Church’s Women’s Festival
Violence Redefined
by
Diane L. Knippers
In the opening ceremony, women poured water representing tears from various
regions of the world into a large bowl. Then several women told horrific
stories of violence. One Canadian woman recounted sexual abuse at the hands
of her father, an Anglican priest. A woman from Papua-New Guinea spoke of
savage beatings by her husband. A Taiwanese woman told of a Cambodian woman
who was lured to Taiwan with the promise of work and then was forced into
prostitution.
Included with such grotesque abuse of women were examples of “institutional
violence” or “theological violence.” Ada Maria Isasi-Diaz, a U.S.
theologian, claimed that “being silenced, being ignored, not being valued,
not being taken into consideration – this is what violence is about.” She
and others had in mind the negative reactions that radical Western feminists
received after events such as the 1993 “Re-Imagining God” Conference.
In a press conference later, I asked Aruna Gnanadason, who heads the WCC
Women’s Program, why the word “violence” was used regarding women who were
denied church jobs or speaking engagements because of their unorthodox
theology. Gnanadason acknowledged that violence was being redefined. “If a
woman is a poet and isn’t allowed to write poetry, that is murder too,” she
said.
Gnanadason is wrong. To call discrimination “violence” demeans and
diminishes the plight of women who truly suffer the worst kinds of physical
abuse – those who are brutally beaten, raped, tortured, or killed. It
disgusted me to see women who enjoy Western privileges and comforts claim a
victim status along with women who suffer far more terrible abuses.
Also, there was no mention of the most serious abuses against women today -
female genital mutilation in parts of Africa, bridal dowry burnings in
India, or the enslavement of girls in Sudan. Of course, these are problems
whose sources lie mainly outside the Christian faith. But, by ignoring these
problems, the WCC festival created the impression that the Church is a major
source of violence against women and that Christian teaching needs to be
radically changed to address this problem.
A more honest look at the world would produce a different conclusion – that
biblical faith, in spite of its imperfect implementation, has been a force
for protection and elevation of women in human history. Indeed, the power of
God to transform lives was, for the most part, ignored. Most speakers saw
empowering women as the answer to human suffering and sin. Through
solidarity, they implied, women can translate the Gospel into a narrowly
political program. And so the festival – and its opportunity to address the
unspeakable abuses some women do face – was reduced to what one delegate
called “a hollow drum which bangs a lot.”
*IDEOLOGY PROMOTED*
by Donna F. G. Hailson
The Decade Festival commemorating the close of the Ecumenical Decade of
Churches in Solidarity with Women was less a celebration of the church’s
oneness in Christ and more a forum for the airing of laments over
maltreatment suffered by women. During the festival’s “Hearing on Violence
Against Women,” for example, speakers detailed their experiences of rape,
domestic beatings, sexual trafficking and “abusive practices by church
institutions.”
The hearing concluded with a “healing act in the Shaman tradition from
Korea,” led by Chung Hyun Kyung, who used music and dance to lead women from
“crucifixion to resurrection.” It was more than a surprise to see Chung back
at the podium given the controversy that swirled around her plenary
presentation at the last WCC Assembly (in Canberra, Australia, in 1991). At
that time, Chung called upon participants to reject traditional Christian
teachings and/or to meld them with spiritism, goddess worship, monism,
eco-feminism, Buddhism and Taoism. In an interview at the Decade Festival,
Chung reaffirmed her self description as a syncretist and asserted that “it
is an act of violence for a Christian to tell non-believers that they will
go to hell if they do not accept Jesus as Savior.”
The Decade Festival concluded with the drafting of a written challenge to
the WCC Assembly. The document, framed as a “living letter,” urged WCC
delegates to “announce to the world that violence against women is a sin …
to declare poverty and all its dehumanizing consequences a scandal against
God … to adopt the UN Beijing Platform for Action and the UN Decade of
Eradication of Poverty 1997-2007 … to raise our voices against all
vestiges of colonialism … [and] to initiate actions to correct the gender
imbalances that exist.”
Though the festival letter was billed as a consensus document, it was not
embraced by all women at the Assembly. Some Orthodox and evangelical women
took issue over a paragraph which called for a “vision of the human
community” where “diversity is celebrated as God’s gift to the world.” In
affirming diversity of race, sex, age, religion and cultural practice, the
letter left room for interpretations approving of practices such as
syncretism, homosexuality, and abortion. Another passage in the document
called for protecting “reproductive rights” – another ambiguous phrase which
might refer to abortion. Evangelicals and Orthodox would have preferred to
see stronger stands taken against these kinds of cultural practices.
*POLICY ADVANCED*
by Janice Shaw Crouse
Participants dressed in vividly colorful national garb celebrated the end of
the Ecumenical Decade on the campus of Belvedere Technical Teachers College,
an institution built as a gift to Zimbabwe from the United States during the
Reagan era. The Great Hall was filled with round tables covered in white
cloths topped by colorful squares and huge bouquets of fresh cut flowers.
The “Out of Africa” ambiance did not, however, mask the decidedly leftist
political agenda of the celebration.
The worship liturgies often substituted a leftist agenda for God’s truth;
they sacrificed impact, insight, and inspiration on the altar of inclusion.
The mishmash of cultures and concerns created services that touched all
issues, but failed to touch our hearts. Examples ranged from minor to
significant. In a traditional Malawi song, the poetic beauty of the song was
distorted by replacing “God, the Father” with “God, Creator.” In fact, I
could not find the word “father” in the whole liturgy booklet.
Some participants complained that the festival seemed eager to substitute a
matriarchal structure for the despised and, admittedly flawed, patriarchal
system. In fact, handwritten female appellations were penciled in over the
blacked out male words of the printed text!
Missionaries were cast in the worst possible light. One litany’s words: “We
weep for those who have been damaged by mission done in your name, but
without the sensitivity of your Spirit.” Obviously, there have been
insensitive Christian missionaries, but such blanket statements present an
imbalanced picture. Blatant insinuations of policy permeated the litanies:
“We weep when people have been marginalized or abused because of their
gender, faith, class, disability, or sexual orientation.”
There are significant problems associated with having ceremonies and worship
services saturated with a political agenda. By blaming the International
Monetary Fund, capitalism, the World Bank, colonialism or men in general for
all women’s suffering – instead of identifying sin as the root cause – the
focus of worship shifts away from our relationship with God.
The transformation that Jesus can bring to human beings is forgotten. The
problem, then, takes shape in areas outside our control. We denounce
“structural adjustment policies” glibly, while ignoring the sins for which
we personally are called to repentance.
*Reprinted with permission from*
*the Winter 1998-1999 edition of*
_FAITH & FREEDOM_
*published quarterly by the*
*Institute on Religion and Democracy*