Idolatry: The Catholic Ricky Bobby Story

[pablope]

I gave my opinion and it is my opinion, regarding the video of what was presented. My last response was edited to include: For the record, I think there are those in all denominations that get at least some things wrong. I have no opinion what the net result of those mistakes would be.

I never said that I was judging the Catholic Church on a few and I thought I made it very clear, respectfully that I didn’t think that.

My only points were that it appeared to me that some had taken things a bit too far and it is my opinion that it was Idolatry. I think it went beyond what the church and most of her members believe is correct.

Peace be with you

First…let me ask, what do you mean by idolatry? What is idolatry to you?

And…I think what you see as idolatry…is more a belief in relics. We believe those statues have no power on their own, but are channels of God’s grace.

There is wide gulf in catholic practice and lingo when compared to that of protestants.

The belief in relics is ancient, is rooted in Jewish roots and the OT:

calledtocommunion.com/201…ption-of-mary/

The first real blow to this interpretation came when I read Peter Brown’s book, The Cult of Saints: Its Rise and Function in Latin Christianity.

Brown challenged my view that the place of saints and relics in the church was a mere holdover from paganism, and that the practice was somehow peripheral to true Christianity. Instead, Brown painted a picture of ancient Christianity and paganism in which relics were indispensable to the former, and repulsive to the latter. Far from a holdover from paganism, the place of relics in the Church appeared as something intensely Jewish, Hebraic, and Old Testament. Pagans, like Julian-the-Apostate, found the practice revolting and legislated against it. (Paganism, with its notions of ritual purity, had strictly delimited the realm of divine worship and neatly separated it from the realm of corpses and the dead.)

Peter Brown:

On this point, the rise of Christianity in the pagan world was met by deep religious anger. We can chart the rise to prominence of the Christian church most faithfully by listening to pagan reactions to the cult of martyrs. For the progress of this cult spelled out for the pagans a slow and horrid crumbling of ancient barriers.1

Brown and others have shown that these practices continued in Judaism into the era of the New Testament, and of the Midrash and Talmud. Especially important in this regard is J. Jeremias’s untranslated work, Heiligengräber in Jesu Umwelt. (Göttingen, 1958) Jeremias shows that this cult was both extremely important to Jews, and of great significance for the development of the relic cult in early Christianity. Likewise, Josef W. Meri in The Cult of Saints among Muslims and Jews in Medieval Syria shows that the Jewish practice continued with Jews in Babylon, Syrian, North Africa, and elsewhere, and included pilgrimages to the tombs not only of Biblical figures, but even more contemporary “saints,” like Maimonides. Cultic visits to the resting place of the ancestors continue in Israel to this day.

Why?

Why did the Jews believe and practice such things? And why were Christians so amenable? There are two important Hebraic and biblical concepts to understand: that of the Zaddiqim (or saints) and the doctrine of zekhut avot (or merits of the ancestors).

Zaddiqim:

In Judaism, the Zaddiqim are the “Holy Men of Old” who are given special powers because of their close relationship to God. Think of Moses with his Shekinah glory, and of Elijah with all his miracles. As we saw from the passage of 2 Kings, these powers were understood to endure after death. And, given the Hebrew view of the body, its sanctity, and dignity, and the concomitant belief in resurrection, it is no wonder that these powers were believed to inhere even in the flesh.

The key to the New Testament doctrine of the saints is not to destroy the older Hebraic doctrine of shared merit and responsibility, but to elevate it to an even greater place. Through Christ, and because of his infinite merits, the finite merits of the saints can now take on an eternal significance. This is why, far from detracting from Christ, the Christian belief in the intercession of saints enhances, fulfills, and completes the doctrine of Christ’s infinite and sufficient intercession.

 

[FabiusMaximus]

Now I’m curious. Can you post a photo of the icon?

f3.s.qip.ru/16qWhVLDj.jpg

It’s not exactly this one, but it’s quite similar.

Also, I think it’s important to mention one thing concerning icons and statues: as was affirmed in the 7th Ecumenical Council - representational images and artwork of Jesus confirm that God became man. If God became man, he therefore became depictable. This is extremely important, especially considering that many in the Church in past centuries have argued such things that Jesus wasn’t really a man, or that he only appeared to have come to Earth as a physical person. The icons are a witness to the fact that we as Christians have always believed that he did indeed become flesh.

I think it’s a beautiful thing.

 

[pablope]

I think in our particular faith tradition, we are so hesitant to avoid idolatry, that we tend to see anything that deviates from our way of worshiping God as idolatry.
Christian heritage.

It is a mindset affected by Bible alone teaching…and taking it to extreme:

ralphwoodrow.org/books/pages/babylon-mystery.html

By this method, the BIBLE itself would need to be rejected as pagan. All of the following practices or beliefs mentioned in the Bible, were also known among pagans—raising hands in worship, taking off shoes on holy ground, a holy mountain, a holy place in a temple, offering sacrifices without blemish, a sacred ark, city of refuge, bringing forth water from a rock, laws written on stone, fire appearing on a person’s head, horses of fire, the offering of first fruits, tithes, etc.

By this method, the LORD himself would be pagan. The woman called Mystery Babylon had a cup in her hand; the Lord has a cup in his hand (Psa. 75:8). Pagan kings sat on thrones and wore crowns; the Lord sits on a throne and wears a crown (Rev. 1:4; 14:14). Pagans worshipped the sun; the Lord is the “Sun of righteousness” (Mal. 4:2). Pagan gods were likened to stars; the Lord is called “the bright and morning star” (Rev. 22:16). Pagan gods had temples dedicated to them; the Lord has a temple (Rev. 7:15). Pagan gods were pictured with wings; the Lord is pictured with wings (Psa. 91:4).

 

[MaryT777]

Out of respect for the Catholic Church and my Catholic friends, I am putting this in the non-Catholic area. It was with joy that I found for myself that the Catholic Church and most of her members do not practice Idolatry nor sanction it. However, I just watched a show on EWTN that I can’t find a way to describe the practices of it as anything but Idolatry.

The show in question was titled Miracles of the Child Jesus. Maybe you can find when it runs again or find it on the internet to see it for yourself.

This older couple was in Europe, possibly Italy and the show was about a statue there of the child Jesus. They told stories of people praying to the “Child Jesus” and miracles happening as a result of that prayer. Since, as we all know, Jesus grew beyond childhood and became a man and still lives today, it’s not possible to pray to the “Child Jesus” unless you’re praying to the statue.

There are those that claim that the church teaches idolatry but I’m not one of those. I’ve already suspected that some of her members were very close to the edge of practicing Idolatry and I’m pretty sure this show confirmed that there are those that are over the edge.

The television had been on for a while before I noticed the show and I might have accomplished recording it on the DVR. If that happens to be true, I will try and watch it again, when I have time and see if my conclusion changes.

I’m curious if others have noticed that some members of the church have gone beyond the bounds of mere veneration and pleas for intercession into actual idolatry?

Brandall:
No doubt some people engage in idolatry. Some things are extreme but it’s difficult to judge because there are many miracles in the world and with God all things are possible.
Good question
I myself sometimes have concerns with presentations of what appears to be extreme idolatry of some kind often compliments of the press though that singles out such events
as a subtle jab at the Church.

 

[aidanbradypop]

You never really answered my questions though. If a memeber from your Baptist congregation goes to the Holy Land to view the buriel site or the baptism site of Christ and prayers there, are they considered to be dabbing in idolatry? Whether it is a statue or a river, the fact remains the same. Right?

I am respectfully waiting for an answer.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Out of respect for the Catholic Church and my Catholic friends, I am putting this in the non-Catholic area. It was with joy that I found for myself that the Catholic Church and most of her members do not practice Idolatry nor sanction it. However, I just watched a show on EWTN that I can’t find a way to describe the practices of it as anything but Idolatry.

The show in question was titled Miracles of the Child Jesus. Maybe you can find when it runs again or find it on the internet to see it for yourself.

This older couple was in Europe, possibly Italy and the show was about a statue there of the child Jesus. They told stories of people praying to the “Child Jesus” and miracles happening as a result of that prayer. Since, as we all know, Jesus grew beyond childhood and became a man and still lives today, it’s not possible to pray to the “Child Jesus” unless you’re praying to the statue.

There are those that claim that the church teaches idolatry but I’m not one of those. I’ve already suspected that some of her members were very close to the edge of practicing Idolatry and I’m pretty sure this show confirmed that there are those that are over the edge.

The television had been on for a while before I noticed the show and I might have accomplished recording it on the DVR. If that happens to be true, I will try and watch it again, when I have time and see if my conclusion changes.

I’m curious if others have noticed that some members of the church have gone beyond the bounds of mere veneration and pleas for intercession into actual idolatry?

As already stated, the best answer is God exists outside of time. An example is given by Jesus Himself:

John 1

43The next day Jesus decided to leave for Galilee. Finding Philip, he said to him, “Follow me.”
44Philip, like Andrew and Peter, was from the town of Bethsaida. 45Philip found Nathanael and told him, “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote-Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”
46"Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?" Nathanael asked.
“Come and see,” said Philip.
47When Jesus saw Nathanael approaching, he said of him, “Here is a true Israelite, in whom there is nothing false.”
48"How do you know me?" Nathanael asked.
Jesus answered, “I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you.”
49Then Nathanael declared, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel.”
50Jesus said, “You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You shall see greater things than that.” 51He then added, “I tell you the truth, you shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.”

So the understanding is, the Child Jesus hears your prayers, as Jesus saw Nathanael under the fig tree.

 

[PatriceA]

The mention of the couple being European makes me think that English was not their native tongue and they were either not fluent or their words were translated. The whole issue might be a problem of translation as to whether they said they were worshiping the statue. In addition, every Catholic (or Lutheran, or other denomination) may not be fully conversant with their faith’s teaching and traditions.

The couple, Bob and Penny Lord, are American. The video the OP is referring to was from one of their pilgrimages to Europe.

 

[FabiusMaximus]

It is a mindset affected by Bible alone teaching…and taking it to extreme:

ralphwoodrow.org/books/pages/babylon-mystery.html

By this method, the BIBLE itself would need to be rejected as pagan. All of the following practices or beliefs mentioned in the Bible, were also known among pagans—raising hands in worship, taking off shoes on holy ground, a holy mountain, a holy place in a temple, offering sacrifices without blemish, a sacred ark, city of refuge, bringing forth water from a rock, laws written on stone, fire appearing on a person’s head, horses of fire, the offering of first fruits, tithes, etc.

By this method, the LORD himself would be pagan. The woman called Mystery Babylon had a cup in her hand; the Lord has a cup in his hand (Psa. 75:8). Pagan kings sat on thrones and wore crowns; the Lord sits on a throne and wears a crown (Rev. 1:4; 14:14). Pagans worshipped the sun; the Lord is the “Sun of righteousness” (Mal. 4:2). Pagan gods were likened to stars; the Lord is called “the bright and morning star” (Rev. 22:16). Pagan gods had temples dedicated to them; the Lord has a temple (Rev. 7:15). Pagan gods were pictured with wings; the Lord is pictured with wings (Psa. 91:4).

I’d say it is true that it is due, to an extent, to exclusive faith in the Bible, in order to avoid any kind of “man-made tradition.”

Well before I began questioning, I never felt the Catholic Church was “pagan,” but that it did adopt certain beliefs that distracted from the true Christian faith. But then again, I was raised in an environment that was built in opposition to the Catholic Church and perhaps the questionable acts of some of the less than perfectly educated Catholics. Italian Pentecostalism, in particular the Assemblies of God, can be very vociferously anti-Catholic. Perhaps the entire Protestant community in a sense is like that, because on some level, they feel smothered by the overwhelming Catholic influence in the country. My parents were firmly in such a mindset. Before moving to the United States, we did not really celebrate Christmas, Easter was disassociated from the Catholic celebrations. Some went so far as to refuse to name their churches, because naming churches is a “Catholic thing.” To give you an example, our home church where my dad preached is referred to as “Via Susanna” - the church at Via Susanna (which is a street name).

Although, today, my parents have become much more relaxed with regards to the Roman Catholic Church and its traditions. I’ve seen my dad watch Papal speeches on television and occasionally watch a Mass. I’ll ask him sometimes: “Dad? Why are you watching a Catholic Mass?” He’ll respond: “Because his homily is good and it is Christian.” I just laugh.

I think much of the opposition to statues and icons is specifically in fear of becoming “too Catholic.”

 

[Nicea325]

Out of respect for the Catholic Church and my Catholic friends, I am putting this in the non-Catholic area. It was with joy that I found for myself that the Catholic Church and most of her members do not practice Idolatry nor sanction it. However, I just watched a show on EWTN that I can’t find a way to describe the practices of it as anything but Idolatry.

The show in question was titled Miracles of the Child Jesus. Maybe you can find when it runs again or find it on the internet to see it for yourself.

This older couple was in Europe, possibly Italy and the show was about a statue there of the child Jesus. They told stories of people praying to the “Child Jesus” and miracles happening as a result of that prayer. Since, as we all know, Jesus grew beyond childhood and became a man and still lives today, it’s not possible to pray to the “Child Jesus” unless you’re praying to the statue.

There are those that claim that the church teaches idolatry but I’m not one of those. I’ve already suspected that some of her members were very close to the edge of practicing Idolatry and I’m pretty sure this show confirmed that there are those that are over the edge.

The television had been on for a while before I noticed the show and I might have accomplished recording it on the DVR. If that happens to be true, I will try and watch it again, when I have time and see if my conclusion changes.

I’m curious if others have noticed that some members of the church have gone beyond the bounds of mere veneration and pleas for intercession into actual idolatry?

Quick question? Would you consider the millions of people who visit monuments with an iconic figure: Abraham Lincoln, Washington,etc as a form idolatry?

 

[aidanbradypop]

Quick question? Would you consider the millions of people who visit monuments with an iconic figure: Abraham Lincoln, Washington,etc as a form idolatry?

 

[Brandall]

Quick question? Would you consider the millions of people who visit monuments with an iconic figure: Abraham Lincoln, Washington,etc as a form idolatry?

I’ve already mentioned in this thread that I have no problems with statues but thanks for asking.

I have no problems with statues or praying for the intercession of the saints. In this instance, it appeared things had crossed the line.

 

[joe370]

Out of respect for the Catholic Church and my Catholic friends, I am putting this in the non-Catholic area. It was with joy that I found for myself that the Catholic Church and most of her members do not practice Idolatry nor sanction it. However, I just watched a show on EWTN that I can’t find a way to describe the practices of it as anything but Idolatry.

The show in question was titled Miracles of the Child Jesus. Maybe you can find when it runs again or find it on the internet to see it for yourself.

This older couple was in Europe, possibly Italy and the show was about a statue there of the child Jesus. They told stories of people praying to the “Child Jesus” and miracles happening as a result of that prayer. Since, as we all know, Jesus grew beyond childhood and became a man and still lives today, it’s not possible to pray to the “Child Jesus” unless you’re praying to the statue.

There are those that claim that the church teaches idolatry but I’m not one of those. I’ve already suspected that some of her members were very close to the edge of practicing Idolatry and I’m pretty sure this show confirmed that there are those that are over the edge.

The television had been on for a while before I noticed the show and I might have accomplished recording it on the DVR. If that happens to be true, I will try and watch it again, when I have time and see if my conclusion changes.

I’m curious if others have noticed that some members of the church have gone beyond the bounds of mere veneration and pleas for intercession into actual idolatry?

Hey Brandall. I was just wondering: Jesus is God, so how is worshipping Jesus considered idolatry? Perhaps the statue of the child Jesus represents Jesus. What’s the first thing that comes to mind when I see a statue of Jesus: The glorified Jesus and redeemer of the world. It is also reaffirming in terms of Mary being Jesus’ mother. What do you think about the miracles associated to the statue? Seem valid?

 

[Brandall]

Hey Brandall. I was just wondering: Jesus is God, so how is worshipping Jesus considered idolatry? Perhaps the statue of the child Jesus represents Jesus. What’s the first thing that comes to mind when I see a statue of Jesus: The glorified Jesus and redeemer of the world. It is also reaffirming in terms of Mary being Jesus’ mother. What do you think about the miracles associated to the statue? Seem valid?

Of course, not everything is a miracle. I don’t think the statue causes miracles. From the blurb of the company that produced the video:See a little image of the Baby Jesus, called the Santo
Bambino, which has been responsible for many
miracles in the Abruzzi area. It sounds like they are saying the statue caused the miracles. The video gave me that feeling too. Just my opinion of course.

Out of curiosity, do you think it possible for anyone to cross the line regarding a statue? Or is that an impossibility?

 

[joe370]

Of course, not everything is a miracle. I don’t think the statue causes miracles. From the blurb of the company that produced the video:See a little image of the Baby Jesus, called the Santo
Bambino, which has been responsible for many
miracles in the Abruzzi area. It sounds like they are saying the statue caused the miracles. The video gave me that feeling too. Just my opinion of course.

Out of curiosity, do you think it possible for anyone to cross the line regarding a statue? Or is that an impossibility?

Well of course the statue can do nothing. If there was a miracle it would come from God.

Sure it is possible. They can even cross the line when it comes to Mary. Thank God Jesus’ church is there to rein in such behavior, at least when they are made aware of it…

 

[pablope]

Of course, not everything is a miracle. I don’t think the statue causes miracles. From the blurb of the company that produced the video:See a little image of the Baby Jesus, called the Santo
Bambino, which has been responsible for many
miracles in the Abruzzi area.

It sounds like they are saying the statue caused the miracles. The video gave me that feeling too. Just my opinion of course.

Out of curiosity, do you think it possible for anyone to cross the line regarding a statue? Or is that an impossibility?

It is a matter of your perception and Catholic lingo.

Your perception is…that, because you have been reared in a faith tradition that looks at catholic practices as idolatrous…this is rubbing off on you…that anything you see or perceive out of the ordinary would seem idolatry.

Keep in mind, there are cultural variances, practices from coutry to country.

And you are right, the statue did not cause the miracle. What you need to see is actually what they mean…as I said, catholics have their lingo and it may take a while for you get accustomed to.

When they said the statue caused the cure or miracle, what they are actually saying, is the image represented by the statue, the Holy Infant, is the source of the miracle, not the statue itself.

You need to see the meaning behind what they are saying, not what you perceive they are saying.

 

[Filioque]

Without seeing the video it’s hard to determine if they are applying the Catholic teaching correctly. While Bob and Penny are very well informed, they are not infallible.

However I think that for many outside the Catholic Church, and even some within the concept of invocations to the Infant Jesus are a bit confusing. We can and should meditate on the great mysteries of our Lord’s life. That He became incarnate without the intervention of a human Father, and was made man. That He humbled Himself to be vulnerable and need the care of our Lady and St. Joseph. Allowed himself to be born into such a danger that His Mother and St. Joseph His foster father had to take him to Egypt to avoid being murdered by Herod, all these things are important in the history of our Salvation;

As the Infant Jesus, and the Crucified Jesus, the Risen Christ are all the same True God and True Man, meditating on a mystery of His life and offering to Him prayer be it a request, praise, or in reparation for our shortcomings is a prayer to the same Jesus who reigns now in Heaven. We cannot separate Him. He is always and has always been the Second person of the Holy Trinity.

 

[LilyM]

It is a matter of your perception and Catholic lingo.

Your perception is…that, because you have been reared in a faith tradition that looks at catholic practices as idolatrous…this is rubbing off on you…that anything you see or perceive out of the ordinary would seem idolatry.

Keep in mind, there are cultural variances, practices from coutry to country.

And you are right, the statue did not cause the miracle. What you need to see is actually what they mean…as I said, catholics have their lingo and it may take a while for you get accustomed to.

When they said the statue caused the cure or miracle, what they are actually saying, is the image represented by the statue, the Holy Infant, is the source of the miracle, not the statue itself.

You need to see the meaning behind what they are saying, not what you perceive they are saying.

More correctly the PERSON represented in the image caused it.

The main evidence of this is that Our Lord and Our Lady are often invoked under particular titles without the person doing so being anywhere in the vicinity of any sort of image of them.

I often invoke the Sacred Heart of Jesus, for example, without being in the presence of a picture or image of the Sacred Heart. If I were truly worshipping an image of the Sacred Heart, I would surely feel the need to place myself in the presence of that image when praying - and if I were truly worshipping that image, then no other image would do, not even other images of the Sacred Heart.

 

[MartinJordan]

As the Infant Jesus, and the Crucified Jesus, the Risen Christ are all the same True God and True Man, meditating on a mystery of His life and offering to Him prayer be it a request, praise, or in reparation for our shortcomings is a prayer to the same Jesus who reigns now in Heaven. We cannot separate Him. He is always and has always been the Second person of the Holy Trinity.

This! Well worded and thoughtfully and concisely. Appreciated.

MJ

 

[Filioque]

Sure it is possible. They can even cross the line when it comes to Mary. Thank God Jesus’ church is there to rein in such behavior, at least when they are made aware of it…

Jesus used mud and spittle to heal the blind man, as God he did not need to use anything, or lay His hands on anyone, or do anything but will that something be done or undone. However He did show us that we can and do use physical things to access the Graces God dispenses.

After Jesus’ Asension we see that the scarves (some translations hankerchiefs) of the Apostles were laid on people to bring about healing, St. Peter’s shadow cast upon the sick was cited as being used in the healing of a paralytic.

God commanded that the brazen serpent be fabricated and that anyone who looked upon it who had been bitten by a viper be healed. He did not need to use it, He rather could have said, call upon my name, your faith will heal you. But He required an act be preformed to obtain the grace, an act that included the use of a graven image, which was not worshipped but was utilized by God to bring about the healing.

So while physical items are not the source of the Graces they can be used by God to bring about His Graces when properly utilized.

 

[joe370]

Jesus used mud and spittle to heal the blind man, as God he did not need to use anything, or lay His hands on anyone, or do anything but will that something be done or undone. However He did show us that we can and do use physical things to access the Graces God dispenses.

After Jesus’ Asension we see that the scarves (some translations hankerchiefs) of the Apostles were laid on people to bring about healing, St. Peter’s shadow cast upon the sick was cited as being used in the healing of a paralytic.

God commanded that the brazen serpent be fabricated and that anyone who looked upon it who had been bitten by a viper be healed. He did not need to use it, He rather could have said, call upon my name, your faith will heal you. But He required an act be preformed to obtain the grace, an act that included the use of a graven image, which was not worshipped but was utilized by God to bring about the healing.

So while physical items are not the source of the Graces they can be used by God to bring about His Graces when properly utilized.