Is the "Our Father" problematic?
Gramps49
Shipmate
in Epiphanies
The bishop of York has raised the issue that the Our Father of the Lord's prayer problematic, primarily because some people have never known a caring father--suffering abuse from the person they knew as Dad, Story here
I tend to think it also raises the question of the patriarchy of the prayer. My wife, who was raised as Christian Scientist learned to begin the prayer with "Our Father/Mother" Took me a while to see their point.
What say you?
I tend to think it also raises the question of the patriarchy of the prayer. My wife, who was raised as Christian Scientist learned to begin the prayer with "Our Father/Mother" Took me a while to see their point.
What say you?
Tagged:
Comments
I can't help but wondering if that was related to what I have heard about attempts by the Church Of Christ, Scientist to kinda sorta deify Mrs. Eddy. I believe she actually was refered to as "Mother" in certain contexts?
I also think he Jesus gave what we call the Lord’s Prayer or the Our Father as a model—“pray like this.” I doubt God is bothered when we follow that model in ways that work for us, and I’m not bothered at all when people pray the prayer in the way most comfortable to them.
The bit that irks me is that the comment was an aside in a speech about unity, and yet it is the issue that gets the media asking for people's opinions. It reminds me of The Day Today parody where two people come on the show to announce a peace deal, and Chris Morris, the presenter, convinces each one that the other is threatening them, prompting a declaration of war.
As for the issue presented, people should pray what they are moved to pray. The Lord's prayer is a model, as Nick says.
I was practicing a hymn yesterday evening, and one ewetube version of the song had changed most of the lyrics into non-gendered language. But they left Lord alone. I thought that was weird. Maybe we should just go back to Latin.
Yes. The Abp's comment about "Father" was quite clearly not the main substance of what he was saying. In fact I think it's an almost "throwaway" comment which he included as he thought, "Ah! If I start talking about the Lord's Prayer some people will pull me up on the use of the term 'Father'. I must acknowledge that as I don't want to get stuck on it, then I can move on". Clearly his strategy didn't quite work! Perhaps he should have used Jesus' prayer for unity in John 17 as his text, although I can see the appeal of beginning with the Lord's Prayer.
Good point, though. Mind you, I can see the traditionalists objecting...
It sounds almost more Mormon to me, though modern Mormon leadership have been doing their best to suppress discussions of Heavenly Mother in current teachings. In terms of attracting converts I would have thought that having a Heavenly Mother would make Mormonism more attractive, though probably not while women cannot receive the priesthood (which in Mormonism is very different to in other denominations - all adult men receive it and it's a lay office not clergy).
I accept that some people have not known for various reasons a father's love but some people have never lived in a house so should we not use the word 'house' in case it upsets someone ? The same could be said about practically any thing or person which some of us will either not have experienced personally or will have bad memories of.
I don’t think it’s so much that it’s “wrong,” as it is acknowledging that for some people, because of their lived experiences, “Father” may be a stumbling block. And we’ve been counseled to be mindful of those things that may be stumbling blocks for others.
As has been said a number of times already, including by you, it’s a model prayer. To me, that means Jesus expected his disciples to follow the model—or, if you will, the pattern—but using words that are authentically their own.
For some people their experience of a human father is hugely worse than not having known a father’s love. They may have been physically harmed and severely psychologically traumatised. I wouldn’t advocate not using ‘Our Father…’ because for others it is hugely positive, but I think it’s right to be aware of and sensitive to those for whom the associations with the word are fear, violence or abuse.
Moreover, I worry about the idea that we might have personal experience of one bad individual, and because of that eliminate the mention of anyone who shares a particular characteristic with them. That feels completely wrong.
I say it's the Archbishop of York.
He's sort of next to the Archbishop of Canterbury in the pecking order.
But then the Pope is the 'Bishop of Rome.'
I'll get me coat.
This may come as a shock to you, but some survivors of abuse at the hands of their fathers feel differently to you. Also, absolutely nobody has suggesed eliminating the mention of fatherhood.
But of course that doesn't mean that any one metaphor or analogy should be regarded as obligatory for all audiences and contexts.
Thank you for sharing your experience, and yes, all of us who have had damaging relationships with our fathers are broken, but in different ways.
Nevertheless, it is difficult to see how the thread is not, at least in part, about finding ways to avoid saying ‘father’ - some posts offer explicit alternatives.
I don’t think anyone is suggesting the latter—“Father” is going to continue to be the default, and I don’t think anyone is suggesting you shouldn’t use it if it carries positive meaning for you. What is being suggested is making room for alternatives for those for whom “Father” does carry negative meaning, instead of just telling those folks to deal with it. And those alternatives just might enrich the understandings of the rest of us.
The current denominational practice in my tribe is to use inclusive language for people and expansive language for God. Inclusive language means not using a masculine generic and avoiding language that may exclude some people. Expansive language about God means not eliminating all masculine language referring to God, but balancing that language with other language—particularly scriptural language—that can expand our understanding of God.
With regard to “Lord,” the position has been that it is so rooted in Scripture, both as a substitute for the Name of the God of Israel and as a claim as to who Jesus is, that it needs to be preserved. Likewise as to “Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” But that doesn’t mean other language can’t be used where appropriate as well.
I didn’t suggest that anyone should ‘just deal with it’; instead I was trying to find a place for my own experience of a word that could have been a horror for me, but was redeemed. All of which led me to express confusion and concern about the focus of the debate and what that might mean. So I am glad to learn from different experiences.
However, I now don’t understand how the expansive approach you outline, which uses masculine and other language, would not leave people ‘just dealing with’ the word ‘father’ in amongst the rest.
I want to pick up on what Nick said. As I understand it, he said we should be careful not to create stumbling blocks for others. This is what Paul sort of says when he said while Christians could eat meat (that had been offered to idols) we should refrain from this if it would be an offense to someone who objects to it.
I remember once participating in a sermon series on the Ten Commandments. The command I had be assigned was: Honor your father and mother. The week before the sermon, I counselled three people who had abusive parents. They certainly changed what I had been planning to preach. That was over 40 years ago, so I cannot remember the details now.
While the statement of the Archbishop seems like a throwaway line to some people on this thread, it seemed like a serious comment to several news sources. I just cannot discount it.
Fair point. I think the idea is that it’s the exclusive use of “Father” or of masculine terms that is particularly problematic. If other terms or images are used, then someone who finds “Father” difficult hopefully hears or is given the opportunity to use other ways of referring to or addressing God that balance that out. Similarly, I’ve often been in services where t people are invited to pray the Lord’s Prayer in the language most comfortable or familiar to them, which lets people know it okay substitute another word for “Father” if they want to—not to mention dealing with debts/trespasses/sins or those whose first language isn’t English.
Yes, it can. But I don’t think that’s the kind of thing we can insist on. We can hope it will help us learn, but we can’t force that learning. And for some people, it will be a much harder lesson than for others. And even then, it may the sort of thing we know with our heads, but to which we still have a visceral reaction.
To me it expresses a feeling of being comfortable and 'at home' in a relatively safe place.
/tangent
I didn't share my experience anywhere in that comment.
I imagine that as society incorporates gender neutral terminology more, 'parent' may become a term to address a parent with, like 'father' and 'mother.' Certainly non-binary people are actively looking for non-gender-specific terms to refer to themselves. I use 'parent' sometimes in my personal prayers.
As someone who grew up with a very abusive mother, I actually like the idea of God as a mother, to be the loving mother I never had, and I know some people who had abusive fathers see the father aspect in that way. So it can go both ways, for both mothers and fathers, and to me there is definitely a need to go beyond specific gender roles. And the Bible of course has motherly imagery of God as well as fatherly, so I can see, when we pray the Lord's prayer aloud, it could be a case of people praying the parent they choose, in the same way as people can pray it in their own language, and even in English some pray 'thy,' feeling more of a connection with God when using thou and thy, while others pray 'you,' finding that a more natural pronoun.
ISTM that it would be pretty well impossible to impose an alternative on the C of E, the Roman Catholics, and the Orthodox - and maybe many Lutheran churches as well.
Are other churches (Baptist, Methodist, URC, and so on) able to alter things at will, for instance if a congregation decided to go with Our God in heaven for the Lord's Prayer?
I think that instead of “impose” an alternative, the better way to approach it is “permit” an alternative. That is to say can an alternative be used in a particular service (as in A New Zealand Prayer Book), or by individuals even when others are using the traditional words?
As I noted above, I’ve been in services where people are invited—either by a notice in the bulletin/service sheet or through the presider’s introduction to the prayer (or both)—to pray the Lord’s Prayer in the way most comfortable or familiar to them. The vast majority will pray using the traditional words, as that is what’s comfortable and familiar to most people. But other worshippers have been explicitly told it’s okay if, for example, they want to use a word other than “Father,” or even a language other than English.
Most of the time, my experience is you can’t even tell that some people are using different words—unless some go for “debts/debtors” while others go for “trespasses.” But even when you can tell, dare I say there is something of Pentecost about it; you know that you’re all praying the same prayer, but using different words to pray it.
I don’t understand. I thought you had experience of working or talking with some survivors of abuse, otherwise it’s hard to see the basis for your comment.
Oh sorry, I think there's just been confusion about what you meant. I understood "your experience" as meaning my own personal experience of abuse - which I hadn't mentioned.
I will say that it is quite widely documented that some people have difficulties with the idea of God as Father due to abuse - this is not at all a new concept, and not something that only eg a social worker would know.
But the whole point of the Trinity is that God is not only the Father. Jesus also refers to God as the Holy Spirit.
Which is also a potential issue with changing "Our Father" to "Our God". Not that I have a good solution; Our Parent sounds weird and you can get very tied up with alternative descriptors for the First Person of the Trinity which always seem to teeter on the edge of an accusation of one heresy or another.
Does reclaiming the original term with something like "Perfect Father" have any legs?
This was unlike the formal Hebrew for Father which would be האב.
The above alternative suggestions seem to miss that nuance.
How can we capture that point?
The problem comes when the pauses are in a different place. In German the prayer ends a whole line earlier than in English, as we noticed when going to various churches in Germany!
Our service book has the traditional version printed in English and Welsh, although few people here would use the Welsh version. Hugal tends to use the modern English version from memory, which does sound rather unusual as no-one else is (the modern version didn't turn up in Wales until the early 80s, so far too late for me and others of my vintage to get it imprinted in my brain!)
Fixed quoting code. BroJames, Purgatory Host
FWIW, I’m used to this—I’m Presbyterian, and we use traditionally use “debts/debtors.” At weddings and funerals and other occasions when there are more than a few people in the congregation who aren’t Presbyterian, there are always those who who use “trespasses.” We get very used to waiting after we say “as we forgive our debtors” while others say “as we forgive those who trespass against us.”
I wonder, is that a German-English difference or a Protestant-Catholic difference? In Catholic usage, the last line (“for the kingdom . . .”) isn’t part of the Our Father proper, but is said a little bit later, at least in the Mass.
Father is extremely formal too. That point is already utterly lost by the English original.
I personally say parent. Gendering god feels bizarre and unnecessary to me. But I don't tell others what to say. My priest prays the prayer as written in the bulletin but regularly says "father and mother" for God in other places. My kids pray the prayer as written when they say anything aloud. If we all say what helps us connect to God, that's good enough surely.
This.
About 60 years ago both the Catholic and the Lutheran churches came up with a common version of this prayer.
In all that time it has only been changed once namely in the first line
Vater unser,(der Du bist) im Himmel Our father (who art) in heaven
Geheiligt werde Dein Name Hallowed be Thy name
Dein Reich komme Thy kingdom come
Dein Wille geschehe im Himmel Thy will be done in Heaven as it is on earth
so wie auf Erden
Unser taegliches Brot gib uns heute give us this day our daily bread
Und vergib uns unsere Suende forgive us our sins
Wie auch wir vergeben unseren Schuldigern as we forgive those who sin against us
Fuehre uns nicht in Versuchung lead us not into temptation
Sondern erloese uns von dem Boesen but deliver us from evil
To those words taken from the Gospels the Lutherans usually add
Denn Dein ist das Reich und die Kraft und die Herrlichkeit in Ewigkeit.Amen
For Thine is theKingdom,the Power and the Glory Amen
Catholics follow the Lord's prayer with a special prayer called the Embolism and then add the extra bit which Lutherans say at the end of the Lord's prayer.
On the more substantial question, I recognise there may be some people whose experiences mean that for them the word 'father' is a problem. Nevertheless, first, it's the word Jesus used and gave us. Second, it's a term that for a lot more people has immense positive resonances. Even for many of those whose own fathers were problematical or absent, it represents a fatherhood such as they would like to have experienced it. God as their heavenly Father speaks of what they wish they'd known.
It would strike me as very wrong if one small, but possibly fairly vociferous, minority were allowed to demand that everybody else forgoes something that for the rest is valuable, important and hallowed by Jesus's own authority, just to fit in with their particular sensitivity.
@Gwai 'Father' might register as fairly formal now, or where you are, but it wasn't that unusual when I was younger in some families for children to address their parents as 'Father' and 'Mother' rather than 'Dad' and 'Mum', though that was probably a bit regional. And as I don't know where you are, it's quite possible all four of those words aren't usual where you are.
And at the risk of being a broken record, if being hallowed by Jesus’s own authority is being invoked, it seems worth pointing out once again that Jesus gave us the prayer as a model of how to pray, not as specific words that we must adhere to. He said “pray like this,” not “pray this.” One could argue that we’re closer to doing what he taught us to do when we take the pattern and put it in our own words than when we all insist on saying the same words.
Is that the "deliver us, Lord, from every evil, and grant us peace in our day..."?
Catholics have been using this term in English for centuries. I don't think they are going to stop at your recommendation. Plenty of words with specific religious meanings have other meanings.