4 – 5 August 2017, the Australian Collaborators in Feminist Theologies curated a symposium to explore feminist theological perspectives on dialogue, disagreement and conflict, as well as the intersections of theology with ethnicity, race, and cultural “norms”. Welcoming international keynote speakers M. Shawn Copeland (Boston College, Boston), Ruth Duck and Cynthia Wilson (both Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary, Chicago).
Questions, Connections and Stories – Ruth Duck
Womb of life, and source of being, home of every restless heart,
in your arms the world’s awakened; you have loved us from the start.
We, you children, gather ’round you, at the table you prepare.
Sharing stories, tears and laughter, we are nurtured by your care.
(Chalice Hymnal, 1995 Ruth Duck)
Many women clergy are part time – is that our of necessity or by choice?
Invited to share our gifts with the church but not invited into leadership and planning.
Sugar-coated feminism unites people by choosing to ignore our differences. Are woman respecting one another in their diversity? How can we share a position on issues without marginalising one another?
Been re-writing hymns since 1974, need to be wary of use of language e.g. using light (good) and dark (bad) > this language reinforces racial stereotypes. Need to be using accessible and expansive language. Not just male or female but neither like living water, bread, vine….
Galatians: 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Lead on, O cloud of Presence, the exodus is come,
in wilderness and desert our tribe shall make its home.
Our slavery left behind us, new hopes within us grow.
We seek the land of promise where milk and honey flow.
(The Faith We Sing Hymnal, Ruth Duck ref: Exod. 13:21-22)
“Being ordained and finding a job are two different things”
– Bryan Cones
“A woman in leadership is not necessarily a feminist in leadership”
– Stephen Burns
At the table of Christa – Nicola Slee
The women do not serve
but are served
The children are not silent
but chatter
The menfolk do not dominate
but co-operate
The animals are not shussed away
but are welcomed
At the table of Christa
There is no seat of honour
for all are honoured
There is no etiquette
except for the performance of grace
There is no dress code
except the garments of honesty
There is no fine cuisine
other than the bread of justice…. (cont.)
WELCOME TO HER TABLE
“Why don’t you call him your husband?” Negotiating the Heteronorm – Bryan Cones
In a parallel reading of the Witnessing and Blessing of a Lifelong Covenant (same-sex civil union) and the Celebration and Blessing of a Marriage in the Episcopal tradition we see differences in the rubrics (instructional notes), spoken words, and bible readings selected.
- erasing gender from language also erases hierarchy
- same-sex couple recognised as arriving as a couple/unit rather than starting the liturgy as individuals who are brought together but the rite e.g. compare: do you take this man/woman to be your husband/wife vs. I [name] take you [name]
- taking or giving language? e.g. compare “do you take…” language vs. “I [name] give myself to you [name]”
- Hetero weddings use Genesis or Mark reading; Covenant Blessing uses Ruth or Samuel.
What are some of the implications of the differences?
Wedding symbolising Christ with Church. Return to Creation – brought together by God, made by God, seen as “good” by God. None of that in the Covenant Blessing but instead Trinity readings – work in the world and perfect communion.
Is this version equivalency or equality? Relationship not treated the same by theology or text. Changes to the gendered language has impacted the liturgical theology. Different, competing (?!) theological accounts.
Biblically “covenant” not helpful language as it has usually followed some punishment/ judgement (Hosea, Jeremiah, Ezekiel…).
A relationship is already present and active – church ritual recognises and affirms what’s already there.
Missed an opportunity to have one liturgy. A liturgy should be written recognising all types of households and relationships and families that are currently being erased.
Like the Catholic approach of couple marrying themselves to each other but others witness… helpful to have resources to offer but not to impose them I think.
‘You don’t understand me’: Serena Williams, Christology, and non-identity – Janice McRandal
Between tennis, race, her gender… we don’t see Serena in the fullness of her humanity. We hold her up to an ideal of personhood and she becomes a series of failures of conform.
Born 6 September 1981 in Compton, Serena has 23 Grand Slam titles and is one of the greatest sportsman of all time. She is seen as both hypersexual and hypermuscular.
People of colour are seen to have “natural ability” whereas white people are considered as being intelligent and working hard.
Serena disrupts narrative. A commentator calls her a “crusader” and she responds:
“Nah, I’m just doing me.”
Another interview ends…
“You don’t understand me.”
Theology is trying to understand (perhaps proscribe?) the personhood of Christ… but we need to let Jesus move not be locked in. Jesus can, and does, say: “You do not understand me.” e.g. WWJD bracelets lock in ‘rules’ about what that looks like with non-normative standards… this creates exclusion. This is a commodification of Jesus. Which Jesus do you buy/sell? Once you make something a commodity you will want to measure it’s productivity and see a return on investment.
Disciple-driven sublimation vs. Christology of non-identity
Not a timeless call but relationality… Knowing here and now. This gives us multiplicity instead of a single discourse. We need to de-economise theology from capitalism.
Unknowing is a dispossessing that remembers and forgets.
Poem: Listen (I lost my voice again today) – Talitha Fraser
“Why the Body Matters: Feminism and Christian Faith” – Shawn Copeland
Theology is worrying about what God worries about – God worries about the world that is broken.
The terms body, feminist, and Christian have many diverse meanings and understandings. Also, imperatives, involved in a period and a context. Symbols that point to what is visible and invisible. Gender, race, sexuality become concrete in the body. The body is us but there is more to you and more to me. SImilar but different. SPirit and body are not separate but one. We need embodiment and engagement and communion with other embodied selves.
There are physical and social layers of meaning to gender, sex and sexuality. Meaning and worth are allocated externally to our bodies through sex, gender, sexuality. The transcendence of men is an ideology. God makes the earth… Creature. ALL created matter very good. This is contextual theology.
Jesus had gender, sex, race… existed within the social morays of his time and transcends these. Feminism is not monolithic but pluralist. Where bodies matter… eucharist matters.
We need to live in a humble praxis of solidarity
with the bodies piled up.
Race
Statements such as “racism did not exist in the US before Obama” silences and makes invisible.
Having no race then can also therefore mean no identity > race matters SO much. When race is considered an objective condition intelligence is seen as fixed and hereditary. When one is equal to one’s race your identity becomes “fixed”. This tramples on personhood and experience. Racial formation (or deform-ation) is organised around a society of oppression. Knowing race becomes crucial to “knowing” relationships – how to relate to and treat people. Are you black or brown? Chinese or Vietnamese? Once I can categorise your identity I will know how to treat and talk to you.
Sex and Gender
There is a disconnect between our body and our identity. Became medical. Sex is biological and our gender is subject to socio-normative treatment/behaviour. There are differences amongst women… what about class, race, sexual orientation…? You can be dually discriminated. Plurality of discourse can be disruptive.
Ref: Judith Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity
Eucharist
Love forms one body with our body. Joined with the eternal transcendent. Solidarity is the incarnation of Christian love. Standing with the other in their otherness.
Owe the wealth and privilege we have to exploitation, massacre, death, slavery… we need to acknowledge the humanness of the other. Even if we suffer rejection or loss.
Solidarity must always affirm life.
Christianity
Stand beside/join with others. Because you are the body of Christ. It is your mystery that lies behind the altar. Our gendered, raced, sexed bodies are one in eucharist. Our ceremonies – we must give as as well as receive.
Be what you receive.
Incarnation means loving others.
political theology > systemic theology. What does it look like to do communion in Baltimore or Ferguson, Missouri (#blacklivesmatter). Not just “All that we have” but “ALL that we have” How can I express myself without my hands, my voice, my body…?! My body is not an illusion. Our body has to be part of our spirituality. It’s what sops us being all-spirit. Ordinary and extraordinary that. We are given and embodied example (enfleshed) of what that looks like lived out. [Christ].
Ref: Susan Griffin, Woman and Nature: The Roaring Inside Her
Q+A
Latin ‘procure’ meant ‘care for’ NOT ‘acquire’
Multiculturalism – honour diversity and richness without “smushedness”. Individuality and interculturality – no domination/subjugation to make alike.
How? Engage, encounter, serious conversation, humility… not acquire or appropriate. Can’t pick up the cultural mores but you can learn. The Word is being made flesh now. It’s about being filled with divine breath and living that out.
itellyouarise 