Isn't prayer to saints idolitary?

[ClementRome]

This question is directed for the Catholics out there.

Prayer is highly regarded as a form of worship.

Just curious how you guys/gals biblically justify praying to Saints.

yea we don’t pray to the saints. We ask the saints to intercede for us.

It would be like asking your bigger, more knowledgeable, more experienced brother to go ask your Father on your behalf.

secondly the saints aren’t dead. In fact they are probably more alive than we are considering they don’t suffer from sin anymore.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Hi Kalt,

See though, that doesn’t explain praying to saints.

To sum up what I understood you said is praying that someone else will pray for me, not praying TO someone else that they would pray for me.

So let’s say I do pray that you pray for me. I would pray to God and ask him that you pray for me also. I do not see that as being bad; however, the alternitive would be eyes closed, knelt down at my bed “Dear Kalt, please pray for me”. Asking you in person to pray for me is not prayer, it is a request for you to pray to God for me.

Communicating with those whom are physically dead is boarderline necromancy no?

No It is no such thing.​

Necromancy is trafficking with the dead in defiance of God. Praying to the Saints presupposes that we are in communion with them through the Holy Spirit Who is the Giver of Life & Grace both to us & to them. One might as well say that urine & water are the same - but one is waste matter, whereas the other is essential for life. That they are both liquids, does not make them the same thing in all respects. The Saints have no life but Christ Himself - He is their Life. So how can they be dead in any sense worth discussing ?

According to my study on Catholic practice,
“Exactly as Christian communion among our fellow pilgrims brings us closer to Christ, so our communion with the saints joins us to Christ…” Pg. 249-250, #957

I mean, biblically Saints are ALL believers, not specific ones. That isn’t the point I am making here, but we have communion with Christ without intersessory prayer to or from saints but strenghened by fellowship of those whom are still alive!

We have fellowship with the Church on earth, & in Heaven: so for us, there is no need to choose between them - that would be as odd as choosing between Christ and Christ; for it is the same Christ Who works mightily through both these parts of the Church​

“Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.” Hebrews 4:16

1 Timothy 2:5
5For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

I think the key here too is nobody other then God whom is Soverign can answer prayer weather someone is dead or alive.

Logically, that would make the Bible itself a threat to God’s Sovereignty - so what is the principle that​

• justifies resort to a thing of ink & paper, instead of to Christ alone ?
• rules out use of the Saints, while allowing use of the Bible ?

**If **the Saints in Heaven can’t be honoured, certainly the Bible can’t be. The Bible is valuable as a means of grace - not in itself. And exactly the same is true of the Saints. And Whose grace do they mediate ? That of Christ, the One Mediator.

 

[dyluck]

Is it really fair to equate prayer the modern conspet with an archaic english vernacular of the word? Prayer in the modern context
Prayer in the archaic context
And even from a Catholic perspective from the Latin and and then over time the consept was picked up by the Latin word Orare. Or to speak so with the similtude of speaking. So for the etymology to properly be assertained in a Catholic sence we are entreating by speaking (with God or the saints (dead)). So the used argument that Saints are not dead is a disingenuous argument. Simply because their bodies are indeed dead in the context of death. The condition of their spirits is irrelevant when comparing to the Mosaic law forbidding speaking with the dead. The sence in the Mosaic law is that their bodies are dead as well. thought the plight of the person spirit is unknown. The fact that a christian is not dead as in the 2nd death is irrelevant to the issue because their bodies are indeed dead and decaying. Moses would have understood this in the law and would have differentiated between speaking with 2nd dead people and living believers. But no he doesn’t. He simply forbids speaking with the dead as can be seen in the book of Maccabees. One of the reasons the Hammer had to pettition God to forgive his men because of their idolatry. So prayer is speak. And Moses forbids speaking with the dead.

Awesome post. So my question is that how do we truely know the condition of a Saint’s spiritual position before God? I know that we can know a true Christian by their fruits, but we seriously can’t 100% say they were saved as nobody knows the person behind the closed doors right? God will judge that person. I guess thats my argument there.

 

[dyluck]

Fire! I love it. Let me look at this logically with you. Where in the bible does it say to pray to the saints? You’re inevitable answer is nowhere. Which is true. Why is it involved in the Liturgy (I’m speaking of Mary here)? Why are we commanded then to pray to the saints for things like indulgences? You say its the deposit. However, a study of the deposit we find that this particular aspect of the faith wasn’t passed down from the apostles. If it had been would it not have been mentioned in the earliest liturgical form we have in writing? Primarily the Didache? Its not. Not even a prayer to Mary! So it must be a later developement. Not from the initial deposit of Faith left by the Apostles!

I really find this post interesting as Church history is really intreaguing to me.

 

[dyluck]

yea we don’t pray to the saints. We ask the saints to intercede for us.

It would be like asking your bigger, more knowledgeable, more experienced brother to go ask your Father on your behalf.

secondly the saints aren’t dead. In fact they are probably more alive than we are considering they don’t suffer from sin anymore.

I honestly can’t wait for the day when I am free from sin completely.
I mean I do believe regeneration really deals with the power of sin and slavery of sin, but it doesn’t completly remove sin.

Clement, I do believe that you can boldly approach the father through Christ

I was hoping for biblical evidences of this, but there is non, even according to other posters here. This is where i begin to kick against the practice, because it isn’t stemed from the word, but from practices invented then by men.

 

[phoenix3212]

Here:

“Praise the LORD, you his angels,
you mighty ones who do his bidding,
who obey his word.”

Psalm 103:20 (NIV)

Since contacting anyone who isn’t Earth is apparently a violation of the commandments and a violation of Jesus as the sole mediator, this psalmist was practicing idolatry by telling angels to praise God.

 

[dyluck]

No It is no such thing.​

Logically, that would make the Bible itself a threat to God’s Sovereignty - so what is the principle that​

• justifies resort to a thing of ink & paper, instead of to Christ alone ?
• rules out use of the Saints, while allowing use of the Bible ?

**If **the Saints in Heaven can’t be honoured, certainly the Bible can’t be. The Bible is valuable as a means of grace - not in itself. And exactly the same is true of the Saints. And Whose grace do they mediate ? That of Christ, the One Mediator.

Well, yes God did write the bible through Inspired men. Its hard for me to connect this analogy with causing saints to interceed s(name removed by moderator)ly because there is no inspired word about this practice. Thats why Protestants have difficulty with this practice as perception at least can be viewed as esteeming man and holding them in high regard. Allowing them to share the place that only Christ deserves. Being that interceeder to the father.

A good point was brought to my attention. Jesus is 100% man and 100% God wereas a Saint is still only 100% man. Jesus is the only one worthy of intercession on our behalf.
I think prayer requests from other brothers are fine, because it doesn’t require a prayer to deliver the message. Does anyone see my point?

 

[phoenix3212]

Another thing. Do you know what “to pray” traditionally meant? It actually means to simply request something.

"I pray thee, good Mercutio, let’s retire" (Romeo and Juliet, Act III, Sc. 1, 1)

Romeo wasn’t worshiping Mercutio in this verse. He was simply speaking to him. It might be odd that I’m using Shakespeare to make a religious point here, but since you’ve brought up the meaning of the word “prayer” in this thread several times, I think you need to hear it used outside Protestant circles.

 

[SonofMonica]

Well, yes God did write the bible through Inspired men. Its hard for me to connect this analogy with causing saints to interceed s(name removed by moderator)ly because there is no inspired word about this practice.

Would you like the Catholic Church to convene another Ecumenical Council and deem all of its writings about praying to the saints inspired and classify them as scripture? It added to Scripture once with a set of four gospels, some epistles and one apocalypse, and now you have the Holy Bible. Now we call Hebrew Scripture (which is what NT writers would refer to when they referred to scripture) the “Old Testament,” and all 72 books collectively as The Bible. Is that what it would take for you?

 

[phoenix3212]

Would you like the Catholic Church to convene another Ecumenical Council and deem all of its writings about praying to the saints inspired and classify them as scripture? It added to Scripture once with a set of four gospels, some epistles and one apocalypse, and now you have the Holy Bible. Now we call Hebrew Scripture (which is what NT writers would refer to when they referred to scripture) the “Old Testament,” and all 72 books collectively as The Bible. Is that what it would take for you?

I say we go for an ex cathedra statement on praying to saints

 

[SonofMonica]

Another thing. Do you know what “to pray” traditionally meant? It actually means to simply request something.

"I pray thee, good Mercutio, let’s retire" (Romeo and Juliet, Act III, Sc. 1, 1)

Romeo wasn’t worshiping Mercutio in this verse. He was simply speaking to him. It might be odd that I’m using Shakespeare to make a religious point here, but since you’ve brought up the meaning of the word “prayer” in this thread several times, I think you need to hear it used outside Protestant circles.

Indeed, as a lawyer, I can tell you that at the end of every affirmative pleading there is a section called the “Prayer” where we are asking the Court to do something for us.

When we pray to the saints, we are asking them to pray for us. They are not 100% man, they are souls united with God and subject to every grace imaginable.

 

[SonofMonica]

I say we go for an ex cathedra statement on praying to saints

Yeah, but then in order for protestants to approve it, we’d have to add ex cathedra statements to the Bible. So I like my more direct route better.

 

[promethius]

He [Moses] simply forbids speaking with the dead as can be seen in the book of Maccabees.

This would be a more credible claim if Moses had in fact written Maccabees. Granted it covers the historical movement of the Maccabeens up through the year 134 BC, the book was written thousands of years after Moses had died.

That being said, Maccabees doesn’t really address speaking TO the dead. It addresses praying FOR the dead, which it accounts as righteous if done for the proper motivation.

One of the reasons the Hammer had to pettition God to forgive his men because of their idolatry. So prayer is speak. And Moses forbids speaking with the dead.

So Dyluck thinks Christ was a necromancer, and you seem to think Christ is an idolator. What other things will come out of this conversation just to prove catholics wrong?

 

[kalt]

So, Kalt, where are these person’s bodies?

I mean Jesus is the only one with a glorified body risen to heaven completely resurected.
The saints are dead in body still and alive in spirt whereas Christ is not dead in body or spirit at all.

When I asked about necromaning, these people believe also, the body is dead, but the spirit is alive; hence the ability to communicate in some way.

My answer is still no. You obviously believe differently, so why do you ask? To try to convince me that you are right and the CC is wrong? Good luck.

 

[kalt]

Though the Catachism is expressed on this issue. The Holy Scriptures are not. And even in the quotes above its communion with the Mystical Body of Christ so in effect we are communing with the Church. Which I have no problem with. The problem is prayers of specificity with the Saints. Ie Saint Christopher. See so we are not praying to the Saint in specificity but communing with the Body of Christ both here and there. Yet the argument is still invalid because Moses did not differentiate between the church (alive) and those who are dead. And he wasn’t talking about the bodies as well. Ie remember not everyone values the Catachism as a catholic does and thus it hold no authority to them. Holy Scriptures is the only point between the two. So your argument must come from there./quote]

No, it doesn’t. If I’m going to defend and explain the faith, I am going to use all valid sources. If others don’t like it, too bad.

Besides, I couldn’t care less if others don’t value the CCC. They don’t “value” the CC either, so who cares. And they don’t have to “value” the CCC to gather accurate information on the faith from it, anyway.

 

[sambos671]

This would be a more credible claim if Moses had in fact written Maccabees. Granted it covers the historical movement of the Maccabeens up through the year 134 BC, the book was written thousands of years after Moses had died.

That being said, Maccabees doesn’t really address speaking TO the dead. It addresses praying FOR the dead, which it accounts as righteous if done for the proper motivation.

So Dyluck thinks Christ was a necromancer, and you seem to think Christ is an idolator. What other things will come out of this conversation just to prove catholics wrong?

Oh you’re being silly and you know it! There are two different apects that I’ve mentioned. The law as stated in Dueteronomy and Macabees. Moses in the law forbids speaking with the dead as in Ore or we say in Mass Oremus from Latin to speak. The men who were idolaters in Macabees also spoke to the dead one that Judas felt the need to have attoned for. As far as Christ was a necromancer he didn’t pray to the dead. The Mount of Transfirguration is not an example of praying to the saints. The saints in this instance took the initative to come down from heaven. Jesus did not entreat them to come down. Big difference! So your argument is disingenuous at best. Deceptive at worst.

 

[sambos671]

Another thing. Do you know what “to pray” traditionally meant? It actually means to simply request something.

"I pray thee, good Mercutio, let’s retire" (Romeo and Juliet, Act III, Sc. 1, 1)

Romeo wasn’t worshiping Mercutio in this verse. He was simply speaking to him. It might be odd that I’m using Shakespeare to make a religious point here, but since you’ve brought up the meaning of the word “prayer” in this thread several times, I think you need to hear it used outside Protestant circles.

Refer to an earlier post where I show how the term prayer is to be taken. Using Shakespear is disingenuous.

 

[kalt]

Fire! I love it. Let me look at this logically with you. Where in the bible does it say to pray to the saints? You’re inevitable answer is nowhere. Which is true. Why is it involved in the Liturgy (I’m speaking of Mary here)? Why are we commanded then to pray to the saints for things like indulgences? You say its the deposit. However, a study of the deposit we find that this particular aspect of the faith wasn’t passed down from the apostles. If it had been would it not have been mentioned in the earliest liturgical form we have in writing? Primarily the Didache? Its not. Not even a prayer to Mary! So it must be a later developement. Not from the initial deposit of Faith left by the Apostles!

Early prayer

The earliest recorded prayer to the Virgin Mary can be found in the Gospel of Luke, Chapter1, verse 28: “And he came to her and said, ‘Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you!’”. And the second is also in Luke, Chapter 1, verses 41-42: “…and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit and she exclaimed with a loud cry, “”Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!’”.

Actually, one can find earlier examples of intercessory prayer. Here is an example involving prayer from an angel (Tobit 12:12). The Archangel Raphael tells Tobit: “When you and Sarah were at prayer, it was I who offered your supplications before the glory of the Lord and who read them…”

In his first letter to Timothy St. Paul asks for prayers of supplication, intercession and thanksgiving. He does not see this as contradicting the fact that Jesus is the perfect Mediator between God and man: “First of all then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men…” (1 Tim 2). Read the whole chapter.

Other than what is found in Scripture, the earliest written prayer we have addressed to our Lady is the “Sub tuum” from the 3rd century:

We fly to thy patronage, O holy Mother of God;
Despise not our petitions in our necessities, but deliver us always from all dangers,
O glorious and blessed Virgin. Amen.

 

[kalt]

Well, yes God did write the bible through Inspired men. Its hard for me to connect this analogy with causing saints to interceed s(name removed by moderator)ly because there is no inspired word about this practice. Thats why Protestants have difficulty with this practice as perception at least can be viewed as esteeming man and holding them in high regard. Allowing them to share the place that only Christ deserves. Being that interceeder to the father.

A good point was brought to my attention. Jesus is 100% man and 100% God wereas a Saint is still only 100% man. Jesus is the only one worthy of intercession on our behalf.
I think prayer requests from other brothers are fine, because it doesn’t require a prayer to deliver the message. Does anyone see my point?

You just don’t believe in the communion of saints. We know what you’re saying, but disagree because we truly believe what is summed up in the Creed.

 

[kalt]

So, Kalt, where are these person’s bodies?

I mean Jesus is the only one with a glorified body risen to heaven completely resurected.
The saints are dead in body still and alive in spirt whereas Christ is not dead in body or spirit at all.

When I asked about necromaning, these people believe also, the body is dead, but the spirit is alive; hence the ability to communicate in some way.

“Bishop Theoteknos of Livias (c. 550-650) delivered one of the most comprehensive early sermons concerning the Assumption: “For Christ took His immaculate flesh from the immaculate flesh of Mary, and if He had prepared a place in heaven for the Apostles, how much more for His mother; if Enoch had been translated and Elijah had gone to heaven, how much more Mary, who like the moon in the midst of the stars shines forth and excels among the prophets and Apostles? For even though her God-bearing body tasted death, it did not undergo corruption, but was preserved incorrupt and undefiled and taken up into heaven with its pure and spotless soul.”