Showing posts with label Mary--Mother of God. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 8, 2014

Refuting the Plagiarized Lies of Mr. Anon Nymous PART 3

(ON IMMACULATE CONCEPTION OF MARY)

La Purísima Inmaculada Concepción
by Bartolomé Esteban Murillo, 1678, now in Museo del Prado, Spain.
courtesy:wikipedia

Mr. Anon nymous said:

[Anon Nymous March 25, 2014 at 11:37 PM

Catholic False Doctrine 3

The Roman Catholic Church claim that Mary was sinless.

"The church has become ever more aware that Mary "full of grace" through God was redeemed from the moment of her conception. This is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses ..... Mary was.... from the first moment of her conception ...... preserved immune from all stain of original sin." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 491)

Not only does the Bible declare that ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23), but Mary herself declared that she needed a Saviour.
Luke 1:46-47 .....'And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God MY Saviour.']

REPLY: It has been proven in the part 1 of this series that Mr. Anon Nymous is guilty of Plagiarism which is a clear violation of what God has commanded to us, “Thou shalt not steal”. Aside from the fact that he committed robbery and theft through plagiarizing an article from one website, it is also proven beyond reasonable doubt that Mr. anon nymous committed a grievous crime of perjury in which he badly falsified our Catholic documents to please himself in attacking our Holy Church. He testified as a false witness trying to deceive others by quoting Bible verses and Catholic dogmas even it is proven that HIS STATEMENTS ARE ALL PLAGIARIZED LIES.

Mr. Anon Nymous said:

"The church has become ever more aware that Mary "full of grace" through God was redeemed from the moment of her conception. This is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses ..... Mary was.... from the first moment of her conception ...... preserved immune from all stain of original sin." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 491)

Not only does the Bible declare that ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23), but Mary herself declared that she needed a Saviour.

Well, it is clear in his plagiarized statement that Mr. Anon Nymous tried to attack the Catholic Marian doctrine of Immaculate Conception but he forgot that the CCC 491 declared that Mary being sinless and Immaculately conceived WAS REDEEMED BY GOD, SO THE CATHOLIC CATECHISM AFFIRMS THAT MARY HERSELF NEEDED A SAVIOR!!! IT NEVER CONTRADICTS THE BIBLE AT ALL!!

CCC 491:Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, "full of grace" THROUGH GOD,WAS REDEEMED FROM THE MOMENT OF HER CONCEPTION. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854:
The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.

The official statement of the Catholic Church declares that Mary herself needed God in order to be saved but the salvation of Mary is different from ours because she is highly-favored by God, she is full of grace (kecharitomene) and she received her salvation through God right at the moment she was conceived immaculately. Therefore, it is reasonable to say that the Catechism itself does not contradict the statement of Mr. Anon nymous when he said, “she needed a Savior.” Ergo, Mr. Anon Nymous was caught lying again. IT IS GOD THAT MADE HER IMMACULATE NOT MARY HERSELF.

Now is it possible?

Of course yes, because Angel Gabriel himself said:

Luke 1:27 –NLT

For NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE with God.

The declaration of Catholic doctrine of Immaculate Conception of Mary does not lower down the power of God but instead it brings glory to the power of God.

God made Mary Immaculate because God promised that He will put ENMITY between the Woman and Satan in the protoevangelium at Genesis 3:15;

Genesis 3:15 [emphasis added]

And I WILL PUT ENMITY BETWEEN THEE AND THE WOMAN, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. (KJV)

Jesus Christ Himself, a True God called Mary “woman” not to bring disgrace to her BUT TO AFFIRM THE FACT THAT MARY IS THE WOMAN WHO WOULD BECOME THE ENMITY OF SATAN.

JOHN 19:26-KJV
When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!

You should notice that in Genesis 3:15; the offspring of Woman (seed) shall crush the head of Satan. This was done by Jesus Christ which is the Son of Mary, but who is this “Woman”? Guess who.

God putted enmity between “Woman” and Satan, while in New testament writings, Mary was called Woman. It is not a coincidence but rather a FULFILLMENT OF GOD’S PLAN ABOUT MARY BEING IMMACULATE, PURE AND SINLESS. THE SALVATION OF MARY IS NOT THE SAME TO US. GOD REDEEMED MARY THROUGH PREVENTIVE REDEMPTION.

Jeremiah 1:5- ESV [emphasis added]

“Before I you in the womb I knew you,
and before you were born I CONSECRATED YOU;

Psalms 97:10-NKJV

You who love the LORD, hate evil! He preserves the souls of His saints;
He delivers them out of the hand of the wicked –

We all know that because of Satan, Adam and Eve had sinned and the Bible tells that sin makes us enemies of God (James 4:4 & 1 John 3:8 ). Now if Mary is a sinner, then she must not be the one who will become enmity of Satan. The very sad truth for heretics like Mr. Anon nymous is the fact that Mary was made faultless in order to become worthy as our “New Ark of Covenant” and “New Eve” who would bear the Son of God (theotokos), which is indeed our Lord Jesus Christ. (this will be explained in later part of the series)

In angelic salutation at the first chapter of Luke where an angel of God brought good news to Mary; Angel Gabriel said; (it should be noted that some of NT writings were written in Greek)

Luke 1:28 - NA – καὶ εἰσελθὼν πρὸς αὐτὴν εἶπεν, χαῖρε, κεχαριτωμένη, ὁ κύριος μετὰ σοῦ

greek NT

The word used here is “κεχαριτωμένη” (KECHARITOMENE) which is the perfect participle form of the Greek word “charitoo” which means “to honor with blessings”. It denotes the fact that Mary has always been and forever remains “full of grace”. Since it is in perfect participle form, then Mary is made “full of grace” or sinless right at the beginning of her life where she was conceived. Ergo, Mary is made Immaculate by God proven by the fact that she is CALLED “KECHARITOMENE”.

Kecharitomene, the perfect passive participle, shows a completeness with a with permanent result. Kecharitomene denotes continuance of a completed action (H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968 ) 108-109, sec 1852:b) (Blass and DeBrunner p.175.)

Mr. Anon nymous also said:

Not only does the Bible declare that ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23)

Romans 3:23 does not denote to “all” without exemption. In Greek, the word used is “pantes” πάντες. It was derived from Greek root word “pas” which means “vast majority” not in the strict sense “all”.

In Thayer’s definition:

1.      individually
1.      each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things, everything
2.      collectively
1.      SOME OF ALL TYPES
... "the whole world has gone after him" Did all the world go after Christ? "then went all Judea, and were baptized of him in Jordan."Was all Judea, or all Jerusalem, baptized in Jordan? "Ye are of God,little children", and the whole world lieth in the wicked one". Does the whole world there mean everybody? The words "world" and "all" are used in some seven or eight senses in Scripture, and it is very rarely the "all" means all persons, taken individually. The words are generally used to signify that Christ has redeemed some of all sorts-- some Jews, some Gentiles, some rich, some poor, and has notrestricted His redemption to either Jew or Gentile ...

Source: http://www.studylight.org/desk/interlinear.cgi?search_form_type=interlinear&q1=romans+3%3A23&ot=bhs&nt=na&s=0&t3=str_nas&ns=0

If we accept his proposition that all have sinned, then that would include Jesus Christ because being human is part of the dual nature of Christ being also a True God. It would be blasphemous at this part since we all know that aside from Mary, Christ is also sinless (Heb. 4:15)

Aside from Romans 3:23; Mark 14:64 also used the word “pantes”:

Mark 14:64- NRSVCE

You have heard his blasphemy! What is your decision?” All of them condemned him as deserving death.

If we accept that “all” condemned Christ to death then Saint Peter also condemned Christ to death because Saint Peter was there during that time:

Mark 14:54-NRSVCE

Peter had followed him at a distance, right into the courtyard of the high priest; and he was sitting with the guards, warming himself at the fire.

Did Peter condemn Christ to death?? Of Course not, Saint Peter is a very loyal servant. Though he denied Christ three times, he cannot condemn Christ to death. The majority condemned Him but not all of them.

In Luke 1:5-6 (NLT)(emphasis added);
When Herod was king of Judea, there was a Jewish priest named Zechariah. He was a member of the priestly order of Abijah, and his wife, Elizabeth, was also from the priestly line of Aaron. ZECHARIAH AND ELIZABETH WERE RIGHTEOUS IN GOD’S EYES, CAREFUL TO OBEY ALL OF THE LORD’S COMMANDMENTS AND REGULATIONS

VERSUS

ROMANS 3:23 AND ROMANS 3:10

as it is written:“None is righteous, no, not one; (Rom.3:10)

If Zechariah and Elizabeth obeyed all Lord’s commandments, then they are worthy to be called righteous before the eyes of God but if we are going to accept the word “all” in strict sense of Romans 3:23 and “no one is righteous” in Romans 3:10, Is it false to call Zechariah and Elizabeth righteous in God’s eyes? Saint Luke versus Saint Paul?

The fact that Zechariah and Elizabeth were recognized as righteous ones and that Mother Mary is called KECHARITOMENE supports the fact that the “all” in Romans 3:23 has exceptions. Like what Thayer’s definition stated, it must also be accepted in “collective” sense permitting some exceptions and admitting the fact that some also became worthy and righteous in the eyes of God. THEREFORE, THE WORD “ALL” IN ROMANS 3:23 IS NOT “ABSOLUTE”.

Monday, August 19, 2013

Veneration of Mary: Is it biblical?

Straight forward answer of Catholics
to all bashers of Marian Veneration

For the third time, we will try to scrutinize the Bible so as to confirm its catholicity in terms of its teachings.

Another question has been posted regarding the biblical foundation of Marian veneration:

If the Bible is a Catholic book...
Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28)

MY REPLY: Before proceeding with the supposed issue, I want to stress that CATHOLICS do not WORSHIP Mary as if we consider her as a goddess (that would be blasphemous). ADORATION (Latria) is for God, the most Holy Trinity, alone while VENERATION (Dulia) is for the heroes of faith (e.g. saints) most specially Mary (Hyperdulia), the first Christian.

The Assumption of the Blessed Mother

"All generations will call me blessed": "The Church's devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship." The Church rightly honors "the Blessed Virgin with special devotion. From the most ancient times the Blessed Virgin has been honored with the title of 'Mother of God,' to whose protection the faithful fly in all their dangers and needs. . . . This very special devotion . . . differs essentially from the adoration which is given to the incarnate Word and equally to the Father and the Holy Spirit, and greatly fosters this adoration." The liturgical feasts dedicated to the Mother of God and Marian prayer, such as the rosary, an "epitome of the whole Gospel," express this devotion to the Virgin Mary.

CCC # 971

Now, anti-Catholics often use Luke 11:27-28 as a proof text to demolish Catholic veneration of Mary...

Luke 11:27-28 NRSVCE

While he was saying this, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him, “Blessed is the womb that bore you and the breasts that nursed you!” But he said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it!”

They insist that Jesus negated the "blessedness" of "the womb that bore him and the breasts that nursed him" which points to none other than Mary, her mother. However, they overlooked the context of Jesus' reply to the woman in the crowd and so they missed his point.

Dave Armstrong, a renowned american Catholic apologist, in response explained in his blog (Biblical Evidence for Catholicism) that the woman was actually complimenting Jesus, not Mary. The word "rather" (menounge; Strong's word #3304) apparently can mean a contrast but not necessarily negate what came before it. The second premise do not undermine the first, but merely expanded upon it, making the category even broader.

In fact, New Bible Commentary, a reputable Protestant reference, states:

The woman's rather sentimental benediction on Jesus' mother meant, 'If only I had such a son as this.' Jesus' reply is that something else matters far more, to hear the message He proclaimed and to obey it (cf. 6:46-49).

Luke 11:27-28, New Bible Commentary, ed. D. Guthrie, rev. 1970, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, p. 906

Now, let's examine if Mary did really "hear the word of God and obey it"...

*Mary fulfilled all prophecies regarding her being the mother of the coming Messiah...

...as the New Eve / New Woman

Genesis 3:15 NRSVCE
I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will strike your head, and you will strike his heel.”

Take note that Jesus, the new Adam (cf. Rom. 5:14; 1 Cor. 15:22, 45), never called her "mother, mama, mom, etc" but only "WOMAN" (cf. Jn 2:4, 19:26-27; Gal. 4:4; Rev. 12:1ff) not to disrespect her but to emphasize the fulfilment of the prophesied woman of Genesis on her.

...as the Ark of the New Covenant

2 Samuel 6:1ff NASB

Now David again gathered all the chosen men of Israel, thirty thousand. And David arose and went with all the people who were with him to Baale-judah, to bring up from there the ark of God which is called by the Name, the very name of the Lord of hosts who is enthroned above the cherubim. They placed the ark of God on a new cart that they might bring it from the house of Abinadab which was on the hill; and Uzzah and Ahio, the sons of Abinadab, were leading the new cart. So they brought it with the ark of God from the house of Abinadab, which was on the hill; and Ahio was walking ahead of the ark. Meanwhile, David and all the house of Israel were celebrating before the Lord with all kinds of instruments made of fir wood, and with lyres, harps, tambourines, castanets and cymbals.

But when they came to the threshing floor of Nacon, Uzzah reached out toward the ark of God and took hold of it, for the oxen nearly upset it. And the anger of the Lord burned against Uzzah, andGod struck him down there for his irreverence; and he died there by the ark of God. David became angry because of the Lord’s outburst against Uzzah, and that place is called Perez-uzzah to this day. So David was afraid of the Lord that day; and he said, “How can the ark of the Lord come to me?” And David was unwilling to move the ark of the Lord into the city of David with him; but David took it aside to the house of Obed-edom the Gittite. Thus the ark of the Lord remained in the house of Obed-edom the Gittite three months, and the Lord blessed Obed-edom and all his household.

Interestingly, these passages are parallel to Luke 1:39ff showing Mary's visitation to Elizabeth. Striking parallelism is exhibited to the greetings of Mary's cousin which is almost verbatim to that of David. The Church also argues that Mary indeed personified the ARK OF THE COVENANT for she literally bore in her womb the Living Bread (Manna), the Highest Priest and the incarnate Word of God.

...as the Royal Queen of the New Davidic Kingdom / New Bathsheba

1 Kings 1:16-17, 29-30

…bowed in homage to the king, who said to her, "What do you wish?" She answered him:"My lord, you swore to me your handmaid by the Lord, your God, that my son Solomon should reign after you and sit upon your throne."…The king swore, "As the Lord lives, who has delivered me from all distress, this very day I will fulfill the oath I swore to you by the Lord, the God of Israel, that your son Solomon should reign after me and should sit upon my throne in my place."

In Old Testament times, the Queen of Israel was not the King's wife (because the king had many wives – a harem), but rather his mother: So Mary, the mother of Jesus who is the KING of the New and Everlasting Davidic Kingdom (cf. Lk. 1:32), deserves to be called as the legitimate Royal Queen.

...as the virgin daughter of Zion

Zechariah 2:10 NRSVCE

Sing and rejoice, O daughter Zion! For lo, I will come and dwell in your midst, says the Lord.

Psalm 45:10-11 NRSVCE

Hear, O daughter, consider and incline your ear; forget your people and your father’s house, Since he is your lord, bow to him;

Isaiah 7:14 NASB

Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.

These passages are all confirmed to Mary, being the prophesied Virgin, by Saints Matthew and Luke, the evangelists in the prologue of their Gospels (cf. Mt. 1:22-23; Lk. 1:27-34).

*Mary takes heed to the message of God through Angel Gabriel

Luke 1:28-38 NRSVCE

And he came to her and said, “Greetings, favored one! The Lord is with you.” But she was much perplexed by his words and pondered what sort of greeting this might be. The angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And now, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you will name him Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his ancestor David. He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.” Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I am a virgin?” The angel said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called Son of God. And now, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son; and this is the sixth month for her who was said to be barren. For nothing will be impossible with God.” Then Mary said, “Here am I, the servant of the Lord; let it be with me according to your word.” Then the angel departed from her.

*Mary sings her Magnificat as an exultation to God

Luke 1:46-55 NRSVCE

And Mary said, “My soul magnifies the Lord, for he has looked with favor on the lowliness of his servant. Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed; for the Mighty One has done great things for me, and holy is his name. His mercy is for those who fear him from generation to generation. He has shown strength with his arm; he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts. He has brought down the powerful from their thrones, and lifted up the lowly; he has filled the hungry with good things, and sent the rich away empty. He has helped his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy, according to the promise he made to our ancestors, to Abraham and to his descendants forever.”

*Mary assists the early Church through her prayers

Acts 1:14 NRSVCE

All these were constantly devoting themselves to prayer, together with certain women, including Mary the mother of Jesus, as well as his brothers.

On that note, Jesus actually affirmed that His own mother is deserving of the highest veneration, though not only because she was His natural mother, but also because she was faithful to His word to an eminent degree.

Jesus knew the law very well and he never violated it including the commandment to honor parents (Honor thy father and mother...; cf. Ex. 20:12). If the Lord himself gave due veneration to Mary, who are we to lambast and disregard her--the Mother of the Lord?

Finally, even Protestant Fathers affirmed the blessedness of Mary:

…she is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin… God's grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil… God is with her, meaning that all she did or left undone is divine and the action of God in her. Moreover, God guarded and protected her from all that might be hurtful to her.

Martin Luther, founder of Lutheran Church

Luther's Works, American edition, vol. 43, p. 40 , ed. H. Lehmann, Fortress, 1968

To this day we cannot enjoy the blessing brought to us in Christ without thinking at the same time of that which God gave as adornment and honour to Mary, in willing her to be the mother of his only-begotten Son.

John Calvin, founder of Presbyterian Church

John Calvin, A Harmony of Matthew, Mark and Luke, St. Andrew's Press, Edinburgh, 1972, p.32

I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin…I esteem immensely the Mother of God, the ever chaste, immaculate Virgin Mary …Christ… was born of a most undefiled Virgin.

Ulrich Zwingli, contemporary of Luther and Swiss protestant theologian

Stakemeier, E. in De Mariologia et Oecumenismo, Balic, K., ed., Rome,1962, p. 456

CONCLUSION: The Bible affirms VENERATION not ADORATION to MARY, ergo, the Bible is indeed a Catholic book! :)

Sunday, October 7, 2012

Feast of Our Lady of Holy Rosary

Beloved brethren, let us answer the call of Blessed Mary and pray the Rosary so that through her unending intercession and guidance as our spiritual Mother, the elusive genuine UNITY among all Christian faithfuls will be attained.

Viva la Virgen del Rosario!!!

~catholic_warrior22 :)

===================================================================

Hail Holy Queen Enthroned Above

===================================================================
THE HISTORY of OUR LADY OF ROSARY

October is the Month of the Holy Rosary, and one of the reasons that Pope Leo XIII designated it so is the Feast of Our Lady of the Rosary, which falls on October 7. Like many Marian feasts, the Feast of Our Lady of the Rosary celebrates the protection of Christians through the intercession of the Mother of God; and, like many feasts toward the end of the liturgical year, it commemorates a struggle with the forces of Islam.

In this case, the Feast of Our Lady of the Rosary celebrates the victory of Christian naval forces at the Battle of Lepanto on October 7, 1571. At a time when Christian Europe was being torn apart by internal strife and the Reformation, Don John of Austria destroyed the Turkish fleet in the Gulf of Lepanto. His victory was attributed to the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, to whom rosaries were offered and processions were made in Rome on the day of the battle.

The feast was instituted by Pope St. Pius V shortly after the victory, and Pope Clement XI extended it to the entire Church in celebration of another victory over the Turkish Muslims in 1716.

Source: http://catholicism.about.com/b/2011/10/07/our-lady-of-the-rosary.htm

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

THE QUEEN OF HEAVEN by Bro. Marwil N. Llasos

Mary the Queen

THE QUEEN OF HEAVEN

Modern Protestants object to calling Mary as “Queen of Heaven” because according to them, the title is pagan and is hateful to God. Before I respond to this to the issue, I just wish to remark that Martin Luther, the originator of Protestantism, Martin Luther admitted that the title “Queen of Heaven” is “a true enough name and yet does not make her a goddess.”[1] In fact, the instigator of the Reformation went as far as calling Mary “more than an empress or a queen.”[2]

Martin Luther: "Queen of Heaven is true enough name and yet does not make [Mary] a goddess"

Protestants point to Jeremiah 7: 18[3] and 44: 17[4] in condemning Catholics for calling Mary the “Queen of Heaven.” They say that "Queen of Heaven" is a pagan title that is offensive to God. However, the title "Queen of Heaven" in Jeremiah 7: 18 and 44: 17 actually refers to the goddess Ishtar or Astarte, a near-Eastern goddess of fertility.

Ishtar: This pagan goddess has nothing to do with Mary

Ishtar was a Near Eastern goddess worshiped for thousands of years by so many different peoples throughout Mesopotamia. Judith Ochshorn writes:“Ishtar's name is etymologically identical with that of the West Semitic goddess Astarte, the South Arabian god 'Athar, or Astar, who in Ethiopia was the god of heaven and who appears in Ugaritic or Canaanite myths as both the female Athtart and the male 'Athar 'Ariz. Perhaps her most significant designation is the Semitic version of Inanna, "queen of heaven," the multifaceted and most enduring of all the powerful Sumerian goddesses. In addition, the association of Ishtar with male as well as female deities reveals an important ingredient of Mesopotamian conceptions of the divine that spilled into cultic practices.”[5]

Astarte: This pagan goddess has no similarity at all with the Virgin Mary

Obviously, none of these goddesses has anything to do with Mary, the Mother of the Lord. A fourth-century heretical cult in Arabia, the Collyridians tried to do what the children did in Jeremiah 7:18; 44:17-18, 25 by offering Mary a sacrifice of cakes, thereby worshiping her. The Catholic Church vehemently condemned this heresy and idolatry (Mariolatry, to be precise). In his Panarion, St. Epiphanius, Bishop of Salamis, writes –

Inanna: An attempt to link this pagan goddess to the Blessed Virgin Mary is simply inane

“Certain women there in Arabia have introduced this absurd teaching from Thracia: how they offer up a sacrifice of bread rolls in the name of the ever-Virgin Mary, and all partake of this bread…[6] It is not right to honor the saints beyond their due …[7] Now the body of Mary was indeed holy, but it was not God; the Virgin was indeed a virgin and revered, but she was not given to us for worship, but she herself worshipped him who was born in the flesh from her … Honor Mary, but let the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit be worshipped, but let no one worship Mary … even though Mary is the most beautiful and holy and venerable, yet she is not to be worshiped.[8]

St. Epiphanius of Salamis condemned the heresy and idolatry of the Collyridians

Early Christian literature, such as the above, disproves that Catholics worship Mary. In our theology and practice, we are one with early Church Father St. Epiphanius who wrote: “According to her nature, Mary remains human and feminine. Hence, like other saints, she is unsuited for adoration, though as an elect vessel, she is glorified in a higher degree than others. In like manner, neither Elijah … nor John the Baptist … nor Thecla may be adored.”[9]

Our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ is the true King of kings and Lord of lords

So what if Catholics call Mary with the title “Queen of Heaven”? The fact that a title is improperly and erroneously applied to a pagan deity does not mean that it cannot be properly and validly applied to someone else.

Let’s take, for example, the title “King of Kings.” It was a pagan title applied to Artaxerxes in Ezra 7:12. However, the same title is applied to Our Lord Jesus Christ in 1 Timothy 6:15, Revelation 17:14 and 19:16. The same title of “King of Kings” was used for Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 2:37. But of course we know that Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the true King of Kings and Lord of Lord (Rev. 19:16).

Mary is queen because her Son is King

Another example would be the title “Morning Star.” The title was used for Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12. The angels of God are also referred to as “morning stars” in Job 38:7. But in Revelation 22:16, Jesus is called the “bright morning star.” Clearly, a title wrongly applied in one case can be used correctly and validly in the proper case.

For Catholics, Mary is Queen of Heaven not because she is a goddess like Ishtar or Astarte. To insist on a nexus between the pagan title and Mary is untenable. Formidable Protestant theologian Karl Barth, himself a critic of Catholic Mariology, considered as “ill founded” the notion that Mariology developed from pagan sources. He said: “It is not to be recommended that we should base our repudiation on the assertion that there has taken place here an irruption from the heathen sphere, an adoption of the idea, current in many non-Christian religions, of a more or less central and original female or mother deity. In dogmatics, you can establish everything and nothing from parallels from the history of religions.”[10]

"Come: thou shalt be crowned" (Song 4:8, DRV)

Another Protestant theologian, John de Satgé, supported Karl Barth, stating that “[i]t is not necessary to accept … the evil conjunction of Christian piety with the primeval mother-goddess.”[11] Evangelical scholar Prof. Tim Perry likewise rejects as “genetic fallacy” (drawing a conclusion about the truth of a concept based on its origins) the argument that the Great Mother traditions of the ancient Near East are incompatible with Christian teaching.[12]

"The Queen stands at your right hand" (Ps. 45:9): The coronation of the Queen Mother

In Catholic Mariology, we do refer to Mary as Queen of Heaven because her Son is King whose kingdom is not of this world (Jn. 18:36). Mary’s Son now reigns in heaven as King and it is said of Him, “at Your right hand stands the queen in gold from Ophir” (Ps. 45:9, NKJV). The queen is none other than the Queen Mother of the Davidic King (cf. 1 Kings 2:19).[13] Since the ultimate King on the Davidic throne is Christ the King, the Queen Mother of His everlasting Kingdom is therefore Mary the Queen. Mary is seen in heaven as the “woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head is a crown of twelve stars”(Rev. 12:1). While the woman in Revelation 12 has polyvalent meaning,[14]nevertheless, Evangelical theologian and scholar Tim Perry sees a Marian reference there: “the case can be made for a fourth secondary referent: Mary.”[15]Thus, the Evangelical professor goes on to state that “[i]n Revelation, at least in its canonical context, she retains her corporate referent and is exalted as the Queen of Heaven.”[16]

Mary for Evangelicals by Prof. Tim Perry

[1] Jaroslav Pelikan, ed., Luther’s Works (St. Louis: Concordia) 24:327, cited in Fr. Mateo,Refuting the Attack on Mary (San Diego, CA: Catholic Answers, 1999) p. 67.

[2] Jaroslav Pelikan, ed., Luther’s Works (St. Louis: Concordia) 36:208; 45:107, cited in Fr. Mateo, Refuting the Attack on Mary (San Diego, CA: Catholic Answers, 1999) p. 110.

Ishtar: No point of comparison with the Blessed Virgin Mary

[3] “The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the
women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and
to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger” (Jer. 7:18).

[4] “But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our
own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out
drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings,
and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for
then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil (Jer.
44: 17).

These pagan god and goddess have absolutely nothing to do with Jesus and Mary

[5] Judith Ochshorn, “Ishtar and Her Cult,” The Book of the Goddess Past and Present, Carl Olson, ed. (New York: Crossroad Publishing Co., 1994) 16-28.

[6] Panarion 78:13.

[7] Ibid., 78:23.

[8] Ibid., 79:1, 4.

[9] Ibid., 79:5.

[10] Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1936-1960), p. 1:143, cited in Fr. Mateo, Refuting the Attack on Mary (San Diego: Catholic Answers, 1999) p. 69.

[11] John de Satgé, Down to Earth: The New Protestant Vision of the Virgin Mary(Consortium, 1976) p. 80, cited in Fr. Mateo, Refuting the Attack on Mary (San Diego: Catholic Answers, 1999) p. 69.