Guardian Angels

[AVZ]

The enormous amount of disinformation spouted by the Catholic Church is unimaginable.
None of it is based on Scripture.

The Bible does not say that there is such a thing as guardian angels, personal angels, or angels that should be prayed to.
Nowhere the Bible mentions that angels deserve any form of worship of veneration.
What we do know about angels is that they too are prone to disobedience to God, hence Satan and his cronies.

The OP claims: "They are not just the occasional messengers from God but they appear many, many times in scripture."
Lets have a look at this and see how many times angels really interact with humans.

The first time angels appear is in the Garden of Eden.
Then about 2000 years later an angel appears to Hagar
Around that same time angels appear to Abraham and Lot
Jacob sees angels
Hundreds of years later Balam sees an angel
And then it is quiet for thousands of years again
Around the birth and ministry of Christ angels appear a few times
And in the New Testament there are three or four interactions of angels with the apostles

I may have missed one or two, but that's it and that's all.
Throughout history there have only been a handful of events that were accompanied by angels, and only a handful of people every saw them.

Perfect opportunity for the Catholic Church to build yet another unfounded theology on.
The Bible says this:

Colossians 2:18  Let no man rob you of your prize by a voluntary humility and worshipping of the angels, dwelling in the things which he hath seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
and
2 Corinthians 11:14  And no marvel; for even Satan fashioneth himself into an angel of light.

I just keep wondering why the Catholic Church seems to think that all these entities need veneration, worship, remembrance and special holidays.
Why they need to be prayed to, and why they have some special power.
The Bible says THEY DO NOT!

Sad.

[Catholica]

part of worship is praying. Again, I will never never never understand praying TO anyone else when we have immediate and full access to the Father of lights, from whom every good and perfect gift comes!  Anything else is just a cheap empty imitation!

Do you understand asking your neighbor to pray for you to God?  Do you understand asking your neighbor to lift you up spiritually?  Do you understand asking your neighbor for a cup of sugar?

This is so wrong and gives an accurate view of how the Catholic Church perceives prayer.

Prayer (as it is meant in the Bible) is not simply asking for things.
Prayer to God and praying (begging) your neighbor are intrinsically different.

A prayer to God contains the following:
- Acknowledgement of divinity
- Glorification
- Admittance of dependency
- Request

All these elements can be found in the "Our Father".
Aside from the request, no such elements can be found in asking your neighbor for a cup of sugar, or asking him to pray for you.

Neither is praying to angels and Mary the same as asking your neighbor for a cup of sugar.
It is yet another distorted view by the Catholic Church to place other entities in between believers and God.

AVZ, your rant is fine, it shows the difference in understanding, as well as exactly what I mean.  When we say we "pray to angels" we are not acknowledging any divinity, we are not glorifying them, we are not admitting our dependency on them.  The Catholic definition of prayer IS different from what those from the Protestant tree believe, and that is why they misinterpret what we are doing.

When we ask someone else to pray for us or to help us, we are:

Admitting that we need help.
Acknowledging the reality of our communion with those persons.
Acknowledging their ability to help us.
Giving glory to God through the reality of our communion with those persons.

For it is good and pleasing to God our savior that we should pray for others, i.e. intercede for them.  1 Tim 2:1-4.

God wishes for us to merit grace and reward in heaven through loving God AND loving our neighbor.  Angels merit (not earn) glory in heaven when they pray for us.  The saints merit (not earn) glory in heaven when they pray for us.  We merit (not earn) glory in heaven when we pray for others.  The Catholic faith is founded in a profound sense of the communion of saints: a community which is in place so that God can work through us, and when we make sacrifice (such as prayer) then we do a good work for God.

Thus God loves to see his children loving each other by interceding for each other, and He gives his grace in this way.  This idea is either profoundly lost in "Jesus and I" theology or is not fully recognized for its reality.  There is only one vine, and we can continue to love our neighbors in heaven, and the angels love us as their neighbors as well, just as we love our God.  Actually it is because we love our God and trust in his means of grace flowing through each other that we see the benefit in mutual prayer. 

If anyone doesn't choose to accept this, it is their choice.  But we believe that the communion of saints is an integral part of the Christian life, and by this we mean "all saints" including those on earth, in purgatory, in heaven and the angels.

[Catholica]

The Bible does not say that there is such a thing as guardian angels, personal angels, or angels that should be prayed to.
Nowhere the Bible mentions that angels deserve any form of worship of veneration.
What we do know about angels is that they too are prone to disobedience to God, hence Satan and his cronies.

The OP claims: "They are not just the occasional messengers from God but they appear many, many times in scripture."
Lets have a look at this and see how many times angels really interact with humans.

The first time angels appear is in the Garden of Eden.
Then about 2000 years later an angel appears to Hagar
Around that same time angels appear to Abraham and Lot
Jacob sees angels
Hundreds of years later Balam sees an angel
And then it is quiet for thousands of years again
Around the birth and ministry of Christ angels appear a few times
And in the New Testament there are three or four interactions of angels with the apostles

I may have missed one or two, but that's it and that's all.
Throughout history there have only been a handful of events that were accompanied by angels, and only a handful of people every saw them.

Perfect opportunity for the Catholic Church to build yet another unfounded theology on.

The original post was actually quite convincing.  We believe EVERY line of the Bible.  Including the ones, no matter how sparse, that demonstrate the reality of guardian angels.

The Bible says this:

Colossians 2:18  Let no man rob you of your prize by a voluntary humility and worshipping of the angels, dwelling in the things which he hath seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
and
2 Corinthians 11:14  And no marvel; for even Satan fashioneth himself into an angel of light.

As has been said before, and as your post previous to this one of yours demonstrates, our definition of prayer which we mean when we pray to angels is different than yours, which is an admission that we do not worship angels.

I just keep wondering why the Catholic Church seems to think that all these entities need veneration, worship, remembrance and special holidays.
Why they need to be prayed to, and why they have some special power.
The Bible says THEY DO NOT!

You keep wondering because you refuse to listen.  And we don't worship angels, you acknowledged this in correctly understanding our definition of prayer.

We celebrate those in heaven who have made great contributions to the fulfillment of God's will on Earth.  Catholic theology is more closely tied to the reality that God works through and with his faithful.  Thus the faithful are not automatons but willing participants in this plan of God, and their contributions, therefore, are praiseworthy.  Including the angels.  And let's not forget,

Colossians 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

While I've already explained why they are prayed to, why they have some special power is because God made them angelic beings.  Angels are capable of doing angelic things, of fighting spiritual battles, of protecting us from spiritual forces.  Just like I can ask my human friend for a hand, one can ask one of God's faithful angels for a spiritual "hand".  They are real beings, after all, and they are really around us, and they are our fellow servants before God.  They desire to do God's will, so anything we ask they would only do if it is God's will.  But they can pray for us, they can help us in many ways, because they are real beings with free will as well.

I think it is clear that there are many among non-Catholic folk who think that angels are just "other" and not to be addressed.  But the angel addresses John and speaks with him in that famous verse in Revelation, 19:9-10 and tells John that they are fellow servants of God with John.  Servants serve: they do things for each other for love of neighbor because of their love of God, and the angels seek to do God's will.

[Helen]

Ok, you Catholics go talk to the angels and departed, and hope against hope they are not disguised demons.

We'll go straight to God, which is the way Jesus opened up for us.

[winsome]

The OP claims: "They are not just the occasional messengers from God but they appear many, many times in scripture."
Lets have a look at this and see how many times angels really interact with humans.

The first time angels appear is in the Garden of Eden.
Then about 2000 years later an angel appears to Hagar
Around that same time angels appear to Abraham and Lot
Jacob sees angels
Hundreds of years later Balam sees an angel
And then it is quiet for thousands of years again
Around the birth and ministry of Christ angels appear a few times
And in the New Testament there are three or four interactions of angels with the apostles

Here are some you missed in the OT:

Ex 3:2
Ex 14:19
Ex 23:20,23
Ex 32:34
Ex 33:2
Jdg 2:1
Jdg 6:11-22
Jdg 13:3-9
Jdg 13:13-21
Sam 24:16-17
1Kg:19:5-7
2Kg 19:35
1Chr 21:15-18
Tob chaps 5 & 6
Esth D:13
Is 37:36
Dan 3:49
Dan 6:23
Zech chaps 1-6

Then in the NT are: Jesus, Zechariah, Mary, Joseph (twice in a dream), Shepherds, Peter (twice), Phillip, Cornelius, Herod, Paul

[Catholica]

Ok, you Catholics go talk to the angels and departed, and hope against hope they are not disguised demons.

We'll go straight to God, which is the way Jesus opened up for us.

Thanks, Helen.  We will and I plan to.

Angel of God, my guardian dear,
to whom God's love commits me here,
ever this day be at my side,
to light, to guard, to rule, to guide.  Amen.

Also a private intention.

[AnnaM]

'Angel of God,
my guardian,
to whom the goodness
of the Heavenly Father entrusts me.
Enlighten,
protect and guide me
now and for ever.
Amen'


"Behold I will send my Angel who will go before you, to guard you on your journey and bring you to the place that I have prepared. Revere him and obey what he says. Do not defy him, he will not pardon such a fault for My Name is in him." (Exodus 23: 20-21)

[Helen]

"Behold I will send my Angel who will go before you, to guard you on your journey and bring you to the place that I have prepared. Revere him and obey what he says. Do not defy him, he will not pardon such a fault for My Name is in him." (Exodus 23: 20-21)

What guided the Israelites through the wilderness was the Shekinah Glory Cloud.  Jesus was and is its divine resident.  "My Name" is YHWH and no one but God Himself takes that Name.

[MeMyself]

"Behold I will send my Angel who will go before you, to guard you on your journey and bring you to the place that I have prepared. Revere him and obey what he says. Do not defy him, he will not pardon such a fault for My Name is in him." (Exodus 23: 20-21)

What guided the Israelites through the wilderness was the Shekinah Glory Cloud.  Jesus was and is its divine resident.  "My Name" is YHWH and no one but God Himself takes that Name.

[AVZ]

The OP claims: "They are not just the occasional messengers from God but they appear many, many times in scripture."
Lets have a look at this and see how many times angels really interact with humans.

The first time angels appear is in the Garden of Eden.
Then about 2000 years later an angel appears to Hagar
Around that same time angels appear to Abraham and Lot
Jacob sees angels
Hundreds of years later Balam sees an angel
And then it is quiet for thousands of years again
Around the birth and ministry of Christ angels appear a few times
And in the New Testament there are three or four interactions of angels with the apostles

Here are some you missed in the OT:

Ex 3:2
Ex 14:19
Ex 23:20,23
Ex 32:34
Ex 33:2
Jdg 2:1
Jdg 6:11-22
Jdg 13:3-9
Jdg 13:13-21
Sam 24:16-17
1Kg:19:5-7
2Kg 19:35
1Chr 21:15-18
Tob chaps 5 & 6
Esth D:13
Is 37:36
Dan 3:49
Dan 6:23
Zech chaps 1-6

Then in the NT are: Jesus, Zechariah, Mary, Joseph (twice in a dream), Shepherds, Peter (twice), Phillip, Cornelius, Herod, Paul

This shows how hopelessly confused your denomination is about angels.
I am not going to address all of the above, just a few to make my point.

Exodus 3:2
It says there "And the angel of Jehovah appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. "
But 2 verses later "And when Jehovah saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I."
- So what was it winsome? Was it an angel or was it the Lord Himself?

Exodus 33:2  "and I will send an angel before thee; and I will drive out the Canaanite, the Amorite, and the Hittite, and the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite:"
- In reality there was no angel was there? Any accounts of an angelic leader before the Israelites?

Daniel 6:22 "My God hath sent his angel, and hath shut the lions' mouths, and they have not hurt me; forasmuch as before him innocency was found in me; and also before thee, O king, have I done no hurt. "
- Does that really say that there was a physical angel present to shut the mouths of the lions?

Zechariah 1-6
- Clearly Zechariah had vision(s) here.

Take a look at this for another example.
When God gave Moses the law, the Bible says that God Himself wrote the law with His finger.
Yet Stephen says in Acts 7:38 "This is he that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel that spake to him in the Mount Sinai"

Weird huh? Sometimes the Bible says that there were angels...and sometimes it speaks of God Himself in the same event.
Clearly when the Bible speaks of "the angel of the Lord" or "an angel of the Lord" it uses this manner of speech to say that God directly inflicted things on humans.
It has nothing to do with an actual angel being present, and it definitely doesn't say that these angels were interacting with the humans and that those humans experienced them as angels.

Your devotion and worship to saints and angels shows how confused you are and how little understanding you have of angels and saints.
You slot in all these kinds of properties when really there are none, devote yourself to them with prayer and other forms of worship and then want the rest of the world to believe that you do not really worship them by bringing grammar to the table.

Catholica says it correctly:
"And we don't worship angels, you acknowledged this in correctly understanding our definition of prayer."
See, the Catholic Church has her own, special and unique, definition of words. So to call a Catholic Dictionary, that is neither in line with the Bible or with the world.
Its a system that thrives on confusion where literally every single word in the human language can be replaced with any meaning at the choice of the Catholic Church.

The actual number of accounts in the Bible where a real angel is portrait is very small.
In fact if you would to take it over the total time since creation, it is on average once in a few hundred years.
If you would to look at the actual accounts you will see that those appearances mostly place themselves around special events.
For example most of the physical appearances are around the events of Jesus' birth and the early church. That's a time span of 60 years or so.

Your denomination has made angels into something they are not, because Catholics like the unexplainable and the mystique.
The theology that has been fabricated around this is equally based on vague mystical events.
It has the same basis as your own Catholic Dictionary...keep it as vague as possible and provide yourself the option to change the meaning whenever required.

It really is so sad that your church fails to base her foundation on what is real in the Bible, and resorts to theologies that demand an awful lot of imagination and extra-biblical documentation.

[winsome]

"Behold I will send my Angel who will go before you, to guard you on your journey and bring you to the place that I have prepared. Revere him and obey what he says. Do not defy him, he will not pardon such a fault for My Name is in him." (Exodus 23: 20-21)

What guided the Israelites through the wilderness was the Shekinah Glory Cloud.  Jesus was and is its divine resident.  "My Name" is YHWH and no one but God Himself takes that Name.

That's not what the Bible says:
"Behold, I send an angel before you, to guard you on the way and to bring you to the place which I have prepared. Give heed to him and hearken to his voice, do not rebel against him, for he will not pardon your transgression; for my name is in him. "But if you hearken attentively to his voice and do all that I say, then I will be an enemy to your enemies and an adversary to your adversaries. "When my angel goes before you, and brings you in to the Amorites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Canaanites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, and I blot them out.." (Ex 23:20-23)

[winsome]

This shows how hopelessly confused your denomination is about angels.
I am not going to address all of the above, just a few to make my point.

Exodus 3:2
It says there "And the angel of Jehovah appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. "
But 2 verses later "And when Jehovah saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I."
-   So what was it winsome? Was it an angel or was it the Lord Himself?

You seem not to believe scripture.

Scripture says "And the angel of the LORD appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush", but since you seem not to believe that God acts through his angels you go into denial.

When Stephen was giving his speech in Acts 7 he said:
"Now when forty years had passed, an angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in a flame of fire in a bush. (vs 30)
Then
"This Moses whom they refused, saying, 'Who made you a ruler and a judge?' God sent as both ruler and deliverer by the hand of the angel that appeared to him in the bush. (vs 35)

What is inconsistent in the angel appearing to attract Moses attention and then when he goes to see, this strange phenomena, then God calls to him. "When the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called to him out of the bush" (Ex 3:4)

Exodus 33:2  "and I will send an angel before thee; and I will drive out the Canaanite, the Amorite, and the Hittite, and the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite:"
In reality there was no angel was there? Any accounts of an angelic leader before the Israelites?

So you don't believe scripture or God.
Scripture says "And I will send an angel before you, and I will drive out the Canaanites, the Amorites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites." (Ex 22:2

Any accounts of an angelic leader before the Israelites?

Then the angel of God who went before the host of Israel moved and went behind them (Ex 14:19)

"Behold, I send an angel before you, to guard you on the way and to bring you to the place which I have prepared. Give heed to him and hearken to his voice, do not rebel against him, for he will not pardon your transgression; for my name is in him. "But if you hearken attentively to his voice and do all that I say, then I will be an enemy to your enemies and an adversary to your adversaries. "When my angel goes before you, and brings you in to the Amorites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Canaanites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, and I blot them out." (Ex 23:20-23)

Daniel 6:22 "My God hath sent his angel, and hath shut the lions' mouths, and they have not hurt me; forasmuch as before him innocency was found in me; and also before thee, O king, have I done no hurt. "
-   Does that really say that there was a physical angel present to shut the mouths of the lions?

Why not?

Why do you no believe what scripture says?

Zechariah 1-6
-   Clearly Zechariah had vision(s) here.

Zechariah clearly saw an angel and had a conversation with him. "Then the angel who talked with me came forward and said to me,..."

Take a look at this for another example.
When God gave Moses the law, the Bible says that God Himself wrote the law with His finger.
Yet Stephen says in Acts 7:38 "This is he that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel that spake to him in the Mount Sinai"


Weird huh? Sometimes the Bible says that there were angels...and sometimes it speaks of God Himself in the same event.

Clearly when the Bible speaks of "the angel of the Lord" or "an angel of the Lord" it uses this manner of speech to say that God directly inflicted things on humans.
It has nothing to do with an actual angel being present, and it definitely doesn't say that these angels were interacting with the humans and that those humans experienced them as angels.

It's not weird if you believe scripture. Your problem is that you are in denial about angels. And they did interact with humans.

"Behold, I send an angel before you, to guard you on the way and to bring you to the place which I have prepared. Give heed to him and hearken to his voice, do not rebel against him.." (Ex 23:20-21)

And the angel of the LORD appeared to the woman and said to her, "Behold, you are barren and have no children; but you shall conceive and bear a son. Therefore beware, and drink no wine or strong drink, and eat nothing unclean, for lo, you shall conceive and bear a son.......Then the woman came and told her husband, "A man of God came to me, and his countenance was like the countenance of the angel of God, very terrible"... Manoah said to the angel of the LORD, "Pray, let us detain you, and prepare a kid for you." And the angel of the LORD said to Manoah,  (Jdg  13:3-5, 6, 15-16)

In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary......And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus....... And Mary said to the angel, "How shall this be, since I have no husband?"  (Lk 1:26, 27, 31, 34)

And there appeared to him an angel of the Lord standing on the right side of the altar of incense. And Zechariah was troubled when he saw him, and fear fell upon him. But the angel said to him, "Do not be afraid, Zechariah, for your prayer is heard, and your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall call his name John......And Zechariah said to the angel, "How shall I know this? For I am an old man, and my wife is advanced in years." (Lk 1:11-13 & 18)

"...the angel of the LORD appeared to him and said, "The LORD is with you, O champion!"  "My Lord," Gideon said to him, "if the LORD is with us, why has all this happened to us?"...... the angel of the LORD stretched out the tip of the staff he held, and touched the meat and unleavened cakes.......... Gideon, now aware that it had been the angel of the LORD, said, "Alas, Lord GOD, that I have seen the angel of the LORD face to face!"  (Jdg 6:12,13, 22).

There are more but that will be enough for now.

Scripture clearly shows humans interacting with angels.

To say "and it definitely doesn't say that these angels were interacting with the humans and that those humans experienced them as angels." is simple denial of scripture.

[winsome]

Catholica says it correctly:
"And we don't worship angels, you acknowledged this in correctly understanding our definition of prayer."
See, the Catholic Church has her own, special and unique, definition of words. So to call a Catholic Dictionary, that is neither in line with the Bible or with the world.
Its a system that thrives on confusion where literally every single word in the human language can be replaced with any meaning at the choice of the Catholic Church.

It's Protestants that have their own definitions of words. And in their arrogance some of them try to impose their definitions on Catholics.

[Catholica]

Catholica says it correctly:
"And we don't worship angels, you acknowledged this in correctly understanding our definition of prayer."
See, the Catholic Church has her own, special and unique, definition of words. So to call a Catholic Dictionary, that is neither in line with the Bible or with the world.
Its a system that thrives on confusion where literally every single word in the human language can be replaced with any meaning at the choice of the Catholic Church.

It's Protestants that have their own definitions of words. And in their arrogance some of them try to impose their definitions on Catholics.

I concur with winsome. In fact, the Catholic Church continues to use an ancient form of Latin for all their official documents. The reason for it is so exactly that the meanings of words don't change over time. They have a definite exact meaning which secular bible compilers cannot alter. And so some words Catholics use will be from their archaic meaning.

We don't, in fact, ever change the meaning of our words. And one of those words which hasn't changed it's meaning is prayer. It is the contents of the prayer, not the fact that one is praying, which either ask for intercession as from the saints, or give divine adoration as to God alone.

[FireSword]

Catholica says it correctly:
"And we don't worship angels, you acknowledged this in correctly understanding our definition of prayer."
See, the Catholic Church has her own, special and unique, definition of words. So to call a Catholic Dictionary, that is neither in line with the Bible or with the world.
Its a system that thrives on confusion where literally every single word in the human language can be replaced with any meaning at the choice of the Catholic Church.

It's Protestants that have their own definitions of words. And in their arrogance some of them try to impose their definitions on Catholics.

I concur with winsome. In fact, the Catholic Church continues to use an ancient form of Latin for all their official documents. The reason for it is so exactly that the meanings of words don't change over time. They have a definite exact meaning which secular bible compilers cannot alter. And so some words Catholics use will be from their archaic meaning.

We don't, in fact, ever change the meaning of our words. And one of those words which hasn't changed it's meaning is prayer. It is the contents of the prayer, not the fact that one is praying, which either ask for intercession as from the saints, or give divine adoration as to God alone.

Catholics have their own dictionary. Protestants use the English language and use bible terms, whereas Catholics invent their own words. No wonder for a Protestant the Catholic faith seems a bit alien.

[winsome]

Catholica says it correctly:
"And we don't worship angels, you acknowledged this in correctly understanding our definition of prayer."
See, the Catholic Church has her own, special and unique, definition of words. So to call a Catholic Dictionary, that is neither in line with the Bible or with the world.
Its a system that thrives on confusion where literally every single word in the human language can be replaced with any meaning at the choice of the Catholic Church.

It's Protestants that have their own definitions of words. And in their arrogance some of them try to impose their definitions on Catholics.

I concur with winsome. In fact, the Catholic Church continues to use an ancient form of Latin for all their official documents. The reason for it is so exactly that the meanings of words don't change over time. They have a definite exact meaning which secular bible compilers cannot alter. And so some words Catholics use will be from their archaic meaning.

We don't, in fact, ever change the meaning of our words. And one of those words which hasn't changed it's meaning is prayer. It is the contents of the prayer, not the fact that one is praying, which either ask for intercession as from the saints, or give divine adoration as to God alone.

Catholics have their own dictionary. Protestants use the English language and use bible terms, whereas Catholics invent their own words. No wonder for a Protestant the Catholic faith seems a bit alien.

English is a very flexible language and sometimes the same word is used in different ways. Also the meaning(s) can change over time. Prayer is a classic example.

Consider the etymology of the word pray:
c.1290, "ask earnestly, beg," also "pray to a god or saint," from O.Fr. preier (c.900), from L. precari "ask earnestly, beg," from *prex (plural preces, gen. precis) "prayer, request, entreaty," from PIE base *prek- "to ask, request, entreat" (cf. Skt. prasna-, Avestan frashna- "question;" O.C.S. prositi, Lith. prasyti "to ask, beg;" O.H.G. frahen, Ger. fragen, O.E. fricgan "to ask" a question). Prayer (c.1300) is from O.Fr. preiere, from V.L. *precaria, noun use of L. precaria, fem. of adj. precarius "obtained by prayer," from precari.(from the Online Etymology Dictionary)

So pray means, at its root, ask earnestly, entreat, beg, request.

If you read old English plays you will find phrases such as "prithee sir" (pray you sir) or "where are you going I pray".

Take these extracts from that great English writer, Jane Austen
"But pray, Colonel, how came you to conjure out that I should be in town today?" (Mrs Jennings to Colonel Brandon in Sense and Sensibility)

"Oh! cousin, stop a moment, pray stop!" (Fanny Price to Edmund in Mansfield Park)

Scripture itself uses the word pray in this manner:

Notwithstanding, that I be not further tedious unto thee, I pray thee that thou wouldest hear us of thy clemency a few words. (Acts 24:4 - KJV)

Wherefore I pray you to take some meat: for this is for your health (Acts 27:34 - KJV)

As Catholica said we sometimes use a word in an archaic sense. But that is perfectly valid English, and I have shown above, it is Biblical. If Protestants want to narrow the meaning of the word for their own purposes that is for them to decide. However to try and impose their narrow meaning on Catholics is not acceptable to us.

A little more to say on Biblical usage. The word for pray in the two scripture quotes I gave is
parakaleo. According to a Greek dictionary this means:- ask, beg, implore, petition, pray, request, solicit, urge, woo

A different Greek word is used here:
I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for the ones you have given me, because they are yours, (John 17:9).

The Greek word we translate as pray comes from the Greek erotao which means: ask, query, question.

Another word that is used in the NT is proseuchomai as when Jesus says: But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret (Mt 6:6).
It is this word proseuchomai that is generally used for addressing God.

Greek speaking Orthodox use proseuchomai for addressing God and parakaleo for addressing Mary & the Saints. We have only the one word, "pray", and hence the misunderstandings that arise because most Protestants, who do not pray to Mary (in the sense of ask), do not understand this distinction and assume that Catholics pray to Mary in the same way that they pray to God.

[winsome]

When we pray together, or someone prays for me, they are not mediating.  I have direct access to the Throne of the Father through Jesus Christ.  I have need of no other. 

Of COURSE I will go directly to God.  I have been given that divine right by Jesus Himself, my Lord and my God. 

Of course you can go directly to God. But it is also scriptural to ask others to pray for you. Paul did (Eph 6:19-20, Col 4:3, 1Thess 5:25, 2 Thess 3:)

[Catholica]

I thought of this this morning at adoration of the Blessed Sacrament.  In Biblical usage, not all prayers that the Bible calls "prayer" give worship to God.  Thus prayer is not inherently the same thing as worship:

Luke 18
11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: 'God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.'

That was his "prayer".  Let's look again at AVZ's definition of prayer means "biblically":

A prayer to God contains the following:
- Acknowledgement of divinity
- Glorification
- Admittance of dependency
- Request

Clearly this act by the Pharisee addresses divinity, but does it acknowledge divinity?  It acknowledges divine attributes, that God created him.  Does it glorify God?  No.  Does it admit his dependency on God?  Perhaps in one sense, but on the whole it is not about that.  Is it a request?  No.  Does the Bible call it prayer?  YES.

Prayer itself, is therefore not by definition an act of worship, although it can be, depending[ on its contents.  The act of prayer, rather, is an act of faith.  Our prayers to God and to the saints and the angels all share this in common, which is that when we pray it is an act of faith that God exists and that the communion of saints is true.  While our prayers to God himself rightly consists of adoration and praise and requests, our prayers to saints and angels are not acts of adoration which is alone due to God, who alone is omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, the Creator of the universe, the Savior, the Redeemer, the Sanctifier, the source of all grace and all that is good.  The prayers to the saints, give them due veneration for how they worked with God in times past but assign no divine attributes to them, nor worship them as God, but recognize their places in God's economy of salvation, which we know from scripture makes them capable of loving us in Christ Jesus, of praying for us in Christ Jesus, and of continuing to serve God in Christ Jesus.

To reduce all prayer to worship is not biblical.  The Pharisee "prayed" according to the inerrant word of God, but he was not worshiping God through that prayer, because of the contents of that prayer.

[FireSword]

When we pray together, or someone prays for me, they are not mediating.  I have direct access to the Throne of the Father through Jesus Christ.  I have need of no other. 

Of COURSE I will go directly to God.  I have been given that divine right by Jesus Himself, my Lord and my God. 

Of course you can go directly to God. But it is also scriptural to ask others to pray for you. Paul did (Eph 6:19-20, Col 4:3, 1Thess 5:25, 2 Thess 3:)

So when you ask 'Mary to pray for us' in Catholic, it is proseuchomai?

[winsome]

When we pray together, or someone prays for me, they are not mediating.  I have direct access to the Throne of the Father through Jesus Christ.  I have need of no other. 

Of COURSE I will go directly to God.  I have been given that divine right by Jesus Himself, my Lord and my God. 

Of course you can go directly to God. But it is also scriptural to ask others to pray for you. Paul did (Eph 6:19-20, Col 4:3, 1Thess 5:25, 2 Thess 3:)

So when you ask 'Mary to pray for us' in Catholic, it is proseuchomai?

We pray (parakaleo) to Mary to pray (proseuchomai) for us. But of course we (English speakers) don't actually us either parakaleo or proseuchomai.

Spirit & Truth Fellowship International (not Catholic) say about proseuchomai & parakaleo:
The Greek verb proseuchomai (#4336 proseu,comai) and its noun form proseuche (#4335 proseuch,), like euchomai and euche, denote prayer in the more general sense. This means the content of the prayer may include various specific requests (aitema), supplications (deēsis), intercessions (enteuxis), etc. However proseuchomai and proseuche are only used as prayer to God (the prefix pros means towards)—whereas euchomai and deēsis are not restricted in this way (Trench, Synonyms). It generally "seems to indicate not so much the contents of the prayer as its end and aim" (Thayer).

The Greek verb parakaleō (#3870 parakale,w) and its noun form paraklēsis (#3874 para,klhsij) have a very wide range of meaning. Further, they appear quite often in scripture (109 verb uses; 29 noun uses). The words' basic meaning is to call to one's side. "To call some one hither, that he may do something...to use persuasion with him" (Bullinger). The calling along can be meant to appeal or plead; encourage or urge; to comfort; summon or invite; only once is it applied to God and that by the Lord Jesus (Matt 26:53).
You see some Proestants understand the difference!

Their text on this lists many words Greek words that are translated as "pray" – euchomai, proseuchomai, erotao, aiteo, deomai, parakaleo, entynchano with explanations and examples in the NT.
See www.stfonline.org/pdf/rev/appendix%20b_commentary.pdf .

I am told that the Perseus Project lists 97 Greek words for "pray".

[AVZ]

When we pray together, or someone prays for me, they are not mediating.  I have direct access to the Throne of the Father through Jesus Christ.  I have need of no other. 

Of COURSE I will go directly to God.  I have been given that divine right by Jesus Himself, my Lord and my God. 

Of course you can go directly to God. But it is also scriptural to ask others to pray for you. Paul did (Eph 6:19-20, Col 4:3, 1Thess 5:25, 2 Thess 3:)

So when you ask 'Mary to pray for us' in Catholic, it is proseuchomai?

We pray (parakaleo) to Mary to pray (proseuchomai) for us. But of course we (English speakers) don't actually us either parakaleo or proseuchomai.

Spirit & Truth Fellowship International (not Catholic) say about proseuchomai & parakaleo:
The Greek verb proseuchomai (#4336 proseu,comai) and its noun form proseuche (#4335 proseuch,), like euchomai and euche, denote prayer in the more general sense. This means the content of the prayer may include various specific requests (aitema), supplications (deēsis), intercessions (enteuxis), etc. However proseuchomai and proseuche are only used as prayer to God (the prefix pros means towards)—whereas euchomai and deēsis are not restricted in this way (Trench, Synonyms). It generally "seems to indicate not so much the contents of the prayer as its end and aim" (Thayer).

The Greek verb parakaleō (#3870 parakale,w) and its noun form paraklēsis (#3874 para,klhsij) have a very wide range of meaning. Further, they appear quite often in scripture (109 verb uses; 29 noun uses). The words' basic meaning is to call to one's side. "To call some one hither, that he may do something...to use persuasion with him" (Bullinger). The calling along can be meant to appeal or plead; encourage or urge; to comfort; summon or invite; only once is it applied to God and that by the Lord Jesus (Matt 26:53).
You see some Proestants understand the difference!

Their text on this lists many words Greek words that are translated as "pray" – euchomai, proseuchomai, erotao, aiteo, deomai, parakaleo, entynchano with explanations and examples in the NT.
See www.stfonline.org/pdf/rev/appendix%20b_commentary.pdf .

I am told that the Perseus Project lists 97 Greek words for "pray".

Word play and semantics. Who cares whether your parakeleo or proseuchomai.

This is what you do:
You prostrate yourself in front of a statue, close your eyes, fold your hands, pray and give honor using divine titles.
The Greek words are prokeneuo, sebazomai and sebomai.

[winsome]

When we pray together, or someone prays for me, they are not mediating.  I have direct access to the Throne of the Father through Jesus Christ.  I have need of no other. 

Of COURSE I will go directly to God.  I have been given that divine right by Jesus Himself, my Lord and my God. 

Of course you can go directly to God. But it is also scriptural to ask others to pray for you. Paul did (Eph 6:19-20, Col 4:3, 1Thess 5:25, 2 Thess 3:)

So when you ask 'Mary to pray for us' in Catholic, it is proseuchomai?

We pray (parakaleo) to Mary to pray (proseuchomai) for us. But of course we (English speakers) don't actually us either parakaleo or proseuchomai.

Spirit & Truth Fellowship International (not Catholic) say about proseuchomai & parakaleo:
The Greek verb proseuchomai (#4336 proseu,comai) and its noun form proseuche (#4335 proseuch,), like euchomai and euche, denote prayer in the more general sense. This means the content of the prayer may include various specific requests (aitema), supplications (deēsis), intercessions (enteuxis), etc. However proseuchomai and proseuche are only used as prayer to God (the prefix pros means towards)—whereas euchomai and deēsis are not restricted in this way (Trench, Synonyms). It generally "seems to indicate not so much the contents of the prayer as its end and aim" (Thayer).

The Greek verb parakaleō (#3870 parakale,w) and its noun form paraklēsis (#3874 para,klhsij) have a very wide range of meaning. Further, they appear quite often in scripture (109 verb uses; 29 noun uses). The words' basic meaning is to call to one's side. "To call some one hither, that he may do something...to use persuasion with him" (Bullinger). The calling along can be meant to appeal or plead; encourage or urge; to comfort; summon or invite; only once is it applied to God and that by the Lord Jesus (Matt 26:53).
You see some Proestants understand the difference!

Their text on this lists many words Greek words that are translated as "pray" – euchomai, proseuchomai, erotao, aiteo, deomai, parakaleo, entynchano with explanations and examples in the NT.
See www.stfonline.org/pdf/rev/appendix%20b_commentary.pdf .

I am told that the Perseus Project lists 97 Greek words for "pray".

Word play and semantics. Who cares whether your parakeleo or proseuchomai.

This is what you do:
You prostrate yourself in front of a statue, close your eyes, fold your hands, pray and give honor using divine titles.
The Greek words are prokeneuo, sebazomai and sebomai.

A bit tricky to fold your hand if you are prostrate.