BREAD NOT STONE: The Challenge of Feminist Biblical Interpretation

by Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza ‧ RELEASE DATE: April 1, 1985

Challenge indeed: Fiorenza (Theology, Notre Dame) needs all her considerable skills as a scripture scholar and philosopher-theologian to pull off the high wire act of totally overhauling the Bible (mostly the New Testament) without destroying it or giving an inch on her radical feminism. Spectators may be impressed--and may wonder what it means to earthbound believers. Fiorenza begins by roundly declaring that the Bible is ""stamped by patriarchal oppression but claims to be the Word of God."" Invoking that transcendent authority, it ""perpetuates an archetypal oppressive myth that must be rejected by feminists."" Modern historical-critical scholarship has pretty much demolished the old notions of inspiration and inerrancy, but it has usually worked from a false, if not dishonest, value-neutral posture (e.g., explaining the androcentric ""household code"" of Colossians 3:18-4:1 and Ephesians 5:22-6:9, while ignoring its grim legacy of permanent inferior status for women in the Church). Liberation theology has rightly seen that the Bible must be read from the standpoint of the oppressed, but it has overemphasized class conflict and paid only scant attention to sexism. What is needed is a four-pronged feminist hermeneutics of ""suspicion"" (a priori mistrust of the Bible's masculine bias), ""proclamation"" (purging all patriarchal texts from the lectionary and liturgical functions), ""remembrance"" (reconstructing women's history from the vestiges left in the Bible), and ""creative actualization"" (a creative reworking of those vestiges in literature, music, and dance). All this constitutes a perfectly coherent, though almost relentlessly abstract, program; but Fiorenza fails to understand that, if carried out, it would spell the end of Christianity except as a discussion topic at American Academy of Religion conventions (since it makes women's experience the supreme theological criterion), or at best a minor schismatic movement (with ""self-identified women"" and ""women-identified men,"" but no ""self-identified men"" or ""men-identified women"" allowed inside). A weighty but unrealistic response to a crucial question.

Pub Date: April 1, 1985

ISBN: 0807012319

Page Count: -

Publisher: Beacon

Review Posted Online: N/A

Kirkus Reviews Issue: March 15, 1985

Categories: NONFICTION