There are lots of Catholic-inspired articles out there on the idea that Mary (the mother of Jesus Christ) is some sort of queen, even the “Queen of the Universe,” or the “Queen of Heaven.” But one would think that such a concept, if true, would have an abundance of solid evidence for it, since it is such an extraordinary claim and so heavily pushed by the Catholic Church.
So, where
does this idea of Mary being a queen come from?
One Catholic source for this idea can be found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which
calls Mary the “Queen over All Things” (CCC #966).
Also, Lumen
Gentium, a Dogmatic Constitution of the (Catholic) Church by Pope Paul VI,
says that Mary is the “Queen of the Universe,” and she was “taken up body and
soul into heavenly glory.” (Chapter VIII, paragraph 59)
Another
source is a papal encyclical written by Pope Pius XII called Ad Caeli Reginam (Latin for “to the
queen of heavens”). In this encyclical,
the pope not only refers to her as a queen, but he also speaks of her as the “Queen
of the human race” (par. 17), “Queen of creation” (par. 50), and “Queen and
Mother of Christendom” (par. 52).
According
to paragraph 6 in this document, Pius XII said:
“In this
matter We do not wish to propose a new truth to be believed by Christians,
since the title and the arguments on which Mary's queenly dignity is based have
already been clearly set forth, and are to be found in ancient documents of the
Church and in the books of the sacred liturgy.”
Furthermore, another
document to consider by Pope Pius XII is Munificentissimus Deus. This
Apostolic Constitution is about the dogma of the bodily Assumption of Mary,
supposedly like Jesus’ assumption into Heaven (Mark 16:19). It states that Mary is “the Queen entering triumphantly into the royal halls of
heaven and sitting at the right hand of the divine Redeemer” and she is “that heavenly
Queen and heavenly Spouse who has been lifted up to the courts of heaven with
the divine Bridegroom” (par. 26).
But Is It Biblical?
Ok, first, I want
to make a few comments about statements in these sources:
When one
calls Mary “Queen over All Things,” what exactly does such a label entitle her
to? Does she now own the earth and everything in it?
Or maybe she owns the whole universe and all existing matter? I could see someone saying this about Jesus, since He is the Creator and
carries the title Kings of kings and Lord of lords (1 Timothy 6:15)… but not
anyone else.
The same
idea goes for the title “Queen of the Universe” and “Queen of Heaven.”
Concerning
Pius XII’s statement about the “truth” about Mary found in the ancient
documents of the Church and the sacred liturgy:
I’m not exactly sure what all the “books of the sacred liturgy” includes, nor to
which of the “ancient documents” he’s referring, but one thing is sure – if
their claims don’t line up with Scripture, they are merely claims, that’s all. It
doesn’t matter what the church fathers thought about Mary if they contradict
the principles of the Bible.
There are a few biblical references in the
above encyclical (Ad Caeli Reginam),
but absolutely none of these Scriptures refer to Mary being a queen. Amazing!
It seems that an official document about the “queenship” of Mary,
written by a pope, would have in it some kind of scriptural backing. But no.
Ok, so let’s look
now to some of the “biblical evidence” given by Catholics for Mary being a
queen.
Bathsheba
Many
Catholics will point to 1 Kings Chapter 2 and Bathsheba as
evidence of Mary’s queenship:
1 Kings
2:19-20
19) So Bathsheba
went to King Solomon to speak to him for Adonijah. The king stood up to greet
her, bowed to her, and sat down on his throne. Then the king had a throne
brought for his mother, who sat down at his right hand.
20) “I have just one
small request of you,” she said. “Do not deny me.” “Make your request, my mother,” the king
replied, “for I will not deny you.”
According
to one article, Catholics will say that Bathsheba is the one who most clearly
illustrates the queen mother’s “royal prerogatives.”
This
author also says, concerning the Scripture passage above:
“Nowhere
else in Scripture does the King honor someone as much as Solomon honors the
queen mother in this scene.”
See here:
Is Mary’s Queenship Biblical? |
Edward Sri
These two
quotes seem to be the consensus amongst Catholics everywhere. So, with these two quotes in mind, let’s dig farther.
It seems
that Catholics tie in the queen’s intercession in the Old Testament directly
with a guarantee of her being granted
a request.
Furthermore,
Catholics see Solomon as an Old Testament type of Jesus and Bathsheba as a type
of Mary (who will never be refused a request from Jesus).
And since
Solomon is about to grant Bathsheba’s petition in the passage above, we can be
assured that Jesus will grant any petition of Mary’s… right? Not so fast.
There are many
Catholic articles about Mary’s queenship, but the great majority of Catholics
who mention this passage in 1 Kings 2 don’t go all the way
down to the part where the request is ACTUALLY DENIED. They will take you as far as Solomon saying,
“I will not deny you,” and no further, and they’ll say, “See! Just as King Solomon will grant the requests
of Bathsheba, King Jesus will grant the requests of Queen Mary.”
But here is
the rest of the passage:
1 Kings 2:21-25:
21-So Bathsheba
said, “Let Abishag the Shunammite be given to your brother Adonijah as his
wife.”
22-King Solomon
answered his mother, “Why do you request Abishag the Shunammite for Adonijah?
Since he is my older brother, you might as well request the kingdom for him and
for Abiathar the priest and for Joab son of Zeruiah!”
23-Then King Solomon
swore by the LORD: “May God punish me, and ever so severely, if Adonijah has
not made this request at the expense of his life.
24-And now, as
surely as the LORD lives—the One who established me, who set me on the throne
of my father David, and who founded for me a dynasty as He promised—surely
Adonijah shall be put to death today!”
25-So King Solomon
sent the order to Benaiah son of Jehoiada, who struck down Adonijah, and he
died.
From the
Catholic perspective, it should seem strange that the only request that we can
find in Scripture from the queen mother toward King Solomon is one that was denied!
And Catholics want to use this
passage as a model of Mary’s queenship?
Isn’t she supposed to be granted all her requests?
It seems
that Queen Bathsheba’s “royal prerogatives” didn’t include such a guarantee after
all!
Those few Catholic
writers who do actually point out the denial of the king will say, “But this
does not negate her position as queen!”
But this is just
begging the question. The whole reason
for Catholics pointing out that Bathsheba would supposedly gain the king’s
favor in the first place was an attempt to prove
Mary’s queenship! So, they are assuming her queenship before proving
it. This logic backfires on them, since
this in no way proves that MARY is a queen!
Typology
Question:
So, if Catholics would ask Mary for something they shouldn’t, or for the wrong
reason, i.e., asking amiss (James 4:3), is Jesus obligated to grant her request just
because she is His mother? The obvious
answer is no. So why is Mary needed in
this equation at all? She is not.
There is no biblical evidence whatsoever that she is a queen, or that
she intercedes for us.
But even if
Solomon would have granted Bathsheba’s petition, this is still a strained
attempt at typology. We must certainly give
honor to whom honor is due (Romans 13:7), but Catholics take
great liberties with typology, especially when it comes to Mary. The Bible depicts Mary simply as a humble and
faithful peasant girl who had the great honor of giving birth to the Jewish
Messiah. But once more, Scripture never
implies that she would be a queen.
But the
bottom line is that a king is not obligated
to grant anyone’s specific request. But the king must consider, is it God’s will? And it is obvious that in the case of
Bathsheba’s request, it was not.
Perhaps
Catholics will say that Mary would never ask for something apart from God’s
will… but again, that is just begging the question. It’s an assertion that needs to be proven.
Conclusion
Ok, so
what’s the big deal? What if Mary would be a queen? What does it hurt?
My answer is
that I wouldn’t have an issue with it if it were a true biblical concept. But it isn’t.
And if it isn’t, Catholics are making claims that put her in a fake
category.
And the big deal is this: If she isn’t all they say she is, there is the
danger of idolatry, and idolatry has
always been a big deal in God’s eyes! If
Catholics are praying to Mary and trusting in her to do spiritual things
for them that only God can do, it is idolatry!
Just as the rebellious, devil-inspired Israelites
in the Old Testament lusted after the Asherim (female deities) and served them,
there seems to be in Catholicism a similar desperate, devil-inspired need for a
female deity. Could this be why they are
so anxious to make her a queen?
Catholics may say, “But we don’t think that
Mary is a deity! The Catholic Church
does not teach that.”
Well, you can SAY that she’s not a deity, but
it’s your actions that count. Praying to someone and giving them that much
“devotion” and attention puts that someone on a level with God.
Concerning idols, I don’t know of anyone who
believes that their money is actually a deity, nor do I know anyone who prays
to their money, but there certainly are those for whom money is their god (Matthew
6:24). Even though they don’t consider their money as a deity, their
devotion and attention given to riches reveal that they are idolaters at heart.
There are also other Catholic reasons for
seeing Mary as a queen, but let me just mention one more. In Revelation 12, we see a “woman”
clothed with the sun and Catholics insist that this is Mary. But a closer look will reveal that this is a
picture of Israel, not Mary. See here:
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2015/09/is-mary-woman-clothed-with-sun.html
