No one had a problem with the English when it was printed inside the Latin-English handmissals. But said aloud? Yes, then it becomes fair game for pc and grammarians.I wonder why we don’t just say “for mankind and for our salvation” in English? It’s the proper translation afterall! I think that sometimes we ‘English first language’ speakers are just trying to excerpt our dominance! We’re egotists!
Do you know what we are saying aloud ? You ’ ll get it ,Pro… Humus… we are all made of earth ,mud !
!
Those of us who are overanalytical will probably “know” more than the rest. Translations are for convenience, not setting new doctrinal standards for the Church. The same Latin had been in use since what, the Council of Nicea? And now we find find flaws in a translation to occupy our time?
Welll , I would not know…I am a bit younger than Nicea…
Yes, but It’s possible to overlearn to the point of doubting your faith altogether. Already I hear people holding back on that “resurrection of the body” line in the creed because they can’t make any sense out of it. At this rate the entire creed may be silent within a few years.Welll , I would not know…I am a bit younger than Nicea…
But look at it like this , we are all learning and the OP person asked…
It is a positive thing to be around you all and learn. Sincerely.
Uggggg !!Yes, but It’s possible to overlearn to the point of doubting your faith altogether. Already I hear people holding back on that “resurrection of the body” line in the creed because they can’t make any sense out of it. At this rate the entire creed may be silent within a few years.
Either that or it will be revised as in this video.
youtube.com/watch?v=IUQcCvX2MKk
My first thought was, “That’s not funny”…but I couldn’t help from laughing.Yes, but It’s possible to overlearn to the point of doubting your faith altogether. Already I hear people holding back on that “resurrection of the body” line in the creed because they can’t make any sense out of it. At this rate the entire creed may be silent within a few years.
Either that or it will be revised as in this video.
youtube.com/watch?v=IUQcCvX2MKk
They certainly know how to recite in unison. That’s what we want, right?Uggggg !!
The beautiful thing here is their English !
Actually, the next push would be not for “humankind” but for “creationkind” or some such word. The New Agers’ argument is that salvation is for people, animals, and maybe other stuff. They would object to wording that betrays exclusionary attitudes.Because then the push would be for “humankind”?
Me too! I thought I was alone on this one! The exact dialogue you quote here is said this way by one choir member. I very politely mentioned the male gender vs. the mankind reference.
Before answering your other question:
The core of our faith is obedience. Obedience to God by being obedient to His Church.Yes, but It’s possible to overlearn to the point of doubting your faith altogether. Already I hear people holding back on that “resurrection of the body” line in the creed because they can’t make any sense out of it. At this rate the entire creed may be silent within a few years.
This is true. That’s why we have to be extremely careful when we change the language. One word can have an enormous impact on the way we see things in our subjective ways.
What you say about over learning has crossed my mind so many times. I tend to overthink things and find inconsistencies, much of which we talk about on these boards. Sometimes I think it would be best to be a PIP again and be knowledgeable about the liturgy, but not know the “behind the scenes” actions of all involved in ministries. In doing so, it would relieve me of my anxiety of who, what, and why! Don’t like grey…black or white for me please!Yes, but It’s possible to overlearn to the point of doubting your faith altogether. Already I hear people holding back on that “resurrection of the body” line in the creed because they can’t make any sense out of it. At this rate the entire creed may be silent within a few years.
Either that or it will be revised as in this video.
And it is also the case that the Liturgy needs to be carried out exactly as the rubrics dictate it should be, without any deviation whatsoever. The Liturgy is a language and every action within it has a meaning, alter the actions and you alter the meaning. This then leads to the impression that things are subjective, including right and wrong.
And of course, removing “men” also removes the beautiful symmetry where, at the end of the phrase in question, we speak of Jesus becoming Man (and not “a man” which often gets inserted by those who erroneously remove “men” earlier thinking that they’re being more inclusive).
