As I read Misusing Scripture’s introduction, I wonder whether it makes sense to add anything else to such a long list of reactions, blogs, book chapters and even books on misusing Scripture. What I can contribute is a lense from my own corner of the world, Argentina. Latin American scholarship is still in the making, so to speak. Most of us have been trained in the North-Atlantic world, where our particular contexts and perspectives were, for a long time, colorful anecdotes but not part of academic scholarship. This translates into a slow process of integrating our different perspectives into our scholarship, as we grow more confident in our own right to speak with our own voice. Furthermore, our theological schools often had, at least until de beginning of this century, scholars from their respective “mother churches” as part of their faculties. Most Latin American countries do not include Divinity schools in their State universities, leaving theology, therefore, to the private realm of the churches.
Our struggles in Latin America are particularly related to counter colonization, patriarchy, racism, and classism. Today, we also face the consequences of economic and ecological disasters produced mainly by decisions made by others in other parts of the globe.
One of the main issues derived from misuse of the Scriptures is that of a rigid and artificial model of family life, allegedly instituted by God Himself (sic) at the creation of the world as the only valid family model forever. I contend that it is a misuse of Scripture because it forgets that there are several family models in the Bible (see Tom Hanks, La diversidad ¡50! de familias en la Biblia (Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires: Epifanía, 2016) besides the nuclear, binary, heterosexual, patriarcal family model espoused by its proponents (furthermore, these Scripture misusers misread gender theories, labelling them an ideology). Consequences of this misuse go from denying women sexual and reproductive rights to preaching the indisoluble character of marriage, even under violent circumstances.
I contend that they also misread Scripture by deriving from this only family model total denial of female sexual and reproductive rights; “male and female he created them” ends up being the ground for prohibition—only for the female—of premarital sexual relations, prohibition of contraceptives, prohibition of abortion, and blaming the mother for single parenthood. While female sexual and reproductive rights in Ancient Israel might have been denied to most women (at least, those under a patriarchal figure), it is debatable that they be derived from Genesis 1! There is, also, a “hermeneutical leap”, disregarding differences in social and historical conditions that put women in dangerous situations for the sake of fixed and idealized “family” and “motherhood” models (see particularly Susanne Scholz’s examples of essentializing women in the USA). Sadly, I have to attest to the fact that not only Evangelicals are guilty of misuse of Scripture when it comes to gender (see, e.g., “Male and Female He Created Them”: Towards A Path of Dialogue on The Question of Gender Theory in Education, by the Congregation For Catholic Education, Vatican City, 2019, https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc…). Perhaps many of us do not deem the Bible inerrant; yet, we all hold beliefs we are not ready to re-examine in the light of contemporary events or academic consensuses. This is of course no justification for misuse of Scripture by evangelicals.
Mercedes L. García Bachmann, PhD
Institute for Pastoral Contextual Studies, United Evangelical Lutheran Church (Argentina-Uruguay), Adjunct Distinguished Faculty, Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago (USA).
As I read Misusing Scripture’s introduction, I wonder whether it makes sense to add anything else to such a long list of reactions, blogs, book chapters and even books on misusing Scripture. What I can contribute is a lense from my own corner of the world, Argentina. Latin American scholarship is still in the making, so to speak. Most of us have been trained in the North-Atlantic world, where our particular contexts and perspectives were, for a long time, colorful anecdotes but not part of academic scholarship. This translates into a slow process of integrating our different perspectives into our scholarship, as we grow more confident in our own right to speak with our own voice. Furthermore, our theological schools often had, at least until de beginning of this century, scholars from their respective “mother churches” as part of their faculties. Most Latin American countries do not include Divinity schools in their State universities, leaving theology, therefore, to the private realm of the churches.
Our struggles in Latin America are particularly related to counter colonization, patriarchy, racism, and classism. Today, we also face the consequences of economic and ecological disasters produced mainly by decisions made by others in other parts of the globe.
One of the main issues derived from misuse of the Scriptures is that of a rigid and artificial model of family life, allegedly instituted by God Himself (sic) at the creation of the world as the only valid family model forever. I contend that it is a misuse of Scripture because it forgets that there are several family models in the Bible (see Tom Hanks, La diversidad ¡50! de familias en la Biblia (Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires: Epifanía, 2016) besides the nuclear, binary, heterosexual, patriarcal family model espoused by its proponents (furthermore, these Scripture misusers misread gender theories, labelling them an ideology). Consequences of this misuse go from denying women sexual and reproductive rights to preaching the indisoluble character of marriage, even under violent circumstances.
I contend that they also misread Scripture by deriving from this only family model total denial of female sexual and reproductive rights; “male and female he created them” ends up being the ground for prohibition—only for the female—of premarital sexual relations, prohibition of contraceptives, prohibition of abortion, and blaming the mother for single parenthood. While female sexual and reproductive rights in Ancient Israel might have been denied to most women (at least, those under a patriarchal figure), it is debatable that they be derived from Genesis 1! There is, also, a “hermeneutical leap”, disregarding differences in social and historical conditions that put women in dangerous situations for the sake of fixed and idealized “family” and “motherhood” models (see particularly Susanne Scholz’s examples of essentializing women in the USA). Sadly, I have to attest to the fact that not only Evangelicals are guilty of misuse of Scripture when it comes to gender (see, e.g., “Male and Female He Created Them”: Towards A Path of Dialogue on The Question of Gender Theory in Education, by the Congregation For Catholic Education, Vatican City, 2019, https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc…). Perhaps many of us do not deem the Bible inerrant; yet, we all hold beliefs we are not ready to re-examine in the light of contemporary events or academic consensuses. This is of course no justification for misuse of Scripture by evangelicals.
Mercedes L. García Bachmann, PhD
Institute for Pastoral Contextual Studies, United Evangelical Lutheran Church (Argentina-Uruguay), Adjunct Distinguished Faculty, Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago (USA).