The recent General Assembly in Fort Worth rejected an overture to require congregations to use inclusive language during worship. The majority of Presbyterians would likely support this rejection, if they thought about it at all, and not simply because of a negative reaction to "top-down" initiatives. Presbyterians would support the Assembly, by and large, because few object to the prevalence of male-gender references to God.
I reach this conclusion after reviewing results from the February 1999 Presbyterian Panel survey on "Language and God," the first-ever systematic gathering of Presbyterian opinion on this issue. Responses to various questions indicate that the vast majority of members and elders tend to use male terms when describing or addressing God. Eight in ten report making no "effort to avoid male terms when addressing God in public prayers." Nine in ten prefer to begin the Lord's Prayer with the words "Our Father in Heaven" rather than with more gender- inclusive or gender-neutral alternatives.
It's not that lay Presbyterians necessarily believe God is a male. In fact, majorities of members (64 percent) and elders (71 percent) agree that "God is beyond gender, i.e., God is neither male nor female." Even more (members, 82 percent; elders, 80 percent) agree that "most people use male terms for God simply because that's the traditional language of the church." But a lifetime of socialization in this tradition has its effects: nine in ten lay Presbyterians agree that "using male terms to refer to God seems natural to me." And about half (members, 52 percent; elders, 47 percent) agree that, for them, "God is best understood in masculine terms."
Given these responses, it makes sense that most church goers would be uncomfortable with or fail to see the point of replacing male imagery and terms for God with more gender-inclusive or gender-neutral alternatives. Nevertheless, many, perhaps a majority, are willing to accept inclusive language when it is used by others in worship. Four in ten members and elders have no problem with substituting "Creator, Redeemer, and Sustainer" for "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" when reference is made to the Trinity; another two in ten are "not sure." Only one in six members and elders report that they feel "less included" in worship when the pastor "refers to God in gender-neutral terms."
Pastors are more sensitized to this issue. Only one in ten agree that "God is best understood in masculine terms"; 94 percent agree that "God is beyond gender." Still, a majority (56 percent) agree that "using male terms to refer to God seems natural to me."
Many pastors preferentially use gender-neutral and gender-inclusive language during worship. Half report that, in their congregation, it is the general practice to "avoid the use of 'He,' 'Him,' 'His,' and other male pronouns when referring to God," and "to balance male images of God with female images of God."
In general, women are more supportive than men of using gender-neutral language about God in worship, especially among clergy. The figure illustrates this pattern with responses to a question on language about the Trinity.
Given the continuing increase in the number of women in ministry, it will be interesting to watch how opinions and practice on this issue develop in the coming years. It's tempting to predict a trend toward wider use of and support for inclusive language in the church. After all, a majority of female pastors (52 percent), but almost no male pastors (12 percent), feel less included by male references to God in worship. But pastors alone don't effect change. What a one- time survey can't tell us is how the use of language about God evolves in the context of individual congregations. And it is there, where Presbyterians regularly come together for worship, that any change will ultimately occur.
The full report on the February 1999 Panel Survey on Inclusive Language (#65100-99259) is available for $5 from PDS at (800) 524-2612. The summary is available on-line at: Presbyterian Panel Summary: Language and God
Research Services