Inclusive language question

Readers of this blog, I imagine, might have a fairly wide variety of opinions on the use of "inclusive language" for God in the liturgy. I found this recent piece by Ward Nelson from "The Living Church" to be of interest. I invite your own comments on the question.
------------------------------------
The matter of liturgies and hymns using so-called “inclusive” or “expansive” language seems to have gotten lost over the past few years. Owing to the relative silence in the midst of the continuing exploration of these texts, one could come to the conclusion that the use of this language is a done deal.
While I don’t believe that expansive language in liturgies and hymns is all bad, I am concerned about the avoidance of references to God the Father, other than in the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer.
I am not opposed to liturgical development. The three eucharistic prayers in Enriching Our Worship all have points to commend them. The difficulty with these texts, including the acclamations and blessings, is that, in avoiding the name “Father,” the only nouns of address left are essentially deistic: “Holy One,” “the One,” “Holy One of Blessing,” “the one holy and living God,” “Creator,” “All Holy God,” “Maker.”
The irony is that whereas one central facet of Jesus’ ministry was to reveal the nature of the heavenly Father, Abba, who has the hairs of our head numbered, we’ve gone back into the ether, worshiping a God who is up there and out there.
Other examples: In place of the traditional salutation “The Lord be with you,” which is personal, we now have “God be with you,” which is less so. In place of the traditional Trinitarian blessing, we now have “Holy eternal Majesty, Holy incarnate Word, Holy abiding Spirit, Bless you for evermore. Amen.” How much more distant and remote could we get?
Preachers often refer to God nowadays as “the Divine,” rendering him even more remote and distant, and using language which at its essence isn’t biblical.
A new hymn styles the Trinity as “Maker, Son, and Spirit.” There’s nothing wrong in calling God “Maker,” but in the context of the Trinity, how is that an improvement over “Father”? After all, Jesus didn’t say, “Maker, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”
Some will argue, as Ruth Meyers has, that Jesus didn’t really call God “Father” all that much, and that this usage reflects theological development in the early church. There are biblical scholars who will refute that; nonetheless, it does not address the central problem in these liturgies of God’s distance. Besides, why is it OK to search the scriptures for feminine images of God while ignoring the plain sense of the New Testament that God is, indeed, Father? If you take Jesus seriously, he was praying to his Father, not to a metaphor nor an image. Surely the Episcopal Church cannot build liturgy upon the slippery premise that “Jesus didn’t say it.”
All 10 eucharistic prayers in the latest edition of the Church of England’s alternative services use “Father” as the noun of address for God, even the one which says, “As a mother, you …” All the eucharistic prayers in the 2004 edition of the Irish BCP [TLC, June 27] are addressed to the Father. In fact, the website of the Church of Ireland says, “The sometimes vexatious issue of inclusive language we have tackled head-on. No opportunity has been lost to affirm that men and women equally share the image of God and make up the body of Christ. In relation to God, and the Fatherhood of God in particular, we have naturally been more cautious.” Our church needs that caution.
Bishop Christopher Epting, the Presiding Bishop’s deputy for ecumenical and interfaith relations, reminds us [TLC, Sept. 12] that the primary form of addressing God in liturgical prayer is as “God,” “Almighty God,” or our “Heavenly Father.” The birthright of every Anglican is to come to church on Sunday and worship God: Father, Son, and Spirit. Liturgical commissions have no business taking that away from people unless they have some special gnosis the rest of us have not received.
Our supplemental liturgies need to re-enlist the aid of the Father, not in every situation, but surely at least once in every eucharistic prayer as well as in other places. To do so is only to acknowledge the one whom Jesus acknowledges in the New Testament: our gracious, loving heavenly Father, the Lord of heaven and earth.
Ward Nelson, is music director and organist at St. Bartholomew’s Church, Beaverton, Oregon. This guest editorial was first published on page 21 of the October 24, 2004 issue of THE LIVING CHURCH magazine. (Guest editorials do not necessarily represent the editorial opinion of THE LIVING CHURCH or its board of directors.)