What constitutes worship?

[ProVobis]

Excellent point but try explaining that to someone living in the ‘now’. I can hear the response already, 'Oh, so just so the protestants could have a way to put down the catholics the whole english speaking world has this conspiracy to change the meaning of the word ‘worship’.

I mean, I understand all of this, but its like…some people, there just is NO leveling with them. And this protestant guy, take that back, every protestant I’ve talked to, its like they BOMBARD you with all these different topics and questions and its like, before you can even tackle ONE point and have them agree that its settled, they’ve already presented like- 15 more. Its so…whimpers …stressful. LOL.

Which explains why we have so many English Bibles.

 

[manualman]

I fail to see why we Catholics have to change the definitions of words that we have used in worship for 2000 years to conform to the recent changes made by non-Catholics.

Reality check: English is a protestant language, not really a catholic one. If you want to use the word that was used in worship for 2,000 years, better dump English altogether right now.

If, on the other hand, you DO intend to keep communicating in English, you need to recognize the foibles of communicating catholic ideas in a protestant tongue. If clarity to your audience is your goal, then prudence and comprehension is called for.

 

[ProVobis]

Reality check: English is a protestant language, not really a catholic one. If you want to use the word that was used in worship for 2,000 years, better dump English altogether right now.

If, on the other hand, you DO intend to keep communicating in English, you need to recognize the foibles of communicating catholic ideas in a protestant tongue. If clarity to your audience is your goal, then prudence and comprehension is called for.

:clapping::clapping::clapping:

Catholics don’t realize how vulnerable they become when they discuss English theology with the Protestants. I know they always try to “correct” me.

 

[Charlotte408]

I’m glad you guys mentioned that because it reminded me of something I wanted to post once, but forgot to.

You know how some people bring up Christ having brothers?? And really what it is is that in Greek there is no word for cousin??

Ok well, at the beginning of your life, things may happen, and you don’t understand them because you don’t have the FULLER picture…and … at the end of your life, you might look back and reflect on things and have a deeper understanding of why certain things took place…God has a plan, and its much bigger than we can hope to comprehend…

And…the bible, is sort of the same way. Christ has these, mysteries, that over time have been revealed to us…

So…and I’m not trying to be heretic or anything just…thinking openly and outloud with you guys here; do you think that God, in his infinite wisdom, knew that the bible would be translated over and over, knew that english would be the end spoken language, and that- the bible is ‘progressive’ in that way?? and that in the end, all things will be made right? be revealed?? make sense?

What do you guys think??

 

[ProVobis]

What do you guys think??

I think the biblical Tower of Babel message is the most suitable one for your question. But to be fair, English isn’t the only Protestant language.

=========================

One further thought on this.

Protestants listen to or sing the Latin Ave Maria all the time. But what are the odds they will tolerate, much less say, the Hail Mary in English?

=========================

 

[Charlotte408]

I think the biblical Tower of Babel message is the most suitable one for your question. But to be fair, English isn’t the only Protestant language.

=========================

One further thought on this.

Protestants listen to or sing the Latin Ave Maria all the time. But what are the odds they will tolerate, much less say, the Hail Mary in English?

=========================

I’ll have to look that up

And yah, I know right?! You know what cracks me up? Some of my accounts for work are Safeways, and they have this strict rule about Christmas, they’re NOT allowed to say Merry Christmas. Yet they continually place ‘Ave Maria’, over , and over again on the overhead.

Go figure

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Reality check: English is a protestant language, not really a catholic one. If you want to use the word that was used in worship for 2,000 years, better dump English altogether right now.

If, on the other hand, you DO intend to keep communicating in English, you need to recognize the foibles of communicating catholic ideas in a protestant tongue. If clarity to your audience is your goal, then prudence and comprehension is called for.

I understand what you’re saying, but the point is, my dear friend, that the English language was not always protestant. In fact, the English language started out ‘Catholic’ and thus, even the familiar quasi-Shakespearean English so familiar to Protestants is STILL the product (as was Shakespeare himself) of an England that, at his birth, had been Catholic until 1533, “Henrician Catholic” --that is to say, all the ‘bells and smells’ of Catholicism and all the beliefs but put into ‘the vernacular’ from 1533 to 1547, BRIEFLY “official Protestant” under Cranmer and the Council ruling in the name of Edward VI from 1547 to 1553, RETURNED CATHOLIC under Mary from 1553 to 1558. . .and thus at Shakespeare’s birth in 1564 “Elizabeth Protestant” a bare 6 years. . .

**The Protestants themselves throughout most of the 16th century were CONCENTRATED IN LONDON (which although a ‘large’ city was by no means the metropolis we know it today). In the first half of the 16th century the majority of the English PEOPLE were still Catholic. In the second half, under the persecutions, many Catholics were executed and many had to FLEE. Even so, there were many who were sympathetic to the Catholic faith, especially in the North. **

So while Protestants even as far back as the 16th century were beginning to ‘co-opt’ the language, even then, Peter Protestant knew and understood that ‘prayer’ was not “TO GOD ONLY” (just as Charles Catholic knew it).

**It was only in more recent times, the 19th and 20th centuries, that “Peter” started narrowing and ‘redefining’ the English language as it is used in ‘religious’ studies. “Charles” is not wrong for insisting that “Peter” adhere to the ‘original’ definition, either. If “Peter” wants to insist that when “Peter” is praying, it is ‘to God alone’, in Peter’s personally composed original prayers, fine. But “Peter” cannot insist that “The Bible” when it speaks of prayer is ‘prayer to God alone’ because that was not the understanding of the word when it was first translated into English from the original Latin, Aramaic and Greek. **

Language is fluid, yes. Quite a few of those who speak English as the native tongue are indeed Protestant, yes. But quite a few of them are NOT Protestant. It is OUR heritage too, a shared heritage, and the ORIGINAL meaning is still the Catholic meaning, and NOT the ‘newer’ Protestant one.

 

[Prayerfully]

I know that we do not worship or pray to Mary and the Saints, but rather that we ask that they intercede with our prayers, and our only salvation comes from Christ…And I’m trying to explain this to a friend- but he supplied a basic definition of the word ‘worship’ and it seems like by definition, we do worship them. We express reverence for them…To me that doesn’t seem like much- I mean, by that logic, every American worships the flag right? But if anyone can help me with how to look at this I’d appreciate it.

Well, I wouldn’t worry too much about a “dictionary” term…it’s kind of relative. Just ask anyone that’s been over on the thread about “women and immodest clothes”. The dictionary definition of “modest” could be interpreted many ways - especially by the folks on that thread and we all have come out with various ideas.

Now, to throw my two cents in. I recall reading something years ago (I’m thinking it was from Scott Hahn) that mentioned the ABSOLUTE difference between Catholic worship and Protestant worship. For Protestants, who do not have the True Presence of Christ in the Mass, “worship” constitutes reading of the Bible, praying, and singing hymns. When they see Catholics singing a song to Our Blessed Mother (Hail Holy Queen, Ave Maria, etc) they think “worship”. When they hear us pray to her or the saints for intercession, they think “worship”. All because that is all they have for worship…songs and prayers. They lack Our Lord and Savior in the Eucharist.

As Catholics, our supreme form of worship is the Mass- the TRUE PRESENCE of Christ in the Eucharist. Ask your friend how followers of Christ worshipped prior to the Reformation? And ask if he honestly thinks that God waited 1500+ years to institute His True Church on Earth, founded by a disobedient priest, instead of going with the one He founded through the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity at Pentecost and is still going strong today?

 

[ProVobis]

I understand what you’re saying, but the point is, my dear friend, that the English language was not always protestant. In fact, the English language started out ‘Catholic’ and thus, even the familiar quasi-Shakespearean English so familiar to Protestants is STILL the product (as was Shakespeare himself) of an England that, at his birth, had been Catholic until 1533, “Henrician Catholic” --that is to say, all the ‘bells and smells’ of Catholicism and all the beliefs but put into ‘the vernacular’ from 1533 to 1547, BRIEFLY “official Protestant” under Cranmer and the Council ruling in the name of Edward VI from 1547 to 1553, RETURNED CATHOLIC under Mary from 1553 to 1558. . .and thus at Shakespeare’s birth in 1564 “Elizabeth Protestant” a bare 6 years. . .

You could be right but now we’re talking technicalities. Pope Leo XIII not only invalidated the Anglican rite and priesthood, he did so RETROACTIVELY. I’d leave it up to the scholars to determine how much Catholicity was ever present after Henry VIII decided to run his own church. It’s almost pointless to ask if the Vatican ever approved liturgical texts in the Henry VIII English as QUO PRIMUM invalidated all rites created after 1370 A.D. And don’t forget all the attempts by St.Thomas More and others to avoid anglicizing the Bible as well.

Manualman’s claim is valid today where a low percentage of English-speaking people in the entire world even call themselves Catholic. (Compared to Polish-speaking people, for example.) But, as I pointed out before, English is not the only Protestant language either.