It appears that Reform Jews in England will now have their ancient heritage destroyed to comply with the whims of their politically correct superiors. Their newest prayer book removes “male” images of God such as Father, Lord, and King, replacing them with the banal, but inclusive “Eternal One” and “Living God.”
It seems that every time scholars excise so-called exclusive language from liturgies (Christian or otherwise), the result is that God’s transcendence is emphasized, while the more intimate language for God is lost. In addition, the new language is often simply heretical. For example, Jesus called God “abba” which recognized God’s role as eternal Father in the Trinity and as our “daddy” as adopted children of God. The PC folks often change “Father” to “Creator” which affirms the modalist heresy and makes God much more remote.
I also see inclusive language as a good example of academic tyranny or worse, the tyranny of committee. Basically, a group of people in the ivory tower force changes upon average believers to suit an agenda, knowing full well that the average person is probably content with the ancient and historic usage. Yet, they must be corrected by their supposed superiors. I should add that I have a Masters in theology, so I am not picking on academics, just taking issue with those who try to force their activist agenda on the allegedly unenlightened plebs in an area so important as faith.
David Bennett
Jennifer
asimplesinner
Fr. J.
Chad Toney
Jorge Flores
Jonathan B
carmelbennett
nicenehobbit
Jason S
jaybird68
papaz
May 20, 2008 at 12:04 pm
One good thing that may come of this sad episode is that people may realize that today’s Judaism is far from being a pristine transmission of Old Testament Judaism.
Growing up and attending Catholic schools it was oft-alluded that modern Jewish praxis had total contitnuity with Old Israel and it was the same faith. In fact Judaism today is based on precepts of Old Israel, but their is lacking continuity.
Maybe this will help people to see just that.
May 20, 2008 at 2:57 pm
“It seems that every time scholars excise so-called exclusive language from liturgies (Christian or otherwise), the result is that God’s transcendence is emphasized, while the more intimate language for God is lost.”
I think you have this backwards, as feminists want to emphasize the ‘maternal’ or feminine aspects of God, such as nearness, intimacy, tenderness, etc. Trinitarian father language is regal (which is precisely what makes Jesus’ words about the Father in Matthew so profound and powerful).
May 20, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Irenaeus,
I guess I had in mind what could be more properly called “gender neutral” language where “father” becomes “creator” and “Lord” becomes “Holy One” or “Loving God,” etc. Rather than feminizing the language of the prayers (e.g. God our Father-Mother), many now prefer to remove any refererence to gender, which quite frankly results in language that may not be openly heretical, but is not actively orthodox either. It’s a bland middle ground. I remember having morning prayer services at the Episcopal seminary I briefly attended that began with “In the name of the one, holy, and living God.” Those are all accurarate descriptions of God, but hardly a substitute for the traditional trinitarian opening.
May 20, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Yeah, on second thought, I see that too. It’s like the traditional language is at once transcendent and highly particular, while the new heretical stuff is so generic it seems removed and thus faux-transcendent.