Why should we pray to saints?

[MiserereMei25]

Well they are prostrate before the throne of God in heaven.

 

[MT1926]

This supports my statement that the practice began to be practiced and accepted around the middle of the 3rd Century.

No because as you posted…

of which we have record, was written in the early 3rd century.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The earliest Bible manuscript fragment is like around 150 AD. Can an atheist claim on the same grounds that the Bible wasn’t penned until then?

guiding the Christian people to perceive ever more clearly their relationship in the Body of Christ with the saints who have gone before us into heaven.

Personally, I would argue that this statement tells us that praying to saints was approved as OK by the Apostles and has been around since the beginning. It was the theological reasoning for it that wasn’t fully developed until the third century.

Like I already said once, why would the Apostles waste their time giving detailed teachings of something everyone already agreed on. It seems they were more worried about what people went against.

And while " Catholic theologians see this consensus as a sign of the work of the Holy Spirit in the Church, guiding the Christian people to perceive ever more clearly their relationship in the Body of Christ with the saints who have gone before us into heaven. " Protestant theologians see this as an introduction of a new tradition that was not taught by the Apostles, is not supported in scripture and therefore should not be practiced.

Could you maybe post a teaching of a Protestant theologian who describes what the early Christians believed about the relationship between the Body of Christ with the saints in heaven before the Catholic Church “introduced something new”.

Once again the evidence is the problem. A Protestant theologian can’t just accuse the Catholics of adding something because they don’t see it in scripture. Even the article you present, as evidence, states perceive ever more clearly. Well if the Catholic now made it unclear then what did it look like when it was clear?

This all comes back to that word contrary. It can’t be contrary unless the exact opposite teaching is stated in scripture.

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

If having a coffee shop service or a rock band service or an outdoor service brings people to faith in Christ and helps them grow in their faith so that as a result they give Glory to God and show His love to their friends and neighbors, then I think He is all for it.

Well thanks for your honesty. As a father of 5 I don’t think I would appreciate my kids doing whatever they want claiming it is bringing them closer to me.

I’m a firm believer that God knows what is best for us, which would include the type of worship that would bring us closer to him.

In my mind if you need some external stimulus to bring you closer to God then your not sacrificing for Him.

 

[lanman87]

In my mind if you need some external stimulus to bring you closer to God then your not sacrificing for Him.

I haven’t posted in a week or so and just came back to this thread.

Can you tell me what you think of the Charismatic movement in the Catholic church? I found this playlist on youtube of Charismatic Catholic music. I’ve sang most, if not all, of these songs in evangelical churches.

Also, my son was attending a Catholic church in Panama City Florida (he made it out okay although some of his stuff got looted). Anyway, he told me the Sunday night mass was similar to the baptist service he was raised attending and that I would be “comfortable” attending that service. He said they had a worship band, compete with drums and electric guitars, and the homily was longer and similar to the style in a baptist church. How is that any different that an evangelical church preaching the gospel in a “coffee shop type setting”? Both are designed to make people comfortable in a setting where the gospel is preached.

 

[lanman87]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Neither does it give evidence of existence. I think the bottom line is I think the absence of evidence is an indication that it didn’t exist and you see the absence of evidence as an indication that it wasn’t a big deal therefore nothing was written/explained about it. .

 

[MT1926]

Can you tell me what you think of the Charismatic movement in the Catholic church?

Works for some but it’s not for me.

How is that any different that an evangelical church preaching the gospel in a “coffee shop type setting”? Both are designed to make people comfortable in a setting where the gospel is preached.

I think the difference would be as a Catholic I don’t go to Church to feel comfortable while hearing the gospel preached. I go to receive the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of my Savior, Jesus Christ. Jesus wasn’t too comfortable when He gave His Body for me, why should me giving myself to him be dependent on my level of comfort or what works for me. Also, if our spiritual act of worship is simply to to “hear the gospel preached”, then I can do that at home sitting in front of you tube.

In my mind if you need some external stimulus to bring you closer to God then your not sacrificing for Him.

I should have better explained what I meant by this. I was listening to Dr. David Anders and he explained in one of his shows…If you look back in Church history and read the Father’s of the Church they were deeply suspicious of certain forms of ecstatic and fanatical spirituality that were overly bold about their assertions of religious experience. In 383 AD there was a heresy of Messalianism. Their error was to confuse their sensible emotional experience with the direct action of the Holy Spirit. Which is basically what I was getting at, and I’m sure can agree happens quite often today.

There is no way we can know that our feelings, that come about from an external stimulus is actually bringing us closer to God. Just because I’m hooting and hollering isn’t evidence of the Holy Spirit at work within me.

St. Augustine wrote that it is idolatry to worship anything other than God, corporal or spiritual even our own fantasims (the mental representation of a sensible impression (hooting and hollering).

The Church Fathers took this seriously. They believed there is a fine line between worshiping God and worshiping your own feelings.

So basically my opinion is, if you are unable to worship God without the cup of coffee then you are worshiping the cup of coffee and bringing God along for the ride.

I would argue that our spiritual act of worship is directly opposite to how comfortable we are. I believe we should concentrate less on our exterior emotional response to see if God is at work in us. I believe our act of worship should be sacrifice. We should be more self critical and reflective about what it is God wants to accomplish in our interior life. Like penitence, humility, charity, chastity, and all the virtues.

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

Neither does it give evidence of existence. I think the bottom line is I think the absence of evidence is an indication that it didn’t exist and you see the absence of evidence as an indication that it wasn’t a big deal therefore nothing was written/explained about it. .

No offense but I think the bottom line is you believe the absence of evidence is an indication that it didn’t exist, when it suits your needs.

I am more than willing to agree with you on this point if you are willing to use this line of reasoning across the board.

If you are going to claim that prayer to the saints began in the 3rd century because those are the only writings still in existence then you have to use that same reasoning in regards to everything including the Bible, which is also dated around the third century.

you see the absence of evidence as an indication that it wasn’t a big deal therefore nothing was written/explained about it. .

Never said it wasn’t a big deal, not sure why you are making that claim about me. You are well aware that we believe in traditions handed down. Not to mention in my view point 3rd century is still early Christianity. This is still 100 years before it was legal to be a Christian. Christianity wasn’t dominate by then it was still small. How hard would it have been to squash Prayer to the Saints that early? Pretty easy in my book.

God Bless

 

[lanman87]

Also, if our spiritual act of worship is simply to to “hear the gospel preached”, then I can do that at home sitting in front of you tube.

Well, the reasoning is that some people will attend a “coffee shop” that will never attend a traditional service. I know someone who would never attend church (I asked him several times) and later went to a church with a “rock band”. He came to faith while attending that church and is now active in giving and ministering to others. He doesn’t need the “rock band” but sees the “rock band” as a tool to share the gospel with others.

 

[MT1926]

Well, the reasoning is that some people will attend a “coffee shop” that will never attend a traditional service. I know someone who would never attend church (I asked him several times) and later went to a church with a “rock band”. He came to faith while attending that church and is now active in giving and ministering to others. He doesn’t need the “rock band” but sees the “rock band” as a tool to share the gospel with others.

I have no problem with this. Never meant to come across that this was a bad thing. Sure whatever brings you to faith is great. What I was getting at was where you go from their is what is important.

That being said, those in charge know what is important. If they want to use the coffee shop as a way to bring someone to Christ great. However, if they are deceiving people by pretending that the coffee shop is true worship by running it side by side a worship service, when they know better, then as far as I am concerned they are false prophets and actually leading people away from Christ.

Sorry Ianman I do not believe we can agree on this subject, because we can’t agree on what it means to worship God. Simply hearing the Gospel preached or 45 minutes of a guys opinion about the gospel is not worship to me, because that is passive. To me worship is something that is active.

I can’t ever see me changing my mind. If worshiping God is dependent on what I want then in all actuality I am just worshiping myself.

God Bless

 

[lanman87]

If you are going to claim that prayer to the saints began in the 3rd century because those are the only writings still in existence then you have to use that same reasoning in regards to everything including the Bible, which is also dated around the third century.

I"m not sure what point you are trying to make here. The Bible (or what became the New Testament) is referenced tens of thousands of times by the late 1st and 2nd Century writings as a way of confirming, teaching, and defending Christianity. Then it was referenced 10x of thousand of more times by the 3rd century onward. History itself confirms what documents the early church used as scripture, which ones some viewed as scripture but were never accepted by the church as a whole and which documents were rejected outright.

 

[lanman87]

Sorry Ianman I do not believe we can agree on this subject, because we can’t agree on what it means to worship God. Simply hearing the Gospel preached or 45 minutes of a guys opinion about the gospel is not worship to me, because that is passive. To me worship is something that is active.

I agree with this. Worship is active. It involves singing and studying and communion but it is much more than that. It is when Christ is the treasure of our heart and life. It is “Doing everything to the Glory of God”.

 

[MT1926]

The Bible (or what became the New Testament) is referenced tens of thousands of times by the late 1st and 2nd Century writings as a way of confirming, teaching, and defending Christianity.

I’m not sure if we have tens of thousands of early writings so I’ll take your word for it. Sorry if my point was too confusing.

All I am asking is are you being honest and using this as your basis for everything you believe? Basically, are you able to find a writing earlier than the second century for everything you church does and believes? Which to me would also include early writings that agree with your interpretation of the Bible?

I guess my only other question would be, are you saying we can use these early writings as an authoritative basis to understand what the early Church looked like? Because many of the Fathers seem awfully Catholic?

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

I agree with this. Worship is active.

AMEN!

It involves singing and studying and communion but it is much more than that.

I would agree it can occur while doing these things but like I said in my post above the Church Fathers believed one can very easily commit idolatry by worshiping the singing and studying and communion. I believe many in this generation are doing this. They don’t think they are and don’t mean to but that is human nature we can very easily fool ourselves.

If you are only willing to worship because of the coffee or the music or because you like the preacher or the people there, then you aren’t sacrificing, you are only doing what is best for you.

St. Paul tells us…

Romans 12:1 I appeal to you therefore, brothers and sisters, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. 2 Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your minds, so that you may discern what is the will of God—what is good and acceptable and perfect.

I’m not saying this is you all I am saying is as a Christian society, as a whole, we have conformed to this world. I see so many out there willing to worship but only as long as it’s on their terms. Christians have forgotten worship isn’t about what they want it’s about what they sacrifice. I’m not just saying non-Catholics here, I’m saying all Christians have forgotten that worship is sacrifice it’s about what we give back to God not what our emotions tell us we feel.

God Bless

 

[Start]

He did need it to go.

 

[lanman87]

All I am asking is are you being honest and using this as your basis for everything you believe? Basically, are you able to find a writing earlier than the second century for everything you church does and believes?

Well, scholars contend that all of the New Testament books were written in the 1st Century. If the Bible is the basis for our belief then yes, I am being honest.

I guess my only other question would be, are you saying we can use these early writings as an authoritative basis to understand what the early Church looked like? Because many of the Fathers seem awfully Catholic?

Which to me would also include early writings that agree with your interpretation of the Bible?

While the early writings agreed on a lot of things there was also much disagreement and different viewpoints. I would argue that much of the early writings disagree with Catholic thought and practice.

I guess my only other question would be, are you saying we can use these early writings as an authoritative basis to understand what the early Church looked like? Because many of the Fathers seem awfully Catholic?

The only early writings that are authoritative are the ones revealed and accepted as scripture. The other writings can be helpful in understanding how the early church practiced Christianity but we aren’t bound by those practices. Many practices are not commands but are examples of how the early church lived out the gospel in their culture and circumstances. We also, can a live out the gospel in our culture and circumstances.

It is also important to note that many of the early writings are gnostic teachings and/or legends that developed over the first couple of centuries that were written down and passed around. That is one reason to take any writings other than the Bible with a grain of salt. They are good at telling us many people believed and practiced but they can’t tell us if that belief/practice was instituted by the apostles or is a spurious belief that came from the opinions and practices of men.

Even the best writings are written by fallible men who injected their own opinions, prejudices, culture, and experiences into the writings.

 

[lanman87]

If you are only willing to worship because of the coffee or the music or because you like the preacher or the people there, then you aren’t sacrificing, you are only doing what is best for you.

I agree with you. Worship is about God, not us. It is about giving Him honor and glory and growing closer to God so that our actions reflect our relationship with Him.

 

[MT1926]

Well, scholars contend that all of the New Testament books were written in the 1st Century. If the Bible is the basis for our belief then yes, I am being honest.

I’m out of town hiking in Maine right now so can’t really go into detail with a response.

The only thing I want to point out is no early writing claims that the Bible is the basis of our belief. Also, the Bible our right tells us the Church, not the Bible, is the foundation of our belief. So how can you be 100% certain that the belief that the Bible is The basis of our belief isn’t just a spurious belief that came from the opinions and practices of men?

Seeing that the Bible never makes that claim, that statement sure sounds like a claim written by fallible men who injected their own opinions, prejudices, culture, and experiences into the writings.

God Bless

 

[julie317]

They are a part of a larger prayer group that we Catholics/Christians are a part of & for me - I ask them to pray to God with me - I don’t pray to them. I ask for their prayers. They want to help us & they love us. Since Catholics stopped praying the many, many litanies, rosaries & chaplets they use to pray pre-vat2 evil has grown tremendously. Those spiritual devotions were powerful weapons against evil & the Litany of the Saints is one of the best. These devotions are all making a huge come back & by mostly young people. Thanks be to God. Pray the Rosary - Padre Pio called it his weapon for good reasons.

 

[lanman87]

I’m out of town hiking in Maine right now so can’t really go into detail with a response.

Wow, I hope you are having great weather.

The only thing I want to point out is no early writing claims that the Bible is the basis of our belief. Also, the Bible our right tells us the Church, not the Bible, is the foundation of our belief. So how can you be 100% certain that the belief that the Bible is The basis of our belief isn’t just a spurious belief that came from the opinions and practices of men?

Seeing that the Bible never makes that claim, that statement sure sounds like a claim written by fallible men who injected their own opinions, prejudices, culture, and experiences into the writings.

Because I have faith that God, in His providence, working through the early church, provided His message to the apostles and preserved His infallible and immutable message for future generations in the Scriptures.

 

[MT1926]

Wow, I hope you are having great weather.

Thanks. We had great weather today. Was finally able to do the technical climb up the Precipice Trail. A little scary in a few spots, hanging a few hundred feet above rocks, but made me feel young again.

Because I have faith that God, in His providence, working through the early church, provided His message to the apostles and preserved His infallible and immutable message for future generations in the Scriptures.

I actually agree with this some what. I think where I differ though is My faith only extends to the Church that Jesus founded and promised the gates of Hell would not prevail against. I hold not faith in the future generations of fallible men who claim to know what that infallible and immutable message of the Scriptures as interpreted by the Apostles. Especially, when these men have no evidence that they were given the authority to interpret nor any evidence, other than their fallible opinions that their interpretations line up with the Apostles’ interpretations. To me that would be having faith in man not in God.

God Bless