Women’s Theologies Conflict with the Historic Faith of the Church
by
Sylvia Dooling
In response to the mandate of the 211th General Assembly, the resource material for The National Network of Presbyterian College Women has been re-written, approved by the General Assembly Council, published, and is now in distribution.
Entitled, Lifting Up Our Voices: Young Women Explore, Life, Liberation, & Faith, the new resource material is creatively laid out and attractive. It deals with issues that are important for all Christians to think about and to act upon regardless of age or gender. It also avoids some of the biases and omissions of its predecessor Young Women Speak. It does this by making sure that every conceivable theological position is mentioned regularly, and that every policy of the General Assembly is carefully stated.
I am troubled, however, by what I think is the resource’s underlying commitment to the assumptions and hypotheses of feminist philosophy. In order to make my point without over generalizing, let me focus my analysis on the chapter entitled, Women’s Theologies. You may not agree with my findings, but I believe that the chapter truly reflects the foundational assumptions that instruct the rest of the material.
In particular, I am concerned about what the chapter teaches our young Presbyterian women about two things:
· the purpose of the Christian life; and
· how it is that we know what we know (i.e. epistemology).
Relative to the purpose of the Christian life, one of my favorite stories is the one that my husband often tells about the young ordinand and the aging presbyter. It seems that during his final ordination examination on the floor of presbytery, the young candidate was having a difficult time. By the time the aging presbyter rose to his feet, the young man had already been put through a long and arduous examination. When recognized by the moderator, the presbyter asked, “Young man, are you willing to be damned for the glory of God?” The candidate thought for a moment, and then answered, “Sir, right now I’d be willing for the whole presbytery to be damned.”
It’s a funny story, but the aging presbyter was getting at something terribly important.
During the Reformation of the 16th century, the reformers summarized the faith with five shorthand statements. We are saved by grace alone, which we lay hold of by faith alone, which is to be placed in Christ alone. Scripture alone is our authority, and the glory of God alone is the purpose of our lives.
My primary problem with the philosophy expressed in “Women’s Theologies,” a philosophy, as I said, upon which the remainder of the resource is built is its tacit assumption that we exist for something other than the glory of God. Viewing all of life through the lens of gender, the resource assumes that the goal of life is liberation, self-expression and personal fulfillment.
To do this, they are forced to create an idol a god whose purpose it is to serve the glory of their own imagination, experience and needs. Simply put, the philosophy of feminism is not so much theological (i.e. a discourse about God), as it is egoistic it’ s all about me.
The Reformed faith, however, is not all about me.
At the very least, it is all about us the church, the community of faith (made up of women and men from every “nation and tribe and tongue and people” ) who live their lives before the face and under the authority of God.
The other problem that I see in the philosophy upon which Lifting Up Our Voices is built is its emphasis on human experience and culture as the medium through which we hear the authoritative voice of God. The Scriptures are not objectively authoritative and true, but rather the truth and validity of Scripture is measured and judged in terms of personal experience.
Personal experience becomes a lens that distorts and alters the objective meaning of the words so that they fit and validate my own personal worldview. In other words, I judge Scripture rather than Scripture judging me.
Now let me be very clear. The grievance that lies behind this essay is not with the young women of NNPCW; it is with those who have been involved in writing and organizing this material, those who are actively involved in promoting this kind of teaching in our denomination, and those who fear standing up for the historic faith lest they be thought of as narrow-minded or extremist.
But, rather than take my word that the resource is flawed, I encourage you to read it for yourself. It is available through the Presbyterian Distribution Service, and can be purchased online. So, buy it; read it; and let the folks in Women’s Ministries know what you think about it. After all, it is your contributions to the PC(USA) that are funding both NNPCW and the new resource which underscores both your right and your responsibility to find out for yourself.