Sunday second-hour meetings are to open with a prayer

[morgan.deane]

This has been an interesting, but rather odd conversation. I always thought the prayers during sacrament were sufficient. But if leadership wants to add focus during second hour that is fine too. 

The other 4 pages has been the odd part with a focus and insistence from some on certain types of language. I enjoy learning about other languages so that part was nice. And as someone else said on here, bringing a moment of sanity to the conversation, the key difference we should look for isn't between formal and informal language, but the amount of sincerity, devotion, and communion with deity the prayer contains. During my military service I faced rather difficult circumstances, and I certainly didn't stop to include archaic language. But I felt blessed and closer to God for my sincerity which is what mattered. 

 

The implicit judgment of someone because their prayer doesn't contain archaic language is very disconcerting. Not the least of which because my favorite scriptures about prayer in Alma 34 give instructions that sound rather informal:  

Quote

18 Yea, cry unto him for mercy; for he is mighty to save.

19 Yea, humble yourselves, and continue in prayer unto him.

20 Cry unto him when ye are in your fields, yea, over all your flocks.

21 Cry unto him in your houses, yea, over all your household, both morning, mid-day, and evening.

22 Yea, cry unto him against the power of your enemies.

23 Yea, cry unto him against the devil, who is an enemy to all righteousness.

24 Cry unto him over the crops of your fields, that ye may prosper in them.

25 Cry over the flocks of your fields, that they may increase.

26 But this is not all; ye must pour out your souls in your closets, and your secret places, and in your wilderness.

27 Yea, and when you do not cry unto the Lord, let your hearts be full, drawn out in prayer unto him continually for your welfare, and also for the welfare of those who are around you.

The key in those scriptures is the sincerity of heart and connection with deity. 

Sadly, these disconcerting arguments are fairly common. The same poster that insists on certain languages in prayers also seemed excessively concerned about the exact rank of general authorities, but showed no concern for "the gays," "the blacks," and doubters that were inappropriately addressed by Elder Wilcox. Nor did the same poster care about plagiarism from an apostle and former university president, even though that individual was a journalist and pounced on plagiarism from another poster on this board just a short time before. Those are really misplaced priorities and need to be identified as such. 

In the matter of prayer, I join with others in hoping we can maintain focus on what's important. And it is not praying with King James language.  

[Rain]

 

5 hours ago, MrShorty said:

I don't know if this adds much. I served a French speaking mission and noticed that the Louis Second translators used the informal/singular "Tu" when a biblical character addressed God. We were taught to use these same singular/informal pronouns in prayers.

In English, the church has long favored the KJV, with its 17th century English, and has encouraged us to use similar language in prayer.

From my understanding it is actually 16th century as the King James Version comes from an earlier version in the late 1500s.

5 hours ago, MrShorty said:

Could it be that the main driver of this is what choices were made by the church's main choice for Bible translation? Maybe it's more about making our prayer language and our scriptural/Biblical language similar?

 

[Scott Lloyd]

4 hours ago, InCognitus said:

Are you asking for examples of Evangelical prayers where they use the word "just" frequently?   If so, just Google the phrase "we ask that you just", and you'll find several examples.  Like, "Father God, we ask that you just touch us right now...", "And so we ask that you just wrap your arms around all of them...", "Lord we ask that you just begin to bring financial security to them...", "we ask that you just touch them and cure them..." (etc. etc.)

OK, thanks. I think I have heard that, though I might not have been fully conscious of it. 

I can see where such a habit might be annoying to some listeners. Perhaps it is more a matter of regional (southeastern and south-central United States) culture than anything else. It comes across to me as the speaker’s urge to convey a sense of earnestness and conviction. I can tolerate it on that assumption, the way I might tolerate the habit among some of our own people of constantly repeating the name of Deity throughout the prayer, which can be annoying to some listeners but which I feel also is borne of an urge to convey earnestness. 

[Scott Lloyd]

7 hours ago, InCognitus said:

We were doing this occasionally in our ward (having a husband and wife say the opening and closing prayer in Sacrament meeting), but when a member of the Stake Presidency was visiting our ward (and we had a husband and wife say the opening and closing prayer), he pointed out to us that the Church Handbook says to "avoid always" doing that:

So we avoided it after that.   (Interesting wording, "avoid always" ) 

Consider the distinction between “avoid always” and “always avoid.” They are quite different in meaning. 
 

“Avoid always” means it’s OK to do it part — even most — of the time, but that there should be occasions when it is not done. 
 

“Always avoid” means that you never, ever do it. 

[Bernard Gui]

One might consider the growing number of Spanish speaking Latin American members (not Spanish speakers from Spain) when discussing prayer language

In some countries there are three forms of the English pronoun you: usted, tu, and vos and their related forms ustedes and vosotros. Their use can vary dramatically by region. One should be aware of this when communicating with Latin Americans. Misuse can have serious consequences.

Usted is used when speaking to strangers, someone in authority, or in formal, business, and official situations. It’s the safest and most respectful way to address another person. 

Tu is used for people with whom one has a more intimate relationship such as friends, family, and Deity, or with inferiors such as a teacher to a student. Purposely using tu with the wrong person can come across as assumptive, condescending, or insulting. In some situations you may ask if it is ok to tutear, or to speak to them with greater familiarity. A person who feels they are becoming your friend may ask you to tutear them. Referring to God as tu implies intimate familiarity, not disrespect.

Vos may be used in very intimate or informal relationships such as with best buddies, BFFs, or family, (not Deity), but it can be intentionally used as a condescending insult that may cause great offense. Tutear or even worse vosear someone in anger or a policeman would be very provocative. Missionaries always use the usted form except maybe with children.

The choice of pronouns also affects verb conjugations. For example, ser (to be):

you are = usted es, tu sois, vos sois or vos soi.

There is no English equivalent to this. We use the ubiquitous you. Some say that the antiquated thee, thou, thy, thine and their related words may be similar. I happen to enjoy and envy the Spanish subtleties.

Perhaps the Brethren’s counsel to use thee and it’s related forms is in consideration of the coming majority of members or to be more inclusive?

Edited December 22, 2022 by Bernard Gui

[pogi]

42 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

One might consider the growing number of Spanish speaking Latin American members (not Spanish speakers from Spain) when discussing prayer language

In some countries there are three forms of the English pronoun you: usted, tu, and vos and their related forms ustedes and vosotros. Their use can vary dramatically by region. One should be aware of this when communicating with Latin Americans. Misuse can have serious consequences.

Usted is used when speaking to strangers, someone in authority, or in formal, business, and official situations. It’s the safest and most respectful way to address another person.

Tu is used for people with whom one has a more intimate relationship such as friends, family, and Deity, or with inferiors such as a teacher to a student. Purposely using tu with the wrong person can come across as assumptive, condescending, or insulting. In some situations you may ask if it is ok to tutear, or to speak to them with greater familiarity. A person who feels they are becoming your friend may ask you to tutear them. Referring to God as tu implies intimate familiarity, not disrespect.

Vos may be used in very intimate or informal relationships such as with best buddies, BFFs, or family, (not Deity), but it can be intentionally used as a condescending insult that may cause great offense. Tutear or even worse vosear someone in anger or a policeman would be very provocative.

The choice of pronouns affects the verb conjugation. For example, ser (to be):

you are = usted es, tu sois, vos sois or vos soi.

There is no English equivalent to this. We use the ubiquitous you. Some say that the antiquated thee and thou may be similar. I happen to enjoy and envy the Spanish subtleties.

Perhaps the Brethren’s counsel to use thee and its related forms is in consideration of the coming majority of members or to be inclusive?

I’m not sure I understand.  If they don’t say prayers in english, how is this in consideration and more inclusive of Spanish speakers?  Learning modern English is hard enough for them, having to learn antiquated English on top of that seems less-than considerate of that.  I know lifelong english speakers who can’t get thee and thou right.

Also, thee and thou don’t really provide options of subtleties.  It is either used right or wrong.  I’m not sure of a sentence where one could choose between thee and thou and both options would be correct usage.  Thou is only correctly used as a subject case pronoun, whereas thee is correctly used as object case pronoun and are both in the same prayer to the same being, but not interchangeably.

If anything, it just adds another layer of challenge for foreign speakers.

Maybe I am misunderstanding you though 

Edited December 22, 2022 by pogi

[Bernard Gui]

23 minutes ago, pogi said:

I’m not sure I understand.  If they don’t say prayers in english, how is this in consideration and more inclusive of Spanish speakers?  Learning modern English is hard enough for them, having to learn antiquated English on top of that seems less-than considerate of that.  I know lifelong english speakers who can’t get thee and thou right.

 

If anything, it just adds another layer of challenge for foreign speakers.

Maybe I am misunderstanding you though 

Why do you assume foreigners have to learn to pray in English? A Latin American living in the US would totally understand using thee and its related forms in prayers. Going from tu to thee would be easy as paella, plus it would make cultural sense to them. No hay problema.

Edited December 22, 2022 by Bernard Gui

[pogi]

7 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Why do you assume foreigners have to learn to pray in English?

That was my very first question to you.  If they pray in Spanish, or another language, how is this policy of old English pronouns more “considerate” and “inclusive” of foreign language speakers?  That is what it sounded like you were saying.

I guess I really don’t understand what you are saying.  How could this be about foreign language speakers?  I thought maybe you were suggesting that if they did know/learn English, these old pronouns would feel more at home with how they use pronouns in their native tongue - which also was confusing to me.  Perhaps you can explain what you meant?

Edited December 22, 2022 by pogi

[pogi]

19 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Why do you assume foreigners have to learn to pray in English? A Latin American living in the US would totally understand using thee and its related forms in prayers. Going from tu to thee would be easy as paella, plus it would make cultural sense to them. No hay problema.

I see you edited your post after I responded.  This still doesn’t make any sense to me for the reasons I already mentioned.

[Amulek]

18 hours ago, JustAnAustralian said:

I find if jarring when I hear someone use non-thee/thy/thou pronouns in a prayer, but that's because I'm used to hearing thee/thy/thou.

I'm used to both: thee/thy/thou from my experiences at church and non-archaic pronouns from all the other people I pray with.

Most of the non-LDS folks I hear tend to be some flavor of Baptist, so I don't think it's strange at all to hear someone open a prayer with, "Dear Heavenly Father, what a Great God you are..."

In fact, if they started saying "thou art" and whatnot I might actually think they were mocking me.

And I sometimes wonder if there isn't something kind of like that happening in reverse whenever we pray. Is it jarring to everyone else when they hear us use thee/thou/etc.? I remember the first time I led the prayer at an interfaith Bible study and feeling a little Pharisaical after I realized that I was the only one whose prayers sounded so formal. Eventually I just figured, 'oh well, if they have a problem with the way I pray and think I'm trying to be captain pious pants' then that's on them. Still, it's something to think about.

 

Edited December 22, 2022 by Amulek

[Eschaton]

13 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Bingo.
 

Because of our reverence and respect for God, we use different forms when addressing Him than we do in everyday speech. Prophets and apostles comprehend this, even if some of us do not. So they teach us accordingly, hoping we will come to understand if we don’t already. 

Prophets and apostles plural? Has anyone other than President Oaks opined on this issue?

[Bernard Gui]

30 minutes ago, pogi said:

I see you edited your post after I responded.  This still doesn’t make any sense to me for the reasons I already mentioned.

No, I edited it before you responded. Having grown up in New Mexico with Latino relatives, served a Central American mission, studied Spanish in college, and taught Spanish, it makes perfect sense to me, but thanks for your comments.

[JAHS]

9 hours ago, morgan.deane said:

During my military service I faced rather difficult circumstances, and I certainly didn't stop to include archaic language. But I felt blessed and closer to God for my sincerity which is what mattered. 

There are no Thees, Thous, or Thines in foxholes  🙂

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

I thought maybe you were suggesting that if they did know/learn English, these old pronouns would feel more at home with how they use pronouns in their native tongue - which also was confusing to me.  Perhaps you can explain what you meant?

First, I was clarifying the issues some have raised about Spanish pronouns. Second, I pointed out that tu and its related words are used to address Deity, not usted, because it implies a more intimate relationship. Third, Spanish speakers would be culturally and linguistically sympathetic to our use of thee and its related words instead of you in our prayer language if they were learning English.  Fourth, Spanish speakers will soon be the majority in our Church. If they come to the US perhaps we can be more inclusive if we respect their culture by continuing a practice we have in common when we pray. I have no problem with what the Brethren are asking us to do. What if they asked us to do some great thing?

Edited December 22, 2022 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

37 minutes ago, Eschaton said:

Prophets and apostles plural? Has anyone other than President Oaks opined on this issue?

Yes, for as long as I can remember, and that is a very long time.

 

[pogi]

38 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

No, I edited it before you responded.

That wasn’t intended as a dig.  To be more precise, you edited your post after I quoted it - I just wanted to note that so it didn’t look like I was ignoring your response.

38 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Having grown up in New Mexico with Latino relatives, served a Central American mission, studied Spanish in college, and taught Spanish, it makes perfect sense to me, but thanks for your comments.

I took Spanish immersion all through school and managed Spanish-speaking-only construction crews for 4 years.  I am not ignorant about Spanish.  I don’t disagree with anything you said about Spanish - my contention is that adding more complexities to the already confusing language of English isn’t doing any  foreign speakers a favor.
 

Edited December 22, 2022 by pogi

[JAHS]

1 hour ago, Eschaton said:

Prophets and apostles plural? Has anyone other than President Oaks opined on this issue?

The Language of Prayer

In this 1993 talk Elder Oaks offers some good reason and explanations of why we use certain pronouns and he refers to other church leaders who have also talked about it:

"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 yours inasmuch 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.)"
 

Edited December 22, 2022 by JAHS

[Peacefully]

I learned thee/thou in the Church of Christ. It just comes naturally to me since that was the way I was taught as a tot. But I believe God just wants to hear from us. I don’t think He stands on ceremony. Ymmv

Edited December 22, 2022 by Peacefully

[Bernard Gui]

4 minutes ago, Peacefully said:

I learned thee/thou in the Church of Christ. It just comes naturally to me since that was the way I was taught as a tot. But I believe God just wants to hear from us. I don’t think He stands on ceremony. Ymmv

Perhaps it is not for His benefit but for ours?

[Rain]

15 minutes ago, JAHS said:

The Language of Prayer

In this 1993 talk Elder Oaks offers some good reason and explanations of why we use certain pronouns and her refers to other church leaders who have also talked about it.

"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.

This would be "you" for me.  I associate "thee" and "thou" with barriers, authoritarianism and showmanship.  I definitely don't judge others for using them as it is what is in their hearts that counts.

So if we are going for "love and respect and reverence and closeness" I don't think we can really say English speakers associate the words this way.  We can only say some English speakers do.

I also don't disrespect others who feel we should use them either.  Again, I go by what is in their heart. I just disagree with them.  And if by going by their own reasoning for what we use that I quoted above then the fact that I use "you" actually fits.

15 minutes ago, JAHS said:

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 yours inasmuch 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.)"
 

 

[pogi]

35 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Perhaps it is not for His benefit but for ours?

Or, perhaps the brethren have simply been raised to believe that the language is more loving and respectful.  Perhaps it is more about their subjective cultural sensibilities which are turning into dogma than anything else.

 I wonder if those sects who use common modern pronouns in prayer agree that they are being less loving and respectful when they pray.  Do you believe that?   Do you believe that we are more spiritually benefited or advantaged than they are because we use better language in prayer?  Almost sounds rameumptom-ish.

We thank thee that we are more benefited than our brethren for the words we speak in prayer.

 

 

Edited December 22, 2022 by pogi

[Bernard Gui]

3 minutes ago, pogi said:

Or, perhaps the brethren have simply been raised to believe that the language is more loving and respectful.  Perhaps it is more about their subjective cultural sensibilities which are turning into dogma than anything else.

 I wonder if those sects who use common modern pronouns in prayer agree that they are being less loving and respectful when they pray.  Do you believe that?   Do you believe that we are more spiritually benefited or advantaged than they are because we use better language in prayer?  Almost sounds rameumptom-ish.

We thank thee that we are more benefited than our brethren for the words we speak in prayer.

Perhaps. 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Eschaton said:

Prophets and apostles plural? Has anyone other than President Oaks opined on this issue?

Quote

Our prayers can be enhanced in other ways. We can use “right words”³⁵—special pronouns—in reference to Deity. While worldly manners of daily dress and speech are becoming more casual, we have been asked to protect the formal, proper language of prayer. In our prayers we use the respectful pronouns Thee, Thou, Thy, and Thine instead of You, Your,and Yours.³⁶ Doing so helps us to be humble. That can also enhance our prayers. Scripture so declares, “Be thou humble; and the Lord thy God shall lead thee by the hand, and give thee answer to thy prayers.”³⁷

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2009/04/lessons-from-the-lords-prayers?lang=eng

I am with Bernard on the popularity of the topic.  In my youth I remember hearing about proper prayer language a lot, including lessons in Primary and Young Women’s; so 60’s and early 70s, off and on since then.

Footnote 36 has references to five others besides Pres Oaks, for some reason I can’t copy it.

This deals specifically with it, though this is one of my English profs at BYU, not an apostle or prophet, the other 4 were though.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1976/01/the-language-of-formal-prayer?lang=eng

Edited December 22, 2022 by Calm

[Navidad]

21 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Hey @Navidad, am I remembering correctly that you and/or your wife have prayed in LDS church meetings? I'm curious what you (as someone who attends) and our LDS friends think of this rule.

Uh oh! It's a list of Preferred Pronouns!  

ETA: I see the pronoun thread is already covering this. Carry on!

Interesting this topic came up just now. Saturday I had a long talk with our stake president (a member of our ward) about it. He came over to our house to give us a gift from him and his wife. We have been through three bishops in the six years we have been in the ward. During the time of our first two bishops (five + of the years), we each were asked to pray to open or close meetings. We each have given sacrament talks, testimonies, and have substitute served as teachers in adult Sunday School (Gospel Doctrine). I have read the Christmas story and prayed at several Christmas celebrations in our ward. I have done several firesides on historical matters and have presented to lots of LDS groups who have come here to visit historical sites and to gather historical information. I was told that such decisions were a matter for local discretion.

It appears that our new bishop is exercising his local discretion and  will not allow us to participate in any of the services of the ward except to sing in the church choir. I am not sure whether we can still clean or not. 🙄I find this disconcerting because of my understanding of gifts given by the Holy Spirit and the use of those gifts in the New Testament Church. My understanding is that God provides folks to a church with particular gifts for the ministry of the church, both internally and externally. It is how He provides for the building up of the church. The concept of members only ministering is unknown in the New Testament (as far as I know). Growing up Mennonite I am actually quite gifted with a vacuum cleaner.

I also was a pastor. If God brought someone to our church who had specific gifts in ministry, I would have jumped at the opportunity to use them as soon as I was comfortable with their spiritual maturity. Membership in the congregation or not would have been irrelevant. I had professors of Biblical Studies in my congregation. They were of a completely different denomination. You can be sure I used them to teach. Their own personal belief in a mode or means of baptism was irrelevant when teaching through Amos.

[Scott Lloyd]

4 hours ago, Eschaton said:

Prophets and apostles plural? Has anyone other than President Oaks opined on this issue?

There have been some very good responses to this already on this thread; I endorse those. I will only add that if instruction is contained in the Church Handbook, as this is (see the link in the OP), I earnestly believe that it carries the implied assent of the Church leadership as a body. 

Edited December 22, 2022 by Scott Lloyd