As stated in yesterday’s post – this post will introduce The Inclusive Bible with specific interest in the intentional choices that were made in the process of preparing the text. The following is from the section labeled “Inclusive Language” from the Preface.
If there is one word to describe the process of developing inclusive language readings, it is transformational. The transformation we have experienced in our work on these readings challenged us to confront how we think and speak about God and how our concepts influence the way we treat other people. We also have had to consider whether modern renderings of sacred scriptures present modern sexist biases, in addition to biases of the ancient Near East and Mediterranean cultures. In the course of our work, we developed new ideas about the role of sacred scripture in liturgy.
We challenge the traditional ways of speaking about God. Traditional Western religious language calls God “Father” and Jesus “Lord.” Our intention is to recover the sense of the text and express that sense in a manner that facilitates immediate application of the Word to the experience of the listener. To that end, we correct our own interpretations by referring them to what scripture scholars have to say about the texts.
This process begins with looking through the standard translations of scripture for sexist and classist forms and attitudes. We compare translations, consult commentaries, and when necessary, go back to the Hebrew and Greek to uncover meanings. Realizing that any translation is an interpretation, we do not limit ourselves to the standard translations, but also look at other inclusive language texts and style forms to understand how others have worked through the problems of sexism in scripture. We go over each text line by line in order to ensure a faithful yet nonsexist rendering in both content and style.
The most difficult problem we address is what can be done about the sexism in scripture without destroying the actual text. Several guiding principles have emerged from our work on this problem. One principle is to determine whether it is the linguistic convention used that expresses a sexist bias or whether the text itself is sexist in its meaning. In all circumstances, we seek to recover the expression’s meaning within the context in which it is written without perpetuating the sexism. (vi)*
These words are just the beginning of the explanation of the complex and detailed process that makes this superb translation possible. An extraordinary process obviously executed with sesitive loving care.
Now – it is time to turn our attention to the issues of inclusive language in the music of worship. The words we ask the congregation to sing – and – the words we offer as prayer on behalf of the congregation in anthems and other artistic expressions require the very same careful consideration as the care given to the content of sacred scripture.
Of course – the matter is complicated in many ways by the provisions of copyright law. These provisions do not allow changes to be made without the permission of the owner of the copyrighted material – and – I am determined to honor those provisions. One solution for this is to do a lot of writing of new materials. I am blessed to have a number of colleagues and friends who have been gifted with talent for writing words that are poetic, expressive, and contribute to the width and depth of our worship experiences. Sometime in the not too distant future – I hope – you will be reading about a publishing enterprise that will make these new creations available for licensed use by those who share our concerns for language and inclusivity.
The posts for the coming days will focus on the language of the music of worship.
In the meantime – please join our community of conversation and invite others to join – the larger the circle the better.
Grace and peace
*The Inclusive Bible: The First Egalitarian Translation. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007.
tmitchellmusic 