Do We Honour or Venerate Saints?

[MORTANIUS]

I have recently been asked by my RC & EO Christian friends, if we Lutherans venerate Saints since many of our Churchs are named after Saints. My answer was that despite the fact that we don't venerate (i.e. worship) saints, we do hold a place for them in the Church to the extent that we recognize their Christian lives and examples in loving Jesus Christ. They didn't agree with my answer and insisted that we Lutherans do infact venerate Saints - just differently.

I think this would make for some interesting discussion here amongst us Lutherans. What is everyones opinion or answer on this matter?

 

[LilLamb219]

You probably need to get their definitions of "Saint" and "venerate" first to really know how they view things before you can get them to see the Lutheran position.

 

[Protoevangel]

I have recently been asked by my RC & EO Christian friends, if we Lutherans venerate Saints since many of our Churchs are named after Saints. My answer was that despite the fact that we don't venerate (i.e. worship) saints, we do hold a place for them in the Church to the extent that we recognize their Christian lives and examples in loving Jesus Christ. They didn't agree with my answer and insisted that we Lutherans do infact venerate Saints - just differently.

I think this would make for some interesting discussion here amongst us Lutherans. What is everyones opinion or answer on this matter?

To answer this, you must first understand that veneration is not worship. Veneration is showing of deep respect. (Latin: veneratio : respect, reverence, honor, veneration.) You venerate a king or wise leader, you Worship only God. So, at the first, your very question "venerate (i.e. worship)" is flawed, and posed in such a way (perhaps not on purpose) to potentially skew any answer you receive.

That being said, naming a church after a Saint is indeed a form of veneration. Recognizing Saints days, as so many Lutheran congregations do, is a form of veneration. In addition, the Lutheran Confessions approve honoring the saints. They are honored in three ways: By thanking God for examples of His mercy; by using the saints as example for strengthening our faith; and by imitating their faith and other virtues. (Apology XXI 4–7).

 

[MORTANIUS]

To answer this, you must first understand that veneration is not worship. Veneration is showing of deep respect. (Latin: veneratio : respect, reverence, honor, veneration.) You venerate a king or wise leader, you Worship only God. So, at the first, your very question "venerate (i.e. worship)" is flawed, and posed in such a way (perhaps not on purpose) to potentially skew any answer you receive.

That being said, naming a church after a Saint is indeed a form of veneration. Recognizing Saints days, as so many Lutheran congregations do, is a form of veneration. In addition, the Lutheran Confessions approve honoring the saints. They are honored in three ways: By thanking God for examples of His mercy; by using the saints as example for strengthening our faith; and by imitating their faith and other virtues. (Apology XXI 4–7).

I agree, however, by 'venerate' they didn't like the point I made that they specifically embue their Saints with specific divine traits instead of recognizing that it is God that gave these saints the Holy Spirit, and so therefore they should recognize the power of the Holy Spirit and not the saint for miracles or requests made in Prayer - and not the saints who are dependant on God in the first place.

Their form of veneration goes beyond exalting saints as in terms of honoring them. Their saints have become a pantheon of deities from which they call on for specific needs - and they do not recognize that it is Jesus Christ who is the intercessor between man and God (not the saints).

 

[Protoevangel]

I agree, however, by 'venerate' they didn't like the point I made that they specifically embue their Saints with specific divine traits instead of recognizing that it is God that gave these saints the Holy Spirit, and so therefore they should recognize the power of the Holy Spirit and not the saint for miracles or requests made in Prayer - and not the saints who are dependant on God in the first place.

Their form of veneration goes beyond exalting saints as in terms of honoring them. Their saints have become a pantheon of deities from which they call on for specific needs - and they do not recognize that it is Jesus Christ who is the intercessor between man and God (not the saints).

Who is "they"?

If you are levelling this strong accuzation against the Orthodox (as you included them in the OP), you may very well have passed over the line into violating the eighth Commandment, my friend. You claim that they "embue their Saints with specific divine traits instead of recognizing that it is God that gave these saints the Holy Spirit" and that they therefore do not "recognize the power of the Holy Spirit". You accuze them of making the saints into "a pantheon of deities", and not recognizing that "it is Jesus Christ who is the intercessor between man and God."

Even with my brief study of Orthodoxy, I can see the falseness of these statements. I hope I misunderstand what you are doing here, because what I see is little other than a mean spirit behind hard heart ed attacks. Certianly I don't see even a slight attempt at understanding the truth before going on the attack. Like I said, I hope I am misunderstanding your purpose, or that you are simply having a "bad day".

Was this thread really about asking about whether Lutherans venerate the Saints or were you just seeking ammunition and mud to attack these people whom Luther called "the most Christian people and the best followers of the Gospel on earth"? (LW32:58-59)

 

[Jim47]

I agree, however, by 'venerate' they didn't like the point I made that they specifically embue their Saints with specific divine traits instead of recognizing that it is God that gave these saints the Holy Spirit, and so therefore they should recognize the power of the Holy Spirit and not the saint for miracles or requests made in Prayer - and not the saints who are dependant on God in the first place.

Their form of veneration goes beyond exalting saints as in terms of honoring them. Their saints have become a pantheon of deities from which they call on for specific needs - and they do not recognize that it is Jesus Christ who is the intercessor between man and God (not the saints).

I certainly agree with what you said her Mort. Its wrong to even think that a mere human could exalt someone to the position of Saint. What many folks don't know is that we as believers are considered saints, even while we walk in this sin filled world.

Just 2 examples:

Ro 16:15 Greet Philologus, Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas and all the saints with them.


2Co 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother,
To the church of God in Corinth, together with all the saints throughout Achaia:

 

[Protoevangel]

I certainly agree with what you said her Mort. Its wrong to even think that a mere human could exalt someone to the position of Saint.

Do you think that is what happens? In EO anyway (I don't know enough about RC to speak of their practice), a Saint isn't made by humans, they are simply recognized as such.

What many folks don't know is that we as believers are considered saints, even while we walk in this sin filled world.

Once again, speaking only for EO, all baptized Christians are recognized as saints. The "canonized" Saints, are simply those saints who have led such a life that those around them, grow in love for the saint, and follow the saint's example.

Just 2 examples:

Ro 16:15 Greet Philologus, Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas and all the saints with them.


2Co 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother,
To the church of God in Corinth, together with all the saints throughout Achaia:

Nothing you say here is wrong. Perhaps the RC would stand corrected by your and Mort's statements. It's just that I sometimes wonder who exactly we are trying to correct.

 

[Jim47]

DanHead

Do you think that is what happens? In EO anyway (I don't know enough about RC to speak of their practice), a Saint isn't made by humans, they are simply recognized as such.

I don't know much at all about EO beliefs, but I do know that RC believe someone can be elevated to saint hood, as with John Paul, correct?

Once again, speaking only for EO, all baptized Christians are recognized as saints. The "canonized" Saints, are simply those saints who have led such a life that those around them, grow in love for the saint, and follow the saint's example.

As I said above, I really don't know a whole lot about EO beliefs. I'm sure you are right, cause I think you have studied it a little right?

Nothing you say here is wrong. Perhaps the RC would stand corrected by your and Mort's statements. It's just that I sometimes wonder who exactly we are trying to correct.

Let me know if you figure it out.

 

[Protoevangel]

I don't know much at all about EO beliefs, but I do know that RC believe someone can be elevated to saint hood, as with John Paul, correct?

Well, I am not quite certian about the RC concept of Saints, and how they become such. What I do know about it is that it is a much more organized and centralized process. But I don't know if a Saint is or isn't s Saint until they are declared such. In EO, a Saint is a Saint is a Saint, the Church does not "make" them saints, but only recognizes them as what God has already made them.

As I said above, I really don't know a whole lot about EO beliefs. I'm sure you are right, cause I think you have studied it a little right?

And I still am. I find the EO facinating. I tend to agree with Luther's quote that I posted above in Post #5. I am also beginning to study the correspondence between the Tubingen Lutherans and the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, His Holiness, Jeremiah II. Most interesting stuff.

Let me know if you figure it out.

Well, first of all, I usually prefer to know what a particular group actually teaches before I tell others what they teach (referring to post #4, not your posts - again, I hope I am wrong about how I see the point of his post).

 

[Daniels]

Who is a saint?

Define scripturally?

Are there living saints?

What do you think of dead saints?

 

[Protoevangel]

Who is a saint?

All those who are in Christ are saints, and all who are in Christ are called to be Saints. Both believers on earth and in heaven.

Define scripturally?

Acts 9:13, Acts 9:32, Acts 26:10, Romans 1:7, Romans 16:1-2, Romans 16:15, 1 Corinthians 1:2, 1 Corinthians 6:2, 1 Corinthians 14:3, 2 Corinthians 1:1, Ephesians 1:1, etc. etc. etc.

Are there living saints?

See above.

What do you think of dead saints?

There are no dead saints, all of the saints are alive, either on earth, or in heaven.

 

[Daniels]

You mean Mary is living saint .

St.Mary, St.Mother Teresa.

 

[Protoevangel]

You mean Mary is living saint .

St.Mary, St.Mother Teresa.

Exactly, there are only living saints.

 

[Jim47]

Its great to see you join us in conversation Daniels.

 

[C.F.W. Walther]

I don't think venerating the Saints football team is right especially with the season they had this past year and..............oh wait! You guys are talking about the Christian saints...............never mind :o





.

 

[Edial]

Do you think that is what happens? In EO anyway (I don't know enough about RC to speak of their practice), a Saint isn't made by humans, they are simply recognized as such.


Once again, speaking only for EO, all baptized Christians are recognized as saints. The "canonized" Saints, are simply those saints who have led such a life that those around them, grow in love for the saint, and follow the saint's example.


Nothing you say here is wrong. Perhaps the RC would stand corrected by your and Mort's statements. It's just that I sometimes wonder who exactly we are trying to correct.

In EO Sainthood is certainly not an "attainable" goal among the regular folks in their common understanding.

And if the "goal" is not attainable, then Saints certainly possess "special" qualities in the eyes of regular folks in EO - "I am not a Saint" expression, certainly qualifies.

And if they possess these special qualities, this brings an unnatural attention towards them by the regular folks.

It does not matter what the EO states officially concerning the Saints.
What matters is how people relate to them in the EO.

And they certainly venerate them. And they certainly present that "it is different from worshipping".

However, in their venaration an unusual and disproportional attention is given to them - and this often crosses the border to idolatry, unhealthy attention.

Unbalanced theology is a dangerous theology, since the Scriptures are what keeps the balance.

Thanks,
Ed

 

[Edial]

Exactly, there are only living saints.

Now, you responded to the question whether St. Mother Teresa is a Saint.
We do not know that.

Yet we know that St. Mary is a saint.

Thanks,
Ed

 

[ByzantineDixie]

In EO Sainthood is certainly not an "attainable" goal among the regular folks in their common understanding.

One has to understand the difference between saint and Saint to understand how the EO view the Saints. My priest just went over this with the Catechumens a week ago. All in Christ are saints but Saints are those especially recognized by the Church as living a particularly holy life. The Church does not "canonize" Saints as in the Latin church but usually there is a local, grassroots movement in the Church to have a person declared a Saint based on how they lived thier lives. The Church will look into the claims and make certain there are sufficient witnesses and everything checks out. Note, there is no requirement that miracles be done by the person, as in the Latin church, for the Church to declare them a Saint.

And if the "goal" is not attainable, then Saints certainly possess "special" qualities in the eyes of regular folks in EO - "I am not a Saint" expression, certainly qualifies. And if they possess these special qualities, this brings an unnatural attention towards them by the regular folks.

They possess ONE special quality...living a holy life. Even Luther said these lives should be an example to us. And...you are right...I surely can not admit I live my life with the same holiness as that of a Saint. And the Lord knows I need these cloud of witnesses to help cheer me on as a I run the race. The Christian faith has never been a "me and Jesus alone" faith. The Saints pray for us and encourage us, the saints, to stay on the path.

It does not matter what the EO states officially concerning the Saints.
What matters is how people relate to them in the EO.

And they certainly venerate them. And they certainly present that "it is different from worshipping".

However, in their venaration an unusual and disproportional attention is given to them - and this often crosses the border to idolatry, unhealthy attention.

Superstitions abound by various members of the Church on earth. That some members hold to superstition does not mean the Church teaches it nor does it define the consensus of the Church. In fact, the Church works to combat the superstitions. Frankly, a little more attention to the lives of the Saints and a little less attention to self would go a long way in the US to combat the idols of food, drink, success, money, possessions, etc. And I admit that I am one of the worst who need the examples of the saints.

Unbalanced theology is a dangerous theology, since the Scriptures are what keeps the balance.

Scripture alone has given birth to Jehovah Witnesses, Gwen Shamblin's ministry, the prosperity gospel, and even David Koresh. The Scripture read outside of the context (read: mind) of the Church does not provide the balance you claim it does...or these heresies would not have spawned. The more dangerous theology is to ignore as She has interpretted the Scriptures. And I thought the Lutherans believed this as well...hence all the patristic references in the Catalogue of Testimonies which are used to bolster the claims of the Confessions.

Thanks,
Ed

Thank you!
Dixie

 

[Protoevangel]

Now, you responded to the question whether St. Mother Teresa is a Saint.
We do not know that.

Yet we know that St. Mary is a saint.

Thanks,
Ed

My answer really had nothing to do with whether Mother Teresa is actually a Saint or not, my answer was directed to the theory, not the specifics. If Mother Teresa is indeed a Saint (and I believe she is), then she is alive in Christ.

Aside from the more general use of the word saint to refer to all members of the Church, Holy Tradition also ascribes Saint as a title to particular persons whose lives have shown most clearly what it means to follow Jesus Christ. These saints are popularly glorified (canonized) by the Church, often in the modern era with a formal service to recognize and affirm the veneration of them by the faithful.

Saints are not thought of as either perfect or infallible, and it is only because of the work of Christ in them that the Church praises these people. It is because we see our Lord's countenance reflected most clearly in their faces that we publicly laud them, ask them to pray for us, and encourage one another to follow their examples.

The example set by St. Mother Teresa, of what it means to follow Jesus Christ, could not be much clearer. And any Christian who would seek to follow her example, in faith, out of love, for the Glory of God, would certianly be on a good and honerable path. And you see, that is exactly what it means to be s Saint.

 

[Protoevangel]

In EO Sainthood is certainly not an "attainable" goal among the regular folks in their common understanding.

One has to understand the difference between saint and Saint to understand how the EO view the Saints. My priest just went over this with the Catechumens a week ago. All in Christ are saints but Saints are those especially recognized by the Church as living a particularly holy life. The Church does not "canonize" Saints as in the Latin church but usually there is a local, grassroots movement in the Church to have a person declared a Saint based on how they lived thier lives. The Church will look into the claims and make certain there are sufficient witnesses and everything checks out. Note, there is no requirement that miracles be done by the person, as in the Latin church, for the Church to declare them a Saint.

The only thing I would add to this, for Edial's edification, is that none of the Saints considered themselves Saints, and none of them, in their earthly life, would probably have ever thought that Sainthood would be attainable by them. Even St. Paul considered himself the least of the saints, and the chief of sinners! If one thinks of Sainthood as an attainable goal, then their eye is off of the prize.

So my answer would be, "Thank God that Sainthood is not an "attainable" goal among the regular folks in their common understanding!!!"