Not even the Roman Catholic catechism is exempt from debates over political correctness.
And maybe it shouldn't be. While the new catechism is a best seller in France and Spain, a dispute over the way the document distinguishes between the sexes is keeping the English translation off U.S. bookshelves.Monsignor Francis Mannion of the Salt Lake City Diocese said the issue of inclusive language in scripture "is a very weighty issue and one that cannot lightly be brushed aside."
Monsignor Mannion said there are two extremes on the issue of inclusivity. "One would hold that the question of language is not at all an important issue and we should not adapt at all. The other extreme would be to say that the church ought to adapt unequivocally to feminist concerns. In my view the more realistic position is somewhere in between."
First due out in March, the translation was still being worked on this week and is not expected to be available to the nation's 55 million Catholics for several months.
Thirteen U.S. publishers are preparing to publish the 676-page document, the first universal catechism of the church since 1566.
While it maintains traditional bans on divorce, abortion and women priests, the catechism also catalogs a list of more modern sins such as tax fraud and low wages and urges compassion for homosexuals.
The U.S. translators' original version, which broadened references to man to include members of the human family and humanity, was turned back by the Vatican as unfaithful to the compendium of Catholic teaching approved by Pope John Paul II last June.
In the middle of the dispute is conservative Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston, who originally suggested the idea of a new catechism at a bishops' synod in Rome in 1985. He now finds himself accused of bowing to political correctness in the English translation.
"If this document were to come out in English in exclusive language, it would ensure a massive alienation immediately," said Mary Boys, associate professor of theology at Boston College. Law "is sticking his neck out a bit vis-a-vis the Vatican, and I respect him for that."
"For any Catholic to be completely informed, they would want to have the catechism as a point of reference," said the Rev. John Pollard of the Education Department of the U.S. Catholic Conference.
The catechism was first issued in French in November. A Spanish version quickly followed, with two printings of more than 400,000 copies selling out within days.
The English version was submitted to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith shortly before Christmas, Pollard said. In a meeting in early February attended by Law and others, objections were raised over the use of more inclusive language in translating scripture and the writings of church theologians.
The translators substituted phrases such as people, men and women, humanity or humankind at various points where the word man was not specifically referring to males.
Some of the more controversial examples related to the translations of the utterances of Jesus in the gospel, said the Rev. Joseph Fessio, editor of Ignatius Press in San Francisco.
The saying in Matthew 25:40 when Jesus tells his followers "as you did it to one of the least of my brethren, you did it to me" was changed to "just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family."
Monsignor Mannion said in his view, "the issue is what was the original word used and what did it mean in that context? I'm not a scriptural scholar, but if in fact he (Jesus) used brethren, I don't think we're free to change it."
As for using the male pronoun when it is clear in the context of the dialogue that the scripture represents all people, Monsignor Mannion said he believes "most people have no great difficulty making the translation."
"I think most priests are attuned to the importance of handling the language question sensitively. I certainly am; I think there has emerged a fairly standard way of thinking in this diocese about such matters."
Yet those involved in the translation of the catechism spoke of the difficulties of translating the French into gender-neutral language. L'homme, the French for "man," can have many different meanings in English that are not exclusive to one sex, they said.
"There was a time when the word `man' would generally be understood . . . as meaning all human beings. This is not always the case today, given the cultural shift concerning inclusivity," Law wrote in a Feb. 12 article in the archdiocesan newspaper The Pilot.
The Rev. Bernard Marthaler of Catholic University of America, who served as a consultant to the English translators, called it a fine translation that intentionally avoided "the so-called battle of the pronouns."
But critics said the English version was an incorrect translation that had more to do with ideological considerations than the handing down of the faith.
"The second person of the Trinity became man, and you can't get away from that reality," said Monsignor Michael J. Wrenn, special consultant for religious education for the Archdiocese of New York. "It (inclusive language) is used to the point where it really becomes bizarre."
The Rev. Douglas Clark, a Georgia priest and the chief English translator, said Wednesday he was still working on the revised translation, but he expected to complete his work shortly. The Vatican will then review the version.
Deseret News religion editor Carrie Moore contributed to this report.