Just before Father’s Day, a group of Roman Catholic schools in Australia decided it was time to officially advance their belief that the Bible should be “gender neutral.” Therefore, they concluded that God should no longer be depicted as male, that is, as a Father.
In addition, the all-girls schools are attempting to produce a more feminist interpretation of the Bible by stripping the Bible of pronouns that portray gender bias, such as “He,” and insisting “Godself” is more appropriate.
A spokesperson for Stuartholme, one of the schools, explained that they “believe God is neither male or female,” so the school “tries to use gender-neutral terms in prayers… so that our community deepens their understanding of who God is for them, how God reveals Godself through creation, our relationships with others and the person of Jesus.”
Similarly, students at All Hallows school no longer recite the traditional “Father, Son and Holy Spirit” when doing the sign of the cross, but rather “the Creator, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.” And the Loreto College has removed “Lord” from their prayers since it is an overtly masculine reference.
Andrea Dean, the director of the Catholic Office for the Participation of Women, says she’s ecstatic about the new changes. “It’s terrific that they’re sensitive to the implications of how God is named,” she said. “God is not of any gender.” She adds that the Bible was written in ancient times, when words like “Lord” and “Father” were terms of honor applied mostly to men. Times, she says, have changed.
These are not isolated incidents or aberrations, but they are examples of the trend to change the gender-specific language of the Bible. As the argument goes, this would make the Bible more accessible to a post-modern audience and remove language that might offend people today.
Don’t misunderstand. We are not talking about simply changing the word “mankind” to “humanity.” Those words mean the same thing and many times such translations are warranted.
No, this gender-specific cleansing is a radical, post-modern effort to force the Bible to comply with the advance of gender-neutrality in our culture.
Does this matter? Of course it does. I’ve addressed this before (https://www.bobweathers.net/if-the-episcopal-church-wants-to-let-god-be-god-they-should-let-him-be-who-he-says-he-is/), and so I will borrow from that blog here, but as the trend continues we need to be reminded why neutralizing the Bible’s gender-specific language is simply the wrong thing to do. It might appease people, but it produces an inaccurate caricature of the Scriptures.
There are three reasons that biblical accuracy suffers when the names of God are changed and pronouns are neutralized:
It’s theologically inaccurate: God teaches us to call Him “Father.” To be clear, God is not male or female in the human sense. But He is our personal, rational, and loving God. The point is the way our Creator made us, how He wants us to know Him, and what the Bible says about Him. When we turn our backs on that, we turn our backs on Him.
If we still regard the Bible as God’s Word and its meaning as truth, we learn that God has defined how we should speak of Him: As our Father.
Yes, that is a masculine image. But God directly established that, in the created order, there are two genders, male and female (Gen. 1:27), and then He established our relationship with Him as that of children to a loving Father (for instance, Matt. 6:9). This is no small thing. If we believe Scripture is truth, then we see that God wants us to know Him, and He wants us to know Him in a particular way. And by that, He teaches us our roles, how to have healthy family relationships, and, especially, how to grasp God’s love for us.
When Jesus uses the image of a woman to illustrate God’s love, such as in Luke 15:8-10, he uses it as a simile to show what God is like, but He addresses God as Father. That is, God the Father is like a woman looking for a lost coin. But He is our Father. Jesus always addresses God as Father and teaches us to do so as well.
It’s textually inaccurate: If the word “Father” is used in the Bible, especially by Jesus, that is precisely how it should be translated. That is what the text actually says, and that is what Jesus actually taught. So, to change that is to renounce the text and the history of the Bible as well. But the post-modern trend is for the reader to bring the meaning to the text rather than the text speak to the reader. The result is an inaccurate, impersonal, inoffensive, watered down interpretation of the Bible.
We need to know who God is. Not who we want God to be. Only accurately translating the text tells us the difference.
And last, It’s historically inaccurate: To change the actual words of the Bible when they are translated is to dismiss history itself. Even the most ardent unbeliever should insist on historical accuracy when an ancient text is translated, so how much more should those who claim to revere the text insist on it as well?
Consider this: Jesus did not capitulate to the culture, especially in His message. If Jesus wanted us to address God as a gender-neutral Being, He would have said so. But instead, He wanted us to know the Father as He knows the Father, and to love the Son as the Father loves the Son.
Our God wants us to know Him.
Maybe that offends some. If so, how do you think God feels when people refuse to call Him Father?