The sheer ugliness of inclusive language

Sunday, August 22, 2010
by James Gibson

The surest way to dumb down a church's theology is to tamper with its liturgy, and there is no more reprehensible way to wreak havoc on the liturgy than to pepper it throughout with "non-offensive" or "inclusive" language. Mainline churches today are dead in large part because their liturgies are lifeless expressions of rancid sterility laced with the deadly poison of idolatrous gender neutrality. The "God" who is "worshiped" in these liturgies is not a loving Father of infinite goodness and mercy, but a faceless functionary who is apparently so distant as to be beyond personal pronouns. If "God loves all God's children," why can't this loving "God" be addressed as Father or referred to as he, him, or his?

A "God" who is not personal is neither capable of loving nor of being loved. The prophets of inclusiveness will insist that "love" is all that matters. But "love," to them, is not unconditional self-sacrifice, but narcissistic self-exaltation. Thus, it is no longer "right to give him thanks and praise," but "right to give our thanks and praise." That subtle alteration, now standard in many eucharistic liturgies, illustrates profoundly the shift which inevitably takes place when "inclusive language" is the main concern. The focus is not on God, but on ourselves. God is no longer the object of worship; we are the object of our own self-congratulation. the rest