Children'S Testimonies At Testimony Meeting

[MiserereNobis]

Children know that the Savior is real more than most adults. They truly believe everything their parents teach them.

This seems to be a contradiction. Do they know or do they believe? My discomfort was the fact that they were saying "I know" when clearly they did not know, they just believed their parents and therefore were parroting their parents words.

Is a testimony about knowing or believing?

At the same time, I know how bad it looks to an investigator. I think in the end it needs to be left up to each family what they want to do.

True, it does look bad to some people. But I think my issue was more along the lines of making all testimonies look bad. What's the power of a testimony if a child who does not know simply says "I know." Then I'll doubt you when you say "I know." Could you just be repeating words that you have heard over and over and over again, like the child? I think that was my point.

[Ahab]

Is a testimony about knowing or believing?

A testimony is simply whatever a person says. If the testimony is true, then it's true, and if it is false, then the person bearing that testimony is a false witness because the testimony itself is false, even if he or she believes it is true.

You've heard it said that we shouldn't bear a false witness against our neighbors, haven't you? Just make sure that whatever you say is true, regardless of what motivates you to share your testimony.

What's the power of a testimony if a child who does not know simply says "I know." Then I'll doubt you when you say "I know." Could you just be repeating words that you have heard over and over and over again, like the child? I think that was my point.

That's a good point, but how do you come to know what you know? What motivates your testimony?

In the Church, a testimony is considered to be whatever God has told us, basing our testimony on his testimony. Should it really be any different with our children? Why shouldn't they believe what we tell them? Why shouldn't that be the basis of their own knowledge? Even if they're not just taking our word for things, and they're just taking God's word for it, instead, isn't what really matters whether or not what they're saying is true? What is your concern when you say whatever you say?

[mfbukowski]

Nah, she probably meant a true Baptist like John the Baptist was a Baptist... the kind of Baptist all Baptists should strive to be like.

That's the way I understood it.

I figured she meant something along the lines of meaning "true Baptism" as in having the authority to baptize. Kids might not get all the details but by that age they should understand that the authority to baptize was lost and restored.

Calling Joseph a true baptist in that context makes perfect sense, even if the terminology is a little unusual

Edited October 17, 2012 by mfbukowski

[spartacus]

Both of the wards I have been in have had parent-child "testimonies" of this sort regularly. I know where Grimace is coming from, especially considering the monotony of Testimony Meetings. In all those cases it was not a "personal" testimony at all but the standard rerun - "I know Joseph Smith is a Prophet. I know the Book of Mormon is true. I know the Church is true. etc."

MiserereNobis, as far as your concern about "making all testimonies look bad", I know where you are coming from. I also think that the standard testimony is probably the clearest and most powerful warrant for "making all testimonies look bad". Obviously some testimonies are not standard but the vast majority, in my experience, have been.

Add to the standardization the fact that it's the standardization that is taught and spoken through the children and still gets repeated ad nauseum by the adults, and that seems to make things even worse. I've heard reasons about some people not being good or comfortable with public speaking, but that doesn't explain the vast majority of testimonies nor the complete uniformity of the standard testimonies (they seem to vary most often only by length/number of the big 5 "knowns" mentioned).

One last thing, as opposed to someone on the previous page who agreed with the first post by a parent, I have never gotten the sense that the parent was simply "reminding the child of what they had testified on their own with family". It's always been the standard Big 5 prayer or an easier version of it.

It would be awesome to see children saying "I know God created puppies" - it would be cute for Grimace, a true testimony for MiserereNobis, not monotonous disturbing repetition, and actually true.

[Tacenda]

Both of the wards I have been in have had parent-child "testimonies" of this sort regularly. I know where Grimace is coming from, especially considering the monotony of Testimony Meetings. In all those cases it was not a "personal" testimony at all but the standard rerun - "I know Joseph Smith is a Prophet. I know the Book of Mormon is true. I know the Church is true. etc."

MiserereNobis, as far as your concern about "making all testimonies look bad", I know where you are coming from. I also think that the standard testimony is probably the clearest and most powerful warrant for "making all testimonies look bad". Obviously some testimonies are not standard but the vast majority, in my experience, have been.

Add to the standardization the fact that it's the standardization that is taught and spoken through the children and still gets repeated ad nauseum by the adults, and that seems to make things even worse. I've heard reasons about some people not being good or comfortable with public speaking, but that doesn't explain the vast majority of testimonies nor the complete uniformity of the standard testimonies (they seem to vary most often only by length/number of the big 5 "knowns" mentioned).

One last thing, as opposed to someone on the previous page who agreed with the first post by a parent, I have never gotten the sense that the parent was simply "reminding the child of what they had testified on their own with family". It's always been the standard Big 5 prayer or an easier version of it.

It would be awesome to see children saying "I know God created puppies" - it would be cute for Grimace, a true testimony for MiserereNobis, not monotonous disturbing repetition, and actually true.

I was a strange child. I was probably 5 or 6 at the time, and it was back when they passed the mike around. I had no inhibition back then and stood on the bench awaiting my turn. When it was my turn I bore testimony that I was so thankful for the garbage man.

[Storm Rider]

I find parroting to be distasteful, but I also realize that there is a time and place in one's spiritual growth for such actions. For example, some families teach their children to pray using memorized prayers. The prayer on the food is the same for every meal; no deviation and often, no real feeling, just a memorized prayer. Of course, then there is the plethora of memorized prayers within many of the orthodox churches. Each of these prayers has a place and a function and it is still the equivalent of parroting. These memorized prayers and testimonies of children are similar; they are the elementary forms of learning. However, they are the beginning of a spiritual journey, but not the end of it.

I think all churches recognize that a prayer from the heart is superior and reflective of a more mature approach to a relationship with God. Bearing testimonies that are reflective of a relationship or interaction with the Holy Spirit is paramount for a LDS...and all other disciples of Christ. A parent helping a child bear a testimony has a place, but it is not in Fast & Testimony at church. Further, when we hear an adult repeat tired phrases (the Church is true, JS was a prophet, etc.) we all should be striving to hear what the Spirit is saying rather than the words being heard. We should just as well listen for the Spirit's conviction when we hear our Catholic brothers and sisters repeat a Hail Mary, Our Father, Novenas, etc. We are all weak vessels and some of us have more facility with language. The main thing we all need to do is to teach others that testimonies and prayers, regardless of the words used, should be a reflection of our love for God, a desire to sing his praises, and a desire to grow closer to Him as a disciple.

[mfbukowski]

Both of the wards I have been in have had parent-child "testimonies" of this sort regularly. I know where Grimace is coming from, especially considering the monotony of Testimony Meetings. In all those cases it was not a "personal" testimony at all but the standard rerun - "I know Joseph Smith is a Prophet. I know the Book of Mormon is true. I know the Church is true. etc."

MiserereNobis, as far as your concern about "making all testimonies look bad", I know where you are coming from. I also think that the standard testimony is probably the clearest and most powerful warrant for "making all testimonies look bad". Obviously some testimonies are not standard but the vast majority, in my experience, have been.

Add to the standardization the fact that it's the standardization that is taught and spoken through the children and still gets repeated ad nauseum by the adults, and that seems to make things even worse. I've heard reasons about some people not being good or comfortable with public speaking, but that doesn't explain the vast majority of testimonies nor the complete uniformity of the standard testimonies (they seem to vary most often only by length/number of the big 5 "knowns" mentioned).

One last thing, as opposed to someone on the previous page who agreed with the first post by a parent, I have never gotten the sense that the parent was simply "reminding the child of what they had testified on their own with family". It's always been the standard Big 5 prayer or an easier version of it.

It would be awesome to see children saying "I know God created puppies" - it would be cute for Grimace, a true testimony for MiserereNobis, not monotonous disturbing repetition, and actually true.

You should listen to a Catholic litany sometime. Imagine the Priest saying the different lines and everyone in the congregation saying the "Have Mercy On Us" and the "Pray for Us" part over and over.

http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/litany09.htm

You either come out spiritually edified or hypnotized- or maybe both.

[MiserereNobis]

You should listen to a Catholic litany sometime. Imagine the Priest saying the different lines and everyone in the congregation saying the "Have Mercy On Us" and the "Pray for Us" part over and over.

http://www.catholic-...ts/litany09.htm

You either come out spiritually edified or hypnotized- or maybe both.

Both, especially when it is all in Latin

It seems that all major religions have "mantras" of sort to help shift our consciousness away from the things of this world and prepare it to receive things of the spiritual world. This purpose is particularly clear when the repetitions (litanies, etc) are in Latin and the focus is taken off of the literal meanings of the words. I'm not saying that those meanings aren't important, but they are not glaring us in the face, either.

However, I don't think repetitive prayers are comparable to repeated testimonies. The purpose is different. For the later, the purpose is to "testify" of truths that the individual knows and thus the repetition of another's words seems out of place. Jesus condemned "vain repetitions," not just "repetitions." Vain means empty. I think that fits the topic at hand.

[mfbukowski]

Both, especially when it is all in Latin

It seems that all major religions have "mantras" of sort to help shift our consciousness away from the things of this world and prepare it to receive things of the spiritual world. This purpose is particularly clear when the repetitions (litanies, etc) are in Latin and the focus is taken off of the literal meanings of the words. I'm not saying that those meanings aren't important, but they are not glaring us in the face, either.

However, I don't think repetitive prayers are comparable to repeated testimonies. The purpose is different. For the later, the purpose is to "testify" of truths that the individual knows and thus the repetition of another's words seems out of place. Jesus condemned "vain repetitions," not just "repetitions." Vain means empty. I think that fits the topic at hand.

Very ironic. That's all I will say. It should be clear enough.

[MiserereNobis]

Very ironic. That's all I will say. It should be clear enough.

Now, now, if you are going to point something out then point it out. The only possible irony I see in my post is if someone misunderstood what I was saying. But since I don't know what you understand about my post, I cannot address it.

[Calm]

I suspect he means there are likely many among your own faith that repeat prayers and other rituals vainly because they are empty of meaning for them, either through ignorance, lack of attention to what one is saying from rote memory, or something else. It is a common part of human experience, what I call functioning on autopilot. May get us where we intend to go with the least amount of energy expended and resources used, but much of the value of the journey is lost---especially when connections with others are made at a superficial level---- and will need to be repeated to learn what we missed.

LDS do try to avoid repetition to a great extent, limiting it to a few rituals. Unfortunately humans are creatures of habit and there is only so many ways to say a certain meaning so we develop patterns.... But as you pointed out repetition is not automatically vain, it can have deep meaning, even when recited by a child following their parent's words...a simple example in my view of the level of oneness that currently exists between ourselves and God where we attempt to repeat his Words and his Ways but fail to fully comprehend what meaning they hold for God and instead must learn line upon line what he has to teach us, sometimes over and over until it becomes second nature and then at that point a light may dawn and a new understanding is added, though still seen through a glass darkly.

I see a parent helping a child learn how to express one's experience of God and God's work a good thing as long as its not the only way they talk about God and their interactions with him. It is not always a bad thing to use repetition to lay in simple but important knowledge deep and secure (why we teach math by repetition of endless times and addition tables for example). In moments of crisis it can be these simple thoughts that are a lifeline to hold onto.

Edited October 21, 2012 by calmoriah

[mfbukowski]

Now, now, if you are going to point something out then point it out. The only possible irony I see in my post is if someone misunderstood what I was saying. But since I don't know what you understand about my post, I cannot address it.

I suspect he means there are likely many among your own faith that repeat prayers and other rituals vainly because they are empty of meaning for them, either through ignorance, lack of attention to what one is saying from rote memory, or something else. It is a common part of human experience, what I call functioning on autopilot. May get us where we intend to go with the least amount of energy expended and resources used, but much of the value of the journey is lost---especially when connections with others are made at a superficial level---- and will need to be repeated to learn what we missed.

LDS do try to avoid repetition to a great extent, limiting it to a few rituals. Unfortunately humans are creatures of habit and there is only so many ways to say a certain meaning so we develop patterns.... But as you pointed out repetition is not automatically vain, it can have deep meaning, even when recited by a child following their parent's words...a simple example in my view of the level of oneness that currently exists between ourselves and God where we attempt to repeat his Words and his Ways but fail to fully comprehend what meaning they hold for God and instead must learn line upon line what he has to teach us, sometimes over and over until it becomes second nature and then at that point a light may dawn and a new understanding is added, though still seen through a glass darkly.

I see a parent helping a child learn how to express one's experience of God and God's work a good thing as long as its not the only way they talk about God and their interactions with him. It is not always a bad thing to use repetition to lay in simple but important knowledge deep and secure (why we teach math by repetition of endless times and addition tables for example). In moments of crisis it can be these simple thoughts that are a lifeline to hold onto.

Yep.

What she said, but I would have said it less eloquently, and probably more offensively.

Meditation is great as an exercise, but worship is not about zoning out and losing oneself in repeated words.

The function of meditation is to learn how to have nothing in your mind and let God fill it- not filling it with words until they become nonsense.

See what I mean?

Teaching a child how to pray is nothing like vain repetition

Edited October 21, 2012 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

An interesting site: http://www.religionf...things/mala.htm

The English word "rosary" may have come from the Sanskrit japa mala. When Roman explorers came into India and encountered the mala, they heard jap mala, and jap for the Romans meant "rose." Thus when the mala was carried back to the Roman Empire as rosarium, and into English as "rosary."

Clearly one of those traditional, never-apostate Christian practices that somehow missed being restored.

Edited October 21, 2012 by mfbukowski

[MormonMason]

PS I have heard some very touching and sincere witnesses of God from small children and at the same time know adults who make me cringe when they walk up to the stand to give their latest personal update (we sometimes call these travelmonys, complainamonys, randomonys...)

"Talkimony" is another word I have heard used to describe these, particularly if running longer than 15 minutes.

Edited October 22, 2012 by MormonMason

[Storm Rider]

The point of all this, as the Church teaches, is that testimonies should be the fruit of the Spirit. We don't bear testimony unless lead by the Spirit. We are not parrots that simply repeat the words of others, parents or otherwise, but we bear as testimony as lead by the Spirit. Children are more than capable of being lead by the Spirit and many can teach us something about God and his love for us.

It does not matter the age of the person and all are encouraged to follow the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Some of us make errors in judgment and use Fast & Testimony time for things other than true testimony. At these times we listen politely and leave it to the Bishop to teach anew what is appropriate and desired.

[MormonMason]

Double post...

Edited October 22, 2012 by MormonMason

[MormonMason]

Both, especially when it is all in Latin

It seems that all major religions have "mantras" of sort to help shift our consciousness away from the things of this world and prepare it to receive things of the spiritual world. This purpose is particularly clear when the repetitions (litanies, etc) are in Latin and the focus is taken off of the literal meanings of the words. I'm not saying that those meanings aren't important, but they are not glaring us in the face, either.

However, I don't think repetitive prayers are comparable to repeated testimonies. The purpose is different. For the later, the purpose is to "testify" of truths that the individual knows and thus the repetition of another's words seems out of place. Jesus condemned "vain repetitions," not just "repetitions." Vain means empty. I think that fits the topic at hand.

Consider the following:

But when ye pray, use not vain ^arepetitions, as the ^bheathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

(Matthew 6:7, LDS-KJV)

Does not seem to address children's testimonies. It seems to speak of prayers that repeat words and phrases. I find the following that seems to agree in ISBE:

REPETITIONS - rep-e-tish'-unz: In Mt 6:7 only, "Use not vain repetitions," for battalogeo (so Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus), a word found nowhere else and spelled variously in the manuscripts, battologeo in Codices K, L, M; etc., batologeo in Codices F G, blattologeo in Codex Bezae (probably influenced by the Latin blatero, "talk idly"); presumably connected with battarizo, "stammer," and perhaps formed under the influence of the Aramaic beta', "speak carelessly," or baTel, "useless." Whether, however battalogeo means the constant repetition of the same phrase or the mechanical recitation of a long series of obscure or meaningless formulas (if, indeed, a distinction between the acts was thought of) cannot be determined. Either practice is abundantly evidenced as a "heathen" custom of the day, and either can be classed as "much speaking."

So, it would seem that the passage does speak of repetitive prayers directly and would have no reference to children's testimonies. Wish I were with my library at the moment. I'd have some interesting examples from the old Lectionary of the Mass and a few Missals on my shelves to share.

[MiserereNobis]

First of all, to address mfbukowski, the Rosary is a practice, not a doctrine. It is not necessary for salvation in any way, shape, or form, though tradition teaches that it is VERY effective for petitions. The Eastern Churches, for example, do not pray the Rosary because it is not part of their tradition. Also, "mantras" are a clear way that one can empty their mind, not to fill it with nonsense but to give the linguistic mind something to chew on so that it stops intruding into what God might be trying to say. I recall a thread somewhere where you mentioned that you have had such experiences while doing rituals in the temple.

Secondly, it is absolutely true that repetitions in prayer can become vain, but repetitions are not inherently vain, hence Jesus saying "vain repetitions" and not just "repetitions." The LDS church may have very few "set" prayers, but you must admit that prayers do become repetitive, at least in my limited experience of prayers over food, etc. Of course, I'm fine with this, as long as those repetitions are not vain (But I do have to say, if one is going to basically say the same thing over and over, it's nice to have a poetic ring to it, as well as true doctrine).

Thirdly, a testimony is not a prayer. My point was to say that it seems that repetitions of all types are counter to the idea of a testimony, especially if that repetition is being whispered in your ear. From my point-of-view, repetitions are acceptable in prayers as long as they are not vain (and that is determined by the subjective experience of the person praying), but repetitions in testimonies seem to defeat the purpose of a testimony.

[bcuzbcuz]

And if they don't have the self-confidence to do it on their own, their parents may prompt them what to say. Sometimes they may be prompted by their older siblings what to say. It is simply a way to accommodate the wishes of the child, rather than an exercise in indoctrination.

Nah, you're just saying that......

[MormonMason]

MiserereNobis,

"Vain" in the phrase "vain repetitions" is an Englishism. Jesus did not actually use the word "vain" in what he said. Please keep that in mind.

[MiserereNobis]

MiserereNobis,

"Vain" in the phrase "vain repetitions" is an Englishism. Jesus did not actually use the word "vain" in what he said. Please keep that in mind.

"Vain repetition" translates the idea better than just repetition, especially if we take it in context of not just the whole verse, but Jesus' life, the practice of the Jews, and the practice of the early Christians.

It's important to remember that in translation, often one word needs a phrase in order to pass on the full idea.

Here's a nice summary of thought on the idea:

Now, the people who make these accusations against Catholics don't understand, apparently:

• That the verse in question reads, in the King James version, "But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking." The operative Greek word here for "vain repetitions" is battalogeo, or babbling. That is, the heathens had a magical perception of prayer and thought the more they babbled to their gods, the more that that god would respond: I Kings 18:26: "And they took the bullock which was given them, and they dressed it, and called on the name of Baal from morning even until noon, saying, O Baal, hear us. But there was no voice, nor any that answered."
  
• That, two verses after the warning in Matthew against "vain repetitions," Jesus gave us the "Our Father" prayer which most Protestant Christians pray with no qualms about praying "in vain." The same command in Luke 11:2 reads: "And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father..." -- "when you pray, say..."
  
• That Christ Himself prayed in repetitions. Matthew 26:44: "And he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words". Mark 14:39 reads: "And again he went away, and prayed, and spake the same words."
  
• That the angels pray repetitiously. Revelation 4:8: "...and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come."
  
• That God commanded Moses to tell the Israelites: "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up." (Deuteronomy 6:4-7)
  
• That the Psalms are nothing but a collection of prayers and litanies which were prayed formally in the pre-Christian synagogues and early Christian churches, are still prayed in synagogues and Catholic churches today -- and were even prayed by Christ from the Cross.
  
• That the liturgy of the synagogue was (and is) filled with repetition and formalized prayer. Christ said "use not vain repetitions, as the heathens do". Were the Jews heathens? They prayed (and still pray) the sh'ma twice a day and, in their liturgy, the Shemoneh Esrei, the Kaddish, the morning blessings, the Aleinu, etc. Check out a Jewish siddur (missal) sometime; does it look more typically Protestant or Catholic?
  

Edited October 23, 2012 by MiserereNobis

[MormonMason]

"Vain repetition" translates the idea better than just repetition, especially if we take it in context of not just the whole verse, but Jesus' life, the practice of the Jews, and the practice of the early Christians.

Not necessarily. Greek had perfectly good words that translate as "vain" or "empty" and none of these are compounded in the word.

It's important to remember that in translation, often one word needs a phrase in order to pass on the full idea.

Sometimes, yes. Few understand that more than someone who is involved in translations of ancient texts. But, one also can go overboard with that.

As to your quote, you should know that "heathen" also does not appear in the Greek text. That is an interpretation. It is "nations" in the majority of Greek texts. Some manuscripts, like Vatican Manuscript 1209 (Codex Vaticanus), have the word for "hypocrites" rather than "nations." But none actually say "heathen" there.

In addition, the phrase "Holy, holy, holy, etc." does not seem to be a prayer but offering of praise rather than prayer. Stating that it is prayer is interpretive. And, where does Jesus tell his disciples to put prayers into books of prayer for people to repeat verbatim? And, where does Jesus enjoin prayer to others besides the Father and himself? The Jews, in point of fact, often did adopt pagan ideas into their own liturgical practices.

That said, there are some prayers that are repeated, such as the LDS Sacrament Prayers that are to be said verbatim, so I don't really have problems with repeated prayers in all cases. Some prayers are intended to be repetitive by their very nature because their use is repeated from week to week in blessing the sacrament, and so forth. But, notice how short these prayers are in comparison to some of the much lengthier, repetitive prayers, with often-repeated phrases and responsa, that can be seen in Missals and Siddurs. These are the kinds of repetition that become devoid of meaning in the repetition, sounding much more in line with the prayers of the priests of Baal.

Collections of prayers said to have varying efficacy in their daily use also actually approaches the ideas of the pagan nations regarding prayer. So, this is a very fine line, if there is a line at all.

Edited October 23, 2012 by MormonMason

[mfbukowski]

Because you did not reference your source, I will respond as if you wrote your the quote. I had to do away with the bullets to make the formatting work

Now, the people who make these accusations against Catholics don't understand, apparently:

That the verse in question reads, in the King James version, "But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking." The operative Greek word here for "vain repetitions" is battalogeo, or babbling. That is, the heathens had a magical perception of prayer and thought the more they babbled to their gods, the more that that god would respond: I Kings 18:26: "And they took the bullock which was given them, and they dressed it, and called on the name of Baal from morning even until noon, saying, O Baal, hear us. But there was no voice, nor any that answered."

This of course is not relevant to Mormons. The first part appears to be talking about "speaking in tongues" which is nothing we practice. But on the other hand, the passage appears to contradict itself, because at first it is addressing speaking in tongues, and then it implies that there was some sort of litany in which the refrain "O Baal, hear us" repeated for hours on end. So which was it- speaking in tongues or a litany to Baal? Either way it is irrelevant to us, because we do neither. Catholics of course do have litanies so if anything, it seems to condemn the Catholic practice.

That, two verses after the warning in Matthew against "vain repetitions," Jesus gave us the "Our Father" prayer which most Protestant Christians pray with no qualms about praying "in vain." The same command in Luke 11:2 reads: "And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father..." -- "when you pray, say..."

The Lord's prayer doesn't even appear in the oldest gospel, Mark, so it is possibly a later addition, and the admonition is completely different in Matthew 6:9-13 where it says^" After this manner therefore pray ye:" Clearly whoever made this argument was quote-mining to justify the Catholic position.

That Christ Himself prayed in repetitions. Matthew 26:44: "And he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words". Mark 14:39 reads: "And again he went away, and prayed, and spake the same words."

We are talking here about vain repetitions, not repeating the same words exactly. We also use prescribed prayers in ordinances for example, but that is not the same thing as repeating the same phrase until one is hypnotized. In fact, arguably, Christ was here repeating a phrase which we repeat in our temple endowment. But that is not anything like the Rosary for example.

That the angels pray repetitiously. Revelation 4:8: "...and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come."

Saying that they praise God night and day is not the same as saying that is ALL they do. We are also to have a prayer in our heart at all times- does that mean we should be reciting the Rosary in every waking minute? Obviously not.

That God commanded Moses to tell the Israelites: "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up." (Deuteronomy 6:4-7)

See above. Obviously there is no admonition here to literally and constantly repeat the same phrase in every waking moment. It is talking about having a prayer in one's heart- an attitude of reverence and openness to God.

That the Psalms are nothing but a collection of prayers and litanies which were prayed formally in the pre-Christian synagogues and early Christian churches, are still prayed in synagogues and Catholic churches today -- and were even prayed by Christ from the Cross.

"Litanies"? Which one is that? Prayers- sure. Prayers in temples- I'll even give you the Mass as being in this category- are entirely different than personal prayer. One is a prayer to perform what we would call an "ordinance" and you would call a "sacrament"- in this case, for you, the consecration of the Eucharist- but that is NOT personal prayer. We need to TALK to our Father and ponder with him what is happening in our lives, not repeat the same words again and again.

That the liturgy of the synagogue was (and is) filled with repetition and formalized prayer. Christ said "use not vain repetitions, as the heathens do". Were the Jews heathens? They prayed (and still pray) the sh'ma twice a day and, in their liturgy, the Shemoneh Esrei, the Kaddish, the morning blessings, the Aleinu, etc. Check out a Jewish siddur (missal) sometime; does it look more typically Protestant or Catholic?

See above- entirely different case. There are times for prescribed prayers and ordinances are a different case than personal prayer.

Edited October 24, 2012 by mfbukowski

[Calm]

I agree with you, mfb, but I am also debating about whether or not it is appropriate to create personal sacred space in much the same way as we do as a community through ordinances/sacraments, by the repetition of a prayer...

However, I can not think of any case of an ordinance/sacrament in the scriptures where one is commanded to say a prayer over and over again, though there are a few where one says something a certain amount of limited times (the one I am thinking of is, I believe, said three times).

So while repetition does not appear to be inherently vain even if repeated more than once at a particular time, there does seem to be a difference between repetition to create a sense of sacredness and excessive repetition....of course the question then becomes when does something become excessive. For me, it would be when the repetition interferes with an actual connection/reaching out being made rather than promoting it.

And I don't believe that sense of timelessness that can come with the hypnotic effect of repeating mantras or prayers until one achieves that state is the sort of connection God desires us to have with him when we pray, which to me is about communication as opposed to creating a certain state of mind or 'mindlessness' so to speak.

Since I have not been taught that I remember the purpose of repetitive prayers for Catholics, I am unsure of the appropriateness, but from what I have learned of the Eastern religious repetitive prayers, I would say these are not what God is looking for in us, that instead we should separate the idea of all encompassing meditation from supplication and not combine it as I have seen some faiths do.

[3DOP]

O give thanks to the LORD; for he is good: for his mercy endures for ever.

2O give thanks to the God of gods: for his mercy endures for ever.

3O give thanks to the Lord of lords: for his mercy endures for ever.

4To him who alone does great wonders: for his mercy endures for ever.

5To him that by wisdom made the heavens: for his mercy endures for ever.

6To him that stretched out the earth above the waters: for his mercy endures for ever.

7To him that made great lights: for his mercy endures for ever:

8The sun to rule by day: for his mercy endures for ever:

9The moon and stars to rule by night: for his mercy endures for ever.

10To him that smote Egypt in their firstborn: for his mercy endures for ever:

11And brought out Israel from among them: for his mercy endures for ever:

12With a strong hand, and with a stretched out arm: for his mercy endures for ever.

13To him which divided the Red sea into parts: for his mercy endures for ever:

14And made Israel to pass through the middle of it: for his mercy endures for ever:

15But overthrew Pharaoh and his host in the Red sea: for his mercy endures for ever.

16To him which led his people through the wilderness: for his mercy endures for ever.

17To him which smote great kings: for his mercy endures for ever:

18And slew famous kings: for his mercy endures for ever:

19Sihon king of the Amorites: for his mercy endures for ever:

20And Og the king of Bashan: for his mercy endures for ever:

21And gave their land for an heritage: for his mercy endures for ever:

22Even an heritage to Israel his servant: for his mercy endures for ever.

23Who remembered us in our low estate: for his mercy endures for ever:

24And has redeemed us from our enemies: for his mercy endures for ever.

25Who gives food to all flesh: for his mercy endures for ever.

26O give thanks to the God of heaven: for his mercy endures for ever.

Edited October 24, 2012 by 3DOP