Catholic Sunday school teacher used female gender pronoun in reference to God

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gamera
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Gamera

Guest
Today at Mass, I accompanied our 4 year old to the kid’s lesson during the Liturgy of the Word. The teacher began the session with the sign of the cross in this way:

"In the name of the Father. What did He do? He made us.
"And the Son. What did He do? He died for us.
“And the Holy Spirit. What does She do? She loves us.”

I couldn’t believe my ears. I know I’ve read authority that we cannot use female gender pronouns in reference to God. But I can’t recall where I read it, and I can’t find it in the CCC. I’d like to show the teacher authority regarding this. Who can refresh my memory, please?
 
Look at John 16: 12-15.

“‘I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear it now. But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming. He will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and declare it to you. Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that he will take from what is mine and declare it to you’.”

-As far as I’m aware, St John used masculine nouns in the original Greek to describe the Holy Spirit, so it’s not just down to English translations…

It is most certainly not in the Catholic Tradition to refer to any of the three Divine persons of the Trinity as female - the Spirit is regarded as having the same gender as Christ, which isn’t surprising since the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Jesus. Most Christian denominations uphold the tradition of attributing a masculine gender to the Holy Spirit, as well as the Father and the Son.
 
I know this isn’t much help, but I had a friend who was a Bible scholar, studied Hebrew and Greek, and he told me that the original words used for the Holy Spirit were indeed feminine.

I can look into this more, but he was VERY conservative, so if he says the Holy Spirit was referred to in feminine terms, I know it’s not something he’d make up.

Miz
 
The appropriation used as well may be a bit of a problem. Althought these ‘jobs’ are attributed to particular Persons but They all do the work in common; however it must be remembered that only the Second Person became flesh and dwelt among us.

God as the first cause should be refered to as He. Using a sexual analogy, it is the man who sows the seed and the woman receives it. Plus our Blessed Lord refered to the Paraclete as He.
 
Just as an afterthought: there is much debate out there as to the gender of the Holy Spirit, of that there is no doubt. But I think, whatever the arguments are, the teacher abused her position by using four-year olds to advance her own views. She is there to teach the children the doctrines of the Catholic Church. If she wants to debate the gender of the Spirit, then there are other fora in which to do so - with a group of young children is not the place. As I’ve pointed out, the Church has always maintained that the Spirit should be referred to in masculine terms - Scripture does so, the Catechism does so, the Credo does so. If she has views which are in conflict with the Church’s teaching, then she has two choices - stop teaching the class if she’s not prepared to uphold this teaching, or continue with the class and keep her personal views personal.

By the way, is this the first time that this teacher has done such a thing or is it a regular occurrence… Though this one incident would have me worried - it clearly wasn’t a mere slip of the tongue.
 
\-As far as I’m aware, St John used masculine nouns in the original Greek to describe the Holy Spirit, so it’s not just down to English translations…\

Actually, in Greek “to agio pnevmati” is neuter.
 
bpbasilphx said:
\-As far as I’m aware, St John used masculine nouns in the original Greek to describe the Holy Spirit, so it’s not just down to English translations…\

Actually, in Greek “to agio pnevmati” is neuter.
Click to expand...
Well, you know more Greek than I - so I don’t mind being corrected, but what about other words which are used to describe the Spirit such as “Advocate” and “Comfortor” etc… I’m not arguing or challenging you 🙂 I genuinely don’t know, and am happy to be enlightened.

However, I would still stand over my remarks that a class of young children was not the place to be bringing up the gender of the Holy Spirit.
 
NPC has the correct focus on this. God is neither male or female, but as Jesus spoke and taught in the male gender, then so we do likewise. As the difference in the Greek, remember that Greek was a second language, as Aramic was the language Jesus spoke and taught in, so there are words that do not translate well between the two. Focus first on Jesus words and teaching. If he used all male pronouns all the time, then we cannot do otherwise, and use another language to explain away the intent of our Lords words and teaching.
You now have the obligation to return to this teacher and in a very quiet manner inform her that she is teaching an error and she needs to return to the all male reference. If she does not, you need to go to Father.
 
NPC said:
Just as an afterthought: there is much debate out there as to the gender of the Holy Spirit, of that there is no doubt. But I think, whatever the arguments are, the teacher abused her position by using four-year olds to advance her own views. She is there to teach the children the doctrines of the Catholic Church. If she wants to debate the gender of the Spirit, then there are other fora in which to do so - with a group of young children is not the place. As I’ve pointed out, the Church has always maintained that the Spirit should be referred to in masculine terms - Scripture does so, the Catechism does so, the Credo does so. If she has views which are in conflict with the Church’s teaching, then she has two choices - stop teaching the class if she’s not prepared to uphold this teaching, or continue with the class and keep her personal views personal.

By the way, is this the first time that this teacher has done such a thing or is it a regular occurrence… Though this one incident would have me worried - it clearly wasn’t a mere slip of the tongue.
Click to expand...
👍
 
Julian0404 said:
NPC has the correct focus on this. God is neither male or female, but as Jesus spoke and taught in the male gender, then so we do likewise. As the difference in the Greek, remember that Greek was a second language, as Aramic was the language Jesus spoke and taught in, so there are words that do not translate well between the two. Focus first on Jesus words and teaching. If he used all male pronouns all the time, then we cannot do otherwise, and use another language to explain away the intent of our Lords words and teaching.
You now have the obligation to return to this teacher and in a very quiet manner inform her that she is teaching an error and she needs to return to the all male reference. If she does not, you need to go to Father.
Click to expand...
Great point:thumbsup: Does this teacher have The Catechism of the Catholic Church(ISBN:1-57455-110-8)? I help assist RCIA and have previously helped assist at CCD youth group and sacramental preparation for Confirmation.
9th grade. I have brought the Catechism at nearly every class and actually have used it especially on issues such as abortion,so called same sex marriage, and so called women priests. My parish pastor priest I learned from his bible study classes always had his Catechism with his Bible when he taught. I would recommend and advise for all religious and lay faithful if they are doing any catechist class even at early grade levels to have their Bible and Catechism available. Many times if I’m not certain on questions I’ll ask the person to write their questions on a piece of paper and submit it to their parish deacon and/or priest.
 
Gamera said:
Today at Mass, I accompanied our 4 year old to the kid’s lesson during the Liturgy of the Word. The teacher began the session with the sign of the cross in this way:

"In the name of the Father. What did He do? He made us.
"And the Son. What did He do? He died for us.
“And the Holy Spirit. What does She do? She loves us.”

I couldn’t believe my ears. I know I’ve read authority that we cannot use female gender pronouns in reference to God. But I can’t recall where I read it, and I can’t find it in the CCC. I’d like to show the teacher authority regarding this. Who can refresh my memory, please?
Click to expand...
I suggest that you just don’t send your child to this any longer.
 
Something else to consider is the fact that the Blessed Virgin Mary is often referred to as the Spouse of the Holy Spirit due to the Incarnation. Remember what St. Gabriel told her: she would be overshadowed by the Holy Spirit and conceive and bear a Son.

This leader is only confusing the children. I would not send my child back until the situation was resolved.
 
Gamera said:
Today at Mass, I accompanied our 4 year old to the kid’s lesson during the Liturgy of the Word. The teacher began the session with the sign of the cross in this way:

"In the name of the Father. What did He do? He made us.
"And the Son. What did He do? He died for us.
“And the Holy Spirit. What does She do? She loves us.”

I couldn’t believe my ears. I know I’ve read authority that we cannot use female gender pronouns in reference to God. But I can’t recall where I read it, and I can’t find it in the CCC. I’d like to show the teacher authority regarding this. Who can refresh my memory, please?
Click to expand...
report it to the pastor immediately, in writing, everything she said and did. she has no business teaching children as she is promoting heresy, just read the CCC section on the Holy Spirit, it is short, and nowhere does it apply feminine gender to the Third Person of the Trinity

pulling your children out is not enough, if you don’t protest you allow it to continue, which means you tacitly approve it. strong language? yes heresy promoted to the young and innocent is a strong topic, we have Jesus’ word for that.
 
Thanks for the replies, everyone. I tried to make clear in the original post that yes, I fully intend to do something about it. The point is that I want to go in ready to cite authority, not just my opinion. I don’t want to just say, “You shouldn’t refer to God with female gender prounouns.” Because who the heck am I? I’m just laity. I want to be able say, “Church Document X forbids us from referring to God with female gender pronouns.” That’s more persuasive.

Unfortunately I still cannot retrace where I read it. The closest I’ve found is, “Similarly, in keeping with the Church’s tradition, the feminine and neuter pronouns are not to be used to refer to the person of the Holy Spirit,” which is great language but it refers only to Bible translations (it comes from 4/4 of The Holy See’s Translation Norms).

I guess sometimes a thing is so obvious that it’s hard to prove.
 
Gamera said:
Thanks for the replies, everyone. I tried to make clear in the original post that yes, I fully intend to do something about it. The point is that I want to go in ready to cite authority, not just my opinion. I don’t want to just say, “You shouldn’t refer to God with female gender prounouns.” Because who the heck am I? I’m just laity. I want to be able say, “Church Document X forbids us from referring to God with female gender pronouns.” That’s more persuasive.

Unfortunately I still cannot retrace where I read it. The closest I’ve found is, “Similarly, in keeping with the Church’s tradition, the feminine and neuter pronouns are not to be used to refer to the person of the Holy Spirit,” which is great language but it refers only to Bible translations (it comes from 4/4 of The Holy See’s Translation Norms).

I guess sometimes a thing is so obvious that it’s hard to prove.
Click to expand...
Here is what Liturgiam Authenticam says:
a) In referring to almighty God or the individual persons of the Most Holy Trinity, the truth of tradition as well as the established gender usage of each respective language are to be maintained
Click to expand...
This is the authoritative document of the Holy See on translations for liturgical use.
 
Perhaps they got confused, as the Holy Spirit is viewed as the most feminin aspect of God. It’s still improper to use a she pronoun to describe the holy spirit. You should approch them, and correct them. if they refuse to listen, I would talk to the church office.
 
Gamera said:
Thanks for the replies, everyone. I tried to make clear in the original post that yes, I fully intend to do something about it. The point is that I want to go in ready to cite authority, not just my opinion. I don’t want to just say, “You shouldn’t refer to God with female gender prounouns.” Because who the heck am I? I’m just laity. I want to be able say, “Church Document X forbids us from referring to God with female gender pronouns.” That’s more persuasive.

Unfortunately I still cannot retrace where I read it. The closest I’ve found is, “Similarly, in keeping with the Church’s tradition, the feminine and neuter pronouns are not to be used to refer to the person of the Holy Spirit,” which is great language but it refers only to Bible translations (it comes from 4/4 of The Holy See’s Translation Norms).

I guess sometimes a thing is so obvious that it’s hard to prove.
Click to expand...
You don’t need to prove it! This does not have to be a discussion about whether the Holy Spirit should have masculine or feminine gender attributed to it. The point is that it is the long-standing teaching and example of the Church that the Spirit should be referred to in masculine terms. This is obvious, as I said earlier, from looking at Scripture, the Catechism and the Credo (“with the Father and the Son He is worshipped and glorified”). These are four-year old children, and as Benedictgal said, this teacher is only confusing them - I mean what’s going to happen when they read that passage from John’s gospel where the Spirit is referred to as “he”, but they’re being led to believe that it’s a “she”? So, it’s not really the gender of the Holy Spirit that needs to be proven or brought into question - the question is why this teacher is being allowed to promote her own opinions which are so violently opposed to the Catholic doctrine which she is supposed to be teaching.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top