HE/SHE/IT? Lead paper: Rebekah and Anne

In “Why Women Need the Goddess: Phenomenological, Psychological, and Political Reflections,” Carol Christ discusses the idea of a female gendered Goddess. She proposes the idea of a society that rejects and replaces the patriarchal thought of God “the father” with a “mother” deity. Christ wants to reinvent the mindset of society by bringing to the attention of women their unconscious suppression through a male gendered God. Through this awakening, she abandons the ideologies of Christianity and develops a religion centered around the liberation of women physically and emotionally. Though Christ makes some insightful points, her proposal is too radical to be possible. In Christian religions, there does need to be a reworking of God’s gender, but a radical switch to a female Goddess would cause more problems than it would fix. Therefore, the replacement needs to be directed to a gender-neutral deity.
Christ proposes the idea of a feminine deity, a Goddess. However, the Goddess images presented by Christ are applicable to only the female gender. It mainly focuses around the female body’s intuition and oneness with nature. If a divine mother or Goddess were used, male association with a “mother” becomes a problem. Men would have difficulty in relating to a female deity just as women find it hard to associate themselves with a male deity. The idea of a Goddess ostracizes men to the point that it appears that the only solution would be a divided society in which men and women have separate theologies. Therefore, the argument for a gender neutral God is made stronger because it allows for men and women to worship the same deity without an inherent dominance of either of the genders.
Christ’s suggestion of a Goddess “thealogy” (279) poses many problems for Christian theology. If Christianity were to try and adopt a female gendered Goddess, it would have to completely modify many of the stories and beliefs that are at the center of the religion. Because of these changes, Christianity would not be recognizable. The term divine “mother” would present such a drastic change that a new religion would form. Christ essentially establishes this new religion through her working out and descriptions of the Goddess. While this may be appeasing to some female individuals, it would not be feasible as a religion for the masses.
If the Christian religion disposed of the divine “father” image, the only other plausible option would be a divine god that transcends gender, a genderless god. The change from a male God would and could not happen over night. The change would have to be gradual because the symbols of Christianity in place today are so ingrained into the minds of believers and even non-believers. According to Christ, symbols function deeper than just on the rational level. “The symbols associated with these important rituals cannot fail to affect the deep or unconscious structures if the mind of even a person who has rejected these symbolisms on a conscious level – especially of the person is under stress” (275). Christianity has been based on tradition and scripture spanning thousands of years. It has developed into what it is seen as today without major opposition on the gender of God. This presents difficulty when trying to separate oneself from the traditional view of God.
Christ provides a very valid argument towards a need for the restructuring of the image of God. However, her proposal for a solution is not an option because it stirs up too many other issues and controversies that would not help and even hinder her argument. We have come to the conclusion that the current situation needs to be reexamined and possibly changed, but Carol Christ’s extreme alternative would only reverse the current feelings and animosity felt between a deity and the opposite gender. In essence, women’s feelings would then become men’s mind-set towards a Goddess (if the idea of Goddess were a more inclusive deity, these feelings may not be expressed). Christ’s beliefs would be met with a great deal of opposition from many members, women included, of Christian denominations. This resistance would inhibit her goals of recognizing a need for change and enacting any change. A God that transcends the gender identity would be more acceptable alternative. The reworking of the religion to accommodate this new ideal would be easier for many who would normally completely reject Christ’s idea. While even this change may cause the Church to restructure some of it’s theologies, the alterations would still hold the main essence of the religion. The only plausible solution is to come to a happy medium of a genderless god. Religion is something for all and not to be excluded to a particular group or gender. A God that transcends gender encompasses all humanity, as a god should.