We Catholics do believe that Mary was crowned Queen of Heaven. I respect that you don't believe it, probably because it is an event not recorded in the Bible. But Martin Luther believed it. I believe he had it carved on his grave! He expected to meet his Queen in Heaven... We Catholics believe it is part of Sacred Tradition handed down from the Apostles, and from Jesus himself. Mary likely would have MUCH rather have died for humanity than see her son die, if it were only possible, but in her humility and wisdom she certainly knew that only God can do that. She knew her place, always. In icons, she is always pointing to Jesus.
The response to a request for documentation was: "Just google it. It's out there." We'll see below that there's a strong dose of embellishment going on in regard to Martin Luther's use of the phrase "Queen of Heaven" and there is significant error in regard to what's printed on hiss grave.
Queen of Heaven
It is necessary also to keep within bounds and not make too much of calling her “Queen of Heaven,” which is a true-enough name and yet does not make her a goddess who could grant gifts or render aid, as some suppose when they pray and flee to her rather than to God (LW 21:327-328) .
Original text: Es darff auch wol ein maß, das man nit zuweyt treybe den namen, das man sie ein konigyn der hymel nennet, wie wol es war ist, aber doch sie da durch keine abtgottin ist, das sie geben odder helffen muge, wie etliche meynen, die mehr zu yhr denn zu got ruffen und zuflucht haben. Sie gibt nichts, szondern allein got, wie folgt (WA 7:573-574).
In Luther's exposition of the Magnificat, the Mary described by Luther in 1521 and the Mary described by sixteenth century Rome have significant differences. In the later view, Mary is someone to pray to and flee to who grants gifts... what Luther would describe as, a goddess. According to Luther, by pouring more into the term Queen of Heaven "we can easily take away too much from God’s grace, which is a perilous thing to do and not well pleasing to her." When Luther here says, "Queen of Heaven" "is a true enough name," he does not mean the same thing Rome's defenders do. If there's any agreement here between the defenders of Rome and Luther, it's only surface level.
Here I must say a few words about the song which is called Salve Regina. It is a great blaspheme of God. For it says, "Hail you queen of mercy, our life, our sweetness and our hope." Is that not too much? Who could justify calling her our life, sweetness and mercy when she is satisfied to call herself, a "handmaiden of the LORD?" Now people sing that prayer in every corner of the world and also the bells ring out, and still today in nearly every church the Salve Regina is, unfortunately, retained and sung.
It is the same with the Regina Coeli, which is not much better, in which she is called the queen of heaven. Is that not doing Christ a disservice when you account to a creature what only belongs to and is proper to God? So forget these ungodly and unchristian words. I will gladly concede that Mary prays for me, but I deny that she must be my comfort and my life. Your prayer on my behalf is also just as precious to me and hers. Why? If you believe that Christ dwells just as much in you as He does her, your prayer can help me just as well as hers. [The Festival Sermons of Martin Luther, pp.160-161].
Original text #1:Item von der hailigen jungkfrawen Marie im Salve, was do wort seind die man ir zülegt 'biß gegrüßt ain künigin der barmherzigkait, unser leben, unser süssigkait und unser hoffnung'. Ist das nit züvil? wer wil das verantworten, das sy unser leben, barmherzigkait unnd süssigkait sein sol, so sy sich doch laßt genügen, das sy ain arms gefeß sey? Das gebet singt man durch die ganzen welt und leytet groß glocken darzü. Also ist es auch mit dem Regina celi, das ist auch nicht besser, do man sy ain künigin des himmels nennet. Ist das nit ain unere Christo gethon, das man ainer creatur züleget das allain gott gebürt?
Darumb laß man von den unverschampton worten. Gern will ich sy haben, das sy für mich bitte, aber das sy sol mein trost und leben seyn, das wil ich nicht, und dein gebet ist mir gleich als lieb als irs. Wie so? dann wenn du glaubest, das Christus gleich als wol in dir als in ir wonet, kanst du mir gleich als wol helffen als sy. Darumb halt man die eer der lieben hailigen, als wir ainander schuldig sein züeeren als gotes kind, aber dannocht das man sich hüt vor den zwen schäden, das man Christum nicht verdunkel, lasse den ja unser leben unnd trost sein und ere sy also, das du ye eher... (WA 10.3:322-323).
Original text #2: Secht nu was das fur wortt seind, die wir der heiligen iunfrawen Marie zu legen im salve regina. Wer wil daß verantwurten das sy unser leben, unser trost, unser süßykeitt sein sol, so sy sich doch last benügen, das sie ein armes gesesz sey? solich gebet singt mann durch die gantzen welt und leut gros glocken darzu. Der gleichen ist es mit dem Regina celi, welches nit beser ist, do man sy ein kungin des himels nent. Ist das nit ein on ehr Christo gethon, daß einer creatur wirt zu gelegt das allein got gebürt?
Darum last von solchen ongeschickten worten. Gern wil ich sie haben das sy für mich bit, Aber daß si mein trost und leben sey wil ich nit, unnd dein gebet ist mir gleich als lieb als das ir. Wie so? Wen du glaubst das Christus gleich als wol in dir als in ir wont, kanstu mir als wol helffen als sy. Drum halt du die er der lieben heilgen gleich der, mit welcher wir ann andern schuldig seind zu ehrenn. Einer sol den andern ehren als gottes kind. Hüten euch vor den zween schadenn: verdunckelt mir Christum nit, Las den unsern trost und leben sein, Ehr Mariam und die... (WA 10.3:321-322).
According to some of Rome's defenders, Luther's acceptance of the title "Queen of Heaven" became a lifelong deep belief provoking him to make sure to have it "carved on his grave" after died. I've covered this myth before. As far as I can tell, it may have been Rome's defender Peter Stravinskas who popularized it:
Nor was Luther an iconoclast, for he strictly forbade the fanatical destruction of images and demanded at least a crucifix and a representation of Our Lady for his own use. He quite clearly did not see the Old Testament prohibition against images as having any application, so long as the images were not used in an idolatrous manner. Most interesting of all, perhaps, is the realization that his burial chamber in the Wittenberg church, on whose door he had posted his ninety-five theses, was adorned with Peter Vischer’s 1521 sculpture of the Coronation of the Virgin, with the inscription Ad summum Regina thronum defertur in altum: Angelicis praelatia choris, cui festus et ipse Filius occurrens Matrem super aethera ponit.
This “archaeological” fact would seem to speak volumes about Luther’s final thoughts on the place of Mary in the life of a Christian.
In noting Luther’s absolute and unswerving adherence to the doctrines of Mary’s perpetual virginity and Immaculate Conception, Wright suggests the reason as Luther’s “holding more closely to the late medieval world of thought than Calvin” (Peter Stravinskas, Mary and the fundamentalist Challenge, pp. 73-74).
Luther Was Not Buried Beneath An Image of Our Lady.... Martin Luther did retain much of his Catholic Mariology after having left the Church. But there are also not a few myths about what Luther did and taught floating about in Catholic circles. If you haven't heard this one yet, you will. It has been written about and spoken about by quite a few Catholics, and I have personally heard some very well-known apologists state it as true as well. The myth claims there to be a relief of the Coronation of the Blessed Virgin Mary with an accompanying inscription by Peter Vischer the Younger over the tomb of Martin Luther in the Wittenberg "Schlosskirche" ("Palace Church") where he is buried. "See?" The argument goes. "Luther believed in Mary assumed into heaven and crowned as Queen of Heaven and Earth!" Unfortunately, it is actually a memorial plaque for Henning Gode, the last Catholic Prior of that church, who died in 1521. Same building, but not connected to Luther.
Conclusion
Yes, if one Google's the information it is "out there," both the errors and the actuall facts. For some of Rome's defenders, anything that remotely seems like their version of Mary becomes "Luther expected to meet his Queen in Heaven" and so should Protestants today. All their typical attacks against Luther cease and he becomes a staunch supporter of Mary; a leader that all contemporary Protestants should learn a great lesson in Mariology from.
Yes: Luther had a Mariology. It reflected his commitment to Christ and stood in antithesis to popular Roman Catholic belief in the sixteenth century. Roman Catholics during Luther's day actually were suspicious of his Mariology, particularly his explanation of the Magnificat. Even later Roman apologists, some quite hostile to Luther understood this. For instance, Hartmann Grisar commenting on Luther’s Magnificat states,
Yes, if one Google's the information it is "out there," both the errors and the actuall facts. For some of Rome's defenders, anything that remotely seems like their version of Mary becomes "Luther expected to meet his Queen in Heaven" and so should Protestants today. All their typical attacks against Luther cease and he becomes a staunch supporter of Mary; a leader that all contemporary Protestants should learn a great lesson in Mariology from.
Yes: Luther had a Mariology. It reflected his commitment to Christ and stood in antithesis to popular Roman Catholic belief in the sixteenth century. Roman Catholics during Luther's day actually were suspicious of his Mariology, particularly his explanation of the Magnificat. Even later Roman apologists, some quite hostile to Luther understood this. For instance, Hartmann Grisar commenting on Luther’s Magnificat states,
[Luther] certainly was in no mood to compose a book of piety on Mary. The result was that the book became to all intents and purposes a controversial tract, which cannot be quoted as a proof of his piety or serenity of mind during those struggles (Hartmann Grisar, Luther IV, p.502).
Revised April 2026
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment