Queen of Heaven

[Church_Militant]

Sort of lost all credibility with that statement, and no reason for us to read on.

and you’re right.

Arguments concerning what we really believe is the only thing worth bothering with.

 

[Ravyn_Guiliani]

Because “queen of heaven” title places her Above Jesus, not on her knees in worship to him.

You give her godlike qualities, like Jesus can not say NO to her.

Only God the Father has authority over Jesus.

In short, you are giving us a poor image of her.

Mary was not only the Mother of the Son and Daughter of the Father…she was also the Spouse of the Holy Spirit. Now I seem to remember something about spouses are ‘two become one’, which definitely gives her more honor than Protestants give her.
Ravyn

 

[Beyrak]

Mary was not only the Mother of the Son and Daughter of the Father…she was also the Spouse of the Holy Spirit. Now I seem to remember something about spouses are ‘two become one’, which definitely gives her more honor than Protestants give her.
Ravyn

Agreed! Plus aren’t we commanded to “honor our father and mother”? I have no doubt Jesus honor’s his.

Yea protestants, that means Jesus honors his mother. That does not mean that Mary is a God or that we Catholics worship her. We simply pay her the same respect Christ does. It would be wise for you to do the same.

 

[Atemi]

Oh, I didn’t know I was getting into a debate with a disgruntled Catholic who now describes himself as a non-catholic christian.

Ha.

I am no “disgruntled” Catholic.

LOL, no.

But if that makes others feel better to believe, then they can believe what they want.

I’ll scream “Uncle” as you are looking through tainted glasses now. I’ll pray for you that you’ll come back home soon.

I am already home in Christ. It is a great place to be.

Thanks anyway.

But in my opinion, your comment about the early church fathers was disingenuous. No one I have ever heard of studies them indepth and goes away from the Church.

And this is more telling than what I claimed to begin with.

I am sorry if your experience is limited there. Now you heard of one.

I also see you can’t bring yourself to call yourself a protestant. You are definately protesting your old faith.

I don’t prefer the term because that is not who I am and it does not define me as a follower of Christ.

I no more protest the Roman Catholic Church than the Catholics here protest non-Catholic churches.

We are all protestants in one way or another, no matter how we flip the coin.

Anyways good luck. Time for me to go to Holy Thursday night Mass. I promise you a prayer at Mass.

Thank you for your prayers, but are you praying for someone you believe to be your enemy or your friend?

That is what matters.

…

 

[Atemi]

At the wedding feast of Cana. Jesus told His mother that it was not yet His time, but she insisted that the guests needed more wine.

Can you please quote where Mary insisted that the guests need more wine after He said it was not His time?

I can’t find that.

He fulfilled her request by changing water into wine for the party guests.

Can you please quote for me where Mary ever asked Jesus for anything?

Again, I can’t find that.

…

 

[Atemi]

Atemi,
I’ll try to clear up a few misconceptions.

Thank you.

The woman in Rev 12 has a double application: Israel and Mary; Mary as mother of Jesus and as mother of the Church.

That is nowhere in the text.

The text does show that the woman of Revelation is Israel for sure, but says nothing about Mary, and never mentions her throughout.

Actually, the text does say that the woman was a sign, not an actual woman.

Regarding the “labor pains”.

1. Mary is the Mother of Jesus and that birth was without labor pains.

1. Mary is the Mother of the Church because the Church is the body of Christ (Ephesians 5:23 “…Christ is the head of the church, His body,…”). It is the birth of the Church, the body of Christ, that is the cause of her great labor pains. Tomorrow especially (Good Friday), we can get an idea of how great her labor pains were.

Well that is not what the text says.

The text clearly says that she was in terrible labor giving birth to Christ Himself, the man child.

Saying it is the Person of Christ, but is not the Person of Christ, cannot be seriously addressed, IMV.

1 Peter 3:6 The words of Peter are addressed to a limited audience, specifically married women, who are already in the Church - are already children of Mary by virtue of being members of the body of Christ. Note that wives are only children of Sarah if they “do right and let nothing terrify them” (RSV).

Galatians 4:26 I’m sure you’re aware the Galatians passage is an allegory (vs 24) where, as St. Paul says, the free woman (Sarah) corresponds to the new covenant and the heavenly Jerusalem, the Church, - and “she (the Church) is our mother”. This also is part of Catholic teaching, that the Church is our mother.

Both texts are clear that it is Sarah that is our spiritual mother, not Mary.

“She” is not “the Church” in the text. Adding that there when Paul is specifically speaking about Sarah and the New Jerusalem in Heaven is a great mistake, IMO.

Have a grace filled, happy Easter,

Same to you, Nita.

God bless. He is risen!

…

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Daniel,

I’m sure glad it was DA Carson that set up those rules and not Jesus. According to them, I’d say there are very few people qualified to read Scripture. It is not a problem for a Catholic - one that knows Church teaching that is. We have the “hedge” or “fence” of doctrine to keep us from falling off the deep end of error. How is the average Protestant to read Scripture if he hasn’t studied Hebrew, Greek, culture of the OT and NT time, etc.?

Nita

Hi Nita, by average protestant, I take it you mean uneducated protestant – because as you know true protestants accept the first six to eight church councils. If one is serious about knowing scripture they will study the history, background, language, exegesis, hermenutics and culture of the Bible times.

Check major protestant publishers you will find good books on biblical history and culture.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Sort of lost all credibility with that statement, and no reason for us to read on.

Then don’t ask an honest question, if you do not want an honest answer. I am telling you exactly how your apologetists are coming across on this topic.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Mary was not only the Mother of the Son and Daughter of the Father…she was also the Spouse of the Holy Spirit. Now I seem to remember something about spouses are ‘two become one’, which definitely gives her more honor than Protestants give her.
Ravyn

So, you are saying that Mary had sex with the Holy Spirit?

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

And, concerning John 2, the wedding wine thing, does that make Mary an enabler?

 

[NotWorthy]

What escapes us non-Catholics is how the Apostles and the early church were never able to figure out what you post here…

What escapes us Catholics is that the first Non Catholics who called themselves Christians had no problem with the Catholic veneration of Mary.

This little dilemna didn’t develope til much later in non-Catholic Christianity. Hence, wouldn’t that make it a Tradition of Man?!?

BTW, Atemi, Welcome to the Forums, rather belatedly I might add. I seem to remember you from CARM.

 

[Atemi]

What escapes us Catholics is that the first Non Catholics who called themselves Christians had no problem with the Catholic veneration of Mary.

This little dilemna didn’t develope til much later in non-Catholic Christianity. Hence, wouldn’t that make it a Tradition of Man?!?

No.

All those first “non-Catholics” were Catholics. That’s how they were raised and what they were taught. It is Catholics that filled the churches of the Reformation.

After you leave the RCC, a lot of baggage is taken with you. This is true for many of those who would say they are “recovering.”

One’s upbringing just does not up and fly away.

BTW, Atemi, Welcome to the Forums, rather belatedly I might add. I seem to remember you from CARM.

Well I appreciate the welcome.

Thank you.

 

[Zooey]

here is an interesting perspective for protestants. if sola scriptura is true, and everyone has the authority to interpret the bible for themselves by the power of the holy spirit, doesn’t this mean that if a catholic reads passages like revelation 12 and the old testament passeages about the queen mother, and from this comes to the conclusion that mary is the queen of heaven, musn’t the protestant conceed that this interpretation is at least potentially valid if the catholic claims to be lead by the holy spirit when coming to this interpretation?

Ah No, because there are rules for interpretation and for doing proper word studies. It is known as exegesis. And, sad to say many people are poor at doing this.

Exegetical Fallacies (by DA Carson)
WORD-STUDY FALLACIES: (condensed from Carson’s book)

1)The root fallacy – “pineapple” is not an apple growing on a pine

2)Semantic anachronism – dynamite is etymologically derived from “dunamis”, then, the idea of dynamite is read back into dunamis.

3)Semantic obsolescence – Is “head of the family” origin or source? It’s not so in Hellenistic Greek, only in classical Greek.

4)Appeal to unknown or unlikely meanings – ‘The law’ refers to rabbinic tradition?

5)Careless appeal to background info – born of water and Spirit (water can be referred to sperm) so physical birth and spiritual birth? Purification by water and new spirit in Ezekiel 36:25-27.

1. Verbal parallelomania – John’s prologue is compared to other remote literature to prove dependency – Bultmann and Dodd?
2. Link of language and mentality – Ancient Hebrews unable to understand past, present and future because only two aspects in their language? False assumption about technical terms – ‘sanctification’ and ‘baptism of Spirit’

8)Problems with synonyms and componential analysis – agape and phileo?

9)Selective use of evidence - Hebrew knowing is experiential, not intellectual? Knowing God is obeying and loving others but also content in John 4:50, 5:47, 13:19, 17:21)

10)Unwarranted semantic disjunctions/restrictions – false either/or meanings. E.g. the headship of Jesus – either He as Head has authority to control and demand obedience OR as Head, He is source/origin and stoops to lift us up?

11)Unwarranted restriction of semantic field – Judaism is only a technical term for a sectarian exclusiveness against Hellenist and not religion of the Jews? This is my body? “IS” could mean Fulfillment, Resemblance, Cause, Attribute or identity?

12)Unwarranted broadening of semantic range – ‘church’ (universal?) in Acts 7:38

13)Problems relating to Semitic background of Greek NT – Methodologically irresponsible to read Hebrew word into Greek equivalent

14)Neglect distinguishing peculiarities of a corpus – a fallacy that one NT writer uses a word (call/justification) with the same meaning as other NT writers

15)Unwarranted linking of sense and reference – The meaning of words in a grammatically coherent array (Three is a prime number) is different from the theoretical referent of each word (Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Locke, Berkeley)

Most word studies you will find commits one or more of the above errors.

D.A Carson? D.A.Carson???
Just where in the Bible may I find the "Gospel According to D.A Carson??? 'Cause, I’ve been:yup: reading the Bible for 5 and a half decades (& a bit), and I have:nope: never in all those years encountered this D.A. Carson…

 

[NotWorthy]

No.

All those first “non-Catholics” were Catholics. That’s how they were raised and what they were taught. It is Catholics that filled the churches of the Reformation.

And like I said, they had no problem with the veneration of Mary. They certainly didn’t let their upbringing get in the way of their numerous other problems with the CC. But their words for their Mother were certainly heartening.

After you leave the RCC, a lot of baggage is taken with you. This is true for many of those who would say they are “recovering.”

You say “recovering”…
I say “lost”…
Let’s call the whole thing off…

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

Can you please quote where Mary insisted that the guests need more wine after He said it was not His time?

I can’t find that.

Can you please quote for me where Mary ever asked Jesus for anything?

Again, I can’t find that.

…

My good bro Church Militant already posted the verses from the Wedding Feast of Cana. Just scroll up.

I thought Protestants always chastised Catholics for not ‘knowing the Bible’…

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

All those first “non-Catholics” were Catholics. That’s how they were raised and what they were taught. It is Catholics that filled the churches of the Reformation.

After you leave the RCC, a lot of baggage is taken with you. This is true for many of those who would say they are “recovering.”

What else is “baggage” that the reformers took with them? The Trinity? The divinity of Christ? The Bible as the inspired word of God? How long until a new Protestant denomination starts up and says that these three things are nothing more than, “carried over baggage from Catholicism”?

 

[Atemi]

My good bro Church Militant already posted the verses from the Wedding Feast of Cana. Just scroll up.

I thought Protestants always chastised Catholics for not ‘knowing the Bible’…

No. Church Militant didn’t supply those verses you mentioned.

Either quote them or not.

 

[PatienceAndLove]

No. Church Militant didn’t supply those verses you mentioned.

Either quote them or not.

Here you go:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2072381&postcount=36

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Yesterday, 11:54 pm
Daniel Marsh
Senior Member Join Date: August 29, 2005
Posts: 2,321

Re: Queen of Heaven

---

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravyn_Guiliani
Mary was not only the Mother of the Son and Daughter of the Father…she was also the Spouse of the Holy Spirit. Now I seem to remember something about spouses are ‘two become one’, which definitely gives her more honor than Protestants give her.
Ravyn

So, you are saying that Mary had sex with the Holy Spirit?

#50 Yesterday, 11:57 pm
Daniel Marsh
Senior Member Join Date: August 29, 2005
Posts: 2,321

Re: Queen of Heaven

---

And, concerning John 2, the wedding wine thing, does that make Mary an enabler?

If this is an example of either the ‘respect’ you have for Mary, or an example of what you think is an acceptable argument, given according to forum rules, I believe you are sadly mistaken. I find your posts above not only offensive but blasphemous. COLOR]

 

[Church_Militant]

Can you please quote where Mary insisted that the guests need more wine after He said it was not His time?

I can’t find that.

Can you please quote for me where Mary ever asked Jesus for anything?

Again, I can’t find that.

…

Ignoring things that don’t line up with what you want to believe?

Oh that would be here in John 2:1-11
3: When the wine failed, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.”
4: And Jesus said to her, “O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come.”
5: His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”
6: Now six stone jars were standing there, for the Jewish rites of purification, each holding twenty or thirty gallons.
7: Jesus said to them, “Fill the jars with water.” And they filled them up to the brim.
8: He said to them, “Now draw some out, and take it to the steward of the feast.” So they took it.

It’s quite obvious that Our Lady’s intercession affected Our Lord’s decision to intervene miraculously.

As for your reading of the ECF, you must not be paying much attention then.

Ignatius of Antioch says: (CHAP. VII.)

“They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer,(7) because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death(11) in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect,(13) that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that ye should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of(15) them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion[of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved.(16) But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.”

and then, (CHAP. VIII.)

See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution(17) of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper(18) Eucharist, which is[administered] either

See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out[through their office] the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper(18) Eucharist, which is[administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.

Written within 10 years of the death of St. John who discipled he and Polycarp.

Polycarp says this at his trial. (" CHAP. IX.–POLYCARP REFUSES TO REVILE CHRIST.)

Now, as Polycarp was entering into the stadium, there came to him a voice from heaven, saying, “Be strong, and show thyself a man, O Polycarp !” No one saw who it was that spoke to him; but those of our brethren who were present heard the voice. And as he was brought forward, the tumult became great when they heard that Polycarp was taken. And when he came near, the proconsul asked him whether he was Polycarp. On his confessing that he was, [the proconsul] sought to persuade him to deny [Christ], saying, “Have respect to thy old age,” and other similar things, according to their custom, [such as]," Swear by the fortune of Caesar; repent, and say, Away with the Atheists." But Polycarp, gazing with a stern countenance on all the multitude of the wicked heathen then in the stadium, and waving his hand towards them, while with groans he looked up to heaven, said, “Away with the Atheists.”(5) Then, the proconsul urging him, and saying, “Swear, and I will set thee at liberty, reproach Christ;” Polycarp declared, **“Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never did me any injury: how then can I blaspheme my King and my Saviour?” ** He was eighty six years old at the time. That means that he was infant baptized.

How’d you miss these things from the earliest of disciples?Plain statements from the Word of God and from the oldest writings of two of the ECF.