C
Church_Militant
Guest
.
Either quote them or not.Better look again… I did indeed supply them… TWICE in fact. Here’s the 3rd time as only a link.
- Status
Either quote them or not.Better look again… I did indeed supply them… TWICE in fact. Here’s the 3rd time as only a link.
A
Angainor
Guest
There is only one biblical “Queen of Heaven”, and I don’t want to have anything to do with her.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
I’m sorry. I guess you meant to say there is one “Queen of Heaven” whom pagans worshipped. I think you are misconstruing this goddess with the perfectly biblical Catholic Teaching of Mary, the Mother of Jesus, being the Queen of Heaven - the “Heavenly Gebira” you could say!
I felt I needed to clear this up for you since there were other king of kings in the OT, but they were not to be confused with Jesus, the True King of Kings!
BTW, regarding your thoughts on Mary as not being the Queen of Heaven, is this Lutheran teaching? If so, when did it change?
A
Angainor
Guest
There are two biblical “King of kings”.
Since you express interest in Lutheran teaching…
We profess very little belief about the life of Mary one way or the other in our confessions. One thing the confessions are clear on is that Scripture teaches not the invocation of saints, Mary included.
Individual Lutherans in the past and present have believed in her perpetual virginity, immaculateness, and assumption. Some Lutherans even pray the (pre-Trent*) Rosary.
I’m quite sure no Lutheran regards Mary as the “Queen of Heaven”. Given that Scripture teaches not the invocation of saints.
*“Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death.” was added to the Roman Catholic version in 1568, and probably had lots to do with turning scores of Lutherans against the prayer.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
I was under the impression that the “Holy Mary” was added in 1483.
I also seem to recall that Luther wrote some glowing things about Mary. I wasn’t aware that the Lutheran Confessions did not express this same veneration. Sorry about the confusion.
A
Angainor
Guest
From the Catholic Encyclopedia:Finally, the petition “Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death. Amen.” is stated by the official “Catechism of the Council of Trent” to have been framed by the Church itself.
Martin Luther did write glowing things about Mary. He did not think, however, that it was the type of thing a Christian should bind his conscience to, so it is not something recorded as a fundamental to Christianity.
K
kaycee
Guest
The church makes Mary Queen by fiat?
Another perfect example of “sola ecclesia”.
In actual practice tradition and the bible are made to say whatever the magisterium wants it to say.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
As opposed to your own approach by which the Bible Alone is made to say whatever you personally want it to say?The church makes Mary Queen by fiat?
Another perfect example of “sola ecclesia”.
In actual practice tradition and the bible are made to say whatever the magisterium wants it to say.
Riiiiiiiight.
Sorry, I’ll stick with the Full Revelation of God in both forms - oral and written - as authored, preserved and protected by an infallible Church led by the Holy Spirit.
J
Jerry-Jet
Guest
If Jesus is the King of Heaven then Mary is the Queen just like Solomon who was King of Israel --his mother was Queen.
If Solomon’s mother can be queen of Israel are you going to tell me that Jesus’ mother Mary can’t be queen of heaven.
Look folks–Mary wasn’t Jesus’ surrogate mother–she wasn’t just a depraved sin stained womb bearer for Jesus–she was the Mother of God!
What’s so hard about the mother of God being the Queen of Heaven?
That doesn’t make her God–that only gives glory to Jesus who is God and makes her Queen of Heaven!
If Solomon’s mother can be queen of Israel are you going to tell me that Jesus’ mother Mary can’t be queen of heaven.
Look folks–Mary wasn’t Jesus’ surrogate mother–she wasn’t just a depraved sin stained womb bearer for Jesus–she was the Mother of God!
What’s so hard about the mother of God being the Queen of Heaven?
That doesn’t make her God–that only gives glory to Jesus who is God and makes her Queen of Heaven!
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Once again, according to the article that you cited, the Holy Mary was used well before Trent, as early as the late 1400’s. All Trent did was to affirm a tradition that was already in place.
P.S. Just curious, why do you parenthecize “Catechism of the Council of Trent”?
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Here is the principle of the Queen Mother demonstrated within the House of David from the pages of Holy Writ:
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. (1 Kings 2:19)
Since Solomon had MANY wives, none of them would be queen. In fact, it was his mother that sat on the throne.
Of course, Jesus never married, but the principle of the queen Mother was established long before.
So let’s see…Jesus sat down at his Father’s right hand…Mary sat down at Jesus’ right hand…Jesus is the King and Mary is His mother, so she is the Queen…yep, makes sense to me.
For additional support, you might conside the following:
QUEEN MOTHER: A BIBLICAL THEOLOGY OF MARY’S QUEENSHIP. By Edward Sri (Emmaus Road Publishing, 827 North Fourth St., Steubenville, Ohio 43952, 2005), xvi + 216 pp. PB $14.95.
ignatius.com/Magazines/hprweb/qm.jpg
The purpose of Edward Sri’s study is to prove the queenship of Mary as explicitly revealed in the scriptures. Therefore, the bulk of his research centers around key texts from the Old and New Testaments.
In surveying the Old Testament, the author considers the importance of the queen mother within the Davidic kingdom. It was the king’s mother who ruled as queen, not the king’s wife. This is portrayed in the prophetic tradition, specifically as seen in Isaiah 7:14 and prototypically in Genesis 3:15. These passages, in considering both Testaments, are eventually associated with Israel’s messianic hopes. Thus, in the structure of the Davidic kingdom in Judah and Israel, the mother of the king and queenship and kingship were inseparably linked.
Hope this helps. :tiphat:
A
Angainor
Guest
But for liturgical purposes the Ave down to the year 1568 ended with “Jesus, Amen”,
and an observation in the “Myroure of our Ldy” written for the Bridgettine nuns of Syon, clearly indicates the generally feeling. “Some saye at the begynnyng of this salutacyon Ave benigne Jesu and some saye after `Maria mater Dei’, with other addycyons at the ende also. And such thinges may be saide when folke saye their Aves of theyr own devocyon. But in the servyce of the chyrche, I trowe it to be moste sewer and moste medeful (i.e. meritorious) to obey the comon use of saying, as the chyrche hath set, without all such addicions.”
I do not deny that “Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us…” existed in the tradition of certain groups and individuals since before the reformation.
However as the chyrche hath set, the rosary ended with “Jesus, Amen” for both liturgical and "comon use" at the time of the reformation.
Isn’t “*as the chyrche hath set” *what we are talking about?
After the reformation, in 1568, the Roman Catholics elevated the traditions of selected groups to official “Roman Catholic teaching” status.
Cynically, if elevating a tradition such as “Mary…pray for us” gets under the skin of reformers who reject the invocation of saints, all the better.
I don’t know. When did I do that?
T
Tom317
Guest
I am sorry you hold such a mistaken view. Matthew 16 ould not be more clear.The church makes Mary Queen by fiat?
Another perfect example of “sola ecclesia”.
In actual practice tradition and the bible are made to say whatever the magisterium wants it to say.
Happy Easter!
A
Atemi
Guest
Yes.The church makes Mary Queen by fiat?
Another perfect example of “sola ecclesia”.
In actual practice tradition and the bible are made to say whatever the magisterium wants it to say.
The RCC now teaches that the mere fact that she says so is all the proof anyone needs that it is true.
Amazing, IMV.
No need for Scripture, an Apostolic witness, ECFs, or tradition.
It is “tradition” that need not be traditional at all.
The early church knew of no such concept.
…
6
6glargento
Guest
here is athanasias speaking on the queenship of mary
It becomes you to be mindful of us, as you stand near Him Who granted you all graces, for you are the Mother of God and our Queen. Help us for the sake of the King, the Lord God Master Who was born of you. For this reason you are called ‘full of Grace’…" (373 St. Athanasius)
A
Atemi
Guest
I would like to save this quote for my files. Could you please cite your source for this.
The writing where this is from would be great.
Thanks.
…
6
6glargento
Guest
here are the following websites where i found this quote at, however none of them directly say which of athanasias’ writings it came from
wf-f.org/StAthanasius.html
davidmacd.com/catholic/mary_in_the_early_church.htm
thecatholicrosary.blogspot.com/2005_10_01_archive.html
maybe somebody on here can tell us what work this was from
S
Semper_Fi_1
Guest
There ARE no official statements regarding Mary having labor pains or not. It simply is NOT a part of the deposit of faith (something required to be believed by the Faithful), thus there is a little leeway there in personal interpretations.
A
Atemi
Guest
I supplied the official citations already. There are more. No one has offered anything to contradict.
Please research “in Partu.”
To deny it is to deny the dogma of Mary’s Perpetual Virginity.
A
Atemi
Guest
Yes. You are only citing RC apologetics websites.
None of them cite the source this text either, but they post it anyway.
What happens is often rumor gets passed on as fact, but never a citation given. Without a citation, this is no different than all other unverifiable quotes floating around the internet.
Thanks anyway.
…
- Status