Worship vs veneration

  • Thread starter Thread starter domestichippie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The bible is silent on the issue on the fact that saints actually do hear our prayers. And even if they do as finite beings unlike god cannot hear millions upon millions of prayers at once.

So as to clarify worship. Gestures of worship include bowing down, kissing feet. Whatever is your 1st priority is who or what you worship.
 
Kingtroll1 said:
The bible is silent on the issue on the fact that saints actually do hear our prayers. And even if they do as finite beings unlike god cannot hear millions upon millions of prayers at once.

So as to clarify worship. Gestures of worship include bowing down, kissing feet. Whatever is your 1st priority is who or what you worship.
Click to expand...
Would you say there is a difference between bowing and kneeling? Or is it all a matter of intent?
 
Kingtroll1 said:
The bible is silent on the issue on the fact that saints actually do hear our prayers.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure it is accurate to say that the bible is entirely silent on the matter, but I agree that it does not speak directly and specifically to this.

But consider -

The Bible is “silent” or perhaps indirect on many things. Jesus himself says that he has not revealed all. (John 16:12)
This is why Jesus gave us The Church. The Church - Guided by the Holy Spirit who reveals what Jesus had not because we were not yet ready (John 16:13).
The Church - with authority to bind and loose and to teach so that we should listen to her (Mt 18:15-18).
The Church - which is the pillar and foundation of Truth (1 Tim 5:15),
The Church - The chosen instrument through which God’s manifold wisdom is to be revealed to the world - and to the powers in the heavenly places.(Eph 3:10)

On this the Bible is clear…That we should Listen to The Church.
And even if they do as finite beings unlike god cannot hear millions upon millions of prayers at once.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure that it is wise to make this assumption. After all, in heaven the saints are not constrained by time and space as we are. The exist with God in eternity outside of time.
So as to clarify worship. Gestures of worship include bowing down, kissing feet. Whatever is your 1st priority is who or what you worship.
Click to expand...
Amen to this. Bowing and kneeling really have little to do with determining what one actually worships. It if were, I dare say that many people would kneel every time they entered a bank…:D.

Peace
James
 
JRKH said:
I’m not sure it is accurate to say that the bible is entirely silent on the matter, but I agree that it does not speak directly and specifically to this.

But consider -

The Bible is “silent” or perhaps indirect on many things. Jesus himself says that he has not revealed all. (John 16:12)
This is why Jesus gave us The Church. The Church - Guided by the Holy Spirit who reveals what Jesus had not because we were not yet ready (John 16:13).
The Church - with authority to bind and loose and to teach so that we should listen to her (Mt 18:15-18).
The Church - which is the pillar and foundation of Truth (1 Tim 5:15),
The Church - The chosen instrument through which God’s manifold wisdom is to be revealed to the world - and to the powers in the heavenly places.(Eph 3:10)

On this the Bible is clear…That we should Listen to The Church.

I’m not sure that it is wise to make this assumption. After all, in heaven the saints are not constrained by time and space as we are. The exist with God in eternity outside of time.

Amen to this. Bowing and kneeling really have little to do with determining what one actually worships. It if were, I dare say that many people would kneel every time they entered a bank…:D.

Peace
James
Click to expand...
So what about individual interpretation? Is there a place for that? If so where?

What about 1 John 2:27? That says 1 John 2:27 DRA

And as for you, let the unction, which you have received from
him, abide in you. And you have no need that any man teach you; but as his unction
teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie. And as it hath taught you,
abide in him.
 
domestichippie said:
So what about individual interpretation? Is there a place for that? If so where?
Click to expand...
Most certainly “individual interpretation” has it’s place. That place though must be within the framework of the Church acting as guide.
But even within that framework there is a lot of latitude for individual to garner somewhat differing understandings. depths and nuances from various passages. These things can even change depending on where a person is in their spiritual journey or what might be going on in their life at a given time.

Where individual interpretation runs into trouble is when it causes conflict within The Church and The Church then needs to come together and discern what is correct. Again - this is what happened in Acts 15. That is at least part of what Mt 18:15-18 is designed to deal with - controversy that threatens the peace of the community - The Church.

So - feel free to read the bible and “interpret”. But also read the wisdom gained by the Church over the last 2 millenia as she dealt with various controversies. Of course a lot of this is contained in the Catechism of the Catholic Church - complete with references…
What about 1 John 2:27? That says 1 John 2:27 DRA
Click to expand...
And as for you, let the unction, which you have received from him, abide in you. And you have no need that any man teach you; but as his unction teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie. And as it hath taught you,
abide in him.
Click to expand...
A very wise verse here which we should embrace with confidence.
However, consider the context in which John makes this comment.
First of all he is telling his “little children” to beware of those who would deceive them (1 John 2;26). and these deceivers are ones who have “Gone out from us” (1 John 2:19)
They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out, that it might be plain that they all are not of us.
These deceivers were once among the believers but have left…or been put out…because of their false beliefs and teachings - the sin of teaching a false Gospel…
This sounds like people who have not “listened to the Church” and need to be treated as heathens and tax collectors (Mt 18:17)

And how does the faithful know which of them have the Lord abiding in them and which do not? By bringing ideas and interpretations prayerfully before the Church in discussion and humble desire to know and hold only the Truth. Then, through discussion and by listening to The Church, the Will of the Holy Spirit is made known. After all is this not what the Apostles wrote in the letter at the end of the Council of Jerusalem?
For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us…(Acts 15:28)
So after all of the debating back and forth between those who believed the Gentiles needed to keep the Law and those who believed the Gentiles did NOT need to keep the law, what was ultimately discerned was that which “seemed good to the Holy Spirit”…In other words, not the teachings of men, but the teachings of “him who abides in you”.

So - the Teachings of the Church - far from being mere “teachings of men” are actually sum of the teachings of the Holy Spirit.

So we are able to fulfill what John tells us here. No man teaches us but the Spirit of God which abides in us and is manifest in the Spirit guided teachings of the Church…

Not sure if I’m clear here…I hope so…

Peace
James
 
JRKH said:
Most certainly “individual interpretation” has it’s place. That place though must be within the framework of the Church acting as guide.
But even within that framework there is a lot of latitude for individual to garner somewhat differing understandings. depths and nuances from various passages. These things can even change depending on where a person is in their spiritual journey or what might be going on in their life at a given time.
Click to expand...
domestichippie,
Just wanted to comment a bit further on the above…

The Catholic Church has actually NOT given “official” interpretations of the vast majority of bible verses or passages. I don’t know for sure but I believe that the actual number is just seven.
These are in areas of salvific import like - was Jesus speaking literally or symbolically about eating His body and drinking His blood in John 6:51-58?
In such a matter there can be no room for conflicting thought within the body of Christ. The Holy Spirit simply cannot tell one group of people that this is meant literally and tell another group of people that it is symbolic.
The Church from the earliest times has taught that Yes Jesus was speaking literally here and at the last supper when He instituted the Eucharist. It’s only been in the relatively recent past (last 400 years or so) that the idea has spread among some protestant groups that this passage is not literal…

However - outside of these certain verses or passage, the Church has not made “official” interpretations of biblical passages. This permits, as I pointed out earlier, the individual - guided by the Holy Spirit, to draw from the Scriptures that which the Holy Spirit knows is most useful to the individual for spiritual growth.

Peace
James
 
JRKH said:
domestichippie,
Just wanted to comment a bit further on the above…

The Catholic Church has actually NOT given “official” interpretations of the vast majority of bible verses or passages. I don’t know for sure but I believe that the actual number is just seven.
These are in areas of salvific import like - was Jesus speaking literally or symbolically about eating His body and drinking His blood in John 6:51-58?
In such a matter there can be no room for conflicting thought within the body of Christ. The Holy Spirit simply cannot tell one group of people that this is meant literally and tell another group of people that it is symbolic.
The Church from the earliest times has taught that Yes Jesus was speaking literally here and at the last supper when He instituted the Eucharist. It’s only been in the relatively recent past (last 400 years or so) that the idea has spread among some protestant groups that this passage is not literal…

However - outside of these certain verses or passage, the Church has not made “official” interpretations of biblical passages. This permits, as I pointed out earlier, the individual - guided by the Holy Spirit, to draw from the Scriptures that which the Holy Spirit knows is most useful to the individual for spiritual growth.

Peace
James
Click to expand...
So would all those official I terpretations be flu d in the catechism?
 
You said there were only a few "official "interpretations. Where would I read these.
 
domestichippie said:
You said there were only a few "official "interpretations. Where would I read these.
Click to expand...
To be honest I do not know. But I shall endeavor to find out.

To be sure, the Catechism contains the True teachings of the Church.

Peace
James
 
domestichippie said:
You said there were only a few "official "interpretations. Where would I read these.
Click to expand...
i dont think the are really listed as official and i dont think we have such a document. The early church fathers interprete the bible in about 4 sense, and all the interpretation are correct according to the circumstance, that is why we see many misunderstanding. Passages regarding the eucharist are usually treated as literal but that does not exclude interpretation that are not against doctrine.
Ubenedictus
 
Domestichippie,

Not able to find a “Vatican” Document on the matter of “official interpretations” but perhaps THIS will help.

Peace
James
 
Kingtroll1 said:
Yo I came across this interesting article that is sort of related to the topic:

tektonics.org/lp/pwsaints.html

Comments?
Click to expand...
I did not read the entire article and comments etc…, but the gist I got from it was that the author sees no positive statements about “talking to the deceased” and asking them to pray for us, but he does see certain admonitions against conjuring…Please correct me if I am missing anything significant…

Based on the above, I will make two comments.
First, In the NT, Christ grants to His Church the authority to bind and loose - “whatever” (Mt 16:17-19 and Mt 18:15-18). In Acts 15 we see the Church, in council, exercise this authority to basically “set aside” most of the Mosaic Law for the Gentile Christians. The only things they mention in their letter at the end of the council is -
“For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from unchastity. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well”. (Acts 15:29)
So - what does this mean for the reference to Leviticus 19:31? Should we then assume that “conjuring” is OK? Certainly not…at least not in all cases. What we can deduce is that, since the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, has the authority to “bind and loose”, and since the Church “set aside” the majority Mosaic Law at the Council of Jerusalem, it follows that the Church would then need to answer the inevitable questions that will naturally arise from their decision. Thus, we look to the teachings of Christ’s Church for the answers to these matters.
The Church takes these things quite seriously and has set forth teachings and guidelines to help. For instance “praying” to a saint for help is fine. Playing around with things like ouija boards is not. Likewise the Church takes reports of apparitions etc very seriously and investigates the cases to determine, as far as possible and for the good of the community, just what is going on.

The second point is something often overlooked in such discussions…
The Church does not and never has required a person to pray to a saint asking their help or their intercession. The Church DOES teach that, within certain boundaries, such prayer is acceptable and helpful…But it is not required and certainly should not replace prayer to the Father through Christ. Prayers and devotions to certain saints, by and large, remains a matter of private devotion and private practice.

Peace
James
 
I think there is little to no difference. The law and the prophets did not have any provisions for it nor did The early church fathers.

Therefore to have anything other than the devotion to the living god is idolatry after all no one can serve 2 masters.

The only acceptable veneration is to hold them up as models of righteousness nothing more. No hymns, devotions prayers to them required.
 
+JMJ+
Kingtroll1 said:
I think there is little to no difference. The law and the prophets did not have any provisions for it nor did The early church fathers.

Therefore to have anything other than the devotion to the living god is idolatry after all no one can serve 2 masters.

The only acceptable veneration is to hold them up as models of righteousness nothing more. No hymns, devotions prayers to them required.
Click to expand...
No resurrection of topics please. This is several months old.

If you really want to know the difference, go ask at the Apologetics forum.
 
Domestichippie,
Tho there are 6 passages of scripture that the church has given definition to, there are other passages of scripture that are given definition, not specifically, but generally by other definitions of the faith it has given, which affect reading passages of scripture. And this is where it gets tacky.

For example Gnostics in the early church and modern Gnostics think of Jesus as less than God. And interpret passages of scripture in the way they see Jesus. The passages of scripture of this nature are many and give us also a way of thinking of Mary and her importance then and now thru a correct interpretation based on the church’s teaching.

Just a thought
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top