When Did Rome Go Wrong?

[gurneyhalleck1]

I think this first sentence is uncalled for; “Culturally-stunted?” Disagreement doesn’t mean the person on the other end is a neanderthal. He simply doesn’t agree with your view.

Comparing kissing objects to kissing statues is a pointless exercise. Kissing hundred dollar bills is a form of idolatry in itself. Kissing the ground is obviously not meant to imply a belief in some kind of presence from within the dirt so what’s the point here?

I can’t speak for Cranmer but my understanding is that Protestants object to the fact that the person is fashioning a statue in the image of someone, be it the BVM or a saint or Christ, and attributing some sort of presence to it by kissing it. Showing an act of affection to something and praying in front of it, putting flowers around its feet, placing a great deal of need, focus, and energy into something innanimant like this bothers them and, from their point of view, it’s idolatrous. Why can’t they pray at the pew without focusing on a statue, kissing it, putting flowers on it, and needing to see something tangiable yet unreal? For some this can become idolatrous. Anglican evangelicals like J.I. Packer consider this an immature form of spirituality where we need to focus on something concrete because we’re unable to just pray and focus our thoughts above. When we become attached to a fixed, tangiable, unreal object too much to focus on godly things and we rely so much on them, it can be idolatrous. That’s my understanding of their take on it.

It doesn’t mean they’re culturally goobers and comparing kissing $$$ or dirt doesn’t apply I would say?

Honestly, Cranmer, you seem very culturally stunted. Have you ever travelled outside your hometown?

Do you realize that people kiss objects as an expression of relief and gratitude?

Don’t you know some of the astranouts kissed the ground when they got back? Do you think they were committing idolatry?

Do you think this runner is worshipping the ground he runs on?http://www.worldculturepictorial.com/images/content_2/usain-bolt-kiss-ground-sprint.jpg

Try this website for a little cultural enrichment:

Since it is a custom, and not a doctrine of the faith, then you are not required to express your emotions in this way. Scripture is clear on provisions of people that suffer as you do. If you are that weak in faith, then we should not engage in such devotions in front of you, because it might cause you to stumble.

 

[PRmerger]

That doesn’t apply to all dogma. The Immaculate Conception wasn’t even a facet of the Early Church but yet became dogma, same with the Assumption. I don’t recall those being heresy sqashers.

Here’s an example of an early Church Father that talked about the Assumption, way back in the 8th century.

crossroadsinitiative.com/library_article/189/ancient_homily_on_mary_s_assumption____st._john_damascene.html

Also read this:

*St Germanus of Constantinople considered that the preservation from decay of the body of the Mother of God, the Virgin Mary, and its elevation to heaven as being not only appropriate to her Motherhood but also to the peculiar sanctity of its virgin state: It is written, that you appear in beauty, and your virginal body is altogether holy, altogether chaste, altogether the dwelling-place of God; from which it follows that it is not in its nature to decay into dust, but that it is transformed, being human, into a glorious and incorruptible life, the same body, living and glorious, unharmed, sharing in perfect life.

Another very ancient author asserts: Being the most glorious Mother of Christ our savior and our God, the giver of life and immortality, she is given life by him and shares bodily incorruptibility for all eternity with him who raised her from the grave and drew her up to him in a way that only he can understand.* source

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I personally am ok with the Assumption teachings but throwing a ninth century reference to someone and calling it “early church” is debatable. Each person might have a different view of what constituted the early church. I usually consider the first 500 to 600 years the really early Church.

Here’s an example of an early Church Father that talked about the Assumption, way back in the 8th century.

crossroadsinitiative.com/library_article/189/ancient_homily_on_mary_s_assumption____st._john_damascene.html

Also read this:

*St Germanus of Constantinople considered that the preservation from decay of the body of the Mother of God, the Virgin Mary, and its elevation to heaven as being not only appropriate to her Motherhood but also to the peculiar sanctity of its virgin state: It is written, that you appear in beauty, and your virginal body is altogether holy, altogether chaste, altogether the dwelling-place of God; from which it follows that it is not in its nature to decay into dust, but that it is transformed, being human, into a glorious and incorruptible life, the same body, living and glorious, unharmed, sharing in perfect life.

Another very ancient author asserts: Being the most glorious Mother of Christ our savior and our God, the giver of life and immortality, she is given life by him and shares bodily incorruptibility for all eternity with him who raised her from the grave and drew her up to him in a way that only he can understand.* source

 

[PRmerger]

I’ve gotten some surprise money before as well and** like yourself, I never idolized it.**

Then, like you said, we are the same!

 

[PRmerger]

Comparing kissing objects to kissing statues is a pointless exercise. Kissing hundred dollar bills is a form of idolatry in itself. Kissing the ground is obviously not meant to imply a belief in some kind of presence from within the dirt so what’s the point here?

Exactly. No one can look at me with a straight face and tell me that when I’m kissing an inanimate object I’m implying some kind of deification of that object. :whacky:

You are creating an arbitrary definition of idolatry. In fact, I’m going to go ahead and say that whenever you post on the CAFs you’re committing idolatry, 'cause you’re posting rather than praying, and joining the rest of us idol-worshipers.

I can’t speak for Cranmer but my understanding is that Protestants object to the fact that the person is fashioning a statue in the image of someone, be it the BVM or a saint or Christ, and attributing some sort of presence to it by kissing it.

Catholics object to that, too. If a person kisses a statue of Our Lady and thinks by doing it he’s going to receive some strength through contact with lips and porcelain, then any Catholic ought to object to that. This is a straw man.

 

[PRmerger]

I personally am ok with the Assumption teachings but throwing a ninth century reference to someone and calling it “early church” is debatable. Each person might have a different view of what constituted the early church. I usually consider the first 500 to 600 years the really early Church.

Fair enough.

You are correct in that there is room for discussion as to who exactly is an “early church father”. I happen to think that St. John Damascene qualifiies. And I am in good company.

Regardless, the post shows that the Assumption was not something that came into existence in the 1950s, when it was declared a dogma of the Church.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I believe one can, like you said, make a good case that Mary’s assumption was a common belief in early Christendom. I myself believe it. Ironically today is Assumption Sunday! I just left from singing a heavy dose of Ave Marias!

I personally have no problem with the Immaculate Conception either even if Aquinas, Bernard, and others did.

Fair enough.

You are correct in that there is room for discussion as to who exactly is an “early church father”. I happen to think that St. John Damascene qualifiies.

Regardless, the post shows that the Assumption was not something that came into existence in the 1950s, when it was declared a dogma of the Church.

 

[PRmerger]

You didn’t read my post carefully. It WASN’T my WIFE’s assessment.

Incidentally, perhaps you should read your own posts carefully. You state right here that it was your wife’s assessment:

My wife, born and raised in the Philippines, tells me all the time that** she thinks** the way thousands of filipinos trample each other each year to try to touch and kiss the black nazarene status of Jesus in order to get good health, fortune, etc. **is idolatry. **

 

[guanophore]

I think this first sentence is uncalled for; “Culturally-stunted?” Disagreement doesn’t mean the person on the other end is a neanderthal. He simply doesn’t agree with your view.

Maybe it is a little strong, but honestly, kissing an object does not equate to idolatry. Disagreement is one thing, but calling me an idolater is something else!

Comparing kissing objects to kissing statues is a pointless exercise. Kissing hundred dollar bills is a form of idolatry in itself. Kissing the ground is obviously not meant to imply a belief in some kind of presence from within the dirt so what’s the point here?

How is that pointless? they are objects, after all.

You have my point very well by clarifying that kissing objects can mean a lot of things, idolatry only one.

Kissing statues does not imply some kind of belief of a presence from within them, either.

Every Good Friday, the entire Latin Church (who attend) line up to venerate the cross by kissing the nailed hands, feet, or wood. Is this idolatry?

I have seen people kiss a coin before they throw it in the wishing well. Is that idolatry? Honestly. It is a human custom, the meaning of which varies depending upon the culture in which it is observed.

I can’t speak for Cranmer but my understanding is that Protestants object to the fact that the person is fashioning a statue in the image of someone, be it the BVM or a saint or Christ, and attributing some sort of presence to it by kissing it.

It is a valid objection. People who do this fall into superstition at the very least, and idolatry at the worst.

But it would be a mistake to think that anyone who kisses such an object believes there is a “presence to it”.

Showing an act of affection to something and praying in front of it, putting flowers around its feet, placing a great deal of need, focus, and energy into something innanimant like this bothers them and, from their point of view, it’s idolatrous.

I can understand this point of view. However, our focus, need, energy and prayers are not directed “into something inanimate” but to God, and with the assistance of the saint who is representative. they are symbols, not gods!

Why can’t they pray at the pew without focusing on a statue, kissing it, putting flowers on it, and needing to see something tangiable yet unreal?

A lot of us do.

But God created us human, with tangible needs. Icons and sacred objects help to draw our focus to Him through those tangible senses.

For some this can become idolatrous.

Certainly, yes.

Anglican evangelicals like J.I. Packer consider this an immature form of spirituality where we need to focus on something concrete because we’re unable to just pray and focus our thoughts above.

I can’t argue with that.

When we become attached to a fixed, tangiable, unreal object too much to focus on godly things and we rely so much on them, it can be idolatrous. That’s my understanding of their take on it.

Yes, I agree. But this only happens with a small percentage of the faithful. Supersition is endemic to humans.

It doesn’t mean they’re culturally goobers and comparing kissing $$$ or dirt doesn’t apply I would say?

If a person cannot accept that people kiss objects for reasons other than idolatry, they really are a cultural goober.

The Eastern Christians kiss the Holy Bible out of reverence. Do you think they are worshipping the book?

Here is a great photo of a kiss. Do you think this little girl is committing idolatry?

 

[PRmerger]

If a person cannot accept that people kiss objects for reasons other than idolatry, they really are a cultural goober.

The Eastern Christians kiss the Holy Bible out of reverence. Do you think they are worshipping the book?

Here is a great photo of a kiss. Do you think this little girl is committing idolatry?

Guanophore! You made me laugh out loud with the photo of the girl allegedly committing idolatry. I was most definitely not expecting to see something like *that! *

And, perhaps it’s just me, but the word “goober” I find funny in and of itself, but when it’s applied to people who think a kiss equals idolatry, well, it’s funny and apropos.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I agree with much of what you say, Guanophore, so you can relax. I’m merely telling you what a Protestant would object to.

I honestly get a little uncomfortable at times with some of the ‘devotions’ I see in the parish church and over in the Philippines with statues. People do some strange stuff that I think IS borderline to full-on idolatry. And I agree with Packer, to a point, that excessive use and constant need to look at images, statues, etc. in order to focus and experience and pray to God, saints, etc. shows a little spiritual immaturity. We should be able to pray without a focus object.

That being said, I think, and this is merely my opinion (I respect others on this) that images are better for reminders of didactic realities. For example, in the Middle Ages most folks were illiterate. Practically everyone was! The Catholic Church brilliantly used images on stained glass and in statues, etc. to tell a tale. You could see images of John the Baptist baptizing the Lord, Jesus raising Lazarus, the Stations of the Cross are powerful artful reminders of the Passion, etc. etc. I like to see images more for that end than for personal devotions.

At St. Mary’s, in my town, the tabernacle is now behind the altar (where it should be!) but before it was on the north side by the entrance. On the south side entrance was a Mary statue. You’d have 1 or 2 people tops praying before the Tabernacle, and you’d have five or six (mostly hispanics) praying in front of the Mary statue then five or six in front of the Fatime Mary statue in the corner. There were more folks praying in front of that Mary statue most of the time than in the Adoration chapel right there behind the sacristy area!!!?

In the Philippines I have seen and my wife has seen ‘devotion’ that does indeed give powers and miracles, and personality-like traits to statues and it’s downright primitive.

So I agree with you that not all images are idols and not all folks have idolatrous motivations. But just being Catholic one cannot look around and be naive and think all of them think as you and I do. Many are superstitious and downright primitive in their view of images.

My home is littered with Greek Orthodox icons. I love 'em! I never ever pray in front of them. Just love to be reminded of the majesty of Christ Almighty in my home. I’m a big icon fan! And as far as the Cross, give me San Damiano anyday!

Maybe it is a little strong, but honestly, kissing an object does not equate to idolatry. Disagreement is one thing, but calling me an idolater is something else!

How is that pointless? they are objects, after all.

You have my point very well by clarifying that kissing objects can mean a lot of things, idolatry only one.

Kissing statues does not imply some kind of belief of a presence from within them, either.

Every Good Friday, the entire Latin Church (who attend) line up to venerate the cross by kissing the nailed hands, feet, or wood. Is this idolatry?

I have seen people kiss a coin before they throw it in the wishing well. Is that idolatry? Honestly. It is a human custom, the meaning of which varies depending upon the culture in which it is observed.

It is a valid objection. People who do this fall into superstition at the very least, and idolatry at the worst.

But it would be a mistake to think that anyone who kisses such an object believes there is a “presence to it”.

I can understand this point of view. However, our focus, need, energy and prayers are not directed “into something inanimate” but to God, and with the assistance of the saint who is representative. they are symbols, not gods!

A lot of us do.

But God created us human, with tangible needs. Icons and sacred objects help to draw our focus to Him through those tangible senses.

Certainly, yes.

I can’t argue with that.

Yes, I agree. But this only happens with a small percentage of the faithful. Supersition is endemic to humans.

If a person cannot accept that people kiss objects for reasons other than idolatry, they really are a cultural goober.

The Eastern Christians kiss the Holy Bible out of reverence. Do you think they are worshipping the book?

Here is a great photo of a kiss. Do you think this little girl is committing idolatry?

 

[guanophore]

I agree with much of what you say, Guanophore, so you can relax. I’m merely telling you what a Protestant would object to.

I thought you did a great job summarizing them, and I agree that they are valid.

  I honestly get a little uncomfortable at times with some of the 'devotions' I see in the parish church and over in the Philippines with statues. People do some strange stuff that I think IS borderline to full-on idolatry.  And I agree with Packer, to a point, that excessive use and constant need to look at images, statues, etc. in order to focus and experience and pray to God, saints, etc. shows a little spiritual immaturity. We should be able to pray without a focus object.

That is a higher order of prayer, and we need to draw such people forward, rather than denigrating them for being stuck in a primitive state.

That being said, I think, and this is merely my opinion (I respect others on this) that images are better for reminders of didactic realities.  For example, in the Middle Ages most folks were illiterate. Practically everyone was!  The Catholic Church brilliantly used images on stained glass and in statues, etc. to tell a tale.  You could see images of John the Baptist baptizing the Lord, Jesus raising Lazarus, the Stations of the Cross are powerful artful reminders of the Passion, etc. etc.  I like to see images more for that end than for personal devotions.

I see your point. Some of them are like photographs of family members, and people like to keep them close.

At St. Mary’s, in my town, the tabernacle is now behind the altar (where it should be!) but before it was on the north side by the entrance. On the south side entrance was a Mary statue. You’d have 1 or 2 people tops praying before the Tabernacle, and you’d have five or six (mostly hispanics) praying in front of the Mary statue then five or six in front of the Fatime Mary statue in the corner. There were more folks praying in front of that Mary statue most of the time than in the Adoration chapel right there behind the sacristy area!!!?

Makes one think that there is some very poor catechesis happening.

In the Philippines I have seen and my wife has seen 'devotion' that does indeed give powers and miracles, and personality-like traits to statues and it's downright primitive.

God does at times choose to act through physical objects. We see this in the NT with the healings that occured from Paul’s handkerchief.

So I agree with you that not all images are idols and not all folks have idolatrous motivations. But just being Catholic one cannot look around and be naive and think all of them think as you and I do. Many are superstitious and downright primitive in their view of images.

And a faith that has not grown, and is stuck in the childlike phase - reminds me of how kids kiss their stuffed animals.

My home is littered with Greek Orthodox icons. I love 'em! I never ever pray in front of them. Just love to be reminded of the majesty of Christ Almighty in my home. I’m a big icon fan! And as far as the Cross, give me San Damiano anyday!

 

[Cranmer2010]

Can you please answer the question posed above, Cranmer? You’re presenting 2 kinds of intercessory prayer:
(a) things that can only be granted by God
and
(b) things that you ask your intercessory group for (presumably things that are not granted by God?)

So what are things in category (b) that are not granted by God that are legitimate to ask your intercessory group to pray for you?

Let’s not get confused here. The things I pray for come from God. I can ask Mary and my intercessory prayer group to pray for me and with me for things like health, comfort, security from the evil one etc., but I cannot ask Mary or intercessors to grant them to me. They do not posess those things or the ability to grant them. God does and he does it through prayer as Scripture tells us.

 

[Cranmer2010]

Maybe it is a little strong, but honestly, kissing an object does not equate to idolatry. Disagreement is one thing, but calling me an idolater is something else!

The point was not that everything that is kissed is some form of idolatry. I think that it is much easier to see the point of this than what you are making out of it and for obvious reasons.

 

[Cranmer2010]

Why wouldn’t I ? It is a Catholic Teaching, and only those are protected infallibly from error by the gift of the HS!

 

[PRmerger]

Let’s not get confused here. The things I pray for come from God. I can ask Mary and my intercessory prayer group to pray for me and with me for things like health, comfort, security from the evil one etc., but I cannot ask Mary or intercessors to grant them to me. They do not posess those things or the ability to grant them. God does and he does it through prayer as Scripture tells us.

Ah, then, good. It seems that you are in agreement with the CC that we can ask Mary to pray for us. There is no “big difference”, then, between your asking the Blessed Mother to pray for you and asking your intercessory prayer group to pray for you?

Any power that Mary has to grant health, comfort, protection from the Evil One is only through God’s omnipotence. Just like “Moses” parted the Red Sea–but, really, it was only because God granted Moses that power, yes?

 

[Cranmer2010]

Ah, then, good. It seems that you are in agreement with the CC that we can ask Mary to pray for us. There is no “big difference”, then, between your asking the Blessed Mother to pray for you and asking your intercessory prayer group to pray for you?

Yeah! I’m Anglican remember. I have no problem with asking the saints to pray with me and I do ask them to pray with me from time to time.

Any power that Mary has to grant health, comfort, protection from the Evil One is only through God’s omnipotence. Just like “Moses” parted the Red Sea–but, really, it was only because God granted Moses that power, yes?

Well, remember though that God granted the power directly to Moses. Moses didn’t get the power to do it through anyone, but directly from God. Yes the parting of the Red Sea was for the good of him and his people, but I am quite sure that his people didn’t pray to him asking for him to part the Red Sea.

 

[PRmerger]

It says nothing of how we must go through certain figures, saints etc. to receive them.

That is absolutely not true, Cranmer. Scripture has many examples of the faithful having to “go through” inanimate objects.

A pool of water:
[BIBLEDRB]John 9:7[/BIBLEDRB]
Peter’s shadow:
[BIBLEDRB]Acts 5:14-16[/BIBLEDRB]
Handkerchiefs and aprons:
[BIBLEDRB]Acts 19:11-12[/BIBLEDRB]

Good job, BTW, on learning to use the quote feature, Cranmer! Thank you!

 

[PRmerger]

Yeah! I’m Anglican remember. I have no problem with asking the saints to pray with me and I do ask them to pray with me from time to time.

Again, that is great!

Well, remember though that God granted the power directly to Moses. Moses didn’t get the power to do it through anyone, but directly from God

That’s very Catholic of you to say that, Cranmer! Any power Mary receives is directly from God.

Yes the parting of the Red Sea was for the good of him and his people, but I am quite sure that his people didn’t pray to him asking for him to part the Red Sea.

If you read the book of Exodus, Cranmer, you will see multiple examples of the Israelites petitioning Moses, asking for his intercession before God.

[BIBLEDRB]Exodus 15:24[/BIBLEDRB]

[BIBLEDRB]Exodus 17:2[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[Cranmer2010]

If you read the book of Exodus, Cranmer, you will see multiple examples of the Israelites petitioning Moses, asking for his intercession before God.

And sure, that is intercessory prayer all the way. I have no problem with that.