History of using Thee, Thy, Thou, etc. in prayers

[MiserereNobis]

1 hour ago, USU78 said:

Fæder ure

"Father our"

Or, in other words, "Pater Noster"

Good job with the pronouns!

[USU78]

26 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

"Father our"

Or, in other words, "Pater Noster"

Good job with the pronouns!

Had a choice of Old English or something else in my major electives undergrad.  Loves me some Beowulf.  Cannot find my textbook, though.

[Thinking]

6 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I wonder if this is by design.

I see Alma speaking to his wayward son with a mixture of consternation, stern indignation, frustration, care and loving counsel. Given the mixture in attitudes, is it any wonder that there would be a variation between the more formal and the more familiar forms of address?

Not in the Spanish translation.

"Y te mando que te comprometas a consultar con tus hermanos mayores en tus empresas; porque he aquí, eres joven, y necesitas ser nutrido por tus hermanos. Y atiende a sus consejos."

[3DOP]

9 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

But the underlying reasoning would apply to all languages, wouldn't it? If the argument is that we should use pronouns that create formality and a barrier, other languages have those pronouns and should use them, right?

It seems weird to say: if you speak English, you should have formality with God, but if you speak Czech (or Spanish or whatever), it's ok to be informal.

So what is it? Should we be formal or informal with God?

If you say formal, then my next question is: should speakers of other languages be formal, too?

And if your answer is no, then please explain why. And if your answer is yes, then please explain why that isn't being taught to other languages.

 

Even those who use vernacular have historically seen the wisdom of using a special, more elevated form of speech for public worship. Latin does even better for us what thee or thou do for English speakers. Except in rare moments of heightened desperation, I haven't reached this place, but if one is so continuously familiar with the King of kings as to speak to Him as one would the grocer or mailman, well, good on them. I think there is a place for that. Especially in private. I also find it instructive, even if it is only a linguistic convention, to come to a place once a week where the speech seems more lofty and mysterious than what is used to describe that which is of our world, equal to us.

[3DOP]

MN, and all,

There is a formal Latin prayer that is constantly recited by the faithful and is included in what are called "the prayers at the foot of the altar", which is only omitted in Masses for the Dead and from Passion Sunday to Holy Thursday.

"Domine exaudi oratione meam" (O Lord hear my prayer) "Et clamor meus ad te veniat" (And let my cry come unto Thee)

Look at that Latin word for "cry". We are literally encouraged in this passage from the 101st Psalm to "make a clamor". Even the Holy Ghost prays for us with "groanings which cannot be uttered". We are to God as babies are to their parents more truly than we realize. We do not know how to talk the language of heaven. But the good Father hears the grunts and cries and groans of the faithful as readily as if they had the most articulate ways of expression.  

Miserere, you will understand the value of vocal prayers in this context. We know we must go beyond vocal prayers as we are drawn by God's love to divine union. But the Church approved vocal prayers can serve as such a wonderful springboard to meditations that increase our faith and hope and love. They can also help the disconsolate (all of us occasionally) to have the strength in trial to carry the cross a little further.

We grope for words and even for thoughts. I feel very limited in knowing what I need except for grace. Oh God fix everything so I can be happy in my particular circumstances? The prayer of faith will be answered. I do not have faith that all my problems need to be fixed. I have faith that I need to grow in love for God and neighbour. The Church through her prayers, the formal liturgy, inspired as we believe, by the Holy Spirit, are prayers that we can take to God with fullest confidence and faith. I have been meditating upon and taking great consolation in the Introits that our Holy Mother has been giving us these weeks after Pentecost. From the Sixth Sunday last week, (Ps. 27):

"Unto thee will I cry, O Lord: O my God, be not thou silent to me, lest if thou be silent to me, I become like them that go down into the pit. Glory be..."

God only wants us to ask for Him to speak to us! He wills to communicate His very life and Spirit to us! Truly, lacking this, we are most miserable. With the ears of faith, we can hear God speaking to us in every word another says to us, in every happy event, difficult trial, or "ordinary" circumstance of our lives. He wants to make us know that He has orchestrated and choreographed every moment of the lives of His adopted children so that He may give us Himself. But it won't happen unless we make that cry. That is the condition. Consider that, and then rejoice at tomorrow's Introit:

Clap your hands, all ye nations: shout unto God with the voice of joy. For the Lord is nigh, He is terrible: a great king over all the earth. Glory be..."

The great king is near to us and terrible against those who would make an approach to harm His children! Thank God for being a terror against the enemy of our souls. He gives us everything that the Prophets of old only saw in shadow! How can we not interiorly clap and shout as Holy Church, through the sacred liturgy, leads us to deeper union with this good God who has adopted us?

I hope it doesn't seem preachy.

FWIW

-------------------------

Ceremonies have rules of movement (rubrics) and speech which is rarely colloquial, even in the secular world. If the inauguration of a President or Supreme Court justice should take place in such and such a fashion, how much more the daily sacrifice of the Mass of Calvary? It deserves to be dressed in the most august words and appropriate gestures. When this is lacking, when there is a defect, it is detrimental to the stupendous truths that the Church is trying to teach. The High Mass is normal. Low Mass is a reduction. The New Mass, in my opinion, has become so familiar, as to breed contempt.

The Church's hierarchy are beginning to be puzzled at why young adults seem to flock to the Traditional Mass. The devil is allowed to assail all of us with doubts, but Traditionalists have the aid of ceremony that appropriately expresses itself in actions becoming of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Polls show that large numbers of Catholics no longer believe in the Real Presence. I do not wonder why. The New Mass is valid. But it is defective in imparting to the young a much needed sense of sublime mystery. From earliest years, a child regularly exposed to the Latin Mass cannot help but know that something splendid and mysterious is being celebrated. This is needed more than ever in competition with a virtual world that can seem much more exciting than the Mass.

So anyway, again to everyone. Except for Miserere, I suspect much of what I said was a little difficult to follow. But maybe you can at least see why I think it is a move further from Catholicism to feel like we can easily speak colloquial to God, especial when worshipping in community. That is why I would encourage Mormons and anyone to keep the Thees and Thous both in private and public. Cry to God in your closet. Have some appropriate ceremony in public would be my best advice (as if you asked for it).  

3DOP

 

 

 

Edited July 22, 2017 by 3DOP

[mfbukowski]

22 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

But the underlying reasoning would apply to all languages, wouldn't it? If the argument is that we should use pronouns that create formality and a barrier, other languages have those pronouns and should use them, right?

It seems weird to say: if you speak English, you should have formality with God, but if you speak Czech (or Spanish or whatever), it's ok to be informal.

So what is it? Should we be formal or informal with God?

If you say formal, then my next question is: should speakers of other languages be formal, too?

And if your answer is no, then please explain why. And if your answer is yes, then please explain why that isn't being taught to other languages.

 

It's up to the cultural context. 

Frankly I find it kind of odd that Catholic cultures which see God as a regal Sovereign speak to him in familiar terms

One of my favorite Catholic hymns, from my memory"

Quote

 

"Holy God we Praise Thy Name!

Lord of all, we bow before thee

All on earth thy scepter claim

All in Heaven above adoring!

Infinite thy vast Domain!

Everlasting is thy Name!"

 

Does it seem odd to you to address such a Being the way you would address a child at the dinner table?

Honestly I don't mean this as a criticism, I just don't get it.

I think it is just American culture to address God this way.   Dunno.

And this is in English.  I wonder if it uses the familiar in Italian?

Edited July 22, 2017 by mfbukowski

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, 3DOP said:

MN, and all,

There is a formal Latin prayer that is constantly recited by the faithful and is included in what are called "the prayers at the foot of the altar", which is only omitted in Masses for the Dead and from Passion Sunday to Holy Thursday.

"Domine exaudi oratione meam" (O Lord hear my prayer) "Et clamor meus ad te veniat" (And let my cry come unto Thee)

Look at that Latin word for "cry". We are literally encouraged in this passage from the 101st Psalm to "make a clamor". Even the Holy Ghost prays for us with "groanings which cannot be uttered". We are to God as babies are to their parents more truly than we realize. We do not know how to talk the language of heaven. But the good Father hears the grunts and cries and groans of the faithful as readily as if they had the most articulate ways of expression.  

Miserere, you will understand the value of vocal prayers in this context. We know we must go beyond vocal prayers as we are drawn by God's love to divine union. But the Church approved vocal prayers can serve as such a wonderful springboard to meditations that increase our faith and hope and love. They can also help the disconsolate (all of us occasionally) to have the strength in trial to carry the cross a little further.

We grope for words and even for thoughts. I feel very limited in knowing what I need except for grace. Oh God fix everything so I can be happy in my particular circumstances? The prayer of faith will be answered. I do not have faith that all my problems need to be fixed. I have faith that I need to grow in love for God and neighbour. The Church through her prayers, the formal liturgy, inspired as we believe, by the Holy Spirit, are prayers that we can take to God with fullest confidence and faith. I have been meditating upon and taking great consolation in the Introits that our Holy Mother has been giving us these weeks after Pentecost. From the Sixth Sunday last week, (Ps. 27):

"Unto thee will I cry, O Lord: O my God, be not thou silent to me, lest if thou be silent to me, I become like them that go down into the pit. Glory be..."

God only wants us to ask for Him to speak to us! He wills to communicate His very life and Spirit to us! Truly, lacking this, we are most miserable. With the ears of faith, we can hear God speaking to us in every word another says to us, in every happy event, difficult trial, or "ordinary" circumstance of our lives. He wants to make us know that He has orchestrated and choreographed every moment of the lives of His adopted children so that He may give us Himself. But it won't happen unless we make that cry. That is the condition. Consider that, and then rejoice at tomorrow's Introit:

Clap your hands, all ye nations: shout unto God with the voice of joy. For the Lord is nigh, He is terrible: a great king over all the earth. Glory be..."

The great king is near to us and terrible against those who would make an approach to harm His children! Thank God for being a terror against the enemy of our souls. He gives us everything that the Prophets of old only saw in shadow! How can we not interiorly clap and shout as Holy Church, through the sacred liturgy, leads us to deeper union with this good God who has adopted us?

I hope it doesn't seem preachy.

FWIW

-------------------------

Ceremonies have rules of movement (rubrics) and speech which is rarely colloquial, even in the secular world. If the inauguration of a President or Supreme Court justice should take place in such and such a fashion, how much more the daily sacrifice of the Mass of Calvary? It deserves to be dressed in the most august words and appropriate gestures. When this is lacking, when there is a defect, it is detrimental to the stupendous truths that the Church is trying to teach. The High Mass is normal. Low Mass is a reduction. The New Mass, in my opinion, has become so familiar, as to breed contempt.

The Church's hierarchy are beginning to be puzzled at why young adults seem to flock to the Traditional Mass. The devil is allowed to assail all of us with doubts, but Traditionalists have the aid of ceremony that appropriately expresses itself in actions becoming of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Polls show that large numbers of Catholics no longer believe in the Real Presence. I do not wonder why. The New Mass is valid. But it is defective in imparting to the young a much needed sense of sublime mystery. From earliest years, a child regularly exposed to the Latin Mass cannot help but know that something splendid and mysterious is being celebrated. This is needed more than ever in competition with a virtual world that can seem much more exciting than the Mass.

So anyway, again to everyone. Except for Miserere, I suspect much of what I said was a little difficult to follow. But maybe you can at least see why I think it is a move further from Catholicism to feel like we can easily speak colloquial to God, especial when worshipping in community. That is why I would encourage Mormons and anyone to keep the Thees and Thous both in private and public. Cry to God in your closet. Have some appropriate ceremony in public would be my best advice (as if you asked for it).  

3DOP

 

 

 

I think there is a lot to be gained by treating our relationship with God differently than our relationship with anyone else, and language is a part of that.  Personally, I pray using thees and thines for that reason.

Question:  Do Catholics believe that there is something special about latin specifically, or is it tradition that keeps latin relevant in the church?

[Bobbieaware]

23 hours ago, mnn727 said:

If that were the reason then all languages would use formal forms. But thats not true in most other languages, sorry but your explanation make zero sense in light of that.

 

I tell you what - since Apostle Dallin H Oaks explains these principles with much more cogency and more authority than I do, read the following General Conference address of his on the "Language of Praye" and then send him a letter telling him his ideas "make zero sense." Maybe he'll respond to you. But as for Yours Truly, I'm delighted to say I'm in Elder Oak's camp.

THE LANGUAGE OF PRAYER -- April 1993

"When I was young, I learned that great respect was owed to those who held the office of bishop. As a sign of that respect, we always addressed our bishop as “Bishop Christensen” or “Bishop Calder” or “Brother Jones.” We never called our bishop “Mr.” or by his first name, as we did in speaking to others. With the bishop, we always used an honored title.

When I was seventeen, I joined the Utah National Guard. There I learned that a soldier must use certain words in speaking to an officer. I saw this as another mark of respect for authority. I also observed that this special language served as a way of reminding both the soldier and the officer of the responsibilities of their positions. I later understood that same reasoning as explaining why full-time missionaries should always be called by the dignified titles of elder or sister, or the equivalent in other languages.

In my legal training I became familiar with the formal language lawyers use to address judges during court proceedings. After graduation I worked for a year as a law clerk to the chief justice of the United States. We always used the formal title of his office, Chief Justice. Similarly, communications to our most senior government leaders should be addressed in a particular way, such as Mr. President, Your Excellency, or Your Majesty. The use of titles signifies respect for office and authority.

The words we use in speaking to someone can identify the nature of our relationship to that person. They can also remind speaker and listener of the responsibilities they owe one another in that relationship. The form of address can also serve as a mark of respect or affection.

So it is with the language of prayer. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches its members to use special language in addressing prayers to our Father in Heaven.

When we go to worship in a temple or a church, we put aside our working clothes and dress ourselves in something better. This change of clothing is a mark of respect. Similarly, when we address our Heavenly Father, we should put aside our working words and clothe our prayers in special language of reverence and respect. In offering prayers in the English language, members of our Church do not address our Heavenly Father with the same words we use in speaking to a fellow worker, to an employee or employer, or to a merchant in the marketplace. We use special words that have been sanctified by use in inspired communications, words that have been recommended to us and modeled for us by those we sustain as prophets and inspired teachers.

The special language of prayer follows different forms in different languages, but the principle is always the same. We should address prayers to our Heavenly Father in words which speakers of that language associate with love and respect and reverence and closeness. The application of this principle will, of course, vary according to the nature of a particular language, including the forms that were used when the scriptures were translated into that language. Some languages have intimate or familiar pronouns and verbs used only in addressing family and very close friends. Other languages have honorific forms of address that signify great respect, such as words used only when speaking to a king or other person of high rank. Both of these kinds of special words are appropriately used in offering prayers in other languages because they communicate the desired feelings of love, respect, reverence, or closeness.

Modern English has no special verbs or pronouns that are intimate, familiar, or honorific. When we address prayers to our Heavenly Father in English, our only available alternatives are the common words of speech like you and your or the dignified but uncommon words like thee, thou,and thy which were used in the King James Version of the Bible almost five hundred years ago. Latter-day Saints, of course, prefer the latter. In our prayers we use language that is dignified and different, even archaic.

The men whom we sustain as prophets, seers, and revelators have consistently taught and urged English-speaking members of our Church to phrase their petitions to the Almighty in the special language of prayer. President Spencer W. Kimball said, “In all our prayers, it is well to use the pronouns thee, thou, thy, and thine instead of you, your, and yoursinasmuch as they have come to indicate respect.” (Faith Precedes the Miracle, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1972, p. 201.) Numerous other Church leaders have given the same counsel. (See Stephen L Richards, in Conference Report, Oct. 1951, p. 175; Bruce R. McConkie, Ensign, Jan. 1976, p. 12; and L. Tom Perry, Ensign, Nov. 1983, p. 13.)

Perhaps some who are listening to this sermon in English are already saying, “But this is unfamiliar and difficult. Why should we have to use words that have not been in common use in the English language for hundreds of years? If we require a special language of prayer in English, we will discourage the saying of prayers by little children, by new members, and by others who are just learning to pray.”

Brothers and sisters, the special language of prayer is much more than an artifact of the translation of the scriptures into English. Its use serves an important, current purpose. We know this because of modern revelations and because of the teachings and examples of modern prophets. The way we pray is important.

The English words thee, thou, thy, and thine occur throughout the prayers the prophets of the Lord have revealed for use in our day.

A revelation given in 1830, the year the Church was organized, directs that the elder or priest who administers the sacrament “shall kneel … and call upon the Father in solemn prayer, saying:

“O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son, Jesus Christ.” (D&C 20:76–77, 79.)

The prayer offered at the dedication of the Kirtland Temple in 1836 is another model that illustrates the language of prayer used by the Prophet Joseph Smith:

“And now, Holy Father, we ask thee to assist us, thy people, with thy grace, in calling our solemn assembly, …

“That thy glory may rest down upon thy people, and upon this thy house, which we now dedicate to thee, that it may be sanctified and consecrated to be holy, and that thy holy presence may be continually in this house.” (D&C 109:10, 12.)

This prophetic model of the language of prayer has been faithfully followed in all of the sacred petitions by which the prophets have dedicated temples to the Lord. Exactly one hundred years ago this week, at a spot not far from where I stand, President Wilford Woodruff began the dedicatory prayer of the Salt Lake Temple with these words:

“Our Father in heaven, thou who hast created the heavens and the earth, and all things that are therein; thou most glorious One, … we, thy children, come this day before thee, and in this house which we have built to thy most holy name, humbly plead the atoning blood of thine Only Begotten Son, that our sins may be remembered no more against us forever, but that our prayers may ascend unto thee and have free access to thy throne, that we may be heard in thy holy habitation.” (As quoted by Gordon B. Hinckley, Ensign, Mar. 1993, p. 2.)

When the Prophet Joseph Smith was imprisoned in the jail at Liberty, Missouri, he wrote an inspired prayer, which we now read in the 121st section of the Doctrine and Covenants. Note the special language the Prophet used in addressing our Father in Heaven:

“O God, where art thou? And where is the pavilion that covereth thy hiding place? …

“Remember thy suffering saints, O our God; and thy servants will rejoice in thy name forever.” (D&C 121:1, 6)

Other prayers offered by the Prophet Joseph Smith also use the special, formal language of prayer. (See The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, ed. Dean C. Jessee Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1984, pp. 283–84, 536–37.)

To cite more recent examples, we are all aware that the prayers offered at these general conferences of the Church always use the special language of prayer we have learned from the examples of modern prophets and teachers.

We are also guided by the special language we read in the prayers recorded in the King James Translation of the Bible and in the Book of Mormon.

We have scriptural record of three beautiful translated prayers the Savior offered during his earthly ministry. They are models for all of us. Notable in each of these prayers are the words thee, thou, thy, and thine instead of you, your, and yours.

In teaching his disciples what we call the Lord’s Prayer, the Savior said, “After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.” (Matt. 6:9; see also 3 Ne. 13:9.)

In his great intercessory prayer, uttered on the night before his crucifixion, the Savior used these words:

“Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee. …

“And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” (John 17:1, 3.)

The Book of Mormon records this prayer the Savior offered during his visit to the righteous remnant of Israel on the American continent following his resurrection:

“Father, I thank thee that thou hast given the Holy Ghost unto these whom I have chosen. …

“Father, I pray thee that thou wilt give the Holy Ghost unto all them that shall believe in their words.” (3 Ne. 19:20–21.)

The special language of prayer that Latter-day Saints use in English has sometimes been explained by reference to the history of the English language. It has been suggested that thee, thou, thy, and thine are simply holdovers from forms of address once used to signify respect for persons of higher rank. But more careful scholarship shows that the words we now use in the language of prayer were once commonly used by persons of rank in addressing persons of inferior position. These same English words were also used in communications between persons in an intimate relationship. There are many instances where usages of English words have changed over the centuries. But the history of English usage is not the point.

Scholarship can contradict mortal explanations, but it cannot rescind divine commands or inspired counsel. In our day the English words thee, thou, thy, and thine are suitable for the language of prayer, not because of how they were used anciently but because they are currently obsolete in common English discourse. Being unused in everyday communications, they are now available as a distinctive form of address in English, appropriate to symbolize respect, closeness, and reverence for the one being addressed.

I hope this renewal of counsel that we use special language in our prayers will not be misunderstood.

Literary excellence is not our desire. We do not advocate flowery and wordy prayers. We do not wish to be among those who “pray to be heard of men, and to be praised for their wisdom.” (Alma 38:13.) We wish to follow the Savior’s teaching, “When ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.” (Matt. 6:7; see also 3 Ne. 13:7.) Our prayers should be simple, direct, and sincere.

We should also remember that our position on special prayer language in English is based on modern revelations and the teachings and examples of modern prophets. It is not part of the teachings known and accepted by our brothers and sisters of other Christian and Jewish faiths. When leaders or members of other churches or synagogues phrase their prayers in the familiar forms of you or your, this does not signify a lack of reverence or respect in their belief and practice but only a preference for the more modern language. Significantly, this modern language is frequently the language used in the scriptural translations with which they are most familiar.

We are especially anxious that our position on special language in prayers in English 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 phraseology.

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.

Men and women 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. My brothers and sisters, the manner of addressing our Heavenly Father in prayer is at least as important as these.

It requires a little time for adults to learn how to use the language of prayer. But it is not really very difficult. In fact, we are more than 75 percent of the way in English prayers when we simply delete you and your and substitute thee and thy. (See Don E. Norton, Jr., Ensign, Jan. 1976, pp. 44–47.) The special language of prayer is even easier in most other languages.

Modern revelation commands parents to “teach their children to pray.” (D&C 68:28.) This requires parents to learn and pray with the special language of prayer. We learn our native language simply by listening to those who speak it. This is also true of the language with which we address our Heavenly Father. The language of prayer is easier and sweeter to learn than any other tongue. We should give our children the privilege of learning this language by listening to their parents use it in the various prayers offered daily in our homes.

The Prophet Joseph Smith said, “It is a great thing to inquire at the hands of God, or to come into His presence.” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 22.) The special language of prayer reminds us of the greatness of that privilege. I pray that all of us will be more sensitive to the importance of using this reverent and loving language as we offer our public and private prayers.

I testify that this is the Church of Jesus Christ, which our Savior has restored in these latter days with the authority and duty to preach his gospel and his commandments to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen

[Calm]

I open my personal prayers in a formal  (thee, thou) way, but once it starts coming straight from my heart, it probably would be unintelligible to anyone listening but God.  I am not worried at that point about how I say something, just that I say it .  I assume God isn't particularly concerned either.  I usually close in a formal way as well.  It sets apart the time for me, but if I were to put effort into paying attention so as to always be using the formal language rather than just letting what comes come, much less actual connection would be made, imo.

Otoh, I think sacred language, whatever currently qualifies, whether considered formal or familiar, is very useful in creating a sacred space and therefore, I would encourage teaching its use and accepting stumblings as we learn.  I would not insist on forcing it at all times though as learning is not an instantaneous occurrence, but happens over time.  I think it can be very important in a community as it helps signify that a sacred ritual is taking place.

[Jeanne]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

I open my personal prayers in a formal  (thee, thou) way, but once it starts coming straight from my heart, it probably would be unintelligible to anyone listening but God.  I am not worried at that point about how I say something, just that I say it .  I assume God isn't particularly concerned either.  I usually close in a formal way as well.  It sets apart the time for me, but if I were to put effort into paying attention so as to always be using the formal language rather than just letting what comes come, much less actual connection would be made, imo.

Otoh, I think sacred language, whatever currently qualifies, whether considered formal or familiar, is very useful in creating a sacred space and therefore, I would encourage teaching its use and accepting stumblings as we learn.  I would not insist on forcing it at all times though as learning is not an instantaneous occurrence, but happens over time.  I think it can be very important in a community as it helps signify that a sacred ritual is taking place.

Gosh...this is kind of what I do. I start out so formal but I end up talking as though God is in the room with me..I figure he already knows my heart..and my respect.  I think this is what it means to have a friend in the Savior...as a mediator for my Father.

[Bobbieaware]

20 hours ago, Thinking said:

Not in the Spanish translation.

"Y te mando que te comprometas a consultar con tus hermanos mayores en tus empresas; porque he aquí, eres joven, y necesitas ser nutrido por tus hermanos. Y atiende a sus consejos."

In this particular verse of Book of Mormon dialogue (and in others like it) it doesn't matter if it contains a mixture of King James English pronouns and modern English pronouns that each only translate into one word in the Spanish language. Why? Because on this thread we're not talking about conversation between mortals. What we are talking about is PRAYER to God and how LDS speakers of English -- not LDS Church members who speak other languages -- have been counseled by the General Authoritires to verbally communicate with the Lord. If there is no equivalent to the LDS Church endorsed sacred language of prayer in the Spanish language, that doesn't mean the LDS speakers of English should stop using the sacred language form of prayer found throughout both the ancient and modern books of scripture published in the English language.

Edited July 22, 2017 by Bobbieaware

[Scott Lloyd]

21 hours ago, Thinking said:

Not in the Spanish translation.

"Y te mando que te comprometas a consultar con tus hermanos mayores en tus empresas; porque he aquí, eres joven, y necesitas ser nutrido por tus hermanos. Y atiende a sus consejos."

Translations from English to other languages are of an entirely different character than the initial -- supernatural, if you will -- translation from the Nephite record to English. Which is why I'm so reluctant to jump to the conclusion that it was Joseph's own whim to use phrasing comparable to the King James Bible. 

Edited July 22, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Bobbieaware]

On 7/21/2017 at 2:25 PM, MiserereNobis said:

But how to deal with languages that have both pronouns? Should those people pray to God using the formal pronoun (which, incidentally, would be the pronoun you would use with the stranger in the street)?

If the argument in the English language is that there needs to be a barrier and a formality in prayer, then that argument also should extend to other languages.

Should there be a barrier and a formality in prayer in ALL languages, or just English? If the answer to this is yes, all prayer should be formal, then why isn't that taught in other languages?

 

If a non-English language has no equivalent to the English language's archaic sacred language of prayer, then you make due with what you've got. But LDS speakers of foreign languages who learn how to speak English (and as you know, there are more and more of these) are under the same counsel to use the English sacred language of prayer when they pray in English. Having a sacred language of prayer is useful but not essential. Simple as that. 

Edited July 22, 2017 by Bobbieaware

[3DOP]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

I think there is a lot to be gained by treating our relationship with God differently than our relationship with anyone else, and language is a part of that.  Personally, I pray using thees and thines for that reason.

Question:  Do Catholics believe that there is something special about latin specifically, or is it tradition that keeps latin relevant in the church?

Thanks for your interest bluebell. Speaking for myself, I am unaware of any linguistic quality associated with Latin that makes it the most suitable language for prayer. But in the life of the Church, historical developments have favored the retention of a language that people no longer speak. It is very comforting when lay people can go anywhere in the world, and hear a priest with a different accent, but praying the same words. Latin is a unifying agent for lay people as well as clerics. Another advantage is that the language is dead. Word meanings do not evolve over the centuries.

They are still correcting mistakes in the English translation of the Mass made over fifty years ago. An unexpected phenomenon is that translations can bring disunity to a parish. If there are significant numbers of Catholics speaking different languages in a parish, they will not mix very well. Instead of going to the same Mass and learning about each other and having a sense of community together, you find each language group going to its own different Mass. There are tendencies to comparisions, which may lead to contentions and jealousies between those who go exclusively to one or the other Masses in the same location. The vernacular has thus had a natural tendency to divide instead of uniting.

So in brief...there is nothing that I know of that makes Latin linguistically special. Latin is the ancient language of Rome in which the prayers of the Mass were first written. It was not tradition that has kept it alive, but practical necessity. The Latin is historically special and has come to be the language of the Roman Catholic Church. The Eastern rites use ancient languages that are undoubtedly as suitable as Latin with similar advantages.

 

[Five Solas]

On 7/20/2017 at 9:15 PM, mfbukowski said:

So it's not meaningless nuance?

All the bibles that agree with our archaic translation are also making the same meaningless nuance, so I see no reason to worry that we are somehow "doing it wrong"

If you can show how it is "wrong" I suppose we would have a conversation but as it is, we do not.

No, it wasn't meaningless nuance, mfbukowski.  Tyndale chose to use the informal/familiar pronouns to make an important theological point (which has been repeated several times on at least two threads dedicated to the topic).  Dismiss it as Protestant propaganda if you wish.  Tell us Tyndale got what he deserved for his impudence.  Heck, while you're at it--tell us how Thomas More was a really great guy for standing up against Tyndale, etc.  

But tell us this is meaningless?  Yeah, I'm afraid the price paid was too high for most folks here to believe that. 

The English language has evolved.  The grammar Tyndale chose in the early 16th century no longer serves such purpose in the 21st.  Contemporary Bible translations (e.g., ESV, NIV, NASB, NAB) have all moved on.  But the history is still worth understanding.  The point Tyndale made still stands.  And LDS borrowing his language in an effort to make the exact opposite point--yeah, that's utterly absurd.

--Erik 

__________________________________

Vows are spoken
To be broken
Feelings are intense
Words are trivial

Pleasures remain
So does the pain
Words are meaningless
And forgettable

--Depeche Mode "Enjoy the Silence"

[Rain]

4 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

It's up to the cultural context. 

Frankly I find it kind of odd that Catholic cultures which see God as a regal Sovereign speak to him in familiar terms

One of my favorite Catholic hymns, from my memory"

Does it seem odd to you to address such a Being the way you would address a child at the dinner table?

Honestly I don't mean this as a criticism, I just don't get it.

I think it is just American culture to address God this way.   Dunno.

And this is in English.  I wonder if it uses the familiar in Italian?

This is why I use "you" for the most part instead of "thee". I always used "thee, thou" etc till I learned about prayer 2-3 years into my Spanish class and it just felt right.

--------

"Spanish speakers use tú (too) and usted (oos-tehd), which both mean “you,” to convey the formality of a relationship. Tú is less formal than usted.

"You use tú when you’re talking to someone of the same age, the same rank, or the same educational level. You can also use it when you want to express a certain level of intimacy with someone. Most adults address children using tú.

"Usted signifies a more respectful way of talking to someone, such as a new acquaintance, an older person, or someone you consider to be of higher rank."

------

Using it with children, does not necessarily mean the same thing as using it to express intimacy. Sometimes you use it with children because they are not the same age/rank. Sometimes because you DO have that it intimacy with them.  That intimacy is why seveal above shared that they often switch into "you" after they have started out more formally.

Edited July 22, 2017 by Rain

[Thinking]

17 hours ago, Bobbieaware said:

In this particular verse of Book of Mormon dialogue (and in others like it) it doesn't matter if it contains a mixture of King James English pronouns and modern English pronouns that each only translate into one word in the Spanish language. Why? Because on this thread we're not talking about conversation between mortals. What we are talking about is PRAYER to God and how LDS speakers of English -- not LDS Church members who speak other languages -- have been counseled by the General Authoritires to verbally communicate with the Lord. If there is no equivalent to the LDS Church endorsed sacred language of prayer in the Spanish language, that doesn't mean the LDS speakers of English should stop using the sacred language form of prayer found throughout both the ancient and modern books of scripture published in the English language.

I went on a Spanish speaking mission. We taught the four steps of prayer as follows...

1. Nuestro Padre Celestial (address Heavenly Father)

2. Te damos gracias... (give thanks)

3. Te pedimos... (ask for blessings)

4. En el nombre de Jesucristo, Amen (close)

The first person familiar is used instead of the formal. I guess God wants to be more relaxed with the Spanish saints.

Edited July 23, 2017 by Thinking

[Scott Lloyd]

22 minutes ago, Thinking said:

I went on a Spanish speaking mission. We taught the four steps of prayer as follows...

1. Nuestro Padre Celestial (addess Heavenly Father)

2. Te damos gracias... (give thanks)

3. Te pedimos... (ask for blessings)

4. En el nombre de Jesucristo, Amen (close)

The first person familiar is used instead of the formal. I guess God wants to be more relaxed with the Spanish saints.

It's the same in Swedish as well. However, there are other conventions used by Latter-day Saints in Sweden when they pray that sets the language of prayer apart from everyday conversational speech and lends an air of sacredness and respect and reverence to the prayer. 

I detailed this in a prior post on this thread. 

Edited July 23, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

18 hours ago, Calm said:

I open my personal prayers in a formal  (thee, thou) way, but once it starts coming straight from my heart, it probably would be unintelligible to anyone listening but God.  I am not worried at that point about how I say something, just that I say it .  I assume God isn't particularly concerned either.  I usually close in a formal way as well.  It sets apart the time for me, but if I were to put effort into paying attention so as to always be using the formal language rather than just letting what comes come, much less actual connection would be made, imo.

Otoh, I think sacred language, whatever currently qualifies, whether considered formal or familiar, is very useful in creating a sacred space and therefore, I would encourage teaching its use and accepting stumblings as we learn.  I would not insist on forcing it at all times though as learning is not an instantaneous occurrence, but happens over time.  I think it can be very important in a community as it helps signify that a sacred ritual is taking place.

Parents and teachers typically teach little children to pray by having the child repeat what the adult says. In teaching in this way, adults ought to be careful to use the language of prayer, since the child in the early stages of cognitive development can as readily pick up on the thee, thy, thou and thine as the you and your. 

Edited to add: On my mission, I would be momentarily amazed when I heard tiny children speaking what to my ears was impeccable Swedish, as it had been a challenge for me to learn it as a second language. Then, I would realize this was the language they had heard and practiced constantly since birth and that children come wired to absorb language rapidly. It's nature's way to aid in their survival and ability to function by interacting with the world around them.

We do children a disservice when we don't use the sacred language of prayer in teaching them to pray. 

Edited July 23, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Stargazer]

I have to jump into this because it's a sore point with me.  I am used to using thou, thee, and thine in prayer -- it's part of my habit, and I admit to feeling uncomfortable when addressing Deity with "you".  But why does this have to be made a Thing?  The pure fact of the matter is this: thee, thou, and thine are NOT sacred.  They are simply archaic.  If this form of "you" were sacred, then we would theoretically be told we're not allowed to use it outside of prayer.  If the play Hamlet were to be performed at BYU, they'd have to change Hamlet's words to Ophelia from "Get thee to a nunnery!" to "Get yourself to a nunnery!"  In order to avoid misusing a sacred word.  The part of this talk which encourages this usage had to have been excised from translations to those languages which still retain both a familiar and formal form of the pronoun "you". Because even translating it would have been problematic and confusing.

 

[Stargazer]

On 7/20/2017 at 0:33 PM, JLHPROF said:

I think the thee and thou being the familiar is designed to draw us closer to God.
The fact that we label them as "formal" is the modern convention, but if I had to guess, it is because the same language used to address deity was also used towards royalty and nobility.

No, the language that was used to address those of a higher social station royalty and nobility was to use the plural, "ye".  See: T-V distinction.  God was always addressed using the familiar form, "thou".  It's the same in German.  You used the third person plural ("Sie") to address someone of a higher social standing (to maintain "social distance"), and this continues today to address anyone with whom one is not intimate.  But in German, God has always been addressed with the familiar: "Du". At least among the Christians.  I don't know if the German pagans used familiar address to their gods.

[Bobbieaware]

5 hours ago, Thinking said:

I went on a Spanish speaking mission. We taught the four steps of prayer as follows...

1. Nuestro Padre Celestial (addess Heavenly Father)

2. Te damos gracias... (give thanks)

3. Te pedimos... (ask for blessings)

4. En el nombre de Jesucristo, Amen (close)

The first person familiar is used instead of the formal. I guess God wants to be more relaxed with the Spanish saints.

I've addressed this issue elsewhere in the thread:

"If a language other than English has no equivalent to the English language's archaic sacred language of prayer, then you make due with what you've got. But LDS speakers of foreign languages who learn how to speak English (and as you know, there are more and more of these) are under the same counsel to use the English sacred language of prayer when they pray in English. Having a sacred language of prayer is beneficial but not essential. Simple as that"

Edited July 23, 2017 by Bobbieaware

[Scott Lloyd]

7 hours ago, Stargazer said:

I have to jump into this because it's a sore point with me.  I am used to using thou, thee, and thine in prayer -- it's part of my habit, and I admit to feeling uncomfortable when addressing Deity with "you".  But why does this have to be made a Thing?  The pure fact of the matter is this: thee, thou, and thine are NOT sacred.  They are simply archaic.  If this form of "you" were sacred, then we would theoretically be told we're not allowed to use it outside of prayer.  If the play Hamlet were to be performed at BYU, they'd have to change Hamlet's words to Ophelia from "Get thee to a nunnery!" to "Get yourself to a nunnery!"  In order to avoid misusing a sacred word.  The part of this talk which encourages this usage had to have been excised from translations to those languages which still retain both a familiar and formal form of the pronoun "you". Because even translating it would have been problematic and confusing.

 

 Bobbieaware a few posts ago quoted at length from the discourse of Elder Dallin H. Oaks in which he took pains to explain "why it has to be made a thing". Did you read what Elder Oaks said, and do you have objections specifically pertaining to points in his reasoning and explanation?

Edited July 23, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Thinking]

On 7/20/2017 at 4:10 PM, mnn727 said:

Never could figure out why 'Olde English" is more respectful or 'Holy' I think it's used as a justification for keeping the KJV (and you don't want to get me started on that subject)

It's the same reason my parents thought their popular music was better than my 80's music - which I know is much better than my children's music.

[Stargazer]

4 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 Bobbieaware a few posts ago quoted at length from the discourse of Elder Dallin H. Oaks in which he took pains to explain "why it has to be made a thing". Did you read what Elder Oaks said, and do you have objections specifically pertaining to points in his reasoning and explanation?

I admit I didn't read it.  It wouldn't be the first time I've disagreed with Elder Oaks, and I'll read it later and see if this is going to be another of those times.

When I pray in German, which I do from time to time, I use the form of "you" which a German-speaker typically uses to address one's own parent: the familiar "Du".  There is no "sacred You" in German.  Or Spanish.  I don't know why praying in English has to be "special".

I'm usually quite happy to sustain the Brethren on all matters great or small, but with this one I'm a bit mulish.