Q: I think the edition of the Liturgy of the Hours and a new lectionary using the CAB translation headed our way will not use inclusive language. For decades I thought that, in main-stream Catholicism, it was a settled question that for some people the words like “man,” “mankind,” “brothers,” “brethren,” ‘sons,” “he” refer to male humans. So community prayer would use words that unambiguously communicate in a way that notes the obvious—that all humans count and are included in the circle of God’s love. Clearly for some people these words communicate both genders. But for some the words mean what they say, and they seem to ignore the plain fact that women were seen as “less than” for much of human history. It seems to me that Christian kindness would accommodate fellow prayers who see these words as excluding or as putting women down.
Apparently my assumption, hope, and expectation was incorrect. I have four questions:
1. Superficial Google research attributed this translation decision to the idea that concern for inclusion in language of public prayer is based on secular ideology and radical feminism. I do not want to believe such a decision would be based on such incorrect and superficial assertions. Can you direct me to any sort of forums or publications that show discussion and debate that reveals the reasoning for this choice?
2. Can I join any effort to oppose this choice before the texts are published and the damage done?
3. Were people who use these texts in public and private prayer consulted?—–women and men religious? Sunday Mass goers? priests? liturgists?
4. This is a real problem for me. I feel betrayed. And I feel for all the people who will experience this as a slap in the face. I do not know what to do. Fourth question: will other English-speaking bishop conferences have liturgical books that take the sin of sexism seriously and have inclusive language?
Thank you for this blog helping us with rubrics and with deeper meanings of what we do in liturgy.
==
A: I’ve not been involved with the biblical translations, but my understanding is that we’re getting a modified version of the ones we use now. I don’t expect to see regression on this topic.
With regard to Abbey Psalms and Canticles, I’m told that one reason some words remain male is their traditional association with foreshadowings of Christ. We’ll see how that lands.
I don’t know what movements exist or who was consulted for biblical translations. Other conferences have a limited choice of translations, and there’s bound to be some variation in how they approach the issue.
View All Blog Posts | Explore Books | Submit a Blog Question | Share Post via Email