HER-meneutics

Schneider uses 232 pages to encourage a re-reading of Scripture (specifically the book of John) that leads to a transformed reality. It is that kind of re-reading that causes tension with traditional Catholic interpreters. If the heart of the matter is Scriptural interpretation, then the stakes are clear and the Bobertz Liturgical hermeneutic provides insight.

A summary of Schneider's feminist approach helps clarify her sensibilities for interpretation. First, Schneider opens the possibilities of interpretation that have been clouded by a male dominated clergy throughout history. Then, she raises the awareness of the role of women in the early Christian Church. These heightened sensibilities stir a fresh reading and encounter of Scripture that leads to transformation. Personal transformation affects social transformation. Schneider wants to realize a society, spirituality, and Church that is more inclusive, respectful, and appreciative of women.

There is a tension between the feminist and Catholic interpretations of Scripture. Behind the convictions about the role of women in the Church, stakes and sensibilities loom large. What is at stake for the feminist? What is at stake for the traditional Catholic?

A diagram of meaning is helpful. See the triangle of meaning below. Where in the triangle do we locate our meaning? Name the location and the stakes become clear. The triangle has three points: Scripture, Church Tradition, and the Reader. To locate meaning solely on Scripture is to read the text apart from Church Tradition and the experience of the Reader. A traditional Catholic reading suspends meaning between Scripture and Church Tradition. The feminist suspends meaning between Scripture and the Reader's experience due to a mistrust of Church Tradition. In the most extreme cases, this puts the Reader at odds with Church Tradition. Herein lies the tension.

For the feminist, the stakes are continuity and relevance from the perspective of the Reader. First, the Church has a responsibility to maintain continuity with the faith community that surrounded Jesus. Over the course of time, elements of Church Tradition have been skewed. Schneider writes, "The masculinizing of the Christian tradition in the course of two thousand years of androcentric and patriarchal interpretation necessitates a watchfulness on the part of the exegete for that which has been distorted or lost" (p. 123-4). It is the role of the exegete to raise awareness and energize a fuller reading of the Scripture for contemporary readers. This leads to the issue of relevance. The Church must engage the experience of contemporary readers. The role of women in society is evolving. Women serve as CEOs, business partners, artists, and homemakers. No one before us has ever had the opportunity to read the Scriptures in our immediate context. Continuity and relevance are our responsibility and a matter of transformation.

For the conservative Catholic, continuity and relevance are also at stake, but from the perspective of Church Tradition. First, the Church has the responsibility to maintain continuity with the faith community of the past. The Church is timeless and Divine. The future of Tradition depends on our present faithfulness to the experience and decisions of Christians behind us. Church Tradition is, then, the collective experience of God's work. Relevance is a matter of identity with the ongoing work of Christ. There is a certain counter-cultural aspect of this reality that speaks to and yet transcends daily life. It is the role of the exegete to share a timeless reading of the Scripture that speaks to God's ongoing work in the Church. Continuity and relevance are God's responsibility and a matter of human faithfulness.

The stakes for the feminist and the conservative Catholic are each sincere and noble. The tension is ultimately a different location of meaning for Scriptural interpretation. The feminist locates meaning with the Reader for the sake contemporary transformation. The traditional Catholic locates meaning with Church Tradition for the sake of the timeless Church. The bridge to be made (seen in the diagram as the dotted line) is between Church Tradition and the Reader. Bobertz's Liturgical hermeneutic suggests a possibility for this bridge.

The Liturgical hermeneutic recognizes the mysterious role of the Liturgy in drawing Scripture, Church Tradition and the Reader together. This union is a matter of Incarnation. Scripture is both a work of God's Incarnation and a record of the same. Church Tradition identifies us within the history of God's Incarnation and embodies that work. The Readers themselves are works and are witnesses of Incarnation.

Liturgy marks the timeless moment of Incarnation - consistent with God's action in the past, impacting our world today, and actualizing the future. In the Liturgy the Scripture, Church Tradition, and the Reader are brought together in harmony. Liturgy is the moment of being wrapped up in Incarnation. By placing the Liturgical hermeneutic in the middle of the triangle diagram, the isolated poles become interdependent:

1. The liturgy uses Scripture to unpack the experience of Incarnation within the Reader and Church Tradition.
2. The liturgy articulates Church Tradition as it encounters the Incarnation in the Scripture and with the Reader.
3. The liturgy draws the Reader into the Incarnation at work in Scripture and Church Tradition.

The Liturgical hermeneutic speaks to the stakes of continuity and relevance by upholding the timeless interaction of Reader and Church Tradition. Seen Liturgically, the Scriptures are God's Incarnational work being spoken through the Church to contemporary Readers. At some point, "contemporary" was what we would understand to be historical and "Tradition" was Spirit-filled innovation. There will be "contemporary Readers" and "Church Tradition" as long as there is "Incarnational work". The Liturgical hermeneutic frames the ongoing conversation that Christians will continue to have for the sake of shaping the way we live and for the sake of articulating our testimony to the Incarnation.

+++

I would count it a personal success if I have correctly articulated feminist, Catholic, and Bobertz sensibilities in this essay. I could not have done that two months ago. Everything I knew about Catholicism or feminism was diluted hearsay. My hunch is that this diluted hearsay is what most of us (and our parishioners) are operating with. My fear is not only that we lack accurate information, but that we lack accurate role models for the dialogue. Schneider earned my trust by her professionalism and commitment to transformation. I read her insights closely as she invited me into her perspective. People at St. John's have earned my trust with their patience and attention to my questions. We have a responsibility to one another and to those who are watching us. Our responsibility is not to erase our differences in perspective, but to set the standard for encountering those differences. Christians are faced with opposing perspectives all day long. We must embody and teach listening and service, grounded in the Incarnational work of God. There is freedom to let people be people when we trust that God is active in Scripture, Church Tradition, and the life of the Reader.