barry1@ihlpa.att.com (Barry O Olson) (01/07/91)
I have a tough time believing that the dead saints have any part in our growth or completion here on earth. First of all, none of them have been judged yet. The resurrection has not occured(unless I missed it). If they have not been judged, how can they act in our best interests? *Speculation* My opinion is that all ministering is done by angels who are able because they are perfect or have not sinned(not meaning the fallen ones). If one prays, petitions, whatever anything other than God, they may get a response to help reinforce their belief. Let's say we ask saint rupin to plead our case with God, but saint rupin has no place of interaction with humans because he has not been judged yet. Does God pick up on the prayer knowing that saint rupin cannot, or does an impersonator of saint rupin pick up on it(a fallen angel) to perpetuate and reinforce the prayer so the believer is actually given the illusion that saint rupin has helped? If the former is the case, no harm done. If the latter is, great harm could be done. The believer in the second case would continue to pray to other saints, and get answers or the illusion of answers(good vibes). Eventually, most of their prayers would be directed or manipulated by fallen spirits. I don't think God would do anything to prevent this. He has given us the formula for prayer(Our Father...in Jesus name). If we alter this formula for any pious reasons or whatever, we do so at our own risk. Comments?
oj@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (Orlando Johnson) (01/09/91)
[Barry Olson wrote about prayers to saints, speculating that such prayers end up in the hands of fallen angels, since the saints themselves are unable to respond. --clh] When Paul addresses the churches in the New Testament, he calls them Saints. So the members of God's church are clearly Saints. In Revelation, it is stated that the Saint's will be resurrected at the return of Christ. Paul believed that he would be changed in the twinkling of an eye when Christ returned (assuming he would be alive when Christ returned). Therefore, there are live and dead saints who will be included in the first resurrection. My understanding of dead is dead and no one can overcome this unless God resurrects them as he did Christ. There is scripture which states that the dead know nothing. Also God inspired the words that "The wages of sin is death and the Gift of God is eternal life." It is not likely that anyone will receive eternal life if they have not earned it, contrary to the popular myth of pagan religions of burning in hell forever. The only hope anyone has for life is in the same manner as Christ who was the first of many (firstfruit). Praying to dead people who have no power over life and death will not do anyone good .
conan@herb-ox.berkeley.edu (David Cruz-Uribe) (01/16/91)
I would like to follow up on the question raised by Barry Olson on the saints by expanding on the example of St. Agnes of Bohemia. In the formal canonization process of the Roman Catholic church, no less than two miracles attributable to the intervention of the saint must be demonstrated--that is, good evidence must be given that the intervention of the saint was sought in prayer and that these prayers were answered by a miracle. (Perhaps this is the case with Czechoslovakia--who am I to say?) Now let's look at the two options that Barry speculates on: first, that the saint has nothing to do with it, and that God answers the prayer. This is actually quite close to how Catholics view it: God answers all prayers and works all miracles. It is just that in His mercy, God chooses to work through all manner of vehicles, and will listen to prayers from all sources--including the saints in Heaven. If, however, the saints have nothing to do with it, then why does God answer a woefully misdirected prayer and do nothing to correct (as opposed to encourage) this mistake? Second, Barry speculates that Demons (fallen angels) actually intercept the prayer and respond. Here however, we must assume that Demons have the power to work miracles and create good in God's name. Surely this is a Manichean view of things! Evil can never create--it can only twist and pervert and destroy. Now, this is clear not a firm basis on which to base prayers "to" saints. But I think the evidence of the miracles attributed to their intervention needs to be considered. Yours in Christ, David Cruz-Uribe, SFO P.S. It's good to be back on the net after a long hiatus. Peace and greetings to those who were here when I left!
cms@gatech.edu (01/26/91)
In article <Jan.16.03.58.56.1991.7541@aramis.rutgers.edu>, conan@herb-ox.berkeley.edu (David Cruz-Uribe) writes: > I would like to follow up on the question raised by Barry Olson on the > saints by expanding on the example of St. Agnes of Bohemia. In the > formal canonization process of the Roman Catholic church, no less than > two miracles attributable to the intervention of the saint must be > demonstrated--that is, good evidence must be given that the intervention > of the saint was sought in prayer and that these prayers were answered > by a miracle. (Perhaps this is the case with Czechoslovakia--who am I > to say?) David! So good to see you back on the Net again. A query for you concerning our dear Saint Thomas Aquinas, whom we both love: Thomas loved a particular kind of fish, called Pike. Supposedly, Thomas's miracle, requisite for sainthood, was his desire and prayer for Pike out of season. A fishing boat came in with Pike even though this was impossible. This miracle qualified him for sainthood. Now, another story has it that Thomas's brothers, who were opposed to his vocation, tried to get him to change his mind by kidnapping him and taking him bodily into a brothel and locking him in a room with several young women. As the story has it, Thomas fended off their advances with a poker from the fireplace. Now, here is my question: Which miracle qualifies him for sainthood? :-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-) > Second, Barry speculates that Demons (fallen angels) actually intercept the > prayer and respond. Here however, we must assume that Demons have the > power to work miracles and create good in God's name. Surely this is a > Manichean view of things! Evil can never create--it can only twist and > pervert and destroy. We're in agreement here, David. As Our Fair Lord once said, "A kingdom divided against itself cannot stand." > Yours in Christ, > > David Cruz-Uribe, SFO > > P.S. It's good to be back on the net after a long hiatus. Peace and > greetings to those who were here when I left! Peace, live long and prosper! Yours in Christ, Cindy Smith SPAWN OF A JEWISH CARPENTER A Real Live Catholic in Georgia (Also an aspirant....sounds like something you're choking on, eh? :-)
jhpb@granjon.garage.att.com (01/27/91)
Barry Olson wrote:
I have a tough time believing that the dead saints have any part in
our growth or completion here on earth.
The following is from "The City of God", written by St. Augustine around
420 AD. I got my (unabridged, it's over 800 pages) copy in a
Waldenbooks or B. Dalton for about $10. St. Augustine was a bishop in
Hippo, North Africa.
In book 22, there are about a dozen pages of miracles of various sorts.
I will relate one in full:
There was a fellow townsman of ours at Hippo, Florentius, an old
man, religious and poor, who supported himself as a tailor. Having
lost his coat, and not having means to buy another, he prayed to the
Twenty Martyrs, who have a very celebrated memorial shrine in our
town, begging in a distinct voice that he might be clothed. Some
scoffing young men, who happened to be present, heard him, and
followed him with their sarcasm as he went away, as if he had asked
the martyrs for 50 pence to but a coat. But he, walking on in
silence, saw on the shore a great fish, gasping as if just cast up,
and having secured it with the good-natured assistance of the
youths, he sold it for curing to a cook of the name of Catosus, a
good Christian man, telling him how he had come by it, and receiving
for it 300 pence, which he laid out in wool, that his wife might
exercise her skill upon, and make into a coat for him.
But, on cuttting up the fish, the cook found a gold ring in its
belly; and forthwith, moved with compassion, and influenced, too, by
religious fear, gave it up to the man, saying, "See how the Twenty
Martyrs have clothed you."
Here is a summary of all the miracles related to saints:
A blind man is cured by the martyrs of Milan, Sts. Gervase and
Protase, when St. Ambrose, bishop of Milan, discovers their tomb.
(St. Ambrose was the instrument of St. Augustine's conversion.)
A possessed man is cured in a shrine of the same martyrs, in North
Africa.
"Others also were cured there, but of them it were tedious to
speak."
A blind woman was cured by the relics of St. Stephen. [the deacon in
Acts]
A bishop was cured "while carrying in procession some relics of
the same martyr."
A priest is cured of the stone by the relics of St. Stephen.
The same priest is later raised from the dead by laying a cloak
from the oratory of St. Stephen on his corpse.
A man with a great aversion to the Christian religion is converted
by a relative who goes and prays at St. Stephen's shrine, and
bringing back some flowers from it, lays them on his hed at night,
while he sleeps. "As long as he remained in life, these words were
ever on his lips: 'Christ, receive my spirit,' though he was not
aware that these were the last words of the most blessed Stephen
when he was stoned by the Jews."
two men cured of the gout at the same shrine
A boy crushed by a wagon near another shrine of St. Stephen is
miraculously healed when his mother immediately lays him at the feet
of the martyr's shrine.
a woman restored to life by a dress of hers brought from a shrine
of St. Stephen
another woman restored to life when her father, after praying for
her fervently at St. Stephen's shrine, brings back a dress to her.
[This seems to have been a custom, judging by what I'm reading
here.]
another young man restored to life by being "anointed with the oil
of the same martyr."
"Likewise Eleusinus, a man of tribunitian rank among us, laid his
infant son, who had died, on the shrine of the martyr, which is in
the suburb where he lived, and, after prayer, which he poured out
there with many tears, he took up his child alive." [How many
shrines to St. Stephen did they have in the region of Hippo,
anyway?]
"For were I to be silent of all others, and to record the miracles
of healing which were wrought in the district of Calama and of Hippo
by means of this martyr -- I mean the most glorious Stephen -- they
would fill many volumes."
a women cured of a long-standing serious illness by the prayers of
St. Stephen.
"One miracle was wrought among ourselves, which, though no greater
than those I have mentioned, was yet so signal and conspicuouis,
that I suppose there is no inhabitant of Hippo who did not either
see or hear of it, none who possibly could forget it." A man and
his sister, one of 7 children cursed by their mother, restored to
health at the shrine of St. Stephen, amidst a great concourse of
people.
Here is how St. Augustine closes on the subject. I reproduce it because
it addresses the question "Who is working all these miracles?".
To what do these miracles witness, but to this faith which preaches
Christ risen in the flesh, and ascended with the same into heaven?
For the martyrs themselves were martyrs, that is to say, witnesses
of this faith, drawing upon themselves by their testimony the hatred
of the world, and conquering the world not by resisting it, but by
dying. For this faith they died, and can now ask these benefits
from the Lord in whose name they were slain. For this faith their
marvellous constancy was exercised, so that in miracles great power
was manifested as a result. For if the resurrection of the flesh to
eternal life had not taken place in Christ, and were not to be
accomplished in His people, as predicted by Christ, or by the
prophets who foretold that Christ was to come, why do the martyrs
who were slain for this faith which proclaims the resurrection
possess such power?
For whether God Himself wrought these miracles by that wonderful
manner of working by which, though Himself eternal, He produces
effects in time; or whether He wrought them by servants, and if so,
whether He made use of the spirits of martyrs as He uses men who are
still in the body, or effects all these marvels by means of angels,
over whom He exerts an invisible, immutable, incorporeal sway, so
what is said to be done by the martyrs is done not by their
operation, but only by their prayer and request; or whether,
finally, some things are done in one way, others in another, and so
that man cannot at all comprehend them -- nevertheless these
miracles attest this faith which preaches the resurrection of the
flesh to eternal life.
Joe Buehlerjhpb@granjon.garage.att.com (02/08/91)
In reply to Joe Buehler's posting about miracles attributed to dead
saints, I'd like to ask him and the other netters who believe in
praying to the saints if they know of any such miracles reported in
the Bible.
4 Kings 13:21: "And some that were burying a man, saw the rovers, and
cast the body into the sepulchre of Eliseus. And when it had touched
the bones of Eliseus, the man came to life, and stood upon his feet."
I don't place much stock in the witness of people already
predisposed to believe in the operations of the dead saints,
including Augustine. Instead, Instead, we should try to determine
what Jesus or His apostles had to say about this.
He saw the miracles with his own eyes, in some cases!!!!! What has
predisposition to do with it? Were the bystanders predisposed to
believe in the resurrection of Lazarus? When you see God work a miracle
before your very eyes in confimation of the holiness of His saints, you
don't tend to doubt!
What my quotation of Augustine was intended to point out was historical
evidence of the Christian belief in the invocation of the saints. It's
not opinion, but FACT that this practice was widespread in the early
Church. How many early Christian writers am I supposed to quote? It's
just a well-known part of history that many are unaware of.
I believe that Matthew chapter 17 shows clearly that we should not
venerate the saints. Here we see that, after the Lord was
transfigured and had spoken to Moses and Elijah, Peter wanted to make
three tents (tabernacles) to honor Jesus, Moses, and Elijah. But God
the Father corrected Peter and told the apostles to pay attention to
Jesus alone:
We've gone through the proof from Scripture before. It's quite simple.
If St. Paul can ask his fellow Christians to pray for him, why can't I
ask the faithful departed? The only difference is that they happen to
be dead. So? Can they not hear us? Do they not care about us? What
about the joy of the angels upon one sinner being converted?
Here's a prayer from a work of St. Ephrem the Syrian. He flourished
around the middle of the 4th century.
"Ye victorious martyrs who endured torments gladly for the sake of the
God and Saviour; ye who have boldness of speech towards the Lord
Himself; ye saints, intercede for us who are timid and sinful men, full
of sloth, that the grace of Christ may come upon us, and enlighten the
hearts of all of us so that we may love Him." (St. Ephrem, In Praise of
Martyrdom, or something of the sort. I only have Latin abbreviations to
go by.)
Why question the legitimacy of something so well established by Divine
miracles in the early Church, and witnessed by so many men whom later
ages have called the pillars of the Church in their time? I'm just
pointing at the evidence, and saying "look".
Here's what a Protestant historian has to say on a related subject, the
veneration of relics. (Well, maybe Protestant. He was pretty
radical.)
Most offensive was the veneration of relics. It flourished to its
greatest extent as early as the fourth century and no Church doctor
of repute restricted it. All of them, rather, even the
Cappadocians, countenanced it. The numerous miracles which were
wrought by bones and relics seemed to confirm their veneration.
The Church, therefore, would not give up the practice, although a
violent attack was made upon it by a few cultured heathens and
besides by the Manichaeans.
Hmmm. Heathens and Manichaens?
It can all be reduced to this: Did God work miracles in the early ages
of the Church through departed Saints, or did He not? That's
essentially a historical question, not a Scriptural one.
Joe Buehler
[I have a continual language gap between Joe's Bible and mine. Since
I suspect others are in the same position, I typically try to
translate his references into the normal English ones. However I find
4 Kings 13:21 quite mysterious. The passage he quotes is in fact the
normal 2 Kings 13:21, once you make the translation Eliseus -> Elisha.
As far as I know, Catholic and Protestant Bibles agree on the names of
1 and 2 Kings. So I conclude that this was a typo, and not a
reference to some apocyphal book I've never heard of. --clh]