Posted on 12/27/2011 8:24:19 PM PST by RnMomof7
Rome, Italy, Dec 8, 2011 / 04:28 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Pope Benedict XVI reflected on the biblical description of a “woman clothed with the sun” in his remarks at Rome's Spanish Steps on the 2011 Feast of the Immaculate Conception.
“What is the meaning of this image? It represents the Church and Our Lady at the same time,” the Pope told the crowd assembled before the nearby statue commemorating the 1854 definition of Mary's Immaculate Conception. “Before all, the 'woman' of the apocalypse is Mary herself.”
The 12th chapter of the Biblical Apocalypse – also known as the Book of Revelation – describes the glorification and persecution of “a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.”
Though not named, this woman is described as the mother of the Messiah. In poetic language akin to the Bible's other prophetic books, Saint John says she faced the threat of “a huge red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns,” and “fled into the desert where she had a place prepared by God.”
Pope Benedict, offering white roses in his traditional yearly act of Marian veneration, gave listeners his insight into the connection between the Virgin Mary and the Church – portrayed in the Apocalypse through the single image of the sun-clad woman.
“She appears 'clothed in sunlight,' that is, clothed in God,” observed the Pope. “The Virgin Mary is in fact completely surrounded by the light of God and lives in God … The 'Immaculate One' reflects with all of her person the light of the 'sun' which is God.”
“Besides representing Our Lady, this sign personifies the Church, the Christian community of all times,” he continued.
The Church, he explained, is “pregnant, in the sense that she carries Christ” and “must give birth to him to the world.”
“This is the labor of the pilgrim Church on earth, that in the midst of the consolations of God and the persecutions of the world, she must bring Christ to men.”
Because the Church continues to bring Jesus into the world, Pope Benedict said, it “finds opposition in a ferocious adversary,” symbolized in scripture by the “dragon” that has “tried in vain to devour Jesus,” and now “directs his attacks against the woman – the Church – in the desert of the world.”
“But in every age the Church is supported by the light and the strength of God,” the Pope said. “She is nurtured in the desert with the bread of his word and the Holy Eucharist.”
“And in this way, in every tribulation, through all of the trials that she finds in the course of the ages and in the different parts of the world, the Church suffers persecution, but comes out the victor.”
Pope Benedict said the Church should not fear persecution, which is bound to arise, but will be defeated.
“The only pitfall of which the Church can and must be afraid is the sin of her members,” he warned, highlighting the key difference between the Church and the woman who is its prototype.
“While in fact Mary is immaculate – free from every stain of sin – the Church is holy, but at the same time marked by our sins.”
While sinless herself, Mary remains in solidarity with the Church struggling against sin.
“That is why the people of God, pilgrims in time, turn to their heavenly mother and ask for her help,” explained Pope Benedict.
He stressed the world's need for the hope brought by the “woman clothed with the sun” – “especially in this difficult moment for Italy, for Europe and for different parts of the world.”
“May Mary help us to see that there is a light beyond the veil of fog that appears to envelop reality,” he declared.
“For this also we, especially on this day, never cease to ask with filial trust for her help: 'O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to you.'”
Is this the position of your church or are you speaking for yourself?
It stands to reason, that if a church sees itself as being the new Israel, that that church would see itself in that prophecy.
What is the significance of the twelve stars to the Presbyterian Church?
Mark 12:29 where Yah'shua quotes Deuteronomy 6:4 The RCC introduced the concept of Three gods: father, son and ghost. Yah'shua said he and the "father" are ONE. Father and son are metaphors. Jews have always believed that there is ONLY ONE YHvH !
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
Jesus answered, "The foremost is, 'HEAR, O ISRAEL! YHvH OUR GOD IS ONE YHvH;
Off the top of my alleged head:
The control our appetites have over our will should certainly decline. I get that. I also read of our appetites becoming more ordered.
Also, I guess our reason, our being able to will with God, should also grow stronger.
Further, I can imagine that our distress at our wants not being satisfied will grow less.
But I can't plausibly pretend that this or that is NOT important to me now. What I CAN do is say, "Father, I REALLY, REALLY want such-and-such. But I know I often want things that conflict with your will and my ultimate good. So, I ask, if I may, for such and such and pray for the grace to hear and to abide by your answer in faith and possibly someday deeper understanding."
How 'bout that?
Must I not?
To me a proof is complete. A bunch of inadequate “proofs” do not add up to one good proof.
I might have understood “One more step in the proof.” or “one more part of a proof.”
But all I saw was an assertion about stars. So I didn’t and don’t see it as THE proof or A proof or any kind of proof at all.
It’s the position of my church, the Catholic church, as I understand it. But also, Mary is a product of Israel; her 12 stars represent not only the 12 apostles in one sense, but the 12 patriarchs in another sense, the 24 elders.
Regarding the Presbyterian church as an “substantially defective, schismatic church,” I don’t relate the 12 stars to the Presbyterian Church.
“Substantially defective” means that the “substance” of the Presbyterian Church is “defective” (removed from its sustenance).
OK. Just running with that, then, why does the church cry out in pain?
Ah, that’s the present purpose of John’s prophecy... the Christians were martyred by Nero, and thus the Church suffered greatly.
WHY should years of awareness of a passage of scripture make it a simple matter,and simple for whom?
I meant the 'side' that thinks that an assertion like that followed with a challenge like
Is there some reason it's not possible for you to do so?
is a helpful way to proceed.
I don't know the state of the question. I don't know the arguments leading up to the state of the question. I don't know that there is an official doctrine one way or the other on the question and at what level in the hierarchy of truth that doctrine is. I'm not even sure I know what the question is.
So I don't see how it follows that it should be a simple matter for anyone, much less for me,to point to this or that.
But the question for some reason why I cannot do this or that SEEMS intended to follow on the self-evidence of your "should be". So, as I say, "your side" uses words like proof and argument in ways I do not recognize, or, come to think of it, care to recognize. I have enough troubles without looking for them.
Should they?
Perhaps. Perhaps not.
But will they? As far as wants, yes, I see that happening. I've seen it happen in my own life.
As far as needs, well, needs are needs. We need food, water, warmth to survive. I don't see any way out of that no matter how much in grace we grow.
No need for all the uproar, Mad Dawg. The answer to the question has been provided by someone else, or I’m assuming so.
Sometimes a simple question or request is best taken at face value for what it is. I’m pretty much a Biblical literalist unless something clearly is a parable, or symbolic in the form of prophecy, and view that as the best means of remaining true to the Word. That spills over into my means of communicating in or to the world at large.
My asking if there was some reason it wasn’t possible for you to do so stemmed from other conversations I’ve had, that led me to perhaps wonder if you felt you lacked the authority to comment.
Revelation is a touchy subject for some, and for others it’s almost a no-go. I actually want to understand the various ways different Christians interpret this. I’ve dealt with varying interpretations amongst family all my life. Maybe that colors my understanding to the point that I’m prone to looking for ways to drive up the middle, so to speak.
I’ve understood that there can be and often is past, present and future meaning to prophecy, that a given meaning doesn’t always apply to a given era.
However, if you percieve the prophecy as also having future meaning, then there is a future meaning to the woman, which you interpret to be Israel and therefore your church in addition to being Mary, crying out in pain, as well as the present or contemporary meaning to John when he wrote it.
I was expecting an answer along the lines of the woman/Israel/church crying out in pain meaning persecution and martyrdom under Tribulation, to be honest.
I would speculate that, but you got me careful to avoid speculation.
One pretty good source for information on Revelation 12 is here:
http://www.biblrytr.com/revelation11.htm
He gives a very good synopsis from which you can study.
What you've got here, is a whole book of the Bible that's all about the extravagance of attraction and desire,: the cascade of praises, the lush images, the unrestrained bridegroom/bride reciprocity, etc.all understood in the light of the supreme love of God..
If a clueless person were to say,
Why? Because it achieves its proper meaning only if it is read in the context of God.
In other words, a person who interprets it apart from God, is reading it wrong.
That is exactly the error made by people who read with disapproval the extravagant praises of Mary. They are interpreting wrongly because they are ignoring the much wider context, which is that Mary is a creature and God is the Creator; Mary is handmaid and God is Lord; Mary is saved and God is Savior.
The praise of Mary can never be wrenched out of this context, because she is not the Supreme Being. Anything that is great about her is constantly referred back to God the Mighty One who has done great things for her.
It is simply head-smackingly wrong to read the praise of Mary in an idolatrous or pagan or blasphemous or even humanistic way. It is being blind to the entire context which gives it meaning: and that context is God’s greatness regarding the lowliness of His handmaid.
“Think Christ and His bride the church and read it again.”
Exactly! Right you are!
G’night, dear CynicalBear.
“and all these things will be added unto you”. Look it up.
You honestly think asking someone about their "whack-a-doodle sect" deserves an answer??? Didn't your Momma teach ya manners?
We all are.
And we are all blessed in Christ as well.
The problem is, Song of Songs is Scripture. Most of the Catholic specific teaching about Mary is not.
That is the interpretation that I know, understand and largely accept, CynicalBear.
I was looking to understand more about Revelation 12 from the Catholic perspective.
All well and good and I could even understand some of that respect for Mary. There is still the problem of placing Mary in between Jesus and us. And please don’t start with that “asking others to pray for us” stuff. That is much different because we don’t pray to them to pray for us. Neither is Mary omnipresent. Jesus told us to go “boldly before the throne” and that there is only one mediator. No mediatrix or helper. Then there is the made up story of the bodily assumption. I could go on but you get the picture.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.