{"id":1540,"date":"2020-08-22T06:56:17","date_gmt":"2020-08-22T01:56:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ocpsociety.org\/blog\/ocrc\/?p=1540"},"modified":"2020-08-22T06:56:17","modified_gmt":"2020-08-22T01:56:17","slug":"gender-and-orthodoxy-series","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ocpsociety.org\/cos\/gender-and-orthodoxy-series\/","title":{"rendered":"Gender and Orthodoxy (Series)"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

Dr. Romina Istratii – (Associate Research Editor – COS) – 22\/8\/2020<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

A decolonial critique of western feminist hermeneutics in theology\/religious studies
\nin relation to Orthodox communities.<\/span><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

In this series, Dr Istratii presents the evolution of the Western feminist theory of gender, the dangers that exist when Western theories extend to other societies without giving attention to the historical conditions that triggered and informed their development and address some of the key issues raised by feminist philosophers in reference to Orthodox theology and from the point of view of the Orthodox phronema of the Holy Fathers and Mothers of the Orthodox Church.<\/p>\n

The series began with a brief genealogical analysis of the concept of ‘gender’ in Western feminist thought to question the human metaphysics it has assumed under the influence of Western philosophy and scientific thought and history (see the\u00a0analysis<\/a>\u00a0in Greek). The second essay in the series examines the validity of Western feminist hermeneutics and gender-sensitive approaches in theology\/religious studies in reference to Orthodox traditions and points to the need for a decolonial method embedded in the historicity and exegetical tradition of the religious community in question each time. The report follows such a method to better understand negative or harmful attitudes towards women associated with domestic violence in Orthodox societies and to suggest how they can be addressed with the help of Orthodox theology. The essay is based extensively on the author’s peer-reviewed article\u00a0\u201cBeyond a feminist\u2018 hermeneutics of suspicion \u2019: Reading St John Chrysostom\u2019s commentaries on man-woman relations, marriage and conjugal abuse through the Orthodox\u00a0phronema.<\/em>\u201d<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Western feminist hermeneutics in theology \/religious studies and the need for decolonisation<\/strong><\/p>\n

The incorporation of gender-sensitivity in theology\/religion(s) studies has been premised generally on the belief that women within western Christian experience were historically marginalised and supressed in a male-dominated society and biblical scholarship, which begot the need to rediscover these female voices and experiences and to reformulate theologies in ways that aligned better with contemporary feminist ideals. For instance, Darlene Juschka in\u00a0Feminism in the Study of Religion: A Reader\u00a0<\/em>explains that the focus of feminist scholars in theology and religious studies has been to reinterpret sacred texts so as to address biases in what is considered male- and elite-dominated scholarship.[1]<\/a>\u00a0Methodological approaches in this discipline have therefore placed emphasis on looking at the historical and societal context in which these traditions developed so as to understand what might have fostered their androcentric tendencies and to provide alternative \u2018readings\u2019 of religious histories and experiences. They have been shaped by the influential works of seminal feminist writers who criticised (western) Christian traditions from different angles, including Elizabeth Cady Stanton (1815-1902), Mary Daly (1928-2010), Rosemary Radford Ruether (1936-) and Elisabeth Sch\u00fcssler Fiorenza (1938-).<\/p>\n

Especially influential has been Fiorenza\u2019s feminist exegetical approach premised on a \u2018hermeneutics of suspicion.\u2019 In her book\u00a0Bread not Stone: The Challenge of Feminist Biblical Interpretation<\/em>, Elisabeth Sch\u00fcssler Fiorenza presented a systematic approach toward a feminist biblical exegetical approach or what she called \u2018feminist evaluative hermeneutics.\u2019[2]<\/a>\u00a0Fiorenza proposed a paradigm shift from understanding the bible as archetypal myth to conceiving it as a historical prototype. As this historical context was androcentric and biased toward women, a \u2018hermeneutics of suspicion\u2019 was needed to detect the ideological underpinnings and distortions. This critical reading needed to be combined with a \u2018hermeneutics of remembrance\u2019, a reconstruction of women\u2019s history from the perspective of the oppressed. Importantly, in proposing this more critical engagement with biblical scholarship, she did not assume feminist authority over the Bible or truth.<\/p>\n

While this paradigmatic approach has made important contributions within western theological\/religious studies, it can become problematic when it is monolithically transposed cross-culturally.\u00a0<\/sup>Using such an analytical prism, many (but not all) prominent feminist scholars in gender and theology\/religion(s) studies have already displayed essentialising tendencies that present all \u2018Christian theology\u2019 as patriarchal, sexist or that attribute to it other essentialist characterisations. For example, in the seminal volume\u00a0Feminism in the Study of Religion<\/em>\u00a0Darlene Juschka cited Mary Daly\u2019s critical writings against patriarchal Christianity and suggested that the latter was inherently androcentric without nuancing this statement in view of cross-cultural particularities.[3]<\/a>\u00a0Fiorenza herself, although careful not to \u201creify texts and traditions as oppressive or as emancipatory\u201d extended her critique cross-culturally, saying that \u201cin most societies and religions wo\/men have been excluded from the authoritative traditions and classic texts not just by historical accident but by laws and custom.\u201d[4]<\/a>\u00a0Similar tendencies are found in Rosemary Ruether\u2019s work. While she reported that her analysis had incorporated Orthodox Christianity, she stated uniformly that \u201c[a]ll of these traditions are sexist\u201d without providing anywhere a theologically-informed and historico-culturally embedded analysis of Orthodox Christianity.[5]<\/a><\/p>\n

The problem is found in the fact that western feminist scholars have tended to\u00a0pre<\/em>suppose a feminist hermeneutics in their study of \u2018other\u2019 religious traditions, especially those of a Christian theology. Their rationale seems to be that since women were historically demeaned in most societies, sexism must have also defined the attitudes and discourses of male theologians in all religious traditions. Thus, scholars who have studied eastern traditions from a gender-sensitive prism have produced representations that are theologically inaccurate. Indicatively, we can take a closer look at Kari Elisabeth B\u00f8rresen\u2019s article \u201cGender, Religion and Human Rights in Europe.\u201d[6]<\/a>\u00a0In her analysis, B\u00f8rresen took a comparative approach in appraising world \u201creligions\u201d and reached some general conclusions, such as that \u201cChristian theology\u201d is \u201credemptive\u201d, \u201csexophobic\u201d and accessible to scientific analysis. While such characterisations may apply to some theological traditions, it is important to recognise that there is no single or monolithic \u201cChristian theology\u201d\u00a0per se<\/em>\u00a0but many historical, context-specific and embodied traditions whose diversity cannot be captured by a singly umbrella term.<\/p>\n

Additionally, the above three characterisations are unreflective of the Orthodox tradition and cosmology.\u00a0The Eastern Orthodox aim at human edification and \u2018perfection\u2019 through the establishment of a personal relationship to God and the embodiment of God\u2019s commandments in everyday living. The word \u2018therapy\u2019 describes better the objective of the soteriological faith and is often used in the local vernaculars. Moreover, in this tradition many adherents become monks and nuns after having lived a full physical life. It is not a\u00a0phobia\u00a0<\/em>of sex that makes ascetics particularly aversive to the topic, but a concern that such thoughts might trigger desires and temptations that can distance them from the path of continence and purity they have decided to follow. Moreover, theology and scientific analysis are not placed on the same axis. As opposed to the historical Roman Catholic tradition that placed emphasis on the intellect as the centre of theological activity, Orthodox theology has always been attributed to the\u00a0nous<\/em>[7]<\/a>, with the latter informing\/being informed by, but not dictating, intellectual activity.<\/p>\n

Mainstreamed feminist paradigms seem to be blind to these specificities and ultimately result in a \u2018reading\u2019 of Eastern Orthodox or other non-western (so-called, oriental) Christianities out of the knowledge system that has defined the meanings of their teachings. Essentially, the fundamental limitation of feminist paradigms in theology\/religion(s) studies is that these are too conditioned to the western cosmological and sociological contexts that begot them in the first place, which limits their applicability and relevance elsewhere. For example, the hermeneutics developed by Fiorenza were motivated by her positionality as an academic in the United States with a German background who had been exposed to a certain genealogy of biblical exegetical traditions.[8]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0It is this \u2018epistemological situatedness\u2019 of both hermeneutics and theorist that limits considerably the relevance that such exegetical presuppositions and tools can have in non-western theological systems,[9]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0which are expected to have followed distinct historical trajectories and to have developed unique exegetical approaches.<\/p>\n

It is important to stress that religious traditions, Christian or not, develop in context-specific historical conditions, which define what is understood as theology and main exegetical traditions within each faith community. Orthodoxy pertains to the upright (ortho-) faith or belief (doxa) which was revealed to the disciples of Christ at Pentecost. Part of this faith has been preserved in written form through the Holy Scriptures. However, in the Orthodox tradition the unwritten Holy Tradition, which was perpetuated through the life of the Church and embodied in the experience of the saints \u2013 known and unknown\u2013 has been equally important and complementary to the written revelations. In the Orthodox Church, the faithful aim at uninterrupted communion with God to achieve likeness with God and the salvation of their soul. They do so by participating in the Sacraments and living a life of Orthodox\u00a0ascesis,\u00a0<\/em>prayer and giving. Following Saint Maximos the Confessor, this therapeutic pathway has been described as purification (catharsis), enlightenment and deification\u00a0(theosis)<\/em>[10]<\/sup><\/a>.[11]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0As the Orthodox believer undergoes purification, she begins to be enlightened and to obtain insight into divine mysteries. This awakening of the\u00a0nous<\/em>\u00a0(theoptia<\/em>) to the grace and wisdom of God is what the Orthodox tradition has identified with noetic theology. In other words, theology in this tradition has not been predicated on reason or intellect, which has been equated to an androcentric perspective within many western feminist critiques, but rather on the enlightenment of the\u00a0nous<\/em>.<\/p>\n

The implication is that women had no reasons to be excluded from knowing and expressing Orthodox theology. In fact, women were as much involved in the preservation and embodiment of apostolic teachings as were men. Readers should not be led to believe that theology was gender-exclusive on the premise that the actual articulation of Orthodox teachings was dominated by males, which has ecclesiastical and socio-cultural explanations. This is partially explained by the fact that males already held more prominence in the early societies and women were generally dedicated to the life of the household and child-rearing. In addition, in the Orthodox tradition only men have been able to serve in the role of priests, providing them with an additional platform for teaching others. However, it should be noted that while the Orthodox Church has historically preserved the priestly order for men, this has been explained in reference to theological reasons that do not suggest an ontological male superiority, as some western feminist writers have thought to be the case within western biblical traditions. It is understood that the priestly order follows Christ (or the \u2018New Adam\u2019) who is considered the Archpriest of the Church. Akin to this, the designation \u2018Father\u2019 is not an effort to ascribe anthropomorphic\/androgenic qualities to God, as interpreted within some western feminist scholarship, but rather to denote that He alone is the Cause in the Trinity.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

There is no question that the Orthodox Church has historically venerated both female and male prophets and saints, with the Virgin Mary being considered the Holiest of all the Saints. In addition, there have been instances where female saints have explicated divine mysteries to male saints with extraordinary theological clarity, and have been considered authoritative to settle doctrinal Church positions among male clergies. The former is exemplified in the dialogue that bedridden Saint Macrina had with her brother Saint Gregory of Nyssa on the state of the soul which enforced his steadiness in the faith. Notably, Saint Gregory of Nyssa considered Saint Macrina his \u2018teacher.\u2019 The latter was exemplified at the fourth Ecumenical Council at Chalcedon in Bithynia (AD 451) when the final decision about Christology was made by a miracle of the deceased local Saint Euthemia.<\/p>\n

Under the influence of the same feminist hermeneutics, Saint Paul and Saint John Chrysostom have been frequently described as misogynists (\u2018haters of women\u2019).[12]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0\u00a0This logic would fail to explain however \u2018readings\u2019 of Saint Paul and Chrysostom that have promoted the visibility and dignity of females as have been typical in the Orthodox tradition. In fact, Saint Paul\u2019s teachings are understood to have given prominence to women in the Church and to have redefined conventional understandings of male headship in marriage in terms of altruistic love. Especially the epistles of Saint Paul to Philemon, Romans and Philippians which include references to female figures (Apphia, Phoebe, Priscilla, Tryphena and Tryphosa, Persis, Euodia and Syntyche) showcase that female activity in disseminating and strengthening the early Church was equally valued to male activity, so much so that their names were mentioned by the apostle at the beginning of his addresses, often preceding the names of men.\u00a0\u00a0Chrysostom\u2019s teachings on gender relations, marriage and domestic violence have been analysed elsewhere thoroughly and will not be repeated here, but there should be no doubt that Chrysostom was genuinely concerned about and advocated for the rights of women in marriage and beyond.[13]<\/a><\/p>\n

In conclusion, it is imperative to recognise that any \u2018readings\u2019 of Christian theology through the prism of western\/feminist hermeneutics remains disproportionately informed by western forms of Christianity and western women\u2019s societal experiences. As such, it succumbs to the same colonial epistemological tendencies that defined early (and strands of later) feminist scholarship.[14]<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Within gender and religious studies a decolonial approach that examines religious traditions through an indigenous theological, doctrinal, hermeneutical and sociological prism as a means to understanding gender issues and redressing potential inequalities and injustices from \u2018within\u2019 seems to be essential.<\/p>\n

Understanding gender issues within Orthodox societies<\/strong><\/p>\n

This approach is especially vital in regards to Orthodox societies due to the particular nature of this tradition. The Orthodox Church not only has a theology that is fundamentally different than western Christianities, but historically acted with a missionary spirit, engaging cautiously with pre-existing social and political systems with the aim to transcend them and to consolidate the Christian message among new converts. In some cases, the early Church was accommodating if it was felt that local systems did not hinder the Christian message to develop, or if a non-confrontation approach was necessary to avoid exacerbating risks for the new converts. This tactic is best exemplified in the instance where Saint Paul used the Greek inscription of worship on the monument dedicated \u2018To An Uknown God\u2019 in order to introduce to the Athenians the Christian message of salvation (Acts 17:23).<\/p>\n

Consequently, pre-existing social systems did not entirely disappear and vestiges carried into the new Christian communities. Church Fathers who lived in subsequent eras were not oblivious to these customary or normative understandings and attitudes that persisted and condemned them openly, such as when Chrysostom spoke against slavery among his audiences, or other instances. It is worth citing also Gregory the Theologian who, referring to the asymmetrical law that stipulated punishment for an adulterous woman but no punishment for an adulterous man, said characteristically:<\/p>\n

\u03a4\u03b9\u00a0\u03b4\u03ae\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\u00a0\u03b3\u03b1\u03c1\u00a0\u03c4\u03bf\u00a0\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u00a0\u03b8\u03ae\u03bb\u03c5\u00a0\u03b5\u03ba\u03cc\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd,\u00a0\u03c4\u03bf\u00a0\u03b4\u03b5\u00a0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c1\u03b5\u03bd\u00a0\u03b5\u03c0\u03ad\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c8\u03b1\u03bd;\u00a0\u039a\u03b1\u03b9\u00a0\u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\u00a0\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u00a0\u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03ce\u03c2\u00a0\u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u00a0\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u00a0\u03ba\u03bf\u03af\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\u00a0\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2\u00a0\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03c7\u03ac\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u00a0\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u00a0\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u00a0\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u00a0\u03c4\u03b1\u00a0\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\u00a0\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd\u00a0\u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03af\u03bc\u03b9\u03b1,\u00a0\u03b1\u03bd\u03ae\u03c1\u00a0\u03b4\u03b5\u00a0\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9\u03bd\u00a0\u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c2\u00a0\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2;\u00a0\u039f\u03c5\u00a0\u03b4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9\u00a0\u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\u00a0\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\u00a0\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd,\u00a0\u03bf\u03c5\u03ba\u00a0\u03b5\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u00a0\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\u00a0\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd.\u00a0\u0386\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2\u00a0\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u00a0\u03bf\u03b9\u00a0\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2,\u00a0\u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u00a0\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u00a0\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u00a0\u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03bd\u00a0\u03b7\u00a0\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1.<\/p>\n

For what reason did they punish the woman, but made allowance\u00a0 for the man?\u00a0 And while the woman who insults the spousal bed commits adultery the law punishes her with heavy sentences, the man who fornicates is not accountable to the woman? I do not accept this legislation and I do not praise this custom.\u00a0 Men were the legislators, and it is for this that the legislation turns again women.[15]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Such a history-based and context-sensitive approach is pertinent also to subsequent communities of Orthodox Christians and the national Churches that eventually emerged. While the Orthodox Church is a single ecclesiastical body, demarcations into national Churches occurred with the development of national consciousness and as a result of historical events. Many of these Churches extend beyond their national boundaries as a result of missionary activity, displacements and immigration. Socio-cultural, economic and political realities specific to the histories of what have been traditionally Orthodox societies mediated both the ways in which theology was pronounced by Church hierarchies or communicated through the clergy and the extent to which the faithful could embody the Orthodox worldview in everyday life. For example, regarding the historically Russian Orthodox populations, Elisabeth Gassin observed:<\/p>\n

Although these cultures may be considered traditionally Orthodox, given the modern history of these lands\u2014which includes domination by Islamic and Communist forces that often did not allow the Church to educate its children fully\u2014one may question how deeply an Orthodox ethos has penetrated such societies.\u00a0[16]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

It should be recognised also that the traditional prominence of the Orthodox Church in these societies deemed religious discourse susceptible to appropriation by different parties for political, socio-cultural and other vested interests, contributing to further distortions. However, such discursive deployments need to be differentiated from the historical experience-based Orthodox\u00a0phronema<\/em>\u00a0(conscience) which the Church Fathers and Mothers and saints consistently embodied and conveyed in their works, despite each having lived in different eras and societal conditions. The folklore vernacular experience of Orthodox communities should not be confounded with this Orthodox\u00a0phronema<\/em>\u00a0or the formal teachings of the Church at any one time, despite these being intertwined in complex ways. While the faithful will tend to have a basic understanding of Orthodox dogmatic tenets, they will not always have a theology-informed understanding of their faith, which will depend on how they have been socialised within the faith and their personal relationship to God (their spiritual journey).<\/p>\n

This is especially crucial to recognise when trying to understand pernicious attitudes towards women, girls or marriage in Orthodox societies (the issue of homosexuality and attitudes towards it will be discussed in the next essay of the series). Such attitudes can include tendencies to emphasise honour that can lead men to become controlling or abusive with females, exceeding preoccupation with women\u2019s chastity but not men\u2019s, or expectations that women should fulfil household works and meet the needs of the husband at all times by emphasising male authority.[17]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0Such attitudes have been associated with various forms of conjugal violence in Orthodox societies.[18]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0<\/sup>These attitudes could emanate from a lack of familiarity with Orthodox theology or an extreme emphasis on aspects of life that appear to be valued also within the faith (such as marriage or the family).<\/p>\n

While these attitudes do not reflect the Orthodox\u00a0phronema<\/em>\u00a0of the saints, they can be unwittingly enforced through the discourses of Church hierarchies and clergy, who do not realise the impact that their speech may have on existing perceptions and attitudes in Orthodox societies, such as when clergy emphasize the maintenance of the marital bond without stressing at the same time that this bond presupposes mutual sacrifices on the part of the spouses, as Chrysostom explained. As I demonstrate extensively in my study of domestic violence in the Ethiopian Orthodox\u00a0T\u00e4wah<\/em>\u04d9do<\/em>\u00a0community, in societies where the woman is already obliged to obey the man or never to confront him openly, an emphasis on the marital bond without simultaneously stressing the responsibilities of love and sacrifice that husbands have towards wives can worsen the situation of women.\u00a0<\/sup>[19]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0\u00a0The implication of these complex dynamics in combination with the centrality that religious discourse has in the vernacular experience of faithful communities is that Orthodox theology can make a significant contribution to tackling distorted ideas, norms or practices among Orthodox populations when it is employed with discernment by the clergy.<\/p>\n

In conclusion, it should be underlined that the author of this article is not generally against feminist hermeneutics or critiques, which should lead the Orthodox, laity and clergy alike, to a serious introspection and evaluation of inequalities and issues concerning women within their own communities. As we have seen, domestic violence is widespread in Orthodox societies too, and although the aetiology of the phenomenon is significantly more complex than feminist theory accounts for,[20]<\/a>\u00a0the problem is also partially associated with some negative attitudes toward women and the family. What I find problematic about these theoretical and analytical frameworks is that despite their origins in Western historical and social contexts, such methods are adopted by writers without thorough knowledge of non-western traditions who assume them to be relevant to non-Western traditions and communities solely because of their feminist aspirations. Feminist or not, this attitude in western academic knowledge production appears to continue colonial legacies in scholarship and needs to be problematized openly.<\/p>\n

[1]<\/a>\u00a0Darlene Juschka,\u00a0Feminism in the Study of Religion: A Reader<\/em>\u00a0(Continuum, 2001).<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a>\u00a0Elisabeth Sch\u00fcssler Fiorenza,\u00a0Bread Not Stone: The Challenge of Feminist Biblical Interpretation<\/em>\u00a0(Beacon Press, 1984).<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a>\u00a0Juschka,\u00a0Feminism in the Study of Religion<\/em>, 163.<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a>\u00a0Elisabeth Sch\u00fcssler Fiorenza, \u201cMethod in Women\u2019s Studies in Religion: A Critical Feminist Hermeneutics\u201d, 224 and 226.<\/p>\n

[5]<\/a>\u00a0Rosemary Radford Ruether, Sexism and God-Talk: Toward a Feminist Theology (Boston: Beacon Press, 1983), 22.<\/p>\n

[6]<\/a>\u00a0Kari Elisabeth B\u00f8rresen \u201cGender, Religion and Human Rights in Europe\u201d in Pieties and Gender, ed. L. Sj\u00f8rup and H. R. Christensen (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2009), 55-64.<\/p>\n

[7]<\/a>\u00a0\u2018\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2<\/em>\u2019; might be thought of as the rational core of the human soul, as differentiated from the intellect. It has also been called the \u2018eye of the soul.\u2019<\/p>\n

[8]<\/a>\u00a0Elisabeth Sch\u00fcssler Fiorenza, \u201cBiblical Interpretation and Critical Commitment,\u201d\u00a0Studia Theologica-Nordic Journal of Theology<\/em>\u00a043, no. 1 (1989): 5-6.<\/p>\n

[9]<\/a>\u00a0See Tina Beattie and Ursula King, ed.\u00a0Gender, Religion and Diversity: Cross-Cultural Perspectives<\/em>\u00a0(New York: Continuum, 2004), 4-9; Rita Gross, \u201cWhere Have we Been? Where do we Need to Go? Women\u2019s Studies and Gender in Religion and Feminist Theology\u201d in\u00a0Gender, Religion and Diversity: Cross-Cultural Perspectives,<\/em>\u00a0Tina Beattie and Ursula King, ed. (New York: Continuum, 2004), 22; Katherine Young, \u201cFrom the Phenomenology of Religion to Feminism and Women\u2019s studies\u201d in\u00a0Methodology in Religious Studies: The Interface with Women\u2019s Studies,<\/em>\u00a0A. Sharma, ed. (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2002), 36; and Elina Vuola, \u201cPatriarchal Ecumenism, Feminism, and Women\u2019s Religious Experiences in Costa Rica\u201d in\u00a0Gendering Religion and Politics<\/em>, H. Herzog and A. Braude, ed. (Palgrave Macmillan, 2009).<\/p>\n

[10]<\/a>\u00a0\u2018\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2<\/em>\u2019; translates verbatim as \u2018making divine\u2019 or \u2018deification.\u2019<\/p>\n

[11]<\/a>\u00a0See also this detailed explanatory essay:\u00a0http:\/\/www.immorfou.org.cy\/seminario-klirou\/1485-stsinantisi2017.html<\/a>.<\/p>\n

[12]<\/a>\u00a0These criticisms are mentioned in various works, such in Susan Heine,\u00a0Women and Early Christianity: Are the Feminist Scholars Right?<\/em>\u00a0(SCM Press Ltd., 1986) and David C. Ford,\u00a0Women and Men in the Early Church: The Full Views of St. Chrysostom<\/em>\u00a0(South Canaan, Pennsylvania: St. Tikhon\u2019s Seminary Press, 1996).<\/p>\n

[13]<\/a>\u00a0Romina Istratii, \u201cBeyond a feminist \u2018hermeneutics of suspicion\u2019: Reading St John Chrysostom\u2019s commentaries on man-woman relations, marriage and conjugal abuse through the Orthodox\u00a0phronema<\/em>,\u201d\u00a0The SOAS Journal of Postgraduate Research<\/em>\u00a011 (2018): 16-47.<\/p>\n

[14]<\/a>\u00a0See for example, Chandra T. Mohanty, \u201cUnder Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses,\u201d\u00a0Feminist Review<\/em>\u00a030 (1988): 61-88; Oy\u00e8r\u00f3nk\u1eb9\u0301 Oy\u011bw\u00f9m\u00ed.\u00a0The Invention of Women: Making an African Sense of Western Gender Discourses<\/em>\u00a0(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1997); Uma Narayan. \u201cThe Project of Feminist Epistemology: Perspectives from a Nonwestern Woman.\u201d In\u00a0The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies<\/em>, edited by S.G. Harding, S.G. (New York: Routledge, 2004), 213-224.<\/p>\n

[15]<\/a>\u00a0Patrologiae Graecae Tomus XXXVI: St. Gregorius Nazianzenus.\u00a0\u039b\u039f\u0393\u039f\u03a3\u00a0\u039b\u0396\u2019 (Migne, 1858).<\/p>\n

[16]<\/a>\u00a0Elizabeth Gassin, \u201cEastern Orthodox Christianity and Men\u2019s Violence against Women\u201d in\u00a0Religion and Men\u2019s Violence against Women<\/em>, A. Johnson, ed. (Springer: New York, 2015), 165.<\/p>\n

[17]<\/a>\u00a0See also Gassin, \u201cEastern Orthodox Christianity,\u201d 2015, 163-175; Paulette Geanacopoulos,\u00a0Domestic Violence: A Training Manual for the Greek Orthodox Community<\/em>\u00a0(New York:\u00a0Greek Orthodox Ladies Philoptochos Society, Inc., 1999).<\/p>\n

[18]<\/a>\u00a0Gassin, \u201cEastern Orthodox Christianity,\u201d 2015, 163-175; Andrew Stickley et al., \u201cAttitudes Toward Intimate Partner Violence Against Women in Moscow, Russia,\u00a0Journal of Family Violence<\/em>\u00a023 (2008): 448; European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights,\u201c Violence against Women: An EU-wide Survey,\u201d 2014,\u00a0http:\/\/fra.europa.eu\/en\/publication\/2014\/violence-against-women-eu-wide-survey-main-results-report<\/a><\/p>\n

[19]<\/a>\u00a0Romina Istratii,\u00a0Adapting Gender and Development to Local Religious Contexts: A Decolonial Approach to Domestic Violence in Ethiopia<\/em>\u00a0(London: Routledge, 2020).<\/p>\n

[20]<\/a>\u00a0Romina Istratii, \u201cDecolonising aetiologies and theories of IPV in public health scholarship and practice: Insights from an ethnographic study of conjugal abuse from an Ethiopian Orthodox\u00a0T\u00e4wah\u04d9do<\/em>\u00a0community\u201d in Development Studies Association Conference 2019, \u2018Opening up Development\u2019, 19-21 June 2019.<\/p>\n

This article was first published on Oodger.<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Source:<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Dr. Romina Istratii – (Associate Research Editor – COS) – 22\/8\/2020 A decolonial critique of western feminist hermeneutics in theology\/religious studies in relation to Orthodox communities. In this series, Dr Istratii presents the evolution of the Western feminist theory of gender, the dangers that exist when Western theories extend to other societies without giving attention […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[16],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ocpsociety.org\/cos\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1540"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ocpsociety.org\/cos\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ocpsociety.org\/cos\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ocpsociety.org\/cos\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ocpsociety.org\/cos\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1540"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/ocpsociety.org\/cos\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1540\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1543,"href":"https:\/\/ocpsociety.org\/cos\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1540\/revisions\/1543"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ocpsociety.org\/cos\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1540"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ocpsociety.org\/cos\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1540"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ocpsociety.org\/cos\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1540"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}