Is prayer to saints / Mary Biblical?

http://www.gotquestions.org/prayer-saints-Mary.html ^ | 2008 | unknown

[Radix]

"Is that what you find when you read the bible? You find that Jesus is turned into a piece of bread? And you find people praying to Mary?"

They think that the "Last Supper" was about the bread and the wine.

The notion that it was about the actual gathering together seems to escape them.

[Mad Dawg]

Wrong-O!

This is like an episode in "Upstairs Downstairs" long long ago when at a country house party some snooty English types approach a guest who is Jewish and discuss finances with him. Then as he walks away one remarks to the other, "Funny thing about these Jews: All they talk about is money!"

You guys tackle us on one aspect of the Eucharist and then when we discuss the topic on which we are attacked you say we miss the other aspects.

If you were to attack us on "gathering", we'd probably quote the Didache

As grain once scattered
On the hill side
Is in this broken bread made one,
So from all lands
Thy Church be gathered
Into thy kingdom by thy Son.

And then get yelled at because the Didache isn't the Bible.

As a general observation, what garners most of the criticism of Catholics is, I'm guessing, not our sort of bread and butter, daily, vanilla worship but the extraordinary stuff. But the extraordinary stuff is almost inevitably misunderstood if it is not viewed in the context of the ordinary.

By "Ordinary" I mean the Mass and the Liturgy of the hours, which is mostly Psalms, but has great hulking chunks of Scripture in it as well, both as "canticles" and as passages for devout reading.

While of course, expository books about doctrine are a good source for learning what we teach, it is impossible to get an accurate sense of the teachings and what they mean to us without at least a lengthy excursion into the liturgical texts. "Lex orandi lex credendi" may not in every way be strictly correct, but it comes pretty close.

So if you were to look at the prayers of the Mass, I think you would be less inclined to say we overlook the "gathering" or "communion" aspect of the Eucharist.

However I would disagree that the Last Supper was only about "the actual gathering", or that it can be fully understood in terms of "koinonia" alone.

And again, why do we get this opening up of a second front? Must every thread posted to counter Catholic dogma end up addressing more than one dogma? Isn't the problem of the intercession of the saints enough or must we branch out into Purgatory, the Mass, indulgences, wearing funny clothes, celibacy, the Apocrypha, etc., etc. as well? I get the impression that the point is not to examine a topic but to ripple fire polemical artillery across as broad a front as possible, with the motto "Who cares where they land as long as there are shells in the air?"

[DungeonMaster]

They think that the "Last Supper" was about the bread and the wine.

The notion that it was about the actual gathering together seems to escape them.

It was about metaphorically eating His flesh and drinking His blood. It should be obvious to anyone that it was not literal. The metaphor of eating God's word is elsewhere in the bible. Eating is a very symbolic ritual of acceptance of the meaning of an event/feast.

[Iscool]

It's not just a matter of differing over "This is My Body." It's also a matter of criticizing what we teach without knowing what we teach. They might still disagree with our teaching on Transubstantiation if they knew what it was. But this stuff really doesn't mention an argumentative engagement because it doesn't address the doctrine but instead some parody of it.

Well here's the opportunity to clear it up...Type in your doctrine on transubstantiation so we'll no longer be in the dark...

[Taggart_D]

Mary is special not only because she gave birth to Jesus, but especially because she submitted perfectly to the role God appointed to her.

You're darn right she's special.

However, she is not worthy to be praised, nor prayed to. She was still a sinner, same as you and me. For all have sinned and fall short of God's glory.

[Radix]

"It was about metaphorically eating His flesh and drinking His blood. It should be obvious to anyone that it was not literal. The metaphor of eating God's word is elsewhere in the bible. Eating is a very symbolic ritual of acceptance of the meaning of an event/feast."

 

Yes, but it was  also a reference to the congregation gathered.  The Apostles gathered together were/are the body, i.e. the (ekklesia) church.

 

 

Ephesians   5:  23    For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

[Radix]

"And again, why do we get this opening up of a second front? ..."

As I read my pings, I sometimes respond at once. Awkwardly, I responded 1st to a ping that was sent after yours but received first by me.

I still recall my 1st semester at college. I was intrigued by the fact that my English Literature seemed related to my Math and that my Biology Course was related somehow to my Effective Speaking. In fact all of my Courses seemed to be intertwined.

That has pretty much been the case concerning just about everything since that somehow fuzzy time long ago when I finally became a man and put away childish notions.

The fact of the matter is, everything is related.

If you do not care for the heat, then maybe you should be on the sidelines. I spend most of my time there.

I did appreciate your post though. Well said!

[Mad Dawg]

The fact of the matter is, everything is related.

Fair enough, but if the relationship is more than, "here's another thing those dreadful Catholics do/believe," it might be good to open up the differences explicitly.

As a matter of fact I think long discussions would probably bring to the surface what has already been mentioned, that a fundamental difference is in our understanding of the meaning of the Incarnation, and this leaks into our thinking about the holiness of the holy ones and about what God can do to some bread and wine.

But it would be a long conversation.

[Mad Dawg]

Well here's the opportunity to clear it up...Type in your doctrine on transubstantiation so we'll no longer be in the dark...

So the gambit is:

1. Say something nasty about something that might or might not be what Catholics teach and believe;
2. have it pointed out that what is attacked is not what we believe;
3. invite the person on the other side to articulate just what it is you are attacking?

Gambit declined, thank you just the same. Maybe after you explained why you attacked something before you took the trouble to find out what it was, maybe then we could discuss it.

But a very fine examination of the question is in the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas, Tertia Pars, Questions 73 - 83. When you've read that, we can talk. A lot of the questions raised on FR are dealt with explicitly, as it happens. Here's an index of the articles and links to the discussions.

[DungeonMaster]

Ephesians 5: 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

There is definitely truth to what you are saying. One time I missed the breaking of bread and a brother said "I saw you there". I'm like "huh?". He said "I saw you in the bread".

I am pondering the breaking part because the body of Christ is not broken...but then again it is when you consider this very thread.

[Mad Dawg]

Somehow it seems relevant to quote the whole passage from the Didache:

Celebrate the Eucharist as follows: Say over the cup: “we give you thanks, Father, for the holy vine of David, your servant, which you made known to us through Jesus your servant. To you be glory for ever”.

Over the broken bread say: “we give you thanks, Father, for the life and the knowledge which you have revealed to us through Jesus your servant. To you be glory for ever. As this broken bread scattered on the mountains was gathered and became one, so too, may your Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into your kingdom. For glory and power are yours through Jesus Christ for ever”.

Do not let anyone eat or drink of your eucharist except those who have been baptized in the name of the Lord. For the statement of the Lord applies here also: Do not give to dogs what is holy.

When you finish the meal, offer thanks in this manner: “We thank you, holy Father, for your name which you enshrined in our hearts. We thank you for the knowledge and faith and immortality which you revealed to us through your servant Jesus. To you be glory for ever. Almighty ruler, you created all things for the sake of your name; you gave men food and drink to enjoy so that they might give you thanks. Now you have favored us through Jesus your servant with spiritual food and drink as well as with eternal life. Above all we thank you because you are mighty. To you be glory for ever.

“Remember, Lord, your Church and deliver her from all evil. Perfect her in your love; and, once she has been sanctified, gather her together from the four winds into the kingdom which you have prepared for her. For power and glory are yours for ever.

“May grace come and this world pass away! Hosanna to the God of David. If anyone is holy, let him come. If anyone is not, let him repent. Maranatha. Amen”.

On the Lord’s day, when you have been gathered together, break bread and celebrate the Eucharist. But first confess your sins so that your offering may be pure. If anyone has a quarrel with his neighbor, that person should not join you until he has been reconciled. Your sacrifice must not be defiled. In this regard, the Lord has said: In every place and time offer me a pure sacrifice. I am a great king, says the Lord, and my name is great among the nations.