Visions of Justice, the Question of Imrnortality: a Study of the Nature Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Visions of Justice, the Question of Imrnortality: A Study of the Nature of Oppression and Liberation in the work of Rosemary Radford Ruether and Marjorie Hewitt Suchocki BY Anne Marie Martin, B.A., M.A. A Thesis Subrnitted to the School of Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirernents for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy McMaster University (c) Copyright by Anw Marie Martin, July 1997 National Library BiMithèque nationale du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services seMcas bibliographiques 395 Wdiingtori Street 395, nie Wdlingtori O(tawa0N K1AW -ON K1AûN4 Canada canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant a la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sell reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/fb, 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 substantial 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. ROSEMARY RADFORD RUETHER MARJORIE HEWITT SUCHOCKI Doctor of Philosopby (1997) McMaster University (Religious St udies) (Hamilton, Ontario) TITLE: Visions of Justice, the Question of Immortality: A Shidy of the Nature of Oppression and Liberation in the Work of Rosemary Radford Ruether and Marjorie Hewitt Suchocki AUTHOR: Anne Marie Martin, B.A. (York University) M.A. (Wilfrid Laurier University) SUPERVISOR: Dr. John C. Robertson NUMBER OF PAGES: 286 Acknowledgments The process of writing a dissertation involves many individuals. Some participate willingly; others by virtue of king a family member or a friend find themselves dong for the at times rather nerve-wracking ride. 1 would first like to thank my husband Stan and my children Nola and Kyle for their ongoing support which saw us al1 through a joumey that proved to be longer and more challenging than any of us ever anticipated. 1 would also like to thank my parents Jean and Bill Heaslip for their ongoing support and encouragement. I would also like to thank Dr. Eileen Schuller and Dr. Peter Widdicombe for the crucial roles that they played in helping to bring this work to completion. Dr. Schuller's probing, thoughtful and insighthil questions, together with her quiet, caring manner helped to keep the work focused as I searched deeper for answers. Dr. Widdicombe's demand for rigorous critical analysis, and his acute attention to detail helped to move this work forward in a very important way. 1 would like to give special thanks to my supervisor Dr. John Robertson. Dr. Robertson's keen interest in the topic. his willingness to discuss, to teach, to guide, to be there when necessary, while at the same time respecting my own need to grapple with the material in my own way allowed for the dissertation process to be a success. Moreover, his conviction that this work would "corne inro harbor" provided the underlying and necessary support that allowed for a possibility to becorne a reality. There is no doubt that without his ongoing support this work would not have reached completion. There are many others, professors, fellow students and friends who have contributed to the completion of this task by offering their knowledge, friendship and support at various times and in various ways throughout this process. 1 would like to thank Dr. Louis Greenspan, Dr. Gérard Vallée, Dr. Adele Reinhartz, Cecilia Wassen, Jeff McPherson, Anne Pearson, Suzanne Sykes, Pat Bush, Peter Denton, Jennifer Nettleton, Kate Blackstone, Ron Baerg, Jean Cunnane, Joe Velaidum, Tinamarie Jones, Angela Careaa, Christina Johns, Bill Goldfinch, Linda Foster, Margot McCurry, Louise Laurie, Ladan Javid-Collishaw, Kathy Cameron, Brian and Donna Porter, Robert and Heidi Boraks, and Ursula and Gerd Mack. I would like to Say a specid word to my son Kyle, who at the age of nine has decided that he is going to quit school early, that is to Say, before writing "the dissertation." 1 hope that his own future academic interests have not been curtailed by sharing the expenence of fulfilling mine, but that both he and my daughter will be inspired to reach their goals. ABSTRACT This thesis examines the ways in which two Christian, feminist theologians, Rosemary Radford Ruether and Marjorie Hewitt Suchocki. undentand the relationship between liberation, the fulfillment of justice and the concept of an immortal self. Central to this discussion are Suchocki's and Ruether's differing views of imrnortality. Suchocki argues that without subjective immortality (the possibility of continuing to experience some form of "life" after death as a subjective centre of consciousness) there can be no justice. Ruether, however, contends that the concept of an immortal self is the root of injustice. While Ruether reproaches the concept of subjective irnmortality, this thesis shows that she nevertheless defends a form of "objective" irnmortality (that al1 that occurs within the creation is taken up within the divine). In Part One, I discuss Ruether's understanding of oppression and liberation. 1 conclude that while Ruether provides a good analysis of the role of freedom in the development of oppressive social conditions, she neglects to explain the nature of finitude within which hurnan activity is carried out and the limitations which finitude places on human freedom. 1 also conclude that while Ruether's understanding of liberation addresses forcefully the emancipative aspect of liberation, her characteristic understanding of God's redemptive activity as a form of objective irnmortality does not address satisfactorily the consequences of injustice as at once individual and relationai. In Part Two, 1 discuss Suchocki's undentanding of the nature of oppression and liberation. Her appropriation of Whiteheadian metaphysics figures significantly in her account of both enabling her to account for oppression as arising from freedom and from the limitations of finitude. It, moreover, enables her account of liberation to address fruitfully not only liberation as emancipation and salvation, but also as redemption. In regard to the latter, Suchocki develops a somewhat original argument for the necessity and possibility of subjective irnmortality. I conclude that while both Suchocki's and Ruether's theologies are driven by a concern for justice, Suchocki provides a better understanding of the nature of oppression which results in injustice, and a better understanding of liberation as the fulfillment of justice. 1, moreover, conclude that while for the most part the concept of subjective immortality has been viewed as anathema by feminist theology, Suchocki's view of subjective irnmortality may in fact open up the possibility of reassessing the concept of an immortal self within feminist theology as not only consistent with but as an aid to developing its own deepest concems for liberation and justice. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ............................................................................. 1 PART ONE Rosemary Radford Ruether: The Nature of Oppression and the Process of Liberation Chapter One: The Nature of Oppression: The Tyranny of the Immortal Self Introduction ............................................................................ Ruether: A Biographie Overview ..................................................... The Nature of Oppression .............................................................. The Concept of the Immortal Self as Untenable and the Source of Injustice ............ The Beginnings of an Orthodox Christology: St. Paul and the Fall .................... Ruether's Christology................................................................. The Concept of an Immortai Seif: The Denial of the Fu!] Humanity of Women ....... Assessing Ruether's View of Oppression ............................................ Summary ................................................................................. Chapter Two: The Process of Liberation: At One with the Divine Introduction ........................................................................... 70 The Nature of God ...................................................................... 71 The Process of Liberation: Emancipation ............................................ 81 The Process of Liberation: God's Redemptive Activity ............................ 88 Summary ................................................................................ 122 Conclusions- Part One ................................................................ 123 PART TWO Marjorie Hewitt Suchocki: The Nature of Oppression and the Process of Liberation Chapter Three: The Nature of Oppression: Freedom and Finitude: Accomplices in Oppression Introduction .................................................. The Nature of Oppression ............................................................. The Nature of Evil .................................................................... Evil as Pe rpetual Perishing ................... .. ............... ... .................. Evil as the Exclusion of Alternative Possibilities .................................... Evil as "ideals born out of