1. The objection to Lord also carries an objection to the explicitly “male” aspect to that word (which, for feminist theology, is reflective of male-dominated power—i.e. “patriarchy”).

2. (And one that I feel is more crucial) The term “Lord” translates the Greek “kurios,” which is used exclusively as the stand-in term for HaShem, the sacred Name, in the Septuagint (which is the Bible that was used by Jesus and Saint Paul, etc.). So when Saint Paul writes about calling Jesus “Lord” he is referring to calling/confessing Jesus as “HaShem”—the I AM. So while “Lord” does have an additional meaning rooted in what is in this article, the primary implication of that term is the confession that Jesus is the God revealed to Moses, the great I AM. Which is all to say that using alternative titles rooted in that sense of confession is both right and proper and in line with the Episcopal Church’s commitment to “expansive” language in our liturgical life.