Feminist theologians* began using feminine nouns and pronouns in reference to God in response to masculinist theologians who insisted that male identity and authority is derived from the image of a masculine deity. To insist on a masculine deity means that women cannot share the image of God. If sharing the image of God is the theological definition of humanity, then insisting on a masculine deity dehumanizes women. Feminist theologians insist that referring to God with feminine nouns and pronouns dignifies women with the image of God. I offer this as an explanation, not an affirmation.
The real issue for all theologians is the mistake of attributing human gender roles to a deity who is not human-like. God is above humanity further than humanity is above an amoeba. God is a being of singular uncreated and ungendered substance. So, the best way forward is offered by an ancient Hebrew theologian:
So be very careful yourselves, since you did not see any form on the day the Lord spoke to you at Horeb from the midst of the fire, so that you do not act corruptly and make a carved image for yourselves in the form of any figure, a representation of male or female… (Deuteronomy 4:15-16).
The revelation of Yahweh at Horeb (Sinai) is foundational for understanding the nature and character of God. The ancient theologian warns us that we should be careful about how we think about God lest we reduce Yahweh to a pagan image. Yahweh is utterly different from all other gods. Yahweh is beyond human imagination.
First, Yahweh has no form. The burning bush was a symbol of divine presence, a manifestation of God. Even so, it does not reflect the totality of divine being. Nothing of the created order can reflect the incomprehensible God. To imagine Yahweh in any form or figure is to think corruptly.
Second, the Hebrew theologian said that Yahweh cannot be represented as male or female. Even inspired words that speak of God with masculine nouns or pronouns cannot adequately represent God. Likewise, inspired feminine analogies and metaphors in the Bible that speak of God cannot adequately represent God.
If, as the ancient Hebrew theologian insists, Yahweh has no form or figure, and should not be characterized as male or female; then, why does Scripture refer to God as Father? (See here). Why does Scripture offer female analogies of God? (See here). Because the only way to speak about the incomprehensible God is with human language (see here). But human language is inadequate to the task. God is mysterious – beyond words.
Throughout the history of Christian creedal formulations, God has been consistently referred to as Father, Son, and Spirit. Even so, the single divine substance shared by the Father, Son, and Spirit has never been masculinized. In other words, no orthodox Christian creeds have ever identified God as male. The Judeo-Christian God should not be imagined as a male deity with male genitalia. Nor should God be imagined as a female deity with female genitalia. Both are heresy.
I favor the traditional creedal language that God is Father, Son, and Spirit. I recognize that the inspired Scriptures sometimes use feminine analogies in reference to God. Even so, with the ancient Hebrew theologian, I affirm that God is neither male nor female.
What about Jesus Christ? Jesus Christ is the union of the eternally begotten and ungendered Son with the created, mortal, and gendered substance of humanity. The divine/human Christ was born a male, born of a woman. Male and female are mutually dependent upon each other (1 Corinthians 11:11).
If we wish to be faithful theologians, we must not reduce the practice of theology to the language of culture wars. Idols reflect culture. In seeking to resist the culture of transgenderism, we must be careful that we do not erect our own idols. If culture drives our theological imagination, then we may become guilty of idolatry.
See here for previous posts on this topic.
* The term “feminist theologian” needs to be qualified. There is a wide range of thinking among women who consider themselves feminist theologians: from those who embrace classic Christian orthodoxy to those who embrace radical secularism. Here, I speak of feminist theologians who embrace classic Christian orthodoxy.
