Introduction
The purpose of the paper is to investigate the question, “Why woman cannot be priests.” To effectively address this question, I will use the feminist theological works of Rosemary Radford Ruether and Elizabeth Johnson. In modern society, there has been an emergence of a variety of feminist theologies that are aimed are challenging male bias within religion and society. The issue of women in leadership of the Christian church has been a pertinent issue throughout history. The Church has relied on historical biblical statements such as the Pastoral Epistles that seem to out rightly prohibit women from ecclesial leadership (Christ & Plaskow, 2016). However, feminist theologians such as Rosemary Radford Ruether and Elizabeth Johnson are committed towards liberating women to play an equal role in religion and society. These feminist theologians argue that the societal and religious structures that deny women their ability to promote their full humanity are not an authentic reflection of the essence of nature and the will of God. Therefore, feminist theologians argue that women should be granted with the same opportunities as men. Feminist movements have been inspired by the Civil Rights Movements in the United States and the Secular Women’s movement of the 1960s (Christ & Plaskow, 2016). In addition, the historical, religious, political and cultural dynamics of history have been a foundation towards the advancements of feminist theology. This paper will analyze views and perspectives from the two highly distinguished and acclaimed feminist theologians and scholars on why women should actually be allowed to be priests.
Rosemary Radford Ruether
Rosemary Radford Ruether is a revolutionary and influential feminist scholar and theologian. Rosemary is instrumental towards the focus of women’s issues particularly in contemporary American religion (Ruether, 1981). Although Rosemary Ruether was a devote catholic, she vehemently criticized the catholic approach towards sexuality. Ruether’s feminist theological ideals were based on historical and theological data adopted from the history of women in liberation theology, Western religion, the relationships between Judaism and Christianity as well as her personal experiences and introspection. According to Racheal et al (2016) Ruether noted that about half of the entire world’s Catholics are women. However, according to the Catholic Church doctrine they are all banned from the opportunity to be ordained as a priest or a deacon. According to the work of Ruether, she focused on the structural injustice of sexism. In her work, she argued that women should be liberated from sexist oppression (Fulkerson, 2010).
Ruether argued that historically there has been inequality and distortion between the sexes in religion, culture, mythology and societal relations (Fulkerson, 2010). Ruether states that the fundamental distortion in the sexes stems from the definition of roles between men and women. Historically, men are associated with certain roles that are inherently superior to the roles of women. As a result of such a disassociation, men are seen to dominate the public sphere while women are required to abide in private (Fulkerson, 2010). Moreover, Ruether argues that God has been defined as a patriarchal deity. Religion associates God with characteristics of power and rationality that are characteristically associated with masculinity. Therefore, an inevitable consequence of sexism is androcentrism in which men are leaders in all spheres of society such as language, arts, history, religion and profession (Caisou-Rousseau, 2011). Therefore, androcentrism effectively locks out women from actively participating in religious leadership roles. Furthermore, Rosemary Ruether argues that the inherent nature of theology is gender-neutral. The nature of biblical theology did not recognize any form of gender bias and parity. On the contrary, the very essence of theological teachings was to deliver spiritual salvation to all of humanity (Fulkerson, 2010). However, men who were inspired by God to deliver his word write the bible. The men who wrote the bible drew on their male experiences and perspectives to write the word of God (Caisou-Rousseau, 2011). Nonetheless, it is important to note that when the bible was authored, the type of society at the time was highly patriarchal and therefore, male perspectives and experiences were bias towards male superiority. Therefore, it can be inferred that Reuther advocated for a gender-neutral society where men and women are granted the same opportunities particularly in regards to religious responsibilities.
Elizabeth Johnson
Elizabeth Johnson is a prominent feminist theologian and professor. According to Johnson, the Christian theological tradition is predominately male dominated. Johnson argues that the fundamental flaw with the suffrage and women’s liberation movement is that it did not change the views and perspectives of society towards women but focused on only integrating women into society (Edwards, 2017). As a result, the economic, cultural and religious values of society remained highly sexist. Therefore, Johnson argues that due to the sexist systems within culture, women are effectively made second-class citizens with church and society. Women are effectively denied the ability to achieve their full potential (Edwards, 2017).
Society socializes and cultures women to believe that they are not only less intellectual than men but they are also entirely dependent. Society also defines women as inferior and weak by merely reducing their roles to sex objects for male gratification (Caisou-Rousseau, 2011). In such a sexist society, Johnson describes the women’s primary goal in life is to cook, clean and provide sexual satisfaction for men. The women’s place is at the home while the role of the man is to explore the world and provide for the family. Therefore, Johnson argues that for women to achieve economic, cultural and political parity there has to be a complete restructuring of institutions within society and a complete redefinition of the roles and responsibilities of men and women (Edwards, 2017). Johnson argues that the teachings of Jesus and the will of God advocate for women inclusivity and fairness and peace for all people.
Nonetheless, Johnson recognizes that the imagery of God and Christianity is highly patriarchal (Edwards, 2017). God is considered masculine and is referred to in masculine terms within Christian teachings. In addition, the women are taught values of submission and sacrifice and as a result, they effectively disappear in the background. Therefore, Johnson argues that the imagery of God should be neutral and be defined in equally for men and women. Johnson therefore states that the fundamental goal is to create a new heaven and earth where no group dominates against another, but where every individual whether male or male has a right to participate without the limitations of societal bias and preconceived stereotypes (Edwards, 2017). Johnson recognizes that the original relationship between men and women was mutually beneficial. Therefore, God’s original intent was to affirm that man and women were created in his image and therefore they are equal stewards of the earth and representatives of God in earth without any form of distinction. Johnson contradicts popular theologians who argue that God is powerful and not weak. According to Caisou-Rousseau (2011) Johnson refers to Jesus intention, ‘Gather children together as a hen gathers her”brood under her wings (Mt. 23:27)’ Therefore, women should embrace the characteristics placed on them by society and religion and identify links between God and the characteristics that are predominately ‘feminine’. As a result, Johnson argues that women will affirm their identity as part of the image of God (Edwards, 2017). Johnson thus argues that this identifies God as weak and vulnerable. Johnson also argues that God presents as a maternal and paternal relationship to mankind. Therefore, although God remains transcendent, God is a mother and father to all of mankind. Nonetheless, Johnson is careful to not to define motherhood as a role exclusively for women (Edwards, 2017). Therefore, women should have a choice to actively participate in religion in addition to raising children. Moreover, Johnson is the fulfilment of all creation irrespective of physical differences. Therefore, Johnson argues that women have role to play in religion.
Critical Analysis
The expository analysis presented by Rosemary Radford Ruether and Elizabeth Johnson is ubiquitous in many aspects of society and religion. Ruether feministic theological ideals paint a picture that is similar to racism where human beings are denied certain rights, privileges and opportunities as well as prescribed certain societal roles based on their physical characteristics. Therefore, the prejudicial attitude that demeans women as less human than men violates the fundamental principle of human dignity (Caisou-Rousseau, 2011). In addition, the arguments by Ruether successful show how sexism displays itself as the structure of society and religion and through androcentrism.
According to Caisou-Rousseau (2011) patriachial structures bequeath men with greater economic, social, religious and political status. Therefore, men define the roles of the women and they are unable to be ordained due to historically sexist patriarchal structure. Moreover, Ruether effectively analyzes sexism based on androcentrism that has made it normal for humanity to be centered on males. The patriarchal structures have led to this andocentric thinking that men are privileged and superior to women (Caisou-Rousseau, 2011). Therefore, the church and society have made it conventional to view women from a secondary perspective of dependency, inferiority and dependence as opposed to gender equals as nature prescribed. Ruether also successfully argues that sexism is unjust and sinful before God. According to Christ & Plaskow (2016) whatever damages the value of humanity is unjust and sinful. Finally, Ruether successfully explains that the biblical teachings that perpetuate gender discrimination cannot be used to justify inequalities in gender. Ruether argues that although the bible contains the word of God, men who were inspired by God write the bible. The men who wrote the bible drew on their personal experiences as well as the current political and social climate. However, the political, social, cultural and religious climate at the time was synonymous with male superiority and female inferiority. Therefore, Ruether argues that the context within which the scripture was written should be analyzed before justifying gender bias based on biblical teachings (Caisou-Rousseau, 2011).
On the contrary, critics of Rosemary Radford Ruether argue that to correct the challenges caused as a result of discriminatory structures particularly in regards to religion will lead to reverse discrimination. In this regards, for patriarchal structures to be eliminated, men within religious leadership positions will have to be forced to relinquish their positions so as to accommodate women. In addition, according to Rachel et al (2016) arguing that defining the roles of men and women is sinful is not accurate. According to biblical scripture, although man and women are both created in the image of God, the women is subordinate to the man. The bible states that man is to protect and provide for the family while the woman is to support the man and be subordinate to the man.
Johnson is able to display the consequences of a sexist society from a woman’s perspectives. Johnson argues that women are disenfranchised from leadership roles as the predominately patriarchal society has led to low self-esteem and confidence from women who would other be actively involved in religious affairs (Rachel et al, 206). In addition, Johnson argues that the depiction of a masculine deity is synonymous with the historical ruling class which is highly suspicious. Therefore, Johnson outlines feminine characteristics in the predominately masculine God. Therefore, this successfully, challenges the historically conventional belief that God is masculine. On the contrary, Johnson displays the image of God in both male and female and terms. According to Edwards (2017) Johnson’s arguments mean that continued emphasis on sexual differences within the theological discussion perpetuates sexism and gender stereotypes and bias. As a result, this creates a culture and a society that is inherently broken and is thus unable to offer authentic humanity to religion and society.
According to Rachel et al (2016) critics of Elizabeth Johnson’s ideals argues that she is merely reducing religious language to metaphorical and symbolical forms. Johnson overly relies on metaphors and symbolical language to argue her feminist theological ideals. As a result, the inherent intention of the Catholic Church and Christian teaching is lost behind her highly metaphorical analysis of biblical text and teachings. In addition, Elizabeth Johnson argues that the relationship between men and women is mutually beneficial when in fact biblical teachings and the covenant relationship between God and mankind defines male and female in the mother and father family structure. According to Fulkerson (2010) the woman’s natural state is to be subordinate to the man and not equal him as Johnson argues. Therefore, in this regard, priests and those in ecclesial leadership positions should be men as they are associated with masculine characteristics.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it is rather unfortunate that society has prescribed gender stereotypes by oppressing and dominating against women. According to feminist theologians such as Rosemary Radford Ruether and Elizabeth Johnson women are not granted the same opportunities as men and therefore they cannot be ordained to church leadership positions. The intention of God’s original design for man and women was to live harmoniously together without perpetuating a sexism battle. Ruether argues how sexism is rife in contemporary religion and society and inevitably leads to andocentric perspectives within society and religion. On the other hand, Elizabeth Johnson attempts to provide the reader with a unique perspective by arguing that the very nature of discriminating man and women is not holy and effectively goes against the intention and teachings of God and Christ. In addition, Elizabeth Johnson argues that religion has misconstrued the imagery depicted in the bible as purely masculine. Johnson argues that the imagery of God depicts both male and female character traits and therefore women have the responsibility and ability to play a more active role in religious affairs. In conclusion, the notion that women cannot be priests is highly misguided.