Babaylan: Feminist Articulations and Expressions

214 Pages·2007·0.41 MB·English

by  Revelation Velunta, Editor

BABAYLAN
FEMINIST ARTICULATIONS
AND EXPRESSIONS
CELEBRATING WOMEN’S VOICES
Hope S. Antone
FEMINISM, WOMANISM AND ASIAN WOMEN
Melinda Grace B. Aoanan
VASHTI AND ESTHER,
THE INDIA, AND THE FILIPINA
Lizette Pearl G. Tapia-Raquel
MIRIAM, MARY, AND VASHTI
Connie Semy P. Mella
WHAT TROUBLES YOU HAGAR?
DO NOT BE AFRAID
Liza B. Lamis
THAT SORT OF CHRIST
Rebecca C. Asedillo
FIRST THE CHILDREN, THEN THE DOGS
Sharon Rose Joy Ruiz-Duremdes
SARDINES AND LUCKY ME INSTANT
NOODLES ARE NOT ENOUGH
Lily P. Ledesma
THE SCANDAL IN BETHANY
Deborrah R. Reyes
ANG BUTAS NA TABO SA KABILANG BANDA
Aileen Isidro-Carbonell
MARIA CLARA, MAGDALENA AT AKO
Marie Tess Cruz
BAOG O PALAANAK – PABIGAT?
Carmel Villar Paet
SUSO: A METAPHOR FOR SPIRITUALITY
Muriel Orevillo-Montenegro
WE WALKED IN THE HOUSE OF GOD
WITH THE THRONG
Darlene Marquez-Caramanzana
NOURISHING A SPIRITUALITY OF RESISTANCE IN
THE ERA OF EMPIRE
Norma P. Dollaga
SI NANAY MAMENG AT NANAY MAXIMA
HAS THE LORD SPOKEN ONLY THROUGH MOSES?
CONTRIBUTORS
1
THE UNION SEMINARY BULLETIN
Occasional Papers
of the Faculty of Union Theological Seminary
January 2007 Year Two Volume 1
Seminaries and divinity schools have, for years, been
described as marketplaces of ideas. Unfortunately, many
such institutions have been marketplaces, or more
appropriately, malls of Western ideas. In other words, if
one were to go “shopping” in these “malls” of theological
education, one will be amazed by the number of stalls,
stores and shops offering “imported” goods: from
theologies, to liturgies, to libraries, to models of
hermeneutics.
We need more “shops” that proudly offer the
diversity of Filipino and Asian articulations of
faith. This collection is an attempt at doing just
that.
Revelation E. Velunta, GENERAL EDITOR
BABAYLAN:
FEMINIST ARTICULATIONS AND EXPRESSIONS
Lizette Pearl G. Tapia-Raquel
Volume Editor
©2007 The Union Seminary Bulletin
The Union Seminary Bulletin publishes sermons,
lectures, and other works by the Union Theological
Seminary faculty and presentations by guests. We do
not accept unsolicited material. Please address
correspondence to The Union Seminary Bulletin, UTS
Campus, Dasmarinas 4114 Cavite, Philippines,
e-mail [email protected].
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CELEBRATING WOMEN’S VOICES 4
Hope S. Antone
FEMINISM, WOMANISM AND ASIAN WOMEN 7
Melinda Grace B. Aoanan
VASHTI AND ESTHER,
THE INDIA, AND THE FILIPINA 31
Lizette Pearl G. Tapia-Raquel
MIRIAM, MARY, AND VASHTI 44
Connie Semy P. Mella
WHAT TROUBLES YOU HAGAR?
DO NOT BE AFRAID 54
Liza B. Lamis
THAT SORT OF CHRIST 92
Rebecca C. Asedillo
FIRST THE CHILDREN, THEN THE DOGS 100
Sharon Rose Joy Ruiz-Duremdes
SARDINES AND LUCKY ME INSTANT
NOODLES ARE NOT ENOUGH 106
Lily P. Ledesma
THE SCANDAL IN BETHANY 110
Deborrah R. Reyes
ANG BUTAS NA TABO SA KABILANG BANDA 117
Aileen Isidro-Carbonell
MARIA CLARA, MAGDALENA AT AKO 139
Marie Tess Cruz
BAOG O PALAANAK – PABIGAT? 148
Carmel Villar Paet
SUSO: A METAPHOR FOR SPIRITUALITY 155
Muriel Orevillo-Montenegro
WE WALKED IN THE HOUSE OF GOD
WITH THE THRONG 161
Darlene Marquez-Caramanzana
NOURISHING A SPIRITUALITY OF RESISTANCE IN
THE ERA OF EMPIRE 167
Norma P. Dollaga
SI NANAY MAMENG AT NANAY MAXIMA 175
HAS THE LORD SPOKEN ONLY THROUGH MOSES? 183
CONTRIBUTORS 203
3
CELEBRATING WOMEN’S VOICES
There is always more than one way of telling a story. On
the shores of Mactan stand two markers that memorialize
April 27, 1521. The first one, erected in 1941, reads:
“On this spot Ferdinand Magellan died on April 27, 1521
wounded in an encounter with the soldiers of Lapulapu,
chief of Mactan Island. One of Magellan’s ships, the
Victoria, under the command of Juan Sebastian Elcano,
sailed from Cebu on May 1, 1521, and anchored at San
Lucar de Barrameda on September 6, 1522, thus
completing the first circumnavigation of the earth.” The
second one, put up in 1951, reads: “Here, on April 27
1521, Lapulapu and his warriors repulsed the Spanish
invaders, killing their leader, Ferdinand Magellan. Thus,
Lapulapu became the first Filipino to have repelled
European aggression.” Actually, as this anthology of
diverse articulations and expressions shows, there is
really more than one way, there is actually legion.
Hope S. Antone’s “Feminism, Womanism, and Asian
Women” serves as an excellent introductory essay to the
diversity, plurality, and possibilities of women-centered
discourses. In their articles seven of the contributors
explore unfamiliar ways of reading very familiar biblical
passages. Melinda Grace B. Aoanan’s “Vashti and
Esther, the India, and the Filipina” juxtapositions
Vashti’s open defiance with Esther’s underground
resistance. Lizette Pearl G. Tapia-Raquel’s “Miriam,
Mary, and Vashti” critiques the systemic
marginalization of three women prophets. Using
narrative criticism, Connie Semy P. Mella’s “What
Troubles You Hagar? Do Not Be Afraid” pushes the
boundaries of God’s “family” to include those we call
“unbelievers” and “enemies.” Liza B. Lamis’ “That Sort
of Christ” takes two texts—the Canaanite Woman of
Matthew 15:21-28 and the struggles of Erlinda, a
4
struggling mother—in a conversation with Jesus. Rebecca
C. Asedillo’s “First the Children, then the Dogs”
takes the same Matthean text and its Markan parallel to
argue for a reading where Jesus is “caught with his
compassion down.” Sharon Rose Joy Ruiz-Duremdes’
“Sardines and Lucky Me Instant Noodles Are Not
Enough” challenges the traditional reading of the
Parable of the Sheep and the Goats. She argues that
food, water, and security are nothing when people are
not free. Lily P. Ledesma’s “The Scandal in Bethany,”
unlike many feminists, makes a case in favor of Mary,
instead of Martha in the Lukan periscope of Jesus’ visit to
the sisters. Mary, for Lily, broke all conventions by doing
the opposite of what all good women should do.
Deborrah R. Reyes’ “Ang Butas Na Tabo Sa Kabilang
Banda” introduces the “tabo” (dipper) as an interpretive
or hermeneutical lens. Through the “tabo” Reyes critically
engages imperial discourses, especially as it pertains to
women and womanhood. Aileen Isidro-Carbonell’s
“Maria Clara, Magdalena At Ako” challenges the
boxes or molds patriarchy created especially for women
in the Philippines—Maria Clara and Magdalena, both of
which are limited and limiting. Aileen challenges women
to break free from these molds. Marie Tess Cruz’s “Baog
O Palaanak – Pabigat?” engages Yahweh and Jesus in
a poetic conversation on the “curse” of barrenness and
the “blessing” of fertility. Carmel Villar Paet’s “Suso: A
Metaphor for Spirituality” explores the sacredness of
breasts and calls for the de-objectification of the same.
Muriel Orevillo-Montenegro’s “We Walked in the
House of God with the Throng” takes the plight of
abused women and children and challenges the notion of
churches and Christian homes as places of safety. Darlene
Marquez-Caramanzana’s “Nourishing A Spirituality Of
Resistance In The Era Of Empire” challenges her
5
readers to take up the “spirituality of resistance” against
the juggernaut of empire. Norma P. Dollaga’s “Si Nanay
Mameng At Nanay Maxima” explores the need for
militancy in the quest for justice, especially among
society’s “widows.” She engages the Parable of the Widow
and the Judge through the struggles of Nanay Mameng
and Nanay Maxima.
If there is any thread that binds these diverse
articulations and expressions together, I think it is found
in each article’s commitment to the voiceless and to other
voices—wherever you find them: in the margins of our
Bible stories, hidden in the dark closets of our homes,
churches, and institutions, or outside the high walls our
comfortable societies have created to shut others out.
In a country whose traditions are both pluri-form and
multi-vocal, these fifteen women are among the many
who have faith stories to share. And there are many,
many more whose stories of faith are yet to be shared.
This collection is an open invitation to start sharing…
Revelation E. Velunta
31 January 2007
6
FEMINISM, WOMANISM AND ASIAN WOMEN
By. Hope S. Antone
Hope S. Antone
Since the popularization of “womanist theology” many
Asian women who are doing feminist theology have been
challenged to define who they are and what they are
doing. Although by popular use and for lack of a
common Asian word “Asian feminism” has become the
commonly agreed name thus far, there are those who
feel uncomfortable using what is deemed to be a Western
construct just as there are many who think the whole
feminist cause is another foreign movement encroaching
on Asian soil. There are also those who desire a clean
break from the traditional concept of “feminine” that for
so long molded the “true and virtuous woman” as soft
spoken, submissive, slow to anger and action, and
dependent. Therefore, some Asian women prefer to
simply call their new interest as “women’s issues” and
their new commitment and perspective as “women doing
theology.” With the popularization of “womanist”
perspective and “womanist theology,” some Asian women
have been quick to identify with the reference, “women
of color.” But as in their experience with “feminism,”
there are also those who are cautious about adopting the
name “womanist” and the description “women of color”
for themselves and for what they are doing.
I believe that Asian Christian feminism1 has so much to
learn from womanism but it still has to grapple with what
is unique about itself in view of its context, the needs of
its constituencies, and the emerging political-economic
and religious-cultural realities. This paper describes an
Asian woman’s gleanings from feminism and womanism
with the hope that some ties may be found and some
links made to hopefully enrich our women’s theologizing
in Asia. The paper will consist of two parts. The first
part will trace the historical development of womanist
7
theology, highlighting its living praxis of shared
experience, shared theology, shared leadership and
shared naming. This will naturally make a comparison
with the earlier movement of feminism. The second part
will try to find ties and parallels as well as challenges for
Asian feminism.
Beginnings of Womanist Theology
African American women doing womanist theology trace
the history of the field to the mid-1970s. However, they
acknowledge two earlier movements in America which
led to the emergence of a distinctively African American
women’s consciousness: feminism and black power
movement.2 Perhaps, a third movement could also be
named which helped to sharpen black women’s critique
and articulation of their multiple oppression: the black
women’s club movement.3
One strong battle cry of 19th century feminism in
America was the women’s fight for their right to vote.
American women, mostly white, who realized that they
could do more than play the role imposed on them,
began to resist the old ideal of Victorian womanhood:
domesticated, submissive, dependent - in relation to their
husbands. The feminist consciousness of American
women opened the struggle for recognition of their
worth and untapped potential as well as the assertion of
their inherent equality in human dignity with men.
African American women were part of this struggle for
women’s social, economic and political rights. However,
a number of them felt that the feminist call for women’s
rights did not cross the racial barriers that remained
between white and black women. There was no interest
in eliminating the racial discrimination still prevailing
within the women’s movement. The African American
women felt that American feminism was simply not only
8
inadequate but also inappropriate. It was evidently white
and consequently racist.4 Although black and white
women did share a subordinate position in society, black
women still had a much lower position, whereas white
women had more privileges and were often in a position
to abuse black women. Such a privileged position of
white women is rooted in the historical gulf between the
whites and the blacks: white women were daughters and
granddaughters of slaveholders while black women were
daughters and granddaughters of slaves.
The rise of the black power movement in the 1960s
highlighted the racial dimension of the African American
people’s struggle for equality. It openly challenged
racism so imbedded in the structures of church and
society and the mindset of the people. Black women
were again very active in this struggle, but often as the
“unsung” leaders and heroines behind the prominent
male leaders of the movement. Yet, it was not just for
this lack of recognition that they realized the sexism
within the black community. There was the outright and
outspoken devaluing of their potential both in the church
and the community simply because of their gender. It
was clear that while both African American men and
women shared the subordinate position in society in
relation to white people, black men took advantage of
their male privilege over black women, a privilege from
patriarchal society.
Apart from the dimensions of race and gender, African
American women also realized that there was an
economic and class dimension to their oppression. Social
mobility and social stratification due to more education,
better profession and higher income helped to reinforce
the existing structure of inequality not only between
blacks and whites in America but even between blacks
within the black community.5 It has generated
9
competitive class consciousness and individualism so
destructive to the building of a community which is based
on cohesiveness and social responsibility. Black women’s
growing consciousness of their multi-dimensional
oppression (because of race-gender-class factors) found
expression and sharpening in the black women’s club
movement. While the white women’s club movement
promoted activism outside the home and moral values
expressed in the concepts of “virtuous womanhood” and
“educated motherhood,” the black women’s club
movement addressed more economic, political and
ethical issues.6 While black and white women shared the
burden of subordination due to gender, they were
different not only because of their races, but because of
their socio-historical and economic realities. Hence, “the
formation of a separate black women’s club movement
was more than a defensive reaction because of racist
exclusion; it was an act of self-determination to address
the particular concerns of black women and all black
people.”7
Although there were diverse types of groups within the
black women’s club movement, they all could be
described as a socio-religious movement against race,
gender and class oppression that was also concerned
about the advancement of all black people.8 It was a
social movement because it was a national network of
African American women, a public venue for challenging
power relations. It was also a religious movement
because these black women were actively involved in the
church, were often trained in the church, and some local
member clubs were church groups themselves.
The term “womanist” as applied to the black women’s
living praxis is a much later development compared to
the rise of the three movements mentioned earlier. But
the roots of “womanist” consciousness go back to the
10