THE DIALOGUES I am having with others in my late 30s are in contrast with the ones I had in my 20s when I was a single suburbanite. ... My aroused feminist perspective tempts me to say that traditional evangelical theology was adequate when I was living with a primarily masculine (in the Jungian sense) orientation to life, but has revealed deficiencies as I have related to life out of a more feminine consciousness.
Being pregnant, lactating, and caring for infants and toddlers; knowing isolation in an urban apartment; seeing the effects of racism, affluence, sexism, and waste—these are very concrete experiences and ones that have been often so exhausting that the necessary energy for abstract, focused thinking has often not been available. Life has become more responsive to the pragmatic, and the help that really helps must relate more to my being and my doing than to my thinking.
This is, of course, a false dichotomy, but how it cannot be a dichotomy is troublesome to me. I have been taught that correct doctrine, orthodoxy, is the source and prerequisite to correct living. ... In my saner moments, I hold to the analysis that evangelical doctrine is correct as far as it goes, but it often does not extend far enough into the life situation of women and men and children who are oppressed and bound by realities that rarely oppress evangelical theologians.
Judy Brown Hull was co-chair of Evangelicals for Social Action when this article appeared.
Image: Lantern, maoyunping / Shutterstock