One

[lonnienord]

the first paragraph:

God, infinitely perfect and blessed in himself, in a plan of sheer goodness freely created man to make him share in his own blessed life. For this reason, at every time and in every place, God draws close to man. He calls man to seek him, to know him, to love him with all his strength. He calls together all men, scattered and divided by sin, into the unity of his family, the Church. To accomplish this, when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son as Redeemer and Saviour. In his Son and through him, he invites men to become, in the Holy Spirit, his adopted children and thus heirs of his blessed life.

Does it bother anyone that it talks generically about "man" It wouldn't take many more words or a lot of work to use non sexist language.

Other than that i like the way the Catachism starts. GOD calls us all to the unity of HIS family, the Church.

We are, because of JESUS death and reseruction, GOD's adopted kids; and thus heirs!!

 

[Llauralin]

No, it doesn't bother me. The Bible uses "man" a lot, and besides, it's easy enough to figure out what he's talking about. Considering how often this chapter refers to "man" and "men," and what English tends to get like when we try to use gender-neutral language, doing otherwise would probably end up sounding either contrived, clumbsy, or inconsistant.

I like that paragraph.

 

[IXOYE<><]

Does it bother anyone that it talks generically about "man" It wouldn't take many more words or a lot of work to use non sexist language.

Personally, I could take it either way. I think today's Christian women are able to understand God includes them equally and fully. But, lets see....


God, infinitely perfect and blessed in himself, in a plan of sheer goodness freely created humans to make them share in his own blessed life. For this reason, at every time and in every place, God draws close to people. He calls us to seek him, to know him, to love him with all our strength. He calls together all people, scattered and divided by sin, into the unity of his family, the Church. To accomplish this, when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son as Redeemer and Saviour. In his Son and through him, he invites people to become, in the Holy Spirit, his adopted children and thus heirs of his blessed life.

 

[PassthePeace1]

the first paragraph: Does it bother anyone that it talks generically about "man" It wouldn't take many more words or a lot of work to use non sexist language.

Other than that i like the way the Catachism starts. GOD calls us all to the unity of HIS family, the Church.

We are, because of JESUS death and reseruction, GOD's adopted kids; and thus heirs!!

No, it doesn't bother me, because I see it as a generic term for humans. What has bothered me is that some male humans...lol...has used this term, as a carte blanc on not treating women fairly. But this has been my experinces in Fundementalism rather than Catholism, I was relieved while in the process of converting...to see the high esteem in which womenhood is held, by the Church.

CCC states

He calls together all men, scattered and divided by sin, into the unity of his family

It hard to imagine a family without women!

I think #1 of the The Life of Man-To Know and Love God....is so beautiful, to think that God, has such a great desire for us, and has provided a way for us to be "His heirs".

 

[PassthePeace1]

Lonnie,

BTW, this study of the CCC is an excellent ideal...

 

[Markh]

The catechism is right regarding God's calling upon man to seek him-

among the first humans, we find the dead being burried with flowers and cave paintings which show Gods.

To be truely human is to seek out God and every healthy human has this desire. It is really quite amazing, it is something that is present in every culture that ever existed. It is a constant that transcends human history.

 

[scraparcs]

First, I think that using more gender-inclusive terms might even hurt the Catechism. It's not a document on political correctness. Besides, look at the Blessed Virgin Mary and her role in the Church -- it's not like women are left out.

I wonder, though, if God calls man or if man seeks God? I've seen so much more of the latter that I wonder.

 

[Llauralin]

Personally, I could take it either way. I think today's Christian women are able to understand God includes them equally and fully. But, lets see....


God, infinitely perfect and blessed in himself, in a plan of sheer goodness freely created humans to make them share in his own blessed life. For this reason, at every time and in every place, God draws close to people. He calls us to seek him, to know him, to love him with all our strength. He calls together all people, scattered and divided by sin, into the unity of his family, the Church. To accomplish this, when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son as Redeemer and Saviour. In his Son and through him, he invites people to become, in the Holy Spirit, his adopted children and thus heirs of his blessed life.

It would work, but doesn't sound quite as good imho.

Actually, come to think of it, you substituted personal pronouns "us" and "our" for the more impersonal "man" and "men." This is the problem with using a different convention - it's hard to avoid the switching between tenses such as "people" and "they," and "us." It would be more correct and consistant to always use "they" and "people," without any "us" and "our," but that would be less inclusive...

Better to stick with "man" until English comes up with a standard, somewhat formal alternative that doesn't sound so contrived.

[/threadjack]

 

[lonnienord]

First, I think that using more gender-inclusive terms might even hurt the Catechism. It's not a document on political correctness. Besides, look at the Blessed Virgin Mary and her role in the Church -- it's not like women are left out.

I wonder, though, if God calls man or if man seeks God? I've seen so much more of the latter that I wonder.

GOD calls people and when we answer the call all goes well. Often people reject GOD's call but because there is that longing for GOD we go out and make a god out of something -- money, power, a person -- whatever we choose always turns into a tragady.

We will learn a lot more about the true GOD as we study this Catechism

 

[lonnienord]

Before paragraph one in my hard copy is this little blurb in italics:

FATHER,...this is eternal life, that they may know you the only true GOD and JESUS CHRIST whom you sent" (John 17:3) GOD our savior desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:3-4) There is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved then the name of JESUS (Acts 4:12)

 

[D'Ann]

God, infinitely perfect and blessed in himself, in a plan of sheer goodness freely created man to make him share in his own blessed life. For this reason, at every time and in every place, God draws close to man. He calls man to seek him, to know him, to love him with all his strength. He calls together all men, scattered and divided by sin, into the unity of his family, the Church. To accomplish this, when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son as Redeemer and Saviour. In his Son and through him, he invites men to become, in the Holy Spirit, his adopted children and thus heirs of his blessed life.

Lonnie:

Does it bother anyone that it talks generically about "man" It wouldn't take many more words or a lot of work to use non sexist language.

I believe the above statement is referring to "mankind". I don't object to how the CCC uses this terminalogy.

Other than that i like the way the Catachism starts. GOD calls us all to the unity of HIS family, the Church.

Amen and Exactly true and right on.

We are, because of JESUS death and Resurrection, GOD's adopted kids; and thus heirs!!

Amen.

Lonnie... excellent idea. What a wonderful way to learn the Catechism... yes... I keep repeating this. I can't help it.

 

[alkan]

IMO I think 'Man' is fine. Put it this way, it's short for 'Human' so unless we are going to start saying the word 'Human' is sexist, and instead use the word 'Huwomanman' I think there is no real issue in terms of sexism. It's the way society's been built; nobody thinks any less of women for it!

 

[Iluminatius]

In the past such expressions as "man" were treated as referring only to males, but today it's rather used in the meaning of human regardless of sex, so I don't think its a real problem using "men", instead of "people". Especially as it's quite commonly used in the Bible.

 

[plmarquette]

man is to be the head of the house and his wife is his advisor and helper

Man will stand before God and give account for his actions , marriage, and family

In that day and that culture (hermeneutics) men were in a postion of authority and women were subservant ... like the arab countries of today ..

Women couldn't vote, own property , were not counted in stories ...[ way it used to be ] ; and book written in that day and age , so the words require us to read between the lines ... Jesus fed 5000 men (plus women plus children ) ... so the story is better than what is written ...

there is a gender correct version of the bible , not many like it , but one is available

 

[chnchris]

there is a gender correct version of the bible , not many like it , but one is available

These versions soothe the feminists and distort
the meanings of Scripture, imho.

JMJ+
chris

 

[plmarquette]

These versions soothe the feminists and distort
the meanings of Scripture, imho.

JMJ+
chris

we have to start some where ....
if a gender correct version will get them to open the book and start reading , then the Holy Spirit , by the anointing upon the Word , has some room to work ...

We started with NIV study bibles , are presently using New King James and Living Translations ....

It is not the translation , but the relationship with God and a friend to instruct them that matters ....
understanding the Word is a miracle of God , John 3.3-8 and an association with hermeneutics , doctrine , dogma, tradition & a valid , useful , practical application of same that wins souls and keeps converts ... amen?

 

[IgnatiusOfAntioch]

the first paragraph: Does it bother anyone that it talks generically about "man" It wouldn't take many more words or a lot of work to use non sexist language.

Other than that i like the way the Catachism starts. GOD calls us all to the unity of HIS family, the Church.

We are, because of JESUS death and reseruction, GOD's adopted kids; and thus heirs!!

Thirty years ago I would have agreed with you. Political correctness has since run amok and caused much damage. Let's get past this anachronistic thinking; the seventies are gone, thank God.

God Bless.

 

[Foundthelight]

man is to be the head of the house and his wife is his advisor and helper

Man will stand before God and give account for his actions , marriage, and family

In that day and that culture (hermeneutics) men were in a postion of authority and women were subservant ... like the arab countries of today ..

Women couldn't vote, own property , were not counted in stories ...[ way it used to be ] ; and book written in that day and age , so the words require us to read between the lines ... Jesus fed 5000 men (plus women plus children ) ... so the story is better than what is written ...

there is a gender correct version of the bible , not many like it , but one is available

A woman, Deborah, was one of the greatest Judges over Isreal. Another woman, Judith, is one of the greatest heros of the Old Testament. And, let us not forget the Mother of God, blessed Mary. Women are not neglected in the Bible. Rather, they are neglected by those who teach and preach.