Rue Plant (LT - National flower of Lithuania): Bucknell University ~ Dear Provost Margot Vigeant, and President John Bravman, All - & Collaborations with MIT OCW-centric wiki World Univ & Sch? ... * * * Poem, Poetry, 2 Haikuish ~ The Canadian geese, Feeling the waters, Float as the Susquehanna flows by ... * * * Scotland World Univ & Sch in Scottish Gaelic, - and exploring collaborations with Sabhal Mòr Ostaig on the Isle of Skye? * * * Nontheist_Friends_(atheist_Quakers?) ? ... searched on "Scott MacLeod, nontheist Friends, Nontheist Quakers" .... especially - * * * Rosemary Ruether, "Sexism and God-talk" - I wrote my Reed College senior thesis in 1985 about this book - * * *

Nontheist Friends Network

Website and blog of the Nontheist Friends Network

Nontheist Quakers 

Feedback and reflections on NFN MfW&CC 1 April 2021

Posted by Trevor

Trevor (NFN web person): I hope other Friends will contribute to these reflections.

Nontheist Friends (atheist Quakers?)

EDIT

Sexism and God-talk: Toward a Feminist Theology

Book by Rosemary Radford Ruether

Philosophical Investigations

HOME

STUDENT A LEVEL COURSE

SUBJECTS

TEACHING RESOURCES

EVENTS

TUITION

PODCAST

Summary Sexism and God Talk Ruether

July 5, 2017

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The Feminist Theology of Rosemary Ruether: A Challenge to Pope Francis

James J. Bacik

To receive my Sunday Meditations, send your email address to jamesjbacik@gmail.com, and to access my

monthly Reflections, go to my website: frjimbacik.org.

Introduction

1. Feminist theology includes: demonstrating the flaws of patriarchal theology that is androcentric (man-centered),

misogynist (hating women) and sexist; finding alternative traditions to challenge this bias;

re-envisioning theological themes that will help free women from bias. It could flourish only as

women, beginning in the 1960s, entered seminaries, did professional ministry and became theologians;

the Quakers, starting in 1667, argued for a feminist reading of the scriptures; Mary Daly published The

Church and the Second Sex in 1968; rediscovery of important women like Teresa of Avila, Catherine of

Siena and Hildegard of Bingen; New Testament Studies by Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza in her book In

Memory of Her (1982); work of Elizabeth Johnson, She Who Is and Sandra Schneiders; Ivone Gebara,

Brazilian eco-feminist.

2. Ruether’s Sexism and God Talk (1983) is still the most important contribution to a systematic feminist

theology. Born Nov. 2, 1936; grew up in a woman centered context, went to Catholic schools, by age

30 she had 3 children, completed her masters and doctorate, was writing her first book and was a

professor at Howard University. She also taught at Garratt-Evangelical Theological Seminary and

Pacific School of Religion; likes to paint; often speaks out against war and for Palestinian rights and for

the mentally ill (her son David has schizophrenia) and for eco-feminism. She is still a practicing

Catholic, married, teaching one class a semester at Clermont, just published her autobiography, My

Quests for Hope and Meaning. She is not a philosophical theologian but an historian of culture who

sees religious symbols as culturally conditioned and as “living metaphors of human existence.”

3. Progressive theologians (men and women) who generally like Pope Francis, have been critical of his

statements on women that reinforce gender stereotypes: women have distinctive skills “sensitivity,

intuition” “special concern” for others; “feminine genius”; women ordination not open to discussion;

women have “a particular sensitivity for the things of God” especially “mercy, tenderness and love.”

I. Ruether’s Feminist Theology

A. Methodology

1. The usual approach of drawing on Scripture and classical Christian tradition to do systematic

theology is inadequate because it simply perpetuates a sexist bias (all written by men).

2. Ruether draws on Gnostic Gospels, Pagan mythology, alternative Christian traditions like

the Quakers, reinterpretation of the Bible and Christian tradition, modern movements of

liberalism, romanticism, Marxism and the experiences of women, especially stories of

women suffering from sexism.

3. She emphasizes the Biblical prophetic tradition that has God against oppression and

opposes idolatry.

4. Whatever harms women is not of God and whatever helps women flourish is.

B. Anthropology

1. Critique: sexual complementarity puts women into a position of inferiority and subjugation;

ancient cultures had men doing the hunting and agricultural plowing while women did

never ending domestic work. Men became identified with the world of freedom and

culture while women were identified with necessity and the fixed world of nature. Genesis

portrays the woman (Eve) as temptress causing men to fall from grace. Men as well as

women are harmed by patriarchy (rule of the father). Androgyny (men taking on feminine

qualities and vice versa) simply preserves the stereotyping that causes the problem.

Aristotle identified men with mind and reason, and women with emotion, passion that must

be controlled. Christian sexism: Augustine (women not fully in divine image), Aquinas

(women are misbegotten males); Puritans saw women as dangerous and this led to witch

hunting in the 14th to 17th centuries.

2. All men and women are made in the image and likeness of God and are products of the

earth. We are relational creatures called to live in community. We all need space to

develop our distinctive gifts and talents. Men and women must help each other move

toward greater maturity. Women need to play an active role in the public world and men

must do their share of the domestic work. All human beings possess a full and equivalent

nature and are called “to live relationality” on the basis of mutuality.

3. Human consciousness is a complex form of developing matter which is always inspirited to

some degree. Intelligence is the interior dimension of human energy (influence of Teilhard)

and calls us to be caretakers and cultivators of the whole ecological community. We are

rooted in nature, in the earth.

4. The self is part of a network of relationships and not an autonomous entity. She does not

accept a “permanent soul unrelated to this context” (My Quests p. 107).

5. We possess a “complex consciousness that seeks meaning, interacts in relationships and

generates creative processes” that is “the mental interiority of the bodily self.” The mind

results from the brain and body in its social and historical context. (My Quests p. 128)

C. God

1. Critique: God seen as male justifying patriarchy. It is a mistake to add feminine imagery to

an all-male God. The apocryphal Gospels apply feminine imagery to the Holy Spirit “my

mother the Holy Spirit” leaving us with an androgynous image of the Trinity (2 males and 1

female).

2. We need inclusive language grounded in the experience of men and women.

3. Religions of the Near East had images of the “mother-goddess.” When male gods appear

they are equivalent and not complementary images of the divine.

4. Ruether speaks of God as “primal matrix” and “the great womb” (like Tillich’s ground of

being).

5. The Hebrew Scriptures. The Exodus portraying Yahweh the liberator of oppressed people:

there are references to God crying out like a woman in labor (Is 42:14-16). Wisdom is a

subtle representative of the divine presence in the world and instructs men in the mysteries

of God’s knowledge (Wisdom 8: 2-4). From the Old Testament, Ruether uses God as

liberator, the Mother who nurtures and Wisdom who guides. The Old Testament

prohibited idolatry, meaning we cannot make male imagery into an absolute, suggesting

God is male.

6. New Testament. Ruether points to Luke’s Gospel using the experiences of both men and

women. Building the kingdom is like a farmer sowing seeds and a woman leavening bread

(Lk 13:18-21). Jesus’ treatment of women is important, including them in religious

discussions (Mary and Martha in Luke 10:38-42). Ruether says Abba was used by adult

males to show respect to older men. She thinks the New Testament notion of God can lead

to a community of equals. Gal 3: 28, where it says in Christ there is neither male nor

female, represents the thrust of the teachings of Jesus and can be used to fight sexism

7. Ruether uses the word “God-ess” to suggest that we will find new ways of naming God as

we overcome patriarchy.

8. Ruether emphasizes the immanence of God, not a male God up in the sky, a being removed

from creation, but the source of being that energizes continuing transformation of nature

and the human community. God cannot intervene out of respect for the evolving world and

human freedom.

9. Ruether is leery of parent language (both mother and father) as too suffocating and favors

redeemer and liberator.

D. Sin and Salvation

1. Critique: classical theology emphasized pride as the main source of personal sin; following

Paul and Augustine put blame on Eve for original sin that caused the loss of a happy,

harmonious human existence; and failed to adequately address systemic evil and social sin.

2. A feminist criticism reveals the way women have been presented as the cause of evil in the

world. Pandora opening the box of evils and Eve tempting Adam. The original sin takes the

opposition of self and other and turns it into the good self against the other less than

human (superior males dominating inferior females masters oppressing slaves, humans

exploiting nature, etc.). Patriarchy hurts both men who are denied intimate contact with

children and women who are denied the opportunity to develop their full potential as

community leaders. All who participate in sexist relationships contribute to the

accumulated evil in the world. We can recognize this only because we begin to envision

another way of relating on the basis of equality and mutuality. Ruether says dualism is the

original sin as represented by the good and evil interpretation of sexual differences, men

representing freedom and rationality and women necessity and emotion.

3. Social sin: sexist attitudes get embedded in institutions and systems that produce false

consciousness. Males have protected their domination in various ways: women were to

keep silent in church (1 Tim); gang rapes of vulnerable women; binding feet in China;

witchcraft trials in Puritan New England, 17th century; women denied the vote until 1920;

denial of woman’s ordination in the Catholic Church; women’s fashions, for examples,

shoes; pornography; wife battering; women paid less for similar work; women doing most

of the domestic work. All of this creates an integrated patriarchal culture that becomes the

norm for human relations. Men are taught to dominate or be dominated; to abstract

themselves from the real harm being done to others; to pursue goals without thought

about means; to project onto women the alienated parts of male humanity. All sin is

relational and contributes to an atmosphere of demonic forces that in turn influence

personal choices. Sexism is a demonic power. Patriarchy is a system bigger that any of us

and extremely hard to discern and dismantle. We do have the power to oppose it even if in

small ways. Historically, female gossip has been a covert way of resisting sexism. The

feminist movement enables more women and men to overcome false consciousness. All

women have contributed to sexism in some ways (trying to please men). Older women are

often more open to seeing the destructive aspect of patriarchy, but often are dependent on

men economically and few expressing their anger and alienation. We all need a

fundamental self-esteem to build our own identity and develop our own talents. Mary Daly

helps free women to express anger and to choose their own path. Ruether is critical of

male feminists who claim to understand women’s true nature and offer advice on dealing

with sexism. She sees Jungian psychology as the intellectual base for male feminism

(Sexism p. 190). Men should be in solidarity with a particular woman or group that is

struggling to find their own way (for example, supporting her education by sharing in

domestic work).

4. Personal sin: women have the same capacity as men to dominate and control, to be selfish,

to misuse power, but men have had more opportunities to do so. Women do not have “a

different nature” or innate spiritual abilities that prevent them from distorting human

relationships. Men do have more opportunities in our culture to do sinful things that hurt

others. There are sins of omission in which men and women accept patriarchy without

challenging it. We all need to become more grounded selves that foster genuine human

relationships but this requires a supportive community.

5. Salvation occurs in this world when: individuals become agents of their own destiny;

married couples relate on a basis of equality and mutuality; small groups work for justice;

more people care for the environment; and society becomes less patriarchal.

E. Christology (Doctrine of Jesus Christ)

1. Criticism: Christians appropriated the Jewish notion of the Messiah and applied it to Jesus

without keeping its social implications while focusing on the idea of a divine savior. This led

to an anti-Judaism bias in Christianity in the New Testament, among the Fathers and still

present today. Classical Christology mirrored the establishment of Christianity as the

imperial religion of the Christian Roman Empire. Just as the Logos governs the universe, so

the Emperor and the Church govern the political universe, masters govern slaves and men

govern women. Androgynous approaches are not helpful, for example, mystics like Julian of

Norwich calling Jesus mother and father.

2. We must reinterpret Christology remembering that faith in Christ suggests a final fulfillment

with partial signs of that now and keeping Jesus in his Jewish context.

3. Jesus of the Synoptic Gospels supports feminism, a prophet who breaks social taboos,

proclaims a reversal of the social order where domination and oppression are ruled out in

favor of equality and mutuality. Jesus says call no man Father, suggesting we must avoid

oppressive social relations. Jesus tells us to obey God, not man, which is an enduring

reminder to avoid oppressive social structures. He spoke of the Messiah not as a king but as

a servant. Leaders must be servants. Jesus shows special concern for women (Samaritan

woman at the well, the Syro-Phoenician woman with a sick daughter, woman with flow of

blood, prostitutes).

4. Jesus, the homeless Jewish prophet, as liberator subverts structures of oppression and

embodies a new order based on mutuality.

5. Christ is in a dynamic relationship with redeemed humanity (vine and branches image). He

cannot be “encapsulated one-for-all in the historical Jesus” (Sexism p. 138).

F. Church

1. Critique: The image of Church as bride of Christ ends up supporting patriarchy. Nuptial

imagery supports sexual complementarity notion that makes women subservient (Eph 5

wives be subject to husbands). Mariology is used to support women being passive

receptive like Mary. The institutional Church is governed by celibate males that set the

rules and interpret the tradition. Since the time of Constantine the church has often

enjoyed privilege in return for supporting the State.

2. Church is a community of equals (Gal 3:28 in Christ there is neither male nor female –

perhaps an early baptismal text).

3. Church is a charismatic community – all members have the Spirit of Jesus who continues to

speak today. Acts 2 says the Spirit is given to men and women.

4. Woman-church movement thinks women should not seek ordination in a patriarchal church

but should join women’s base communities where there is equality in leadership (Mary

Hunt and Elisabeth Fiorenzo) this led to Women-Church Convergence that seeks to

eradicate patriarchy in church and society. Vatican has not responded.

5. The Roman Catholic Women Priests (RCWP). In 2002, seven women were ordained by a

Catholic bishop on the Danube River; several women were ordained bishops. In 2012 they

claimed 9 bishops, 81 priests in the USA, Canada and Europe. In general they are highly educated

and have much experience. They claim apostolic succession even though that concept is

challenged by scholars. In May 2008 the Vatican excommunicated all these women. Ruether

sees the 2 movements as complementary.

6. The Church, a symbol-producing community, should be the avant-garde of liberated

humanity and the support system for that process. The historic churches mostly support

patriarchy creating great disappointment among feminists. Historically, women have been

denied ministerial roles.

7. Alternate traditions: the church has never denied that the gifts of the Spirit are given to

women as well as men. Roles for women: early Gnostics, acceptance of Joan of Arc, radical

Puritans, Quakers, secularized liberal feminism fostered women’s ordination (Antoinette

Brown first woman ordained in Congregational Church in 1853). By 1970s many Protestant

denominations were ordaining women but into the same clerical caste without challenging

the sexist bias.

8. The role of base communities in transforming the church. Ruether says women need feminist

groups to nourish their spiritual life and as a prod to help redeem the institutional church

from patriarchy (a dialectical relationship). She remains a faithful Catholic, tithing her time

and energy for church reform.

9. NT ministry is service, not control. Clericalism is rooted in the belief that people have no

direct access to the divine but need clergy mediation. Ministers should empower others.

10. Sacraments: their celebration and interpretation arises from the communities’ collective

experiences of its life of grace. Liturgy uses special gestures and rituals (symbolic distance)

to open up the deeper dimensions of transformed life that gives us energy for ordinary life.

11. The liberated church must be involved in transforming society. It helps to focus energy on a

single project that offers the possibility of some success. This is a dynamic interplay

between liberating individuals and institutions. Liberalism and socialism (modern forms of

biblical notion of the Messiah) have helped Christians appreciate the social dimension of

the Gospel. Niebuhr’s Christian realism stressed human limitations in order to provide a

solid basis for a more just society. Feminist theology assumes a unity of creation and the

redeemed world of spirituality and social justice. Liberal feminism insists on the equal

rights of women based on a common human nature (right to vote, education, employment,

etc.) but domestic work keeps women from seizing new opportunities. Socialist feminism

invited women into the male-influenced workforce promising economic independence

offering state supported day care centers, etc. This strategy has not really worked and

women have not thrived in socialist economies.

Radical feminism (Mary Daly) exposes the inhumanity of males who treat women as sexual

objects and encourages a culture of rage and anger. Promotes a feminist spirituality over

against male physicality and violence (reversal of patriarchy which makes men the enemy of

women).

Integrated feminism espoused by Ruether, affirms: democratic participation; equal value of

men and women; equal access to education and jobs; gives ownership and management to

base communities; creating an organic community where men and women share in home

making and child rearing as well as political and economic public decision making; caring for

the environment in a sustainable way.

There are two ways of moving toward this new

society: (1) small groups that combine all aspects of this vision; (2) concentrating on one

part of the vision (educational opportunities for all).

G. Christian Life

1. Importance of liturgy as symbolic action. It provides an alternative vision of human

community.

2. Ecofeminism: Christian life includes living a simple lifestyle and attending to the earth, to

care for the environment. Men came to dominate nature and women in the same historical

process of creating the world of freedom and culture while controlling nature and women

the world of necessity. Women and land were seen as possessions of men who could use

them for their own ends. Men monopolized food production using plow animals and saw

themselves as owning the land. Calvinism destroyed the notion of nature as sacrament of

divine presence. (God is revealed only through the scriptural word). The natural world is

controlled by demonic powers. Women were the gateway of the devil and independent

women were often the ones tried for witchcraft in Salem and elsewhere. The scientific

revolution and the age of colonialism enabled Western Europeans to appropriate land and

resources in the Americas, Asia and Africa and to enslave indigenous populations. All of this

led to enslaving women and polluting the earth to the benefit of white males who

developed more sophisticated weapons to mainline control. Ecofeminism addresses these

problems striving for a just and sustainable planet: we must see that we came from the

earth, are dependent on the natural world, have destroyed the ecological balance, and have

to transform production, consumption and waste into sustainable patterns that help keep

nature healthy. We are nature becoming conscious of itself. God is the imminent source

that sustains the whole planetary community, the font that produces such a variety of

plants and animals, the matrix that sustains the whole ecosystem. All relations of

domination must be replaced by relationships that are mutually enriching: men and women

sharing public and domestic work; humans working together to sustain the world of nature

and the cycle of growth and disintegration which we share. Today climate change caused

by burning fossil fuel leads to melting of polar ice caps, rising sea levels, flooding and odd

weather patterns.

Starhawk female American neo-pagan activist offers 5 principles for an

alternative economy: (1) shift from fossil fuels to solar and wind; (2) more human labor and

less machines; (3) recycling of waste as fertilizer; (4) cultivation of biological and cultural

diversity; (5) greater efficiency in using resources. Other ecofeminists include Brazilian

liberation theologian Ivana Gerhara and process theologian Catherine Keller. Ruether

supports smaller local forms producing crops for local consumption (there are about 1.000

community-supported farms in the US); an increase in urban and suburban gardens. We

can learn from monasticism that rejected excessive consumption, cultivated the land, while

abstaining from meat, and promoting sustainable use of resources.

H. Eschatology (Theory of the end-times)

1. Critique: traditional popular view on immortality of the soul that separates from the body in

death and goes to heaven, hell or purgatory. Ruether thinks this denigrates the body and

nature and is part of a patriarchal theology.

2. Babylonians had no sense of the afterlife and the Gilgamesh Epic suggested the secret for

immortality was useless or a failure; the early Israelites had no belief in a blissful afterlife

but developed hope in a Messiah who would bring a new era of happiness, peace and

justice for the righteous. Late Jewish thought incorporated notions of the immortality of

the soul (Wisdom 3: 1-9 – the souls of the just are in the hands of God). Early Christianity

kept the apocalyptic notion of a new era: for example, the Book of Revelations speaks of a

millennium when Christians arise and reign with Christ followed by a final battle with the

Devil and a final judgment when the evil are punished in everlasting fire and the good are

rewarded. By the Constantine era (4th century) mainline Christianity focused on the

immortality of the soul separated from the body.

3. Paul developed the idea of a spiritual body freed from finite limitations and the particularity

of gender. Gregory of Nyssa (c 335-395) and the other Greek Fathers thought humans

originally had spiritual bodies, took on carnal bodies in the Fall but regain spiritual bodies in

heaven. Augustine taught the female spiritual body in heaven would no longer excite lust.

4. Ruether notes the work of Vine Deloria, God is Red, that contrasts: the view of Native

Americans that does not fear death because it does not seek personal mortality but accepts

collective immortality in being buried in the earth with ancestors; and the white man’s

desire for personal immortality and consequent fear of death and belief in a personal

afterlife.

5. She criticizes liberal thought and socialism for a utopian view that the kingdom can be

established on this earth often at the expense of care for the natural world (great pollution

in China).

6. She cites Anne Wilson Schaef’s Women’s Reality, claiming men are more interested in

personal immortality than women who are more accepting of finitude.

7. Ruether’s own position: accept life on its own terms including the cycle of birth and death.

Do all we can to create a more just, peaceful and livable world without expecting utopia.

Hebrew practice of the Jubilee Year is instructive: debt forgiveness, slaves released, land

and animals rest (Lev 25:8-12). Every social movement leaves something undone and

generates new contradictions. Jesus, who came to liberate captives and provide daily bread

and preaching to the poor is our model.

8. Ruether thinks agnosticism is the appropriate response to the question of personal

immortality. Upon death, our conscious ego dissolves back into the cosmic matrix.

Accepting death means accepting our finitude and the abiding character of the everlasting

matrix that contains us all. We must trust Holy Wisdom to give transcendent meaning to all

our attempts to do good.

II. Ruether and Pope Francis

A. Personally: She likes him, applauds his care for the poor, thinks he should appoint women to

high places but does not expect him to do anything on women’s ordination. She personally

does not want to put energy into convincing him.

B. Her theology challenges the common patriarchal outlook shared by the Pope and suggests

some practical advice in responding to feminist interests.

1. It attacks the root cause of patriarchy that transforms reproductive gender differences into

a value-laden theory of sexual complementarity that prizes male characteristics over female

traits. Hans Urs von Balthesar made this into a philosophical principle. Ruether insists that this theory of sexual complementarity is a product of historical development and should be

abandoned as harmful to men as well as women.

2. Anthropology: do not speak about women’s innate maternal instincts; but raise up

examples of strong women’s involvement in public life like Dorothy Day.

3. God: do not limit your language about God to male imagery like Father, King and Lord; but

sometimes speak of God as Mother, Liberator and Source of Life.

4. Sin and Salvation: do not support the abuses of patriarchy; but take steps to bring greater

equality to the church and society.

5. Jesus: do not preach only on the Exalted Jesus of John’s Gospel; but call us to imitate the

synoptic Jesus who came to liberate captives and serve others.

6. Church: do not totally close off the discussion of women priests; but listen to the experience

of women ministers and re-examine the arguments for women’s ordination.

7. Christian Life: do not divorce liturgy and life; but call all of us to continue Christ’s work of

establishing equality, justice and peace.

8. Eschatology: do not allow thoughts of heaven to divert us from healing this world; but find

creative ways to combine the struggle for gender equality and care for the environment.

Book Review: "Sexism and God-Talk" by Rosemary R. Ruether

“We need to start with language for the divine as redeemer,

as liberator, as one who fosters full personhood and in that context,

speak of God as creator, as source of being.”

At times, her discourse brings up a post-structuralist definition of what a patriarchal society means to her: it “erects a false system of alienated dualisms modelled on its distorted and oppressive social relationships.”[7] She highlights what she calls “the patriarchalization of Christology” by drawing a correlation that defines this hierarch of being: The Logos of God governs the cosmos, the emperor and church govern the political order, masters govern slaves, and men govern women. Ruether’s counter proposal is that “fundamentally, Jesus renews the prophetic vision whereby the Word of God does not validate the existing social and religious hierarchy but speaks on behalf of the marginalized and despised groups of society,”[8] and one of those marginalized groups are women.

Bibliography

Rosemary Radford Ruether. Sexism and God-Talk: Toward a Feminist Theology. Boston: Beacon Press, 1983.

 [1] Ruether, Rosemary Radford, Sexism and God-Talk: Toward a Feminist Theology (Boston: Beacon Press, 1983), xvi.

 [2] Ruether, 1.

 [3] Ibid., 45.

 [4] Ibid., 260.

 [5] Ibid., 95.

 [6] Ibid., 152.

 [7] Ibid., 71.

 [8] Ibid., 136.

SEXISM AND GOD-TALK: Toward a Feminist Theology

BY ROSEMARY R. RUETHER

RELEASE DATE: MARCH 30, 1983

Much talk about sexism, rather less about God, in this vigorous, wide-ranging, but problematic proposal for radical surgery on Christian tradition. Ruether argues forcefully that although Christianity has been twisted out of shape by a male bias, Jesus' message implies the ""kenosis of patriarchy"" and hence can be embraced by modern feminists as a liberating vision of humanity. The catch is that, like most liberal theologies, Ruether's has to excise so much age-old doctrine, practice, and imagery (everything from ""male monotheism"" to the equally masculine obsession with personal immortality) that it strains historical continuity to the breaking point. It's hard to recognize the God of the Bible in Ruether's ""God/ess who. . . leads us to the converted center, the harmonization of self and body, self and other, self and world."" Religion here seems to be a Durkheimian celebration and symbolic validation of the community, as when Ruether defines the Eucharist not as the body and blood of Christ but as ""the people, the ecclesia, who are being transformed into the body of the new humanity. . . ."" This may appeal to left-wing Christian intellectuals like Harvey Cox and Robert McAfee Brown (who have already praised the book), but it will strike most believers as secular humanism (of a romantic-socialist sort) in pious trappings. Perhaps Ruether herself senses this, because she spends much of her time on all-purpose exposition of contemporary feminism--an eloquent plea, somewhat marred by rhetorical overkill (high fashion as the ""sadistic tyranny"" of woman-hating dress designers, the pulpit as a phallus ejaculating ""upon the passive body of the laity,"" etc.). Ruether's pervasive intelligence and breadth of sympathy make this essay worthwhile, but her synthesis of feminism and the gospel in prophetic-revolutionary-utopian hope is, for all its nobility, a shaky one.

#MITTechReview: New beginning #MITOCW-centric wiki China_Medical_School_at_WUaS https://wiki.worlduniversityandschool.org/wiki/China_Medical_School_at_WUaS @WorldUnivAndSch @ https://wiki.worlduniversityandschool.org/wiki/China #WUaSUniv @YaleMed planned online for all 1.4 billion Chinese in all languages in China incl. https://wiki.worlduniversityandschool.org/wiki/Mandarin_language_(Chinese) with #WUaSAI~

#MITTechReview: New beginning #MITOCW-centric wiki China_Medical_School_at_WUaS https://t.co/ECRn7IJhLi@WorldUnivAndSch @ https://t.co/ydH2T22TVN#WUaSUniv@YaleMed planned online for all 1.4 billion Chinese in all languages in China incl. https://t.co/Dj7VXYdlTl with #WUaSAI~ https://t.co/xFvSvLZke2

— WorldUnivandSch (@WorldUnivAndSch) October 31, 2023

https://twitter.com/WorldUnivAndSch/status/1719360636533018834

https://x.com/WorldUnivAndSch/status/1719360636533018834?s=20

https://twitter.com/WUaSPress/status/1719362505611284690?t=ZZKRFKhLgdQm3BZ3-TQIhQ&s=19

https://twitter.com/sgkmacleod/status/1719362834109268020?t=FpOeihLtJJuffSikZJjCCQ&s=19

Retweeting

From the archives. Opening of a medical school in Shanghai early 20c, showing my great grandfather, Edward Hume. At right, a 2018 reunion of the descendants of people in the photo, including me & Michael Chou, of Harvard University (Church Lab).  photo c/o Michael Chou.

From the archives. Opening of a medical school in Shanghai early 20c, showing my great grandfather, Edward Hume. At right, a 2018 reunion of the descendants of people in the photo, including me & Michael Chou, of Harvard University (Church Lab). photo c/o Michael Chou. pic.twitter.com/guLkCkweXR

— Antonio Regalado (@antonioregalado) October 29, 2023

https://twitter.com/antonioregalado/status/1718666949591199847

https://wiki.worlduniversityandschool.org/wiki/China_Medical_School_at_WUaS



Creating the [[China Medical School at WUaS]], as a second of ~200 planned WUaSunivs' nation states' medical schools, - and potentially to collaborate with MIT Tech Review Biotech Editor Antonio Regalado - https://x.com/antonioregalado/status/1718666949591199847?s=20


Hi Ma,

how are you? Instead of making headway (in asylum) on my next book "Society, Information Technology and the Global University" I created a new China Medical School at WUaS just now - https://wiki.worlduniversityandschool.org/wiki/China_Medical_School_at_WUaS - and am hoping to collaborate further with Antonio Regalado, MIT Tech Review BioTech editor (and Yale Alum) ... and see the emerging Tweets on this new Med Sch page to come and also

https://twitter.com/WorldUnivAndSch/status/1719360636533018834

https://twitter.com/antonioregalado/status/1718666949591199847 ...

What are you up to this week?

Love, abolition-ally, hoping you're doing well,
Scott
(https://scott-macleod.blogspot.com/search/label/Medical%20Schools)