Jesse Medina

The notion of a female God is nothing new.

But what is new within the past 100 years or so is the notion that the Christian God is, or should be female.

The idea of a masculine God, particularly in a patriarchal society, makes it very difficult for some people to relate to God.   This is no more true than for those who come from families where their fathers have been absent or abusive or for whom much pain has come from the hands of men.  The idea that God is a “he” just like the “he” who hurt them is appalling and difficult.   There are even arguments that this is not solely a matter of preference, but one of sociology – the result of a patriarchal society that points out weakness in men by referring to them as “girls” telling them to “man up.”  For many (women especially) this creates a God who is difficult to relate to.  In response, many simply ditch the notion of a masculine God and replace the Father verbiage with Mother verbiage.  And, as a result, many have been able to relate to God in new ways.

After all, God isn’t really a “he,” right?

Wrong…well, kind of.

It is an accepted truth that God does not have a body.  Jesus had a body, and he was a he (anatomy and all), but the “Father” and the Spirit do not have bodies, at least none that we know of (or could understand for that matter).  In that sense, it is true that God does not have a penis.  But neither does he have a vagina.  Perhaps, like an army guy or Ken doll he is just smooth “down there.”

But that’s not really the point, is it?

The real problem here is not whether God is more of a “he” than a “she” but whether God, whatever God is, is like the hes and shes that we know who have hurt us.  My guess is that most of us would say that he is not.  And yet, we still get hung up on the language.  So what do we do?  How can some of us who have suffered significant wounds under the hand of a man relate to a God is referred to almost exclusively in masculine language?  Is it appropriate to try to find God’s “feminine side” and relate to God through mother-language?

While there is a part of me that wants desperately to say that it is appropriate and that we should relate to God in whatever way is most helpful, I simply can’t get over the fact that God chose, for whatever reason, to reveal himself using masculine language.  That is a fact that we cannot easily dismiss otherwise we are running the risk of creating a god of our own choosing – or, in other words, worshipping an idol.   I’m not saying that we cannot affirm the “feminine” qualities of God (I put feminine in quotes because even the concept that some attributes are masculine and some are feminine are social constructs) – we absolutely can.  But we need to give God the liberty to reveal God’s self however God chooses – in our case, as a Father.

But we take comfort in the fact that God is, in fact, not like the hes and shes who have hurt us.  God is not like our earthly fathers or our earthly mothers.  God is not a harsh dictator ruling over us with an iron fist.  Like a good Father, he is strong, rational, powerful, demanding, and even dangerous.  But like a good Mother he is nurturing, compassionate, emotional, soothing, and kind.

And the biggest thing that we have to keep in mind is this: the gender God chose to reveal himself as is not nearly as important as the fact that he did reveal himself and has proven, time and time again, that he is nothing like us – he is simultaneously more masculine than the manliest of men and more feminine than the girliest girl.  He is God and as male and female, we are made in his image.

What do you think?  Is it okay to relate to God as “Mother?”  Why or why not?

Filed under: Uncategorized Tagged: | God, Theology