During this period between Ascension Thursday and Pentecost Sunday, I have been promoting the Novena to the Holy Ghost, which recalls the nine days that the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Apostles spent in prayer after Christ's Ascension, while waiting for the promised descent of the Holy Spirit. To my surprise, especially since no one has objected in previous years, I have had some complaints about the use of the title "Holy Ghost" rather than "Holy Spirit."
One reader wrote, "How about the Novena to the Holy Spirit? Some of your information really sounds obsolescent." Another declared, "Our Milwaukee area Roman Catholic churches have not used 'Holy Ghost' since Vatican II said we should use 'Holy Spirit.' What does your CCC [Catechism of the Catholic Church] say?"
Over the years, I've heard a lot of claims about what "Vatican II said," but this was a new one for me. Did Vatican II really mandate the use of the title "Holy Spirit," and is it therefore wrong ever to use the older title "Holy Ghost"?
Like most of the claims made about Vatican II, both from those who are critical of the council and those who invoke the "spirit of Vatican II," this one is simply mistaken. It's true that the current Catechism of the Catholic Church uses "Holy Spirit" exclusively, but that in itself doesn't tell us anything about what Vatican II may or may not have said.
The "Holy Ghost" and the "Holy Spirit" are both historical names applied to the Third Person of the Holy Trinity. In English, "Holy Ghost" became the common title back in the 17th century, when the phrase was used in the two most prominent English translations of the Bible, the Authorized Version (the King James Bible) and the Douay Rheims.
At the time, there was little difference between the meanings of ghost and spirit. Today, the use of ghost to mean "spirit" or "soul" is considered archaic, so the first reader has a point. Of course, so is the use of art as the second person singular of be, hallowed for "holy," and thy for "your." Yet most of us still begin the Our Father with the words "Our Father, Who art in Heaven, hallowed be Thy name" (which, not incidentally, is still the official English translation of the Our Father for the Mass).
Vatican II made no decree on the use of "Holy Spirit" rather than "Holy Ghost." The English translation of the Novus Ordo Missae, the new Mass promulgated in 1969, uses "Holy Spirit," and that's probably where the second reader got the idea that the change had something to do with Vatican II. But the change goes back even further than that: By the early 20th century, the use of "Holy Spirit" had become quite common, though "Holy Ghost" was still used in official translations of the text of the Mass.
By mid-century, the English edition of the Raccolta, the official manual of indulgences, offered about half of the prayers to the Holy Spirit using the title "Holy Ghost" and other half using "Holy Spirit." Indeed, the beginning of the text of one of the most famous prayers to the Holy Spirit is given as this:
Come Holy Ghost, fill the hearts of Thy faithful and kindle in them the fire of Thy love.
V. Send forth Thy Spirit, and they shall be created;
R. And Thou shalt renew the face of the earth.
Throughout the 20th century, there was great fluidity in the use of the titles, and over time, the "Holy Spirit" became the more common, aided by the fact that ghost had become restricted in common use to mean the spirit of a dead person, and by the use of "Holy Spirit" in the official translations of the new Mass.
And yet Holy Ghost persists in both popular and liturgical use. On Pentecost, in many (or even most) Catholic churches in the English-speaking world, we still sing "Come Holy Ghost," and no one bats an eye or invokes the spirit of Vatican II. ("Holy Ghost" is also used in the final verses of a number of traditional hymns that include a Trinitarian doxology.)
And to my mind, that's as it should be; there's room in our liturgical and prayer life for both titles. I've never been disturbed by either title; it always seemed self-evident to me, even as a child, that the Holy Ghost was not a "ghost" in the popular sense. In preparing to write this post, I turned to my followers on Twitter and asked them what they thought, and I received a number of interesting responses, split pretty much down the middle. One said that she preferred "Holy Ghost" because it is "old style" and "sounds more reverent," while another noted that "'spirit' suggests an idea while 'ghost' suggests a concrete entity." On the other hand, those who disliked "Holy Ghost" pointed to the current connotations of the word ghost as the main reason.
So why do I refer to the Novena to the Holy Ghost? Am I deliberately attempting to sound "obsolescent," or making some sort of statement by doing so? No. I refer to the Novena to the Holy Ghost because that's how I learned it growing up—and I had a decidedly post-Vatican II childhood, being born in 1968. Because of the history and tradition of this devotion, which was once much more widespread than it is today, the use of "Holy Ghost" continued on long after "Holy Spirit" had gained the upper hand in other prayers and the English translation of the Mass.
Even so, if you go to any web page or blog post where I discuss the novena (or any other traditional prayer on the Catholicism GuideSite that uses the term "Holy Ghost," such as this prayer by St. Catherine of Siena), you'll see that I also use the title "Holy Spirit" to refer to the Third Person of the Trinity.
If the use of "Holy Ghost" is a distraction to you, then the solution is an easy one: In praying a prayer to the Holy Spirit that uses the title, simply substitute "Holy Spirit" wherever the prayer uses "Holy Ghost."
But please don't do so when you're singing "Come Holy Ghost" on Pentecost Sunday. "Spirit" will ruin the flow of the hymn, and it's one of my favorites. If you mess up that melody, my ghost might just have to come back to haunt you.
(A dove perched in a hole in the wall outside the Basilica di Sant'Agnese Fuori le Mura (Basilica of St. Agnes Outside the Walls), Rome, Italy. The dove is the traditional Christian symbol for the Holy Spirit. Photo © Scott P. Richert)
If you have a question that you would like to have featured in our "Reader Questions" series, send me an e-mail at catholicism.guide@about.com. Be sure to put "QUESTION" in the subject line, and please note whether you'd like me to address it privately or on the Catholicism blog.
Connect With Scott: Facebook | Twitter | Newsletters
Everything about modernism usually has a Satanic reason. Jesus said it in Scripture in many places. Scott mentions “ghost” as being of a dead person.. but Ghost is of a “person”. The Holy Spirit is the third person of the trinity.
Spirit meanwhile can apply to any created thing, not a person. A tree or a dog and a human being has a living spirit. This spirit is not a person or soul. Jesus had a soul and a spirit in addition to His Divinity.
We already have people who say the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of the Father. This opposes the Trinity.
The term Holy Ghost ensures there can be no confusion. He is the third Person of the Holy Trinity.
Philip.
Human cannot understand God. We cannot express the name of God in human language. But we should know whom we mean when we invoke the title, either “Holy Spirit” or “Holy Ghost”.
Holy Spirit is the Proper Term,Even in the Old Testament.People have the Spirit of Life From God nort Plants Trees or animals.
I attended the consecration of a bishop recently. One of the hymns was “Come Holy Ghost.” In most of the prayers, the Third Person of the Trinity was referred to as the Holy Spirit.
I doubt anyone was confused.
Ghost comes from Old High German Geist which means Spirit. I was born in ‘42 and had 17 years of Catholic education. I have never stopped using the name Holy Ghost. From very early on to this day, I pray daily to the Holy Ghost as he was always there as a friend or “buddy” as Jesus said we had to go through the Holy Ghost until He returned. We were told that the Catholic Bishops elected, after Vatican II, to use Spirit because some thought the term Ghost was silly like “Casper the Ghost”. I didn’t and still don’t.
I think name Holy Ghost can be confusing to some. My husband also grew up post-Vatican (born in 1968) as well. I’m a convert but have been surprised at some of the things he was taught. One of those is that the Holy Ghost is Jesus’ Ghost after the crucifixion. So maybe it’s things like that that have caused the shift towards Holy Spirit. I did notice that my children’s homeschool catechism books use both – which I think is wise.
Karyn, when you say that your husband was “taught” that “the Holy Ghost is Jesus’ Ghost after the crucifixion,” do you mean that literally—i.e., that a teacher in a Catholic school or CCD actually told him that? Or do you mean that he may have absorbed that from other children, or come to the conclusion himself because of poor catechesis?
I’m old enough and Tridentine in spirit enough to very much appreciated your use of the Holy Ghost. Thank you.
I concur.It is so wonderful to see the profound and reverent use of the term Holy Ghost.I am a Catholic convert,and feel very privledged to be a part of such a formal worship of our most High God,and his triune persons in the Mass!I have a grown son,who I brought up in the Catholic church,and watching him genuflect before the crucifix is breathtaking.I am so grateful to the CHURCH for their guidance,as I had to leave my first husband when my little boy was 2years old,and the guidance and support of the Church made all the difference in making him a drug-free,responsible,God-fearing young man!
The oxford English dictionary defines “ghost” as follows….
“an apparition of a dead person which is believed to appear or become manifest to the living, typically as a nebulous image
Eg: the building is haunted by the ghost of a monk.
“spirit” is defined….
…the non-physical part of a person which is the seat of emotions and character; the soul…
The use of the term “soul” or “spirit” is not a question theological debate, nor is is an aspect of modern animistic paganism, it is simply a question of semantics. The term Ghost is an archaic form (and often the term used when trying to explain the holy trinity to children. The term “Holy Spirit” is the more modern and descriptive term. It is also the word used in the modern Catechism and as such, I recommend its use by all.
Mr Richert’s article began as a very worthwhile piece on a Novena, and then quickly degenerated into a debate piece about “ghost or spirit.”
When discussing theological matters, it is most important not to take you eye off the ball. Nit picking about the use of the technically correct word, is about as stupid as The Lilliputians in Gulliver’s travels, going to war over whether you opened a boiled egg at the big end or the little end.
Holy Ghost – Holy Sprit, its all good – personally I would plumb for the term “Holy Spirit – its more modern, its more descriptive and it is the form used in the modern Catechism.
Ashley, I’m not quite sure how my article could have “quickly degenerated into a debate piece about ‘ghost or spirit,’” unless your comment did as well, since the point of the article was the same as your point. The richness of language is an asset; I really dislike seeing old, familiar prayers and hymns rewritten just because of, as you put it, “nitpicking.” My children, ranging from age 3 to age 16, have no trouble understanding that the Holy Ghost and the Holy Spirit both refer to the Third Person of the Trinity; I’m surprised that others seem to have such trouble.