Our Person (?) Who Art in Heaven

Brethren once were amused by the goings-on in the denominational world, but now the question has become, “How long will it be until some of us try to imitate the latest folly?” One of the big issues before the Church of England currently, according to an article by Harriet Sherwood for the Guardian (July 7, 2023), is whether or not to continue to pray to God with the opening words, Our Father.

The archbishop of York has declared to the ruling body of the Church of England (the General Synod) that the two words in question may be “problematic” because of their association with all things patriarchal. Why? Oh, some have experienced earthly fathers that were abusive. Does that mean that these unfortunate individuals cannot possibly understand a loving father? Nobody’s father must behave perfectly in order for us to understand that the Heavenly Father is perfect. If a child has an unfair, unjust teacher who runs roughshod over him, does that mean he cannot envision a good teacher who cares for him and supports him?

One might suspect that another underlying reason exists for this pronouncement, and most have probably figured out what it is. That’s right. “Rev.” Christina Rees, who campaigned for female bishops said the archbishop had “put his finger on an issue that’s a really live issue for Christians and has been for many years.” That “really live issue” would be characterizing God as a male. As one of the conservative group countered: “In the Bible Jesus urged people to pray to Our Father.”

But that is the problem, isn’t it? These denominational groups do not go by the Bible. If they did, they would use Our Father and not think about it twice. But then they would not be debating female bishops, either. Someone would have noticed that the qualifications for a bishop include being “the husband of one wife” (1 Tim. 3:1-2).

“But wait,” someone protests. “When two women get married, one of them is called a husband.” Yes, well you can call a fool brilliant, also, but don’t expect to get any wisdom out of him. No man or woman can be a practicing homosexual and even be a Christian—much less a bishop. Those who had been in Corinth repented of the sin (1 Cor. 6:9-11).

Rees added: “The big question is, do we really believe that God believes that male human beings bear His image more fully and accurately than women? The answer is absolutely not.” The Scriptures agree. When the text tells us that God said, “Let us make man in Our image” (Gen. 1:26), the word translated “man” also means “mankind.” That mankind is intended is clarified by the next verse: “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.” Rees is right to say that men are not more fully in God’s image than women.

Did someone say they were? However, God created males for the leadership role (1 Tim. 2:11-14), and that is the real problem for feminists. So, to further their ignoble cause, they now want to get rid of the male reference relating to God—even if it directly contradicts what Jesus said to do.

And they have enlisted the aid of many of their cohorts in their crusade. Of course, the archbishop of York, who suggested the replacement of Our Father is a male. Several priests asked earlier this year to be allowed to use gender-neutral terms instead. They agreed to launch “a commission on gendered language.”

Violations

But why should anyone expect the synod to follow the Scriptures? Consider what has already taken place.

The archbishop wears a title that is not found in the Scriptures.

He addressed the General Synod—another term not found in the Bible.

No Church of England is mentioned in the Bible.

Who gave mere men authority to sit in judgment on the Word of God? In effect, they are telling Jesus He is wrong to advise His followers to pray to Our Father. What’s next? Will people be told not to call Jesus, “Lord, Lord,” because some ladies might be offended?

Women are not authorized to be bishops, but that stipulation is also ignored. (What the Church of England means by the word bishop is probably different than what meant by it in the New Testament.)

The Church of England has already ignored what the New Testament teaches about homosexuality.

The Church of England has ignored New Testament teaching about the nature of the church. No authority exists for a denomination, period, let alone a denominational superstructure. Each church was autonomous—that is, self-governing—in the Scriptures.

Ironically, the archbishop’s overall theme centered on the need for unity. Surely, he knows that his proposal to move away from Our Father will only add to the division in that religious group. But, then, those who truly want unity would not be a part of a religious denomination, the very existence of which is divisive. The early church had unity because they “continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine” (Acts 2:42). No synod sat in judgment over the Lord’s teachings—to agree or disagree with them. They were expected to be joined together in the same judgment (1 Cor. 1:10). And when they prayed, it was to “Our Father”—not “Our Person.”