Embracing God as Goddess: Exploring Connections Between Female Sexuality, Naming the Divine, and...

BODY and

Rethinking Sexuality as Justice-Love

Marvin M. Ellison and Sylvia Thorson-Smith, eds.

THE PTLGRIM PRESS Cleveland

-9

Embracing God as Goddess Exploring Connections between

Female Sexuality, Naming the Divine, and Struggling for Justice

Rebecca Todd Peters

I will praise God, my Beloved, for she is altogether lovely. Her presence satisfies my soul, she fills my senses to overflowing so that I cannot speak. 1

Recently we were sitting at the dinner table when our two-year-old looked up and asked, "Who is God?" You would think that, as a feminist Christian ethicist, I would have prepared myself for this question. Indeed, over the past several years I have painstakingly searched for children's books about God that reflect (or at least do not contradict) my own thea-ethical beliefs. We have been reading a number of these to and with her since she was very young. I have played out different scenarios in my mind about how to talk with her about God. I guess I was expecting something more along the lines of "Where does God come from?" or "Why did God make mosquitoes?" But she caught me unawares. Who is God?

Even if I have come to some kind of understanding approximating an answer to this question, how am I to explain this to a two-yearold? I began to talk about God's relationship to us and about how God had created the world and all the things in it and how much God cares for us. Not missing a beat she queried, "Did he make the trees?" "Yes, he made the trees." "Did he make the bunny rabbits?" "Yes, she made the bunny rabbits." "Did she make my milk?" "Well,

157

158 Rebecca Todd Peters

the cow made your milk, but God made the cow." "Did she make the table?" And so on regarding all the objects within her sight for the next ten minutes.

Here is a young child who assumes that God is male, even with parents who are committed to gender justice and inclusi e language. Luckily, we have paid enough attention to gender in our household that when I switched to a feminine pronoun in response to her queries, she quite naturally followed my lead. It's not that I want to teach her that God is female rather than male, or do 17 Gender is an important, and highly contes ed, factor in understanding who God is, even for a small child.

In the struggles for inclusive language ave the past thirty years, feminists, womanists, mujeristas, and other justice-seeking people have strived to develop images and metaphors for God that expand our imaginations and allow us to experience he divine in wholly new ways.2 However, most people, even those committed to inclusive language, shy away from using female names and pronouns to refer to God. Mother God is rarely used, and the thought of speaking of the divine as Goddess is anathema to most Christians. The juxtapositions of the very words-God and Goddess-illustrate how deeply gendered our language remains. 3 "God" is no more gender

eutral than "man" or "mankind" is, and yet, resistance to changing the way we talk about Godless runs deep.4 Female metaphors and analogies are acceptable on occasion, but we strive mostly for gender neutrality. Why this reticence to embrace truly female images of God that can stand beside the dearly male images of God that have colonized our thought, language, and theology?5

One way to answer this question is to enter into he process of reimagining the divine ourselves and to discover the sources of our own fear and resistance to speaking of the divine as Sophia or Goddess. In doing so, we need to be aware that this fear is about more than a reaction to female names for the divine. It is about resistance to the ethical implications such language unleashes. As Beverly Harrison points out in an essay examining the r lationship between sexism and language in Christian e hics, "A working assumption of a feminist ethic must be that we critically assess all language for its moral effects."6 The purpose of this essay is a explore the ethical implica-

Embracing God as Goddess

tions of one such relationship, and how we image Godless. 7 I of thinking about the power a and world. Because sexuality, is not something readily asSO( tail discomfort or uneasiness fe sexuality with the divine may l dess language. Nevertheless, I iJ imagery for a time: embrace it sources of resistance to knowinc ploration may well Show how f~ expanded knowledge of and ex

Confronting resistance and

Reaction to the 1991 Presbyteril Together," exemplifies the resist tempts to rethink sexual theolo ately attacked a foundational c sexual ethic with an exclusive nc longer adequate. In doing so, crit like homosexuality and teen sex able or persuasive argument the defending was still viable. The I no exclusive hold on this reactio zations within many mainline de people's fears about homosexua bian, gay, bisexual, and transger portray the current debates abo only about ordaining queer clerg] deeper, more productive debate ab ethics that would recognize the di' relationships and move beyond t of marriage as the normative de sexual intimacy ought to occur. TI report" was second only to the up the Re-Imagining event. 9

159 Embracing God as Goddess

tions of one such relationship, the connection between our sexuality and how we image Godless.? In the process, we will tryon new ways of thinking about the power and presence of the divine in our lives and world. Becau e sexuality, and particularly women's sexuality, is not something readily associated with the divine, his might entail discomfort or uneasiness for some. Indeed, connecting women's sexuality with the divine may be at the heart of anxiety about Goddess language. Nevertheless, I invite readers to stay with this Godless imagery for a time: embrace it, experiment with it, and search out sources of resistance to knowing the divine in different ways. This exploration may well show how female bodies and sexuality can offer expanded knowledge of and expressions for Godless.

Confronting resistance and fear

Reaction to the 1991 Presbyterian report, "Keeping Body and Soul Together," exemplifies the resistance and fear that often greet attempts to rethink sexual theology. Right-wing detractors immediately attacked a foundational claim of the study, namely, that a sexual ethic with an exclusive norm of heterosexual marriage is no longer adequate. In doing so, critics highlighted controversial issues like homosexuality and teen sex without ever offering any reasonable or persuasive argument that the aditional norm they were defending was still Viable. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has no exclusive hold on this reaction, however, as right-wing organizations within many mainline denominations have capitalized on people's fears about homosexuality and on mystification of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender "LGBT') people in order to portray the current debates about sexual ethics as if they were only about ordaining queer clergy.8 This strategy has preempted a deeper, more productive debate about sexual behavior and Christian ethics that would recognize the diversity and complexity of intimate relationships and move beyond the woefully inadequate standard of marriage as the normative defining relationship within which sexual intimacy ought to occur. The controversy over "the sexuality report" was second only to the uproar two years later surrounding the Re-Imagining event.9


The hostile reaction to the Re-lmagining gathering (which brought the Presbyterian Church to the brink of denominational split) is il

lustrative of the discomfort and misunderstanding often attached to feminist liturgical expressions that incorporate divine female imagery.tO In November 1993, twenty-two hundred women and some men spent four days together celebrating women's lives, struggles, and moral wisdom in the con ext of their faith journeys. Shared rituals focused on worshiping the divine in a multitude of forms and with a variety of names. Women's embodied experience, including sexuality, was Jifted up as not only diVinely blessed, but as a window into our nowledge of Godless. The ideas that were expressed and celebrated were not radically new within feminist circles. What was transformative and ultimately so threatening about the event was that feminist theological ideas of the last several decades we e collectively embodied in liturgy and brought into the cultural and religious main tream through widespread media coverage initiated, ironically, by conservative right-Wing publications, including The Good News (United Methodist Church) and The Layman (Presbyterian). The extreme reaction of right-wing factions within these Protestant churches to the incorporation 0 female images of the divine into the liturgy at the Re-Imagining Conference speaks to the volatility of this issue and the vehemence with which it has been treated in mainline Christianity.

The accusation of pagan worship is levied against feminist, womanist, mujerista, and other Iiberationist theologians whenever they explore female images and embodiments of the divine. This sensationa izing rhetoric seeks to discredit rather than to dialogue about theological and ethical issues. The Religious Right has invoked stereotypes and misinformation about feminist theologies and sexual ethics in an effort to portray them as forms of heresy and witchcraft that threaten the core fundamentals of Christianity. The strategy of the right wing has been to obfuscate meaningful theological efforts to reexamine God language and moral norms for sexual behavior by quoting people and ideas out of context and by playing on people's fears of change and difference. As happened with Re-lmagining, this discrediting is accomplished through demonizing the Other (for the most part, feminists, womanists, and

EmbraCing God as Goddess

LGST people) and denour. marginalized groups of Chr

The fact that the terms "l have become lightning rods 1 tions of mainline churches is the~e terms sends dollars flyi zations.) Changes in these language about God and sex digm shift. I 1 A dialectical TE

of diVinity and sexual ethics ined as we seek sexual justic the logy and ethics are intim native of the other, they exist think about Godless and our decision-making. If we believ sex, then that affects behavior nonmarital sex; we have non ated from God; we think that world in which nonmarital sex reject God; or we experience C of intimate relationship, which God and our theology. While b havior, so, too, our experience into how and what we know 01

Change is occurring Within Bevers are praying to a femal ethical models of sexual behavi' that Christian churches have SI

Course marked by justice, love, native social order and reflects c that is fundamentally differe t ogy.

13 However, none of what 15

against the historic principles 0

In my judgment, those of us Ii first century are experiencing f and a continuing process of r wrong in its assessment that tl Christianity. As Elizabeth Johns(


LGBT people) and denouncing changes proposed by historically marginalized groups of Christians.

The fact that the terms "homosexuality" and "goddess worship" have become lightning rods for co servative and fundamentalist factions of mainline churches is not coincidental. (The mere mention of these terms sends dollars ying into the coffers of right-wing organizations.) Changes in these two areas of thea-ethical discourselanguage about God and sexuality-will reqUire an enormous paradigm shift. 11 A dialectical relationship exists between conceptions of divinity and sexual ethics that must be acknowledged and examined as we seek sexual justice in confusing times. Differently said, theology and ethics are intimately related. While neither is determinative of the other, they exist in a dynamic relationship.12 What we think about Godless and our relationship to her affects our ethical decision-making. If we believe that God disapproves of nonmarital sex, then that affects behavior in one of several ways: we do not have nonmarital sex; we have nonmarital sex and fe I guilty and alienated from God; we think that such a God does not make sense in a world in which nonmarital sex is a positive aspect of life and t us we reject God; or we experience God's presence and love in the context of intimate relationship, which helps us re hink our relationship with God and our theology. While beliefs about Godless can influence beh vior, so, too, our experience of the world is an important window into how and what we know about Godless.

Change is occurring within the Christian tradition. Faithful believers are praying 0 a female Christian Godless and embracing ethical models of sexual behavior that differ from the historic stance that Christian churches have supported. Contemporary sexu I discourse marked by justice, love, and right relation requires an alternative social order and reflects a theological conception of the divine that is fundamentally differe t from radi ional male-stream theology.13 However, none of what is happening is necessarily heretical or against the historic principles of the Christian faith tradition.

I my judgment, those of us living at the beginning of the twentyfirst century are experiencing the contiI)ued revelation of Godless Q d a continuing process of reformation. The Religious Right is wrong in its assessment that these changes are incongruous with Christianity. As Elizabeth Johnson points out, "Words about God are


cultural creatures, entwined with the mores and adventures of the faith community that uses them. As cultures shift, so too does the specificity of God-talk."14 Resolution of these issues will mark the future of both hurch and society. This theological conflict reflects present ethical conundrums that people are facing daily. The only way for churches to stay relevant is for theology and ethics to help people make sense of the world in which they live. 15 Semper reformanda or "always ref rrning" is an ongoing and a cherished legacy of the Reformed tradition.

Women's bodies as a starting point for theo-ethical reflection about God/ess16

Women's bodies might seem like an odd starting place when thinking about Godless, especially because historically women's sexuality, as Ursula Pfafflin points out, has been seen as a hindrance to contact with God, not to mention women's ability to function as ordained ministers and priests, 17 In thiS light, women's sexuality has long been a topic of theological import! If women experience relationship with God in all aspects of life-as we are menstruating, having sex, or giving birth - then the barrier lies not between women and God, but in traditional theologic I attitudes rooted in male ignorance and ambivalence about women and female sexuality. Women's experience of sexuality can offer powerful means for thinking afresh about Godless.

In a recent essay, Beverly Clack explores the relationship between human sexuality and the concept of God/ess. I8 She notes that lithe messy, painful, and sometimes tragic business of procreation and life-givi ng has not been seen as appropriate for the God of order celebrated in the Western tradition. Better that God should create by his word than through the organic process of birthing!"19 I agree with Clack that the changing nature of women's bodies offers important insights into understanding the divine. For example, over the course of an average lifetime, female bodies morph and shift in amazing ways. Adolescent girls gradually develop swelling breasts and hips that indicate their ability to bear and feed children. Cycles of menstruation are marked by ovulation, changes in vaginal fluid, and blood issuing forth where there is no wound. During pregnancy,


Women grow larger with s their bodies nurture naSCE body opens in alma t incor: forth from existing life. In with Iife- ustaining fluid so of their infants that comme reproduce it. Through men new state of being manifest and the cessation of menst ual pleasure vary Widely no within the sexual experienCE very nature of female sexua

If we start with women' window into the divine, its redefining the way we think observes, lilt is not only won vious physical evidence, me important to consider in dey vinity. Opening up our unde of change can resonate profo

Historically, the Western God's immutability and imp found comfort in vieWing the of an unpredictable world. H< contradicted by actions of G< see Godless changing her mi particular figures. In Genesis Who thinks about her actions'a deed, it is through her conven to spare Sodom and Gornorrl be found. Nevertheless, the id~ has made deep inroads into tJ image SUpposedly evokes Godl human beings by convincing u 1 find it a strangely dead irnc the problem of understanding more complicated when comb "all good" and "aU powerful."


women grow larger with swollen bellies and feel many changes as their bodies nurture nascent human life. I childbirth, the female body opens in almost inconceivable ways and allows new life to is e forth from existing life. In nursing, women's breasts become heavy with life-sustaining fluid so pure and perfectly attuned to the needs of their infants that commercial manufacturers have been unable to reproduce it. Through menopause women move, once again, into a new state of being manifested in their physical bodies by hot flashes and the cessatio of menstrual activity. Female orgasms and sexual pleasure vary widely not only from woman to woman, but also within the sexual experiences of an individual woman. 20 In short, the very nature of female sexuality can only be defined as changeable.

If we start with women's bodily experience of sexuality as a window into the divine, its very mutability can offer insight into redefining the way we think about Godless. Furthermore, as Clack observes, "It is not only wome who change: while there is less obvious physical evidence, men's bodies change toO.//21 This is also important to consider in developing insights into the concept of di·nity. Opening up our understanding of Godless to the possibility

of change can resonate profoundly with men as well as women. Historically, the Western Christian tradition has emphasized

God's immutability and impassability. Christian theologians have found comfort in viewing the divine as unchangeable in the midst of an unpredictable world. However, the concept of immutability is contradicted by actions of Godless in the Hebrew Bible where we see Go less changing her mind in negotiating relationships with particular figures. In Genesis, for example, we encounter a Godless who thin about her actions and discusses them with Abraham. Indeed, it is through her conversation with Abraham that she agrees to spare Sodom and Gomorrah if only ten righteous people can be found. Nevertheless, the idea of Godless's changeless perfection has made deep inroads into the Christian imagination. While this image supposedly evokes Godless's constancy and thereby comforts human beings by convincing s that Godless is all that we are not, I find it a strangely dead image for a living faith. Theologically, the problem of understanding the divine as unchangeable becomes more complicated when combined with other attributes of God as "all good// and Iiall powerful." When this theological interpretation

.


confronts very real evil and suffering in the world, the result is the classic dilemma 0 theodicy.

Given that tragedy and pain are part of the human experience, a theology of an immovable God is woefully inadequate to help the majority of the world's people make sense of their lives. For people who experience lives of relative comfort and privilege, this theological constr ct may sometimes suffice. For those with a steady paycheck, a healthy family, a decent education, and the comfort and power to secure a First World eXistence, the image of God as all good, all powerful, and unchangeable can contribute to a personal sense of "blessedness" or well-being. It enables an interpretation of life circumstances as "blessings" that God bas bestowed. As long as one remains inside that world, this heology may remain adequate.

What happens, however, when we think. through the logic of this theology in the context of massive global economic disparity? Do First World white Christians really believe we are God's chosen people? That our power and privilege are divinely ordained? That we have more resources and physical comforts because God loves us more? Do we really believe that our consumption patterns and predilection for gas-guzzling cars and SUVs are morally neutral? Or that people the world over are living in poverty through some personal moral failing or because they have fallen into disfavor with God? Unfortunately, many U.S. citizens do believe these things, and a theology of impassability, beneficence, and omnipotence contributes to the isolationist behavior prominent among many First World Christians. I telling ways, mainline churches' preoccupation with arguing about individualized sexual ethics becomes a means to ignore the interconnections between androcentric theology and the str ctural sins of poverty, racism, and greed that underlie resistance to birthing a new social order.

Often, he theology of an immutable God fails even privHeged, economically stable white Christians. How does one explain an unchanging, immovable God to a mother who has lost her baby or to a man diagnosed with incurable cancer? The emphasis on God's impassability and beneficence falls apart in the face of evil and tragedy. Our theological constructions of the divine must be large enough to help make sense of extreme poverty, random disaster and disease, and devastating violence. Faith is supposed to help make sense


of the world. In moments oj vine being can do that? An self-blame and feelings of a1 imperfect world. In contrast tent with images of divine I together in the ongoing proo

Women as life-carriers, life is like to be changed by our c pain, to be rejected by them of them even when they are experience, women have kno emotional change. Our mont childbirth, nurSing, and mer a natural part of the cycle oj idealizing, romanticiZing, or E

women experience debilitatinl experience amenorrhea due te of the world's women in labor along with other dangers tho women never experience pre! erhood can bring great joy, i1 boring. Neverthel ss, the fact t of these experiences provides insights that might expand 01

Genesis text tells the story that we know also that it is huma t A static image of God based prir lotion of the divine must be sup with female experience and kn

The image of Godless as creo istence has deep historical roo the world's women. In a world havior and hubris, many peor humanity in partnership with a As co-creators with Godless, WE

that she risks and weeps with u ing Godless as open to change I

blaming the divine or feeling th


of the world. In moments of tragedy and despair, what kind of divine being can do that? An unchanging, changeless God generates self-blame and feelings of abandonment in the face of a changing, imperfect world. In contrast, a Godless open to change is consistent with images of divine partnership with humankind, working together in the ongoing process of co-creation. 22

Women as life-carriers, life-bearers, and life-formers know what it is like to be changed by our children and to weep with them in their pain, to be rejected by them and love them still, and to be aware of hem even when they are not present.23 Through our embodied experience, women have known the pains and joys of physical and emotional change. Our monthly cycles and experiences of puberty, childbirth, nursing, and menopause allow us to know change as a natural part of the cycle of life. However, 1 have no intention of Idealizing, romanticizing, or essentializing these experiences. Many women experience debilitating pain on a monthly basis while others experience amenorrhea due to extreme malnutrition.24 The majority of the world's women in labor face the very real possibility of death along with other dangers that accompany giving birth, and many women never experience pregnancy and childbirth. While motherhood can bring great joy, it is also often tedious, stressful, and boring. Nevertheless, the fact that most women share at least some of these experiences provides fertile ground for exploring possible insights that might expand our knowledge of Godless. While the Genesis text tells the story that humanity was made in God's image, we know also that it is human to create the divine in our own image. Astatic image of God based primarily on male experience and articulation of the divine must be supplemented and reshaped in dialogue with female experience and knowledge of the divine.

The image of Godless as creator, life-bearer, and ground of all exi tence has deep historical roots and resonates well with many of the world's women. In a world increasingly damaged by human behavior and hubris, many people are turning toward an image of humanity in partnership with a divine being who cares for the earth. As co-creators with Godless, we can take comfort in the knowledge that she risks and weeps with us in the face of tragedy. Understanding Godless as open to change can allow us to face tragedy without blaming the divine or feeling that we have been abandoned.

Rebecca Todd Peters166

This way of thinking about Godless al 0 has bearing on ow we construct sexual ethics. Images 0 the divine matter because our sexual ethics reflect ou u derstanding not only of Godless, but also of her relationship with umanity. It is this radical notion of the divine as Goddess as well as God as our partner and friend and as eingin- elation that was celebrated a the Re-Imagining Conference. It

Iso the divine image found at the heart of much contemporary di course abou sexual e hics.

Language about God/ess and sexuality

Thus ar we have compared a traditionalist understanding of God with a liberationist understanding of Godless. What relationship does the image of God/ess have with sexual ethics? Many theologians have made trenchant observations about how traditional, patriarchal theology affects the understanding of gender and sexuality. Perhaps most famously, Mary Daly wrote, "If God is male, hen the male is God."25 Clack has noted that "Just as power, knowledge, invulnerability, and steadfastness are privileged in an androcentric culture, so omnipotence, omniscience, and impassibility are central to the classical concept of od." 6 These androcentric notions of God have contributed to a social order in which control and order are h'ghly valued and maintained. I God is imaged as a divine being "in control," then control itself becomes a desirable moral norm.

In the midst of such a theological climate, the control of exual partnering, sexual expression, and sexual behavior become important social and e c1esiological tasks. However, sexual desire, attraction, erection, and orgasm are not experiences easily controlled. We do not necessarily choose the person to whom we will be attracted. While Western culture validates heterosexual desire, when it comes to same-sex attra ions, many people insist that gay people should control their attractions in ways that heterosexual couples are never asked to do. Traditional religiocultural b lief systems rooted in androcentric Chris .an theology have long held hat homosexual behavior is wrong because it stands outside the social order of control so central to this theology. A double standard is created in which it is permissible for hetero exual people to fall in love and pursue


relationships with the objects of hold sexual coupling until after' sex attractions are denounced ( people who accept this double dissonance when they come fao ones who a e just as powerless whom they are attracted. Inasm fled people become aware of thl their feelings of desire and choiCE with the experience of their gay, friends and family. It is in thes personal relationship and in tJ their stories that transformation church and society.

Human expe ience of erectio mythic dimension of the belief ity.27 As many men are painful or inhibit an erection at will is r to control. The popularity of dIl have erections suppo the conti able to control sexual perform ance " "impotence," and "frigidi1 of power and control.) Additionl able to "control" thei orgasms. counter as a journey that is diffel meet. She describes approaching

To stop here is frustrating, inc that it is not over, that there main open to the flaring gUid~

and feelings as they arise, litl forward. 28

A certain amount of vulnerabilit) volved in giving oneself over to SE mesh well with theological and ( cation of power and control, but, and nderstanding when image


relationships with the objects of their affection (provided they withh Id sexual coupling until after they are legally married), but same-ex attrac ions are denounced as deviant and sinful. Heterosexual

people who accept this double standard may experience cognitive dissonance when they come face to face with gay friends and loved ones who are just as powerless as they are to decide or control to whom they are attracted. Inasmuch as many heterosexually identified people become aware of their inability to exercise control over their feelings of desire and choice of a love partner, they can resonate with the experience of their gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender friends and famil . It is in these complex feelings and choices of personal relationship and in the risks that people take to share their stories that transformation beyond homophobia takes place in church and society.

Human experience of erection and orgasm also witness to the mythic dimension of the belief that we can "control" our sexuality.27 As many me are painfully aware, their ability to stimulate or inhibit an erection at will is not always something they are able to control. The popularity of drugs like Viagra that enable men to have erections supports the contention that we humans ought to be able to control sexual performance. (Even the language of "performance," "impotence," and "frigidity" suggests deeply imbedded issues of power and control. Additionally, most women and men are not able to "control" their orgasms. Mary Pellauer speaks of sexual encounter as a journey that is different every time she and her partner meet. She describes approaching orgasm this way:

To stop here is frustrating, incomplete; it leaves me with a sense that it is not over, that there is more.... All I can do is to remain open to the flaring gUidance I receive from the impulses and feelings as they arise, little beaconlights summoning me forward. 28

A certain amount of vulnerability, abandonment, or surrender is involved in giving oneself over to sexual ecstasy. These realities do not mesh well with theological and cultural values based on the glorification of power and control, but what happens to sexual experience and understanding when images of the divine shift?

I


Focusing on Godless's graciousness and love, as well as her desire for justice and a flourishing creation, can generate a very different sexual ethic. These are precisely the theological foundations on which recent models of sexual ethics are grounded. The love and concern of Godless for the wholeness of human experience is emphasized over against order and control. Rather than prescribing the form in which sexual activity should take place (heterosexual marriage , liberationist ethicists address the substance of the sexual relationship itself. Is it healthy? Is it harming anyone? Does it contribute to creating a more just world? A sex-positive "ethic of common decency," such as that offered in the 1991 Presbyterian report, afft rns that Godless celebrates and delights in our sexuality and that it is truly a gift given to enjoy, explore, and share within the boundaries of relationships that contribute to individual and communal well-being. This sexual ethic is not about eliminating boundaries or ethical mores as guides for sexual activity. Rather i requires redefining where those boundaries should lie and what occurs within sexual relationships. Images and beliefs about Godless have direct bearing on how we discern those boundaries and moral norms. A Godless open to change, vulnerability, and partnership exercises a nontraditional form of power rooted in relationality and redprocity. These, then, can become the moral ground for ethical behavior in the world, induding sexual behaVior.

The very fact that many people experience the divine presence in their relationships with lovers, children, parents, and friends is witness to the power of transformation that exists in mutuality. In ex loring the possibilities of knOWing Godless more fully, we need to "get into our souls" and realize the positive ways that women and men can experience divine relational power. Embodied knowledge of Godless is new for some and threatening for others. One way to overcome fear of the unknown is to start by sticking a toe into the abyss. I invite you to experiment with these ideas, experience the movement and diversity they offer, and discover the joy they unleash. You might start by exploring female-gendered language for Godless in your own prayer life and spiritual journey. How do these images of Godless feel? How do they change your relationship with Godless? Then examine language for God in worship. Has your church incorporated female images and language about God into

Embradng God as Goddess

liturgy or merely liminatE congregation, especially cr Is your congregation coml your girl and boy children of the divine? .

Along the way we must n this process is an attempt tc thing inherently ineffable. Exploring and utilizing fern attempt to know Godless in resonance for many peopll into the divine should not bl an effort to replace traditior Rather, expanding God/es: worship can reveal the divh

'Embracing the kin-dom of a new social order

The use of inclusive (or rathe dally in speaking about Go< mantics and a matter periph life. It is important to insist, guage is central because lane we believe about Godless, ~ ships between the entire hUll called for, a change of mind does not take place, if we do I

matters, it becomes easier to simply ignore the history of fE and Christian traditions. eel munities of faith should be a, for justice in other areas is rel< hymns we sing, the prayers WI

stir hearts and minds. The language of worship, pI

a fringe issue. It indicates thE embrace and live into in mir


liturgy or merely eliminated the male ones? Talk with people in your congregation, especially children, about their understanding of God. Is your congregation comfortable praying to God as Goddess? Are your girl and boy children growing up equally affirmed in the image of the divine?

Along the way we must remember that the experimental nature of this process is an attempt to gain insight and knowledge about something inherently ineffable. Ultimately, the divine remains a mystery. Exploring and utilizing female names and images for the divine is an attempt to know Godless in new ways, ways that have deep personal resonance for many people. However, this epistemological insight into the divine should not be regarded as counterfundamentalism or an effort to replace traditional male images of God with female ones. Rather, expanding Godless language in personal and corporate worship can reveal the divine to us in fresh and challenging ways.

Embracing the kin-dom: the challenge of a new social order

The use of inclusive (or rather expansive) language in worship, espedally in speaking about Godless, is often dismissed as "merely" semantics and a matter peripheral to the deeper concerns of faith and life. It is important to insist, again and again, that the issue of language is central because language both reflects and reinforces what we believe about Godless, our relationship with her, and relationships between the entire human and nonhuman world. Metanoia is called for, a change of mind and heart. If genuine transformation does not take place, if we do not believe deeply in our souls that this matters, it becomes easier to acquiesce in the face of resistance or simply ignore the history of female imagery for the divine in biblical and Christian traditions. Certainly this is not the only issue communities of faith should be addressing, but success in our struggles for justice in other areas is related intimately to how we worship, the hymns we sing, the prayers we utter, and the images of Godless that stir hearts and minds.

The language of worship, prayer, and the daily vernacular is never a fringe issue. It indicates the kind of social order that Christians embrace and live into in ministry, mission, and our life journeys.

.


Womanist scholars have long emphasized the link between songs, prayers, and language of the black church with a justice-oriented and liberatory theology that seeks "hope, salvation, and transformation."29 As long as we continue to allow a male monopoly of language for the divine without balancing it with female language and images, we capitulate to the powerful privilege of male-dominated culture and replicate those structures in our very speech. It has been thirty years since Mary Daly's groundbreaking book, and yet we still have not moved "beyond God the Father." Until we are able to do so and embrace Godless the Mother along with the many other female faces of the divine, we will fail to realize the social order of justice and equality that so many are striving to usher forth.

Re-imagining God in ways that incorporate female images is intimately connected to struggles for justice that address concrete, material oppressions in people's lives. To come full circle, I return to my daughter. As a two-year-old, she is at the beginning of discovering the world, including Godless. I want her, as a womanchild, to know Godless in ways I had to discover only as an adult, in ways that connect my embodied female self (and her embodied female self) to that which is divine. One gift that we gave her to help her on that path is her Christian name. In the first days of her life, as I held her in my arms, I felt the presence of the sacred and knew that this tiny infant would be a window into Godless's wisdom for me in the years to come. Naming her Sophia was a personal act of reclamation of the divine as female. I also hoped that blessing her with a strong name and a personal connection to the female Christian traditions of the divine would offer her strength and wisdom for her own life journey.30

As the child of educated, white, U.S. parents, Sophia will UTI

doubtedly live a life of relative privilege. What matters is how she is taught to understand and use her privilege. No one is exempt from the urgency of struggles for justice. Privileges are not blessings from Godless but acddents of birth. First World Christians and particularly white First World Christians must remember that faith is about being in relationship with Godless and the larger world. In the midst of privilege it is easy to focus exclusively on the first relationship, especially if we retain a traditional "God's-in-controlall's-right-with-the-world" image of divine power (and by extension,


~ur ~wn). The image of the divine bve mto the future beyond a mytJ ness to change. With the voice of a Sh~ calls us to a renewed sense of losmg even our gender and other s( the work of justice.

Notes

1. Janet Morley quoted in Mary Gre' (Cleveland: Pilgrim, 2001), 15.

2: Mary Grey's IntrodUcing Feminist ImG the ~s~ory of these struggles and how dim erati~mst, womanist. and TWO-Thirds Worl Amenca,n) .h?ve approached talking about Fa ~'. VIrginIa Ramey Mollenkott first brol

mihes 2000 conference Sponsored by the r 4. 1n thi~ essay I refer to the divine as "G

lar contexts 10 which an exclusively male Ime cases I use the traditional "God."

5. F~llowing SaIlle McFague's advice, we conceptions of God to include the "feminin cau~e this strategy has a tendency to reWe SalIJe McFague, Models ofGod: Theology for anFortress, 1987), 98-99.

6. Beverly Harrison, "Sexism and th l the Co t".. e al

nnee IOns. Essays In Feminist Sodal Ethic1985),24.

7. For an expOSition of the ethical implic to the motherless" and "father to th t th power ad' . e a elh n Injustice, see Cheryl Townsend Gm

t er ~~ th~, Fatherless': Power, Gender, and COl TradItion, Semeia 47 (1989): 57-85.

. 8: ~e term "queer" denotes those Who se' ldentity, mcluding gay, lesbian, transgender. ~

9. For a more detailed analysis of tb RI art M. Hoover and lynn SchOfield Oork "E Case StUdy of the RE-Imagining COnfere~ce~: 39, no. 2 (December 1997): 153-71 .

~O. For a more thorough study of di"'- t'glrua Ra M I YjJle E

mey 0 Ienkott, The Divine Feminine' 7 (New York: Crossroad, 1983); RaphaeIPato." Wayne State University Press 1990)' and A:' lions' Th S " n.:op

. e eare" for the Female in Deity (Freedl


our own). The image of the divine as Goddess calls people of faith to live into the future beyond a mythology of control and with openness to change. With the voice of a mother, sister, and female friend, She calls us to a renewed sense of accountability, asking us to risk losing even our gender and other social privileges in order to further the work of justice.

Notes

1. Janet Morley quoted in Mary Grey, Introducing Feminist Images of God (Cleveland: Pilgrim, 2001), 15.

2. Mary Grey's Introducing Feminist Images of God is a wonderful overview of the history of these struggles and how different feminisms, including lewish, liberationist, womanist, and Two-Thirds World women (African, Asian, and Latin American) have approached talking about God.

3. Virginia Ramey Mollenkott first brought this point to my attention at a Families 2000 conference sponsored by the National Coundl of Churches in 1991.

4. In this essay ( refer to the divine as "Godless" with the exception of particular contexts in which an exclusively male image of the divine is intended. (n those cases I use the traditional "God."

5. Following Sallie McFague's advice, we must be cautious about broadening conceptions of God to include the "feminine" over against the "masculine" bemuse this strategy has a tendency to reinforce culturally scripted stereotypes. Sallie McFague, Models ofGod: Theology fOr an Ecological, Nuclear Age (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1987), 98-99.

6. Beverly Harrison, "Sexism and the Language of Christian Ethics," Making the Connections: Essays in Feminist Social Ethics, ed. Carol Robb (Boston: Beacon, 1985),24.

7. For an expOSition of the ethical implications of the gospel lyrics "mother to he motherless" and "father to the fatherless" with regard to the topics of power and injustice, see Cheryl Townsend Gilkes, "'Mother to the Motherless, Father to the Fatherless': Power, Gender, and Community in an Afrocentric Biblical Tradition," Semeia 47 (1989): 57-85.

8. The term "queer" denotes those who self-identify outside of a heterosexual identity, induding gay, lesbian, transgender, and bisexual persons.

9. For a more detailed analysis of the Re-Imagining Conference, see Stewart M. Hoover and Lynn Schofield Clark, "Event and Publicity as Social Drama: A Case Study of the RE-lmagining Conference 1995 [sic]," Review ofReligious Studies 39, no. 2 (December 1997); 153-71.

10. For a more thorough study of divine female Imagery in the Bible, see Virginia Ramey Mollenkott, The Divine Feminine: The Biblical [magery of God as Female (New York: Crossroad, 1983); Raphael Patill, The Hebrew Goddess, 3d ed. (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1990); and Asphodel P. Long, In a Chariot Drawn by Lions: The Search for the Female in Deity (Freedom, Calif.: Crossing Press, 1993).

Rebecca Todd Peters72

11. This observation is not meant to be reductionist in the sense that these are the only two issues relevant or necessary for moving into a new justice-centered era, nor do I mean to imply that they are the most important. Racial justice, economic justice, and environmental justice are al 0 paradigmatic of a justicecentered sodal order, but in this new era, we will need a much broader conception of Godless along with a potent critique of compulsory heterosexuality.

12. In traditional theological parlance, this is often referred to as the hermeneutical circle.

13. As the purpose of thi essay is to explore reasons that ethical formulations have been so difficult for the church to engage, I will not re-present their arguments here. Suffice it to say, I reject the traditional ethical model of marriage as the sol locus for sexual intimacy and assume that a sexual ethic must be grOlmded in right relation, justice, and love. See Carter Heyward, Touching Our Strength: The Erotic as Power and the Love ofGod (San Franc! co: Harper & Row, 1989); Christine Gudorf, Body, Sex., and Pleasure: Reconstructing Christian Sex.ual Ethics (Cleveland: Pilgrim, 1994); Anne Bathurst Gilson, Eros Breaking Free: lnterpr ting Sex.ual TheoEthiCS (Cleveland: Pilgrim, 1995); Marvin Ellison, Erotic Justice: A Liberating Ethic ofSex.uality (LOUisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996); nd Usa Sowle Cahill, Sex., Gender; and Christian Ethics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).

14. EJizabeth A. Johnson, She Who Is: The Mystery of God in Feminist Theological Discourse (New York: Crossroad, 1992), 6.

15. This is not the same as capItulating to contemporary culture or adopting an attitude of "if it feels good do it." Far from it. Serious attempts at rethinking se I ethics and language about Godless are critical explorations into the biblical and social meanings of justice in our world today.

16. It is important to note that in discussing the female body and the insights it might rovide in understanding Godless imaginatively, it is not my intent to essential1ze women or totalize women's bodily life experiences. ifferences of age, race, economic status, culture, and other markers 0 vulnerability affect women's experiences of their bodies in distinct ways. In this brief essay I am draWing on the realm of my own experience as a white, heterosexually partnered, married, professional woman, and mother of a daughter. I invite other women to contribute to this discussion of how sexuality helps us re-imagine Godless.

17. Ursula Pfafflin, "Mothers in a Patriarchal World: Experience and Femini t Theory," Conci/lum 6, no. 206 (1989): 16.

18. Beverly Clack, "Human Sexuality and the Concept of the Godless," in The Good News of the Body: Sex.ual Theology and Feminism, ed. Usa Isherwood (New York: New York University Press, 2000), 115-33.

19. Ibid., 118. 20. Mary Pellauer, "The Moral Significance of Female Orgasm: Toward Sexual

Ethics Tha Celebrate Women's Sexu !ity," in Sex.uality and the Sacred: Sources for Theological Reflection, ed. lames B. N Ison and Sandra P. Longfellow (LOUisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1994),153.

21. Clack, "Human Sexuality and the Concept of the Godless," 130. 22. This image of partnership resonates with contemporary womanist dis

course about the divine that empha izes God's relationship with humankind in


seeking liberation from oppressi larly elly Delaine Brown, "God Journa[ of Religious Thought 46 "The Strength of My Ute ". ['S I In m alvation, and Transformation ed

122-39. ' .

23. While this is certainly nol represent Common experiences 01 . 24. In the TWO-Thirds World, th m the First World it is more ofter approval and acceptance through

25. Mary Dal , Beyond God the J (Boston: Beacon, 1973), 19.

26. Clack, "Human Sexuality ar 27. This should not be read as su

ma~er) are unable to control theiJ While people are capable of makinc and act upon sexual desire, we ~ aspects of sexual response as arous(

28. Pellauer, "The Moral Significc2? Embracing the Spirit: Womanis

matlOn, edited by Emilie Townes, is 0

expen~nce and the black church wit ormatIOn. Karen aker-F1etcher in "1

the top~c of "God-talk." Delores Willi Womamst God-Talk (Maryknoll NY. between language about God' '" , worne struggle for justice; see particularly d

30. For an exemplary clevelopmE lohnson, She Who 1s.

Embracing God as Goddess 173

seeking liberation from oppression and strength for life's struggl s. See particularly Kelly Delaine Brown, "God Is as Christ Does: Toward a Womanist T eology," Journal of Religious Thought 46, no, 1 (1989): 7-16; and Karen Baker-Fletcher, "The Strength of My Life," in Embracing the Spirit: Womanist Perspectives on Hope, Salvation, and Transformation, ed. Emilie Townes (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1997), 122-39.

23. While this is certainly not a uni ersal description of all mothers, these represent common experiences of many women who are.

24. In the Two-Thirds World, this malnutrition is due to extreme poverty while in the First World it is mOfe often the result of deeply troubled women seeking approval and acceptance through unrealistic and unhealthy standards of beauty,

25. Mary Daly, Beyond God the Father: Toward a Philosophy of Women's LIberation (Boston: Beacon, 1973), 19.

26. Clack, "Human Sexuality and the Concept of the God/ess," 119. 27. This should not be read as support of the idea that men or women, for that

matter) are unable to control their responses to their sexual feelings or desires. While people are capable 0 making responsible decisi ns about how they exercise and act upon sexual desire, we are not always able to " ontrol" such physical aspects of sexual response as arousal, erection, and orgasm.

28. Pellauer, "The Moral Significance of Female Orgasm," 156. 29. Embracing the Spirit: Womanist Perspectives on Hope, Salvation, and Transfor

mation, edited by Emilie Townes, is oriented toward connecting African American experience and the black church with these themes of hope, salvation, and transformation. Karen Baker-Fletcher in "The Strength of My Life" specifically addresses the topic of "God-talk." elores Williams, Sisters in the Wilderness: The Challenge of Womanist God-Talk (Maryknoll, N.V.: Orbis, 1993) also addresses the relation hip between language about God, womanist and black liberation theology, and the struggle for justice; see particularly chapter 6.

30. For an exemplary development of contemporary Sophia theology, see Johnson, She Who Is.

Embracing God as Goddess: Exploring Connections Between Female Sexuality, Naming the Divine, and...

Documents

Transcript of Embracing God as Goddess: Exploring Connections Between Female Sexuality, Naming the Divine, and...