Graven Images

[JonathanMichael]

Hello

First I would like to say, someone mentioned the need to start a thread on transubstantiation. I think this is a wonderful idea. Especially from the view of the Anglican Communion, and from what is seems to me (IMHO) everyone seems to have a different view or belief (even within a single congregation or parish).

I am not a Roman Catholic, I am an Anglican, and will try give my point of view (although this may not be the point of view of the Anglican Church (of Southern Africa) or Communion), so that is my background.

I understand there to be a big difference between Veneration and Worship, and I think that is the first thing to consider when debating such topics. I myself am not too clued up on this so would not make any good arguments. All I know that all we worship is God. One God. and we don’t need to be in any building, in front of any statues, to worship God.

Wikipedia has an article on Veneration. [en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veneration]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veneration])

I have never been taught to pray to a statue, and I do not believe any Roman Catholic has. We do not pray to a rosary, the function of the rosary is so we do not have to try keep our place by counting on our fingers and toes.

In Our church we have a crucifix in the sanctuary. It is not worshiped or prayed to. It is there to remind us of the sacrifice that Jesus gave us, so we could live.

Regarding icons:
Remember and icon is not painted, and icon is written, and I think that is a very important thing to consider. We need to remember that in the dark or middle ages, most the people could not read. There is no point in giving a person a bible if he cannot read it. For this reason, stories or concepts where taken out the bible and written in the form of icons. The people could look at the icon and be reminded of the stories and teachings from the bible.

These answers are only my opinion.

Also, I feel it’s very important for us to know the answers to these types of questions. There is a lot of anti-catholic nonsense going around, and even some things that the media decide to blow way out of proportion. We need to know the right answers, for when people ask us questions.

 

[The_Preacher]

As a lecturer on Luther, you are aware that neither Luther, nor any Lutheran worth his salt, would use the term consubstantiation to describe the Eucharist. The term used by Luther was sacramental union. That said, believe the best description of the mystery is by Melanchton in the Apology to the Augsburg Confession:

BTW, order a pint for me.

Jon

Innocent of all rancor, I’m a bit surprised: This is the first time in twenty years that anyone has questioned me on the term “consubstantation.” You may indeed be very right, but the term was used as a given by my professors at Lutheran Theological at Philadelphia and Princeton Theological (my professors at Nashotah House Theological hesitated to challange me on anything). I’ll have to investigate that. I fear that I have questions about Milanthon. The problem in Lutheran Theology is that Luther never was, never tried to be and never clamed to be a systimatition. Like our Lord he simply went through life expostulating on things theological as the situation arose. We don’t even have his early lectures, just the copiously annotated texts and bibles he used. His students resorted to taking notes, then (gathering over a pint or five) redacting a cohesive text. The same is true of his “Table Talks” (of course he and Katey had posessed an entire Chapter House for a home and dinner for thirty was the norm). Ol’ Phill figuratively chaced him around frantically trying to compose his discourses into a managable body. I frequently get the impression that he didn’t quite get it. I aslo had the privalage of studying under Carlfrig Freulig at Princeton (I never did understand why so august a Lutheran Theologian chose to teach at Princeton as I was never sure what god the rest of the place was talking about but that was beside the point). He taught the entirty of Luther’s Theology using nothing but Luther’s hyms. They are highly structured and formulaic (many of the verces have been conveniently surpressed, as the verse of “A Mighty Fortress” which says "Tough Pope and Turk may rave, His people he shall save) and are pure, unadultrated Luther. I depart from Lutheran Theology with the advent of the German High Scolastics. I’ve always wondered at the arguement over “con” verses “trans”. It seems to me as trivial as the question “did Jesus own his robe” pertaining to his poverty, which was a hot meedeval issue and formed the occasion of Umbarto Ecco’s superb novel “The Colour of the Rose” which I highly recommend (I also love Ellis Peters’ “Brother Cadfale” books). To my way of thinking, the issue is the real presence, not the way He pulls it off. As another victum of Princeton, Albert Einstine said: “I wish to know the mind of God, all else is just details.” As to ordering a pint: Do you know the difference between Heaven and Hell? In Hell you drink all you want but can never get drunk. In Heaven you drink all you want but can never get a hangover. See you there (Heaven that is). PAX; God is good and He has a nice mother.:heaven:

 

[kalt]

The fact is I do not know what is being taught today in Catholic schools, but I do know first hand what was taught to me throughout Catholic elementary and high schools. We prayed ‘to’ the statues, asked for intercession from the saints, wore relics (which I do know now were not actually from the saints or cross of Jesus. But as a child you do believe what you are told by nuns). Why even pray the Hail Mary when Jesus is our intercessor.

It certainly has no connection to viewing a nativity scene, as I would not pray to the statues there.

I am sorry to have inflamed some of you with the truth.

If you had taken a test on Catholicism at any time in that Catholic education, you would have failed. You weren’t taught that Catholics ask statues for anything.

Though I agree that some nuns weren’t the most well-versed in theology, this business of the statues is so off-base that I have no idea how you came to this conclusion.

I’ve never heard of anyone having a relic hanging around his neck, especially not a first class relic, like a piece of a saint’s body. If you were taught that you were wearing a piece of a Saint’s arm bone around your neck, I’ll eat the computer in front of me. . First class relics are somewhat rare and aren’t used as bodily adornments. I think you’ve mixed up sacramentals and relics.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

The fact is I do not know what is being taught today in Catholic schools, but I do know first hand what was taught to me throughout Catholic elementary and high schools.

Then - and I am assuming you are being sincere - you left what you never really understood. I’m not blaming you. I cannot speak to your situation. But from what you have stated here it seems pretty clear that your understanding of the Catholic teaching regarding the intercession of the saints and the use of sacramentals (like holy medals, etc.) is incorrect.

informed:

We prayed ‘to’ the statues, asked for intercession from the saints, wore relics (which I do know now were not actually from the saints or cross of Jesus. But as a child you do believe what you are told by nuns.

Then I am happy that you are here as an adult. Perhaps it will clear up some of your misconceptions about the Catholic faith.

informed:

Why even pray the Hail Mary when Jesus is our intercessor.

Christ is our one Mediator. Christians are called to be intercessors for each other in Christ as our one Mediator.

[1] First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men,
[2] for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way.
[3] This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
[4] who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (1 Tim 2:1-4)

informed:

It certainly has no connection to viewing a nativity scene, as I would not pray to the statues there.

The point of the original post was to address the propriety of statues per se being considered as idols. The Catholic position is that the proscription against “graven images” is addressed towards how they are to be used, as opposed to just a general proscription against making images. The examples of the Cherubim and the Seraphim being ordered by God were examples where God directly ordered the construction of graven images to be used for His honor (and not to be worshipped as prohibited by the Commandment). An interpretation against all “graven images” per se would necessarily preclude the making of a nativity scene, whether or not the purpose of these images was for worship.

informed:

I am sorry to have inflamed some of you with the truth.

If any are upset, it is because what you did was present your misperception as if it were correct Catholic doctrine when in fact it is not. You have not presented the truth. You have presented some significant errors concerning Catholic doctrine based upon your personal experience alone.

From what I have read from you, I am guessing that one of two things has happened (assuming your assertion about attending Catholic schools is sincere): (1) You were taught incorrectly; or (2) You misunderstood what the nuns were trying to teach you. Whichever is the case, it is simply not true that Catholic doctrine states that it is correct to pray to statues, nor does it provide that sacramentals like scapulars and holy medals are charms or idols to be prayed to. Statues, medals and scapulars are merely objects - tools for focusing our thoughts on God. These things are not the focus of our worship or our prayers.

Peace,
Robert

 

[The_Preacher]

If you were “educated in Catholic schools” you would have been taught better.
Please quit trying to pretend you were taught anything of the sort.

:imsorry: Would that I could say that all was well with Catholic schools. I’ve taught in several Catholic High Schools, and overall I’m not at all encouraged. Many are superb, but since the advet of secular control wit Vatican II, the theological situation has detereated dangerously. Indeed I was retained as the defacto chairman of an austencably Catholic high school last year (defacto in that I was the entire department with administrative duties over the department and grants) with a mandate to bring it up to Archdiosesen standards. Before I got there theology had been taught by a Presbaterian history teacher and a Lutheran librarian! Though the students thought I was from Mars, I developed an entirely new cariculum based on the Didache series of texts from Navar University (dare I say Opus, well never mind). I was continued for the next year, but obeying the Archbishop would have cut into the sports program. The department was eliminated and the school went on to win the state football championship (explain that to St. Peter). Then again there is a dark side to the history of Catholic education. I believe that common education to all citizens is essential to the society can only support private education when there is an overwhelming need (which does not includ class considerations). I do support it when there is an overwhelming need (such as this society’s hsitoric and continuing determination to wipe out “Papism”). Unfortunately our schools began by careing in the prime for immigrants (which is most of us, my Native American, nay American Indian roots not withstanding, I’m a bit of a mutt), who brought with them an unfortunately righ store of folk piety, which did permeate and colour the teachings. As witniss this debate, enemies of the Christ and His Bride have pounced upon this regretable laps.uch: The practices and belieefs of the unsophisticated should never be allowed to mistaken for the teachings of the church. It is ingerous to the body Catholic and gives opportunity to the antichrist among us (google the “Jefferson Bible”). We need to demand a more rigerous and pure teaching, and be on watch for those who would destroy us npatrol: I know that this is not popular. His Holyness Benedict forsees a smaller but purer church and who am I to argue? Those who have gone out from us were never of us.

 

[JonNC]

=The Preacher;5340687]Innocent of all rancor, I’m a bit surprised: This is the first time in twenty years that anyone has questioned me on the term “consubstantation.” You may indeed be very right, but the term was used as a given by my professors at Lutheran Theological at Philadelphia and Princeton Theological (my professors at Nashotah House Theological hesitated to challange me on anything). I’ll have to investigate that. I fear that I have questions about Milanthon.

My dad attended Mount Airy, however I suspect - know - it has changed quite a bit since then.
Consub, seems a simple enough term that more easily roles off the tongue than “sacramental union”, “or in with and under”. I don’t think, however, that Luther would have approved of the philisophical overtones of the word.

I’ve always wondered at the arguement over “con” verses “trans”. It seems to me as trivial as the question “did Jesus own his robe” pertaining to his poverty, which was a hot meedeval issue and formed the occasion of Umbarto Ecco’s superb novel “The Colour of the Rose” which I highly recommend (I also love Ellis Peters’ “Brother Cadfale” books). To my way of thinking, the issue is the real presence, not the way He pulls it off

.

Now this I completely agree with. Luther hints at this a number of times, and it is the reason I prefer, above all other confessional descriptions of the Eucharist, Melanchton’s in the Apology.

As to ordering a pint: Do you know the difference between Heaven and Hell? In Hell you drink all you want but can never get drunk. In Heaven you drink all you want but can never get a hangover. See you there (Heaven that is). PAX; God is good and He has a nice mother.:heaven.

lol, and he has a wonderful mother.

Jon

 

[slyboots]

Please: No offence intended.:blushing: I’m an occasional guest lecturer on Luther, whome I dearly love at a local University and look forward to shareing a beer with at the feast of the Lamb. He was driven by his faith, which I can’t say of all the reformers. I understand his reasoning, I just come to a different conclusion, which I suspect he would appreciate. I also understand not wishing to upset family: My brother disowned me when I became Catholic.uch:

None taken Preacher.
Interesting stuff isn’t it?

 

[slyboots]

The fact is I do not know what is being taught today in Catholic schools, but I do know first hand what was taught to me throughout Catholic elementary and high schools. We prayed ‘to’ the statues, asked for intercession from the saints, wore relics (which I do know now were not actually from the saints or cross of Jesus. But as a child you do believe what you are told by nuns). Why even pray the Hail Mary when Jesus is our intercessor.

It certainly has no connection to viewing a nativity scene, as I would not pray to the statues there.

I am sorry to have inflamed some of you with the truth.

You wore relics? Do you mean scapulars? Where was this school you attended? And how long ago please?

 

[QuickCat]

I was in a small village in England several years ago. There is a very large statue of Mary situated between a Catholic and an Anglican church. The “pilgrims” were coming by the busloads to “venerate” this bronze likeness of Mary. They were praying to it; kneeling before it; kissing the feet; rubbing it; and bowing to it. Any unbiased observer would have said that they were worshipping it.

Does the 2nd commandment forbid this type of worship? Of course it does.

 

[JonNC]

I was in a small village in England several years ago. There is a very large statue of Mary situated between a Catholic and an Anglican church. The “pilgrims” were coming by the busloads to “venerate” this bronze likeness of Mary. They were praying to it; kneeling before it; kissing the feet; rubbing it; and bowing to it. Any unbiased observer would have said that they were worshipping it.

Does the 2nd commandment forbid this type of worship? Of course it does.

One of the dangers of veneration is that some may cross into worship with it. This is not evidence that the Catholic Church teaches or even condones such actions. They claim an understandable difference between dulia and Latria, and I have no reason to doubt what they say.

For clarification, Catholics (and Lutherans) number the commandments where the first includes prohibitions of idolatry. The second forbids taking the Lord’s name in vain.

Jon

 

[The_Preacher]

One of the dangers of veneration is that some may cross into worship with it. This is not evidence that the Catholic Church teaches or even condones such actions. They claim an understandable difference between dulia and Latria, and I have no reason to doubt what they say.

For clarification, Catholics (and Lutherans) number the commandments where the first includes prohibitions of idolatry. The second forbids taking the Lord’s name in vain.

Jon

Vary true, but there is strong historic-redactive evedence that the second entered the tradition before the first and is therefore older.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

One of the dangers of veneration is that some may cross into worship with it.

But I think it takes a conscious decision to actually cross that line. One knows the difference between honoring a person and contemplating/adoring them as Deity. But I am certainly willing to concede that, objectively speaking, an act of veneration can appear to “cross the line” for someone who is viewing the activity from a different faith tradition or social context. Marian devotion in some of the Latin American countries - I have been told - can appear to be acts of idolatry. However, Catholics in Latin America know that Mary is not divine and understand that their veneration is not intended as worship. Staunch protestants from the U.S. think they see idolatry. They are simply wrong. To the extent that someone consciously decides to start worshipping Mary (or the other saints) that person is no longer practicing the Catholic faith.

JonNC:

This is not evidence that the Catholic Church teaches or even condones such actions. They claim an understandable difference between dulia and Latria, and I have no reason to doubt what they say.

Thanks. Much appreciated.

JonNC:

For clarification, Catholics (and Lutherans) number the commandments where the first includes prohibitions of idolatry. The second forbids taking the Lord’s name in vain.

It always surprises me that so many people think Catholics “removed” the “no idolatry” commandment so we could have statues in our churches. I think this view says more about where these people are coming from in their formation than what the Catholic Church actually teaches. Thanks for the clarification.

Peace,
Robert

 

[The_Preacher]

I was in a small village in England several years ago. There is a very large statue of Mary situated between a Catholic and an Anglican church. The “pilgrims” were coming by the busloads to “venerate” this bronze likeness of Mary. They were praying to it; kneeling before it; kissing the feet; rubbing it; and bowing to it. Any unbiased observer would have said that they were worshipping it.

Do you really expect a good Catholic to take anything that happened in England, the mother of abominations seriously? :kissme: The English are famiously, well :whacky: As far as I can see the only good thing to come out of England was St. Patrick whome God ordained the Irish to rescue and deliver from that profain soggy rock. If only the Spanish Armada had succeeded, or had the Stewarts prevailed there might have been a chance for that blited land and ours spared the birth defect of having been it’s colony.:knight2:

 

[Robert_in_SD]

I was in a small village in England several years ago. There is a very large statue of Mary situated between a Catholic and an Anglican church. The “pilgrims” were coming by the busloads to “venerate” this bronze likeness of Mary. They were praying to it; kneeling before it; kissing the feet; rubbing it; and bowing to it. Any unbiased observer would have said that they were worshipping it.

I kissed the Blarney Stone once. Was I worshipping it? No.

I knelt before my grandmother’s grave marker. Was I worshipping her? No.

I bowed to my friend from Japan. Was I worshipping him? No.

I prayed the Divine Mercy chaplet using my grandfather’s rosary beads. Was I worshipping the rosary beads (or my grandfather)? No.

Does the 2d (or 1st) Commandment prohibit the worship of idols? Yes. Is veneration worship? No. You have to consider the context.

Peace,
Robert

P.S. If you want to try to accuse Catholics of idolatry you need go no further than the Eucharist. If we are wrong on the Real Presence then Eucharistic Adoration is idolatry. But if we are right, you would be blaspheming. That’s were - I think - the charge can be made with sincerity. What you do above is make assumptions about other people’s thoughts and intentions based upon your own religious formation. Others may see these acts as pious and holy acts giving honor to God and His saints. My suggestion is that you stop wasting your time accusing Catholics (and Anglicans) of idolatry where it is quite clear (at least to all of us) that no one is worshipping that statue of Mary in the small English village.

 

[John_Hiner]

I was in a small village in England several years ago. There is a very large statue of Mary situated between a Catholic and an Anglican church. The “pilgrims” were coming by the busloads to “venerate” this bronze likeness of Mary. They were praying to it; kneeling before it; kissing the feet; rubbing it; and bowing to it. Any unbiased observer would have said that they were worshipping it.

Does the 2nd commandment forbid this type of worship? Of course it does.

Laudetur Iesus Christus.

How would an “unbiased observer” define or identify “worshipping?” How about a mother kissing her baby’s feet and talking to him? What would distinguish the two, if anything? How about traveling hundreds or thousands of miles to visit with a childhood friend or the same baby when he is in college or has moved away?

Spiritus Sapientiae nobiscum.

John Hiner

 

[Robert_in_SD]

Do you really expect a good Catholic to take anything that happened in England, the mother of abominations seriously? :kissme: The English are famiously, well :whacky: As far as I can see the only good thing to come out of England was St. Patrick whome God ordained the Irish to rescue and deliver from that profain soggy rock. If only the Spanish Armada had succeeded, or had the Stewarts prevailed there might have been a chance for that blited land and ours spared the birth defect of having been it’s colony.:knight2:

One has to wonder what the world would look like today if the sun had set on the Brittish Empire 4 centuries earlier.

Peace,
Robert

 

[The_Preacher]

One has to wonder what the world would look like today if the sun had set on the Brittish Empire 4 centuries earlier.

Peace,
Robert

My life and vocation would be far easier. I really don’t hate the English people. It’s just that the American onthic myth was formed in the English civil war, republic and restoration. The final battle in that civil war was actually fought in Conneticut when Cromwellian delegates fought the legally installed Catholic govoner for control of the state! Well, the Puritans failed in Englind and the republic with them. However they succeeded here! It’s hard living and teaching the Catholic truth in a country founded with an “antipapist” agenda. npatrol: As to what the English did to the rest of the world, and the whorlwind were currently reeping from the wind they sowed, that’s another story.
God is good, and he has a nice mother. :shamrock2:

 

[Robert_in_SD]

My life and vocation would be far easier. I really don’t hate the English people. It’s just that the American onthic myth was formed in the English civil war, republic and restoration. The final battle in that civil war was actually fought in Conneticut when Cromwellian delegates fought the legally installed Catholic govoner for control of the state! Well, the Puritans failed in Englind and the republic with them. However they succeeded here! It’s hard living and teaching the Catholic truth in a country founded with an “antipapist” agenda. npatrol: As to what the English did to the rest of the world, and the whorlwind were currently reeping from the wind they sowed, that’s another story.
God is good, and he has a nice mother. :shamrock2:

What a great idea for an alternative history novel… the Spanish Armada launches a successful invasion of the Brittish Isles and Ireland becomes a Catholic Nation shortly after Elizabeth I is deposed.

Slainte’ :shamrock2:
Robert

 

[The_Preacher]

What a great idea for an alternative history novel… the Spanish Armada launches a successful invasion of the Brittish Isles and Ireland becomes a Catholic Nation shortly after Elizabeth I is deposed.

Slainte’ :shamrock2:
Robert

Aaaaaa… If wishes were fishes then beggers would feast. Truth be told, my first novel is in edit. If it makes it to print it will be the first non tecknical theological publish. Think an Irish American navel archetecture senior from Hoboken just before WWII who’s protoyuppi girl dumps him because he has no job offers the day he gets a telegram informing him he’s inherited a bankrupt thirteen mile long hay wire and bubble gum railroad in a German enclave encircled by the zenophobic protistant mid west. Titled “The Farmer’s Daughter of the D & O” (Downer and Outtington Railroad) it draws liberally upon the history of the area.

 

[JonNC]

=Robert in SD;5345274]But I think it takes a conscious decision to actually cross that line. One knows the difference between honoring a person and contemplating/adoring them as Deity. But I am certainly willing to concede that, objectively speaking, an act of veneration can appear to “cross the line” for someone who is viewing the activity from a different faith tradition or social context. Marian devotion in some of the Latin American countries - I have been told - can appear to be acts of idolatry. However, Catholics in Latin America know that Mary is not divine and understand that their veneration is not intended as worship. Staunch protestants from the U.S. think they see idolatry. They are simply wrong. To the extent that someone consciously decides to start worshipping Mary (or the other saints) that person is no longer practicing the Catholic faith.

I think you are probably right today. Would you agree that in the past - middle ages, for example - that absolute ignorance may have contributed to a crossing of the line?

Thanks. Much appreciated.

No problem. Just being honest and reasonable.

It always surprises me that so many people think Catholics “removed” the “no idolatry” commandment so we could have statues in our churches. I think this view says more about where these people are coming from in their formation than what the Catholic Church actually teaches. Thanks for the clarification.

Well, if you removed it, then so did we Lutherans. And you know how touchy we are about being accused of removing stuff.

And btw, being of German ancestry, all I have to say about your dialogue about the British is

Jon