Ship of Fools: Purgatory: All Things Mary

Printer-friendly view

»	Ship of Fools » Ship's Locker » Limbo » Purgatory: All Things Mary (Page 6)

Email this page to a friend or enemy.

Pages in this thread: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Source: (consider it)

Thread: Purgatory: All Things Mary

Carys

Ship's Celticist
# 78

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by josephine:

quote:
Originally posted by ladyinred:
This may be going off topic - so feel free to ignore me if so ...

but I'm intrigued by the notion that this thread has worked on that prayer is asking. One aspect of prayer is asking, yes. But the guidance that Jesus gave about prayer goes much further than that.

It seems to me that, in a discussion like this, the other things that we often call prayer might be more accurately described by other words -- worship, meditate, contemplate, and so on. In normal usage, we might lump all of those into the single word pray, and expect others in our own tradition to be able to determine from context which aspect of prayer (in this broader and more modern sense) we're talking about.

But in a discussion with people of other traditions, where the context is limited and the presuppositions are so different, we can probably communicate more clearly and with less misunderstanding if we try to say exactly what we mean.

Indeed. Especially given that a common Protestant presupposition is that praying means `talking to God' and so the idea of praying to the saints is obviously idolatrous because it expands to `talking to God to the saints' which thus implies that one sees the saints as in some way equal to God. The Catholic/Orthodox tradition has retained far more of the earlier sense of `pray' as `ask' and so praying the saints is entirely unproblematic.

Dobbo asked:

quote:
Would you rather pray to the omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent God or one of His creations?

Ruling out praying to the saints on those grounds would be like ruling out talking to one's friends on earth by asking

quote:
Would you rather talk to the omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent God or one of His creations?

Praying to the saints has never, properly understood, been instead of praying to God, but as well as.

Carys

--------------------
O Lord, you have searched me and know me
You know when I sit and when I rise

Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged

ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Carys:
Especially given that a common Protestant presupposition is that praying means `talking to God'

Not so much a presuppostion as a difference in language. I suspect the Protestant one is nearer to the standard modern English one.

quote:

and so the idea of praying to the saints is obviously idolatrous because it expands to `talking to God to the saints' which thus implies that one sees the saints as in some way equal to God.

Well, yes. Maybe a new word needs to be found so as not to confuse people.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002 | IP: Logged

Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by ken:

quote:
Originally posted by Carys:
and so the idea of praying to the saints is obviously idolatrous because it expands to `talking to God to the saints' which thus implies that one sees the saints as in some way equal to God.
Well, yes. Maybe a new word needs to be found so as not to confuse people.

Wonderful idea! What word would you suggest for "talking to God"? Then we can use your word to specify things that are addressed to God, and not properly to anyone else, and we can keep using pray in the way it's been used in our tradition lo these many years.

And who knows? Maybe your word will catch on, causing a huge advance in ecumenical relations, more charity, less hostility. A Christmas gift to the people of God!

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003 | IP: Logged

Lyda*Rose

Ship's broken porthole
# 4544

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:

quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:

quote:
Thou knowest our offences; forgive them , and resolve them as Thou dost will.
This I cannot comprehend or (pending explanation) agree with.

I suppose it might be asking Mary to forgive us offences against her personally - perhaps, the grief we cause her by rejecting her son - which would, after all, be only polite before going on to request something of her. Or it might be asking her to forgive in the way that a catholic might say 'Father, forgive ... ' to a priest - not asking for the personal indulgence of the priest as a man, but for a declaration of forgiveness by him as the minister of a forgiving God.

Either seems to me to stretch the apparent meaning a little too far.
I too have problems with this kind of language. I tend to see it through your first explanation, if I don't dismiss outright it as inappropriate (as sometimes it very much seems to be). In place of your second, I'd say it was asking her to pray for our forgiveness to God. But it does come across as having gone too far in the direction of making Mary the "fourth person of the Trinity" as some anti-catholic wags have phrased it. I far prefer the wording in the (rather RC) rosary prayer: "Pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death."

But to say "some Orthodox and some Roman Catholics go too far in their devotion to Mary" isn't terribly different from saying "some Protestants go too far in their esteem for the Bible." Some OC and RC are guilty of Mariolatry. Some Protestants are guilty of Bibliolatry. That a thing can be taken too far does not mean that it is bad in itself; only that it needs to exist within bounds. (Not accusing you of anything here, Eliab! Just using what I said in answer to your post as a springboard to a broader point.)

The language of such prayers is indeed beautiful, but I'm afraid its extravagance discourages those of us who otherwise might take a shot at talking to the saints. It really seems to blur the line between worship and veneration. And the episcopate of the RC and Orthodox Churches don't seem interested in gently correcting the misleading language. This much more than the lack of direct permission by the Scriptures is what holds me off.

--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano

Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003 | IP: Logged

Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
The language of such prayers is indeed beautiful, but I'm afraid its extravagance discourages those of us who otherwise might take a shot at talking to the saints. It really seems to blur the line between worship and veneration.

The language is indeed extravagant. An akathist or a canon, where most of that sort of language is found, is a poetic form, and extravagant language is proper to the form. If you wrote an akathist in the spare style of, say, Carl Sandburg or e.e. cummings, it simply wouldn't be an akathist.

I know, to a modern ear, the poetic language sounds over-the-top, in the same way that older love poetry sounds over-the-top. But I'd hesitate to say that the language of akathists and canons is misleading and needs to be corrected. I think it communicates something extremely important to our sparse and spare and analytical generation -- that we are not lavish enough in expressing our adoration of God. If our extravagant expressions of love for the saints seem as though they are too grand for a saint, and should be directed to God, I think the problem is not that they are too grand, but that our ordinary expressions of love for God are too spare.

So rather than being misleading, I think the lavish language, the rich metaphors, might well be leading people in a direction they need to go. I think toning down the poetry would impoverish our tradition and impoverish our prayers.

Besides, we don't rewrite our prayers for every new geneation, and I don't believe that every generation in every land will be as averse to extravagant language as our own is. What seems OTT here may not seem that way at all in another place and another time.

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003 | IP: Logged

Dobbo
Shipmate
# 5850

Posted

More poetic language

quote:
O victorious leader of triumphant host! We, your servants, delivered from
evil, sing our grateful thanks to you, O Theotokos! As you possess
invincible might set us free from every calamity so that we may sing:
Rejoice! O unwedded Bride!

web page

quote:
Beneath your tender mercy we flee, Birthgiver-of-God.
Reject not our prayer in our trouble, but deliver us from harm,
Only Pure and Blessed Lady. Amen

web page

quote:
Prayer at the Icon of the Theotokos

Since thou art a well-spring of tenderness, O Theotokos, make us worthy of compassion; Look upon a sinful people; Manifest thy power as ever, for hoping on thee we cry aloud unto thee: Hail! as once did Gabriel, chief Captain of the Bodiless Powers.

web page

quote:
All-merciful Virgin Theotokos, Mother of compassions and love for mankind, my most beloved hope and aspiration! 0 Mother of the most sweet and most desired Savior, Who exceedeth every love, Jesus Christ, the Lover of mankind and my God, the Light of my darkened soul! I, the exceeding sinful and hopeless one, fall down before thee, to thee I make my prayer, 0 well-spring of compassion, Virgin Mary, who didst bear the Abyss of compassion and Depth of mercies and love for mankind: Have mercy on me, have mercy on me, I painfully cry to thee; have mercy on me who am all in wounds, who have fallen among brutish thieves and who am, alas!, stripped naked of the garment in which the Father clothed me. Wherefore I lie stripped of every good deed, my wounds stinking and festering before my madness. My Mistress, Theotokos, look down on me, I humbly pray thee, with thy merciful eye and despise me not, who am all in darkness, all in filth, all immersed in the mire of passions, terribly fallen and unable to stand. Do thou take pity on me and grant me a helping hand, lift me up out of sinful depths, 0 my Joy! Deliver me from them that surround me; make thy face to shine upon thy servant; save the perishing, cleanse the filthy, raise up the terrible fallen: for thou canst do all things, as thou art the Mother of God Almighty. Pour forth on me the oil of thy compassion and grant me to overflow the wine of compunction, for I have acquired thee as truly the only hope in my life; turn thou not away from me who flee to thee, but behold my grief, 0 Virgin, and the longing of my soul and accept this prayer and save me, 0 thou the Mediatress of my salvation . Amen.

web page

quote:
A wonderful and marvellous healing has been given to us by your holy icon, O sovereign Lady Theotokos. By its appearance we have been delivered from spiritual and physical ills, and from sorrowful circumstances. So we bring you our thankful praise, O all-merciful Protectress. O sovereign Lady, whom we call "The Inexhaustible Cup": bend down your ear and mercifully hear our lamentation and tears that we bring to you, and give your healing to those who suffer from drunkenness, so that we may cry out to you with faith: "REJOICE, O INEXHAUSTIBLE CUP THAT QUENCHES OUR SPIRITUAL THIRST!"

web page

This is but another small sample of prayers to the Theotokos.

The problem I have with language and prayers like these is - they are not like asking a friend to pray for you but are giving attrinutes to Mary that I believe are only due to God.

For example

Satan may have might but only God is invicible in His might.

I believe that my wife may be merciful in not making me go to my inlaws for Christmas dinner but only God is absolute ie all merciful

I also believe that we only have one mediator and this being Christ (1 Timothy 2 v 5)- I suppose the response to that would be well we have a mediator the bible does not say we can have a mediatress as well?

quote:
For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus

My understanding of icons was that you look beyond the icon to God in yet the prayer to the icon seems to be directed to Mary?
--------------------
Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others.

Groucho Marx

Close this window

© Ship of Fools 2005

UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

--------------------
I'm holding out for Grace......, because I know who I am, and I hope I don't have to depend on my own religiosity
Bono

Posts: 395 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2004 | IP: Logged

Lyda*Rose

Ship's broken porthole
# 4544

Posted

Yup. Dobbo's problems with those prayers are the same as mine. I freely acknowledge that the BVM is very likely much better than me, and has an eternity-eye's view of mortal problems, but I think I'd better just get more extravagant in my praise of God, and keep my requests of the saints (if I make any) expressed in a respectful but moderate manner.

--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano

Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003 | IP: Logged

Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675

Posted

After a great kerfuffle and visit to the Hell thread I wanted to try to clarify my explanation(s) and line of thinking regarding praying to Mary and asking Mary (or ‘saints’) to pray for someone (this should give Josephine a chance to put her toys back in the pram). Much of this was said earlier in the thread, but I do hope that by them putting in one place, the discussion might be furthered. Finally, the thread has drifted just a tiny bit to talk more about ‘saints’ and icons, etc.; I wondered if we ought to start a separate thread for that. Just a thought.

When I pray, I only pray to God through Jesus Christ and here is why:

Who can say what is more pleasing to God than God himself? The perfect example of how to pray is given to us from Jesus himself in the Lord's Prayer. Luke 11: 'He said to them, "When you pray, say: " 'Father, hallowed be your name,"

1 Timothy 2:5: 'For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,'

These two verses makes it clear to whom one addresses prayer. Also, they rule out praying to others (particularly the verse from 1 Tim). Jesus instructs us: ‘when you pray, do this’.

Paul gives further advice on how to pray:

Matthew 5:6 'But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.'

Again, when you pray, pray to your Father.

As for praying to the dead or asking the dead to pray for you, Josephine has argued that “’living’ in this context means alive in the flesh, or alive in Christ.” On the face of it, I don’t object strongly (it is ‘context’ here that causes concern). To try to clarify the point, we might say ‘on the other side of death’. This way we might agree that, though passing through death, the saved are alive in Christ. Two problems now spring to mind:
1. How can we know the final judgement of the Lord? (In other words, who has been saved?)

2. Even if we accept the ‘passing through’ definition, in the story of Lazarus, the Bible tells us not to cross that line: Luke 16:26: ‘And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.'

Nowhere are we told to pray to Mary or to the dead (or to ask the dead to pray for us [see above for clarification of ‘dead’], in fact exactly the opposite is true (and 1 Timothy 2:5 seems to be a clear warning of this). Of course I realise that this line of thinking does not take tradition into consideration. But it seems to me that the tradition argument is not the strongest one. Slavery was an ancient tradition and even practiced by many Christians – is that an argument for slavery?

K.

--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004 | IP: Logged

GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
(this should give Josephine a chance to put her toys back in the pram).

Nice bit of trolling.

quote:
When I pray, I only pray to God through Jesus Christ and here is why:

Who can say what is more pleasing to God than God himself? The perfect example of how to pray is given to us from Jesus himself in the Lord's Prayer. Luke 11: 'He said to them, "When you pray, say: " 'Father, hallowed be your name,"

You're making, in my opinion, an unjustifiable leap of logic here. I could use your argument to say that one should never pray anything other than the Lord's prayer. Do you restrict yourself to that?

quote:
1 Timothy 2:5: 'For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,'

The implication of you using this prooftext is that it is legitimate to ask for the prayers of the mediator - Christ Jesus. As Jesus is not the Father, this shows either that the Bible contradicts itself or that your interpretation of Luke 11 is wrong.

quote:
These two verses makes it clear to whom one addresses prayer.

The Father or Christ Jesus? Which is it?

quote:
Paul gives further advice on how to pray:

Matthew 5:6 'But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.'

St Paul wrote St Matthew's Gospel?

quote:
1. How can we know the final judgement of the Lord? (In other words, who has been saved?)

We can make reasonable guesses, and back the notion that the Church has the authority to make these assessments with scripture if necessary.

Would you answer another yes/no question, please? Do you think it would matter to God if we asked for the intercession of someone about whom we'd been innocently wrong, to the extent that he would condemn it as idolatry?

quote:
2. Even if we accept the ‘passing through’ definition, in the story of Lazarus, the Bible tells us not to cross that line: Luke 16:26: ‘And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.'

I believe your reading is mistaken again. Reading the rest of the story reveals that the chasm is between the blessed dead and the dead in torment, between Abraham+Lazarus and Dives, not between the dead and the living. You prooftexted out of context and made the text mean something totally different.

quote:
Of course I realise that this line of thinking does not take tradition into consideration.

I wonder if you came up with these arguments independently or if your tradition taught you them?

Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003 | IP: Logged

Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:

quote:
...You're making, in my opinion, an unjustifiable leap of logic here. I could use your argument to say that one should never pray anything other than the Lord's prayer. Do you restrict yourself to that?
No, I do not limit myself to only saying The Lord's Prayer.

quote:
1 Timothy 2:5: 'For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,'
Originally posted by GreyFace: The implication of you using this prooftext is that it is legitimate to ask for the prayers of the mediator - Christ Jesus.

Yep. Note well that the passage claims that Jesus is the only meditator. I don't see where I went wrong in my interpretation.

quote:
St Paul wrote St Matthew's Gospel?

Oops! That's the price I pay for cutting and pasting from my earlier posts.

quote:

Would you answer another yes/no question, please? Do you think it would matter to God if we asked for the intercession of someone about whom we'd been innocently wrong, to the extent that he would condemn it as idolatry?

I have no idea. But why risk it? He has given us the Bible and Jesus, isn't that enough?

quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:I believe your reading [about lLazarus] is mistaken again. Reading the rest of the story reveals that the chasm is between the blessed dead and the dead in torment, between Abraham+Lazarus and Dives, not between the dead and the living. You prooftexted out of context and made the text mean something totally different.

I don't think so. But I do realise that some traditions maintain your position.

quote:
Of course I realise that this line of thinking does not take tradition into consideration.

I wonder if you came up with these arguments independently or if your tradition taught you them? [/QUOTE]

A bit of both I suppose. But I believe that tradition is fallible.

K.

--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004 | IP: Logged

Jason™

Host emeritus
# 9037

Posted

K.,

The confusion was that in your Lord's Prayer proof it says "when you pray, say Father" and in your Timothy verse it says pray to Jesus. So which is it? And if it's both, then each verse is not saying you may ONLY pray to the Father or ONLY pray to Jesus, which would undermine your argument and proof.

Secondly, can you honestly and in good conscience say that you interpret Luke 19 as speaking about a chasm between the dead and the living? It starts out, "The time came when the beggar (Lazarus) died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried." Then the rich man sees Lazarus across the way -- "In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side."

The chasm quote you used is Abraham speaking of himself and Lazarus vs. the rich man, as seen here:

"But Abraham replied, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us."

This is obviously and without much interpretation needed at all speaking about a chasm between Abraham/Lazarus, who are dead, and the rich man, who is dead. I don't see how you could dispute that.

And lastly, GreyFace said:

I wonder if you came up with these arguments independently or if your tradition taught you them?

And you answered:

A bit of both I suppose. But I believe that tradition is fallible.

And that's where the argument that "Scripture always trumps tradition" falls apart. You believe tradition is fallible, and I'd assume you think that you yourself are fallible, right? So you've received your interpretation of these Scriptures from tradition, which you believe is fallible, and yourself, who is fallible. So your interpretation of Scripture could very well be wrong.

-Digory

Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005 | IP: Logged

Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
Jesus instructs us: ‘when you pray, do this’. [...] Matthew 5:6 'But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.'

I think this expands a point that GreyFace is making:-

Jesus here is teaching one model of prayer. It seems, from scripture, to be the main model which he himself used, but not the only one. It is a model for private prayer, and it should be done in secret. Empty verbosity is discouraged, persistence is encourage. Praise of God, forgiveness of sins, and material needs can all be the subject of prayer, and (to me) its most notable feature is praying for God's kingdom and his will on earth.

We have our Lord's authority that this is how we should pray. I take that to mean that ALL Christians are under an obligation to pray, in private, in plain words, reasonably often, for all the things in the Lord's prayer.

The question is whether this is the ONLY model of prayer we can use. It is the most essential, certainly, but scripture sanctions others. Prayers of thanksgiving, I suggest, are allowed, as is corporate prayer, prayer in tongues, prayer as a witness to others (though the abuse of this one is prohibited), intercessory prayer for others, prayers of healing, even prayers of protest. Some of these may not be obligatory on all Christians. Not all of us, I believe, will find it helpful to pray in tongues, nor are we all meant to do this.

It seems to me legitimate, and Biblical, to address prayer to entities that are not God. "Lift up your heads, O gates", "Hope in the Lord, O Israel", "Give praise, O servants of the Lord", "If I forget you, O Jerusalem", "Praise the Lord from the earth, you sea monsters and all deeps, fire and hail, snow and frost [...and all manner of other stuff...]" appear from a very cursory flicking through some Psalms.

We have King David's authority for the legitimacy of addressing in prayer "my brother Jonathan" and "Absolom, my son", both of whom were dead at the time. I doubt the king expected them to hear him - but we live after the resurrection, and our case is better than his.

Christian hymns (even ones sung by we Protestants), following the Biblical pattern, frequently address prayers to "Ye servants of God", "Ye blessed souls at rest", "Angels from the realms of glory", "Star of the East, the horizon adorning" and many other parts of creation.

I don't think all Christians have to use all models. Some prayers will be ones which, though proper in themselves, individuals may not have the faith to prayer. I could not pray the prayer to the Theotokos which Dobbo linked to. In my mouth, it would be a lie. That does not mean that no Christian should be allowed to pray it.

([tangent] If I can cite an extra-Biblical authority, it seems that no less a hero of our faith than Jack Chick teaches that Mary is aware of human prayer and can be grieved by human sin. Can there be any further doubt that we can therefore speak to her and ask her to forgive us for hurting her?[/tangent])

--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"

Richard Dawkins

Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005 | IP: Logged

Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675

Posted

Digory,

I pretty much agree with everything you wrote. I should have stuck with Isaiah 8:19, 'When men tell you to consult mediums and spiritists, who whisper and mutter, should not a people inquire of their God? Why consult the dead on behalf of the living?'.

As for the difference between praying to God and Jesus, it is a tricky one and I do not know 'the answer'. I do know they are of the same substance, so the difference between praying to God/Jesus is small fish compared to praying to those who are not part of the Godhead.

As for tradition being fallible and scripture being infallible, I never said this (though I can see where you get the idea from my earlier posts). I think that scripture is more reliable than tradition (tradition is subject to the 'Chinese whispers' problem to a greater degree than the Biblical texts). That said, I completely agree that the interpretation of scripture is hugely problematic – that ought to go without saying (but in this case, perhaps it is best to say it anway).

K.

--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004 | IP: Logged

Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
As for the difference between praying to God and Jesus, it is a tricky one and I do not know 'the answer'. I do know they are of the same substance, so the difference between praying to God/Jesus is small fish compared to praying to those who are not part of the Godhead.

Actually, I'm not sure that helps you much. Even if God the Father and God the Son are consubstantial (as they are for Trinitarians), your interpretation of Christ's giving us the "Our Father" is that we must only pray to the Father - i.e., not to the Son (a different Person whether consubstantial or not).

If you now want to say that prayer to God the Son is also allowed, then you'll have to drop the claim that only the Person addressed in the "Our Father" may be prayed to, and I don't see how you can any longer invoke Christ's prayer "instuctions" as evidence against praying to others.

P.S. Remember, in re the Isaiah quote, that Cath/Orthos don't accept your premise that the Saints are dead - indeed, they're more fully alive that we are!

[ 13. December 2005, 13:12: Message edited by: Chesterbelloc ]

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002 | IP: Logged

Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:

quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
... Even if God the Father and God the Son are consubstantial (as they are for Trinitarians), your interpretation of Christ's giving us the "Our Father" is that we must only pray to the Father - i.e., not to the Son (a different Person whether consubstantial or not).
If you now want to say that prayer to God the Son is also allowed, then you'll have to drop the claim that only the Person addressed in the "Our Father" may be prayed to, and I don't see how you can any longer invoke Christ's prayer "instuctions" as evidence against praying to others.

Well, I suppose one ought to consider what Jesus said and also the circumstances of that particular time. Jesus was alive in his earthly body, he had been born by Mary though the Holy Spirit; so God was very much his Father. Jesus said that he was 'the Son', so it makes sense for him to say 'our Father'. Similarly in Matthew's Gospel, pray to your Father. Ok, these passages do not rule out praying to Mary, but that seems to be questioned in 1 Timothy, where we are told that Jesus is one an only intercessor between God and man. I also think that arguing for what Jesus did not say could be a slippery slope.

K.

[code]

[ 14. December 2005, 01:18: Message edited by: John Holding ]

--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004 | IP: Logged

Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

Posted

Komensky, there's a hell thread for your snide remarks. It would be so much easier to discuss Mary in a Purgatorial fashion if we could keep the snide remarks there.

You reiterated your point that we can't pray to the dead because the OT forbids seances. Would address my objections to your points?

First, and most important, because Christ destroyed the power of death, the saints are alive in Christ. That is the reason we can pray to the saints. I am quite certain you believe that Christ is risen. What effect do you think that has on Christians? On those who are alive, and on those who are, in your words, dead?

Second, prayer is not a synonym of worship. A quick check of Merriam-Webster Online shows that its primary meaning is entreat or implore. Surely its lawful to entreat or implore people other than God. In fact, this is normally the language used by plaintiffs addressing courts. It's old-fashioned, and restricted to religious and legal usage, but that's what it means.

Third, prayers addressed to the saints are no more like seances than medications are like the making of magical potions? Likewise, God, in the clearest of terms, prohibited idols, but he commanded the images of the cherubim in the Temple. There are similarities between the former and the latter in each example, but enough differences to make the one forbidden and the other lawful. If you disagree, would you explain why medication would be lawful and magical potion-making not, and explain why that reasoning would not apply to prayers to the saints and to seances?

Thank you.

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003 | IP: Logged

Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
Ok, these passages do not rule out praying to Mary, but that seems to be questioned in 1 Timothy, where we are told that Jesus is one an only intercessor between God and man. I also think that arguing for what Jesus did not say could be a slippery slope.

As long as we're agreeing now that Jesus doesn't rule out our praying to Him (or the Holy Ghost), I think we're getting somewhere! I'm not arguing exclusively from what Christ did not say - but you were arguing that His prayer guidance excluded praying to anyone but the Father. I was just pointing out that Christ can't have meant to proscribe any such thing, or else we couldn't pray to him or the Holy Ghost.

As to Christ being our only intercessor, if that means we cannot ask anyone else for prayers then it would prohibit asking one another in church to pray for us every bit as much as it would rule out asking Mary for her prayers.

What's the difference (with respect to Christ being our only intercessor) between my saying on the one hand, "Komenski, pray to Christ for me" and on the other, "Mary, pray thy Son for me."?

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002 | IP: Logged

Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

Posted

Dobbo, I understand your and Lyda*Rose's reservations about the poetic language that is employed in the veneration of the saints. A few points related to the prayers you cited:

quote:

quote:
O victorious leader of triumphant host! .....
web page

That's from an akathist, which, as I mentioned before, is a rather OTT poetic form. But if you read the entire akathist (as I'm sure you did), all the lavish praise of Mary is linked explicitly and repeatedly to her being the Mother of our God. That's why we venerate her.

quote:

quote:
Since thou art a well-spring of tenderness, O Theotokos, make us worthy of compassion; Look upon a sinful people; Manifest thy power as ever, for hoping on thee we cry aloud unto thee: Hail! as once did Gabriel, chief Captain of the Bodiless Powers.
web page

Again, the reason we praise her, and the source of any power that she has, is revealed in the Annunciation.

quote:

quote:
0 well-spring of compassion, Virgin Mary, who didst bear the Abyss of compassion and Depth of mercies and love for mankind: <snip> <snip> thou canst do all things, as thou art the Mother of God Almighty. <snip> turn thou not away from me who flee to thee, but behold my grief, 0 Virgin, and the longing of my soul and accept this prayer and save me, 0 thou the Mediatress of my salvation . Amen.

web page

The first bit of that prayer uses a Byzantine poetic convention that you'll see in lots and lots of our prayers and liturgical poetry -- she is the well-spring of compassion, because she bore the abyss of compassion. From the akathist you linked to, there are lines like Mary being the star that caused the Sun to shine, that she tends the Husbandman that tends mankind, that she is the dawn of the Day. I'm not sure what that particular trope is called, but it's a standard poetic trope, and one that I have learned to enjoy in Byzantine poetry.

The monk who wrote the above prayer made it clear that Mary does anything she does, not by her own power, but because she's God's Mom, and as she did at the wedding at Cana, she can still do.

Mediatress is problematic, I know. When I was an inquirer, I asked about the prayers where that term shows up. In our usage, it doesn't mean a female equivalent of Christ. It refers specifically to her role as the one who bridged the chasm between the Divine Nature and human nature in the Incarnation. She is the mediatress of our salvation, not at all in the same sense that Christ is the Mediator between God and Man, but because God became incarnate through her. That mediation (of a radically different kind than Christ's mediation) is what the prayer refers to. I'm not sure I've explained that at all well. Do you see what I'm getting at?

quote:
The problem I have with language and prayers like these is - they are not like asking a friend to pray for you but are giving attrinutes to Mary that I believe are only due to God.

For example

Satan may have might but only God is invicible in His might.

We have it on the authority of Jesus that only God is good. Yet I am sure you call others good as well, do you not? You're accustomed to hearing "good" used to praise people, but not "invincible." But it's the same thing -- we can be, by grace, what God is by nature.

quote:
My understanding of icons was that you look beyond the icon to God in yet the prayer to the icon seems to be directed to Mary?

Yes, the prayer before the icon is directed to Mary. The prayer passes through the icon to the person depicted in it. And as the person in the icon is also an icon, being made in the image of God, any honor or praise granted to the icon or to the saint is ultimately honor and praise to God.

If you get a chance, you should read "On the Divine Images" by St. John of Damascus. It's a slender book, but it sets forth our theology of icons as well as any.

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003 | IP: Logged

Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675

Posted

Josephine,

Sorry about the pram remark. One of my greatest weaknesses is that I am too easily goaded. Perhaps I need less coffee and more red wine. A side point Josephine, there was a fascinating programme on Radio 4 this morning about St. Nicholas, you can hear it here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/bookoftheweek/pip/yculc/

quote:
Originally posted by josephine:

First, and most important, because Christ destroyed the power of death, the saints are alive in Christ. That is the reason we can pray to the saints. I am quite certain you believe that Christ is risen. What effect do you think that has on Christians? On those who are alive, and on those who are, in your words, dead?

Redemption and promise of eternal life.

quote:

Second, prayer is not a synonym of worship. A quick check of Merriam-Webster Online shows that its primary meaning is entreat or implore. Surely its lawful to entreat or implore people other than God. In fact, this is normally the language used by plaintiffs addressing courts. It's old-fashioned, and restricted to religious and legal usage, but that's what it means.

Yes, you've said this before, but I don't see the relevance here. Could you clarify the application to the circumstances under consideration?

quote:

Third, prayers addressed to the saints are no more like seances than medications are like the making of magical potions?

I don't agree with medicine analogy at all. I would think that we ought to consider our actions in the light of following Jesus. the Bible urges us to heal people, whereas 'magic potions' are more likely to be either malicious or draw on powers other than God's. But this is beside the point. The Bible tells us to address our prayers to God the Father and that's good enough for me.

In the NT 'saints' simply refers to believers. Is that what you mean?

K.

--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004 | IP: Logged

Jason™

Host emeritus
# 9037

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
Digory,

I pretty much agree with everything you wrote.

The sweetest words any of us here can ever hear.

[Killing me]

Thanks, K. Watch those bitter jabs!

-Digory

Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005 | IP: Logged

Jason™

Host emeritus
# 9037

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by josephine:
A quick check of Merriam-Webster Online shows that its primary meaning is entreat or implore. Surely its lawful to entreat or implore people other than God. In fact, this is normally the language used by plaintiffs addressing courts. It's old-fashioned, and restricted to religious and legal usage, but that's what it means.

Josephine,

I like your explanation of the word "pray," and an earlier distinction made between this usage and the traditional (at least by modern Protestants) understanding as "talking to God" or as encompassing "worship" and "meditation."

My question is... what do you think Jesus meant by it when he used the word? Just a curious question to pick your oversized brain. [Biased]

Any Greek/Aramaic scholars who want to parse out the word Jesus used for "pray" from the texts?

-Digory

Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005 | IP: Logged

Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

Posted

Originally posted by Komensky:

quote:
The Bible tells us to address our prayers to God the Father and that's good enough for me.[/QB]

Only it's not, apparently! Unless you've changed your mind and don't pray directly to Jesus or the Holy Spirit?

[ 13. December 2005, 14:51: Message edited by: Chesterbelloc ]

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002 | IP: Logged

Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:

quote:
The Bible tells us to address our prayers to God the Father and that's good enough for me.
Only it's not, apparently! Unless you've changed your mind and don't pray directly to Jesus or the Holy Spirit? [/QB]

Very funny. I had mentioned earlier that this can be a confusing matter, but that prayer to one part of the Godhead involves the others, they are not seperate in that way. There're are Biblical prayers addressed to Jesus: Acts 7:59, 'While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.'

But the role of the Spirit in prayer is also included as part of the process (if 'process' is the right word):Romans 8:26, 'In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express.'

Also, to get back to Josephine's comments about prayer and the use of the word meaning 'to ask', it is only partially releveant to praying to God. In the case of Christian prayer, worship and prayer would appear to be linked.

K.

--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004 | IP: Logged

GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
Very funny.

I don't think it was intended to be funny, and I didn't intend it that way when I made the same point earlier.

The point is that your biblical argument contradicts itself. You say that 'When you pray, say "Our Father, ..."' means that you must only ever pray to the Father. If this is the meaning, then you cannot pray to the Son or the Holy Spirit, neither of whom are the Father if you're a Trinitarian Christian.

So either the Bible contradicts itself, or your interpretation of the meaning is just plain wrong. Which will you have?

Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003 | IP: Logged

Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

Posted

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough, Komensky, but, yes - what GreyFace just said is just what I meant.

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002 | IP: Logged

Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

Posted

About Jesus being our only intercessor: Can someone point me out where it says that in the Bible? I just did a multi-version search of the entire Bible at BibleGateway.com, and I found only two uses of the word intercessor, one in Job in the NIV, and one in Isaiah in the KJV.

When I searched on "pray for" I got 41 hits, starting with God telling Abimelech that Abraham would pray for him, and ending with 1 John 5:16, where we are told not to pray for the sin unto death.

1 Timothy 2:1 says "First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people" -- it doesn't sound from the context like Jesus is the one doing the supplicating and praying and interceding.

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003 | IP: Logged

The Scrumpmeister
Ship’s Taverner
# 5638

Posted

I think the reference is to Jesus being our only mediator rather than intercessor. Then, I suppose, that opens up a whole new debate about whether or not to two are the same thing.

(B2F bows out again and resumes his "observer" status)

[ 13. December 2005, 16:57: Message edited by: Back-to-Front ]

--------------------
If Christ is not fully human, humankind is not fully saved. - St John of Saint-Denis

Posts: 14741 | From: Greater Manchester, UK | Registered: Mar 2004 | IP: Logged

Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675

Posted

Yes, BTF, I sit in my crappy Ikea office-chair corrected. 'Mediator' is the word that (I think!) is use in 1 Timothy. Otherwise it would seem that there might be a problem in asking someone else to pray for you (which happens many time in the Bible and, thankfully, in my life).

K.

--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004 | IP: Logged

Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

Posted

[C-P'd with Komensky]
I casually responded to Komensky's mention of Christ being our "one and only intercessor" without thinking to check the provenance.

I think B2F is probably right.

[ 13. December 2005, 17:06: Message edited by: Chesterbelloc ]

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002 | IP: Logged

Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675

Posted

Just for clarity. 1 Timothy 2:5: 'For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,'

K.

--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004 | IP: Logged

Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
A side point Josephine, there was a fascinating programme on Radio 4 this morning about St. Nicholas, you can hear it here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/bookoftheweek/pip/yculc/

Thank you! I shall have to listen to it after work.

quote:
Originally posted by josephine:
I am quite certain you believe that Christ is risen. What effect do you think that has on Christians? On those who are alive, and on those who are, in your words, dead?
quote:

Redemption and promise of eternal life.

That's all? I think this may be the root of our difficulty, then, because, from my way of seeing things, the Incarnation and most specifically the Resurrection changed everything.

quote:

Second, prayer is not a synonym of worship. A quick check of Merriam-Webster Online shows that its primary meaning is entreat or implore. Surely its lawful to entreat or implore people other than God.
quote:
Yes, you've said this before, but I don't see the relevance here. Could you clarify the application to the circumstances under consideration?

You say that we can't pray to anyone other than God. If pray means worship, that's true. But pray doesn't always mean worship. Otherwise, lawyers and all plaintiffs would be worshipping the judge when they entered papers saying "The plaintiff prays the court to .... " or "prays that the court shall ...." As that's clearly not the case (I would assume you agree), then the question is not whether it is permitted to pray to anyone other than God, but what form of prayers are permitted to anyone other than God, and what forms of prayer are only appropriate for God.

quote:
Third, prayers addressed to the saints are no more like seances than medications are like the making of magical potions?

quote:

I don't agree with medicine analogy at all. <snip> But this is beside the point. The Bible tells us to address our prayers to God the Father and that's good enough for me.

I don't think it's beside the point at all, but if the analogy doesn't work for you, there's no sense pounding on with it. As others have said, while the Bible does tell us to pray to God the Father, nowhere does it tell us never to pray to anyone else. If I tell my son to eat his vegetables, that doesn't mean he should never eat cheese or fruit or meat. A command of one thing is not a prohibition of something else.

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003 | IP: Logged

Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675

Posted

Now we're getting somewhere!

quote:
Originally posted by josephine:

That's all? I think this may be the root of our difficulty, then, because, from my way of seeing things, the Incarnation and most specifically the Resurrection changed everything.

If I may nick a leaf from your book; no, that's not all. Of course the ressurection changed everything – without it I would not have been able to write 'redemption' or the 'promise of eternal life' among other wonderous things. I don't think we disagree about the magnitude of the Ressurection.

quote:

You say that we can't pray to anyone other than God. If pray means worship, that's true. But pray doesn't always mean worship. Otherwise, lawyers and all plaintiffs would be worshipping the judge when they entered papers saying "The plaintiff prays the court to .... " or "prays that the court shall ...."

The latter use, I would think (I don't have the OED at hand) is much later, but may be related – I don't know. But I would think this isn't the strongest argument to be made for your case. There are plenty of other (in this case, English) words that may also appear to be faux amis. I'll try to get my hands on the Greek. As it stands, I think there is little danger of the confusion you mention.

quote:
...A command of one thing is not a prohibition of something else.

Yes, I agree. But it would seem that we disagree that passages in the Bible amount to a prohibition of these 'other' prayers. We may have to leave it at that.

K.
[code]

[ 14. December 2005, 01:23: Message edited by: John Holding ]

--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004 | IP: Logged

Chesterbelloc

Tremendous trifler
# 3128

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
But it would seem that we disagree that passages in the Bible amount to a prohibition of these 'other' prayers. We may have to leave it at that.

Before we do, Komensky, can I just clear up the outstanding issues in re Christ's giving us the "Our Father"? Is this still one of those passages which you think excludes prayers to the Saints? Are there others you haven't raised, or to which you don't think we've given a good answer?

--------------------
"[A] moral, intellectual, and social step below Mudfrog."

Posts: 4199 | From: Athens Borealis | Registered: Aug 2002 | IP: Logged

Dobbo
Shipmate
# 5850

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by josephine:

Mediatress is problematic, I know. When I was an inquirer, I asked about the prayers where that term shows up. In our usage, it doesn't mean a female equivalent of Christ. It refers specifically to her role as the one who bridged the chasm between the Divine Nature and human nature in the Incarnation. She is the mediatress of our salvation, not at all in the same sense that Christ is the Mediator between God and Man, but because God became incarnate through her. That mediation (of a radically different kind than Christ's mediation) is what the prayer refers to. I'm not sure I've explained that at all well. Do you see what I'm getting at?

quote:

quote:
My understanding of icons was that you look beyond the icon to God in yet the prayer to the icon seems to be directed to Mary?
Yes, the prayer before the icon is directed to Mary. The prayer passes through the icon to the person depicted in it. And as the person in the icon is also an icon, being made in the image of God, any honor or praise granted to the icon or to the saint is ultimately honor and praise to God.

If you get a chance, you should read "On the Divine Images" by St. John of Damascus. It's a slender book, but it sets forth our theology of icons as well as any.

quote:
That's from an akathist, which, as I mentioned before, is a rather OTT poetic form. But if you read the entire akathist (as I'm sure you did), all the lavish praise of Mary is linked explicitly and repeatedly to her being the Mother of our God. That's why we venerate her.

Yes I read some of the akathist (Kontakion to the Mother of God)

I did not notice the following said of Mary in

quote:
IKOS 3 - Rejoice! Propitiation of the whole world.
IKOS 8 - Rejoice! For through Thee our sin is remitted:
IKOS 10 - Rejoice! Provider of God’s mercy.
IKOS 12 - He hallowed and He glorified thee

Can we excuse poetic language from being theologically preposterous - I am sure I could find some satanic poetry that no one on the board would think it was acceptable because "It is ok it's just poetry."

quote:
From polluted lips accept thou a prayer, 0 unblemished, pure and most- pure Virgin Theotokos, and despise not my words, 0 my Joy, but look down on me and have pity, 0 Mother of my Maker. During my lifetime do thou not abandon me, for thou knowest, 0 Mistress, that I place all my hope on thee and all mine aspiring is alter thee. Wherefore, at the time also of my death, stand thou before me, 0 my helper, and be not then ashamed of me. For I know, 0 Virgin, that I am guilty of many sins, and I, the wretched one, tremble, contemplating that hour. But thou, my Joy, reveal unto me then thy presence, work thy mercy marvelously upon me, 0 Mediatress of my salvation. Rescue me, 0 Mistress, from the cruelty of the demons, and from the fearsome and terrible trial of the spirits of the air, and deliver me from their malice, and transform all that grief and sorrow into joy by thine enlightenment and grant me to pass unharmed through the principalities and powers of darkness and to attain to worship at the throne of glory before Christ our God Who sitteth there with His Beginningless Father and All-Holy Spirit. Amen.

web page

From what you are saying Mary stands between us (in the sense of bridging the Divine and the human)and Jesus, and Jesus who stands before God as a man. But then why pray to ask her to show mercy surely it is only God we should look to for mercy. Given that we have already ascertained that Mary can hear prayers because she is in Christ how come the person is asking to see Mary - and not Christ who she is in.

Why are mercy and mediatress mentioned in the same sentence - is it because there is a direct correlation? There certainly is when we talk of Christ being mediator and showing mercy.

quote:
The monk who wrote the above prayer made it clear that Mary does anything she does, not by her own power, but because she's God's Mom, and as she did at the wedding at Cana, she can still do

Not to put words into your mouth but does that mean Mary has some sort of power over Christ- being His mother an' all ?
ie Mary was able to force Jesus to do something? Or was it simply out of God's good pleasure that Jesus performed the miracle?

quote:
The first bit of that prayer uses a Byzantine poetic convention that you'll see in lots and lots of our prayers and liturgical poetry.

The other thing is you did not start at the beginning of the prayer for some reason that ends with talking of Mary as the Mediatress -are the first and last line of the prayer perchance linked. The start goes as follows

quote:
All-merciful Virgin Theotokos, Mother of compassions and love for mankind, my most beloved hope and aspiration

You seem to miss my whole analogy of my wife being merciful but only God is all merciful and I thought it was my most humourous comments?

I suppose in response to Eliab statement earlier it is inconsequential whether 2 and 5 are right or wrong in comparison to the prayers that I have highlighted. His example is of one of asking whereas the ones highlighted are giving praise and attributes to Mary that some of us truly believe are God's and are not conferred to another simply because of her being predestinated to bring Christ into the world.

quote:
Yes, the prayer before the icon is directed to Mary. The prayer passes through the icon to the person depicted in it. And as the person in the icon is also an icon, being made in the image of God, any honor or praise granted to the icon or to the saint is ultimately honor and praise to God.

So the logic is

man prays to the physical icon which is directed to someone in heaven who is also an icon which then directs the praise to God?

Do these middlemen take a "cut" of the praise ?

According to Vine there are 4 words that are translated to pray

Euchomai - to pray (to God) to wish Euchomai
Proseuchomai - to pray is always used of prayer to God, and is the most frequent in this respect
Proseuchomai
Erotao - to ask , translated as pray Erotao
Deomai - to desire Deomai

I also think if we define prayer as asking then it must be acceptable for both camps to use, as Jesus asks(prays) of Simon in Luke 5 v 3 to put the boat out. AS the other such as proseuchomai would not be appropriate because it talks of Elijah praying - and being a Jew it could only possibly be to God.

Eliab said

quote:
I suppose it might be asking Mary to forgive us offences against her personally - perhaps, the grief we cause her by rejecting her son - which would, after all, be only polite before going on to request something of her. Or it might be asking her to forgive in the way that a catholic might say 'Father, forgive ... ' to a priest - not asking for the personal indulgence of the priest as a man, but for a declaration of forgiveness by him as the minister of a forgiving God.

Either seems to me to stretch the apparent meaning a little too far

If I then went on to put what the priest says next per the second site - to give perspective to Eliab's comments on forgiving sins

quote:
Wisdom, Most Holy Theotokos, save us

I think it gets stretched even further, perhaps to breaking point?

[code]

[ 14. December 2005, 01:29: Message edited by: John Holding ]

--------------------
I'm holding out for Grace......, because I know who I am, and I hope I don't have to depend on my own religiosity
Bono

Posts: 395 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2004 | IP: Logged

Dobbo
Shipmate
# 5850

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Chesterbelloc:

quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
But it would seem that we disagree that passages in the Bible amount to a prohibition of these 'other' prayers. We may have to leave it at that.
Before we do, Komensky, can I just clear up the outstanding issues in re Christ's giving us the "Our Father"? Is this still one of those passages which you think excludes prayers to the Saints? Are there others you haven't raised, or to which you don't think we've given a good answer?

Having looked into the Greek per above

The example Christ spoke of when He says Our Father is actually proseuchomai - which is used towards God (it is mentioned to other gods but only as part of idolatrous worship ) per Thayers Lexicon ie proseuchomai is mentioned with respect to Elijah (James 5 v 17), I do not think he would of known any of the saints to pray to.

So I think this template of prayer is only expected to go to God. In My Humble Opinion.

As discussed there are other words for prayer which are not simply ascribed to God and I would not dispute could be directed to anyone even fellow shipmates ie ask. (erotao)

G4336
προσεύχομαι
proseuchomai
pros-yoo'-khom-ahee
From G4314 and G2172; to pray to God, that is, supplicate, worship: - pray (X earnestly, for), make prayer.

Another example of proseuchomai is Matthew 6 v 6

quote:
But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you

--------------------
I'm holding out for Grace......, because I know who I am, and I hope I don't have to depend on my own religiosity
Bono

Posts: 395 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2004 | IP: Logged

Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Dobbo:
I did not notice the following said of Mary in

quote:
IKOS 3 - Rejoice! Propitiation of the whole world.
IKOS 8 - Rejoice! For through Thee our sin is remitted:
IKOS 10 - Rejoice! Provider of God’s mercy.
IKOS 12 - He hallowed and He glorified thee
Can we excuse poetic language from being theologically preposterous - I am sure I could find some satanic poetry that no one on the board would think it was acceptable because "It is ok it's just poetry."

I'm not sure what part you consider theologically preposterous. Surely Jesus is God's Mercy, and Mary provided him to us in the sense that she's the one who said Yes to God, thus allowing his Incarnation. Without her obedience, we would not have received the forgiveness of our sins. And God has hallowed her and glorified her -- she isn't holy and glorious by her own right, but because God has granted holiness and glory to her.

quote:
From what you are saying Mary stands between us (in the sense of bridging the Divine and the human)and Jesus, and Jesus who stands before God as a man. But then why pray to ask her to show mercy surely it is only God we should look to for mercy.

When we are ill, Dobbo, to whom do we look for healing? Surely it is God alone who heals us. He said to his people in Egypt, "I am the LORD, who heals you." It is God who forgives all our iniquities, who heals all our diseases. Over and over, the Scriptures identify God as our healer.

But we can also receive healing from doctors, from medication, from our own immune system. Recognizing their role in our healing doesn't mean that we're ignoring God's role; praising a doctor or a medication doesn't mean we're granting them attributes that belong only to God.

quote:
Why are mercy and mediatress mentioned in the same sentence - is it because there is a direct correlation? There certainly is when we talk of Christ being mediator and showing mercy.

Of course there is a direct connection. We receive God's mercy, through Christ, because Mary was able, in her flesh, to mediate the human and divine natures.

quote:
Not to put words into your mouth but does that mean Mary has some sort of power over Christ- being His mother an' all ?
ie Mary was able to force Jesus to do something? Or was it simply out of God's good pleasure that Jesus performed the miracle?

Of course Mary doesn't force her Son to do anything. Does a righteous man, by his effectual fervent prayer, force God to do anything? Yet the Scriptures say that such prayers avail much. If so, Dobbo, if your effectual, fervent prayers will avail much, why should we not expect that the prayers of God's mother will also avail much? When God answers your prayers, is it because you have forced God to do it, or out of God's good pleasure?

It's not "either God chose to do it, or Mary made him do it," it's "because of God's mercy, grace, and love, he chose to do what Mary asked." Change Mary to Dobbo, and it's the same thing.

quote:

quote:
All-merciful Virgin Theotokos, Mother of compassions and love for mankind, my most beloved hope and aspiration
You seem to miss my whole analogy of my wife being merciful but only God is all merciful and I thought it was my most humourous comments?

Sorry for missing it. Remember what John told us? "We know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.
promised us that we shall be like him." So if God is holy, you shall also be holy. If God is all-merciful, you shall be all-merciful.

We believe that Mary has already seen God as He is, and has received the fulfillment of this promise. But it's not a promise made only to her, but to all of us.

quote:
Do these middlemen take a "cut" of the praise ?

Of course, and rightly so. Please, read "On the Divine Images."

quote:
Wisdom, Most Holy Theotokos, save us
quote:
I think it gets stretched even further, perhaps to breaking point?

In Romans, Paul says that he wants to provoke his brethren to jealousy, and so save them. He said that a wife may save her husband, or a husband his wife. And Peter said that baptism saves us.

But getting wet doesn't save us. It's God who saves us through baptism. Paul couldn't save his brothers on his own. It's God who could save them, through Paul's ministry.

So how is saying that Mary saves us any different? We are not saying that Mary is the Savior, any more than Paul was claiming to be the Savior. A man can be a part of his wife's salvation, by his love for her, by his prayers for her, by his godly example, and in that sense he can save her. In the same way, Mary, by her obedience, by her prayers, by her love, can participate with God in our salvation.

God does most of his work through the hands of those who love him and serve him. When you say, "Thanks for dinner!" to the person who prepared it, does that mean you are giving them thanksgiving and praise that belongs to God? Not at all.

Again, it's not either/or. It's not like we love Mary and therefore we don't love God. It's not like we honor her and therefore we don't honor God. Rather, because we do honor God, we also honor those whom he has honored. Because we love God, we love those whom he loves.

[ 13. December 2005, 20:40: Message edited by: josephine ]

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003 | IP: Logged

Lyda*Rose

Ship's broken porthole
# 4544

Posted

You are awfully persuasive, josephine [Smile]

. Maybe I ought to try out a rosary. And there are a few saints I've always been tempted to chat with: Philip Neri, Hugh of Lincoln, Teresa of Avila, Martin de Porres, Michael the Archangel...

--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano

Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003 | IP: Logged

Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
You are awfully persuasive, josephine . Maybe I ought to try out a rosary. And there are a few saints I've always been tempted to chat with: Philip Neri, Hugh of Lincoln, Teresa of Avila, Martin de Porres, Michael the Archangel...

FWIW, I've found it useful to start with, "God, I hope you don't mind this...Hi X, how are you?". Helps me deal with qualms.

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001 | IP: Logged

Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
My question is... what do you think Jesus meant by it when he used the word? Just a curious question to pick your oversized brain.

Any Greek/Aramaic scholars who want to parse out the word Jesus used for "pray" from the texts?

Looks like Dobbo already took a crack at this one, and did a fine job. I don't speak Greek, beyond the occasional liturgical word here or there. But it appears that one reason for the confusion in English is that our Lord apparently meant several different things when he said pray.

It's kind of like that passage in John, where Jesus said, "Do you love me?" "Do you love me?" "Do you love me?" And the third time, John is grieved because Jesus asked "Do you love me?" So what is that about? In English, it doesn't make a lot of sense. But in Greek, I am told, that passage uses two completely different words for love.

And since there are four or five words that mean different shades of what we mean by "pray," it's no wonder that we can hear the same Scriptures and understand different things from them, and listen to each other and not understand what the other means.

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003 | IP: Logged

Lyda*Rose

Ship's broken porthole
# 4544

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:

quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
You are awfully persuasive, josephine . Maybe I ought to try out a rosary. And there are a few saints I've always been tempted to chat with: Philip Neri, Hugh of Lincoln, Teresa of Avila, Martin de Porres, Michael the Archangel...
FWIW, I've found it useful to start with, "God, I hope you don't mind this...Hi X, how are you?". Helps me deal with qualms.

Good idea. [Smile]

--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano

Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003 | IP: Logged

GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by josephine:
And since there are four or five words that mean different shades of what we mean by "pray," it's no wonder that we can hear the same Scriptures and understand different things from them, and listen to each other and not understand what the other means.

This is the root of the problem, I think. I've watched this argument over praying to the Saints several times, and it usually comes down to an inability to grasp that praying has different meanings in context.

So we usually end up having
Prot: You pray to people other than God.
Cath: Yes. So do you, like your friends, in the sense in which we're using the word "pray".
Prot: No, I just ask them, but you're praying. We should only pray to God, therefore your praying to Saints is idolatrous.
Cath: No, it would be idolatrous if we gave the love and honour due to God alone to the Saints. We don't.
Prot: But you pray to them, and that's what the word means.

The point actually worth discussing in all of this is really whether or not the dead-in-Christ can hear us and thus whether asking for the intercessions of the departed is effective or a colossal waste of time, but for some reason we rarely get past "Stage One - Are Catholic Idolaters?"

Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003 | IP: Logged

Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Dobbo:
Can we excuse poetic language from being theologically preposterous - I am sure I could find some satanic poetry that no one on the board would think it was acceptable because "It is ok it's just poetry."

A poet, with whose work I'm sure you are familiar, once addressed a bag of hot offal in this way:

quote:
Fair fa' your honest, sonsie face,
Great chieftain o the puddin'-race!

Literally, and culinarily, this is preposterous. A haggis does not have a face, and is not recognised by any legal authority as being a chieftain of anything. Yet it is poetically true. I know it is poetically true because, whenever I read the Address to a Haggis, I want to eat one.

I suppose every poetic tradition has expressions which someone familiar with the tradition understands in a certain non-literal way, and would not even imagine taking in any other sense. Those statements are, within the conventions in which they are made and understood, capable of being true or false.

Norse skaldic poetry (of which I know a little), is the supreme example - almost every line is laden with descriptive ways (kenningar) of alluding to people and things that are not meant to be understood literally but as conventional synonyms. Speaking of the "king of the Greeks", or the "builder of Rome's halls", for example are both ways of referring to Jesus, not because the Icelandic skalds imagined that he had literally ruled in Constantinople or built at Rome, but because those cities were pre-eminently the places where he was worshipped as Lord. Therefore, if you know and understand the convention, it is poetically true to say that these cities are ruled on behalf of, or built for, him. And therefore it is poetically true to say he rules or built them. If you do not know the convention, you could not say whether the expression was, according to its own rules, true or false.

The reason I can't use the language of Byzantine poetry in addressing saints is that I know damn all about Byzantine poetry. I don't know, I can't begin to know, what I am meant to understand by praying to Mary for forgiveness, unless someone explains it to me. I can only guess, and I might be wrong. Until I have a clearer understanding, I think I'd be well advised to leave it alone (at least as far as worship goes) - neither using it with misgivings myself, nor condemning those who are fortunate enough to be able to use it without misgivings.

An example of extravagent praise of Mary, clearly influenced by Latin forms but in first-rate English (Scots, if you insist) verse might begin to bridge the conceptual gap:

quote:
Empyse of prys, imperatrice,
Bricht polist precious stane;
Victrice of vyce, hie genitrice
Of Jhesu lord soverayne;
Our wys pavys fro enemys
Agane the Feyndis trayne;
Oratrice, mediatrice, salvatrice,
To God gret suffragane;
Ave Maria gracia plena:
Haile, sterne meridiane;
Spyce, flour delice of paradys
That baire the gloryus grayne.

Full text here.

That makes sense to me as poetry. Literally, I could not address Mary as "salvatrice" in prose without some serious mental hedging, but because I know something of Dunbar's works and tradition, I don't need to do that when I read his Ballat, I can simply let my heart sing the words.

--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"

Richard Dawkins

Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005 | IP: Logged

Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:
An example of extravagent praise of Mary, clearly influenced by Latin forms but in first-rate English (Scots, if you insist) verse might begin to bridge the conceptual gap:

Thanks for posting that, Eliab! I'm afraid that's a dialect of English that I often need some help working through, so I'm sure I've missed a great deal -- but it seems that the poet had read enough Byzantine poetry (or other poetry derived from it) that he used turns of phrase and thought that would be very much at home in an akathist.

I think the single most characteristic trope of Byzantine poetry is a particular use of contrasts. So, for example, the Akathist to St. Olga of Russia calls her the "all wondrous and tender plant from which the great tree of right Faith has grown in the land of Russia" and the akathist to St. Joseph the Betrothed calls him the "earthly carpenter who was vouchsafed to be called the father of the heavenly Architecht" and "guardian of the infant Jesus Who once guarded Israel in the wilderness with a piller of fire and of cloud" and "nourisher of Him that sustained his people with manna."

There's also a great love, in Byzantine poetry, of the sort of extended metaphors that later came to be associated with poets like John Donne. So, in Dunbar's poem, making Mary the lantern by which the darkness is made visible and the infernal darkness dispersed -- that's a very Byzantine trope. She's the lantern that carries the Light and makes it available to us. And, later, calling her the daystar that scatters darkness, that fits, too. In fact, that's a common image of Mary in Byzantine poetry, the daystar that precedes the Sun, the dawn that brings forth the day.

And I love the image, from Dunbar, of her making our odds even! Wonderful poem. Thanks.

[ 14. December 2005, 13:51: Message edited by: josephine ]

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003 | IP: Logged

St. Sebastian

Staggering ever onward
# 312

Posted

Josephine, thanks for your posts. You've helped me understand some things much better (as have some others). I've had a lot of trouble with some of the prayers to and descriptions of the Theotokos, especially those about her being "our only hope and comfort" and asking her to "save us", but I begin to see them differently now.

My heart is in sync with the Orthodox veneration of the Virgin, but my mind has more trouble with it and I hate when those two can't get on the same page!

I just got Saint John Maximovitch's little book on the Orthodox Veneration of Mary, which I'm told will be a big help, so I'll be back after I read it!

--------------------
St. Seb

In Spite of Everything: Yes.

Posts: 962 | From: Burlington, North Carolina | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged

Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by St. Sebastian:
My heart is in sync with the Orthodox veneration of the Virgin, but my mind has more trouble with it and I hate when those two can't get on the same page!

I understand entirely. I was raised Presbyterian, and Presbyterians just don't do saints. When I was in college, I found much about the Catholic church attractive, but there were the saints. I thought I could never join a church where the saints are venerated.

But here I am, in the Orthodox Church, where the saints have played an enormous role in my spiritual growth and development. Because of them, I understand God better, am more sure of his love, and, I think, I love him more.

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003 | IP: Logged

Dobbo
Shipmate
# 5850

Posted

Josephine –you have put forward some very good arguments and it has challenged me to open parts of my mind that I in times past used to contemplate on God and you have help restored that desire to know God more and understand what I believe and why I believe it. For this I truly thank you. It has taken me back to a point when I was a young Christian and was “turned on” by theology and knowing more about the one I love.

I had to go back to some first principles with respect to your points firstly about mediatress. The first thing I had to look at was what is a mediator

A mediator is one who intervenes between contesting parties for the sake of making reconciliation

Such as a judge mediating in a divorce setting or a tribunal in an employment dispute.

I have to confess that in looking at it further Moses could be considered a mediator for Israel (Deuteronomy 5 v 5) so I will have to concede that calling Mary mediatress is not as problematic as I first thought. So Mary could be likened to Moses.

As you have suggested, the scriptures apply the term, in a higher sense than the above, to Christ.(ie the one mediator between God and man) It is Christ that
1) In respect to God, He should propitiate the just displeasure of God by expiating the guilt of sin
2) In respect to man, He should reveal the truth to us concerning God and our relationship to Him, that our deliverance from sin and from the powers of an evil world shall be perfected.
This mediatorial role involved all three of Christ’s great functions of prophet, priest and king.

veneration of the Theotokos
I found this article very revealing – and it helped me understand Orthodoxy as opposed to Roman Catholicism in respect to the Immaculate Conception. I do not know if this article truly reflects Orthodoxy as a whole – but I understand the logic and thinking of it (though not necessarily agreeing with it. [Devil]

Iconoclasts rule ok [Devil]

).

What interested me is the following

quote:
Thus, when the Church tells us in her hymns and icons that the Apostles were miraculously gathered from the ends of the earth in order to be present at the repose and burial of the Mother of God, we as Orthodox Christians are not free to deny this or reinterpret it, but must believe as the Church hands it down to us, with simplicity of heart.

Would this apply to all the teachings of the Orthodox Church?

quote:
A Prayer to Your Guardian Angel

O Angel of Christ, holy guardian and protector of my soul
and body, forgive me every transgression which I have
committed this day and deliver me from every craft of my
enemy and adversary. May I not anger my God by any sin. Pray for me to the
Lord, His sinful and unworthy servant, that He may make me worthy of the
grace of the All-Holy Trinity, and of the Most Blessed Theotokos, and of all the
Saints. Amen

web page

I think two verses in scripture states my problem with using any other name with respect to being saved

Acts 4 v 12

quote:
"And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved."

compare with

quote:
O Most holy Theotokos, save us!

The other text that I think some of the prayers have difficulty getting round is

Mark 2 v 7

quote:
"Why does this man speak that way? He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but God alone?"

You led me to a pet hate of mine

quote:
Josephine
It's God who saves us through baptism

I get very upset when baptism is linked to salvation when I think of all those that have been aborted. As a protestant, not holding to baptism being anything other than an outward sign, I have no problem in being able to say I know God will have saved all these ones as He did with David’s son – but what happens when you make baptism a requirement of salvation, can you have that same certainty – because there certainly is no baptismal font in the abortion clinics. Did God have them conceived just so that they have a lost eternity.

quote:
Josephine
Of course Mary doesn't force her Son to do anything. Does a righteous man, by his effectual fervent prayer, force God to do anything? Yet the Scriptures say that such prayers avail much. If so, Dobbo, if your effectual, fervent prayers will avail much, why should we not expect that the prayers of God's mother will also avail much? When God answers your prayers, is it because you have forced God to do it, or out of God's good pleasure?

It's not "either God chose to do it, or Mary made him do it," it's "because of God's mercy, grace, and love, he chose to do what Mary asked." Change Mary to Dobbo, and it's the same thing.

So if I fervently ask Mary that she would help me win the lottery – God will choose to do it? [Devil]

quote:
Josephine
Sorry for missing it. Remember what John told us? "We know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.
promised us that we shall be like him." So if God is holy, you shall also be holy. If God is all-merciful, you shall be all-merciful

Logically – if Christ is eternal we shall be eternal? If Christ is infinite we shall be infinite?

Isa.40:25

quote:
To whom then will you liken Me
That I would be his equal?" says the Holy One.

I would suggest that we as humans will be like the perfect Christ the man – I do not we can ascribe attributes of God like being all merciful and eternal to ourselves even in our perfected state.

In my research may I also say that again I apologise about saying there are more prayers to Mary (trouble of looking at books rather than finding out for yourself) - the ones that I have picked are truly a small minority of all the prayers written - with the vast majority being to part of the Godhead.

--------------------
I'm holding out for Grace......, because I know who I am, and I hope I don't have to depend on my own religiosity
Bono

Posts: 395 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2004 | IP: Logged

Carys

Ship's Celticist
# 78

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Dobbo:
You led me to a pet hate of mine

quote:
Josephine
It's God who saves us through baptism

I get very upset when baptism is linked to salvation when I think of all those that have been aborted. As a protestant, not holding to baptism being anything other than an outward sign, I have no problem in being able to say I know God will have saved all these ones as He did with David’s son – but what happens when you make baptism a requirement of salvation, can you have that same certainty – because there certainly is no baptismal font in the abortion clinics. Did God have them conceived just so that they have a lost eternity.

I think paragraph 1257 of Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church answers this point well

quote:
1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.[59] He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.[60] Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament.[61] The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

Carys

--------------------
O Lord, you have searched me and know me
You know when I sit and when I rise

Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged

Weed
Shipmate
# 4402

Posted

Here’s another poster applauding josephine on her explanation. It all makes perfect sense, as Eliab says, within the convention.

But could we take it a little further? Could we say that the authors of the nativity stories of the gospels, and particularly the author of the Protoevangelium of St James were writing in a very similar tradition? That’s how the stories of Christ’s birth have always seemed to me. The writers weren’t concerned with newspaper reporting, they were telling in the best way they could the story of the man who was also God. It wasn’t lying to say x happened even if x never happened, as long as x was the meaning of whatever non-X thing had happened.

Within the convention I can believe in angels, shepherds and a virgin birth. The problem I have, and this is what looks to me to have happened in the West at least, is when information has been plucked out of the convention and has been used as historical fact upon which to build more conventions which have become in their own turn used as historical fact. In other words, believing that Mary was a virgin is fine within the convention but going on from there to argue the physiological point of whether she had an intact hymen until her death seems to me to miss the point entirely of what the early story-writers were saying.

If Mary was in reality a girl unique in all of Israel who wove the royal purple for the veil in the Temple, why do people ask whether any good has ever come out of Nazareth? Why is the tradition that has come down surrounding Jesus of Nazareth that he was of humble origin, from the agricultural north, an itinerant preacher, teacher and exorcist, from an ordinary family if his mother had been such a star in Jerusalem? It’s the mis-match between the conventions surrounding Mary and those surrounding Jesus that I cannot reconcile and I know which seem to me to ring true.

--------------------
Weed

Posts: 519 | From: UK | Registered: Apr 2003 | IP: Logged

Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Dobbo:
veneration of the Theotokos
I found this article very revealing – and it helped me understand Orthodoxy as opposed to Roman Catholicism in respect to the Immaculate Conception. I do not know if this article truly reflects Orthodoxy as a whole – but I understand the logic and thinking of it (though not necessarily agreeing with it. Iconoclasts rule ok ).

You know, that's what I like about the Ship and similar forums -- I don't expect that we'll ever all agree with each other, but if we can understand each other, I think that's a good thing. Understanding is not unity, it's not love, but it's a beginning.

quote:

What interested me is the following

quote:
Thus, when the Church tells us in her hymns and icons that the Apostles were miraculously gathered from the ends of the earth in order to be present at the repose and burial of the Mother of God, we as Orthodox Christians are not free to deny this or reinterpret it, but must believe as the Church hands it down to us, with simplicity of heart.
Would this apply to all the teachings of the Orthodox Church?

The abbess who said that would probably say yes, as would many others. But there would likely be just as many others who would say no; you're expected to believe that it's true, but how it's true may be open for discussion.

In the Orthodox Church, we've got a fairly small number of doctrines that we are all expected to believe "with simplicity of heart," as the abbess said. Most of that is in the Creed. If you don't believe those things (that Mary was really a virgin when Christ was born, that Jesus rose physically from the dead), your faith is not Orthodox, to such an extent that you would probably be advised not to receive Communion.

There's another, larger, area, where the Church's tradition is clear, and if you disagreed, the Church would consider you in error (Mary's perpetual virginity, for example). But if you were uncomfortable with that teaching, and re-interpreted it in a symbolic way, so that you could affirm the essential but not literal truth of it, you could still be a good Orthodox Christian. And even if you went so far as to say that it's not true at all, just a story, you would not be asked to refrain from the Eucharist on that account.

And there's an even larger area where our tradition includes a variety of opinions (whether Mary never wilfully sinned, ever, or whether she never sinned after she conceived Jesus, for example), or has nothing to say. In these areas, you're free to believe as you like.

quote:
I think two verses in scripture states my problem with using any other name with respect to being saved

Acts 4 v 12

quote:
"And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved."
compare with

quote:
O Most holy Theotokos, save us!

But Paul said that a believing husband could save his wife, and he said that he hoped to save his fellow Jews by provoking them to jealousy. Those are verses in Scripture, too. How do you reconcile them with Acts 4:12?

quote:
You led me to a pet hate of mine

quote:
Josephine
It's God who saves us through baptism

I get very upset when baptism is linked to salvation when I think of all those that have been aborted. As a protestant, not holding to baptism being anything other than an outward sign, I have no problem in being able to say I know God will have saved all these ones as He did with David’s son – but what happens when you make baptism a requirement of salvation, can you have that same certainty – because there certainly is no baptismal font in the abortion clinics. Did God have them conceived just so that they have a lost eternity.

Hold on! You're reading things I didn't say. I did not say that baptism is a requirement for salvation. I simply quoted what St. Peter said, in his epistle that is now part of the Bible. He said that baptism saves us. But that doesn't mean it's required for salvation. If I say that penicillin wil cure strep throat, that doesn't mean that a different antibiotic won't work just as well. God can do as he pleases, he can save whom he will.

If you are going to object to the fact that God saves us through baptism, would you tell me how you understand St. Peter's words? If he was wrong, then the Bible is wrong, because that epistle is included in the Bible. But I don't think you'd say that. So how do you understand it?

quote:
Josephine
Of course Mary doesn't force her Son to do anything. <snip> It's not "either God chose to do it, or Mary made him do it," it's "because of God's mercy, grace, and love, he chose to do what Mary asked." Change Mary to Dobbo, and it's the same thing.

quote:
So if I fervently ask Mary that she would help me win the lottery – God will choose to do it?

James 4:3. [Two face]

quote:
Josephine
Sorry for missing it. Remember what John told us? "We know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.
promised us that we shall be like him." So if God is holy, you shall also be holy. If God is all-merciful, you shall be all-merciful
quote:
Logically – if Christ is eternal we shall be eternal? If Christ is infinite we shall be infinite?

To really explain the Orthodox take on this, I'd need to get into an explanation of the essence of God and the energies of God. We will not ever share God's essence -- we can't even begin to understand what it is. But we will share completely in God's energies. I think Gregory Palamas and Vladimir Lossky are the theologians you'd need to read to be able to get it.

quote:
In my research may I also say that again I apologise about saying there are more prayers to Mary (trouble of looking at books rather than finding out for yourself) - the ones that I have picked are truly a small minority of all the prayers written - with the vast majority being to part of the Godhead.

Thank you very much, Dobbo. That means a lot to me.

[ 15. December 2005, 17:38: Message edited by: josephine ]

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003 | IP: Logged

Dobbo
Shipmate
# 5850

Posted

quote:
Hold on! You're reading things I didn't say. I did not say that baptism is a requirement for salvation. I simply quoted what St. Peter said, in his epistle that is now part of the Bible. He said that baptism saves us. But that doesn't mean it's required for salvation. If I say that penicillin wil cure strep throat, that doesn't mean that a different antibiotic won't work just as well. God can do as he pleases, he can save whom he will.

If you are going to object to the fact that God saves us through baptism, would you tell me how you understand St. Peter's words? If he was wrong, then the Bible is wrong, because that epistle is included in the Bible. But I don't think you'd say that. So how do you understand it?

I do not think it is appropriate to discuss it on this thread - I would not want to side track it - I have mentioned my position on threads about baptism and noone has responded, it is just I feel strongly about children who die go into God's presence whether they are baptised or not. I know you were just mentioning a text - my comment was not directed at anyone in particular - what it was trying to convey is the idea of injustice for the children that are aborted not being in heaven simply because they were not baptised.

quote:
Josephine
Sorry for missing it. Remember what John told us? "We know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.
promised us that we shall be like him." So if God is holy, you shall also be holy. If God is all-merciful, you shall be all-merciful
quote:
Logically – if Christ is eternal we shall be eternal? If Christ is infinite we shall be infinite?
To really explain the Orthodox take on this, I'd need to get into an explanation of the essence of God and the energies of God. We will not ever share God's essence -- we can't even begin to understand what it is. But we will share completely in God's energies. I think Gregory Palamas and Vladimir Lossky are the theologians you'd need to read to be able to get it.

Yes and I appreciate it is difficult for you to discuss certain concepts because the East is ontological whereas the West is juridicial - although I have not got to the bottom of these words - but it certainly sounds like I know a bit [Biased]

East talks of energies and essence west talks of attributes of God.

quote:

quote:
In my research may I also say that again I apologise about saying there are more prayers to Mary (trouble of looking at books rather than finding out for yourself) - the ones that I have picked are truly a small minority of all the prayers written - with the vast majority being to part of the Godhead.
Thank you very much, Dobbo. That means a lot to me.

I knew it would - I think it does make me think of Greyfaces comment and think yes I could probably go onto stage 2.

quote:
Greyface
The point actually worth discussing in all of this is really whether or not the dead-in-Christ can hear us and thus whether asking for the intercessions of the departed is effective or a colossal waste of time, but for some reason we rarely get past "Stage One - Are Catholic Idolaters?"

quote:
Originally posted by josephine:
You know, that's what I like about the Ship and similar forums -- I don't expect that we'll ever all agree with each other, but if we can understand each other, I think that's a good thing. Understanding is not unity, it's not love, but it's a beginning.

The abbess who said that would probably say yes, as would many others. But there would likely be just as many others who would say no; you're expected to believe that it's true, but how it's true may be open for discussion.

I think diversity in the church is a blessing - different people would not necessarily fit in a church that only sings Graham Kendrick songs just as much as some would feel short changed if the service did not go on for three hours.

I think the unity people can have is in Christ whether or not people agree on doctrinal issues.

So Orthodoxy is a broader church than an outsider would expect but not as broad as say the Anglicans.

quote:
Josephine
Of course Mary doesn't force her Son to do anything. <snip> It's not "either God chose to do it, or Mary made him do it," it's "because of God's mercy, grace, and love, he chose to do what Mary asked." Change Mary to Dobbo, and it's the same thing.

quote:
So if I fervently ask Mary that she would help me win the lottery – God will choose to do it?
James 4:3.

quote:
But Paul said that a believing husband could save his wife, and he said that he hoped to save his fellow Jews by provoking them to jealousy. Those are verses in Scripture, too. How do you reconcile them with Acts 4:12?

Interesting verses - that probably could lead to interesting studies but they are not as core as Jesus saying

"I am the way, the truth, and the life, no man comes to the Father but by Me"

Posts: 395 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2004 | IP: Logged

Pages in this thread: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Printer-friendly view

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0

sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website