Masculine titles for God

[Goya]

Follow up:

Here are a couple of salient passages from the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

Section 239:

239 By calling God “Father,” the language of faith indicates two main things: that God is the first origin of everything and transcendent authority; and that he is at the same time goodness and loving care for all his children. God’s parental tenderness can also be expressed by the image of motherhood,62 which emphasizes God’s immanence, the intimacy between Creator and creature. The language of faith thus draws on the human experience of parents, who are in a way the first representatives of God for man. But this experience also tells us that human parents are fallible and can disfigure the face of fatherhood and motherhood. We ought therefore to recall that God transcends the human distinction between the sexes. He is neither man nor woman: he is God. He also transcends human fatherhood and motherhood, although he is their origin and standard:63 no one is father as God is Father. (370, 2779)

And Sections 39-43:

IV. How Can We Speak about God?

39 In defending the ability of human reason to know God, the Church is expressing her confidence in the possibility of speaking about him to all men and with all men, and therefore of dialogue with other religions, with philosophy and science, as well as with unbelievers and atheists. (851)

40 Since our knowledge of God is limited, our language about him is equally so. We can name God only by taking creatures as our starting point, and in accordance with our limited human ways of knowing and thinking.

41 All creatures bear a certain resemblance to God, most especially man, created in the image and likeness of God. The manifold perfections of creatures—their truth, their goodness, their beauty—all reflect the infinite perfection of God. **Consequently we can name God by taking his creatures’ perfections as our starting point, “for from the greatness and beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of their Creator.”**15 (213, 299)

42 God transcends all creatures. We must therefore continually purify our language of everything in it that is limited, image-bound or imperfect, if we are not to confuse our image of God — “the inexpressible, the incomprehensible, the invisible, the ungraspable” — with our human representations.16 Our human words always fall short of the mystery of God. (212, 300, 370)

43 Admittedly, in speaking about God like this, our language is using human modes of expression; nevertheless it really does attain to God himself, though unable to express him in his infinite simplicity. Likewise, we must recall that “between Creator and creature no similitude can be expressed without implying an even greater dissimilitude”;17 and that “concerning God, we cannot grasp what he is, but only what he is not, and how other beings stand in relation to him.”18 (206)

Hence it appears to confirm what I posted above–no express prohibition against such, as ‘offense’ would be a function of ‘intent’. So, for example, if referring to God in the Feminine was done out of reverence–"…by taking creatures as our starting point, and in accordance with our limited human ways of knowing and thinking…", as part of seeking to “…continually purify our language of everything in it that is limited, image-bound or imperfect”, and because we see “…[t]he manifold perfections of creatures—their truth, their goodness, their beauty—all reflect[ing] the infinite perfection of God”, “…expressed by the image of motherhood” (for instance)–it would be ‘kosher’. Certainly not patently offensive.

FWIW.

(same caveat as above, at least concerning my application of the cited passages).

 

[Elizium23]

The camel’s nose in the tent is the neutering of God by eliminating pronouns altogether and referring to “God” and “God’s” instead of “Him” and “His”. This is frequently done liturgically as found in certain hymnals as well as the parish culture of certain places. I was a member in a place where the secular Third Order members hinted that God could perhaps be female and God was neutered in the liturgy.

You will often find multiple versions of hymns, where well-meaning people have neutered God during an attempt to be “inclusive” and “gender-neutral”. While it can be permissible to convert e.g. “brethren” into “brothers and sisters” because the English language has changed, this is known as horizontal neutrality. Vertical neutrality is a theological error and has no place in liturgy, hymns, or the common parlance.