Central to the Reformers’ objections to certain practices in the Roman Church was the issue of faith. And here I’m not referring initially to the issue of sola fide, though that does come in later. The issue was worship, and the question had to do with worshipping in faith.
So let’s take the question of the invocation of departed saints: Mary, Peter, John, etc. Whether this invocation is done through icons or not, the issue has to do with the question of faith.
It is not faith to believe that if you jump off the Empire State Building you will grow wings and soar into the air like an eagle. And it won’t do to start quoting Bible verses like the devil, insisting that angels will bear you up if you should happen to not grow wings. Jesus answered that kind of twisting of Scripture in his own temptation. But the point is that faith always clings to the Word of God. It is not faith if God has not spoken. It is not faith to believe that you are still in your sins and God is out to damn you because the clear proclamation of the Scriptures is Jesus is risen, there is now no more condemnation, believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved. Likewise, it is not faith to believe that the world is going to end any minute now as soon as the antichrist shows up and most of the world begins worshipping him and offering their children on neo-pagan altars. Faith sees the world in all its goodness, in all of its ugliness, in all of its glory, in all of its mess, and believes that Word of God which says Christ shall reign until all of his enemies have been made his footstool, the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea, and that God did not send his own son into the world to condemn the world but that through him the world might be saved.
The point is that faith clings to the Word of God. And furthermore, the apostle Paul says that it is the Word that actually creates faith. “How shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard?… So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” (Rom. 10:14-17)
The problem with prayers to the saints or invocation of the saints is not that they can’t hear us, don’t care about us, and are otherwise unavailable and uninterested in the affairs of the Church on earth. The problem is that God has not spoken to us about this. The Scriptures tell us many things, and they indicate a great deal about death, the intermediate state, the resurrection, and the communion of the saints. But for all that, if invoking the saints and calling upon them to offer prayers on our behalf was so important, so normal, so natural, why is it not at least referenced one time in passing? Why don’t we have at least one example of some apostle calling on the Mother of our Lord to intercede on their behalf? Granting that the saints in heaven *might* be able to hear all of us in some miraculous way through the power of the Spirit is not the same thing as having the Word of God tell us clearly that this in fact is the case.
This means that by definition the saints cannot be called upon in faith. Brothers and sisters who call on the departed saints do so in an unbelieving way. Or to put it another way: they must do so trusting someone or something else besides the Word of God. But there is no faith apart from the Word of God, and whatever is not of faith is sin (Rom. 14:23). Do the math.
We do know that the saints are in heaven worshipping God. We do know that they pray for us, and that we join in with them in worship as we join that great cloud of heavenly witnesses.
But for all that, we have not been invited, encouraged, or lead in any direct way to talk to them. And the weight of Scripture actually pushes us in the other direction.
At the same time, I would be one in favor of recovering a more robust Protestant celebration of the saints. Remembering their lives, their gifts, their struggles, and all that they have added to the Body of Christ is something we need to recover. Songs, poetry, stories, and art are all ways that cultures remember. Furthermore, a more robust recognition of their presence in worship, giving thanks to God for them (by name), and asking God to give us their courage and faithfulness. Protestant amnesia is certainly a significant problem, and it cannot be surprising that our children continue to grow up and leave the faith, almost as if they have forgotten us. But they have learned the lessons well: we do not remember that great cloud of witnesses and so neither do they.
Joshua says
“The problem with prayers to the saints or invocation of the saints is not that they can’t hear us, don’t care about us, and are otherwise unavailable and uninterested in the affairs of the Church on earth. The problem is that God has not spoken to us about this.”
Pastor Sumpter,
If you said this kind of thing to a Roman Catholic, they could answer you from Scripture and argue otherwise.
The Protestant Church has really suffered by claiming that Catholics have “no Scriptural justification” for things that they clearly do. It is damaging to make claims like the one you’ve made here to younger Christians because, when younger Christians get older and when they speak to Catholics, they find there are Scriptures supporting specific RC doctrines. This makes their Protestant teachers seem untrustworthy in retrospect. It’s this kind of thing that leads people away from Geneva unto Rome.
Chad Toney says
What Josh said and:
“The problem with prayers to Jesus or worship of the Holy Spirit is not that they can’t hear us, don’t care about us, and are otherwise unavailable and uninterested in the affairs of the Church on earth. The problem is that God the Father has not spoken to us about this.”
jfe says
Josh,
I don’t want to start a fight or anything, but I’m curious: what are those “Scriptural justifications” that you’re referring to? It seems that if you’re going to complain to Pastor Sumpter about what he says, you ought to give him something to work with. After all, what if a young RC discovers that the “Scriptural justification” for prayers to the saints are weak? Where will he be led?
Austin Storm says
Josh,
Be careful to look out for a the grass-is-greener when you approach this – Frank is right to point out that this argument goes both ways. It’s not as though Protestants assert that Catholics made their doctrines up out of thin air. Every Catholic I’ve talked to on this issue has been very sincere, but sincerely wrong.
And Chad,
Whaaaaa ?
Toby says
Josh,
Thanks for the interaction.
2 Things:
First, note that I did not claim that there was no “scriptural justification.” The temptation of Jesus shows us clearly that there can be “scriptural justifications” for any number of things which may still turn out to be wrong. So, yes, I am well aware of the fact that RC apologists have their verses. My point is that the verses they cite don’t teach us to call on the saints. Rev. 5:8 is about as good as they can get.
Second, your point about teachers seeming untrustworthy is important. Should younger Christians feel the same when a Mormon comes to their door quoting Scriptures to prove that Jesus is not one with the Father? It seems to me that there are other loyalty issues at work. Seems like if a few Scripture verses suddenly cause a young Christian to call into question the overall trustworthiness of the fathers and mothers who have raised him in the faith, there was something much deeper already causing such mistrust. It’s a prior mistrust and disloyalty that leads people to reject their fathers in Geneva and look for new ones in Rome or Constantinople.
Glad you made it to Florida safely. Blessings.
Joshua says
Pastor Sumpter,
You wrote, “My point is that the verses they cite don’t teach us to call on the saints.” So says you, but what do the people at E Free think about your verses that support infant baptism? What do the people at E Free think of your verses that talk about the Eucharist? That talk about election? This is one of those big problems with the Protestant vision of Christianity; everyone gets a say, everyone gets to interpret how they see fit. The only way to shut down any person’s interpretation is with a different interpretation, and the authority of that interpretation comes from…
Elsewhere, “Seems like if a few Scripture verses suddenly cause a young Christian to call into question the overall trustworthiness of the fathers and mothers who have raised him in the faith, there was something much deeper already causing such mistrust.” I don’t think it’s wise to so casually dismiss this kind of scenario, or to throw all the guilt back on to the child. Find a student who spent their youth reading A Beka textbooks and then sit them down with a real live Catholic. “No,” says the Catholic, “I don’t believe any of that crap. Who have you been talking to?” Shoot, it was only two years ago that I encountered the fact that Catholics believe worshiping Mary to be a grave sin. It’s far easier for Protestants to spread misinformation about Catholics than it is to engage their arguments head on- largely because the Catholic story is more fully developed than the Protestant story. Catholics have had four times as long to work out their arguments, narrative and rhetoric as Protestants have and it shows, especially every time Dave Hodges comes up on Pastor Wilson’s comments section. And I say this as someone not tempted to join the Catholic Church at all.
Also, “It’s a prior mistrust and disloyalty that leads people to reject their fathers in Geneva and look for new ones in Rome or Constantinople.” Man, folly was poured into this statement and someone forgot to say “when.” You need to allow for the Holy Spirit to work in ways that make you uncomfortable, that affront your pride and make you feel insulted. Or was it disloyalty that created Geneva?
Austin,
Every Catholic you’ve spoken to on the matter of invoking saints has been sincerely wrong according to who? Who gets to determine this is wrong? If you determine I’m wrong and I determine you’re wrong, and then my interpretation of Revelations prove I’m right and your interpretation of the Second Commandment proves you’re right, then who do we appeal to?
-and with your spirit.
Toby says
Josh,
I still think you’re giving too little credit to your Protestant fathers. Please take some time to actually research some of this.
So you were raised to think that RC’s give undo worship to Mary, and an RC apologist comes along and says “nuh-uh.” This should not cause your Protestant world to come crashing down. Again, the issue is one of trust and loyalty. Is there nothing true about the Protestant stance towards RC and EO on Mary? Has there been no abuse, no idolatry, no popular level misunderstandings of these doctrines? Ever? It may be all pretty on paper, but that doesn’t mean problems don’t exist, and doesn’t necessarily mean that Protestants are purposefully creating straw men.
But back the original point of this post: Our Reformational fathers recovered a radical freedom that was nearly lost in the middle ages, the freedom of submission to the traditions of the apostles found in the Scriptures. It’s that kind of freedom that allows us to worship in faith because we are worshipping according to Scripture. I would gladly sit down and discuss issues of baptism, the eucharist, and election with the saints at the e-free church any day of the week, and I would not in the least bit be dismayed if we didn’t agree at the end of the day. We do agree on the authority of Scripture, and we trust God to work out our differences. We aren’t so insecure to think that if we don’t have answers right now, right away that everything is going to fall apart. God is good, and he’s content to work out these details over time. He’d rather have us disagree vigorously and go home to a glass of wine and a beautiful wife and learn to be thankful with what he’s given than figure out who’s exactly right and who’s exactly wrong on this, that, and the other thing. I know I’m still full of a good bit of folly, but I’m pretty sure that’s something close to wisdom.
Matthew N. Petersen says
What do you think of prayers to the Holy Spirit?
Joshua says
Pastor Sumptor,
So you were raised to think that RC’s give undo worship to Mary, and an RC apologist comes along and says “nuh-uh.” Wow, this really describes what happened so well… I think it was the intonation of the “nuh” that really did it. Why is it that parents are responsible for their children, husbands responsible for their wives, and yet when people want to leave Geneva, all of a sudden the dialogue about those in power being responsible for those under them just kind of vanishes? Where does judgement begin? As close to home as possible.
I know that you’re only doing what you think right, and I know that your continual insistence that moving away from Geneva is “disloyal” is meant to pull at my heart, keep me in place and do something you believe will benefit my soul. I don’t believe this is selfish. I believe you are only doing what you believe your Spiritual fathers called you to do.
If you’d grant me the same kind of benefit of the doubt, you’d make a strong move towards fulfilling the Lord’s Prayer. I ask for no greater liberty than the liberty of conscience that Luther asked for, the liberty that Luther tried to restore, as you remark. Our Reformational fathers recovered a radical freedom that was nearly lost in the middle ages, the freedom of submission to the traditions of the apostles found in the Scriptures. The freedom of submission to the traditions of the apostles as they understood it, of course. Being right and being authoritative are not one and the same. Or am I shackled to this freedom?
Toby says
Josh,
Just to be clear, the reason I’m pursuing these questions is because I do think that we share some level of responsibility for those of you out there who are considering a move away from the Protestant Church.
On your last point, please be assured that it is freedom that I want to bestow on you and anyone else reading along with us.
I would really appreciate you sharing what some of those RC/EO apologists said/wrote that shook up your world. What has made you begin to doubt the validity or soundness of being Protestant?
Joshua says
Pastor Sumptor,
The RC apologists that got me thinking asked nothing more than what I was brought up, at Logos, to ask any secularist: Says who, and on what authority?