Prayer to Saints in Orthodoxy.

[One Bad Pig]

Just finished Frank Herbert's God Emperor of Dune. Not quite as good as the previous entries, imo.

I thought God Emperor of Dune was awful.

Finished my SAAS OT/NKJV NT Orthodox Study Bible. Pretty good, although I still disagree with certain Orthodox doctrines and notions. I just didn't find the commentaries and mini-articles included persuasive.

FWIW, the commentaries got panned in some Orthodox circles, too. If you want to discuss certain Orthodox dotrines/notions in Ecclesiology, I'd be up for that. Can't guarantee I'd be any better than the mini-articles, but I might be able to offer a different perspective.

[Rational Gaze]

If you want to discuss certain Orthodox dotrines/notions in Ecclesiology, I'd be up for that. Can't guarantee I'd be any better than the mini-articles, but I might be able to offer a different perspective.

Basically, I don't buy praying to saints to intercede on our behalf. I know the intent, I just don't think it is taught in Scripture or evidenced in the earliest Church. My position is not too dissimilar to JP Holding's, IIRC. In that, it's far from clear whether the saints can hear our prayers or not (God can, because he's omniscient and omnipresent, for instance), it's also far from clear whether the saints can intercede on our behalf (I'm open to the possibility, I'm just agnostic on the issue) and if they can intercede on our behalf, I think they're probably doing it already.

I don't buy the doctrine of Mary's 'perpetual virginity'. I know the term 'brother' could be used to refer to relations other than siblings, I'm just not convinced the context supports a non-sibling relation between Jesus and those listed as his brothers and sisters. I'm also still not too big on the use of the title 'Mother of God'. I know EO mariology is less 'heavy' than RC, but it still seems whacky and bizarre to me. I AM okay with veneration, however.

[One Bad Pig]

Basically, I don't buy praying to saints to intercede on our behalf. I know the intent, I just don't think it is taught in Scripture or evidenced in the earliest Church. My position is not too dissimilar to JP Holding's, IIRC. In that, it's far from clear whether the saints can hear our prayers or not (God can, because he's omniscient and omnipresent, for instance), it's also far from clear whether the saints can intercede on our behalf (I'm open to the possibility, I'm just agnostic on the issue) and if they can intercede on our behalf, I think they're probably doing it already.

Well, I wouldn't take your last postulate as arguing against prayer to them. After all, God already knows what we need before we ask. We don't pray to God because he has to be told anything, but because it strengthens our relationship to Him. Saints, on the other hand, are not omniscient. They may (and I think they can - Heb. 12:1) be able to see what's happening to us, but like those around us who can also see what's happening, may not know everything we need. I think that it's only by the operation of the Holy Spirit that the saints can hear our petitions to them, but that they can intercede for us is IMO manifest - because intercessory prayer of the saints works. Countless miracles have been wrought over the centuries because people asked for intercessory prayer of saints. And, just like asking your neighbor to pray for you, the very act of asking brings you closer.

I don't buy the doctrine of Mary's 'perpetual virginity'. I know the term 'brother' could be used to refer to relations other than siblings, I'm just not convinced the context supports a non-sibling relation between Jesus and those listed as his brothers and sisters.

I think the possibility that the brothers and sisters were Joseph's beget from a prior marriage makes the most sense to explain the relationship; if they were sons and daughters of Joseph & Mary, then why did Jesus place his mother in the care of John while on the cross? Her other sons, if any, would have had that responsibility.

I'm also still not too big on the use of the title 'Mother of God'. I know EO mariology is less 'heavy' than RC, but it still seems whacky and bizarre to me.

"Mother of God" is really not the best translation, because it has a wider range of meaning than 'Theotokos', which more precisely means "God-bearer". The term is at least as old as Origen, who used it; the term continues to be used without comment (by Dionysus of Alexandria IIRC, and the Cappadocian Fathers), but there is no (non-Arian) opposition to its use until Nestorius, who proposed "Christ-bearer" instead. "Theotokos" merely affirms that Mary bore the Incarnate Son of God in her womb. This is, by the way, another argument for her perpetual virginity. If the Israelites could not touch the Ark of the Covenant because God rested on it, Joseph may have been wary of touching what had contained God Incarnate.

I AM okay with veneration, however.

Ok.