Saturday, June 24, 2006

PC Religion

Something's been bothering me for a long time now. After reading an article in the local paper praising this trend I feel a strong need to vent. The article was from Mona Safley, a local religion writer who just last week wrote a piece about accepting and embracing homosexuals because Jesus would have. She has a habit of missing or distorting the truth.

PC is running amok in churches these days. The one place I had always hoped would remain a refuge from the insanity of popular culture has joined that very popular culture.

I'm talking about something called "inclusiveness".

A few activist feminists in churches have decided it's offensive that so much of what goes on there violates their sensitivities by calling God "The Father". 200 year old hymns contain lyrics referring to people as "men" or "mankind". (Show of hands, how many are offended by the phrase "good will toward men" in a hymn we all know by heart?)

So they went about rewriting everything they could get their hands on. Ancient hymns I used to be able to sing without cracking the hymnal have now been rewritten so thoroughly that sometimes they don't even convey the same message. (Some hymnals have replaced or rewritten verses that refer to uncomfortable issues like "sin" and "repentance" because we don't want any sinners to feel bad)

They've even rewritten the entire Bible into the New Revised Standard Inclusive Edition, which has completely neutered God.

Our singing group did a kind of tour of local churches over the last few weeks. In two of these churches, the theology of inclusiveness was in full display. The first church's female pastor was making opening remarks before the service, during which she apologized to the congregation because that day's service included the singing of the Gloria Patri. The apology was that this ancient piece of sacred music was not "as inclusive as we here at (church name) prefer". But she went on to explain that it was an ancient traditional song that had long been sung on this particular Sunday. I couldn't believe what I was hearing.

Another church had the "inclusive" hymnals of course, which isn't really all that unusual. I did get sort of caught singing a favorite old hymn without looking at the words, but nobody seemed to notice when I sang the offensive male-gender lyric in place of its neutered replacement.

But it was during the sermon that it hit like fingernails on the chalkboard. The pastor (a male this time) on several occasions chose to refer to God as "she" or "her". Why wreck an otherwise good sermon with such hubris?

I cantor regularly in the Catholic Church, which officially frowns on the "inclusive language" movement. But that doesn't stop local parishes from forging ahead. My personal little act of disobedience in the big church that we mostly don't attend anymore was to ignore the instructions to replace the text in the Gloria. I refused to change "and peace to His people on earth" to "and peace to God's people on earth". But nobody ever confronted me about it.

Here's my bottom line. God self-identifies himself in the masculine. The Bible is full of teaching on the roles of men and women that our modern feminist society can't accept. What people fail to recognize most of all is that Christianity in no way seeks to demean or oppress women. What it clearly does instead is honors women, and teaches that men and women were created to complement each other.

The truth, even though it may offend modern feminists, is this: Men are given certain abilities and strengths and women are given other abilities and strengths. Together, a man and woman can make a great team if they recognize and honor the capabilities of each other.

And if people spend all their time being offended at hearing God referred to as Father, then I suggest they may be more focused on things temporal than things divine.

2 comments:

N said...

religion, in large part, is about deciding what we want to believe. we are provided, by history or divine providence, a few documents to guide us, but it falls to us to interpret the gaps and human factors of whatever faith we choose.

in many cases, political correctness has, in fact, become a serious consideration of religion. to me, the argument over whether God is male or female is an utter waste of time. i choose to think of God as male due to my raising and my general impression of the world. whether or not others think the same doesn't especially worry me, but it does worry me that they think it's worthwhile to make an "issue" about it. in any case, lacking real evidence, God as a gender-unknown being would still be referred to as "he" - or perhaps my information is old.

to paraphrase a quote i read recently, i'm not sure who's turning the cosmic crank, i am merely thankful that he doesn't stop.

Dan S. said...

While it is certainly true that a full understanding of the nature of God is beyond us, when we decide whether or not to believe we have to either accept or reject the evidence at hand.

And that evidence is the scripture. As a Christian, my perspective is you have to either accept the faith as it is presented and described within the Bible, or reject it. Christ was crucified and resurrected or he wasn't. God created the heavens and the earth or he didn't. The Bible is inspired by God or it isn't.

My concern is what I see as an infiltration of the church by people who prefer to pick and choose what to believe or not believe. Not based on any grand scientific or historical revelations that refute something in scripture, but because they prefer to live a lifestyle that is disobedient to the basic tenets of their religion.

Too much of religion today is supermarket-style. Ooh, I'll take some of that love and peace and harmony, but no thanks on sin and repentance and judgement.