This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It doesn't say, but I suppose this is all about Wicca or something, don't you suppose.... Is this our idea of neutral tone, "God's Word" being a euphemism for the Bible, and all that? -- Wetman 08:56, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
This page gets over 6,000 hits a month. How many references does it have as of now? Zero. Amazing. The page looks well written, however. To those with claim to authorship here: could you please add references? I can try to add references, but that will mean modifying the text since I do not know where all the text came from. Thanks. History2007 ( talk) 12:33, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
hey, this practice is also called Thomistic Prayer and Discursive Meditation. It would help if those search phrases led here.
Nouns are translated as (imperative) verbs enclosed in un-necessary quote-marks. Lectio doesn't mean read.
I didn't understand the use of the word "dissecting" in this sentence: "For example, given Jesus' statement in John 14:27: "Peace I leave with you; my peace I give unto you", an analytical approach would focus on the reason for the statement during the Last Supper, the biblical context, etc. In Lectio Divina, however, the practitioner "enters" and shares the peace of Christ rather than "dissecting" it.[4]" It seems to me unconvincing to describe setting something in context as an example of 'dissecting' (no point in getting misled by extraneous connotations of the word 'analysis') - instead it seems a matter of a coolly scholarly, hermeneutic approach which need not be an expression of faith (unlike the approach of the practitioner of lectio). I changed it but then noticed that other sources on the web (from which this page seems to be copied wholesale) also use it, so thought there might be an explanation for this way of talking and changed it back. 90.254.160.96 ( talk) 21:07, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It doesn't say, but I suppose this is all about Wicca or something, don't you suppose.... Is this our idea of neutral tone, "God's Word" being a euphemism for the Bible, and all that? -- Wetman 08:56, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
This page gets over 6,000 hits a month. How many references does it have as of now? Zero. Amazing. The page looks well written, however. To those with claim to authorship here: could you please add references? I can try to add references, but that will mean modifying the text since I do not know where all the text came from. Thanks. History2007 ( talk) 12:33, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
hey, this practice is also called Thomistic Prayer and Discursive Meditation. It would help if those search phrases led here.
Nouns are translated as (imperative) verbs enclosed in un-necessary quote-marks. Lectio doesn't mean read.
I didn't understand the use of the word "dissecting" in this sentence: "For example, given Jesus' statement in John 14:27: "Peace I leave with you; my peace I give unto you", an analytical approach would focus on the reason for the statement during the Last Supper, the biblical context, etc. In Lectio Divina, however, the practitioner "enters" and shares the peace of Christ rather than "dissecting" it.[4]" It seems to me unconvincing to describe setting something in context as an example of 'dissecting' (no point in getting misled by extraneous connotations of the word 'analysis') - instead it seems a matter of a coolly scholarly, hermeneutic approach which need not be an expression of faith (unlike the approach of the practitioner of lectio). I changed it but then noticed that other sources on the web (from which this page seems to be copied wholesale) also use it, so thought there might be an explanation for this way of talking and changed it back. 90.254.160.96 ( talk) 21:07, 16 March 2019 (UTC)