CATHOLIC APOLOGISTS’ MISUSE OF JAMES 5:16

 

(v. 14) Is any sick among you?  Let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:

(v. 15) And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.

(v. 16) Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed.  The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. (James 5:14-16)

[For the record, the word “faults” in v. 16 is translated as “sins” in the majority of our Bibles, including Catholic versions.]

James 5:16 is very often used by Catholic apologists to promote certain Catholic teachings.  In fact, there are two different teachings in which this passage is usually pressed into service. 

I will address two major points in this article, concerning the misuse of this passage, but before moving on, I want to say that I am not aware if any official Catholic sources, like the Catechism of the Catholic Church or papal encyclicals or other documents actually use this Scripture passage to promote the following teachings, but I have indeed seen certain Catholic apologists use this passage on numerous occasions to bolster these Catholic doctrines.

First Major Point – Confession to a Priest

Ok, the first major point is that one of the foundational teachings of the Catholic Church is the sacrament of Confession (also known as Penance or Reconciliation).  This sacrament normally consists of a member of the Catholic Church confessing his sins privately to a priest in order to have all his sins forgiven/absolved.  This is also called “auricular confession” by the Church. 

But Protestants will often object and say that a person can, and should, confess his sins directly to God (Hebrews 4:16).  And the Catholic will normally respond with the previously mentioned James 5 passage, especially v. 16.

But there are serious problems with trying to use this passage to support the idea of confession to a priest.  First of all, the Bible does not even recognize a “ministerial” priesthood in the New Testament church like the one in the Old Testament.  See these links:

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2010/03/priesthood.html

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2018/07/where-are-all-priests-in-new-testament.html

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2016/05/does-exodus-196-support-catholic.html

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2016/06/martignoni-and-korahs-rebellion.html

Secondly, the New Testament never says to confess your sins to an elder, priest, rabbi or any specifically-designated person at all. 

Thirdly, James 5:16 says to “Confess your faults/sins ONE TO ANOTHER.”  The context is the local body of believers confessing their sins which they may have committed against each other.  It is about praying for the sick and about rectifying personal offenses toward other members in the local body.

But if this really is about confessing to a priest (as Catholics suggest), then why would James tell the local body to confess to “one another”?  If a priest is there to hear sins, shouldn’t this priest also confess his own sins to members of the laity, just as the laity confesses to him?  After all, that’s what “confessing one to another” means, right?  The context of James 5:16 is calling for reciprocal confession.  After absolving the sins of the lay person, would the priest then be willing to use the confessional box to allow a lay person be in charge of absolving his (the priest’s) sins also?  I don’t think so.  The context of this passage will not let this interaction be limited to “one-way confession.”

So I don’t think that this passage suggests auricular confession to a priest, as is found in the Catholic Church.  So James 5:16 cannot be used to promote the doctrine of confession to a priesthood.

Footnote in the Douay-Rheims

The (Catholic) Douay-Rheims Bible has this in its footnotes for James 5:16:

“[16] “Confess therefore your sins one to another”: that is, to the priests of the church, whom (ver. 14) he had ordered to be called for, and brought in to the sick; moreover, to confess to persons who had no power to forgive sins, would be useless.  Hence the precept here means, that we must confess to men whom God hath appointed, and who, by their ordination and jurisdiction, have received the power of remitting sins in his name.”

See here:

https://www.drbo.org/chapter/66005.htm

The publishers of the Douay-Rheims Bible are missing the whole point.  They are automatically assuming up front that just because the word “confess” is present in the text, it is about Catholic auricular confession, i.e., confessing to a specific person (a priest) in order to get a “clean slate.”

But the New Testament elders (Greek, “presbyterous”), not priests (which is “hiereis” in the Greek), were there to help pray for the sick, not to “hear confessions” from the “laity.”  The publishers of this Catholic Bible obviously assume that there are priests in the post-apostolic New Testament era who have the “power to forgive sins,” but this is without biblical warrant. 

If modern “priests” have the power to absolve sins at will (like Jesus did), then they would also have the power to heal people at will (like Jesus did in Luke 5:20-26).  But they can’t, and again, there is no biblical evidence for a designated (human) person to whom one must go to be forgiven.  But on the other hand, we are always free to go directly to God for forgiveness (Psalm 73:25) – even “Pope Peter” said this! (Acts 8:20-22)

Catholics wrongly turn to John 20:23 to try and justify auricular confession, believing that Jesus gave men the power to forgive sins in the confessional box.  But this is not the case.  See this link:

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2011/08/hi-jacking-of-john-2023.html

Again, there is no New Testament “ministerial” priesthood to start with, as indicated in the four links I listed together above.

Second Major Point – Praying to Saints

It also seems that this passage (James 5:16) is often used by Catholic apologists to promote prayer to Mary, saints and angels.  Apparently, this would involve the concept of “communion of saints,” i.e., that spiritual union of all the saints on earth and all the saints in Heaven.  Catholics will emphasize the latter half of the verse that reads, “… The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.”

They do this to stress the righteousness of those saints who are in Heaven.  After all, those in Heaven are certainly far more righteous than we are here on earth, so (according to Catholics) their prayers would have to be very effective, and we on earth should be eager to seek their intercession! 

Catholic apologists use this particular passage, but it backfires on them, because once again, James is telling them to pray for one another, which would mean reciprocal prayers.  

So, if the saints (including Mary and angels) in Heaven are (supposedly) praying for us, then likewise, we must need to reciprocate and pray for them, as well, right?  Once more, isn’t that what “pray one for another” means? 

But if that’s the case, why in the world would we (on earth) need to pray for THEM?  If they are indeed in Heaven, they are complete in Christ – they don’t NEED our prayers.  In fact, they have need of nothing!  Why would James be telling us to pray for them?  The point is, he’s NOT.

Ahhh, then maybe James is NOT referring at all to those in Heaven in this context.  James recognizes that there are some people on earth who can pray effectual and fervent prayers.  He is simply telling the saints on earth (in the local body) to pray for other saints on earth (in that same local body).  That’s the reciprocal prayer he’s talking about.  He is actually telling them to pray (along with the elders) for each other for healing (v. 6) and for when they have offended one another.  This is about both physical and spiritual restoration for the local body.  I would assert that this is exactly what is happening here in this context.  There is nothing here suggesting prayers to Mary, saints or angels.  See also these links:

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2011/02/praying-to-saints.html

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2019/01/dave-armstrong-on-praying-to-saints.html

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2014/11/praying-to-saints-revisited.html

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2023/10/worship-and-prayer.html

So, this is another misuse of James 5:16 by Catholic apologists.

Conclusion

I know that James 5:14-16 is not the only passage that Catholic apologists use to promote auricular confession to a priest or to promote prayer to saints.  I am aware of that, but I wanted to specifically address these Catholic teachings in relation to this Bible passage (which they themselves use).  I think that it is clear that James 5 does not support either of these teachings.

For more detailed arguments against these particular Catholic topics, see the links I posted in this article.

 

WORSHIP AND PRAYER

 Catholics believe that it is ok, and even beneficial, to pray to “saints,” i.e., those who have lived exemplary and honorable lives on earth, but are now in Heaven (Catechism of the Catholic Church, #2683).  Likewise, they believe that it is very profitable to pray to Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ (CCC #2769).  They also believe that it is ok to pray to angels (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol.11, p. 673).  However, Protestants seem to have a problem with all this.  But Catholics may wonder why.  After all, we need all the help we can get when it comes to prayer, right?

Well, the problem is our understanding of the similarities and differences between worship and prayer in Scripture.  We Protestants contend that 1) prayer is actually a form of worship and 2) therefore, only God should receive prayer.  We believe that prayer to anyone or anything else is idolatry and we should have nothing to do with this sin:

“Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.” (1 Corinthians 10:14)  

Unfortunately, Catholics have a different understanding of worship and prayer than that which is in the Bible.

Inseparable

There are many different words for “worship” in the Bible.  But there is nothing in the context of any of these passages where the idea of prayer is expected to be divorced or detached from any form of worship.  Worship is not only an external action you do, but it is also an attitude.

Obviously, God can be worshipped in many ways – in your relationships, your job, your praise and singing, your finances, your good works, in all aspects of your life.  But an attitude of prayer is always connected to proper forms of worship.  Prayer should never be reduced to mean mere “conversation,” or the act of simply “asking” for something, as many Catholics argue.  But to divorce worship from prayer is to destroy the very essence of both terms!  There is certainly an “overlap” between the two.

Invariably, the term “pray” or “prayer” in Scripture is automatically assumed by its authors to be an act of worship.  Proper prayer is only and always directed toward God.  Please let this sink in.  There are NO examples in Holy Writ of acceptable prayer to ANYONE other than God:

“Whom have I in heaven but thee? and there is none upon earth that I desire beside thee.” (Psalm 73:25).

Now, please understand that prayer and worship are not the same things, but are vitally dependent on each other.  On the one hand, true prayer depends on worship, since your prayer to God is useless apart from an attitude of worship (Matthew 15:8).  As I said just above, if there is no worship involved, praying would be just “conversation” or “asking.”  On the other hand, true worship depends on a prayerful attitude.  After all, who can say that they are exercising true worship apart from communing with God?

Thus, prayer and worship are distinct, but inseparable. 

“I Pray Thee…”?

There are multiple arguments from Catholics for praying to Mary and the saints.  One such argument is by Catholic apologist Tim Staples, who wrote an article attempting to justify this type of prayer. 

See his article here:

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/is-prayer-synonymous-with-worship

In this article, Staples strives to demonstrate that prayer to saints is not adoration (worship), and he uses the extremely weak argument that the term “I pray thee” is actually a prayer (entreaty) to the person addressed, even if it is another human!  He then refers to 1 Kings 2:20 as an example, where Bathsheba addresses her son, King Solomon, and asks a request of him, which begins with the words:

“I pray thee, say me not nay…” 

And she goes on to make her request of him.

But again, Staples considers this to be authentic prayer and says:

“There was never a question here of whether the King James Bible was presenting Bathsheba as adoring her son as God, or praying to him in a way that was forbidden.  It was not.  Nor are Catholics when we pray to saints.” (Emphasis in original)

Of course no one with the slightest bit of biblical understanding would say that Bathsheba was “adoring” her son in the same way she would adore God.  And her entreaty was not in the least a prayer in any biblical sense.  Staples is using a Catholic “straw man” argument here and it crashes and burns.

Notice he says above:

“… or praying to him in a way that was forbidden.” 

What?!!  The only thing that should be “forbidden” here is Staples trying to inject the idea of prayer in the context of 1 Kings 2:20.  He is trying to imply that there is a correct way to pray to a person, but the multitude of prayer examples in Scripture will not permit him to suggest praying to anyone but God!  He either doesn’t see it or he refuses to see it.  I suspect it is the latter.

Tim Staples goes on to say that “The Catholic Church has gone to great lengths to define the essential difference between prayer to God and prayer to saints.”  Yes, they have, but we can successfully sum it up much quicker: Prayer to God is biblical and prayer to saints is not.

Assumptions and Scripture Twisting

I think the whole point is that Catholics start out assuming that it is ok to pray to the dead because the Church encourages such prayer.

Tim Staples qualifies the practice of praying to saints and says:

“We certainly honor them when we pray to them.  In other words, we do not talk to them like we talk to the boys at the local bar and grill.  We show great respect and reverence for them.  But we do not adore them as we adore God alone.” (Emphasis in original) 

There is nothing wrong with giving honor to whom honor is due (Romans 13:7), but praying to someone is far more than showing mere respect or simple human reverence.

Furthermore, he says:

“And we also petition them for their prayers because Scripture makes very clear that we need each other as members of the body of Christ.” (Emphasis in original) 

For this, he appeals to 1 Corinthians 12:12-27, which is about the diversity and necessity of everyone participating in the local body.  But the members of the body that the apostle Paul is referring to are the ones that are living.  Paul never implies that we need the help of those saints who have gone on before us.  There is no passage in all of Scripture to suggest this. 

Building a Case?

I’ve seen Catholics suggest that there is a cumulative, or collective, argument for prayer to Mary and the saints.  In other words, there is this long string of evidence for praying to these saints and it goes something like this:

1) Christians can help one another through their prayers.

2)   We are one body of believers (both dead and alive).

3) Some people’s prayers are stronger than others.

4) The saints are more alive now than they ever were (because they are in Heaven).

5) We have a “cloud of witnesses” in Heaven (Hebrews 12:1), and they pray for us.

6) In Revelation 6:9-10, there is intercession by those in Heaven for those on earth.

7) Mary had the closest relationship with Jesus, more than anyone.  So, her prayers must be the strongest.

Ok, so this is supposed to be a cumulative argument, but it just takes one weak link to collapse this whole line of thinking.

Weak Links in the Chain

So let’s break this down. 

1) Their first point is that Christians can help one another through their prayers.  Absolutely.  This is scriptural.  We have no problem with this idea.

2) Second, the assertion is that both living and dead Christians are part of the one body.  True, but we (the living) now have no more dealings with those who have gone on before us.  We will be re-united with them at our death (or the Rapture), but until then, there is no indication in the Bible that we can communicate with them or pray to them.

3) Third, yes, the prayers of some are more effective than those of others (James 5:16).  But there is nothing here at all about the prayers of the dead.

4) Those who have gone on before us (to Heaven) are more alive than they ever were before.  In a sense, that is true, but they are still in the category of “the dead” (Isaiah 26:19; Luke 20:37; Acts 23:6; 1 Thessalonians 4:16).  Just because they are “more alive than ever” doesn’t mean that we can pray to them or that they can communicate with us.  This gets dangerously close to necromancy (Deuteronomy 18:10-13).

5) The “cloud of witnesses” passage (Hebrews 12:1) is all about the Old Testament believers’ EXAMPLE OF FAITH to us.  This statement is a continuation of the context of Hebrews chapter 11.  The author’s point is NOT that they are now spectators, and that they are all watching what is happening to us on earth (although it is possible that God can allow them to).  But the whole point of the passage is that they are witnesses of the same message of faith and hope and that we should follow their lead (…let us [also] run with patience the race that is set before us – 12:1b); they encourage us as role models of the faith.  This is in no way a “proof” that those in Heaven are watching us.  And if they are watching us, so what?  We are never told in Scripture that they can pray for us.  It is another Catholic assumption.

6) Concerning the souls who cry out for vengeance on their enemies in Revelation 6, this is another weak attempt to “prove” that those in Heaven are watching us.  Maybe they are or maybe they aren’t, but it still doesn’t mean they should be prayed to.  This passage just means that they were waiting for retribution on their enemies.

7) Ok, Mary certainly had a close relationship with her Son, Jesus.  That’s obvious.  But it is an illogical leap to go from that idea to her being able to pray for us after her death, when there is absolutely no biblical evidence for that.

So this “cumulative argument,” this “long string of evidence for praying to saints” has several weak links within and therefore, collapses upon itself.  This does not prove that we can pray to Mary or the saints or that they are able to help us, or intercede for us.  But we do know living saints, here on earth can pray for each other (Colossians 4:3; 1 Thessalonians 5:25; Hebrews 13:18) and that Jesus, Himself, intercedes for us (Romans 8:34) and so does the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:26).

Prayer – the Highest Form of Worship

Some pastors, like John MacArthur, believe that prayer is the highest form of worship.  I don’t agree with everything he says (e.g., his Calvinism), but I do agree with his view of prayer and worship:

“Godly prayer is worship, acknowledging His sovereign will and our utter dependence…”

“If prayer is anything, it is the highest form of worship that an individual can participate in, because prayer is saying, ‘God, Your name, Your kingdom, Your will be elevated, not my will, not my kingdom, not my name.’”

“True prayer is the distilled essence of worship…”

I certainly agree.

See his article here:

https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/90-447/prayer-the-highest-form-of-worship

Conclusion

The Catholic Church claims that there are three “levels” of prayer: Dulia (toward the “saints”), Hyperdulia (toward Mary) and Latria (toward God).  This is certainly not a biblical concept and it seems a little complicated.  For example, how do you know when you have crossed the line from dulia into hyperdulia?  Or from hyperdulia into latria?  It seems pretty subjective and dangerous to me.

Catholics may claim that they can “discern” the differences, yet they can’t see the utter absence of this type of prayer in the multitude of examples of acceptable prayer in Scripture.  In this way, they are much like the religious Pharisees in Jesus’ day, who would filter out a gnat, yet swallow a camel (Matthew 23:24).  How could they miss something so obvious? 

If there were indeed examples of prayer to saints in Scripture, you can bet that the Catholic Church would be pointing to them.  This is very telling indeed.  The “elephant in the room” has always been the fact that there are NO EXAMPLES in the Bible of anyone (rightly) praying to anyone but God.

Catholic apologists tell us Protestants that we shouldn’t confuse worship and prayer.  But according to the Bible, it is obvious that the confusion is on their part.  Prayer is not just “asking” for something, or “conversing” with a lesser being.  Prayer is a form (possibly the highest form) of worship.  Both worship and prayer belong to God alone.

 

DAVE ARMSTRONG ON PRAYING TO SAINTS

Popular Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong has written an article defending the practice of praying to, and praying for, the saints.  The “saints” to which Catholic theology refers in these cases are certain persons who lived especially holy lives and who have died and (it is assumed) went on to Heaven.  They are not referring to the biblical definiton, which says that every true believer is a saint (e.g., 2 Corinthians 1:1; Ephesians 1:1; Philippians 1:1), but rather, the Catholic definiton.  How they know that these “saints” are really in Heaven to begin with is altogether another issue.  But Armstrong’s defense of the saints giving and receiving prayer can be found here:

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/darmstrong/4-biblical-proofs-for-prayers-to-saints-and-for-the-dead

The first example that Armstrong uses in an attempt to make his case is the story of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16:19-31.  He first points to the fact that in the King James Version of the Bible, the rich man used the term “I pray thee” (v. 27) and implies that this is evidence that the rich man was “praying” to Abraham.  Therefore, praying to a saint.

But we have to remember that this was “King James talk,” which was the common way to speak in the day the King James Bible was written.  The term “I pray thee” can indeed be used while in prayer, but it does not necessarily mean that one is praying.  It simply means, “I ask of you,” or “I beg of you.”  

Also, biblically speaking, prayer is only to someone who is in another realm, different than your own, for example, from earth to Heaven, and more specifically, from people on earth to God in Heaven (which is the only biblical example).  In Luke 16, Abraham and the rich man were in the same realm, near to each other.  They were certainly in two different places, but in the same realm (Hades).  So, two people in Hades communicating with each other is no different than two people in Heaven communicating with each other, or two people on earth communicating with each other – they are simply talking face to face, not praying.

Toward the end of this point, Armstrong says:

“Thus we can only conclude that human beings in the afterlife can be prayed to and that they have the power… to fulfill the requests… exactly what the Catholic communion of saints / invocation of saints holds…”

No, sorry Dave, but this is not the “only” conclusion that we can come to concerning prayer in this passage.  Actually, there is nothing at all in this passage about prayer.  Not only is yours not the only conclusion, it is not even a valid conclusion, according to the Bible.  Throughout Scripture, the only God-approved prayer is directed to God alone, not to Mary, not to saints, and not to angels.

Armstrong’s second example is King Saul “petitioning” the prophet Samuel after Samuel died (1 Samuel 28:15-16).  Actually, this is the story of how Saul, acting against God’s law, sought out the witch of Endor (1 Samuel 28:7) to conjure up Samuel to help him.  It was (and is) a sin to be involved in necromancy or to use mediums to communicate with the dead (Leviticus 19:31; Deuteronomy 18:10-12).  Even the witch knew that! (1 Samuel 28:3, 9)

It is interesting that Catholics will complain when Protestants compare praying to saints with necromancy, using mediums, or seances (all communicating with the dead), yet here, Dave Armstrong uses that very thing (the services of a medium) as an example of praying to saints!

Armstrong then states, “The Bible casually assumes that great prophets like Moses and Samuel would be praying for those on earth after they died.”  And then he uses Jeremiah 15:1 to try and support his claim:

Then the LORD said to me, “Though Moses and Samuel stood before me, yet my heart would not turn toward this people.  Send them out of my sight, and let them go!”

But any “casual assumptions” about the dead praying for us in this passage are made by Catholics, not Scripture.  God is not saying that Moses and Samuel actually stood before Him and interceded for the people.  He was making the point that even if they would have, He wouldn’t answer even their request.  God also says something similar to the verse above in Ezekiel 14:14: 

Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they should deliver but their own souls by their righteousness, saith the Lord God.

He then repeats this concept in verses 16, 18, and 20.  But in each case God is merely saying that EVEN IF great men of God like Moses, Samuel, Noah, Daniel, or Job would try to intervene (great intercessors as they were), God STILL would not answer their prayers, because of the great sin of Israel.  That’s the point God is making here.  He certainly was not endorsing the idea of prayer from these men after death.  Nowhere in Scripture do we see anyone in God’s will praying to anyone but God, nor do we see any departed saints praying for us.

Next, Dave points out that the bystanders at Jesus’ crucifixion believed that He was asking (praying to) Elijah to come and save Him.  Supposedly, “This type of petition was commonly believed at the time.”  But these Jews had no biblical reason whatsoever to believe that one could pray to anyone other than God.  

Dave Armstrong’s third example is the apostle Paul supposedly praying for the dead in 2 Timothy 1:16-18: 

[16] May the Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, for he often refreshed me; he was not ashamed of my chains, [17] but when he arrived in Rome he searched for me eagerly and found me – [18] may the Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that Day – and you well know all the service he rendered at Ephesus.

Notice that this is merely an assumption on Dave’s part.  There is no mention of anyone dead here.  It is possible that Onesiphorus was simply away from home, so maybe that is why Paul prayed for his household (2 Timothy 1:16; 4:19). 

 

But even if Onesiphorus was indeed dead when Paul wrote this, the final destiny of Onesiphorus was fixed, it was already decided (Luke 16:19-23; 2 Corinthians 5:6, 8; Hebrews 9:27).  No amount of prayer from anyone, even an apostle, could help his state after death.  

But obviously, Onesiphorus was a godly man, or Paul would not have spoken so highly of him.  Therefore, if he was dead, there was no need to ask God for mercy for Onesiphorus, since he had already obtained that final mercy.  But there was something else going on here.  If Onesiphorus was actually dead, Paul’s “prayer” for him to find mercy in that day was not specifically a petition to “help” him, but rather, a pious wish, an expression of a heart-felt desire toward him.  Like when we say “May you rest in peace” to someone who is dead.  It is not really praying for him or to him, but it is simply a sentiment toward the dearly departed, a commending of them to God.

But Catholics may ask, “But what about Purgatory?  Couldn’t Paul have been praying for Onesiphorus’ well-being in Purgatory?”  No, Scripture does not speak of such a place.  After death, there is only Heaven or Hell.  See here:

http://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-false-doctrine-of-purgatory-part-1.html

http://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-false-doctrine-of-purgatory-part-2.html

And the fourth example Armstrong gives us is both Jesus and Peter supposedly “praying to saints and for the dead.”  He points to Acts 9:36-41 where a girl named Tabitha had died.  And elsewhere, Jesus raises Lazarus from the dead (John 11:41-42), speaking “directly to a dead man (in effect, ‘praying’ to him).”

This is desperation.  There is a difference between 1) praying to a dead person who is supposedly in Heaven to help someone on earth, and 2) authoritatively and miraculously speaking to a dead body to raise it from the dead.  Neither Jesus nor Peter was asking these dead persons for help, i.e., they were not praying “to” them.  And neither were they praying “for” them in the Catholic sense of praying to aid them in Purgatory.  Again, this is a ridiculous attempt by Dave Armstrong to validate the Catholic practice of praying to the dead to help the one praying, and praying for the dead to help them to get out of Purgatory.  This is a desperate, shameful, and irresponsible manipulating of Holy Scripture, confusing and deceiving multitudes of Catholics.

For more information on praying to saints, see these links:

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2011/02/praying-to-saints.html

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2014/11/praying-to-saints-revisited.html

PRAYING TO THE SAINTS - REVISITED

A while back, we did an article on praying to the saints in Heaven, demonstrating how unbiblical this concept is.  The article can be found here:

http://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2011/02/praying-to-saints.html

Although this practice is found in the Catholic Church, the Orthodox Churches, and even in some of the Protestant Churches, it seems to be most popular with Catholics.  Note what the Catholic Church says about this teaching...

Official Sources

The Council of Trent teaches that “it is good and useful” to invoke (pray to) the saints in Heaven and ask them for their prayers, their aid, and their help in “obtaining benefits from God.”  This same Council also warned that anyone who denies that this is true is “wholly to be condemned.” (Session 25, On the Invocation, Veneration, and Relics, of Saints, and on Sacred Images)

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the intercession of the saints will “fix the whole Church more firmly in holiness” and “by their fraternal concern is our weakness greatly helped.” (CCC #956)

The Catechism also says that “their intercession is their most exalted service to God’s plan.” (CCC #2683)

The Catholic document Lumen Gentium (“Light of the Nations”), which is a dogmatic constitution on the Church, tells us that the saints in Heaven, through their intercession, “lend nobility to the worship which the Church offers to God here on earth and in many ways contribute to its greater edification.” (Chapter 7, Paragraph 49)

According to the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia (online):

“Canonization is a precept of the Roman Pontiff commanding public veneration to be paid an individual by the Universal Church.“ [Emphasis added]  

And again:

“The pope then issues a Bull of Canonization in which he not only permits, but commands, the public cultus, or veneration, of the saint.” (“Beatification and Canonization”) [Emphasis added]

Concerning Mary, the Catechism says of her:

“… You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death” (CCC #966). [Emphasis added]

“Mary… by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation… Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix” (CCC #969). [Emphasis added]

“… The Church rightly honors ‘the Blessed Virgin with special devotion.  From the most ancient times the Blessed Virgin has been honored with the title of “Mother of God,” to whose protection the faithful fly in all their dangers and needs…’” (CCC #971) [Emphasis added]

If This is All True…

Ok, a lot of special claims have been made here concerning the intercession of saints, and (especially) Mary, in these official Catholic sources.  According to Catholics, praying to saints has been a “universal practice of the church” since ancient times.  If this is all true, and if praying to the saints in Heaven is “good and useful” to “obtain benefits from God,” if it does indeed “fix the whole Church more firmly in holiness,” and contributes so much to the “greater edification” of the church, delivering our souls from death, bringing us “gifts of eternal salvation,” and if the faithful are to “fly in all their dangers and needs” toward the saints’ protection... then surely, something of this magnitude would at least be mentioned in Scripture, wouldn’t you think? 

It’s Just Not There

If all of the Catholic sources above are correct, then praying to Mary and the saints must be a wonderful and spiritually helpful thing to do.  But if that’s true, then why is this concept totally absent from the God-breathed Scriptures (in spite of the confident claim of Catholics that this teaching is a biblical idea)?  In the Bible, there are literally hundreds of references to prayer, and not a single one of them encourages us to pray to someone OTHER THAN GOD.  In fact, we are warned that God is a jealous God (Exodus 20:5; Deuteronomy 4:24; Nahum 1:2), and the constant example is to call upon HIM in time of need… not saints, angels, etc. (Jeremiah 33:3; Psalm 50:15; 91:15; Matthew 6:6, 9).  We are to pray to Him alone (Psalm 73:25).

So, has God been negligent, or perhaps even cruel, to withhold such a seemingly vital “treasure” from His people who study the Bible?  No, this teaching of praying to saints is not a treasure, but a trap!

Strain a Gnat… Swallow a Camel

It is truly amazing that Catholics can, on the one hand, see an infallible dogma (the supposed “Immaculate Conception” of Mary, herself) in Luke 1:28 … and yet, on the other hand, altogether MISS such a simple and obvious biblical pattern of praying ONLY to God, a concept that is thoroughly interwoven throughout all the Scriptures!  The pattern of hundreds of references to prayer is ignored in the one case, while a Catholic dogma is fabricated from the twisted “evidence” of (mainly) a single verse, in the other.  This is not only tragic, but dishonest.  And furthermore, to add insult to injury, remember, Catholics are commanded by the pope to pray to saints (as noted above) and those who don’t are condemned by the Council of Trent.

Conclusion

Catholics will often tell us that when they pray to saints, they are simply asking the saints to pray, or intercede, for them (the Catholic).  But in many cases, it is obvious that their requests are so much more than just “asking for prayer.”  In Scripture, prayer is never “just asking.”  Rather, biblical prayer is an act of WORSHIP, humbly addressing Almighty God, and Him alone.  Attempting to address anyone (or anything) else in prayer (even if only for the purpose of asking for intercession) is idolatry.  Any alleged “benefits” from praying to Mary, angels or saints are deceptive, at best, and ultimately destructive to souls, at worst.