- This topic is empty.
- Posts
you know CA, have you ever tested anything, or are you just a company man who goes straight to the company handbook without question, a priori.
we all sin ca, just how we attain forgiveness begins the battle between us.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 20 2010,13:39) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Feb. 19 2010,17:57) Ca, Where then, do you came across the info that dead people are in heaven and can hear you and pray for you, if not from the Word of God?
Sacred Written Tradition (Scripture) and Sacred Oral Tradition
Ca,If God's Holy Word says one thing, and oral tradition says another, which one are you going to believe?
God's Word IS Sacred Tradition. The Scriptures are Sacred Tradition.It is not contradictory.
So I am not troubled by this problem.
But you cannot substantiate what books even belong IN the Bible. So you have no right to appeal to it's authority. You can't even prove it's authority. We can.
Quote (princess of the king @ Feb. 20 2010,13:46) you know CA, have you ever tested anything, or are you just a company man who goes straight to the company handbook without question, a priori. we all sin ca, just how we attain forgiveness begins the battle between us.
No. The battle between us started long ago.The battle we have is one of authority.
What is your authority?
Quote (CatholicApologist @ Feb. 20 2010,13:46) God's Word IS Sacred Tradition. The Scriptures are Sacred Tradition. It is not contradictory.
So I am not troubled by this problem.
But you cannot substantiate what books even belong IN the Bible. So you have no right to appeal to it's authority. You can't even prove it's authority. We can.
Ca,Can you show me where it says dead people go to heaven in any of the books that were not cannonized?
And I don't mean Catholic writings.
Peace and love
mikei would tend to believe it is more of spiritual battle.
my peaking order is short, the Father Almighty, the true and living God.
what about you?
Ca,
I'm still waiting for a reply to the call no man father post I sent. It seems that you like to start a topic, then when you run out of defenses, you run and start another one.
You did it with the father topic
and with the worshipping Mary topicstand and defend yourself or admit defeat
Peace and love
mikeAnd stop quoting pages and pages of Catholic writers. Try to use your own words and thoughts, please.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 20 2010,13:55) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Feb. 20 2010,13:46) God's Word IS Sacred Tradition. The Scriptures are Sacred Tradition. It is not contradictory.
So I am not troubled by this problem.
But you cannot substantiate what books even belong IN the Bible. So you have no right to appeal to it's authority. You can't even prove it's authority. We can.
Ca,Can you show me where it says dead people go to heaven in any of the books that were not cannonized?
And I don't mean Catholic writings.
Peace and love
mike
What are you talking about? You mean books by Max Lucado or Billy Graham? Because those books were not canonized. What I mean is, there are a multitude of books that didn't make the canon. Please be more clear.Quote (princess of the king @ Feb. 20 2010,13:57) i would tend to believe it is more of spiritual battle. my peaking order is short, the Father Almighty, the true and living God.
what about you?
Don't all of the cults, heretics and wackos claim the same authority?Admit it. Your trust is in your own subjective PERCEPTION of who God is. Yours is a personal (self-made) faith. Not a Divine (God-ordained) faith. Right?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 20 2010,14:11) Ca, I'm still waiting for a reply to the call no man father post I sent. It seems that you like to start a topic, then when you run out of defenses, you run and start another one.
You did it with the father topic
and with the worshipping Mary topicstand and defend yourself or admit defeat
Peace and love
mike
Nice try. Didn't you see the whole ARTICLE I posted to you in response? Well here you go again:Call No Man “Father”?
Many Protestants claim that when Catholics address priests as “father,” they are engaging in an unbiblical practice that Jesus forbade: “Call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven” (Matt. 23:9).
In his tract 10 Reasons Why I Am Not a Roman Catholic, Fundamentalist anti-Catholic writer Donald Maconaghie quotes this passage as support for his charge that “the papacy is a hoax.”
Bill Jackson, another Fundamentalist who runs a full-time anti-Catholic organization, says in his book Christian’s Guide To Roman Catholicism that a “study of Matthew 23:9 reveals that Jesus was talking about being called father as a title of religious superiority . . . [which is] the basis for the [Catholic] hierarchy” (53).
How should Catholics respond to such objections?
The Answer
To understand why the charge does not work, one must first understand the use of the word “father” in reference to our earthly fathers. No one would deny a little girl the opportunity to tell someone that she loves her father. Common sense tells us that Jesus wasn’t forbidding this type of use of the word “father.”
In fact, to forbid it would rob the address “Father” of its meaning when applied to God, for there would no longer be any earthly counterpart for the analogy of divine Fatherhood. The concept of God’s role as Father would be meaningless if we obliterated the concept of earthly fatherhood.
But in the Bible the concept of fatherhood is not restricted to just our earthly fathers and God. It is used to refer to people other than biological or legal fathers, and is used as a sign of respect to those with whom we have a special relationship.
For example, Joseph tells his brothers of a special fatherly relationship God had given him with the king of Egypt: “So it was not you who sent me here, but God; and he has made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house and ruler over all the land of Egypt” (Gen. 45:8).
Job indicates he played a fatherly role with the less fortunate: “I was a father to the poor, and I searched out the cause of him whom I did not know” (Job 29:16). And God himself declares that he will give a fatherly role to Eliakim, the steward of the house of David: “In that day I will call my servant Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah . . . and I will clothe him with [a] robe, and will bind [a] girdle on him, and will commit . . . authority to his hand; and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah” (Is. 22:20–21).
This type of fatherhood not only applies to those who are wise counselors (like Joseph) or benefactors (like Job) or both (like Eliakim), it also applies to those who have a fatherly spiritual relationship with one. For example, Elisha cries, “My father, my father!” to Elijah as the latter is carried up to heaven in a whirlwind (2 Kgs. 2:12). Later, Elisha himself is called a father by the king of Israel (2 Kgs. 6:21).
A Change with the New Testament?
Some Fundamentalists argue that this usage changed with the New Testament—that while it may have been permissible to call certain men “father” in the Old Testament, since the time of Christ, it’s no longer allowed. This argument fails for several reasons.
First, as we’ve seen, the imperative “call no man father” does not apply to one’s biological father. It also doesn’t exclude calling one’s ancestors “father,” as is shown in Acts 7:2, where Stephen refers to “our father Abraham,” or in Romans 9:10, where Paul speaks of “our father Isaac.”
Second, there are numerous examples in the New Testament of the term “father” being used as a form of address and reference, even for men who are not biologically related to the speaker. There are, in fact, so many uses of “father” in the New Testament, that the Fundamentalist interpretation of Matthew 23 (and the objection to Catholics calling priests “father”) must be wrong, as we shall see.
Third, a careful examination of the context of Matthew 23 shows that Jesus didn’t intend for his words here to be understood literally. The whole passage reads, “But you are not to be called ‘rabbi,’ for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called ‘masters,’ for you have one master, the Christ” (Matt. 23:8–10).
The first problem is that although Jesus seems to prohibit the use of the term “teacher,” in Matthew 28:19–20, Christ himself appointed certain men to be teachers in his Church: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations . . . teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” Paul speaks of his commission as a teacher: “For this I was appointed a preacher and apostle . . . a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth” (1 Tim. 2:7); “For this gospel I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher” (2 Tim. 1:11). He also reminds us that the Church has an office of teacher: “God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers” (1 Cor. 12:28); and “his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers” (Eph. 4:11). There is no doubt that Paul was not violating Christ’s teaching in Matthew 23 by referring so often to others as “teachers.”
Fundamentalists themselves slip up on this point by calling all sorts of people “doctor,” for example, medical doctors, as well as professors and scientists who have Ph.D. degrees (i.e., doctorates). What they fail to realize is that “doctor” is simply the Latin word for “teacher.” Even “Mister” and “Mistress” (“Mrs.”) are forms of the word “master,” also mentioned by Jesus. So if his words in Matthew 23 were meant to be taken literally, Fundamentalists would be just as guilty for using the word “teacher” and “doctor” and “mister” as Catholics for saying “father.” But clearly, that would be a misunderstanding of Christ’s words.
So What Did Jesus Mean?
Jesus criticized Jewish leaders who love “the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues, and salutations in the market places, and being called ‘rabbi’ by men” (Matt. 23:6–7). His admonition here is a response to the Pharisees’ proud hearts and their g.asping after marks of status and prestige.
He was using hyperbole (exaggeration to make a point) to show the scribes and Pharisees how sinful and proud they were for not looking humbly to God as the source of all authority and fatherhood and teaching, and instead setting themselves up as the ultimate authorities, father figures, and teachers.
Christ used hyperbole often, for example when he declared, “If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell” (Matt. 5:29, cf. 18:9; Mark 9:47). Christ certainly did not intend this to be applied literally, for otherwise all Christians would be blind amputees! (cf. 1 John 1:8; 1 Tim. 1:15). We are all subject to “the lust
of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life” (1 John 2:16).Since Jesus is demonstrably using hyperbole when he says not to call anyone our father—else we would not be able to refer to our earthly fathers as such—we must read his words carefully and with sensitivity to the presence of hyperbole if we wish to understand what he is saying.
Jesus is not forbidding us to call men “fathers” who actually are such—either literally or spiritually. (See below on the apostolic example of spiritual fatherhood.) To refer to such people as fathers is only to acknowledge the truth, and Jesus is not against that. He is warning people against inaccurately attributing fatherhood—or a particular kind or degree of fatherhood—to those who do not have it.
As the apostolic example shows, some individuals genuinely do have a spiritual fatherhood, meaning that they can be referred to as spiritual fathers. What must not be done is to confuse their form of spiritual paternity with that of God. Ultimately, God is our supreme protector, provider, and instructor. Correspondingly, it is wrong to view any individual other than God as having these roles.
Throughout the world, some people have been tempted to look upon religious leaders who are mere mortals as if they were an individual’s supreme source of spiritual instruction, nourishment, and protection. The tendency to turn mere men into “gurus” is worldwide.
This was also a temptation in the Jewish world of Jesus’ day, when famous rabbinical leaders, especially those who founded important schools, such as Hillel and Shammai, were highly exalted by their disciples. It is this elevation of an individual man—the formation of a “cult of personality” around him—of which Jesus is speaking when he warns against attributing to someone an undue role as master, father, or teacher.
He is not forbidding the perfunctory use of honorifics nor forbidding us to recognize that the person does have a role as a spiritual father and teacher. The example of his own apostles shows us that.
The Apostles Show the Way
The New Testament is filled with examples of and references to spiritual father-son and father-child relationships. Many people are not aware just how common these are, so it is worth quoting some of them here.
Paul regularly referred to Timothy as his child: “Therefore I sent to you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ” (1 Cor. 4:17); “To Timothy, my true child in the faith: grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord” (1 Tim. 1:2); “To Timothy, my beloved child: Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord” (2 Tim. 1:2).
He also referred to Timothy as his son: “This charge I commit to you, Timothy, my son, in accordance with the prophetic utterances which pointed to you, that inspired by them you may wage the good warfare” (1 Tim 1:18); “You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 2:1); “But Timothy’s worth you know, how as a son with a father he has served with me in the gospel” (Phil. 2:22).
Paul also referred to other of his converts in this way: “To Titus, my true child in a common faith: grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior” (Titus 1:4); “I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I have become in my imprisonment” (Philem. 10). None of these men were Paul’s literal, biological sons. Rather, Paul is emphasizing his spiritual fatherhood with them.
Spiritual Fatherhood
Perhaps the most pointed New Testament reference to the theology of the spiritual fatherhood of priests is Paul’s statement, “I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (1 Cor. 4:14–15).
Peter followed the same custom, referring to Mark as his son: “She who is at Babylon, who is likewise chosen, sends you greetings; and so does my son Mark” (1 Pet. 5:13). The apostles sometimes referred to entire churches under their care as their children. Paul writes, “Here for the third time I am ready to come to you. And I will not be a burden, for I seek not what is yours but you; for children ought not to lay up for their parents, but parents for their children” (2 Cor. 12:14); and, “My little children, with whom I am again in travail until Christ be formed in you!” (Gal. 4:19).
John said, “My little children, I am writing this to you so that you may not sin; but if any one does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 John 2:1); “No greater joy can I have than this, to hear that my children follow the truth” (3 John 4). In fact, John also addresses men in his congregations as “fathers” (1 John 2:13–14).
By referring to these people as their spiritual sons and spiritual children, Peter, Paul, and John imply their own roles as spiritual fathers. Since the Bible frequently speaks of this spiritual fatherhood, we Catholics acknowledge it and follow the custom of the apostles by calling priests “father.” Failure to acknowledge this is a failure to recognize and honor a great gift God has bestowed on the Church: the spiritual fatherhood of the priesthood.
Catholics know that as members of a parish, they have been committed to a priest’s spiritual care, thus they have great filial affection for priests and call them “father.” Priests, in turn, follow the apostles’ biblical example by referring to members of their flock as “my son” or “my child” (cf. Gal. 4:19; 1 Tim. 1:18; 2 Tim. 2:1; Philem. 10; 1 Pet. 5:13; 1 John 2:1; 3 John 4).
All of these passages were written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and they express the infallibly recorded truth that Christ’s ministers do have a role as spiritual fathers. Jesus is not against acknowledging that. It is he who gave these men their role as spiritual fathers, and it is his Holy Spirit who recorded this role for us in the pages of Scripture. To acknowledge spiritual fatherhood is to acknowledge the truth, and no amount of anti-Catholic grumbling will change that fact.
NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 20 2010,14:11) Ca, I'm still waiting for a reply to the call no man father post I sent. It seems that you like to start a topic, then when you run out of defenses, you run and start another one.
You did it with the father topic
and with the worshipping Mary topicstand and defend yourself or admit defeat
Peace and love
mike
Maybe you don't have a family. But I do. I have limited time. They come first. But what is the difference between my words and anothers? If I agree with the article I post, isn't it as good as my words if it applies directly to the topic?Yes.
So stop stalling and admit you can't refute this:
Saint Worship?
The word “worship” has undergone a change in meaning in English. It comes from the Old English weorthscipe, which means the condition of being worthy of honor, respect, or dignity. To worship in the older, larger sense is to ascribe honor, worth, or excellence to someone, whether a sage, a magistrate, or God.
For many centuries, the term worship simply meant showing respect or honor, and an example of this usage survives in contemporary English. British subjects refer to their magistrates as “Your Worship,” although Americans would say “Your Honor.” This doesn’t mean that British subjects worship their magistrates as gods (in fact, they may even despise a particular magistrate they are addressing). It means they are giving them the honor appropriate to their office, not the honor appropriate to God.
Outside of this example, however, the English term “worship” has been narrowed in scope to indicate only that supreme form of honor, reverence, and respect that is due to God. This change in usage is quite recent. In fact, one can still find books that use “worship” in the older, broader sense. This can lead to a significant degree of confusion, when people who are familiar only with the use of words in their own day and their own circles encounter material written in other times and other places.
In Scripture, the term “worship” was similarly broad in meaning, but in the early Christian centuries, theologians began to differentiate between different types of honor in order to make more clear which is due to God and which is not.
As the terminology of Christian theology developed, the Greek term latria came to be used to refer to the honor that is due to God alone, and the term dulia came to refer to the honor that is due to human beings, especially those who lived and died in God’s friendship—in other words, the saints. Scripture indicates that honor is due to these individuals (Matt. 10:41b). A special term was coined to refer to the special honor given to the Virgin Mary, who bore Jesus—God in the flesh—in her womb. This term, hyperdulia (huper [more than]+ dulia = “beyond dulia”), indicates that the honor due to her as Christ’s own Mother is more than the dulia given to other saints. It is greater in degree, but still of the same kind. However, since Mary is a finite creature, the honor she is due is fundamentally different in kind from the latria owed to the infinite Creator.
All of these terms—latria, dulia, hyperdulia—used to be lumped under the one English word “worship.” Sometimes when one reads old books discussing the subject of how particular persons are to be honored, they will qualify the word “worship” by referring to “the worship of latria” or “the worship of dulia.” To contemporaries and to those not familiar with the history of these terms, however, this is too confusing.
Another attempt to make clear the difference between the honor due to God and that due to humans has been to use the words adore and adoration to describe the total, consuming reverence due to God and the terms venerate, veneration, and honor to refer to the respect due humans. Thus, Catholics sometimes say, “We adore God but we honor his saints.”
Unfortunately, many non-Catholics have been so schooled in hostility toward the Church that they appear unable or unwilling to recognize these distinctions. They confidently (often arrogantly) assert that Catholics “worship” Mary and the saints, and, in so doing, commit idolatry. This is patently false, of course, but the education in anti-Catholic prejudice is so strong that one must patiently explain that Catholics do not worship anyone but God—at least given the contemporary use of the term. The Church is very strict about the fact that latria, adoration—what contemporary English speakers call “worship”—is to be given only to God.
Though one should know it from one’s own background, it often may be best to simply point out that Catholics do not worship anyone but God and omit discussing the history of the term. Many non-Catholics might be more perplexed than enlightened by hearing the history of the word. Familiar only with their group’s use of the term “worship,” they may misperceive a history lesson as rationalization and end up even more adamant in their declarations that the term is applicable only to God. They may even go further. Wanting to attack the veneration of the saints, they may declare that only God should be honored.
Both of these declarations are in direct contradiction to the language and precepts of the Bible. The term “worship” was used in the same way in the Bible that it used to be used in English. It could cover both the adoration given to God alone and the honor that is to be shown to certain human beings. In Hebrew, the term for worship is shakhah. It is appropriately used for humans in a large number of passages.
For example, in Genesis 37:7–9 Joseph relates two dreams that God gave him concerning how his family would honor him in coming years. Translated literally the passage states: “‘ehold, we were binding sheaves in the field, and lo, my sheaf arose and stood upright; and behold, your sheaves gathered round it, and worshiped [shakhah] my sheaf.’ . . . Then he dreamed another dream, and told it to his brothers, and said, ‘Behold, I have dreamed another dream; and behold, the sun, the moon, and eleven stars were worshiping [shakhah] me.’”
In Genesis 49:2-27, Jacob pronounced a prophetic blessing on his sons, and concerning Judah he stated: “Judah, your brothers shall praise you; your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies; your father’s sons shall worship [shakhah] you (49:8).” And in Exodus 18:7, Moses honored his father-in-law, Jethro: “Moses went out to meet his father-in-law, and worshiped [shakhah] him and kissed him; and they asked each other of their welfare, and went into the tent.”
Yet none of these passages were discussing the worship of adoration, the kind of worship given to God.
Honoring Saints
Consider how honor is given. We regularly give it to public officials. In the United States it is customary to address a judge as “Your Honor.” In the marriage ceremony it used to be said that the wife would “love, honor, and obey” her husband. Letters to legislators are addressed to “The Honorable So-and-So.” And just about anyone, living or dead, who bears an exalted rank is said to be worthy of honor, and this is particularly true of historical figures, as when children are (or at least used to be) instructed to honor the Founding Fathers of America.
These practices are entirely Biblical. We are explicitly commanded at numerous points in the Bible to honor certain people. One of the most important commands on this subject is the command to honor one’s parents: “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the lan
d which the Lord your God gives you” (Ex. 20:12). God considered this command so important that he repeated it multiple times in the Bible (for example, Lev. 19:3, Deut. 5:16, Matt. 15:4, Luke 18:20, and Eph. 6:2–3). It was also important to give honor to one’s elders in general: “You shall rise up before the hoary head, and honor the face of an old man, and you shall fear your God: I am the Lord” (Lev. 19:32). It was also important to specially honor religious leaders: “Make sacred garments for your brother Aaron [the high priest], to give him dignity and honor” (Ex. 28:2).The New Testament stresses the importance of honoring others no less than the Old Testament. The apostle Paul commanded: “Pay all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due” (Rom. 13:7). He also stated this as a principle regarding one’s employers: “Slaves, be obedient to those who are your earthly masters, with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as to Christ” (Eph. 6:5). “Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be defamed” (1 Tim. 6:1). Perhaps the broadest command to honor others is found in 1 Peter: “Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor” (1 Pet. 2:17).
The New Testament also stresses the importance of honoring religious figures. Paul spoke of the need to give them special honor in 1 Timothy: “Let the presbyters [priests] who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching” (1 Tim. 5:17). 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 [saint] because he is a righteous man shall receive a righteous man’s reward” (Matt. 10:41).
So, if there can be nothing wrong with honoring the living, who still have an opportunity to ruin their lives through sin, there certainly can be no argument against giving honor to saints whose lives are done and who ended them in sanctity. If people should be honored in general, God’s special friends certainly should be honored.
Statue Worship?
People who do not know better sometimes say that Catholics worship statues. Not only is this untrue, it is even untrue that Catholics honor statues. After all, a statue is nothing but a carved block of marble or a chunk of plaster, and no one gives honor to marble yet unquarried or to plaster still in the mixing bowl.
The fact that someone kneels before a statue to pray does not mean that he is praying to the statue, just as the fact that someone kneels with a Bible in his hands to pray does not mean that he is worshiping the Bible. Statues or paintings or other artistic devices are used to recall to the mind the person or thing depicted. Just as it is easier to remember one’s mother by looking at her photograph, so it is easier to recall the lives of the saints by looking at representations of them.
The use of statues and icons for liturgical purposes (as opposed to idols) also had a place in the Old Testament. In Exodus 25:18–20, God commanded: “And you shall make two cherubim of gold; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece with the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be.”
In Numbers 21:8–9, he told Moses: “‘Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every one who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live.’ So Moses made a bronze serpent, and set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent and live.” This shows the actual ceremonial use of a statue (looking to it) in order to receive a blessing from God (healing from snakebite). In John 3:14, Jesus tells us that he himself is what the bronze serpent represented, so it was a symbolic representation of Jesus. There was no problem with this statue—God had commanded it to be made—so long as people did not worship it. When they did, the righteous king Hezekiah had it destroyed (2 Kgs. 18:4). This clearly shows the difference between the proper religious use of statues and idolatry.
When the time came to build the Temple in Jerusalem, God inspired David’s plans for it, which included “his plan for the golden chariot of the cherubim that spread their wings and covered the ark of the covenant of the Lord. All this he made clear by the writing from the hand of the Lord concerning it, all the work to be done according to the plan” (1 Chr. 28:18–19).
In obedience to this divinely inspired plan, Solomon built two gigantic, golden statues of cherubim: “In the most holy place he made two cherubim of wood and overlaid them with gold. The wings of the cherubim together extended twenty cubits: one wing of the one, of five cubits, touched the wall of the house, and its other wing, of five cubits, touched the wing of the other cherub; and of this cherub, one wing, of five cubits, touched the wall of the house, and the other wing, also of five cubits, was joined to the wing of the first cherub. The wings of these cherubim extended twenty cubits; the cherubim stood on their feet, facing the nave. And he made the veil of blue and purple and crimson fabrics and fine linen, and worked cherubim on it” (2 Chr. 3:10–14).
(See the Catholic Answers tract, Do Catholics Worship Statutes? for further information.)
Imitation is the Biblical Form of Honor
The most important form of honoring the saints, to which all the other forms are related, is the imitation of them in their relationship with God. Paul wrote extensively about the importance of spiritual imitation. He stated: “I urge you, then, be imitators of me. Therefore I sent to you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ, as I teach them everywhere in every church” (1 Cor. 4:16–17). Later he told the same group: “Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ. I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you” (1 Cor. 11:1–2). The author of the book of Hebrews also stresses the importance of imitating true spiritual leaders: “Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God; consider the outcome of their life, and imitate their faith” (Heb. 13:7).
One of the most important passages on imitation is found in Hebrews. Chapter 11 of that book, the Bible’s well-known “hall of fame” chapter, presents numerous examples of the Old Testament saints for our imitation. It concludes with the famous exhortation: “Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with perseverance the race that is set before us” (12:1)—the race that the saints have run before us.
NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004What you say about “worship” is true, that English word has changed. I often point this out when refuting the idea that Jesus was worshiped, and hence believed to be “God Almighty” based on that misunderstanding.
But, however you decide to translate proskyneo, the Bible itself does not say to “worship” Mary.
It says to worship God.As well, the earliest Christians did not seem to worship her or hold her up on a pedestal as so many do today.
The apostle Peter makes no mention of her at all in his inspired writings.
The apostle Paul did not use her name in his inspired letters but spoke of her only as “a woman.”—Gal. 4:4.
So, she is mentioned of course in connection with Jesus birth, but after that, she isn't mentioned very much at all. Perhaps this was done purposefully to hinder people from getting dangerously close to to worshiping her.
What example did Jesus himself set in referring to his mother?
If you wonder why this question matters, it's because we claim to follow Jesus and we are to follow his example.Luke 11:27, 28, JB:
“Now as he [Jesus] was speaking, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said, ‘Happy the womb that bore you and the breasts you sucked!’ But he replied, ‘Still happier those who hear the word of God and keep it!’”This would have been the perfect, absolutely perfect moment for Jesus to show us all that we are to venerate and almost worship Mary, if that was the case.
As our exemplar, as the Son of Mary, Jesus was handed here the perfect opportunity to speak of Mary.WHAT DID HE DO?
He directed attention away from Mary and toward God's word.
Is this not what we should do? Instead of directing undue attention to Mary, should we not direct attention to God and his Word, as Jesus did?
Hi CA,
Wow, that was a lot of words to say:Quote wor·ship /ˈwɜrʃɪp/ Show Spelled [wur-ship] Show IPA noun, verb,-shiped, -ship·ing or (especially British) -shipped, -ship·ping.
–noun
1.reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred.
2.formal or ceremonious rendering of such honor and homage: They attended worship this morning.
3.adoring reverence or regard: excessive worship of business success.
4.the object of adoring reverence or regard.
5.(initial capital letter) British. a title of honor used in addressing or mentioning certain magistrates and others of high rank or station (usually prec. byYour, His, or Her).
–verb (used with object)
6.to render religious reverence and homage to.
7.to feel an adoring reverence or regard for (any person or thing).
–verb (used without object)
8.to render religious reverence and homage, as to a deity.
9.to attend services of divine worship.
10.to feel an adoring reverence or regard.I agree there's nothing wrong with#3, #7 or #10 when it comes to certain persons. But my Catholic friend once gave me a card with the “traveler's prayer”. I've thrown it away, but I'm pretty sure the prayer was to St. Christopher. How can you condone PRAYING to Mary and the saints? You should only pray to God, as the Scriptures teach.
And I've heard things about your statues and paintings, but I'll research and get back to you when I can be sure of what I'm saying.
peace and love,
mikeQuote (CatholicApologist @ Feb. 22 2010,15:54) Honoring Saints Consider how honor is given. We regularly give it to public officials. In the United States it is customary to address a judge as “Your Honor.” In the marriage ceremony it used to be said that the wife would “love, honor, and obey” her husband. Letters to legislators are addressed to “The Honorable So-and-So.” And just about anyone, living or dead, who bears an exalted rank is said to be worthy of honor, and this is particularly true of historical figures, as when children are (or at least used to be) instructed to honor the Founding Fathers of America.
These practices are entirely Biblical. We are explicitly commanded at numerous points in the Bible to honor certain people. One of the most important commands on this subject is the command to honor one’s parents: “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land which the Lord your God gives you” (Ex. 20:12). God considered this command so important that he repeated it multiple times in the Bible (for example, Lev. 19:3, Deut. 5:16, Matt. 15:4, Luke 18:20, and Eph. 6:2–3). It was also important to give honor to one’s elders in general: “You shall rise up before the hoary head, and honor the face of an old man, and you shall fear your God: I am the Lord” (Lev. 19:32). It was also important to specially honor religious leaders: “Make sacred garments for your brother Aaron [the high priest], to give him dignity and honor” (Ex. 28:2).
The New Testament stresses the importance of honoring others no less than the Old Testament. The apostle Paul commanded: “Pay all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due” (Rom. 13:7). He also stated this as a principle regarding one’s employers: “Slaves, be obedient to those who are your earthly masters, with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as to Christ” (Eph. 6:5). “Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be defamed” (1 Tim. 6:1). Perhaps the broadest command to honor others is found in 1 Peter: “Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor” (1 Pet. 2:17).
The New Testament also stresses the importance of honoring religious figures. Paul spoke of the need to give them special honor in 1 Timothy: “Let the presbyters [priests] who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching” (1 Tim. 5:17). 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 [saint] because he is a righteous man shall receive a righteous man’s reward” (Matt. 10:41).
So, if there can be nothing wrong with honoring the living, who still have an opportunity to ruin their lives through sin, there certainly can be no argument against giving honor to saints whose lives are done and who ended them in sanctity. If people should be honored in general, God’s special friends certainly should be honored.
Statue Worship?
People who do not know better sometimes say that Catholics worship statues. Not only is this untrue, it is even untrue that Catholics honor statues. After all, a statue is nothing but a carved block of marble or a chunk of plaster, and no one gives honor to marble yet unquarried or to plaster still in the mixing bowl.
The fact that someone kneels before a statue to pray does not mean that he is praying to the statue, just as the fact that someone kneels with a Bible in his hands to pray does not mean that he is worshiping the Bible. Statues or paintings or other artistic devices are used to recall to the mind the person or thing depicted. Just as it is easier to remember one’s mother by looking at her photograph, so it is easier to recall the lives of the saints by looking at representations of them.
The use of statues and icons for liturgical purposes (as opposed to idols) also had a place in the Old Testament. In Exodus 25:18–20, God commanded: “And you shall make two cherubim of gold; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece with the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be.”
In Numbers 21:8–9, he told Moses: “‘Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every one who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live.’ So Moses made a bronze serpent, and set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent and live.” This shows the actual ceremonial use of a statue (looking to it) in order to receive a blessing from God (healing from snakebite). In John 3:14, Jesus tells us that he himself is what the bronze serpent represented, so it was a symbolic representation of Jesus. There was no problem with this statue—God had commanded it to be made—so long as people did not worship it. When they did, the righteous king Hezekiah had it destroyed (2 Kgs. 18:4). This clearly shows the difference between the proper religious use of statues and idolatry.
When the time came to build the Temple in Jerusalem, God inspired David’s plans for it, which included “his plan for the golden chariot of the cherubim that spread their wings and covered the ark of the covenant of the Lord. All this he made clear by the writing from the hand of the Lord concerning it, all the work to be done according to the plan” (1 Chr. 28:18–19).
In obedience to this divinely inspired plan, Solomon built two gigantic, golden statues of cherubim: “In the most holy place he made two cherubim of wood and overlaid them with gold. The wings of the cherubim together extended twenty cubits: one wing of the one, of five cubits, touched the wall of the house, and its other wing, of five cubits, touched the wing of the other cherub; and of this cherub, one wing, of five cubits, touched the wall of the house, and the other wing, also of five cubits, was joined to the wing of the first cherub. The wings of these cherubim extended twenty cubits; the cherubim stood on their feet, facing the nave. And he made the veil of blue and purple and crimson fabrics and fine linen, and worked cherubim on it” (2 Chr. 3:10–14).
(See the Catholic Answers tract, Do Catholics Worship Statutes? for further information.)
NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004
CA
I tell you, do you write science fiction too?
Have you ever gone to Washington and knelled down in front of George Washington statue, and if you did, what did you ask for?
We are to honor people while they are alive, after they are dead, what can they do for us?
Yes, God commanded Moses to put two angels above the ark, but were was the ark placed, in a public place, did any one knelled in front of it?
You may not pray to the statue you're kneeling down in front off, but, are you not praying to the one that statue represents? and what is the purpose of t
hat? some one dead in the grave can't help you with anything.
As a matter of fact, the Bible tells you, you should not even have that statue, Ex. 20:4,5.
Free of doctrinal errors? you got to be kidding.Georg
I'm just going to go find that scripture where Peter says we should venerate Mary. Oh, wait, Peter never mentioned Mary at all. I guess that scripture doesn't exist.
Well, Paul wrote a whole lot. I know he must have said we should venerate Mary. hmmm. He doesn't seem to even mention her by name. He refers to her as “a woman.”—Gal. 4:4.
How many books did Paul write? And nowhere do we find him urging us to “venerate Mary”? I guess not, since he doesn't even speak of “Mary.”
Where Peter and Paul “true” Christians? Can we learn anything from them?
Quote (david @ Feb. 22 2010,17:34) I'm just going to go find that scripture where Peter says we should venerate Mary. Oh, wait, Peter never mentioned Mary at all. I guess that scripture doesn't exist. Well, Paul wrote a whole lot. I know he must have said we should venerate Mary. hmmm. He doesn't seem to even mention her by name. He refers to her as “a woman.”—Gal. 4:4.
How many books did Paul write? And nowhere do we find him urging us to “venerate Mary”? I guess not, since he doesn't even speak of “Mary.”
Where Peter and Paul “true” Christians? Can we learn anything from them?
David! It also says that Maria did not stay a Virgin in Math, 1:25. But it does not matter to them. She did not have other Children either. John is not Jesus Brother. We know that He is. They actually pray to Maria. The Our Father is followed by Hail Maria full of Grace the Lord is with thee. Blessed is the Fruit of thy womb Jesus, Hail Maria pray for us now and at the hour of our Death, Amen. That is the prayer that is being said, also with the Rosary….One abomination to God after the other. And they think that they are the only true Church here on earth. Their claim that Peter was their first Pope is a lot of nonsense. He and the other Apostles all went to prison and were killed, except John who lived His lived to the end on the Island of Petra.Irene
Hi:
Quote Luke 8:19Then came to him his mother and his brethren, and could not come at him for the press. 20And it was told him by certain which said, Thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to see thee.
21And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are these which hear the word of God, and do it.
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (david @ Feb. 22 2010,17:14) What you say about “worship” is true, that English word has changed. I often point this out when refuting the idea that Jesus was worshiped, and hence believed to be “God Almighty” based on that misunderstanding. But, however you decide to translate proskyneo, the Bible itself does not say to “worship” Mary.
It says to worship God.As well, the earliest Christians did not seem to worship her or hold her up on a pedestal as so many do today.
The apostle Peter makes no mention of her at all in his inspired writings.
The apostle Paul did not use her name in his inspired letters but spoke of her only as “a woman.”—Gal. 4:4.
So, she is mentioned of course in connection with Jesus birth, but after that, she isn't mentioned very much at all. Perhaps this was done purposefully to hinder people from getting dangerously close to to worshiping her.
What example did Jesus himself set in referring to his mother?
If you wonder why this question matters, it's because we claim to follow Jesus and we are to follow his example.Luke 11:27, 28, JB:
“Now as he [Jesus] was speaking, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said, ‘Happy the womb that bore you and the breasts you sucked!’ But he replied, ‘Still happier those who hear the word of God and keep it!’”This would have been the perfect, absolutely perfect moment for Jesus to show us all that we are to venerate and almost worship Mary, if that was the case.
As our exemplar, as the Son of Mary, Jesus was handed here the perfect opportunity to speak of Mary.WHAT DID HE DO?
He directed attention away from Mary and toward God's word.
Is this not what we should do? Instead of directing undue attention to Mary, should we not direct attention to God and his Word, as Jesus did?
God's living Word in Sacred Tradition (Scriptures and Oral) and Magisterium still speaks through His one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.Unlike your damnable group that has a history of contradicting itself like:
“To worship Christ in any form cannot be wrong … ” (WT, 3-1880, 83). “It is unscriptural for worshippers of the living and true God to render worship to the Son of God, Jesus Christ” (WT, 11-1-1964, 671).
The men of Sodom will be resurrected (WT, 7-1879, 7-8). The men of Sodom will not be resurrected (WT, 6-1-1952, 338). The men of Sodom will be resurrected (WT 8-1-1965, 479). The men of Sodom will not be resurrected (WT 6-1-1988, 31). The men of Sodom will be resurrected (Live Forever, early ed., 179). The men of Sodom will not be resurrected (Live Forever, later ed., 179). The men of Sodom will be resurrected (Insight on the Scriptures, Vol. 2, 985). The men of Sodom will not be resurrected (Revelation: Its Grand Climax at Hand! 273).
“There could be nothing against our consciences in going into the army” (WT, 4-15-1903, 120). Due to conscience, Jehovah’s Witnesses must refuse military service (WT, 2-1-1951, 73).
“We may as well join in with the civilized world in celebrating the grand event [Christmas] . . . ” (WT Reprints, 12-1-1904, 3468). “Christmas and its music are not from Jehovah . . . What is their source? . . . Satan the devil” (WT, 12-15-1983, 7).
“Everyone in America should take pleasure in displaying the American flag” (WT Reprints, 5-15-1917, 6068). The flag is “an idolatrous symbol” (Awake!, 9-8-71, 14).
Quote (CatholicApologist @ Feb. 23 2010,05:57) Quote (david @ Feb. 22 2010,17:14) What you say about “worship” is true, that English word has changed. I often point this out when refuting the idea that Jesus was worshiped, and hence believed to be “God Almighty” based on that misunderstanding. But, however you decide to translate proskyneo, the Bible itself does not say to “worship” Mary.
It says to worship God.As well, the earliest Christians did not seem to worship her or hold her up on a pedestal as so many do today.
The apostle Peter makes no mention of her at all in his inspired writings.
The apostle Paul did not use her name in his inspired letters but spoke of her only as “a woman.”—Gal. 4:4.
So, she is mentioned of course in connection with Jesus birth, but after that, she isn't mentioned very much at all. Perhaps this was done purposefully to hinder people from getting dangerously close to to worshiping her.
What example did Jesus himself set in referring to his mother?
If you wonder why this question matters, it's because we claim to follow Jesus and we are to follow his example.Luke 11:27, 28, JB:
“Now as he [Jesus] was speaking, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said, ‘Happy the womb that bore you and the breasts you sucked!’ But he replied, ‘Still happier those who hear the word of God and keep it!’”This would have been the perfect, absolutely perfect moment for Jesus to show us all that we are to venerate and almost worship Mary, if that was the case.
As our exemplar, as the Son of Mary, Jesus was handed here the perfect opportunity to speak of Mary.WHAT DID HE DO?
He directed attention away from Mary and toward God's word.
Is this not what we should do? Instead of directing undue attention to Mary, should we not direct attention to God and his Word, as Jesus did?
God's living Word in Sacred Tradition (Scriptures and Oral) and Magisterium still speaks through His one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.Unlike your damnable group that has a history of contradicting itself like:
“To worship Christ in any form cannot be wrong … ” (WT, 3-1880, 83). “It is unscriptural for worshippers of the living and true God to render worship to the Son of God, Jesus Christ” (WT, 11-1-1964, 671).
The men of Sodom will be resurrected (WT, 7-1879, 7-8). The men of Sodom will not be resurrected (WT, 6-1-1952, 338). The men of Sodom will be resurrected (WT 8-1-1965, 479). The men of Sodom will not be resurrected (WT 6-1-1988, 31). The men of Sodom will be resurrected (Live Forever, early ed., 179). The men of Sodom will not be resurrected (Live Forever, later ed., 179). The men of Sodom will be resurrected (Insight on the Scriptures, Vol. 2, 985). The men of Sodom will not be resurrected (Revelation: Its Grand Climax at Hand! 273).
“There could be nothing against our consciences in going into the army” (WT, 4-15-1903, 120). Due to conscience, Jehovah’s Witnesses must refuse military service (WT, 2-1-1951, 73).
“We may as well join in with the civilized world in celebrating the grand event [Christmas] . . . ” (WT Reprints, 12-1-1904, 3468). “Christmas and its music are not from Jehovah . . . What is their source? . . . Satan the devil” (WT, 12-15-1983, 7).
“Everyone in America should take pleasure in displaying the American flag” (WT Reprints, 5-15-1917, 6068). The flag is “an idolatrous symbol” (Awake!, 9-8-71, 14).
CA,Thanks for providing the abundance of contradictory statements in the Watch Tower. Now we know where David gets it from.
thinker
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
