Inviting Ourselves to the Table’ – the Contributions of Feminist Ecclesiology and Feminist Theology
2.3. African Feminist Ecclesiology
2.3.1. Hospitality – Inclusive Church Structures
The first feature of African feminist ecclesiology, that we shall examine here, is the place of hospitality in the Church. In the section on ‘Justice and the Church’ Russell (1993:128ff) raises the key thought, the oikos, Greek for the ‘household’. She proposes that in God’s realm there is hospitality and that nurturing characteristics should be the
40 See chapter 1.1. for the MCSA’s Mission Statement.
41 Many homes today have a table in their dining room that can be expanded for a special family celebration, such as a birthday, an anniversary or a Christmas feast. Feminist theologians wish to expand ‘the Table’ of the Church in a similar way – such an addition is usually inserted in the centre of the table and not added on around the periphery.
49 features of the Church. Rigid constitutions seldom create space for generous hospitality and homely conversations, which are both characteristic of feminist ecclesiology. God’s household or oikos has become much more like God’s court of law and this particular analogy is not supported in the Gospels.
In African tradition, hospitality is a key factor to community life. The concept of ubuntu, which broadly translated means ‘I am a person because you are a person’, is a helpful way to view basic African hospitality. This can be translated into ‘what I have I share with you, even if it is only a little’. This cultural practice contrasts strongly with modern Western selective hospitality with regard to, for example, wedding celebrations. In an African village everyone is invited to a wedding whereas in a modern Western context only those with an official invitation are welcome at the wedding banquet. This topic is open to further discussion and would make for interesting research outside of this thesis.
However, in general, African cultural practices are known for their warm hospitality as Moyo (2005:187) explains: “While theological hospitality has to do with the care of a stranger, in Malawian communities it extends to the care of anyone in need”. Ubuntu stretches beyond special feasts as this is a day-to-day experience for African people. A well-known saying asserts that ‘a village raises a child’ and this is characterised by the mothers in the village who take responsibility for feeding and caring for any child who needs love and a meal. Riaan Manser (2007), the adventurer who circumnavigated Africa on his bicycle, writes about the many occasions when he was warmly welcomed into a simple African hut and given hospitality and even offered accommodation by complete strangers. Even in the towns, like in Limbe, Cameroon, Manser (2007:206) recalls the following incident:
I made one of those instant friends I had come across everywhere so far, a man called Nelson, who owned a photo shop where people could have identity and family pictures taken – the sort of place where you can have the Eiffel Tower or Waikiki Beach in the background if you want. Nelson gave me a place to sleep on the floor of his studio, in front of the fan and right next to the Brooklyn Bridge, and outlined Limbe’s rather dangerous recent history for my benefit.
Very often, Manser and his hosts could only communicate with each other by using some universal sign language, hand gestures and facial expressions.
In the Church, though, hospitality is often selective. Many will argue that standards of membership in the Church are essential to encourage a deeper commitment and spiritual
50 growth for its members. African feminist ecclesiology argues for more open doors and greater inclusion of the marginalised, the poor, the hungry, the homeless, the women and the children. Church practices that welcome rather than exclude are supported by the stories Jesus told, for example when Jesus brought a child into their circle and indicated to the religious leaders that if they wanted to be part of God’s reign they needed to become like a child.42 Another example of inclusion, when the exclusion of a woman in male company was the culture, was in the narrative when Jesus welcomed Mary to stay and to be part of the company with the men.43 The Church today still has many ‘rules of exclusion’
that makes it an uncomfortable place for women. Sheena Duncan reflects on the Rustenburg National Conference of Church Leaders in South Africa, and mentions how the women present were only there to serve the men at that conference. Her experience there was most uncomfortable. She writes that at
… a very late stage in the planning of the conference someone realized that women had been excluded from the agenda altogether and it was hastily decided to cobble together a “women’s hour” at 5:30 one afternoon far on in the conference process (Duncan 1991:386).
Once the women had taken their places on the platform one of “the middle-aged men”
addressed the conference and suggested that the women’s hour was a “waste of the time of the conference and not a priority at a gathering such as this one” (Duncan 1991:386). It seemed apparent to the women that all the men agreed with him so the women, including Sheena Duncan, walked out. Although some of the organisers of the conference tried to make amends to the women by inviting them to come back into the hall, the damage had already been done. Hospitality had not been extended to half of the Church at a crucial juncture in the life of the Church in Southern Africa, when South Africa was standing at the brink of a new political dispensation. Duncan (1991:387) went on to say that by “limiting the role and ministry of women – as was reflected at this Conference – we have impoverished the church. We have been insensitive to the double oppression suffered by black women under sexism and apartheid”.
Margaret Donaldson (1991:207)tells the story of an Oxford professor who continued to ignore the first two women in his class, regularly greeting them by saying, “Good
42 See the Bible in Mark 10:15.
43 See the Bible in Luke 10:38-42.
51 morning, gentlemen”, until all the male students decided to boycott the class so that he would be forced to greet the women but on that day the professor walked into the room and wrote on the blackboard, “Because there are no students present today there will be no lecture”. I acknowledge that the situation in many universities is different today, yet ‘the invisible factor’ regarding women remains a difficulty in many churches. Incidents, like the experience of the first female students at an all-male Oxford University, resonate with the experiences of many women in the Church.
Mary Tororeiy (2005:158) writes that women in Kenya are “present but unwanted” in the Church. She suggests that women in the Church in Africa are the ones who provide the hospitality, fill the pews, teach the children in Sunday School, cook the food for church suppers, make the tea, clean the church buildings, visit the elderly and the infirm and form prayer groups to pray for the Church. She asks “why women cannot be involved in the mission field, sit on committees where these suppers are enjoyed, and become servants of the Lord [sic] in the Sanctuary and preside over the sacraments” (Totoreiy 2005:158). In her own interview for the ordained ministry Totoreiy (2005:159) was asked the following two questions:
Question One: Do you intend to get married? If so, how will your husband handle the responsibilities you are trying to get into?
Question Two: Women are known to cry. What will you do, so that you don’t cry when chairing serious meetings?
The above questions clearly imply that women who enter the ordained ministry are intruders; intruders, because women dare enter a domain that by traditional convention belongs to men. Later, when openly discussing what I had asked, it became evident that my male counterparts had not been asked the same questions. Maybe they were asked the proper interview questions.
Her response to the questions put to her and to this experience, as a whole, is understandable. Why should women candidates be treated any differently to the men in the group? An exclusive Church cannot be hospitable – these two characteristics go hand-in- hand. Totoreiy (2005:161) feels that although the Church “is supposed to be liberating, the lot of the African woman has not changed. The exclusion that marks her presence in the wider society follows her to the pew; where she faithfully sits every Sunday”. What encourages the African woman, if all she can look forward to is ‘the heavenly banquet’44
44 See the Holy Communion liturgy – The Methodist Service Book (Section B17; p61).
52 where she, hopefully, will not only be responsible for the cooking and the cleaning but where she will be welcome to participate fully?
Teresa Okure (1992/2006:224) who wrote the epilogue to Will to Arise, shares a perceptive insight into hospitality when she relates the story of the healing of Jairus’
daughter.45 When Jesus tells the little girl to get up, she does so by herself and then Jesus tells her parents to give her something to eat. Okure (1992/2006:224) reminds her readers that Jesus also asked for something to eat after the Resurrection – consuming food proves that the person is alive and food
… keeps each one of us alive with our own life, not with somebody else’s life.
The daughter of Jairus was raised to life; she was to continue living her own life if she was to be of any comfort to her parents. She had to be personally alive before she could be of any comfort to her parents. On the other hand, her life would be lacking if she failed to be a comfort to her parents.
Jesus is concerned for both the parents and for the little girl. His liberation for her is to be free from the bondage of death but Jesus wants a full life for her – not one lived in the life of someone else (as Jairus’ daughter) and so she is to be offered food to prove that she is her own person – fully alive. Only as a fully alive person does she become the kind of comfort her parents needed. Okure (1992/2006:225) views what Jesus did for that little girl as a powerful symbol of what Jesus does for women today – “he was not simply restoring her to life; he was empowering her to take up her life and live”. Hospitality in the Church, therefore, should be offered in order that all its members, including women and children, and gays and lesbians, and other marginalised groups, can take up their lives and become fully alive – not living their life in someone else’s life.