(one in an occasional series highlighting ridiculous inclusive-language overkill, without regard for the scansion, meaning, or music.)
I’m preparing the Exultet for Easter Vigil, a long and inspiring chant which opens the vigil service, sung by candlelight. In English. After a congregational greeting the chant continues:It is indeed right, our duty and our joy, that with full devotion of heart and mind and voice we should praise the invisible God, and his only Son, Jesus Christ our Lord
Except it doesn’t. Instead it says
…and the only son, Jesus Christ our Lord
That doesn’t even make sense. Jesus wasn’t the only son — there are millions of sons. I have one myself. It’s just another example of knee-jerk pronoun evasion, kind of like changing “God grants salvation to his people” (meaning the select few) to “God grants salvation to the people” (meaning everyone). This is quite a difference in meaning, which should be decided on its theological merits, not by fiat of the language police. And substituting “God” and “God’s” everywhere doesn’t really help either: not only does it ruin the language flow which pronouns enable (cf. “Allen started Allen’s computer and wrote a post to Allen’s blog about Allen’s upcoming performance”), but it doesn’t even solve the problem: God isn’t a Goddess, and the Lord isn’t a Lady.
I’m in favor of inclusive language, just against having the tail wag the dog. I don’t really want to bash the Lutheran church, whose new hymnal has generally struck a good balance in gender-neutral language; but they missed on this one. And for the record, I’m going to change that line in the Exultet back to “his”. Don’t tell my choir director.
Glen McCune says