No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
God's pronouns
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 May 2024
Abstract
The Church of England is currently debating what pronouns to use of God in liturgy. Opinions are strongly established on various sides. This article aims to slow the pace at which strong judgements are arrived at, through four sets of arguments. First, the distinctiveness of English compared with some other European languages and the danger of allowing the contingencies of English pronoun use to dominate the possible meanings of scripture. Second (drawing on the work of Janet Martin Soskice), the complexity of the figure of the fatherhood of God. Third, the significance of German philosophy of language in relation to negative theology and the particular ways in which the inadequacy of language about God has theological consequences. Fourth, a more philosophical discussion of the ways in which what is necessary or possible in one language cannot adequately be conveyed, as necessary or merely possible, in translation.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
1 See, for example, Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey, and Svartvik, Jan, Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language (London: Longman, 1985), pp. 335, 375Google Scholar; Kremer, Marion, Person, Reference and Gender in Translation. A Constrastive Investigation of English and German (Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 1997), pp. 31–2Google Scholar; and many since.
2 Bruce Metzger, ‘NRSV: To the Reader’, archived at http://www.ncccusa.org/newbtu/reader.html
3 For the distinction between dynamic and formal equivalence, see Roberts, J. H., ‘Dynamic Equivalence in Bible Translation’, Neotestamentica 8 (1974), pp. 7–20Google Scholar.
4 ‘Version Information: From the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA’, New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition; https://www.biblegateway.com/versions/New-Revised-Standard-Version-Updated-Edition-NRSVue-Bible/
5 Cf. Mills, Sara, ‘Minding your Language: Implementing Gender-Free Language Policies’, Critical Survey 4/2 (1992), pp. 183–90Google Scholar; https://www.jstor.org/stable/41555650
6 For example, Stein, David, ‘The Grammar of Social Gender in Biblical Hebrew’, Hebrew Studies 49 (2008), p. 8CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
7 Boroditsky, Lera and Schmidt, Lauren, ‘Sex, Syntax, and Semantics’, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 22 (2000)Google Scholar; https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0jt9w8zf
8 UK Government, ‘Review of gender identity data harmonised standard’; https://analysisfunction.civilservice.gov.uk/policy-store/review-of-gender-identity-data-harmonised-standard/
9 For Ælfric, see Fox, Michael and Sharma, Manish, Old English Literature and the Old Testament (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2012), pp. 3–24Google Scholar. For Tyndale, see Daniell, David, William Tyndale: A Biography (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1994), pp. 283–315Google Scholar.
10 The British Library, Cotton MS Claudius B IV, f.2v, includes Ælfric's translation of Genesis from the Old Latin.
11 Ricoeur, Paul, ‘Fatherhood: From Phantasm to Symbol’, in Paul Ricoeur (ed.), The Conflict of Interpretations: Essays in Hermeneutics, trans. Ihde, D. (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 1974), pp. 481–2Google Scholar.
12 Soskice, Janet Martin, ‘Calling God “Father”’, in Janet Martin Soskice (ed.), The Kindness of God: Metaphor, Gender, and Religious Language (Oxford: OUP, 2008), p. 68CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
13 Ibid., p. 75. For details on the counting, on which there seems to be some variation, see Hamerton-Kelly, Robert, ‘God the Father in the Bible and in the Experience of Jesus: The State of the Question’, in Johann Baptist Metz, Edward Schillebeeckx, and Marcus Lefébure (eds), God as Father? (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1981), p. 98Google Scholar; Kysar, Robert, John, the Maverick Gospel (Louisville, KY: Presbyterian Publishing Corporation, 2007), p. 8Google Scholar.
14 Ricoeur, ‘Fatherhood’, p. 486.
15 Soskice, ‘Calling God “Father”’, p. 76.
16 Ibid., pp. 71–2.
17 Puryear, Stephen, ‘Leibniz on the Metaphysics of Color’, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 86/2 (2013), pp. 319–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
18 Wittgenstein, Ludwig, Philosophical Investigations, trans. Anscombe, G.E.M. (Oxford: Blackwell, 1958), p. 610Google Scholar. Cf. Mounce, H. O., ‘The Aroma of Coffee’, Philosophy 64/248 (1989), pp. 159–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
19 Heiden, Bruce, ‘The Muses’ Uncanny Lies: Hesiod, “Theogony” 27 and Its Translators’, The American Journal of Philology 128/2 (2007), pp. 153–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
20 Conway-Jones, Anne, Gregory of Nyssa's Tabernacle Imagery in Its Jewish and Christian Contexts (Oxford: OUP, 2014), pp. 63–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
21 Cf. Turner, Denys, The Darkness of God: Negativity in Christian Mysticism (Cambridge: CUP, 1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Ticciati, Susannah, A New Apophaticism: Augustine and the Redemption of Signs (Leiden: Brill, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
22 Bowie, Andrew, German Philosophy: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: OUP, 2010), pp. 21–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
23 Ibid., pp. 22–3.
24 Ibid., pp. 23–4.
25 See Ticciati, A New Apophaticism.
26 I am grateful to Jon Morgan for advice on Hebrew grammar. Any errors are my own.
27 See William Chomsky, ‘How the Study of Hebrew Grammar Began and Developed’, The Jewish Quarterly Review, New Series 35/3 (1945), pp. 281–301; Skoss, Solomon, ‘Saadia Gaon, the Earliest Hebrew Grammarian’, Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research 23 (1954), pp. 59–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
28 There is one significant exception: in Greek, neuter plural nouns take a singular verb.
29 Holmstedt, Robert, ‘Issues in the Linguistic Analysis of a Dead Language, with Particular Reference to Ancient Hebrew’, The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 6 (2006), pp. 9Google Scholar, 13; https://doi.org/10.5508/jhs.2006.v6.a11