Contextualization as an Ethical Practice: Part 2—Unpacking “Machine-Made” Biblical Knowledge

Critical theory posits that all analysis and evaluation has political implications. It also claims that systems of representation shape our sense of who we are. In Rosemarie Garland-Thomson’s words, we “are multiply interpellated.”

Applied to the discipline of biblical studies, our attention is drawn to the porous relationship between exegetical practices and the representational systems of gender, race, ethnicity, ability, sexuality, and class. A persuasive critique long offered in feminist theory is how Western representations of masculinity saturate established knowledge and the order of things.

Biblical Criticism as Commodity

The constant plowing of the scholarly landscape in the production of biblical knowledge has depersonalized the exegetical enterprise. Similar to modern industrial practices, biblical specialists as embodied persons are removed from their exegetical results. Here critical readings of the Bible resemble machine made commodities. Their package labels are generic like historical criticism, literary criticism, redaction criticism, form-criticism, textual criticism, rhetorical criticism. Within the publishing market, this inventory of criticisms enters a complex network of affiliations that work to profit from scholarly production. Among the fundamental forces at play in the publishing market is the ebb and flow of public demand.

In the U.S., public demand for scholarly biblical knowledge reveals particular cultural, economic, and social patterns, which, in turn, assist publishers to make low-risk investment decisions. Gleaned from these patterns is key information pertinent to social context such as sources of wealth in the public domain and the value systems associated with them. The one advantage the market place has going into this process is the reality that the Bible has long been a best seller in the Western world since the development of the printing press. Hence, the burden of maximizing profit gains lies not on the sale of the Bible itself but rather on other socioeconomic factors.

The Cachet of the Biblical Specialist

Reaching authority status in the field of biblical studies is not always the result of a peer review process. The demands of the market place also foster the standardization of a critical method. Given that the current field of biblical studies pertains to an ancient text, a major part of the scholarly discourse operates within the discipline of history.

For most biblical scholars, history writing has remained the standard for both intellectual measurement and market demand. Since the emergence of historical critical approaches to the Bible in the 19^th century, the market place and the peer review process have privileged history writing as an approach to biblical knowledge. Over the past 150 years, there has emerged a hierarchy of biblical specialists who have acquired a cachet of scientific authority. Intermixed here is not random selection but a default system whereby authoritative history writing points to elite male reality.

The Practice of Contextualization

Through contextualization, we are drawn to uncover the social beliefs underwriting the default system present within the field of biblical studies. What is it about the specialist’s gender, racial-ethnicity, class, abilities, and sexuality that determine his or her scholarly currency? What are the cultural norms that grant scholars power, privilege, and status in the academic study of the Bible? I agree with Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza that “despite claims to professional objectivity, virtually every academic discipline operates on the unarticulated common sense assumption of academic discourse that equate elite male reality with human reality.” (2007)

Although scientifically disproven, the abiding influence of social Darwinism, eugenics, and racial craniology on the field of biblical studies has yet to be adequately interrogated. The decades these sciences endured as authoritative in Western society were sufficient to reify the European male as the superior producer of biblical knowledge. The critical methods produced during this period are still in circulation alongside the continual European male dominance in the field. To quote Schüssler Fiorenza, “wo/men and other subaltern intellectuals who have shown leadership and claimed independence have been judged as unnatural, aggressive, and disruptive figures.” (2007)

Contextualization as an Ethical Practice

Contextualizing the biblical scholar can lead us into the particularities of meaning in biblical interpretation. This mode of analysis deepens our critical focus on the registers of racial ideologies and systems of representation in biblical studies. Moreover, the cultural iconic status of the Bible in Western society can easily be harnessed for oppressive purposes. This demands an ethical obligation to biblical interpretation that scientific historical methods alone are unable to fulfill.

Note:  Part 1 of this series describes the step-by-step manner by which Dr. Cuéllar exposes his students to the practice of contextualization.

Photo Credit: “Composeuse” by Frédéric BISSON – CC by 2.0

[sociallocker] [/sociallocker]

Add to favorites