Mary - Christian Prototype

[~Anastasia~]

No, Jesus is the Christian prototype. We are to be like Christ not like Mary

What is usually meant by that in the historic sense is that "Christian" means "little Christ" or "like Christ.

Christ Himself wasn't a "little Christ" or "like Christ". Mary was the first example, living beside Him and being devoted to Him through his whole earthly life.

You are right that we all are to be like Christ. But we mean that Mary is the prime example of how to do that.

 

[david.d]

While Mary was obviously held in high esteem in the eyes of God, she was chosen to give birth to Jesus, it wasn't her choice. It was God's choice and as in everything else, the praise should go to God.

The church preceded the Roman Catholic Church and there wasn't a pope in the Bible. By the time the Roman Catholic Church was founded, the Romans had already killed their "first Pope", the saints and likely Mary as well (all were dead). Roman Catholic traditions proceeded the Biblical church.

The reason I'm going into this is, while I respect Mary's role in the life of Christ, she merely played a role. She was obviously chosen to play that role, but I don't worship her anymore than I do Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob (also chosen).

Christ founded the Church, not Mary, Peter, Paul, or Constantine. Christ is the example.

 

[Vicomte13]

Let's not forget that God has used Mary as an emissary to various individuals and groups of people across history. Her appearance at Guadelupe in Mexico, and the image she left on the famous tilma that is still on display, resulted in more people converting to Christianity than any other act of evangelism by anybody in human history. Through her, about 15 million came over in a short period.

Our Lady of Lourdes. Our Lady of Fatima.

I think that the horror of Mary for many is that fact that she did all of this emissary work for God in recent centuries, so none of it is in the Bible, which means that one cannot get to the things she said through Sola Scriptura, as the revelations from God are newer and come from her.

She is not much in the Book, and not constrained BY the book, but is an ongoing source of new revelations from God that are not always in the book. And that forces a dramatic conflict for Sola Scripturalists, to which they often respond by rejecting or insulting God's messenger and turning to bibliolatry, unfortunately.

 

[gabbi0408]

It was Mary's choice to do God's will she could have said no. God does not infringe on the free will he gave us.

I don't know of any faith that worships Mary.

Mary is an example to us precisely because she is human, just like us. She is the ultimate example of a human being fully submitting to the will of God. I hold her in high regard, she is the mother of our Savior, and the person from whom Christ took his humanity, his flesh.

As scripture says "all generations will call me blessed." Lk 1:48 - and so we should.

 

[Brian Mcnamee]

It would be superfluous, because according to his Heavenly or divine nature, Jesus Christ is inherently uncreated and unoriginate, having been Begotten, not Made.

According to His assumed humanity however He has a mother.

Jesus appeared in physical form many tim

Let's not forget that God has used Mary as an emissary to various individuals and groups of people across history. Her appearance at Guadelupe in Mexico, and the image she left on the famous tilma that is still on display, resulted in more people converting to Christianity than any other act of evangelism by anybody in human history. Through her, about 15 million came over in a short period.

Our Lady of Lourdes. Our Lady of Fatima.

I think that the horror of Mary for many is that fact that she did all of this emissary work for God in recent centuries, so none of it is in the Bible, which means that one cannot get to the things she said through Sola Scriptura, as the revelations from God are newer and come from her.

She is not much in the Book, and not constrained BY the book, but is an ongoing source of new revelations from God that are not always in the book. And that forces a dramatic conflict for Sola Scripturalists, to which they respond by rejecting or insulting God's messenger and turning to bibliolatry, unfortunately.

Here is a quote attributed to Mary from Jaun Diego "Know for certain, least of my sons, that I am the perfect and perpetual Virgin Mary, Mother of the True God through whom everything lives, the Lord of all things near and far, the Master of heaven and earth. It is my earnest wish that a temple be built here to my honor. Here I will demonstrate, I will exhibit, I will give all my love, my compassion, my help and my protection to the people. I am your merciful mother, the merciful mother of all of you who live united in this land, and of all mankind, of all those who love me, of those who cry to me, of those who seek me, of those who have confidence in me. Here I will hear their weeping, their sorrow, and will remedy and alleviate all their multiple sufferings, necessities and misfortunes."

Mary is setting herself up here as the one who will here and remedy the suffering and misfortune not pointing to Jesus but herself requesting a temple for her own honor. This is not good and we are told to test the spirits to see if they are from God.

1Jo 4:1

Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
I have known many who are devoted to Guadalupe and they are praying to Mary exclusively. If you go there the honor is to her far above Jesus. These apparitions have people falling for signs and wonders and then bowing before the icon of Mary. They converted 8 million to a Corrupt catholic faith. I do not see a call to repentance and belief in Jesus but instead a devotion to Mary her promise to protect and give her mercy. It is true there is a large push to declare Mary the Mediatrix of all grace and the coredemptress. These lying signs and wonders are the fuel for this fire. I look to Revelation 5 and see who gets the praise for redemption and it is clear.
Now when He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. 9 And they sang a new song, saying:
“You are worthy to take the scroll,
And to open its seals;
For You were slain,
And have redeemed us to God by Your blood
Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation,
10 And have made us[fn] kings[fn] and priests to our God;
And we[fn] shall reign on the earth.”
11 Then I looked, and I heard the voice of many angels around the throne, the living creatures, and the elders; and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands, 12 saying with a loud voice:
“Worthy is the Lamb who was slain
To receive power and riches and wisdom,
And strength and honor and glory and blessing!”
13 And every creature which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, I heard saying:
“Blessing and honor and glory and power
Be to Him who sits on the throne,
And to the Lamb, forever and ever!”[fn]
14 Then the four living creatures said, “Amen!” And the twenty-four[fn] elders fell down and worshiped Him who lives forever and ever.[fn]

Mary needed a savior too and she will be singing this song to her LORD and savior too. The Catholics have declared her sinless and this is where we are divided and for good reason.

 

[paul becke]

It is not the question of respecting her as the prototype of Christianity. It is in praying to her, as one prays to God, as one prays to a false god, as one prays to an idol, that we derive the division. My question to you is this: is it really a division within the church? Will Christ return and call unto himself those who, like Eve, took what belonged to God and gave it to a woman?

Protestants such as yourself, fail to appreciate the central pivot of the Christian faith, the almighty, omniscient, God's infinite love of us, as expressed by Jesus' Incarnation, life, torture and murder - so that we could be like little toys for Him to play with ? No.

'Know ye not that ye are gods?(!)

On the contrary, it was to adopt us into the very life of the Most Holy Trinity, as part of God's very own, niuclear family. Indeed, the impression given is that if He could have drawn us into his own life, not by adoption but by nature, He would have done so. As it is, his love in adopting us would be far greater than even the best parent, adoptive or natural could be capable of. Perhaps, part of God's purpose in vocally honouring his mother so exceptionally highly, was, indeed, to accustom us to realise that this adoptoin of us into his own divine life.

Although on a somewhat lower plane, evidently, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, the Catholic church has elevated St Joseph to the status of Patron of the Universal Church. Without that operation of the Holy Spirit, the worldlier faction among the decision-makers would surely not have given Joseph a second thought - with such scant reference to him in the Bible. But do you think because of his relative anonymity he should not have been accorded a status of the highest honour among even slightly lesser mortals than Mary ?

It is very common for atheists to attribute to God a human's way of thinking about man, his creation i.e. in terms of his 'nothingness' in comparison with his own infinite magnitude, grandeur, dignity, etc. 'Why would God bother about a single petty little human individual He is supposed to have made out dust?' However, it is an axiom of our faith that God loves each one of us, as if we were his only child. The only one. Very much part of that atheistic way of thinking is that our individual personalities somehow make us less worthy than if we were impersonal and invulnerable, just as their God would be like a very autocratic and invulnerable monolith, like those Easter Island busts - more like a controlling martinet than an infintely-loving Father, who wishes us to know and possess the true freedom of will we shall only fully possess in heaven, sharing to the limits of our capacity in his divine nature.

Once you grasp that, the extraordinarily majestic nature which, God, himself, and in deference to the promptings of the Holy Spirit, the Catholic Church, accords to Mary is seen to be unavoidable - that is even if one wished to avoid it ; which we don't, because like an Italian mother, and the Jewish mother she is, she is a fuss-pot, a very loving one, sure, but a fuss-pot, where we are concerned. And that's good for our ego, if nothing else!

Here is a question you might like to ponder in this context : Why is it that so many soldiers, severely injured in battles, call out for their mothers ? We Christians know we are in a war of a unique scope, ferocity and brutality, which, in fact subsumes all the other wars and battles of every kind, i.e. wherever great suffering is being caused - 'from Timbuktoo to Katmandu', as Kiwi NDEer, Ian McCormack, so poetically put it - Our Lady is ready with her spiritual medicine-cabinet in tow - or like my mother, just itching to put a thermometer in the suffering patient's mouth. And why wouldn't she, given her own marvelous, divine son's compassion for us, like a mother hen gathering her brood to her bosom.

I also think it serves as a very plausible correctiive to the more explicit impression that God is pre-eminently masculine. There seems to be a fair amount of evidence that women are closer to God the Father in his eternal essence - not unlike the angels, pure spirits, but traditionally depicted by artists as almost lookng rather on the androgenous side, a little like women. Another NDEer, Sean Weed, an American marine, was saved from the claws of a gigantic demon by Michael, the archangel. What was hilartiously funny though was to see this very macho lad, laughing with embarrassment, trying to explain why he said Michael was kind of asexually 'beautiful', and not 'handsome'! He realised it evidently couldn't be explained because we have no experience of that kind of, at worst, neutral kind of 'beauty' in relation to the male sex.

Before I reverted to my Catholic faith as 22 year old, before and beyond the first moment of my reversion, when I had been a vehementy anti-Catholic agnostic, I was always attracted to the Hindu and Buddhist belief in Samadhi and Nirvana, in both of which, I believe, our personalities are obliterated as we become absorbed by the divinity. However, being grafted into the Mystical Body of Christ, the True Vine, and personally meeting again our relatives and old friends in heaven, I now believe, while all of us are enveloped in God's unimaginably-sublime love for us, beats all.

 

[Light of the East]

Will Christ return and call unto himself those who, like Eve, took what belonged to God and gave it to a woman?

If you had a proper understanding of God's Covenant and the covenant family He created, you would not say this:

From the book THE DANCE OF ISAIAH, from KINGS OF LUIGHNE PUBLISHING,available on Amazon (Quotes in black bold, my commentary in red and blue.)


"Imagine again, if you will, the world without the Fall Imagine that King Adam and Queen Eve are still on earth, still regnant over creation in the splendor of their fully formed imaging of God. As human beings they are creatures who are as beautiful and splendid as Christ was on the Mount of Transfiguration. The shekinah glory of God covers them as it did Moses when he descended from Mount Sinai. Their rule extends to not only this earth, but to planets which have been formed from divine fiat of the Godhead. There are children of men on these planets and they bear similar rule over the creation there.

Suppose, in this planet of splendor without the Fall, that you were to come to me today and say “I have taken time off from my duties and am going to go see Eve the ruler, to pay her my respects.”

Would I chide you and say, “How dare you call her the ruler! Adam alone is the ruler over this earth! She is but his helpmeet and a mere creation of God!”

{This represents the typical Evangelical response to Mary.}

Not likely, if you have understood the principle of unity I have set out in earlier paragraphs. They would be one flesh and one mind and as such, to call one by the title ruler is to acknowledge and honor the other one who makes up the whole. Separation of rulership came only after the Fall. And even then, Eve still retained a position higher than the children who would come from her womb. Thus the commandment says not “Honor thy father...” but instead “Honor thy father and thy mother.” Even in a subordinate position to Adam, Eve still bears in his authority a place of dignity and honor. In each normal human family (and God knows there are some weird and abnormal ones out there) the father treats disrespect of the mother as disrespect of himself and his own authority. In a properly functional family, the mother is carrying out the wishes of the father, and therefore, disrespect to her is disrespect to the one who has given her the authority and in whose name she ultimately speaks. Swift and serious punishment is the consequence.

What does covenant have to do with what is written above?

EVERYTHING!

Note that Jesus is the Last Adam (1 Corin. 15:45). This is a significant title which is given to Him. It means that not only does He restore mankind to its original unity with God as was found in the Garden, but that He is now the covenant Head over the covenant family. The title "Last Adam" means that He has taken the place of Adam, restored mankind, and the family of God is repaired, the breech of sin done away with. By His work on the Cross, all the destruction of the Fall in the Garden is repaired.

But wait!!! What of Eve? If Eve is not restored as was Adam, then something has not been repaired in the Garden Family, has it? And what woman shall we find in all of history who would be a suitable replacement? It would only be Mary.

The Early Fathers say of the Blessed Virgin that she, by her obedience, undid the knot of Eve’s disobedience. Let us take a little closer look at the New Eve and see if we can draw type/antitype parallels which will put her in proper perspective rather than in the contempt and disrespect that the Fundamentalists and others have for her.

From Eve would have come all living, for her name means “mother of all living.” She was created in innocency without sin. The children who came from her would have therefore been also born without taint of sin and in innocency. In keeping with the type therefore, it would be necessary for her to be created without sin. Since she was by her organic connection to father Adam, a sinner, it was necessary that God intervene and apply the work of Christ to her at the moment of conception so that, cleansed of all sin, she might be as Eve was, innocent and without sin from the moment of her conception. Thus the doctrine and teaching of the Immaculate Conception fulfills the antitype requirements necessary for the redemption of the human race.

Eve was created as Adam’s help. She was a helpmeet fit for him. There is nothing in Scripture to suggest that Adam couldn’t have administered the Garden by himself, but at the same time, God found it necessary that he have a helpmeet. Therefore, we must assume that God saw something lacking which needed fulfillment in an appropriate helper, or God would have left all alone and let Adam run all things as a solitary king.

In the same way then, keeping with the type/antitype relationship, we must see the Blessed Virgin as the helpmeet of Jesus (again, not of God, for He needs no help.) Therefore, Jesus, who is the Christ, could not have even been born except that He had a mother after the flesh to bear Him. He had to come in the flesh to redeem us in the flesh. And He could not have redeemed the world except that He had received from His mother flesh which was sinless. If the Blessed Virgin had the slightest taint of sin about her, then the Savior would have been a blemished lamb not fit for the sacrifice for sins. Without her consent to all that God proposed to her, the redemption would have been impossible.

As the first Eve was in complete harmony with the will of her co-regent before the Fall, we see the last Eve in complete harmony with the will of God. She is, in turn, in complete harmony with the will of Her divine Son, with Whom she rules and reigns in glory. Adam and Eve, fully human, are restored and God sends out the good news that the kingdom is redeemed from sin and all who will may come and enter into the family. The New Eve rules in total harmony with the Last Adam. There is no idea that we can request of the Blessed Virgin and that somehow she will act contrary to the will of God or bestow upon us answers that are not in His will. She intercedes for us as a mother of her children, in our best interests, but always in line with the will of the family head. As Adam’s wife, Eve was destined to bear rule as the queen over all creation. Therefore, as the Last Adam is the King over God’s creation, it is fitting and proper to call her the Queen of Heaven.

Through the unity of their wills, expressed in a way we are not sure of, life would be brought forth to the Garden. It seems that before the Fall, this would have possibly precluded sexual intimacy as we know and understand it after the Fall. The birth of Christ in the East is spoken of as a mystery in which the Blessed Theotokos brought Him forth in a way unknown to man. He was not born in the fashion of all mankind after the Fall, but brought forth in mysterious manner, perhaps such as Eve would have borne offspring had she not sinned.


Jesus said that we are to honor our fathers and mothers. Father and mother are familial positions of authority over their children. The commandment is also taken to mean that we must give honor to all authority above us. Mary has taken Eve's place. The old family of God under the Old Covenant is gone, as are Adam and Eve as being the parents - mother and father - over it. The New Covenant family is headed up by Jesus and Mary - King and Queen - ruling over the Creation of God as Adam and Eve could have, but lost that great privilege by their Fall from grace.

 

[Light of the East]

There are actually several faithful women in the Bible besides Mary. Women such as Ruth, Hannah, Esther, Priscilla, Mary Magdalene, Rahab, Deborah, Abigail, etc.

They are not "full of grace" and they are not the replacement for Eve.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Indeed ... no other mention will so quickly bring about divisions among Christians. It IS rather ironic, don't you think?

Yup. And yet it happened right away, the accusation that we worship Mary, that we think Mary is God, the usual and expected divisive inaccuracies. It's so tiring. So expected. So par for the course. So disappointing. And from people I have to consider as brothers and sisters in Christ.

 

[Light of the East]

The church preceded the Roman Catholic Church and there wasn't a pope in the Bible. By the time the Roman Catholic Church was founded, the Romans had already killed their "first Pope", the saints and likely Mary as well (all were dead). Roman Catholic traditions proceeded the Biblical church.

I would be curious to better understand your statement. When do you think the Roman Catholic Church was begun (I have an idea what you think, but I want to hear it from the horse's mouth). And what do you mean by "the Church" that preceded the RCC? Do you mean Episcopalian, Baptist, Methodist, Fundamentalist, Nazarene, Lutheran....what?

 

[Vicomte13]

Jesus appeared in physical form many tim


Here is a quote attributed to Mary from Jaun Diego "Know for certain, least of my sons, that I am the perfect and perpetual Virgin Mary, Mother of the True God through whom everything lives, the Lord of all things near and far, the Master of heaven and earth. It is my earnest wish that a temple be built here to my honor. Here I will demonstrate, I will exhibit, I will give all my love, my compassion, my help and my protection to the people. I am your merciful mother, the merciful mother of all of you who live united in this land, and of all mankind, of all those who love me, of those who cry to me, of those who seek me, of those who have confidence in me. Here I will hear their weeping, their sorrow, and will remedy and alleviate all their multiple sufferings, necessities and misfortunes."

Mary is setting herself up here as the one who will here and remedy the suffering and misfortune not pointing to Jesus but herself requesting a temple for her own honor. This is not good and we are told to test the spirits to see if they are from God.

1Jo 4:1

I wonder, then, why God performs such an ongoing cascade, a veritable river, of astounding healing miracles at Lourdes.

Be careful about ascribing healing miracles to Satan - the Pharisees and scribes did that, and Jesus told them about the unpardonable sin.

Can Satan cast out Satan? Can Satan heal the blind? No? I wonder, then, if Mary is misleading mankind and not fulfilling God's will, why God heals the blind and performs other Jesus-level miracles at Lourdes, a shrine built where Mary appeared.

 

[RC1970]

They are not "full of grace" and they are not the replacement for Eve.

They may have been "full of grace", after all, they are believers, I presume.

Christ is the new Adam and Mary was His mother, that's all we know for sure. Jesus paid it all, and lived the perfect life that Adam failed to do. No need for a new Eve.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Christ is the God the Son. Our God is a trinity yes.

There is no scripture to back up mary being the mother of God.

Just the earthly mother of Jesus.

Mary is no different to anybody else who believes in Jesus, who was born to a virgin, lived, was crucified, was ressurrected and now sits on the right hand of God.

It's really quite simple.
Is Jesus really God?
Jesus is God, the Eternal Son of the Father.
Who is the mother of Jesus?
Mary of Nazareth.
So Mary is the mother of God.
There is nothing more to it.

Not that naysayers haven't brought up how this somehow makes Mary divine, and even how that makes Mary the progenitor of God before all ages. Such ought to be considered to be silliness.

Mary had a very human child who was the Eternal Son of the Father from before all ages. She was the mother of God. She is not divine herself. She did not give birth to the Father or to the Holy Spirit. She didn't even create the Eternal Son. She did give birth to a human baby that was, from the moment of his conception in her womb, God.

It is right to call her the mother of God. And the reason it is good to do so is because it provides clarity that Jesus was not adopted into being God, or just some godly figure but true God from God. You might prefer 'theotokos' to 'mater dei' but they are the same thing. The baggage about this making Mary some kind of divinity is, I think, disingenuous. You would do well to question who taught you to reject Mary as the mother of God. They failed you, at least on this.

 

[chevyontheriver]

While Mary was obviously held in high esteem in the eyes of God, she was chosen to give birth to Jesus, it wasn't her choice. It was God's choice and as in everything else, the praise should go to God.

So her 'Yes' recorded in Scripture was meaningless? She could have said 'No' but it was going to happen anyway?

The church preceded the Roman Catholic Church and there wasn't a pope in the Bible. By the time the Roman Catholic Church was founded, the Romans had already killed their "first Pope", the saints and likely Mary as well (all were dead). Roman Catholic traditions proceeded the Biblical church.

Can you clarify your use of 'preceded' and 'proceeded'? In my book there is one Church, and Peter was the holder of the Keys, and the Romans did kill him and all of his successors for decades to come.

The reason I'm going into this is, while I respect Mary's role in the life of Christ, she merely played a role. She was obviously chosen to play that role, but I don't worship her anymore than I do Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob (also chosen).

For the record, and maybe to surprise you, I don't worship Mary, or Abraham, or Isaac, or Jacob.

Christ founded the Church, not Mary, Peter, Paul, or Constantine. Christ is the example.

Christ founded the Church, yup. But does Philippians 3:17 have anything to say about this? Paul tells you that he is an example for you to follow. Mary and Peter are examples as well, although none of them founded the Church because Jesus did that.

 

[JoeP222w]

She is for us the very Icon of the Church

No, she is not. That would be idolatry.

In a very real way she is the prototype for every Christian, as we are all called to respond in obedience and bring Christ into the world.

If Mary is a "prototype" why is there so little about her in the Bible?

This claim that Mary is a "prototype" is completely false. Christians follow Jesus Christ and are to be Christ-like, not Mary-like. Nowhere in the Bible are we told to imitate Mary. And I imagine Mary, if she could speak to us now, would say, "Don't look to me, look to Jesus, He is God not me!"

This is not say that Mary did not have an important role in history (she did), but this is elevating Mary to a place the Bible never elevates her.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

Jesus appeared in physical form many tim


Here is a quote attributed to Mary from Jaun Diego "Know for certain, least of my sons, that I am the perfect and perpetual Virgin Mary, Mother of the True God through whom everything lives, the Lord of all things near and far, the Master of heaven and earth. It is my earnest wish that a temple be built here to my honor. Here I will demonstrate, I will exhibit, I will give all my love, my compassion, my help and my protection to the people. I am your merciful mother, the merciful mother of all of you who live united in this land, and of all mankind, of all those who love me, of those who cry to me, of those who seek me, of those who have confidence in me. Here I will hear their weeping, their sorrow, and will remedy and alleviate all their multiple sufferings, necessities and misfortunes."

Mary is setting herself up here as the one who will here and remedy the suffering and misfortune not pointing to Jesus but herself requesting a temple for her own honor. This is not good and we are told to test the spirits to see if they are from God.

1Jo 4:1

Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
I have known many who are devoted to Guadalupe and they are praying to Mary exclusively. If you go there the honor is to her far above Jesus. These apparitions have people falling for signs and wonders and then bowing before the icon of Mary. They converted 8 million to a Corrupt catholic faith. I do not see a call to repentance and belief in Jesus but instead a devotion to Mary her promise to protect and give her mercy. It is true there is a large push to declare Mary the Mediatrix of all grace and the coredemptress. These lying signs and wonders are the fuel for this fire. I look to Revelation 5 and see who gets the praise for redemption and it is clear.
Now when He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. 9 And they sang a new song, saying:
“You are worthy to take the scroll,
And to open its seals;
For You were slain,
And have redeemed us to God by Your blood
Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation,
10 And have made us[fn] kings[fn] and priests to our God;
And we[fn] shall reign on the earth.”
11 Then I looked, and I heard the voice of many angels around the throne, the living creatures, and the elders; and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands, 12 saying with a loud voice:
“Worthy is the Lamb who was slain
To receive power and riches and wisdom,
And strength and honor and glory and blessing!”
13 And every creature which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, I heard saying:
“Blessing and honor and glory and power
Be to Him who sits on the throne,
And to the Lamb, forever and ever!”[fn]
14 Then the four living creatures said, “Amen!” And the twenty-four[fn] elders fell down and worshiped Him who lives forever and ever.[fn]

Mary needed a savior too and she will be singing this song to her LORD and savior too. The Catholics have declared her sinless and this is where we are divided and for good reason.

Actually the proper understanding starts with God's messenger making a declaration about Her, which is rather unique to Her alone and to no better favor to any other human save remarks made about Her Son.
That He gave Her to us (the Body of believers) as our Mother is a part of the message taken from a view of His final Words to Saint John (please note I said "a part of").

That some apparently think it would do some great harm seeing Her as a Mother, who we could appeal to in prayer for Her Prayers for our benefit seems odd given the apparent willingness of most Christians to even ask total strangers to pray for them. These things are at the heart of the quotes you gave from a Saint and must be part of any attempt to understand those quotes, otherwise one is putting words in the mouth of someone clearly not present on CF to defend themselves.

 

[Root of Jesse]

It is not the question of respecting her as the prototype of Christianity. It is in praying to her, as one prays to God, as one prays to a false god, as one prays to an idol, that we derive the division. My question to you is this: is it really a division within the church? Will Christ return and call unto himself those who, like Eve, took what belonged to God and gave it to a woman?

The problem with your premise is that nowhere does God tell us not to pray to someone, pray being an English word meaning "ask". God tells us not to worship anything or anyone on earth. But to ask Mary to intercede for us to her son, just as the example of the steward at the wedding in Cana did, is not the same as worship.
In other words, we don't worship Mary. We hold her higher than anyone born of a husband and wife, but not to the level of God.

 

[Root of Jesse]

I think there is a division in the Church about our approach to Mary. Quite a number of traditions place significance on the person and role of Mary, without adopting her as divine, but rather seeing at at every moment every thing about her points to Jesus, as we should.

I believe the question is really "How much attention should Mary get?" Some believe that it's sufficient to sing "Round yon virgin mother and child" and leave it at that. Some love to parade her statue through the streets. If someone wants to afford her as little as the first, that's their own thing. I don't criticize it. I believe much closer to the latter.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Mary is an excellent example of a godly women. She was most likely a submissive and dutiful wife and a wonderful mother to several children. Unfortunately, there are those who seemingly worship her, which is a clear violation of the first commandment. This problem of idolatry concerning Mary has required a de-emphasis of her in many Christian circles.

I would really like to understand how anyone can say and believe it that Mary had several children.

Your suggesting that there is idolatry concerning Mary is a judgement of hearts. You honestly have no idea whether someone worships something or someone as an idol. Someone, though, who would rather go to work and pull overtime that is unnecessary save for the desire to buy the latest iPhone, could be said to idolize technology or money. But all veneration of Mary points to Jesus.

 

[Philip_B]

No, she is not. That would be idolatry.
If Mary is a "prototype" why is there so little about her in the Bible?
This claim that Mary is a "prototype" is completely false. Christians follow Jesus Christ and are to be Christ-like, not Mary-like. Nowhere in the Bible are we told to imitate Mary. And I imagine Mary, if she could speak to us now, would say, "Don't look to me, look to Jesus, He is God not me!"
This is not say that Mary did not have an important role in history (she did), but this is elevating Mary to a place the Bible never elevates her.

Thank you for your contribution

I do not accept the Idolatry claim. Perhaps you have failed to understand my use of the word icon which in Orthodox traditions are a window through which we see to a truth beyond, and indeed I identified the truth beyond in terms of obedience and bringing Christ into the world. To suggest prototype I was endeavouring to make the same truth apparent.

Mary always points to Jesus. I see that as the force of her role in the wedding feast in Cana of Galilee.

John 2:5
His mother said to the servants, ‘Do whatever he tells you.’​

I agree absolutely that Mary always directs us to Jesus, he is the focus of her gaze and her embrace. God clearly thought well of her, and so do I. That does not imply idolatry, nor do I for one moment intend to suggest that we are not called to be Christ-like.