New Missal and the Gender-neutering controversy

[chevalier]

To add my two cents to the discussion, some languages have masculine and feminine genders (plus some fancy derivative categories with longer names) for all nouns. Anima (soul), persona (person), are feminine. In many languages, if you talk about “persons”, you’re going to use the feminine gender even if you’re talking about a man or a group of men. This was particularly prominent in Polish when I went to school. This many persons had come, that many were going, some person did this, the other was feeling sick etc. So there was plenty of time schoolboys heard themselves referred to in the feminine gender. Actually, there was a lot of confusion as to proper grammatical form of the essential words “boy” and “girl” in plural (really! and teachers and other wise people preached the wrong ones ), but that’s another tale for a different occasional.

Also, in some languages, there are words that have a different grammatical and logical gender. The grammatical gender dictate the declension (i.e. the exact noun forms you use), while the logical one governs associations with other words, e.g. verbs or adjectives. Example: mater bona. Mater, the very word for mother in Latin, actually declines like a masculine noun (following exactly the same form as pater or frater), as does soror for sister.

Incidentally, the Greek parthenos for a virgin or young girl (it’s true that the Latin virgo doesn’t always refer to a virgin in the modern understanding, by the way) is actually neuter. How that came about, I don’t know.

So I wouldn’t fret so much about grammar (whether actual grammar or established use) being evil, exclusive, divisive etc. “Person”, “people”, “human” etc. only appear neutral because English has lost the gender distinction of inanimate nouns. Their Latin and French grandaddies have genders (and “people” is actually singular, which isn’t as bad compared to the French literally saying “the whole world” (tout le monde) when they mean “everybody”, e.g. everybody in the room ).

As for “sisters and brothers”, that may be chivalry, such as in “ladies and gentlemen”. In Polish polite society you used to be expected to start enumerations with the ladies, putting the men afterward, to the point it became a language mistake if you didn’t. It has caused collisions with hierarchical pecking orders.

 

[Stitchwort]

Thank you, Chevalier, for those points!

These are good examples of the differences between grammatical gender and biological gender. I was aware that some languages require males to speak of themselves with female pronouns in certain constructions, but didn’t have any examples at hand to use.

 

[ProVobis]

Incidentally, the Greek parthenos for a virgin or young girl (it’s true that the Latin virgo doesn’t always refer to a virgin in the modern understanding, by the way) is actually neuter. How that came about, I don’t know.

Good example of why genders should be translated differently. In Latin (and Greek too, I suppose) “gender” is important because any modifier (and its ending) must be in the same gender as the noun. For example, pulchra stat virgo, homo pulcher, agricola pulcher, vir pulcher. The modifier in this case has the same meaning, one of beauty (and also can be split from its noun.) The English translation, however, would require some delicacy. So we would have “the virgin stands beautiful,” “good-looking person,” “excellent farmer” and “handsome man.”

 

[chevalier]

Good example of why genders should be translated differently. In Latin (and Greek too, I suppose) “gender” is important because any modifier (and its ending) must be in the same gender as the noun. For example, pulchra stat virgo, homo pulcher, agricola pulcher, vir pulcher. The modifier in this case has the same meaning, one of beauty. The English translation, however, would require some delicacy. So we would have “the virgin stands beautiful,” “good-looking person,” “excellent farmer” and “handsome man.”

Actually, the modifier isn’t always in the same grammatical gender as the noun, such as in my example of mater bona. Mater is obviously female because, well, mum isn’t a guy, right? And that’s pretty much all there is to it because the noun itself is grammatically masculine. The logical gender is then what dictates the gender of the modifiers. It’s only the meaning, known to you, which allows you to tell the logical gender as different from the grammatical one, and decide that mater* is bona while pater is bonus. An example of the opposite can be iurista bonus**, where iurista follows the feminine declension (I) but is logically masculine, therefore gets a masculine adjective. In fact, this logical gender is so strong (i.e. the logical masculine gender of the grammatically feminine iurista) that an actual woman would also be iurista bonus, not bona, in Latin. In fact, similarly as a man referred to as e.g. persona would be persona magna (persona having both its grammatical gender and the logical one feminine), except a bit more shocking here.

On the other hand, in some languages, you can actually have the noun and the modifier both take a gender manifestly different from the actual biological sex of the living creature they describe. For example, in Polish, it’s possible to form a neuter “dziewczę drogie” or “chłopię drogie” (both of which are archaisms but especially the latter) for “dear girl” or “dear little boy” respectively, pretty much the same as “dziecię drogie” (dear baby). (Not only the modifier but even the verb will take neuter forms here, if applicable!) This is basically a funny little method of diminution that bestows a young animate creature with an affectionate neuter gender (which isn’t at all offensive). It is sadly avoided in modern (post-WW2) Polish for fear of embarrassment, despite still being somewhat of an obligatory norm. So, suppose we’re a lawyer that cares about the beauty of language and we want to say that a beautiful girl came to our office today… the only feminine word we use is “office”.

Or if you wanted to say, in Polish, that some guy was a truly magnificent person which provided a shining example to others and which heroically overcame all the obstacles piling before it etc. etc., you’d be regularly referring to a superman as a “she” or “her”. Or, you may even be male and using some particular syntax such as, “I am a person which…”, then you’d be referring to yourself as “she” or “her”. Same in Latin and French.***

 

[Rence]

Hi everyone,

so the new Missal is coming in this Advent, and there seems to be a sizeable portion of discontented Catholics, particularly regarding the ‘sexist’ language used.
And then there are people actively campaigning to retain the gender-specific language.

Personally, I find it very irritating when the priest makes a point of inserting ‘sister’ after ‘brother’ during the Gospel, or ‘he or she’ instead of ‘he’ and I know he’s not technically meant to do that.

But for the new Missal, I don’t understand why a lot of the masculine pronouns, when referring to mankind, (not God obviously, because those pronouns are scriptural and should be retained) haven’t been made more neutral to include women. I have heard that the ‘masculine’ pronouns are really shared pronouns that incorporate both masculine and both masculine and feminine, but it seems that English allows for more general terms, such as ‘people’ instead of ‘man’ that would avoid unnecessary confusion.

Does anyone have any reason why the Church is making a point of retaining this often confusing language?

God bless

I don’t know why they are going backwards, so I can’t answer you there. But there will always be priests who use language that include women, so that people like me (who get more out of the Mass when women are included) can just go to those Masses. And those who like the masculine pronouns in everything in the Mass can just go to those priests who only use masculine pronouns. I’ve always been lucky to be able to attend Masses where “Brothers and sisters” are included, and not just “men” and “mankind”. I just don’t go to Masses celebrated by priests who don’t include women. I figure, it’s really nothing to argue about, just go to the Masses that allow you get more out of Mass if it’s going to be something that will distract you

 

[ProVobis]

I just don’t go to Masses celebrated by priests who don’t include women. I figure, it’s really nothing to argue about, just go to the Masses that allow you get more out of Mass if it’s going to be something that will distract you

So it would bother you if the priest (or anyone else, for that matter) uses expressions like “everyone should do his own thing”? Just asking.

 

[Cavaille-Coll]

I don’t know why they are going backwards, so I can’t answer you there. But there will always be priests who use language that include women, so that people like me (who get more out of the Mass when women are included) can just go to those Masses. And those who like the masculine pronouns in everything in the Mass can just go to those priests who only use masculine pronouns. I’ve always been lucky to be able to attend Masses where “Brothers and sisters” are included, and not just “men” and “mankind”. I just don’t go to Masses celebrated by priests who don’t include women. I figure, it’s really nothing to argue about, just go to the Masses that allow you get more out of Mass if it’s going to be something that will distract you

No priest or bishop has the authority to alter words of Mass prayers (except where such options are listed) or Scripture readings. I don’t consider you “lucky” that you have access to disobedient priests who put their personal politics above the Mystical Body of Christ.

 

[Rence]

So it would bother you if the priest (or anyone else, for that matter) uses expressions like “everyone should do his own thing”? Just asking.

Depends on what they’re talking about when they use the expression. If we’re talking about preferring to go to one Mass over another, yeah, everyone should do his or her own thing. No, that wouldn’t bother me in the least.

 

[Rence]

No priest or bishop has the authority to alter words of Mass prayers (except where such options are listed) or Scripture readings. I don’t consider you “lucky” that you have access to disobedient priests who put their personal politics above the Mystical Body of Christ.

I find myself very lucky that I have access to priests who are sensitive to different persons’ needs.

 

[ProVobis]

As for “sisters and brothers”, that may be chivalry, such as in “ladies and gentlemen”. In Polish polite society you used to be expected to start enumerations with the ladies, putting the men afterward, to the point it became a language mistake if you didn’t. It has caused collisions with hierarchical pecking orders.

Also in the Polish, usage of the second person is considered rude unless it’s used in an intimate way. (At least that’s what my mother taught me.) So using “pan” (addressing an adult male) or “pani” (adult lady) in every sentence is not too uncommon in conversations.

 

[Cavaille-Coll]

From Redemptionis Sacramentum, nos. 31, 59 (2004)

"(Priests) ought not to detract from the profound meaning of their own ministry by corrupting the liturgical celebration either through alteration or omission, or through arbitrary additions.

The reprobated practice by which Priests, Deacons or the faithful here and there alter or vary at will the texts of the Sacred Liturgy that they are charged to pronounce, must cease. For in doing thus, they render the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy unstable, and not infrequently distort the authentic meaning of the Liturgy"

People who don’t fully understand the English language need education, and hypersensitive people may need psychological therapy, but the Mass cannot be compromised for fear of offense.

 

[Cavaille-Coll]

Also in the Polish, usage of the second person is considered rude unless it’s used in an intimate way. (At least that’s what my mother taught me.) So using “pan” (addressing an adult male) or “pani” (adult lady) in every sentence is not too uncommon in conversations.

I cannot speak for the Polish language, but the English phrase “brothers and sisters” was never reversed until the last couple of decades, and that almost exclusively at the hands of liberal Catholic and high-church Protestant clergy.

 

[Rence]

From Redemptionis Sacramentum, nos. 31, 59 (2004)

"(Priests) ought not to detract from the profound meaning of their own ministry by corrupting the liturgical celebration either through alteration or omission, or through arbitrary additions.

The reprobated practice by which Priests, Deacons or the faithful here and there alter or vary at will the texts of the Sacred Liturgy that they are charged to pronounce, must cease. For in doing thus, they render the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy unstable, and not infrequently distort the authentic meaning of the Liturgy"

People who don’t fully understand the English language need education, and hypersensitive people may need psychological therapy, but the Mass cannot be compromised for fear of offense.

Including women by saying “brothers and sisters” instead of just “brethren” for example, will NOT detract from the profound meaning, or corrupt the liturgical celebration, or distort the authentic meaning of the liturgy. If it bothers you that much, just go to a Mass celebrated by a priest who will say every single word, word for word. As for me, I will continue to go to a Mass celebrated by a priest who includes women in this way. I like it that way. It doesn’t bother me where you go, so please don’t be bothered about where I go. The world is big enough for the both of us to live in

 

[ProVobis]

I cannot speak for the Polish language, but the English phrase “brothers and sisters” was never reversed until the last couple of decades, and that almost exclusively at the hands of liberal Catholic and high-church Protestant clergy.

I guess my point was that the second person by itself fails in English, unlike in other languages where tu- and vos-like pronouns can be used by themselves. So it has to be qualifed either as “you, John” or “you, folks” or “my fellow Americans…” However, if you notice in sermons, it is more common for the priest to use the “royal we” when speaking, to avoid the need to be gender sensitive in any way.

 

[ProVobis]

People who don’t fully understand the English language need education, and hypersensitive people may need psychological therapy, but the Mass cannot be compromised for fear of offense.

I’ll agree with you about the education but all translations are compromised to some extent. For starters, very few first-year Latin students would translate “Dominus Vobiscum” as “The Lord be with you.” If we don’t want to be offended at the local level, we have to go with the Mass text exactly the way the Vatican promulgated for the entire Latin Rite.

 

[TheMc]

Including women by saying “brothers and sisters” instead of just “brethren” for example, will NOT detract from the profound meaning, or corrupt the liturgical celebration, or distort the authentic meaning of the liturgy. If it bothers you that much, just go to a Mass celebrated by a priest who will say every single word, word for word. As for me, I will continue to go to a Mass celebrated by a priest who includes women in this way. I like it that way. It doesn’t bother me where you go, so please don’t be bothered about where I go. The world is big enough for the both of us to live in

[edited] In fact, it does corrupt the celebration, and detract from the profound meaning, more than you can possibly understand.

If it bothers you that much, just go to a Mass celebrated by a priest who will say every single word, word for word. As for me, I will continue to go to a Mass celebrated by a priest who includes women in this way. I like it that way.

Ahem… every Mass should word for word. Obviously, you can’t ask the pope, but if you could, I would bet my life that he agrees with me.

Our personal personal tastes do not give us the licence to disobey Holy Mother Church.

For your own good, I would seriously recommend for you to pray about your priorities and the obedience you owe to holy mother church.

 

[japhy]

There are places in the Missal (at least in the US) where the priest is permitted to say “Brothers and sisters” (or something similar) instead of “Brethren”. Examples: the introduction to the Penitential Act and the Orate fratres (“Pray, brethren, that our sacrifice…”).