Is Mary the Queen of Heaven?

[pablope]

OK, this makes more sense (in my tiny brain). It was said that the Queen Mother counseled her son, the king. And I ask myself, “Why does God need counsel?”

God would not need counsel…and I do not think Mary would interfere and go and offer her own counsel.

Also, because the Queen Mother is the mother of the king, her place is “higher”, as any mother is, and I’m told what happens on earth happens in heaven. I just had a hard time reconciling this since Jesus is God, and no creature is “higher than” or “equal to” Him, even though He is fully human as well as fully God.

 

[BellsMom]

If the old and new testament writers used their own world experience to describe god and heaven, wouldn’t it make sense that the reason they used words associated with a royal kingdom because that’s the world they lived in? If their only experience was with a democratically elected government they would probably refer to Jesus as the president or prime minister of heaven and Mary the first lady.

Are we to take all the prose about thrones and crowns as literal? I don’t think Jesus wears a literal crown as he has no body. Why should we believe that there is an actual system of royal governance where he owns the title king and Mary queen?

I believe the writers of the bible were limited in their ability to explain these deep and complicated ideas. So they used a vocabulary they were comfortable with. As the church became bigger and spoke in more educated theological terms, it maintained the language of the early writers.

Royalty is just a human invention in my opinion.

 

[EIF5A]

If the old and new testament writers used their own world experience to describe god and heaven, wouldn’t it make sense that the reason they used words associated with a royal kingdom because that’s the world they lived in? If their only experience was with a democratically elected government they would probably refer to Jesus as the president or prime minister of heaven and Mary the first lady.

Are we to take all the prose about thrones and crowns as literal? I don’t think Jesus wears a literal crown as he has no body. Why should we believe that there is an actual system of royal governance where he owns the title king and Mary queen?

I believe the writers of the bible were limited in their ability to explain these deep and complicated ideas. So they used a vocabulary they were comfortable with. As the church became bigger and spoke in more educated theological terms, it maintained the language of the early writers.

Royalty is just a human invention in my opinion.

He has no body? I thought Jesus (and all those redeemed) have/will have a body, though glorified and different from bodies we presently have…

 

[pocohombre]

]1 Kings 2:19
19 When Bathsheba went to King Solomon to speak to him for Adonijah, the king stood up to meet her, bowed down to her and sat down on his throne. He had a throne brought for the king’s mother, and she sat down at his right hand.

So, Solomon had a throne brought in where none had existed previously and bowed down to his mother to honor her.

My bibles say Solomon sat on a throne and Bathsheba on a “seat”

In re-establishing the Davidic kingdom, Jesus established the same throne for His mother, though I think it would be fair for anyone to say that it is unlikely that Jesus (who is God) bowed down to Mary. But who knows?

I just wish you would say who knows if indeed she sits on His right side, and is Queen of heaven.

Mary’s position flows from the king’s so the honoring of the queen by the king does not diminish him.

No need to bring up the diminishing of king by bowing to his mother.

Oh, one more point…the “outcome” of the conversation does not change anything just stated, and the Gebirah was a constant fixture within the Davidic kingdom from that time on

It is mentioned several times in scripture, but as to it’s full meaning I would not draw it further than succession, very important to show bloodline of Christ. Apparently some of the apostles were unaware that this Gebirah would carry over to His kingdom, for they tried to weasel into the position (sitting at right hand), quite interestingly using their mothers, to no avail again.

 

[Alizarin]

He has no body? I thought Jesus (and all those redeemed) have/will have a body, though glorified and different from bodies we presently have…

Yeah, has a body. Presently. There was bodily resurrection, and ascent into heaven. Not sure what that other poster (Bell(name removed by moderator)) was thinking…

 

[BellsMom]

Sorry I should have said “I don’t believe” he has a body. But if you believe he does, does he wear clothes made of cotton or perhaps silk or is he naked? Is his crown made of the actual elements for gold and gemstones?

Seems a bit silly to me.

 

[Randy_Carson]

My bibles say Solomon sat on a throne and Bathsheba on a “seat”

Depends on the translation, I guess. However, your argument seems to overlook all the other verses in the OT which refer to the Queen Mother or gebirah.

I just wish you would say who knows if indeed she sits on His right side, and is Queen of heaven.No need to bring up the diminishing of king by bowing to his mother.

I’m sure you do wish such a thing; however, Rev. 12:1-2 seems to suggest that we do know.

It is mentioned several times in scripture, but as to it’s full meaning I would not draw it further than succession, very important to show bloodline of Christ. Apparently some of the apostles were unaware that this Gebirah would carry over to His kingdom, for they tried to weasel into the position (sitting at right hand), quite interestingly using their mothers, to no avail again.

God is pure spirit and occupies no space. There is no right or left in heaven; these are human terms based on OUR limitations.

 

[Reuben_J]

Understand. Only responding to statements as if they were based on what is stated in bible.So, if you give me a scripture as proof text then i respond to what is stated in bible text. I understand there are prevoius interpretations that then become “tradition” .

That was my point. Just as many wives is an earthly thing, not in His mold, so is queen mother an earthly thing, not in His mold, unless you strictly mean “succession” or born from her, and not with a ruling throne.
Again, you are ascribing something ancient kings did. Jesus was ( is) Lord of Lords and ruler of all before time began.

Yes, that is a paraphrase, an interpretation indeed. Ezekial speaks of a shepherd, the Good Shepherd only. Yes in earthly terms, He will be King of Kings, a fulfillment of Davidic promise. The government will be upon His shoulders. When you say Mary is queen mother are you saying more than succession of Jesus coming from her ? Are you saying she will be at His right side, enthroned and co -ruler ? What is Catholic tradition? Is it not also still being formed-the tradition of full Marion doctrine still in flux ?

I am on android now, so this post may not come out well.

Well, the idea of Queen Mother has its parallel in the Davidic kingdom. So it’s quite Biblical. That’s as far as it goes - that there is such thing as Queen Mother. The Queen here is not a wife of a king which is quite different from ordinary monarchy system that we often see in other kingdoms.

To use the parallel also on what these kings and their administration did was not sustainable, which was what I tried to explain. OTOH, to object to the title Queen of Heaven because it is very human is not fair and consistent. We can also object to the use of God as Father since human fathers is nothing like God, yet we do. We use all those human terms to denote the Trinity and they can never be sufficient nor they follow strictly what their human counterparts do.

As for your last few questions, the answers are obviously no, my reasoning above accordingly applies.

The term Queen of Heaven as far as I know is not exactly a dogma unlike the Immaculate Conception or Assumption of our Lady. It’s usage is more of devotional practice and prayers.

The reference to the Queen in Revelation which is alluded to the Queen of Heaven is by no means set in stone as the Church also recognizes that Revelation could never be fully interpreted literally.

I would say that’s as far as how and why the term of Queen of Heaven is being used and I thought that is it quite reasonable.

 

[pocohombre]

Sorry I should have said “I don’t believe” he has a body. But if you believe he does, does he wear clothes made of cotton or perhaps silk or is he naked? Is his crown made of the actual elements for gold and gemstones?

Seems a bit silly to me.

Is he no longer God/man ? Jesus went out of His way to show he was not a “ghost” after His resurrection.You could touch him. He did eat. You could see Him. What resurrects but a body ?

 

[pocohombre]

I am on android now, so this post may not come out well.

Well, the idea of Queen Mother has its parallel in the Davidic kingdom. So it’s quite Biblical. That’s as far as it goes - that there is such thing as Queen Mother. The Queen here is not a wife of a king which is quite different from ordinary monarchy system that we often see in other kingdoms.

To use the parallel also on what these kings and their administration did was not sustainable, which was what I tried to explain. OTOH, to object to the title Queen of Heaven because it is very human is not fair and consistent. We can also object to the use of God as Father since human fathers is nothing like God, yet we do. We use all those human terms to denote the Trinity and they can never be sufficient nor they follow strictly what their human counterparts do.

As for your last few questions, the answers are obviously no, my reasoning above accordingly applies.

The term Queen of Heaven as far as I know is not exactly a dogma unlike the Immaculate Conception or Assumption of our Lady. It’s usage is more of devotional practice and prayers.

The reference to the Queen in Revelation which is alluded to the Queen of Heaven is by no means set in stone as the Church also recognizes that Revelation could never be fully interpreted literally.

I would say that’s as far as how and why the term of Queen of Heaven is being used and I thought that is it quite reasonable.

Came thru loud and clear, thank you. So it is not a doctrine, and maybe that is what is still in flux, that some are pushing for solidifying just what the term means. Queen can allude to many things, such as influence, power,decision making etc etc… For sure I take it you mean she, like any other saint, can be prayed to for intercession, “queen” putting her above all other saints as far as having the King’s “ear” like no one else. Again, even there I don’t think that is the best biblical example.that the queen was the king’s number one counselor/mediator, always at his right hand side. I thought it was a rare occurrence, at least officially,publically, throne wise. Behind the scenes though a mother I suppose is always whispering.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Came thru loud and clear, thank you. So it is not a doctrine, and maybe that is what is still in flux, that some are pushing for solidifying just what the term means. Queen can allude to many things, such as influence, power,decision making etc etc… For sure I take it you mean she, like any other saint, can be prayed to for intercession, “queen” putting her above all other saints as far as having the King’s “ear” like no one else. Again, even there I don’t think that is the best biblical example.that the queen was the king’s number one counselor/mediator, always at his right hand side. I thought it was a rare occurrence, at least officially,publically, throne wise. Behind the scenes though a mother I suppose is always whispering.

“Do whatever He tells you.” John 2:5.

 

[chero23]

, here in the Islamic countries we take our moms everywhere, even if she wants to visit her neighbor.

However, JESUS in John 2:4 called her “Woman”, and not any fancy title!

Like I had stated, he called her woman to let you know that she was the woman described in genesis 3:15.

 

[Reuben_J]

Came thru loud and clear, thank you.

I guess that would make my simple objective done.

Again, even there I don’t think that is the best biblical example.that the queen was the king’s number one counselor/mediator, always at his right hand side. I thought it was a rare occurrence, at least officially,publically, throne wise. Behind the scenes though a mother I suppose is always whispering.

That would be subjected to your imagination though. i would disagree if it makes her appear to be higher than Jesus, and that the Lord is subjected to her. But if it supports the notions that the King honors her being that he is her Son, then it makes sense to their relationship.

Suffice to say, Mary is a Queen because her Son is a King.

 

[Reuben_J]

So it is not a doctrine, and maybe that is what is still in flux, that some are pushing for solidifying just what the term means.

You have to differentiate between Dogma, Doctrine and Discipline (especially in the Catholic Church). And to that I may want to put more emphasis on Devotion, especially for the information of our Protestants brethren.

 

[pocohombre]

“Do whatever He tells you.” John 2:5.

“Whom is my mother ?”

 

[pocohombre]

“Do whatever He tells you.” John 2:5.

It is all in the eye of the beholder. You see John 2 as part of her influential "Gebirah"ship,“Queen” etc .Others see it as the opposite, where Jesus makes it quite clear that he will do what he must do when it is His time, and not by any deference to His mother (much like Solomon and Bathsheba) .“Woman (not what he called her at the cross), what have I do with you ? My time has not yet come”. Why did he say this if he knew he was gonna do what he did ? Why? Some would say he puts the whole “Gebirah” thing into question, not to mix up earthly traditions with kingdom heirarchy. For sure we know it was His time. For sure we know she prodded Him but we don’t know other than to get/buy more wine. We don’t know if she understood what Jesus said to her, or that she was demanding a miracle. I would suspect Jesus was “man of the house” and took care of things for Mary previously, without miracles.

 

[pocohombre]

You have to differentiate between Dogma, Doctrine and Discipline (especially in the Catholic Church). And to that I may want to put more emphasis on Devotion, especially for the information of our Protestants brethren.

Ok Question though as far as praying to saints,how do they hear everything? I know it is likened to asking a brother or sister in Christ here on earth to pray for you, but we are not omniscient and are limited to only pray for what we have heard or read from one another, or what the Lord puts on our heart. Are saints in heaven glorified already, and like Christ where they have some omnisceince/presence ? Is it channeled thru Christ to the particular saint ?

 

[Reuben_J]

Ok Question though as far as praying to saints,how do they hear everything? I know it is likened to asking a brother or sister in Christ here on earth to pray for you, but we are not omniscient and are limited to only pray for what we have heard or read from one another, or what the Lord puts on our heart. Are saints in heaven glorified already, and like Christ where they have some omnisceince/presence ? Is it channeled thru Christ to the particular saint ?

Don’t know the details or the omnipresence thing. Not everything has an answer or can be explained. We know they hear us because they are in communion with us as a body and they are not limited by physical barrier (as probbaly now they are spirit). The Gospel alludes to this when Abraham heard the plea of lazarus to send prophets to his relatives who were still alive.

As for Jesus saying,“Who is my mother?” Mary would be best exemplified as one. Many Christians agree that she is a true first Christian the moment she said yes to God’s word (and she did it - by having Jesus as her son).

Personally, and it’s just a personal opinion, that of all the people Mary would be the one who knows Jesus best and thus i would have the opposite opinion to yours regarding John 2:5. We can never under estimate a mother’s knowledge of her children. As opposed to Protestants’ interpretation of John2:5, the fact that Jesus saying his (mission and Godly ministry) has nothing to do with her and right rightly so, and the fact the he mentioned his time has not yet come, Jesus still performed the miracle. Would he do it had it not for Mary informing him of the situation, we never know. My guess is probably not - “his time has not yet come” and the lack of wine might not get to his attention. But because of Mary, one way or the other, the problem at the wedding in Cana was solved.

 

[Reuben_J]

The Gospel alludes to this when Abraham heard the plea of lazarus to send prophets to his relatives who were still alive.

Edit: I admit that it is not a great idea to use this story (LK 16:19-31) in relation with praying to the saints. I was tinkling with the thought that the idea of the dead communicating with the living is implied when the rich man asked abraham to send lazarus to warn his living relatives/family.

 

[Alizarin]

Sorry I should have said “I don’t believe” he has a body. But if you believe he does, does he wear clothes made of cotton or perhaps silk or is he naked? Is his crown made of the actual elements for gold and gemstones?

Seems a bit silly to me.

Okay, I see what you meant. As someone else posted above, after the Resurrection He went out of His to illustrate He still had a body. Now, if you don’t believe in the Resurrection, then I see how you arrive at not believing Jesus has a body.