Engendering Theological Education for Transformation: an international follow up consultation on Re-visioning Theological Education: 5-8 November 2001, Montreux, Switzerland a brief report.

For centuries, the histories and contributions of women to church and society have been hidden or submerged. With increased access to both education and participation in the life and ministry of the church, women have developed critical tools and equipped themselves with skills to analyze traditional teaching and theology and are striving to bring to the fore these hidden histories and contributions of women. Awareness regarding women's issues in theology has grown and the need to correct this biased or non-inclusive theology is gaining ground. The attempt to do, write and incorporate feminist perspectives in theology has therefore, emerged as a critical response to the androcentric and patriarchal bias in the various disciplines of theological education.

Although feminist/womanist/Mujerista theologies have made a tremendous impact on biblical and systematic scholarship and influenced practical theology, they have nevertheless remained on the peripheries of theological education and curriculum and have often been considered with a certain degree of ambivalence.

At the Second Global Consultation on Theological Education organized by the Lutheran World Federation, Department for Mission and Development (LWF/DMD) in Rome (1999) on the theme "Re-visioning Theological Education," the participants stressed the need "for curriculum development which is attentive to contextualization, spirituality and the insights provided by feminist and other liberation perspectives."

Upon this recommendation and upon the specific request of some of its participants, the Desk of Women in Church and Society (WICAS), organized a global consultation for theological educators to reflect further on the possibilities, prospects and methods of "Engendering Theological Education for Transformation." The Consultation, which was held in Montreux, Switzerland, 4-8 November, 2001, brought together 30 theological educators--20 women and 10 men--from various regions of the LWF and representing several disciplines. Five were ecumenical participants.

The Consultation aimed at:

* Assessing the various and diverse feminist theologies from around the world and reviewing the ways in which these are presently taught in the seminaries and theological colleges represented.

* Exploring possibilities for mainstreaming feminist perspectives into the different disciplines of the theological curriculum.

* Developing a set of guidelines for engendering theology.

* Identifying a balanced core group that would formulate an integrated curriculum which could be presented to the Churches.

A number of issues and rationales relevent to engendering theology were raised through biblical reflection in the daily worship, in plenary sessions and in regional and discipline group sessions, i.e., Biblical Studies, Systematics/Church History, Practical Theology and New Approaches, to draft some guidelines for the core group which would develop a curriculum in the near future.

The following papers were presented:

A Keynote address Journey Thus Far: An Overview of Feminist Perspectives horn Around the World.

1. Engendering Theology: What does it entail?

2. Engendering Theology as an Inter-disciplinary Approach

Panel presentations on:

1. Feminist Perspectives Theology Transforming Curriculum: A Regional Update

2. Integrating Gender Perspectives in the Curriculum--Biblical, Systematic and Practical Theology.

Some of the major issues/ideas raised in small group discussions during the Consultation were as follows:

* Engendered theology challenges the traditional assumption that the male is normative; that male theology and male experience can speak equally for women.

* Engendering theological education means transforming the entire theological enterprise; it is not a matter of adding to or being corrective.

* To engage in theological dialogue with gender issues is to see how the understanding of gender society has affected our understanding of God, the Scriptures, the teachings and practices of the church and our relationships with one another as men and women.

* The purpose of engendering theology is to provoke a reformation and reformulation of theological education which is both relevent and life-affirming for women and for men.

* The need to engender theological education was unanimously affirmed. As indicated by the regional reports, there is much work that needs to be done for there is no institution where engendered theology is being done in a thorough manner. All are at different stages and using different methodologies, depending on each ones' context. Engendered theology is not a matter of discussion but one of collaborative action that takes context seriously. It should be introduced in the popular, pastoral and academic levels of the church. It needs to include students, faculty and administrative heads, as well as people from the grass roots, in discussions on content and method of doing theology.

* There is still some ambiguity and confusion regarding such terms as feminist, womanist and gender. This lack of clarity is proving to be problematic. Feminist/ womanist views on language are complex and very diverse, reflecting not only political, regional and cultural differences within feminism itself, but also within other disciplines. Language is a cultural and social institution and we need to analyze linguistic structures and [determine] how they shape theological thinking and experience. It is essential that we work towards promoting a language that is inclusive both with regard to God and humanity.

* A critical component of the gender discourse and its potential for transformation and justice in society is power and how it operates. Hence an analysis of power is essential for general analysis.

* Tokenism, fear, the quota system, limited financial resources, competition for jobs, lack of published resources in the vernacular, dominance of the English language, lack of cultural critique of theological education, lack of faculty and the existing paradigm of the scholar are some of the barriers that hinder the engendering of theological education.

* Engendering theology is possible through networking, sharing of resources, equipping individuals with analytical tools, and training of faculty. Doing engendered theology retrieves lost and hidden stories and traditions, and breaks open cultural stereotypes and hierarchies. It offers new ways of reading the Biblical texts and seeks to free people from their patriarchal moorings. Engendering theology requires collaborative reflection with people on the margins of society.

* It is not easy to formulate a single integrated curriculum. A multiplicity of models is needed for the purpose of preparing an integrated curriculum. Therefore, as an initial exploration, it was decided to use the outcome of the group discussions on curriculum formation as a base on which to work.

The following members were nominated by the participants to form the Core Group to convene in a year's time:

1. Rev. Andreas Koranyi                Hungary
2. Dr. Musa Filibus                    Nigeria
3. Dr. Monica Melanchthon                India
4. Dr. Norma Cooke Everist                 USA
5. Ms. Allie Ernst                   Australia
6. Dr. Arnfridur Gudmundsdottir        Iceland
7. Dr. Lothar Carlos Hoch               Brazil
8. Dr. Sara Dille                       Canada
9. Dr. Beverley Haddad            South Africa
10. Dr. Isabelle Phiri            South Africa

Regional Updates

These were presented by representatives from each continent on the ways feminist perspectives in theology are currently included in the curriculum in their region.

Africa: The report from Africa noted that the major source of support for developing a feminist perspective in theological education is the "Circle of Concerned African Women Theologians," an ecumenical women's group from across the continent. This Circle redresses the major issue of lack of publication by African women theologians. It has identified issues of African feminist theology, including African women's experiences of African traditional religions, Islam, mission Christianity and African Christianity as well as colonialism, apartheid, post-colonialism, poverty, war and globalization. The teaching of theology from a gender perspective is difficult because it is linked with [the presence of] female staff members--few in number in African theological institutions.

Latin America: The evolution of feminist perspective in theological curriculum across Latin America is far from uniform. An important constraint is that most institutions in the region have a conservative attitude towards texts. Feminist theology is considered a part of liberation theology with an emphasis on class and racial issues as well as women's issues. Many women professors take their work on gendered theology directly to the churches with an understanding that this is essential to change.

Asia: It is difficult to speak about the Asian and Pacific situation as such. This is evidenced in the fact that some Lutheran churches ordain women, while others do not. The Gurukul Lutheran seminary in Chennai, India, is on the forefront of engendering theology, with its MTh in women's studies. It is a concern that, in other Asian countries engendering theology is not on the agenda. There are often small numbers of women students involved in theological education and often only one female faculty member.

Europe: The report from Europe focused on the Scandinavian region of the continent and did not account for Eastern, West and Central Europe, perhaps because Scandinavia is often seen to lead the way in engendering theological education. Yet even here there are pockets of resistance and engendered theology is not fully integrated into the curriculum. The majority of students interested in feminist theology are still female and qualified female theologians often find it hard to get positions. While there are now more female than male students, not all the female students graduate. In these state churches, often the push for gender inclusivity has come from the state.

North America & Caribbean: The inclusion of feminist perspectives in theology and theological education has gained wide acceptance, even though some struggles remain. On an average, women comprise one third of seminary faculties; some are full professors; one is a seminary president. (This is the situation in the ELCA/ELCIC, not LC-MS.) Since women in ordained ministry are in their fourth generation, there are many female ministry role models. Nevertheless, some men may "play the politically correct game," without the transformation of underlying gendered attitudes, arguing that engendered theology is not a core issue in the larger church. Many men however fully appreciate feminist contributions and now use collaborative male-female leadership styles.

Major issues raised in small group discussions during the consultation

1. Engendering theological education

* Engendering theological education means transforming the entire theological enterprise. It is not a matter of adding to, or being corrective. To engage in theological dialogue with gender issues is to see how the understanding of gender in society has affected our understanding of God, the Scriptures, the teaching and practices of the church and our relationships with one another, as men and women.

* Engendering means giving birth to something new--to hatch, cause, induce, provoke, develop, excite, stimulate, rouse or stir. The purpose is not to incorporate feminist perspectives into the existing curricula, but to provoke a reformation and reformulation of theological education, which is both relevant, and life affirming for both men and women.

* Engendering theology does not mean supplanting men's way of knowing with women's way of knowing, thereby merely inverting the hierarchy.

2. Context

* In the consultation there was a unanimous affirmation for engendering theological education and it was affirmed as timely and transformatory. In some countries, engendering has happened on an institutional level so that women are ordained as well as welcomed into seminaries as students and faculty. In spite of this, the system was not transformed and so women are merely fulfilling male positions.

* We are all at different stages and using different methodologies depending on our context

* The regional reports clearly show, no institution is yet doing engendered theology in a thorough way.

* Often, the experience of women is that the official rhetoric and the lived experience in a given context do not match. Many women leaders still experience marginalization, denial and doubting of their gifts.

* In some contexts gender stereotyping is so prevalent, it is argued that women by nature do not possess the abilities to fulfill leadership roles. Women's roles are seen to be first of all as wives and mothers and it is argued that these then interfere with their work.

* We must account for the various contexts in which the church finds itself, as well as the various contextual layers within the church--popular, pastoral, academic.

* Engendered theology is not a hyphenated theology, but theology in and of itself. Thus, Engendered theology is not a "special interest" theology separate from the "real" theology. Rather, our experience of ourselves as gendered beings permeates all. Engendered theology challenges the traditional assumption that male is normative; that male theology and male experience can speak equally for women.

* Engendering theology recognizes that theory is one form of praxis. Since all theory is abstracted from contextual situations, there is no true objectivity. Therefore, engendered theology stresses contextuality.

* Engendered theology discussions must involve students, faculty, powers of the institution and the world as well as those from the grassroots. It needs to be a collaborative venture with people on the margins.

* Moreover, engendered theology is not just a matter of discussion, but of collaborative action.

3. Language

* We must clarify our terminology. A feminist perspective in theology is not the same thing as gender studies, which is not the same as engendering theology.

* The connotation of terms such as "feminism", "womanist", "womanist theology" make discussions difficult. For example, feminist theology is often thought of as only a first world, white woman's issue.

* The term "andrist" was suggested during the consultation to denote theology from a self consciously male perspective.

* Lack of clarity on the term `gender' itself is problematic. It is not an easily translatable term.

* Language that works in one context will not necessarily work in another because we have different issues, histories and agendas.

* Since language shapes thinking and experience, inclusive language both for humanity and God is essential.

* The issue of women's ordination and discussions of engendering or of feminist perspectives in theology are often collapsed into one another. This must be avoided. The question of the ordination of women is a part of the question of engendered theology, but not the whole. Yet, engendering theology opens a broad ecclesiological space to discuss women's ordination.

4. Power

* Gender analysis necessarily involves an analysis of power in order to reveal the operation of power, reconstructing and reforming for the sake of transformation and justice.

* Engendered theology always includes gender awareness training which includes power analysis.

* Power analysis includes examining policy, structure and organizational dynamics as well as processes of organizational change.

* We need to establish parallel processes between engendering theology and engendering the church and its structures. This involves not just education, but also employment situations after education.

* Some participants felt that gender analysis necessarily leads into analysis of class, race, economics and ethnicity. Other participants felt that class analysis is fundamental to gender analysis. Others felt that any one analysis potentially leads into the other areas. These ideas were not discussed in the plenary session, and bears further discussion in future.

5. Barriers to engendering theological education identified

* Engendering theology involves attitude change, which is difficult to achieve.

* Change is frightening. Powerful women are frightening. Questioning theology is threatening. There is a fear that engendering theology will involve feminization of the church. Some fear losing power.

* The association of engendered theology with gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered persons often present barriers but may also present opportunities. This is not the primary issue of engendering theology and was not a focus at the consultation.

* Often there is a lack of cultural critique in theological education, including lack of self-critique.

* The pressure and competition inherent in the economic race, upward mobility and self-actualization often suppress gender discussion, marginalize and disadvantage women and so leave them highly vulnerable.

* The dominance of western language prevents research in many other languages, since supervisors are unable to work with these languages and feel unable to supervise such research appropriately. Yet such contextual research is exactly the research which engendered theology seeks to promote.

* Lack of published resources in local languages is a barrier. The need to translate resources disadvantages those who are not familiar with the dominant languages. Both translation and publication are expensive.

* The paradigm of the scholar as a distant, objective, autonomous, participant observer is an outgrowth of individualism, enlightenment and rationalism. This paradigm is problematic and reflects an in-built problem in western ways of thinking. It often includes dualistic thinking, which connotes woman as `other'.

* Since this problematic paradigm is still the dominant paradigm, there are important financial implications about what kind of scholarship is supported, what the academic agenda is and who sets it.

* The need for engendered theology also requires faculty training.

* Two barriers in the North American context are that women in seminary assume the battles are won, and are surprised upon leaving that they are not; and the large number of women on leave from call.

* Limited financial resources impact in several ways: at times the resources for gender analysis are not available. Adequate scholarship money is not available to cover women theology students who also maintain their role as mother and care-giver. Lack of employment opportunities after education further detracts women from pursuing theological education. Funding is needed for new women faculty positions.

* Tokenism is a positive action that has negative consequences and often inhibits further change. This is the most dangerous stage, which leaves both women and the church vulnerable.

* The quota system is a positive action but may function as a limit and may promote inappropriate hiring.

6. Opportunities to engender theological education identified

* Engendering theology frees men as well as women, leading men to recognize their own engendered experience.

* Doing engendered theology retrieves lost stories and traditions and breaks open cultural stereotypes and hierarchies. It offers new ways of reading the Biblical text and seeks to free it from its moorings in patriarchy. It also values the stories and traditions preserved in other texts, narratives and traditions.

* Engendered theology does not require academic expertise, since it builds on experiences as gendered beings. On the other hand, there is also a need for theoretical reflection tools for gender analysis.

* Gender analysis needs to be framed as an opportunity and a potential. Even where institutions are not ready to use this tool, individuals can and thereby become more aware of their own situation and influence. This awareness provides a point of immediate impact of this consultation on the contexts from which the participants have come.

* Consultations such as this, promote and affirm the need for networking as a means of sharing resources, ideas and support.

* While the consultation set out with an aim of formulating an integrated curriculum, it has become clear that there is a need for a multiplicity of models to come out of this consultation.