Truth Unites - Praying to the Saints? No, Origen is NOT For it

Episode Date: September 11, 2023

In this video I respond to Joe Heschmeyer on whether Origen affirmed praying to the saints, and other areas of misrepresentation. See Samuel James' Digital Liturgies: https://www.crossway.org/press-room/digital-liturgies-tpb/ See Joe's first video here: https://youtu.be/BA5rOsIhotM?si=lJxp6rGtub8PU9si See Joe's second video here: https://youtu.be/OEreH7eKUqc?si=vNPUvWhSHG_e8E6T Truth Unites exists to promote gospel assurance through theological depth. Gavin Ortlund (PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary) serves as senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Ojai. SUPPORT: Become a patron: https://www.patreon.com/truthunites One time donation: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/truthunites FOLLOW: Twitter: https://twitter.com/gavinortlund Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthUnitesPage/ Website: https://gavinortlund.com/

Hey everybody, this video is going to be a response to Joe Heschmeier on the topic of praying to the saints Joe put out a couple of videos on this subject. The first two and a series of three are interacting with me and offering criticisms of my treatment of this. The first video was more about the nature of praying to the saints, the second one more on the historical origins of praying to the saints. And I really like Joe. If I was hanging out in the same city, I think he lives in Kansas City. Maybe I can't remember if he still lives there. If I was in Kansas City, city, we were going out for a beer. I would say, awesome. Oh, great. It'll be great to hang out, you know. But I did not care for these videos. I thought they were just filled with these outrageous

misrepresentations of my position pretty consistently. And then at times of the subject matter, we are debating here as well. I'm sure that's not his intention. But I'm really concerned for people watching these videos that will be misled. And I want people to know the truth about this. So I'm going to spend a lot of time on origin in this video, for example, because I think Joe makes origin out to be saying the exact opposite of what origin actually taught, which is pray to God only. And I think that position is evident in the very passages Joe is citing on origin. And yet, Joe is accusing me of misrepresenting origin. So what I want to do is just put up those passages and work through that so people can see

the truth about origin's position and then just some other things in this debate. So I will, this will be, I'll try to be brief real quick. go through some areas where Joe misrepresents my position, and I would like to clarify what I actually believe. Secondly, we'll talk about origin, and then thirdly, I'll conclude by saying why this topic of praying to the saints is so important. Before I dive in a book recommendation, there are so many good books coming out these days, and I'm still working my way through this one, but it's just so good. I have to talk about it because, so it's Samuel James digital liturgies discovering Christian wisdom in an online age. I think about this every day.

The internet is shaping us. YouTube is shaping us. Most of the ways it's shaping us are really scary. And I think about that all the time. You know, where do I need to pull back and that kind of thing? And so this is a really important issue for us to think about, especially those of us who are followers of Jesus. How do we respond wisely to the fact that our world is so driven by the internet in so many ways right now? This is the first. book I would give for someone who's struggling with this and wanting to learn about this, because it doesn't shame you, you know. He gives you gospel hope, not just shame and it's realistic, you know.

It's not just going to beat you up, but it points you to biblical wisdom for how to cultivate habits. So you'll learn a lot about how the Internet is shaping us, but then he's going to, he helps us think about what are habits we can cultivate that reflect biblical wisdom so that we can push against some of the negative effects of that. So I've just been reading through it and looking forward to finishing it. Check it out. I'll put a link in the video description.

Fantastic book. All right. Let me just work through the first section of this video where Joe misrepresents me, and I'll just go through each of his two videos in turn. In the first video, Joe is responding to my concern about excess in medieval prayers to Mary. I think these prayers go too far. Unfortunately, his response is framed against a position I never stated and I do not recognize. put up here the Facebook sharing of this video that I was tagged in. It says Dr. Gavin Horton

argues that medieval prayers asking for Mary's intercession are proof of people being estranged from Christ and thus needing Mary as an intercessor. Actual medieval historians argue that this interpretation is totally wrong. So who should we believe? Now I'll pass over the sort of insulting nature of the rhetoric here. It seems designed to sort of discredit me, especially to viewers who will not be aware of my scholarly work in medieval theology and history, because it's like, well, there's the actual scholars over here who totally disagree, and then there's Gavin over here. It's kind of funny.

There is so much, and then in the comments, you just read, people just run with this. You know, this way it's unfortunate how many comments there are accusing me of dishonesty and just all manner of terrible things. I don't understand that at all. I am not dishonest. I genuinely in my heart of hearts, in the depths of my conscience, pretty clearly and certainly don't believe we should pray to saints. I think prayer should be to God alone.

I think that's what Christianity originally was before this started creeping in. If I'm wrong, I'm not wrong because I'm dishonest. But a framing comment like this kind of caters toward that suspicion that I feel increasing against me, which is very uncharitable and unfair. But leaving that aside, no big deal. I'm sure that's not intentional. The main point is simply this, that the entire framing of the video is a fundamental misrepresentation. Dr. Gavin Orlin argues that medieval prayers asking for Mary's intercession are proof of people being estranged from Christ.

What? I've never said that. I don't recognize that at all. You can watch my whole video. You'll never hear me say that. As with so many things, there's this consistent just not listening carefully. And then there's as a result of that tearing down a straw man. So so much of Joe's video is referencing scholarship like Eamonduffy about the Christocentrism of the medieval era.

He gives the example of Eucharistic adoration. I found that a very surprising example because I think honest Roman Catholic historians will admit that Eucharistic practice got really bad in the late medieval era. And that was one of the main concerns of the Reformation. Like, hey, we need both the bread and the wine. And we need to do this more frequently. And, you know, there's concerns about the superstition that is, going on and so many other things I could talk about. I've talked about that a little bit in other

videos, but all of that is really irrelevant here because I could even concede the point about the Eucharist, and it doesn't matter. All of this misses my actual concern, which is that there are these prayers that go too far. You know, prayers that say things like Mary placate Jesus. Now, you can have a Christocentrism and specific forms of idolatry at the same time. So pointing to the one to negate the other is a very weak response. it would be like if you walked into a Protestant parish and you found people worshipping angels there and you express concerns about this and people say, oh, so you're saying our church is estranged from Christ? Not at all.

Look at all this documentation that we love Jesus. And that's a bad response because obviously you can have in the same church people who love Jesus and idolatry. Similarly, if you're looking at the entire medieval era, of course you can have these two things at once. Christocentrism and idolatrous prayers. Those things can coexist. Meanwhile, the most disappointing part of this is that the most problematic prayers got skipped over. Joe went through about three of them and then he stopped going through the rest. So here's one that didn't get a comment. Oh, you who are more beautiful than the stars and blessed above all women, placate your son and cleanse all faults of the faithful. Joe talked about general concerns about whether God needs to be propitiated and uneasiness with this

language and so forth. That is not the issue. The issue here is very simple. Mary doesn't propitiate Jesus. Jesus is the propitiator, not the one propitiated. He does that work at the cross. So prayers saying Mary placate Jesus reflect a bad atonement theology. There was also no discussion of some of these other prayers. A lot of these prayers are targeting Mary alone, which seems to go against the both and way of thinking. That, oh, you can, you know, the more you love Mary, the more you love Jesus. it's a both and. But then you have these prayers that say things like, oh, queen of heaven, I commend myself to you alone.

And there's lots of prayers like that. So it's like, I think the better response would be for a Roman Catholic to just concede that some of these prayers go too far. You could do that as a Roman Catholic. You could just say, yeah, placate Jesus. That's a little weird. It's one thing to say, I commend myself to Mary. Another thing to say, I commend myself to Mary alone, you know?

But Joe defends these prayers. In his second video, he even claims that Ironaus is teaching about Mary is even more scandalous than these prayers. So for the argument from silence to work, the way that it kind of impresses itself on people's imagination is, oh, the early church fathers didn't have a super high view of Mary. That's like a later thing, a medieval thing. And then you read what they actually have to say about Mary, and they're saying things like this. Mary is the cause of salvation. That's the kind of thing that makes many Protestant skin crawl. That sounds crazier than the medieval prayers that Gavin was objecting to.

Now, I've written a little bit about Irona's doctrine of recapitulation in my work on the Atonement. I have a video on that so you could watch that. Basically, I would just say nothing I Renéa says about Mary being the cause of salvation makes my skin crawl. In fact, I love it. Amen. Mary is the cause of salvation because of the incarnation.

Mary gave birth to Jesus and Jesus is the Savior. That statement is not problematic. is not more scandalous than saying, Mary propitiate Jesus. And moreover, there isn't in Ironaeus' day all these later developments that come into and now exist in modern Roman Catholic Maryology, like the Immaculate Conception, praying to Mary, the bodily assumption to Mary, etc. Those things get read back into the typology here, but they're not present in Ironaeus' day. You can see my videos for a case why. But the more basic point here is that Joe's not really dealing with my actual concern. These kinds of prayers, Mary, placate Jesus, by characterizing my position

as though I had argued that medieval Christians were estranged from Jesus, something I've never said or even thought, he's able to go off on these long digressions attacking that idea and not deal with these most problematic prayers. A similar issue comes up in the other section of his first video where he's giving proof texts about the power of intercessory prayer, and I could get into some of the particulars here where I would disagree on some of the details. I don't think Simon in Acts 8 is a good model for how to pray, for example, because I don't think Simon was regenerate. I just preached on that passage a while back. But all of that is kind of irrelevant because I could just grant the point. Of course, intercessory prayer is powerful. I've never denied that. I totally believe that. And yes,

God uses intercessory prayer unto the salvation of people. Absolutely. That does not touch my concern, which was about the specific kinds of intercessory prayer that are in view here, many of which were kind of skipped over. In the second video, there's a lot of misrepresentation as well. So when it comes to the historical origins of praying to the saints, Joe characterizes my view as an argument from silence. And he compares this to what Christian Smith is criticizing in his book, the Bible made impossible, this naive biblicalism. Here's how he describes this approach. But it's very weak to say, well, I don't see this liturgical practice and therefore it's forbidden.

Or here's another example. Protestant theologians and authors don't seem to use a consistent standard. On one issue, they'll say, Scripture's silent on this, so it's forbidden. On the next one, they'll say Scripture's silent on this, so it's permitted. Chew the lane. But that's not my argument. That is a complete straw man. I never said the Bible is silent, therefore it's forbidden.

You could just go back and watch my video. What I observed is that the nature of prayer, as it is presented in Scripture, is contrary to praying to the saints. That is then just one observation that is in a sequence of argumentation. So if you just pluck out one little thing that I say and then run with it and ignore the sort of larger context and sequence in which that statement occurred, that's a form of misrepresentation. And that's where you can get these I statements like, well, the Bible says, silent, therefore it's forbidden. I don't think that. That's not my view. That's a caricature of Sola Scriptura and the sufficiency of Scripture. That's not what those doctrines hold. So, you know,

the biblical testimony is one piece of the argumentation. The other piece would be church history, which I went through, and you see it coming in. And then the other piece would be explicitly negative testimonies, as we'll see in a moment with origin, for example. And I'm going to do a video Lord willing in the future on a few other early Christians like Athenegorus and Athanasius, where you have people, you know, just explicitly saying, prayer is to God alone. We'll see that in a minute with origin. That's not silence. But by characterizing my position like that, he's able to go on long digressions attacking that idea.

Similar with, now when it comes to arguments from silence, I would say that the silence is pretty telling. You know, Joe makes some fair points about how the first 200 years of church history he concedes we don't have any evidence for praying to the saints in the first 200 years of church history, but he's trying to say that's not as significant, and he makes some fair points to that effect. I agree. You need to be mindful of basically the way arguments from silence work is just, to what extent do you expect them not to be silent? And that's where we would have a slight difference, but not a total difference. Because I would have a slight difference, because I would say it is

surprising that in these lengthy treatises on prayer specifically by Tertullian, origin, Cyprian, et cetera, we just never have any mention to praying to deceased Christians. So that is more surprising to me, especially because then I think the silence goes a little longer than Joe does. But all that is beside the point. We could talk about that. Another time, the main point right now is just it's a caricature because I'm not making an argument from silence.

Also, there's this overfocus on the issue of pagan origins. That was not my argument. I just made one passing comment about that. I didn't develop that. yet his entire video in the thumbnail it's referenced and it's cast as a response to this. And then he's critiquing me for not developing that more. I'm like, yeah, that wasn't really my argument. I didn't really put the focus upon that.

So it's weird to focus on that so much. I'll just give one other example of where there's this misrepresentation. So people are alert to this as they're watching his critiques to the way that things get sort of twisted in the way he's construing them. And that's my approach to parables. basically with the parable of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16, I had made the point that you can't use the details of parables as historical or literal descriptions of the world. And the reason is just that's not what parables are.

You know, no one wonders who's the prodigal son, because the prodigal son is not a historical figure. It's a parable. No one thinks we're going to literally turn into sheeps and goats because of Matthew 25. These are parables. Similarly, Luke, 6th, is not designed to teach us the details of the metaphysics of the afterlife, because it's a

parable. If you did try to use it like that, it would not be a proof for Christians on earth praying to saints in heaven, because the rich man praying to Abraham is in hell. And there's all kinds of other unique features, kind of unique characteristics of that parable. So the point I was making is very simple. It's just Hermonutics 101. Not that you sweep up. parables away, but you interpret them as parables. But kind of amazingly, Joe seems to characterize this as though I was saying we can't learn from Jesus's parables in general. And there was a sort of a remarkable thing. I don't know if you caught Gavin saying it, that he doesn't think it's a sound basis to rely on Jesus's parables for showing the intercession

of the saints. And I would suggest that that's a strange position for a pastor to take, because a lot of what Jesus does is he teaches by parables. So, I mean, for instance, in Matthew 13, verse 34, it says, indeed, he said nothing to them, the crowds, without a parable. And this was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet. I will open my mouth in parables. I will utter what has been hidden since the foundation of the world. That is, we're told that Jesus is revealing these foundational things through parables.

So if we're not allowed to look to the parables, we have to throw out a lot of Jesus. Jesus is teaching. But this is a misrepresentation of my position. I didn't say we just were not allowed to look at parables. So anyway, you know, there's other other things like this on Augustine, on Polycarp, where I felt my position was pretty fundamentally misrepresented. I'm sure it's not intentional, but people need to know the truth about that. On origin, let's talk about origin. Origin is really important because if we're saying, okay, there's no testimony for praying to the saints in the first 200 years of church history, well, what comes in at 200 years? So like mid-third century, what are we talking about?

Now, it seems to be, unless I'm missing something, two things, basically. The Subtum Presidium, which is a hymn that has a prayer to marry, I'm not going to address that in this video simply because I don't know the date. I know enough to know that's complicated. I don't have an opinion on that. Some people say it's third century, some people say it's fourth century, some people say it's later. I just don't know. So I need to look into that more before I'm able. That's a tough call.

But unless I miss something, it's just that and origin for the third century. Joe mentioned others like Cyril of Jerusalem, but there later. So unless I'm missing something, Cyril origin is the only other early testimony that Joe was appealing to. And I think the truth needs to be seen about origin. So let me just show that here in this final section of the video. This is probably the most important part where we'll just work through these passages. Before I dive in, one preliminary remark is just to be alert to this danger, that we have to to distinguish the saints praying for us and us praying to the saints. Okay, think of an arrow down

and an arrow up. There are two different directions. There are two different things. Now, you could make an argument that because the saints are praying for us, therefore we should pray to them. You could argue for that, but you can't just assume that and you certainly can't just mush them together as though they're the same thing. But a lot of the examples that Joe cites from origin are about the saints praying for us or angels praying for us. This is, for example, from Origen's homilies on Joshua, there's the citation of Numbers 22. With that passage, it's about the arrow down. It's about the saints praying for us. And Origin seems to articulate that as his own opinion, not a generally held dogma or something like that. That's why I started off my whole video saying, the concern is

not that the saints in heaven are blind to or indifferent about the affairs on earth. It's about how we relate to them, the arrow up. When it comes to the saints praying for us, I'm agnostic on how much they know. I don't know how much they know. But I'm sympathetic to the fact that they are some aware generally and certainly that they care about us. So I'm not saying they're indifferent and so forth.

But the point is that's not the concern. The concern is the arrow up, that we should not pray to them. Okay. Now, one of the reasons we have to make this distinction between us praying to them and them praying for us is origin. This is exactly origin's position that they are praying for us, but we should not pray to them. Prayer is to God alone. And this is clear in the two passages Joe cites, from against Celsius.

So let me put these up. First I'll show Joe's comments on both of the passages. Origin is clear. Yeah, sure, we don't worship the angels. That totally misunderstands it. we do think that they intercede for us. And then he even says, yeah, they are called angels. That means messengers.

We find that they are divine. They are sometimes termed gods in the scriptures, but not so that we are commanded to honor and worship in place of God, those who minister to us and bear to us as blessing. So in scripture, you'll find, you know, God and the assembly of the gods, and this means the angels. But that doesn't mean they're literally gods in the way a pagan would hear that. And so that's an important distinction to make.

when you're answering paganism. No, no, no. What we're talking about with the angels and the saints isn't paganism, which is, by the way, the exact point I'm making. That's what origin is saying to Selsus. And then he explains a little further on. A little further here is skipping ahead three books later. So I'll come back to book five in a second. Here's the quote from book eight. We may indeed boldly say that men who aspire after better things have when they pray to God tens of thousands of sacred powers upon their sides. He means, of course, the angels. And that these, even when not asked, pray with them. They bring succor comfort to our mortal race.

And if I may say so, take up arms alongside of it. Now notice it, even when not asked, he's assuming it's okay to ask the angels for their prayers, knowing that they're going to pray for you either way. But if you have something particularly you want to pray for, by all means, you can ask them. Because what are they doing? They're offering your prayers up to God.

And so that's well and good. So all that's to say, origin is not arguing against praying to the saints or to the angels, for that matter. He's arguing that we don't worship the saints and angels because he's responding to a confused pagan who thought we did. Okay, so Joe is saying, origin is just denying that we worship angels, not that we can't pray to them. And he says origin couldn't be clear, couldn't be clearer in supporting his view on this. So let's look at these two passages in context. I'll put up the first passage as Joe quoted it first, and then this is where then he skips ahead to book eight.

But now let me just put up what comes immediately after the words and bear to us his blessings. Origin continues, for every prayer and supplication and intercession and thanksgiving is to be sent up to the supreme God through the high priest, who is above all the angels, the living word, and God. Then he talks about praying to the Word of God. Then he continues into the next chapter, skipping down a few sentences after saying, once we know the nature of angels, this will not permit us to pray with confidence to any other than the supreme God,

who is sufficient for all things, and that through our Savior, the Son of God, who is the Word and wisdom and truth, and everything else, which the writings of God's prophets and the apostles of Jesus entitle Him. You're going to see this is a theme in Origins Theology of Prayer. Pray to God alone. It's a little odd his Trinitarian theology. Sometimes he'll say pray only to God through the son of God, through Jesus. Sometimes he'll say pray to the Father and the Son. But he never has any notion of praying to anyone other than God.

Created beings are not the object of prayer. You see this in the next quote that Joe gave from book 8. First I'll put up what Joe quoted, and Joe takes these words, even when not asked, okay, to as though that we're saying we should ask them, which is the opposite of what it says. So the basic point here is origin is saying when a Christian prays, the angels pray with us. Okay. And then there's this phrase, even when not asked.

So Joe took that, I'll play what Joe said so I don't misquote him. Even when not asked, he's assuming it's okay to ask the angels for their prayers. knowing that they're going to pray for you either way. But if you have something particularly you want to pray for, by all means, you can ask them. Because what are they doing? They're offering your prayers up to God. And so that's well and good. So all that's to say, origin is not arguing against praying to the saints or to the angels, for that matter.

But that is not what origin says. Ordin says when not asked, and the full context of this passage shows he's saying, don't pray to the angels. Just pray to God. and when you pray to God, the angels know what you're praying for automatically. Here's backing up a few sentences. There is therefore one whose favor we should seek and to whom we ought to pray, that he would be gracious to us, the Most High God,

whose favor is gained by piety in the practice of every virtue. And if he would have us to seek the face of others after the Most High God, let him consider that as the motion of the shadow follows that of the body which casts it. So in like manner. It follows that when we have the favor of God, we have also the goodwill of all angels and spirits who are friends of God, for they know who are worthy of the divine approval. And they are not only well disposed to them,

but they cooperate with them in their endeavors to please God. They seek his favor on their behalf. And with their prayers, they join with their own prayers and intercessions for them. We may indeed boldly say, and that's the section that Joe cited there, starting with the words we may indeed boldly say. So you see what Origen is saying here. when we pray to God and have God's favor, you automatically have the favor of the angels as well.

That comes along just as the shadow follows the object making the shadow. That is why Origin says even when not asked. You don't have to ask the angels. You just pray to God and the angels know even when not asked. Now, let's just make this crystal clear. Let's seal off any possible room for doubt with several further quotes from Origin to show that he thinks pray to God alone. Stepping back a little further earlier in book 8,

Origin writes, Away then with this council, which Selsus gives us to offer prayers to demons. It is not to be listened to for a moment. For our duty is to pray to the most high God alone, and to the only begotten, the firstborn of the whole creation. He talks about Christ as our high priest.

In his treatise on prayer, Origin is talking about how we can offer requests and intercessions and thanksgivings to other fellow Christians, not deceased Christians, but to other Christians, but then he makes a distinction. But if we accept prayer in its full meaning, we may not ever pray to any begotten being. Not even to Christ himself, he says.

This is one of those passages where he directs it to God, the Father, alone. He continues, It remains accordingly to pray to God alone, the Father of All, skipping down, just as the man who is scrupulous about prayer ought not to pray to the one who himself prays, but to the Father upon whom our Lord Jesus has taught us to call in our prayers, so we are not to offer any prayers to the Father apart from him.

So look, let Origen be Origin. If Origen wanted to say, oh, don't pray to God alone. Pray to the angels. Pray to the saints. He could have said that. But that isn't what he said. He says, pray to God alone. And if praying to angels or praying to deceased Christians was a generally known Christian practice,

It's hard to imagine origin arguing like this. Now, there's lots of other issues that we need to work through for a full treatment of this topic. There's lots of other issues that I'm not going to be able to get into in this particular video. One big one is the canon. That's too big to cover here. I've talked about that elsewhere. For example, in my response to the Allie-Beth-Stucky George Farmer debate, obviously that is relevant here. Joe takes the popular talking point that the Protestants, quote-unquote, took books out of the Bible.

In that video, I've explained why I think that's a very nice. naive way of portraying the history and just not accurate. We also got to work through these biblical proof texts. One by one, we've got to go through them. I can address those in a future video. I'll just say, I don't think they're, I think they're very weak. But let me just conclude by stating the importance of this topic. It's really important to know how to pray. One of the most foundational things of being a Christian is prayer. And one of the most basic things you need to know about prayer is to whom it should be directed. And I'm just genuinely burdened about this for people watching a that they're not getting the truth here and they're being persuaded towards an erroneous practice.

You know, my position is pretty simple. If we want to know what prayer is, look to how God revealed it. The wisest and best way to follow Jesus is to look to God's revelation for how do we do that. And there are literally hundreds of lengthy prayers given to us in divine revelation in Holy Scripture from all different kinds of circumstances. Corporate individual, liturgical, more spontaneous, all different circumstances, good and bad. So many prayers we have. Never do we have people praying to anyone other than God. Prayer is such a sacred gift. It is such a sacred thing. We should practice it as God has taught it. And I'm concerned about people kind of naively drifting away. It's a big deal. If you're supposed to pray only to God and you start praying to other people,

that's not a minor issue. And my appeal to people who are wrestling with this issue is to encourage them, you may have a richer experience of the doctrine of the communion of saints without deviating from how revelation defines prayer. God is the best one to pray to. Pray to God alone, like origin says, and other early Christians, as I will show if I can find the time I'm traveling next week, so it might be a few weeks.

I'll try to do another video on a few others. But God's the best one to pray to because God is infinite. If you get God, you get everything else thrown in. So just pray to God. He's omniscient, he's omnipotent, he's infinite, he's God. And we have the privilege through the work of Christ of going straight to the throne of grace directly to God. So, you know, it's a big deal.

Who you pray to is a big deal. And I'm just concerned about this. I want people to know the truth about this topic. And I want to encourage people to practice it as God has revealed it. because I think praying to the saints can be pretty clearly seen to be this later accretion that's kind of slowly eking in because even when you get to the third century, I'm not sure it's there or not. I got to figure out the sub-tum prysidium. But whenever it's coming in, it's still very slow and mild, you know? So that's my concern about this topic.

Hope this video will be helpful for people who are wrestling with this. Let me know what you think in the comments. Lord willing, I'll try to address this topic a little more in future videos as well. Thanks for watching and have a great day. Now notice it even when not asked, he's assuming it's okay to ask the angels for their prayers knowing that they're going to pray for you either way. But if you have something in particular you want to pray for, by all means, you can ask them.