The Theology Committee is currently compiling all of the information and resources that we gathered at the worship services and bible studies during CSW.
If you remember, the overall theme was what is described in the original Greek language of the New Testament as the basileia of God (cf. Luke 17: 20-21), the “other” world: a world of justice, peace and community, which will come and is already amidst us.
In many English bibles this is translated as “kingdom of God” But this is not the only way of translating basileia. And English is not the only language women and men communicate about basileia. Therefore, we continue ask you, after reflecting on the CSW: What comes into your mind when you hear basileia, or “kingdom of God” or another translation? Do you have any alternative idea? If so, why do you think it is more appropriate? What’s the word for basileia in your own language, if it is not English?
The Theology Committee also hosted a strategy group session as well, at the EW orientation. In it, we spoke about a theological approach to Financing for Gender Equality. One of the members of the theology committee, Rev. Kathleen Stone, submitted this paper “Theology at risk” as a thought-provoking impulse. Please feel free to comment on that. What is your theological approach to Financing for Gender Equality?
11 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 1, 2008 at 9:42 pm
O.S.
In French, we find both “Royaume de Dieu” and “Règne de Dieu” in
translations. I wouldn’t say that any of them has strong gender
implications. For instance, it doesn’t sound strange in French
that the “Royaume-Uni” (UK) is lead by a queen.
“Royaume de Dieu” seems to focus more on the organisation, on
the comparison between the time to come and a country with God as
sovereign.
“Règne de Dieu” insists more on the sovereignty in itself, its
all dimensional extent (everywhere, for ever).
February 1, 2008 at 9:43 pm
F.M.
“Ufalme wa Mungu” – Kiswahili from Tanzania
In Kiswahili there is no complication. It simply means the Reign of God, A God who rules every where and for ever.
February 4, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Jane
You can of course talk about God’s reign in English but this still has the idea of a “ruler”, other ideas I’ve heard played with are God’s republic or God’s commonwealth, God’s participatory democracy doesn’t work because the idea is that God’s desire and plan for the world are other than human plans and challenging to our power politics – yet Jesus also says the Kingdom is with you.
There was quite a lot written by feminist theologians about “king”dom – reign may again work better. Some theologians would argue that there is a permanence in God’s reign that human institutions don’t have (whatever the Vatican may claim) I’m not so convinced by that – our ideas about God and God’s reign change over time but it is also one of the things that makes it quite tricky in ecumenical settings.
Anyway I rather like the idea that just as there is a transcendent and immanent side to our experience of God there is also an “otherness” and “within you” aspect to the commonwealth of God (Just to be clear I use the word commonwealth more in the sense of Cromwell than as the current group of former British colonies.)
February 4, 2008 at 2:33 pm
S.O.
Is the word governance worth playing with? Not so monarchical as reign yet implying that there is an authority that may be either within us or beyond us.
February 4, 2008 at 4:32 pm
J.S.
You could translate this word in a whole bunch of ways. But the most important thing is to realize that God’s Kingdom/God’s reign (basileia) stands in contrast to another kingdom—not one governed by God, but by an emperor, namely the Roman Empire. Unfortunately that’s gets lost in translation, not only textually but in context. (Your question centers around text, I think context is essential.)
So in speaking of the Roman Kingdom in contrast to God’s Kingdom, and more importantly, bringing that into a modern and diverse world, we need to highlight the contrast between potentates that rule by force and God in Christ Jesus who suffers on a cross.
I think the most helpful way to do that biblically (text and context) in the United States is to speak about a Roman Empire and the Empire of God. By extension I think it helpful to talk about the Empire of the United States in contrast to the Empire of God. Or the Empire of the United Nations in contrast to the Empire of God, etc. I very rich interpretive texture emerges if you do this the world over.
Hope this is helpful. I realize I’m making a very fine distinction, but I think it is an essential distinction.
February 4, 2008 at 10:40 pm
christianalbers
Thank you all of you for your contributions. This is very helpful for us. Please fell free to let your friends and colleagues know about our site!
J.S. I appreciate your very fine distinctions. Empire of God would be a translation taking up the context of the Roman empire and enlighten the subversive use of that term by Jesus. And in many languages, such as German (=Reich Gottes), this term is used as the traditional translation for basileia.
Thank you, O.S. for your French translation. On a website I found “Empreinte de Dieu” ( http://stranzblog.blogspot.com/2007/12/feminist-theology-with-regula-strbel.html ), which is something like “imprint of God”. Have you heard that before? To me, an imprint doesn’t seem to be enough for another world.
February 6, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Pirjo-Liisa Penttinen, YWCA of Finland
Short reflection to Your theme on Kingdom…
Finnish language has only one word for “he” and “she”. if You want to know is someone he or she, You have to use names or other indications, like clearly saying “man” or “woman”. We do not have articles either and we build the words with various endings, having 15 cases for a none.
Kingdom of God is translated “Jumalan valtakunta”, “God’s reign” – not mentioning anything about king or queen. The word says also that God is having “ power over everything”. God is able to exercise power over everything created.
Would be interesting to carry on, but this is in my mind just now.
February 6, 2008 at 10:09 pm
christianalbers
I found John Wycliffe’s translation from 1383 on http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/wycliffe/Luk.txt. Hes doesn’t say kingdom but rather an old version of realm or reign or so.
20 And he was axid of Farisees, whanne the rewme of God cometh. And he answerde to hem, and seide, The rewme of God cometh not with aspiyn. Obviously the old English term for “realm” or “reign”
February 7, 2008 at 6:09 am
David Seiple
It’s unclear to me just what the objection to the old language “Kingdom of God” is — I’m not sure if the objection concerns the gender issue or the imperial issue. (Maybe both at once?) I personally find the language congenial as it stands. It seems to me, as I think it does to J.S., that the use of language which alludes to (even mimics) structures of oppression can actually underscore the contrast. (If you don’t have a point of contact, you don’t HAVE any interesting contrast.) This is a common literary device, but a political one as well: think of the change in tone accompanying the gay community’s embrace of the derogatory word “Queer” — once an epithet uttered only on the lips of homophobes, it has been reappropriated by the victimized. So too with “Kingdom” or “reign” even “Empire” — the contrast is emphasized by the irony of its reappropriated use.
February 7, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Basileia - the kingdom (?) of God « Ecumenical Women at the United Nations
[...] our considerations for the opening worship. So, if you want, please comment on this site or check this and let us know what you [...]
February 12, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Angelika
“Bibel in gerechter Sprache” (german): “To stress the central content of the kingdom of god and prevent mistaking connotations with today’s outward forms of monarchy, the term in our bible is also translated to ‘gerechte Welt’, ‘Welt Gottes’ (‘fair world’, ‘world of god’) etc.”