Posted on 08/15/2013 7:03:11 PM PDT by annalex
Once a woman in the crowd surrounding Christ and His disciples cries out to Him:
Blessed is the womb that bore thee, and the paps that gave thee suck. (Luke 11:27)
What is it? We have, clearly, an act of venerating Mary. Note that the Blessed Virgin is venerated properly: not on her own but as the mother of Christ. Yet the reason for venerating is indeed concerning: it is her physiological and physiologically unique relationship with Jesus that is emphasized. That is not yet paganism with its crude theories of gods giving birth to other gods, but it is lacking proper focus and Jesus corrects it:
Yea rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God, and keep it. (Luke 11:28)
|
| The Virgin with the Child on her knees and a prophet pointing at the star. Catacomb of Priscilla, late 2nd c. Source |
Having gotten past this linguistic hurdle, we can understand clearly what this passage, Luke 11:27-28, does: it establishes veneration of saints based not on their blood relation to Christ but on their obedience to God. It is in that sense that we venerate Our Lady: given that Christ is the Word of God personified, she heard and kept both Him in person as her Child and His teaching, figuratively. In Mary the essence of sainthood is seen in the flesh as well as in the mind. We could say that by the late second century at the latest, when we find evidence of the veneration of both the prophets and the Mother of God in the catacombs, the two reasons to venerate a saint: his martyrdom as in the case of Polycarp, or his obedience to the Word, as in Mary, -- unite into a single practice.
Also the rosary system as it exists today seems to further trivialize the praise of God if it wasn’t trivialized enough before.
FOLKS! Saints’ praise can’t EVER take the place of YOUR praise! I got a big secret for y’all (not just Catholic but Protestant). Praising God while receiving His wondrous graces forever is going to be what heaven is about. We who are saved are now in a Holy Spirit taught school for the dance that is going to be heaven. We need to get PERSONALLY praising, SERIOUSLY. The Lord was not woofing when He said that He dwelt in the praises of His people! Hey, TRY it you’ll LIKE it as the story goes... well, actually get ready for some very serious divine loving. God will actually rattle your cage to get you moving forward. So there will be some temporary bummers, but only long enough for you to see the divine light and yield to it in a better way. His anger is but for a moment. It’s not like the devil’s rage which never quits except when he is acting sweet to tempt us into a bad place.
I am not endorsing prayer to Mary, Bob. I am speaking on the level of a Roman Catholic, without BEING a Roman Catholic and not INTENDING to be a Roman Catholic. I am giving a cautionary lesson to the Roman Catholics. Take a Jesus chill pill and a swig of forbearing love, and look at what I mean.
Wrong yet again!
"We speak where the Bible speaks, and we are silent where the Bible is silent."
Now, brothers and sisters, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, “Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not be puffed up in being a follower of one of us over against the other.
Wrong yet again!
"We speak where the Bible speaks, and we are silent where the Bible is silent."
Now, brothers and sisters, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, “Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not be puffed up in being a follower of one of us over against the other.
Wrong yet again!
"We speak where the Bible speaks, and we are silent where the Bible is silent."
Now, brothers and sisters, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, “Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not be puffed up in being a follower of one of us over against the other.
Wrong yet again!
"We speak where the Bible speaks, and we are silent where the Bible is silent."
Now, brothers and sisters, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, “Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not be puffed up in being a follower of one of us over against the other.
oH?
Then why has 'she' no NAME?
Your church is merely GUESSING that the 'woman' is MARY.
6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
HMMMmmm...
What's 'MARY' doing out in the wildeness???
it does NOT! (Well; using YOUR church's definition it does.)
This shows that a life of a saint BELIEVER is abundant compared to unbeliever;
There: I fixed it for you.
it does NOT! It 'shows' that someone is capable of LOOKING at EVIDENCE and JUDGING whether certain conditions have been met.
(Where'd you learn English?)
We either believe something because of what the Scriptures say; or else the Scriptures say something because we believe it.
Annalex is supposedly writing a book about Mary. Maybe we will learn all about the wilderness adventures of Mary. I am seeing a profound depth of knowledge from this soon-to-be-author. I fear it won't be on the NYTimes best seller list anytime soon.
Many thanks. I wish that I had met you before I left Indiana.
A context is necessary in any case. The Holy Spirit will furnish the proper one, but even then patience is needed as indwelling sin may prevent proper understanding of part of it, or it may just not be God’s time to reveal it.
Come back Shane!
(We need your tax money!)
OK, where on FR have you encountered this?
I see claiming a lack of perspicuity is a recourse of RCA's, while being able to derive meanings from obscure texts of Scripture in order to support Rome.
I agree that veneration of saints fully developed when the heaven became filled with saints, that is at the age of martyrs, -- roughly 2nd century, out of the historical scope of the scripture. The argument here is about the necessary elements of veneration of saints in the Holy Scripture.
TRCs are upset with evangelical veneration of Paul, but the issue is that of RC veneration of saints with its inclusion of prayer to them. These are ultimately inseparable regardless of attempts to deal with them as separate issues.
As for trying to explain the absence of actual support in Scripture for this based upon the lack of subjects in Heaven to pray to, that will not do, as prayer to angels is part of the same doctrine as PTDS, and there were plenty to pray to in OT times as well.
In addition, there were plenty of deceased believers by the time Revelation was written, but not one examples of prayer to any one of them, Stephen and the apostle James included.
I do understand that this absence, as well as in teaching which involves who to pray to, is not a problem for RCs as their real source of assurance of doctrine is Rome herself who channels oral tradition into doctrine. But it seems that in condescension to evangelical types you are trying to show support from Scripture. However, this is counterproductive due to the desperate measures this has been shown to require.
And what did foster PTDS in Heaven is not Scripture exampling or teaching it, but external influence did have a part, as the CE affirms:
A further reinforcement, of the same idea, was derived from the cult of the angels, which, while pre-Christian in its origin, was heartily embraced by the faithful of the sub-Apostolic age. It seems to have been only as a sequel of some such development that men turned to implore the intercession of the Blessed Virgin. — http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15459a.htm
εγω ηλθον ινα ζωην εχωσιν και περισσον εχωσιν (John 10:10) Literally, "I come so that life have and more have", so the afterlife is "more". Deal with it.
Indeed i did deal with it, and your new rendering still does not teach that this abundant life ("more abundantly" is one word meaning abundant, exceeding) is "not yet given them," much less that it refers to acting as heavenly secretaries! Your conclusion simply does not follow. Give it up.
that they are presently dead is a minority position usually held by cults.
Indeed. Thank you. That is the objection I hear most often from Protestant cultists. May they ever come to the liberty of the True Church.
Indeed, and may far more Catholics become part of the body of Christ.
being like something does not necessarily equate to having all their abilities
Well, no, not necessarily, but for the comparison to be even possible the faculties of an angel have to somehow match the faculties of a saint. Also see the "περισσον" above and the ability of a saint to judge the angels.
Extreme extrapolation. There is simply nothing in the meaning of perissos (abundant) that makes this simply refer to the next life, and there is nothing in the words or context about this that even speaks of being able to judge angels, much less being a heavenly object of prayer. Having life abundantly includes the afterlife,and the elect will judge angels, but the Holy Spirit also much details the "so great salvation" and abundant life for believers now, yet shows nothing of them being prayed to in heaven by saints on earth, or the need for a heavenly intercessor btwn God and man for man to mentally pray to, except for Christ.
The saints shall receive their glorified bodies after the resurrection; it is not clear how possession of a body restricts the saint's intellectual ability now.
Regardless, this does not make them heavenly objects of prayers.
The Holy Scripture calls them "prayers", not "memorial". I prefer to believe the Holy Scripture rather than you.
You have evidenced you prefer neither, as RCs must prefer what Rome holds irregardless of anything to the contrary, and must compel Scripture to support it. Rev. 8:3,4 does not teach angels were delivering prayers as if thru proper channels were necessary, much less being prayed to, nor that this was a regular practice, but that before the trumpet judgments an angel was given a golden censer and much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar. The prayers were given Him from God, the source of every good gift, while the memorial aspect refers to why the prayers are offered, not as if they needed a porter.
It does describe the ability to "see clearly", so yes, given that a saint does not need vision to drive to work and back, I'd say, it has to do with the ability of saints to comprehend our affairs and therefore comprehend prayers when addressed to them. See also Hebrews 12:1.
Heb. 12:1 flows from Heb. 11 and the hall of faith, and thus states we are surrounded by a great a cloud of witnesses, as indeed they are in glory. (Heb. 12:23) but this does not support praying to them regardless of what vision Rome constrains, and instead the very next verse exhorts, "Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God." (Hebrews 12:2) He is the one in Heaven the saints are to look to, and the only one therein whom the Holy Spirit says makes intercession for the saints (besides the Spirit Himself).
As for 1 Corinthians 13:12, that refers to superior perception of Divine things, but still does not teach that saints above hear prayers addressed to them, much less that the Scriptures teach we should make prayers to them (which is the real issue) even if they can (and they may), regardless of what RCs force out of this verse.
Such are desperate attempts in the light of absolutely zero examples of anyone in Heaven being prayed to by believers except the Lord, and the teaching on prayer which places the believer in Christ in the holy of holies therewith to meet directly with God. And arguments from silence, as in speculating what saints might be able to do, does not a doctrine make.
On almost any subject there would be a variety of opinions expressed by the fathers. I would be happy to discuss any particular patristic work with you and see how close to the consensus patrum I am and your sample would be.
Which presume i hold them as deterministic of doctrine, which i stated they were not, and Rome herself judges them more than they judge her. My remarks relate to your invocation of them for support, and not interpreting Scripture except according to the unanimous consent of the fathers.
And unlike the church, it is wholly inspired of God, and formally sufficient in that a person may read it and be saved and grow in grace, and is materially sufficient in providing for reason, natural revelation, the church and its magisterium, etc. which is needed for the perfection of the saints.
While formal sufficiency aspect is limited and refers to a complete canon, yet before its completion Scripture also evidences recognition of both men and additional writings as being of God due to their Divine qualities and attestation (not due to an infallible decree from Rome), and thus accordingly it provides for recognition of a canon in the light of the recognition of a lack of writings from God.
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.