It was such a dramatic experience that it gives me shivers even when I think of it today, 30 years later. I was in tears, shaking and shivering, and I received the gift of tongues on the spot. My wife saw my experience, and she too went up and had a similar experience. Life was completely different after that. We were able to tell the Lord that even if he wanted us to be childless, we would be happy, as his will was more important that our want.
It is only after this acceptance that the Lord gifted us with a son ten years into our marriage. Most of our content is available or can be made available for distribution at Catholic Digital Resources. Join us in celebrating 25 years of ministry! How many stars would you give to Good News Ministries? All of them offer healing, rest and restoration in the gentle arms of Christ.
Some are interactive. Some are prayer-poems. Some are multi-media. Some are in Virtual Reality and you don't need headgear to see it. Take time alone with the Lord: [go]. Tell Me about those who are closest to you, the sorrows they cause you, and your fears for them.
- Why we need a new Lord's Prayer | Psephizo;
- Lupus (FICTION) (French Edition)!
- Story Placement?
- Welcome Home.
How would you like Me to help them? Join us in celebrating 25 years of building faith and healing souls! Holy Land Tour. Good News Ministries provides individuals at no charge many faith-building materials. Your support will help keep this ministry going. God Bless Ken. Click to open -- Take a tour of what we're doing to build faith and heal souls!
Do you want a stronger prayer life?
Lord, I Am Not Worthy
Receive the Good News Reflections every day by email! Order the book or subscribe free to daily posts. The intercessions in a celebration with a congregation or in common are thus introduced by a brief invitation, given by the priest or minister and designating the single response that the congregation is to repeat after each petition. Further, the intentions are phrased as direct addresses to God and thus are suitable for both common celebration and private recitation.
Different methods can therefore be used for the intercessions. The priest or minister may say both parts of the intention and the congregation respond with a uniform response or a silent pause, or the priest or minister may say only the first part of the intention and the congregation respond with the second part. In accord with ancient tradition, the Lord's Prayer has a place suited to its dignity, namely, after the intercessions at morning prayer and evening prayer, the hours most often celebrated with the people.
Henceforth, therefore, the Lord's Prayer will be said with solemnity on three occasions during the day: at Mass, at morning prayer, and at evening prayer. The concluding prayer at the end marks the completion of an entire hour. In a celebration in public and with a congregation, it belongs by tradition to a priest or deacon to say this prayer. In the office of readings, this prayer is as a rule the prayer proper to the day. At night prayer, the prayer is always the prayer given in the psalter for that hour.
The concluding prayer at morning prayer and evening prayer is taken from the proper on Sundays, on the weekdays of the seasons of Advent, Christmas, Lent, and Easter, and on solemnities, feasts, and memorials. On weekdays in Ordinary Time the prayer is the one given in the four-week psalter to express the character of these two hours. After his conversion, Monis had no further contact with any Jewish community; the devotional translations were read solely by his Puritan students and colleagues, if at all.
And though his benefactors were inclined to read these translations as preparatory exercises for a mission to the Jews, Monis himself may have had something rather different in mind.
For an essential ambiguity troubles the citation from Zephaniah: does incorporation mean a universal Christianization of the people, or a universal Hebraization of prayer? This blurring, between Christianized Hebrew and Hebraized Christianity, should be contextualized amid the uncertainty that could characterize early American identities.
In this sense, the present article follows the work of early Americanists Jill Lepore and Edward Gray on the ways in which American identities only gradually emerged over the course of the colonial period, hardening along confessional, linguistic, and cultural lines.
Powerful Communion Prayer for Remembrance and Reflection
In this context, Monis occupied a precarious and indeterminate position, called to maintain these boundaries even as he himself traversed them. As a proselyte, he was to repudiate his former co-religionists, but also to continue to represent them to a Puritan audience, perhaps even to return to them as an evangelist. The same dynamic can be observed in contemporary reactions to American languages. In colonial America, language could be both symptom of difference and its antidote. As with contemporary efforts to evangelize native peoples in their own Algonquian languages, it was hoped that Christian prayer in Hebrew might induce the Jews to adopt the collective identity—spiritual and cultural—imagined by colonial Puritans.
The ambivalence was rather baked into the very substance of Christian Hebraism. On the one hand, Hebrew was revered as the hebraica veritas , the immaculate, original language both of Scripture and of Eden. On the other, a fetishization of Hebrew might dangerously blur the distinction between Protestants and contemporary Jews, whose Hebraic erudition was as much a threat as a resource.
A solution to this problem lay, in part, in the hope of Jewish conversion.
The founding of the Massachusetts Bay Colony was accompanied by a wave of millenarian enthusiasm, which brought with it fantasies of the long-awaited conversion of the Jews. Universal Christianization, it was hoped, would not be long in coming. Most importantly, the Ordinance of the General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony hewed wherever possible to the language and spirit of the juridical books of the Old Testament, styling their new society as a Torah-observant commonwealth. It was only by recourse to the original language of Scripture that revelation might be re-experienced and translated into temporal law.
Yet high-level Hebrew competence was hard to come by in the colonies and posed a major obstacle to the success of any Hebraist project. The greatest expertise in Hebrew, meanwhile, lay with contemporary Jews, whom the Puritans viewed with equal parts fascination and suspicion.
Pope Francis wants to change words to the Lord's Prayer
The problem, of course, was that converts like Monis rarely abandoned the Jewish cultural apparatus by which they had learned their Hebrew in the first place. Dickdook Leshon Gnebreet embodies the encounter between Christian Hebraist and traditional Jewish approaches to Hebrew. While its outward appearance—in language, format, and organization—resembles contemporary grammars of other classical languages, Monis prominently announces his intellectual debt to a number of Jewish grammarians, most notably David Kimhi, on the title page.
Elsewhere, Monis was vocal in his defense of the Masoretic vocalization system, which had lately come under attack by Christian Hebraists. His pedagogy, too, was informed by distinctively Jewish practices, such as the use of mnemonic acronyms, which had been only occasionally taken up in Christian Hebraist circles.
At the same time, however, the textbook had to avoid looking too Jewish, and especially too rabbinic. Like Monis himself, Dickdook was required to do two things at once: demonstrate the authenticity of its Jewish origins, even as it divested itself of the very Jewish features that established this pedigree.
Perhaps as a result of this innate contradiction, the work has not fared well in the eyes of posterity. Noted Semiticist George Foot Moore set the tone in when he wrote:. Moore likely meant the observation merely as an insult, casting Monis as a snakeoil salesman among the Hebraically ignorant Puritans.
Remarks of this kind have come either from Semiticists or from scholars of Jewish history who lament the transliterations as a mutilation of Hebrew grammar. It tells us little about why Monis did what he did, and less about its effects on his students who were neither accomplished Hebraists nor Jewish historians. For them, there was no pristine Hebrew to be protected from barbarization. Monis, aware that his system was unlike anything his students had encountered before, ironically explains his transliterations as an accommodation or adaption to English orthography:.
I have in the first chapter throughout, and in sundry other Places, turned the Pronunciation of the HEBREW Words in English Letters, as near as the difference of the Tongues would permit, with a design to lead as it were young Beginners into the way of Pronouncing this Tongue by their own Industry. Monis sets out, it seems, to adapt the peculiarities of English spelling to Hebrew. By adopting these conventions, however arbitrary or whimsical, he hoped to elicit correct pronunciation by means of visual cues his students had acquired over years of reading and writing in English.
Through orthographic convention, Monis forges visual associations with English words the student already pronounces instinctively, on sight. Figure 1. From Gale. Eighteenth Century Collections Online.