ABSTRACT
“Feminism” has many strands, some of which are compatible with traditional Christian theological anthropology. Victoria Harrison and Janet Soskice, for example, have made important contributions to philosophy of religion, without taking leave of Christian tradition. But a common, forceful component of much feminist philosophical and theological work today is profoundly opposed to traditional, especially Christian, theological anthropology. If Mary Daly, Pamela Sue Anderson, Grace Jantzen, and Nancy Frankenberry are correct, Christian theism is irremediably patriarchal, a religion built upon and supportive of a male bias. Because of the importance of this critique to the present volume dedicated to theological anthropology, we concentrate chiefly on reasons for thinking that Christian anthropology and theism support (historically and today) a damaging oppositional dualism of mind and body, God and world. Our concern is with the feminist critique of Christian anthropology both in terms of content and method. We highlight the charge by Anderson and others that the supposedly impartial, disinterested philosophical literature that appeals to “reason” and a “God’s eye point of view” by leading philosophers of religion (Richard Swinburne, Alvin Plantinga, William Alston) involve the promotion of a disembodied, male point of view that has been used in the past and today to overshadow our bodily life, our sexuality, and the passion of those who are currently still marginalized in western culture.
