Genesis 3:15 a mistake?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dizzy_dave
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dizzy_dave

Guest
I was listening to EWTN radio last week and someone called Fr. Mitch Pacwa and asked about Genesis 3:15 about the crushing of the head of Satan, in some bibles it’s Mary doing it (Douay Rheims)
and in most others it’s Jesus, Fr. Mitch said it was basically a translation mistake and it’s supposed to be Jesus, then the person asked what about all the Mary devotions and doctrines based on Mary doing this, I did not hear his reply, I was at work. Was does this mean for all those Marian devotions and doctrines and Prayes, etc. I’m trying to build a real love for our Lady and hearing this is not a help. I’m confused. What should I think of this? Or was Fr. Mitch wrong?:confused:
 
40.png
dizzy_dave:
I was listening to EWTN radio last week and someone called Fr. Mitch Pacwa and asked about Genesis 3:15 about the crushing of the head of Satan, in some bibles it’s Mary doing it (Douay Rheims)
and in most others it’s Jesus, Fr. Mitch said it was basically a translation mistake and it’s supposed to be Jesus, then the person asked what about all the Mary devotions and doctrines based on Mary doing this, I did not hear his reply, I was at work. Was does this mean for all those Marian devotions and doctrines and Prayes, etc. I’m trying to build a real love for our Lady and hearing this is not a help. I’m confused. What should I think of this? Or was Fr. Mitch wrong?:confused:
The presence of the feminine ancient Vulgate manuscripts and the Douay-Rheims no doubt reflects the Marian theology which parallels Eve. This theology is still valid whether or not all manuscripts of Genesis explicitly support this with regards to the gender of the pronoun. And, in fact, writings of the Church have made explicit such an association, regardless of the ultimate resolution regarding the gender of the pronoun.
 
The seed of the woman will bruise the head of the serpent.
The seed of the woman " I am a servant of the Lord, let it be done unto me according to thy word" also “Father if it be possible let this cup pass from me but not my will be done but thy will be done”. The seed of the tree of life is obediance to the will of God the Father and it is this that bruises the will “Head” of Satan. God Bless
 
Mary’s fiat, the obedience of a virgin to undo the disobedience of a virgin, was still the gateway to our salvation. That will never change.

Her fiat, her patient bearing through the Passion, and her Assumption are all roadsigns of hope for all of us.

Don’t forget how the doctrine of her Queenship in Heaven goes back to the Queen Mothers of the Kingdom of Israel of Solomon’s time and thereafter. Where Bathsheba interceded on behalf of Solomon’s brother, but was turned down, Mary interceded without being asked to at the wedding of Cana and her request was granted.

In Christ’s peace and joy,

Robin L.
 
From the Haydock commentary of the Douay-Rheims’s correct rendition of “I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.”:
Ver. 15. She shall crush. Ipsa, the woman: so divers of the fathers read this place, conformably to the Latin: others read it ipsum, viz. the seed. The sense is the same: for it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent’s head. (Challoner) — The Hebrew text, as Bellarmine observes, is ambiguous: He mentions one copy which had ipsa instead of ipsum; and so it is even printed in the Hebrew interlineary edition, 1572, by Plantin, under the inspection of Boderianus. Whether the Jewish editions ought to have more weight with Christians, or whether all the other manuscripts conspire against this reading, let others inquire. The fathers who have cited the old Italic version, taken from the Septuagint agree with the Vulgate, which is followed by almost all the Latins; and hence we may argue with probability, that the Septuagint and the Hebrew formerly acknowledged ipsa, which now moves the indignation of Protestants so much, as if we intended by it to give any divine honour to the blessed Virgin. We believe, however, with St. Epiphanius, that “it is no less criminal to vilify the holy Virgin, than to glorify her above measure.” We know that all the power of the mother of God is derived from the merits of her Son. We are no otherwise concerned about the retaining of ipsa, she, in this place, that in as much as we have yet no certain reason to suspect its being genuine. As some words have been corrected in the Vulgate since the Council of Trent by Sixtus V. and others, by Clement VIII. so, if, upon stricter search, it be found that it, and not she, is the true reading, we shall not hesitate to admit the correction: but we must wait in the mean time respectfully, till our superiors determine. (Haydock) Kemnitzius certainly advanced a step too far, when he said that all the ancient fathers read ipsum. Victor, Avitus, St. Augustine, St. Gregory, &c. mentioned in the Douay Bible, will convict him of falsehood. Christ crushed the serpent’s head by his death, suffering himself to be wounded in the heel. His blessed mother crushed him likewise, by her co-operation in the mystery of the Incarnation; and by rejecting, with horror, the very first suggestions of the enemy, to commit even the smallest sin. (St. Bernard, ser. 2, on Missus est.) “We crush,” says St. Gregory, Mor. 1. 38, “the serpent’s head, when we extirpate from our heart the beginnings of temptation, and then he lays snares for our heel, because he opposes the end of a good action with greater craft and power.” The serpent may hiss and threaten; he cannot hurt, if we resist him. (Haydock)
Note the Douay-Rheims gives the only correct English translation out of all the Catholic and Protestant bibles!
 
The Clementine Vulgate uses the Latin word ipsa, the Clementine Vulgate is the only version of the Bible that has been declared completely clear from all doctrinal and moral errors, I believe. I think I’d go with Fr. Mitch was wrong.
 
If it is not her, who is the she? For a certainty?

Who else would have every reason to do it? Any mother would do that. It would not make her special, but very very normal and in fact, more normal than she is thought of as.

She was human. Any mother would do the same thing, if they were confronted with the one who this one was.
 
Jam is right, it is Mary who is spoken of as the mother of He who shall crush the serpent’s head.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top