Prove that mary is in heaven

[Spyridon]

@JonNC I should’ve been more careful in specifying and said “I’ve occasionally seen some Protestants” and not merely “I’ve seen Protestants”.

But it’s also necessary for people to learn and understand and always keep in mind that Protestantism is not like Catholicism or Orthodoxy. In Catholicism and Orthodoxy, you’ve got the vast majority of people all falling under a single Church structure, then much, much smaller numbers falling into various schismatic sects or offshots. So Catholicism and Orthodoxy are pretty monolithic, at least insofar as doctrine is concerned, so it’s usually not gonna lead to confusion if one says “I’ve seen Catholics do/say x…”

Much more problematic and prone to confusion Protestantism…

You’ve got literally ~700,000,000+ people existing in 30,000+ individual communities which are part of 10,000+ separate, divided, and often contradictory groups subscribing to about 1,000+ different streams of Protestant thought.

The high Church Anglican who is essentially fully Catholic becomes grouped with the mainstream Congregational who is pretty much neutral to Catholicism grouped with the radical Jack Chick fundamentalist who is openly and violently hostile to Catholicism.

Admittedly, this is a problem. But it is kind of the nature of Protestantism… shrug

 

[JonNC]

But Protestantism isn’t a church, or a belief system, or a monolithic, and it never was.
Off topic, so I won’t continue.
Thanks for recognizing that an Anglican like me has nothing in common with the likes of these

 

[JonNC]

Hi guys… I have a question
I get a problem when trying to prove to my friends who are protestants that the virgin Mary is really in heaven though i know she is. Can you help me to make them understand that this woman is no ordinary???

From the agony of the cross, Jesus takes the responsibility to see to it His mother is looked after, since He had no blood brothers or sisters.
How much more so would He take care to have her with Him after she died ?

 

[Spyridon]

@JonNC

Like I said, you’ve got high Church Anglicans who are basically fully Catholic in all the essentials. The only thing lacking is their full Communion with the Holy See - with regard to the Catholic Church, they are basically in the same boat as the Eastern Orthodox. Communion with these types is so easily reachable that many individual Anglican parishes have actually been fully grafted back into the Church - that’s how we got the Anglican Ordinariate which exists now, happily!

God forbid, and please forgive me (both God and you) if I gave the impression that I was saying these types of Protestants are in even the same category as those who hold the abhorrent views previously illustrated!

 

[JonNC]

No worries. I’m happy to have had the chance to clarify it with you.

 

[anon65111186]

prove to my friends who are protestants that the virgin Mary is really in heaven though i know she is.

She is heaven because she told us so, she appeared many times here on earth. You have to convince them that she actually appeared though first.

 

[Gorgias]

However, it you only have one human parent then all your genes come from that parent. It doesn’t take a theologian to figure that out. My point is that if you take the doctrine of the Virgin birth seriously and consider it’s implications in light of modern science

The Church doesn’t suggest that Jesus got all his genetic material from Mary. It doesn’t take a theologian to figure that out…

I get a problem when trying to prove to my friends who are protestants that the virgin Mary is really in heaven

I think their problem might be more along the lines that she was assumed into heaven, body and soul…

 

[De_Maria]

Bro im catholic but same catholic schoolars recognize that the woman in revelation fits betters with israel.

On the contrary, let’s go through that:

Israel is our Patriarch, not our Matriarch. Israel is a man.

St. John doesn’t say that he saw a man, crowned with twelve stars. So, at best, this can only be a very indirect reference to the fact that Jesus Christ is a very distant relative of the man, Israel. Because men do not get pregnant and have children. And that is how the Woman of Rev 12 is described:

Rev 12:2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

Of course, people always bring up Israel’s son’s dream. Joseph crowned with 11 stars. Yeah, not 12. Notice, again, that it is a dream of a man, Joseph, not Israel, not crowned with twelve stars but with 13 heavenly bodies bowing to him. 11 of those were stars, one was the sun and one was the moon.

Genesis 37:9 And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me.

So, if this is a reference to Joseph’s dream, it is very indirect and barely fits without a great deal of stretching.

Israel is a nation

This has some merit. But only secondarily, because, again, St. John described a woman, not a nation. Although, Israel is frequently described as a woman, in the OT. Still the vision fits Mary, the Woman, the Mother of Jesus Christ, perfectly.

The Woman is Mary

1. The Woman of Rev 12 gave birth to the Messiah. Who can deny that?

Revelation 12
1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:…5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.

1. This man child is the Messiah. Jesus Christ is the Messiah. Who can deny that?
2. Mary is the mother of Christ. Who can deny that?

Therefore, the Woman of Rev 12 is Mary the mother of Christ.

It seems really simple, don’t you agree?

Therefore, it is God who has revealed, in Scripture, that Mary is the Queen of Heaven.

Which is called a woman, and if u want i can reply in academical way but know i have stomachache bro

I’m ready when you’re ready.

 

[Fauken]

Out of curiosity, what is your response to the interpretation set forth by Haydock’s Commentary, which says that the woman is the Church and the child representing children brought to Christ?
Ver. 1. A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet. By this woman, interpreters commonly understand the Church of Christ, shining with the light of faith, under the protection of the sun of justice, Jesus Christ. The moon, the Church, hath all changeable things of this world under her feet, the affections of the faithful being raised above them all. — A woman: the Church of God. It may also, by allusion, be applied to our blessed Lady. The Church is clothed with the sun, that is, with Christ: she hath the moon, that is, the changeable things of the world, under her feet; and the twelve stars with which she is crowned, are the twelve apostles: she is in labour and pain, whilst she brings forth her children, and Christ in them, in the midst of afflictions and persecutions. Ch. — Under the figure of a woman and of a dragon, are represented the various attempts of Satan to undermine the Church. — On her head . . . twelve stars, her doctrine being delivered by the twelve apostles and their successors. Wi.
Ver. 2. With child, &c. to signify that the Church, even in the time of persecutions, brought forth children to Christ. Wi. — It likewise signifies the difficulties which obstructed the first propagation of Christianity. Past.

EDIT: Catholic Answers has an article stating that all three are correct, that the woman in Revelations 12 has four meanings: https://www.catholic.com/index.php/magazine/print-edition/the-woman-of-revelation-12

 

[Gorgias]

Out of curiosity, what is your response to the interpretation set forth by Haydock’s Commentary, which says that the woman is the Church and the child representing children brought to Christ?

That was going to be my response to @Miguel25’s assertion about “the woman” being “Israel”, too. I’ve always heard that it was the Church as well as Mary, as a multivalent symbol…

 

[De_Maria]

Out of curiosity, what is your response to the interpretation set forth by Haydock’s Commentary, which says that the woman is the Church and the child representing children brought to Christ?

What @Gorgias said. The Catholic Church does not even deny the Israel interpretation. But acknowledges that the best fit, is that it is Mary.

“A great sign,” thus the Apostle St. John describes a vision divinely sent him, appears in the heavens: “A woman clothed with the sun, and with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars upon her head.” Everyone knows that this woman signified the Virgin Mary, the stainless one who brought forth our head…John therefore saw the Most Holy Mother of God already in eternal happiness, yet travailing in a mysterious childbirth. What birth was it? Surely it was the birth of us who, still in exile, are yet to be generated to the perfect charity of God, and to eternal happiness. And the birth pains show the love and desire with which the Virgin from heaven above watches over us, and strives with unwearying prayer to bring about the fulfillment of the number of the elect. (“Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum” Pope Pius X)

Note: I didn’t notice that you beat me to the punch in your own note.

 

[Miguel25]

Im not denying is Mary, im saying that there are reasons to think its israel and maybe both, if look at the second temple literature it seems to fit with israel.

 

[Miguel25]

Give me some minutes i got to translate what i got from Spanish to English. God belss you

 

[Miguel25]

@De_Maria

I paste you here the commentary.

The seer of Patmos looks in the sky a large signal. The sky is not properly the scene of the vision, whose phases are developed on the earth, but the sky is rather the screen on which the signal is projected. This sign is a woman clothed in the light of the sun, with the moon by her footstool and a crown of twelve stars (v.1). This description of the woman with those radiant attributes indicates her supramundane character, holy, pure 3. The radiance of the Woman, wrapped in the sun, gives relief to her extraordinary greatness and glory. This symbolism was known to the Jews, who use the image of light to express the glory of God 4, and even sometimes use astral ornaments for the glorified representation of great characters or sublime realities. The Song of Songs also describes the wife surrounded by light: “Who is this that rises like the dawn, beautiful as the moon, splendid as the sun?” 5 And the Testament of Naphtali describes Judah with an image quite similar to that of the Apocalypse: “Judah became bright as the moon, and under its feet were twelve rays” 6. The twelve stars most likely designate the twelve tribes of Israel. In this, almost all authors coincide today7. But they could also designate the twelve apostles 8. This image reminds us of the passage in Genesis, in which it is said that Joseph had seen in dreams that the sun, the moon and eleven stars worshiped him 9.

The sidereal adornments were also attributed to several pagan deities, such as Cybele, Isis and Attis 10. In addition, the cult of the mother goddess was very flourishing in the proconsular province of Asia in the time of John. For that reason, the vision of “the Woman-Church could very well be - as A. Gelin says - a plastic replica of the goddess whose cult was necessary to combat.”

 

[Miguel25]

Despite the celestial glory that surrounds this extraordinary woman, San Juan presents her shouting for the pains of childbirth and the desire to give birth (v.2). These details that the sacred author gives us are of capital importance to individualize the mysterious Woman. Who is that Woman effulgent of glory and splendor? The simplest answer for us would be to affirm that that Woman is Mary, the Mother of Jesus, since in v.5 it is said quite clearly that she gave birth to the Messiah. But there are several reasons that seem to oppose this solution powerfully. In the first place it is said in our passage that Woman shouted in the pains of childbirth. Now, tradition teaches unanimously that the Blessed Virgin gave birth to Jesus in a virginal and painless way. In the second place, the sacred author speaks in verse 17 of the descendants of the Woman, that is, of other children that he would have had. We know from the Gospels, through faith and tradition that Mary was always Virgin and had only one Son, Jesus Christ. These obvious reasons forced the interpreters, since ancient times, to look for other solutions. Some see in the Woman the symbol of Israel; for others it would be the figure of the Church. And there is noThose who see in Israel the representation of Israel are based on reasons that, in our view, are very important. There are many places of the Old Testament prophets in which Israel is represented under the figure of a woman. Leaving aside the wife of the Song of Songs, we can discover this personification of Israel in Hosea 12, in Jeremiah 13 and in Ezekiel14. The latter presents the two sisters Oola and Ooliba, who represent the two kingdoms of Samaria and Judah 15. The apocryphal books follow the same norm, as can be seen in 4 Ezra 16. And in the New Testament we find these same personifications 17. On the other hand, the image of Zion in labor pains was not unknown in the Old Testament. The prophet Micah exclaims: “You hurt and groan, daughter of Zion, as a woman in labor because you are going to leave the city now and dwell in the fields and you will reach Babylon.” 18 Isaiah introduces us to the oppressed Israelites who cry out to Yahweh: “As a pregnant woman when childbirth arrives she writhes and screams in her pains, so we were far away from you, Yahweh!” 19 And in another place, the same prophet She speaks of the multiplication of the new Jerusalem in these terms: "Before giving birth she gave birth, before she felt the pain she gave birth to a son, who heard such a thing? Who ever saw such a thing? A nation, is it born all at once, since Zion has borne her children before she feels the pain? shortage of those who see in it symbolized in some way the Blessed Virgin.

 

[Miguel25]

In addition, the author of the Apocalypse tells us expressly in verse 6 that the Woman fled to the desert, where she was fed by God until the danger disappeared on the part of her enemies. Through the book of Exodus we know that Israel fled Egypt into the wilderness of Sinai, where it was fed by God with the fallen manna from heaven until it became a well-formed people, able to confront and resist enemy peoples. From this obvious parallel it seems that the Woman of the Apocalypse represents the people of God personified. But what is this town? Is it the Israel of the Old Covenant or rather the new Israel, that is, the Church of Christ? We believe that the woman in our text symbolizes in the first place the Israel of the Old Testament, from which Jesus Christ was born according to the flesh. And in the second place it represents the new Israel, that is, the Church, which will be the target of all the attacks of the Dragon.

For the ν. 17 it is clear that St. John looks mainly at the Christian Church, since it presents Woman as Mother of all believers in Jesus. However, it is important to note the continuity between the old Israel of the promises and the new Israel, in which those promises were made. They are, in fact, two distinct phases of the same reality, of the same community: they form a single and unique Church through all ages. It is the historical Church that has given birth to the Messiah. This birth has been painfully prepared throughout the history of Israel. They are the pains of childbirth and the desire to give birth that the Apocalypse speaks of. These pains can not obviously refer to the happy and virginal birth of the Messiah in Bethlehem. Victorino de Pettau (circa 303) interprets them of the sufferings of the righteous of the Old Testament: “She is the ancient Church of the patriarchs and prophets, of the saints and of the apostles.” She had to endure the moans and torments of her yearnings until Christ, the promised fruit of his people according to the flesh, took body of this same race "21. The pains that the author of the Apocalypse speaks to us have a symbolic meaning. According to Jewish tradition, also recorded in Matthew 22 and present in various places of the Apocalypse, great pains and sufferings of Israel, which are compared with the pains of childbirth, had to precede the coming of the Messiah 23

 

[Miguel25]

The prophets themselves used to announce the coming of the Messiah in the moments of the great tribulations suffered by the people of God. Yahweh subjected the people to hard penance in punishment of their prevarications. But the greater the tribulation and the more distant the human hopes for a remedy, the more well-founded the hope of messianic health appeared. The birth of the Messiah promised to Israel would take place in the greatest predicament of the nation. It would come accompanied by severe labor pains. St. Paul also speaks of these pains at the end of time, before final health 24. In the apocryphal books and rabbinic literature, the “pains of the birth of the Messiah” are greatly weighted.25 These pains would be so severe that some would prefer to renounce even the physical goods for not experiencing such terrible calamities

Such is, without doubt, the meaning of our text, expressed in style very consistent with that of the ancient prophets and very close to the apocalyptic language. The Messiah was to be born of the holy nation in the moments of greatest anguish. Therefore, the Woman of the Apocalypse is the personification of the Church in its various phases. First, in its imperfect stage of the Old Testament, and later, in its perfect stage of the New Testament. One constitutes the perfection and the coronation of the other. Because there is only one Church, which has been developing through the centuries

Because she is this Woman, so beautifully adorned, the Mother of the Messiah (ν.5) there have been many ancient and modern authors who identify her with the Virgin Mary, from whom, in fact, the Savior was born. This interpretation can be justified if we bear in mind that the historical sense does not exhaust the richness of Sacred Scripture as we are taught to read it by the Holy Fathers and the Church. In an accommodative literal sense this text can be applied to the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of the Messiah and of all Christians, following Saint Augustine 27 and Saint Bernard 28. Saint Paul, writing to the Romans, contrasts Christ with Adam in these terms "Death reigned from Adam to Moses even over those who had not sinned, as Adam did, who is the type of the one who was to come in. But the gift was not like transgression, for if only one person dies by the transgression of one person, much more the grace of God and the free gift, consisting of the grace of one man, Jesus Christ, will be diffused abundantly over many, and it was not the gift that was the work of a single sinner, because for the sin of only one the judgment came for condemnation, but the gift, after many transgressions, ended in justification. " 29 This same counterposition is developed by the Apostle in 1 Cor 15: 45-49. For this contrast between Adam and Christ led the Holy Fathers to another, that of Eve and Mary, who usually develop it by making known the part that Mary took in the work of redemption. It is the application of the principle of analogy, which is so valuable in theological science.

 

[Miguel25]

Well, between the Woman of the Apocalypse, the chosen people, the offspring of Abraham according to faith, from which came the Messiah and Mary, originally from the people who gave birth to him, there is an obvious analogy. If the Apostle of the Gentiles could count among the glories of Israel the one who proceeded from Christ 30, much more can this be said of the Mother who bore him, and that for this she deserved the title of Mother of God. Similarly, if the Apostle says of Israel, of the offspring of Abraham according to faith, which is our mother 31, much better can this name be given to the one who begot Christ, Son of God and Son of man, firstborn among many brothers32, for whom we have received the dignity of children of God

All this and much more knew San Juan. That is why it is very possible that the visionary of Patmos somehow alludes, in this vision of Ap 12, to the Blessed Virgin Mary. He, who knew Mary, the Mother of Jesus; that he had received her as his mother on Calvary, that he had fulfilled the duties of a good son, he could not help but think of her when he speaks of the birth of the Messiah. The liturgy of the Church also understands this vision of the Virgin Mary. This application is not opposed to the fact that in our text we speak of the women’s birth daughters, since this could be understood from the compassion of Mary 34. In recent times, much has been written about the Marian sense of this vision of Revelation 35. The defenders of the mariological sense see in the offspring of the Woman of v.17, meaning the spiritual motherhood of Mary, who also begets those who believe in Jesus

 

[Miguel25]

As opposed to the radiant image of light of the Woman, which symbolizes the Church, Saint John contemplates a new prodigy: he sees in the sky a great Fire-colored Dragon, with seven heads, ten horns and seven crowns (ν.3 ). This Dragon represents the powers of evil, which rise up against the Church of Christ with the purpose of destroying it. According to verse 8, the Dragon is Satan, the old serpent Π ', by means of which the devil tempted Eve. Here he does not persecute Eve, but the ideal Woman, the Israel of God. In the Old Testament, one often speaks of a sea monster 38, which is designated by the names of Leviathan, Behemoth and Rahab, which symbolizes the enemy forces of God. The Dragon that appears in our text of the Apocalypse is similar to the Beast of Rev 13: 1 and 17: 3. However, here the heads and horns of the Dragon do not seem to have the precise meaning of those of the Beast. The ten horns and seven crowns of the Dragon are symbols of his power. These elements are taken from the book of Daniel 39, where the ten horns designate ten kings of the Seleucid dynasty. The seven heads, like those of the hydra of the fable and those of the seven-headed basilisk, signify their resistance to death. The crowns that adorn the seven heads signify their great power, exercised by means of so many other kings. The Dragon has crowns because he is the Prince of this world 40, and as such he presents himself to Jesus in the desert to tempt him41. The temptations of Jesus are an indication of the deaf and continuous struggle that the devil maintains against God through the centuries. The history of mankind is sown with facts and events that clearly demonstrate the struggle that has been waged from the beginning between good and evil. The Apocalypse greatly dramatizes this struggle between the forces of good and evil, between Jesus Christ and Satan, which will end with the total and definitive triumph of Christ.

San Juan indicates the evil and formidable force of the Dragon when he affirms that with his tail he dragged the third part of the stars and threw them to the earth (v.4). Also in the book of Daniel we are told of a “little horn” that grew very much towards the four cardinal points, “enlarging itself until it reached the army of the heavens, and ground stars and trampled them.” 42 The prophet Daniel refers to Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who with his religious persecution against Judaism achieved the defection of relevant characters of the Hebrew nation and profaned the temple and all the most sacred of the religion of Yahweh 43. Therefore it would not be surprising that the author of the Apocalypse alluded to the apostasy of high representatives of the Church of Christ during the persecutions then unleashed. However, according to a symbolism known in apocalyptic literature, 44 the stars that fall from the sky represent the prevaricating angels. With its power of persuasion, the Dragon drags after itself a good portion of the angels of heaven, and with the same power it will also drag many men, as it dragged our first parents into paradise.

 

[Miguel25]

The Dragon, who had appeared in the sky dragging the third part of the stars, stands before the Woman, who was about to give birth, to swallow her Son. The attitude of the Dragon tells us clearly that what he is trying to do is to put an end to the kingdom of God by killing its founder. He realizes that the one who is going to be born is the Messiah, who comes to implant the kingdom of God in this world in order to put an end to the evil empire. The Gospel story shows us with all clarity that the devil tried from the beginning against the life of Jesus and endeavored to undo his work. To diabolical inspiration the confederations of Heredes obeyed to kill Jesus newborn and, especially the temptations of the desert with the purpose of annulling the messianic mission of Jesus Christ. But above all, the scene described by the Apocalypse refers to the efforts of the Jews, encouraged by the demon 45, to kill our Lord and finish his work. We can also see here implicitly indicated the bonds that the devil will tend to all Christians to make them fall, because the idea of the mystical Christ is present in this story beside that of the personal Christ

The Son that is born of the Woman is characterized by using some words from Psalm 2: 9: A man born, who is to feed all nations with a rod of iron (v. 5). This quotation from a messianic Psalm clearly indicates that Saint John identifies this male Child with the Messiah, that is, with Jesus Christ, considered both in his historical reality and mystical in Christians. The Messiah, according to the Ancient

Testament, was to feed, as sovereign and ruler, Israel and all nations. He would be like the lieutenant of Yahweh, who would deal with an authoritative and powerful scepter, that is, with hardness, against those who revolted against him. The Woman who gives birth to him represents the chosen people, who, in the midst of great difficulties and crises of all kinds, have succeeded in enlightening the Messiah.