Mary Omniscient and Omnipresent?

[daddave]

I heard on a RC radio show discussing how during a difficult birth Mary would be with this mother at her side in the hospital room.
That seemed very odd to me. Obviously God could put Mary in the hospital room. But the gist was more that whenever we pray to Mary she will be by our side.
To me it sounds like that is making Mary omnipresent and omniscient -- something that I thought was reserved for the Trinity alone.
What would be the Orthodox view on this?

 

[Protoevangel]

I heard on a RC radio show discussing how during a difficult birth Mary would be with this mother at her side in the hospital room.
That seemed very odd to me. Obviously God could put Mary in the hospital room. But the gist was more that whenever we pray to Mary she will be by our side.
To me it sounds like that is making Mary omnipresent and omniscient -- something that I thought was reserved for the Trinity alone.
What would be the Orthodox view on this?

I don't think that was the intention. The Orthodox pray for the intercession of the Saints, and we know that it is God alone who empowers them to hear our prayers.

 

[daddave]

I don't think that was the intention. The Orthodox pray for the intercession of the Saints, and we know that it is God alone who empowers them to hear our prayers.

What I gathered out of it was something like, I think of the poem "Footsteps on the beach" (or something like that) but instead of Jesus place Mary in there instead. Or think of those paintings that have Jesus side by side with someone working or in the hospital and replace Jesus with Mary.

While it is usefull from the standpoint to understand these saints are "still alive" and that we are not alone and that they intercede for us. It seems to me, and I have heard mentioned or at least implied, that Mary will "hear" our prayers better than Jesus will.

 

[Protoevangel]

In general, Catholics do know the difference between the created and the Creator. Perhaps the radio show went overboard, I don't know, I haven't heard it. so I can't speak directly to it.

 

[Kristos]

My personal opinion is that many of the poetic, hyperbolic and metaphoric hymns & prayers about Mary have been twisted out of context to some degree. IMHO, some of the earliest language surrounding Mary used her as a personification of the body of believers - the Church or the Mother of the Church. This was very common for a strong female figure to represent a group in literature. Over time, these metaphors became taken more literally and have caused confusion.

 

[rusmeister]

I'm sympathetic to Catholics, and listen to some Catholic programs in connection with the American Chesterton Society, and I DO feel that some Catholics do sometimes go overboard on Mary, that she does seem to be lifted above Christ.

On the OP, what the others have said. Speaking of "omnipresence" in reference to the spiritual seems to me a little like talking about the smell of the color yellow.

 

[daddave]

One thing that's always bothered me about being Catholic is that there ate.many who place Mary as the object of theory worship. While they think objectively that they don't worship or pray to her, in practice it is.
While the current Catechism is very speciific in how she is to be venerated, there are many past and present that go far beyond that. And hence one of the reasons I am interested in EO and EC because they seem to put theotokos in the right relationship to the trinity.

 

[rusmeister]

One thing that's always bothered me about being Catholic is that there ate.many who place Mary as the object of theory worship. While they think objectively that they don't worship or pray to her, in practice it is.
While the current Catechism is very speciific in how she is to be venerated, there are many past and present that go far beyond that. And hence one of the reasons I am interested in EO and EC because they seem to put theotokos in the right relationship to the trinity.

I note you say "pray" to her. You should know that we understand te word "pray" differently from traditional Protestants, to whom it means "addressing God". We mean "spiritual communication", and so pray to a good many people. It's along the same lines as to ask, just as we said "I pray you", "Pray tell" and "Prithee". So we DO pray to Mary, but legitimately don't think her to be God (or Goddess) in so doing. We ask the saints who have passed on to pray for us, just as you ask your living friend Joe to pray for you. So logically, if we couldn't do that, we could never ask ANYBODY to pray for us. Only we ARE told to pray for each other, and there is no command to stop doing so at death.

There are much better explanations out there; that's just a quick and dirty one.

 

[Trogool]

I note you say "pray" to her. You should know that we understand te word "pray" differently from traditional Protestants, to whom it means "addressing God".

Actually, many take it further and say that to prayer = worship of the divine.

 

[rusmeister]

Actually, many take it further and say that to prayer = worship of the divine.

Well, the salient point is that we do not.

 

[Protoevangel]

Actually, many take it further and say that to prayer = worship of the divine.

Well, the salient point is that we do not.

And people who do think that are ignorant of reality. Pray has always meant "to ask earnestly" or "please, if you will", even from the word's Latin parent, precari.

 

[JesusIsTheWay33]

I believe in almost all instances when Catholics speak of prayer, we mean the equivalent action of the word "orare" in Latin (as in "Pray Brethren..."/"Orate, Fratres..."). Orare literally means to beg, plead, entreat, and, in that sense, pray (it also has a specific meaning in some contexts of to speak as an orator - hence our word oratory, but that is clearly not connected with its liturgical/devotional use).

I do have on question, though: how does one unintentionally worship something or someone? In the Latin church we distinguish between adoration and veneration (the former done to God, the latter to the saints), but both are essentially mental distinctions, not shown unambiguously by outward signs necessarily.

As for the actual OPs point, it seems to me that the radio host meant something more like: the intercessions of Mary will be with the person in the hospital. Which I would take as an invocation rather than a statement. Not that Mary would be actually present in the room.

 

[Resha Caner]

I note you say "pray" to her. You should know that we understand te word "pray" differently from traditional Protestants, to whom it means "addressing God". We mean "spiritual communication", and so pray to a good many people. It's along the same lines as to ask, just as we said "I pray you", "Pray tell" and "Prithee". So we DO pray to Mary, but legitimately don't think her to be God (or Goddess) in so doing. We ask the saints who have passed on to pray for us, just as you ask your living friend Joe to pray for you. So logically, if we couldn't do that, we could never ask ANYBODY to pray for us. Only we ARE told to pray for each other, and there is no command to stop doing so at death.

So, the assumptions here are that the dead are conscious, by some means able to hear your prayer, and also by some means able to intercede.

In that regard, I have 4 questions:
1) Does the state of the dead give them abilities beyond those we have here on earth? I imagine there are thousands (if not millions or billions) of people asking for the intercession of Mary at any given time. Is she able to respond to all these requests?
2) Do the dead only intercede by praying to God for you, or do they intercede in other ways?
3) Are the prayers of the dead more effective than those of the living?
4) What scripture, tradition, or church father are these beliefs based upon?

 

[rusmeister]

So, the assumptions here are that the dead are conscious, by some means able to hear your prayer, and also by some means able to intercede.

In that regard, I have 4 questions:
1) Does the state of the dead give them abilities beyond those we have here on earth? I imagine there are thousands (if not millions or billions) of people asking for the intercession of Mary at any given time. Is she able to respond to all these requests?
2) Do the dead only intercede by praying to God for you, or do they intercede in other ways?
3) Are the prayers of the dead more effective than those of the living?
4) What scripture, tradition, or church father are these beliefs based upon?

Well, intercede may mean only "ask God" - we mostly don't know much about the dead, except that they are alive in God and God can enable or permit anything intrinsically permissible.
So, from an ordinary layman...
1) If God allows it. We know they are alive in Christ, and that the prayers of a righteous man avail much.
Evidently restrictions of space and time are not as absolute or even relevant for the dead as they are for us.
2) We don't know, but certainly believe God can permit what He will. He took Elijah up into heaven bodily; why not then permit His saints to do something with His power and approval? (Narnia, "The Silver Chair", Caspian entering "our world" with the children for a moment and whacking nasty kids with the flat of a blade comes to mind as a fictional representation of how we could grasp that)
3) The prayers of a RIGHTEOUS man are more effective, living or dead. That's why we pray to saints, but don't often ask for the intercession of the ordinary dead.
4) There's almost too much to name. This is where I'd let an energetic poster like Mac or Proto do the listing. (Dagnabit, I'm an apologist, not a theologian, Jim!") Grasping the Transfiguration is a good beginning, I think. Also that God is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and He is the God of the living, not of the dead. They are ALIVE.

I'll let others kick my behind if I've erred on any point...

 

[Resha Caner]

1) If God allows it.

I could say much about your post, but I'm afraid it would cause us to spin out of control. So, I'll confine myself to the above snippet ... and we can get to the rest later if need be.

I'm afraid your answer doesn't explain anything. I could use this same statement to justify all sorts of unfounded assertions. I suppose I am most interested in question #4 - the source of this belief. And I don't mean a quote that someone like Origen prayed to Mary. I mean a theological defense based on scripture or from a church father.

As it stands, it sounds as if you are saying: Yes, God made Mary omniscent. If that's not what you're saying, I can only imagine something very convoluted. God wanted to hear John's prayer, and he knew John would pray to Mary, so he enabled Mary to hear John. Umm. If he wants to hear John's prayer and is going to take action to that end, I don't see why he needs an intermediary. Just listen to John's prayer.

I understand that you have tried to answer that, but I repeat it in order to ask this further question. Does God limit anything? If not, this "If God allows it," idea is very disturbing. For all I know he might change his mind and decide Buddha better serves his purposes than does Jesus. Why not? I mean, if God allows it ...

 

[Protoevangel]

So, the assumptions here are that the dead are conscious, by some means able to hear your prayer, and also by some means able to intercede.

This almost sounds as if you believe in the heresy of "soul sleep". I hope that is not the case... It is certainly not a Lutheran position. The Apology of the Augsburg Confession admits that the "concerning the saints we concede that, just as, when alive, they pray for the Church universal in general" To do that, they must be conscious. In that, we agree with the Lutheran Church. We just disagree that it ends there. I will give you a few reasons, from Holy Scripture, as to why we believe what we do.

Note that I post these knowing full well that the Lutherans do not interpret the Scriptures in the same way that the Orthodox do... I was a Confessional Lutheran myself for years. If you are here to learn what and why we believe what we do, I will be happy to continue to dialog, but I will not respond to any debate or argument.

In that regard, I have 4 questions:
1) Does the state of the dead give them abilities beyond those we have here on earth? I imagine there are thousands (if not millions or billions) of people asking for the intercession of Mary at any given time. Is she able to respond to all these requests?
2) Do the dead only intercede by praying to God for you, or do they intercede in other ways?
3) Are the prayers of the dead more effective than those of the living?
4) What scripture, tradition, or church father are these beliefs based upon?

To add to Rus' excellent answer:

In John 11:25, Jesus tells Martha "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live."

Jesus tells us in Mark's Gospel (verse 27), that "He is not the God of the dead, but of the living."

Also, Paul, in his letter to the Romans (ch 8, vss 38-39) tells us, "For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."

Those who have died on Earth, are truly alive in Christ. An "earthly" death cannot separate us from God or from one another. We are one Body, one Church, in Christ.


Paul also tells us, in his first letter to Timothy chapter 2, verse 1, "Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,"

It pleases God that all believers pray for one another.


Saint John tells us in his Apocalypse (Chapter 5, verse 8): "Now when He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints."

Here, we see our prayers being offered to God by the Elders (with white robes and gold crowns - To see the robes in context, see: Revelation 6:11, Revelation 7:9, Revelation 7:13-14. To put the crowns in context, see: 1 Corinthians 9:25, 2 Timothy 4:8, James 1:12, 1 Peter 5:4, Revelation 3:11, and Revelation 2:10). These Elders symbolize the Church Triumphant.


Again, Saint John describes in Apocalypse 8:3-4 "Then another angel, having a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne. And the smoke of the incense, with the prayers of the saints, ascended before God from the angel’s hand."

We also read of the Archangel Raphael telling Tobit that he personally gave his prayers to God: "When thou didst pray with tears, and didst bury the dead, and didst leave thy dinner, and hide the dead by day in thy house, and bury them by night, I offered thy prayer to the Lord."

So we see that the Angels also offer our prayer to God. And yes, I understand that you do not see Tobit as canon, which is why I did not offer it alone.


Knowing also that any in God's presence must be righteous, Saint James tells us that "The effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much." (5:16)

So yes, the prayers of the LIVING Saints Triumphant (whom you have called dead, do have a effect greater than those of us who are yet to be made fully righteous.


I hope this helps you understand our position a bit more.

 

[rusmeister]

I could say much about your post, but I'm afraid it would cause us to spin out of control. So, I'll confine myself to the above snippet ... and we can get to the rest later if need be.

I'm afraid your answer doesn't explain anything. I could use this same statement to justify all sorts of unfounded assertions. I suppose I am most interested in question #4 - the source of this belief. And I don't mean a quote that someone like Origen prayed to Mary. I mean a theological defense based on scripture or from a church father.

As it stands, it sounds as if you are saying: Yes, God made Mary omniscent. If that's not what you're saying, I can only imagine something very convoluted. God wanted to hear John's prayer, and he knew John would pray to Mary, so he enabled Mary to hear John. Umm. If he wants to hear John's prayer and is going to take action to that end, I don't see why he needs an intermediary. Just listen to John's prayer.

I understand that you have tried to answer that, but I repeat it in order to ask this further question. Does God limit anything? If not, this "If God allows it," idea is very disturbing. For all I know he might change his mind and decide Buddha better serves his purposes than does Jesus. Why not? I mean, if God allows it ...

It seems to me that you start from the assumption that this is impossible, and my respose says that it is possible. Do you concede that it COULD be possible, that within what you understand of theology, God could enable a saint to hear our prayers if it did not contradict anything more basic and primary? (That's why the Buddha idea doesn't work; it does in fact contradict all Chrstian theology.)

Does it mean "omniscience"? I don't think so. It DOES mean greatly expanded awareness. But only within the finite human sphere, not the infinity of omniscience. I still see it as limited.

On Mary and "John", we don't think God NEEDS anything at all. He lacks nothing, needs no intermediaries. Only we don't see intercession as being "in the way", as mediating. For there is one mediator between God and man. But there are many intercessors. As soon as you've asked your buddy Dave to pray for you you are "guilty" of the same thing we are when we pray to Mary or St Nicholas. You are asking for intercession, not for Dave, or Mary, to get between you and God.

I don't know if that helps, maybe someone else will see something I've missed that will help you get it.

 

[Resha Caner]

I was a Confessional Lutheran myself for years.

I'll keep a seat open for when you're ready to come back.

This almost sounds as if you believe in the heresy of "soul sleep". I hope that is not the case... It is certainly not a Lutheran position. The Apology of the Augsburg Confession admits that the "concerning the saints we concede that, just as, when alive, they pray for the Church universal in general" To do that, they must be conscious. In that, we agree with the Lutheran Church. We just disagree that it ends there. I will give you a few reasons, from Holy Scripture, as to why we believe what we do.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you misunderstand the quoted phrase, and so have used it out of context. Regardless, we'll need to clear up such things before we move on or I won't be able to place much weight on how you interpret these things.

Your quote comes from the section entitled Article XXI (IX): Of the Invocation of Saints, where it clearly states "Scripture does not teach the invocation of the saints, or that we are to ask the saints for aid." Whether or not you agree with that, it makes the position of the Lutheran Confessions clear. We are not to pray to dead saints. It is not that we agree to a point and the Orthodox go further. Rather, it is an outright opposition of views.

Further, the place of the Confessions is as an exposition of scripture. By this it is meant that the Confessions cannot add to scripture an idea that is not already there. Also, they are not considered infallible. Lutherans do not accept a doctrine for which there is no scriptural support. Note, further, then, that the phrase you quoted is based on 2nd Maccabees, for which the confessions state that "albeit no testimony concerning the praying of the dead is extant in the Scriptures."

So if the authors of the Confessions did not think scripture gave evidence of praying to dead saints, why did they say this? Well, honestly, it could have been a mistake.

But consider also that the Confessions might be saying that even though no evidence can be found in scripture to support praying to dead saints, they are willing to concede the possibility that dead saints pray "in general" based on the passage from Maccabees. I emphasize in general. If one understands the historical context of these documents, one will realize that occassionally a statement is made to the effect of "OK, we can't know issue X for sure. Scripture is silent. So, we'll concede it's possible that X is true for the sake of making a more important point." What is the more important point? That even if dead saints are praying in general, they are not praying specifically, and the living saints should definitely not be petitioning them.

With respect to "soul sleep," I don't know all that might mean to you, but it is an idea to which Luther was sympathetic. Consider this quote from one of his funeral sermons:

But we Christians, who have been redeemed from all this through the precious blood of God's Son, should train and accustom ourselves in faith to despise death and regard it as a deep, strong sweet sleep; to consider the coffin as nothing other than our Lord Jesus' bosom or Paradise, the grave as nothing other than a soft couch of ease or rest. As verily, before God, it truly is just this; for he testifies, John 11:11: Lazarus, our friend sleeps; Matthew 9:24: The maiden is not dead, she sleeps. Thus too, St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, removes from sight all hateful aspects of death as related to our mortal body and brings forward nothing but charming and joyful aspects of the promised life. He says there [vv.42ff]: It is sown in corruption and will rise in incorruption; it is sown in dishonor (that is, a hateful, shameful form) and will rise in glory; it is sown in weakness and will rise in strength; it is sown in natural body and will rise a spiritual body.

Not that I expect you to adhere to Luther, but you would at least need to answer the scripture he quotes.

 

[Resha Caner]

It seems to me that you start from the assumption that this is impossible, and my respose says that it is possible. Do you concede that it COULD be possible, that within what you understand of theology, God could enable a saint to hear our prayers if it did not contradict anything more basic and primary? (That's why the Buddha idea doesn't work; it does in fact contradict all Chrstian theology.)

That is exactly why I used Buddha as an example. I can think of all kinds of possibilities, but what good are they if God says he is going to limit those possibilities?

It seems you agree with that (i.e. that Buddha is outside Christianity). As I understand it, Orthodox theology is framed by scripture + tradition (even though I find "tradition" to be very vaguely defined). So, I was asking if these beliefs come from scripture, tradition, or both? WRT tradition, was there something at a Council or in some other context where this idea was debated?

Proto presented what he thought was scriptural support. I don't expect that position will change, so I'll push on to the next question: what, then, from tradition backs this up? The section of the Confessions that Proto quoted basically claims there is no support in the tradition.

Does it mean "omniscience"? I don't think so. It DOES mean greatly expanded awareness. But only within the finite human sphere, not the infinity of omniscience. I still see it as limited.

Then what's the point? I can pray to Mary who is limited or God who is unlimited. I think I'll take my chances with God.

FYI, I think you and I see prayer very differently.

 

[Blonde]

Or, you and Mary can pray to God together and where two or more are joined in Christ's name He is there with them.