Catholic Argument Supporting Images in Church

[JM]

http://www.roca.org/OA/19/19e.htm

Thank you for the link. I'll check it out a little later tonight.

 

[Cappadocious]

You are welcome to your opinion, but not permitted to take us to task as this is a safe-haven forum

Let it be known that Evangelicals invented the Safe Space.

 

[JM]

Let it be known that today is the Lord's Day.

 

[Bob Crowley]

I'm Catholic, ex-Presbyterian (although the only reason I was Presbyterian was that my father, who was Catholic but lost his faith, had me baptised Presbyterian as an act of rebellion). But when I became Christian, the first and most outstanding pastor I had was an ex-Methodist, so I missed out on the hardline Calvinist arguments.

Now we've got a few "images" in our church - a wooden statue of Mary, Mother of God (in the sense she was the mother of God the Son), a photograph or print of St. Mary McKillop, Australia's only saint, a series of plaques representing the stations of the cross, a cross (with at least one other church in the parish having a cross with a crucified Christ on it).

Now I've been Catholic for close on 20 years, and I can assure you that not once, not once, have I seen a Catholic bow down and worship a single image, of whatever sort.

The core of our faith is Christ, and Him crucified. When God gave the original command about "graven images", the intent was that the Israelites should not created and worship IDOLS. God himself gave Moses a command to create an image of a snake on a pole to deal with the plague (I've always thought that was a strange totem, since the "serpent" was mentioned in Genesis as the tempter, but I digress), and He also told the Israelites to put images of cherubim on various accoutrements. If that's not "graven images", then what is.

No doubt someone will say we worship "images", or Mary, or whatever, which really cheeses me off. Such critics accuse us of behaviour that we just don't do. In other words, they think they know our minds better than we do.

And the chances are that the majority of these expert critics have never once set foot inside a Catholic mass. If they did, they'd wonder what all the fuss was about.

 

[hedrick]

There is the need to connect the prohibition of "graven" images with the purpose: no bowing down to or serving.

Your exposition would agree with my assessment. But that leaves use of images in Catholic / Orthodox churches up to judgement on how they're used. If they're on an altar where people bow in prayer, I'd be suspicious. If they're there to inspire people by the example of faithful Christians, it would seem that they're OK.

 

[Bob Crowley]

As the practising Catholic, ex-Presbyterian who wrote the post just before yours, even if an image was on the altar, when we bow to the alter, we're bowing to what the altar represents ie. Christ crucified. The images, except for the bread and wine in which we say Christ is present in some supernatural form (and even then its only after the priest has asked the Holy Spirit to come upon them and make them holy - prior to that they're just bread and wine) are mere window dressing.

Got photographs of your family on your work desk? Worship them? Of course you don't! You probably "venerate" your family. But the photographs themselves are obviously not the real thing - they're just an image, or reminder. Ditto Catholic images.

As far as I'm concerned, the whole Protestant thing about Catholic and Orthodox images is a storm in a teacup, and about as relevant.

 

[hedrick]

Of course Presbyterians don't have altars in the first place. That thing up front that looks like an altar is (depending upon its position) a communion table or an elaborate flower stand.

 

[Bob Crowley]

I'm aware of that - I used to be Presbyterian. I even enjoyed that particular church the most in my church years - not because it was "Presbyterian", but because of the (younger) people there (I was still a spring chicken myself - we even had a gym under the church), and the wisdom of the pastor.

This whole thing reminds me of a quote my then pastor made about a church in Germany he'd read about (presumably Reformed of some sort) where the only items in the church were white washed walls, backless pews (aka benches), a wooden table, and a tuning fork to sing by. And that was it.

As he commented, "They'd gotten art mixed up with idolatry".

 

[hedrick]

Then there's the Presbyterian Church I went to in grad school: http://www.shadysidelantern.com/sanctuary primer.htm

(That whole site is interesting, but I'm showing the picture that summarizes the style best.)

 

[Bob Crowley]

It would have made a good Catholic Church. Other than no Marianism, or Stations of the Cross, there's virtually no difference.

Attractive church.

You might be interested in the stained glass windows of St. Monica's Cathedral in Cairns. My wife and I visited Cairns in 2014, and just happened to be staying in a unit around the corner, so I just dropped in. I virtually discovered it by chance.

It's rather plain on the outside, but the windows on the inside are something else again. Mind you the congregation doesn't worship the windows, but they're a real work of art.

The windows have two themes - the main display on the side walls are the Creation Windows. At the back there's a smaller display called the Peace Windows, which relate to the Battle of the Coral Sea between US and Japanese naval forces in WWII. Apparently servicemen in Cairns and on the Atherton Tableland behind Cairns could see the flashes of the explosions at night.

https://www.tripadvisor.com.au/Show...l-Cairns_Cairns_Region_Queensland.html#photos

 

[PanDeVida]

One of the biggest arguments that I'm having trouble responding to in support of using images in the Church (one that Lutherans make all the time) is that the Temple included many statues, images, etc. How can I reply to this from the Reformed perspective?

I tried responding by saying that those images which God commands are obviously permissible, but some of them pointed out that many graven images were not commanded but we don't see God fighting against them. For instance, Solomon appears to have made many graven images in the Temple that God never denounces.

Thoughts on these points?

Jinc. Images / statutes in a church or at home are not wrong and they do not take away from God. It only become sinful if one begins to worship putting it before God.

As for wine it is good, even Christ our Lord drank wine, but wine becomes sinful, when one becomes addicted to it.

 

[JM]

Beautiful Calvinist Meeting Houses

 

[AMR]

Jinc. Images / statutes in a church or at home are not wrong and they do not take away from God. It only become sinful if one begins to worship putting it before God.

As for wine it is good, even Christ our Lord drank wine, but wine becomes sinful, when one becomes addicted to it.

As you are a new member, please be aware that you are posting in a faith-based group where the rules prohibit posts (e.g., images) that advocate contrary to our confessional basis:

Statement of Purpose - Statement of Faith for the Confessional, Covenantal, Creedal - Presbyterian Forum