|
Good Language(1)
One Man's Web
> Studies
> Good Language (1)
Inclusive Language, Good Language and Compassion.
This essay was originally
written for Dr John Gaden in the late 80's. I thought it would be
interesting to re-visit it after nearly 15 years and see where I have shifted,
and where the church has shifted. It was a watershed essay for me, as I
struggled with the tension between my old theology and my new experiences.
I have tried to present the original essay in the left column (black text), with
a commentary and new ideas in the right (blue text.) I have certainly
shifted! In the red text I have included comments John made on the original
essay.
The original essay is "as was" except for pulling some comments
from the footnotes into the text. It solves John's exasperated
comment: "Please don't footnote your footnotes!"
This is an
experiment. The "blue essay" is not an attempt to write a
critique or an alternative. It is more about a felt response to
where I was and where I am now. Inclusive language was the concern
of the first essay. "Good" Language and Compassion are my
present wider concerns |
|
SYNOPSIS
The church ought not exclude people by the language of its liturgy; '..love one another as I have loved you.' The problem is to discern if and when language really does exclude people, especially women. The essay concludes that the language of the church is not intrinsically sexist, but that much important terminology correlates with the patriarchy of our society, resulting in it being seen as sexist and exclusive by many people. The problem cannot be solved by the removal of these terms without great detriment to the church. Yet a strategy for dealing with the problem is possible and is outlined.
|
The study on Women
in Mark on these pages would suggest I believe that the original
Gospel of Christ was certainly not sexist, however flawed it may have been
but instead a strong challenge to the patriarchy of the times.
However I would not be so definite now on the idea that much of the
language of the church is not intrinsically sexist. I think it
is. Much of the church, based on the later epistles and / or equally
strongly based in the very sexist church fathers, is intrinsically sexist
until it has been greatly reformed by the kind of challenge Mark presents.
Based in Jesus we are not intrinsically sexist. But much of what we
are is not based in Jesus. |
|
WHAT IS INCLUSIVE LANGUAGE?
Inclusive language may be defined as language that does not exclude some of its hearers. Exclusive language excludes; the choice of words way in some fashion imply that only whites are acceptable to God, for example, or that only the middle class are acceptable. Exclusive language may also operate in the area of marriage versus singleness, or suggest a family must have two parents if it is to be a real family.
The nature of language in liturgy and worship is important. "Christians are formed by the way in which they pray"
1 ,to at least some extent. Words have an enormous capacity "to construct the way in which we think about ourselves and our faith.2
Exclusive language, then, has the capability to at least reinforce divisions and
'exclusions' within the church.
|
Having entered parish
ministry, the power of language in worship became blindingly obvious to
me: I will never forget the Papuan woman who visibly "shrank and
wilted" when I talked about "black evil" one Sunday
morning. --The pain of single people who feel they are less than complete because
of the language of couples and family. --The old woman who said
"That was a lovely tenor voice this morning... and I loved the way
you changed the words." --The whole psyche of a congregation changing
from despair to hope and strength as I constantly spoke of the love of God
and left the condemnatory liturgy of the past behind. |
|
The particular interest of this essay is sexist language; that is, language which allegedly excludes members of one of the sexes, usually women. In virtually all worship situations there is the potential for exclusiveness along the lines of sex; women and men are both usually present. This is not to say that the words we use are in themselves the only factor of exclusiveness. Actions,
intonations, and nuance can be equally excluding. Nonetheless, words form an important part of the liturgy even if the non verbal proportion of our communication is somewhat larger. One could say sexist language is the language of sexism.
Sexism stereotypes people and discriminates against them because of their sex.5 Sexist language is a continuation and reinforcement of this sexism.
There is no doubt that the language of liturgy and worship should be inclusive: "...love one another as I have loved
you";4 Jesus excluded
no one. The question we face is if the language of liturgy and worship is in fact exclusive. If so, when is it exclusive? Is the use of
'man' as a generic term exclusive, or the use of 'Father' when praying to God? A host of terms come under feminist scrutiny; 'Father', 'Son'. 'Lord',
'Son', 'he' 'Man', 'mankind', and even
'human'- witness 'womyn' in some graffiti.
|
Sexist
language hurts. I have seen it in the woman in the church. I
have felt it where I have been one of the few men, and the language of the
women has been their own, excluding me, even diminishing me and my
humanity. I have no sympathy for those men who deny there is a
problem. The last ten or twelve years makes the phenomenon
absolutely undeniable.
The startling nature of language plus other actions is revealed by
this story. A colleague was strongly challenged by some of us about
his use of language and exclusion of women. At the next weekly
service he told us, with some pride, I think, that he had heard this
challenge and had included feminine examples. He did too. All
through the service his feminine imagery was negative. Male was
good, female was bad... and he had not
seen it. This is what women sit through from earliest times...
as do the men who then go on to re-perpetrate it. |
|
PATRIARCHY
To begin to answer these questions we will consider the
notion of Patriarchy. This is because the feminist critique of the church operates from patriarchy as a 'given' and says it shapes the church's language. Language is part of a much wider debate which needs to be understood even if somewhat shallowly to appreciate why words such as 'man' in the generic sense cause such offence.
A patriarchy is a patriarchal system of society, or government.8 The
father, or patriarch is the authoritative and dominant organising unit of the society. The society is organised largely in
terms of male dominance and thought forms.
|
I am not so sure about
the Patriarchal basis of things anymore. I have no doubt whatsoever
of the phenomenon, and the accuracy of my definition in the essay, but
more of its genesis and position in the scheme of our society. I am
inclined to think that it is a tool of the ruling elite. Many men
are as much a victim of patriarchy as women. To be sure, they get a
pay off... they are higher up than the women. But it seems to me to
be more a tool of the socio-economic system that drives the West.
Some men think they rule over women. Others know they are struggling
to survive in a financial system that tries to use them as producers and
buy them off with the veneer of "being a man" and bread-winner
and superiority to the little woman. They know the costs this deeply
ingrained system has caused to their spirituality and the distance it
creates from their loved ones. I wonder how often "mid-life
crisis" is a kind of recognition at some level of how much we have
been chasing bullshit. |
|
I think that there is little doubt that our Western and Australian culture is still largely patriarchal in many respects.
9
However, The claim of a golden age of matriarchy in the distant past (e.g.
Elizabeth Gould Davis The first Sex), has no substantiation.
|
So,
maybe on the basis of what I have noted above, I would not worry too much
about proving a patriarchy exists. Sexism is the issue at the basis
of the original essay and there is plenty of evidence of that! |
|
A typical example of patriarchy at work is as follows:
In... Human Behaviour there was a report of a study ... in which ...letters were sent to hundreds of people in the counselling profession.
They were first asked to describe a healthy male personality; some time
later they were written to again and asked to describe the healthy
female personality; still later [in a third letter] they wrote what
they saw as a healthy personality. With few exceptions, the descriptions
of the healthy male personality and the healthy personality coincided.
How terribly devastating on for women whose personalities are thus seen as
unhealthy- non male. 10
This quotation incidentally points out an important attribute of patriarchy and
sexism- much of it is unconscious. It is like movie screen- we see the pictures
but not the screen on which they are shown Many of the counsellors would doubtless
have been surprised at their responses if they looked at all three together.11
Patriarchy is also present within the church (in varying degrees depending on denomination and location) and may be seen in Bible translations, church government, and so on. Judith Ruhe Diehl's story of her childhood is an excellent example of how patriarchy has been present in the church.
12
Bible translation appears to suffer patriarchal or sexist bias. In Jeremiah 31:22 the Revised Standard Version says of God in His action towards Israel, "..a woman protects a man..". The Living Bible says of the nation for whom God is a protecting woman, "Israel shall seek Him!"!
13 Even the RSV has Phoebe as a "deaconess" and a "helper of many". The Creek plainly says 'deacon' (
diakonon) and prostatis pollon. The prostatis is not a helper but
one who stands in front of or before; a leader,
a protector, champion, patron .... a patroness, protectoress14 (RSV,
Romans16:1-2)
The paucity of women present in positions of responsibility in the church, especially its upper echelons, reflects
the patriarchy of society. With respect to ordination it is often argued that there is theological justification
for exclusion. But is that all?
A friend of mine was trying to find out how much her five and six year old Sunday School charges understood about the church. She asked if anyone knew what the
'church council' was.
As it happened, one boy had recently attended part of a council meeting with his father, an elder. The lad solemnly explained to the other children that the church council was a "bunch of guys who get together once or twice a month to try and figure out ways to keep girls out of their club"
15
One would probably want to say that the little boy had taken an "inadequate sampling" of the church.
16 But others would say that the sexism we see in the church is not the human sin of patriarchy corrupting the church at all; rather the church is intrinsically patriarchal. I think this is not so. Galatians 3:28 shows that "in Christ Jesus" discrimination on the basis of one's sex is not a Christian act. 17 This is an important issue. If the religion is intrinsically
patriarchal and one regards patriarchy (on account of its sexism) as wrong, the religion must be changed fundamentally. If, however, this is not the case, and the examples cited above are sinful aberrations of the religion, then there is room for reform.
The alleged patriarchy of the church is a large subject in itself.
Man as Male and Female by Paul Jewett is a good overview. This present
essay will touch on the subject again in discussing God the 'Father'. It is sufficient here to state that I do not believe an argument for the intrinsic patriarchy of Christianity can be sustained, unless one is to remove any connotation of sexism from the term and say Christianity is a
non-sexist patriarchy on the basis of verses like Ephesians 3:14-15. This is to change my definition of patriarchy, (see above) which sees sexism as a basic characteristic of patriarchy, to something completely different.
|
Move
on to Good
Language 2
© Jan Thomas
1. Morley, Janet "Exclusive Language in the Liturgy" in Feminine in the Church Monica Furlong (Ed.) p56. She is quoting the Alternative Service Book of the Church of England.
2.Ibid p57
3. comment transferred into
the text
4. John 13:34
5. Fiorenza, Elizabeth Schussler "Feminist Theology as a Critical Theology of Liberation" Theological Studies 36(1975):606
6. comment transferred into
the text
7. comment transferred into
the text
8. Concise Oxford Dictionary (7th Edn.) (OUP 1982) pp751
9. Classics such as Sexual Politics by Kate Millet illustrate this in detail.
pp61. It would appear to be true of most cultures.
10. Lesher A. Jean "Women and the Power of Language: A Religious Perspective."
(A paper for the Lutheran Church in America 1978) quoted in A Woman's Place
Diehl, J. Ruhe pp50
11. Sharpe K. From Science to an Adequate Mythology pp34
12. Diehl ppl?25 The story is told unhampered by the understandable anger present in some other similar stories, and thus excellent for parish work. She does not come across as a 'fanatic.'
13. Diehl pp32 She gives other examples as well.
14. Moulton H.K. The Analytical Greek Lexicon (Revised) pp344
15. van Leeuwin, Mary Stewart "The End of Female Passivity" Christianity Today Jan. 17 1986 (The article is in
Christianity Today Institute , a supplement at the rear of the magazine. ) pp
12-I
16. van Leeuwin pp12-I
17. comment transferred into
the text
Top
Men's Business Mud
Map Theology Studies Conversations
Thinking Where I Live
Sermons Mark Politics
Words Computing Jan's
Links Fundamentalism
Sexuality
in the Uniting Church Replies,
Responses, Debate Latest
Pages
© Jan Thomas
|