‘Reuther’s view on Gender in Theology are More Convincing than
Daly’s’ Discuss
Reuther’s views on gender and theology are more convincing than Daly’s. Reuther emphasises
that Christianity is not inherently sexist and that it should be reformed in order to rid itself of
patriarchal doctrines that have been attached to the original message of love and salvation for
all regardless of gender. Mary Daly blames Christianity for our patriarchal society and believes
that women should move beyond it in order to liberate themselves from oppression. Reuther
is more convincing because it is incorrect to state that religion existed before sexism and
therefore blame religion for sexism and it is also more meaningful to try to reform Christianity
in a way that includes all genders equally rather than try to separate women from it, in a way
that actually deepens the conflict and inequality between men and women.
Daly argued that men have sought to oppress women throughout history and that religion is
used as a tool to enforce this oppression. God is traditionally referred to with male language –
he/him pronouns, father, son etc – which, Daly argues, makes God male and therefore makes
the male God. Just as God dominates the world, men dominate women. This view has been
entrenched in Christianity, with many influential theologians seeing women as lesser than
men. Tertullian saw women as ‘the devil’s gateway’ and responsible for the fall and therefore
the reason Jesus had to die; Augustine believed that women were not made in the image of
God; Martin Luther emphasised that Eve was the one who ruined the paradise; Bonhoeffer
insisted that women should be subject to their husbands; Barth similar said women are
subordinate to men and Pope John Paul II suggested that women’s liberation is not found in
equality with men but through recognition of their role as mothers. Daly believed that this
view of God as male is inadequate and that the maleness of God needs to be removed.
Instead, she argued, women should turn to find the quintessence in nature which has been
damaged and blocked by religions patriarchy.
Daly’s arguments about the patriarchy found in Christianity is very convincing, as it can be
clearly seen in the writings of influential Christian writers. She is also convincing when she
argues that people should seek their own spirituality through experience rather than
traditional doctrines. However, I think she goes to far in claiming that Christianity is too
inherently sexist so it should just be discarded. Simon Chan argues convincingly that the idea
of God the father is not meant to exclude feminine qualities, rather it is supposed to show
that God is a caring and personal deity that people can rely upon as they would a parent. This
argument is convincing because God is a transcendent being, and the language we use to
describe him is symbolic or analogical rather than literal. As Aquinas argued, language to
describe God is just meant to ground our understanding of God in experience we know, but
we have to recognise that this is not literal because God is beyond description and beyond
human ideas of gender. He also rejects her idea that ‘if god is male then male is God’ by
pointing to the fact that even when religions have goddesses as well as gods, they are just as
patriarchal. Furthermore, Daly is unconvincing in her argument that Christianity is
irretrievable. Fiorenza argued that although scripture if read alone is sexist, if the historical
context is understood, the sexism in the Bible can be explained as contextual rather than as
Daly’s’ Discuss
Reuther’s views on gender and theology are more convincing than Daly’s. Reuther emphasises
that Christianity is not inherently sexist and that it should be reformed in order to rid itself of
patriarchal doctrines that have been attached to the original message of love and salvation for
all regardless of gender. Mary Daly blames Christianity for our patriarchal society and believes
that women should move beyond it in order to liberate themselves from oppression. Reuther
is more convincing because it is incorrect to state that religion existed before sexism and
therefore blame religion for sexism and it is also more meaningful to try to reform Christianity
in a way that includes all genders equally rather than try to separate women from it, in a way
that actually deepens the conflict and inequality between men and women.
Daly argued that men have sought to oppress women throughout history and that religion is
used as a tool to enforce this oppression. God is traditionally referred to with male language –
he/him pronouns, father, son etc – which, Daly argues, makes God male and therefore makes
the male God. Just as God dominates the world, men dominate women. This view has been
entrenched in Christianity, with many influential theologians seeing women as lesser than
men. Tertullian saw women as ‘the devil’s gateway’ and responsible for the fall and therefore
the reason Jesus had to die; Augustine believed that women were not made in the image of
God; Martin Luther emphasised that Eve was the one who ruined the paradise; Bonhoeffer
insisted that women should be subject to their husbands; Barth similar said women are
subordinate to men and Pope John Paul II suggested that women’s liberation is not found in
equality with men but through recognition of their role as mothers. Daly believed that this
view of God as male is inadequate and that the maleness of God needs to be removed.
Instead, she argued, women should turn to find the quintessence in nature which has been
damaged and blocked by religions patriarchy.
Daly’s arguments about the patriarchy found in Christianity is very convincing, as it can be
clearly seen in the writings of influential Christian writers. She is also convincing when she
argues that people should seek their own spirituality through experience rather than
traditional doctrines. However, I think she goes to far in claiming that Christianity is too
inherently sexist so it should just be discarded. Simon Chan argues convincingly that the idea
of God the father is not meant to exclude feminine qualities, rather it is supposed to show
that God is a caring and personal deity that people can rely upon as they would a parent. This
argument is convincing because God is a transcendent being, and the language we use to
describe him is symbolic or analogical rather than literal. As Aquinas argued, language to
describe God is just meant to ground our understanding of God in experience we know, but
we have to recognise that this is not literal because God is beyond description and beyond
human ideas of gender. He also rejects her idea that ‘if god is male then male is God’ by
pointing to the fact that even when religions have goddesses as well as gods, they are just as
patriarchal. Furthermore, Daly is unconvincing in her argument that Christianity is
irretrievable. Fiorenza argued that although scripture if read alone is sexist, if the historical
context is understood, the sexism in the Bible can be explained as contextual rather than as
