The Crowning of Mary as Queen of Heaven

[Gareth]

Hi All,

It’s been a little while since I last posted, and it feels good to be back, this is still the best place to get an answer, Catholic or catholic

Anyway, I’ve started praying the rosary properly using the correct prayers, Hail Mary, Hail Holy Queen and the visualations on the different mysteries. As a protestant I’m fine with the whole thing now it’s taken me a while, except for the last two mysteries, namely, the assumption and in particular the 'crowning of Mary as Queen of Heaven"

the asumption doesn’t overly bother me, but the biblical verse quoted in support of the crowning of Mary
Rev 12:1-2

if this woman is Mary, why does she suffer pain in child birth, wouldn’t this indicate that she had inherieted the curse of original sin and violate the ‘remained intact’ concept of Mary Ever Virgin?

Isn’t it more likely that this is a symbol of the nation of Israel, most commentries support this, and it goes with the idea of ‘in the wilderness which comes later in the chapter.’

Is the interpretation of this chapter as Mary a Catholic doctrine?

I still feel myself growing more Catholic despite joining the Anglican Church.

Kindest Regards
Gareth

 

[Eileen_T]

Hi Gareth

I am just on my way to work so don’t have time to discuss this now. Whereabouts in NZ do you live?

I have just ‘inherited’ hundreds of Catholic books, many on Mary and Church teaching. I know I have at least one on Mary as the Woman of Revelation.

Maybe you could PM me and I could mail you something (they are all in boxes at present, I am planning to list them on a database for easier access.

 

[RyanL]

Gareth:

It’s been a little while since I last posted, and it feels good to be back, this is still the best place to get an answer, Catholic or catholic

Good to have you back!!

Anyway, I’ve started praying the rosary properly using the correct prayers, Hail Mary, Hail Holy Queen and the visualations on the different mysteries. As a protestant I’m fine with the whole thing now it’s taken me a while, except for the last two mysteries, namely, the assumption and in particular the 'crowning of Mary as Queen of Heaven"

My Baptist wife has a similar difficulty.

the asumption doesn’t overly bother me, but the biblical verse quoted in support of the crowning of Mary Rev 12:1-2

if this woman is Mary, why does she suffer pain in child birth, wouldn’t this indicate that she had inherieted the curse of original sin and violate the ‘remained intact’ concept of Mary Ever Virgin?

Good question…(1) Eve’s child birthing pain was increased, not originated, with the fall, and (2) it isn’t physical pain being described in Rev 12…more in a sec…

Isn’t it more likely that this is a symbol of the nation of Israel, most commentries support this, and it goes with the idea of ‘in the wilderness which comes later in the chapter.’

You are discovering the polyvalent nature of the Scriptures, and most especially Revelations… And as far as “most commentaries”, I would assume you mean most modern Protestant commentaries; that’s not really surprising.

Is the interpretation of this chapter as Mary a Catholic doctrine?

Sorta’, though it’s a both/and and not an either/or.

I still feel myself growing more Catholic despite joining the Anglican Church.

Just be open to where God leads you - if it’s to the Catholic Church, be open to that. If it’s to the Anglican Church, please seek out the Traditional Anglican Church and be open to that - .

Now, for an actual answer…please do read the link, but if you don’t have the time here’s the most important section (though the link gives context starting in Genesis).

Notice that we have the same elements here as in Genesis—the Woman, her Seed, and the Dragon, who is explicitly identified in Revelation as the serpent of old (Rev. 12:9, 14–15, 20:2). In this, the symbol of the woman, like much of the rest of the symbolism in Revelation, is “polyvalent”—that is, it refers to more than one thing. For example, the seven heads of the beast are said to be both seven mountains (Rev. 17:9) and seven kings (Rev. 17:10).

The Woman in Revelation 12 has several referents. First, she is Israel because she is associated with the sun, the moon, and twelve stars. These symbols are drawn from Genesis 37:9–11, where the patriarch Joseph has a dream of the sun and moon (symbolizing his father and mother) and stars (representing his brothers) are bowing down to him. Taken together, the sun, moon, and twelve stars symbolize the people of Israel. Second, she is the Church because, as 12:17 tells us, her “the rest of her offspring” are those who bear witness to Jesus, making them Christians. Third, she is Mary because she is the mother of Jesus—the child who will rule the nations with a rod of iron (cf. 19:11–16).

Finally, she even echoes Eve because she is involved in the three-way conflict described in Genesis, where the woman was, in the literal sense, Eve (and in the prophetic sense, Mary).

Because the Woman is such a multi-dimensional symbol, different aspects of the narrative in the chapter apply to different ones of the referents. Like Mary, she is pictured as being in heaven and she flies (mirroring Mary’s assumption). Like the Church, she is persecuted by the devil after the Ascension of Christ. Like Israel, she experiences great trauma as the Messiah is brought forth (figuratively) from the nation. And like Eve, it is her (distant) seed with whom the serpent has his primary conflict.

In the same way, portions of the narrative do not apply to each referent. Mary did not literally experience pain with the bringing forth of the Messiah, only figuratively (the sword that pierced her heart at the Crucifixion). Eve did not ascend to heaven. And the Church did not bring forth the Messiah (rather, the Messiah brought forth his Church).

All of this has to be kept in mind when interpreting particular aspects of the text of Revelation. Like biblical prophecy in general, its text is very rich and very subtle, and we must expect it to be all the more so when it concerns a subject as profound and enduring as the conflict between the Woman, her Seed, and the Serpent.

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[Todd_Easton]

Mary’s assumption and crowning only anticipate what awaits all of God’s friends. If you have difficulty with the last two mysteries, try generalizing them to the Second Coming when all of God’s friends shall be assumed to heaven to reign with Christ.

Nevertheless, from the time of King Solomon onward, the Jewish king reigned with his mother, the Queen-mother, at his side (1 Kings 2:19), except for King Asa who removed his mother, Maacah, from being queen-mother because of her idolatry (1 Kings 15:13; 2 Chronicles 15:16) . So, it is reasonable to assume that the last Jewish king, whose reign will never end, Jesus Christ, the King of heaven, would also reign with His mother, the Virgin Mary, as Queen-mother of heaven, at His side.

The Virgin Mary as the woman of Revelation 12 is a permitted interpretation but it is not the only permitted interpretation. Other permitted interpretations include Israel, as you suggest, and the Church.

If the woman of Revelation 12 is Israel, as you suggest, then the labor pains it experiences are a metaphor for its fervent desire for the Messiah. If the woman of Revelation 12 is Mary, the labor pains she experiences need not be physical pains either but could also be a metaphor for her fervent desire for the Messiah. St. Paul uses a similar phrase in Galatians 4:19 and no one takes him to mean he is feeling the physical pains of childbirth:

19My little children, with whom I am again in travail until Christ be formed in you!

As far as the woman fleeing into the wilderness described later in chapter 12 of Revelation, one can assume that the Virgin Mary was among those Christians who fled the great persecution that arose in Jerusalem following the death of Stephen since the Bible says that only the apostles remained. (Acts 8:1) Where Mary went is anyone’s guess since the Bible is silent on the point and the wilderness is as likely a destination as any other place. (Acts 11:19) I think there is a tradition that says Mary spent some time in Ephesus with the Apostle John.

 

[RyanL]

Good points, Todd!

If I may piggy-back a little…

Aside from the prophetic types present in the [Old Testament], there is also the text of Psalm 45, which when speaking of the Kingdom of God also speaks of its Queen.

                [6] ** Thy throne, O God**, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a             right sceptre. [7] Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy             God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. [8] All thy garments             smell of myrrh, and aloes, and cassia, out of the ivory palaces, whereby they have made             thee glad. [9] Kings' daughters were among thy honourable women:** upon thy right hand did             stand the queen in gold of Ophir. [10] Hearken, O daughter, and consider, and incline             thine ear; forget also thine own people, and thy father's house; [11] So shall the king             greatly desire thy beauty: for he is thy Lord; and worship thou him.** (Psalm 45:6-11, KJV - Bold added by RyanL)

               That Kingdom ruled by God is the same as the Kingdom ruled eternally by the Son of               David. It is not an earthly kingdom, though it is present on earth in the Church, but a               heavenly kingdom, the Kingdom of God. The Queen of that Kingdom is the Blessed Virgin               Mary,  the Mother of the Lord God Jesus Christ.

Further info on the role of the Queen Mother:

Queen mothers had an important position in eastern courts and especially in Israel. Their names have been preserved with care in the Books of Kings (1 Kgs 14:21; 15:2; 22:42; cf. 53. 2 Kgs 9:6; 12;2: 14:2; 15:2,33; 18:2; 22:1; 23:31,36; 24:18). They bore the title gebirah and were found closely associated in the honor and position of the monarch (Jer 13:18; 22:6). It is important to note that it was not the position of the wife of the kind that counted, but that of the king’s mother. Very significant in this regard is the comparison between 1 Kings 1:16,31 and 2:19, where Bethsheba prostrates herself before King David, her husband, whereas Solomon, her son, after he has become king, prostrates himself before her and makes her sit at his right hand.

My note - God established the Kingdom of Israel, and it was through His holy word that these texts were written. Why fill up so much of the Bible with “chaff” if the role was extranious? Well, perhaps it’s not extranious after all…
As Augustine put it: “The New Testament is in the Old Testament concealed, the Old Testament is in the New Testament revealed.”

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Hi Gareth it is possible that Rev 12 could refer to both Israel and Mary. For example, Jewish interpretators understand Isaiah 53 as referring to the Messiah and / or the people of Israel. It could be that Mary was subject to the physical consequences of Adams fall as is all of creation.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

RyanL:

Good points, Todd!

If I may piggy-back a little…

Further info on the role of the Queen Mother:
My note - God established the Kingdom of Israel, and it was through His holy word that these texts were written. Why fill up so much of the Bible with “chaff” if the role was extranious? Well, perhaps it’s not extranious after all…
As Augustine put it: “The New Testament is in the Old Testament concealed, the Old Testament is in the New Testament revealed.”

God Bless,
RyanL

My Jewish friends tell me that the rabbis believe that there is no extraneous word in the bible. Every word is there for a purpose, and if it is repeated it has a further purpose.

An example is “all the days of your life” in regard to sacrifices. The days of your life would appear to suffice, but all the days means the sacrifices will extend into the Messianic times.

 

[Marquette]

Ryan L. -THANKS! I’m just turning Catholic in April and I’ve had a bit of a question about the Queen of Heaven myself. Your info was MOST informative.

Marquette

 

[Della]

I just wanted to add that although the Assumption of Mary is a dogma the Crowning of Mary Queen of Heaven and Earth has not been defined as a doctrine of the Church. This does not at all mean that we shouldn’t/can’t believe it or that the Magisterium would discourage us from believing it. It only means that, so far, no reason has been found to define it.

Most doctrines and dogmas concerning Mary have been defined in order to support a teaching regarding Christ, not solely or even primarily to honor her. So, unless a good reason can be found to say that Mary’s Coronation supports the Church’s teachings about Christ in some necessary way, this belief, though perfectly good and believed by the Church will not be defined.

The mysteries of the rosary aren’t meditated upon because they are doctrines or dogmas but because they allow us to relate to the life and mission of Jesus who came to save us from our sins and of Mary his Most Holy Mother. I hope that helps rather than confuses you.

 

[RyanL]

Marquette,
It is my humble privedge to be of service. May God bless you richly as you enter the Faith of the Apostles.

Della:

I just wanted to add that although the Assumption of Mary is a dogma the Crowning of Mary Queen of Heaven and Earth has not been defined as a doctrine of the Church. …Most doctrines and dogmas concerning Mary have been defined in order to support a teaching regarding Christ…

Quite right! If I may illustrate through more C&P from www.ewtn.com (hopefully without getting the thread closed for wandering off topic)…
**

**

The Assumption Of Mary And The Church

The second Marian principle is that we should understand Mary in light of the mystery of the Church. Vatican II’s Constitution on the Church, , tells us that Mary is a symbol or icon of the Church, of all Christians. She is not only the first Christian and most preeminent member of the Church, she is also a model of the Church, a paradigm for what God wills to accomplish in and through the Church. Consequently, by reflecting on the graces God gave the Blessed Virgin, we understand more about his gifts to us. The Assumption of Mary points to a profound gift to all believers—the resurrection of the body.

“But wait,” someone might object, “isn’t Christ our model, rather than Mary?” Yes, Christ is our model, but in a different way. Christ is a , God the Son, who worked through human nature to redeem us. He effected the perfection and elevation of by grace. Through Christ, we become children of God and are empowered to follow his example of humble submission to the Father. But Mary is a , fully redeemed by Christ, and one who followed Christ’s humble submission perfectly. She represents the perfection and elevation of the by grace. And the human person, as the reminds us, consists of body as well as soul, of matter and of spirit (nos. 362-368). A redeemed human person, then, would be redeemed in body as well as soul, as was the Blessed Virgin Mary.

In this way the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin reminds us of who and what we are as human beings. There is a kind of puritanism, to use the word in its pejorative sense, which suggests that only the soul is important; the body is at best a hindrance and at worst, evil. The Assumption of Mary reminds us that we are more than souls: whatever the weaknesses of our bodies after the Fall of humanity, the body, as such, remains good and is part of our ultimate destiny.

The link above has the full explanation, but this should serve to illustrate the Christocentric nature of Marian Dogmas. Unless the Kingship of Christ were to come into question (who knows what heresies might arise), I can’t see a need to dogmatically define the Queenship of Mary as a dogma (though I fully believe the Bible teaches this to be the case).

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[Eileen_T]

I’m still a bit sleepy after night shift. I woke briefly to play with my grandson and am going back to sleep.

I have seen Mary referred to as the Woman mentioned in Genesis after the Fall, as well as the Woman in Revelations. She was linked with how Jesus referred to her, “Woman, what is this to thee and to Me?”

Doesn’t Jesus call her “Woman” in different places in the NT?

Goodnight.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

Daniel Marsh:

Hi Gareth it is possible that Rev 12 could refer to both Israel and Mary. For example, Jewish interpretators understand Isaiah 53 as referring to the Messiah and / or the people of Israel. It could be that Mary was subject to the physical consequences of Adams fall as is all of creation.

It could also be, since Revelation is a 2 part book (the 2nd part starting on chapter 12, ironically) that it speaks of the New Israel (the Church) as well as the vessel which was used to bring the new Israel to Earth (Mary).

 

[Gareth]

Wow! thanks for all the great info, I’ve saved it off, that’s a lot to digest.

I especially like the points about the Queen Mothers
And how the assumption and crowning of Mary are a forshadow of what will one day happen to all Christians.

I also see how the symbols can represent more than one thing at a time.

Thanks for your time everyone

God Bless
Gareth

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

Gareth:

Wow! thanks for all the great info, I’ve saved it off, that’s a lot to digest.

I especially like the points about the Queen Mothers
And how the assumption and crowning of Mary are a forshadow of what will one day happen to all Christians.

I also see how the symbols can represent more than one thing at a time.

Thanks for your time everyone

God Bless
Gareth

Gareth, to understand the book of Revelation you might want to listen to this:

play.rbn.com/?url=ewtn/g2ewtn/g2demand/odaudio/lamb01.ra&proto=rtsp

and order a copy of…

The Lamb’s Supper: The Mass As Heaven on Earth by Dr. Scott Hahn.

God bless!

 

[Eileen_T]

Go here mindspring.com/%7Edarcyj/files/drhahn.html for a list of links to Dr Scott Hahn’s talks.

The text for The Lamb’s Supper is here star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m5/lmbsp.html