subjects are created by and are dependent upon God does not deout social construction but qualifies it. As creanires of God. our identities are socially coclst~ctedwithin our relationships and contexts. However, the particularity and diversity of d created subjects transgresses human attempts to consmict boundaries of social identity. Socially constructeci categories of race. gender and sexual orientation cannot contain this diversity and mut not be identified as naturd and divinely-created. Such identification essentializes particular identities and occludes diversity within these categories. in order to respect the diversity of dl creation. Tanner emphasizes dong with the other three ferninists the shifting and multiple boundaries of identity. Similar to Kwok's preference of political identity over ontological, Tanner prefea to defme identity relationally rather than ontologically in order to honour the multiple identities of the subject within the limitaiions and possibilities of relationships with God and one another. Al1 four feminists agree that subjects are socially constmcted within comrnunity. T'us.discussions about subjecthood ultimately refer to cornmunity. Schüssler Fiorenza's Fragmented and fractured identity of wo/men is stabilized through Meridentification of the multiple identities of subjects within particular contemporary and historicd cornmunities of oppressed peoples (the ekklësia of wo/men). Fulkerson also stabilizes subjects through their construction within particular cornmunities and within rhetorical don,aithough she wams that such stabihtîon is always temporary. Kwok is even more cautious about such stabihaîion, insisting that even within communities. identities remain unstable and fluid. For this reason, she focuses upon political, rather than ontolopicai identity- Tanner suggests that our relationship with God Merrelativizes and destabilizes our boundaries of social identity. Like Kwok, she prefers to dehe identity relationally with God and one another. With these understandings of subjecthood and community in mind let us remto the different types of communities upon which each feminist focuses. Let us recall hm our earlier overview of their methods that their differing communal foci figure prominently in the distinction of their methods. The type of community chosen directly reflects the difference in the purpose of their methods. Let me elaborate. Schüssler Fiorenza's purpose is to recognize the women and men who have been marginalized in historical and contemporary Christian communities. She therefore seeks to reconstruct the early Christian communities in order to reclaim the voices which have ken obliterated or marginalized. Because Schüssler Fiore~l~a'svision of a democratic, liberative and inclusive faith community cannot be reaiized within institutional churches. she calls for altemate faith communities of people who have been marginalized in institutional churches and society. and who struggle against oppression. It is to these historical and contemporary faith communities. which she calls the ekklësia of wo/men. that she is accountable. In contrast to Schüssler Fiorenza. Fulkerson is not interested in the creation of new faith communities. Fulkerson's purpose is to recognize women whose faith traditions and commitments place hem outside the rehof traditional feaiiaist practice. She therefore examines the exïstuig faith conimmities of these women in order to understand their cornpliance with and resistance to oppressive gender praftices in their communities. Her aaalysis of the canonical systern takes her into the past traditions and practices of these communities that remain formative in the social construction of the women and their biblical interpretations. Kwok's purpose includes elements of both Schüss1er Fiorenza's and Fukerson's. Like Schüssler Fiorenza. Kwok is interested in people who have been marginalized within the dominant Christian traditions. Like Fulkerson she is interested in the social construction of the identity and faith practices of a particular group of people. Therefore. she does not seek to establish new faith communities. but to conduct a postcolonial analysis of the faith communities of colonized peoples and their multiculturaVmultifaith contexts. She also extends her anaiysis beyond these particulas faith communities into diaiogue and solidarity with other faith communities around the globe. Like Schüssler Fiorenza and Kwok. Tanner is also interested in people who have ken marginalized within Christian traditions. Like Fulkerson. she seeks to find liberative strands withh Christian beliefs and practices that address this marginalization. However. unlike Fulkerson, she is not content to explain the resistance that is aiready present within faith communities. Rather. she seeks to Merreconstruct liberative possibilities fiom particular selections and organizations of Christian materials. While Fulkenon concentrates upon certain faith communities, Tanner broadens her focus to a variety of different Christian traditions. Like Kwok Tanner is interested in dialogue (or argument) amongst Christian communities as they seek to be United ami& diversity. The various purposes for each feminist's work have direct implications not only upon their commrnial foci, but also upon theK choice of method and authoritative criteria In hun, this has direct implications upon their understanding of reveiation. While I will be highiighting the differences in these areas within this section, as with previous sections I will also be noting simiiarities in their conclusions and overail goals. Throughout al1 of Tanner3 work she hm consistentiy underscored the universality of God's grace and the provisional nature of human judgements. She argues on the basis of God's transcendence that only God is absolute. All human perceptions and judgements must therefore be understood as partial. Any claims to absolute tnith. "God-endosed" decisions.' ' or empirically- proven facts that are piaced beyond critique are idolatrous. Thus. human endeavours are limited and relativized in Iight of God's transcendence. and must be open to critique. Such recognition of our creaturehood and dependence upon God gives us a sense of humility. Although none of the other feminists emphasizes the limitations and fallibility of human endeavours. none of them would argue this point. Where they and many other theologians disagree is with Tanner's elabration of God's transcendence in her earlier work. By positing fundamental and denvative rules to judge proper Christian interpretation. Tanner cornmitted the same fallacies which she later cntiqued within the "This term was used in reference to capital punishment in a Letter to the Editor of a local newspaper. See James Knox, "God's Power is Life-Tmsfonning," The Toronto Star. Febniary 1 8 1998. A 19. work of postliiberals. Fulkerson joins Tanwr in the critique of postliberal use of grammatical desto judge the appropriate use of Christian traditious. Fulkerson notes that although postliberals agree that the desoriginated within the context of Christian comrnunities. they raise hem to universais that retain a constant, inherent meaning outside of any signiwng process. Their intratexhial approach brings closure to biblicai and historicai texts by granting them their own self-contained meanings. When they are then used to measure other interpretations, the diversity of Christian traditions and the diversity of interpretations in different social locations is undermined If each of these interpretations is judged by a meaning derived outside of their communities fiom a postliberal theo1ogian.s social location. the particular significations of each community will be lost. Different readings of a particular doctrinal rule will either be rendered invalid or will be dismissed as irrelevant to their overall adherence to this uni~ersal.~ Tanner acknowledges in Theories of Culture that the positing of desor hdarnentals is problematic and proposes style as an alternative. In order to discem Christian identity. she suggests looking at the style in which Christian materials are used. It is not the meaning of the matenais, but the manner in which they are used that unifies diverse interpretations. Style is more general than the specificity of des, and better honours the divenity of Christian interpretations. lnterestingly enough, Tanner has not abandoned her mie of God's transcendence. nor presurnably her defor God's creative agency. What has changed is her use of these beliefs. Instead of positing them as fixed "Fulkerson, Changing the Subject, p. 13 0, 148, 156-64. -1 88- constants, she acknowledges thaî they may change in meaning as they are variously placed dongside different Christian materials. They can ody offer gendguidelines. at best. Her earlier work also emphasized their general practical import and she had cautioned against particdarizhg them outside of communal use. However. she is much more carefbi in her later work not to define theological statements beyond a general pdcdirnport. As Tanner is beginning to identi4 more closely with posûnodem than with postliberal methods. she is moving closer to Fuikerson's method. Their similarities include the insistence that the rneanings of Christian matenals are constnicted by communal use. They aiso complement one another's method. Fuikerson's canonicai system helps to explain how communities select and organize Christian mateials. Tanner's use of style amplifies Fulkerson's canonical system by explaining how different Christian cornrnunities can communicate and be unified across their diverse contexts and interpretations. in addition. Tanner's understanding of plain sense as the cornmunity's traditionai understanding of a biblicai text can help inform Fulkerson's canonical system." This description explains the normative weight which communities give a particular biblical interpretation. regardless of their agreement with it. This can only happen. though. if Tanner dispenses with her additional. undefined concept of plain % a recent article Fulkerson acknowledges the benefit of Tanner's understanding of plain sense as communal consensus. See Mary McClintock Fuikerson, " '1s There a (Non-Sexist) Bible in this Church?' A Feminist Case for the Pnority of Interpretive Communities," Modern Theohgy 14, no. 2 (April, 1998): 225-42. sense.24 Tanner's move towards postmodeniism may lead her into the same apolitical dilemma of postst~icturalismwhich Fuikerson experiences. As Tanner incorporates more postmodem critiques, she is less able to develop Miversal critena with which to j udge histoncal or doctrinal adequacy and ethical accountability. This politicai impasse of postmodemisrn has been extensively critiquecl by Schüssler Fiorenza Schüssler Fiorema notes that postmodernism abandons not only the agency of the subjecf but also any metanarrative that can provide universal values of truth. justice. fkedom and equality. Because of its relative pluralism and endless signifjhg, political change is inhibited and feminist standpoints are negated. There can be no epistemological privilege of the oppressecl? Although Kwok has difficulty with standpoint theory. she joins with Schüssler Fiorenza to insist that our critique cannot be limited to local and regional communities. Because we are part of both global and local comrnunities and systems of oppression. we must critique global. systemic totaiities and not pnvatize '4~ecauseof the confusion around the vqing definitions of plain sense. and the related terms of literd sense and semas Iiteralis. I propose the constnict "assumed senses" to convey the plurality of different community's traditional understandings of the biblical text. This constmct emphasizes that the common sense. or cornrnunity's sense of a text arises out of traditionally constructed assurnptions. 3Elisabeth Schüssler Fiore- "Text and Reality-Reality as Text: The Problem of a Feminist Historical and Social Reconstruction Based on Texts." Studia Theologica 43 ( 1 989): 24-27; Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, "The Politics of Otherness: Biblical Interpretation as a Cntical Praxis for Liberation." in The Future of Liberalion Theology: Essays in Honor of Çustavo Gutiérrez, ed. Marc Ellis and Otto Madm (New York: Orbis Books, 1WB), 3 16,322; Schüssk Fiorenza Discipleship of Equals, p. 370. emancipatory struggles? Both Tanner and Fulkerson reallle these limitations of posbmodern or poststnictural critiques. In order to be constructive as well as deconstructive and offer a liberationist methodology, they add other approaches. Fuikerson is nrming increasingly to narrative Chrinian theology. and Tanner uses a political theory of culture to refomulate a postliberal emphasis upon Christian doctrine. Based upon a collection of sociaily located stories. Fulkerson offers potential universah of sin, gendered fallibiiity, grace, and agapic love. These provide general guidelines. to be paaicularized within comrnunity. Likewise. Tanner's doctrines of God's transcendence and creative agency offer general practical import that cm be specified conditionally within particdar contexts. This might result in the universalization of ethical noms borrowed fiom the wider society because of God's universal concems. Hierarchical relations in the wider culture rnight also be dumped upside down because of our humility before God. Such charactenzations are only possibilities. however. and not definitive. Reference to God relativizes al1 things, including characterizations." While these guidelines move Tanner and Fulkerson out of the political impasse of postmodemism, their critical edge may still be too vague to be effective. in order to sharpen it both tum to pragmatic noms. Fulkerson takes a liberative feminist approach "%chÜssler Fiorenza Jesus, p. 10- 13. "~annersuggests that postliberals deQ this relativization by subordinating ail borro wed, cultural material to Christian materid, which is i tsel f borrowed material. They are guilty of subordinating the Word to a particdar choice of human words declared to be inherently Christian. "Christianity does not need to keep the upper hand when using borrowed rnaterials: the Word does." See Tanner. Theories ofCuil~re,p. 149. by identifying the rcsistance of women towards gender oppression within their own faith traditions. Tanna demonstrates that Goci's creative agency cdls for a respect for the diversity of dl creatures. This belief offers pragmatic guidelines that oppose intolerance and oppressive dations of dominance and exploitation: the least powerful deserve the greatest right to be heard; the concept of nonidolatrous esteem challenges the inflated self-esteem of oppressors and the lack of self-esteem of the oppresseci: cornmunitarian goals should not sacrifice the individual but respect the diversin/ of the community. ScMssler Fiorenza and Kwok also use a combination of various methods and pragmatic noms that allow both diversity and political action. Schüssler Fiorenza uses poststruchvalism to explain the social construction of mbjects and the hi~torïcally contingent, constnicted nature of tnith." Po~tstructiaalism~combined with the rhetorical rnethod also helps to demonstrate the multiple, constructeci meanings of the biblical texts. At the same time. she uses archaeology. historical criticism, literary theory, sociology, and political social theory to detemine the limitations of multiple meanings and provide ethical critena of accountability and historïcal adequacy. Recently. Schüssler Fiorenza has suggested that postcolonialism might be the best methodology to offer such an integration. As she explains. postcoloniatism is the ody "mst" term which contrasts its method with an oppressive situation (colonialism) rather than with a philosophical approach (modernity. structuralisrn or liberalism). It is the only terni which is explicitly "Schüssler Fiorenza But She Said p. 1 08; Schiissier Fiorenza, "Text and Reality," p. 24. Although Kwok is cautious about the use of western methods. including postmodemisn, for colonized pples, she dws aclaiowledge their value for Eastern scholars. She herself employs rhetorical criticism, and on some occasions historical criticimt. in her anaiysis of the biblicd texts? Similar to Schüssler Fiorenza she calls for correlative thinking that will interweave historical criticism, postmodern and postcolonial theory ,literary cri ticisrn, sociology and reader-fesponse theory. For Kwok this reading strategy of parallel processing will incorporate estern and western religious. cultuml and philosophical traditions into a multifaith hermeneutic. in order to attend to the diveaity of peoples throughout the globe, and give a systemic analysis of colonial systems of oppression. Kwok finds that such an integrative approach is necessary. The nsk of using multidisciplinary methods is the potential for contradiction and misconstnial of the methods. For example. Schüssler Fiorenza and Kwok continue to insist that scriptural texts are patriarchal. while emphasizing the rhetorical construction of their multiple meanings. Fulkenon points out the inconsistency of a poststructuraI emphasis on constmcted meaning with such totaiistic critiques of a text. In spite of the potential for contradictions. though. al1 four feminists agree that a multidisciplinary approach is necessary. They find the integration of various approaches key to a new emancipatory paradigm for theological method and would together reiterate Kwok's cal1 'g~chiisslerFiorenza, "Biblical Studies in a Postmodern and Postcolonial Context," p. 1-5, 13, 15. ''One example is her study of the Syrophoenician woman in which she refers to form criticism. See Kwok Discovering the Bible, p. 76. to enter into another the-heon the edges of modernity and postmodernity. This new pdgmwould in& that pragmatic, liberative criteria be located and discemed within local faitb communities. Truth and revelation wodd be understood relationally. to be found within the interaction of the community and its traditions. Tanner and Kwok would need to move beyond the particular communities emphasized by Fdkerson (Protestant denominations) and Schiissler Fiorenza (ekklësia of wo/men) and cal1 for dialogue amongst various Christian traditions, as weil as various faith traditions. They would both insist on a pragmatic approach to this dialogue that begins not on common points of beliet but on a comrnon respect for difEerences and a concern for the welfare of the earth and its creatures." The impetus for this cornrnon vision cornes. in part, from God's revelation variously expressed through the Living Gospel, the Word of God the bdeia of G*d. and agapic love. Accompanying this openness to God's revelation is humility. Tanner believes that the limitations of our humanity require a humble acceptance of self-critique and openness to those with whom we disagree. She calls for a community of argument united in their common Christian ta~ks.~'Kwok extenàs this understanding of humility to a muitifaith context. Christians mut humbly receive revelation and critique fkom other faith traditions. "See in particular Kathryn E. Tanner. "Respect for Other Religions: A Christian Antidote to Colonialist Discourse." Modern Theology 9(January 1993): 1-1 8; Kwok Pui-tan, "Ecotheology and the Recycling of Christianity," in Ecotheology: Voicesfiom South and North, ed. David G. Haliman (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1994), 107-1 1. "Tanner, Theories of Culture, p. 123 -25, 152-54, 174-75. Tanner and Kwok both stress the importance of unity ami& diversity and solidarity. Kwok emphasizes the unity and connectedness of the one body of Chnst that is inclusive of diversity and conxious of inevitable coaflict thai accompanies diversity. In order to have a global consciousness. Kwok encourages diverse Christian cornmunities to connect with the wider body of Christ An interfaiith process of dialogical imagination will enable conflicts to be faced within a deeper sense of solidarity or intercomection. It will also deepen the anaiysis of the intersection of race, clsss. gender. culture and history. Without this analysis, Kwok wams that solidarity may be an excuse for indifference or the oblitemtion of diversity. "Such critical engagement is the beginning for ~olidarity."~~ Conclusion Each of the four feminists has developed a theological alternative to li beral. modem approaches in order to better attend to issues of diversity and marginalization within faith communities. Their methodologies share many similarities comsponding to their mutual concems. Their divergence in methodology is related to their different purposes for their work. Schüssler Fiorenza wants to recognize margidized people within Christian traditions. Her focus is upon historically rnarginalized women and the reconstruction of their obliterated stories. Fulkerson also wants to recognize marginalized people within 33~wokPui-lan. "The Sources and Resources of Feminist Theologies: A Post-Colonial Perspective," in Sources and Resources of Feminist Theologies,ed. Elisabeth Hartlieb and Charlotte Methuen, Yearbook of the European Society of Wornen in Theological Research, vol. 5 (Kampen: Kok Pharos Publishing House, 1997). 13. Christian traditions. However. her focus is upon contempofary women who are marginalized not only by their own communities of faith but ais0 by femuiist commuaities. Kwok wants to recognize the colonized within multifaith traditions. While she concentrates upon Christian commUILities, she emphasizes their mukifaith construction. Her focus extends hmeastern traditions to a global. muitifaith context for al1 Christian communities cornmitteci to the survival of this pianet. Tanner wants to recognize the liberative elements within dominant Christian traditions. Her focus is on the use of Christian materiais by emancipatory Christian communities. While elements in each of their methods can be improved by the critiques fiom the others, as suggested in this chapter, each method is best suited to its particdar purpose. For this reason. each one's purpose must be kept in mind during evaluation. Fulkerson has not sufficiently developed global criteria of accountability. but her primary focus is upon liberative aspects of women within pariicular communities. Tanner has not incorporated reconstmcted stones of the marginalized into her method. but her pnmary focus is upon the liberative aspects of dominant Christian traditions. Thus. gaps in each method may not necessarily be a weakness but may simply affim a need for a variety of methodologies to work together and complernent one another. Kwok urges us to enter into another time frarne. She and Schüssler Fiorenza cal1 for the integration of modem and postmodem approaches. Tanner hmbly offers her methodology as a supplement to other approaches "in the service of greater j~stice".~Indeed. the political impact of "Kathryn E. Tanner, 13re Politics of God: Christian Theologies adSocial Jtlriice (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992), 257. revisionist theologies, such as Schüssler Fio~aza's,will be much greater if they are accompanied by an internai critique. The potentid arising fiorri Tanwr's mlitics of ~olidarity"~~amongst methodologicdy diverse theologies is tremendous. "~anner.The Politics of Cod, p. 25 7. - 197- PART TWO: THEOLOGICAL METHOD IN THE UNITED CHUl€CH OF CANADA In Part Two of this thesis. 1 wili-be exarnining the usefulness of these four methods within a Protestant denomination that is stmggling with issues of diversity and marginalization. in the fim chapter of Part Two 1 will examine the theological methods employed by United Church documents dealing with sexuality. I will identi@ modem and liberal elements withthese theological methods, and demonstrate how these elements have affected the adequacy of the documents to address issues of gender and sexual orientation. In the second chapter of Part Two. 1 will fmemploy the critiques of the four feminists to Merassess the adequacy of the liberal. modem theological approaches to address the marginaiization of women and of lesbian and gay people. Following this critique. I will then sugget elements from each of the alternative theological methods proposed by the four feminists that can assist the United Church in attending to the other and respecting diversity. How could each method better enable a liberal Protestant church to attend to the other? How might an integration of these methods be usehl for a Protestant denomination? These questions will help to assess the w of these feminist theological methods within an ecclesid context. Chapter 6 Theolo@cai Method and the Other orithin United Church Sexttaiity Documents Since its formation in 1925, The United Church of Canada has established itself as a faith community strongly committed to social justice issues.' Its officiai policies have reflected this concem about the welfâre of the margidzed and oppressed in society. according to its understanding of the gospeI of Christ. It has also established itself as a liberal church, open to and inclusive of a diversity of theological positions and political beliefs.' Its mwritten mono is ''uniteci amidst diversity" which is dective of its liberai identity. At certain points in its history, it has found these two values of social justice and Iiberalisrn to conflict. As it has addressed issues of marginaiization and confronted the oppressive aspects of the status quo, it has dienated some of its own members. In tum their requests for equal consideration and inclusion have pressured the United Church to soften its political stands. This confiict brtween its liberai and liberation agendas is parùcularly evident in its struggles around sexuality. In what has proven to be one of the most divisive issues in 'In 1925 the Methodist Church of Canada, the Congregationai Union of Canada and about 62 percent of the members of the Presbyterian Church in Canada joined together to fom ïhe United Church of Canada. Over 40 years later, the Evanglical United Brethren joined this union in 1968. See Steven Chambers, This Is Yow Church: A Guide ro the Beliefs. Policies and Positions of The Unired Church of Canada, 2* edition (Toronto: canec, 1986), 36-37. 132. 'AS defined in Part One, the terni "liberal" refers to an emphasis upon human nghts, equality, individual freedom and democracy (see the second page of Chapter 1). By extension, within the United Church 1 am using the term "liberal" to refer to its ernphasis upon the inclusion and equality of al1 voices with their diverse identities and theological perspectives. its history, the United Church has tned to be inc1usive of diverse opinions while still taking political action on behalf of lesbian and gay people. It has trieci to be united ami& diversity while enacting its commitments to social justice. One of the ways in which the United Church deals with controversial issues is to develop documents that explore the theologicd and ethical components of these issues. In this section 1 will be examining sexuality documents fkom the 1960's and 1980's that have proven to be central in the debate over sexual orientation. Afier giving a brief introduction to each document. 1 will identie the theological methods employed in these documents. with particular attention given to authoritative sources and biblical interpretati~n.~1 will then note the similarities in thek theological methods and examine their conclusions regarding women and lesbian and gay people.* 1 will conclude this chapter by suxnmarizing the modem and liberai aspects of these theotogical methods. and exarnining their implications for issues of rnarginalization and diversity. In the following chapter, I will analyze these implications Merthrough the critiques from the four feminists. Before continuing. 1 must emphasize that my analysis and critiques of these sexuality documents use methods not yet established at the time most of these documents o or further analysis of United Church sexuality documents see Tracy Trothen, "A Feminist Critical Analysis of The United Church of Canada's Evolving Understanding of Violence Against Women," dissertation (Toronto: Victoria University and University of Toronto, 1996). '~lthoughI will be making some reference to bisexual people in this chapter, these documents made little, if any reference to bisexuality. Therefore, rny comrnents will be limited primarily to lesbian and gay people. were written. Therefore my intent is not to criticize the documents for their fiiilure to attend to particular concems. On the contrary, most of these documents were as attentive as possible to the new insights and criticai theories of their time. Rattier. my intent is to expose problematic implications of modem and liberal approaches for the benefit of firture work within the United Church and other Protestant contexts. United Church Sexuality Documents The United Chmh has produced numerous documents dealing with issues of sexualitv, of which the most contentious have included discussion of sexual orientation. The most explosive and divisive debate in 1988 around the ordination and commissioning of lesbian and gay candidates centred around one of these documents. In this section 1 will examine the theological methods employed by the four sexuality documents that 1 have found to be central in these debates. One was published in 1960 while the others were published in the 1980s. Although the 1980 documents were the most controversial. 1 have included the 1960 document for two reasons. The first is that groups opposing the 1980 documents would often cite this 1960 document in support of their opposition. The second reason is that the parailels between the debates over gender in the 1960's and the debates over sexual orientation in the 1980's illuminate my arguments. 1 will begin with this 1960 document. Tmmd a Christim Understanding of k Love, Mhuge ((1960) In September, 1956, the 1P Gened Counds initiateci a "re-studying of the whole matter of Christian Marriage and Divor~e."~This dtedin the fïrst part of a report fiom the Commission on Christian Marriage and Divorce. as titled above. which was approved by the 19th General Council in 1960. Sources for its theological method included scripture. Christian doctrines. previous United Church documents, special desrequested fiom social scientists and counsellors. recent studies of other denorninattions, media articles, and submissions from individuals, youth groups, married couples, United Church courts. and social agencies.' In this section we will look at the manner in which these sources were used and their implications for women, and for "hom~sexuals".~ 'Generai Council is the highest court of The United Church of Canada and meets once every two or three years. Among other things. Gened Council legislates on matten respecting the doctrine, worship. membership. govemment and property of the United Church. Decisions are made by approximately 200 lay and 200 ordered ministry Commissioners. who are elected for each General Council by the 13 Conferences across Canada. See The United Church of Canada. The Manual (Toronto: The United Church Publishing House, 1995), The Basis of Union 8.6.2 and Section 505. 6The United Church of Canada. "Evangelism and Social Service Report No. 2," Record of Proceedings of the I 7th General Coirncil( 1956):90.The 1960 document was mandated in part to provide a means for including humble repentance in church policy regarding the rernarriage of divorced people. 7These are al1 mentioned in the report with the exception of media articles. The Commission's interest in the media was indicated by a file of clippings from Toronto newspapers and Canadian and British magazines. See The United Church of Canada, Commission on Marriage and Divorce, "Clippings" (United Church Archives 82.084C 4- 41). '1 will use the term "homosexual", rather than lesbian and gay, when referring to the terminology used in the documents. Care was taken not to base the report on isolated passages of scriptme, "especially ifthey support a literalism and legalism which Jesus denouncedu. Instead, scriptural interpretation was to be based upon "the spint of Christ as revealed in the whole of the New Testament"? The general purpose and order of the Kingdom of God was deemed more important than specific laws or social preceptdOThe love of God and neighùour estabfished the underiyhg purpose of life, while monogamous mamage contributed to the basic order." This emphasis upon the social order had particular impact upon their view of marriage, gender roles and homosexuality, as I will now summarize. Sexual expression was restricted to monogamous marriage, God's preordained institution which would allow men and women to complement and therefore cornplete each other. to procreate and raise their offspring, and to protect the stability of society." Birth control was advocated for family planning, thereby indicating approvd of sexual intercourse purely for the fulfilrnent of relationship. However, procreation and parental responsibility were still considered part of the primary purpose for mamage. and those who could not conceive were expected to adopt. Couples who chose not to raise children were therefore considered to be as "sinfÙll'as those who bore children without regard to 'The Board of Christian Education of The United Church of Canada. Toward a Christian Understanding of Sex. Love. Marriage (Toronto: The United Churc h 196O), p. 5. 'Osex. Love. Marriage. p. 7. IlSex, Love. Marriage, p. 7. "This was based primarily upon Mark 10:7-8, Genesis 1:28, and I Corinthians 6:16. See Sex, Love. Mmiage, p. 1-1 1. This report exhibited ambivalence on women's emancipation It supporteci the changing roles of women, which it amibuted primarily to birth conml. It also supported the correspondirng change in men's roles." At the same time, although gender stereotyping was discouraged., the report stated that the stability of society could oniy be maintained by women and men accepting their traditional femlliine and masculine roles." Ackoowledgement was made of a small minority of people with a "learned" homosexual or bisexual orientation. Popular misconceptions thai homosexual people were more criminally inclined were refuted. It encouraged fair, nonpprejudicial, and chantable attitudes towards homosexuals. However, it upheld the common societal view which considered homosexual acts as unnatuml and indecent because of their inability to 13Sex,Love. Mmiage , p. 2. '"The authon referred to an essay that had ken recently published on the Welfare State by Professor Titmus of the London School of Economics. He suggested that planned parenthood had a much greater influence on women's &dom than political emancipation (Sex. Love. Marriuge. p. 25). The authos then wrote that women were spending more time outside of the home with social activities. and with work that was both volunteer and paid, while men were spending more time in the home, jointly sharing parental and housekeeping duties (Sex. Love, Marriage. p. 27). The authors stated this as a fact. although 1 assume that this was more a reflection of their hopes rather than statistical data. There was some indication however, that men were beginning to participate in domestic duties both at home and at church socials. See Dorothy Vipond. "Out of the West." Observer (January 15. I962):2 1 ;and an editorial entitied "Divorce Isn't That Bad," Observer (March 1. 1962): 1 0. "Stereotypes of masculine and feminine roles were said to be giving way to a new "wholesorneness" and "full appreciation of human potential" which would no longer force partners into "perfoming Puppet charactenzations of husband, wife, parent" (Sex. Love. Marringe, p. 27). The dangers of a rigid sex limitation ofroles were said to include a man becoming homosexual because of social convention, thereby limiting his deand misconstruing his desire to paint or dance. See (Sex, Love, Mme,p. 26). accornplish rrproduction, one of the fhdamental purposes given for the "sexuai instinct" 16 Four reasons were given for their view of homosexud conduct as immoral: 1) it was a sin against God (or nature)" because it violated God's wiil for "proper" sexual expression within monogamous marriage; 2) it was a sin against the self because of its "misuse of naturai fÙnctionsn;3) it was a sin against other people because it involved sexual partners and was therefore "unedifying and destructive of neighbour love": and 4) it was a sin against society because it tended "to undermine the foundations of a stable Society based upon heterosexual marriage and family respofl~ibility".'~ Sin referred to sexual expression, both within and outside of rnarriage, which destroyed. degraded or fiagmented life. It also referred to any sexual relations which contradicted the divine order. including common-law, extra-marital, pre-marital. and homosexual. With an understanding of redemption that included forgiveness and reconciliation. the documents urged the church to provide counselling for those experiencing marital problems, and to recognize that temporary or fmal separation may be '%ex, Love. Marriage, p. 14- 16. "In a letter dated Sept. 22. 1959 to Frank Fidler, Secretary for the Commission on Christian Marriage and Divorce. from J. Arthur Boorman, professor in the Faculty of Divinity at McGill. homosexuality was considered to be a moral problem becaw it was against nature. the self. other people and society. See The United Church of Canada. Commission on Marrïage and Divorce (United Church Archives 82.084C 2-22). Concem was expressed about a paper written for this Commission by Dr. W. E. Boothroyd. Issue was taken with his analogy of hornosexuality with left-handedness. See The United Church of Canada, Commission on Marriage and Divorce "General Council Specific Subjects: Homosexuaiity" (United Chiach Archives 82.00 1C 140-4). lasex,Love. Marrioge, p. 15. evennially wcessary. The Cornmission was committed to a serious study of traditionai Christian attitudes towards marrïage and seniality in light of modem advancements in medicine. United Church members were therefore urged to love God with their min& by considering these hdings.19 As an example they were encourageci to exercise responsible parenthood through the use of contraception. Under certain situations, voluntary sterilization and artificial insemination by the husband were ais0 deemed acceptable. Specific studies and statistics in the social sciences were also requested by the Commission on the role of women. The report refened to a survey distributed to Hamilton Conference youth in which a large majority believed that wives could "work &ter marriage for financial reasons".'* In addition. most articles and letters published in the United Church Observer supported married women in the work force." Ail of this led IPSex, Love. Marriage. p. 16. 'Osex. Love, Marriage. p. 43. ''&ticles and responses in the United Church Observer in the late 1950's and early 1960's indicated a general support for women to work outside the home and take church leadership roles. See Jean Shilton. "Prudence in the Parsonage," Observer (March 15. 1957):17,21; (May 1. 1957): 17; (August, 1957): 17; (Febniary 1,1958):15; (March 15, 1959): 16. See also "The Question Box." Observer (Febrwry 15, 1958), and (December 1, 196 1); Maorie Macdonald, "Putting Women in Their Place," Observer (September 15, 19%): 12- 1 3,24; and an editorial entitled "Feminism," Observer (January 15. 1962): 1 1,22,24. Generai support was also expressed in the Observer for the ordination of married women. See Ralph Barker, "1s Ordination for Unrnamed Women Only?" Observer (October 1, 1957): 13, 14; an editorial "Women Ministers-A Good Record." Observer (October 15, l960):6; and A.C. Forrest, "Little Girl Minister," Observer (3uly 1961 ):8- 1 0, 20. It was only an article by R.B. Craig, speaking against manied women in the ordained ministry in 1957, which elicited letters to the editor. See "A Married Woman's Place is in the Home," Observer (November 1, 1957): 1 3,30. One letter fkom Nova Scotia the Commission to consider in a positive light the changing desof women and men, in spite of great ~ticenceamongst chutch leadersP The Commission gave more weight to these studies and the views of youth than they did to more conservaîive submissions supporting traditiod gender roles? Normative value appears to have been given to scriptme, traditional Christian doctrine- findings fiom the medical field and the social sciences, and the views of individuals and youth org~tions.Scientific findings were particulariy persuasive. The comrnended Craig's views, suggesting that his argument could support a celibate rninistry (J.T.N. Atkinson, December 1, l957:2). The following edition contaùied two letters, one fiom Pickering and the other from Toronto, protesting Craig's article (Honor Butiars and Mr. & Mrs. E.B. Swinton. December 15, 1957:2). -This was evident in the heated debate around the ordination of married women at London Conference in 1957. Although they decided to ordain Eleanor Leard. who was the first married woman with young children to be ordained in the United Church. they requested guidance hmGeneral Council. See News article "Marriage no Obstacle." Observer (December 15, 1963):7; "Settling Married Women," Observer (August, 1964):4; and Barbara Bagnell, "Women Ministers: Are They Really Worth Stailing Church Union For?" Observer (Mach 1. 1968): 12- 15,40. At the same General Council in 1960 which approved this sexuality report, an interim Report of Commission on Ordination mentioned the "problem of the ordained woman who subsequently manies and becomes a mother". See The United Church of Canada. Record of Proceedings of the 19th Genernl Corncil( 1960):24 1. ""1t is extremely important to discover what young people are thinking, even though they may say things that imtate and annoy, and even though we may not accept their statements as ours." See The United Church of Canada, Commission on Marriage and Divorce. "Minutes 1957-1 958" (United Church Archives 82.084C 1 - 1 ):Minutes Novernber 26, 1957. The conclusions of this report indicate that they dici, indeed, tend to agree with the statements of the youth. rather than statements supporting traditional gender roles. An example of the latter is a submission hmEarl Lautenschlager, the Principal of Emmanuel College 1963-71,whose opinion against married women working outside of the home was later published in the Observer. See "The Marriage Partnership: Part II" Observer (Apnl 1 5, 1962):25-27 and "The Marnage Partnership: Part II," Observer (May 1, 1 962):25-27. report carefufly baiancecl each of these sources against the other to reach its conclusions. When in confiict, it favoined the more progressive views and interpretations of scripture that supporteci the emancipation of women and the challenge of patrichal societal ~tnictures?~ In God S Image ....Male and Fernale: A Smdy on Hman SexuaIity (1 980) Alter a lengthy and strenuous debate, the 28th General Council approved In God's Imge in 1980 not as church policy, but as a study document? They also heeded momting criticism to it and called for an accompanying document which wodd better reflect "the range of theological and ethicai opinion in this ares? As with previous documents. the sources for In God's Image were diverse. Social scientific research on sexuality and theologians who drew upon these fmdings, such as Paul Jewett, James Nelson, Tom Harpur, Tom Driver. and Virginia Rarney Mollenkott figured promïnently in this report. It also referred to the Kinsey sexuality studies and to the removal of homosexuality fiom the list of mental disorders within the Arnerican Psy chiatric Association and American Psycho logical Association. Reference was made to '4By the phrase "patriarchal status quo': 1 refer to social structures that privilege heterosexual male identity. "The Division of Mission in Canada of The United Church of Canada. Gifi. Dilemma and Promise: A Report and Aflrrnations on Human Sexuality (Toronto: The United Church of Canada 1984), 4. '' Division of Mission in Canada of The United Church of Canada and the Cornmittee on Theology and Faith, Faith B SexuaIiîy: A Spectmrn of î'ïzeologicd Views in The United Church of Canadafor The General Council (Toronto: The United Church of Canada, I 98 1). the changes in Canadian law which refiected the shifk in socid attitudes towards sexual boundaries, and homosexuality in parti~ular.nIt was noted that the United Church had submitted briefs in 1976 and 1977 requesting that sexuai orientation be added to the prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Ontario Huma. Rights Code and the Canadian Human Rights Act. Previous United Church documents and statements on sexuality and gender issues were also studied. Aithough church tradition was mentioned as a source of authority," no reference was given to traditionai church pradces and beliefs about sexuality." These various sources, together with scriphire, personal experience and studies hmother denominations. were assumed to belong to one of two categories: Christian heritage and contemporary knowledge. Both were considered essential sources of revelation that should be brought together in dialogue because "scientific research... may speak the truth more faithfùlly about our world and ourselves...[ and] may be a deeper and more authentic the010gy''~~ "The report referred to federal. provincial and municipal laws decriminalizing homosexual activity and protecting the rights of homosexual citizens. These included the 1969 amendment to the Criminal Code legalizing sexud activity between two consenting adults in private, Québec adding sexual orientation to its Human Rights Code in 1977. and several major Canadian municipalities protecting the rights of homosexual people. 'me Division of Mission in Canada of The United Churçh of Canada, In God's Image... Male and Female: A Study on Human Semrality (Toronto, The United Church of Canada 1980), p. 1 O. '9~ignificantreference was given to Martin Luther's Cbristological key to the interpretation of scnpnire (In Gd's Image, p. 8 1). However, any other reference to Christian traditions is either minimal or negative (In God's Inrage, p. 1 1). God 's Image, p. 1 1. The approach to biblical inwonincluded the foUowing principles: 1. Ail consciousuess and understanding is historically conditioned. Biblical characters Iived in their own language worlds. 2. Biblical texts must be given the distance needed to have their own integrity and be authenticaiiy themselves. 3. Scriptme is a record of an ongoing hmeneuticai process which builds upon rehterprets and corrects itself. Jesus often appealed "beyond Scripture to Scripture", when he negated a particdar biblical law in order to uphold a broder biblical pruiciple. 4. Scripture must be set fiee to make contact with our lives and illumine the present. This is accomplished through remembrance of our common humanity. 5. The goal of biblicai interpretation is not to critique or master the text but to be critiqued and mastered by it. One must never assume cornpiete knowledge of the meaning of a passage nor use the text to confirm prior values. 6. The Bible as a whole reveals Jesus Chrin who is the central nom by which scripnire is judged." The Christological key was often observed throughout this document, according to the following assumptions about Jesus' ministry. Jesus was depicted as a "radical feminist" who resisted the patriarchai bias of s~ripture.~'Jesus also treated people holistically. honourine the body as much as the spirit. Therefore he seemed to be cornfortable with the sexuality of himself and others, especially those considered sexually unclean and suiful. Accordingly. he was more concemed with people than with legalisms, and did not cal1 for puritanical asceticism. These characteristics were given as the Christ- like standard by which to judge al1 scriptural passages and contemporary experience 3'In God's Image, p. 14-18. "In God's Image, p. 8 1-2. relating to sedty. On the basis of "the Movement and the Man", the following banc guideiines regardùig sexual behaviour were reached: 1) 1s it creative and iiberating? In Godk Image continueci to assume male and femde complernentarity with one notable ciifference hmthe 1960 documents. No longer did women and men need each other to be complete. Rather, masculine and feminine characteristics were to be recognized and developed within each person." The holistic god was to become androgynous. as Jesus was assumed to have ken? 2) 1s it mutually supportive? Sexual relationships outside of marriage, including non-permanent. extra-marital)' and homosexual relationships, were considered appropnate if they were faimand mutudly supportive. The quality of relationship was deemed more important than the fom. Therefore, sexuality was considered distorted when it was debased. trïvialized, mechanized, exploitive, commercialized and manipulative? When sexuality was "reduced to sex and used for ends other than the wholeness of persons" it became "In God's Image, p. 2.41.57. "III Godk Image. p. 83. "ln Go&' Image suggested that "intention to faithfulness" be the basis of primary relationships. Exclusivity and permanence were understood as munrally incompatible for many Christian couples. Therefore. permanence and primacy of the mamage in honesty. openness and trust were valued at the possible expense of sexual exclusivity (In God's Image p. 66-68). Outside of marriage, non-permanent relationships were also considered. '6Examples of sexual exploitation were rape, incest, sexual assault, prostitution, sado-masoc hism, sexual favours for job promotion or security, deceptive misuse of birth control, neglect, and teenage peer pressure of sexual performance (In God's Image, p. 45). demonic? 3) Is it sociaiiy responsible? No longer was promation or the upholding of the social order mentioned as part of the purpose of sexuality. In fact many oppressive aspects of the social order, such as double standards and institutionalized sexism in laoguage, social and econornic structures. attitudes and social conventions were condemned? Social respoosibility no longer entailed a preservation of the social order, but a critical resistance to e~ploitation.~~ 4) 1s it joyous? Sexuaiity, as a gifi from God was meant to enrich the individual and society in relationship with the self, with others and with Gd?' Gifi. Dilemma and Promise: A Report and Afirmationr on Hwnan Sexualiry (1 984) In God's Image was circdated as a study document with other materials and over seventy facilitators were trained across Canada to assist in this study? Four years later. in 1984. Gifi. Dilemma and Promise was approved by the 30h General Council as a concluding report. This document made much less reference to extemal sources than In "~nGod's Image. p. 1-2. ''ln God's Image, p. 7 1-2.84-5. j91n God's Image, p. 69-73. loIn God's Image, p. 1-7. %ver 10.000 copies of In God 's Image were sold and distributed together with a response fom study suggestions and The Permanence of Christian Marriage, the 1975 statement of the Committee on Christian Faith. See G@. Dilemma und Promise, p. 4. God's Image, but this could be due to its purpose of following up, with shidy and response, to In God's Image, derthan presenting new material. AIthough the Wnting team gave lpasons for not significantly incorporating the suggestions of most respondents to In God's Image, the negative reactions hmthe majority of the responses together with negative reaction hmthe media's attention and hmat least one petition approved at the General Council in 1982~'may well have influenced their cautious approach and conclusions. In order to indicate (and possibly defend) its faithflllness to United Church practice, the report claimed that it followed the way in which theology is developed in the United Chur~h?~It stated that the United Church does not fom its theological positions on the basis of majority opinion. sharing of experiences or consensus. Rather. the report stressed that the United Church carefully seeks God's will through consultation with the Bible. the great traditions. modem voices and contemporary experience. These four sources were categorized into church tradition and contemporary experience. The report suggested that church tradition. defined as 'the Bible and the "~p~roximatel~1,000 responses were received. 833 of which were collated and included in an appendix of Gif, Dilemmo and Promise. Because they were not a --scientificsampling" of the church. because "many of them were written out of strong conviction... and some quite emotionally" and because the United Church does not deveiop its theological positions through rnajority vote, through the "mere sharing of experiences" or through consensus. they did not figure significantly in the report's conclusions. However. the report still tried to honour and reflect the insights, feelings and experiences of the respondents. See Gif, Dilemma and Promise, p. 4-5,83-90. For media response and the 1982 General Council petition see Gifr. Dilemma and Promise, p. 3,400 41. "This assumes a common United Church theological method. history of Christian thinking" is critical for the devefopment of theology. In order to attend to the Bible and historical Christian thoughf "experts in these must be consulted? The work of the Spirit in the contemporary experiences of Chnstiaos constituted the other critical theologicai source, and could be accessed primarily through persod stories and scientific research. Church tradition and current Christian expenence were given as the two criteria that "must constantiy be tested against each other".'" Elsewhere in the report the Spirit of Christ was named as an authoritative source in which scripture should be interpreted." The conclusions fiom this mutual testing of tradition and Christh experience were then to be debated within the Church courts with the recognition of the potential fallibility of their decisions. The report suggested that the church gains Iife. energy and God-granted insight fiom these debates "even while it is ready for divine correction and redire~tion.'~' The particular approach followed throughout the report attempted to ref lect this theological method. Each chapter set forth a description about their particular topic. illustrated these descriptions with different life stories (assumed to be fictional). explored related biblical passages. presented questions for study and concluded with acknowledgements of "descriptions of. ..social and personai reality" and affirmations of %ifi. Dilemma and Promise. p. 5. 45Gij,Dilemma and Promise, p. 5. "G* Dilemma and Promise. p. 78. "Gif, Dilemma and Promise, p. 5. -2 14- guidelines for use in the United Ch~rch,~~Missing hmits method, however, was attention to the "geai traditionsn of the churcb It drew upon sociological research, Me experiences (although not directly attnbuted to the experience of the Holy Spirit) and biblical passages, but made only passing reference to prwious United Church statements and studie~."~ As mentioned earlier, this report was more cautious thao its 1980 predecessor, perhaps because of the adverse reaction to In God S Image. In particular, it recommended sexual exclusivity in mamiage and was ambiguous in its affinnation of homosexual relationships. It affirmed that homosexual people can be full memben of the church and referred to previous church resolutions that cal1 for the inclusion of sexual orientation in the Canadian Human Rights Act. It also noted that some Christians understand the Spirit of Christ to ovemide specific biblicai verses which appear to condemn homo~exuality.~ At the sarne time it tried to include a balanced version of various perspectives by allowing room for negative response and including as an appendix a study of the Bible and homosexuaiity which condemns homosexuality. The report's chapter on sexism. society and the self was the strongest and most clearly advocatory chapter of the book?' It did not leave openings for those who might "Gfi Dilemma and Promise. p. 7. 49~ifi.Dilemma and Promise, p. 50,80. %@, Dilemma and Promise, p. 78. "It gives extensive reference to demographic surveys of societal violence against women. and women's leadership roles within the United Church. disagree, but clearly dedthe church to work towards the chination of sexist structures within the church and society. It was also the only place in the document which suggested a hermeneutics of suspicion regarding sexism found in scriptme. It acknowledged that scripture contains the Word of Gdbut is not to be equated with it The bibiicai texts are to be wrestled with "until they become guidelines for tifen." The affirmations that concluded each chapter were adopted as generai guidelines for the United Church in order to: 1) cal1 Christians into "responsible Momin which we must ponder and respond to God's gifi and dilemma of sexuali~,"2) cal1 for programs of advocacy "%O defend the powerless", pastoral support '30 guide the confused". and education '90 help us grow into mahxrity in Christ";and 3) cail for political action to develop "policies for women's rights. for strengthening rnarriage and farnily. for divorced persons. for the single, the elderly, the disabled and many more".53 Toward a Christian Understanding of Sema1 Orientations. Lijes~lesand Minisny (1 988) In 1984 the 30h General Council mandated the church 30develop an educational programme with thorough and well developed biblical, ethical and theological components refiecting in a balanced way, the theological diversity of The United Church of Canada..to understand homosexual orientation and practice as well as a theological - - -. "Gijr. Dilemma and Promise. p. 64. "Gif, Dilemma and Promise, p. 8 1. It should be noted that no reference is made to lesbian and gay people in this summary liseven though political action for the civil and human rights of homosexuals was specifically affîrmed on p. 79. understanding of marriage and creation..with a comprehensive statement conceming..fitness for ordinati~n/commissioning".~~The National Coordinathg Group was established and developed two kits of study matenal thaî included raponse forms. As with G23, Dilemma and Promise, the responses were carefdly collated and included in a sumrnary statement in an appendix to the report. The 1988 report (referred to as SOLM hereafter) dso gave similar reasons as Gij?,Dilemma und Promise for the difficulty of shapuig a report on the basis of voluntary responses which "may be biased or they may not"." SOLM explained how different approaches to tnith, understood as transcendent and etemal. affect our biblical interpretation and views of biblical authonty? The absolutist approach suggests that tmth 'hiakes itself known and is self-revealing" through rational arguments. The relativist approach suggests that humans can only know a culturaily and personally conditioned view of transcendent truth. Because it "arises" in particular contexts, it is only true for that particular context. Thus, ûuth is contexnial and no overall critena can be found to judge competing claims to truth. ïhe third approach is the pluralist. in which al1 humans have provisional and contexhial understandings of "~eeThe Division of Ministry Personnel and Education & The Division of Mission in Canada of The United Churc h of Canada Tuwurd a Christian Understanding of Sema1 Orientations. Lifestyfes and A4inistr-y (Toronto: The United Church of Canada 1988). p. i. ''In fact. they note that the multiple problems associated with this invitational approach "raises signifiant questions about what consultation means in our councilliar (sic) church system and how subsequent policy decisions are made". See Sed Orientations, Lijësyies and Minisir-y, p. 22. 56SO~~'sdescription of mith is similar to some descriptions of the Word of God. üanscendent buth, as with the reiativists. However, the pldstbelieves that through dialogue with other people we can arrive at better understandings of tnah and discover transcendent truth that is basic to ail SOLM concludeci that our provisional and contextual understanding of tnith must be tested, validated and enacted within the faith community. The more diverse and inclusive the community, the more reliable the testing. In order to relativize our interpretation of the Bible. SOLM noted our contextually Iimited interpretations of scripture. It did not celebrate these ciifferences between contextually shaped interpretations. however, but wamed that they will "distort the original meaning and intention" of scxipture if we are not aware of the differences between our context and the Bible's original context. Historical criticism and humble dialogue with people fkom different cultural and faith traditions were the~foreconsidered crucial in the discovery of mith? SOLM also suggested that the Bible itself has been humanly shaped and therefore culnirally and historically conditioned. Thus. not everything in the Bible should be considered equally authoritative. Rather. the authority of Bible is found in its overall witness and inspiration for new ways in which to find healing, empowennent and liberation. It suggested that the BibIe9srelation to insight and imagination is more important than an "exact recording of objective facts". Therefore, if one uses the Bible as an infallible guide. one misuses it.59 lnstead of following the letter of the law. the church S7SexualOrientations. L+styies and Ministry, p. 29.30. S8Se~afOnentaiions. L Lifestyies and Ministry, p. 30,3 1. 59Se~aIOrienrationr. Lifestyles and Ministry, p. 32. -218- should be guided by the spirit and mind of Christ.60 Of the four dtydocuments, SOLM was the only one to draw upon United Church tradition to any extent It referred to previous United Church faith statements and "mainstream" Reformed understandings about the authority of the Bible to support its positiodl It noted that United Chmh tradition believes the Bible. as interpreted by tradition, reason and experience, demands Christian loyalty and is a -orthy guide to action. Thus, histoncal criticism and dialogue were viewed together with traditioa reason (in addition to historical criticism) and experience as important tools to understand the meaning of a text and test its appropriateness and application for our lives? By extending these theological and biblical principles to sexuaiity it stated that United Church practice has usudly bepwith biblical themes. such as grace. redemption, and justice. rather than specific tem. to guide our actions. The biblical theme which SOLM recornmended was the covenant relationship of God with Israel and the people of Christ. As this covenant relationship is characterized by faithfiilness. justice, and compassion. SOLM suggested that these characteristics shodd guide our understanding of sexual ity and our sexual be haviour. Accordingly ,sexual be haviour for heterosexual, gay and lesbian people is morally responsible when it is "faithful to God's @Se& Orientations. Lifestyles and Ministry, p. 3. 611tdoes not elaborate what these mainstream Reformed understandings are. However, it does quote United Church faith statements fiom the 1925 Basis of Union, and the 1977 Lordship of Jesus study. See Sexual Orientations, LifestyIes and Ministry, p. 31-33. 62~exualOrientations. LifstyIes and Ministry, p. 33,34. cdto be just, loving, health-giving, hdg,and sustainhg of commimi~.~It should also be engaged within committed relationships th have an intention of permanence. Beaiuse of human tendencies toward deception, this judgement of sexual behaviour should occur withthe commimity of fath. SOLM also recommended that sexual orientation not be a barrier to mioistry within the United Church including the order of ministry." The writing team of SOLM stniggfed between concem for a liberal balance and concem for emancipatory decisions that would, by definition. exclude those who disagreed. Rather than take a more cautious, inclusive approach as did G$, Dilemma and Promise. the wrïting team chose to retain clear justice statements for the support of lesbian and gay relationships and ordered ministen. The expense of this choice was the dienation of two of their own writing tearn, who attached dissenting statements to the report's appendix. and the decision of General Council to reject the report.65 "Semal Orientations. L~estyiesand Ministry. p. 3. asexml Orientations. Lifestyles und Ministry, p. 34. "III its place, they accepted a statement enritled Membership. Minisny and Human Sexuality, written by a cornmittee at General Council representing different views and operating on a consensus model. After General Council was over at lest one of the rnembers of the cornmittee withdrew support for the decision, suggesting that the conxnsus model had forced an uncornfortable agreement. It shouid be noted that the cornmittee members also faced difficult opposition to their decision upon retuming to their home comrnunities. Modern, Liberal Approaches and the Other Although each of these documents presents contrasting theolopicai arguments and conclusions, they share similar theologid methods that contai0 modem and &rai assumptions. After briefly identifyhg these assumptions, I will examine their impact upon women and upon lesbian and gay people. Each document assumed a singular meaning of the biblicd text that could best be discovered with the use of historical-critical tools. The opinion of biblical scholars was sought in order to gain insight from the latest historïcal-critical findings. Expert opinion was also sought hmthe social sciences in order to make a credible theological correlation between the biblicd and contemporary worlds. Another monfor their emphasis upon scholarly work was to provide as objective a document as possible. This tended to devalue the opinions of those most affected by the documents because of their political interests in the conclusions. It aiso tended to devalue the studies and responses from faith communities. When input fiom individuais and communities was encouraged, attempts were made to balance the voices so as to include everyone. The modem and liberal aspects of the theologicai methods employed in the United Church sexuality documents have significant implications for biblical interpretation. When the original meaning of the biblical text is sought, there is an underlying assumption that a singular. correct meaning exists within the text and cm be found with the appropriate historical-criticai tools. However. this assumption has proven problematic in United Church documents dealing with gender and sexuai orientation, and particularly so when the different documents use the same passage of scripture. As 1 will show below, the meaning of the same scripture passage chaaged hmdocument to document Poststni~theorïsts expea this change in meanhg according to the changing conte-, theologicai sources, scient& findings, and writers for each document. However, hmthe modem perspective taken in the documents, this change in meaning indicated that some interpretations must be in error. In order to grant authority to their pariicular interpretation, each document sought expert authonty to prove that their interpretation was correct. If an interpretation contradicted that given in previous documents. it assumed the advantage of more recent, and therefore more austworthy. biblical scholarship. This becarne even more problematic if the writing team itself was divided over the correct interpretation. In the case of the sexuality documents. it was usually the more socially progressive interpretations which were favoured. When the writing teams could not agree on the correct interpretation, those interpretations that preserved the patriarchal status quo, if included at dl, were moved to the back of the document as an appendix. The inclusion of these appendices indicates the church's attempt to honour the diversity of ail opinions. but their placement at the back of the documents indicates the church's attempt to emphasize the liberative perspectives. The result is a contradictory rnix of competing claims to the correct. and therefore authoritative. scriptural interpretation. As an exarnple we will look at the doctrine of creation. based upon the Genesis stories. The 1960 document used the Genesis creation stones to support women's increasing social and economic independence while still insisting upon their acceptance of traditional fhily roles." The changing roles of women could be accepted as long as they continuai to be the primary caregîvers for their children and husband. Woxnen could gain a certain degree of independence as long as they accepted the theory of complementarity: women and men are mt complete without the other. The stability of society depends upon women and men accepting their traditionai ferninine and masculine roles. These were the three purposes given for dage:the complementarity and therefore completion of women and men in a mutual1y fulfilling partnership; procreation; and the stability of society?' Because homosexuality refhtes ail three purposes, it was considered imm0ral,6~ The Genesis stories in the 1980 document served a dual purpose. One was to illustrate the ongins of the pahiarchal "orders of creation" as elaborated by Thomas ~quinas.~~That Genesis had been used to justifjr male supremacy was proof of the need for biblical reinterpretation. The histoncal context and original meaning of the biblical text in light of modem sciences and God's revelation in Christ must therefore be e~arnined.'~The second purpose of the Genesis stories was to support the 1980 document's foilowing androgynous theory. Genesis 1 :27 indicates that God has created each of us to be male and female. and therefore complete, in ourselves. We are then to &sex. Love. Marriuge, p. I 1. 67Sex.Love. Morriage, p. 8. 68Sex,Love. Marriage, p. 13, 14. God 's Image, p. 1 1. m~nGod's Image, p. 12-18. &are uiis deness and femaleness with each other." Baseci upon this endrogynous goal, the 1980 document negated the need to uphold traditional gender roles and supported the possibility of healthy homosexual relatiotionships. The 1984 document referred to the Genesis stories to suggest that sexudity and gender reflected the divine image, that the fidi equality of dl persans was to be affirme& and that God intended humans beings to live in covenanted relatioaship." Genesis 2 was taken to support a mutually enhancing, genitally exclusive, Me-long marriage relationship between a husband and wife? Genesis 1 :27 was used to indicate that everyone. regardles of their sexuai orientation, is created in God's image.74Although this document gave tentative support for homosexual people (not necessarily relationships), an appendix cited Genesis to condemn homosexuality. Like the 1960 document, the appendix believed Genesis to confimi God's intention for women and men to complement each other and to procreate in marriage. Homosexuality was therefore not part of God's purpose for h~manity.'~ These exarnples demonstrate the wide divergence of opinion on the meaning of a particuiar biblical text. Each view established its own singular meaning which was then posited as scripturai authority for its opinion on gender and sexual orientation issues. "in God S Image, p. 40-4 1. "Gifr. Dilemma and Promise, p. 17-64. "Gij. Dilemma and Promise. p. 26. 74 Gij?,Dilemma and Promise, p. 79. "GaDilemma and Promise, p. 93. -224- However, w position aclmowledged the diverse fmors that idormed its derivation of meaning. ïhere was only occasional recognition of the disagreement amongst schoiarly sources," and there was litfie awareness of the impact of the vuriters' own cultural, political and personal biases and interests." Scriptinal authonty, and therefore tnah and revelation, were based upon the opinions of biblical experts (seldom Canadian) who were removed fiom the United Church context- Similar authority was given to scientific experts. AU sexuaiity documents cited medical. sociological and psychologicai studies as uncontested authority for issues of gender and sexual orientation. The 1980 document explicitly named empirical scientific research as a source of tmth equal in authority to that of ~cripnire.~However. in effect al1 documents gave much more weight to scientific findings than to any other authoritative source. If scientific findings should contradict traditional biblical interpretations. science was welcomed as an undisputed correction. As a consequence of this reliance upon expert knowledge and objectivity. the United Church documents tended to devaiue and mistrust three sources of authority that they mentioned as also important: tradition. the response of faith cornrnunities. and the response of those. such as women and lesbian and gay people, who were the object of "~lthoughthe 1960 document recognizes disagreement amongst biblical scholars regarding the gospel teachings a bout divorce. i t does not recognize disagreement regarding the Genesis passage. See Sex. Love. Marriage, 5- 1 0. "The 1988 document does acknowledge the impact of the reader's biases and cultural context, but assumes this to be a problem that can be set aside if acknowledged. See Sexud Orientations, L@styIes and Ministry, p. 30. "~nGod's Image, 10-13. The first source of devaluecl and mistnisted authority was tradition. Reference to any tradition in these documents was scant When positive reference to tradition was made in, paticdarly in the 1988 document, it was in regard to eariier United Chmh statements conceming Christologicd noms that guîded noditerdistic biblical interpretation." Occasional reference to reformed tradition was made, but ody in passing remarks. Apart fiom this positive reference, tradition, when mentioned at dl, was usually viewed with suspicion." Documents of the 1980's echoed Schiissler Fiorenza's and Kwok's concems by asking whose heritage and whose tradition is king considered. They were particularly aîtentive to the silencing of women in these traditions. While these concerns are crucially important. there may be another reason for the questioning of tradition in these documents. In rny experience, Protestants have typically viewed church traditions emerging after the fornation of the biblical canon and prior to the Reformation as Roman Catholic distortions of the gospel. This bias cm be found in the United Church documents. To note the misogynist theology of Thomas Aquinas in order to justifj the superionty of empirical sciences' serves to reinforce the anti-Roman Catholic and modern biases of United Church mernbers. While most references to tradition in the documents were not this 79Seml Orientations, Lif styles and Ministry. 32-36. Although dl documents followed this pattern of biblical interpretation, only the 1988 document supporied this with reference to earlier UNted Church statements. 80 In God's Image, p. 1 1 ;Sema2 0rienra1ion.s. Lifestyles and Ministry, p. 1 5- 1 6. "ln God's Image, p. 1 1. blatantiy wgative, they stiu singled out tradition as the most suspect source of authority. Aithough Christian traditions should be examined Cnticaily as potenually oppressive, they shouid also be examined as potentiaily liberaiive. By ignoring the liberative aspects of United Church tradition, the sexuality documents reinforced conservative accusations that the documents of the 1980's were based upon secular knowledge and were void of its faith heritage. It is usuaily those opposed to issues of inclusive language or the ordination and commissioning of lesbian and gay candidates who refer positively to tradition. They have accused the United Church of forsaking its tradition regarding moral standards. biblical interpretation, and theological foundation-a Only a few have insisted that the United Church's response to homosexuality has been consistent with its traditional ro0tsg3 The second devalued and mistnisted source of authority was the response hm faith communities. Although most documents demomtrated serious consideration of congregational studies, biblical interpretations arising out of faith communities, both nTerrence Anderson. "Further Reflections on the General Council Statement," Touchrrone 7.no. 2 (May 1989): 17-24; Donald Faris. Trojan Horse: The Homosexual Ideology and the Christian Church (Burlington, ON: Welch Publishing Company Inc., 1989); Victor Shepherd, "The United Church and Ordination of Active Homosexuals: A Cri tique," in A Crisis of Understanding: Hornosexuality and the Canadian Church, ed. Denyse OtLeary (Burlington. ON: Welch Publishing Co. Inc., 1988), 35-50; Vernon R. Wishart. "The Making of the United Church Mind - No. 1," Touchstone 18, no. 1 (January 1990): 6- 16. "Roger OToole, Douglas F. Campbell, John A. Hannigan, Peter Beyer and John H. Simpson, "The United Church in Crisis: A Sociological Perspective on the Dilemmas of a Mainstream Denomination," Siudies in Religion 20, no. 2 (Spring 1991): 15 1-63; Harold Wells, "The Making of the United Church Mind - No. 2," Touchstone 18, no. 1 (January 1990): 17-29. -227- .. marginalized and maaistream, were not accorded much weight. Authority was given primarily to the opinions of biblical and scientific experts, and inadvertently to the interests and biases of the \KntersYown experiences. The third devalwd and mistnisted source was those who were the subject of study. As a result, United Church treattnent of women and gay, lesbian and bisexual people has been directed by the vascillations of scholarly opinion. Expert advice was privileged over the experiences of "the other" in order to fom objective and unbiased judgements about their sexuality and their fitness for ministry. Fears expressed about women were similar to those expressed about gay men.' Both were thought to have uncontrollable sexuality." Independent women and gay men were seen as threats to the stability of the family and society." These fears led to a suspicion of biblical "Pamela Dickey Young has given an excellent analysis of the parallels of resistance to women and to lesbian and gay candidates for ordered ministry in the United Church. See Pamela Dickey Young, "Homosexuality and Mini*: Some Feminist Reflections," in TheologicaI ReJections on Ministry and Sema1 Orientation. ed. Pamela Dickey Young (Burlington ON: Trinity Press. 1990). ''Up until the early 1960's the United Church debated whether or not the approval of contraception would encourage women to become promiscuous. See The United Church of Canada, "Record of Proceedings of the 20th General Council" (Toronto: The United Church of Canada 1962). 87. 105-06; The United Church of Canada, "Record of Proceedings of the 12th General Council" (Toronto: The United Church of Canada, 1946), 112-13. Likewise. the United Church expressed concern in the early 1980's over the possibility of promiscuity and pederasty if homosexuaiity was accepted. See Gifr. Dilemma and Promise. p. 68-69. 861n 1962 the United Church General Council voted to restrict the ordination of women to those who were unmarried or widowed, unless it could be demonstrated that ordination wouid not interfere with women's positions as mothers andor wives (AAer Merdiscussion this was referred to a cornmittee for Merstudy. At the next General Council two years later, al1 restrictions on the ordination of mamed wornen were removed). See The United Church of Canada, " 1962 ROP," p. 59,76,80-81. The 1984 intcrpretah'on and critiques fbm women and £hmIesbian, gay and bisexuai faith com~nunities.Unlike the scholars' data, these views were considered biased. Information -about the otha was more diable than information hmthe other. If their views were considered, they must be balanceci by the other side (i.e. those opposing the ordination and commissioning of mamieci women in the 1960's and of lesbian and gay candidates in the 198û's)." In 1988, when the writing team included lesbian and gay members of Affùmg8and a clear cal1 for the acceptance of lesbian and gay people in al1 areas of ministry was made, the document was rejected by General Council. It was perceived as too one-sided. In other words. its emphasis was not on a liberal balance of viewpoints, as in the 1984 doc~ment.~Rather: its tone was advocatoryw It suggested that attempts to be inclusive and 1988 documents went to great lengths to reiterate their support for manîage. This was no doubt in response to concerns that the acceptance of lesbian and gay relationships wodd destroy marriage and the family. 87 This is particularly evident in the 1960 report's ambivalence over the emancipation of women, and in the 1984 report's inclusion of opposing viewpoints and biblical interpretations regarding homosexual relationships. See Gif, Dilemma and Promise, p. 78,68,9 1-93. aniis was the name of the support and advocacy group for lesbian, gay and bisexual people within the United Church. It has since amalgamated with Friends of Affirm to become Afkn United, hile the 1988 report indicated a desire to reflect theological balance. it focused upon advocacy for lesbian and gay people. See Semd Orient~tion~.Li&estyIes and Minisny, p. 5. The liberal balance in the 1984 report was most apparent in its chapter on sexual orientation. On the other hami, its chapter dealing with sexism had a clear, liberative tone. POThis was the ody document which included dissenting statements from the two conservative members of the writing team, one of whom was ex-gay. The team chose not inevitably exclude those who exclude others?' Thus, the liberal goal of inclusivity must be qualined by its ability ?O Myinclude society's marginalized. Al1 of these sexuality documents indicate a seuggie between a liberal balance that respects the equality and importance of every opinion, and a liberation approach that privileges the voices of the marginalized and silenced within society. Although these documents attempted to be both inclusive and jus& people who supported traditional sexuai nom oflen felt ignored and people who were rnarginalized within society:' such to arrive at a consensus to produce a more arnbiguous and "balanced" report. The consensus approach was the choice of the 1988 General Council. however. After studying the massive number of petitions sent to General Council, dong with the 1988 document and its dissenting statements. a sessional cornmittee representative of divergent theological and ethical perspectives found consensus. They presented their statement entitled "Membership. Ministry and Human Sexualiry" to the 1988 General Council. which approved it fier rejecting the 1988 document. This statement declared that anyone. regardless of their sexual orientation. was eligible to be considered for ordered minie. Church courts responsible for these decisions were to work out the implications of this --in light of Holy Scripture" and the cail of al1 Christians '70 a lifeme pattemed on obedience to Jesus Chnst". See The United Church of Canada, Membership. Ministry and Human Semality: A New Statement of The United Church of Canada &y the 32nd Generul Council (Toronto: The United Church of Canada 1988). The results of this decision varied across the country. Some Conferences decided to reject openly Iesbian or gay candidates. Most did not although the settlernent of openly lesbian or gay candidates (a condition of ordination or commissioning) still proves difficult. "sexual Orientations. Lijktyles and Minist?y, p. 1 2. "~Ithou~hthe conservative groups have been marginatized within the United Church, 1 use the word marginalize in reference to societal status. Western society attributes power and privilege to those who are white. heterosexual. and male. Those who differ fiom this dominant identity experience certain degrees of marginalization proportional to the degree of their divergence from the dominant identity. For instance. a Fint Nations lesbian would experience multiplicative forms of marginalization. as women. and those who are lesbian and gay, often felt patronized and silencedo Particularly in the eariier documents. few questions were asked about relations of power and the danger that open dialogue between opposing sides creates for those whose very identities are at de." The 1988 report recognized that the vulnerability of lesbian and gay people in the 1984 cal1 to dialogue had created an imbdance of power that led to Mersilencing? not dialogue." Because the United Church did not provide equal oppominity for dl to participate. its values of diversity and inclusivity Ied to the valuinp of some and marginalization of others.% These confiicts. which were heightened in 1988. have made the United Church question the possibility of remaining united amidst diversity. In fact 25.000 United Church members. or 3.5% of its membership. are estimated to have left the United ')lust before the release of the 1980 document. a United Church gay support group questioned how the church could make authentic decisions regarding hornosexuality without open dialogue. forums and discussions with "homosexual men and women". See T.O.U.C.H.(Toronto Organization of United Church Homosexuals), "Letter to the Editor," The United Ch& Observer. May 1980.4. %The 1984 report called for reconciliation between homosexual and heterosexual Chriaians. and the need for both to heuand understand the other (Gifi. Di[emrna ad Promise: 70).This cal1 appears to value both sides equally, assuming a balance of power that would enable reconciliation. It also assumes the controveny was a matter of disagreement that could be resolved between homosexual and heterosexual people. Rather. the controversy was over a conservative group challenging lesbian and gay people's right to existence within the life and ministry of the chuch. 95 Sexual Orientations. Lijës@ies and Ministry, p. 15. " Sexuof Orientations. Lifestyles and Ministry, p. 12. Chtrrch because of its decisions over semai orientation." Supporthg the marginalized of society has proven costly to community and diversity. Conversely. offering a liberal inclusion of al1 voices without questioning oppressive power structures has retained the patriarchal status quo and mersilenced the marginalized. In the following chapter I will fürther analyze the problems of these modem and liberal aspects through the earlier critiques of the four feminists. I will then explore their alternative theological methods and identifL aspects from each one that might be helpfd for the United Church in its smiggles to support the rnarginalized while remaining united arnidst divenity. 97ThomasG. Bandy. "The United Church of Canada: Cnsis and Creativity." in The Sexuaiity Debate in he North American Churches. ed. JOhn Carey (Lewiston, N.Y .: Edwin Mellen Press. 1995): Ann Naylor, "Reflections on SexuaI Orientation Issues in The United Church of Canada" (Toronto, October 29, 1993). Chapter 7 Assessrnent of Theological Methods In the nrst section of this chapter 1 will engage the analyses hthe four feminist rnethods considered earlier to merthe critique of the modem and liberal approaches used within the United Church sexuality documents. In the second section 1 wili explore alternative approaches to the use of scripture and Christian tradition. with particular emphasis upon Fuikerson's canonicai system. After I have noted the advantages of attending to the fith traditions of panicular communities, 1 will draw upon the works of Tanner and Schüssler Fiorenza to suggest ways in which connections with the diversity of traditions within the wider body of Chna might be made. In light of these diversities. the final section will refer to Kwok and Tanner to suggest sources of criteria that can offer universal guidelines which support the marginalized and respect diversity. Critique of Modern, Liberal Approaches The sexuaiity documents assume that we can better understand scripture if we know the original context. the authonal intent. the intended audiences and the evolution of particular manuscripts. These aspects of the biblical texts. discovered through histoncal cnticism. will shed light on their original rneaning which cm then be assessed against the gospel as to its authoritative claims for contemporary Christians. There are a number of problems with such reliance on historical criticism. The first is what Fulkerson cails the professionalization of knowledge. Conml of knowledge is retained by biblical experts who set universal standards on the bais of their historical hdings Biblical interpretations are then authorized as they cohere with these findings. If pticular interpretations are not supported by historical-cfitical analysis they are disregardeci. If contradictory interpretations both claim support, one is assumed to be more accurate than another. Because of ongoing archaeological discoverïes and the modem belief in the progression of hman reason, the most recent scholarly opinion is ofien taken to be the most diable. According to this pattern of logic, the sexuality documents each base their biblical interpretations and conclusions upon the biblical and scientific findings of that &y. As these expert opinions change. so do the conclusions of the documents. Thus. contradictory interpretations of the creation stories evolve only as they are factuaily supported by historical-criticai analyses. As church communities read these documents. some are left confused intimidated and silenced. If the conclusions and interpretations are not in accord with their own beliefs and they are not trained in histoncai cnticimi. they cannot contest the conclusions. lust as they mut trust the expertise of professionals in other areas. they must trust the expertise of bi blicai scholars. This leads to a broader question of the use of the Bible within congregations. How can people engage the Bible if they do not have access to historical-critical tools? In the United Church 1 have heard many laity say that they are not knowledgeable enough to read or study the Bible. When a few brave souls do gather together for Bible Study. they expect me to teach them out of rny expertise. and they resist suggestions to read from Our own places. Reading the Bible has become an intimidating enterprise. The second problem with the reliance upon modem, historical-critical biblicai scholanhip is its emphasis upon objective impmtkdiîy. The writers of the sexuality documents give the opinions of biblical and scientific experts more weight than the opinions of congregatiod members because the experts are assumed to be govemed by empirical, scientific methoâs rather than interest. Al1 four feminïsts note that this assumption occludes the biases and interests of the experts. As Schùssler Fiorenza points out historical-critical analyses of scripture tend to produce interpretations reflective of the identities and interests of the biblical scholars. The preference of expert opinion also values those removed fiom the context over those most aEected by the issue at hand.' The input of lesbian and gay groups into the sexuality documents was curtailed. I suggest, because they could not be austed to give impartial views. Instead of following an epistemologicd privilege of the oppressed, the documents supported an epistemological pnvilege of the "impartial" expert. The third problem with the reliance upon modern, historical-critical methods concerns representation. The sexuality documents relay particular historical-critical analyses as facnial representations of reality. They understand these analyses as windows into the original context. meaning of tems and authorial intent of biblical passages deemed relevant to sexuality. Al1 four feminists dispute the assumption that with the proper tools, one cm unearth reality. Nor do they believe that historical texts of any kind represent reality. Schüssler Fiorenza wams against such historical positivism. She I Some of the documents relied heavily on Amencan sources. Men American experts are used. the typical Canadian deference to Amencan expertise enforces the devaluing of Canadian opinion. Kwok recognizes this same deference of Asian theologians to Eum-Amencan biblical scholarship. suggests that these assumptions ignore the rhetoncal nature of the texts. They are not a direct correspondence with reality, but a reflection of the power and privilege of the writers. Her rhet~ricdapproach to the text takes this bias hto consideration. She still employs historicalcntical analysis, but uses it rhetorïcally to open up possibilities of rneaning and reaiity. It cannot be used to fmd definitive answers. Through rhetoric. she reconstructs the text's socio-histoncal context to more adequately represent a marginalized historical perspective. She would ask the following questions: How would a particular biblical story be reenacted by women at that time? How would the texts' patriarchal bis affect their margindization of women and condemnation of homosexual acts? Fulkerson understands al1 historical criticism as rhetorical. regardless of its claims. It only offers possibilities of meaning that are chosen or rejected by communities. Therefore it is possible for certain communities to read or hear passages that historical critics consider oppressive to women or homosexuals in a liberative light. For instance. Iesbian and gay people have read Romans 1 :26-27 in a rnanner that is supportive. rather than condemnatory.' Thus. even as hinorical criticism is useci in the sexuality documents. she wodd encourage it to be undentood as rhetorical constructions of the biblical text that present likely possibilities. not facts. An emphasis upon the multiple meanings of scripnve will challenge competing claims to its singular meaning and accurate '~ornewould argue that this passage merely condemns umatural sexual expressions. People with hornosexual orientations are naturally atcracted to their same gender. To have heterosexual klations would there fo re be unnatural and condemned by this passage. representation of dty. A fourth problem is the devaluing of fa-baseci performances of scriptme within community. When objective study of the biblical texts is preferred over the performance of the biblical texts as scripture. there are a number of consequences. Kwok notes that the tirst approach, indicative of western, linear, abstract thought, stnves for logical. sophisticated and intenially coherent redts. The second approach, indicative of eastem holistic and embodied thought, values intuition, imagination and fke association of ideas? When historical-critical methods are used to prove the logicd, definitive. correct meanings of scrip~ue,factually based, objective interpretations are preferred over faith based, subjective interpretations. In this sense. faith becomes a liability, not an asset, in biblical interpretation. The role of communities with their diverse and disordered readings of scripture are thereby negated. Ironically, it is in this neglected hodgepodge of communal performances where 1 have often found the sacred mystery of an encounter with God to be the most powemil. The performance of scripture through Iiturgy, Song, drama and sermon reveals an embodied communal sense of the divine and engages participants with the transfomative, liberating Word Worship has always ken a central aspect of AErm United enabling new. transfomative interpretations of scripture and grace-filled encounters with the divine. Afirm United has found the liberating Word of God to be '~tmut be noted that these distinctions between eastem and westem thought force an artificiai poiarity between the east and west Western feminist thought and First Nations traditions involve holistic embodunent while technological expertise emerging nom Japan and Korea involve linear, abstract logic. radidy engaged and reveaied when Iesbian, gay and bisexual Christians Wyfind a de, affirming fdyof faith. These paformances of scriptrne have ban ignored or downplayed in the sexuality documents4 for fear of exnotionally-based, biased interpretaîions of scriptme. Likewise, the scriptural performances of conservative renewal groups and congregational study groups have been given little con~ideration.~ In addition to these modern problems associated with a reliance upon the historical-critical methoci, the sexuality documents also demonstrated problems arising hmtheir liberal notions of equdity and inclusion. As long as the documents only considered the inclusion of marginalized people into the present church and societal structures, questions about the oppressive nature of the structures themselves were not asked. Assumptions of equality also precluded discussion about the power imbalances of the different voices." In addition. the writing tearns did not indicate any awareness of their own impact upon the documents. They didn't recognize that marginalized people were invited into the documents' discussions and conclusions on terms set by and beneficial to the writing teams. These points will now be fiirther elaborated. 'My the 1984 document refen to the wonhip experiences of Affirm, and then not by narne. It mentions 'a recent gathering of homosexual Christians in Montreal'' at which "those attending testified to king suddenly aware of the Holy Spint among hem7*. See Gfl. Dilemma and Promise. 78. This was acnially the founding meeting of Afirm. '~lthoughmoa documents elicited and collated numerous responses, the responses made little impact on the conclusions or theological methods employed in the documents. Even though the writing cornmittees based their judgement of the responses upon liberative norms, choosing not to give weight to more exclusive, conservative responses, these norms were not acknowledged. 6Apart fiom the one chapter on sexism in Gif Dilemm and Promise, only the 1988 document entertained these questions. When dealing with the rights and treatment of a marginalized group, the writing teams consisted primarily, if not entirely, of the dominant identity.' Thus, their conclusions reflected attempts to attend to the marginalized on the terms and conditions preferred by the dominant pup. For example, in the early 1960's women were allowed freedom only to the extent that they continued in their role as primary homemaker and caregiver for their husbands and children. Thus, the United Church documents reached conclusions reflective of the dominant male identities of the writing teams. Similar dominant. heterosexual interests were reflected in the earlier 1980 documents- For instance, in the 1980's lesbian and gay relationships were accepted only if they conformed 7When the right of women to economic and social independence was debated in the context of married women's right to ordered ministry, the writing team of the 1960 document was primarily male. When the right of lesbian and gay people to membership and ministry within the church was debated in the documents of the 1980's. the writing teams had better gender balance, but were all primarily if not entirely heterosexual. Only the 1988 document identified two members of its writing team as lesbian and gay. However. to keep the balance, an ex-gay was later added to the team. The breakdown of membership on the writing teams is as follows: The Commission writing the 1960 report were self-identified by name as 1 1 ordained men and 4 lay women, of whom two were married and two were single. Two women. one married and one single. resigned before the report was completed. The marital status of the men was not identified. No racial or cultural identity of anyone was given. See Sex. Love. Marriage, p. v. The Task Force producing the 1980 report were self-identified by name as 6 men and 4 women. No marital status. sexual orientation. clerical status. racial or cultural identity was given. See, In God's Image, p. vii. The 1984 document is the only one which identifies the writing team beyond name. It gives a brief description of 3 men and 3 women. All are described as ordained. except one woman. who is the wife of a minister. All portray themselves as heterosexual, married with children. No racial or cultural identity is given. Their interests and work experiences related to this document are given. See G@, Dilemma and Promise, p. 8-9. The 1988 document only identifies its writers by name and geographical location. Of the 7 men and 6 women, 5 are from the West, 1 is fiom the Maritirnes and 7 are fiom Ontario. No indication of marital status, clerical status, raciai or cultural identity is given. It is noted without naming that two of them are lesbian and gay members of Affirm, and another man identifies himself as ex-gay. See Send Orientations, Lifestyles and Ministry, p. ii. to heterosexuai norms Bisexualjty was more difficult to assimilate snd bas not yet been given serious consideration.* Schùssler Fiorenza wouid describe this dominant bias hughthe logic of identity whe~the identity of the other is subsumed into the identity of the dominant. The logic of identity is particularly evident with the readùigs of Genesis which understand it to prescribe God-ordained complementary, heterosexual gender relations and roles. Tanner notes that whenever any social order such as patriar~halgender relations or compulsory heterosexuality is identified as natural, it is assumed to be divinely created. De facto norms, situationdly dependent, are identified with de jure noms, absolute ontological descriptions that are beyond critique. Thus norms that are created on the basis of a certain social order are assumed to be universally applicable and divinely prescribed for al1 people at ail times. This approach informs those readings of Genesis which understand it to prescribe God-ordained complementary, heterosexual gender relations and roles. Correspondhg absolute noms are established which reib these dominant-submissive relations. These standards of behaviour and relationship reflect the identity of the dominant group 'Members of Afirm urged the writing team for a 1995 document to consider bisexuality. Mer much resistance. they decided to mention bisexuality, albeit only briefly. The team aiso insisted that its suggested covenanting services for lesbian and gay couples be pattemed after United Church heterosexual marrïage se~ces.This resource is still based upon the liberal mode1 of inclusion. Some consideration is given of the oppressive effects of heterosexism. and it acknowledges the problem of assimilation into the dominant heterosexual identity. However. it concludes that the church is not yet ready to accept lesbian and gay people on their terms, and posits heterosexual noms for homosexual relationships. See Together in Faith: Inclusive Resources About Sexuul Diversiîy for Study, Didogue, Celebration. and Action (Toronto: The United Church of Canada, 1995), 44-47. (heterosexual, white, midde-class des)and benefit them by protecting the status quo. Anything deemed characteristic of gay men, people of wlour or women are considered peripheral and dispensable to the essence of hinnanity. Only the dominant group's œ identity corresponds exactly to humanity's essence. Nomestablished to protect humanity's essence therefore protect the dominant gmup and pressure others to deny their otherness. Thus in the 1960 document women could have independent nghts as long as the inter- of their husbands were prioritized, In the 1980's up until the present lesbian and gay relationships can be recognized as long as they are controlled by heterosexual noms and the heterosexual institution of marriage is uplifted9 This identity logic leads to Tanner's "peculiar dialectic of identity and difference". The difference between the dominant and marginalized is absolutized while the differences amongst the marginalized are ignored. This is simliar to Kwok's "ideological construction of sameness and difference". An artificial polarity between women and men straight and gay, western powea and the 'Ihird World is produced. At the same time the differences within each marginalized group are flattened. For instance. no attention is given in the 1980 documents to the diRering interests and needs beîween lesbian women and gay men, working class and middleclass lesbians, white and Fim Nations gay men. Kwok also points out the fallacy of the liberal notion that al1 humans are equal and the same. In fact dl hurnans are not equal according to the distribution of power and wealth. This notion of equality is behind the cal1 for a balance of voices on al1 sides of the %very sexuality document in the 1980's was careful to defend the institution of marriage even as they gave conditional support to sexual relations outside of marriage. issue so that everyone's views cau be given equal consideration. Yet, with no accotmt of power differentiials amongst the people dedinto dialogue, evayow's views cannot be given equal consideration. Fulkemn suggests that simple inclusion of those marginaiized erases multiple identities, social locations and structures of domination. As an alternative. she and Kwok both argue for the poststmctural insistence on the instability of identity. Kwok notes that multiple subject positions produce multiple identities withui multilevel discourses. Fulkemn agrees that multiple identities are socially constructed and not based upon a nahiral essence of that identity. Women do not share a natural essence that defines their gender, nor do lesbian and gay people share an essence of sexuai orientation. Thus, women in general, as weI1 as lesbian, gay and bise& people, should not be essentialized into one category that can be excluded or included. Fulkerson suggests that this will create a binary gender system that will produce patriarchal, heterosexual noms against which women or lesbian and gay people will be measured. Such is the case for the sexuality documents. It is inevitable that the interests and social locations of the writing teams will influence their conclusions and establishment of noms. It is also impossible for the composition of the writing teams to represent every identity and interest. However. when the social locations and interests are not acknowledged they are not open to critique. Likewise, when those who use historical criticism are unaware of the aforementioned modem problems associated with it, they are less open to critique. Simple awareness of the potentid problems of modemity and liberalism is insufficient, however. Alternative theologicd methods are required to better attend to issues of diversity and .. margmabîion within Protestant churches. 1 will now explore the adequacy of the theological methods proposeci by the four faninists for use within the United Church. Scriptnn and Tradition As ail four ferninists repeatedly insist, any approach to theology and biblical interpretation is informed by one's social location. It is therefore essential to identim our social location and be consciously aware of the multiple discourses which shape our multiple, shifking identities, out of which our theology is formed. One formative influence on our theology and interpretation of scnpture is our faith traditions. The assumed sense of biblical texts (which Tanner calls the plain sense), faith practices. communal noms, particular doctrines and beliefs all contribute to a community's canonical system and shape the present understanding of these texts. Within the United Church this would inciude the centrality of Jesus the Christ, the primacy of scripture, the teaching of the ancient creeds, and the evangelical doctrines of the Reformation as adopted by the Presbyterian. Methodist and Congregationd Churches in Canada" The liturgical practices of these founding denominations also contribute to the United Church's canonical system."These founding traditions incorporate the Reformed pnnciples of sola scriptura and of the church reformed and always reforming. The United Church's canonical system also includes United Church statements of faith and the social '@These principles are taken fiom me Bcrsis of Union. See The United Church of Canada, The Manual (Toronto: United Church Publishing House, 1995), Section 2.0. "1 wish to thank Charlotte Caron for noting this liturgicd contribution. gospel movement as it has impacted our Canadian context Regionai differences across Canada have contributed to the United Church's diverse &os, including the cwperative movement and the Union Churches on the prairies, and the culhaal isolation of Newfoundand's Methodist c0mmUI1Ities.'~Protest movements speaking out against the injustices perpetrated against the First Nations, Japanese Canadians. women, the poor. lesbians and gays. and the environment have aii contributed to the United Church's identity. First Nations and ethnic minority congregations bring mdtifaith and rnulticultural traditions. These are only brief notations of the primary components of the United Church's canonical system. Further elaboration requires the attention of a fûture book. A community's canonical system helps to construct and therefore stabilize the meaning of biblical texts. Within this system. Fulkerson suggests that there are ideal and resisting reading @mes which altemately restnct and widen the possibilities of meaning of these texts. The distinction between ideal and resisting regirnes is not obvious within the United Church. Particularly on the prairies, the United Church was bom out of protest against inj~stice.'~This protest has been directed both externaily and internally. "~ee*'Special Issue: Christianizing the Social Order: A Founding Vision of The United Church of Canada" Toronto Journal ofïheology 12, no. 2 (Fall); A Long and Faithful March: Towards the Christian Revolurion ' 1 93 0s/1980s, ed. Harold Wells and Roger Hutchinson (Toronto: United Church Publishing House, 1989); Ben Smillie, Beyund the Social Gospel: Church Protest on the Prairies (Toronto: United Church Publishing House, 199 1); Sandra Beardsall, "Methodist Religious Practices in Outport Newfoundland," dissertation (Toronto: Victoria University and University of Toronto, 1996). I3See Smillie, Beyond the Social Gospel. Resistance against societal injustice has repeatedy led to protest against our own church's unjust practices. Cails for the right of married women to work outside the home were accompanied by calls for the right of manieci women to be ordaineci- Cdsfor the right of lesbian and gay people to employment and housing were accompanied by calls for the right of lesbian and gay people to be in ordered minisûy. Hence it is dificult to separate ideal hmresisting regimes in the United Church. Resistance is pari of our identity! Fulkerson's distinction may, however, help us to understand the continual movernent between the resisting and ideal reading regimes withh the United Church's canonical system. As resisting regimes protest against ideal regimes, they push @rut the acceptable boundaries of interpretation and practice. if they are evenhially incorporated into the ideal regime, they help to establish new boundaries of acceptable belief which in tum are challenged by new resisting regimes. The degree to which they are successfully incorporated depends. in part. upon theK ability to remain within the boundaries of the ideal regime even as they are resisthg. For example, cntical study of the Bible. including feminist criticisrn more recently," is an accepted part of United Church traditions. However. this critique needs to happen within the parameters set by the rest of the United Church's canonical system. To dispense entirely with biblicd authority. to dismiss the ultimate authority of the Word of "Over the last couple of decades this critical examination has included feminist historical cnticism, such as that of Schüssler Fiorenza, within groups of United Church women. Fulkerson would name these resisting regimes. The degree to which these resisting regimes have been incorporated and effective within the United Church is proportional to the degree in which they have remained within the canonical system of the United Church . &xi, to interpret scripture without reference to the gospel of Jesus Christ, or to make ethicai decisions without consideration of their socid impact on society's marpinaiized are al1 vioiations of United Chiirch traditions. This is not to say that critiques caxmot be made that push the boundkes of United Church traditions. To be hdhowever. they must be supporteci by other aspects of the United Church's canonical system. Herein may lie the greatest problem with the sexuality documents. They were challenging traditional meanings of biblical texts. boundaries of se& mordiv and doctrines of anthropology, creation sin and redemption. At the same the. they vimially ignored aspects of United Church traditions which wouid support these changes. They did not mention that the method of biblical interpretation used in the 1960 document was very sirnilar to that used in the 1980 do~uments.'~They did not refer to the stmng social gospel tradition that has always championed the cause of the other. They downpiayed the role of the Holy Spirit and the revelation of God. They gave extemal scientific analysis and expert opinion more authonty than the experiences and faith responses of those within the United Church. If the sexuality documents had demonstrated the consistency of their conclusions with the liberative aspects of United Church traditions, they may welt have received more support. The sexuality documents refer sparingly, if at dl. to past interpretations of scripture and United Church traditions. Thus. they ignore their own canonical system and "This similarity included the nonliteral approach to scripture, the use of a Christoiogicd nom, the use of a variety of theological sources including historical criticism and scientific research, and the attempt to include al1 voices while challenging injustice. -246- its formative impact on the theological understandings and biblicd interpretations of United Church parishioners. In effécf congregations were asked by the documents not to stretch the bomdaries of their ideal reading regime, but to dispense with them. This may pdally account for the wide gap between the theological conclusions of the writing teams and the responses fiom pastoral charges. Consemative refom groups then accused the United Church of forsaking its heritage. This is one of the rasons that Tanner has emphasized the importance of tradition. Resistance to the oppressive status quo wiU be much more effective if it is supported by a faith tradition. Otherwise. groups supporthg the status quo can rightïy clairn that they are the oniy ones upholding the historic faith. Another reason to identifjr United Church traditions is to acknowledge the social construction of the documents. Even though the documents may ignore or resia tradition. they were still produced within the tradition's web of signifiers. Certain words retain meanings and associations unique to United Church contexts. If passages of scripture are given new interpretations in the documents. they are usually conaasted with traditional. plain sense meanings assumed by United Church members. The fact that al1 documents give scriptural support indicates the importance and authonty of scripture within the United Church. Acknowledgment of these and other aspects of United Church traditions makes explicit their formative role in the documents. Thirdly. identifjring United Church traditions helps United Church parishioners know who we are. As we hear stones about the roots of our multiple traditions, we will better undentand our multiple. sometimes contradictory identities. This will enable us to draw upon the strengths of our traditions as well as to recognize their oppressive aspects. Connecting with our social gospel heritzlge gives us soiid support as we take rmpopular stands with society's rnarginaiized. This WUchallenge the curent mutation of the United Church as a w& Liberal and amorphous body, shape shitting with the times. ConnecMg with our beliefs and practices that have contributed to oppression will help us take responsibility for our acts of abuse and recognize ways in which our beliefs and practices are still connibuthg to oppression. This evaluation may Iead us to change the selection and organization of particdar beiiefs and practices that have proven oppressive in our history. Of particular concem are the evangelical doctrkes that have ken used to espouse Christian superiority and to justfi imperialist colonization of the First Nations in Canada, as well as Third World nations who were recipients of United Church rnissionaries. To use Fulkerson's nuanced terms. Christian traditions must be viewed with the potential for oppression in light of theu oppressive use throughout history. For this reason traditions must be carefully sified and measured against the concems of marginalized and colonized peoples. A fourth reason to identiQ United Church traditions is to realize the correctives they offer. We are to evaluate our traditions. as mentioned in the previous paragraph but our traditions can also evaluate us. The meanings of certain traditions and scripture that have been consmcted within particular comrnunities have a formative influence on subsequent uses and meanings. Thus, as Fulkerson suggests, they are stabilized and have a certain degree of agency within their social construction. One effect of this agency is to limit the endless possibilities of interpretation according to the community's own canonicd system. The system provida its own checks and balances against which new under~fandingsand challenges are md.Similady, Tanner recommaids that one responsibility of theologians is to be aware of the historical interpretations of scriptu~ and Christian traditions in order to offer these as checks and balances for contemporary interpretati~ns.'~According to Tanner, theologians should cal1 to mind certain traditions that have been lost in the overernphasis of their diaiecticai counteqart. For example. the 1980 document ernphasizes the embodied immanence of God, but fails to keep in dialectical tension the transcendent otherness of God that is emphasized in the Basis of Union. As a red~it niggests images of God and Jesus that reflect the interests and identity of dominant pups whïie subsuming the identities of others into these dominant images.'' Ifernbodied presence is held in tension with transcendent othemess. pronouncements of particular images of God would be viewed as incomplete and partial. The other would not be as easily colonized and subsumeci. For the above reasons. biblical interpretation and ethical deliberation needs to be conducted in reference to the traditions of one's own faith community. Within a '6~significant difference between Fulkerson and Tanner is Fulkerson's concentration within a particular Christian community. Tanner makes broader generalizations for the entire Christian community across space and time. "The 1980 document suggests an androgynous ideal for women and men, patte& after an androgynous image of God. Rosemary Radford Ruether points out that androgynous images of God perpetuate the male-fernale split in which the subordination of female roles and characteristics can be maintained. See Rosemary Mord Ruether, Sexism and God-Talk: Toward a Ferninisr Theology (Boston: Beacon Press, 1983). The 1980 document also asks the readers to speculate on the possibility of Jesus' sexual musal and attraction to women. It suggests that Jesus could have been rnarried. By considering the possibility of Jesus' sexuality oniy within a traditionai, heterosexual mamage, divine incamation is Merentrenched in a patriarchal institution that primarily benefits heterosexual males and has proven abusive to many women and to lesbian, gay and bisexual people. Protestant denomination, ho-, the identification of these traditions is not an easy task. The United Church has multiple traditions which are selected and organized differently by the diverse communities within B In order to ideneits traditions. attention must be given to its constitution. in addition, attention must be given beyond its own bounds to 0th- faith communities. As Protestants our faith community includes the immediate community of one's denornination and the wider commuoity of the universal body of christ." We will now examine these aspects of commuaity and diversîty. Cornmunity and Diversity The United Church is formally comprised of four denominational traditions: Methodist, Presbyterian Congregational and Evangelical United Brethren. Most United Church congregations cm still be identified according to their former affiliations with these denominations through their architecture. liturgy, doctrine and faith practices. In addition to these four traditions. some congregations have ken affiliated with yet other denominations before joining the United Church. Many individuals within the United Church also bring multidenominational and multifaith backgrounds. This mix of diverse faith traditions affects the manner in which congregations will select and organize Christian materials. While general observations can be made about cornmon United Church tradition, each congregation will emphasize different aspects, as well as other "Protestants affïliated with the World Council of Churches acknowledge that we are baptized into the one holy catholic Church. See World Council of Churches, Buptisrn, Euchurist and Ministry, Faith and Order Paper, vol. 1 1 1 (Genevx World Council of Churches, 1982), 2-3; The United Church of Canada, The Mamral, p. B 2.15. traditions with *ch they are familiar. Thus, each congregation will have its own hctiodcanonid system within the fornial, overarching canonical system of the United Church. included withh the United Church's canonid system are resisting reaes of those who offer correctives to the dominant regime. These regïmes select and organize Christian materials in a different manner than the dominant regimes. As a result they will arrive at new meanings of the Christian materials which will inevitably challenge the traditional meanings held by the dominant regime. The basis of their challenge is dly related to the cohemice of Christian traditions, or the oppressive effects of certain beliefs or practices. Withthe United Church, renewai groups which tend to favour the patriarchal status quo usually question the coherence of the dominant regirne's theology. while groups which are rnargidized by the patriarchal status quo usually reveal the oppressive effects of particula. beliefs or practices observed by the dominant regime. These multiple, diverse discourses within the United Church ofien resuit in conflict over docnine and faith practices. In order to resolve this conflict. the United Church has atternpted to reach consensus on the issues at hand with iittle consideration of the formative impact of its own diverse faith tradition^.'^ It has ken more attentive to the doctrines and faith practices of other denominations in its theological and ethical 'me 1988 document is one exception. It has given considerable attention to past United Church faith statements and ethicai guidelines, as well as noting the diversity of belief within United Church congregations. deliberationsTMbut nich ecumenid dialogue is hampered ifthe United Church is unclear about its own diverse faith traditions. For this reason, the United Church must begin the identification of its faith traditions within its own diverse co~~l~nUIilties.Once it is familiar with its own various uses of Christian materids, it can then enter into dialogue with other Christian communities to Merexamine the coherence and Iiberative or oppressive efTects of these particular uses. While the United Church has actively engaged in ecumenical dialogue with the contemporary faith cornmunities. it has placed less emphasis on dialogue with historic faith communities. and yet both contemporary and historic communities constitute the wider body of Christ. Tanner and Schtissler Fiorenza can both help with this comection to the historic body of Christ Tanner can help us connect with dominant Christian traditions. while Schüssler Fiorenza can help us comect with marginaiized Christian traditions. Tanner's selection and organization of historic Christian materiais can be contnisted with their use in different contemporary Christian comrnunities. These conaasts can provide insight into multiple meanings. coherence, and effects of Christian beliefs on the marginalized. Schiissler Fiorenzaosrhetoncd reconstruction of the early Christian communities allows those who had no voice in the formation of the dominant Christian traditions to be heard. Her reconstructions of Christian tradition can be contrasted with both Tanner3 dominant. historicai Christian traditions and the canonicd systems of contemporary faith communities. These con- can provide Merinsight '"The earl ier sexuality documents sought input fiom other Protestant denominations in Canada, the United States, and Britain. ioto the multiple meanings, coherence, and effiof Christian beliefs on the marginalized- As dialogue amongst diverse faith traditions within the body of Christ helps to identiQ formative traditions. and to assess them according to their coherence with other beliefs and practices and to the* impact upon marginaiized and colonized people throughout the world disagreement is inevitable. However, both Tanner and Kwok recognize the vital importance of such dialogue, and urge Christian communities to nsk conflict and work towards solidarity. Tanner suggests that commwties can avoid densive division by weIcomin& not fearing, disagreement as they establish communities of argument Rather than attempting to agree over the meaning of particular Christian materiais, they could simply agree with the choice of matenals. and agree to disagree over their meaning. This may be the key for the United Church to remain united amidst diversity. It could agee with the cenaal importance of scripture, the use of Christological noms and avoidance of literalism in its interpretation, support for the margindized and recognition of diversity, even though it may disagree over the meanings of these aspects of its faith traditions. One difficulty with this solution is its lack of political impact. In order to avoid absolute relativism and the preservation of the statu quo, Iiberatïve criteria must dso be established. In the following section, we will be examining criteria that arise out of faith communities and allow hem to respect diversity while attending to the marginaiized. Authority and Revelation As part of the miversal body of Christ, Christian communities must be accountable not oniy to their own canonid system, but also to the wider Christian communion. Accordhg to the social gospel traditions and the World Council of Churches' mandate to seek peace, justice and the integrity ofcreation, Christian communities must also be accountable for the welfare of the whole of creation. with particdm attention given to the rnarginaiized of society. UlUmately they mut be accountable to God. Cnteria for the evaluation of this multiple accountability must extend beyond a poststnictural focus on the particular. At the same hethe criteria must not fd back into a modem universal or metanarrative that collapses diversity and abso1ut:zes the particular. In this section 1 wilt identiQ aspects of each feminist's methodology that contribute towards the development of such criteria and are helpful within the context of a Protestant denomination. 1 will fiat consider criteria arising fiom Christian traditions. Following this 1 will consider the importance of historical and contextuai adequacy. On the bais of these two areas 1 will then consider pragmatic critena that are globally conscious. Cornmon Christian Criteria Cornmon critena can be established amongst Christian communities with the help of Tanner's concept of style. Although scripture, historical faith staternents and faith practices contain an endless possibility of meanings, their selection and organization by various communities have produced certain parameters and criteria to limit and guide these meaniags. As different co~ll~~lunitiesoffaith cormect acrou space and he,their use of Christian materiais and derived criteria are wntrasted. It is in these interconnections that the United Church can better realize the potentiai oppression and liberation of their own traditions. They can also find nmilarïties in the use of Christian materials and in critena by which they can be judged. It is out of this dialogue or narration of noies hmdifférent traditions that Tanner, Fulkemn and Kwok derive Christian guidelines. Fulkerson mimes potential universals of s@ grace and agapic love. Tanner establishes criteria based upon God's transcendeme and God's mative agency. Kwok encokesecumenical dialogues that promote a unity of the body of Christ which respects its own diversity. Th- through their identification. selection and organization by different Christian communities, Christian traditions can produce generai guidelines that provide criteria and corrections in the proclamation of the gospel. As these guidelines are continually formed and reformed they cal1 us to seek not the presentation of a fixed gospel, Kwok reminds us, but the disceniment of the living Gospel. As an example of the general import of these guidelines for the United Church, we will look at Tanner's guideline of relativity. She observes that Christians use cornmon materials in a similar manner: everything is used in reference to God. Even though some will select and organize their materials and practices differently, the style in which they use the material is the same. If al1 things are referred to Cod, al1 things are relativized before God. This has direct implications for a Christian community's concept of authority. Acwrding to Tanner, if a commUDity defers to the transcendeme of Gad, all decisions and authoritative pronouncements will be relativized, We se+ in a mirror dimly and know only in part. If we deciare any decisions to be God's defînîtive wiU or claim absolute authority for particular interpretations of scriptme and tradition, we transgress into idolatry. Only God is absolute. Our understandings are constructed out of a mesh of interwoven webs of influence. They are particular to our social locations. Therefore. raising the particuiar to the infinite is demonic, Tillich reminds us. Indeed, some of the most evil atrocities committed by Chnstians have been authorized by the absolutizing of out own xenophobic standards. Because of the oppressive aspects of Christian history. western Chnstians in particular need to be most cautious in our use of authority. If we keep the transcendeme of God always before us. Tanner believes that this will prevent the absolutizing of our own positions and give us pause to listen humbly to others. Even those with whom we are radicaily opposed may have words of auth that need to be heard." The United Church documents would agree that only God is absolute. They would not want to replace divine authority with their own, and they would want to remain open to the ongoing revelation of the Holy Spirit. Likewise, the documents do not give the biblical texts ultimate authority. Although scripture is engaged as a source of God's revelatory authority. it is Jesus the Christ who is given ultimate authority. While scripture "The operative word here is "may". Margindized people should not be expected to listen to vitriolic diatribes directed against them. This serves only to Mertheir oppression. Carefid consideration needs to be given to issues of power, privilege and safety as conditions for dialogue are established. For an excellent discussion of this see Sharon Welch, A Feminist Elhic of Risk (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990). provides a fbnctional authority for féith practÏces and daily living, the basis of its authority Lies in its witness of Christ Where biblicai passages appear to contriadict the gospel, they are! considered non-authoritative. Thus, it is not saipture itself that is sacred but the Word of God that is revealed within and tnmscends it. Only as it reveals Jesus Christ, the Living Word is it authoritative? As pointeci out earlier, there are similarities between this position, Kwok3 reference to the Living Gospel and Tanner's later emphasis upon the Word of God. These concepts reinforce the relative authority of scripture in reference to God. Submitting scripture to the author@ of God's Word recognizes the human limitations and inconsistencies of scrïpture's revelation of God. Especially in light of the oppressive uses of scripture against women gay and lesbian people and colonized nations. the biblical texts and their interpretations must be relativized in their authority. At best, they are rhetorical constructions of God's realm and the gospel, and must be understood and critiqued as such. The Word of God is related not only to Godostranscendence but also to God's immanence through the peson of Jesus the Christ. Therefore. scripture is not only relativized in its authority, but is also judged by its own portrayal of the life and ministry of Jesus. Jesus' radical love for social outcasts and his constant striving to break the "~heuse of various terms in the sexuaiity documents to refer to the Christological nom for biblical interpretation may well indicate a number of different Christologies operative within these documents. This would be an interesthg exploration for fiiture work. To begin this discussion, see Kathryn E. Tanner, "Jesus Christ," in The Cambridge Cornpanion zo Christian Doctrine, ed. Colin E. Gunton, Cambridge Cornpanions to Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997). chah of oppression offer evaluative crïtexia that have proven particularly important for the social gospel tradition of the United Church? One of the difficulties with the use of general guidelines, such as a Christological norm, is that they cm be particularized in a meaning and manner that best suïts the interpreter. Noms can be established which benefit the dominant identities of the writing teams under the pretense of divine authority. The ambiguity of Jesus' response to sexual issues in the biblical texts altows the documents to select Christological nomthat support their pre- formed beliefs? There is always a danger of equating one's understanding of the spirit of Christ with one's own interests. in fact. this may be inevitable. For this reason. Tanner cautions that al1 decisions and particularizations of general guidelines must be relativized. However. there are two additional sources of critena that can prevent a lapse into absolute 'This is particularly apparent in United Church readings of the gospel of Luke, where Jesus' stmggle against oppression is set forth in Jesus' inaupurai speech in the synagogue as the purpose for his ministry (Luke 4: 16-21 ). It is therefore no surprise that this passage has been important in United Church liturgies. '4~e1960 document admits the difficulty in knowing the spirit of Christ. as the New Testament presents differing interpretations of Jesus' thought. However, the 1960 document suggests that it be based on Jesus' revelation of the underlying purpose and order of the Kingdom of God. See Sex. Love. Marriage, p. 7. On this basis, it restricts sexual expression to marriage in part to maintain societal order. The 1980 document suggests that a Christo-centric reading of scnpture will hear God' s "yes" uttered in Christ. See In God's Image. p. 18. This yes is to life. to the celebration of sexuaiity and to the fieedom fiom sexual taboos. On this basis. it opens up the possibilities for pre-marital, extra-marital, and same gender sexual relationships that are mutually supportive and socially responsible. The 1988 document recommends that the Bible be interpreted according to the compassion, faithfulness and justice of the spirit of Christ. See Sexual Orienfa~ions.Lifstyks and Ministry, p. 36. Its correspondhg noms cal1 for sexual relationships that are just. loving, health-giving, healing and sustainuig0. of cornmunity. relatiivization or a jwtificafion of the oppressive status quo: historical and conted adequacy and gIobaiIy conscious pragmatism. HistoricaI cmd Contextual Adequacy One of the reasom that Schiissler Fioremm is reluctant to give up the use of historicai criticism is because of its political viability. Even if it is used rhetorically. thereby ailowing multiple meanings of the -it still lirnits the potential number of historidy adequate readings. Historical criticisn, combined with archaeology. anthpology, and sociology, suggest that some readuigs are more dblethan others. and thus allow the stones of those who have been marginalized, silenced and abused throughout history to be heard, and not subsumed into contemporary identities. Likewise. Tanner suggests that the multiple meanings of Christian materials are limited by their coherency with each other. She also emphasizes dong with Kwok and Fulkerson, that Christian materials are borrowed materials from the surrounding culture, thereby making it impossible to separate gospel fiom culture, Christian materials fiom sdarmaterials. intertextuai relations with the surrounding context are integral to a Christian comrnunity's identity. These positions dl suggest that cross-disciplinary work with the social and physical sciences. anthropology. archaeology. Iiterary theory and political theory is invaluable in understanding the nature of Christian communities and their faith practices and beliefs. Critiquing the scientific method does not mean dispensing with scientific findings. It only means that scientific conclusions cannot be absolutized. However, they can stiil be considered. Placing the different conclusions and theories fiom the different disciplines together in critical didogue limits the number of credible conclusions, including those of theology. Thus, theological documents that examine issues of sexuality should be in dialogue with the social sciences. This dialogue can limit the number of credible conclusions, thus adding a criteria of contexnial adequacy that prevents the absolute relativization of the document's conclusions. Lu order to demonstrate the difference between histoncal and contextual adequacy. and unquestioned reliance upon scientific conclusions. I wili review the semiality documentsouse of the social and medicd sciences. Through this review, we will understand the danger for marpinaiized people of a modem reliance upon scientific clairns, while still recognizing the value of criticai dialogue with the sciences. The United Church documents seldom question scientinc and scholarly opinion. When deaiing with controversial issues of sexuality, the documents ofien present cornpetkg views foliowed by defmitive explanations based upon scientific and historical- criticai findings. Modem methods of empïrical analysis are not questioned, thereby granting them unconditional authority. Their social location and social construction is ignored. One of the documents suggests that scientific findings are the most trustworthy source of tnitfi, and hence of God's revelation." This concept of mith is based on an elevation of abset essentidism. Kwok recommends an altemate concept based upon a pragmatic. relational understanding. If this latter concept is used the focus in the sexuality documents will be less upon empirical findings and more on right relationships. By implication, God will then be "In God's Image, p. 1 1. sought not in hidden, essentialist tndhs,but in justice-ceatred relationships. The sexuaiity documents began to move in this direction in the 1980's, although their deference to empirical science retained the elevation of abstnict euth. This contributed to the earlier documents' emphasis upon the causes of homosexuality, as well as the 1980 documents' emphasis upon the fixeci nature of sexuaf orientation? If sexual orientation codd be proven to be part of an unchangeable essence of humani*/. it could be viewed as part of God's creation, regdess of the type of orientation. Because bisexuality challenges these assumptions of fixïty' it has still not been seriouçly considered by the United Church. The element of choice is threatening to ail sides. Even more significant, God's creation is limited to essentid physiological charact&stics. If we can prove that sexual orientation is a genetic trait. it could be argued that Iike biue-eyed people. lesbian and gay people are c~atedby God to be lesbian and gay. Conversely, it could also be argued that, like a birth defect, sexual orientation is a '6This was a particular concern of the 1960 document. If homosexual relations were sinfil then God had to provide the possibility of heding and of transformation to heterosexuaiity. To know the social and psychologicd causes of this "disease" would enable a more effective transformation. See Sex. Love. Marriage, p. 14- 16. The 1980 and 1984 documents both discussed the causes of homosexuality, but emphasized that scientific findings are showing that sexual orientation is not a choice. However, the 1984 document still called for a study of the nature and origins of homosexuality. See In Godk Image, p. 5 6-57; GiJ, Dilemma and Promise, p. 68-7 1.The 1988 document stated that one needed to find the cause of homosexuality only if one needed to find a cure. If only heterosexuaiity is considered naturai, there must be causes for the aberrations of homosexuality and bisexuality. However, if they are dl considered na- variations of sexual orientation, the cause becomes irnmaterid. See Seml Orieniatiom, LfestyZes and Ministry, p. 48-5 1. disability thaî may be able to be "correctedn with future technoIogica1 researchhnThis last possibility dramatizes the danger of unquestioned scientific conclusions and essentiaikt philosophy. Fulkerson encourages sexual orientation to be viewed dong with race and gender as a social construction. Along with the other three feminists. she warns against the homfic dangers of essentidism. The identification of parîicular chamcteristics of sexual orientation, race or gender inevitably exciudes those who don? fit, and subjugates those who do into absolutized categories. Mediml experiments conducted by the Nazi regime on mentalIy and physically disabled people, gay men and other expendable undesirables have demonstrated potential treatment of the essentialized other. If scientific studies are understood within their own social locations and political interests. the voice of scientific authority is no longer ciear, nor unanimous. Identity becomes a site of multiple, sometimes confiicting. discourses. The creativity of God is no longer reduced to a particular essence, but is understwd within the complexity and diversity of our world. It is ongoing and unfolding, never static or fixed. It is within this context of multiple, conflicting discourses that scientific. cultural, and historical claims should be considered. Critical dialogue arnongst a variety of disciplines and their findings will enable historical and contextuai adequacy without absolutizing any particular claim. ?he1988 document outlines a few of these different views of sexuai orientation. See Sexual Orientations. LifstyZes and Minhtry, p. 49-5 1. Global. PTagmutzc Critericl The second source of cntena which prevents absolute relativisrn and the preservation of the oppressive status quo is liitive, pmgmic concems. Ail four feminists are aware that pragmatic, emancipatory norms are necessary within their methods. While ail are cautious about the establishment of any universal noms that subsume diversity, they also recognize the need for universal guidelines which can be particularized in diverse forms within local communities. Hence, each feminist suggests universal guidelines related to emancipatory, pragrnatic concems. ïhese global. pragrnatic guidelines are an important contribution to the development of a more adequate theological method within the United Church context. Tanner is not al1 inclusive in her use of Christian materials. She adrnits that some traditions may weil contribute to oppression. Therefore, she selects and organizes materiai that will best challenge the oppressive stanis quo. On the basis of two Christian principles she fompragmatic, emancipatory nom. God's transcendence relativizes the authority of human consmictions. Gd's creative agency honours the diversity and particularity of every creature. Anything clairning absolute authority contravenes these norms. Anything devaluing or otherwise oppressing any of God's matures is also a contravention. With these two norms in mind. the United Church's dialogue with its own diverse cornmunities can be guided by respect for the diversity and particularity of every person including lesbian, gay and bisexual people. Any conclusions and judgments made must be underskmd as partial and relative to God. On the bais of a cornrnunity's discursive construction of the Christian principles of sin, grace and agapic love, Fulkerson identifies intemai noms produced by the cornxnunity to rneasure its own resisfauce to patriarchd capitalism. These Yeminist stipulations of relevance" are shaped by the cornmunïty's Christian identity and are pragmatic. asking what effects a pzwticular ordering of discourse have on the marginalized Within the United Church, those who are marginalked hmthe benefits of patriarchal capitalism must be considered when conducting theologicd and ethical analysis within its canonical system. With the help of postcolonid analysis. Kwok establishes pragmatic noms that honour diversity and ailow a global systemic anaiysis of structures of colonization. Through her ecumenical work she also cails for the unity of the body of Christ that honours its diversity. In order to achieve this unity. she suggests a solidarity of connections. mutuality and inclusivity amon@ faith communities. Kwok does not limit this solidarity to Christian communities. but draws on the traditions of other faiths to respect the multiple culturai and faith identities of Asian people. As people have been imrnersed in multiple faith traditions. their readings of any one will be influenced by the othen. This is the case not only of people living in Asian countries. Many United Church congregations. especialiy those which are of an ethnic minonty. include people who have multifaith backgrounds. Many First Nations United Church congregations are begiming to reclaim faith practices and traditions fkom their own people. For these congregations a parallel reading process with the traditions of each faith will help identiQ the multiple webs of signification that are already present. It will also welcome the insights and critiques which each faith brings. In addition, these critiques wilI give those who do not have a muitifaith background additional insights into the oppressive and liberative aspects of various orderings of Christian traditions. Thus, a multifaith hermeneutics will benefit ail Christian communities and contribute to a globally cooscious dialogical imagination. Out of this dialogue amongst Christian communities and different faith traditions. globally accountable criteria can be developed." Withùi this context Kwok poses ethical criteria for judging biblical interpretatiom and theological methods. They must contribute to the liberation and humanization of the global comrnunity, emphasinng freedom, justice, peace and reconciliation. Schûssler Fiorenza also posits ethical critena to judge biblicai interpretation. Her criteria are developed out of historical and contemporary faith communities of emancipatory wo/men. They are pragmatically based and clearly favour emancipatory over kyriarchal discourse. Although she acknowledges the multiple identities. oppressions and privileges faced by many. she privileges those who are faced with multiplicative oppressions. '*~lthoughthe writing teams of the sexuality documents consulted with other denominations. they did not connilt with other faith and cultural traditions. Learning about the berdache and -'Two Spirited Peoples" of the First Nations, as well as the "cut sleeve" of the Ming dynasty in China would have disputed the prevailing belief that homosexual activity was a western. Caucasian phenornena. It would also have demonsûated the respect afforded those with non-traditional gender roles and sexual behaviour. For merreading see Walter L. Williams, 7he Spirit and the Flesh: Sena1 Diversi@ in American lndian Cullure (Boston: Beacon Press. 1992); Bret Hinsch, Pussions of the Cui Sleeve (Berkeley: University of California, 1990); Viven W. Ng, "Homosexuality and the State in Late Imperia1 China," in Hidden From History: Reciaiming the Guy and Lesbian Past, ed. Martin et. Duberman, al. (London: Penguin* 1991); Grace M. Jantzen, "Off the Straight and Narrow: Toward a Lesbian Theology" (King's College, London Apnl, 1995). The pragmatic, liberation basis for each of these feminists allows the establishment of emancipatory critcria hmwithin the community of faith. Such criteria could well emerge from the United Church's social gospel tradition. and help it to more adequately attend to the other. This was missing hmall but the 1988 document The primary emphasis in the sexuality documents, apart hmthe 1988 document was to educate and include into a system, rather tban educate and liberate from oppressive structures. They aiso did not stress the need to connect with other communities of faiùi in order to develop a global consciousness and globally accountable critena In conclusion, the writers of future United Church documents need to take an intertexnial approach in their interpretation of scripture and use of theologicd methods. To begin. they should connect with the canonid system of the United Church in order to listen to its own faith communities. This includes the resisting regimes of those marginalized from church structures. They also need to listen to those marginalized in our society, especidly when dealing with issues afTecting them. When addressing their marginaiization, they need to address questions of structural oppression. and not simply include everyone into the existing structures. The great diversity of faith communities within the United Church will bring different. sometimes conflicting, biblical interpretations. ethical criteria and theological opinions. These al1 need to be measured against the United Churchœsown faith traditions. with particular attention given to the traditions which support the marginalized. In addition, they need to be measured against the beliefs and concems of other Christian communities, and accountable to the wider body of Christ, to those who are marginalized and colonized around the worlcS. and to the weEare of the eartb and its inhabitants Cnteria arising out of the common use of Christian material and out of global, pragmatic concems that prove adequate to our historical and cultural conte= will dowthe development of universal principles thai can be particuiarized by diverse communities. Throughout this process each community needs to be open to the critiques of other faith communities, as well as marginaiized peoples amund the world. This will contribute to the unity of the body of Christ and solidanty with other faith traditions as we seek to end oppression and celebrate diversity. Within this faith journey, we must be "faithful to God's cal1 to be jwt, lovhg, hedth-giving, healing, and sustainhg of cornmunity?" "Sexual Orientations. Lifestyles and Ministoy? p. 3. -267- CONCLUSION: TOWARD A MORE ADEQUATE FEMINIST THEOLOGICAL METHOD To conclude 1 will suggest elements of a feminist theological method which adequately address issues of marginalkation and diversity, and are appropriate for use within Protestant churches.' Urhile Schiissler Fiorenza, Fulkerson, Kwok and Tanner each present contrasting theological methods as alternatives to modem. Iiberal approaches. they share some similarities and complement each other's approaches. In my conclusion 1 will first review presuppositions which they share concerning modem, liberal approaches used in theological methods. Following this 1 will outline two steps that Protestant churches cmtake as they develop theological methods that can better attend to the other. The first step is to identie the canonicai system of one's own faith community and its relationship to the wider body of Christ and to other faith traditions. The second step is to evduate these faith traditions according to their coherence. their histoncal and contexnial adequacy, and their oppressive and liberative potentials. This two step process of identification and evaluation should occur within certain parameters of accountability that are ultimately accountable to God- Presuppositions Before exarnining elements which 1 consider important for a feminist theological method. heegeneral presuppositions must first be mentioned. These presuppositions are '~lthoughmy hope is that this method will be helpful for a variety of Protestant churches, it will be of particuiar benefit to those Protestant churches which take liberal. modem approaches in their theological methods. held in common by the four feminst theologians presented in this thesis: 1. Theologid methods and types of biblical interpretaîion are Iimited and perspectival. 2. Christian traditions and biblical texts are diverse. 3. Systemic anaiysis of oppression renders liberal notions of equality and inclusion insufficient, The first presupposition challenges assumptions that any particular theological or hermeneutical method is impartial or disinteresteci. Al1 are limited by the social location and interests of the interpreter. While approximations of historical adequacy can and should be made in biblicai interpretation, as Schtissler Fiorenza stresses. they remain only approximations. MI biblical interpretations are rhetorical constructions. as Fulkerson reminds us. whether acknowledged or not. Failme to recognize this is to be guilty of historical positivism. Historical reality is not a hidden entity waiting to be unearthed in historicd documents and represented with the proper histoncal-critical or literary tools. Rather. histoncd documents represent the perspective of histoncal individuals and groups (often those in dominant positions) as read fiom the perspective of the interpreter. Historical and textual interpretations therefore are not value neutral, but are embedded with persona1 interest and have politicai implications. Because each interpreter brings a different set of interests from different social locations. interpretations are as diverse as the nurnber of interpreters. As biblical texts are read by different faith communities. different meanings will arise. Thus. there is no one. correct objective and factual meaning of the text that is universally valid. Such a modem assurnption betrays textual positivism. Instead, the social location of each community will contribute to its own unique construction of meaning. The recognition of a biblicd text's multiple m&gs leads to the second presupposition concerning the diversity of the texts as well as Cbnstiau tradition. The Bible is not a uniform text of logicaiiy flowing passages and books. Rather, it contains diverse. sometimes contradictory matenais. Likewise, Christian tradition is not a uniform set of historical beliefs and practices. but coosists of a variety of doctrines. creeds. and practices that are selected and organized differently by particular ffaith communities. To dismiss Christian tradition and the Bible categorically as inherently paniarchai is to collapse their diversity into a homogenous whole and ignore theu liberative potential. Similarly, to clairn biblical principles as the essence of scripture or certain doctrines as the essence of Christian tradition is to collapse their diversity into an essentialized totality and ignore their oppressive potential. Marginalized voices within scripture and Christian tradition are ignored with such sweqing generalizations. as are the diverse uses of Christian material by faith communities. Concems of totalitarianism and essentialism are aiso extended to marginalized peoples within contemporary society, contributing to our third presupposition. Invitations of inclusion extended by those whose identities are privileged in society inevitably set the temis of that inclusion according to their own interests and identities. Seldom are the structures which benefit their dominant identities challenged. Marginalized people are therefore welcomed into the very structures which keep them marginalized. This logic of identity subsumes the identities of marginalized and colonized peoples into identities of dominant groups. It also tends to essentialize certain aspects of marginalized identities as "other," and to collapse direrences within these identities. For instance, a statement that Asian people do not think linearly ponts a false dichotomy between Asan and non-Asian peoples, and ignores the divemity amongst western and eastem Asian people. In order to address issues of diversiîy and marginalization, a tbeo1ogic.d method needs to move beyond a liberal mode1 which assumes equality of d and which welcomes inclusion. It needs to recognize and address power differentials and systemic structures of multiplicative oppression that produce unequal positions of privilege and power. It dso needs to recognize the social consmiction of idenûty and move beyond individualism to cornmal sites of discourse. Communal Beginnings One element of a feminist theological method that adequately attends to issues of diversity and marginalization within Protestant churches concerns its starthe point. While earlier feminist approaches have begun with women's expenence. more recent feminia writings, including Fulkerson9s, have exposed the problem with this approach. Reference to women's experience in the singular subsumes the diversity of women's experiences into one totalistic account. It also fails to note the multiple and shifing. social construction of identity and experience.' For these reasons, it is more hetpfid and accurate to begin with a particular cornmunity, rather than an individual or an arnorphous group defuied by identity. 'For Merdiscussion on women's experience, see George Schner, "The Appeal to Experience," Z7ieologicd Studies 53(Marc h 1992) : 40-59; Loraine Mac Kenzie Shepherd. "The Deceptive Monolith of Women's Experience: Stniggiing for Common Feminist Visions Amidst Diversity," Toronto JomaL of Theology 1 1, no. 2 (1995). As 1 am interested in a ferninist methodology that wiU be helpfd witb Protestant churches, 1job with Fulkerson to suggest beginning with a church body's canonicaI system? This will engage a community's diverse stories of experiences, beliefs, scriptural interpretations, traditions, ethos, and practices. Within this context. communi~ refers to a denomination or association of churches with its interlocking structures of smaller comunities.' If Stones of experience are engaged without reference to the other components of a community's canonical system, their social construction within this commewill not be understood. Experience could then be isolated and raised above critique to support a totditarian ideology. If traditional doctrine is cited without reference to diverse faith practices or experiences, it could be used to -press diversity and support a totalitarian ideology. In order to acknowiedge and respect the diversity within the community, the multiple aspects of its canonical system must be considered. lncluded wi thin a community 's canonical system are the resisting regimes. Attention to these groups will allow voices marginalized withthe church body to be heard. They may offer correctives to the dominant regime in one of two ways. They could reveal incoherencies in the manner in which the dominant regime selects and organizes '1 use the term "church body" instead of th de nomination^ because some churches that are not comectional. such as those that belong to the Southem Baptist Convention. emphasize the autonomy of the local congregation by refusal of the term "'denomination". "Within the United Church these consist formally of the structures of General Council, Conferences, Presbytenes and Pastoral Charges. Within these courts exist other formally constituted groups such as the United Church Women and the AOTS (As One That Serves) men's group. informally recognized groups include AffiUnited, ferninist groups and the renewal organizations of Community of Concem, The National Alliance of Covenanting Congregations and Church Alive. Christian materiais. Resisting repimes could also correct the dominant regime by revealing the oppressive aspects hmthe community's canonid system. Evaluation of these corrections offered by the misting regimes will be discussed in the next section. One Meraspect of a community's canonical system is its relationship with its wider societal context As a society changes, so do faith communities? This intertexnial formation has direct implications on the rnanner in which communities will read scripture, interpret tradition and practice their faith. Thek construction of Christian identity, the meaning of biblicd passages, and the selection and organiiriition of Christian naditions are shaped, in part, by their social location. As Canada becomes increasingly multicultural and mukifaith, the social location of Christian churc hes will include interaction with other fGth cornmunities. and a recognition of the multifàith identities of its many of its own members. In its interaction with society, faith communities are also aware of the marginalized people of society and the world Their historical relationships with the marginalized and colonized foms part of their canonical system and can be challenged or affirmed by resisting regimes. Once a faith community has identified the multiple, conflicting discourses that comprise its canonical system. it is better able to enter into dialogue with other faith cornmunities and evaluate the coherency and liberative or oppressive effects of particular 'This is particularly apparent with the United Church. Political changes in Canada invariably are reflected within the United Church. The social gospel movement is associated with the rise of the CCF (Co-operative Commonwealth Federation) and socialized medicine. Increasing resistance to centraiized power in Ontario is accompanied by increasing resistance to the power of the United Church's head office in Toronto. Fragmentation and threatened splits in the country are reflected in the withdrawal of membership and threatened splits in the United Church. uses of Christian materialS. This dialogue should happen with both the wider body of Christ and with other faith traditions, in order to gain a greater understanding of the liberative and oppressive effiof certain beliefs and practices for colonized peoples who live in muitifaith contexts, The mamer in which this evaluation could best occur wil now be discussed- Revelation and Authority When engaging a community's canonical system. including its resisting regimes. questions of authority and revelation will arise. Positions, decisions and actions will need to be evaluated. Assessing conflicting opinions about theology and ethics wiU therefore require criteria and guidelines. The cornbined contributions of ail four ferninists give helpfül authoritative criteria which evaiuate faith traditions according to their coherence. their historical and contextual adequacy, and their oppressive and liberative potentials. For a feminist theological method to be adequate for Protestant churches. 1 propose that these criteria operate within three primary areas of accountability: to the commimity's canonical system. to the wider body of Christ. and for the welfare of the earth and its margindized peoples of the present and past. Ultimately, these three areas are accountable to God. To be accountable to God we could hold a belief of God's radical trrinscendence in dialectical tension with a belief of God's radical immanence. As Tanner emphasizes. the radical transcendence of God relativizes all human constructions, including the Bible. Nothing can daim absolute authority, but mus< be viewed in relationship to God as finite and limite& God's radical immanence as reveaied through the person of Jaus challenges followers of Christ to seek agapic id& in ~lationshipsand commimities. while opposing al1 forms of oppression and domination. By reading scripture and evaluating faith practices in light of the Word, God's emancipatory love becornes the authoritative criteria This criteria of emancipatory love pushes ùito the future. promising Godœs presence and guidance through the empowerment of the Spint of Chria as Christians strive for the basileia of Gd. Within these parameters of accountability to a radically transcendent and immanent God we will now look at the three nibsidiary areas of accountability for a feminist theological method. The ktarea concerns Tanner's and Fulkerson's emphases upon a community's use of Christian materials. The organization and selection of Christian materials will be shaped by that community's historical traditions and identity. For a ferninia theologicai method to be operative within a particular community. it mut be accountable, in part, to the canonical system of that community. It cm do this by demonstrating connections to and logical consequences fiom the community's historical traditions and faith practices. W ithout this accountability to a commun@ 's canonical system, a feminist theological method could ignore sources of revelation and guidance found within the community's traditions and could be dismissed much more easily by the cornmunity. Through their selection and organization by a cornmunity, the multiple meanings of particular biblical texts and Christian doctrines are stabilized. As one biblical passage is juxtaposeci with another, in Iight of one doctrinal statement jinaaposed with another, in light of one faith pdcewith another, the potentially Iùnitless meaaings of each are restricted The meanings are Merlimiteci by the assumed sense of the biblical texts. This stabilizaiion of meaning grants the texts agency to limit and adjudicate the community's positions. practices and decisions. In this rnanner, scriptural passages and doctrinal statements can stand against a community to offa correctives or affi~rmations and to suggest normative theological p~ciples.For instance, a United Church reading of Luke 4: 16-2 1. with a readuig of Isaiah 58 and 60:1-2, with a doctrine of sin, with stories of the social gospel movement. with stories of ecumenical taskforces on corporate responsibility supports a materialist reading of scripture and names the iiberation of the oppressed as a nomative Christological prùiciple.6 As the traditional readings of scriptural texts conflict with their juxtaposition with other texts. doctrines. beliefs and faith practices. or with readings from the resisting regimes, criteria concerning coherence and pragmatic effects will be needed. These critena will initially be derived from the community3 canonical system. including their selection and organization of Christian rnaterials. Once a community has identified its traditions and centrai doctrines. these can be used to correct an overemphasis upon or neglect of certain beliefs or fâith practices within their canonical system. While it is important that a community understand its own canonical system and derive evaluative cnteria from it. it is equally important that the community not base its 6This example was taken from a meeting of the United Church's national Church in Society Unit of the Division of Mission in Canada in November. 1997. judgements exclusively upon its own canonid system. The two dangers of an exclusive adherence to intemal criteria established by the community are isolation and a tendency to preserve the oppressive status quo. It is for this reason that 1 propose accountability to the wider Christian Church. and for the weffare of the earth and its marginalued peoples of the past and present Accountability to the universal body of Christ as emphasized by Kwok, prevents a myopic cocooning of a community of faith and acknowledges diversity of Christian traditions. beliefs, and faith practices. It also reveals the potential danger of pariicular beliefs and practices as they have been used to support domination and colonidism. Through dialogue with other Christian communities, the use of Christian materials and the intemal criteria established by each community can be contrasted. In their varying selection and organization of Christian materials. they can provide alternative perspectives and understandings of revelation that can offer both insights and correctives to each other. They can demonstrate the oppressive effects of particular uses of Christian matenals within their context and heip privileged communities to understand their role in the continued domination of marginalized communities. Dialogue with different Christian communities need not be limited to the present. The work of Tanner and SchüssIer Fiorenza helps us access the doctrines, creeds. beliefs and faith practices of historical Christian comrnunities fkom different perspectives. Tanner proposes doctrines which she has found to be fundamental to historical Christian communities within dominant Christian traditions. Schtissler Fiorenza proposes alternative- liberative faith practices of marginalized groups within these historical Christian communities who have ken excluded fiom dominant Christian traditions. As contemporary Christian co~lllllunitiesinterconnect with one anothei and with rhetoricai constructions of historicai Christian commmities, they will find divergences and commonajities in their use of Christian materials. It is on the basis of these commonalities that Christian communities can derive universal Christian guidelines. It is because of the divergences that these guidelines can only be generalized. They contain a general practical import that cmthen be particdanteci in different ways in different commUNties accordhg to the cornmunity's canonical system. For instance. the radical immanence and embodiment of God is frequently emphasized within the United Churck and often to the exclusion of God's transcendence. Comections could be made with the United Church's histoncal faith statements. Refonned doctrines. and traditions emerghg from other histoncal communities outlined by Tanner, ai1 of which emphasize God's transcendence. These comections could produce a general dialectical guideline that holds together God's radical immanence and radical transcendence. The particularization of this guideline within the United Church might retain images of God's radical immanence as lover. CO-suffererand fkedom fighter. while simultaneously acknowledging the human limitations and insufficiencies of these divine referents. The radical immanence of God through Jesus the Christ helps us focus upon Godospartnership with humanity to usher in the reign of God, while God's radical transcendence helps us realize the transient. imperfect nature of our contributions and our resultant dependency upon God. One Merexample of a Christian guideline derived from the interconnections between a community's canonicai system and the traditions of other communities leads to the third area of accountability for the welfare of the earth and its marginalized peoples. Let us co~ectthe foIIowing Christian maîerials: the United Church's consistent emphasis upon a ChristoIogical herniewutic; a reading of Jesus' inaugurai speech in the synagogue (Luke 4: 16-2 1); a reading of Isaiah 60: 1-2; stories of the Methodist social refonn; stories of the social gospel movement; stories of women and lesbian and gay people rnarginalized within church and society; stories of ecurnenical work about women and human sexuality;' Tanner's historicdly denved principle of Godoscreative agency requiring respect of diversity; and Schüssler Fiorenza' s rhetorical reconstruction of the early church's liberative defor women. When these materials are connecteci. they suggest the liberation of the marginalized as a normative Christian guideline. One particularization of this guideline within the United Church calls for an elimlliation of the stnictures of oppression that continue to marginalire on the bais of gender and sexual orientation. As Chnstian communities move into the third area of accountability for the welfare of the earth and its marginalized peoples, Christian dialogue must extend into mukifaith dialogue with other faith communities that seek the same welfare. This can contribute to mutual critique and solidarity. As Kwok points ouf readings of Christian materials from other faith perspectives provide additionai insight into their oppressive and liberative potentiais. Different faith communities can evaluate the parûcularization of Christian principles fiom their own perspectives and contexts. When various faith '~heWorld Council of Churches is concluding a Decade of Churches in Solidarity with Wornen, and has produced a study guide of statements on Sexuality and Human Relations fiom its member churches. See Robin Smith+Living in Covenanf with God nnd One Another: A Guide to the Study of Sexuality and Hunan ReCctfionr Llsing Statements from Member Churches of the World Council of Churches (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1 990). commmities have been colonized by Chrïstians, their critique has the added impact of a marginalued. . paspective. As such, this third area ofaccomtability requïres that their voices be heard, When seeking the welfare of marginalized peoples, one must first enable their voices to be heard. Contrary to the patterns of Christian history. including that of the United Church, dominant groups should not assume what is in the best interests of the marpinaiized. United Church assumptions on behalfof the Fust Nations has led to abuse and a devastating eradication of their culture, language and spirituality. United Church assumptions on behalf of women led to a liberaiization of gender roles on the condition that patriarchal interests were still served. United Church assumptions on behdf of lesbian. gay and bisexual people still lead to a liberaiization of sexual boundaries on the bais of heterosexual noms. It is vital that the input of those most affected by certain theological deliberations be consuited. Equally important. it should be recognized that one person fiom a marginalized group no t be assumed to represent that particuiar marginalized identity . Rather, people marginalized in society should be recognized as subjects with multiple. shifting identities shaped by multiple, complex discourses. This recognition will render insufficient simple poiicies of inclusion that tend to reie differences between dominant and marginalized identities. obliterate differences within the marginalized group. and establish the ternis of inclusion according to the interests of the dominant identities. Instead. analyses of power imbdances and structures of oppression must be made. This will necessitate dialogue with other disciplines, including history, archaeology, anhpology, sociology, psychology, political theory, and economic analysis in order to -280- . * best undastaad the cornplexities of -on and colonizatîon, as well as to provide historicai and contextual ade~uacy.Analyses of oppression will also necessitate imaginative dialogue in which marginalized people wiU be invited to express themselves in as cornfortable, familiar and dea mariner as possible. Once the voices of marginalïzed and colonized people are enabled to be heard and sincere attempts at addressing the mots of their marginalization and colonization are made. faith communities can begÏn to walk in solidarity with the marginaiized in their midst. This type of solidarity is difficult and exacts a price hmthose who benefit fiom the oppressive status quo. As a resuit, faith communities may face extreme intemal opposition as they attempt to be in solidarity- There may also be strong argument over the moa appropriate and effective approaches to solidarity. However. mngdifferences of opinion and belief are to be expected and even welcomed within the multiple. conflicting discourses that comprise Protestant churches. If these faith communities can agree to disagree in communities of argument while holding in common the use of Christian materials and the evaluative criteria of coherence. historical and contexhiai adequacy and the liberation of the oppressed. they rnay be able to remain united amidst diveaity. However. the extent to which a faith community cmretain its political edge in support of the marginalized while encouraging a comrnunity of argument remains a question. In order to prevent their depoliticization. Protestant communities could commit themselves to an ongoing process of assessrnent in light of the above areas of accountability. They cm continually measure the coherence of particular theological positions to their own canonical system and to the faith naditions of other communities. They can also assess their historical and contextual adequacy through updated -28 1- rnultidisciplimry study. This will allow a dwelopmg understanding of the complexiti~ of multiplicative oppressions and will continuously infonn and correct appropriate emancipatory action to be taken for the welfare of the earth and its marginalized peoples. Within this ongoing process, Protestant churches rnust always remember that they are ultimately accountable to God. God's radical transcendeme will remind them of their finite, limited understandings. while God's radical immanence through the Word will cal1 hem to an emancipatory love that attends to society's marpinaiized, challenges sources of marginalization and colonization and stnves towards visions of the basileiu of God. Adam, AKM. Khat is Postmodem Biblicd Cn'ticism? New Testament Series. Minneapolis: Foriress Press, 1995. Adorno, Theodor W. Negative DiaZectics. Original edition published as Negative Dialektik in 1966. New York: Continuum, 1994. .411a* Gd,David Jobling, Marilyn Legge, and Catherine Rose. The Engaged Community as Authority: A Cntical Presentation of the United Church of Canada's Statement The Authority and lnterpretation of Scripture." Panel presentation. Authority and Interpretation: A Multi-Disciplïnary Conference. University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Mar& 17-1 9, 1994. Anderson, Janice Capel. "Matthew: Gender and Reading." Semeia 28 ( 1983): 3-27. . Review of In Memory ofHer. Critical Review of Books in Religion (19%). Anderson, Terrence. "Further Reflections on the General Council Statement." Touchstone 7, no. 2 (May 1989): 17-24. . "No Defense Against Nonsense." Touchstone 1 1. no. 1 (January 1993): 7-19. Anderson, Victor. Beyond Ontologicai Blackness: An Essay on African American Religious and Culrd Criticisrn. New York: Continuum. 1995. Ariarajah, Wesley. The Bible and People of Other Faiths. Maryknoll: Orbis Books. 1989. Atkinson, J. T.. N. "Letter to the Editor." The United Church Obsenter, December 1 1957.2. Bagnell, Barbara. "Women Ministers: Are They Really Worth Stalling Church Union For?" The United Church Observer, March 1 1968,120 15,40. Bal. Meike. Death and Dissymme fry: The Poiilics of Coherence in the Book of Judgs. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1988. Bandy, Thomas G. "The United Church of Canada: Crisis and Creativity." In The Sexuaiiw Debate in the North American ChuTches, edited by John Carey. Lewiston, N.Y.: Edwin Meilen Press, 1995. Barker, Ralph. "1s Ordination for Unmamed Women Only?" The United Church Obsenter, October 1 1957, 13, 14. Beardsall, Sandra. "Methodist Religious Ractices in Outport Newfoundd" Dissertation. Toronto: Victoria University and University of Toronto, 1996. Benhabib, Seyla "The Gendized and the Concrete Other." In Feminism as Critique, 77-95. Feminist Perspectives Series Mllineapolis: University of Minnesota Ress. 1987. . "Epistemologies of Postmodernism: A Rejoinder to Jeau-François Lyotard." In Ferninism~Postmodemim,edited by Linda J. Nicholson, 107-30. Thinking Gender Series. New York: RoutIedge, 1990. . "Feminism and Postmodemism: An Uneasy Alliance." In Feminist Contentions: A Philosophicd &change, 17-34. niinking Gender Series. New York: Routledge, 1995. Bordo, Susan. "Feminism. Postrnodemism, and Gender-Scepticism. " In Feminism/Postmodernism, edited by Linda J. Nicholson, 133-56. niinking Gender Series. New York: Routledge, 1990. Briggs, SheilanCanan Enslaved God Liberate? Hermeneutical Reflections on Philippians 2:6-11." Semeia 47 (1989): 137-53. . "The Politics of Identity and the Politics of Interpretation." Union Seminary Qumrerly Review 43. no. 1-4 (1989): 163-80. . "The Deceit of the Sublime: An Investigation Into the Origins of Ideological Cnticism of the Bible in Early Nineteenth-Century Gemian Biblical Studies." Semeia 59 ( 1992): 1-23. Brunner. Emil. The Chrisrian Doctrine of God. Vol. 1. Philadelphia: Westminster Press. 1949. Buckley. James J. "The Hermeneutical Deadlock Between Revelationalists, Textuaiists. and Functionalists." Modern Theology 6. no. 4 (July 1990): 325-39. Burrell, David B., C.S.C. "Divine Action and Human Freedom in the Context of Creation." In The God Who A cts: Philosophicai and Theological Exploroiions, edited by Thomas F. Tracy, 103-09. University Park, Pemsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press. 1994. Butler, Judith. "Gender Trouble: Feminist Theory, and Psyc hoanalytic Discourse. " In FeminismPostmodernism. edited by Linda J. Nicholson, 324-40. Thinking Gender Series. New York: Routledge, 1990. Butler, Judith. "Contingent Foundations: Feminism and the Question of %stmodemismr." In Ferninikt Contentions: A Philosophical Exchange, 35-57. Thinking Gender Series. New York: Routledge, 1995. Butiars, Honor, "Letter to the Editor." The United Chuch Observer, December 15 1957. 2. Campbell, Charles. Review of Theology und Nmative: Selected Essqs by Ham Frei. Modem Theology 1O. no. 4 (October 1994): 425-27. Cannon Katie Geneva "SIave Ideology and Biblicd Interpretation." Semeia 47 ( 1 989): 9-23. Cartwright, Michael G. "Ideology and the Interpretation of the Bible in the Afncan-American Christian Tradition." Modem Theology 9, no. 2 (Apnl 1993): 141-58. CasteIli. Elizabeth. "Interpretation of Power in 1 Corinthians." Semeia 54 (1992): 197-222. Chambers, Steven. This Is Your Church: A Guide to the Beliefs. Policies and Positions of neUnited Church of Cmda. 2* Edition. Toronto: canec, 1986. Charleston, Steve. "The Old Testarnent of Native Arnerica" In L@ Evety Voice: Comh~rctingChristian Theologiesfi.omthe Underside, edited by Susaa Brooks Thistlethwaite and Mary Potter Engel. 49-6 1. San Francisco: Harper, 1990. Childs. Brevard S. "The Sensus Literalis of Scriphire: An Ancient and Modem Problem." In Beitrüge Zur Alttestamentlichen ï?zeoZogie,edited by Herbert DOM^^, Robert Hanhart and Rudolf Smend 80-93. G6ttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1977. Chopp, Rebecca The Praxis of SMering: An Interpretation of liberation and Political TheoLogies. Maryknoll: Orbis Books. 1986. . The Power to Speak: Feminism. Laguage, God. New York: Crossroad 1992. . "Feminist Queries and Metaphysical Musings." Modern Theology 1 1, no. 1 (Januaiy 1995): 47-63. Christ, Carol P. "Embodied Thinking: Reflections on Feminist Theological Methoci." Jour~Zof Ferninifi Studies in Religion 5, no. 1 (Spring 1989). Cormie, Lee. "Revolutions in Reading the Bible." ln The Bible and the Politics of Eregesis,, ediîed by D. JobIing, Peggy Day and Gerald Sheppard. Ohio: The Pilgrims Ress, 1991. Comell, Drucilla "What is Ethical Feminism?" In Feminist Contentionsr A Philosophical fichange, 75-1 06. Thinking Gender Series. New York: Routledge, 1995. Craig, R B. "A Married Woman's Place is in the Home." The United ChchObserver. Novernber 1 1957,13,30. Culp, Kristine A. Review of But She S'id. ïïzeology Today 50 (January 1994): 6 1%XI+. Davaney, Sheila Greeve. "ProbIems with Feminist Theory: Historicity and the Search for Sure Foundations." In Ernbodied Love: SemaZity and Relationship es Feminist Values, eâited by Pada M. Cwey, Sharon A. Fanner and Mary Ellen Ross. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987. Davis. Scott. Review of The Politics of God: Christian Theologies and Social Justice. Modern Theology 10. no. 3 (July 1994): 291-93. Demson, David. "Response to Walter Lowe." Modern Theology 8, no. 2 (April 1992): 145-48. Dewey, Joannâ "Feminist Reading, Gospel Narrative and Critical Theory."Biblical Theology Bulletin 22, no. 4 (1 992): 167-73. "Divorce Isn't That Bad." The United Church Observer, March 1 1962, 10. Donaldson, Laura E. Decolonising Feminisms: Race, Gender, and Empire-Building. Chape1 Hill: The University of North Camlina Press. 1992. Dreyfus, Hubert L.. and Paul Rabinow. Michel Foucault: Beyond Stnïcturalism and Henneneutics. 2nd edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983. Dudiak, Jefiey. "Unless Tmth is a Stranger: The Janus-Face of the Canonical Scriptuses in Middleton and Walsh's Trurh is Stranger nian II Used to Be." Presentation. Canadian Theological Society. Brock University, St Catharines, Ontario. 25 May, 1996. Duraisingh, Christopher. "Reflection on Theological Hemeneutics in the Indian Context" Indian Journal of Theology 3 1, no. 3-4 (1 982): 259-78. Faber, Alyda. "Embodied Moral Reasoning in Benhabib's Sihrating the Secand Porter's ModAction and Christian Ethics." Presentation. Canadian Theological Society. Brock University, St Catharines, Ontario, 26 May, 1996. Faris, Donald. Trojun Horse: neHomosd Ideology and the Chnrlian Chch. Buriington, ON: Welch Publishing Company Inc, 1989. Felder, Cain Hope. "Afkentnsm and Biblical Authority." Theology Toahy 49 (1992): 3 5 7-66. Flax, Jane. "Postmodernism and Gender Relations in Feminist Theory." In Feminism/Posrmodernisrn, edited by Linda J. Nicholson. 39-62. Thinking Gender Senes. New York: Routledge, 1990. Ford, David F. Review of Cod md Creation in Christian Theology: Tyrmrry or Empowerment ? Religious Studies 26' no. 4 (December 1 990): 550-52. Forrest, A. C. "LittieGirl Minister." The United Church Observer, July 196 1.8- 10.20. Forrester. Duncan B. Review of The Politics ofGod: Christian ïïzeologies and Social Jwtice. Journa2 of ï7zeological Sludies. N~ewSeries 45. no. 2 (October 1994): 80% 1 1. Foucau' Michel. The Archaeology of howledge and the Discourse on Language. Onginally published as L Xrchéohgie du Savoir in 1969. New York: Pantheon Books, 1972. . The History of Sexuality: An Ikroduction. New York: Vintage Books. Random House, 1978. . Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 19 72- 19 77. Edited by Colin Gordon. New York: Pantheon Books. 1980. Fraser, Nancy. "False Antitheses. " In Ferninisr Contentions: A Philosophical Exchange, 59-74. Thinking Gender Series. New York: Routledge, 1995. and Linda J. Nicholson. "Social Criticism Without Philosophy: An Encounter Between Feminism and Postmodemism." in Ferninism/Postmodernism, edited by Linda J. Nicholson, 19-38. Thinking Gender Series. New York: Routledge, 1990. Frei, Hans W. The Eclipse of Biblical Narrative: A Studj of Eighreenth and Nineteenth Century Hermeneutics. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1974. Frei, Hans W. "The Zitd Reading' of Biblical Ndvein the Christian Tradition: Does It Stretch or Wi11 It Break?" in The Bible and the Narrative Tradition, edited by Frank Mdometi, 3677. New York: @dord University Press, 1986. Froehlich, Karfied. "'Alwaysto Keep the Literal Sense in Holy Scripture Means to Ki11 One's Soul': The State of Biblicd Henneneutics at the Begianing of the Fifieenth Century." In Literury Uses of TpIogy: From the Late MiMe Ages to the Present, edited by Earl Mk,20-48. Princeton: Princeton University, 1977. Frow. John. "Intertextuality and Ontology." In InrertextuaZity ïheories and Procrices. edited by Judith Still and Michael Worton. 45-55. Manchester: Manchester University Press. 1990. Fulkerson, Mary McClintock. Review of Wommguides. JomIof the American Academy ofReligion 54, no. 3 (Fall 1986): 607-08. . "Women, Men, and Liberation: Old Issues, New Conversations." QziarterZy Review 8, no. 4 (Winter 1988): 76-89. . Review of Inherihg Our Mother's Gmdem. Theology Today 46, no. 4 (January 1990): 430-3 2. . "Contesting Feminist Canons: Discourse and the Problem of Sexist Texts." Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 7, no. 2 (Fall 199 1): 52-73. . "Sexismas Original Sin: Developing a Theacentric Discourse."Journal of the American Academy of Religion 59. no. 4 (Whter 1991 ): 653-75. - "Gender-Being It or Doing It? The Church, Homosexuality, and the Politics of Identity." Union Seminary Quarteri) Review 47. no. 1-2 ( 1993): 29-46. . Changing the Subject: Women's Discourses and Feminist Theology. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. 1994. . "Church Documents on Human Sexuality and the Authonty of Scnpture." Interpreration 49. no. 1 (January 1995): 46-58. . Review of She Who 1s. Religious Studies Review 21, no. 1 (January 1995): 21-25. Fulkerson, Mary McClint0ck"Contestingthe Gendered Subject: A Feminist Account of the Imago Dei." In Horizons in Feminist Theology: Identity, Tradition. und Nu=, edited by Rebecca S. Chopp and Sheila Greeve Davaney, 99-1 15. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997. ."'b There a (Non-Sexist) Bible in this Church?' A Feminist Case for the Priority of Interpretive Communities. Modern Theology 14, no. 2 (April. 1998): 225-42. Gavenw Beverly R Review of In Memory of Her. Lexington 77teoIogicul Quarterly 20 (April 1985): 58-60. 'General Council Executive of The United Church of Canada. Minutes. Toronto. November 543-1985. Gerhart. Mary. "The Restoration of Biblical Narrative." Semeia 46 (1 989): 13-29. Gever, Martha, "The Names We Give Ourselves." In Out There: Mmginalization and Contemporary Cultures, edited by Russell Ferguson, Martha Gever, Trinh T. Minh-ha and Cornel West, 119-202. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. 1990. Gilkes. Cheryl Townsend. "'Mother to the Motherless, Father to the Fatherless': Power. Gender. and Community in an Afrocentric Biblical Tradition." Semeia 47 (1 989): 57-85. Goba Bonganjalo. "What is Faith?" In Lifi Every Voice: Constructing Christian 7Reologiesfiom the Underside. edited by Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite and Mary Potter Engel. 2 1-30. San Francisco: Harper, 1 990. Godez, Justo L. Out of Every Tribe and Nation: Christian Theology at the Ethnic Roundtable. Nashville: Abingdon Press. 1992. Goss. Robert. Jesus Acted up: A Gay and Lesbian Manifesto. San Francisco: Harper, 1993. Gottschall. Marilyn. Review of Changing the Subject. Journal of the American Academy of Religion 65. no. 2 (Summer 1997): 490-91. Grifith, Gwyn. Member of the Theology and Faith Committee. Interviewed by Loraine MacKenzie Shepherd. Toronto, December 17, 1997. Phonecall. Gmton, CohReview of Godand Creution in Chrkîiàn Theology: Tyranny or Empowennent? The Expository Times 100, no. 6 (March 1989): 236. Gutiérrez, Gustavo. A Theology of Liberation: HistorypPoZitics. und Saivation. Revised edition. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1990. Hacido*. David W. Review of nie Politics ofGod: Christian Theologies and Social Jmice. TheologicaI Srudes 54, no. 1 (DeceInber 1993): 782-83. Haraway, Donna "A Manifest0 for Cyborgs: Science, Technology. and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s." In FeminisndPosfmoderis~,edited by Linda J. Nicholson, 190-233. Thinking Gender Series. New York: Routledge, 1990. Harding, Sandm "Ferninim. Science. and the Anti-Enlightenment Critiques." h Feminisrn/Postmodernism.edited by Linda J. Nicholson, 83-106.Thinking Gender Senes. New York: Routledge. 1990. Hartsock. Nancy. "Foucault on Power: A Theory for Women?" In Feminism/Postmodernism, edited by Linda J. Nicholson, 157-75. Thinking Gender Series. New York: Routledge, 1990. Hasker. William. "God the Creator of Good and Evil?" In The God WIOActs: Philosophical and 73eological Explorations, edited by Thomas F. Tracy. 137-46. University Park, Pennsylvania: The Pemsylvania State University Press. 1994. Hays. Richard B. "Scripture-Shaped Community: The Problem of Method in New Testament Ethics." Interpretation 44, no. 1 (January 1990): 42-55. Hewitt, Marsha A. "Cyborgs, Drag Queens, and Goddesses: Emancipatory-Regressive Paths in Feminist Theory." Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 5. no. 3 (1993). Heyward, Carter. Review of The Politics of God: Christian Theologies and Social Justice. Journal of Church and Srare 36, no. 1 (Winter 1994): 166-67. Hinsch, Bret. Passions of the Cut Sleeve. Berkeley: University of California, 1990. hooks. bell. "Marginality as Site of Resistance." In Out There: Marginalkation and Contemporary Cultures. edited by Russell Ferguson, Martha Gever, Tnnh T. Minh-ha and Corne1 West. 34 1-43. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. 1990. hooks, beil. "Talking BackmIn Our There: M@mOlUaon ami Contemporary Cdtwes. edited by Russell Ferguson, Martha Gever, Trinh T. Minh-ha and Cornel West, 337-40. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Ress, 1990. Hospital, ClBord "Scriptural Autbority and Cultural Change-"In ZXeological Reflections on Ministry & SaalOrientation, dtedby Pamela Dickey Young, 13-25. Burlington, Ontario: Press, 1990. Huenernann, Edward M. Review of me Politics of God: Christian Theologies and Social Justice. neology Todizy 50, no. 3 (October 1993): 495-97. Hughes, Frank Win "Feminism and Early Christian History." Anglican Theological Revio~69, no. 3 (Jdy 1987): 287-99. Incandela, Joseph M. Review of God and Creation in Chrisian l'heology: Tyanny or Empowement? Theology Todqy 47, no. 1 (April 1990): 66-69. Isasi-Diaz, Ada Maria. "The Bible and 'Mujerista' Theology." In Li# Every Voice: Cons~ructingChristian Theologiesfiom the Underside,edited by Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite and Mary Potter Engel, 26 1-69. San Francisco: Harper, 1990. . "Solidarity: Love of Neighbor in the 1980s." In Li# Eve'y Voice: Constmcting Christian Theologiesfiom the Underside. edited by Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite and Mary Potter Engel, 3 1 -40. San Francisco: Harper, 1990. Jantzeflz Grace. "Off the Straight and Narrow: Toward a Lesbian Theology." Presentation King's College, London. King's College, London, Apd, 1995. . "ORthe Straight and Narrow: Toward a Lesbian Theology." King's College. London. Apnl. 1995. Joy. Morny. "Beyond a God's Eyeview: Alternative Perspectives in the Study of Religion." Presentation. 1-38. Canadian Society for the Study of Religion. Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, May, 1996. Kelsey, David. The Uses of Scriprure in Recent Theology. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975. Knott. Deborah. "A Feminist Reading of Ham Frei on Method." Presentation at Faculty-AD Students Seminar. Regis College, Toronto, Febniary 8, 1995. Knox, James. "God's Power is Life-Transfomllng." The Toronto Star, February 18 1998, A 19. Ko* Wesley A. Bdto Dzrer: memies of Theologicai Discourses- University Park, Pennsylvania: The Pemqlvania State University Press, 1992. Kraemer, Ross S. Review of In Memory of Her. Religiw Studies R&ew 11, no. 1 (January 1985): 6-9. . Review of In Mernos. of Her. Jodof BiblicaZ Litera~e104, no. 4 (Decemk 1985): 722-25. Kwok Pui-lan. "Image of Birth." art A&= Journal of Theology 1, no. 1 (1 983): 128-29. . "God Weeps with Our Pain." East Asia JomaI of Theology 2, no. 2 (October 1984): 228-32. . "The Feminist Hermeneutics of Elizabeth Schüssler Fiorenza: An Asian Response." Emt Asia Journal of Theology 3, no. 2 (October 1985). . "God Weeps with Our Pain" In New Eyesfor Reading: Biblical and Tneological Reflections by Womenfiom the Third Worlù, edited by John S. Pobee and Babel Von Wartenberg-Potter. Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1986. . "Claiming a Boundary Existence: A Parable fiom Hong Kong." Journal of Ferninist Studies in Religion 3, no. 2 (Fall 1987): 12 1-24. . "Worshipping with Asian Women: A Hornily." Asia Journal of Theology 1. no. 1 (April 1987): 90-95. . "Mothen and Daughters, Wntea and Fighters." In Inheriting Our Mothers' Gmdens: Feminist TheoZow in Third World Perspective. edited by Letty Russell. Kwok Pui-!an. Ada Maria Isasi-Diaz and Katie Geneva Cannon. 2 1-34. Louisville: The Westminster Press, 1988. . "Discoveringthe Bible in the Non-Biblical World." Semeia 47 (1989): 25-42. . "The Emergence of Asian Feminist Consciousness of Culture and ~heology." In We Dare to Dream: Doing Theology as Asian Women. edited by Virginia Fabella and Sun Ai Park. Lee. Hong Kong: Asian Women's Resource Centre for Culture and Theology, 1989. . "Meditation." One World, no. 155 (May 1990): 15. . "The Mission of God in Asia and Theological Education." Ministerial Formation, no. 48 (January 1990): 20-23. Kwok Pui-laa "Gospel and Culture." Christimity and Crisis 51, no. 10/11 (Jdy 15 1991): 223-24. . "The Image of the 'White Lady': Gender and Race in Christian Mission." In n>e Speciul Nature of Women? edited by Anne Carr and Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza. Concilium SexÏes. London: SCM Press- 1991. .Chinese Women and Christianiîy.-1860-1 92 7. Edited by Susan Thistlethwaite. AkcanAcademy of Religion Academy Series, No. 75. Atlanta: Scholars Press. 1992. ."Claiming Our Heritage: Chinese Women and Chnstianity." Infernafional Bullefin f 6, no. 4 (October 1992): 150-52, 154. . "Speaking from the Margins." Jodof Feminist Studies in Religion 8. no. 2 (Fa11 1992): 102-05. . "Chinese Non-Christian Perceptions of Christ." In Any Room for Chrisr in Asia? edited by Leonardo Boff and Virgil Elizondo. Concilium Series. London: SCM Press, 1993. . "Racisrn and Ethnocentrisrn in Feminist Biblical Interpretation." In Searching the Scriptures: Volume 1: A Feminist Introduction, 10 1- 1 6. New York: Crossroad. 1993. . "Ecotheology and the Recycling of Christianity." In Ecotheology: Foicesfiorn South and North, edited by David G. Hallman, 107-1 1. Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1994. . "The Future of Feminist Theology: An Asian Perspective." In Feminist Theologyfiom the nird WorZd. edited by Ursula King. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1994. . "Business Ethics in the Econornic Development of Asia: A Feminist Analysis." Asin Journal of 77ieology 9, no. 1 (Apnl 1995): 133-45. . Discovering the Bible in the Non-Biblical World. The Bible and Li beration Series. Maryknoll: Orbis Books. 1995. . "The Global Challenge. " In Christianiy und Civil Socieîy: Theological Education for Public Life, edited by Rodney L. Petersen. Maryknoll: Orbis Books. 1995. Kwok Pui-lan. "The Sources and Resomes of Feminist Theologies: A Post-Colonial Perspective." In Yembook of the Ewopean Society of Women in Theoiogical Resemch. Vol 5, Sources mrd Resources of Feminist Theoiogïes, edited by Elisabeth Hartlieb and Charlotte Methuen, 5-23. Kampen, Deutschland: Kok Pharos Publishing House, 1997. . "Discovering the Bible in the Non-Biblical Worid: The Journey Continues." The Jodof Asian and Asian American Theology 2, no. 1 (Summer 1997): . "JesusmieNative: Bibiical Suesfiom a Postcolonial Perspective." In Reading- niis Place, vol. DI, edited by Fernando F. Segovia and Mary Ann Tolbert. Muuieapolis: Fortress Press, Forthcorning. Chung Hyun Kyung. S.ggie to Be the Sun -4gain: Introducirzg Asim Women's Theology. MaryhoIl: Orbis Books, 1990. Lautenschlager, Earl. "The Marriage Partnership: Part 1." The United Church Observer. Apd 15 1962,25-27. . "The Marriage Partnership: Part II." The United Church Observer. May 1 l962,25-27. Lee. Archie C.. C. "Biblicd Interpretation in Asian Perspectives."Asia Journal of ïheology 7. no. 1 (1 993): 35-39. "Letter to the Editor." The United Church Observer. May 1980,4. Lorde. Audre. Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches. Freedom, CA: The Crossing Press. 1984. Lowe. Walter. "Hans Frei and P henomenological Hermeneutics." Modern Theology 8. no. 2 (Apnl 1992): 133-44. Macdonald, Marjorie. "Putting Women in Their Place." The United Church Observer. September 15 1958. 12-13.24. Maddox. Randy. Review of But She Said. Christian Scholar's Review 24. no. 3 (March 1995):323-25. . Review ofGod and Creaiion in Christian Theology: Tyranny or Empowerment? Christian Scholar'i Review 21, no. 2 (December 1991):21 6-1 7. "Marriage No Obstacle." fie United ChchObsener, December 15 1963.7. Mayeski, Marie Anne. Review of Jesus: Mirimn's Chili$ Sophia's Prophet. l%eological Studies 57 (March 1996): 167-69. Meyer-Wihes, Hedwig. Rebellion on the Borders.- Ferninikt nieology Between Theoty ond Pruxis. Kampen. the Netherlands: Kok Pharos Publishg House. 1995. Mich M. H. Review of In Memory of Her. Christiarzity and Crisis 43 (October 17 1983): 388-89. Miller. David L. "The Question of the Book: Religion as Texture." Semeia 40 (1987): 53-64. Moore. Stephen. 'Wegative Henneneutics, insubstantiai Texts: Stanley Fish and the Biblicai Interpreter." JoumuZ of the American Acaderny of Religion 54. no. 4 (Winter 1986): 707- 19. Mosala, Itumeleng J. Biblical Herrneneutics and BZack Thedogy i~ South Ajica. Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans, 1989. . "The Implications of the Text of Esther for Afiican Woments Stniggie for Liberation in South Afnca." Semeia 59 ( 1992): 129-3 7. a Murphy, Nmcey. and James Wrn. McClendon. Jr. "Distinguishing Modem and Postmodem Theologies." Modern Theology 5. no. 3 (Apd 1989): 19 1-2 14. Nader- Lam "Orientdism, Occidentalism and the Control of Women." Cultural &namics i 1, no. 3 (1989): 323-55. Naylor, Ann. "Reflections on Sexual ûrientation Issues in The United Church of Canada." Toronto, October 29. 1993. New Eyes for Reading: Biblical and TheofogicalRefecfiom &y Womenfiom the Third World. Edited by John S. Pobee and Barbel von Wartenberg-Potter. Oak Parks. Ill.: Meyer Stone Books. 1987. Ng, Viven W. "Hornosexuality and the State in Late Imperia1 China" In Hidden Fm History: Recfaiming ihe Gay und Lesbian Parr, edi ted by Martin et. Duberman. al. London: Penguin, 199 1. Ng, Wenh-In. Member of the Theology and Faith Cornmittee. Interviewed by Loraine MacKenzie Shepherd. Toronto, December 19,1997. Phonecail. Ochs, Peter. "Scriptural Logic: Diagnuns for a Postcriticd Metaphysics." Modern Theology 11, no. 1 (January 1995): 65-92. Ogde~Schubert Review of Types of Christian Theolo&v by Hans W.Frei. Modern nieology 9, no. 2 (April 1993): 2 11 - 14. Osborn Lawrence H. Review of God rmd Creation Ni Chrisrimi Theology: Ty'anny or Empowemenf?Science & Christian Belief 3, no. 1 (April 1991): 68-69. OTooIe. Roger, Douglas F. Campbefl, John A. Hannigan, Peter Beyer, and John H. Simpson. "nieUnited Church in Crisis: A Sociological Perspective on the Dilemmas of a Mainstrearn Denomination." Studies in Religion 20, no. 2 (Spring 1991): 151-63. The Oxford Dicfionury of the Christian Church. Revised. Edited by F. L. Cross and E. A. Livingstone. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985. Park. Sun Ai, Lee. "Undexstanding the Bible from Women's Perspective." Voicesfiom rhe Third WorZd 10, no. 2 (1 987): 66-75. Phelan. Shane. Identity Politics: Lesbian Feminism und the Limifs of Community Women in the Political Economy Series. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989. Pinn. Anthony B. CYhy Lord? Suffering and Evil in Bluck Theology. New York: Continuum, 1995. Placher, William C. "Paul Ricoeur and Postiiberal Theology: A Conflict of Interpretations?" Modern Theology 4. no. 1 ( 1 987): 33-52. . "A Modest Response to Paul Schwartzentruber." Modern meologv 8. no. 2 (April 1992): 197-20 1. . "Gospels'Ends: Pfurality and Arnbiguity in Biblical Narratives." Modern Theology 1 0, no. 2 (April 1994): 14 1-63. The Pleasure of Her Text: Ferninisi Readings of Biblical and Hisiorica/ Texrs. Edited by Alice Bach. Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1990. Poole. Thomas G. Review of nie Politics ofGod: Christian Theologies and Social Justice. Christian Century 1 10, no. 28 (October 13 1993): 989-90. "The Question Box." 7ïze United Chwch Observer, February 15 1958. -296- "The Question Box." The United ChchObserver, Decemk 1 1961. Raschke, Car1 A. "From Texhiality to Scripture: The End of Theology as 'Writingr." Semeia 40 (1987): 39-52. Reed, Esther D. Review of Jesusr Mirianz's CmSophia's Prophet. Eirpsitory Times IO6 (September 1995): 380-8 1. Richards. Kent Harold "From Scriptme to Textuality." Semeici 40 (1987): 1 19-24. Ri ffaterre, Michael. "Compdsory Reader Response: The Intertextuai Drive." In Iiztertextuality: 7'heories and Practices. edited by Judith Still and Michel Worton, 5678. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1990. Ringe, Sharon H-"Reading from Context to Context Contributions of a Feminist Henneneutic to Theologies of Liberation." h Lzp Every Voice: Comtrzicting Christian Theologiesji.om the Underside, edited by Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite and Mary Potter Engel, 270-9 1. San Francisco: Harper, 1990. . "The Word of God May Be Hazardous to Your Health." Tlteology Today 49 (1992): 367-75. Ro. Young-chan. "Symboi. Myth. and Rinial: The Method of the Minjung." In L# Every Voice: Comtructing Christian Theologiesfiom the Underside, edited by Susan Brooks niistiethwaite and Mary Potter Engel, 41-18. San Francisco: Harper. 1990. Robb. Carol S. "Introduction." In Making the Connections: Essays in Ferninist Social Ethics, edited by Carol S. Robb. xi-xxii. Boston: Beacon Press. 1985. Ruether. Rosemary Radford. Sexism and God-Talk: Toward a Feminist Theology. Boston: Beacon Press. 1983. . Review of Bread Not Stone. Journal ofhe American Academy of Religion 54. no. 1 (Spring 1986). Russell. Letty. Household of Freedom: Authoriv in Ferninist Theology. Philadeiphia: The Westminster Press. 1987. . Church in the Round: Ferninist Interpretation of the Church. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993. Russell, Letty, ed. Feminlrt Ihtqretation of the Bible. Philadelphia: Westmhter Press, 1985. Sabourin, Leopold. Review of In Memory of Her. Religiow Studies 4, no. 2 (May 1984): 102-04. Said, Edward. OrientaZism. New York: Vintage Books, 1979. . "Reflectionson Exile." In Oui There: Mmg~nulizationand Cuntempormy Cultures, dtedby Russell ~ergkn,Martha Gever, Trinh T. Minh-ha and Cornel West, 35766. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1990. - Culture and hperialism. New York: Vintage Books, 1 994. Sakenfeld, Katherine Doob. "Feminist Perspectives on Bible and Theology: An Introduction to Selected Issues and Literature." Interpretation 42 (1 988): 5- 1 8. Samartha, Stanley J. The Semch for New Hemeneutics in Asian Christian Theology. Madras: Christian Literature Society, 1 987. . "Religion, Language and Redity: Towards a Relational Hemeneutics." Biblical Interpretation 2, no. 3 ( 1994): 340-62. Scharlemann, Robert P. "Theological Text." Semeia 40 (1987): 5- 1 9. Schneiders, Sandra M. The Revelafory Text Interpreting the New Testament as Sacred Scriptzire. San Francisco: Harper, 199 1. Schner, George. "The Appeal to Experience." Theological Studies 53 (March 1992): 40-59. . "The Eclipse of Biblical Narrative: Analysis and Critique." Modern Theology 8. no. 2 (Apnl 1992): 149-79. Schüssler Fiorema. Elisabeth. "'For the Sake of Our Salvation..' Biblical Interpretation as Theological Task." in Sin. SaIvatim andthe Spirit, edited by Daniel Durken. Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1979. . In Memory of Her: A Feminist Theological Reconsn~rcfionof Christian ûrigins. New York: Crossroad, 1983. Schiissler Fioremza, Elisabah. "Response to 'hm Shidy to ProcIamation' by Walter J. BiirghardtnIn A Nau Look at Preaching, edited by John Burke. Good News Studies, vol. 7. Wilmingtoq Delaware: Michael Glaser, Inc, 1983. .Bread not Stone: The Challenge of Ferninisr Biblicul Interprefution. Boston: Beacon Press, 1984. . "EmerghgIssues in Feminist Biblical Interpretation." In Christian Feminism: Visiom of a New Humanity, edited by Judith Weidrnan, 33-54. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1984. . ïhe Book of Revelation: Justice and Judgment. Philadelphiô Fortress Press. 1985. "Claiming Our Authority and Power." In The Teaching A uthotity of Believers. edited by Johann Baptist Metz, and Schillebeeckx. Edinburgh: T & T Clark Ltd.. 1985. . "The Will to Choose or to Reject: Continuing Our Cntid Work." In Feminist Interpretation of the Bible, edited by Letty M. Russell. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1985. . nie Insiae Stories: Thirteen Vuliunt Women Charrenging the Church. Lnterview. Edited by Annie Lally Milhaven. Mystic, Ct.: Twenty-Thkd Publishers. 1987. ."The 'Quilting' of Women's History: Phoebe of Cenchreae."In Embodied Love: Sennaïity and Relationship as Feminist Values, edited by Paula M. Cooey. Sharon A. Farmer and Mary Ellen Ross. San Francisco: Harper & Row. Pub., 1987. . "Rhetorical Situation and Historical Reconstruction in 1 Connthians."New Testament Studies 33. no. 3 (1 987): 386-403. . "The Ethics of Biblical Interpretation: Decentenng Biblical Scholarship." Journal of Biblical Literature 107, no. 1 (March 1988): 3- 1 7. . "Biblical hterpretation and Critical Cornmitment"Studia Theologica 43, no. 1 (1989): 5-18. . "The Politics of Othemess: Biblical Interpretation as a Critical Praxis for Liberation." In The Future of Liberation Theology: Essays in Honor of Gustavo Gutiérrez, edited by Marc Ellis and Otto Maduro. New York: &bis Books, 1989. Schüssler Fiorerm, Eiisabeth nTextand Reality-Reality as Text: The Roblem of a Ferninist Historicai and Social Reconstruction Based on Texts." Studia Theologica 43 (1989): 19-34. ."Biblical hterprebtion in the Context of Church and Ministry." Word & World 1 O, no. 4 (Fail 1990): 3 17-23. . "Changing the Paradigms." "How My Mind Has Changed" Series. The Christian Century 107. no. 25 (Septernber 5-1 2 1990): 796-800. . Revelation: Vision of o JW World. Edited by Gerhard Krodel. Proclamation Commentanes. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 199 1. . But She Suid: Feminist Practices of Biblical Interpretation. Boston: Beacon Press, 1992- . Discipfeship of Equals: A Critical Feminist Ekklesia-Logy of Liberation. New York: Crossroad, 1993. . "Introduction: TratlSfoRning the Legacy of The Wuman's Bible." In Searching the Scriptures: Volume I: A Ferninisr Introduction. edited by Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza. New York: Crossroad, 1993. . "The Bible. the Global Context. and the Discipleship of Equals." In Recomtructing Christian Theulog); edited by Rebecca S. Chopp and Mark Lewis Taylor. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994. . "Introduction: Transgressing Canonical Boundaries." In Semching the Scriprures: Volume 11: A Feminist Commenfary,edited by Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza. New York: Crossroad, 1994. - "introduction to the Tenth Anniversary Edition: Remember the Stmggle." In In Memory of Her: A Feminist Theulogical Reconstruction of Christian Origins. 1ûth Anniversary Edition. New York: Crossroad, 1994. .Jesus: Miriam 's Child Sophia 's Prophet: Critical Issues in Feminist Christology. New York: Continuum. 1994. . "The Ethos of Interpretation: Biblical Studies in a Postmodern and Postcolonial Context." Presentation. The Association of Korean Theologians. Usong, The Republic of Korea, October 26, 1996. SchiissIer Fiorenza, Elisabeth. "BRakuig Silence -Becoming Visible." In nie Paver of Nming: A Concilium Reader in Feminist Liberation Theology,edited by Elisabeth Schiissler Fiorenza Concilium Series. Marybll: Orbis. 1996. . "Introduction: Feminist Liberation Theology as Critical Sophialogy." In nie Power of Namingr A ConciIium Reader in Ferni- Liberation nieology, edited by Elisabeth SchSsler Fio~nv~Concilium Series. Maryknoll: Orbis. 1996. . "For Women in Men's World: A Critical Feminist Theology of Liberation." In The Power of Naming: A ConciZium Reader in Feminist Liberation Theology. edited by Elisabeth Schiissler Fiorenza. Concilium Series. Maryknoll: Orbis. 1996. . "Justified By Al1 Her Children: Ssuggle, Memory. and Vision." in The Power of king: A ConciIbn Reader in Feminist Liberation nieology, edited by Elisabeth Schiissler Fiorenza. Concilium Series. Maryknoll: Orbis, 1996. and David Tracy. "The Holocaust as Interruption and the Christian Return uito History." In The Holocaust us Interrupion, edited by Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza and David Tracy. Concilium Series. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark Ltd., 1984. Schüssler Fiorenza Francis. "The Cnsis of Scriptural Authority: Interpretation and Reception." Interpretation 44 ( 1990): 353-68. . "The Crisis of Hermeneutics and Christian Theoiogy." in Theologv ai the End of Modemity, edited by Sheila Greeve Davaney. Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 199 1. Schwartzentmber. Paul. "The Modesty of Henneneutics: The Theological Reserves of Ham Frei." Modem Theoiogy 8, no. 2 (April 1992): 18 1-95. Schweiker. William. Review of The Politics of God: Christian Theoiogies and Social Justice. The Journal of Religion 75. no. 1 (January 1995): 147-48. Shepherà, Loraine MacKenzie. "The Deceptive Monolith of Women's Experience: Struggling for Common Feminist Visions Amidst Diversity." Toronto Journal of Theology 1 1. no. 2 ( 1995). Shepherd, Victor. "The United Church and Ordination of Active Homosexuals: A Critique. " In A Crisis of Undersrandingr Homose;ruality and the Canadian Church, edited by Denyse OfLeary, 35-50. Burlington, ON: Welch hblishing Co. inc., 1988. Sheppard, GcraId T. "Canonkation: Heahg the Voice of the Same God kugh Histoncally Dissirda Traditions." Inte~ptetuiion3 6 (1982): 2 1-3 3. ."The Use of Scriptme Within the Christian Ethicd Debate Conceming Same-Sex Onented Persans." Union Seminmy pUurterly Review 40, no. 1&2 . "Between Refodonand Modem Commentary: The Perception of the Scope of Biblical Books." In A Commentary on Galatians, edited by Gerald T. Sheppard, 1989. New York: The Pilgrim Press. 1989. . "Biblicai Revelation and Human Semiality." In AIDS Issues, edited by David Hallman, 233-47. New York: The Pilgrim Press, 1989. . The Future of the Bible: Beyond Liberalism and Literalim. Toronto: The United Church Publishing House, 1990. . "'Enemies' and the Politics of Prayer in the Book of Psalms." in The Bible und the Politics of Begesis, edited by David Jobling, Peggy Day and Gerald Sheppmi, 6 1-82,308- 1 1. Cleveland: Piigrim Press, 199 1. . "Biblical Interpretation After Gadamer." 1994. In process of king published. Shilton. Jean. "Pmdence in the Panonage." The United Church Observer. March 15 1957. 17-21, "Prudence in the Parsonage." The United Church Obsenter. May 1 1957. 17. . "Prudence in the Parsonage." The United Church Observer. August 1957. 17. . "Prudence in the Parsonage." The United Church Observer. Febmary 1 1 95 8. 15. . "Prudence in the Parsonage." The Unired Church Observer, March 15 1959. 16. Smillie. Ben. Beyond the Social Gospel: Church Protest on the Prairies. Toronto: United Church Publishing House. 199 1. Smith Robin. Living in Covenant wiîh God and One Another: A Guide to the Study of Sexuality and Human Relations Using Statements fiom Member Churches of the World Council of Churches. Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1990. Smith, Ruth. "The Evasion of Othemess: A Problem for Feminist Moral Reconstruction," Union Seminmy Qumterly Review 43, no. 14(1 989): 145-6 1. Soares-Prabhu, George M. "The Historical Critical Method: Reflections on Its Relevance for the Shi@ of the Gospels in India Today." In Theologizing in Indirr, edited by M. Amaiadoss, T. K. John and G. Gispert-Sauch. Bangalore: Theological Publications in Ma,198 1. Song, C.S. "Context and Revelation with One Stroke of an Asian Bnish." In LwEvery Voice: Constructing Chrktian n>eologiesfiomthe Underside. edited by Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite and Mary Potter Engel, 62-75. San Francisco: Harper. 1990. "Special Issue: Christianizing the Social Order: A Founding Vision of The United Church of Canada." Toronto Journal of Theology 12, no. 2 (Fall) Vol. 12. Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. "Explanation and Culture: Marginalia" In Our There: Marginailiation and Contemporary Cultures, edited by Russell Ferguson, Martha Gever, Trinh T-Minh-ha and Corne1 West, 377-93. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1990. . The Post-Colonial Critic: Interviews. Strategrgres.Dialogues. Edited by Sarah Harasym. New York: Routledge. 1990. Stefano, Christine Di. "Dilemmas of Difference: Fedsm, Modernity and Postmodernism." in FerninisntPostrnodernism,edited by Linda J. Nicholson, 63-82. Thinking Gender Series. New York: Routledge, 1990. StilI, Judith, and Michael Worton. "Introduction." In Intertextuality: Theories und Practices. edited by Judith Still and Michael Worton, 1-44. Manchester: Manchester University Press. 1990. Stony the Rood We Trod: Aficun A merican BibIicd Interpreution. Edited by Cain Hope Felder. Minneapolis: Fortress, 199 1. Strug, Mary Carol. "Review of In Memory ofHer." Word and World 4, no. 3 (Summer 1984): 332-33. Sugirtharajah, R. S. "The Syrophoenician Woman." Expository Times 98 (Octotm 1986): 13-15. .ed Voices Fom the Mirgin: Inlerpreting the Bible in the mird Worfd. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1991. Sugirtharajah, R S. "The Bible and Its Asian Readers." Biblicd Intepretation 1, no. 1 (1 993) : 54-66, T.O.U.C.H. (Toronto ûrganization of United Church Homoseds). "Letter to the Editor." The United Church Observer, May 1980,4. Tarnez, Elsa. The Bible of the Opp'essed. Maryholl: Orbis Books, 1 982. ."Women's Rereading of the Bible." Reflections hmthe Women's Commission of the Ecumenical hiationof Third World Theologians. In With Parsion and Compassion: Third World Women Doing Theology, edited by Virginia Fabella, M.M. and Mercy Amba Oduyoye, 173-80. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1988. Tanner, Katfirvn E. "Iheology and the Plain Sense." In Scriptural Authority md Nàrrative Interpretation, edited by Garrett Green, 59-78. Philadelphia: Forîress Press, 1987. . God and Creation in Christian Theology: Tyranny or Empowement? Oxford: Blackwell, 1988. .Review of Etemal God: A Snrdy of God Without Time. Tlteology Todqy 47. no. 1 (Apd 1990). . Review of Intimations of Divinity. neology Today 46, no. 4 (January 1990): 449-50. .Review of Faith Afrer Foundutionalism. Journal of the American Acaderny of Religion 59, no. 4 (1991): 855-58. - The Politics of God: Christian Theologies and Social Jtcstce. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992. . "Respect for Other Religions: A Christian Antidote to Colonialist Discourse." Modern Theology 9 (January 1993): 1 - 1 8. . Review of Mimetic Refection: A Studj in Hermeneutics, 73eolog-y. and Ethics. nte Jownai of Religion 73, no. 1 (Januaxy 1 993): 1 1 7- 1 8. . "A Theological Case for Human Responsibility in Moral Choice." Journal of Religion 73 (October 1 993): 592-612. Tanner, Kathryn E. "Creation, Environmental Ce,and Eeological Justice." in Recomtrzicting Christian Theology, edited by Rebecca Chopp et al. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994. . "The Merence Theological Anthropology Makes." Theology Todoy 50 (January 1994): 567-79. . "Human Freedom, Human Sin, and God the Creator," In 7he God FYho Acts: Philosophical and Theological ErpZorations, ededd by Thomas F. Tracy. 1 1 1 -3 5. University Park, PennsyIvZUua: The Pennsyivania State University Press, 1994. . Review of Religion Theology, American Public Life. Religious Sludies Reviav 20, no. 3 (Jdy 1994): 2 12. . Review of The Body of Cod. Modem Theology 1 O, no. 4 (October 1994): 417-19, . Review of Communicufionand CulfuralAnalysis. Church History 64. no. 4 (December 1995): 747-48. ,"The Care That Does Justice: Recent Wntings in Ferninia Erhics and Theology." Joudof Religious Efhics 24, no. 1 (Spruig 1996): 1 71-9 1. . "Jesus Christ." In nie Cambridge Cornpanion 10 Christian Doctrine, edited by Colin E. Gunton. Cambridge Cornpanions to Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge Universisr Press, 1997. . "Social Theory Concerning the "New Social Movements" and the Practice of Feminist Theology." In HorLzom in Feminist Tneology: Idenfity. Tradition. and Nomedited by Rebecca S. Chopp and Sheila Greeve Davaney, 179-97. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997. . nieories of Culture: A New Agendafor Theology. Guides to Theological inquïry. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997. . "Scripture as Popular Text-" Modern Theology 14, no. 2 (April 1998): 278-97. Taylor, Mark Kline. Remembering Eiperama: A Cultural-Polifical Theologyfor North American Praxis. Maryknoli: Orbis Books, 1990. The Board of Christian Education, The United Church of Canada. Toward a Chrisfian Understanding of Sex, Love, Marriage. Toronto: The United Church of Cd 1960. The Board of Christian Education, The United Church of Canzada Mmrioge Breakidmm Divorce, Remawiage: A Chnkrim Understanding. Toronto: The United Church of Canada, 1962. The Board of Evangelism and Social Senrice, nie United Church of Canada. "Sex and Morality " 83.OOSC, Division of Ministry Personnel and Education. United Chwh Archives, no. 11 4-3. Toronto: Victoria University. The Commission on Marriage and Divorce, The United Church of Canada. United Church Archives. no. 82.084C 2-22. Toronto: Victona University. - "General Council Specific Subjects: Homosexuality." United Church Archives, no. 82.00 1C 14O-4. Toronto: Victoria University. . "Minutes November 26. 1957." United Church Archives, no. 82.084C 1- 1. Toronto: Victoria University. The Cornmittee on Christian Faith. The United Church of Canada, The Permanence of Christian Marriage. Toronto: The United Church of Canada, 1975. The Department of Church in Society of The United Church of Canada. "Submission to the Ontario Human Rights Commission." Toronto. October, i 976. . Submission Re: The Proposed Canadian Human Rights Act (Bill C-25). Toronto. March, 1977. The Division of Ministry Personnel and Education and The Division of Mission in Canada of The United Church of Canada Toward a Christian Understanding of Smul Orientations, LifesfyIes and Ministry. Toronto: The United Church of Canada, 1988. The Division of Mission in Canada and the Cornmittee on Theology and Faith of The United. Church of Canada. Faith and Sexuality: A Spectrum of Theological Views in The United Church of Canadafor The General Council. Toronto: The United Church of Canada 198 1. The Division of Mission in Canada of The United Church of Canada. Marriage Today: An Eipioration of MaNoman Relutiunship and of Marriage. Toronto: The United Church of Canada 1978. - In God's Image ... Male und Fernule: A Study on Hwnan Semiity. Toronto: The United Church of Canada 1980. The Division of Mission in Canada of The United Chwh of Canada G@, DiZemltul and Promise: A Report and Amations on Human SexuaZitytvToronto: nie United Church of Canada, 1984- . Together Ni Fuith: Inclusive Resources About SdxuaI Dbersity for St*, DiaZogue, Celebration and Action. Toronto: The United Church of Canada. 1995. The United Church of Canada "Record of Pmceedings of the 9th General Council." Toronto: The United Church of Canada, 1940. . "Record of Proceedings of the 12th General Council." Toronto: The United Church of Canada, 1946. . "Record of Proceedings of the 17th Generai Council." Evangelism and Social Service Report No. 2. Toronto: The United Chmh of Canada 1956. . "Record of Proceedings of the 19th General Council." Toronto: The United Church of Canada. 1960. . "Record of Proceedings of the 20th General Council." Toronto: The United Church of Canada, 1962. . "Record of Proceedings of the 22nd General Council." Toronto: The United Chwch of Canada. 1966. . Membership. Ministry and Human Sexuality: A New Statement of nie United Chwch of Canada by the 32nd Generai Council. Toronto: The United Church of Canada. 1988. . "Record of Proceedings of the 32nd Gened Council." Toronto: The United Church of Canada 1988. . "Record of Proceedings of the 34th General Council." Toronto: The United Church of Canada. 1992, . 73e Manual. Toronto: The United Church Publishing House, 1995. Theil, John E. Review of God and Creation in Christian Theology: Tyranny or Empowerrnent? Theologica~Studies 5 1, no. 1 (March 1 990): 14041. Theology and Faith Committee of The United ~hurchof Canada The Authoriry and Interpretation of Scripture: A Studj Document by me United Church ofCanada. Toronto: The United Church of Canada, 1989. Theology and Faith Cornmittee of The United Church of Canada nie Aurhorify mid Inte'pretaîion of Smpture. Appmved as a Statement of The United Church of Canada by the 34th General Council. Toronto: The United Church of Canada, 1992. Thistleuiwaite, Susan Brooks. "In Mernory of Her. A Symposium on an Important Book." Anima 1O. no. 2 (Spring 1984): 102-05. . Sm. Race, and God: Christian Ferninisnt in Bluck and FWiite. New York: Crossroad 1989- Thornpson, Leonard L. Review of Revelation: Vision of a Juîr World. Catholic BiblicaZ mer&55 (July 1993): 576-78. Tilley, Terrence W. "Incommensurability,htratexhiality, and Fideism." Modern Theology 5, no. 2 (January 1989): 87-1 1 1. - Primary author. Postmodern Theologies: The Challenge of Religiouc Diversîîy. Secondary authors: John Edwards, Tami England, H. Fredenck Felice. Stuart Kendall, C. Brad Moms. Bruce Richey, and Craig Westman. Maryknoll: Orbis Books. 1995. Tillich, Paul. Systemuiic TheoIogy: Remn and Revelation: Being and God. Vol. 1. London: SCM Press Ltd,. 1951. . T7re Protestant Em. Originally published in 1948. Phoenix Books. no. Abridged. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 195 7. . Systematic Theology: Eristence und the Christ. Vol. II. London: SCM Press Ltd.. 1957. . Sysiernatic Theology: Life and the Spirit: Histo~and the Kingdom of Goù. Vol. m. London: SCM Press Ltd., 1963. Tolbert Mary Ann. "Defining the Problem: The Bible and Feminist Henneneutics." Serneia 28 (1983): 1 13-26. . "Protestant Feminists and the Bible." Union Seminus> Quarterly Review 43, no. 1-4 (1989): 1-1 7. Tracy, David. Blessed Rage for Order: Be New Plurdlimi in Theology. Minneapolis: The WUlSfodSeabury Press, 1975. .PluraZity and Ambiguity: Henneneutics, Religion, Hope. San Francisco: Harper, 1987. . Dialogue with the Other: The Inter-Reliigius DiaZogue. Louvain Theological and Pastoral Monogrqhs Series, vol. 1. Louvain: Peeters Press. 1990. . me Amlogical Imagination: Christian Thedogy and the Cuhire of Pludism. New York: Cmssroad, 1991. Tracy, Thomas F. "Review of God and Creation in Christian Theology: Tyranny or Empowerment ? " Failh and Philosophy 9, no. 1 (January 1992): 120-24. . "Acknowledgments." In The God Who Acts: Philosophical and Theological Erplorations, edited by Thomas F. Tracy, vii. University Park Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1994. . "Divine Action, Creaîed Causes, and Human Freedom." In The God mo Acts: Philosophical and Theological Explorations, edited by Thomas F. Tracy, 77- 102. University Park, Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Ress, 1994. , ed. The God Who Acts: Philosophical and ï%eological Ekplorations. University Park. Pennsylvania: The Pemsylvania State University Press. 1994. Trible, Phyllis. Texts of Terror: Litermy-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives. Philadelphia: Fortress Ress. 1984. Vipond, Dorothy. "Out of the West." The United Ch& Observer, January 15 1962,2 1. Wainwright, Elaine Mary. Towardr a Ferninisr Critical Reading of the Gospel According to Matthew. New York: Walter de Gmyter, 199 1. Wallace, Mark. "Postmodem B iblicism : The Challenge of René Girard for Contemporary Theology." Modern Theology 5, no. 4 (July 1989): 309-25. Ward Graham. Review of Changing the Subject. Modern Theologv 1 1, no. 4 (October 1995): 477-78, Weems, Reniîa J. Just a Sister Aww A Womanist Vision of Women!s Relatiomhips in the Bible. San Diego, Calif-: LuraMedia, 1988. Weems, Renita 3. "Do You See Whaî I See? Diversity in Interpretation." Chchd Society 82, no. 1 (September/October 1991): 2843. . "The Hebrew Women Are Not Like the Egyptian Women: The Ideology of Race, Gender and SedReproduction in Exodus 1." Semeia 59 (1992): 25-34. Welch, Sharon. A Feniinist Ethic of Risk. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990. Wells, Harold. "The Making of the United Church Mind - No. 2." Touchstone 18. no. 1 (Jnua~y1990): 17-29. ,ed with Hutchinson, Roger. A Long and Fuithfi[ Mmch: Towardr the Christian Revo&uiionfI930s/1980s.Toronto: United Church Publishing House, 1989. Wea Comel. "The New Cultural Politics of Difference." In Out There: Marginalization and Contemporm Culliaes, edited by Russell Ferguson, Martha Gever. Trinh T. Minh-ha and Comel West, 19-36. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1990. . Beyond Eurocen~ismund Multiculturalism. Rophetic ïhought in Postmodem Times, vol. 1. Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press. 1993. Wiles, Maurice. Review of God and Creation in Christian Theology: Tyranny or Empowennent? Journal of 77zeological Studies, New Series 40, no. 1 (Apnl 1989): 322-24. Williams, Rowan. "The Literal Sense of Scripture." Modern Theology 7. no. 2 (January 1991): 121-34. Williams, Walter L. The Spirit and the Flesh: Sexwl Diversity in Americm Indian Culture. Boston: Beacon Press, 1992. Wilson-Kastner. Patrick Review of Discipleship of Equals. Sewunee Theological Review 38 (Michaelmas 1995): 378-80. Wimbush. Vincent L. "HistoricaVCultural Cnticism as Liberation: A Proposal for an Afiican American BibIical Henneneutic." Semeia 47 (1 989): 43-55. Wire, Antoinette Clark. "Gender Roles in a Scnbal Commdty." In Social History of the Matthean Community, edited by David L. Balch. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991. Wishart, Vernon R. "The Makmg of the United Chmh Mind - No. 1." Touchtone 18. no. 1 (Jan- 1990): 6-16. Wittig, Monique. "The Straight Mind" In OM ke:Menaiization and Contempormy Cullures, edited by RweU Ferguson, Martha Gever, Trinh T. Minh-ha and Comel West, 1 19-202. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1990. "Women Ministers-A Good Record." The United Church Observer, October 15 1960.6. Wumen of Couroge: Asiun Wumen Reading the Bible. Edited by 00 Chung Lee. et al. Seoul: Asian Women's Resource Center for Culture and Theology, 1992. Woods, Chris. State of the @eer Nation: A Critique ofGay and Lesbian Politics in 1990s Britain. Listen Up! Series. London: Casseil. 1995. World Council of Churches. Baprsm, Euchmist and Minisiry- Faith and Order Paper. vol. 1 1 1. Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1982. Young. iris Marion. "The Ideal of Community and the Politics of DifTerence." In Feminism~Postmodernism.edited by Linda J. Nicholson. 300-23. Thinking Gender Series. New York: Routledge, 1990. Young. Parnela Dickey . Ferninist 77zeologyKhristian Theofogy:In Search of Method. Mimeapdis: Fortress mess. 1 990. . " Homosexuality and Ministry : Some Ferninist Reflections." in Theologicuf Refectiom on Ministry and Semai Orientation, edited by Pamela Dickey Young. Burlington. ON: Trinity Press. 1990. lMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (QA-3) APPLIED -4 IWGE . lnc -.--- 1653 East Main Street --, Rochester. NY 14604 USA ------Phone: 71â1482-0300 ---- Fa 716/288-5989 O 1993. Image. lm. M WgîWs Resecved