Re: OT: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives

----- Original Message -----
From: "Erich Rickheit KSC" <rickheit-cnl@...>
To: <CONLANG@...>
Sent: Friday, July 04, 2003 5:22 AM
Subject: Re: Opinions wanted: person of vocatives


> Joe wrote:
> > Should worship be recitation of archaic language?  I mean, would you
have
> > supported mass to be retained in Latin, when the everyday person could
not
> > understand it?
>
> I've been watching this discussion from the sidelines, and as a
> Hellenic reconstructionist, I want to throw in my two obols.
>
> For whose benefit is the recitation of prayers? If prayers are for
> the gods, they should be done in a manner, and therefore a language,
> that is pleasing to the gods.
In my version of Christianity, prayers should satisfy both needs.  And, of
course, I very much doubt that God cares what language prayers are done in.
I see prayer as a way of talking to God, asking for forgiveness, praying for
needs.  I don't think God really needs prayer.  I suppose he finds it nice
for us to talk with him.

> Of course I think the doctrine, the Bible, needs to be available
> to every worshipper; and I agree that prayers not understood can
> easily turn into empty mouthings. But I thought it curious to see
> all this argument about how the prayers were all about the worshipper's
> needs, not the gods.
See above.  I have no problem with prayers in archaic language inherently,
but I find that it can often merely become empty recitation.

Reply