The Saints: A Summary

[Uphill Battle]

it seems like U.B. was saying he was ok with veneration but it is petitioning that bothers him, lets try and focus on this for a little bit

depends on what you intend by "veneration."

do I think people should be glorifying people?

no.

do I think you can talk about them? respect them? try to follow their lead? sure, go ahead. I WILL state that many forms of veneration I would personally reject. Such as kissing Icons, parades, feast days in their honour, etc...

however, I've got no problem sitting down, talking about a "sleeping" Christian, and the life they led, and how we can use that as an example for our own lives.

 

[PaladinValer]

To honor a Saint is to honor the Christ that we see through the Saint.

To kiss a Saint's icon is to kiss the Christ that we see through the Saint.

To bow to a Saint's statue is to bow to the Christ that we see through the Saint.

To parade a Saint is to parade the Christ that we see through the Saint.

Saints are saints who the Church recognizes as characterizing Christ in some way in such a way that said charactistic is truly Christlike. Some are martyrs; some are defenders of the faith; some miracle-workers; some are apostles; etc.

If we reject the Christlike characteristics of the Saints simply because they are not Christ Himself, then what are we really saying?

 

[Uphill Battle]

To honor a Saint is to honor the Christ that we see through the Saint.

depending on what you mean by "honour."

To kiss a Saint's icon is to kiss the Christ that we see through the Saint.

To bow to a Saint's statue is to bow to the Christ that we see through the Saint.

To parade a Saint is to parade the Christ that we see through the Saint.

I disagree.


you can bow to Christ, without bowing to a statue of a "saint."

Saints are saints who the Church recognizes as characterizing Christ in some way in such a way that said charactistic is truly Christlike. Some are martyrs; some are defenders of the faith; some miracle-workers; some are apostles; etc.

scriptures make no such distinctions, between saint, and Saint.

If we reject the Christlike characteristics of the Saints simply because they are not Christ Himself, then what are we really saying?

now tell me, how does not kissing or bowing or parading statues mean that we reject the Christlike characteristics of a saint?

what are we really saying? That we are reserving that type of adoration for Christ alone.

 

[PaladinValer]

depending on what you mean by "honour."

By honor, I mean honor. Veneration.

I disagree.

you can bow to Christ, without bowing to a statue of a "saint."

Straw Man.

scriptures make no such distinctions, between saint, and Saint.

Actually, the Scriptures don't use uppercase or lowercase.

And since the Scriptures don't even make clear the dogma of the Trinity, sola scriptura isn't a very effective argument.

now tell me, how does not kissing or bowing or parading statues mean that we reject the Christlike characteristics of a saint?

You seem to foget that there is a difference between non-practice and disaffirmation of orthodoxy.

what are we really saying? That we are reserving that type of adoration for Christ alone.

Or perhaps that Christ isn't those characteristics either.

 

[Uphill Battle]

By honor, I mean honor. Veneration.

They are not necessarily the same.

Straw Man.

not so. I did not assert that it is wrong because you can bow to Christ without the rigamarole applied to the saints. I assert that it is in no way taking away from Christ if you do not. You seem to think it's neccessary, for some reason.

Actually, the Scriptures don't use uppercase or lowercase.

exactly. so why some Churches do, is beyond me.

Paul wrote letters to the saints. People who were not yet dead, and did not perform miracles, and hadn't been beatified through a bureaucratic process. Imagine that.

And since the Scriptures don't even make clear the dogma of the Trinity, sola scriptura isn't a very effective argument.

that argument is as old as the hills, and just as inert. the trinity is in scripture.

You seem to foget that there is a difference between non-practice and disaffirmation of orthodoxy.

perhaps. Whether or not it truly is orthodox, is another matter. It's par for the course NOW, for sure, at least for many.

Or perhaps that Christ isn't those characteristics either.

and you talk about strawmen?

none have said any such thing.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

ROFL, I repent!
I'll look into anduoille "allegro"!

Don't worry, I can help you get that absolved, I know a guy.

 

[Rowan]

Sentimentality? I don't realy know.
Are you "kissing up"? Trolling for favors?

See, you don't get it. I'm sure you're not alone. How can anyone make judgements, then? That was my point.

Such as St Mary being "mediatrix".

But I believe she does pray for our salvation, while Jesus saves us. That's what that means to me.

Aha, made ya blush

Hard to say for sure. I definitely have an understanding most RC's don't. And I have a pretty good idea of their understanding, having been born Catholic & having graduated from a Catholic High School. Wouldn't you figure my understanding to be at least on par with the average RC?

Why drag slams at Catholics into the conversation? It looks like *somebody* has a beef.

Are you denying that venerating saints is a witness of your faith? You threw me on that, sis.

Assert what? That your religious activities venerating the saints is a witness of your faith? Sorry, I'm confused.

I mean a false witness as in ones God tells us not to bear: lies told about what we really believe when we say it's not true. Conversations about Christianity with some Non-Christians can mimic this, as those in the Non-Christian Religions board quickly find out.

You ARE a Sola Scriptura Girl, if you actualy DO make sure "traditions" agree with scripture, but if you did that, you would leave the RC.

Once again, as the description of my faith icon says, I am a catechumen in the Orthodox Church.

...and Luther's Sola Scriptura has nothing to do with me.

LOL, no... veneration as idolatry...regression, not innovation.

Speculation. Let me guess...the "real" church went underground to escape us idolaters?

Well, nothin' fancy... like the seperation that keeps my flesh from physicaly entering it.

"Spiritual world" =/= heaven or hell, as Scripture shows (my last post all had scriptural examples). A more accurate statement would be something that keeps your eyes from seeing it or something that keeps you unaware of it.

The spiritual experiences described in the Bible are far from anomalies. We have truly have no idea.

 

[PaladinValer]

Sentimentality? I don't realy know.

If you "don't really know," then who are you to tell her, me, or anyone else?

Are you "kissing up"? Trolling for favors?

Straw Man. The Saints do not bestow grace.

Such as St Mary being "mediatrix".

1. Rowan, if you haven't noticed yet, leans very EO. They don't have that belief, so why you would actually bring that up to her is yet another Straw Man.

2. Even in the VC position, "mediatrix" is not only not a doctrine, but what it means isn't what you imply.

Hard to say for sure. I definitely have an understanding most RC's don't. And I have a pretty good idea of their understanding, having been born Catholic & having graduated from a Catholic High School. Wouldn't you figure my understanding to be at least on par with the average RC?

That doesn't make you an expert on Vatican Catholic theology. Most VCs I've known who attended a church-run school knew squat about their church. My own cousin, who is currently attending a church-run university, knows extremely little, and he's Confirmed in that particular church.

Furthermore, the fact that you seem to like to twist VC terminology to what you want it to be makes me think your claim of knowledge, if it does exist, isn't used for honest purposes.

Are you denying that venerating saints is a witness of your faith? You threw me on that, sis.

It is orthopraxic, but not venerating them is also orthopraxic. What is unorthodox is the claim that Saintly veneration isn't orthodox, which was dogmatized by the Seventh Ecumenical Council late in the 8th century.

You ARE a Sola Scriptura Girl, if you actualy DO make sure "traditions" agree with scripture, but if you did that, you would leave the RC.

This is going to completely ruin your credibility, but Rowan isn't a Protestant. Most people who read her posts would note that her positions on issues is very Apostolic. The fact that she often hangs around TAW should also be noted as well.

If you are going to debate a person, you really should know you who are debating with.

LOL, no... veneration as idolatry...regression, not innovation.

No problem with veneration until several key folks in the East began to borrow Muslim ideas.

Well, nothin' fancy... like the seperation that keeps my flesh from physicaly entering it.

Sounds Manichean...

They are not necessarily the same.

In orthodox Christianity, they are the same.

not so.

Yes so.

I did not assert that it is wrong because you can bow to Christ without the rigamarole applied to the saints. I assert that it is in no way taking away from Christ if you do not. You seem to think it's neccessary, for some reason.

I do not seem; that is why you are committing a Straw Man.

exactly. so why some Churches do, is beyond me.

It is because the doctrine of Saints is ancient. And to distinguish things better, they capitalize.

Same difference when it comes to the word "hell." Back in the days of early modern English, "hell" could refer either to actual hell or to sheol. Today, we use different words for the different places: hell for hell and sheol for sheol.

Languages change to keep up with the times yet to refer to the same things.

Paul wrote letters to the saints. People who were not yet dead, and did not perform miracles, and hadn't been beatified through a bureaucratic process.

Straw Man. The VC system of beatification isn't the only Christian method of recognizing Saints.

"Imagine that."

that argument is as old as the hills, and just as inert. the trinity is in scripture.

Where is the Personhood of the Holy Spirit in the Bible?

Where is the connective verse that specifically says the Holy Spirit is YHVH?

Those are essential parts of the Trinity. If the Bible lacks affirmation to even just one of those, then the Bible is not concrete on the issue and the wholeness of the dogma of the Trinity is simply not found therein.

perhaps. Whether or not it truly is orthodox, is another matter. It's par for the course NOW, for sure, at least for many.

It is the ancient practice. The non-practice out of concern that it is not orthodox is later.

Historically speaking, therefore, it is orthodox.

and you talk about strawmen?

none have said any such thing.

Straw Man. I didn't say any did.