115

Creating a Process and Sharing Methodologies (1)

Ann Wansbrough

1. Some Characteristics of the Patriarchal Method

* It searches for eternal, abstract truths.

* It focuses on ideas, not relationships.

* It assumes male experience.

* It analyses the biblical text "then" without reference to the "now."

* It separates the question of "application" from the question of "exegesis." Application is deduced from the principles derived from the text. The scholar, instead of bringing text and situation into dialogue, processes the text through his own mind, then processes the situation today through his mind and brings the two interpretations into dialogue (more often, imposes on the situation today the results of interpreting the text).

* It develops theological systems modelled on philosophical systems.

* It is deductive rather, than inductive.

* It is static rather than dynamic.

116

* It emphasis academic, scholarly analysis as the key to understanding.

* It claims to be "objective."

* It ignores the emotions and experience of the interpreter.

* It derives the framework of questions which are brought to the text from theology or philosophy rather than reality.

* It sees scholarship as a way of expanding a system of universal, external truths which can be imposed on life.

* It separates exegetical and theological scholarship from spirituality, discipleship and action.

* It assumes that one can do theology in isolated academic settings. Immersion in life, even in church life, is likely to be considered a distraction.

* It tries to satisfy fellow academics rather than the community of faith or struggling and suffering peoples.

* It ignores, or considers irrelevant, the fact that the biblical writers addressed and reflected on their own situation, i.e., the biblical writers did contextual theology.

* It uses scholarship to reinforce the status quo, even when it tries to avoid this, thus, reinforcing patriarchy, classism, elitism, colonialism and economic colonialism. This happens because of the failure to be self-critical and their unwillingness to change themselves, their peers and the system.

* It uses reality as a source of symbols to help illuminate or express ideas, rather than letting ideas and symbols help us see and understand reality in a new way (that is, the purpose of the exercise is ideas, not interaction with reality).

117

* It emphasises a transcendent rather than an incarnate God. It treats incarnation as an idea rather than an act of solidarity. That is, it emphasises the God in heaven rather than the God who entered into the world in Jesus Christ and who continues to be present in our neighbour.

2. Some Feminist Models

(i) Recognise that women were in the Bible – state that simply and clearly. Remind women that they are part of the biblical tradition.

(ii) Attempt to show clearly the negative conditioning (oppression) which the Bible perpetrates against women – e.g. Mary Daly, Phyllis Trible.

Sometimes lead women to reject the Bible on the grounds that it is irrelevant or harmful to women. Recognise how the tradition has contributed to women's pain and oppression.

(iii) Liberation Theology – e.g. Letty Russell

* The true tradition is that Christ sets women free from the patriarchal traditions.

* Sees man as having interfered with this tradition – e.g. Paul.

* Differentiates between scripture and human script within the biblical writings, that is, recognises that not every word in the Bible is the word of God.

(iv) Reconstruction Theory – e.g. Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza

* Recognises that the Bible has been edited, canonised, translated and interpreted by andro-centric (male-centered) scholars.

118

* Reclaims women in the traditions underlying the Bible and writes them in again – e.g. women apostles.

* Recognises the full significance of the women who are mentioned in scripture and builds on this.

* Sets up principles/statements for looking at the Bible – e.g. suspicion, proclamation, remembrance and creative actualisation.

Courtesy: Hei Qi

119

3. A Methodology for Using the Bible

Patriarchal theology has relied heavily on logical thinking processes and scholarship centered in biblical language, history and philosophy.

We need to use our imagination but to do so in a way which reflects the biblical texts.

We need to use our experience as human beings, and as women. We need to use our understanding of our context. We need to use our spirituality.

One way of doing this is to begin with the biblical text and to use techniques of meditation and imagination to experience the text, to discover the dynamics and the symbols – the story underlying the story.

That can lead to a tentative exegesis, or expression of the meaning of the passage. It can also lead to questions about the context, to be explored in the next step, and to tentative ideas about how it illuminates our experience or our situation, or how stories from our situation illuminate the text.

This then needs to be tested by recognising that the text is "alien speech" – it comes from a different culture and must be respected as a product of that culture. This means we need to learn about the historical and social context. We need to check that we are not relying too heavily on particular words – e.g. by comparing translations, or using tools based on the original languages. We need to understand what was going on at the time and what the symbols were likely to mean in their context.

If we are committed to community rather than individualism, then we will draw on the insights of others. We may do some of

120

the imaginative process in a group, sharing the results. We should at least consider what commentators have said about the passage. We should also consider the Christian tradition. For example, if from some passage we have concluded God is angry and judgmental, we need to remember the concept of the grace of God and work out why, in this context, God is angry. If some passage appears to limit 'women's role, we must test this against other parts of the tradition which liberate women.

Often we will find, unfortunately, that scholars are unable to answer our questions because they have not considered them.

Equipped with the information about the context, we can test; our tentative understanding of the passage – has it been confirmed?! Is it unrealistic when we understand the time in which it was written or place it in its literary context? Does it need to be modified? If we disagree with what others have said about the passage, what is it in the text which leads us to do so?

When we think about particular situations in our context, do new questions arise that we want the text to answer and which seem appropriate to the particular text?

We can then return to the passage and again let it speak to our imagination and our spirituality. It is my experience that we often have to stop consciously trying to think about a passage if we want to understand it – we need to have absorbed information, but to move beyond logical analysis. The brain, when we allow it, is capable of its own creative dialogue with itself and our spirituality and God.

We can use a variety of means of expressing that synthesis. We may write an article or a paper or a sermon or a prayer or a poem. But we may find we need to draw or dance or mime or create something out of clay or make another form of sculpture – perhaps even a human sculpture. We can paraphrase the story, retell it in modem dress.

121

Out of this process can come a biblical image which can illuminate our situation. We may offer the image to a group and let it work out where that image is found in the lives of the group or the individuals in the group, or in the wider context of the world. It may help us understand things that have happened, as we retell stories which come from our situation, or to understand what we should do in the future, creating new stories by our actions.

4. A Further Method – The Hermeneutic Circle

The method just given already begins to bring into dialogue Bible, interpreter, reality and community of faith. But we can also develop that dialogue in other ways. I have used this method in the two Bible studies I have given at this workshop. Let me explain the process and its various steps.

My work for the Uniting Church in Australia has involved me in theologising or helping others theologise from the perspectives of a number of different groups. They all challenge the perspective and theology of the Anglo-Celtic, male, middle class theologians, but each has particular experiences of injustice. A number of different cultures are involved. The groups include: (a) people within Australia: women, people with disability, aboriginal people, young people, people in disadvantaged areas, people who are poor, people of minority cultures and (b) people outside Australia: Pacific Islanders, Asians and the "undeveloped" or "less developed" countries.

The purpose of doing this theology is to determine church policy and action – what is God doing in the world, and what is the church called to do in the world in cooperation with God and with other people as an expression of our faith, our discipleship and our spirituality? What does it mean to work as Christians for justice and liberation?

122

All theologians and biblical scholars have some theological principles in mind when they do their work – basic statements of the faith which provide the framework for critical thinking. The following are among the most important in my work:

* The Bible is written from the underside of history, i.e. from the perspective of, and for the sake of, people who suffer injustice. It is only properly understood from that perspective.

* God is the God revealed in the Exodus and the Magnificat – the God who challenges unjust regimes and rescues those who suffer injustice – and the God revealed in the crucifixion – the God who takes upon Godself the suffering which comes from political evil and injustice. The God revealed in Jesus Christ is in solidarity with those who suffer injustice.

* Women and men are all in the image of God, and God is only understood when we take the experience of women and the experience of non-European cultures seriously.

* God is a God of grace who offers not only forgiveness, but a new way of living together. The grace of God frees Christians who have wealth and power to face reality. They can only experience the gospel as they confess to their need of forgiveness and new life-style.

* The church is only faithful when it sides with those who suffer injustice, even at a cost to itself.

* The Bible is dynamic, not static. It is the story of a people's, spiritual journey together. It is best understood by people today who are on a spiritual journey.

* Theology is the expression of life-centered spirituality. As such, it leads to action for liberation.

123

Because of the nature of my work, I have needed to develop a process which enables theology to draw on the particular situations and experiences of people. The method is illustrated in my Bible studies on Ephesians and on Women in the New Testament.

I have adopted the theological method of the theologian Segundo. I do not follow his theology or ideology, simply his brief outline of the hermeneutic circle, which I interpret as follows. The questions I suggest are intended to be illustrative and to act as a stimulus; they are not the only questions which can or should be asked at each step. (For example, many of the methods Sharon suggested in her workshop on methodology would be helpful at different points in the circle.)

Looking at Reality – Observe reality of injustice and describe it. We may reflect on an action we have been involved in, on our own stories, or on the stories of people involved in the situation.

Ideological Suspicion – Recognising that there is something wrong with the way things are. Recognising the pain, the suffering, the struggle. At this point we may not be able to argue the case for why something is wrong, but deep within us we know it is wrong (that is, this step is intuitive and emotional rather than intellectual). This leads us to look for clues as to what specifically is wrong.

Critique of the Ideological Superstructure – Looking at the way ideas are used to justify actions; looking at who wins, who loses; and looking at how the ideology protects the winners against the losers.

The three steps above could be done through the methods of social analysis.

124

Exegetical Suspicion – How has theology been used to support the injustice? What assumptions have been made in that theology? Is the God to which that theology points the God of Jesus Christ? the God we know? What are the false ideas? What parts of the biblical and Christian tradition challenge this false theology? How has God, and the life God gives, been rejected by the ideology/church/society?

New Hermeneutic – From our ideological and exegetical critique, can we derive new principles which provide a different way of interpreting reality, which open our eyes to see reality in a new way and which lead us to action? What would it mean to recognize God and accept God's offer of life, peace, liberation in this situation?

Reality/Action – What action will we take? What do we learn from the action we take?

At this point, we have come full circle and commence the process again. The circular nature of the process means that we assume in our understanding of the reality, the issues, theology and principles of interpretation. We never exhaust the Bible (or even one passage in it) or the analysis of reality or ideology – there is always something more to be found, when our experience enables us to see it. However, this will only really happen as we act on what we already know, so that we participate in reality rather than simply looking at it from the outside.

We need to note that the method only works if we are prepared to ask some very challenging questions about society and about the Christian faith. It will also only work as we implement what we have learned, i.e. take action. Without this, it degenerates into a new form of patriarchal intellectualism. Coupled with action, it can enable us to find the meaning of faith in our context and to find the path of discipleship. Each turn of the spiral should take us deeper in our understanding of the faith and further in action.

Artwork: Soumya Mohanty