AUDIO
 |
Archbishop Peter Jensen's Christmas Message 2011 on the centrality of Jesus to human history
|
You would have to be living on another planet not to notice the avalanche of publicity about Mary MacKillop at the moment.
This week we heard about Kathleen Evans and her miraculous cure from cancer.
What a wonderful story! A little Aussie battler, facing a death sentence, prayed for by family, friends and a church community - now cured, able to enjoy her daughter's wedding and the prospect of grandchildren to come!
Only the most cynical of people would not want to praise God for such a wonderful cure.
At the very least it causes people to consider the possibility of a power greater than themselves and admit that as humans we don't have an answer for everything.
The story of Kathleen Evans gives us a great opportunity for conversation starters about God and what He is like over the water cooler.
Shouldn't we raise concerns?
But what about Mary MacKillop's role in all this? How can we respond?
There are some obvious concerns the publicity about Mary raises. There is much more talk about Mary than Jesus and God, and people are being encouraged to pray to Mary or pray with Mary who has been dead for over 100 years.
Is there any reason to believe dead believers can or would listen to tens of thousands of people talking to them, and if they can are they able to do anything about it?
The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus in Luke 16 suggests that dead believers are unable to help those in Hell, nor are they permitted to warn the living, because there can be no greater warning than the resurrection of Jesus.
The pattern of prayer in the Bible is to pray only to the Father, thru Jesus with the Holy Spirit. The addition of another go-between makes God more distant. The attributing to humans the powers only God has elevates humans beyond their God given capacity and robs God of his glory.
Try a different tack
However, when talking with people from a Catholic background, rather than raising these concerns straight away, it would be better to take another approach.
Generally speaking, experiences in this world are a big part of the way most Catholics understand and relate to God. The sacraments are all physical experiences of God. As physical beings we want to be close to God physically - to touch him, to have some close contact with Him. That is why the relics of Saints are so popular - people want to touch something that is close to God here now.
If I could run down the street and give Jesus a hug today - nothing would stop me! But Jesus told his disciples that, while they would have to wait to be with him physically again, he was sending someone who would bring God even closer than a hug - his own Spirit. His Spirit keeps us trusting and obeying Him, His Spirit keeps changing us to be more like Him, His Spirit keeps us going till we see Him face to face.
Because God's Spirit lives in the hearts of all believers in this world now, we have an even greater experience to share, we have an even greater miracle to proclaim. God's work in our lives!
Miracles for today
I think we can use all this talk of miracles to talk about the amazing things God has done and is doing in our own lives and in the lives of the believers around us, not through some Saint, but directly, through His Spirit.
The experience of changing a selfish person into someone who lives their whole life for Jesus, the experience of changing someone who was unsure where they stood with God to someone who knows where they will be spending eternity, the experience of changing someone who despised Christians to someone who loves church, the experience of someone who once lived for money but now is content to give most of it away.
For those Catholic people who are highly tuned to listen to experiences this may prompt them to find out more about the amazing experiences happening all around them all the time, or at least start to question their own experience.
As a starter you could say, "You know I think miracles happen every day ."
If I may, as a Catholic, point out the biblical basis for the belief in the Communion of Saints and the honor due to them.
I suppose the main objections I have been reading about are: can 'dead' people hear our prayers; praying to saints is idolatry; God is the forgotten hero; Jesus is the sole mediator and it just aint biblical. So, my attempt to give the Catholic biblical perspective:
Revelation 5:8 depicts the saints in heaven offering our prayers to God under the form of "golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints". The saints in heaven are aware of our prayers and intercede for us. Even if those prayers were prayed to God directly, then this makes the case even more clearer that they can hear us!
Matt 22:31-32 tells us that God is the God of the living not of the dead when referring to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In Romans 8 35-38 we see that nothing can separate us from the love of Christ - not even death. The saints in heaven are not dead.
In 2 Kings 13:21 we see a man being brought to life when he touched the bones of Elisha. In Acts we see that handkerchiefs that Paul had touched were passed around. Obviously an early Christian practice of passing relics around. Even Peter's shadow was believed to have power (Acts 5:15). These are witness to intercessory prayer and that God can use whatever He likes to dispense grace.
cont.
Another objection I hear is that "I go directly to Jesus". So do Catholics. Catholics also take Paul's advice to ask others to pray for him (Rom 15:30-32; Eph 6:18-20; Col 4:3....) It makes even more sense to ask a righteous Christian now in heaven to pray for me. I can know for sure that this Christian is so united to Christ that his prayer will be said knowing God's will. I am not convinced that a fellow Christian on earth has the same capacity to know God's will, therefore, his prayer is less efficacious. If protestants go straight to Jesus, then asking a fellow Christian to prayer for them seems pointless.
At the transfiguration we see that Jesus brings with Him Moses and Elijah. Moses and Elijah are clearly not dead but alive and having a chat with Peter and co. This scene seems to conflict with the protestant view that once dead, you are somehow disconnected from the body of Christ.
You bring up the passage regarding Lazarus. You seem to misunderstand the Catholic teaching on the Communion of Saints. Catholics also believe that a 'dead' believer is unable to help anyone in hell. Once in hell, there is no way of getting out. I think this parable demonstrates that the 'dead' are able to communicate.
Looking at what the early Church Fathers believed, it is clear that the apostles left them with a Catholic perspective on the efficacy of the intercession of saints:
cont.
"As often as the anniversary comes round, we make offerings for the dead as birthday honours." Tertullian, The Crown, 3 (AD 211)
See also the Maryrdom of Polycarp 17,18 (AD 157); Cyprian, To Clergy and People, Epistle 33(39):3 (AD250); Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 23:9 (AD 350).
Christ Himself promised special blessings to those who honor religious figures: "He who receives a prophet because he is a prophet shall receive a prophet's reward, and he who receives a righteous man because he is a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward" (Matt 10:41). God is not offended when we honor those who have loved Him. Am I more happy that my children receive praise for a special gift they possess or am I jealous and offended that I did not receive the praise, as the one who helped create that child? When Catholics celebrate the faithfulness of the ones gone before us, we are ultimately praising God for the work He has done in them.
Regards
Donna
I'm curious to know ... what are your experiences of praying to Saints? (I use "S"aints to refer to Catholic Saints as opposed to "s"aints which the new testament writers use to refer to Jewish Christians in particular, and sometimes all Christians so we dont get confused). Are there particular Saints that you pray to? How often do you pray to them and what do you pray for? What is the effect of praying to them? And from where do you get the confidence that your prayers are heard? (if that is different from the Bible passages mentioned above).
I do find quoting Bible passages back and forth to back up a position that neither of us is willing to change not all that edifying. However if you do want to talk in depth about each of those passages - that would be a good thing to do - provided our aim was to genuinely understand what God was saying rather than just back up our own cases.
I think for purpose of helping readers to know how to engage with Catholic friends over the topic of Mary MacKillop and the recent cure of Kathleen Evans, your experiences of praying to Saints would be really helpful.
I suspect you wouldn't suggest readers of this blog go and quote bible verses at their Catholic friends, not that I think many would, but rather find out more about why and how their friends pray to Saints.
I guess firstly understanding what the CC teaches about the communion of Saints is helpful in understanding the relationship some Catholics have with Saints who are in Heaven. By the way, Catholics also understand the difference between saints and Saints. Christians here on earth are saints, whilst those in heaven are Saints.
The CC teaches that the Church is the mystical body of Christ. That body consists of the Church Triumphant (those in heaven) and the Church Militant (those here on earth) as well as the Church suffering (those in purgatory - see 1Cor3:14-15). Death does not separate us from the love of Christ and His body so even though we may be separated physically from those gone before us, we are connected spiritually. We see in Revelation that relationship. In Hebrews, the writer refers to the cloud of witness - those faithful to God whilst on earth. We are not disconnected.
The relationship Catholics have with Saints is a similar to one that you may have with a loved one. A Catholic may read about the life of a particular Saint and find great example in their life to emulate. The purpose of praying to Saints should not be for one's personal gain, say to receive worldly things but to receive grace from God in order to serve Him better. In fact, our relationship with God and our prayer to Him should also be according to His will not our own. cont.
James tells us that the "prayer of a righteous man availeth much". I know I will ask someone that I know to be very close to God to pray for me over someone who has a lukewarm relationship with God. So, asking the Saints in heaven to pray for us is natural for Catholics. We see no discrepancy nor do we see any glory being taken from God. God dispenses the grace and has chosen to bless those that love Him.
You ask what do I pray to saints about, how often etc. I think it is important to remember that prayer is not about getting what we want, but should be about asking our Lord to know Him more so that we may love Him better. So all prayer to Saints should be in that vain. I try not to pray for earthly things, whether that be to God or a saint. I know God knows what I need so I try and trust Him in that area. I do prayer for those who do not love God and ask the Saints to prayer also for them. Having said that, there is nothing wrong to pray for healing or help in studies etc. I do have the utmost confidence that my prayers are heard. All prayer is answered, although sometimes differently to our own wills. A Saint in heaven never forgets to pray for you. How many times have you said you will pray for someone and forgotten? I see the Saints as true family members who love us without any attachment to earthly things.
Jesus does teach us how to pray and I think what I said about prayer is what he intended. His will be done, not ours. How does it relate to praying to saints. The same way it relates when we ask a fellow Christian to pray for us. The only difference being is that one enjoys the beatific vision and the other is yet to attain it.
Here we see that the Christian has approached a number of heavenly beings - heavenly Jerusalem, the angels, God, Jesus, the assembly and church of the firstborn and spirits of righteous ones who have been made perfect - which can only be referring to the Saints in heaven. Sheldon Rev 5:8 does indeed tell us what is happening and we can rightly assume that before they present the prayers of the saints, those prayers must have been already uttered by someone. Similarly in Rev 8:3-4 the prayers of the saints went up from the hand of the angel before God. These texts help us to understand how the saints offer our prayers. They are like nuggets of incense which smell sweet and good. They set them on fire before the throne of God. It is a beautiful image of how the intercession of saints works. The saints being so close to the fire of God's love can stand immediately before Him and set our prayers on fire with their love.
If I have understood you correctly then I think you have done the Holy Spirit out of a job!
I agree that as sinners, there is a barrier between us and the Father because he is Holy and we are not. As a result, I agree, you are right to question whether the prayers of the unrighteous are heard. However Romans 8 assures us that even in our weakness, our prayers are presented perfectly to God with the right words if Jesus' Spirit is in us (if we are Christian in other words).
cont.
That gives me great confidence, and I hope it gives you confidence, because your prayers to the Father will always be perfect if you are Christian.
The role of the Holy Spirit is to be our one and only mediator. We are united firstly to the Father thru the Spirit because of what Jesus has done. As a result of that we are spiritually united to all Christians, living and dead for eternity, but it is always firstly thru God to them. Our prayers need to reflect that. The only connection we have with dead Christians is thru God so we pray to Him not to them to get to Him. When we ask our Christian friends on earth to pray for us, it is because we have a physical connection with them, the apostles did it all the time, but never do they talk to or pray to dead Christians to connect to them or to ask them to pray for them. The early church had so little connection with dead Christians that they referred to them as asleep.
cont
But getting back to the purpose of the blog - how do you think we should talk with Catholic people about Mary MacKillop - is the Bible the place to start with most Catholics?
Perhaps I am reading you wrongly, but you seem to feel that there is some point to press or argument to be had over the elevation of Mary McKillop to sainthood. To borrow your phrase, why not take a different tack? Why not simply try joining with Catholics in delighting in this response to prayer, affirming the value of the example of the life of faith in others and expressing best wishes for the joy that this event will bring, even if you don't share all of the theology?
Unfortunately you have misunderstood what I have said about prayer. Of course I do not think prayers of fellow Christians will not be heard because they are somehow less righteous than someone else. When James tells us that the prayer of a righteous man avails much he does not exclude those of us who are less righteous. He seems to imply degrees here. There are plenty of examples in the OT where people go to the prophets or a holy person for prayer and blessing. I did say that all prayer is answered, albeit not always according to our own wills. I think I also demonstrated that the 'dead' saints are perhaps not dead as we would think on a natural level. The scene at the transfiguration surely speaks volumes about those in heaven being able to communicate - of course only through God and He allowing it.
I prayer to God through Jesus, I ask fellow Christians to pray for me and I also rely on the Saints in Heaven to also intercede. It is not a matter of only going to the Saints in order to 'get to God'. That is a classic protestant misunderstanding. To be consistent you would have to apply that thinking also to asking fellow Christians to pray for you because you may be somehow undermining the role of Jesus as the one mediator.
cont.
Mark
I agree with much of what you have said regarding the role of the Holy Spirit.
You speak about the physical connection we have with our fellow Christians thereby allowing intercession to be possible. How much more are we connected to those in heaven in a spiritual sense. The body of Christ does not disconnect from itself. One member being here on earth then the other member in heaven cut off. Death does not cut us off from the love of Christ nor from His body.
There is much evidence about the life of the early Church and their belief in the intercession of the Saints. You seem to need evidence that the apostles themselves prayed to 'dead' saints. I think the scripture I quoted gives at least implicitly the belief. The writer of Hebrews talks about approaching the 'righteous ones' in heaven. Do you need names? Moses, Elijah, Abraham....and of course, Jesus Himself demonstrated it possible at the transfiguration. I wonder what they talked about together?
You ask how to approach a Catholic regarding Mary Mackillop. I guess the first thing I would like to know is your motive in doing so. Is it to prosletyse? If so, then perhaps you should find out what you are objecting to first. Find out what official teaching is. Take a look at a good Catholic website for the biblical foundations and early Church teaching so there can be no misunderstanding. cont.
Mark
I know some protestants think Catholics are easy pickings when it comes to scripture debates so play fair. Some good sites I would recommend are www.scripturecatholic.com; www.catholicbridge.com; www.catholic.com; dave armstrong's site - biblical evidence for catholicism is excellent.
Apologise for the long-winded response.
Regards
Roland
I appreciate your comments. God bless.
But now more on-topic: I see no reason, either within Revelation or elsewhere in Scripture, to understand "the prayers of the saints" in Revelation 5:8 (and 8:3-4) as anything other than the prayers of living (Christian) people uttered while they (we) are alive here on earth. I think those verses were written to living Christian people, for the purpose of encouraging us here and now to pray (to God!).
The Saints are praying for us whether we ask them or not. As I have said before, we are all part of the body of Christ; all members. Death cannot and does not cut off from that. I can't help but think the word 'pray' in regard to saints is an hindrance to understanding the doctrine of the communion of Saints. Prayer does not always constitute worship. So when a Catholic says they pray to the Saints, they are not worshipping them. Remember the old English connotation this word had - "Pray tell"!
Are there Saints more saintly than others? They are all perfected in Christ. However there are a couple of scripture verses which demonstrate that reward is given according to what that Christian has done. Matt 5:19; 1 Cor 3:8; 1 Cor 15:41.
I guess the question regarding performing 2 miracles is in reference to the process by which the Church 'proves' Saintliness. The CC is very careful in giving approval to any claim regarding miracles or the like - too many frauds around. The CC teaches that all revelation ceased after the last apostle died. Private revelation is another matter which no Catholic is bound to believe in. The miracles of anyone, Saint or otherwise, are part of private revelation.
In order for me to answer your question more thoroughly would take quite some time and think we may be getting a bit off topic. I hope this answer has been sufficient.
Thanks Andrew. As editor, I take your point.
As a former Catholic, converted when I heard a sermon entitled "What is a Saint" I find the Catholic view that you defend as interesting. Without wishing to question everything you haves said can I ask how Saints are defined from saints who is everyone who has a relationship with Jesus?
I think I mentioned earlier that the Catholic Church teaches that all Christians are saints. 'S'aints are those who have arrived at their final destination - heaven.
Which part did you find interesting?
I don't think you have answered Eddie's question properly.
Also could someone explain the Rev 5 comment to me. In my Bible (NIV) it says
" And when he had taken it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp and they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints" Fouir living creature and elders, not saints. Or are these the same things?
I think I did answer the question put. If Eddie means something else, then he can elaborate and I will attempt to answer that.
My commentary says (RSV) that the four living creatures refer to Esek 1:4:25 - the four angels who preside over the government of the world. But in Christian tradition these symbols are used for the four evangelists. So, yes, they are saints. A saint is anyone who is in heaven.
So what happens to Christians after they die, before the Resurrection? The Resurrection is when Jesus returns and all Christians alive at the time and those that have died before Jesus returns are given new bodies to match their perfect spirits. 1 Thessalonians answers this question directly.
1 Thessalonians 4:14-17 Since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. 15 For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord,1 that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.
The point being that whether we are alive or dead –
cont
Now back to topic … I have suggested that when we talk with Catholics about Mary MacKillop, talking about our own experience, particularly of miracles is a good place to start. The active discussion in this forum on prayer suggests talking about our experience of prayer might be an even better place to start. The reason I’ve said this is that most Catholic people I speak to are uncomfortable talking about the Bible, Donna being a notable exception :-).
I’ve suggested that we talk with Catholics about our experience because it is less threatening for them and will hopefully lead to better discussions.
A couple of people, perhaps a bit unfairly, have suggested that I have some hidden agenda. No, I want to talk to everyone I can about Jesus. The publicity surrounding Mary MacKillop gives us a great conversation starter. I mentioned that the talk of miracles might be a good place to start with non-Christians, but I also want to talk with people from a Catholic background about Jesus. If they are Christian I’ll be spending eternity with them, so it seems a bit silly not to talk with them now, and if they’re not Christian then Jesus’ last words on earth are for us - to make disciples of all people. I’m very happy being upfront about that.
Thanks for all the comments! This will be my last post on this topic, but if anyone wants to talk further, I can be reached at City Bible Forum - 9232-8700.
God Bless.
After reading your last couple of posts, it appears to me that there seems to be a question in your mind that Catholics may not know Jesus or they may not even be Christian. You mention also that most Catholics you speak with are uncomfortable about speaking about the bible. Protestants seem to forget that during Mass there consists of an OT reading, the Psalm, NT reading and Gospel reading. Some Catholics go to Mass every day, so that is a lot of scripture covered. The whole of the bible is covered in the liturgical year.
My experience has been that the Catholics I fellowship with and others I am familiar with through books, missionary work, evangelisation etc are more bible-versed than any non-Catholic I know - I have many friends who are evangelicals and pentecostals and am continually amazed about their lack of biblical knowledge. They are, after all, 'bible-Christians'! I also have read many protestant books that seem to lack the intellectual rigour I come across when I read an orthodox Catholic book. "The Shack" topped Koorong's most popular book. A major concern. I do not say that to point score but only to demonstrate a narrowminded view some have regarding Catholics. So I think we need to stop the generalisation many protestants have about Catholics and their lack of knowledge or fear of the bible.
Your exegesis of Heb 12 I cannot agree with. In context, the writer is talking about the heroes already passed - see Heb 11. cont.
It helps to remember that scripture did not come with chapters and verses marked. That came much later:)
Thanks Mark for allowing me to comment on this topic. I hope in your travels you meet some fired-up Catholics who can share some biblical truths with you. I have some great bible studies on CD I would love to share with you if you are interested. In fact, I have a 6hr study on the Saints packed full of scripture:) I'm really not a pushy evangelical Catholic!
Kind regards and God bless
I agree Donna. I've read Carson, Stott and Packer among other and while I find their sincerity admirable, I do find their writing to be the intellectual and spiritual equivalent of McDonalds. When I want something a bit more nourishing, I'll usually head for an orthodox Catholic source.
While this may not be his intention, I must confess that I find Mark's tone a little patronising. Just by way of assistance, Mark, it might help to consider that if a Catholic seems unwilling to discuss the Bible with you, it may not be a result of discomfort and unfamiliarity with the Bible that may be the issue, but rather discomfort and familiarity with evangelicals who smugly believe that they have a monopoly on understanding of the Bible, not to mention a familiarity with the proof-texts that these people try to use to try to convince one of their position.
I'd point out that avoiding the type of baseless caricatures that Mark has engaged in is more likely to engender respect from Catholics. A reasonable example can be found in Peter Jensen's "Why I am a Protestant", where he expresses a healthy respect for the robust academic and biblical tradition that exists within Catholicism.
I found this whole discussion really helpful.
THanks too to Donna,it is good to know where you are coming from. Doesn`t mean I agree with you and honestly, I am yet to meet a catholic where I live (66% of the city population) who would even know those verses you mentioned. They are only too happy to tell you they are doing these catholic things because it's what you do as a catholic. they are afterall paying taxes to the catholic church.
Glad you found it helpful.
I guess we have something in common because 66% of protestants I meet don't know those verses I mentioned either and 66% of protestants I know just do what protestants do because that's what they do as protestants.
Taxes? I'll give the benefit of the doubt and assume you are joking.
Regards, Roland
No Roland, this doesn't apply to Muslims. Or other Christian churches. When a child is born in Germany and gets christened in the Catholic or Lutheran church, they are 'in' the church. They can only change this by putting in an application to officially leave the church later, or if their parents do this, they are also out. Of course alot of good things are funded by this money from which everybody living in Germany benefits such as hospitals, kindergartens. If people were left to give of their own free will, which I'm sure alot of them do as well, the two churches would be in financial straits.
Living in Australia it is probably hard to imagine how it is to live in a place where the catholic church really does have power and influence. Why even the pope's brother getting parking tickets here caused angry letters to the editor , as did the fact that the Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkl, critisised the pope for reinstating the Pious brothers order, home of a man who openly denied the holocaust, very bad decision, but how dare she critisise the pope! It's a world I never could have imagined.
I am serious. Think about what you have said and then look at the facts. It is not the Catholic Church nor the Lutheran Church that has mandated a tax on its members. It is the state! How is that the Catholic Church's fault or the Lutheran's for that matter? Either they collect taxes or the churches receive no financial support from the government. It appeared to me that you may be alluding to a sinister plot by the Catholic Church to make money from its members. Something I've heard several times before. I apologise if I misunderstood you.
You can go on and on about the sins of the Pope and the "power and influence" they wield. It is usually a distraction from meaningful dialogue and nothing I say will change your view. Come to Australia where you can say anything you like about the Pope and no-one will blink an eye:)
God bless
I think you have misunderstood me but I think we will go on misunderstanding each other if we continue. I thank you once again for your honesty and openness, I have printed out all you have said because as I said before, it is good to know where you (and other Catholics) are coming from.
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you.
What I find interesting about the Catholic view is some of the biblical interpretations in your earlier posts. I am no Greek scholar but when I read Paul saying in "Matt 22:31-32 tells us that God is the God of the living not of the dead when referring to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In Romans 8 35-38 we see that nothing can separate us from the love of Christ - not even death. The saints in heaven are not dead," while I agree that the saints in heaven are not dead it is drawing a long bow to suggest that we can pray to them. Whilst Catholicism teaches that we have a heavenly reward which is biblical your interpretation that this accords the departed in heaven a role in salvation lacks any biblical authority.
If we look at the Romans quote you would need to contextualise the words Paul is using. You have quoted three verses but edited them. Paul is urging the Christians in Rome to be brave during persecution which ultimately may lead to death. If you read verse 39 he goes on to say that ......nor anything else will be able to separate us from the love of God.... Romans 8:28-39 should be read as a whole. It is not making any reference to saints in heaven praying for us on earth it is exhorting Roman Christians to understnd what it is God has done for them and nothing, not even an earthly death will separate us from God. TBC
The recent press about the woman who says her cancer was cured following prayers to Mary no doubt believes that it was prayers to Mary that cured her cancer. Christians who go to a doctor and receive medical treatment which cures their cancer on this basis should be praying to medical science rather than God. It is God who cures and we as Christians have direct access (no priests, confessionsals, saints, penances etc) to God. Read Romans with an open mind. Paul clearly makes it clear that there is no mediator between God and man save for Jesus. To suggest otherwise is not helpful to the millions of sceptics in Australia who look at Christianity and cannot make sense of it.Mary's canonisation will no doubt be a boost to the tourist economy but it will not advance the Kingdom in an increasingly secular society.
St Eddie
(making the point that saints are those on the journey not just those in heaven)
My attempt to put the Catholic view forward was not intended to be a full blown exegetical exercise. I just wanted to demonstrate that there is biblical evidence. My quoting Romans 8 was not an attempt to show a proof text for praying to saints.
I think you still confuse the word 'prayer' in this context.
Point out to me where I said that the saints in heaven play a role in our salvation. I assume you mean by this that they somehow replace Christ's redemptive work. So in that sense I would not be saying that.
Christ is the one mediator, however, He appoints us to minister to others so that others may know Him. He provides the gifts and graces necessary in order that others may come to Him, through us. That in no way takes away from Christ but gives glory to Him because it is Him that is working in us by His grace. So, in that sense, we do play a role in salvation.
James 5:14 - Is any among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord;
Mark 6:13 - And they cast out many demons, and anointed with oil many that were sick and healed them.
A clear example where Christ uses others to confer grace through matter ie oil. How many pastors actually follow these God-breathed words?
cont.
As to the issue of miracles that you raise. The CC in declaring something a miracle has strict criteria. The person must have been diagnosed as incurable; the 'miracle' must have been immediate and permanent and the church receiving medical evidence stating that no human intervention was made.
More importantly Eddie, the divide between Christians (not just Catholic v Protestant) is even more reason for those skeptics to remain skeptical.
st Donna (making the point again that we on earth are small saints and the ones in Heaven are big ones:)
According to the (or any) Catholic view:
- Are all Christians who are now in heaven "S"aints?
- Or just the ones that have been officially recognized as such?
- Are there some Christians in heaven who are not "S"aints because they have not been officially recognized?
All in Heaven are "S"aints, even the ones not officially recognised.
If Paul in his letters addressed to the saints was addressing those on earth then how do we differentiate between saints on earyt and those in heaven. Why is canonisation for the few rather than for all who die in Christ?
If, according to a Catholic view, all Christians in heaven are "S"aints, then what difference does it make if one of them is officially recognized or not? Why is there so much attention paid to whether someone qualifies for official recognition?
(In your view, would it be fine, then, as soon as Eddie (above) is dead, that I can start praying to him as St Eddie?)
To recognise a Christian for his faithfulness is to give glory to God. 1Tim 5:17 tells us to give double honour to the elders and teachers. It would follow that this honour could continue or be applied to those who have left this world. The recognition of some Saints over others comes about because the Church is petitioned by its members to investigate the life of someone who, they think, possessed special gifts by God. Having said that, we still give honour to all the Saints even though we may not know them by name.
Historically, the early church demonstrated the belief in prayer to our departed brothers and sisters. The catacombs provide the physical evidence. The ancient liturgy and the writings of the early church fathers provides the other evidence.
Assuming Eddie goes to heaven upon his death, by all means pray to him and ask him to pray for you that you understand the communion of Saints better:)
Perhaps the 39 Articles are lacking in a little grounding in scripture and charity to say the least.
1Cor 3:14-15 - If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If any man's work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.
Let's look at this verse. This passage clearly is speaking about the individual judgment we all undergo. The work of a man, if not based on the foundation - i.e. Christ - will be burned up. This man suffers loss but at the same time is saved. Now this cannot be heaven as there is no loss in heaven nor can it be hell as no-one is saved in hell. Call it whatever you like, Catholics call it purgatory - i.e. the purging fire to make us perfect before we meet Him face to face. Of course, the word 'purgatory' is not in the bible because it is a latin word. Nor does the word Trinity, yet all Christians hold to this doctrine.
Matt 12:32 - this verse suggests that there is some sin that can be forgiven in the afterlife. "..in this age or in the age to come".
1 Peter 4:6 - obviously those who did not hear the gospel were given the opportunity after they died so they might live in the spirit like God. Now, I don't think these individuals were in hell - once in no getting out and of course, no need to preach in heaven.
cont.
LOL ;)
You may well LOL but how about contributing something of your own. Something that can convince me that the scripture I presented above is absurd. Go on Kev, have a go!
For the sake of consistency being maintained according to their 39 Articles, perhaps Anglican Churches should be named "The Anglican Community of Newtown" instead of St Lukes, St Paul's, St Mary Magdalene etc. It is very confusing for us Catholics who think you may be giving undo honour to a dead person.
Christians have always been willing to hold up Christian people - alive or dead - as inspirations or examples. It's not the honouring of the saints that makes protestants uncomfortable, but the feeling that sleeping saints are being introduced as intermediaries between people and God. A church named after St Paul is being named after his example and memory, not his presence.
Alternatively, you might be correct in seeing it as an inconsistent hold-over that should have been done away with. It's interesting to note that churches are mainly named after new testament saints (usually apostles), not heroes of faith from the old testament or later times. While the apostles did have unusual access to Christ, they certainly are not the only examples of Christian faithfulness worth celebrating!
Thanks for your response. What you have explained is pretty much what I explain to my children, knowing the extent to which Anglicans honor saints. Although, there are some parts of Anglicanism where the Catholic position is held.
I think the thing I see as a problem with the protestant interpretation is that it seems one dimensional and not consistent with the bible. Hebrews 12 tells us that these saints are a cloud of witness. A witness is not asleep but active in some form. Nowhere does scripture tells us that once we die we are cut off from the body of Christ.
This belief in the saints not being able to intercede for us was never part of the early Church belief and practice. As I mentioned previously, the Catacombs are evidence of that.
Thats right and we are also a nation of priests and we also ask those who are in Chirst on earth to pray for us. But I only see examples where the apostles ask others here on earth to pray for them even though there are those in heaven praying for them. Even you have said there is still a differance between those who are members of Church Triumphant and the Church Militant.
I think it is very telling that there are some things in scripture that are quite explicit, yet do not practice them. Elisha's bones effected a miracle; Paul's handkerchief's passed around to effect healing, Peter's shadow. Some protestant reasoning - it is descriptive not prescriptive! That really sounds like a cop out to me.
Perhaps some well respected Protestant scholars will have a better impact than I am able to provide. I will quote only one.
Regarding 2Tim:16-18: J.N.D. Kelly (Anglican): A Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles, London: A&C;Black, 963, p.171
On the assumption, which must be correct, that Onesiphorus was dead when the words were written, we have here an example, unique in the NT of Christian prayer for the departed...the commendation of the dead man to the divine mercy. There is nothing surprising in Paul's use of such a prayer, for intercession for the dead had been sanctioned in Pharisaic circles at any rate since the date of 2 Macc 12:43-45...Inscriptions in the Roman catacombs and elsewhere prove that the practice established itself among Christians from very early times.
The general consensus among the Protestant commentators is that Paul refers to Onesiphorus in the past but his household in the present tense.
It still fits in with the doctrine of the communion of Saints. The examples I gave of scripture previously do give examples that the Saints do intercede for us. If you want a particular example of an apostle explicitly praying to a Saint, I can't give you one. However, Paul tells us that in Hebrews 12 that we are surrounded by a great cloud of witness (remember he details the great hall of fame - the OT saints previously). "But you have come to...the city of the living God...and to innumerable angels...and to the assembly of the first-born who are enrolled in heaven, and to a judge who is God..and to the spirits of just men made perfect..and to Jesus".
Note Paul says we "come to". Of course, the book of Revelation also depicts this where the prayers are seen as incense being offered by the Saints to God. Now God could receive these prayers without the aid of these saints and angels, but that is not how John sees the vision. If it is ok with God that prayers are presented to Him on behalf of another, then it is ok with me.
It doesn't make sense that we on earth, who have not yet been completed in perfection are able to pray for the dead, yet the Saints, who are perfected have been cut off from this communion. It is like saying to your hand, "I don't need you anymore". Of course, you cut off your hand and your whole body goes into recovery mode. It is the same with the body of Christ.
Cheers
We do have a lot in common, even when we come to understanding the doctrine of salvation and justification. I hope more dialogue like this can be fostered so, at the very least, we don't misrepresent each other.
God bless