Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Why do people print Novenas in papers?
Options
-
18-12-2009 11:42am#1Probably one for the Catholics, but I don't get it. I'm reading my local newsletter, and there's 2 Novenas in from the same person, and at the bottom it says "Say this prayer for three days, promise publication, and favour will be granted".
Do people actually believe that in order to win God's/Jehovah's favour, they have to pay to take out a newspaper ad?0
Comments
-
Any such notion would not be Christian let alone Catholic. This is folk religion and superstition.0
-
-
-
It also contravenes the prohibition on repetitive praying:PaintDoctor wrote: »Probably one for the Catholics, but I don't get it. I'm reading my local newsletter, and there's 2 Novenas in from the same person, and at the bottom it says "Say this prayer for three days, promise publication, and favour will be granted".
Do people actually believe that in order to win God's/Jehovah's favour, they have to pay to take out a newspaper ad?
Matthew 6:7 And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words.
8 “Therefore do not be like them. For your Father knows the things you have need of before you ask Him.
But what have these poor people learned about praying? Does not the use of the rosary lead to this? Do not the prescriptions of the Confessional encourage it - so many 'Our Fathers', so many 'Hail Marys'?0 -
It also contravenes the prohibition on repetitive praying:
Matthew 6:7 And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words.
8 “Therefore do not be like them. For your Father knows the things you have need of before you ask Him.
So you're not allowed pray the Our Father on 3 consecutive days? What's the rule? Do we have to leave days between praying the same prayer? :rolleyes:0 -
Advertisement
-
It also contravenes the prohibition on repetitive praying:
Matthew 6:7 And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words.
8 “Therefore do not be like them. For your Father knows the things you have need of before you ask Him.
But what have these poor people learned about praying? Does not the use of the rosary lead to this? Do not the prescriptions of the Confessional encourage it - so many 'Our Fathers', so many 'Hail Marys'?
Matt. 6:7 - Jesus teaches, "do not heap up empty phrases" in prayer. Protestants use this verse to criticize various Catholic forms of prayer which repeat phrases, such as litanies and the Rosary. But Jesus' focus in this instruction is on the "vain," and not on the "repetition."
Matt. 26:44 - for example, Jesus prayed a third time in the garden of Gethsemane, saying the exact same words again. It is not the repetition that is the issue. It's the vanity. God looks into our heart, not solely at our words.
Luke 18:13 - the tax collector kept beating his breast and praying "God be merciful to me, a sinner." This repetitive prayer was pleasing to God because it was offered with a sincere and repentant heart.
Acts 10:2,4 - Cornelius prayed constantly to the Lord and his prayers ascended as a memorial before God.
Rom. 1:9 - Paul says that he always mentions the Romans in his prayers without ceasing.
Rom. 12:12 - Paul commands us to be constant in prayer. God looks at what is in our heart, not necessarily how we choose our words.
1 Thess. 5:17 - Paul commands us to pray constantly. Good repetition is different than vain repetition.
Rev. 4:8 - the angels pray day and night without cessation the same words "Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord God Almighty." This is repetitious prayer that is pleasing to God.
Psalm 136 - in this Psalm, the phrase "For His steadfast love endures forever" is more repetitious than any Catholic prayer, and it is God's divine Word.
Dan. 3:35-66 - the phrase "Bless the Lord" is similarly offered repeatedly, and mirrors Catholic litanies.0 -
No, we could pray the same prayer several times in a row, if our extremity was grave enough for us to need that degree of communion with God - as Christ did in the Garden. Are you saying those who say the rosary are doing so with that intense sense of need? Are they sweating, as it were, great drops of blood?So you're not allowed pray the Our Father on 3 consecutive days? What's the rule? Do we have to leave days between praying the same prayer? :rolleyes:
Or are they happily getting through the list with the thought that God will hear and reward their efforts - their much speaking?0 -
Stephentlig said:
Indeed so. I'm saying the repetitions are not from the heart, but a device to influence God by means of quantity, not quality.Matt. 6:7 - Jesus teaches, "do not heap up empty phrases" in prayer. Protestants use this verse to criticize various Catholic forms of prayer which repeat phrases, such as litanies and the Rosary. But Jesus' focus in this instruction is on the "vain," and not on the "repetition."
Again, we agree. But if he set out to say 50 of these, that would not suggest the pouring out of the heart but the notching up of a total to impress God.Matt. 26:44 - for example, Jesus prayed a third time in the garden of Gethsemane, saying the exact same words again. It is not the repetition that is the issue. It's the vanity. God looks into our heart, not solely at our words.
Luke 18:13 - the tax collector kept beating his breast and praying "God be merciful to me, a sinner." This repetitive prayer was pleasing to God because it was offered with a sincere and repentant heart.
Again, spot on. We should pray often, from the heart, not just use set words repeatedly in hope that God will be impressed.Acts 10:2,4 - Cornelius prayed constantly to the Lord and his prayers ascended as a memorial before God.
Rom. 1:9 - Paul says that he always mentions the Romans in his prayers without ceasing.
Rom. 12:12 - Paul commands us to be constant in prayer. God looks at what is in our heart, not necessarily how we choose our words.
No suggestion in this text that his prayers were a set form of words. But the issue about repetition is as you say, good vs vain. I'm saying the practice of saying prescribed numbers of repetitions is the vain type.1 Thess. 5:17 - Paul commands us to pray constantly. Good repetition is different than vain repetition.
The angels can repeat the phrase infinitely without even meaning it a bit less, but we cannot. We are limited in our expression - true prayer must flow from the heart and prescribed repetitions cannot achieve that.Rev. 4:8 - the angels pray day and night without cessation the same words "Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord God Almighty." This is repetitious prayer that is pleasing to God.
It is a song, not a prayer.Psalm 136 - in this Psalm, the phrase "For His steadfast love endures forever" is more repetitious than any Catholic prayer, and it is God's divine Word.
Daniel 3 ends at v30. Were you thinking of another book?Dan. 3:35-66 - the phrase "Bless the Lord" is similarly offered repeatedly, and mirrors Catholic litanies.0 -
Catholics must pray the rosary in humility and from the heart, but only God can read the heart and tell or not if people are praying in vain not you Wolfbane, your theory has no scriptural evidence to back it up. and the fact that you think a song cannot be prayer is just laughable to be honest.0
-
I have encountered what certainly appeared to be "vain repetitions" in both Catholic and Protestant settings.
A few years ago I popped in at a funeral home to support a friend who had lost her father. I got stuck in the room while a group of people were going through a decade of the rosary, and found it quite unnerving. They rattled off the same prayer ten times, but it was done so quickly that I wondered if anyone could really concentrate on what they were saying.
Equally I have been in Protestant churches where I saw people reciting the Lord's Prayer parrot-fashion while checking their text messages at the same time.
So I don't think one group is in a position to criticise the other. We probably just notice it more in unfamiliar cultural contexts. I'm sure some people would see my own church's practice of singing a chorus several times as being vain repetitions - even though most people would be singing heartfelt words.0 -
Advertisement
-
That bugs me too. The rosary is supposed to be a prayer of meditation on the events of the Gospel. The Our Fathers and Hail Marys are essentially framework for this meditation. Rattling prayers off without attention to the words or to the object of meditation would probably count as vain repetition.A few years ago I popped in at a funeral home to support a friend who had lost her father. I got stuck in the room while a group of people were going through a decade of the rosary, and found it quite unnerving. They rattled off the same prayer ten times, but it was done so quickly that I wondered if anyone could really concentrate on what they were saying.0 -
Yes, that is how I have observed such prayers are said. But if the one praying can repeat it several times with meaning, that's OK. I just doubt anyone can or needs to, except in the most extreme circumstances.That bugs me too. The rosary is supposed to be a prayer of meditation on the events of the Gospel. The Our Fathers and Hail Marys are essentially framework for this meditation. Rattling prayers off without attention to the words or to the object of meditation would probably count as vain repetition.
BTW, that is not to endorse any Hail Marys.0 -
That bugs me too. The rosary is supposed to be a prayer of meditation on the events of the Gospel. The Our Fathers and Hail Marys are essentially framework for this meditation. Rattling prayers off without attention to the words or to the object of meditation would probably count as vain repetition.
It's a ritual. Rituals help people deal with significant life events. Ritual (IMO) is older than religion, and the only role left for "religion" in Ireland today for most people is to provide the rituals for births deaths and marriages. The key part of a ritual is that it is a standard formula shared by a community. It's the participating that matters, not any (imaginary) spiritual dimension.0 -
Yes, like head-banging or rocking back and forth. May give psychological relief, but of no spiritual benefit at all. In fact, quite a hindrance to spiritual enlightenment. God is seeking those who worship Him in spirit and truth, not ritual:It's a ritual. Rituals help people deal with significant life events. Ritual (IMO) is older than religion, and the only role left for "religion" in Ireland today for most people is to provide the rituals for births deaths and marriages. The key part of a ritual is that it is a standard formula shared by a community. It's the participating that matters, not any (imaginary) spiritual dimension.
John 4:19 The woman said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. 20 Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, and you Jews say that in Jerusalem is the place where one ought to worship.”
21 Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe Me, the hour is coming when you will neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, worship the Father. 22 You worship what you do not know; we know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews. 23 But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. 24 God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”0 -
-
Its words were all true. But they were Elizabeth's words, not ours.God forbid! :rolleyes:
Do you not realize the Hail Mary is based on Luke's Gospel?
We have no mandate to present them to Mary, even if she could hear us. It is taking an historic text and using it for idolatry. No where in the Bible are we permitted to 'venerate' the departed, much less elevate one to be Queen of Heaven, Mediatrix, Co-Redemptrix, etc. Mary was a godly sister, blessed among women - not above them.0 -
Its words were all true. But they were Elizabeth's words, not ours.
No its the word of God therefore they were not Elizbeths words but Gods words through Elizibeth.
Elizibeth was not the only one who hailed her Full of Grace
Luke 1:28 - the angel Gabriel venerates Mary by declaring to her "Hail, full of grace." The heavenly angel honors the human Mary, for her perfection of grace exceeds that of the angels.
Romans 13:7 - we are to give honor where honor is due. When we honor God's children, we honor God Himself, for He is the source of all honor.We have no mandate to present them to Mary, even if she could hear us. It is taking an historic text and using it for idolatry. No where in the Bible are we permitted to 'venerate' the departed, much less elevate one to be Queen of Heaven, Mediatrix, Co-Redemptrix, etc. Mary was a godly sister, blessed among women - not above them.
You've picked up on a lot of Doctrines, as the Marionolgy is a huge doctrine to discuss, but if you just pick one wolfsbane I'll take you through it. by the way since when did the word of God become ''Historic text''?
It also does not have to be in the Bible for it to be true, as even Scripture contradicts the Protestant doctrine of ''Sola Scriptura'' not even the word ''Bible'' is in the Bible yet you call it a ''Bible''.
John 20:30; 21:25 - Jesus did many other things not written in the Scriptures. These have been preserved through the oral apostolic tradition and they are equally a part of the Deposit of Faith.
Acts 17:28 – Paul quotes the writings of the pagan poets when he taught at the Aeropagus. Thus, Paul appeals to sources outside of Scripture to teach about God.0 -
Stephentlig said:
Let's not play with words. Yes, it is in the Bible, so it is God's word. So are the words of Judas and Satan, however. Yes, Elizabeth was moved by the Holy Spirit to speak, but they were still her words:Quote:
Its words were all true. But they were Elizabeth's words, not ours.
No its the word of God therefore they were not Elizbeths words but Gods words through Elizibeth.
Luke 1:43 But why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44 For indeed, as soon as the voice of your greeting sounded in my ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.
Elizabeth had the womb, not God.
Indeed. Both gave an accurate description of Mary. But that gives us no mandate to pray to her, any more than these do:Elizibeth was not the only one who hailed her Full of Grace
Luke 1:28 - the angel Gabriel venerates Mary by declaring to her "Hail, full of grace."
“Rejoice, highly favored one, the Lord is with you; blessed are you among women!”
“Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God.
Or to pray to Zacharias, “Do not be afraid, Zacharias, for your prayer is heard; and your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall call his name John.
Or to the shepherds, “Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people.
Indeed, as he did to Gideon:The heavenly angel honors the human Mary,
Judges 6:12 And the Angel of the LORD appeared to him, and said to him, “The LORD is with you, you mighty man of valor!”
And Daniel:
Daniel 10:11 And he said to me, “O Daniel, man greatly beloved, understand the words that I speak to you, and stand upright, for I have now been sent to you.”
Chapter and verse?for her perfection of grace exceeds that of the angels.
True. The question is, how much honour is due from us? Certainly as a godly sister. What honour does the NT tell us the church gave her, or command that we give her, more than this?Romans 13:7 - we are to give honor where honor is due. When we honor God's children, we honor God Himself, for He is the source of all honor.
They are all offensive, but let's start with Co-Redemptrix.Quote:
We have no mandate to present them to Mary, even if she could hear us. It is taking an historic text and using it for idolatry. No where in the Bible are we permitted to 'venerate' the departed, much less elevate one to be Queen of Heaven, Mediatrix, Co-Redemptrix, etc. Mary was a godly sister, blessed among women - not above them.
You've picked up on a lot of Doctrines, as the Marionolgy is a huge doctrine to discuss, but if you just pick one wolfsbane I'll take you through it.
It always was. It was there from the writing of the apostles and was not a later story made up to validate a new sect.by the way since when did the word of God become ''Historic text''?
It is the RC allegation those teachings were preserved orally and handed down as necessary doctrine. It is like the Pharisees and their tradition - their own ideas subverting the only commands God left for subsequent generations - the Bible.It also does not have to be in the Bible for it to be true, as even Scripture contradicts the Protestant doctrine of ''Sola Scriptura'' not even the word ''Bible'' is in the Bible yet you call it a ''Bible''.
John 20:30; 21:25 - Jesus did many other things not written in the Scriptures. These have been preserved through the oral apostolic tradition and they are equally a part of the Deposit of Faith.
As to the word Bible not being in the Bible, the word means 'book', and that term is often used of individual books of the Scriptures - the book of Psalms, for example. The totality of the books are called the Scripture or the Scriptures in the Bible.
Protestants don't mind whether one calls the collection of books that make up the Holy Scripture The Bible or The Scriptures or The Holy Bible or The Holy Scriptures. It all means the same.
No, he doesn't. He merely shows that his understanding is in line with one of their great poets. Like I might quote something true by an unbelieving scholar to show my generation that not only Christians see this truth.Acts 17:28 – Paul quotes the writings of the pagan poets when he taught at the Aeropagus. Thus, Paul appeals to sources outside of Scripture to teach about God.
The heathen poet was not a source of doctrine for Paul.0 -
Stephentlig said:
Let's not play with words. Yes, it is in the Bible, so it is God's word. So are the words of Judas and Satan, however. Yes, Elizabeth was moved by the Holy Spirit to speak, but they were still her words:
Luke 1:43 But why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44 For indeed, as soon as the voice of your greeting sounded in my ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.
Elizabeth had the womb, not God.
I'm going to do nothing but just laugh at your response for this. Its still Gods word, that we meditate on, you cannot just choose which part of the Bible is Gods word and which is not.Indeed. Both gave an accurate description of Mary. But that gives us no mandate to pray to her, any more than these do:
“Rejoice, highly favored one, the Lord is with you; blessed are you among women!”
No both hailed her full of grace, your protestant KJV version prefers to hide it with ''Highly favoured'' because when something is at its fullness all else is cancelled out, which means mary was Immaculate. she is the Mother of the King, and in the old testament the Mother of the King was always Queen, she is greater than the biblical characters such as Abraham and Moses.Indeed, as he did to Gideon:
Judges 6:12 And the Angel of the LORD appeared to him, and said to him, “The LORD is with you, you mighty man of valor!”
And Daniel:
Daniel 10:11 And he said to me, “O Daniel, man greatly beloved, understand the words that I speak to you, and stand upright, for I have now been sent to you.”
yes but both these prophets were not ''hailed full of grace.''True. The question is, how much honour is due from us? Certainly as a godly sister. What honour does the NT tell us the church gave her, or command that we give her, more than this?
that she is the Mother of God our King, Queen of heaven and most honoured among the saints.
They are all offensive, but let's start with Co-Redemptrix.It always was. It was there from the writing of the apostles and was not a later story made up to validate a new sect.
because it is the word of God and God is not historic its always new to me.It is the RC allegation those teachings were preserved orally and handed down as necessary doctrine. It is like the Pharisees and their tradition - their own ideas subverting the only commands God left for subsequent generations - the Bible.
Not at all and you have no evidence to prove your personal assertion. The teachings come from the early church fathers who were ordained by the apostles and closest to the apostles, and the apostles passed this tradition on, as I showed that not all God commanded was commited to a book. saint Paul himself commanded that we obey apostolic tradition both in its oral and written form in his 2nd letter to the thessalonians 2:15"So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter."As to the word Bible not being in the Bible, the word means 'book', and that term is often used of individual books of the Scriptures - the book of Psalms, for example. The totality of the books are called the Scripture or the Scriptures in the Bible.
what ancient dictionary contains ''Bible''? nowhere in the Bible does the word ''Bible'' appear, and yet you call it a Bible.No, he doesn't. He merely shows that his understanding is in line with one of their great poets. Like I might quote something true by an unbelieving scholar to show my generation that not only Christians see this truth.
The heathen poet was not a source of doctrine for Paul.
Pauls understanding? what you mean to say is that the Holy spirit through Paul is teaching them about himself and that he speaks through everyone, and the Holy Spirit shows this and doesnt even refer to Scripture to do it.
You see, the Holy spirit speaks through us all, and once we say something that conforms to the truth then it is truth and not a lie.
2 Thess. 2:14 - Paul says that God has called us "through our Gospel." What is the fullness of the Gospel?
2 Thess. 2:15 - the fullness of the Gospel is the apostolic tradition which includes either teaching by word of mouth or by letter. Scripture does not say "letter alone." The Catholic Church has the fullness of the Christian faith through its rich traditions of Scripture, oral tradition and teaching authority (or Magisterium).
2 Thess 3:6 - Paul instructs us to obey apostolic tradition. There is no instruction in the Scriptures about obeying the Bible alone (the word "Bible" is not even in the Bible).
I am not going to continue the discussion on sola scriptura, tradition etc etc because it takes us too far a field, and I dont have the time to be debating several doctrines at once.
You want to talk about ''Co-Redemptrix, so lets do that in another thread for we would be going away from the OP and against the rules of the forum.
God bless speak soon
Stephen0
Advertisement