Inclusive language back in the day

Halden notesthat the uber-repressed, hyper-patriarchal Augustine once called God Mother. I believe John Calvin did the same thing in his Commentary on Isaiah, although he may have employed a simile rather than a metaphor. I don't have the text before me.

Here's a hunch. Such language is not a protest against patriarchy, or even an attempt to oh-so-slightly smooth patriarchy's sharp edges, but is a direct result of patriarchy. Given the relatively static gender roles of both Calvin and Augustine's day, both theologians could probably experiment with such daring language and feel utterly safe in doing so. "God our Mother" is a kind of via negativafor a pre-egalitarian Christianity.

I'm thinking this because I'm remembering a pastoral visit to an elderly couple, in which the husband, a World War II Navy vet, broke out some old photos of his time in the service. Some of the pictures were of a day when the whole crew, to blow off steam, dressed in drag and threw a party. He laughed out loud at them, but they sort of creeped me out. I think that our different reactions owe a lot to the fact that I came of age in an era of much less gender role stability.

Long story short: people's aversion to inclusive language is at bottom about the vertigo they feel living in a world in which women do run meetings and preside at the Eucharist. But I'm no rhetorician, or a women's studies expert, so feel free to correct me.

Comments

[Lee]

I'm about to start Elizabeth Johnson's "She Who Is." Maybe I'll have some insight after I finish it.

[Marvin]

Embarrassing admission: I should be able to answer my own question since I read "She Who Is" last spring. Alas, all I seem to have retained is the realization that good theology doesn't necessarily demand horrid prose, as is the case with all the dead Germans.