We are English people. We speak English. For good or for ill, we express ourselves in the tongue we have inherited. This shapes our thinking. Unlike Latin, our native language is not today a scheme with a precise compartmentalised structure or vocabulary. This is its strength and its weakness.
Take the word ‘lord’. This, in our language before the Conquest, was a term for the head of a household. A hlaford was the guardian of the loaf and the lady was the hlaefdige, the kneader of the bread. Hence we might say a lord is the breadwinner and his lady is the mistress of the kitchen. If we apply the word to the Supreme Being, we bring to that understanding the idea of rule, supremacy over an extended family. God is thus the paterfamilias. The word ‘lord’ has clearly masculine import and has gained a flavour of feudalism.
Not so another word favoured by our ancestors. ‘Dryhten’ was popular in the days of King Alfred. It was a term with ‘noble’ at the heart of it and it was applied to a chief of retainers. The word went missing 600 years ago, so we can’t use it as a replacement for ‘lord’. Nor is the Greek word ‘kurios’ available in an Anglicised form. We are stuck with a word with feudal overtones just as we are stuck with the House of Lords. Should they not be styled senators?
Before the Conquest a woman was a wifeman. The word ‘man’ was equivalent to ‘human’. It could be modified to particularise a female human being. ‘Man’ and ‘woman’ have collected overtones over the generations. ‘Lord’ and ‘lady’ today carry varying flavours with them. Things change with time. Context makes all the difference. The feudal element persists.
Is it still appropriate – or was it ever appropriate – to apply this term (lord) to God? We have become disenchanted with a similar word: ‘master’. Its feminine accompaniment ‘mistress’ has become impossible. Actresses have become actors and manageresses have become managers. We no longer have station-masters and the term head-master is moving towards redundancy. Yet we continue to speak of a masterpiece and to watch Mastermind. Why? Words have a way of persisting even when their original meaning died long ago.
An interesting candidate for a word to replace ‘lord’ is ‘governor’. It comes in Matthew 2.6 (KJV) and it is of course a word used of our Queen in relation to the Church of England. The fact that it sounds strange when it replaces ‘lord’ is an indication of how far we have been conditioned by feudal understanding in our religious vocabulary. ‘Lord’ often accompanies ‘bishop’’ in English usage. Other English versions of the Bible than the KJV opt for ‘leader’ or ‘ruler’ in their translation of Matthew 2.6.
We need to beware. Words are not counters or chess-pieces with a fixed unvarying meaning. This is just as true of words in a religious context as of any other words. Much anguish has been caused by ignoring this. Having just written this, I gulped and did a double-take. I couldn’t believe what I saw on the St Giles’s church, Normanton website.
THE LOVING RULER
St Giles’s church, Normanton, Derby makes no bones about it. It has a message. ‘God is the loving ruler of the world,’ says the website. It goes on to outline what it means to be a Christian in the light of this. And the word ‘ruler’ is significant. It is a word belonging to the 21st century. A visitor to the website is being invited to consider what the Church stands for in the world today. Neil Barber leads the ministry team.
If you have a comment on this post please send an email to Revd John King at johnc.king@talktalk.net Edited extracts may be published. To forward this to a friend click on the chain icon below.
Komentar