Rev. 12:2-5 : Why Mary, if the woman, cries in pain?

[itsjustdave1988]

I’m just confused as to how Mary can be free of Original Sin and yet still suffers the punishment of Original Sin.

She died too. She suffered pain. So did Jesus. These things are a consequence of original sin. Does that mean the Jesus and Mary both were punished for their originial sin? No. Catholic teaching insists that neither was subject to the punishments of original sin, although for the sake of God, they suffered and died meritoriously, not as a punishment or else you are also forced to opine that Jesus, since he suffered and died, must have been due to punishment for original sin, which would be absurd.

 

[Psalm45_9]

The pain described is a reference to Isaiah, I don’t know the verse off the top of my head. The pain alludes to the pain felt at the crucifixion. Yes the Woman is symbolic of the Church and Israel, but neither one can give birth to a child, not even in a metaphor. Mary is not to be disculded in this symbolism.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Axion:

The Sun, moon and stars may indeed be signs of Israel but they are not the Woman. They are only associated with the Woman.

So the 12 stars can represent the 12 tribes of Israel, or the 12 apostles, however they just show that the Woman is associated with Israel and the Church, not that she is either.

In fact none of the symbols in Revelation 12 is a collective entity like Israel. Each represents an individual. The Child is Jesus, the Dragon is Satan. The stars that fall from the sky are individual angels. Therefore the Woman, the Mother of Jesus is also an individual. Mary.

It is more than a hint. Who was Jesus’s Mother?

Mary, of course, but it does not follow that the woman is her. The Catholic tradition of interpretation of this figure is very far from unanimous that Mary is the woman.​

Similarly the same sign of a Woman and Child appears in Isaiah 7, and no-one has any trouble recognizing that as Jesus and Mary.

Isaiah was probably not prophesying about Our Lord - look at the words of the chapter. However, Our Lord may be a completer fulfilment of the passage, in some respects, than the figure immediately intended by Isaiah, who was probably a mortal Jewish prince. The immediate fulfilment presupposes the existence of Assyria, which was no longer important in Our Lord’s time.​

The Woman given wings was being persecuted by the Dragon, and she was helped to flee. Again, the simplest explanation is the persecution by Herod that caused the flight into Egypt, or one of the later persecution episodes.

The only drawback here is that the wings don’t get mentioned. As they are present in the text, it seems reasonable to suppose they are important in some way​

Its a doctrine but not a dogma

The Holy Spirit.

But knowledge of specific events can’t be based on appeals to the Holy Spirit. That’s over-supernatural - it’s fideistic. If something is said to have happened as a fact, there is presumably some basis for asserting it. I could say the Holy Spirit had taught me that Our Lady had grey eyes - that would not be a reason to believe such a claim. The apostles did not assert that the Resurrection had occurred, and expect their unsupported claim to be believed. So with the Coronation of Our Lady - to assert it, implies there is some basis for so doing which is not mere say-so; that there is evidence of it, of some kind.​

 

[mlchance]

Psalm45:9:

Yes the Woman is symbolic of the Church and Israel, but neither one can give birth to a child, not even in a metaphor.

Not even in metaphor? Hardly. The Church is our mother from whom we are nurtured on the milk of wisdom. I believe that, among others, the Venerable Bede used this metaphor.

– Mark L. Chance.