Protestants and the rosary

Paternosters Blogspot ^ | February 26, 2007 | Chris Laning

[Frank Sheed]

I grew up Protestant in the Northeastern U.S., in an area with many Irish and Italian families, so most of my playmates when I was in elementary school were Catholic. This was somewhat (ahem!) before Vatican II, and both Protestant and Catholic kids were taught by their parents (and sometimes even in Sunday School) to regard the other with suspicion, if not downright hostility. My Catholic playmates, for instance, said they were told they would spend eternity in Hell if they (literally!) so much as set foot inside a Protestant church building.

Boy, have things changed. While there are still plenty of Protestants who believe the Roman church is the Scarlet Woman of Babylon, for the most part Catholics and Protestants now acknowledge each other as fellow Christians, are often fairly relaxed about attending each other's worship services, and I suspect that informal, unofficial sharing of Communion is more common than the authorities on both sides would like to think. There are still plenty of incompatibilities (women priests, to name one) but I don't see that degree of almost superstitious mistrust of the "other" any more.

The status of the Virgin Mary is a point of difference between Catholics and Protestants, of course, and that's one of the reasons Protestants tend to be rather wary of the rosary. Unfortunately, I think people brought up Catholic often demonstrate how little they understand about their "separated brethren" when they blithely suggest that Protestants can pray the rosary too.



There are four main points I can think of about the rosary that give many Protestants problems. Briefly they are (from the Protestant point of view):
(1) What about Jesus's prohibition of "vain repetitions" in prayer?
(2) Does the Rosary give Mary too much honor?
(3) Do saints actually hear the prayers of living people?
(4) Is it legitimate to ask saints for favor?

I should make it clear here that when I say "Protestants" in this discussion, I am not including modern Anglicans or Episcopalians. There are certainly Anglicans who do say the rosary, either in the same form common to Roman Catholics or some other form, such as the modern Anglican rosary (which I still want to write about sometime). But what Americans usually call "mainstream" Protestants (Presbyterians, Methodists, etc.), and essentially all of the more evangelical and conservative Protestants, are generally opposed to the rosary as a Roman practice, and that's who I'm referring to here.

As I've said, Catholics do sometimes cheerfully assert that Protestants, too, can "honor" the Virgin Mary and pray the rosary. But I've noticed that somehow, all the Catholic stories that circulate about Protestants praying the rosary tend to end with the story's Protestant becoming a Catholic. If those are the only stories you ever hear, the (inadvertent) message is "If you start praying the rosay, you'll become Catholic" -- as though the rosary were the first step down a slippery slope!

I noticed this on Rosary Workshop's "Why pray the rosary?" page and mentioned it to the website's owner, Margot Carter-Blair -- who shared my amusement, once I'd pointed it out. Margot is now looking for some good stories about Protestants praying the rosary who stay Protestant.

Hmmm. Looks like this is the start of another series of articles....



The first challenge Protestants frequently offer is Matthew chapter 6, verse 7, where Jesus says (in the original King James 1611 spelling): "But when yee pray, use not vaine repetitions, as the heathen doe. For they thinke that they shall be heard for their much speaking."

This verse has had various English translations. Wycliffe's version from around 1400 says: "But in preiyng nyle yee speke myche, as hethene men doon, for thei gessen that thei ben herd in her myche speche." ("But in praying, nil [do not] ye speak much, as heathen men do, for they think that they are heard in their much speech.")

The Bishop's Bible (1568) says, amusingly, "But when ye pray, babble not much, as the heathen do. For they thynke that they shalbe heard, for theyr much bablinges sake."

One modern version puts it: "And in praying do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do; for they think that they will be heard for their many words." In all the versions the next verse says "Therefore be not lyke them, for your father knoweth, what thynges ye haue nede of, before ye aske of hym."

The King James version, however, is so entrenched in the English language that "vain repetitions" is the actual phrase the debate tends to focus on. Protestants generally assert that any repetition of the same prayer over and over must be "vain" by definition, since God really only needs to be asked once, and repeating the same words doesn't add anything.

The usual (rather feeble) Catholic defense is to argue that Christ didn't mean to prohibit all repetition but only vain repetition -- which is a very incomplete answer, since it leaves open the question of how you tell whether it's vain or not.

I think there's a point here, though: saying the same thing over and over doesn't necessarily mean it's less sincere. Parents and children, husbands and wives tell each other "I love you" over and over, and it doesn't seem to mean any less to them for being repeated.

Protestants generally don't see that their own argument isn't completely consistent. There may be no particular virtue in repeating the same prayer over again, but Protestants will cheerfully pray the "Our Father..." weekly and daily throughout their lives anyway. Many Protestants are taught that "true" prayer is spontaneous and from the heart, expressed in one's own words or wordless desires -- but if that were literally followed at all times, we'd all be praying like Quakers, who only pray as they feel "inspired" to do so. But in fact, most Protestant worship services do include standard, pre-written prayers in which everyone is expected to join. I was brought up, for instance, saying one that begins "Almighty and merciful Father, we have erred and strayed from thy ways like lost sheep...." every Sunday without fail.

I think both sides would admit that the idea of saying a prayer 10 or 100 or some other "round number" of times is something humans have dreamed up for our own satisfaction, not something God particularly cares about. (100 is only a round number if you're using a base-10 number system, anyway!) So perhaps the question that needs to be addressed is whether or not it's a good thing to allow our human preferences for certain numbers to affect our prayers this way. I can certainly see that reasonable adults could have different opinions on this.

to be continued

posted by Chris at 11:04 AM  

[ears_to_hear]

Those were PCUSA links. That is an apostate church that is marginally Christian. They ordain gays and women and are pro abortion etc. The one near me believes that Muslims and Hindus are saved if they are good people.

In short they pray the Our father because they do not know how to seek God on their own

[ears_to_hear]

No I said we approach the throne of God with OUR words not vain repetitions

[Frank Sheed]

Did you scan the Paternoster blog, Mother? The poor woman has a verse that looks like Dutch to me that she needs translated. She thinks it is one of the Psalms. It is in the middle of her blogging somewhere.

If you crack that riddle, you will have a friend for life.

F

[Frank Sheed]

“Myn Seele gebenedyt den Heere die u croont in bermhertigheyt ende ontferminghen - Psal. 102” I’m not sure how to translate this (German? Dutch? Low German?) and I can’t find the verse offhand in either Psalm 102 or 103, but it seems to be something beginning “My soul [blesses?] the Lord...

From April 2, 2007

[AnAmericanMother]

Well, you didn't confine your remarks to PCA, now, did you?

You said, "I have attended MANY services at Baptist churches, AOG's , Methodist ,.Wesleyan, Nazarene, Church of Christ and many other non denominational churches, I am a Presbyterian and I have never heard the "Our Father" used as a part of the service NEVER."

You were dead wrong about the Prebys, and I'm pretty sure you're dead wrong about the others too. My grandfather-in-law was a Methodist minister, and I'm now holding his personal hymnal with the Order of Worship in the back. Order of Worship I, item 7 is "The Lord's Prayer - which may be said or sung". Order of Worship II, item 12. Order of Worship III, item 6. Order of Worship IV (morning or evening prayer), item 7 "to be said by all."

I'm not going to go hunt out all the other denominations for your benefit, as Cromwell said, "I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken."

[Frank Sheed]

...as Cromwell said, "I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken."

NYUK!

[GoLightly]

The keys seem to have been taken up into heaven at some point...

The Apocalypse Of Saint John

16 And he had in his right hand seven stars. And from his mouth came out a sharp two edged sword: and his face was as the sun shineth in his power. 17 And when I had seen him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying: Fear not. I am the First and the Last, 18 And alive, and was dead, and behold I am living for ever and ever, and have the keys of death and of hell.

[Frank Sheed]

God knows everything that is or will be. God started His Church and inspired the Apostolic men to write the Books of the Bible. And God knew that by the time the twenty-first century came along that there would be over 20,000 different denominations all contradicting each other on how to interpret the Bible. God wants us to know the truth with confident conviction, because only clear thinking will lead to that certainty of conviction that will enable a person to die to himself. No one dies to himself for just a fuzzy maybe. And only by dying to ourselves can we truly follow Jesus Christ and have true joy and everlasting life in Him. How can we know with absolute certainty what the correct interpretation of the Bible is ?

We read in Isaiah 22 how it is the transfer of the keys that designates Eliakim as the new master of the palace.

Isaiah 22:15-22 “… go to that official, Shebna, master of the palace,
… I will thrust you from your office and pull you down from your station.
On that day I will summon my servant Eliakim … and give over to him your authority. He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem … I will place the key of the House of David on his shoulder; when he opens, no one shall shut, when he shuts, no one shall open.”

It was the transferring of the keys that denoted the transfer of power to the new successor of this office as the king’s representative, his regent, the master of the palace.

It was God the Father who had picked Peter to be the one to proclaim Jesus as the Messiah. And it was upon hearing this that Jesus alludes to that passage in Isaiah 22 above and gives the keys to Saint Peter.

Matthew 16:13-19 “When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi he asked his disciples, ‘Who do people say that the Son of Man is ?’
They replied, ‘Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.’
He said to them, ‘But who do you say that I am ?’
Simon Peter said in reply, ‘You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.’
Jesus said to him in reply, ‘Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.
And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.’ “

The keys represent absolute power to rule. They are owned by the King of Israel who entrusts them to his representative the “master of the palace.” Christ is the true King of Israel. Just as in Isaiah 22 above where the keys are handed down to the successors of the king’s prime minister we see Christ giving His keys to his designated “master of the palace,” his chief minister, his vicar, St. Peter.

That the “gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it” also implies succession for Peter’s office. Peter died. Yet, Christ’s promise is true. Peter who became the Bishop of Rome has a successor. The future tense used in Matthew 16, “will build” and “will give you the keys,” refers to what Christ will give to St. Peter after the Resurrection.

Jesus knew this teaching would be hard, that is to follow Him completely means to trust Him completely. Perhaps that is why Jesus gave his teaching about taking up our cross shortly after this revelation given near Caesarea Philippi, as we can see in the parallel passage in Luke.

Luke 9:20-25 “Then he said to them, ‘But who do you say that I am ?’ Peter said in reply, ‘The Messiah of God.’
… He said, ‘The Son of Man must … be killed and on the third day be raised.’
Then he said to all, ‘If anyone wishes to come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will save it. What profit is there for one to gain the whole world yet lose or forfeit himself ?’ “

God wants us to know the truth. Jesus knew when He started His Church that there would be confusion over how to interpret the Bible. That is why the institution of the Papacy is such a gift from God. The alternative is where each person is his own pope, and relying on the assumption that the Holy Spirit has guided his own judgment and his alone and to the contrary of over 20,000 different “Bible Alone” believing Churches as to how to interpret the Bible.

Peter is the Rock on which the Church is built. By himself, Peter is just a man, weak and a sinner. However, Christ is God and God is the Rock of our faith, (1 Cor. 10:14) it is the Rock of Christ that is working through Saint Peter that makes Peter’s Rock-ness faithful and sure. Peter is no longer just alone. It is the Holy Spirit that imparts to Peter the Rock-ness of Jesus Christ as he foretold in Matthew 16:19.

Peter, and his successors, and those in union with him give us infallible guidance as to how to follow our Lord Jesus Christ. We find true joy in knowing, loving, and serving Jesus Christ [according to His will.]

Luke 10:16 “Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me.” NAB

Luke 22:29-32 “ … and I assign to you, as my Father assigned to me, a kingdom, that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren.’ “ RSV

The meaning of the original Greek reveals that Satan had demanded to have “you -plural,” - meaning all of the disciples - but Christ says that He prayed for “you -singular” meaning Peter uniquely. (see KJV)

John 21:15 “Jesus said to Simon Peter, ‘Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these ?’ He said to him, ‘Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.’ He said to him, ‘Feed my lambs.’ “ NAB

Jesus gave over to Saint Peter the care of all of His sheep.
Now the only question is how many Christian sheep belong to Jesus ?
……………Answer: All of them.
[ All Bible quotations unless otherwise stated are from the New American Bible.]

[ears_to_hear]

I was confining my comments to Christian churches.

The PCUSA is MARGINALLY Christian . I have attended a few services at the one near me and NO OUR FATHER was said on those occasions.

I can only tell you that in 30 years of weekly attendance and often mid week attendance I have never heard the Our Father prayed.

It is my guess that the order of services you are looking at are not followed by the majority of the churches of that denomination with any regularity, it is rather like you
taking “St Joseph’s Trinitine missal” to mass. It is a Catholic “prayer book” it is a product of the church but no longer applicable to catholic mass

Protestants do not use “prayer books” in their services.

[Frank Sheed]

Evangelical discourse with Robert Sungenis

http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/num41.htm

[kenth]

I grew up Protestant, mainly Methodist, but with some Baptist and Presbyterian stays along the way, and every one said the Lord’s Prayer.

[Suzy Quzy]

Sorry, but he said nothing about atoning.

[Suzy Quzy]

WOW!! And you aren’t Catholic?

[Suzy Quzy]

My best friend is a Missionary Baptist that was brought up to DISLIKE Catholic everything very much....but her childbirth experience was going so badly that she started praying to MARY, and then everything went fine!!

[Frank Sheed]

Shortened version:

Keys in the Bible always symbolize authority:
Revelation 1:18 And alive, and was dead, and behold I am living for ever and ever, and have the keys of death and of hell.

Isaiah 22:22 And I will lay the key of the house of David upon his shoulder: and he shall open, and none shall shut: and he shall shut, and none shall open.

Peter is the only apostle given a ‘key’ by Jesus, setting him apart:
Matthew 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

QUESTION: Isn’t this authority given to all the apostles, just as ‘binding and loosing’ was in Matthew 18:18?

ANSWER: The Douay Rheims (and King James Version also) use ‘thee’ to signify a singular subject or person, and you for plural. Thus, Jesus was specifically addressing Peter.

ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:
1. There is no other disciple mentioned as frequently and prominently in the New Testament as Peter.
2. Peter served as:
a. Group spokesman following Pentecost (Acts 1:14 +)
b. God chooses Peters in Acts 10_11 to introduce the Gentiles into the Church, and those who objected ‘held their peace’ (Acts 11:18) at Peter’s testimony
c. Peter is a target of imprisonment and miraculous escape (rather than being a martyr as James)
d. Peter’s words are respected and authoritative at the first Church Council in Jerusalem (Act 15:7 +)
e. Paul specifically visits Peter before working for the Church: Galatians 1:18 Then, after three years, I went to Jerusalem, to see Peter, and I tarried with him fifteen days.
3. Only Peter is commissioned specifically by Jesus to “feed my lambs” (John 21:15).
Aside from references to Christ, the Greek word lamb (arnion) is only used in he
New Testament to refer to the disciples (aren) in Luke 10:3. Thus, Jesus is commissioning to lead and care for the other apostles.

[Frank Sheed]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1845279/posts?page=164#164

Have you seen this and the post preceding it? The blogger needs translation help!

[Uri’el-2012]

Sorry, but he said nothing about atoning.

172 posted on 06/05/2007 7:52:17 PM MDT by Suzy Quzy

I have not a clue as to what you are addressing.