www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship Vespers, Matins & the Divine Liturgy The Revised Divine Liturgy What's Wrong with Gender-Neutral Bible Translations

Sigh. Again, you imply that the use of gender neutral language enables mankind to engage the universe and the environment with more love and compassion. Not many are convinced of such a perspective.

I too, must admit that there seems to be a strong protestant influence.

Brother Mike J., I am knocked over by the thoughtful ideas that you present in your posting and the theological acumen that they display. For me, they show a clear commitment to understanding the ideas that we are talking about and a thoughtful development of the theological principles that underlie them. It�s clear that you have thought these through theologically and haven�t just put out a knee-jerk reaction. (And 2000 word replies are sometimes necessary to address the multiple issues that some folks present.)

You comment:

�The problem of modern America is that many of us *think* we know what love is but have mistaken something else for it. Which is why I use truth as an indicator of whether love is actually present. The note I make is two elements of Scripture brought together in a fashion that some of the Father's of the Church did when reading Scripture, namely, I took John 14:6 and 1 John 4:16 and drew the conclusion that if Christ is God, tells us that He is the Truth and another part of Scripture tells me that God is also love, and that God is an inseparable unity of persons, then Truth and Love are inseparable from one another�.

�Love� is a strange thing. As I understand it, it is the heart-based desire to achieve what is best for the beloved. The analogy that Christ is the Way, the Truth and the Life, is without question. If Christ is indeed the �Truth�, then it is clear that we Christians must absolutely bring everyone to Him, as the Truth of universal and human existence. But, prescinding from other scriptural �connections�, when Christ tells us that the New Covenant LAW is that we love God and love our neighbors, then it would seem that the connectivity is between Christ Himself and what He told us was paramount: love of God and love of neighbor.

So, your statement about Truth and Love being inseparable from one another makes perfect theological sense.


You follow through on a subsequent theological principle:

�So here's an example: it doesn't make other Christians feel good, or feel "included" when I tell them that the Catholic Church is the fullness of the faith and the are deficient unless visibly united with it. That's tough stuff to say and be quite sure I don't usually say it so bluntly so don't key in on that. The point is, it's not loving my neighbor if I withhold this truth from them because they are just as deserving of the fullness of the faith and God that I enjoy as a Catholic and sharing this with them is loving them.�

I understand what you are saying here, and I perceive it as a clear shift from fundamental Systematic Theology to Ecclesiology. Much in this depends on one�s understanding of Church. I have no indecision or question about the position of the Catholic and Orthodox churches as the fullness of the baptized �ekklesia�. But the Catholic church, at least, has always taught that that God is present even to those outside the Church, and that they can attain �heaven� because of their righteous lives despite not knowing of Christ and His Gospel, because they have come to understand the �love of God; love of neighbor� teaching of Christ. (Wow! Isn�t grace wonderful!!) While we would rejoice at these people coming to loving Christian communities, and we take the time and effort to evangelize them, we should at least understand where they are, and honor them for their graced (?) understanding.

At this point, you move into Moral Theology:

�When Jesus forgave the adulterous woman, yes He approached her with love and openness and compassion. But he also followed the meeting saying, "Go and sin no more". Tough cookies for a woman who probably derived her entire income and well-being from her profession. Lying about something will never be loving a person, despite popular notions of "white lies". Neither has the Church shied away from this position as evidenced by such documents like Dominus Iesus which reiterated Jesus Christ's centrality in salvation viz world religions.�

I think you are right on target on this one. I will, however, remind you that �sin� is both objective and subjective. A person doing evil to another is inherently sinful, and in need of counsel/education. But there are many who don�t have the ability to see doing certain things to another as evil � not to mention doing offenses to God! This is where we need to focus education on moral issues. Too often, a type of fascism has crept into Christian education where we mimic the black/white dichotomy of the Torah and the Talmud. �Do this and it�s evil and a sin.� And this is the major modus-operandi of many �faith� communities. It leads to jihads, crusades and persecutions. �Believe this and lead your life this way or else God will get you.� But, as Christians, it mandates to us the need to reflect on one�s actions and to discern how they are compatible with the �love God, love one�s neighbor� mandate. And sometimes the 'obvious' isn't exactly the moral thing to do. (E.g., the Samaritan on the road.)

This former perspective clearly (at least to me) is in direct contradiction to Christ who told His disciples to discern where the people are. (I�m thinking of the people who in Acts would eat the food that had been consecrated to idols. Hey, free grub is free grub. And if you are subsistence, anything edible is a gift. If you are a barely subsistence Christian in a Moslem area, do you partake of the food that is offered by Moslems at Eid-Al-Fitr? It�s hard to resist a sandwich when you have only a little rice. We need to consider where the people are.)


In your next comments, you move on to Liturgical Theology - the absolute mine-field of Christian theology: (Old seminarian joke: what�s the difference between a terrorist and a liturgist? You can negotiate with a terrorist�.!!!)


�If the liturgy is changed and loses subtleties in the language (like the unitary and inclusive nature of man) then the liturgy is failing to transmit the fullness of the faith.�

I�ve got a problem here. The �liturgy�, as its name implies (�laos ergeizei� = �the people act�) is not static. By definition, it can�t be since it must be the peoples� action. Thus, what happens at the people�s celebration of the Lord�s Eucharist at Passover and His Resurrection from the Dead, is a living entity. Putting the liturgy into black-letter law and �red-letter� citations denies its ontological existence as the people�s action. It can and should be changed as circumstances require. This is not to suggest that essential elements of the faith should be excised or amended, but rather to realize that focus will change depending on the human circumstance. And this is where "sermons" and "education" come into play. It's not just during the liturgy, but rather an adjunct element of the community as a worshipping and mutually-serving group.

Our world changes depending on a lot of circumstances. And the people will respond as circumstances require. The Lord�s Eucharist must be made �real� (=real-ized�) as best as the people can accomplish it. And our collective cultural experience along with the doctrinal history of the Church must be part of the equation that determines what we do.

(I am recalled of Fr. Walter Ciszek, S.J., who, while in prison in the Soviet gulag, used to take raisins that were smuggled in to him as nourishment and would soak them in warn water, and use the liquid as the �fruit of the vine� to celebrate Eucharist along with whatever bread was available. I�m sure the liturgists would have angina, but he did what he could under the circumstances. Holy Eucharist with unusual elements, or no Eucharist at all? Is there really a question here for a priest in prison?)


Further, you note:

�It becomes less than it should be because of a shortsighted dependence on an ideology and a shortsighted vision of what love really is. Most of the people on this forum thread see the problem in that - see the importance of the liturgy and are worried that the RDL will be shortchanging themselves, converts and future generations of the riches they've been accustomed to as a matter of course. That's a Catholic sensibility regarding the liturgy at work which even our Orthodox brethren can sympathize with. Protestants are usually the only folks who can dissociate the worship services they attend from the transmission of "faith".�

All of a sudden, in the midst of really good theological discourse, the RDL raises its ugly head. I agree that some of the RDL is pretty poor; some is actually good. (I like the inclusion of the �theotokos� [OK, Greek bias on my part], but it puts us in line with our Orthodox brethren who use the term. And ANYTHING that makes us �be doing the same thing and saying the same prayers� is for me a blessing.)

WE have got to get the mucky-mucks to get up off their tushes and make re-union a reality. No more �my diocese� � �your diocese�, �my jurisdiction� � �your jurisdiction� baloney. The secular world is out there, and so are the Zlami�s who want to overwhelm the world and lead people into a false faith in Mohammed and his so-called �revelation�. If changing liturgical wording on our Catholic part and on the Orthodox part brings us together, then Yahoo!! Clinging to a 1920s Ruthenian rendition has its value for those whose salvation is linked to a certain external practice. But the Church in 2008 (and beyond) has got to make sure we have the armaments to confront the forces of falsehood expressed in Islam, and the �whatever you want� forces of contemporary irreligious society: �if you screw people and the poor to make a buck, hey � I made a buck!�

Love really means caring for the �others� and doing what is best for them. The liturgy must inspire people to live Gospel lives and not just preserve the riches that we have. It�s the �treasure in heaven� that counts, not the treasures here on earth � liturgical, financial or otherwise. I feel bad for the folks whose salvation depends upon one or another practice, form or linguistic manifestation. St. Paul marveled at "Oh! The freedom of the people of God!!" as being freed from the "do this, do that" mandates of the Torah law. As Christians, we need to go out and tell people: "Do you know that God tells us to love one another and to take care of each other?" And then let them make a decision. (But badger them to make sure they see the absolute Truth and logic in this Gospel!) This is INDEED the "Truth" that Christ came to proclaim!!

As my buddy Sharon always said: �GO GET �EM!!!�

Blessings to All God�s Children!

Dr John

If I did not know better, I would say that this comment is insulting to many people.
And so gender neutral language will help the Church confront the falsehoods of Islam. Excuse me if I reject that.
Please don't feel bad. Nobody feels bad that you embrace gender neutral language---many disagree with you---but they do not feel bad for you.


Glory to Thee, O Lover of Mankind!

Dr. J

I liked your post and agree with what you are saying. I think the main problem is that I (and I am guessing many others are sick and tired of Politically Correct America.) I am not sure when it was decided that America should be an Atheist Country when a student will get in more trouble for saying a prayer than for saying a curse word. When did it become ok to show Desperate Housewives plotting numerous sinful acts, but not to show a Sunday Mass? When did the 10% of Americans who identify themselves as Atheists get the rest of us scared even to wish someone a Merry Christmas or pray before a meal at a restaurant?
I think this is the main issue we are used to being pushed around in the world, we are used to being told what we can and cannot say, but in church we are free with the scripture and the Lord to pray and say all the things we cannot say in the world and then there is an intrusion into our world of prayer and peace, someone telling us how to pray and what words need to be changed. Maybe there should be an optional PC Bible for all of those who cannot understand that Mankind means humankind or that Jesus was the Son and not the Child of God. But I am sick of being pushed around and having to be PC I want to pray my prayer the way I was taught it and not be scared because I said for "us men and for our salvation, he came down from heaven"
I agree with you that they are words and that even they are of this world and yes I am sure over time I will become used to the change, but I do not like change and especially for the PC agend since I see them beig in cahoots with Atheism. I am more scared of an Atheist than a Muslim because even they have faith in something and can acknowledge that there is something greater than themselves but the people who see themselves as God's like the Athiest they terrify me. The word is for the people but changing it would not be for the people but for one person. I do not think every book should be changed for one person. What is next? Sometimes looking at the color yellow gives me headaches should all yellow be removed from the Church and stainglass windows? I agree it is a material thing and does not matter but should one decide the whole.

Yours in Christ,
Maura

Dear Sister Maura, I think you have squarely hit many of the major issues on the head.

The primary issue is being a true servant of the Lord. He told us, quite clearly, that we are to love God, the Creator, and to love our neighbors as we would love ourselves.

I am with you on the idea that many of the words and the practices that are familiar to us are REALLY important to US, and I mean US, that are familiar with them. And at the same time, we have to go out "and go get 'em" to bring folks in to the Gospel. But the words that we use are usually for "us", as a support to our efforts to evangelize. Political correctness is the for weak-minded. I say "Merry Christmas" and even "God bless you" after sneezes, and no one has EVER given me grief. Why? Because folks know that I am sincere. If there is a problem, then one should just apologize and move on. No one can condemn someone for that. (Unless they are stupid.)

Honestly, I fear Moslems more than Atheists. The Moslems have a 'system' and a 'structure' that militates against anybody who is non-Mohammedan, and even allow them to kill the non-believers. The atheists are usually kinda "we believe this/that", but at least they are usually willing to talk since they have no "scriptures" like the Koran to make them think that they are legitimate and that authorize them to annihilate everybody else who disagrees.

For the atheists, I usually take the tact that "hey, I believe in God, whatever that might mean for you". But my care for them provides a witness of concern that can't be denied. And if it's based upon my faith in God, then there's no possible argument from them. They might dismiss it, but it's still there for them to deal with. And that creates possibilities for evangelization.

I am very much in favor of going out into the "byways and the alleyways" to buttonhole the non-believers and to talk to them, person-to-person. Like Christ, if we encounter someone and show them real love and concern, they have no real choice except to at least listen. And if we help them, in a way that they can understand, then we have at least one person who might come to Christ. And that's what it is all about. And even if we are not directly able to bring them to Christ, at least they have the idea that Christians have a clue. And they have no 'ammunition' to shoot at Christians for being hostile to them.

Changes in liturgy, or renderings of public prayer, can be distressing. And make us older people uncomfortable. And sometimes the changes are stupid. But the public prayers of the church are only a minor element in our evangelization. (The theologians and liturgists are probably now running for the nitroglycerine tablets for an attack of angina!), but the reality it, it's us folks in the "pews" who do the real evangelizing - among our family, among our friends and among our co-workers. When our contacts see us, and see us as "good people", it's hard for them to ignore what our lives witness. We love God, and we REALLY care for our neighbors - we're there when fire, flood or hardship hit a family.

Just like our Amish brethren were when the assasin hit the schoolhouse in Lancaster and murdered the children. They forgave the murderer, and even welcomed his family to prayer. I read about this and thought to myself: "The Lord must be pleased that His Gospel totally imbued His children with His message of Love." I would hope that I had the strength. What a witness!!

The words are important, especially for those who are more mature in life and in participation in the Community, but the words are less than important if they don't help us to reach the "others".

I ask myself daily, apart from a few bucks to the homeless on the streets of Washington, DC, what have I done to let the non-Christians know that Christ's message is alive in me and in the way that I treat my fellow human beings? And yes, I wear my cross (three-bar) so that it is (usually) visible outside my polo shirt so that there is NO doubt about my affiliation. It's not presenting myself as a 'Christian nut case', but rather an ordinary way of evangelizing, much like Ste. Therese of Lisieux in her theology of "little things". And talking with people. Not sermonizing, but rather asking how folks are doing and if there is anything I can do to help.

Blessings to you, Sister Maura. "Go get 'em!!"

Blessings to ALL!

Dr John

I agree with this. And I believe that the "old" language--the non-neutered language--can reach more people.

Christos Voskrese!

Glory to Thee O Lover of Mankind!

Dr. John:

Christ is Risen!! Indeed He is Risen!!

You've also "hit the nail on the head." As my spiritual father once said to me about my own work, "you get into places and homes that a priest could never get into." "People somehow feel more comfortable unburdening to you and tell you things they wouldn't consider revealing in the confessional."

It's the "being there" for people that's so important in a world that is increasingly cold, distant, and harsh. And it's the "going the extra mile" when others don't think they have the time or want to take it that separates the true believers from the rest of the pack. It's the "being genuine" and "walking the walk." People can spot a phony a mile away and they take a long detour around the people who want to make every contact a theological argument.

As I once observed to someone who needed a "pick me up," we walk three-legged into the Kingdom--something like a three-legged race. Sometimes I pick you up and get you going; sometimes you pick me up--but in the end we don't make it alone; we need each other.

You obviously live what a friend of mine once observed. "We may be the only Bible some people ever read."

In Christ,

BOB

X. B!
C. I. X!
Bob,
I liked it, it is real.

Mykhayl:

Christ is Risen!! Indeed He is Risen!!

It can be a bit scary if you stop and think about it. Imagine the responsibility of being the conduit between God and another person. I guess I never thought of it until I had to get into that kind of role. I always thought that clergy "got it" with ordination--something like a special conduit that they could "plug into" the Divine and everything would always be right.

Well, I get a lot of people who have been hurt by the Church or their local minister of whatever kind. I do advanced funeral planning. It always bothers me when people say, "Number 4 in my instructions is NO CLERGY. Will you preach my funeral?"

I've had other times when people in my parish have asked me to guide their spiritual journey or give them some advice on prayer or praying. One woman who helps me with my election district said she watches me all the time and wants to know how she can learn to pray like me. What do you say to people when they hit you with this kind of thing?

I know, ask for the grace not to lead anyone astray and to be the best kind of example you can be.

Here's a prayer I use often:

Lord, help me be the kind of example You want me to be for Your People. Help me to love You always, above everything. Show me Your Kindness, grant me a spirit of true repentance, keep me close to You always, and then do with me what You will. AMEN.

In Christ,

BOB

X. B!
C. I. X!
Bob,
Sure it�s scary, it�s real. You are there when they are vulnerable, not board and apathetic. You are not preaching to the choir and you may be the closest personal connection they get next to AM radio. You are there to serve not to be served playing scout master controlling the stupid peasants. It�s real. You are real. Pray for my charity.
Michael

I find gender neutral language offensive. Re-writing the Holy Bible and the Holy Liturgy to cater to the anti-Christian demands of Molly Yard and Patricia Ireland is just dumb.

I also find it odd that almost no one in our Byzantine Catholic Church wants gender neutral language. The only ones who do want it are all men, and all liberal priests who reject what the pope said about it.

Has anyone here been to St. John's Cathedral in Parma? It's empty. The few who are there can't sing the deformed music. Why is it a model for anything?

But I guess I'm a just a stupid woman. I guess I'm not educated enough to understand that I should be offended by gender neutral language.

God help us!

Dear Sister "Lady Byzantine", I have read your post and am somewhat confused.

You talk about 'neutral language' and then link them to Molly Yard (don't know who that is) and Patricia Ireland. And then link to the idea that it is 'liberal priests'.

And then you jump to the Cathedral in Parma and its lack of worshippers and the 'deformed music' as the cause.

"Educated enough" is not the issue. The real questions are many. The language issue is there - and the question is: by using other nouns/pronouns, are we killing off the reality of our Liturgy? Or are we just making updates to contemporary American language use?

As for the music of the liturgy, that is certainly also a question. I've been worshipping in a Byzantine/Ruthenian parish for more than 30 years. And I LOVE music. And I still get screwed up at Liturgy when I (loudly) sing the responses and find myself "out of synch" with the 'approved' text. (Thank God, at Pascha, we used the old yellow books!!)

I think that some of the text changes are decent - they bring us closer to our Constantinople tradition (like "theotokos") and ultimately grease the skids with our Orthodox brethren. We were "one" until the translations were made from Slavonic to English in the 1920s up to the 1950s. Some of the Byzantine-Catholic translations were really kind of "romantic tradition" and rather 'free' in terms of rendering the Slavonic. But they were comfortable for the people in the pews. And to change them now is a real assault on the peoples' worship. Any changes should have come from the community of people and not from some committee of experts. I trust the babas more than anybody else.

I beg you to not move away from the Byzantine Catholic church because of changes. As long-time Byzantine/Carpatho-Ruthenians, we need to stand with our parish communities and the people in them. I always remember: it's the PEOPLE who are the church. And whenever I get frustrated about the 'official' stands on X, Y or Z, I remember Tom, Mary, John, Daria, Monica, and Jack who are my fellow worshippers - and I realize that I could NEVER move away from these incredibly wonderful people who have been stalwarts of the parish and incredibly wonderful supporters of myself and the other members of our parish. It's the PEOPLE!!

Blessings to All!

Dr John

"I beg you to not move away from the Byzantine Catholic church because of changes. As long-time Byzantine/Carpatho-Ruthenians, we need to stand with our parish communities and the people in them. I always remember: it's the PEOPLE who are the church. And whenever I get frustrated about the 'official' stands on X, Y or Z, I remember Tom, Mary, John, Daria, Monica, and Jack who are my fellow worshippers - and I realize that I could NEVER move away from these incredibly wonderful people who have been stalwarts of the parish and incredibly wonderful supporters of myself and the other members of our parish. It's the PEOPLE!!"

Dr. John,

While I appreciate your stand to fight for what is right, how long should one wait for the wrong to be corrected, if it ever is? A year, two, five, ten? Hasn't the Byzantine Catholic church been through enough in its history?

This recent chapter was not needed, and has caused myself and others to leave for the Orthodox church. If everything was corrected tomorrow, I would not run back to the BCC, because it ran away from me in the first place. Ones church should be a source of peace and stability in an otherwise chaotic life here in the U.S..

I know, the Orthodox church is not perfect, like any other church, but I've never been more at peace spiritually since becoming an Orthodox Christian.

Continued prayers for the Ruthenian Greek Catholics.

Christos Voskrese!

It is our church who has moved away from us. I've met some really nice people at the Orthodox Church, many,many former Ruthenians who left because they got tired of waiting for the official changes to happen that have been talked about for years! The priest at the one Orthodox Church is a former Ruthenian -- for me then, it will be like going home. Maybe my friends and former parishioners will come visit me, and see what they are missing.