Protestants: Why are many of your churches named after saints?

[gcnuss]

Or a Saint Mary for that matter.

I have seen St. Mary Lutheran Church in Silver Creek, Maryland. And, in Washington, DC, a Lutheran Hispanic congregation is named Iglesia Luterana Santa Maria.

Just a couple of exceptions to the rule…:tiphat:

 

[The_Reginator]

That’s BS. For instance, MLKJ is venerated in ECUSA.

SAINT Martin Luther King Jr?
St. Martin Luther King Jr United Church?
I think I see your point. I just have never heard of protestant churches named after Saints who are not Catholic.

Maybe I can learn something. Can anybody give a list of saints that are not Catholic?

 

[VARC]

I think your logic is severely flawed here. Saints are cannonized by Rome in a very complex manner. Other churches such as mine (Anglican) and the Orthodox recognize saints as well. Some of them we share in common and some we do not. I don’t recall Roman Catholics recogizing St. George as we do in Anglicanism. St. Patrick was a Celltic, not a praciticng Roman Catholic. Sainthood is not exclusive to Roman Catholics.

St. George was recognized until recently when he was removed from the calendar because they deemed him mythical.

Saints are recognized in Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and liturgical Protestantism. St Patrick is claimed as a Saint in all three communions. Roman Catholics believe he was a Roman Catholic but the Orthodox believe he was an Orthodox Christian. Anglicans usually will say that he was simply a Christian because they believe that the distinctions of “Roman Catholic” and “Orthodox Christian” are inappropriate for Patrick because he lived before the Great Schism.

 

[The_Reginator]

I think you will find the vast majority, if not all, protestant churches that are named after saints are named after the apostles. St. Mark, St. Matthew, St. Luke, St. John, St. Paul, St. Peter. You are not likely to find a St. Bernadette or a St. Clare Lutheran or Methodist Church

The apostles are all Catholics – the early Church is still with us today, now known as the Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox Church also has never been separated from the original Church established by our Lord. (I don’t think I’m being very complete here. Anyone care to elaborate, or start a thread to clear things up?)

 

[GeorgeSword]

St. George was recognized until recently when he was removed from the calendar because they deemed him mythical.

This is untrue. He was never deemed a myth and is still just as much a saint as always. The calendar was revised, true, but we can’t just yank someone out of heaven or claim they are myths. The mere fact of his many intercessions should be proof enough of this. Many saints were removed from the calendar, but none of them have been deemed mythical or 'desainted.

 

[VARC]

This is untrue. He was never deemed a myth and is still just as much a saint as always. The calendar was revised, true, but we can’t just yank someone out of heaven or claim they are myths. The mere fact of his many intercessions should be proof enough of this. Many saints were removed from the calendar, but none of them have been deemed mythical or 'desainted.

St Simon of Trent had his canonization yanked because his cult was anti-Semitic.

 

[The_Reginator]

I’ve been realizing that my terminology is lacking…
When the Church declares someone a saint are they beatified? (sp?) Or is that the step that comes first?

 

[gamewell45]

Here’s a thought that’s been on the back of my mind for a while.
Many protestant churches are named after (or dedicated to) saints. But the only saints we know of are Catholic. It seems odd to me that protestants worship in buildings named for Catholics.
Any thoughts?

Most likely we are trying to curry favor with the Catholics.

 

[GeorgeSword]

St Simon of Trent had his canonization yanked because his cult was anti-Semitic.

There never was a St. Simon of Trent. It was all deemed a hoax.

 

[BernadetteM]

I think your logic is severely flawed here. Saints are cannonized by Rome in a very complex manner. Other churches such as mine (Anglican) and the Orthodox recognize saints as well. Some of them we share in common and some we do not. I don’t recall Roman Catholics recogizing St. George as we do in Anglicanism. St. Patrick was a Celltic, not a praciticng Roman Catholic. Sainthood is not exclusive to Roman Catholics.

Yes St. George is recognized, when my daughter lived in England her children attended a Catholic school named St. George.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

 

[ralphinal]

I’ve been realizing that my terminology is lacking…
When the Church declares someone a saint are they beatified? (sp?) Or is that the step that comes first?

That is the second step. The First step is to be declared a servant of God. Then they are beatified (Blessed is added before their name). Then, if all conditions are met, canonized (Saint).

Not all Saints went through the current process. The saints in the Bible we just called saints. They were seen as holy and that is all the title means. For a while, it was more informal and somewhat local. Now, we have the process. There are still a few exceptions. For example, St. Albert the Great did not go through the standard process. Once he was named a Doctor of the Church, he became known as Saint.

 

[crazzeto]

I never said there was no love, respect or admiration for them. But it’s possible to admire someone without praying to them for intercession. I admire Martin Luther King, Jr. a great deal, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to pray to him.

I guess what I have to wonder is, why wouldn’t you? We know the prayers of a just man avails much, who is more just than a saint? Wouldn’t having them pray for you, sort of like you might ask me, to pray and interceed for you with my prayers, make a lot of sense? After all, God is going to weigh St. Peter’s prayers more heavily than those of a sinner on earth such as my self.

 

[crazzeto]

That is the second step. The First step is to be declared a servant of God. Then they are beatified (Blessed is added before their name). Then, if all conditions are met, canonized (Saint).

Not all Saints went through the current process. The saints in the Bible we just called saints. They were seen as holy and that is all the title means. For a while, it was more informal and somewhat local. Now, we have the process. There are still a few exceptions. For example, St. Albert the Great did not go through the standard process. Once he was named a Doctor of the Church, he became known as Saint.

The theif who gloified the Lord on the Cross, and begged to be remembered was instantly cannonized. It doesn’t get much clearer than “you will be with me in paradice this day”.

 

[ralphinal]

The theif who gloified the Lord on the Cross, and begged to be remembered was instantly cannonized. It doesn’t get much clearer than “you will be with me in paradice this day”.

Not exactly. Cannonized does not mean sent to heaven. It means that we, on earth, can be sure that he is in heaven. Based on that statement, we can say that he is in heaven. However, because of that statement, there is no need to cannonize him, because Jesus outright said he would be in heaven.

Does that make sense?

 

[ralphinal]

I guess what I have to wonder is, why wouldn’t you? We know the prayers of a just man avails much, who is more just than a saint? Wouldn’t having them pray for you, sort of like you might ask me, to pray and interceed for you with my prayers, make a lot of sense? After all, God is going to weigh St. Peter’s prayers more heavily than those of a sinner on earth such as my self.

We have no proof of his being in heaven. We cannot say that he is in Hell or purgatory, either. All that we can say is that he no longer walks the earth. WE should pray FOR him, not to him. Should he be in heaven, he will still be able to pray for us. Should he be in Purgatory, he needs our prayers.

The only people that we should pray to are those that we KNOW are saints. Everyone else, we should pray for

 

[Bill_Pick]

If I may, why would you name a church after them then? If there is no love, respect or admiration for them, what is the point?

In Christ,
Andrew

Well lets see about this why do prostant have a person called a Bishop like Bishop Jake, who did he and other get called a Bishop,who gave them the right to call then self a Bishop

 

[gearhead]

If I may, why would you name a church after them then? If there is no love, respect or admiration for them, what is the point?

You can have love, respect or admiration for someone without outright veneration.

And there are lots of reasons to name a church.

For example, my grandmother attended Yorkminster Park Baptist Church. The name came from the merger of Yorkminster Baptist Church and Park Road Baptist Church after the Park Road church burned down. And Yorkminster took its name from the original Yorkminster in England, which itself took its name from its community.

Nobody at that church venerated Yorkminster or Park Road in the sense that Catholics venerate saints. And they certainly didn’t worship the little parkette next to the church that came to be known as “Yorkminster Park” by people who didn’t know the origins of the church’s name.

 

[agiosotheos]

SAINT Martin Luther King Jr?
St. Martin Luther King Jr United Church?
I think I see your point. I just have never heard of protestant churches named after Saints who are not Catholic.

Maybe I can learn something. Can anybody give a list of saints that are not Catholic?

Saint that are not “Catholic” is a significantly broader group than saints that are Protestant.

 

[agiosotheos]

The apostles are all Catholics – the early Church is still with us today, now known as the Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox Church also has never been separated from the original Church established by our Lord. (I don’t think I’m being very complete here. Anyone care to elaborate, or start a thread to clear things up?)

It seems like you’re not even making sense.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Well lets see about this why do prostant have a person called a Bishop like Bishop Jake, who did he and other get called a Bishop,who gave them the right to call then self a Bishop

Congregational polity. Since bishop is in the Bible, his congregation would not believe that it has to be given through apostolic succession. The biblical pattern, while open to debate obviously, is felt by his church to be just that…congregational polity. If they believed in the episcopal form of government, then obviously that would be the means.