How is praying to the saints not necromancy?

[Mark_David]

I don’t think true necromancy is even possible - the dead are in hell; the living (who’ve departed from their earthly bodies) are alive, either in Purgatory or in Heaven.

Necromancy, in reality, is communication with Satan or demons, if anything. This is my understanding.

The Lord Jesus Christ bless you all.

 

[_Gandalf]

Well, right off the bat Necromancy is a branch of Witchcraft that involves the summoning of the spirit of a dead individual; usually for your own gain (More benign reasons for doing this include gaining knowledge and trying to divine the future). This is a complex practice that involves many different elements of Witchcraft to complete, one of the most notable ones being the art of casting a protective circle.
My understanding of prayer is that you simply announce an intention, as if you were talking to a person. Clearly falling nowhere near the reals of Necromancy.

 

[Chen_Zhen]

One could also remember that the events in Samuel took place before Christ’s death and resurrection. People at the time of Samuel WERE dead, dead in sin. None of them could go to heaven (It took Christ to open those gates).

However, since the time of Christ, Heaven’s doors are open and those who die are **no longer dead, but living. Living indeed far more than we on earth, united eternally to Christ, forever. How indeed can any saint, by definition, be ‘dead?’ **

This seems rather logical. The way it was done in the O.T. is different than the N.T. for that reason.

I think also that the way in which the two are done is different. In some way, whether actively or passively, one who offers prayer to the Communion of Saints is submitting his will to the Will of God. So if one asks a saint for help, he knows that essentially, the answer to the prayer is dependent on the will of God.

With Necromancy (in the pagan world), were it even possible, it seems the person is trying to command authority over that particular spirit through the use of some wicked means.

 

[ReturningToRome]

ReturningToRome;7957462:

I think it’s due to a shift in the meaning of the word in English. It used to have a usage that represented high regard or respect without implying that the person was divine or supreme (indeed, without any religious meaning at all). In some places the term “your worship” is still the correct form of address for mayors. . . .

Yes, thanks for that insight.

 

[ReturningToRome]

According to the Bible we are called to honor God (for example, the first three of the Ten Commandments) as well as one another (for example, 1Peter 2:17).

The specific kind of honor we give God is not the same kind of honor we give to humans. This distinction is made in Greek because two different words are utilized (latria for the honor given to God and dulia for the honor given to humans, and there is a category within dulia called hyper-dulia meaning a special kind of honor given to Mary).

Traditionally such a distinction was not made in English. The words “honor” and “worship” were originally interchangeable, and the context told you if it referred to God or humans. As proof of this, consider the fact that in American English a judge is called, “Your honor” while in Britain a judge (i.e., magistrate) is called “Your worship.”

At some point in the early 20th Century there was a desire to give English the kind of distinction that is found in Greek. Therefore, a gradual trend happened in which one saw the term “worship” being used exclusively for God (or other divine persons in the case of other religions). Therefore, when you see Catholic literature or hymnals referring to the “worship” of the saints or Mary, check the publication date and you will inevitably discover that it is about 100 years old or older. In other words, it was published at a time when the words “worship” and “honor” were considered interchangeable.

Such books that continued to be published later in the 20th and 21st Century will probably have been edited to replace the word “worship” with “honor” (when applied to Mary and the saints) to reflect the new trend in the English language to restrict the term “worship” to the concept of the honoring of divinity.

Thank you. Very helpful.

 

[ReturningToRome]

This seems rather logical. The way it was done in the O.T. is different than the N.T. for that reason.

I think also that the way in which the two are done is different. In some way, whether actively or passively, one who offers prayer to the Communion of Saints is submitting his will to the Will of God. So if one asks a saint for help, he knows that essentially, the answer to the prayer is dependent on the will of God.

With Necromancy (in the pagan world), were it even possible, it seems the person is trying to command authority over that particular spirit through the use of some wicked means.

I think I’m getting the hang of this quote thing with cut-and-paste Your distinction of motive is convincing. Thanks.