Rogers: An introduction to feminism
By Paula R. Kincaid, The Layman Online, August 20, 1999
MONTREAT – “Theology has been a silent partner in the religious wounding of women. But things change, particularly in the past three decades,” said Isabel Rogers, in a workshop titled “Introduction to Feminist Theology” held during the 1999 Women’s Conference at Montreat Conference Center in North Carolina.
A former moderator of the Presbyterian Church USA, Rogers appointed the task force on human sexuality that reported to the 1991 General Assembly. That report, which approved homosexual beahvior, adultery and premarital sex was rejected 534-31-1.
In the Old Testament, said Rogers, women were considered property – a man’s possession. “She was more respected if she had children, especially sons,” said Rogers.
“If you hear of misogyny in the New Testament, you do not hear it from Jesus Christ,” she said. Christian theologians, however, have “picked up their cues from Paul and Aristotle, not Jesus.”
In relation to a pyramid, Aristotle believed God was at the highest point, with man right below him. Then, in descending order, came woman, child, animal, plant, and inanimate objects. Intellect, according to Aristotle, was found only at the top of the pyramid with God and man, said Rogers.
Rogers said the dominant theologians of the Christian tradition were baffled at why women were created. They did not believe women were quite human.
She said Augustine believed there was no way women could share the spiritual and intellectual work of men. He believed women were body people.
Calvin, she said, does admit the purpose of womanhood is more than to bear children. He thought a woman was “to be a man’s companion. Woman’s purpose is to help man live more comfortably.”
“That’s our theological heritage,” said Rogers.
“When Christian women looked back on this, all of these male theologians,” said Rogers, they asked, “What if women did theology? What different things would be said?”
Rogers said the best of the women theologians “are not seeking to replace the old tradition. The best want to enrich it and expand it.”
Three options of response
Rogers listed three options for women to respond to theology.
The first option is to accept the scriptural picture. “There it is. God has spoken. It’s in the Bible,” said Rogers.
She spoke of two books, Total Woman and Fascinating Womanhood, both written by women. Their thesis, based on Scripture, advocates that the wife totally submits to the husband.
Rogers said that way of “using the Bible story makes many women throw up their hands in despair.”
The second option is to reject the picture. For some women, Rogers said, if the Bible is interpreted only as the two authors read it, then “we throw out the Bible as useless.”
The third option, Rogers’ preferred option, is to wrestle with the biblical texts and find liberating elements.
She said women can still take the Bible seriously, but study the Bible with new eyes.
A new look at the creation story
Rogers used feminist theologian Phyllis Trible, who took a new look at the creation stories as an example.
Both the first and second chapters of Genesis give an account of the creation story. Rogers said that according to Trible, in chapter one “what you get is almost a co-ordinate creation of man and woman. God created humanity and to them gave dominion and God said let us make humankind.”
In chapter two the story is quite different. The man is created first and then the woman created to be a helpmate – an almost subordinate creation.
Trible looked at the Hebrew words adham, or soil or earth; ish, or male; and ishshah, female. The male term did not appear in chapter two until the female term appeared. Chapter two now agrees with chapter one. “The words were there all along,” said Rogers.
“No one noticed because men were the scholars and they weren’t on the lookout for this … This is part of the reason why we need women’s voices,” said Rogers.
Trible also looked at the Old Testament use of the word ezer or helper – a word used for three different relationships, but most of the time used in relationship with God. Ezer can be used as a helper superior to one; as a helper subordinate to one; or as a helper on the same level as one. “By itself, it does not imply inferiority,” said Rogers.
Jesus was a feminist
Rogers spoke of the article “Jesus was a feminist.”
The author defined a feminist as 1) a person who is in favor of and promotes equality of women and men; 2) a person who advocates and practices treating women as human persons; and 3) a person who defies social custom to do this. The author cites stories from the Gospels to confirm that Jesus was a feminist.
Rachel Conrad Walhberg, author of Jesus According to a Woman, “reads the gospel stories through a woman’s eyes,” said Rogers.
For example, Walhberg looked at Luke 15 and noted that of the three parables told in that chapter, nobody pays much attention to the second parable of the housewife sweeping the floors.
In the story about Jesus and the woman caught in adultery, Walhberg said that story is about the men. It is the men Jesus is speaking to.
Concern over Paul
Rogers then turned to Paul and identified two general ideas that New Testament scholars have about him that “to me have been helpful.”
First, Paul was concerned for freedom and second, Paul was also concerned with order in the church.
Rogers said that Paul said “freedom,” and the women said “hot diggity.” That caused some consternation in the church, so Paul told the women to be careful how they exercised that freedom. Don’t cause such an uproar that the church can’t get on with its mission.
“He was not necessarily trying to put women down, just wanted to help the church get along,” said Rogers.
Many New Testament scholars believe “Paul was caught in the same kind of tension we are in today,” said Rogers. “He was caught in the vision of how God wants us to be and live together, but he was still caught in a patriarchal society.”
“Paul was still shaped by culture,’ said Rogers.
“Once we come to know Jesus Christ we are still part of our culture, so scholars say, ‘Why should we expect Paul to be different from us?'”
