The Role of Women's Experience in Feminist Theologies of Atonement

Linda D. Peacore

• Publisher: Pickwick Publications
• Year: 2010
• Print ISBN:
  9781556358036
  9781498251044
• eBook ISBN:
  9781630876982
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Christian Theology

A strong critique of traditional atonement theology is found in the work of many contemporary feminist theologians. This approach, in large part, is related to the notion of women's experience--a category that is used widely within feminist theology. But what is women's experience and how does it affect feminist theology, particularly views on the atonement? The category of women's experience is pivotal to feminist theology, yet its use may lead to models of atonement that place excessive stress upon the subjective element of Christ's saving work thereby neglecting to address adequately the objective aspects of the cross. This book focuses on the methodological issues regarding the category of women's experience generally, its definition and use in feminist theology, with a more detailed analysis of its use in the context of feminist theologies of atonement. Utilizing the work of a wide variety of feminist theologians in conversation with theologies of experience, this work attempts to understand the role of women's experience as it shapes feminist views on the atonement, noting the strengths and limitations of feminist approaches to soteriology.

part one

The Category of Women’s Experience

1

Women’s Experience in Feminist Theology

Introduction: Theology’s Gender Perspective

Feminist theology’s first significant relationship with the category of experience is most often attributed to an influential piece written by Valerie Saiving in 1960, titled “The Human Situation.” In the article Saiving criticizes, from the viewpoint of feminine experience, the estimate of the human situation made by certain contemporary theologians, primarily Anders Nygren and Reinhold Niebuhr, who represented a tendency in contemporary theology to describe humanity’s predicament as rising from a separateness and anxiety and to identify sin with self-assertion and love with selflessness.1 Saiving argues that although men and women do share common experiences, women’s sin cannot be characterized as pride or will-to-power because such a doctrine of sin is based primarily on masculine experience and thus, portrays the human condition from a male standpoint. Women’s sin is more accurately described in terms of underdevelopment or negation of the self.2 Saiving’s timely article drew theology’s attention to the significant role of experience in the construction of theology. Jewish feminist scholar Judith Plaskow adopted Saiving’s proposal in her Yale doctoral dissertation, also claiming that Reinhold Niebuhr describes sin in terms of male experience and that in order for a doctrine of sin to be relevant to women’s experience it must deal with more than self-exaltation.3 Whether or not one agrees with their conclusions about sin, both feminists demonstrate that to some degree experience, male or female, affects all theological reflection.

Other feminist theologians, cognizant of the need for more work in this area, began composing theology from a distinctive viewpoint. Rosemary Radford Ruether, one of the most influential feminist theologians, poignantly notes that feminist theology is not unique in its use of experience, but rather its use of “women’s experience, which has been almost entirely shut out of theological reflection in the past.”4 In this regard, feminist theologians share a common perspective with liberation theologians by acknowledging the “standpoint-dependent” nature of theology, considering all theology to be a construction of particular persons and faith communities who confess their faith through particular metaphors and thought patterns.5 In addition, the voices and experiences of “non-persons” are important for an understanding of God.6 However, most theology has been written primarily by male theologians who, by neglecting the experience of half of the human race, effectively define the human condition in terms of male perspective. Such Christian theology represents a form of imperialism when it claims that white male experience is equivalent to the experience of universal humanity.7 Ruether notes that “[a]ll the categories of classical theology in its major traditions . . . have been distorted by androcentrism. This not only makes the male normative . . . but it also distorts all the dialectical relationships of good/evil, nature/grace, body/soul, God/nature by modeling them on a polarization of male and female.”8 Consequently, contemporary feminist theology understands its task in large part as an attempt to give voice to women and to include a female perspective in the construction of theological doctrines.

My intention is not to elaborate on Saiving’s argument; however, she and Plaskow represent a standard as well as persuasive feminist position which perceives most systematic theology as neglecting the standpoint of women.9 Therefore, I am concerned to include women’s experience in theological reflection, yet I will need to examine the category of experience and, more precisely, what feminist theology means by “women’s experience.” I will explore the variety of ways this category is understood, even as it is used in a similar manner throughout feminist theology. Some feminist theologians from process and womanist backgrounds have challenged not only these definitions of women’s experience, but their use in theological method as well. These feminists’ insightful critique raises a concern: will the category of women’s experience help or hinder the feminist theological project?

What Is Women’s Experience?

Any discussion of the role of experience in feminist theology is hindered by the fact that it is difficult to identify precisely what is meant by the word “experience.” At first it appears to be a fairly straightforward concept, but upon closer examination one realizes experience implies many things.10 There are various layers of meaning to such a term and all pervade feminist theology to some extent.11 However, within this multiplicity of understandings common designations do arise that factor into feminist theology, including: socialized experience, which is what we learn about women from culture, usually defined by men and related to the private realm; feminist experience, which is a response to socialized experience and is concerned with women defining their own experience; historical experience, which is related to women’s activities in the past and concerned with recovering their stories;12 and individual experience, which acknowledges the limitations of generalized understandings of experience.13 In addition to these categorizations, we find women’s religious, bodily, and sociopolitical experience as particularly significant to feminist theology, thus requiring further consideration.

Religious/Spiritual

Although it is not the primary way feminist theologians speak about experience, an underlying understanding of religious experience is often relevant to and influential upon the theology being constructed. According to Rosemary Radford Ruether, reaction to patriarchal distortions of the Christian tradition forces feminist theology to utilize the “primary intuitions of religious experience itself” as a theological resource. Ruether unde...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction
• Part One: The Category of Women’s Experience
• Chapter 1: Women’s Experience in Feminist Theology
• Chapter 2: A Feminist Theology of Religious Experience
• Chapter 3: Feminist Liberation Theology and the Method of Correlation
• Part Two: Women’s Experience and Feminist Theologies of Atonement
• Chapter 4: The Role of Women’s Experience in Feminist Theologies of Atonement
• Chapter 5: The Subjective Element of Feminist Atonement Theologies
• Chapter 6: Trading Authorities: Experience and Revelation in Feminist Theologies of Atonement
• Chapter 7: Feminist Atonement Theology: Where Do We Go From Here?
• Bibliography