Isn't prayer to saints idolitary?

[sambos671]

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.

Thats a good attempt but no dice. Gabriel’s greeting to Mary was just that. I don’t know if you read Asterix comics or not. I use to as a kid. Anyway the Romans are always greeting each other with Ave or Hail. Gabriel was doing just that greeting. Mary was obviously full of Grace because the Holy Spirit covered her for the incarnation who was the very definition of Grace. Elisabeth’s greeting was a Holy Spirit filled acknowledgement of who Mary was and who Jesus was to be. Neither was prayer to someone who had passed into the after life so to speak. Note fruit of your womb. As the fruit of Eve’s womb brought sinful man into the world the “fruit” of Mary’s womb would bring sinful man into righteousness. Also it was believed among the Jews that women would be saved in Child bearing. As far as Paul he’s asking for the intersession of the believers (presently alive). No one doubts intersession. We arguing about getting it from people who have passed from this life to the next. Moses calls this necromancy. And the last prayer you mention is nice but note “but deliver us” She is unable to do so as you’ve noted. To request her to deliver us sounds a little like ancient romans beseaching Juno (Hera) to deliver them as their patrion god. In fact. My consern is that giving saints like Christopher or Anthony a patronage for a particular aspect of life (like pilgrims and travelers, or finder of lost things) seem to close in resembelance of how the ancients viewed their gods. Jupiter or Zeus was the greatest god over all the gods yet Mercury or Hermes was a patron god of trade and profit. Can we compare with Saint Homobonus or Saint Matthew? You see my meaning? Jesus cannot be compared with Necromancy since he never spoke to the dead save in one instance. He commanded Lazerus to come forth. But then he rose him from the dead. Is it the same thing?

 

[dyluck]

“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.”

Hi Kalt,

Well you are right, Mary had not assended but indeed died physically. The only thing here is, we can only assume that Jesus held a high place for Mary. The only reason that Mary is santified and spotless and blamelessness is due to the fact that Christ was a propitiation for her Sins as well. Not even Mary is outside of the fact that Only through Christ we can come to the Father.
The bible says that God found favor with Mary, but that doesn’t mean Mary was without sin. God found favor in many people who were no where near perfect right?

I believe God chooses whom he chooses, it doesn’t depend on that person’s merit or foreknowledge of God that that person was going to be a good person or not.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Hi Kalt,

Well you are right, Mary had not assended but indeed died physically. The only thing here is, we can only assume that Jesus held a high place for Mary. The only reason that Mary is santified and spotless and blamelessness is due to the fact that Christ was a propitiation for her Sins as well. Not even Mary is outside of the fact that Only through Christ we can come to the Father.
The bible says that God found favor with Mary, but that doesn’t mean Mary was without sin. God found favor in many people who were no where near perfect right?

I believe God chooses whom he chooses, it doesn’t depend on that person’s merit or foreknowledge of God that that person was going to be a good person or not.

As Catholics we believe that Mary is without sin, spotless.

We pray to her like this: Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now, and at the hour of our death. Amen.

 

[SonofMonica]

Hi Kalt,

Well you are right, Mary had not assended but indeed died physically. The only thing here is, we can only assume that Jesus held a high place for Mary. The only reason that Mary is santified and spotless and blamelessness is due to the fact that Christ was a propitiation for her Sins as well. Not even Mary is outside of the fact that Only through Christ we can come to the Father.
The bible says that God found favor with Mary, but that doesn’t mean Mary was without sin. God found favor in many people who were no where near perfect right?

I believe God chooses whom he chooses, it doesn’t depend on that person’s merit or foreknowledge of God that that person was going to be a good person or not.

1. She may have died physically, but the assumption simply means that her body was assumed. Being alive isn’t the point.
2. We don’t have to assume Jesus held a high place for Mary. It is a fact. Jesus is our King from the lineage of David. All Davidic Kings had Queen Mothers who interceded on behalf of the people to the King. Take a look at Bathsheba in the Old Testament. The King is higher than the Queen Mother, but he “cannot refuse her.” We all do what our Mothers ask us to do. This is because we honor our father and mother. All the more so for a royal Mother, a Queen.
3. Catholics agree that the only reason Mary is sanctified, spotless and blameless was because of her Savior, Jesus Christ. The difference is, He chose to preserve her from sin in order that she might become the literal Ark of the New Covenant. A perfect vessel for her perfect Son.

 

[promethius]

Oh you’re being silly and you know it! There are two different apects that I’ve mentioned.

I don’t think there’s anything silly about pointing out when someone’s argument is based on false expertise. The simple fact is that Moses did NOT write Maccabees, as you claimed in your argument. The connection between the two instances becomes tenuous at best after that is realized.

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.

First and foremost, Deuteronomy doesn’t addess speaking or prayer to the dead. It exorts against “consultation” with the dead, particularly through a medium. That, my friend, is called Devination and is entirely removed from the practice of petitionary prayer.

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.

No no no, you said yourself to pray means to speak with. That means whether or not Moses and Elijah came down of their own accord, if Jesus spoke to them then you have asserted that Jesus violated moral law, and Dyluck has asserted that that was necromancy. This is your OWN definitions.

If you’re changing your assertion now that the violation of moral law lies in entreating the Saints to come down from heaven then you can rest easy: the Catholic church teaches that we do no such thing in praying to the saints. I have another of your posts I need to respond to, let me find it.

 

[promethius]

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 have misunderstood. To pray to the saints is not commanded in the bible, because it is not necessary in the way that sacramental grace is. However, it is demonstrated as an available option for christians as shown by scripture.

The bottom line is, I’m not saying you’re wrong NOT to pray to the saints, but there’s no way to condemn the ligitimate catholic practice without likewise condemning Christ.

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!

It didn’t have to be mentioned, it was commonly known. I guess we can safely suppose that you’ve never been to rome to visit the catecombs. They are scrawled with prayers to people’s dead ancestors that they thought were saints. They are also scrawled with prayers to the apostles who had been taken into heaven. My personal favorite reads (translated) “Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us” and it dates to 150 AD (note: hundreds of years before the bible was compiled).

The bottom line is that your average christian prayed to the Saints for hundreds of years before anyone even thought to object. The reality is that this idea that prayer to the dead is idolatry is the invention, and not the other way around.

 

[sambos671]

don’t think there’s anything silly about pointing out when someone’s argument is based on false expertise. The simple fact is that Moses did NOT write Maccabees, as you claimed in your argument. The connection between the two instances becomes tenuous at best after that is realized.

I have never claimed Maccabees was writen by moses. That was your assumption based on what I wrote.

 

[promethius]

I have never claimed Maccabees was writen by moses. That was your assumption based on what I wrote.

Let me present what you said again:

Originally Posted by sambos671 forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
He [Moses] simply forbids speaking with the dead as can be seen in the book of Maccabees.

*Moses does not forbid speaking to the dead in Maccabees, so there is no way to look at Maccabees and see writing of Moses which forbids speaking to the dead. Further, Maccabees doesn’t even address prayer to the dead, but rather addresses prayer FOR the dead, which the bible counts as righteous if done properly. *
The people condemned in Maccabees weren’t accountable for simple prayer to the dead either. They stood condemned of worshipping icons and thereby offering adorative prayer to false gods. And, as already stated, you have misrepresented what Moses wrote in Deuteronomy, since that has to do with consultation of the dead (devination) and not simply with prayer.
Why are you choosing to deliberately obscure biblical text?

 

[FCEGM]

. . .
The bottom line is, I’m not saying you’re wrong NOT to pray to the saints, but there’s no way to condemn the ligitimate catholic practice without likewise condemning Christ.

Exactly so, Paul. Exactly. Those who do so have a diminished understanding of the Incarnation and all that flows from it. Our experience as Catholics in our Communion in Christ which we enjoy with our Blessed Mother and our brothers and sisters the Saints testifies to an ever-deepening awareness and love of God. Far from distracting us from love of the Most Holy Trinity, our unity within the Communion of Saints only fosters greater attentiveness to living faithfully in His Light. One without this understanding of the Communion of Saints will inevitably hold to a truncated version of Christianity.

And regarding the Liturgy, a Catholic knows (or should know) that when a particular Saint is honored during Mass it is a thanksgiving to God for the Christ-life that shined through that man or woman and is essentially a praise of God for His work in and through His creature so transformed in Christ. It is also a time for asking God that His grace and mercy which abounded in the life of the Saint be shed on us, that we may live as faithfully in Christ as our brother or sister in Heaven did.

 

[sambos671]

First and foremost, Deuteronomy doesn’t addess speaking or prayer to the dead. It exorts against “consultation” with the dead, particularly through a medium. That, my friend, is called Devination and is entirely removed from the practice of petitionary prayer.

Your aregument Doesn’t follow. Here is the passage I’m referring to:

Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in [a] the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, 11 or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. 12 Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD, and because of these detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you. 13 You must be blameless before the LORD your God.

As its listed here the medium mentioned here is the practitioner. So it follows a Medium or a spiritist or who consults the dead. So someone who consults the dead is considered a medium in this respect. Would a person who beseaches council from the Saints who have passed on a Medium then?

It didn’t have to be mentioned, it was commonly known. I guess we can safely suppose that you’ve never been to rome to visit the catecombs. They are scrawled with prayers to people’s dead ancestors that they thought were saints. They are also scrawled with prayers to the apostles who had been taken into heaven. My personal favorite reads (translated) “Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us” and it dates to 150 AD (note: hundreds of years before the bible was compiled).

No you cannot safely assume that. I’ve been to the very places you speak of though it was many years ago now. But I’ve been there. In those same catacombs I also have seen Madusa’s head pictured on wealthy sepluchers. Hmmmm. Note the bible was compiled during this time but specific books weren’t established as canons.

You have misunderstood. To pray to the saints is not commanded in the bible, because it is not necessary in the way that sacramental grace is. However, it is demonstrated as an available option for christians as shown by scripture.

I’m tired of Catholics asking me to beseach St. Joseph for a good house sale or bury his statue. I’m tired of being asked to pray to St. Theresa for an indulgence or visiting a particular church as advertised in my Catholic news paper. I’m tired of seeing superstition added to the faith from people more faithful to the saints than the Lord. But thats niether her nor there. We are requested by the clergy. Though its not demanded how ackward would it be to tell your priest. Hey, father not into that stuff. I’ll say a few Pater Nosters, and Gloria Patris ok?

 

[sambos671]

Let me present what you said again:

*Moses does not forbid speaking to the dead in Maccabees, so there is no way to look at Maccabees and see writing of Moses which forbids speaking to the dead. Further, Maccabees doesn’t even address prayer to the dead, but rather addresses prayer FOR the dead, which the bible counts as righteous if done properly. *
The people condemned in Maccabees weren’t accountable for simple prayer to the dead either. They stood condemned of worshipping icons and thereby offering adorative prayer to false gods. And, as already stated, you have misrepresented what Moses wrote in Deuteronomy, since that has to do with consultation of the dead (devination) and not simply with prayer.
Why are you choosing to deliberately obscure biblical text?

Yeah your getting me mixed up Moses gave the law. The Maccabees broke it. Judas Maccabees had to do something for the sinful dead soldiers. Get the train of thought? First comes moses. Many years later come the Maccabees. How about this Moses forbids Mediums in the law and Saul broke it. Now moses did not write Samuel either but he’s still the law giver.

 

[sambos671]

And no I did not misrepresent what moses wrote in Deuteronomy. You may say what I accuse the soldiers of in Maccabbes is a misrepresentation but not Moses.

 

[promethius]

I guess we had a mix up on what you meant about moses and maccabees… sorry bout that. The connection is still moot, though. Moses forbids consultation with the dead, the sinners who needed prayer in Maccabees were guilty of idolatry through adorative worship of icons and thereby false gods. The two situations aren’t connected.

As its listed here the medium mentioned here is the practitioner. So it follows a Medium or a spiritist or who consults the dead. So someone who consults the dead is considered a medium in this respect. Would a person who beseaches council from the Saints who have passed on a Medium then?

No, there is no consultation. If I pray to St Jude to intercede to God for me on behalf of a cause, I don’t expect or even request an answer or any sort of corresponding communication from the Saint, nor do I carry on conversation of any sort.

No you cannot safely assume that. I’ve been to the very places you speak of though it was many years ago now. But I’ve been there. In those same catacombs I also have seen Madusa’s head pictured on wealthy sepluchers. Hmmmm. Note the bible was compiled during this time but specific books weren’t established as canons.

Not surprised if you saw that, seeing as the gorgon head came to symbolise satan and death in early christianity. The fact that you saw a christian symbol of death on a tomb is hardly surprising. Furthermore, one or two of such symbols is not analogous to the literally thousands of petitionary supplicants of the living to the “dead” Saints, the economy of scale is simply enormously different.

As to the compilation of the bible, you might more accurately say that the books of the bible had (probably) been penned by this time, but were NOT actually compiled, as there was no universally agreed-upon cannon at the time. Even the fact that they were all penned by that time is a little suspect, however, because modern scholars are beginning to claim that the gospels were written later than Christian scholarship has traditionally held. All of that, again, is irrelevant to the fact that before the bible and doctrine was compiled that it was VERY common practice to pray to the dead for their intercession and that reluctance to that practice is the actual invention.

I’m tired of Catholics asking me to beseach St. Joseph for a good house sale or bury his statue. I’m tired of being asked to pray to St. Theresa for an indulgence or visiting a particular church as advertised in my Catholic news paper. I’m tired of seeing superstition added to the faith from people more faithful to the saints than the Lord. But thats niether her nor there. We are requested by the clergy. Though its not demanded how ackward would it be to tell your priest. Hey, father not into that stuff. I’ll say a few Pater Nosters, and Gloria Patris ok?

I’ve never found it awkward to tell a priest no when I didn’t feel comfortable with something, so I can’t relate at all. Perhaps, though, you should look at your reasoning for your public opposition to a church teaching, since here you have only produced fallable personal interpretations of unrelated scriptures with no historical backing.

And no I did not misrepresent what moses wrote in Deuteronomy. You may say what I accuse the soldiers of in Maccabbes is a misrepresentation but not Moses.

No, you didn’t. But you’ve misunderstood what catholicism teaches in that regard, since consultation and petitionary prayer are two entirely seperate things.

 

[sambos671]

I guess we had a mix up on what you meant about moses and maccabees… sorry bout that. The connection is still moot, though. Moses forbids consultation with the dead, the sinners who needed prayer in Maccabees were guilty of idolatry through adorative worship of icons and thereby false gods. The two situations aren’t connected.

No, there is no consultation. If I pray to St Jude to intercede to God for me on behalf of a cause, I don’t expect or even request an answer or any sort of corresponding communication from the Saint, nor do I carry on conversation of any sort.

Not surprised if you saw that, seeing as the gorgon head came to symbolise satan and death in early christianity. The fact that you saw a christian symbol of death on a tomb is hardly surprising. Furthermore, one or two of such symbols is not analogous to the literally thousands of petitionary supplicants of the living to the “dead” Saints, the economy of scale is simply enormously different.

As to the compilation of the bible, you might more accurately say that the books of the bible had (probably) been penned by this time, but were NOT actually compiled, as there was no universally agreed-upon cannon at the time. Even the fact that they were all penned by that time is a little suspect, however, because modern scholars are beginning to claim that the gospels were written later than Christian scholarship has traditionally held. All of that, again, is irrelevant to the fact that before the bible and doctrine was compiled that it was VERY common practice to pray to the dead for their intercession and that reluctance to that practice is the actual invention.

I’ve never found it awkward to tell a priest no when I didn’t feel comfortable with something, so I can’t relate at all. Perhaps, though, you should look at your reasoning for your public opposition to a church teaching, since here you have only produced fallable personal interpretations of unrelated scriptures with no historical backing.

No, you didn’t. But you’ve misunderstood what catholicism teaches in that regard, since consultation and petitionary prayer are two entirely seperate things.

Ok on your first point. Christians petitioning the dead and pegans petitioning the patron gods can have a coorilation as I’ve mentioned before on this post. This is historically verifiable. That pagans requested their gods and had patron gods similarily to the Early Christians. Most christans in Rome came from a pagan background so it is easily to assume that it wasn’t a big jump for them from praying to their ancestors to praying to the saints. Yet what do we see reported in Judea? The scriptures themeselves are a testiment to the earliest Churches in Jerusalem and there is nothing about petitioning dead saints (whether or not they are alive in an afterlife) So historically there is some evidence to what I’m saying. Didache doesn’t show it. Does clement beseach the dead saints in his letter to the corinithians? How about Ignatius? And as for your assertion about not having the saints respond. Did you read the post where I show that in the prayer itself it asks for a responce from the mentioned saint and that Mary herself can protect us? So its still seems like consulting with the dead.
So I know what the catachism teaches with regard to the saints. I don’t mind them being used as an example. I don’t have a problem with them intercessing for us in heaven. But those two prayers I mention previously shows you where some consternation comes in. I know the Saints are suppose to lead us to God. No problem there. I have problems consulting the dead.

 

[promethius]

Ok on your first point. Christians petitioning the dead and pegans petitioning the patron gods can have a coorilation as I’ve mentioned before on this post. This is historically verifiable. That pagans requested their gods and had patron gods similarily to the Early Christians. Most christans in Rome came from a pagan background so it is easily to assume that it wasn’t a big jump for them from praying to their ancestors to praying to the saints.

There’s an intrinsic difference between praying to a demi-“god” and asking them to do something from their own power vice praying to a Saint and asking that they in turn pray to God for HIS grace.

Yet what do we see reported in Judea? The scriptures themeselves are a testiment to the earliest Churches in Jerusalem and there is nothing about petitioning dead saints (whether or not they are alive in an afterlife)

I don’t presume to give historical account of Judea, I’ve never been there. However, there is a total LACK of widespread condemnation of the practice until more than a thousand years later. If the practice were wrong, as you imply, there would definitely have been mention forbiding it. If it is right and common practice, there was no reason to write about it.

So historically there is some evidence to what I’m saying. Didache doesn’t show it. Does clement beseach the dead saints in his letter to the corinithians? How about Ignatius?

We have evidence that early Christians prayed to the saints. We have evidence via Christ’s perfect example that communion of the saints is real and moral. We do NOT have any sort of evidence that states this practice was discouraged or supressed. If you’re looking for a direct scriptural reference saying prayer to the dead is encouraged/available, you’re right, you won’t find it explicitly stated… but lack of evidence is not proof of your side, especially compared to the historical evidence of Christians offering prayers to saints.

And as for your assertion about not having the saints respond. Did you read the post where I show that in the prayer itself it asks for a responce from the mentioned saint and that Mary herself can protect us? So its still seems like consulting with the dead.

Prayer to the saints is a personal affair, one in which I’ll not be baited into criticizing what is in the heart and mind of others… particularly not when said prayer is written in a different language and then translated into my own. I have no way of knowing whether or not that person intended mary to act by some intrinsic power or if the language or intent was such that Mary would “protect us” vis her prayer to God in turn. It isn’t my place to judge that.

In other words, the fact that prayer to the saints is morally acceptable is totally seperate from individual prayers which may or may not have been abuses of the doctrine (which would be based on nuance in the language and intent of the original prayer… something niether you nor I can judge at this point)

So I know what the catachism teaches with regard to the saints. I don’t mind them being used as an example. I don’t have a problem with them intercessing for us in heaven. But those two prayers I mention previously shows you where some consternation comes in. I know the Saints are suppose to lead us to God. No problem there. I have problems consulting the dead.

As I said, there’s a difference between penitentiary prayer to the dead, and consulting them as a medium does which moses discusses. In fact, there must be an incredible distinction because Christ, our perfect example, talks with the Saints and this was not a moral violation. In other words, there’s a distinct action of arcane activity which a medium does and Christ did not which earns condemnation. If you don’t want to pray to the Saints, that’s fine, it’s not required for salvation… however as a catholic (?) i would urge you not to condemn those who do choose to validly take advantage of this resource under the proper form.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

This question is directed for the Catholics out there.

Prayer is highly regarded as a form of worship.

No. A “prayer” is a request. It can often include adoration, but it does not have to. For example, when I file a complaint in superior court, the last part of the document is entitled the “prayer” in which you state to the court the relief that you are seeking - i.e. damages, restitution, specific performance of a contract, etc. By filing a complaint I am not “worshipping” the judge who reads the pleading.

dyluck:

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

See above. We ask for their intercession. We ask them to do this by joining their prayers to ours. We believe that they can intercede because we believe they are still part of the mystical body of Christ to which all chrisitans are mystically joined. Thats about it in a nutshell. No idolatry. No blasphemy. Just a request for intercessory prayer.

Peace,
Robert

 

[RevDrNorth]

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.

I am not Catholic but do not necessarily see anything wrong with it. You ask living people to pray for you don’t you? Do you believe in soul extinction and that dead people no longer exist? Catholics and others believe in the Communion of the saints (we are all part of the Church). Also, look in scripture (Book of Rev) and see the prayers of the saints mentioned.

A misconception among Protestants is that when Catholics, Anglicans and Orthodox pray to Saints they are asking saints to heal them and so on. This may happen but it is an abuse. What they ask is that the saint pray for them over an issue. Remember from scripture that the prayers of a righteous man availeth much. All the petitions I have looked at do just that.

Before you (or anyone else mentions the use of saint’s relics in healing) you may want to also look in the Book of Acts where it mentions articles being touched to the apostles and then healing people (relics).

I guess the Catholics are following biblical practices

 

[kalt]

Thats a good attempt but no dice. Gabriel’s greeting to Mary was just that. I don’t know if you read Asterix comics or not. I use to as a kid. Anyway the Romans are always greeting each other with Ave or Hail. Gabriel was doing just that greeting. Mary was obviously full of Grace because the Holy Spirit covered her for the incarnation who was the very definition of Grace. Elisabeth’s greeting was a Holy Spirit filled acknowledgement of who Mary was and who Jesus was to be. Neither was prayer to someone who had passed into the after life so to speak. Note fruit of your womb. As the fruit of Eve’s womb brought sinful man into the world the “fruit” of Mary’s womb would bring sinful man into righteousness. Also it was believed among the Jews that women would be saved in Child bearing. As far as Paul he’s asking for the intersession of the believers (presently alive). No one doubts intersession. We arguing about getting it from people who have passed from this life to the next. Moses calls this necromancy. And the last prayer you mention is nice but note “but deliver us” She is unable to do so as you’ve noted. To request her to deliver us sounds a little like ancient romans beseaching Juno (Hera) to deliver them as their patrion god. In fact. My consern is that giving saints like Christopher or Anthony a patronage for a particular aspect of life (like pilgrims and travelers, or finder of lost things) seem to close in resembelance of how the ancients viewed their gods. Jupiter or Zeus was the greatest god over all the gods yet Mercury or Hermes was a patron god of trade and profit. Can we compare with Saint Homobonus or Saint Matthew? You see my meaning? Jesus cannot be compared with Necromancy since he never spoke to the dead save in one instance. He commanded Lazerus to come forth. But then he rose him from the dead. Is it the same thing?

And of the saints in Heaven? Are they dead?

 

[kalt]

Hi Kalt,

Well you are right, Mary had not assended but indeed died physically. The only thing here is, we can only assume that Jesus held a high place for Mary. The only reason that Mary is santified and spotless and blamelessness is due to the fact that Christ was a propitiation for her Sins as well. Not even Mary is outside of the fact that Only through Christ we can come to the Father.
The bible says that God found favor with Mary, but that doesn’t mean Mary was without sin. God found favor in many people who were no where near perfect right?

I believe God chooses whom he chooses, it doesn’t depend on that person’s merit or foreknowledge of God that that person was going to be a good person or not.

And Elijah and Enoch.

 

[sambos671]

kalt:
And of the saints in Heaven? Are they dead?

Of all the things in that post you could have resonded to you can only come up with that? Which I’ve explained that a dead body is a dead body no matter what the condition of that persons spirit is. Moses did not have the after life worked out to the extent that we do. He meant do not speak with people who have died. The 2nd death is not the issue but the first.