Read an Interview with Matthew, the owner of CathInfo

Author Topic: Difference between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit  (Read 2222 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Canuk the Lionheart

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 131
  • Reputation: +38/-0
Difference between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit
« on: June 13, 2011, 05:14:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I've been using "Holy Ghost" in my prayers for about a year now, however this is mainly due to it's use by other Traditionalists. However I've never really understood the difference between the two, or how to defend my use of "Holy Ghost" instead of "Holy spirit". What is the difference?

    Offline Vladimir

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1707
    • Reputation: +494/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Difference between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit
    « Reply #1 on: June 14, 2011, 03:58:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Its a matter of linguistic preference, "Ghost" being Germanic, "Spirit" being Latinate.

    There is no real difference, although it seems that older prayer-books prefer "Ghost".

    Another poster (Jamie), posted a while back arguing that Germanic vocabulary is more effective than Latinate in the English language.




    Offline TKGS

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4433
    • Reputation: +3800/-251
    • Gender: Male
    Difference between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit
    « Reply #2 on: June 16, 2011, 07:07:22 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The terms "Holy Ghost" and "Holy Spirit" are completely interchangeable.  In fact, there have been a few times I've noticed that the Douay-Rheims bible uses the "Spirit" form.

    Traditional Catholics generally use the term "Holy Ghost" because it is...traditional to do so in English speaking countries.  Also, when speaking to older Catholics I've been told that the Church (in the United States anyway) began the switch from "Holy Ghost" to "Holy Spirit" in the 1950s.  One gentleman specifically recalled the reason the priest gave for the change:  With the trick-or-treats at Halloween using the ghosts and goblins, the Church doesn't want children to be scared of the "Holy Ghost", and since the word "Spirit" is more gentle, children won't be frightened.  Clearly, this is poppycock.  I believe the Church in America began using "Holy Spirit" as an ecumenical gesture because it happened (i.e., in the 1950s) around the same time priests and bishops started thinking along ecumenical lines and American protestants always use "Holy Spirit".  That's right...the insane ecumenism we generally associate with Vatican II really began to become pronounced prior to Vatican II which is why the American bishops were so active in promoting Religious Liberty at Vatican II.

    Thus, today, using one term or another, though each are equally valid can be thought as more a political statement rather than a theological statement.  Using "Holy Ghost" signifies to others that one is, or considers himself to be, a traditional Catholic.  It tells the world the one rejects the New Order, the New Mass, the New Ecumenism, the New Evangelization, etc., etc., etc.  It does not signify sedevacantism or the SSPX or other traditional orders or communities.  Even indult traditional Catholics use the term.  

    Using the term "Holy Ghost", however, does tend to change one's theological outlook.  Not because the words themselves have any special psychological meaning or effectiveness, but because one is preferred by theological reformers and revolutionaries in the conciliar structures who have usurped the Catholic Church and have expelled those Catholics who, like Saint Athanasius, cling to tradition rather than fall for the new theology; in his case it was Arianism and in our case Modernism.  Thus, using "Holy Ghost" tends to give us a connection with the past and makes us a people set apart.

    Interesting that you feel a need to "defend" the use of a fully Catholic term.  If you're having to defend using "Holy Ghost", how long do you think it will be before you have to defend using other Catholic terms, such as, "mortal sin", "confession", "true"....

    Offline Exilenomore

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 720
    • Reputation: +583/-35
    Difference between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit
    « Reply #3 on: June 16, 2011, 08:56:12 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • In Dutch we only have 'Heilige Geest' (Holy Ghost), so it has remained unchanged here. Even the heretics use these words because there simply are no others.

    Offline TKGS

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4433
    • Reputation: +3800/-251
    • Gender: Male
    Difference between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit
    « Reply #4 on: June 16, 2011, 10:06:47 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Exilenomore
    In Dutch we only have 'Heilige Geest' (Holy Ghost), so it has remained unchanged here. Even the heretics use these words because there simply are no others.


    This makes complete sense give your language.  Few (if any) languages are as versitile and dynamic as English.  English has developed over the centuries in a way that few other languages have.  For some reason, the people of Britania were very eager to incorporate words and grammar from others with whom they came into contact whether by defeat, conquest, or trade while seldom, it seems, giving up on their own language and grammar.

    Thus, the Latin of the Roman, the French of Saxony, the Greek of international trade, among other languages, found a home on that island off the European coast in the very Germanic language of Old English which is, to an English speaker today, a completely foreign and alien language.

    English often contains numerous words to describe one idea.  Oftentimes, English words contain subtle differences in connotation, but just as often word choice might just be a matter of preference.

    This is the case of "Holy Ghost" and "Holy Spirit".  At one time, I think, it was just a matter of preference and the ancient Catholics gravitated more to the Germanic Ghost rather than the Latinized Spirit.  The history is unknown to us, but there may have been subtle differences (or even political realities) in meaning those centuries ago that led to one use over the other.  On the other hand, the rise of the use of Spirit was essentially a move to show a separation from Rome.  It is also interesting that this doesn't seem to make sense:  The Christians loyal to Rome and the Catholic Faith used the more English Germanic word Ghost while Christian revolutionaries used the Latin form Spirit to show their separation from Latin Rome.  English contains so many paradoxes in language that is truly a very interesting language.



    Offline Exilenomore

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 720
    • Reputation: +583/-35
    Difference between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit
    « Reply #5 on: June 16, 2011, 10:42:28 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yes, I have also noticed the simplicity of my own language compared to English. I remember reading how the Flemish priest and poet Guido Gezelle devoted much energy in keeping the authentic Flemish language intact so that the people would be protected from the influences of the French revolution. Now, the 'official' language here has become Dutch, but in our daily lives we all just speak  in Flemish dialect. It is kind of an oral tradition here. A tradition which I am glad to follow, as these are the lands on which my fathers toiled with catholic piety, whose bones now lie at rest in her bosom, until the trumpet of the Archangel will sound.

    But that is a different case altogether.

    There is obviously nothing inherently wrong with using the word 'spirit' when speaking of the Holy Ghost/Spirit. If some have changed 'ghost' to 'spirit', just for the sake of change, then that naturally does not affect the intrinsic value of both words.

    Offline LordPhan

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1171
    • Reputation: +826/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Difference between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit
    « Reply #6 on: June 16, 2011, 09:10:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: TKGS
    Quote from: Exilenomore
    In Dutch we only have 'Heilige Geest' (Holy Ghost), so it has remained unchanged here. Even the heretics use these words because there simply are no others.


    This makes complete sense give your language.  Few (if any) languages are as versitile and dynamic as English.  English has developed over the centuries in a way that few other languages have.  For some reason, the people of Britania were very eager to incorporate words and grammar from others with whom they came into contact whether by defeat, conquest, or trade while seldom, it seems, giving up on their own language and grammar.

    Thus, the Latin of the Roman, the French of Saxony, the Greek of international trade, among other languages, found a home on that island off the European coast in the very Germanic language of Old English which is, to an English speaker today, a completely foreign and alien language.

    English often contains numerous words to describe one idea.  Oftentimes, English words contain subtle differences in connotation, but just as often word choice might just be a matter of preference.

    This is the case of "Holy Ghost" and "Holy Spirit".  At one time, I think, it was just a matter of preference and the ancient Catholics gravitated more to the Germanic Ghost rather than the Latinized Spirit.  The history is unknown to us, but there may have been subtle differences (or even political realities) in meaning those centuries ago that led to one use over the other.  On the other hand, the rise of the use of Spirit was essentially a move to show a separation from Rome.  It is also interesting that this doesn't seem to make sense:  The Christians loyal to Rome and the Catholic Faith used the more English Germanic word Ghost while Christian revolutionaries used the Latin form Spirit to show their separation from Latin Rome.  English contains so many paradoxes in language that is truly a very interesting language.



    Hi, I want to say I agree with everything you said, I just wanted to correct an error in your statement. You said the French of Saxony, The Saxons were Germanic, the English Language originated from the Saxons and Angles(and to a lesser extent the Jutes) who came over and conquered England. They may have merged a few words but it mostly stayed germanic for a time. The French came from Normandy. When William the Conqueror conquered England, he was a Viking decended Duke of Normandy who had integrated into the french culture slightly, but definately in language. For the next couple hundred years I believe the English Court spoke french. Thus latin based French words entered english.


    Offline Hobbledehoy

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3746
    • Reputation: +4804/-5
    • Gender: Male
    Difference between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit
    « Reply #7 on: June 16, 2011, 10:26:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Sometime ago, I addressed this point in a tangential discussion with another poster:

    Quote
    Why is it that "Holy Ghost" is preferred to "Holy Spirit" as the translation of the Latin "Spiritus Sanctus," the most ancient and renowned of the theological and liturgical designations for the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, even to the point of imputing modernistic leanings upon the use of the latter? Literally, "Holy Spirit" is more correct. "Ghost" is an older English synonym for "Spirit," so there is really no substantial difference and, consequently, no inherent or necessary theological ramifications that would be negative.

    I believe it is ultimately a cultural preference that has been sustained by an ethos amongst traditional Catholics that is suffused with a love and zeal for traditional grammatical usages in prayer, together with a well substantiated "xenophobia" for usages that are not as ancient and have been used (wittingly or unwittingly) to supplant the older, venerable usages. This is the correct Catholic instinct when it comes to sacred lexicon, which is why I prefer "Holy Ghost" to "Holy Spirit," without, however, any prejudice against the latter.

    There is at least one exception I have to this general rule that I can call to mind right now. I have noticed that the vernacular translation of the conclusion of the Collects, Per omnia saecula saeculorum, is translated by most folks as "world without end." It is the older usage, and though it is not a literal translation, it does essentially communicate the significance of the words. I personally prefer rendering the clause as "Throughout all ages of ages." It shows clearly the finiteness and weakness of human intelligence in its failure to properly conceive and express the reality of eternity, the eminence and transcendence of the Deity. But "world without end" would have the same effect anyways.

    Ultimately, the vernacular cannot fully express the beauty and sublimity that the original Latin text enshrines. This is especially true when it comes to liturgical texts.

    I dunno, maybe it's just me...


    Ultimately, as has been written already on this thread, the two terms are interchangeable, and can be found in prayer-books [including sanctioned translations of official liturgical texts] published before the 1960's.

    The influence of the Book of Common Prayer and the Authorised Version account for various religious linguistic usages amongst the Anglophones, since these two books were read by all Anglicans throughout the history and territories of England since its defection from the Faith, and these texts had tremendous influence upon the development of modern English. However, these texts only solidified usages of diction that existed long before their publication.
    Please ignore all that I have written regarding sedevacantism.


    Offline TKGS

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4433
    • Reputation: +3800/-251
    • Gender: Male
    Difference between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit
    « Reply #8 on: June 17, 2011, 08:29:16 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: LordPhan
    Hi, I want to say I agree with everything you said, I just wanted to correct an error in your statement. You said the French of Saxony, The Saxons were Germanic, the English Language originated from the Saxons and Angles(and to a lesser extent the Jutes) who came over and conquered England. They may have merged a few words but it mostly stayed germanic for a time. The French came from Normandy. When William the Conqueror conquered England, he was a Viking decended Duke of Normandy who had integrated into the french culture slightly, but definately in language. For the next couple hundred years I believe the English Court spoke french. Thus latin based French words entered english.


    Why thank you.  I was unaware of this.  I find history fascinating but, because of limited resources, I sometimes have to infer certain facts.  I had never, before now, read anything concerning the ancestory of the Saxons and had inferred, based on other histories, that they were a French speaking people.  I knew that the English totally incorporated French as language of the English Court after William of Conqueror and maintained french for a few generations.  I believe it was Edward I's reign in which English returned to the English Court, though that may be mistaken.

    I appreciate the lesson.

    Offline Daegus

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 802
    • Reputation: +586/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Difference between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit
    « Reply #9 on: June 25, 2011, 08:29:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I grew up using Holy Spirit and don't really know if I should be using Holy Ghost instead. While I understand that they are essentially the same thing, they tend to have different connotations. Should I be using 'Holy Ghost' to differentiate myself from those who are Novus Ordoites, or should I avoid it for that very reason (seems prideful)
    For those who I have unjustly offended, please forgive me. Please disregard my posts where I lacked charity and you will see that I am actually a very nice person. Disregard my opinions on "NFP", "Baptism of Desire/Blood" and the changes made to the sacra

    Offline Canuk the Lionheart

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 131
    • Reputation: +38/-0
    Difference between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit
    « Reply #10 on: July 09, 2011, 12:03:31 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Daegus
    I grew up using Holy Spirit and don't really know if I should be using Holy Ghost instead. While I understand that they are essentially the same thing, they tend to have different connotations. Should I be using 'Holy Ghost' to differentiate myself from those who are Novus Ordoites, or should I avoid it for that very reason (seems prideful)


    While either are fine to use, is it ever prideful to do something to distiguish yourself from modernists?


    Offline Daegus

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 802
    • Reputation: +586/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Difference between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit
    « Reply #11 on: July 09, 2011, 07:55:04 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Not really, or else you could say that not dressing like a ghetto loser like the rest of the world and attending the N,.O. Mass and blindly following someone who may not even be Pope is prideful as well. One must do whatever they can to disassociate themselves with modernism at all costs, or else they will fall into a Fish Eaters-type apostasy.

    It does "seem" prideful, but I'm not sure I can say that it is. Holy Ghost is something that non-Catholics simply don't use. This way, people will understand that I am Catholic when I say "the Holy Ghost".
    For those who I have unjustly offended, please forgive me. Please disregard my posts where I lacked charity and you will see that I am actually a very nice person. Disregard my opinions on "NFP", "Baptism of Desire/Blood" and the changes made to the sacra

    Offline MyrnaM

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6006
    • Reputation: +3476/-323
    • Gender: Female
      • Myforever.blog/blog
    Difference between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit
    « Reply #12 on: July 09, 2011, 09:08:01 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I remember when I was still in the novus ordo church and trying to teach the little children their religion instructions.  I was told not to use the word "Ghost" but only "Spirit" because the world "Ghost" was too frightening for the little children.  


    Offline Daegus

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 802
    • Reputation: +586/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Difference between Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit
    « Reply #13 on: July 09, 2011, 09:16:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: MyrnaM
    I remember when I was still in the novus ordo church and trying to teach the little children their religion instructions.  I was told not to use the word "Ghost" but only "Spirit" because the world "Ghost" was too frightening for the little children.  



    Maybe the Novus Ordo "Catholics" should stop adhering to the doctrines of this world (I.e., that "ghosts", outside of the context of the one that is Most Holy are anything BUT non-existant) and start adhering to the Catholic faith. If I ever get married (I am doubting that this will happen.. Where would I find a Catholic spouse?) and have children, I am going to teach my children to say "Holy Ghost". I will tell them not to say "Holy Spirit", not because anything is wrong with it, but because Holy Ghost has a very specific Catholic-connotation to it, and non-Catholics rarely (if ever) use Holy Ghost, but instead use Holy Spirit. I would not want to associate myself with non/pseudo-Catholics.

    It's unfortunate that I have to go to a "Catholic" school and talk to heretics, apostates and schismatics, but I really don't have any other options, and it'll all be over soon.
    For those who I have unjustly offended, please forgive me. Please disregard my posts where I lacked charity and you will see that I am actually a very nice person. Disregard my opinions on "NFP", "Baptism of Desire/Blood" and the changes made to the sacra

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16