Inclusive Language
by Marilyn Lerch
In both scripture and life, we are reminded of the
importance of words. From “the Word became flesh
and dwelled among us” to “sticks and stones will
break my bones but words will never hurt me” (which
of course is not true), our lives revolve around
words. As the mother of a 24 year old daughter with
autism who has never developed verbal language as
well as the mother of a 22 year old son who has, it
sometimes seems to me, developed far too much
language, I have become very aware of the power of
words. As a feminist Christian whose understanding
of God is that God is beyond any description that
we could put into words and that to limit
descriptions of God to only male language is to
limit in image of God, I am convinced that it is
important to put forth the effort it takes to use a
language of faith that is more expansive. Over the
years I have also become keenly aware that not only
do some never consider the importance of this,
others truly believe that God is male and therefore
feel they are affronting God not to use male
language when speaking of the Divine.
Years ago when I was the TRIM (TRaining In
Ministry) Coordinator in IL-WI District, I would
bring up this issue at the TRIM/EFSM Orientations I
attended, sometimes resulting in good and helpful
discussions, sometimes resulting in just making
people angry. When I joined the Brethren Academy
for Ministerial Leadership staff six years ago as
the TRIM Coordinator, it occurred to me that I was
in a position to be able to encourage students in a
more direct way to at least give inclusive language
a try. Not feminine language for God, but simply
non-gendered language. If those training for
ministry could learn Greek or Hebrew, could they
not learn inclusive language? I would lead a short
discussion explaining inclusive language at the
student orientation and then require the use of God
language other than male in the paper written by
students following orientation. I found such
extreme resistance to this in some students that I
decided that while I would continue to model
inclusive language in my own life and ministry,
this format was not a helpful place in which to
introduce such an emotionally charged issue.
In the seminary atmosphere where new ideas can be
introduced and then processed over a period of
time, I believe it is important to do so. But in
the one-time event of TRIM/EFSM orientation, there
is not enough of a relationship built to be able to
faithfully do this. Rather than look at my decision
as a failure, frustrated as I was to make this
change at the time, I believe as with all change,
there is wisdom in knowing what battles to fight
when.
Like many of my ministry colleagues, I am adamant
about using inclusive language myself. Recently one
of them reminded me of the subtle power of quietly
modeling inclusive language as she had a
parishioner visit another church and come back
astounded at all the male language she heard in
that other setting. Perhaps one of the most
powerful actions we advocates of inclusive language
can take is to use it ourselves and step gently
into those opportunities that come our way to talk
about why we do so. There are a vast array of ways
to begin a prayer, so why would “Heavenly Father”
be such a common choice? Habit. Pure habit.
And I would suggest laziness. I was told by one COB
elder that the old Brethren almost always began a
prayer with the words “O Thou who art from
everlasting to everlasting.” While that language is
somewhat archaic, it allows our religious
imagination much more space in which to picture the
One in whom we live and move and have our being.
May we be those who continue the expansive nature
of our tradition and help those we minister to be
open to the imaginative act of the Word made flesh
among us.