Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pagan Saints
The Cripplegate ^ | July 19,2012 | Nathan Busenitz

Posted on 01/21/2015 4:47:04 PM PST by RnMomof7

As a church history professor, I am sometimes asked how certain practices developed in church history. For example: When did the Roman Catholic (and Eastern Orthodox) emphasis on praying to saints and venerating relics and icons begin?

A somewhat obscure, but extremely helpful, book by John Calvin answers that question directly.

In his work, A Treatise on Relics, Calvin utilizes his extensive knowledge of church history to demonstrate that prayers to the saints, prayers for the dead, the veneration of relics, the lighting of candles (in homage to the saints), and the veneration of icons are all rooted in Roman paganism. Such practices infiltrated the Christian church after Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire in the fourth century.

Here is an excerpt from Calvin’s work that summarizes his thesis:

Hero-worship is innate to human nature, and it is founded on some of our noblest feelings, — gratitude, love, and admiration, — but which, like all other feelings, when uncontrolled by principle and reason, may easily degenerate into the wildest exaggerations, and lead to most dangerous consequences. It was by such an exaggeration of these noble feelings that [Roman] Paganism filled the Olympus with gods and demigods, — elevating to this rank men who have often deserved the gratitude of their fellow-creatures, by some signal services rendered to the community, or their admiration, by having performed some deeds which required a more than usual degree of mental and physical powers.

The same cause obtained for the Christian martyrs the gratitude and admiration of their fellow-Christians, and finally converted them into a kind of demigods. This was more particularly the case when the church began to be corrupted by her compromise with Paganism [during the fourth and fifth-centuries], which having been baptized without being converted, rapidly introduced into the Christian church, not only many of its rites and ceremonies, but even its polytheism, with this difference, that the divinities of Greece and Rome were replaced by Christian saints, many of whom received the offices of their Pagan predecessors.

The church in the beginning tolerated these abuses, as a temporary evil, but was afterwards unable to remove them; and they became so strong, particularly during the prevailing ignorance of the middle ages, that the church ended up legalizing, through her decrees, that at which she did nothing but wink at first.

In a footnote, Calvin gives specific examples of how Christians saints simply became substitutes for pagan deities.

Thus St. Anthony of Padua restores, like Mercury, stolen property; St. Hubert, like Diana, is the patron of sportsmen; St. Cosmas, like Esculapius, that of physicians, etc. In fact, almost every profession and trade, as well as every place, have their especial patron saint, who, like the tutelary divinity of the Pagans, receives particular hours from his or her protégés.

You can read the entire work on Google Books.

Calvin’s treatment includes a historical overview, quotes from the church fathers, and even citations from sixteenth-century Roman Catholic scholars. The result is an air-tight case for the true origin of many Catholic practices.

Calvin’s conclusion is that these practices are nothing more than idolatrous superstitions, rooted in ancient Roman paganism. Even today, five centuries later, his work still serves as a necessary warning to those who persist in such idolatry. Hence his concluding sentence: “Now, those who fall into this error must do so willingly, as no one can from henceforth plead ignorance on the subject as their excuse.”


TOPICS: Apologetics; General Discusssion; Mainline Protestant; Theology
KEYWORDS: canonization; catholic; catholicbashing; idoltery; reformation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360361-380381-400 ... 461-471 next last
To: Elsie

So it seems


361 posted on 01/23/2015 9:15:14 AM PST by RnMomof7 (Ga 4:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 360 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Ephesus, for one.


362 posted on 01/23/2015 9:17:35 AM PST by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 358 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

It is an open question whether Mary died or not.


363 posted on 01/23/2015 9:18:16 AM PST by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 360 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Tell me, did I ever assert that nobody ever wrote anything?

What conceivable point are you trying to make by assembling a bunch of Scripture verses that remind us that PEOPLE WROTE STUFF?


364 posted on 01/23/2015 9:20:24 AM PST by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 357 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
And, of course, you HONORED that advice; right?

There weren't but a handful of them at my first 2-year college but the few that were there were more than a handful.

Actually, I did honor his advice, but it was by default because the two that interested me both were rich and from Connecticut. Nothing much in common with me. (Why were they even THERE?)
365 posted on 01/23/2015 9:37:03 AM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan
It is an open question whether Mary died or not.

Only to you and other RCs with vested interests in the RCC.

Every last one of those associates of Jesus died the first death, just as promised also to you and me.
366 posted on 01/23/2015 9:40:15 AM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan

Please respond to my post 250 to you.

Thank you for not ignoring it.

R2z


367 posted on 01/23/2015 9:42:26 AM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan; metmom
>>Saint Luke tells us that MARY was his source for the account of Jesus’ birth: “Mary pondered all these things in her heart.”<<

That doesn't say "Mary told him" or that she "was his source". In fact, your statement counters what Jesus said.

John 14:26 But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

>>The notion that Mary was “unimportant” and that nobody even cared where she lived is preposterous.<<

So show us any writing or accounts of her life after Pentecost.

>>You are stuffed so full of anti-Mary propaganda that you are willing to contradict the gospels.<<

I just showed where you contradicted the gospels. Your assertion that Luke said Mary was his source in simply injecting something that isn't there.

>>In St. John’s gospel, Jesus is FOUNDING THE CHURCH,<<

No, it says He will build His ekklēsian, those "called out". If you think that word means "church" as the Catholic Church would have you believe then you have to also think any meeting of those "called out" for meeting of government or whatever was also the "church". A little study of what the word "ekkelesia" means and how it was used during that time could save themselves the embarrassment off comments about the "church" and what Christ said He would build.

>>He gives Mary to John (and therefore to the whole Church) as mother.<<

So now John symbolizes the church? That's simply an injection that isn't there. Besides, scripture says that the "Jerusalem which is above is the mother of us all" not Mary.

As for the rest of your post, I do believe you have been warned about raising the name of he who will not be mentioned on this site. Like I said, the Catholic Church cannot definitively state where Mary died as they don't know where she was actually living. There is simply no word of her after Pentecost. Making things up doesn't change that fact.

368 posted on 01/23/2015 9:43:01 AM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan

POST NUMBER CORRECTION...

Please respond to my post 350 to you.

Thank you for not ignoring it.

R2z


369 posted on 01/23/2015 9:43:53 AM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 367 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan; RnMomof7
>>Since sola scriptura is mentioned NOWHERE in the New Testament, sola scriptura is a man-made doctrine.<<

Just like your assumption of Mary? Or maybe recommendations to pray to saints to get better reception? Or maybe the Jesus would send Mary as His advocate? Or maybe even the trinity for that matter.

370 posted on 01/23/2015 9:47:09 AM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

Many Christians here, including myself, have received a knowledge of WHO Jesus of Nazareth really is from reading the Gospels and other New Testament books in addition to the Old Testament books compiled in the Holy Bible.

Not only have I learned and ACCEPTED that Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ and the Son of the Living God via Scripture and hearing and responding to the foolishness of the preaching the Cross, I also have a personal intimate daily relationship with Him in Spirit and via His Written Word and have been given the Seal that promises me that I am known in Christ as well.

No believer in Lord Jesus Christ needs Rome or any other religious system to be a Christian and to be saved from the second death and eternal separation from Almighty God and to have fellowship with the saints here and now.


well said...............


371 posted on 01/23/2015 10:01:39 AM PST by PeterPrinciple (Thinking Caps are no longer being issued but there must be a warehouse full of them somewhere.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan; Elsie
>>Ephesus, for one.<<

Says who and what's their source proof? Wait....I think I found it.

"The house was discovered in the 19th century by following the descriptions in the reported visions of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich (1774–1824)"

On, and there is this. "The Catholic Church has never pronounced in favour or against the authenticity of the house."

Well there you have it. The concrete evidence!!! Right?

372 posted on 01/23/2015 10:06:41 AM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 362 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan; Elsie
>>It is an open question whether Mary died or not.<<

So they don't talk about "the dormition of Mary"?

373 posted on 01/23/2015 10:16:00 AM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies]

To: stonehouse01

To reiterate: Jewish tradition allowed for the recognition of material relics as holy (see above biblical proof texts) and the early Christians continued the practice.


God also allowed divorce, but it was a recognition of our hearts, not HIS desires......................


374 posted on 01/23/2015 10:30:01 AM PST by PeterPrinciple (Thinking Caps are no longer being issued but there must be a warehouse full of them somewhere.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: stonehouse01

To reiterate: Jewish tradition allowed for the recognition of material relics as holy (see above biblical proof texts) and the early Christians continued the practice.


I am partially in error in my prior post. Jewish TRADITION allowed for divorce, but God has always hated divorce. Do you think RC traditions are anymore trustworthy than Jewish tradition?

He has always hated graven images and idols also. Did you ever catch that in the Old testament? Relics are man made for mans purposes.

Why would God Never allow any earthly image of him?

He is a jealous God. Anything that distracts from Him is an idol.

Why would you rely on traditions when you have the primary source, the Bible, available to you.

Why would you pray to Mary when God invites you to speak with him as Father?


375 posted on 01/23/2015 11:31:36 AM PST by PeterPrinciple (Thinking Caps are no longer being issued but there must be a warehouse full of them somewhere.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan
He gives Mary to John (and therefore to the whole Church) as mother.

Now there's an ASSUMPTION about Mary that has no basis either.

There's simply nothing in the context that indicates that Jesus meant that.

376 posted on 01/23/2015 12:36:21 PM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan
The absence of any relics of Mary is an ANOMALY. It sticks out like a sore thumb. Given the early Christians’ devotion to the relics of all those who were close to Jesus on earth, the absence of relics of Mary demands an explanation.

The need to have no relics of Mary to *prove* her *assumption* is plenty enough reason to hide them.

if there were relics of Mary, it would blow the whole assumption of Mary schtick to pieces.

As long as the church wants to perpetuate that myth, then no relics will ever be found.

Thus, in a Catholic's eyes, making that *proof* that Mary was assumed.

It's not merely circular logic, it's a black hole of logic from which there is no hope of reason ever escaping.

377 posted on 01/23/2015 12:41:26 PM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan; CynicalBear
It is just bizarre to posit (gratuitously, of course) that the early Christians, who kept the relics of the apostles and tens of thousands of martyrs, just let Mary shuffle off to croak in an alley somewhere. It’s an insane notion born of extreme bigotry.

And CB stated that just where?

Seems to me that HE'S not the one who thought of it.

378 posted on 01/23/2015 12:46:40 PM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan

“Since sola scriptura is mentioned NOWHERE in the New Testament, sola scriptura is a man-made doctrine. It is unscriptural. It is self-contradictory, precisely because it doesn’t come from Scripture.”

Aren’t you a self-disclosed roman priest???

How can someone claiming to be a priest be so unfamiliar with:

Understanding what sola scriptura means?
Understanding what the Scriptures say about themselves?
Basic logic?


379 posted on 01/23/2015 1:45:05 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion ( "I didn't leave the Central Oligarchy Party. It left me." - Ronaldus Maximus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
It’s amazing to me that Catholics even ask those questions. Do they not read scripture for themselves at all?

I don't know about all of them, but I did not read it when I was a catholic. That catholic family Bible just gathered dust.

380 posted on 01/23/2015 2:34:03 PM PST by Mark17 (Fear not little flock, from the cross to the throne, from death into light he went for His own)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 339 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360361-380381-400 ... 461-471 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson