Catholics and Statues: You shall not carve idols for yourselves?

“Love the Lord with all your heart, and with all your soul,     

and with all your MIND”--Matt 22:37

 “Every Christian is a missionary to the extent that he or she has encountered the love of God in Christ Jesus” --Pope Francis  (Evangelii Gaudium, #120)

This Sunday's first reading will be from Exodus.  It explicitly states:  "You shall not carve idols for yourselves".

So why do Catholic churches have....idols?

And then the Bible continues to say, in Exodus:  "You shall not bow down before them or worship them."

And yet we see this in our churches as well as our homes:

So do Catholics just disregard what the Bible says?

Short answer:  no. 

Long answer:  Catholics believe in and uphold what the Bible says.  But we take the Word of God in its entirety; we do not just extract verses out of context and in isolation.

If one just reads a bit further in Exodus, we see where God actually commands the building of statues:

Make two cherubim of beaten gold for the two ends of the cover;

make one cherub at one end, and the other at the other end, of one piece with the cover, at each end.

The cherubim shall have their wings spread out above, sheltering the cover with them; they shall face each other, with their faces looking toward the cover.--Exodus 25:18-20

So it's not having statues that's offensive to God.  It's worshipping them.  

And of course, no Catholic worships a statue!

We keep statues in our churches as visual reminders of those we love, just as we have pictures in our homes as visual reminders of people we love.

As far as bowing down...well, that's not worship.  In many cultures bowing is a sign of respect, but it is NOT a means of worshipping a person.

It is no more worshipping a statue when we bow before one, than this person is worshipping the Bible when he bows before it and kisses it:

Unfortunately, there are still many folks who continue to spread the false belief that statues in our churches is evidence that we Catholics practice idolatry.  Consider this, from the very popular website:  gotquestions.org

Question: "Do Catholics worship idols / practice idolatry?"

Answer: Sadly, our Catholic friends and family members have been indoctrinated to believe that the use of statues, relics, and other articles is acceptable and even necessary for worship. They have been taught by the Roman Catholic Church that the images and icons used in the church are not actually “worshiped” but are simply “visual aids” to worship.

The Catholic Church long ago began making allowances for the idolatrous use of images by the way they reference the Ten Commandments. In the Catholic catechism and in most official Catholic documents, the first and second commandments are combined and then summarized with “I am the Lord your God. You shall not have other gods beside Me.” Suspiciously absent is what comprises the second commandment in the Protestant numbering of the Ten Commandments: “You shall not make any graven images.”

Firstly, the Catholic Church has never stated that use of statues, relics and other articles are "necessary for worship."  If anyone insists that this is true, please ask this person to produce any document from the Church which asserts that statues and relics are required for worship.

Secondly, it is true that the numbering of the Ten Commandments is different for Catholics than for other Protestants.  However, the commandments given by God in the Old Testament actually number MORE than 10.  If you count the number of "thou shalt nots" plus the "thou shalts" the actual number of commandments is 13.  Thus, Catholic group some of the commandments into one, but so do Protestants.

It's a rather common objection, esp. in the blogosphere, to hear that Catholicism makes its own rules up, giving no regard to the Bible.  

However, we can be assured as Catholics that our Church does indeed profess, uphold and venerate the Scriptures.  We just don't take verses out of context, and read them without the lens of Sacred Tradition. 

For more info, visit these websites:

Did the Catholic Church Change the Ten Commandments?

Catholic Bible online

Catechism of the Catholic Church online

Catholics Come Home

"Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect" - 1 Peter 3:15  

Jesus and Horus--No. Just....no.

In 2007 a "documentary" called Zeitgeist became an internet sensation.  It purported, among other things, that Jesus was simply a myth that plagiarized from more ancient mythological heroes.  That is:  Jesus never existed--some ancient people heard stories of other gods (Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Aztec) and simply created a hybrid of their own god, and thus Christianity was born.

That's simply gaga, lala nonsense.

This deliciously satirical, funny and witty video puts to rest any notion that Christianity borrowed from already existing myths.  

http://catholicmemes.com/video/horus-ruins-christmas/

So when we're at dinner over Christmas, and a teen announces, with a knowing swagger, that he/she doesn't believe in Christianity anymore because it's all a mish-mash of even older religious myths, we can respond with some facts.

Why do Catholics have statues in their churches when the Bible forbids having statues?

“Love the Lord with all your heart, and with all your soul,     

and with all your MIND”--Matt 22:37

 “Every Christian is a missionary to the extent that he or she has encountered the love of God in Christ Jesus” --Pope Francis  (Evangelii Gaudium, #120)

Short answer:  The Bible doesn't forbid having statues.  

The Bible forbids worship of statues.  No Catholic ought to be worshipping anything or anyone but the Triune God.  

I think that if you asked even the most nominal Catholic, "See that statue? Do you believe that statue is a god?" even if she's essentially clueless about her Catholic faith, she's most likely going to respond, "No?  I'm pretty sure that statue isn't god."

Longer answer:  This Sunday's first reading from the Book of Numbers has a good apologetics verse to defend Catholic use of statues:  

So Moses prayed for the people, and the LORD said to Moses,
“Make a saraph and mount it on a pole,
and if any who have been bitten look at it, they will live.”
Moses accordingly made a bronze serpent and mounted it on a pole,
and whenever anyone who had been bitten by a serpent 
looked at the bronze serpent, he lived.--Numbers 21:8

This is an example from Scripture of God commanding the carving of a statue.  And from this statue benefit to the faithful is achieved--"whenever anyone who had been bitten by a serpent looked at the [statue], he lived".

Here's another example from Scripture of God commanding the building of a statue:

“You shall make two cherubim of gold, make them of hammered work at the two ends of the mercy seat. “Make one cherub at one end and one cherub at the other end; you shall make the cherubim of one piece with the mercy seat at its two ends. “The cherubim shall have their wings spread upward, covering the mercy seat with their wings and facing one another; the faces of the cherubim are to be turned toward the mercy seat--Exodus 25:18-20

Statues and other religious icons in our churches are simply images of heavenly realities.  There is nothing idolatrous about having statues and paintings in our churches.  It does not contradict any Bible verse to have statues.  

It is not an act of worship (to the statue) to kneel down and pray before a holy image.  

We are no more worshipping the holy image, than this Protestant Christian group is worshipping a box of kleenex when we see them bowing in prayer (during presumably an altar call):

"Common sense tells us that, since God has revealed himself in various images, most especially in the incarnate Jesus Christ, it’s not wrong for us to use images of these forms to deepen our knowledge and love of God. That’s why God revealed himself in these visible forms, and that’s why statues and pictures are made of them. "-Catholic.com

For more in-depth study visit these websites:

So Catholics Worship Statues?

  

Catholic Bible online

Catechism of the Catholic Church online

Catholics Come Home

"Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect" - 1 Peter 3:15

What's so bad about embryonic stem cell research?

Love the Lord with all your heart, and with all your soul,     

and with all your MIND”--Matt 22:37

 “Every Christian is a missionary to the extent that he or she has encountered the love of God in Christ Jesus” --Pope Francis  (Evangelii Gaudium, #120)

Question:  What's so bad about embryonic stem cell research? 

Please note:  We are talking about embryonic stem cell research (ESCR), not all stem cell research. ESCR = bad. Stem cell research = good.  (Just like the difference between acid rain and just plain rain.  Acid rain = bad.  Just plain rain = good. *:) happy)  One little adjective can change the meaning immensely!

Short answer:  Embryonic stem cell research uses a human person, in its earliest stage of development, for the (potential)* benefit of society.  It is always, everywhere, in all situations, gravely immoral and offensive to our inherent dignity to use another person as an object.

It is an intrinsically evil act to kill an innocent person so that another may benefit.

Longer answer:  The Catholic Church is nothing, if not consistent.  So if the Church teaches that it's gravely immoral to abort a fetus at 20 weeks gestation, it would make sense that the Church, consistently, declares, "It is also wrong to abort a human person at 10 days gestation."  Thus, from the moment of conception, in which an entirely new organism is created, with its own DNA, to our natural death, human life is worthy of the right to live.  

I have heard some arguments presented in favor of ESCR as:  "I am against abortion, when there is a fetus. But the blastocyst (formed after conception) consists of only about 150 cells.  A housefly is more complex than this blastocyst, and the Catholic Church doesn't have a problem with our swatting a housefly, so why should the Church have a problem with using 150 cells for research, especially if it could potentially provide a cure for millions of people who suffer horribly from diseases?"

The Catholic response is:  because these 150 cells are a human life.  Personhood is not dependent upon the number of cells we have in our body.

It might be helpful to ask this ESCR supporter:  how many cells would it take for you to be against research on this organism?  Is 150 cells ok to use for research, but a 1500 cell organism is wrong to experiment on? Do you believe that at 10 days gestation it's ok to use for research, but not on a fetus that is 20 weeks old? What has changed in this organism that makes one not worthy of life but the other worthy?"

I don't think that a logical answer can be offered by a ESCR supporter.  At least, not if she is against abortion but pro-ESCR.

The Church's teaching against ESCR is clear and concise.  The dignity of the human person begins at the very moment of its existence, because we are made in the image and likeness of God.  

From Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae:

Even if the presence of a spiritual soul cannot be ascertained by empirical data, the results themselves of scientific research on the human embryo provide a valuable indication for discerning by the use of reason a personal presence at the moment of the first appearance of a human life: How could a human individual not be a human person? 

*Regarding the potential benefit that may be achieved from ESCR--my understanding is that NO RESEARCH has demonstrated any true benefit from embryonic stem cells.  It is actually adult stem cells which seem to hold some promise for future cures/therapies for ALS, Diabetes, Parkinsons, etc etc etc.

Catholic Bible online

Catechism of the Catholic Church online

Catholics Come Home

USCCB Info on ESCR

"Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect" - 1 Peter 3:15

Didn't the Church just invent the dogma of the Assumption in 1950?

“Love the Lord with all your heart, and with all your soul,

and with all your MIND”--Matt 22:37

Question: Regarding the dogma of the Assumption, didn't the Church just invent this dogma in 1950?

Solemnity of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary:  August 15

By a special and singular privilege bestowed by God, the Virgin Mary was taken up body and soul into heaven and re-united with Our Lord Jesus Christ to reign with Him in His kingdom for all eternity.

Answer:  While it is indeed true that the Catholic Church did not officially define the dogma of Mary's Assumption into heaven until 1950:  "The Immaculate Mother of God, Mary Ever-Virgin, after her life on earth, was assumed, body and soul, into heavenly glory"

this in no way means that Christians did not profess and proclaim the Assumption until 1950. That is, Christians have believed in Mary's Assumption into heaven from the very beginning of the Church.  

That it wasn't defined until 1950 is actually irrelevant.  

When something is solemnly pronounced, or formally declared and defined is not an indicationthat it only came to be believed at that point.

For example:  the dogma of the Trinity was not formally defined for over 300 years in the early Church.  However, it would be erroneous to declare, "The Church simply invented this teaching in the 4th century!"  Most Christians understand that from the very beginning the Apostles and early Church believed in the Trinity.  It only came to be formally defined in the 4th century when certain factions of Christianity called this teaching into question.

The Church calls councils at various points in history for a multitude of reasons, sometimes to formally define a teaching when the understanding of the faithful may be lacking.

An analogy helps illustrate this:

It has been the "constant teaching" in our house that when the kids come home from school they are to do certain things: hang up their backpacks, put their shoes away, wash their hands, take off their uniforms, eat their snack, finish their chores, practice their piano, etc etc etc.

Despite the fact that they have been doing this every school day for over 15 years every once in a while we need to have a "family meeting" to pronounce, declare and define exactly who should be doing which job and how it is to be done. (Note: I try to ignore their incredulous looks that say, "What? We're supposed to hang up our backpacks again this year?" or "What? You've never said that we had to take off our uniforms and hang them up!" )

At this council we recall what’s been done in the past, review the current norms and define again exactly what’s the expectation. Sometimes the kids complain that we are “making up new rules”, claiming we’ve “never done it this way before” when in actuality we are just pronouncing, declaring and defining a standard norm of our family.

Thus, the solemn declaration of the dogma of the Assumption was not newly formed in 1950. It was a constant belief held and spoken of for many years, sometimes correctly, sometimes incorrectly.  

However, this dogma was ancient, dating back to the times of the apostles. Perhaps in order to alleviate any doubt and to correct any wrong information, God chose 1950 as the time to pronounce, declare and define this belief and practice.

Sometimes our Protestant brethren recoil at the idea of Catholics professing Mary's assumption into heaven, as if that gives her some co-equality with Christ, or perhaps even a primacy over Him.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  Mary is and always will be a creature, NOT DIVINE.  Her assumption was done by God's grace, NOT OF HER OWN POWER.  While Her Son ascended into heaven by his own divine power, Mary was taken up (assumed) only through the power of God.

Also, there are numerous Scriptural examples of other good and holy souls being assumed into heaven, so why would it be such a stretch to assume (haha!) that God wouldn't do this for Mary as well.  

When Enoch had lived sixty-five years, he became the father of Methuselah. Enoch walked with God after the birth of Methuselah three hundred years, and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Enoch were three hundred and sixty-five years. Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him.” (Genesis 5:21-24)

“By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death; and he was not found, because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was attested as having pleased God.” (Hebrews 11:5)

“Now when the LORD was about to take Elijah up to heaven by a whirlwind, Elijah and Elisha were on their way from Gilgal… And as they still went on and talked, behold, a chariot of fire and horses of fire separated the two of them. And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.” (2 Kings 2:1,11)

Thus, while we have nothing explicitly in Scripture which says Mary was assumed (and where, BTW, does Scripture demand that everything we believe as Christians must be found explicitly in the Bible?  Nowhere), we do have some examples of some holy men who were assumed into heaven.  

And we have no examples in the early Church of Christians venerating Mary's relics, as they did with other saints.

Finally, it simply makes sense that Christ would so honor His mother by preserving her body from corruption by assuming her into heaven in a special way to be with Him.

For more in-depth study visit these websites:

Catholic Answers Tract on the Assumption

Catholic Bible online

Catechism of the Catholic Church online

Catholics Come Home

"Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect" - 1 Peter 3:15