dUSt Posted June 21, 2004 Share Posted June 21, 2004 A) Why do some Catholics do it? B) Why do Protestants reject it? A) Because it's a physical reminder of the deceased, like a picture. It helps them remember, therefore, making them feel closer to the source. B) Because they look at it as some type of idol worship. They feel that people who do it are putting something else in between them and God. They see it as a prayer hindrance, as opposed to a prayer aid. I can personally see both sides of the issue. One doesn't ever have to pray in front a statue to be a good Catholic. Although, if a statue is used in a way that glorifies God, I fail to see how it can be bad. It can only be bad if it hinders our relationship with God. So, why do some Protestants reject it? I can only think that they feel that it does just that--hinders a person's relationship with God. So, as a Catholic--I could make the same argument with just about anything that may go along with prayer. Allow me to name a few... [b]Holding hands while praying -[/b] wouldn't this make you think of the person you are holding hands with, thus taking focus off God? [b]Praying in a group -[/b] again, focusing on community takes focus off God. [b]Reading psalms out of the Bible as a form of prayer - [/b] the person doing this may lose focus and start to regard the actual book too highly, taking the emphasis off God, and placing it in the Bible instead [b]Praying over a meal - [/b] the food may distract the person from focusing on God? Maybe? [b]Praying while driving - [/b] traffic, other drivers, etc will detract from God [b]Praying near a cross[/b] - again, the person may begin to elevate the actual physical cross above God, creating a barrier The list could go on and on. I really would like for a non-Catholic to explain to me why it is wrong to pray in front of a statue. I'd like for them to give me specific reasons why it is wrong. I'm fairly certain that I can take those exact same reasons and apply them to one of the situations above. I'm making this post for the very best reasons, as I'm sincerely and honestly confused. God bless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luthien Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 Those are some really good points, dUSt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomProddy Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 I don't see anything wrong with it at all. "I really would like for a non-Catholic to explain to me why it is wrong to pray in front of a statue." Not all non-Catholics are the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DojoGrant Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 dUSt, I've seen it carried to the extreme. I've heard that mental images of Jesus or God are idolatry, since that's not what they really look like. There really is no end to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 Another extreme would be to say that paintings and sculptures of any person or thing is idolatrous. Of course, that would make the statue of Abe Lincoln in the Lincoln Memorial an idol. Same with statues of dead generals and other actual generals. Believe it or not, I've met at least one person who actually believes that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1337 k4th0l1x0r Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 (edited) You could also claim that prayer itself is a lack of trust in God. If you're praying to God and asking Him for something, it could mean that you don't trust that He'll provide even if you don't ask. I of course don't believe this, but this is what overanalysis can do to our religion and how putting faith into thought and words can draw one away from faith in God. Edited June 22, 2004 by 1337 k4th0l1x0r Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 [quote name='Dave' date='Jun 22 2004, 11:27 AM'] Another extreme would be to say that paintings and sculptures of any person or thing is idolatrous. Of course, that would make the statue of Abe Lincoln in the Lincoln Memorial an idol. Same with statues of dead generals and other actual generals. Believe it or not, I've met at least one person who actually believes that! [/quote] Isn't that what Muslims believe? That's why there are no statues or paintings of people in mosque. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomProddy Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 [quote name='Sojourner' date='Jun 22 2004, 06:37 PM'] Isn't that what Muslims believe? That's why there are no statues or paintings of people in mosque. [/quote] There are highly elaborately done cursive writings that could qualify as paintings, but they depict no people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dUSt Posted June 22, 2004 Author Share Posted June 22, 2004 Well, if anyone knows of a non-Catholic who is opposed to praying in front of a statue, please direct them here, or find out why they are so opposed and post their thoughts. I'm still trying to figure out the specific reasons why... I know Lumberjack is against it, but I don't ever remember him pointing out specific reasons why he feels that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomProddy Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 (edited) Ah yes, I remember now, some say it's expressly banned in one of the commandments. Three schools of thought: One, it's not in the commandments (Catholic bibles leave one commandment out and split one into two to make ten). Two, it's in the commandments but the Church is exepted from the rule. Three, it no longer applies. (I had considerable debate about point 1/ to someone, claiming the Catholics changed the commandments, I disagreed, but I put it out there in the thread because it's a well-thought myth). Edited June 22, 2004 by RandomProddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatcatholic Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 (edited) no one took anything out of the commandments. they're all there in the bible for the world to see (the catholic bible too, i might add) the only difference is how we summarize them so we can make cute little posters and put them on our walls. the whole argument is utterly absurd. btw, over at the FCFC ezboard, they believe any TV shows or movies that depict Jesus are graven images as well. gimmie a break...... Edited June 22, 2004 by phatcatholic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomProddy Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 [quote name='phatcatholic' date='Jun 22 2004, 07:56 PM'] the only difference is how we summarize them so we can make cute little posters and put them on our walls. [/quote] Yeah, I never understood that. Why remove it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 We are not to worship a graven image, but nowhere does it say we cannot make images. The jews made images of angels to represent God guarding the Ark of the Covanant. So they had no problem with images. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0lar_bear Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 [quote name='RandomProddy' date='Jun 22 2004, 03:10 PM'] Yeah, I never understood that. Why remove it ? [/quote] Actually, it wasn't removed. It is included with the 1st Commandment. Protestants separate the two, while Catholics separate coveting the neighbor's wife and coveting the neighbor's goods. Contrary to what some may charge, Catholics did not create a new numbering of the Decalogue. The two different divisions existed in pre-Christian Jewish times based on choosing the earlier form in Exodus (Ex. 20:1-17;) or the more developed form in Deuteronomy (Deut. 5:6-21). The two books of the Bible do not contradict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatcatholic Posted June 22, 2004 Share Posted June 22, 2004 (edited) b/c "graven images" falls under "have no other gods besides me" whereas the last two commandments are disctinctly different, so they should be separated instead of combined into one. see this from the New Advent entry on the [url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04153a.htm"][b]Ten Commandments[/b][/url]:[list] [*]There is no numerical division of the Commandments in the Books of Moses, but the injunctions are distinctly tenfold, and are found almost identical in both sources. The order, too, is the same except for the final prohibitions pronounced against concupiscence, that of Deuteronomy being adopted in preference to Exodus. A confusion, however, exists in the numbering, which is due to a difference of opinion concerning the initial precept on Divine worship. The system of numeration found in Catholic Bibles, based on the Hebrew text, was made by St. Augustine (fifth century) in his book of "Questions of Exodus" ("Quæstionum in Heptateuchum libri VII", Bk. II, Question lxxi), and was adopted by the Council of Trent. It is followed also by the German Lutherans, except those of the school of Bucer. [b]This arrangement makes the First Commandment relate to false worship and to the worship of false gods as to a single subject and a single class of sins to be guarded against -- the reference to idols being regarded as mere application of the precept to adore but one God and the prohibition as directed against the particular offense of idolatry alone.[/b] According to this manner of reckoning, the injunction forbidding the use of the Lord's Name in vain comes second in order; and [b]the decimal number is safeguarded by making a division of the final precept on concupiscence--the Ninth pointing to sins of the flesh and the Tenth to desires for unlawful possession of goods.[/b] Another division has been adopted by the English and Helvetian Protestant churches on the authority of Philo Judæus, Josephus, Origen, and others, whereby two Commandments are made to cover the matter of worship, and thus the numbering of the rest is advanced one higher; and the Tenth embraces both the Ninth and Tenth of the Catholic division. [b]It seems, however, as logical to separate at the end as to group at the beginning, for while one single object is aimed at under worship, two specifically different sins are forbidden under covetousness; if adultery and theft belong to two distinct species of moral wrong, the same must be said of the desire to commit these evils. [/b] [/list]pax christi, phatcatholic Edited June 22, 2004 by phatcatholic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now