Thee, Thy, Thou - Archaic English - Essential To L D S Prayer

[T-Shirt]

But you keep on saying that only children, new members should be permitted to not use old English in addressing Deity in a public settings. I am neither a child, nor a new member. I find the whole thee, thine, thou thing an unwarranted affectation. But if someone wants to use those words I have no objection. It is the demanding that it be done THIS WAY, and only THIS WAY. That I'm somehow a child, or new member that doesn't know any better that is irksome.

How you pray on your personal time is your business, however, as a seasoned member, refusing to pray as we are instructed in a public setting for no other reason than you don't like it and you would rather be stubborn than be an example to those who are not as mature in the gospel, is, in my opinion, rather childish.

[Scott Lloyd]

Please let me get up on my own Rameumptom.

 

That's another thing: Comparing the leaders of the Church, and those who desire to follow them, to the unrighteous Zoramites of the Book of Mormon is offensive.

[halconero]

That is a much different scenario. Was that at the Union Hills ward?

Maybe.

And I was just kidding, Valentinus. It was a fake reference to you.

[halconero]

That bad, hey?

Freudian slip?

Definitely that bad, especially wth Valentinus there. We were in the same ward, and it was a joking reference to him.

[Rob Osborn]

Let me ask this- Why is it that we have different rules now for praying than they did in Jesus time? If Jesus prayed using everyday language then why is it we have been counseled to do otherwise? Are our words somehow unholy when we don't use "thee, thine "thy, or thou"? Why is it that children are not taught the languge of prayer in primary (I checked it out and nothing I could find in all primary manuals) nor are new members if it so important? I taught the Gospel Principles class to new members, and those slow to understand (like myself) for abou 5 years and never once went outside of the lesson manual on "Praying to our Heavenly Father"http://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-8-praying-to-our-heavenly-father?lang=eng to teach "thee, thine, thy and thou". We were instructed to pretty much teach what was outlined in the manual and not go off topic in our teaching. This is basically a pretty big issue if it is in fact policy to pray with "thee, thine, thy and thou" when there is no organized instruction on teaching members how to pray? Why is this? I have noticed that only some manuals and church publications speak on policy of "prayer language" and that all instructional material for children and new members it is not there.

 

I am coming to the conclusion that this is a tradition started by Joseph Smith and that it has carried out in to todays prayers with the bias of opinion that prayer language should be different because we think that our normal everyday language  of "you and your" is somehow unholy when addressing God. But, we address the very ones we love the most in our everyday mortal lives with "you and your". This brings up another point of debate. I see greeting cards and messages on the internet left by people that says in some part of the poem, spiritual or uplifting saying, etc, that says- "Thankyou God" and I have to ask, is this any different than someone who in prayer says the same thing? Is it wrong to say in our prayers "thankyou". In grammatical use one would thus put it like this for a for instance- "...and thankyou for all the blessings you have poured out upon us.." Here the sentence replaces the "i" or "we" and because of its structure it is automatically inferred. To replace this with an Archaic word it would not work unless you inserted an "I" or "we" after and- "...and we thank thee for all the blessings thou hast poured out upon us.."

 

At this point it becomes a drill in the english language to sound "Shakesperian" rather than just pleading and praying with our heart and I am afraid that we tend to build up a rameumpton because of our greater concern for how flowery our speech is rather than the content of what our words mean. I mean really- whats the difference in "Father I love thee " versus "Father, I love you"?

[Rob Osborn]

As a side note I find myself at various times offering up a sort of mini prayer on the go such as when I see a miracle response to a parayer and I silently or even whisper out a very powerful "thankyou God" and then move right along. I have heard others do this same thing which in my opinion is a prayer to God and recorded as such.

[The Nehor]

Let me ask this- Why is it that we have different rules now for praying than they did in Jesus time? If Jesus prayed using everyday language then why is it we have been counseled to do otherwise? Are our words somehow unholy when we don't use "thee, thine "thy, or thou"? Why is it that children are not taught the languge of prayer in primary (I checked it out and nothing I could find in all primary manuals) nor are new members if it so important? I taught the Gospel Principles class to new members, and those slow to understand (like myself) for abou 5 years and never once went outside of the lesson manual on "Praying to our Heavenly Father"http://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-8-praying-to-our-heavenly-father?lang=eng to teach "thee, thine, thy and thou". We were instructed to pretty much teach what was outlined in the manual and not go off topic in our teaching. This is basically a pretty big issue if it is in fact policy to pray with "thee, thine, thy and thou" when there is no organized instruction on teaching members how to pray? Why is this? I have noticed that only some manuals and church publications speak on policy of "prayer language" and that all instructional material for children and new members it is not there.

 

I am coming to the conclusion that this is a tradition started by Joseph Smith and that it has carried out in to todays prayers with the bias of opinion that prayer language should be different because we think that our normal everyday language  of "you and your" is somehow unholy when addressing God. But, we address the very ones we love the most in our everyday mortal lives with "you and your". This brings up another point of debate. I see greeting cards and messages on the internet left by people that says in some part of the poem, spiritual or uplifting saying, etc, that says- "Thankyou God" and I have to ask, is this any different than someone who in prayer says the same thing? Is it wrong to say in our prayers "thankyou". In grammatical use one would thus put it like this for a for instance- "...and thankyou for all the blessings you have poured out upon us.." Here the sentence replaces the "i" or "we" and because of its structure it is automatically inferred. To replace this with an Archaic word it would not work unless you inserted an "I" or "we" after and- "...and we thank thee for all the blessings thou hast poured out upon us.."

 

At this point it becomes a drill in the english language to sound "Shakesperian" rather than just pleading and praying with our heart and I am afraid that we tend to build up a rameumpton because of our greater concern for how flowery our speech is rather than the content of what our words mean. I mean really- whats the difference in "Father I love thee " versus "Father, I love you"?

We have no idea how Jesus prayed. He presumably prayed in Aramaic but the account of his prayers is written in bastardized trade Greek which means we have lost some of the nuance both in the translation and in the relatively scanty version of the Greek language used to write the gospels. You say we should pray more like Jesus and take no trouble to establish how He did pray. Of course we do not teach children thee and thou formally. They learn it by osmosis.

We have reached a new low if we judge the best ways to communicate from Facebook posts and greeting cards.

Praying from the heart and using "thee" and "thou" is not an either/or proposition. I testify you can do both so let's not pretend using a few words leeches the Spirit out of everything.

[Ahab]

So using thee, thy and thou is the formal LDS way of speaking informally with God, our Father. Got it.

[Tacenda]

I use to be afraid to say "God".  I would replace it with "Heavenly Father".  When I'd hear people say "oh my God".  Or even "thank God".  I'd think it was taking His name in vain.  I was super bad.  Even in a movie or TV show, when I'd hear someone say "oh my God".  I would quickly say "gosh" to replace "God", especially with my children around me.  I was that bad.  Now I see it differently, I see that people are not taking his name in vain exactly.  They just speak his name all the time because they are comfortable with saying it because they may feel him nearby or maybe calling out to him.  How far off I've been.  I still struggle saying his name, not so much when typing His name.  But I don't wince any longer when I hear people say it out loud.  And with prayer, I will no longer let someone tell me how to speak to my father.  It's personal.  It should be with all of us.  We all should have a relationship with Him.  Which I've yet to have, too many obstacles I need to take down.  

[Scott Lloyd]

So using thee, thy and thou is the formal LDS way of speaking informally with God, our Father. Got it.

Change the word "informally" to intimately or lovingly, and you would be more accurate.

[Damien the Leper]

Maybe.

And I was just kidding, Valentinus. It was a fake reference to you.

 

You jerk! lol. I was never like that. Sure I challenged some things in Gospel Essentials when Elder Henrie taught or in Gospel Doctrines when the instructor would teach. My reason for challenging such was to get others to critically analyze why certain teachings were essential or doctrine. That ward had some of the most brilliant minds I've ever encountered and I wanted to help share with them depths of scripture and antiquity and tradition. The reasons for LDS theology, as I observed it back then, went much further than restored scripture or modern revelation or Joseph Smith but a chance to connect at the heart of the Judeo-Christian heart. In the end, it did make me an enemy to some and friendships were lost.

Edited January 22, 2014 by Valentinus

[Damien the Leper]

You are a dear soul.

 

A little weird, but a dear soul. 

 

Are you antagonizing me, Mark? I value our friendship as well but what do you mean by 'dear soul'? You make me sound like I'm dying.

[Ahab]

Change the word "informally" to intimately or lovingly, and you would be more accurate.

Okay, I'll accept that correction, but the point is that it is a formal language we LDS use to speak intimately and lovingly with our Father.

[Rob Osborn]

We have no idea how Jesus prayed. He presumably prayed in Aramaic but the account of his prayers is written in bastardized trade Greek which means we have lost some of the nuance both in the translation and in the relatively scanty version of the Greek language used to write the gospels. You say we should pray more like Jesus and take no trouble to establish how He did pray. Of course we do not teach children thee and thou formally. They learn it by osmosis.

We have reached a new low if we judge the best ways to communicate from Facebook posts and greeting cards.

Praying from the heart and using "thee" and "thou" is not an either/or proposition. I testify you can do both so let's not pretend using a few words leeches the Spirit out of everything.

I have never given it too much thought until these posts. Now I realize I use both the thee, thou dpeech and you, your speech in prayer and have never really cared to analyze the floweriness of my speech because thats how I see it. Now I have the problem of analyzing my language formality in prayer and that is taking away from the spirit of it. We used to address all peopke as thee, thou, thine but now its only reserved for deity? Who made that rule?

[Scott Lloyd]

I know the talk from Elder Dallin H. Oaks on the language of prayer has been cited and linked to repeatedly here, but I think it well to emphasize the following excerpt, as misunderstanding on this point is starting to crop up here repeatedly. I have put in boldface type a portion I particularly want to emphsize.

 

We are especially anxious that our position on special language in prayers not cause some to be reluctant to pray in our Church meetings or in other settings where their prayers are heard. We have particular concern for converts and others who have not yet had experience in using these words.

I am sure that our Heavenly Father, who loves all of His children, hears and answers all prayers, however phrased. If He is offended in connection with prayers, it is likely to be by their absence, not their wording.

When one of our daughters was about three years old, she did something that always delighted her parents. When we called her name, she would usually answer by saying, “Here me is.” This childish reply was among the sweetest things her parents heard. But when she was grown, we expected her to use appropriate language when she spoke, and of course she did. As the Apostle Paul said, “When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things” (1 Cor. 13:11).

The same is true of prayer. Our earliest efforts will be heard with joy by our Heavenly Father, however they are phrased. They will be heard in the same way by loving members of our Church. But as we gain experience as members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we need to become more mature in all of our efforts, including our prayers.

Those who wish to show respect will take the time to learn the special language of prayer. Persons spend many hours mastering communication skills in other mediums, such as poetry or prose, vocal or instrumental music, and even the language of access to computers. The manner of addressing our Heavenly Father in prayer is at least as important as these.

 

Edited January 22, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

Okay, I'll accept that correction, but the point is that it is a formal language we LDS use to speak intimately and lovingly with our Father.

The point is, formality and being intimate and loving are not necessarily mutually exclusive, particularly when it comes to approaching Deity.

[cinepro]

Could you please give an example of what that might be like?  And don't crib from the Gettysburg Address.

I did enjoy the manner of speaking from the 2010 "True Grit". I wish everyone could still carry on conversation in that way.

Edited January 22, 2014 by cinepro

[Senator]

Praying from the heart and using "thee" and "thou" is not an either/or proposition. I testify you can do both so let's not pretend using a few words leeches the Spirit out of everything.

 

Praying respectfully and reverently and using "you" and "your" is not an either/or proposition. I testify you can do both so let's not pretend using a few words leeches the Spirit out of everything.

 

I believe this to be equally true.

[omni]

I will say that Eucharistic Prayer C of the Book of Common Prayer is rather heretical because of the universalism that is evident and I refuse to take Communion as I don't believe that it has a valid epiklesis and anamnesis. Without valid forms of those then the Communion is not valid as pneumatic presence communion is a heretical product of the Reformation.

Sorry to tangent.

 

Whoa, easy there Wikipedia Brown.  Dumb it down a little so we can all participate here.

[mfbukowski]

Are you antagonizing me, Mark? I value our friendship as well but what do you mean by 'dear soul'? You make me sound like I'm dying.

Heck no!  Quite the contrary.  I find your search for truth earnest and fascinating.  I too value our friendship and wouldn't do anything to hurt that. 

 

True searchers jump around from one truth model to another, and it sounds like now you are in some kind of perhaps Anglican mode?  Your comments on communion were pretty interesting but obviously not.....   very "LDS". 

 

I consider myself "weird" and meant that as one weirdo to another.  You remind me very much of myself when I was younger.  The hippies of old called themselves "freaks" proudly- and that is the way I meant "weird".  So greetings from one "freak" to another!

[halconero]

You jerk! lol. I was never like that. Sure I challenged some things in Gospel Essentials when Elder Henrie taught or in Gospel Doctrines when the instructor would teach. My reason for challenging such was to get others to critically analyze why certain teachings were essential or doctrine. That ward had some of the most brilliant minds I've ever encountered and I wanted to help share with them depths of scripture and antiquity and tradition. The reasons for LDS theology, as I observed it back then, went much further than restored scripture or modern revelation or Joseph Smith but a chance to connect at the heart of the Judeo-Christian heart. In the end, it did make me an enemy to some and friendships were lost.

 

I know you weren't, my friend. It was a hyperbolic description mixed with utter falsity. I loved your comments, insights, and they helped me grow in my own knowledge of Jesus, the Father, and the Gospel message. 

 

I'm so sorry about your experience there, and it was obvious that in sharing what you knew it was always sincere, with the best intent, and friendship in  your words.

Edited January 22, 2014 by halconero

[mfbukowski]

I did enjoy the manner of speaking from the 2010 "True Grit". I wish everyone could still carry on conversation in that way.

Wonderful!

 

Indeed that seems to capture the spirit of discourse from that period.

[The Nehor]

Praying respectfully and reverently and using "you" and "your" is not an either/or proposition. I testify you can do both so let's not pretend using a few words leeches the Spirit out of everything.

 

I believe this to be equally true.

Of course praying like that is actually devil worship and you can expect your head to start spinning around and to vomit pea soup at exorcists. If you are okay with that downside more power to you.

[Rob Osborn]

I know the talk from Elder Dallin H. Oaks on the language of prayer has been cited and linked to repeatedly here, but I think it well to emphasize the following excerpt, as misunderstanding on this point is starting to crop up here repeatedly. I have put in boldface type a portion I particularly want to emphsize.

I respectfully disagree with opinion and still honor him as a man of God. From what he said he basically equated things children do as "childish" in the context of "ignorance" and as such we should learn how to do things right. I have a lot of problems with his take on the matter. For one thing, man has made the rules of "english" and not God! Its whats "conveyed" from the heart, that is all that matters. We dont have to abide by special "formal" man made rules in addressing God. This is one reason childrens prayers actually have more focused power and affect with God because theybtruly speak or "convey" the words of the heart. My mother used to record everything in journals including who said family prayers and how prayers were answered. Now that I am older I go back and read the miracles that came from a childs humble prayer. There is no "childish" in how a child prays. We could actually learn a lot from listening to the prayers of children who truly possess no flowery or "formal" distinction in language. Its only when we grow up that we start hearing speech rules that man has made up to sound more formal. It amazes me how Native Americans in their speech use true pure speech laboring in no instance, or not many, to use "pretty sounding" speech. They are slower, more methodical, yet also simpler in their speech. In my opinion their soeech is closer to God because they speak with greater authority by not having so many rules, manmade, that would make their speech "puffed" up like ours.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

Change the word "informally" to intimately or lovingly, and you would be more accurate.

Do you use thee and thou in your other intimate and loving relationships? If not, why not?