Sir, – As a practising Catholic, I am not impressed with the changes in the new Roman missal. They have some merit, but there has been a failure to listen or to consult. Many priests and laypeople are angry about that, as indicated also in Patsy McGarry’s report (Home News, September 10th).
As a former publisher of books on parenting, health professionals would never have let me away with sexist language, yet the new missal has a total lack of inclusive language.
The Canadians have been making the responses in non-sexist language for years. For example they replace “His” with “God’s” in the following prayer: “May the Lord accept the sacrifice from your hands for the praise and glory of God’s name, for our good and the good of all God’s holy church.”
Surely respect for the Latin text should not be incompatible with respect for women. – Yours, etc,
Sir, Whilst not in favour of the changes to the Roman missal, nor of the manner in which they have been prepared and promoted, I must take exception to the claim that, “Throughout, the missal refers to ‘man’, ‘men’ and ‘he’.”
For starters, read the first sentence of the “Gloria”. There are other examples of a more inclusive language than was used heretofore. – Yours, etc,