Why do protestants acknowledge Saints cannonized by the Catholic Church?

[Believe_85]

Why do some Protestants acknowledge Saints cannonized by the Catholic Church?

Are all Saints who are recognized by the Catholic Church also recognized by Protestant Churches?

Do any Protestant faiths also “cannonize” saints? If so, is there anyone that they formally call saints who are not Catholic?

 

[gcnuss]

Why do some Protestants acknowledge Saints cannonized by the Catholic Church?

We Lutherans look upon the faithfulness of the saints as examples for us to follow. In particular, we recognize the apostles as saints – as you drive around you may see Lutheran churches named for St. Matthew, St. Mark, etc. St. Paul is widely recognized in congregational names, too. There are also a few named for St. Mary and one that I know of named for St. Mary Magdalene.

There are other saints who are acknowledged, especially among descendants of immigrants whose congregations were named for patron saints of their homelands, e.g., St. Olaf among the descendents of Norwegian immigrants, St. Birgitta of Sweden, etc.

Are all Saints who are recognized by the Catholic Church also recognized by Protestant Churches?

Not in my experience. From the list of “Lesser Festivals and Commemorations” in the Lutheran Book of Worship, the following saints are listed:

St. Matthias, Apostle
St. Mark, Evangelist
St. Philip, Apostle
St. James, Apostle
St. Barnabas, Apostle
The Nativity of St. John the Baptist
St. Peter, Apostle
St. Paul, Apostle
St. Mary Magdalene
St. James the Elder, Apostle
Mary, Mother of Our Lord
St. Bartholomew, Apostle
St. Matthew, Apostle and Evangelist
St. Michael and All Angels
St. Luke, Evangelist
St. Simon, Apostle
St. Jude, Apostle
St. Andrew, Apostle
St. Thomas, Apostle
St. Stephen, Deacon and Martyr
St. John, Apostle and Evangelist

I note that we do not append the title of saint to Mary in this listing. This, to my mind, is something that ought to be changed.

A number of other persons recognized as saints by the Catholic Church are included, without “St.” being appended to their names – Timothy, Titus, Silas, Polycarp, Gregory the Great, Anselm, Catherine of Siena, Athanasius, Monica, … and the list goes on.

Do any Protestant faiths also “cannonize” saints? If so, is there anyone that they formally call saints who are not Catholic?

We have no process for formally canonizing saints.

 

[flameburns623]

Why do some Protestants acknowledge Saints canonized by the Catholic Church?

Are all Saints who are recognized by the Catholic Church also recognized by Protestant Churches?

Do any Protestant faiths also “canonize” saints? If so, is there anyone that they formally call saints who are not Catholic?

Churches in the historic Reformation tradition more or less tend to recognize many or most of the saints about whom there is some degree of reliable record, especially saints who have made significant contributions to Christian thought or spirituality. However, Protestants almost universally are reluctant to actually ‘pray’ to saints: for Protestants, prayer is a manifestation of worship and worship is strictly reserved to God. There is no sense of the verb ‘to pray’ as a synonym of the verb ‘to ask’, as there is in Catholic and Orthodox theology. This is why Protestants and Catholics often talk past one another in conversations about prayers to the saints: for Protestants, the Catholic is advocating something that should be reserved to God alone, whereas Catholics see themselves as doing something that is perfectly natural and which even Protestants do for one another–that is, to ask one another for prayers. Exceptions to this general rule would be found among some Lutherans, Methodists, and of course Anglicans, some of whom do in fact address prayers to saints. But what I have said is true for the generality of Protestants.

Anglicans do have their own hagiography, their own canon of saints. Somewhere in one of my bookmarks I found an Episcopalian counterpart to Butler’s Lives of the Saints. I don’t know if the same is true of Lutherans or Methodists. In general, Protestants do have their modern ‘heroes of the faith’, such as Stanley Livingstone the missionary made famous by the line “Dr. Livingstone, I presume?” Any number of other names can be found held in high regard. But no formal method for investigating and canonizing Protestant saints is extant, at least not to my knowledge.

 

[Contarini]

Why do some Protestants acknowledge Saints cannonized by the Catholic Church?

Are all Saints who are recognized by the Catholic Church also recognized by Protestant Churches?

Do any Protestant faiths also “cannonize” saints? If so, is there anyone that they formally call saints who are not Catholic?

I will only speak for Anglicans here.

The Episcopal Church (the branch of the Anglican Communion in the United States) has a calendar of commemorations that includes pre-Reformation saints, but only Anglicans after the Reformation. The Church of England has a much broader calendar that includes Catholic and Orthodox post-Reformation saints, as well as a number of Protestant figures. Anglicans in general consider the saints of the New Testament to have a more official status and dedicate most of our churches in their honor (or in honor of God Himself–Holy Trinity, Christ the King, Church of the Resurrection, etc.), but we do use the term “Saint so-and-so” for pre-Reformation saints (and sometimes for post-Reformation Catholic and Orthodox saints), and you will sometimes find churches dedicated to a non-Biblical saint (St. Hugh of Lincoln, St. Margaret of Scotland, St. Gregory of Nyssa, etc.).

We do not have an official canonization process–adding someone to the calendar is not seen as saying anything official about their current state, but it recognizes that they are examples for the rest of us in one way or another. C. S. Lewis was recently added to the calendar of the Episcopal Church (at the initiative of my current bishop, as it happens).

The closest we have to an official “Anglican saint” is King Charles I, who was added to the calendar after the Restoration of the Stuart monarchy, in a particularly high-church and pro-monarchy period in Anglican history. The rationale is that since the largely Puritan “Parliamentarians” allegedly would have spared his life if he had agreed to abolish episcopacy and Puritanize the Church of England, he counts as a martyr. In the 19th century the commemoration was taken out of the Prayer Book, but many Anglo-Catholics still consider him a saint.

I detect behind your question the assumption that Protestants regard themselves as being a different Church than pre-Reformation Christianity, or than Catholics and Orthodox today. Anglicans certainly do not think this, and by and large I think most Protestants today do not think it either. We believe in one Holy Catholic Church and we think that we and you are both part of that Church.

Edwin

 

[Believe_85]

Hi Edwin,
I wanted to ask this question to get the clarification that Pastor Gary mentioned in his first post, as well as find out if Protestants honor Catholic Saints beyond the Apostles. I wondered if in honoring Catholic Saints and not cannonizing their own they are by default aknowledging that the Catholic way of life is the most Christ-like.
That is all

 

[reteeks21]

Hi Edwin,
I wanted to ask this question to get the clarification that Pastor Gary mentioned in his first post, as well as find out if Protestants honor Catholic Saints beyond the Apostles. I wondered if in honoring Catholic Saints and not cannonizing their own they are by default aknowledging that the Catholic way of life is the most Christ-like.
That is all

I don’t know if I would go that far, but as for myself I can certainly appreciate any Christian, regardless of their church, who does great things for God. I think it is quite ok to show that appreciation and respect regardless of who you are. So I will say that I think that is one thing we could all stand to learn from the RCR.

 

[Contarini]

Hi Edwin,
I wanted to ask this question to get the clarification that Pastor Gary mentioned in his first post, as well as find out if Protestants honor Catholic Saints beyond the Apostles. I wondered if in honoring Catholic Saints and not cannonizing their own they are by default aknowledging that the Catholic way of life is the most Christ-like.
That is all

No, it doesn’t.

We do not acknowledge people canonized by the Catholic Church as necessarily being holier than people not so canonized. But we recognize that generally the people who have been canonized are people who are worthy of respect and imitation, as are many people (Catholic and non-Catholic) who have not been canonized. Just because your Church has a more formal process to recognize holiness does not make holiness more common among you.

Actually, while Protestants recognize the existence of very holy people within Catholicism, many Protestants are disturbed by the *lack *of evidence for a Christlike life among ordinary Catholics. There are lots of reasons for this, such as:

1. biased and theologically indefensible definitions of a Christlike life on the part of evangelical Protestants (for instance, I was shocked when I saw a devout Catholic college student pull out a beer and drink to the Resurrection at midnight on Easter Saturday–but as I got to know him better I realized that he did in fact live a very moral and pious life, just not a life that conformed to the specific cultural taboos of my tradition)
2. self-selection based on the fact that evangelical churches are generally “gathered communities” of committed people, while Catholic congregations represent a much wider spectrum of commitment

and so on. In other words, I’m not claiming that evangelicals are better Christians than Catholics. But it’s not true that most Protestants look at Catholics as a whole and say “Wow! Those folks are Christlike!”

One beef I have with this kind of argument is that Catholics are often deliberately ignorant of holy people among Protestants (if you try to tell them about such people, they lose interest and say that they have better things to do with their time), but then make a big deal about the fact that they have never heard of “Protestant saints.” Well, I can point you to the website of my parents’ publishing company, and you can buy some of their books which describe many such people.

Edwin

 

[Publisher]

Hi Edwin,
I wanted to ask this question to get the clarification that Pastor Gary mentioned in his first post, as well as find out if Protestants honor Catholic Saints beyond the Apostles. I wondered if in honoring Catholic Saints and not cannonizing their own they are by default aknowledging that the Catholic way of life is the most Christ-like.
That is all

I’m not Edwin, but there is a book called “A Book of Quaker Saints” you may be interested in. It won’t be a book about saints you are familiar with, but their dedication to Christ in the face of adversity and their testimony to grace and peace is wonderful.

One of the “queries” each Friend is asked over the course of a year is…"Do you make time for meditation, prayer and worship? Do you read the Bible, the writings of Friends, and **other **inspirational works, seeking new light? Do you regularly seek God’s guidance? Are you open to guidance and support and do you give thanks for them? Do you share your spiritual insights with others and willingly receive from them in turn?

Every Friend is challenged to read the great spiritual classics…as well as stories of those saintly Friends.

As a Quaker, we have many “saints” in our history, men and women of conviction who lived a life dedicated to God and others…we don’t call them “saints” for the most part…but Friends.

 

[Believe_85]

Hi Publisher,
Thanks for the info I’m glad you shared. I don’t know much about Quakers, and that was part of the purpose in this posting…to identify and clarify beliefs, so Thanks! In High School there were girls on my Softball team who called themselves “Friends”. Is that the same as Quakers? Are Quakers similar to Amish?

 

[Believe_85]

Hi Edwin,
I believe there are people who aren’t even Christian who are Holy, and if there are Protestant Saints, yay! That was the answer to one of my questions. The Holy Spirit is able to work in every one, I’m sure you agree.
Thanks for your post.

 

[Publisher]

Hi Publisher,
Thanks for the info I’m glad you shared. I don’t know much about Quakers, and that was part of the purpose in this posting…to identify and clarify beliefs, so Thanks! In High School there were girls on my Softball team who called themselves “Friends”. Is that the same as Quakers? Are Quakers similar to Amish?

Friends are the same as Quakers.

No Friends have their history in England, Amish have their roots in Germany/Holland/Switzerland, but both are a part of what has been called the “Radical Reformation”.

The Amish are/were part of Anabaptists. They are related to Mennonites. Friends, Mennonites, Amish and Brethren hold similar beliefs concerning Peace and non-resistance. We work together often, however the Amish have retreated from the world…they are much closer to “Plain Friends” who tend to be ultra conservative.

When I was in college…many many moons ago…a young Quaker woman told a story in which she was on an elevator with a group of people. She was dressed in a tennis outfit with a short white skirt and light blouse. An Amish couple got on the crowded elevator. When they got off and the doors closed people were chuckling amongst themselves saying “Weren’t the Quakers cute?” About that time a small voice from the rear of the car said…“They weren’t Quakers, they were Amish, but I’m a Quaker.” and the door opened…the young Friend moved through the crowd and as she exited the elevator she turned and curtsied…everyone just looked dumbfounded at this young woman holding her tennis racket in a “revealing” by Amish standards, tennis outfit.

 

[JMBNH]

1. biased and theologically indefensible definitions of a Christlike life on the part of evangelical Protestants (for instance, I was shocked when I saw a devout Catholic college student pull out a beer and drink to the Resurrection at midnight on Easter Saturday–but as I got to know him better I realized that he did in fact live a very moral and pious life, just not a life that conformed to the specific cultural taboos of my tradition)

Interesting because from a Catholic perspective the sexual morality of evangelicals is poor- following Christian morality til marriage, but reverting to pagan sexual morality within marriage (and wide encouragement of that), and the very young marriages and permitting remarriage after divorce kind of takes away a little from their morality of no sex outside of marriage. I was pretty shocked when with some unmarried evangelicals the other day hearing about how much they thought contraception was good and talking about giving their friends loads when they got married, also the culture of talking about how they can’t wait to get married and have lots of sex seems a bit suspect to me

But from an evangelical point of view the amount that Catholics drink looks bad, I have to admit to having said ‘make sure you drink enough that noone thinks you’re protestant’ before. Also compared to conservative evangelicals Catholics swear more, though the more liberal/charismatic evangelicals are pretty much the same as Catholics on that score, also it’s very rare to see an evangelical that smokes but more common among Catholics.

Thus why both groups are likely to think of themselves as more moral than the other in my opinion.

 

[O.S.Luke]

Some of this was discussed on this thread.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I will only speak for Anglicans here.

The Episcopal Church (the branch of the Anglican Communion in the United States) has a calendar of commemorations that includes pre-Reformation saints, but only Anglicans after the Reformation. The Church of England has a much broader calendar that includes Catholic and Orthodox post-Reformation saints, as well as a number of Protestant figures. Anglicans in general consider the saints of the New Testament to have a more official status and dedicate most of our churches in their honor (or in honor of God Himself–Holy Trinity, Christ the King, Church of the Resurrection, etc.), but we do use the term “Saint so-and-so” for pre-Reformation saints (and sometimes for post-Reformation Catholic and Orthodox saints), and you will sometimes find churches dedicated to a non-Biblical saint (St. Hugh of Lincoln, St. Margaret of Scotland, St. Gregory of Nyssa, etc.).

We do not have an official canonization process–adding someone to the calendar is not seen as saying anything official about their current state, but it recognizes that they are examples for the rest of us in one way or another. C. S. Lewis was recently added to the calendar of the Episcopal Church (at the initiative of my current bishop, as it happens).

The closest we have to an official “Anglican saint” is King Charles I, who was added to the calendar after the Restoration of the Stuart monarchy, in a particularly high-church and pro-monarchy period in Anglican history. The rationale is that since the largely Puritan “Parliamentarians” allegedly would have spared his life if he had agreed to abolish episcopacy and Puritanize the Church of England, he counts as a martyr. In the 19th century the commemoration was taken out of the Prayer Book, but many Anglo-Catholics still consider him a saint.

**King Charles the Martyr still enjoys a cult of a sort in the Episcopalian Church in Scotland; & I believe the Prayer Book Society commemorates him. **​

**Elizabeth Butler was added to the Calendar of the Alternative Service Book a few years ago. **

**I wonder how many Catholics know that St. Thomas More - yes, that one - is in the C of E Calendar, rubbing shoulders with Thomas Cranmer **

I detect behind your question the assumption that Protestants regard themselves as being a different Church than pre-Reformation Christianity, or than Catholics and Orthodox today. Anglicans certainly do not think this, and by and large I think most Protestants today do not think it either. We believe in one Holy Catholic Church and we think that we and you are both part of that Church.

Edwin

Despite its age, Bishop Stephen Neill’s book “Anglicanism” would be a good book for anyone who wants to understand the subject of the title. He also wrote a very readable account of the Interpretation of the New Testament from 1861 to 1961 - see: Stephen Neill & Tom Wright, The Interpretation of the New Testament, 1861-1986 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988) paperback, $18.​