Language Mistake by a SpiritWe received the letter below regarding a fact reported in the May issue
of The Spiritist Review, in the article entitled “Pneumatography
or Direct Writing”:
“Dear Sir,
It was only today that I read the May issue of The Review,
finding the report of an experience of direct writing, carried out
in my presence at Ms. Huet’s house. It is a pleasure to confirm
the report with the exception of a small inaccuracy that escaped
the storyteller. What we found in the piece of paper was not God
loves you but God love you, that is to say, the verb love without the
s, which was not in the third person. Thus, it should not be translated
as God loves you (in French) unless presumed the existence
of a particle “what” giving the phrase an imperative or subjunctive
form. This observation was made in the following session to
the spirit Channing (considering that it was Channing since you
know me and please excuse me for keeping my doubts about the
absolute identity of the spirits); the spirit did not explain it very
categorically and even criticized us a little, if I remember well, for
giving importance to one letter “s” as compared to a more or less
remarkable experience. “Regarding that friendly criticism by the
spirit of Channing, I thought it was my duty to inform you about my observation about the way the word love was written. The
honorable Mr. E. de B… that kept the piece of paper can show it
to you and he will show it to many people and among those there
could be some who would have read the article from The Review.
Well then, it is important – and I am sure you agree with my
opinion – that the highest fidelity be given to the report of the so
strange and marvelous facts that we obtain.”
Yours sincerely…
Mathieu
We had noticed perfectly well the mistake indicated by Mr. Mathieu and
promptly corrected it, knowing from experience that the spirits give little
importance to these typos, with which the more enlightened have no
qualms about; or are we not surprised at all by Channing’s observation
to something, as he said, a fact far more crucial. The accuracy in the reproduction
of facts is, no doubt, something essential. But the importance
of such facts is relative and we must confess that if we were supposed to
always follow the French orthography of the invisible ones then the grammarians
on duty would have fun, treating them as cooks, even if the mediums
had passed those subjects. We have a lady medium at the Society
full of academic titles, and whose communications, sometimes written
very calmly, have several of those mistakes. The spirits always tell us: “Pay
attention to the message not the form; the actual thought is everything
to us; the form is nothing. Modify the form, if you like. We leave that to
you.”
If the form is mistaken we don’t maintain it unless it can provide a
teaching. Well, that was not the case in the situation above, in our opinion,
because the meaning of the statement was obvious.
