Posted on 12/06/2006 6:18:21 AM PST by NYer
I agree.
Yet a caution is important. Reliance is one thing. Overreliance is another, especially when it gets in the way of relying directly upon God.
If you look at my "Herr Pastor" comment--the "flock" of a "Herr Pastor"-led church would often overrely on the pastor at the expense of recognizing the Holy Spirit as the "Top Exec" of the Church and Jesus as the true Head.
And, as for recognizing the importance of "righteous" intercessors (James 5:16), I have several questions for you:
I know you believe those righteous men are not only in heaven but here on earth as well.
(1) So why isn't there a bigger push in the Church to mass identify these people? Why has there been no huge push to find out and publicize what their "specialty" intercessory areas are (like St. Jude, etc.)?
(2) And once we've done that, why don't we have more chuch-led appeals for folks to begin lifting up their prayers to them according to their specialized intercessory successes?
(3) And, then, of course, the ultimate consequence would be that eventually, I'm sure, we would see mass RC individuals who would begin to place newspaper ads & Web "thank yous" to these righteous men, right?
(4) And, not that we don't limit them, but why concentrate our prayerful appeals to intercessors who are "righteous" saints? Shouldn't we be making mass appeals to the poor to intercede for us? Doesn't Scripture say that "the Lord regarded the prayer of the destitute"? (Ps. 102:17) Knowing that, shouldn't there be a mass effort to pray to the poor, so that they, in turn, can intercede for us before God?
Well, it seems you have made some progress since last we chatted Colofornian! At least to me. D-fender and Campion can speak for themselves of course but I find it remarkable that now you even admit that the Saints in Heaven offer intecessory prayer for those on Earth!
Our differences of opinion, then, are boiled down primarily to the issue of what dimensional barriers exist--barriers that affect communication access.
Correct! That is where our disagreement comes from.
But the foundation that this difference sits upon is ultimately bigger: Scriptural guidance.
You seem to step out in faith minus Scriptural guidance. And I say, if this was important enough for us to do, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, or the apostles would have guided us to do so in Scripture.
If it was important enough for us to believe, wouldn't the actual word "monotheism" be in the Bible? Do you see where this is going?
Let me digress a bit and make the point this way: We are both conservatives, so let's look at this from a conservative perspective. For 1500 years after our Lord's Death and Ressurection, was it the "rule" to go by "Scripture alone"? If not, then why should we believe God's Plan for His Church changed suddenly because some mere man invented a printing press? Why does the normative process of His Church suddenly change, simply because man stumbled on some technology that made the reproduction of His Written Word easier? Does that make sense, from a conservative standpoint?
You see my friend, that's the central issue here. That's what ALL the disagreements between Catholics/Eastern Orthodox and Protestant Christians comes down to: The issue of "sola scriptura". There is no historical precident for it, and indeed, there are no Scriptural bases for it.
So we come back to history as our guide: What did Christians do for the first 1500 years with regards to the Saints? It's clear that history tells us they believed the Saints to be alive, and able to hear intecessory prayer requests. ALSO, history does NOT record anyone NOT believing this, at least for the first 1500 years. So this "history", which really we call "Tradition", is our guide, and indeed, part of the Word of God. The Word of God is not only written, it is transmitted via His Church, in BOTH written and oral forms, preserved by the Holy Spirit, until the end of time.
Don't limit yourself to the rich history that is our true Christian faith, by only reading the Bible brother! The Bible is the Word of God, but it's not the ENTIRE Word of God. There's so much more to hear and learn, for those with eyes to see and EARS to HEAR!
This is our fundamental (no pun intended) disagreement. Personally, I find it difficult to believe that God would limit Himself to just a book.
By the way, I have not said anywhere in this post that the Word of God is being added to today, nor was it ever "increased"; the canon of Scripture is complete and never to be added to, like say the Mormons have done. Likewise, the Oral Tradition, the Word of God you are missing, was given complete by Jesus, passed on to his Apostles, and via apostolic succession, to us today. What may seem like "doctrinal additions" is actually the journey of discovery Catholics continue today. We continue to learn what the original deposit of faith contains, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit via the Magisterium.
Because the Church teaches that the doctrine of "once saved, always saved" is false. To that end, the Church is not able to definitively state that a person is indeed "righteous" in the eyes of God, until and unless that person has, by all evidences, "persevered to the end". I believe that answers your question (if not I can elaborate further), and also invalidates your questions/points 2-4.
Except for this point in #4: Psalms 102:17 He will regard the prayer of the destitute, and not despise their prayer.
Emphasis added. He (God) will not DESPISE their prayer, this is not the same thing as saying, "the prayer of the righteous AVAILETH much". This (Psa 102:17) is saying that God doesn't ignore anyone's prayer, no matter how lowly they are. That is not the same thing as the message in James.
Well, you may have missed my earlier post (#465) where I wrote: I want to make a clarification...I don't deny that heavenly saints are interceding for earthly saints. That's not my objection. You better believe that when I die, I'll talk to the Holy Trinity about my family and friends remaining on earth!
I think it's plain from Scripture that the essence of heaven is knowing Jesus (John 17:3), so communication there is part & parcel of being there. And our love for our friends and family on earth won't diminish but will rather greatly expand once in heaven.
In addition, Rev. 6:10 tells us that the martyrs "called out in a loud voice, 'How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?'" I would think that these martyrs who are now in a timeless dimension are not only representing themselves with such an appeal, but from our perspective, martyrs-to-come.
Maybe I should have mentioned the above earlier.
So why be further distracted by praying to spirits who will never answer our prayers! God will!Distracted, spirits who never answer, God will... All seems to either misunderstand intercessory prayer.
You seem to argue back and forth on two points of intercessory prayer. Let's reduce them to two questions: Can we? (with Saints in heaven) and Should we?
You've argue against both those questions in different posts. To be clear, do you answer in the affirmative for "Should we?" (engage in intercessory prayer and ask others to pray for us)? [Excluding for now your objections to the 'can we' part as regards saints in heaven.
No, all it does it broaden the scope of your misunderstanding of Scripture.
While it's true that "there is no one righteous, not even one" (Ro. 3:10), Paul also made it clear to the Corinthians that Jesus is "our Righteousness"--1 Cor. 1:30 (funny how again we wind up at 1 Cor 1...where I started in this thread). This is an extension of Jer. 23:6: "The Lord is our Righteousness"
Righteousness is not just a future, heavenly concept only--just like the Kingdom of God or eternal life is not only a heavenly concept. Righteousness is where the Lord indwells a temple. Eternal life is where the Lord is known--now! (John 3:36; 1 John 5:10-13; John 17:3)--even if we're not once saved, always saved (I know many Evangelicals would disagree w/me there; but I'm actually on the same page as you are here). The Kingdom of God is where the Lord rules!
So, no one is righteous apart from Christ. And if you say that if the "righteous" (in the eyes of God) are only "computed" by the Church after a person dies, then it renders all kinds of Scriptural passages mentioning the "righteous" as meaningless
I won't even go to the OT. "He who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous." (1 John 3:7). "He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous." (Mt. 5:45). [What? It rains in this other dimension? That's news to me. And the sun shines on them, too--even though the book of Revelation says that God Himself is the sun in heaven?] "For the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous and his ears are attentive to their prayer, but the face of the Lord is against those who do evil" (1 Pet. 3:12)
Especially, your interpretation renders James 5:16 as non-sensical: "Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective."
It says confess your sins to one another and (simultaneously) pray for one another. If this was limited to a heavenly dimension, then folks are still confessing their sins to one another? Does that go on for eternity? Are folks still sinning in heaven? Are you seriously trying to tell me that there are no righteous intercessors here on earth--folks who are righteous in Christ?
No, what this shows is that (a) you've done cartwheels to avoid those questions; and (b) that not only is the RC Church the current "DJ" (Designated Judge) of sainthood, but is the current DJ of the righteous as well.
In light of 1 Cor. 6:2, I don't have a problem of trumpeting that the saints will one day judge the world; I do have a problem with the saints attempting to formally (note this qualifier) judge who is righteous and unrighteous this side of heaven. (Paul had just earlier told the Corinthians, "I don't even judge myself"--meaning by his own standards--1 Cor. 4:3).
I must confess I'm:
1. Growing mentally tired from our exchange. I've enjoyed it and look forward to answering you in the future, but I believe I may pack it in for today.
2. My computer is having connectivity problems at this time, I believe, so instead of getting frustrated at that, and possibly taking that frustration out on you, I believe I will pack it in for today.
Look for a response in the next few days, at most. God bless! I have enjoyed our exchanges!
Well, certainly I reduced one recent post to the "can we" part: we are seamlessly one body (heaven & earth together); we are not seamlessly one communicative body. Not every part of the body is an ear.
I'm not sure if we can fully separate the "should we" argument from the "can we" argument. Let me explain:
Let's say you tell me, "we agree we should intercede for each other as the body of Christ, right?" "Yes, I agree," I say. Then, the next thing you know you get on my case for not interceding for you when you were on a recent trip to the Bahamas. "C, I telepathized my specific prayer requests to you every night on the trip; and yet when I arrived home, you said you didn't pray for me."
Do you see how "empty" the "Should we" argument is if the "can we" argument is a disconnection?
You've seen the cell phone "dropped calls" commercials, right? Somebody is waiting for a key response from a girlfriend or future father-in-law & suddenly cannot hear.
Well, if we each find out in heaven as we look back on life on earth that every or almost every prayer to a heavenly saint was a "dropped" prayer because of divine barriers, then we would both agree the "should we" question was irrelevant.
I mean, you can ask me: "C, shouldn't we share our intercessory prayer one for another with that phoneless, computerless, lone Christian shipwrecked on that remote island?" Even if I said, "Sure" and we agreed upon that, he has no phone, computer, mail service, etc. to share. Do you see where your "communion of saints" idea falls flat? We can have a "communion of saints" with that lone Christian even if he never gets a prayer request from us!
Understand. It's mutual. It's invigorating and taxing at the same time. I've enjoyed this discussion as well.
Also, if we eventually find out that if prayers to saints were indeed "dropped" prayers, how much potential wasted time & effort was that?
The word "sin" literally means "missing the mark." (It's not just doing unrighteous, naughty things). Sometimes, we can do perfectly seemingly righteous things, but "miss the mark" because they were ill-motivated or self-centered or whatever. A prayer to the wrong target "misses the mark."
And it's in this vein that we need to raise related questions on the "should we" question.
Should a priest or pastor shepherd his flock by preaching? (Of course). But should he if he wants to receive all the glory and Lord it over the church? (No)
Should an arresting officer arrest convicts on the run? (Of course) But should he if he's the S.S. and he's tracking down a Jew in hiding during WWII? (You know what our hindsight answer is)
Likewise, no one--not Rutles4ever & Campion re: post#358, nor Fourty-Seven in the more recent post (4 questions I asked him in response to James 5:16), wants to directly address the "should we" question in light of the saints and angels getting "thank you" notes in ads & Web sites for answering their prayers.
If we should intercede for one another, then does that mean we thank one another for answering our prayer? (No!) Only God answers prayer. And the fruit of a practice shows us the root of a practice. Thanksgiving and glory and credit is going to saints and angels when in fact it should be solo de gloria! to God alone!
The fact is the inconsistency I've been accused of may perhaps be a more pertinent matter for folks who put these ads in the paper. You should ask them, "Should we intercede for one another?" Because it seems to me, based on who they are thanking, that they are only asking heavenly beings and heavenly saints. They (seemingly) either (a) aren't asking earthly saints to intercede for them, or (b) if they are, they don't feel the same compulsion to thank these earthly saints in the same way.
If this is still too complex, perhaps you could simply answer this one: Is it a good think to pray for our brothers and sisters in Christ?
And if you are feeling fulsome: "Is it a good thing to ask our brothers and sisters to pray for us?"
thank you.
E.g., no convicts on the run, no S.S. Officer, no shipwrecks, cell phones, dropped calls, computer glitches, yada yada yada...
Just as an unconditional value statement: should we, does is it a good thing, does it have value... all other conditions being equal.
Or folks who handle snakes or folks who go on tv. Should I assume your belief is the same as that of Benny Hinn, Rod Parsley, prayer cloth 'gifts' and Trinity Broadcasting? We can both degenerate the discussion to what 'some' Catholics or 'some' non-Catholics do and believe.
Catholicism has a stated official interpretation, doctine and dogma. How about we use this to determine what the Church teaches?
I'll make it as simple of a response as I can: Paul asks other Christians to pray for him (Eph. 6:19). Other passages describe believers praying for one another (2 Cor. 1:11; Eph. 1:16; Phil. 1:19; 2 Tim. 1:3).
Well, good for you. It's about time you mentioned this (unless I missed it somewhere earlier).
My understanding is official Catholic doctrine & dogma doesn't advance the "official" idea that RC are to pray to saints or Mary. (But that's only because it has heartburn w/that word "pray" being applied to any saint or Mary.)
Official RCatholic doctrine & dogma apparently sanctions folks asking heavenly saints and Mary to pray for them.
In light of some of the earlier posts on this thread from RC posters--including one who asked if there was really any difference between praying to a saint and asking/petitioning a saint--can you tell me what the difference is to the grassroots RC person when their church supposedly tells them it's okay to ask a heavenly saint to pass on their prayer request...just don't call it "prayer."
(If I'm off-base in representing the "official" RC doctrine & dogma above, please correct me w/proper sources).
Yes, you're off base. The Communion of Saints includes all of us together, including the Church Triumphant and Church Militant. We are a single body, we pray for each, we ask each other to pray for us. The Communion of Saints is who we are with Christ as our head. We still say the Apostles Creed.
I don't know what your 'grassroots' thing is. I'm not sure if you mean it as a derrogatory term or not. The Church is clear on its teaching. There are good teachers and poor ones, good students and poor ones.
The teaching and doctrine remains the same. We believe in the Communion of Saints. And have for well over a millenium and a half.
May I add may insight. These saints are seen by the Catholic Church as icons. They represent a tenant of faith which act in the process of worship as a way to strengthen their love of God. There are many ways to worship God and strengthen ones relationship with God. One can read the Bible, sing songs of worship, find quiet time in a corner of the room, listen to songs of worship, listen to tapes of those preaching the word, say the Rosary, and etc. For the Catholic, worship is the use of icons to focus ones mind in an act of worship. What must be understood is that these icons are not worshiped in lieu of God. That would be idolatry. These icons are used to stregthen one love of God and bring one to the spiritual throne room with God.
I'm very sorry, but I must ask again. I really think you didn't respond. Does your post mean: It is a good thing, it has value, it is something we should do for each other?
[All the previous caveats and conditions still holding.]
Paragraph 5. The Communion of Saints
946 After confessing "the holy catholic Church," the Apostles' Creed adds "the communion of saints." In a certain sense this article is a further explanation of the preceding: "What is the Church if not the assembly of all the saints?" The communion of saints is the Church.947 "Since all the faithful form one body, the good of each is communicated to the others.... We must therefore believe that there exists a communion of goods in the Church. But the most important member is Christ, since he is the head.... Therefore, the riches of Christ are communicated to all the members, through the sacraments." "As this Church is governed by one and the same Spirit, all the goods she has received necessarily become a common fund."
Of course there are righteous people on the Earth, and, through the passages you gave, we can have a fair, decent idea of who they are. The point is though, for this discussion, the Church cannot definitively state who they are until they lead a wholly righteous life, to the end.
This is, again, because OSAS is false. The only way one can know one is as "righteous" as the terms used in the Bible, is to know at that moment, one is living a righteous life. Only the individual person can know that himself, and God, no one else.
In other words, I don't know you. I can judge that you may be a righteous person NOW, that is, you don't fall into the trap of sin, and/or when you do, you ask for forgiveness. You do charitable works. You spread the Gospel. I can know that you do these things, NOW. But I can't know the FUTURE. I can't know if a day from now, a week from now, 10 years from now, if you won't backslide into sin and/or disbelief. Thus, I cannot know if you are TRULY righteous, as a person, for all ETERNITY.
That's all the Church does when She canonizes someone. She makes an infallible determination that for all ETERNITY, a person is righteous. Something that cannot be done on Earth, only after that person has passed from the Earth, for the reasons I stated in the preceding paragraph.
It [James 5:16] says confess your sins to one another and (simultaneously) pray for one another. If this was limited to a heavenly dimension, then folks are still confessing their sins to one another? Does that go on for eternity? Are folks still sinning in heaven? Are you seriously trying to tell me that there are no righteous intercessors here on earth--folks who are righteous in Christ?
As should be clear now, it's not limited to a heavenly dimension, and thus, no one is saying there are sinners in Heaven. In a previous post you pointed out Psa 102:17, which clearly indicates that God hears, and may even respond to, all prayers not just those of the righteous. So that's why it's profitable to ask for prayers on prayer threads. Not only because the prayers of the righteous (who are both in heaven and on earth, we just can't know for certain who the righteous on earth are) availeth much, but also because we have the promise from the psalmist that God hears ALL prayer.
......
As far as the "thank you note" issue, I'm not familiar with that particular debate, evidently you were having it with others. (?) But if I may state, no one should suggest we should thank the Saint for an answered prayer, INSOMUCH as we should not realize that the answer came from GOD.
That is to say, we should realize in our hearts that the ultimate source of our answered prayer was God. There's nothing wrong though with thanking a Saint for answering our prayer, which WAS, a prayer for THEM to pray FOR US.
IOW, every Catholic should realize (and I believe most do) that it's God that answers our request. Even if you see an ad or a web page thanking a Saint, it's ASSUMED that God answered our prayer, but the person thanking is thanking the Saint for PRAYING FOR them. They aren't thanking the Saint for ACTUALLY answering the prayer. That's at least assumed, if not stated, in the thanks. I'm certain.
I state this as a matter of certainty knowing the proper Church teaching on the Saints. I cannot speak for someone who wasn't properly catechized, who may actually thank a Saint for doing the actual work. For clarity: That IS wrong. But again, that's NOT what the Church teaches. Don't hold the Church in error because of someone's personal error.
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.