Mary and Saint worship

[NotWorthy]

Catholics have * never stopped *using it in this sense. Never have, never will. I’ll say it again – dumbing down language only makes people dumb and dumber, and **banalizes **the culture.

Oh Great!!! Now I’ve got ANOTHER word I’ve got to look up in the dictionary…

 

[rr1213]

LOL! When was the last time you heard anyone use “sinister” as a synonym for “left” in ANY context? By contrast, Catholics have * never stopped* using “prayer” as a synonym for “petition” or “entreaty.” Something doesn’t become archaic until it has stopped being used. That is not the case for this use of the word “prayer” – except among Protestants, who equate it with worship because, without the Mass, prayer is the highest form of worship they have – and among people who practice no religion at all.

Catholics have * never stopped *using it in this sense. Never have, never will. I’ll say it again – dumbing down language only makes people dumb and dumber, and banalizes the culture. If someone doesn’t understand something, you explain it to them, not bring the culture down if they can’t or won’t understand it.

Ok. Go ahead and use the word “prayer” as you always have. You can also continue to use “sinister” for “left”, “charity” for “love”, and “gay” for “merry”. If you make the effort to educate everyone, they’ll know what you mean.

If I haven’t made my point by now I’m never going to make it.

Moreover, there are plenty of ways of worshipping God and I’m not sure that they come in gradations with prayer inferior to the Eucharist. There are also plenty of non-Catholic Christians who consider the Eucharist to be a pinacle of their worship notwithstanding the Catholic Church’s view of the matter. In any event, we’ve alll been admonished that “[r]eligion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.” James 1:27. Who’s to say that this latter form of worship is less pleasing to God than any other?

 

[Fidelis]

Ok. Go ahead and use the word “prayer” as you always have. You can also continue to use “sinister” for “left”, “charity” for “love”, and “gay” for “merry”.

Prayer – I intend to. Gay – maybe. Sinister for “left” – that was way before either of our times.

If you make the effort to educate everyone, they’ll know what you mean.

And that’s what I’ve been doing. :tiphat:

If I haven’t made my point by now I’m never going to make it.

Probably not.

Moreover, there are plenty of ways of worshipping God and I’m not sure that they come in gradations with prayer inferior to the Eucharist.

That’s only true if one has a truncated, i.e. non-Catholic, view of the Eucharist. Then it’s all the same thing.:yup:

In any event, we’ve alll been admonished that “[r]eligion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.” James 1:27. Who’s to say that this latter form of worship is less pleasing to God than any other?

And, of course, James is not addressing worship per se in this passage, only religion in general. Again, prayer is not synonymous with worship, except for those with a very low ecclesiology.

 

[Fidelis]

Oh Great!!! Now I’ve got ANOTHER word I’ve got to look up in the dictionary…

Sorry.

 

[Verita]

But the meaning of the word hasn’t really changed. It’s ALWAYS meant to ask. And it is still used that way. I learned what the word pray meant as a young child just from reading books.

This is that point I’m trying to make. It HASN"T changed. It still means the same thing as it always has.

rr1213, you’re trying to say we should stop using a word because many people misapply it or misunderstand it. That’s a bad reason. How many people really know what Transubstantiation means? Or the Immaculate Conception? Or Hypostatic Union? I’d wager 9 protestants out of 10 don’t understand any of those terms and misapply them. But that’s no reason to stop using them.

Words end up evolving (as in the case of “gay”) because ignorant people start misusing them. I do not find this a positive thing. We shouldn’t give in to these people we should educate them and maintain the integrity (what integrity there is) of our language.

 

[mikeledes]

While the Catholic Church teaches that we should not worship Mary, there are Catholics out there who do not know the distinction between the veneration given to Mary and the worship given to God. I have heard things like, 'If she is God’s mother, isn’t she superior to God and hence more powerful." That I heard from a poorly catechized Catholic. I read an old Catholic book of Saints in which the author claimed that since Jesus was Mary’s son, he had to obey her and that’s why her prayer was omnipotent. God obeying Mary? Shouldn’t it be the other way around. If this were to fall into the hands of a Protestant, they would have a field day. If this were to fall into the hands of a poorly catechized Catholic, then that would lead to further confusion. I think we need to use language that stresses the distinction between the veneration we give to Mary and the saints and the worship we give to God. Otherwise, there can be a lot of confusion among Protestants and fellow Catholics.

God Bless

 

[rr1213]

While the Catholic Church teaches that we should not worship Mary, there are Catholics out there who do not know the distinction between the veneration given to Mary and the worship given to God. I have heard things like, 'If she is God’s mother, isn’t she superior to God and hence more powerful." That I heard from a poorly catechized Catholic. I read an old Catholic book of Saints in which the author claimed that since Jesus was Mary’s son, he had to obey her and that’s why her prayer was omnipotent. God obeying Mary? Shouldn’t it be the other way around. If this were to fall into the hands of a Protestant, they would have a field day. If this were to fall into the hands of a poorly catechized Catholic, then that would lead to further confusion. I think we need to use language that stresses the distinction between the veneration we give to Mary and the saints and the worship we give to God. Otherwise, there can be a lot of confusion among Protestants and fellow Catholics.

God Bless

Thank you. Maybe SOMEBODY understood what I was saying.

 

[mikeledes]

Language evolves. The word “worship” meant “honor” in the 16th and 17th centuries. You can even find that in the King James Version. But we would never say we “worship” Mary even if we meant it in the archaic sense of the word because that would be extremely confusing.

 

[Fidelis]

Thank you. Maybe SOMEBODY understood what I was saying.

Oh, we understood, alright – we just didn’t agree.

 

[RyanL]

Thank you. Maybe SOMEBODY understood what I was saying.

Why do I feel like I’m always quoting C.S. Lewis at you?
Mere Christianity:

The word gentleman originally meant something recognisable; one who had a coat of arms and some landed property. When you called someone “a gentleman” you were not paying him a compliment, but merely stating a fact. If you said he was not “a gentleman” you were not insulting him, but giving information. There was no contradiction in saying that John was a liar and a gentleman; any more than there now is in saying that James is a fool and an M.A. But then there came people who said -so rightly, charitably, spiritually, sensitively, so anything but usefully- “Ah, but surely the important thing about a gentleman is not the coat of arms and the land, but the behaviour? Surely he is the true gentleman who behaves as a gentleman should? Surely in that sense Edward is far more truly a gentleman than John?”

They meant well. To be honourable and courteous and brave is of course a far better thing than to have a coat of arms. But it is not the same thing. Worse still, it is not a thing everyone will agree about. To call a man “a gentleman” in this new, refined sense, becomes, in fact, not a way of giving information about him, but a way of praising him: to deny that he is “a gentleman” becomes simply a way of insulting him. When a word ceases to be a term of description and becomes merely a term of praise, it no longer tells you facts about the object: it only tells you about the speaker’s attitude to that object. (A “nice” meal only means a meal the speaker likes.)

A gentleman, once it has been spiritualised and refined out of its old coarse, objective sense, means hardly more than a man whom the speaker likes. As a result, gentleman is now a useless word. We had lots of terms of approval already, so it was not needed for that use; on the other hand if anyone (say, in a historical work) wants to use it in its old sense, he cannot do so without explanations. It has been spoiled for that purpose.

You seem to be advocating that ‘prayer’ has now been commonly accepted as being equal to ‘worship’, and has been ruined for the legitimate Catholic use of the word ‘prayer’.

I think Fidelis is unwilling to let the word ‘prayer’ be ruined for such a purpose.

Would that be accurate?

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[Fidelis]

While the Catholic Church teaches that we should not worship Mary, there are Catholics out there who do not know the distinction between the veneration given to Mary and the worship given to God. I have heard things like, 'If she is God’s mother, isn’t she superior to God and hence more powerful." That I heard from a poorly catechized Catholic. I read an old Catholic book of Saints in which the author claimed that since Jesus was Mary’s son, he had to obey her and that’s why her prayer was omnipotent. God obeying Mary? Shouldn’t it be the other way around. If this were to fall into the hands of a Protestant, they would have a field day. If this were to fall into the hands of a poorly catechized Catholic, then that would lead to further confusion. I think we need to use language that stresses the distinction between the veneration we give to Mary and the saints and the worship we give to God. Otherwise, there can be a lot of confusion among Protestants and fellow Catholics.

God Bless

Again, the answer is education. The goal is to make people (Catholics and non-Catholics alike) more knowledgable, not facilitate their ignorance.

Mark Twain once said, “Always do what’s right. It will gratify some, and astonish the rest.” If you educate a well-disposed person, they will adjust their thinking; if they are poorly disposed, you can redefine until you rot, but they will cling like moss to their predjudices. In this case, for example, many non-Catholics will not accept the fact of asking the saints in heaven to intercede for us, no matter how you slice it.

In light of this, another saying comes to mind: "Never wrestle with a pig [in this case, the poorly disposed] … … you’ll both get dirty, and only the pig will enjoy it.

 

[rr1213]

Why do I feel like I’m always quoting C.S. Lewis at you?

You seem to be advocating that ‘prayer’ has now been commonly accepted as being equal to ‘worship’, and has been ruined for the legitimate Catholic use of the word ‘prayer’.

I think Fidelis is unwilling to let the word ‘prayer’ be ruined for such a purpose.

Would that be accurate?

God Bless,
RyanL

Nothing wrong with citing C.S. Lewis…he seems to be one of the few commentators that everyone respects notwithstanding their religious affiliation.

You’ve pretty accurately summarized the issue. My only comment at this point might be to observe that even if Fidelis is unwilling to let the word “prayer” be ruined, the damage is already done and it is not within his (or anyone else’s) power to reverse the course of linguistic history on this one. To tack onto C.S. Lewis’ comments above, would it make sense in today’s world to insist that a “gentlemen” is someone with a Coat of Arms and landed property? Or, even worse, to insist that someone is not a gentleman because he does not satisfy the older meaning of the word, thereby resulting in miscommunication and perhaps insult?

 

[Fidelis]

Nothing wrong with citing C.S. Lewis…he seems to be one of the few commentators that everyone respects notwithstanding their religious affiliation.

You’ve pretty accurately summarized the issue. My only comment at this point might be to observe that even if Fidelis is unwilling to let the word “prayer” be ruined, the damage is already done and it is not within his (or anyone else’s) power to reverse the course of linguistic history on this one. To tack onto C.S. Lewis’ comments above, would it make sense in today’s world to insist that a “gentlemen” is someone with a Coat of Arms and landed property? Or, even worse, to insist that someone is not a gentleman because he does not satisfy the older meaning of the word, thereby resulting in miscommunication and perhaps insult?

Perhaps that’s where we differ the most on this. You seem to think it is irreversable. I don’t believe it is – especially when it comes to explaining the distinction to individuals we encounter who misunderstand it. It can be a moment of teaching and evangelization. And it is among these individuals – *the ones who care of enough about the things of God to inquire about it and sincerely listen *-- that the difference can be made. And isn’t that what it’s all about?

As for people who **don’t give a fig about religion **OR **who are rabidly against the doctrine of the Communion of the Saints no matter what you say ** – they aren’t even in the equation: Let God work on them, since he has more time or patience than me.

 

[rr1213]

Perhaps that’s where we differ the most on this. You seem to think it is irreversable. I don’t believe it is – especially when it comes to explaining the distinction to individuals we encounter who misunderstand it. It can be a moment of teaching and evangelization. And it is among these individuals – *the ones who care of enough about the things of God to inquire about it and sincerely listen *-- that the difference can be made. And isn’t that what it’s all about?

Good luck then.

 

[Fidelis]

Good luck then.

Thank you.

 

[tonnnie2008]

As Catholics, we pray to (or “through”), kneel to, and praise Mary and the saints. Protestants claim that prayer, praise, and kneeling combined constitute worship, and hence Catholics worship Mary and the saints. If veneration and worship externally look the same, what is the fundamental difference between the two. Is there a difference or are we just splitting hairs?

God Bless and Thanks

There is definately a difference. If it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck and smells like a duck its a duck!!! But all denominations are always spliting hairs among each other… I wish we could all just be called children of God and leave out the denominational barriors…that divide us!!! I mean we all love Jesus and believe!!!That should be enough to glue us together right!!!

 

[tonnnie2008]

Well, I was taught we pray with the saints, not to them. Anyways, no, we are not splitting hairs. At Mass, we worship God and only God. We look to Him to save us, no one else, though we may ask saints and the Blessed Virgin Mary to pray on our behalf. If asking a saint to pray for you is worship, then asking your family and friends to pray for you is worship. If keeping images of the saints is worship, then those fancy family pictures from the photographer are indeed worship. The same with our monuments to dead leaders, and the Statue of Liberty must be the American way of worshiping liberty and freedom, rather than venerating it.

That’s probably one of the easiest to understand explanations about how the saints are involved in the catholic religion. That’s very much food for thought. It does make since to me… thats the first time i have thought that…Im not catholic…but i am non-denominational.

 

[NotWorthy]

There is definately a difference. If it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck and smells like a duck its a duck!!! But all denominations are always spliting hairs among each other… I wish we could all just be called children of God and leave out the denominational barriors…that divide us!!! I mean we all love Jesus and believe!!!That should be enough to glue us together right!!!

Then come back to the Church and worship in the Sunday Service that has remained consistent for almost 2000 years. If Jesus is the glue that binds us, then why can’t people return to the Mass that they abandoned?

 

[tonnnie2008]

Then come back to the Church and worship in the Sunday Service that has remained consistent for almost 2000 years. If Jesus is the glue that binds us, then why can’t people return to the Mass that they abandoned?

ok not to sound to ignorant. But i don’t know everything about mass. I will have to investigate more into catholic religion. As i am just learning about it. I never said i knew alot about catholics however im open to learn. Thats why this lwebsite caught my eye. I just know that there is great division among the children of
God.

 

[NotWorthy]

ok not to sound to ignorant. But i don’t know everything about mass. I will have to investigate more into catholic religion. As i am just learning about it. I never said i knew alot about catholics however im open to learn. Thats why this lwebsite caught my eye. I just know that there is great division among the children of
God.

The Catholic Mass is the ultimate form of worship we can do. In it, Catholics are united with Christ in the Eucharist in a way that can’t be done anywhere else, other than by extraordinary means (after all, anything is possible with God, eh?). When Jesus talks of “He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him”, He is talking of the Eucharist at Mass.

So, for a Christian to walk away from this union is something the devout Catholic could not even fathom!!!

BTW, did you know that the Catholic Mass typically has more Scripture than any other Sunday Service? I think I read where 26% of the Mass comes from Scripture, whereas the average non-Catholic Christian service is about 10% Scripture.