As I mentioned in an earlier post – I have become more and more convinced of the necessity for fully inclusive language – including the use of non-feudal language – as I have matured. Some phrases and terms that I used for years and years now make me shudder – and very sorry that I did not know any better in earlier years.

Today I want to highlight two brief sections from the Inclusive Language statement from St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church here in Austin, Texas. Just a reminder – this statement is available on St. Andrew’s website – http://www.staopen.org – follow the tab on the right hand side of the homepage labeled “About Us” which provides a drop-down menu – then click on “Philosphy and Mission” – the link to the statement is on that page.

The first section I would like to highlight today reads: “we must not minister to one group by using language that excludes another group.”

Our calling is to care for all of God’s creation – not even just the human createds – but – all of God’s creation. It seems to me that our unintentional exclusions are probably more abundant that our intentional exclusions – but – they are still very much exclusions just the same. As I have said and quoted very often from the hymn text of Fred Kaan – “Teach us to care for people, for all, not just for some, to love them as we find them or as they may become” – or – as Jesus taught – “love your neighbor as yourself” – including your enemies. It is very important for us to remember that love does not exclude – love always includes!

The second section reads as follows”

“In theology we are not really describing God, because God is beyond human words and comprehension. In theology, we are building a bridge to the sacred through our human images. In theology we are envisioning an ideal world where God’s will for each of us is fulfilled, so it is important not to limit God to a gender. In theology we are putting a face on the sacred. It is important not to say that some faces look more like God than others. Inclusive language for God and people is an important and tangible way to make us all aware of our sacredness.”

A question for prayerful consideration: How do our human images of God impede the building of a bridge to the sacred for ourselves and for others? Do our human images of God contribute to love or stand in the way of love?

Our journey continues – I hope that more of you will join our community conversation!!