New missal's lack of inclusive language is jarring

Don't worry your pretty little head about mere words, dear. Of course "men" includes you. Only feminists worry about these petty details.

Despite those who fail to see the importance of it, inclusive language is now expected in academic writing and journalism. But it is glaringly absent in the revised Roman Missal. Astrid Lobo Gajiwala, a doctor based in Mumbai, has written a thoughtful blog for The Tablet called, "New Missal makes women invisible."

She provides a commentary on the New Missal from the church in India, where inclusive language has become the standard:

Such a translation is at complete odds with the "Gender Policy of the Catholic Church of India" issued by the Catholic Bishops' Conference of India (CBCI) in 2009, that calls the Church to be gender-sensitive at all times. By excluding women it establishes the "divinity" of man, reinforces the superiority of man, and emphasises man's close relationship with God in direct contravention of the opening remarks of Varkey Cardinal Vithayathil CSsR, then-President, Catholic Bishops Conference of India, which promote "the egalitarian message of Jesus, with the vision of a collaborative Church with Gender Justice".

Making women invisible in this way is referred to as "symbolic annihilation". It implies that women are insignificant and can be wholly represented by men. Yet the CBCI Gender Policy clearly recognises the "unique experiences and insights" of women, and acknowledges the need "to make space for a spirituality that is shaped by women's life experiences and creative expression".

We say: Charlottesville reveals the weeping wound of racism. What do we, the American Catholic faith community, do next? Read the editorial.

Here in Canada, we use the more inclusive New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) Bible for our lectionary. Some revisions were requested by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments to ensure "clarity of language and of conformity to the original Greek or Hebrew." The standard agreed upon was:

When the original language was clearly intended to include both males and females, the translation was to be inclusive; when the original language was clearly meant to be gender specific, this was to be respected in the translation. The principles also addressed issues of oral quality and respect for the long-standing traditions of the Latin Church as well as the common prayer texts used by English-speaking Catholics.

A backgrounder to the Canadian Lectionary on the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops website explains the history of the NRSV Lectionary.

When minds, ears and hearts have been formed to embrace and expect language that respects inclusivity, it is all the more jarring to pray in words that ignore it.

Support independent reporting on important issues.

 One family graphic_2016_250x103.jpg

Show comments

NCR Comment code: (Comments can be found below)

Before you can post a comment, you must verify your email address at
Comments from unverified email addresses will be deleted.

  • Be respectful. Do not attack the writer. Take on the idea, not the messenger.
  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Stay on point. Comments that stray from the original idea will be deleted. NCR reserves the right to close comment threads when discussions are no longer productive.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report abuse" button. Once a comment has been flagged, an NCR staff member will investigate.

For more detailed guidelines, visit our User Guidelines page.

For help on how to post a comment, visit our reference page.

Commenting is available during business hours, Central time, USA. Commenting is not available in the evenings, over weekends and on holidays. More details are available here. Comments are open on NCR's Facebook page.