Does Revelation 12 contradict the teaching that Mary gave birth painlessly?

[pnewton]

I don’t know. Do we assume as well that Jesus wasn’t a very hard worker, as toil was also part of the fall? Revelation is not a good source for such a doctrine, as it is imagery, but I tend to agree with St. Pius X on this point.

 

[MJDorry]

This a a paragraph in Pope Saint Piux X’s Encyclical Ad Diem Illum:

Rev 12:5 “And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule (shepherd) all nations with an iron rod: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.”

I was under the impression here that this is a reference to Jesus, not us.

 

[tony-nj]

I don’t know. Not around many animal births. I’ve seen them on TV on educational channels. I’ve never seen an animal crying out in pain like women I have heard in hospitals.

Here are the verses I were referring to from Genesis 3 (NRSVCE)
To the woman he said,

“I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing;
in pain you shall bring forth children,
yet your desire shall be for your husband,
and he shall rule over you.”

17 And to the man[b] he said,

“Because you have listened to the voice of your wife,
and have eaten of the tree
about which I commanded you,
‘You shall not eat of it,’
cursed is the ground because of you;
in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life;
18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you;
and you shall eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your face
you shall eat bread
until you return to the ground,
for out of it you were taken;
you are dust,
and to dust you shall return.”

 

[AngelusDomini]

What Mother does not wonder and despair for the world her child is entering?

 

[AngelusDomini]

Don’t forget The Revelations of St John is a mystical book - we are all Mary’s children and so she cries out in travail for all of us.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I apologize if I don’t understand this, but the Immaculate Conception is Mary’s conception. Christ’s conception was the Incarnation.

No, you’re absolutely correct Tony.
“Immaculate Conception” refers to Mary being conceived without sin in the womb of her mother Anne.
Has NOTHING to do with the conception or birth of Jesus.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

it would seem to follow Revelation 12:2 indicates that Mary did in fact experience a laborious childbirth.

Yes, I don’t think there’s a definite teaching of the Church that Mary did or did not have labor pains. There’s a lot of theological opinion that Jesus passed through Mary’s body “like light through a window”, rather than painfully down the birth canal. Much of this was focused on discussing Mary’s virginity in physical terms, as giving birth in the normal way would break a hymen. However, the Church doesn’t really define virginity in terms of a hymen since many life activities other than sex or having babies can break a hymen.

Mary certainly was not immune to pain throughout her life, as the Church teaches that she suffered along with her son during Christ’s Passion.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I don’t know. Not around many animal births. I’ve seen them on TV on educational channels. I’ve never seen an animal crying out in pain like women I have heard in hospitals.

I’ve raised horses, cattle and donkeys – believe me, animals suffer as much as humans when giving birth.

 

[Dan_Defender]

Perhaps the labor pains mentioned in Revelation 12:2 could be understood metaphorically as they are in Galatians 4:19 NRSV, where St Paul said, “My little children, for whom I am again in the pain of childbirth until Christ is formed in you,”

This. Revelation is full of allegories, in the vision the woman is both Mary and the Church. She is given wings to fly into the desert as Jerusalem is utterly destroyed. Mary was not alive on earth during the time of Revelation.

 

[MJDorry]

Except that Rev 12 isn’t meant to be a literal account of Jesus’s birth. It isn’t literal at all.

I’m not supposing that it is. The author would likely have been unaware of the details of the nativity beyond what was preached in Christian circles, which would not likely have included the specifics of the loteral moment of Christ’s birth.

Nevertheless, if we take it for granted that Mary is a subject of the allegory, the spirit of the literature then at least still seems to suggest suffering in childbirth–that is, it does not apear as though it ever occurred to the author that it might be any other way, and since laboriousness was included as an explicit aspect of the allegory of the woman in Heaven giving birth to a ruler of all nations, it potentially reveals that it was an assumption on the part of the author that Mary did experience labor.

 

[De_Maria]

We take scripture to be free of error, so it would seem to follow Revelation 12:2 indicates that Mary did in fact experience a laborious childbirth. Yet, though such has never been defined doctrinally by the Church, how do we reconcile this with the fact that so many great thinkers within have believed the contrary of Revelation 12:2?

This book is not written in literal language. It is written in prophetic language. The image of a painful labour is not literally a description of the pain she endured in giving birth to Jesus Christ. It is about the spiritual pain she endured in the birthing the Church. Mary is the Mother of all believers.

Revelation 12:17 Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring—those who keep God’s commands and hold fast their testimony about Jesus.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

So, it’s an allegory for which the “spirit of the literature” “suggests” something that is open to a number of multi-layered interpretations.

What’s your point?

This thread seems to have started from the idea that

1. It’s Church teaching that Mary gave birth painlessly (a dubious premise, as there isn’t really a definitive “Church teaching” on this matter)
2. Revelation definitely refers to Mary giving birth to Jesus (also a dubious premise as it is not literal, is an allegory, can be read as giving birth to the Church, etc)
3. So based on 1 and 2 some “error” occurred (based on two dubious assumptions)

There’s no “error” when the premises 1 and 2 are, at the very least, up for debate and require a lot of assumptions to be made to arrive at the conclusion you seem to be pushing for.

 

[Cathoholic]

Mary brought forth Jesus without experiencing any sense of pain.

Q: WHY is this Woman in Revelation 12 in pain if it is Mary,
and the Church teaches Her birthing Jesus was painless?

A: Because there is not just a (painless) birthing of Christ (Jesus) at Bethlehem,
but ALSO
a (painful) birthing of the Mystical Body of Christ (the Church) at Calvary.

The Blessed Virgin Mary has a universal motherhood in a sense. She is our Mother too.

Both senses are being shown to you in Revelation.

That’s WHY when the dragon goes off to make war on the rest of her children in Revelation 12:17, it isn’t merely “Tom, Dick, and Harry” but rather ALL who bear testimony to Jesus (are Her children).

Hope this helps.

God bless.

Cathoholic

CATECHISM OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT By believing the serpent, Eve brought malediction and death on mankind, and Mary, by believing the Angel, became the instrument of The divine goodness in bringing life and benediction to the human race. From Eve we are born children of wrath; from Mary we have received Jesus Christ, and through Him are regenerated children of grace. To Eve it was said: In sorrow shalt thou bring forth children. Mary was exempt from this law, for preserving her virginal integrity inviolate she brought forth Jesus the Son of God without experiencing, as we have already said, any sense of pain.

 

[po18guy]

Short answer: No.

1. It absolutely does not matter.
2. The “woman” is multi-faceted.