In protestant theological institutions: a critical appraisal of contextual challenges in kerala, india jessy jaison b b s., M d



Yüklə 1,36 Mb.
səhifə7/30
tarix09.08.2018
ölçüsü1,36 Mb.
#62195
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   ...   30

1.5.6 Segregation of Women

In the seminary situation, women are grafted onto a male enterprise. The associated challenges develop in some women a sense of being outsiders. Ruether says, “Not only were women prevented from becoming theological learners but also the theological tradition itself was biased against them. Christian theology has been distorted both by women’s absence and by the need to justify and reinforce their absence.”106 What theological educators need to realize for women is a real transformation of theological institutions as well as their curriculum.


Another challenge would be the tendency of churches to look with suspicion at women who claim to have been called into ministry. For Ellison, “It is sometimes easier to believe that a man has been called to the ministry than a woman has.”107 As far as future ministry placement is concerned, women students do not fit into the system of training that has been given to them. They are squeezed into a system that is designed for men students and their future ministry in the church, while women students need to have a life-changing experience through their learning and practice of theology in a seminary setting. Haddad cites from WOCATI News:
Women are disadvantaged; in the daily administration of theological institutions; in male models of ministerial formation; in the syllabus based upon a male biblical and theological canon; in having to deal with predominantly male faculty role models and a male ‘unwritten syllabus’ shaping institutional life; and in institutions where a token female presence simply maintains the status quo.108
The body of knowledge fostered in a seminary is often not inclusive of women. Feminists of all times have questioned in one way or other the male-dominated development, interpretation and use of knowledge. Theological institutions are no exception to the perpetuation of this status quo. Feminists argue that libraries contain men-oriented traditional books as the source of knowledge, and predominantly male professors and lecturers are the major designers of learning activities that have remained totally insensitive to the large number of women students on the roll. The Cornwall reports the response of women on this,
As feminists, we have become increasingly aware of the ways in which women are outsiders to the process of theological education. We are not only physically outside, excluded from positions of power such as faculty appointments and top administrative positions; we are physically outside, because our history and experience are not taken seriously.109
Farley, Kelsey, The Cornwall, and The Mud Flower Collectives and Chopp-all were aware of the fragmentation in theological education and could identify the need to reform theological education by rethinking its structure. Women’s studies have not yet received the due attention they require in many seminaries and especially in doctoral research. Fiorenza says,
While emancipatory approaches such as feminist…or post colonial critical studies…have brought about some change in the curriculum and education of ministerial and undergraduate students, doctoral biblical education- as a quick internet search of departments can show-is still mostly devoted to the philological-historical or exegetical-doctrinal disciplinary paradigm.110

1.5.7 Divorce of Theory and Practice

One of the major criticisms discussed by The Cornwall Collective was that theological education tends to separate theory and practice. The Seminary Quarter at Grailville (SQAG) grew out of the two week long seminars – Women Exploring Theology – held in the summers of 1972 and of 1973. The movement grew increasingly: “In the four years- 1974 to 1977- eighty-four women from thirty-three schools (twenty-eight seminaries, five universities) have participated in SQAG. All the major denominations have been represented.”111 The report outlined feminist criticisms of theological education and proposed some basic revisions, including some alternative forms of theological education. It also brought out the need for integration and spirituality, which cannot be achieved where there is a gap between theory and practice. The Mud Flower Collective discussed the relation of theory and praxis along with its emphasis on other concerns such as the politics of theological education, the role of cultural pluralism, the standards of excellence, the role of community, the claims of validity in scholarship and the structure of theological reflection as the problems for women in theological education. Feminism in the secular society has provided feminist scholarship in theological education with its research, research methodology, and perspectives and development of criticism and construction of structures.


Feminist theology aspires to transform the structures, images and patterns of symbols about being human. It attempts to construct new discourses on women’s experiences, develop symbolisms, new liturgies, women-church concept, and methods to resist the traditional way of doing theology as a purely academic discipline divorced from the real lives of people. For instance, “Rosemary Radford Ruether’s Women-Church contributes new liturgies, such as a rite of healing from violence, a rite of healing for an incest victim, a rite of healing for a victim of wife beating, and a puberty rite for a young woman”112 When these are provided, according to Ruether, women will find the psychological and mental space that is a basic foundation of any pursuit of study for ministry. How such moves would affect male-biased societies is yet to be explored. Women need freedom from expending all their energies simply to survive; they also need freedom within their institutional structures to pursue their own vocational goals. Learning through practice has been given primary significance in feminist thought on education. Chopp discusses this strategic emphasis: “To focus on practices is a contemporary strategy within the broader turn to praxis and practical reason within contemporary critical theory.”113 She suggested that,
Theological education, long studied in terms of the internal development of ideas, is shaped by social forces and by developments of higher education. In order to understand the challenges and changes in theological education, we must see them historically, in terms of institutions with which they react.114
Feminists stand in strong opposition to the ‘banking-model of education’ which lacks sensitivity to the real life situation of the student or offers no hope for the application of the learning. Freire describes this model: ‘the professor holds a certain body of knowledge, which he deposits in the brain of the student; the student holds it there until the professor calls for it, when it is returned, perhaps with a little interest, perhaps without, for the students’ own ideas are add-ons.’115 The accumulation of descriptive knowledge that has nothing to do with practical life is deemed worthless by women as the section below further explores.
1.5.8 Neglect of Experiential Learning
Theological education has to equip students to build their skills, make them self-confident and prepare them to face the challenges ahead. “Education that does not divide its affective and cognitive aspects is desirable for everyone and may be especially so for women, whose self-confidence frequently has been limited by their life circumstances.”116 This assertion would necessitate a consideration of subject design and curriculum in theological education. According to Chinnici, “Psychologically, taking a course that you cannot use, or being excused from a class because you are a woman can do little help your feelings of self-confidence.”117 Only learning that is connected to real life experience will make a lasting impact on students. It is held that the experiences of women who are outside of the dominant society have not been adequately affirmed in theological education. Women should be encouraged in theological education to provide their experiences and expectations whether individual or collective, in written and oral forms. Chopp terms it ‘narrativity,’118 which is the first of the three aspects of feminist practices she suggests–the other two being ‘ecclesiality’ and ‘theology’ as together they become the heart of reflective learning. The Cornwall saw that collective reflection on shared experience is crucial for such a theology. Further, they stated,
We understand sexism to be a set of attitudes, behaviours and social structures that differentiates between women and men on the basis of their sex in, access to resources, participation in making and enforcing decisions, setting criteria for inclusion/exclusion, the power to name reality119
Feminist scholarship supports the generation and use of knowledge based on the actual experience of women, which may be significantly different to that of men. Though this was briefly mentioned earlier, a further exploration would be helpful. Women’s experience is central to a feminist way of doing theology. Saiving, who promoted the emphasis on women’s experiences in learning and pedagogy,120 regarded women and men as inherently different, while Plaskow, who developed from Valerie’s contention, looked at the whole issue from a different angle,
When societies create expectations and roles for women it affects the message women internalize about themselves. These messages influence women’s experiences and in turn, require feminist interpretations, which views women’s traditional status and roles with suspicion, that these are creatures created by patriarchy and serve to bolster male privileges.121
As mentioned above, while some feminists tend to use ‘women’s experience’ wholly as individualistic experiences of women, there are others who define women’s experience as covering the multi-faceted experiences such as bodily, socialized, feminist, historical and individualistic experiences of women. Some view women’s experiences only as a social construct while others consider it as merely a psychological issue. There has not been much consensus on this. The Cornwall Collective observed that the patriarchal family structures teach women a “kinship modality” to behave as daughters, sisters, wives, mothers, “In a patriarchal educational system and in other business women learn to internalize the mutually exclusive complement to this first socialization.”122 This contention suggests that the context in which a girl receives her upbringing matters a great deal and further, if her educational context only lets her internalize previous understandings mostly of her limitations, she becomes rooted in that mode for life. Bridges-Johns, quoted by Solle, pessimistically surmises that for women, “Knowledge has increasingly degenerated into knowledge of death.”123 Abraham, responding to Bridges-Johns, affirmed the need to make theological education accessible to all, especially the less privileged ones like women. Having realized that ‘education is considered the vehicle of the values and culture of modernism and our theological education is cast in the same mould,’ he says, “….the new models for education should be based not on modernity but on the experiences of its victims.”124 If theological education worked out of the experiences of its victims, certain things should follow.
We need to start from ‘below’ (from the experiences of people, especially the marginalized). We need a new perception of ‘reality’ (everything – hopes, aspirations, struggles, wounds). We need to operate with ‘openness’ (which becomes the seed of inter-relatedness of new relationships and a new order). Theological education must be done in solidarity with the suffering.125
Despite the differences of views, women in the modernist and post-modernist eras accord vital significance to their experiences, which they hold as the foundation to challenge male-stream pedagogy. Women in seminaries continue to raise both intellectual and practical challenges to the entire structure of training. Their voices disturb the traditional pattern of decision making and discussions. Feminist thinking in general calls for a re-evaluation of the existing methodology of experience in classroom, chapel and field ministry and hence affects the whole of curriculum. In essence, women tend to move beyond the institutional definitions of ministry in their search for a place to serve the society and the church.

    1.6 Women’s Major Struggles in Theological Education



The above review of literature has led to the deduction that the struggles of women in theological education are categorized and concisely stated in the following section, which will also guide the gathering of empirical data. The three categories are:

Structural issues (hierarchical structures, the traditional concept of teaching and teacher, the inclination to the university model),
Discriminatory issues (use of sexist language, male-stream epistemology, the segregation of women), and
Vocational issues (the divorce of theory and practice, negligence of experiential learning)



    1.6.1 Structural Issues

Due to the traditionally valued hierarchical structures in the church, theological institutions and the society, women’s voices are not as easily heard and responded to as they expect. This phenomenon is the result of the way the hierarchical structures function. The Cornwall Collective expressed it thus,


We have addressed the essential questions and have argued convincingly that our concerns are central to the issues at hand, only to find ourselves defeated by a technicality (i.e. The committee of which we are part is only advisory). The energy and creativity needed to forge new forms and new programmes are often dissipated in the struggle simply to enter the arena where the decisions are made.126
Despite the initiatives of women who drew the attention of the wider world to the concerns of women in theological education, there was an obvious laxity in implementing structural change and neglect of suggestions feminists had introduced for the reformation of theological education. As noted earlier, the number of women in theological seminaries is steadily increasing and the challenges that accompany this situation have been phenomenal. Zikmund identified how women have upset the existing structures in theological education127 by challenging the traditional sources of religious authority, by expanding the understanding of religious life, by changing the style of religious leadership and by calling the churches to a more vital theology of ministry. The Cornwall Collective suggested nothing less than setting up explicit structures to assist women in theological seminaries because only such a measure corresponds to mobilization in its true sense. The suggestions included open agendas, rotated tasks, rotation of the representative roles, distribution of routine tasks as equally as possible, agreement on ground rules for communication, a stress on accurate reporting and open decision-making in the handling of finances, encouragement of individuals to develop new skills, diffusing information frequently to all members and allocation of tasks according to the criteria of ability.128
1.6.2 Discriminatory Issues
Discriminatory concepts and practices appear in many ways. Wheeler observed that, “many women argue and some administrators acknowledge that full recognition and appreciation of women have not been achieved.”129 Compared to the situation ten or twenty years ago, certainly, the situation of women has objectively improved somewhat. There are women faculty in many seminaries; some colleges have developed Women’s Studies programmes. Generally, women have no extra difficulty in being admitted to a Bible College; no concerns are needed over issues such as physical insecurity etcetera. Yet, this does not mean women are freed from all discriminatory practices. Zikmund talks about the hidden traps that ensnare female faculty and administrators in theological education:

In spite of the fact that women administrators are very effective at balancing the multiple obligations of their complex jobs, male colleagues continue to resent women who have power ‘over them’. Male faculty want female administrators to be available, to be ‘at home’ ready to tend to their needs.130


This also shows that any change in the system will require time. The dramatic increase in the enrolment of women thus poses challenges and requires a response from seminaries.



    1.6.3 Vocational Issues



Thirdly, the vocational concerns of women seminarians are still strong issues for debate. Often seminary leadership tend to forget the fact that being a woman has different concerns for ministry and personal formation. The issue is not just one of equal opportunities, but it is of intentional commitment required for the vocational formation of women. Wheeler maintains that,

  • Seminaries should equip their women to survive amidst resistance and even hostility in church structures.

  • Seminaries should create awareness of the coming placement problem and to encourage women to develop strategies to confront it.

  • Seminaries should require at least one women’s studies course for the M Div degree or if not a single course, attention throughout the curriculum to women’s perspectives.

Many women in theological education are not prepared to accept the traditional practice with all its inherent weaknesses. With a broader concept of ministry, women demand a total transformation of the traditional curriculum that perpetuates clericalism. This is not just a plea for access to training, but also for training that offers them formation in life and ministry. Feminists highlight how one’s approach to knowledge and learning is shaped by one’s self-image. Wheeler claims from her expertise in the field, that the feminist challenge goes far beyond studies that attempt to compensate for lack of attention to women and their contributions by scholars in the past. The feminist perspective is a critical one which challenges a fundamental consensus, forged out of the Enlightenment, about how knowledge is conditioned, shaped and limited by the social location and cultural conditioning of those who create knowledge, and that it is far more difficult to transcend the limits placed by social and cultural conditioning than Western rationalists have long thought. While evaluating the women’s studies program in one seminary Wheeler experienced the great difficulties institutions have with the intellectual challenges raised by feminists. The intention had been to bring women’s perspectives into the heart of the curriculum, and this had not happened.131
With the influx of women into seminaries that has caused discomfort to the traditional practices of seminaries, there is a call for reflective, non-hierarchical praxis in theological education, continual assessment of student-oriented learning environment and an imperative for contextual relevance of curricula. This perspective stands in sharp contrast to the banking-concept of knowledge, male-oriented training, and the insensitivity in the university model of education. ‘Consciousness-raising’ and the developments resulting from the presence of women in theological education has been creditable in some of the Western settings, where women emerge into the ordained ministry of the church on completion of their training. However, the issue of women in theological education differs much in its theoretical and practical implications from culture to culture. Varied theological and ministerial perspectives on women also determine emphases on women’s theological education as will be discovered in the following chapter.

CHAPTER 2: CONTEXTUAL DISTINCTIVENESS – WOMEN’S EDUCATION AND THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION IN INDIA



Yüklə 1,36 Mb.

Dostları ilə paylaş:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   ...   30




Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©genderi.org 2024
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

    Ana səhifə