S
shaky
Guest
What’s the differenceOh oh! maybe I should not post I know posts until I know moreBut today I heard
“we do not pray to God, we pray in Him”
- Status
E
EricFilmer
Guest
Don’t worry, LoveMercyGrace, there was nothing wrong with how you worded things in Post #29. From the Catholic and biblical perspective, both terms are acceptable. I’m not sure what sort of distinction this person was trying to make, but I don’t think it’s a distinction one ought to be making in the first place.Oh oh! maybe I should not post I know posts until I know more
“we do not pray to God, we pray in Him”
The phrase “pray to God”, “pray to the Father”, etc. is used repeatedly in the Catechism. Consider, for example, this elaboration on the Lord’s Prayer:
…it is through the Word of God that the Holy Spirit teaches the children of God to pray to their Father. (CCC #2766, emphasis added)
Moreover, the concept of praying “to God” is found throughout the Bible. For example, Luke tells us that even Jesus did this:
In these days he went out to the mountain to pray; and all night he continued in prayer to God. (Luke 6:12, emphasis added)
Regarding the idea of praying “in God”, this comes from St. Paul:
“Pray at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication.” (Ephesians 6:2, emphasis added)
M
mattwilliams
Guest
This is not a rigorous use of if-then-therefore logic. What you have said is the equivalent of “2 is a number, and 7 is also a number, therefore 2 is equal to 7.” Just because saints are imbued with properties of Christ does not mean that they have the same purpose and perform the same duties.
The argument that since we are called to pray for each other, and due to the fact that the saints are alive in heaven, then we may call upon the saints to pray for us, is more scripturally and logically sound.
T
thenobes
Guest
E
EricFilmer
Guest
I only have a moment to respond. I like what both you and Brywan have posted concerning this. To advance the concept further (and lend it more credibility) I think what should be considered is that conformity to Christ and the role of intercession is an aspect of the Church (of which Christ is the head and we are the body, including the saints in heaven).
E
EricFilmer
Guest
To be honest I really don’t see how your representation fits the biblical language Brywan posted. Please keep in mind that the term is “perfectly conformed” and I’m not seeing where this concept is properly represented in your post. I think a better mathematical expression would be: 2 = us (prior to perfection) and
7 = the image of Christ (including us after perfection), along with the idea of being “perfectly conformed” being the process by which 2 is made to be the equivalent of 7, which is to say +5. This results in 2 + 5 = 7.
D
DavidFilmer
Guest
Sorry, brother, but **mattwilliams **is correct. Simply because we are in the perfect image of Jesus does not make us the same as Jesus, or mean that we can do everything that Jesus can do.
**thenobes **is also correct that we could insert an intermediate proposition to “close the gap.” Obviously, we can do SOME things that Jesus can do, such as love. When we are perfected, we can love like Jesus loves. Everything that we can do that Jesus also does will be perfected.
Thus, we need to prove that we can intercede for others, even in our earthly, imperfect state. If we can prove this proposition, and insert it into Brywan’s logic, then we have proved the point.
As thenobes pointed out, this intermediate step requires proof. Can we (while on earth) intercede for one another? It’s not hard to prove this (at least if the Bible is admitted as a source).
E
EricFilmer
Guest
I’m still not convinced. As has been pointed out, what is being considered is the ramifications of being perfectly conformed to the image of Christ. Christ, as you know, is a messianic title (“Anointed One”). Saying that people are conformed to the “image of Christ” is another way of saying that they are “like the Messiah” (and this happens through grace, which is a participation in divine life).
Therefore, what has to be considered is the role of the Messiah in salvation history, because that is what the saints are perfectly conformed to. The role of the Messiah is to sacrifice his life and to intercede for others (all for the purpose of reconciling humanity with the Father). We participate in the former aspect through the Mass. We do this sacramentally on earth which unites us to the Lamb’s Supper being celebrated by all the angels and saints in heaven. It is logical, therefore, to conclude that saints continue participating in the other roles of the Messiah as well, such as intercession.
It would be good to keep in mind exactly what my point has been in this thread. mattwilliams stated (in Post #43) that Brywan’s material (from Post #6) did not use proper if-then logic. I’m saying that he did, as I have now outlined. I don’t see how Brywan used a non sequitur or any other fallacious reasoning. Brywan never said that the saints are “the same as Jesus” but rather “perfectly conformed to the image of Christ”, and the image of Christ most certainly encompasses the role of intercession. As Hebrews states, Christ lives to make intercessions for us.
But is this enough to make a fully convincing biblical argument in support of the doctrine of the intercession of saints? Probably not, which is why I suggested (in Post #45) that Brywan’s material be expanded upon by including what the Bible teaches about the Church’s role in intercession, and how Christ is the head of the Church and various Christians are the body. To use your phrase, this is what I proposed yesterday to “close the gap.” I would also add Revelation’s description of martyrs at the throne of heaven beseeching God to enact retribution against the wicked on earth (6:9-11), which is a type of intercession. As a side comment, I thought I had mentioned Rev. 6:9-11 earlier in this discussion, but it was actually in another thread. That’s the problem of discussing the same general topic simultaneously in different threads; I sometimes get them mixed up.
Nevertheless, seeing as people can argue interpretations, I don’t think any biblical argument would (or could) be fully convincing. I just basically try to show people that Catholics have sound scriptural support for the doctrine of the intercession of the saints.
T
thenobes
Guest
- Status