Priests removing every reference to "man" and "mankind" ... common practice?

  • Thread starter Thread starter gez722
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
genealogist said:
Homo means man as opposed to animals.

Vir means man as opposed to woman.
Click to expand...
Yes, but to translate the word “homo” as anything other than “man” is not that correct. “Homo” has always been translated as “man;” the recent switch to “human” or “person” is a departure from the traditional translation.

Also, I’m not sure whether this means anything, but the Italian word for man (as opposed to woman), “uomo,” does not come from “vir” but from “homo.” I believe it is the same case for the french word “homme.”
genealogist said:
Another good reason for a return to a Latin liturgy.
Click to expand...
I agree.

Before people accuse me of being a traditionalist, let me say that I don’t believe that Latin is better than English or any other language. However, the fact is that for some reason bishops and priests will not translate the Latin correctly, so I prefer to hear a mass in Latin and know that it’s being said correctly (even if I don’t completely understand it) than to hear a mass in English and know that the language is not what it should be.
 
There is a recurring theme in many Protestant churches in the US to move away from masculine pronouns such as “He” or the use of “Father.”

The Presbyterians and recently the Anglicans have had formal statements about the use of such words. As for us Catholics, check your hymnal and compare the Psalm in that with the missal and see how many times the “He” or “His” or “Father” is changed for musical purposes.

Peace,

MilesJesu
 
I once went to a Mass several years ago where the priest said God our Father-Mother.😦 This is apparently no longer happening judging from the last time I was there. I’m glad.😉
 
francesco920 said:
Yes, but to translate the word “homo” as anything other than “man” is not that correct. “Homo” has always been translated as “man;” the recent switch to “human” or “person” is a departure from the traditional translation.

Also, I’m not sure whether this means anything, but the Italian word for man (as opposed to woman), “uomo,” does not come from “vir” but from “homo.” I believe it is the same case for the french word “homme.”

Before people accuse me of being a traditionalist, let me say that I don’t believe that Latin is better than English or any other language. However, the fact is that for some reason bishops and priests will not translate the Latin correctly, so I prefer to hear a mass in Latin and know that it’s being said correctly (even if I don’t completely understand it) than to hear a mass in English and know that the language is not what it should be.
Click to expand...
Give this person the common sense post of the week award. 🙂 Rarely have I seen a post here that I would never have made myself but which makes more good old-fashioned sense.

As I have posted previously, we are sort of stuck with the gender implications and the linguistic ambiguities of inclusivity. I have to add to what you state that in German, Mensch means human being and Mann means man, which gives that particular language a little “out” on the subject, but I would not delve to deeply into the etymology of “Mensch” if I wanted it to continue to hang by its slender thread.

On the matter of referring to God in contexts such as homilies (I am now addressing other things in the thread than your post), for a long time I was the organist for a Methodist Church (don’t get on my case–they were wonderful people who ended up saving my life), and the very brilliant and in his subtle way charismatic pastor there, who was perhaps the most gifted preacher I have ever known (he never preached a word a Catholic could disagree with) never did a pronoun substitute for God. Somehow, he made it convincing.
 
I actually prefer the use of “man” or “mankind” in literature and speech, and I am a woman. Maybe it’s the English major in me, but literature speaks to me when it is lyrical, and using “his/hers”, or “humankind” just doesn’t sound right. I guess you could say that my ear has been trained to enjoy the more traditional speech, but whatever the reason, I would rather hear the masculine.

Also, another reason why inclusive language bugs me is because it drips with secular, politically correct sap oozing from the pop culture world we live in. I don’t want the mass to emulate the “ways of the world” I want it (mass) to take me away from everything that is common and worldly.

No matter how many times one refers to Jesus as “person” or “human” it doesn’t change the fact HE was born MALE.
To any feminist that cringes at this thought, get over yourself. With all the problems facing the church and our society today, this is what people get upset about?

The church is the author of true feminism. It was Jesus that eleveted the status of women in society and the church that eventually would implement it. All catholic women should look to Mary for a guide to real womanhood and pray that they would emulate this beautiful example of Christian motherhood.
 
marci said:
I actually prefer the use of “man” or “mankind” in literature and speech, and I am a woman. Maybe it’s the English major in me, but literature speaks to me when it is lyrical, and using “his/hers”, or “humankind” just doesn’t sound right. I guess you could say that my ear has been trained to enjoy the more traditional speech, but whatever the reason, I would rather hear the masculine.

Also, another reason why inclusive language bugs me is because it drips with secular, politically correct sap oozing from the pop culture world we live in. I don’t want the mass to emulate the “ways of the world” I want it (mass) to take me away from everything that is common and worldly.

No matter how many times one refers to Jesus as “person” or “human” it doesn’t change the fact HE was born MALE.
To any feminist that cringes at this thought, get over yourself. With all the problems facing the church and our society today, this is what people get upset about?

The church is the author of true feminism. It was Jesus that eleveted the status of women in society and the church that eventually would implement it. All catholic women should look to Mary for a guide to real womanhood and pray that they would emulate this beautiful example of Christian motherhood.
Click to expand...
It is the time of the year … Christmas and New Year’s … to consider not only the Incarnation … but also, the Feast of the Circumcision, which has been “abolished”.

Was there a PC reason for getting rid of the Feast of the Circumcision?
 
Our former music director/organist/cantoress, used to do this deliberately every time a hymn referring to God contained the words, he, his, or him.
She would loudly sing the word GOD! or GOD’S in place of him, he, or his, each and every time. We needed her to teach us p.c. hymn-singing, don’tcha know. Right.
My sister, who frequently attends mass with me, finds it sickening. It’s done to appease the worldly, not for spiritual concerns.

Jaypeeto4 (aka Jaypeeto3)
 
I would like to hear a rational discussion from those who are offended by the wording of Mass.

What galls me more than the precipitous action of the priests in changing the wording at Mass, is the fact, alluded to here, that these changes are thrust on us, without “firing a shot.” By that I mean that no one asked me about it, did they?

In “The Catholic Weekly” newspaper of the Saginaw (Michigan) Diocese, a priest takes issue about his modifications to the Mass, based on pastoral reasons, he says.

But, he didn’t say what those pastoral reasons are, and he didn’t warn anybody about them coming at them.

Remember Canon 212 of the Code of Canon Law, that the lay faithful have the right and duty to express their opinions on matters that affect the good of the Church.

You should speak out about these things.
 
Not only did they take out “man” and “mankind”, but they also “prettified” the words to “Amazing Grace”.
 
True story: at 7:00 am daily Mass, the “regulars” were present along with a group of women tourists who sat in a block (this is a tourist town).

Introductory dialogue:
Priest: The Lord be with you.
People: And also with you
Priest: Life up your hearts
People: We lift them up to the Lord.
Priest: Let us give thanks to the Lord our God
Regulars: It is right to give Him thanks and praise
Tourists: It is right to give God thanks and praise
Priest: (Clears throat) The proper response is, “it is right to give HIM thanks and praise” shall we start again? The Lord be with you. . . dialogue . . .

Regulars: It is right to give HIM thanks and praise.
Tourists: * (mumble mumble).*

Congratulated the priest via e-mail later that morning. Couldn’t greet him personally as there was too much of a crowd around him after Mass. . .
 
Al_Masetti said:
Out of curiousity, how do they express: “Son of Man”?
Click to expand...
Not sure you want to know–but I did encounter a Bible which rendered that expression as “Child of Humanity” :banghead: (Now, where’s that puking one, which is particularly apt.)

I also sing the correct words to all the verses of Joy to the World, Hark! the Herald Angels Sing, and all the rest. Loudly.)
 
I attended Mass on Saturday at the local Newman Center. In the Nicenec Creed our God, the Father Almighty did not become man but “one of us.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top