Something that prevented me from being a Protestant

Daniel Peres said:

A devotion is simply an affection for Saint or some other aspect of Christianity. Some Catholics have a devotion to the passion of Christ, and they spend a lot of time meditating on it. When the devotion is to a saint it has, I believe, two aspects. The first, the devotion means you try to imitate the great Christian in living out your Christian life. The second is that the particular saint is the person you like to turn to to pray on your behalf, since the prayers of a righteousness man availeth much. However, you still continue to pray directly as well.

That’s pretty much it.

Click to expand...

Does this mean I can pray to Copernicus, Descartes, Pascal or Kierkegaard?

Daniel Peres said:

The prayer of a righteous man availeth much. If they are in Heaven, then yes. However, the church has not declared they are in heaven. On the other hand, you are free to pray to your fellow Christians who are still living, and you probably do, since their prayers can also avail much.

Click to expand...

No, I actually only pray to Jesus directly whenever I do pray. Philosophically speaking, I see all others as being superfluous to the purpose of gaining efficacy.

But I surely would like to meet Mary, Paul, & Peter some day, as well as the figures I mentioned above. That would be awesome!

Daniel Peres said:

After I decided to leave atheism and return to Christianity, I decided I had to choose what church to join. I was certain I did not want to return to the Catholic Church. But I kept running into the same problem with Protestant churches. Why did so many Protestants lie about the Catholic Church?

Click to expand...

given that the Protestant reformers were all Catholics that had discovered some doctrinal or practical issues -- and after trying to reform the church ...were expelled, I guess I can understand why you might say that as a former Catholic

Daniel Peres said:

I even had my own issues with the Catholic Church.

Click to expand...

Would you care to share what those were and how you solved them? I know some former Catholics that are now members of a non-Catholic church and maybe they would find your solutions helpful.

Daniel Peres said:

I would always explain that Catholics don’t do those things. I would always get the same response which was something like, “Yes Catholics believe those things, they just don’t know it. And I would always respond, “I think I would know if, as a former Catholic, I was worshiping Mary, and earning my salvation.”

Click to expand...

I think you would agree (along with most non-Catholics) that the Ten Commandments say

"4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God,"

So when non-Catholics see hindus bow down before an image and pray to the one that the image represents and promise to serve that entity - they view it as breaking that commandment.

And when non-Catholics see Catholics bow down before an image that is not God himself, and pray to the one that the image represents and promise to serve that entity - they tend to view it in a similar light.

Daniel Peres said:

I’m just saying, there are legitimate differences like infant baptism, and the real presence in the Eucharist.

Click to expand...

I agree that there are some real differences that both sides agree to be differences.

But specifically in the example you cite above and in my response to it above what is the "other way" the non-Catholic was supposed to view it?? You can't just accuse them of "lies" without first showing the non-Catholic view of it that they should consider to be the more accurate one?

Daniel Peres said:

So are you saying the prayer of a righteous man does not availeth much? Or are you just not interested in the benefits?

Click to expand...

No, I believe the prayer of a righteous man does availeth much. It's just as an educated person (and as a philosopher) I place more value and use in going directly to the TOP. It seems superfluous, and not any less efficacious, for me to do anything else in my short life time, brother Dan.

If you think that praying to other Christian individuals if "more" efficacious because of the way you apply your now Catholic hermeneutics, then have at it. I'm not going to knock you for it, being the Existentialist that I am and the Protestant that I'm not.

Daniel Peres said:

You really never ask any fellow Christian to pray for you? You never pray for your fellow Christians?

Click to expand...

It'd be better, I think, if those questions included the word "do" in their phrasing. That way, the semantics would come across as being less prescriptive and more of what they only should be: descriptive in the speech act of inquiry. And that way, my answer can be beyond a mere "yes or no."

Daniel Peres said:

Wouldn’t you like your prayers to be in the golden bowls of smoke in Revelation 5:8?

Click to expand...

Who says they're not?

Daniel Peres said:

So then that verse about the prayers of a righteous man were a waste of ink. On the one Protestants claim they respect scripture more than Catholics, but on the other many Protestants have a practice of demoting or negating verses they deem unnecessary or, as you say, superfluous. Didn’t Jesus say something about hypocrisy?

Click to expand...

Are you hearing me? Earth to Dan! Come in Dan! Do you hear me? Dan, if you can hear this, please respond!

[Guys (all here at Houston Control)..........................I don't think Dan is hearing me.])

Daniel Peres said:

Did you not say requesting prayers from other Christians is superfluous praying?

Click to expand...

No. I was focusing solely and only on the application of what I know IS the efficacy of my own private prayers-----like those that Jesus said to go do in the private quarters of one's own place or domicile.

On the other hand, I can fully understand the sideways hermeneutical deduction of culling the fact that Jesus also said that, "Where two or more are gathered in My Name............................"

So, while I'm all good with others praying for me, as I do for them, as far as Eternal and Infinite efficacy is concerned, I ONLY have to have a one man's prayer to make something move. Like Elijah did, for instance. (Not that I'm anything like Elijah or Elisha or even close to their quality and maturity in faith as Prophets of the Lord, but I'm just looking to what I see, Hermeneutically.)

Also, let me remind you, Dan, I'm not Protestant. And I'm not anti-Catholic. If I was, I'd throw my Christian Smith book in the garbage can...along with a number of others.

And as fate would have it, those who think I should jettison my Catholic brethren can go sit on a philosophical tack.

2PhiloVoid said:

No. I was focusing solely and only on the application of what I know IS the efficacy of my own private prayers-----like those that Jesus said to go do in the private quarters of one's own place or domicile.

On the other hand, I can fully understand the sideways hermeneutical deduction of culling the fact that Jesus also said that, "Where two or more are gathered in My Name............................"

So, while I'm all good with others praying for me, as I do for them, as far as Eternal and Infinite efficacy are concerned, I ONLY have to have a one man's prayer to make something move. Like Elijah did, for instance. (Not that I'm anything like Elijah or Elisha or even close to their quality and maturity in faith as Prophets of the Lord, but I'm just looking to what I see, Hermeneutically.)

Also, let me remind you, Dan, I'm not Protestant. And I'm not anti-Catholic. If I was, I'd throw my Christian Smith book in the garbage can...along with a number of others.

And as fate would have it, those who think I should jettison my Catholic brethren can go sit on a philosophical tack.

Click to expand...

Please correct if I'm misunderstanding; you seem to be saying that you know of no other person (past or present) more rightous than yourself, of whom, you would benefit from their prayers. Is this what you are saying? If others want to pray for you, you have no objection. However your understanding is, that is unecessary.

Daniel Peres said:

Look, I don’t condemn you. I used to have the same view. That said, you believe that asking for prayers on your behalf is superfluous praying, yet scripture says it’s not superfluous. That said, since you are neither Protestant nor Catholic, you are not bound to follow the teachings of all verses in the NT. Fair enough.

Click to expand...

You have no idea as to what I believe exactly or don't. So, please spare me the "oh, don't you know I see through you" language.

Ya don't!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So, Dan, if you can apprehend that simple point, our fellowship as peers in the Christian faith will go oh so much more smoothly.

As far as following the Teachings, did I not say I am an Existentialist? I follow the "teachings of the NT" to the extent that I find the Bible to be generally (representationally, really) "real." It's not an issue of truth for me. It's other issues. Epistemic and historical and analytic issues.

And I'd ask that you keep this in mind if you think you're going to engage me. I'll do the same for you in return. OK?

Daniel Peres said:

A devotion is simply an affection for Saint or some other aspect of Christianity. Some Catholics have a devotion to the passion of Christ, and they spend a lot of time meditating on it. When the devotion is to a saint it has, I believe, two aspects. The first, the devotion means you try to imitate the great Christian in living out your Christian life. The second is that the particular saint is the person you like to turn to to pray on your behalf, since the prayers of a righteousness man availeth much. However, you still continue to pray directly as well.

That’s pretty much it.

Click to expand...

Thanks because that was what I was wondering whether it was simply meditating on her example, submission etc.


I was reading a discussion of someone on a catholic forums (not this website) and they were having difficulties with the language of the devotions in that they said they felt a disconnect between their understanding of the dogma of Mary and the language that a devotion contained which they were concerned was an excess.

FenderTL5 said:

Please correct if I'm misunderstanding; you seem to be saying that you know of no other person (past or present) more rightous than yourself, of whom, you would benefit from their prayers. Is this what you are saying? If others want to pray for you, you have no objection. However your understanding is, that is unecessary.

Click to expand...

No, that's not what I'm saying, brother Fender. But of course, the trick here is in the semantics embededed within the long chains of nuanced hermeneutical details and implications that are surely at play between us all, and for which neither you nor I have all the time in the world to list, explicate or haggle over.

But yes, If I would ask the Lord to "move" on my part, then generally speaking--- but not necessarily specifically speaking---my own prayers are in many instances efficacious....enough.

How we attempt to each understand and appropriate the power of fellowship in His Spirit is attentuated to the hermeneutical deliberations that we all make, my good man. I think you know this.

Daniel Peres said:

Since you like to philosophize , let me ask you your opinion about this…
You say your prayers are more efficacious because they are direct to God. But if a person prays on your behalf, aren’t their prayers also direct prayers to God making them just as efficacious?

Click to expand...

Sure. I've never discounted that.

Daniel Peres said:

This isn’t a trap. I just want your opinion as a fellow philosopher.

Click to expand...

But again, being that I am wary of just about every other person on this planet, I'm wondering if you're actually engaging what I'm saying, or whether or not you actually are trying to pin me down with some few bits of Scripture and Church Tradition that you happen to think are absolute, logical and will essentially knock the wind completely out of my sails.

I mean, I hope not. Of course, I get it that a lot of folks won't like the fact that I approach Christian faith, history and doctrine the way I do. I don't expect them to follow suite. I just expect bilateral understanding. Something which seems to be in short supply, even in "the Church."

2PhiloVoid said:

No, that's not what I'm saying, brother Fender. But of course, the trick here in the semantics is embededed within the long chains of nuanced hermeneutical details and implimations that are surely at play between us all, and for which neither you nor I have all the time in the world to list, explicate or haggle over.

But yes, If I would as the Lord to "move" on my part, then generally speaking--- but not necessarily specifically speaking---my own prayers are in many instances efficacious....enough.

How we attempt to each understand and appropriate the power of fellowship in His Spirit is attentuated to the hermeneutical deliberations that we all make, my good man. I think you know this.

Click to expand...

Thank you. I will pry no further, I think I understand your point of view.
However, my own understanding of the faith in this regard is more along the traditional lines of the Church.

Daniel Peres said:

My debates are always for the purpose of discovering the truth. It may seem like I have bad intentions, but I truly want to get hit back by a great arguments, if even for my own sake only.

Click to expand...

Ok. I'll take you at your word. Byself, I'm only interested in self-defense--even blind self-defense--where epistemic "hitting" is concerned among brethren. Actually, I take that back, even then, my self-defense has more to do in recognizing those situations where I'm not among Christian Brethren (whether they be Catholic, Orthodox or one of a smattering of other Trinitarian sectors of the Church). We're Ecclesial buddies! Family.

Daniel Peres said:

I have nothing against you. I actually enjoy people like you the most. You say you are interested in Epistemic and historical and analytic issues. Well so am I. So, we may not be fellow Catholics, but I do consider you a fellow thinker whose thoughts have great value. I only hope I can return the favor.

Click to expand...

You already have, bro! And by the way, welcome to CF! I'm always glad to see another sharp tack join us here!