I would argue that LA does not apply in the East as it does in the West. The liturgical context of the East is vastly different than the West, so I do not think that the LA can be put as a "straight-jacket" over the East.

the LA states that the translation has to be accurate.

What evidence that they understand LA correctly? The fact that Rome approved the documents does not mean that the translations hit the mark, and could certainly mean some compromise was made. "Should be allowed" and "is allowed" are two different things. In another discussion, Father John posted an article about the approval of the Canadian Lectionary which included the following:


Here we have Archbishop Weisgerber of Winnipeg saying that it a compromise. So the point is logical and supportable. And when we think that Father Robert Taft has stated to several that he was the only reviewer of the RDL, that he only reviewed the texts (as he was not asked to review the rubrics) and called Liturgiam Authenticam “unfortunate”, the idea is very logical. Don’t forget that LA came just a month or after the approval for the revised text of the RDL. The delay in promulgation of six years allowed plenty of time to fix the problems.

Let’s also remember that the issue is not about “inclusive language”. It is about “gender neutral language”. “Who for us men and our salvation” is inclusive. Removing the word “men” makes it potentially exclusive according to the now retired head of the Congregation of Divine Worship.

There is certainly nothing inappropriate about petitioning Rome about this matter.

The RDL mistranslates the only word used in any of the ancient texts for our Lord's words in the Beatitudes. They chose to use *children* instead of *sons* of God. Your bishops purposely misquoted Jesus.

Ed

stands for Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible. It is complete translation of the Holy Scriptures based on the Greek text of the Old Testament (Septuagint / LXX) and for the New Testament on the official ecclesiastical text published in 1904 by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.

Blessed are the peacemakers,for they shall be called children of God.

That is OK. They are wrong too.

Fr. Deacon Lance

You are incorrect, and your continued accusation in this regard is without merit. Many old and venerable English translations (eg, the Douay-Rheims, which is championed by Catholic traditionalists, the KJV) use "children of God" in the Beatitudes.

BTW, Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount in Aramaic, not English, so you have no basis on which to make your accusation.

You are incorrect,...

From my perspective, Rome does not seem to have the will to refuse the use of horizontal inclusive language

Christ our true God, through the prayers of His all-spotless and all-pure mother, of our Father among the saints John Chrysostom Archbishop of Constantinople (of the saints of the church and of the day) of the holy and just ancestors of Christ Joachim and Anne and of all the saints, may this same Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on us and save us, for He is good and loveth every human being.
Kyr Jospeh Archbishop Raya
The Divine and Holy Liturgy of our Father among the Saints John Chrysostom
Alleluia Press, 2001

He repented of his use of what he calls the casualness of "You" but still saw fit to replace "mankind" with "every human being".

It seems to me misleading to quote Archbishop Joseph in an attempt to discredit horizontal inclusive language when the Archbishop used it himself in his last liturgical publication.