Striking "man" from creed?

[Sara_Bickley]

At our parish, the pastor has edited the word “man” from the creed, saying, “For us, and for our salvation, [etc.] . . . and became Flesh.”

The way I learned it, the words in bold were “us men” and “Man,” respectively.

What I want to know is, is the “old way” right and this new version wrong, or is either okay?

Before this priest came, I had never heard anything but “us men” and “Man” in the creed, either in a Catholic church or back when I was a Lutheran. (Even now, the priest is almost the only one who doesn’t say it this way – he even pauses briefly after saying “us,” to allow the rest of us to squeeze “men” in.)

On the other hand, I read somewhere that it’s just a matter of different translations, and that as long as the meaning isn’t altered, it makes no difference.

I don’t like the change, but if it’s permissible I feel I ought to go along with it.

Can anyone enlighten me about this?

 

[Stephen-Maguire]

Sara Bickley:

At our parish, the pastor has edited the word “man” from the creed, saying, “For us, and for our salvation, [etc.] . . . and became Flesh.”

The way I learned it, the words in bold were “us men” and “Man,” respectively.

What I want to know is, is the “old way” right and this new version wrong, or is either okay?

I feel your pain, all the priests in my parish omit man as well bar one.

I always say man, Sara Bickley, this is inclusive language that has been discussed on this forum many times.

Mary never used inclusive language, and God never looked down on Her.

I will continue to say the Creed the way I was taught, and I suggest you do the same, God Bless.

 

[Cherub]

Just to add a similar thing to this question: I have also heard “may the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands, for the praise and glory of God’s name, for our good and the good of all God’s Church.”

It’s been “PC’d” somehow or other.

 

[mkw]

This pastor sounds like he is trying to keep the femaninst happy with a gender nuetral language.

I’m a woman, but I have no problem in saying “MAN” instead of “US”. Shoot, I still say policeMAN and fireMAN.

 

[JimO]

This is part of the “inclusive language” trend, which I’m sure was begun with noble intentions; however, when taken to extreme, it smacks of “political correctness.” I suppose that I could understand why some might be offended by “for us men and our salvation” even though “men” is meant in terms of species. But, Jesus was a man, as in male. Why would that offend anyone? If someone is offended by Jesus’ maleness, then they have issues.

 

[Church_Militant]

Stephen-Maguire:

I feel your pain, all the priests in my parish omit man as well bar one.

I always say man, Sara Bickley, this is inclusive language that has been discussed on this forum many times.

Mary never used inclusive language, and God never looked down on Her.

I will continue to say the Creed the way I was taught, and I suggest you do the same, God Bless.

I agree…be hardheaded like all us Irish Catholics. All this PC trash…those inclusive language folks need to grow up.

 

[katherine2]

Mary never used inclusive language, and God never looked down on Her.

Do we know this? How do we know this?

 

[mommy]

I don’t think they should be able to change this. Should Jesus be “child of God” no, he’s the son of God.

taking out ‘men’ is just plain SILLY. Get over it girls!

 

[kmktexas]

It’s not allowed.

GIRM paragrahs 23 & 24:

1. Moreover, in order that such a celebration may correspond more fully to the prescriptions and spirit of the Sacred Liturgy, and also in order to increase its pastoral effectiveness, certain accommodations and adaptations are specified in this General Instruction and in the Order of Mass.

1. These adaptations consist for the most part in the choice of certain rites or texts, that is, of the chants, readings, prayers, explanations, and gestures that may respond better to the needs, preparation, and culture of the participants and that are entrusted to the priest celebrant. Nevertheless, the priest must remember that he is the servant of the Sacred Liturgy and that he himself is not permitted, on his own initiative, to add, to remove, or to change anything in the celebration of Mass.34

There are some parts of the Mass where optional wording has been approved. For example “Pray Brothers and Sisters” in place of “Pray Bretheren”. Where there are options offered, the priest has the right to choose between the options. But the priest is never permitted to make such changes on his own.

 

[Trelow]

catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9901fea1.asp

From:
THE TEN MOST COMMON LITURGICAL ABUSES

And Why They’re Wrong

By Kevin Orlin Johnson

1. Disregarding the prescribed text of the Order of Mass.

This particular abuse is perhaps the most widespread. You might think that the mere existence of a prescribed, official Order of Mass would be enough to show priests that theyÕre not to change or improvise, but it isnÕt.

ItÕs not uncommon to find lectors eliminating male references to God in the Scripture readings or using the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible (or other inaccurate and unapproved ones) for the readings. You sometimes hear priests changing the words of the Nicene CreedÑomitting the word “men” in “for us men and for our salvation” is the most common violationÑor omitting the Creed altogether; saying aloud the prayers to be said quietly; or generalizing them, saying, for instance, “Lord, wash away our iniquities and cleanse us of our sins” (instead of “my” and “me”).

You hear priests changing the tense and thereby the sense of phrases like “pray that our sacrifice is acceptable” instead of “may be acceptable” or “the Lord is with you” instead of “the Lord be with you.” You hear them inviting the congregation to join in prayers specified as the priestÕs alone. On occasion you even find priests winging it during the Eucharistic Prayer. And beyond the improvised words youÕll find a lot of flippant practices like using blue vestments for Marian feasts or gingerbread for the Eucharist at childrenÕs Masses.

All of this is unlawful: “Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See and, as laws may determine, on the bishop. Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority” (Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, 22, repeated in documents like Sacram Liturgiam; Tres Abhinc Annos; CIC 841, 846; and many other laws and regulations). Deviations from the Order are illicit, and when done intentionally theyÕre a grave offense both against the Church and the faithful who have a right to an authentic liturgy (Inaestimabile Donum, CSDW, April 3, 1980).

 

[Stephen-Maguire]

katherine2:

Do we know this? How do we know this?

“Be it done on to me according to thy word”

Not Marys word.

Or should it be done onto me according to my word ???

 

[Nichevo]

It took the Council of Nicea two years to get the creed to a point where they all accepted it. Who are these people to change it?

Stephen-Maguire:

Mary never used inclusive language, and God never looked down on Her.

Katherine2:

Do we know this? How do we know this?

Well, we know that God never looked down on Mary, that’s fairly obvious. It is also highly likely that Mary was far more concerned with raising her son and doing the will of God than obsessing over the use of masculine/feminine/gender neutral pronouns just so everyone could have a warm fuzzy feeling. Mary would have a hard time fitting in at a VOTF meeting that’s for sure.

 

[JimO]

katherine2:

Do we know this? How do we know this?

"Then Mary said: ‘My being proclaims the greatness of the Lord, my spirit finds joy in God my savior, for he has looked upon his servent in her lowliness…’ " (Luke 1:46-47).

I have a few questions for you -

Why is there an objection to using the term “man” or “men” as a “species” reference?

What is the objection to seeing God as Father?

Can anyone really object to referring to Jesus as “He” since He was born male?

Just curious.

 

[katherine2]

Nichevo:

It took the Council of Nicea two years to get the creed to a point where they all accepted it. Who are these people to change it?
.

filoque?

 

[katherine2]

Nichevo:

Well, we know that God never looked down on Mary, that’s fairly obvious. It is also highly likely that Mary was far more concerned with raising her son and doing the will of God than obsessing over the use of masculine/feminine/gender neutral pronouns just so everyone could have a warm fuzzy feeling. Mary would have a hard time fitting in at a VOTF meeting that’s for sure.

Okay, we udnerstand that you get jollies belitting those who disagree with you on contemporary issues and like to think that Mary takes yoru side. But my question still remains.

 

[rlg94086]

kmktexas and Trelow,

Thanks! I was thinking the same thing. It’s more than a matter of preference…

May He bless all mankind ,

Robert

 

[JimO]

katherine2:

But my question still remains.

My post above quotes a passage where Mary refers to God as “he” and because I really don’t understand the offensive nature of the Biblical gender references, I asked you some sincere questions. Assuming (by your responses) that you prefer inclusive language, I’m really interested in your response. If my assumption is wrong, please forgive my presumption.

Blessings

 

[Franciscum]

kmktexas:

It’s not allowed.

GIRM paragrahs 23 & 24:

There are some parts of the Mass where optional wording has been approved. For example “Pray Brothers and Sisters” in place of “Pray Bretheren”. Where there are options offered, the priest has the right to choose between the options. But the priest is never permitted to make such changes on his own.

You gotta be kidding…

You are suggesting the Church allows options when reciting the Nicene (or Apostles) Creed?

Are you serious? This is a statement of our Catholic-Chrsitian faith. It’s not open to wordsmithing. You are sadly mistaken.

I detest red herrings like the one you just offered.

 

[katherine2]

JimO:

My post above quotes a passage where Mary refers to God as “he” and because I really don’t understand the offensive nature of the Biblical gender references, I asked you some sincere questions. Assuming (by your responses) that you prefer inclusive language, I’m really interested in your response. If my assumption is wrong, please forgive my presumption.

Blessings

I have it on good authority that the Blessed Mother did not speak the English language.

 

[Nichevo]

katherine2:

Okay, we udnerstand that you get jollies belitting those who disagree with you on contemporary issues and like to think that Mary takes yoru side. But my question still remains.

Actually I get my jollies from watching reruns of “The Young Ones” and putting slinkys on escalators.

My point was that the whole inclusive language debate is a waste of time and distracts us from the true purpose and meaning of prayer. As for Mary taking my side, it’s far more accurate to say that she expects me to take her side. Sometimes I have, and sometimes I haven’t, and many times I’ve asked for her help and intercession when I knew I needed all the help I could get.