5

Lest the reader dismiss the writer as an obscurantist for not using the politically correct word human, it has to be pointed out that the distinction of “exclusive” language is political, not linguistic. Fr. Patrick Reardon, a convert to Orthodoxy and a scholarly philologist, notes that in its ordinary and generally understood use among the populace at large, when the word man is not grammatically or socially contextualized, it refers to human beings generally and is not used in a sense that excludes women. Both man and human are derived from the Latin humanus, which is generic. (Fr. Patrick notes that when this fact is discovered by the faddish academic world at large, and when the offensive word man is discovered in human and humanus, academia's thought police might next insist on expunging the word human from the English language as well).

            The same linguistic scholar points out that the use of man and mankind to designate human beings is completely and unequivocally proper, and he demonstrates that linguistic tradition is abundantly clear on this point. For example, all the following words normally mean human beings as such (although in some contexts they can refer to men alone): ho anthropos (Greek), ha'adam (Hebrew), nôshô (Syriac), al-insan (Arabic), chelovyek (Russian), der Mensch (German), de man (Dutch), zmogus (Lithuanian), and homo (Latin), along with its derivations in Italian, French, Spanish, Portuguese and Romanian. Moreover, literally thousands of other examples from other languages could be given to show that this usage is a universal phenomenon.  Fr. Patrick adds, as a former feminist, Sarah Cowie, who is now an Orthodox Christian, also explains, for centuries women had no trouble in seeming themselves included in the words mankind, men, man, and the masculine referent pronoun. She notes that inclusive language, which is about power and control and has the real goal of forcing social change, carries the false assumption that the present language is not inclusive.

            To no one's surprise, semantic confusion in this area has been created by feminism. As this political interest group came into being against a background of mass apostasy and the complete secularization of society, it is one whose sociopolitical program should be examined.

            At its inception, feminism (then called women's liberation) claimed to have as its purpose increased opportunities for women. Once its organized activities attracted people's attention through this alleged objective, this concern was quietly placed on a back burner in favor of another one — that of reducing humanity to a collection of victims of patriarchal tyranny and reducing the study of history and literature to political warfare carried on by other means.

            Such a politicizing of history and literature is part of a broader deculturation that elite groups in the West are forcing onto people, a deculturation that attempts to regulate Christianity to a “regressive” mentality and that proclaims that it should not be given a public hearing. Feminism’s agenda has not only converged with this broader ideological program, but it has also pushed harder along these lines than any other single political interest group. For this reason, a growing number of women in the academic world have come to see feminism as an attack upon humanity itself, an attack on the West, and most of all, an attack upon Christianity. They also understand that in all the politically correct routine bashing of Western civilization (and by extension Christianity) as the root of all evil, the overriding concern of the cultural elite and feminists alike is to make people forget who they are and where they came from — the first necessary step in indoctrinating them for the anti-Christian “utopia,” the new world order.

            Fr. Patrick goes on to note that today there are entire battalions of self-appointed theorists, “experts,” political agitators and other wardens of the mind who issue orders to university administrators and see to it that academic writers bring themselves into conformity with the new rules. When their demands are not complied with, writers' manuscripts are either rejected or edited, and some professors have even been denied tenure for not using the new politically correct way of thinking or writing.

            Fr. Patrick examines this extensive and all-pervasive ideological control and notes that it is unparalleled in American history. Moreover, he adds, for some time now, those who promote it have even forced themselves into Church circles. There, thought police are coming to accredit a growing number of Christian seminaries, and the same orders are given to seminary administrators and bishops as are given to universities. In that environment, radical feminist thought police attempt to “re-image” God and “revise” divine revelation by modifying masculine titles through which He has traditionally been invoked or referred to: Father, Son, Lord, King, and so forth, even though Christians have always worshiped God as Father and pray to Him as “our Father.” An example of this linguistic engineering is a new Methodist service book in which God is invoked by such names as “Father-Mother,” in direct contradiction to what God has revealed about Himself. Another example is the Inclusive Language Lectionary  of the Bible that was produced in 1983. In it, 209 passages were rewritten so that there were no masculine gender references to God. John 3:16 for instance, is rewritten in this absurd wording: “For God so loved the world that God gave God's only Child....” Feminism is also promoting a feminization of the Holy Spirit so that women can be consoled with their own divine Person.

            When feminism is not always successful in turning God into “Mother,” then it at least attempts to turn Him into a genderless abstraction: “the Creator,” or “the Source.” In its advanced stages, that is, in its anti-rational, goddess-worship modes, feminism is offering a new anti-Christian way for a new age in the new world order. Its agenda in this regard is one and the same as that of the forerunner agents of the antichrist.

            Perhaps some readers of these lines have felt intimidated by the cultural tyranny, mind control and pseudo-intellectual babble coming from educators, media personalities, judges and business leaders who together shape the intellectual, political and social atmosphere of our country. Few can escape being affected in one way or another by the ideological war raging within our borders as it comes from a very well-educated, well-heeled, powerful cultural elite. For those who have felt coerced into being politically correct by their ideologically charged environment, understand that the enemies of Church and state have bullied and browbeat you into this submission in an attempt to de-Christianize you for the new world order. In order to achieve their global imperium, the globalists rely on their ability to poison people with hatred, which is the old principle of divide et impera (divide and rule). By promoting discord and dividing people against one another along as many lines as possible (gender, racial, and other lines), the masses can be turned into obedient instruments of the one-world forces in their sinister agenda. At present, their work is that of dismantling all underlying foundations of society — most of all the Christian Churches. Then, at the time the united world government is ushered in, their ultimate aim will be the total extermination of Christianity. At that time, Christians will be politically incorrect for professing Christ and for not bowing down to the modern idol of politically correct secular ideology. For these “crimes against humanity,” all of them will summarily be dealt with by a world court of the new world order, or a Hague tribunal.

            The world is now seething with unprecedented passions, and everyone can sense the approaching darkness. In view of these developments, the choice is now completely clear: capitulation to the politically correct mentality of the new world order that is undeniably insane and bent on the complete eradication of Christianity, or adherence to the traditional Christian worldview that is now out of fashion, “regressive.” For a Christian, there can be no doubt that the time has come for there to be no further thought of being programmed like a computer into being politically correct.

            Concerning men and women, an Orthodox nun observes that the separation into gender was made by God in foreknowledge of the fall of the primogenitors of the human race. This condition is temporary, something meant only for this world. The nun goes on to note that the Holy Fathers teach that the souls of men and women are the same and that they have the same spiritual capacities and capabilities and needs. Orthodoxy therefore does not denigrate or disparage but exalts Christian women. As a deacon goes on to note in this regard:

The Orthodox Church venerates tens of thousands of saints, both individually and collectively. A great many of these are women. A particular role is played by the Myrrhbear-ers, to whom the Resurrection was first revealed, and also by a group of women known as Equals-of-the-Apostles, who include great missionary saints. The Church also has collections of Sayings of the Spiritual Mothers containing the wisdom of female ascetics. One instance of the veneration of the Church for women is the way in which the Church venerates St. Monica as a saint but reveres her son as “Blessed Augustine,” thus recognizing a greater degree of saintliness in the modest humility and silence of the mother than in the son who wrote many tomes of learned theology, much of it spiritually inspired, but a small amount of it sadly erroneous. It is almost to confirm a popular proverb: “Behind every great man stands a great woman.” Indeed, this is confirmed in Church history; every great male saint has somehow been linked to a grandmother, a mother, a sister, a spiritual mother or sister or daughter, or simply, in the case of laymen and married clergy, a humble and pious spouse. The foremost example is, of course, our Lord and His Holy Mother [Deacon Andrew Philips].

Likewise, as the above mentioned Sarah Cowie writes in her book More Spirited than Lions:

I was still a feminist when I discovered the Orthodox Church. In my study of Orthodoxy, I discovered its soul-stunning beauty and power. I fell in love with its saints. I was profoundly touched by the vision of Christian womanhood I saw through their lives. They were living proof that the Orthodox Church is graced with mystical power that can bring a soul into direct, personal communication with its Creator [p. 18].

Regarding the women saints of the Church, the same writer notes that:

These were women like us who found answers — who lived heroic lives of courage, wisdom and holiness. They found a way of life and followed it unswervingly. They conquered both themselves and life's difficulties, and rose up to become noble, powerful women. Their lives shine forth in our lives with a light that is not of this world.... They are able to touch our souls and lift us up out of our quotidian life into a vision of nobility and beauty of soul [p. 19].