I reviewed a book written on this subject, in the following thread: https://forums.anglican.net/threads/mary-in-early-christian-faith-and-devotion.3176/
I think there is a trap that is easy to fall into. That trap is: thinking of "the church" as a monolithic entity or organization. The church is the body of Christ, the scattered true believers who have been sealed by the Holy Spirit. Many within the monolithic group were not then, and are not now, born again; this could even include many leaders of the organizational entity known as "the church." So when 'they' say that the church is led by the Holy Spirit, the saying sounds right because we know that we (members of the church) are being so led, but they're misapplying the saying to the hierarchical leader group within the monolithic "church," a group of leaders who might or might not be obediently yielded to the Holy Spirit.
I would adjust that somewhat, because the Church can't exist without ministers of God to shepherd the flock. Or more accurately, it can't exist without the government of The Shepherd himself, exercised through his ministers. But the trap you're referring to, is thinking of The Church as a monolithic entity or organization. That's indeed where the centuries of Roman propaganda have misled people. Either it's a monolithic entity; or if you reject Rome then it is "just a mass of people sealed by the holy spirit". No the Church is definitely more than just a mass of people; it is an entity, with boundaries and an internal structure. But it is not necessarily a monolithic entity. There are various "particular churches" (technical term) within the One True Church. That is why we have councils, as evidenced in the Council of Jerusalem in Acts, and subsequently. A conciliar model of church government is the apostolic one. Canon Phil Ashey wrote a book that explains how Conciliarism is the Anglican model of church government: https://americananglican.org/news/conciliarism-what-does-it-really-mean/
lol that’s great. It’s obvious none of the apostles had “Marian piety.” I wonder if the council of Ephesus that titled Mary theotokos in order to express the divinity of Christ would’ve ever considered naming her co mediatrix co redemptrix. It’s just sad the mother of our Lord has become such an obsession for many and they heap such extravagant titles upon her. Mary is supposed to make us imitate her by her great faith, not that we are dirty sinners and in need of her pure and perfect intercession. Though we are sinners, but I believe her to be one too…
You are so right, I never thought about it that way. How can people that aren’t even Christian be lead by the Holy Spirit? I’ve seen Catholics saying some of their leaders aren’t Christian. I wonder how a church can function with non Christian leaders lol… The guidance of the Holy Spirit is a complex thing. As evidenced by the various Protestant denominations, and the Holy Spirit leading people to the RCC or EO. Idk how to reconcile these things. Maybe the Spirit just guides us to where it thinks we will do best despite the doctrinal differences….
He was the Archbishop of Constantinople. It was just part of his official policy. That and he made a number of speeches known collectively as “Against the Jews” (which was code for Jewish Christians), to stir up popular resentment. This group of speeches was so harshly acerbic that they were quite highly regarded by the Nazis. Honestly, it’s hard to read about the behavior of a lot of the Nicene/Post-Nicene era “Fathers” and come away thinking they were truly “saints”. Cyril of Alexandria falls very much in this category as well.
Let's not get carried away: these are the people who helped define the Trinity itself. It is well known that the Church has mistreated the Jews, all the way down to the 19th century really when things began to turn around. The Fathers were no more guilty of that than anyone else. And as for the Nazis, they used the Hindu swastika so are we going to call Hindus the proto-nazis? Let's not use ridiculous criteria to demonize the Fathers. They were in far holier than anyone here on this site. And if you are less anti-jewish than some of them were, it's not because of your superhuman amazing personal holiness. In a different time every one of you and I would've thrown rocks at the Jews as well. Let's not posture about our own personal greatness here. Everyone is sinful and a sinner. We all need to plead repentance. I bet you Saint Cyril was not watching porn like everyone on this site, and I bet you he wouldn't allow little children to be killed in the womb like everyone of us allows. He would rather go to the stake than give a pinch of incense to the state; while we all give a pinch of incense and compromise our Christianity every single day. So let's focus on the log in our own eye. Don't be the self-righteous pharisee, be the self-convictant publican.
The Reformer Martin Luther, Saint Chrysostom, the Apostle Paul, and Saint Cyril of Alexandria (?) were all against Jewish people and Jewish Christians. What was their rationale for disliking them? Certainly, no one is a perfect person.
Whatever. I guess next you’re going to say it wasn’t Cyril who incited mob that murdered Hypatia, it was really Antifa, right? But what about the Hindus?! The point is that there are plenty of saints who did some pretty un-saintly things, and yet I’m not aware of either Cyril or Chrysostom repenting for the damage some of their words caused. They don’t get a free pass because of what they had to say about the Trinity or the Incarnation. And that’s a good reason not to be presumptuous in thinking that God will favor you because you ask for certain saints’ prayers. They may not be the kind of people you would want to represent your case, which is why it is best simply to appeal to Christ and leave it at that.
Personally, I never understood how a mortal could receive prayers. The ability to receive prayers seems to necessarily require omniscience and omnipresence, which are attributes that only the Triune God has. Just imagine the number of prayers that are directed to Mary every day: she would have to be God to even possibly respond/process to them all.
The only example in the Bible of anyone alive communicating with deceased Saints (I haven't read much of the deuterocanon) is when King Saul uses a witch to communicate with Samuel, which doesn't really go all that well for him. When people start talking about praying to Saints, my inner Puritan begins to fester. I apologize
I think this is right. Such practices are functionally polytheistic. The argument that Christian icons weren’t idols because “honor paid to the image passes on to the one being depicted” was actually the same argument used by pagans to justify their own worship practices. And those (Christian) practices are based on the assumption that saints have “excess merit” to dole out in exchange for our asking for their prayers. It’s got nothing to do with the Gospel.
Apparently even jews ask their ancestors to intercede for them. I don’t think this saint veneration is new to humanity. You can see many of the fathers mocking pagans saying they worship the deity through the image, not the image itself. It’s clear this wasn’t a practice in the early church. It’s not hard to see where it ask crept in when you take into account the Jews had a whole oral law that is now the Talmud and Mishnah, they did things outside of scripture all the time. What I find super bizarre is how RCs and EOs say it’s idolatry to venerate a pagan statue…. Like somehow it’s ok to bow before a statue of Mary and pray to it, but if you bow to a pagan statue it’s idolatry??
“Just how ancient and popular is this custom? The Torah tells us that Caleb, one of the twelve spies that Moses sent to spy out the Land of Canaan, made a personal detour to Hebron. What was his interest in Hebron? The Talmud (Sotah 34b) tells that he wished to pray at the cave where Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Rebecca, Jacob and Leahare buried. He prayed there for mercy on his soul and he was saved from the fateful decision of the other spies. The Talmud also states that it is customary to visit a cemetery on a fast day (Taanit 16a). Why? Typical of the Talmud (and anything that involves Jewish people), two opinions are provided: Some say that this is simply to remind those who are fasting of their own mortality—a graveyard can be a magically effective cold-bucket of inspiration when you're feeling smug and self-assured. But others say that this is in order to connect to ask the souls of the righteous who are buried there that they intercede on our behalf. In fact, the Zohar states that if it were not for the intercession of those souls who reside in that afterworld, our world would not endure for a moment. In other words, all Jews can be considered as one body. If the toe is hurting, it needs the head and the heart to help it. So too, if I am in need, I can call upon all other Jews—and especially those who are the head and the heart of our people—to pray for me as well. Because if one Jew is hurting, we are all hurting. Rabbi Shik then extends this to the deceased, as well. According to the Talmud and the Zohar, those righteous souls who have passed on from this world are still very much in touch with their students and family and care for them and their problems. We petition them to pray on our behalf—and they do and often their prayers are more effective than our own. After all, we often don't fathom the seriousness of these problems from our limited perspective as much as they might from their much more lofty view.” https://www.chabad.org/library/arti...k-a-deceased-tzaddik-to-pray-on-my-behalf.htm
You can’t extrapolate from the Zohar to all of Judaism. Go read through an Orthodox siddur and tell me where the prayers to saints are given. I’ll wait…
Apart from the specious OT reference, every other part of this reference is medieval rabbinic Judaism. The Talmud was compiled in the 4-700s AD, and the Zohar after the 1200s AD. I don’t dismiss that the Chabad may endorse this practice, but as someone who due to family relations is not very far removed from judaic practices, I’ve never seen it. That’s actually the reason I was quick to jump on the question, since I’ve never seen it myself. Now Chabad is a specific movement and yeah most other Jews don’t subscriber to their theology. If I remember correctly the Chabad declared that a recent Rebbe of theirs was actually THE messiah, the one prophecied in the Old Testament, and that he’d resurrect soon. Or maybe that’s just the Lubavitch Chabad school. But anyway they’re on the peripheries. And notice how they put it on the peripheries of their practice. It is something one does once a year, and even then, “Some say A, while others say B”. It’s not a definitive teaching, but more importantly it is something totally absent from regular devotions. If you go to a Saturday service even in Chabad, you’ll spend 3 hours listening to invocations of God, God, God, God, God. There will be no one else.
You’re probably right. I didn’t think it was too far off for Jews to do that because of all the other things they did outside of scripture lol. I don’t think even most modern rc churches pray to Mary during worship. Times have changed a lot, the new mass looks like a Protestant service