Thursday knows Why are there no monasteries for Lutherans?

Ask anything – Torsti and his lollipop offer an answer. If you are not satisfied with the answer, please submit your own suggestion. Address: Usko Sister / Thursday knows, HS Sunday, PO Box 65, 00089 Sanoma. Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

Hey just, dear readers, this is Thursday! This time we dive straight into the new questions. In addition to questions, you will continue to send comments and discussion openings, it is a pleasure to read them!

My little child asked what priests, monks, and nuns do. I was able to answer this somehow, but I am no longer into why there are no monks, nuns, and monasteries in my own Evangelical Lutheran congregation. So, why not? Has there ever been, and what kind of Lutheran monastery could it be? Could such be of help to those in need of our time, tired and lonely?

– Kaisa

Lutheranism once abandoned its monastic system, that is, it has existed. Martti Lutherkin followed strict, medieval convent discipline before breaking his convent vows and marrying a nun.

Luther understood that everything was ultimately based on God’s grace alone. Thus, in his spirituality, he began to emphasize the daily walk of the Christian instead of retreating to the convent.

Researcher at the Church Research Center Jyri Komulainen according to something was also lost with the abandonment of the monastic system: Monasteries have often been countercultural places in the silence of which new ideas have developed.

In recent decades, Lutherans have begun to crave a new kind of spirituality. In this case, influences from the Catholic monastic tradition have been sought: this is how, for example, it was born to cultivate silence called flow. Komulainen says that there is a monastery community in Enonkoski, which you can retire to for a longer period of time.

“If the Lutheran Monasteries multiply, they could, above all, be places of stopping from which there is always freedom to return to the world.”

It is difficult for many Finns to pronounce the letters b, d, f and g. Even news readers talk about “bag strike”, “lekenda” and the airline “Vinnair”. Where do these pronunciation difficulties come from? Those who speak Swedish and English as their mother tongue do not think I have the same problem.

– Anders Snellman

Words that are difficult to pronounce are often not originally Finnish words: bus, legend and Finnair are all established in a language foreign to us. Therefore, they can be difficult to pronounce.

Pronouncing “wrong” is like pronouncing a word in Finnish: the word fits better among the rest of Finland when pronounced “in Finnish”. This, in turn, is due to the fact that the letters b, d, f and g you mentioned are a relatively new phenomenon in the Finnish phoneme system.

Phoneme means a small unit of language that separates meanings. Finland is written in the phonetic alphabet, where almost every sound has its own letter.

In practice, this means, for example, that the words “I” and “you” can be changed to mean each other by changing only one sound – that is, the m- and s-sounds are Finnish phonemes.

The letters you mention indicate voiced sounds. Historically, the difference between voiced and unvoiced sounds has not been significant in distinguishing. Only when words came to Finland, such as “bus”, which had to be able to be distinguished from the word “bag”, did the need arise to add phonetic sounds to the phoneme.

There must therefore be a meaningful relationship between the voiced b and the unvoiced p, otherwise “bag” and “bus” refer to the same thing.

This leads to one more impressive factor, namely dialects. For example, the language used by a person who speaks stad slang and speaks the dialect of Northern Ostrobothnia is very different, not only in terms of vocabulary but also in terms of pronunciation.

It is only natural that in Helsinki, where there have historically been a lot of Swedish and Russian loanwords, you can pronounce even weirder words. In a community where voices are barely heard, they are used less frequently and therefore do not necessarily pronounce them “correctly”.

The more language contacts there are, the better we recognize the differences between sounds.

When did man first use a biological weapon?

– Sissi

Attempts have been made to exploit infectious diseases in warfare since ancient times, but there is no more precise information about what would have been the first time. Apparently, early means have included throwing squid or animal carcasses into water sources, among other things.

There are also descriptions of poisoned arrows from early times. For example, Scythians living in steppe areas have been reported to have used a mixture of snake and human blood on arrowheads.

At that time, of course, it was not even known exactly what caused the diseases. In that sense, biological weapons are an invention of modern times.

Thursday on Facebook:


Related Posts

Next Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Premium Content