Socius

Feminism

   Experience.

You foolish and unreasoning men

who cast all blame on women,

not seeing you yourselves are cause

of the same faults you accuse:

   if, with eagerness unequaled,

you plead against women’s disdain,

why require them to do well

when you inspire them to fall?

   You combat their firm resistance,

and then solemnly pronounce

that what you’ve won through diligence

is proof of women’s flightiness...

   Women’s good favor, women’s scorn

you hold in equal disregard:

complaining, if they treat you badly;

mocking, if they love you well.

   Not one can gain your good opinion,

for she who modestly withdraws

and fails to admit you is ungrateful;

yet if she admits you, too easily won.

   So downright foolish are you all

that your injurious justice claims

to blame one woman’s cruelty

and fault the other’s laxity…

   Why then are you so alarmed

by the fault that is your own?

Wish women to be what you make them,

or make them what you wish they were…

   Thus I prove with all my forces

the ways your arrogance does battle:

for in your offers and your demands

we have devil, flesh, and world: a man

- Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz de Asbaje y Ramírez (1651-1695)[1]

This poem, written in the 17^th century reveals the struggles of women at the hands of a male dominated world. Sor Juana, a Mexican nun, was an outspoken critic of the injustice to women and saw the displeasure of the Roman Catholic Church in her time because of this.[2]

   Her struggles are no different to the struggles of many women today. Not only are women fighting for equality in the secular world, but also within the church. Though some Christian denominations have accepted women’s equality and have allowed their ordination, other denominations find this unacceptable. This experience reveals the existence of discrimination.

   Exploration. John Cobb Jr notes that “the history of civilization is, for most part, also the history of patriarchal societies.”[3] A patriarchal society has been the cause of inequality between the sexes. “Anthropology, sociology, psychology, philosophy, literature and the sciences”[4] have exposed the influence western civilization’s social structure and religious ideals have had.  Mary Grey notes that western culture, as well as the religions that make up that culture are “gender-blind.”[5] Veronica Brady mentioned at a conference some years ago that the term “gender” was a term used to order reality, but not reality itself.[6] It is a class term used to differentiate and show the distinctiveness of the other. But as Brady notes, the manner in which gender has been used by the patriarchal church has led to the silence of women and “imposed an impoverished patriarchal view of the world on all of us.”[7]

   Reflection. The Christian narrative has shaped many of the values and attitudes of western society. A return to the narratives therefore, is necessary in order to discover messages contained within the narratives and possibly force change from certain understandings which are antiquated. This is precisely the intent of Mary Daly who seeks to move beyond Christological dogma developed by the Church. Daly states that “a logical consequence of the liberation of women will be a loss of plausibility of Christological formulas which reflect and encourage idolatry in relation to the person of Jesus.”[8] For Daly, the idea that the Savior was and still is male, leads to women subordination. She boldly asserts that “Christianity itself should be castrated by cutting away the products of super-male arrogance.”[9] In regards to Christological doctrine the Church, influenced by a patriarchal worldview imputed meaning into the biblical narratives that were not necessarily there. Postmodern scholarship, as previously mentioned, offers a solution by recognizing the validity of incorporating the reader’s (in this case the woman’s) values, attitudes, responses and needs within the text. The text is thus approached in creative and novel ways to draw out meanings that become relevant. Lyn Bechtel approaches the J creation narrative of Genesis 2:4b-3:24 in such a way. Bechtel points out that it is wrong to view woman as subordinate to man because she comes from man’s rib any more as it is wrong to view man as subordinate to the earth because he comes from the dirt.[10] It is wrong therefore to understand the creation story as a text that subordinates women based on gender. This is how the church has used the text throughout history. This despite the fact that Galatians 3:28 says that “there is neither…male nor female, for you are all one in Christ.”  Through Bechtel we see a woman’s reflection based upon her needs which has led into a deeper insight into the creation narrative. A reading of Scripture that appeal to insights from the church fathers of yesteryear is no longer acceptable or accurate. As Geoff Thompson notes in reference to the Uniting Church’s document titled Why does the Uniting Church in Australia Ordain Women to the Ministry of the Word (WMOW), “the authority of the Fathers is set aside, not just because of some generic (and simplistic) Scripture principle, but because MWOW maintains the Fathers were reading the Bible in the wrong way.”[11]

   Action. First of all, for the church to be taken seriously about women’s rights it must treat woman as equal within the church community. Anything less is hypocritical. The church must therefore clean up its own backyard before it can talk about equality between the sexes. Women should have greater involvement within the church.

   The practical theologian can also be involved in movements that help the feminist cause through education and understanding. For example, in Europe there exists The European Society of Women in Theological Research[12] whilst the southern hemisphere has The Ecumenical Association of Third World Theologians Women’s Commission.[13] Discourse therefore is of great importance.

Practical Theology and the Pastoral Cycle

   The term practical theology arose within the German Protestant tradition during the eighteenth century, with Friedrich Schleiermacher (1764-1834) being the earliest promoter of the term.[1] The term practical theology, as against pastoral theology, indicated a concern that extended beyond ecclesiastical issues. Practical theologians were thinking of the relevance of Christian theology beyond “worship, preaching, Christian education and church government.”[2] Their interests stretched beyond the Christian community, forcing, out of necessity, a dialogue with other fields of inquiry. For this reason practical theologians were traditionally seen to be more academic than pastoral theologians for their “theoretical theological and ethical framework” inevitability became broader.[3] Therefore, the practical theologian covers issues that span the environmental and political sphere. A practical theologian’s client does not only include the churched, but also the un-churched, those within the broader community. It is therefore not necessary for the practical theologian to be involved in clerical ministry.[4]

   Pattison and Woodward point out that “there is no one universally accepted definition” of pastoral and practical theology.[5] The two terms are often used interchangeably nowadays as there is much overlap between both.[6] Pattison and Woodward note that “it is probably futile to try and separate these areas [pastoral and practical] either definitionally or in practice.”[7] The working definition used for practical theology within this paper will then be that of Pattison and Woodward:

Pastoral/practical theology is a place where religious belief, tradition and practice meets contemporary experiences, questions and actions and conducts a dialogue that is mutually enriching, intellectually critical, and practically transforming.[8]

   What we have then is a practical theologian concerned with his/her cultural context. This cultural context is a modern/postmodern one. It is a cultural context which is religiously pluralistic and takes seriously the advances of the various sciences.[9]

   Practical theology requires a working model for it to be effective. An appropriate working model will assist in applying its theory to the particular area of concern in order to achieve results. Various models have been offered and still are in use. However, one successful model which forms a coherent relationship between theory and practice,[10] and is most commonly used today is the pastoral cycle.[11]

   The pastoral cycle is said to have developed in the 1960’s through the influence of Latin American liberation theology.[12] Seeking human liberation from oppressive social, political and economic structures,[13] liberation theology began with the experiences of the poor and marginalized within their social environment.[14] These experiences were the catalyst for developing a working model for actively applying theology effectively. The pastoral cycle was born.

   The pastoral cycle is a “four-fold action” which consists of experience, exploration, reflection and action.[15] Experience is where it all begins. It exposes the present experiences of ordinary people in unordinary situations. The experience may reveal the injustice of individuals and/or communities and groups, as may be the case amongst the poor. The experience may reveal discrimination and prejudice against certain groups as may be the case against homosexuals. The experience may also reveal hostility between groups due to misunderstanding as may be the case between differing religious groups within a pluralistic society. Ballard and Pritchard say, “The [pastoral] cycle starts…with present experience which becomes questioned by some event or crisis.”[16] In other words, practical theology commences and acted out from below.

   The second step involves exploration. Here the practical theologian must analyze what is going on.[17] This is achieved by gaining information through discussion with those who are experiencing some form of crisis.[18] Analysis however, does not stop here, for information may be obtained through inter-disciplinary dialogue.[19] Here the practical theologian needs to be kept up to date with the various inquiries that are relevant to the issues at hand. For example, in regards to homosexual tendencies, a practical theologian should be aware of what biology has to say. Is there genetic evidence that suggests that a person may be more predisposed towards homosexual tendencies? Also, what was the socio-cultural climate that gave rise to condemnation of homosexuals? In other words, what do historians, sociologists and/or anthropologists have to say in regards to this issue?

   The next step of the pastoral cycle involves reflection. Ballard and Pritchard adequately write that “information, by itself, does not give answers; it only indicates possibilities.”[20] Possibilities occur when the information gathered is understood within a larger narrative framework. The practical theologian enters the experience, participates in the dialogue and reflects upon the situation from a world-view that is, in this case, Christian influenced. The Christian narrative then plays an informing role. It is this worldview that provides the possibilities for a Christian practical theologian. Possibilities occur when the Christian narrative is viewed as dynamic not static. Reflection of information acquired will inevitably lead to the fact there will be “discovery and change.”[21]

   There are many examples of discovery and change within the Biblical narratives. Mark 7:1-24 will be used to cite one example. Jesus’ disciples were accused of eating with defiled hands. Jesus’ responds to this by stating that “whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile” (Mark 7:19). This verse ends with the Markan conclusion that Jesus declared all foods clean. However, in the parallel passage of Matthew 15:1-20 this conclusion is not reached. We do not get the impression from Matthew that Jesus declared all foods clean. Furthermore, if Jesus did teach that all foods were clean why would Peter, at a much later date, need a special revelation to declare all foods clean (Acts 10:9-16)? The idea that all foods were clean was contrary to Jewish law. This is why Matthew never went so far. Mark was willing to do away with that particular law because it was seen as a barrier between Jew and Gentile relations. Therefore it is unlikely that the historical Jesus declared all foods to be clean. For Mark, reflection upon a particular contemporary issue of his time led to discovery and change. This is the dynamic aspect of the Christian faith. Abandoning certain antiquated, preconceived notions then, should not be understood as abandoning the Christian tradition. Rather, one still remains within the Christian tradition by applying through reflection, principles that epitomize the dynamic relational issues that exist within society. This is unlike static, dogmatic, unchangeable principles that potentially cause divisions within society.

   Not only are the Christian Scriptures a source of reflection, but also the broader Christian tradition, such as the lives of the saints.[22] Church history has a rich resource of lives that combated the conditions of their time. There exists historical figures like St. Francis of Assisi, Joan of Arc and more recently Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Their lives and ideas are a rich source for reflection.

   Culture is also of great importance.[23] Through culture one interacts with the various groups that exist.[24] Culture forms the social structure and norms by which one lives. Culture gives rise to values, symbols, myths and various philosophies and ideologies.[25] Reflection upon all these facets allows an individual and/or group to analyze those things which shape their daily lives.[26]

   Also important is the physical environment.[27] The environment may seriously affect the conditions in which one lives. This means reflection also involves understanding ecological issues.

   One final point to consider is that people enter a situation with attitudes, opinions, beliefs and convictions. This is what Killen and De Beer call “positions.”[28] These positions are developed in an individual via culture, family, life, religion, etc. Therefore, scripture, tradition, culture and positions are all involved when it comes to theological reflection of any given situation.

   The final step of the pastoral cycle is action. Without action practical theology is void of its “practicalness.” Moving through experience, exploration and reflection is irrelevant if it does not lead to action that seeks to remedy a particular crisis. Action is not only the most important part, but also the most complex part of the cycle to implement. Most likely there will exist several options for active implementation of a remedy. However, until the action is implemented, the best option will not necessarily be known. In fact there may not be one best option. Furthermore, there is likely to be obstacles in the implementation of action. But this is the liability of being involved in a theology from below.

   Having now described the postmodern paradigm and the type of working model that can be useful for a practical theologian within this era, four contemporary issues, which were mentioned in the introduction, will now be cited. These four issues do not exhaust the area of environment for the practical theologian, but they are chosen because of their contemporary importance within postmodernity. Likewise, the content within each issue is neither exhaustive nor definitive, but examples of possibilities. Each issue will be referenced through the four-fold pastoral cycle as already mentioned.

[1] A. Campbell, “The Nature of Practical Theology” in J. Woodward and S. Pattison (eds), The Blackwell Reader in Pastoral and Practical Theology (Oxford: Blackwell, Publishers, 2000), p. 78

[2] S. Pattison and J. Woodward, “An Introduction to Pastoral and Practical Theology” in ibid, p. 2

[3] Ibid, p. 2. It would be wrong however, to regard pastoral theologians nowadays as less academic.

[4] P. Ballard and J. Pritchard, Practical Theology in Action (London: SPCK, 1996), p. 5

[5] S. Pattison and J. Woodward, op. cit, p. 4

[6] Ibid, p. 6                                                                                            

[7] Ibid, p. 6

[8] Ibid, p. 7.

[9] P. Ballard and J. Pritchard, op. cit, p. 3

[10] Ibid, p. 73

[11] Ibid, p. 74

[12] Ibid, p. 74

[13] G. Gutierrez, “Toward a Theology of Liberation” in A. T. Hennelly (ed), Liberation Theology: A Documentary History (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1990), p. 69

[14] C. Rowland, “Introduction: The Theology of Liberation” in C. Rowland (ed), The Cambridge Companion to Liberation Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), p. 2

[15] P. Ballard and J. Pritchard, op. cit, pp. 77-78

[16] Ibid, pp. 80-81

[17] Ibid, p. 77

[18] Ibid, p. 77

[19] Ibid, pp. 104-116

[20] Ibid, p. 77

[21] Ibid, p. 78

[22] P. O’Connell Killen & J. De Beer, The Art of Theological Reflection (New York: Crossroad, 2003), p. 55

[23] Ibid, p. 56

[24] Ibid, p. 56

[25] Ibid, p. 56

[26] Ibid, p. 57

[27] Ibid, p. 57

[28] Ibid, p. 58

Postmodernity and a Postmodern Practical Theology

   It is believed that the term postmodern first appeared in the 1930’s, however it was not until the 1970’s that the term became widespread.[1] There is debate as to how the term postmodern should be defined, but what ever the meaning should be, it should signify “the quest to move beyond modernism.”[2] Postmodernism then, is a reaction against and departure from modernism.[3]

   The postmodern thinker is not optimistic about the future of the earth and its inhabitants. John Cobb Jr. says that “most of us who call ourselves postmodernists agree that much of modernity is now destructive and threatens the future of the earth.”[4] As already noted, the events of the twentieth century have given rise to this belief. Pope John Paul II sided with postmodernism because it was his belief that today’s moral crisis is the result of Enlightenment thought.[5] However it would be wrong to suggest that because we live in a postmodern era the modern era has ceased. This could not be further from the truth. As David Bosch notes, “new paradigms do not establish themselves overnight. They take decades, sometimes even centuries, to develop distinctive contours. The new paradigm is therefore still emerging and it is, as yet, not clear which shape it will eventually adopt. For the most part we are, at the moment, thinking and working in terms of two paradigms.”[6] This dualistic paradigm is that which the practical theologian must work in and be aware of. 

   It is to be recognized that Postmodern’s are not anti-rational in their thinking. This is also true for theologians who continue to believe in God. Harvey notes that the “postmodern theological project is to reaffirm God’s truth without abandoning the powers of reason.”[7] This means that the postmodern affirms the Enlightenment’s power of reason. What it reacts against is the restrictive and narrow use of this reason as is evident in its methodology. Enlightenment rationalism has led to a reductionist view of reality based on its methodological use of experimentation and sense-perception. Experimentation is based on the idea that there is a natural law that can be understood on the principal of cause and effect. It is based on the assumption that a system will always function in the same manner, therefore once we know the cause of an event we also know its effect. However, a postmodern mathematical theory known as chaos theory has challenged this perception. Chaos theory states that we can only ever have “an approximate knowledge of a system’s initial conditions and an understanding of natural law” therefore “one can only calculate the approximate behaviour of the system.”[8] This means we can only discover the habitual running of the universe. The possibilities, given the conditions, are literally infinite. A practical theologian must take this on board. No situation is absolutely the same. Many variables exist regardless if the practical theologian is dealing with humans or environmental issues. Therefore, no one way of providing assistance is the absolute correct way in any given situation. The practical theologian is called to draw upon his/her creative resources in order to assist. Such postmodern theories have spelt the end to the deterministic mechanicalism of modern thought. For the postmodern there really is such a thing as autonomy.

   In regards to sense-perception David Ray Griffin notes that it is restrictive because it presupposes that humans only have this form of perception.[9] But many postmoderns understand that there exists non-sensory perception which is moral, aesthetic and religious.[10] This means that rationality needs to be expanded to incorporate such human dimensions. The postmodern thinker does expand such rationality for within the postmodern paradigm “metaphor, symbol, ritual, sign and myth…are today being rehabilitated.”[11] Therefore, recognizing there is more than just sense-perception the practical theologian can regard the client more than in mechanicalistic terms. Humans are more than just the sum parts of their anatomy. The Enlightenment/Modernist approach worked under a dualism between mind/soul and brain/body in which the brain/body gained greater attention for it could be easily measured. The postmodern now sees an inter-connectedness between the two parts. The postmodern approaches an individual in a holistic manner.

   One important issue however that the postmodern theologian will inherit from the past and cannot escape if he/she wishes to be in dialogue with the academic community is that of supernaturalism. It is unlikely that western intellectualism will incorporate supernaturalism into its thinking. Ballard and Pritchard write that “the university represented very forcibly the need for academic freedom, the ability to pursue knowledge for its own sake, unfettered by practical expectations or prejudged orthodoxy.”[12] Supernaturalism falls under the realm of prejudged orthodoxy. The practical theologian cannot wait for some divine intervention to make things right. The practical theologian must maintain a dynamic involvement. The practical theologian must understand the need for theological reflection which means being challenged by acquired knowledge. This may mean amalgamating the knowledge of secularist thought and the knowledge of religious thought from the Christian tradition. The result of this may mean a rejection of a supernatural God. This in fact has been the case for some theologians, in particular Process theologians. These theologians recognize that they are working in a postmodern environment and have creatively offered a new vision of God which is naturalistic. Such an endeavor will hopefully bridge the gap between science and religion.[13] A naturalistic understanding of God is a panentheistic understanding of God (more on this later). It is a vision of God that states the God is in all things, but is also more than all things which makes it different to pantheism. This understanding of God therefore embraces both the transcendent and immanent understanding of God and still allows for an involvement of God which is not supernatural.

   The question remains as to how this affects the Christian tradition and its use of the Scriptures. The theory behind language and communication for a postmodern differs from a modern.[14] Postmodernity comes to recognize that language is not absolutely accurate.[15] The complexity of language has guided the way a postmodern will approach the Bible. Harvey’s insight to language is important here. He notes that “writers who write texts or use words do so on the basis of all other texts and words they have encountered, while readers deal with them in the same way. Cultural life is then viewed as a series of texts intersecting with other texts, producing more texts…This inter-textual weaving has a life of its own. Whatever we write conveys meanings we do not or could not possibly intend, and our words cannot say what we mean.”[16] The point that readers shape the meaning of words based on their cultural life which gives possibility to new meanings of the words is how Edgar V. McKnight promotes a postmodern use of the Bible.[17] The text has a life of its own which is dependent upon the reader. Many meanings are projected into the texts which are dependent upon the reader’s “values, attitudes and responses.”[18] The postmodern approach to scripture is therefore a reader-oriented approach. This is how liberation theologies have approached the use of scripture and this can be an effective way for practical theologians to use the bible within their field.  But the further question is what about the truths of Christianity? How are the Christian doctrines affected if anyone can read into it what they will?

   Paul Lakeland mentions how postmodernity “is the simultaneous cancellation and preservation of the past.”[19] McKnight’s use of the bible follows both of these ideals. It cancels the past in the sense that it is not dogmatic but it preserves the past for the Christian can identify with his/her tradition in a relevant manner. This allows the Christian to still remain part of the community. Furthermore, the Christian narrative provides insight into how one can relate with other communities that are encountered on a daily basis.[20] The postmodern understands that the scriptures do not provide scientific propositions or absolute doctrines, but instead are living texts that one can use as a resource for the diversity that life exposes one to. This makes the scriptures a dynamic source, not a static one frozen at one point of time.