Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies.
Locked on 10/07/2009 10:02:28 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:

Locked



Skip to comments.

Is Mary's Queenship Biblical? [Ecumenical]
CatholicAnswers-The Rock ^ | not given | Edward P. Sri

Posted on 08/22/2009 1:20:36 PM PDT by Salvation

Is Mary's Queenship Biblical?

By Edward P. Sri

Mary’s title as "Queen of Heaven and Earth" is a great scandal to many non-Catholic Christians. After all, the Bible doesn’t mention anything about there being a queen in God’s kingdom. All this royal attention Catholics give to Mary—whether it’s singing "Hail, holy queen enthroned above" or portraying Mary in statues and paintings with a crown on her head—seems to many non-Catholics to detract from the royalty of Christ, who alone is King of Kings. Besides, how could Mary be a queen, since she is not the wife of the Jesus but only his mother?

One biblical theme sheds light on these questions and serves as a key for unlocking the mystery of Mary’s queenship: the Old Testament tradition of the "queen mother" in the Davidic kingdom.

In the monarchy of King David, as well as in other ancient kingdoms of the Near East, the mother of the ruling king held an important office in the royal court and played a key part in the process of dynastic succession. In fact, the king’s mother ruled as queen, not his wife.

The great pre-eminence of the king’s mother may seem odd from our modern Western perspective, in which we think of a queen as being the wife of a king. However, recall that most ancient Near-Eastern kings practiced polygamy. King Solomon had seven hundred wives (1 Kgs. 11:3)—imagine the chaos in the royal court if all seven hundred were awarded the queenship! But since each king had only one mother, one can see the practical wisdom in bestowing the queenship upon her.

A number of Old Testament passages reflect the important role of the queen mother in the Davidic kingdom. For example, almost every time the narrative of 1 and 2 Kings introduces a new monarch in Judah, it mentions the king’s mother as well, showing the mother’s intimate involvement in her royal son’s reign. Similarly, the queen mother is listed among the members of the royal court whom king Jehoiachin surrendered to the king of Babylon in 2 Kings 24:12.

Her royal office is also described by the prophet Jeremiah, who tells how the queen mother possessed a throne and a crown, symbolic of her position of authority in the kingdom: "Say to the king and the queen mother: ‘Take a lowly seat, for your beautiful crown has come down from your head. . . . Lift up your eyes and see those who come from the north. Where is the flock that was given you, your beautiful flock?’" (Jer. 13:18, 20). It is significant that God directed this oracle about the upcoming fall of Judah to both the king and his mother. Addressing both king and queen mother, Jeremiah portrays her as sharing in her son’s rule over the kingdom.

Probably the clearest example of the queen mother’s role is that of Bathsheba, wife of David and mother of Solomon. Scholars have noted the excellence of Bathsheba’s position in the kingdom once she became queen mother during Solomon’s rule. Compare the humble attitude of Bathsheba as spouse of King David (1 Kgs. 1:16–17, 31) with her majestic dignity as mother of the next king, Solomon (1 Kgs. 2:19–20). As spouse of the king, Bathsheba bows with her face to the ground and does obeisance to her husband, David, upon entering his royal chamber. In striking contrast, after her son Solomon assumed the throne and she became queen mother, Bathsheba receives a glorious reception upon meeting with her royal son:

"So Bathsheba went to King Solomon, to speak to him on behalf of Adonijah. And the king rose to meet her, and bowed down to her; then he sat on his throne and had a seat brought for the king’s mother; and she sat on his right. Then she said, ‘I have one small request to make of you; do not refuse me.’ And the king said to her, ‘Make your request, my mother; for I will not refuse you’" (1 Kgs. 2:19–20).

This account reveals the sovereign prerogatives of the queen mother. Note how the king rises and bows as she enters. Bathsheba’s seat at the king’s right hand has the greatest significance. In the Bible, the right hand is the place of ultimate honor. This is seen in particular in the messianic Psalm 110 ("Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool"). In fact, many New Testament passages refer to the right-hand imagery of Psalm 110 to show Christ’s divinity and his reign with the Father over the whole universe (e.g., Hebrews 1:13). Thus, the queen mother sitting at the king’s right hand symbolizes her sharing in the king’s royal authority and illustrates how she holds the most important position in the kingdom, second only to the king.

This passage regarding Bathsheba also shows how the queen mother served as an advocate for the people, carrying petitions to the king. In 1 Kings 2:17, Adonijah asks Bathsheba to take a petition for him to King Solomon. He says to her: "Pray ask King Solomon—he will not refuse you—to give me Abishag the Shunammite as my wife" (1 Kgs. 2:17). It is clear that Adonijah recognizes the queen mother’s position of influence over the king, so he confidently turns to Bathsheba as an intercessor for his request.

A few Old Testament prophecies incorporate the queen mother tradition when telling of the future Messiah. One example is Isaiah 7:14, which originated during a time of dynastic crisis in Judah when Syria and Israel were threatening Jerusalem and plotting to overthrow King Ahaz. God offers Ahaz a sign that the kingdom will continue: "Hear then, O house of David! Is it too little for you to weary men, that you weary my God also? Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Emmanuel" (Isa. 7:13–14).

On one level, this passage points to the next king (Hezekiah) as a pledge that the Davidic dynasty will continue despite the threats of invading armies. At the same time, the royal son who is to be named "Emmanuel" points to the future messianic king (cf., Isa. 9:6–7, 11:1–2). This is why the New Testament says Jesus fulfills this prophecy from Isaiah (Matt. 1:23).

For our purposes we should note how this prophecy links the mother to her royal son. Since the oracle is addressed specifically to the Davidic household and concerns the continuation of the dynasty, the young woman bearing forth the royal son would be understood as a queen mother. This has implications for our understanding of Mary. Since the mother of the king always ruled as queen mother, we should expect to find the mother of the messianic king playing the role of the true queen mother in the everlasting Kingdom of God.

With this Old Testament background, we can now more clearly see how the New Testament portrays Mary in light of the queen mother tradition.

The Gospel of Matthew has often been called the "Gospel of the Kingdom." Matthew emphasizes that Jesus is "the Son of David," who is the true King of the Jews establishing the "Kingdom of Heaven." With all this kingly imagery, it should not be surprising to find queen mother themes as well.

Right away, Matthew shows explicitly how the infant Jesus is the "Emmanuel" child as prophesied in Isaiah 7:14 (Matt. 1:23). As we saw above, this prophecy links the royal messianic child with his queen mother. Further, Matthew singles out the intimate relationship between the mother and her royal son by using the phrase "the child and his mother" five times in the first two chapters, recalling the close association between queen mother and royal son as described in the Books of Kings. Just as the queen mother was constantly mentioned alongside the Judean kings in 1 and 2 Kings, so Mary is frequently mentioned alongside her royal son, Jesus, in Matthew’s infancy narrative (Matt. 1:18; 2:11, 13, 14, 20, 21).

We find Mary portrayed against the background of Davidic kingdom motifs in Luke’s Gospel as well, especially in his accounts of the Annunciation and Visitation. First, the angel Gabriel is said to appear to a virgin betrothed to a man "of the house of David" (1:27). Then the angel tells Mary, "And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there will be no end" (Luke 1:31–33).

Hear the strong Davidic overtones describing Mary and her royal son: a woman from the house of David giving birth to a son who will be the new king whose reign will never end. With echoes from the queen mother tradition of the Davidic kingdom and the mother-son prophecy of Isaiah 7:14, we can conclude that Mary is being given the vocation of queen mother.

Mary’s royal office is made even more explicit in Luke’s account of the Visitation. Elizabeth greets Mary with the title "the mother of my Lord" (Luke 1:43). This title is charged with great queenly significance. In the royal court language of the ancient NearEast, the title "Mother of my Lord" was used to address the queen mother of the reigning king (who himself was addressed as "my Lord"; cf., 2 Sam. 24:21). Thus with this title Elizabeth is recognizing the great dignity of Mary’s role as the royal mother of the king, Jesus.

Finally, Mary’s queenship can be seen in the great vision described in Revelation 12: "And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; she was with child and she cried out in her pangs of birth, in anguish for delivery" (Rev. 12:1–2). Who is this newborn child? He is described as the messianic king exercising his dominion. In verse 5, the author of Revelation chose the messianic Psalm 2 to describe how this child will "rule all the nations with a rod of iron" (Rev. 12:5, Ps. 2:9). This royal son is taken up to heaven to sit on a throne (Rev. 12:5), and he ushers in the kingdom of God by defeating the devil: "Now the kingdom of our God has come, for the accuser has been throne down" (12:10). Certainly, this newborn child is the royal Messiah, King Jesus.

In this light it is clear who this woman is who gave birth to the messiah: It is Mary. Some people have interpreted this woman in Revelation 12 as merely a symbol either for the Old Testament people of Israel or for the New Testament Church and therefore have concluded that the woman cannot be an individual (i.e., Mary). However, this "either-or" proposition is foreign to the biblical worldview, in which individuals often symbolically represent collective groups. For instance, Adam represented all humanity (Rom. 5:19), and Jacob stood for all of Israel (Ps. 44:4). Given this biblical notion called "corporate personality," the woman in Revelation 12 should be understood as both an individual (Mary) and a symbol for the people of God.

But for our purposes, once we see that this woman is Mary, the mother of Jesus, it is important to note how she is portrayed as queen in this passage. Her royal office is hinted at by the imagery of the sun, moon, and twelve stars, which recalls the Old Testament story of Joseph’s dream in which the sun, moon, and stars bow down before him, symbolizing his future authority (Gen. 37:9–11). Her queenship is made even clearer by the crown of twelve stars on her head. Just like the queen mother in Jeremiah 13:18, here Mary is wearing a crown, symbolizing her royal office in the kingdom of heaven. In sum, Revelation 12 portrays Mary as the new queen mother in the Kingdom of God, sharing in her son’s rule over the universe.

We have seen how the Old Testament queen mother tradition serves as an important background for understanding Mary’s royal office. Indeed, the New Testament portrays Mary as the queen mother par excellence. Thus, prayers, hymns, and art giving honor to Mary’s queenship are most fitting biblical responses for Christians. In honoring her as queen mother we do not take anything away from Christ’s glory, but rather we exalt him even more by recognizing the great work he has done in her and through her.

Understanding Mary as queen mother sheds light on her important intercessory role in the Christian life. Just like the queen mother of the Davidic kingdom, Mary serves as advocate for the people in the Kingdom of God today. Thus, we should approach our queen mother with confidence, knowing that she carries our petitions to her royal son and that he responds to her as Solomon did to Bathsheba: "I will never refuse you."


Edward P. Sri is assistant professor of Religious Studies at Benedictine College in Atchison, Kansas. He holds a Licentiate in Sacred Theology from the Angelicum in Rome, where he is currently a doctoral candidate.



TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; History; Theology
KEYWORDS: catholic; catholiclist; holymarymotherofgod; saints
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 201-213 next last
To: Salvation
It seems the rules preclude real discussions. Truth is by nature antagonistic to those who hold a lie, intentionally or unintentionally. That is why Jesus said “ Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.”

Can you imagine the founders of our Country who were known to get in passionate and even heated debates following the rules on this thread?

It seems to me that the rules as they are written allow for the moderator to decide what is defensive not because of content but because of feelings, and since they are the moderator that means their feelings. If your argument agrees with their belief then it is not contentious but if it does not, it is.

I think the rules need to be change to allow for adult passionate discussion. This would leave out intentional abusive name calling.

Free Republic is suppose to be free conservative thought. Nothing will ever get solved if everyone on a religious thread has to keep white cloves on. Truth is to be fought for not treated like we are just playing a harmless game without dire consequences. Lies destroy well meaning people's souls. Anyone who truly believes in the truth of what they are saying is strong and passionate and can handle adversity.

81 posted on 08/22/2009 9:20:59 PM PDT by Bellflower (The end of this age is near but the beginning of the next glorious one is coming!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bellflower

cloves=gloves


82 posted on 08/22/2009 9:22:10 PM PDT by Bellflower (The end of this age is near but the beginning of the next glorious one is coming!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Sorry, but Catholics don’t put that kind of spin on Scripture. (by trying to interpret it for themselves.)

Actually, Catholics don't do much except swallow whatever the magisteria in Rome tells them to. They can't ever admit the Pope is wrong about anything, ever, through the ages, one Pope can't say another earlier Pope was wrong about dogma, any dogma. What a nice religion, don't think, don't ask the Holy Spirit to reveal the truth of Scripture (that the Lord God ensured would be preserved for us), don't bother reading Scripture, don't worry about anything...we'll tell you what to believe. We are infallible. We know everything. All those other religions are false cults. Does this about explain your viewpoint?

83 posted on 08/22/2009 9:23:38 PM PDT by boatbums (Pro-woman, pro-child, pro-life!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Bellflower
This Religion Forum thread is labeled "ecumenical" - if you want to have a town square format "open" debate, start your own thread.

Likewise, if you want to complain about the Religion Forum guidelines or me, start a new thread.

84 posted on 08/22/2009 9:27:44 PM PDT by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Bellflower
Thank you. I agree with you totally on that thought. Mature people can disagree and be free to express their reasons without getting personal - meaning don't be mean-spirited or hateful. Don't call people names and don't assume they are being hateful and persecuting you just because they may disagree. Keeping it civil!
85 posted on 08/22/2009 9:31:34 PM PDT by boatbums (Pro-woman, pro-child, pro-life!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: All
The Past Her Prelude: Marian Imagery in the Old Testament

86 posted on 08/22/2009 9:33:17 PM PDT by Salvation (With God all things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross
And it is! Praise be to God! It is called transubstantiation in which Christ, through the hands of His priest, transforms simple bread into the body of Christ! Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity! Our God is an awesome God!

Transubstantiation is not biblical...Not scriptural...If you insist on making that verse in John 6 literal, you as men have to provide for the missing link because God did not...And you did that by creating transubstantiation...

And then, the Catholics illegitimize the process...You bake the bread, you DON'T break the bread...

Jesus did NOT say eat this bread because it's holy...Jesus said BREAK this bread because my Body was BROKEN for you...

And you guys don't drink the blood even tho Jesus said to drink it BECAUSE it is His blood that was SHED for you...

You don't break the bread nor drink the shed blood...What's up with that???

87 posted on 08/22/2009 9:38:02 PM PDT by Iscool (I don't understand all that I know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
The Queenship of the Blessed Virgin Mary - August 22, 2009
 
 

(proclaiming the Queenship of Mary)


88 posted on 08/22/2009 10:01:38 PM PDT by Coleus (Abortion, Euthanasia & FOCA - - don't Obama and the Democrats just kill ya!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross
Nothing in there about metaphors. If it was a metaphor, verse 66-67 would read, "hey, come back guys, I only meant this metaphorically!

No they wouldn't...Jesus didn't want to 'spill the beans' to them...

Joh 6:64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
Joh 6:65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

Jesus knew already before He made the statement that they did not believe...That's why he was talking in a parable...

Mar 4:33 And with many such parables spake he the word unto them, as they were able to hear it.

Exactly...The believers did not leave, even if they did not understand the parable...Even if they thought Jesus was actually talking about eating His flesh and blood...

Mar 4:34 But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.

Mar 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
Mar 4:12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.
Mar 4:13 And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?

Mat 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

89 posted on 08/22/2009 10:28:34 PM PDT by Iscool (I don't understand all that I know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Bellflower; Religion Moderator

Sorry you don’t like the Ecumenical thread designation. You can always post your own thread on the open Religion Forum.

Or you can debate on an already posted open thread.

I wanted this to be a rational discussion, and for the most part it is.

Especially about the typology, the Old Testament being a foreshadowing of the New Testmant. In the Gospels Matthew probably makes the most use of this technique.


90 posted on 08/22/2009 10:29:41 PM PDT by Salvation (With God all things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross
Huh?! Followers that had been with him for a long time, witnessing many miracles, being filled both physically and spiritually

Jesus disagrees with you and answers your question:

Joh 6:26 Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.

91 posted on 08/22/2009 10:35:39 PM PDT by Iscool (I don't understand all that I know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross
I believe that the word "blessed" has meaning far beyond my weak imagination (but certainly to include Queenship and Immaculate Conception).

You're free to believe anything you want...But what does Jesus say about it in the scriptures??? He was not silent on the issue...

She is the new "Eve"; Mary's "yes" eclipses Eve's sin (as her Son's "yes" reverses Adam's sin

Eve was sinful...Mary was sinless (according to your religion)...That doesn't make Eve a type of Mary...That makes Eve an anti-type of Mary...They were opposites...

Eve was the mate of Adam...Mary is NOT the mate of Jesus...She was His mother...Your's is a descritpion of a pagan religion that was prevalent in those times and is still popular today...

Your perceived typologies are way off the mark...

92 posted on 08/22/2009 11:00:58 PM PDT by Iscool (I don't understand all that I know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

Today’s Gospel. LOL! Thanks!


93 posted on 08/22/2009 11:05:06 PM PDT by Salvation (With God all things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Colonel_Flagg
The bride of the King of Kings is His church. Heaven therefore has no need for a queen.

You're missing the point. In the Catholic universe, you see, the tail wags the dog, the human creature has enduring influence over the Eternal Creator, and Jesus is forever attached to his mommie's apron strings.

94 posted on 08/23/2009 12:54:47 AM PDT by RJR_fan (The day a marxist becomes president, is the day that pigs will fly. Well, Swine Flu!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
In sum, Revelation 12 portrays Mary as the new queen mother in the Kingdom of God, sharing in her son’s rule over the universe.

We have seen how the Old Testament queen mother tradition serves as an important background for understanding Mary’s royal office. Indeed, the New Testament portrays Mary as the queen mother par excellence. Thus, prayers, hymns, and art giving honor to Mary’s queenship are most fitting biblical responses for Christians. In honoring her as queen mother we do not take anything away from Christ’s glory, but rather we exalt him even more by recognizing the great work he has done in her and through her.

Understanding Mary as queen mother sheds light on her important intercessory role in the Christian life. Just like the queen mother of the Davidic kingdom, Mary serves as advocate for the people in the Kingdom of God today. Thus, we should approach our queen mother with confidence, knowing that she carries our petitions to her royal son and that he responds to her as Solomon did to Bathsheba: "I will never refuse you."

The writer fails to report the outcome of Bathsheba's request. It was, indeed, refused. Solomon had wisdom enough to see Adonijah's request (for David's "Miss Palestine" trophy wife) as one more attempt to bypass God's ordination, one more illicit attempt to maneuver for the throne. The writer may, unwittingly, have given us a clue to the psychological dynamics behind the cult of the BVM -- the desire of fallen humanity to gain illicit leverage over God Almighty. The notion that the Judge of the Universe can be manipulated by "channeling" one's devotions and requests through an alternate channel.

Fallen humanity would love to have a "back door to heaven." Some buffering against the august Lordship of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the World. Cosmic momism is embraced out of a defective appreciation for the order of the universe. Out of a desire to make things other than they are, to suspend the laws of nature and of nature's God.

95 posted on 08/23/2009 1:03:36 AM PDT by RJR_fan (The day a marxist becomes president, is the day that pigs will fly. Well, Swine Flu!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PugetSoundSoldier

You wrote:

“Are protestants Christians?”

Yes, but they are not Catholic, nor catholic in their faith. They do not have the universal faith. Their faith is from the 16th century, not from Christ. I know many good Protestants, but they are not catholic nor Catholic. They are Protestants.


96 posted on 08/23/2009 4:27:53 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: PugetSoundSoldier; Servant of the Cross

You wrote:

“1. Context meaning metaphorical - Jesus is calling himself Bread of life, as compared to other Heavenly-provided bread (manna) which did not provide the same kind of life. Thus Jesus is speaking metaphorically.”

The problem is that we already know what the metaphor means when someone is said to be eating a man’s flesh: Look at Psalms 27:2. According to the metaphoric usage in scripture, to eat someone’s flesh is to hate him, to revile him. We have a similar expression in English, “What’s eating you?” Jesus could not have been saying, “He who reviles me has eternal life.” See also Isaiah 9:20; 49:26; Micah 3:3; 2 Sam. 23:17; Rev. 16:6; 17:6, 16.

Thus, if Jesus is speaking metaphorically in John 6, He doesn’t make sense. It is wiser to believe the Son of God made sense and that the audience He had gathered around Him, but didn’t pursue when it misunderstood Him actually was on to something.


97 posted on 08/23/2009 4:39:26 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: RJR_fan
You wrote:

“In the Catholic universe, you see, the tail wags the dog, the human creature has enduring influence over the Eternal Creator, and Jesus is forever attached to his mommie’s apron strings.”

It's interesting. Catholic and Orthodox Christians believe Mary is the greatest intercessor with her Divine Son - who Himself is the one and only Mediator - yet we don't assume Mary has any power over Jesus whatsoever. You, on the other hand, imagine we do believe that, and not only mock Mary, but Christ Himself, in the process. And still, you would probably claim you say what you say to defend the sovereignty of Christ. If that were so, you would think you would do it in a more dignified manner since your topic is clearly a dignified one.

98 posted on 08/23/2009 4:46:21 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

You assume a metaphor can only have one meaning. A closer metaphor is to consider the words of Jesus in John 4, or earlier in chapter 6.

If the metaphor is explained in John 6, you need not go to Psalms to define it.


99 posted on 08/23/2009 6:33:13 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross
"Peter was the first Pope, upon whom Christ built His Church. Every Pope since has been the direct successor of Peter himself. As the Vicar of Christ on earth and the head of the Church He established, the Pope speaks with authority on matters of faith and morals."

No. Peter had an important role to play, as did Mary. Peter was not supreme - Paul said he was in now way inferior to the other Apostles, and Peter was "afraid" of men sent by James. Jesus Himself told the Apostles flat out when they argued over who was the greatest that they were missing the point - God is the greatest, but we are all to be servants.

He opened the doors to the Jews at Pentecost, and to the Gentiles a little later. The Church is built on Peter's confession, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."

The pride and arrogance that led to the Bishop of Rome claiming authority over the other bishops is what caused the downfall of the Catholic Church. When the bishop of Rome branded people as heretics for celebrating Easter at Passover rather than the day he picked, he demonstrated a total lack of understanding of Christ.

It has only become worse with time.

Heaven has a King, and there is no 'Mrs. God' sitting beside Him. John Paul II wrote "In this divine marriage with humanity Mary answers the angel's announcement with the love of a spouse who is able to respond and to adjust to the divine choice in a perfect way. For this reason, especially since St Francis of Assisi's time, the Church calls her "the spouse of the Holy Spirit". Only this perfect marital love, deeply rooted in her total virginal self-gift to God, could have brought it about that Mary became the "Mother of God" in a conscious and worthy fashion, through the mystery of the Incarnation.

In the Encyclical Redemptoris Mater I wrote: "The Holy Spirit had already come down upon her, and she became his faithful spouse at the Annunciation, welcoming the Word of the true God, offering 'the full submission of intellect and will ... and freely assenting to the truth revealed by him'..."

Those are words of blasphemy, not "The Vicar of Christ". I've read all the verses where Jesus addresses his mother in public. He doesn't even call her "Mother"! He addresses her as "Woman". Not Queen. Not Mrs God. Not Mother.

Woman. Even in his final agony, "26 When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, "Woman, behold, your son!" 27Then he said to the disciple, "Behold, your mother!"

Think about it. There is more scriptural warrant for calling Mary the "Mother of John" than there is for calling her "Queen of Heaven".

100 posted on 08/23/2009 6:40:08 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 201-213 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson