Some mysterious Marian verses

[Lief_Erikson]

I have a question for anyone here who might know the answer. This question may be obscure, a bit, so I won’t be surprised if it’s a difficult one.

In Revelation 12:6, we read that after giving birth to Jesus, Mary “fled into the desert where she had a place prepared by God, that there she might be taken care of for twelve hundred and sixty days.” This would be Mary’s flight into the desert between Israel and Egypt, where she escaped the dragon, who was seeking to “devour” the child through Herod’s killers, and remained in hiding for a time with Joseph and the Christ-child.

Thus far, the chapter seems clear enough.

But then, later in the chapter, we read of the woman making another flight into a desert.

Revelation 12

13
When the dragon saw that it had been thrown down to the earth, it pursued the woman who had given birth to the male child.
14
But the woman was given the two wings of the great eagle, so that she could fly to her place in the desert, where, far from the serpent, she was taken care of for a year, two years, and a half-year.
15
The serpent, however, spewed a torrent of water out of his mouth after the woman to sweep her away with the current.
16
But the earth helped the woman and opened its mouth and swallowed the flood that the dragon spewed out of its mouth.
17
Then the dragon became angry with the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring, those who keep God’s commandments and bear witness to Jesus.
18
It took its position on the sand of the sea.

The verses above, I fail to understand. Part of the reason for this, no doubt, is the great sketchiness on the Biblical witness as to Mary’s later life, after Jesus’ infancy. We read about her role in the Miracle at Cana and a little about her role at Golgotha. Then we read that she was present at the Ascension of Jesus and at Pentecost, praying with the believers. All these pieces of information are important, though I don’t see how they fit into the account above, if they do at all.

I’ve heard speculation that the woman being given wings like an eagle to fly into the desert is a reference to her Assumption. Maybe that is a secondary meaning, but the difficulty I have with that being a primary meaning is twofold. One is that a “desert” seems a strange way to refer to Heaven, and the second, more important, reason is that the verse appears to describe this place of protection against the devil as being a temporary respite, followed in verses 15 and 16 by more battle.

Could it be that the passage is repeating pieces of information it has already related? In this case both flights into the desert would be the flight to Egypt, and the flood pouring forth from the dragon’s mouth could be interpreted as his onslaught against her at Golgotha. The earth could be said to have swallowed up the flood by opening its mouth to release Christ (the tombstone was rolled aside), and the power of death was destroyed.

That’s just a theory. I don’t understand these verses, or the organization of the chapter, all that well. Any additional ideas or information would be appreciated!

If anyone knows if the saints have written on this part of the chapter, I’d be curious to see what they say as well.

 

[panevino]

Thanks for posting this.
I was not aware of this parallel .

Mat 2: 13 And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him…16Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men.

Rev2:34 …and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.

Rev2:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

 

[Lief_Erikson]

That is interesting. Herod’s attack on the Holy Innocents does indeed appear to reflect Satan’s attack on Mary’s spiritual children.

 

[Crumpy]

I can’t offer help with the whole section in Revelation, but I have run across this.

The “desert” is probably a variant of translation for the word ‘wilderness.’ Scripture seems to use the wilderness as referring to a place not of desolation, but of a “simpler” place where one is closer to God, it’s closer to the setting of the garden of Eden.

don’t know if that helps any

 

[NotWorthy]

I can’t offer help with the whole section in Revelation, but I have run across this.

The “desert” is probably a variant of translation for the word ‘wilderness.’ Scripture seems to use the wilderness as referring to a place not of desolation, but of a “simpler” place where one is closer to God, it’s closer to the setting of the garden of Eden.

don’t know if that helps any

I also notice that St. John is often referenced as “The Eagle” (Mark is the Lion, Luke is the Bull, and Matthew is the Man). Mary was given to St. John by Jesus at the foot of the Cross. John took her into his home in Ephesus. We don’t see much of St. John after Acts 5 or 6. Maybe Ephesus is the wilderness that Mary was taken.

 

[LongJohnSilver]

I also notice that St. John is often referenced as “The Eagle” (Mark is the Lion, Luke is the Bull, and Matthew is the Man). Mary was given to St. John by Jesus at the foot of the Cross. John took her into his home in Ephesus. We don’t see much of St. John after Acts 5 or 6. Maybe Ephesus is the wilderness that Mary was taken.

I like the line of thinking in this topic. It seems to fit pretty well.

On a side note, how does this relate to the authorship of Revelations? Does the above make it more likely or less likely that it was written by the same St. John, considering he was prophecising his own acts (probably after the events)?

 

[Lief_Erikson]

I like the line of thinking in this topic. It seems to fit pretty well.

I find it interesting, too.

On a side note, how does this relate to the authorship of Revelations? Does the above make it more likely or less likely that it was written by the same St. John, considering he was prophecising his own acts (probably after the events)?

I don’t think it makes any difference. After all, he spent the chapter writing about his mother Mary also, without naming her (except as “ark of the covenant” and as “woman”). He also failed to name Jesus explicitly in this chapter. He only named Satan.

 

[NHInsider]

Biblical prophecy generally contains multiple layers of meaning.

In the case of the Woman in Revelation 12, she is generally understood as representing:

1. Mary the Mother of the Messiah. Literal sense, obviously - gave birth, went into Exile to protect the Child, caught up into Heaven.
2. Israel, who figuratively gave birth to the Messiah.
3. Mary as the New Eve, whose seed will crush the serpent
4. Mary as the embodiment/icon of the Church, whose offspring are persecuted by the dragon and driven into the desert.

Here’s an article by James Akin that is more detailed than the above.

 

[Axion]

I also notice that St. John is often referenced as “The Eagle” (Mark is the Lion, Luke is the Bull, and Matthew is the Man). Mary was given to St. John by Jesus at the foot of the Cross. John took her into his home in Ephesus. We don’t see much of St. John after Acts 5 or 6. Maybe Ephesus is the wilderness that Mary was taken.

Yes. And in Acts it also states that all Christians had to flee Jerusalem after the martyrdom of Stephen.

 

[NotWorthy]

Yes. And in Acts it also states that all Christians had to flee Jerusalem after the martyrdom of Stephen.

Well… no. All Christians except for the Apostles.a

Acts 8:1 -1*** Now Saul was consenting to his execution.On that day, there broke out a severe persecution of the church in Jerusalem, and all were scattered throughout the countryside of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles.***

 

[Lief_Erikson]

Well… no. All Christians except for the Apostles.a

Acts 8:1 -1*** Now Saul was consenting to his execution.On that day, there broke out a severe persecution of the church in Jerusalem, and all were scattered throughout the countryside of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles.***

They also ended up leaving Jerusalem before it was conquered by the Romans.

Yes. And in Acts it also states that all Christians had to flee Jerusalem after the martyrdom of Stephen.

Thank-you for pointing this out! It’s a wonderful meditation, for this shows how the woman of Revelation 12 parallels so perfectly the lives of Mary and the Church. It also parallels the life of Old Testament Israel, which had to flee into a desert to escape Egypt, which also sought to destroy the Israelite children.

Herod sought to destroy Mary’s child so she fled into the desert. Following this, Herod attacked the children of Bethlehem and killed them.

The Jews tried to destroy the Christians, and the Christ they were bringing forth, so they had to flee into the desert.

Also the Egyptians tried to destroy the Israelite children, so Israel had to flee into the desert to escape them.

This also all takes place in the soul of an individual Christian. When we come to faith in God, the devil attacks the Christ child within us, so we flee into the desert of self-abandonment and humility so that we can escape his continued assault.

It also took place with Noah and his family. Noah, the New Testament tells us, was a “preacher of righteousness,” but his world was disgusted with him, mocked him and opposed him. He “fled into the desert” and built an ark. Then great waters came, but he was saved from these waters through the ark.

This brings me to another parallel I’m beginning to see in all of these situations. That is the waters Revelation 12 talks about. It says the devil unleashed a flood of water, but the earth opened its mouth and swallowed the water, saving the woman.

In the case of Old Testament Israel, we can see this flood of water in the Red Sea, which cut the Israelites off and left them vulnerable to the forces of the devil, the Egyptian army. The Lord parted the sea so that the Israelites could cross.

In the Early Church, this flood of waters sent to destroy the woman can be seen as the flood of persecutions the devil afflicted the Church with, to consume it in death. The Lord raised the Church up above these waters, though, and its teachings filled the the nations. As the Scripture says, “the meek shall inherit the Earth.”

In the life of an individual Christian, the Lord raises us above the waters through baptism, pealing back the power of sin and the devil in our lives. The Scripture uses water as a metaphor for death, which is why we are raised above the waters in baptism. We descend into them in the Lord’s Passion and are raised out of them in His Resurrection.

In Mary, the flood waters could be seen as her anguish at the Lord’s Passion. Simeon prophesied that this would be a sword through her soul. In a spiritual way, she died in Him then and there.

Mary saw death cover all that she held most dear, yet she had faith. Then the earth was opened, the tombstone was rolled back, Christ was raised, and the flood waters were themselves consumed, like the Egyptians washed away by the waters, or our sins washed away in baptism, or Noah’s world of wicked men washed away by the Flood, or the martyrdom of the Early Church ended by its resurrection in the 4th century and spiritual coronation over the nations, as the Catholic faith spread throughout the world.

Praise God!

 

[rcjones]

I can’t offer help with the whole section in Revelation, but I have run across this.

The “desert” is probably a variant of translation for the word ‘wilderness.’ Scripture seems to use the wilderness as referring to a place not of desolation, but of a “simpler” place where one is closer to God, it’s closer to the setting of the garden of Eden.

don’t know if that helps any

Israel was going to go to the wilderness to meet God and sacrifice.
Aaron met Moses in the wilderness and gave him a kiss.
Jesus met Satan in the wilderness.

These are the same picture.

Israel as the ‘Son of God’ went to the wilderness to meet God and sacrifice.

Kiss also means ‘burn’, Aaron was made the mouthpiece of Moses and Moses was made God to Pharaoh, So Aaron as the mouthpiece of God (Jesus) went to the wilderness and met God and burned or sacrificed.

The third one is tricky… Obedience is better than sacrifice, So when Jesus met Satan in the wilderness he made a better sacrifice to God by his obedience.

The wilderness is where we meet God.

 

[rcjones]

I also notice that St. John is often referenced as “The Eagle” (Mark is the Lion, Luke is the Bull, and Matthew is the Man). Mary was given to St. John by Jesus at the foot of the Cross. John took her into his home in Ephesus. We don’t see much of St. John after Acts 5 or 6. Maybe Ephesus is the wilderness that Mary was taken.

Ephesus means ‘permitted’ and as one of the seven churches refers to the saints who may now approach the throne of grace boldly. It also refers to the Garden where Adam was permitted to walk with God. So going to Ephasus is a riddle which may refer to assumption.

I am not sure yet if it is a repeat image or a serial image. I have only poked through the symbols a bit and done the first and part of the second chapter word for word.

I’m not Catholic and don’t know Mary like I know Christ so the riddles are more difficult to discern for her.

 

[NeedImprovement]

It can be difficult trying to narrow down certain passages from the Book of Revelation to a single interpetation.

The way the imagery is presented doesn’t follow what we have been accustomed to calling “chronological order”.

For example when we say Revelation 12:6 is the flight into the desert to escape Herod, how can it be that Revelation 12:5 says Jesus already “ascended into Heaven”, (which you’ll find as a footnote in the USCCB version of the NAB).

And how can Jesus have already ascended into Heaven in Revelation 12:5 , when it is Revelation 12:7 that says war broke out in heaven ?

**NAB , Revelation **[12:5-8]

5
She gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod. Her child was caught up to God and his throne.
6
The woman herself fled into the desert where she had a place prepared by God, that there she might be taken care of for twelve hundred and sixty days.

7 Then war broke out in heaven; Michael and his angels battled against the dragon. The dragon and its angels fought back,
8
but they did not prevail and there was no longer any place for them in heaven.

So when reading Revelation, we need to keep an eye on the sequence in which things are presented.

That being said, I’d read in some private revelation, that our own hearts were where Mary would be [Rev. 12:14] “taken care of.”

It makes sense that we would follow in the steps of St. John, the Eagle, who first received her as Mother. It also makes sense that in a world which is becoming more and more secularized, a refuge should exist where the flame of love and devotion to our Blessed Mother will continue to burn brightly.

…Just my limited opinion

 

[John_Calvin]

It can be difficult trying to narrow down certain passages from the Book of Revelation to a single interpetation.

The way the imagery is presented doesn’t follow what we have been accustomed to calling “chronological order”.

For example when we say Revelation 12:6 is the flight into the desert to escape Herod, how can it be that Revelation 12:5 says Jesus already “ascended into Heaven”, (which you’ll find as a footnote in the USCCB version of the NAB).

And how can Jesus have already ascended into Heaven in Revelation 12:5 , when it is Revelation 12:7 that says war broke out in heaven ?

**NAB , Revelation **[12:5-8]

5
She gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod. Her child was caught up to God and his throne.
6
The woman herself fled into the desert where she had a place prepared by God, that there she might be taken care of for twelve hundred and sixty days.

7 Then war broke out in heaven; Michael and his angels battled against the dragon. The dragon and its angels fought back,
8
but they did not prevail and there was no longer any place for them in heaven.

So when reading Revelation, we need to keep an eye on the sequence in which things are presented.

That being said, I’d read in some private revelation, that our own hearts were where Mary would be [Rev. 12:14] “taken care of.”

It makes sense that we would follow in the steps of St. John, the Eagle, who first received her as Mother. It also makes sense that in a world which is becoming more and more secularized, a refuge should exist where the flame of love and devotion to our Blessed Mother will continue to burn brightly.

…Just my limited opinion

The figure of the pregnant woman in Re 12 does not reference Mary. It may seem attractive to those who venerate her (not me), but as you have indicated it involves problems. You then have to deal with the reference to “the rest of her children” which does not agree with Roman Catholic dogma. It should be noted that this figure is drawn from the OT story of Joseph’s dream. In Joseph’s dream it was the sun and the moon and 11 stars since Joseph himself would not be included. Here, however, Joseph is included so that there are 12 stars.

Instead, the pregnant woman is the symbol of the divine preparation for both the Jewish people and the Church. Christ is of course symbolized by the male child who is snatched up into heaven. To attempt to historicize the symbols of Revelation is a mistake (such as referencing the flight into the desert as the Flight into Egypt).

 

[NeedImprovement]

The figure of the pregnant woman in Re 12 does not reference Mary. It may seem attractive to those who venerate her (not me), but as you have indicated it involves problems. You then have to deal with the reference to “the rest of her children” which does not agree with Roman Catholic dogma. It should be noted that this figure is drawn from the OT story of Joseph’s dream. In Joseph’s dream it was the sun and the moon and 11 stars since Joseph himself would not be included. Here, however, Joseph is included so that there are 12 stars.

Instead, the pregnant woman is the symbol of the divine preparation for both the Jewish people and the Church. Christ is of course symbolized by the male child who is snatched up into heaven. To attempt to historicize the symbols of Revelation is a mistake (such as referencing the flight into the desert as the Flight into Egypt).

That is interesting - being able to see how non Catholics would interpret this part of sacred scripture . I would like to confirm that the above quote doesn’t express the Catholic mindset however .

Even for Catholics who don’t venerate our Blessed Mother, prevalent Catholic thought has and continues to identify this woman in Chapter 12 of the Book of Revelation with both the Church and with the Blessed Virgin Mary in particular. We also make an initial connection ( as Lief Erikson did in his original post) between the dragon wanting to devour the woman’s son with the stirring up of the jealousy of Herod and his attempts to kill the Christ child. Along with many of the Saints throughout Catholic tradition,Father Rene Laurentin, foremost among mariologists would say so ; and there is a good article confirming this right here under CAF’s own wing, in Catholic Encyclopedia . Here’s a pertinent excerpt :

“…In the Apocalypse (xii, 1-6) occurs a passage singularly applicable to Our Blessed Mother: “And a great sign appeared in heaven: A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; and being with child, she cried travailing in birth, and was in pain to be delivered. And there was seen another sign in heaven: and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and on his heads seven diadems; and his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth; and the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to be delivered; that when she should be delivered, he might devour her son. And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod; and her son was taken up to God, and to his throne. And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she had a place prepared by God, that there they should feed her a thousand two hundred sixty days”. The applicability of this passage to Mary is based on the following considerations: (I) At least part of the verses refer to the mother whose son is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron; according to Ps. ii, 9, this is the Son of God, Jesus Christ, Whose mother is Mary. (2) It was Mary’s son that “was taken up to God, and to his throne” at the time of His Ascension into heaven. (3) The dragon, or the devil of the earthly paradise (cf. Apoc. xii, 9; xx, 2), endeavored to devour Mary’s Son from the first moments of His birth, by stirring up the jealousy of Herod and, later on, the enmities of the Jews. (4) Owing to her unspeakable privileges, Mary may well be described as ` clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars”. (5) It is true that commentators generally understand the whole passage as applying literally to the Church, and that part of the verses is better suited to the Church than to Mary. But it must be kept in mind that Mary is both a figure of the Church, and its most prominent member. What is said of the Church, is in its own way true of Mary. Hence the passage of the Apocalypse () ii, 5-6) does not refer to Mary merely by way of accommodation (cf. Drach, Apocal., Paris, 1873, 114), but applies to her in a truly literal sense which appears to be partly limited to her, and partly extended to the whole Church. Mary’s relation to the Church is well summed up in the expression “collum corporis mystici” applied to Our Lady by St. Bernardin of Siena."

 

[Lief_Erikson]

Instead, the pregnant woman is the symbol of the divine preparation for both the Jewish people and the Church. Christ is of course symbolized by the male child who is snatched up into heaven. To attempt to historicize the symbols of Revelation is a mistake (such as referencing the flight into the desert as the Flight into Egypt).

Dear John,

Thank-you for bringing up the relationship between this passage and Joseph’s dream. Joseph was a type of Christ, and the glory given him represents the glory of Christ. Indeed, the Church too, and Mary, are clothed in the glory of Christ.

The glory of Mary and the Church, as described in Revelation 12, is also predicted in several other passages in the Bible. Psalm 45, for instance, describes the queen as clothed in gold of Ophir, which parallels the woman described as clothed with the sun.

The Song of Songs carries some of the most beautiful Mariology in the Old Testament.

I know that there are more meanings in Song of Songs than Mary, though she is a beautiful and very important one. The woman in Song of Songs, like the woman in Revelation 12, also represents the Church, Israel, and our personal relationships with God. These meanings do not negate the Marian meaning, though. You make a mistake when you say Revelation 12 does NOT reflect Mary, though I understand that, being part of the 16th century tradition you grew up in (rather than the Apostolic Tradition), you’re accustomed to thinking NOT Mary.

All these meanings work together, praise be to Mary’s Son .

Song of Songs 6:10-12 (NIV) prophesies about this woman of Revelation 12 quite explicitly.

8 Sixty queens there may be,
and eighty concubines,
and virgins beyond number;
9 but my dove, my perfect one, is unique,
the only daughter of her mother,
the favorite of the one who bore her.
The maidens saw her and called her blessed;
the queens and concubines praised her.
10 Who is this that appears like the dawn,
fair as the moon, bright as the sun,
majestic as the stars in procession?
11 I went down to the grove of nut trees
to look at the new growth in the valley,
to see if the vines had budded
or the pomegranates were in bloom.
12 Before I realized it,
my desire set me among the royal chariots of my people.

The woman described in Song of Songs is the “perfect one” (Song of Songs 6:9) who, like Mary, is blessed above all women (Song of Songs 6:8-9 – Luke 1:42), raised to royal splendor (Song of Songs 6:12 – Luke 1:43), and brings forth the Christ (Song of Songs 6:11 – Luke 2:6-7). The Song of Songs associates this foretold woman with new growth, the budding of the vine (Christ is the Vine), the blooming of the pomegranates. This woman is associated constantly in Song of Songs with fertility, bringing forth perfect offspring, being herself the perfection of beauty. The magnitude of her love for her beloved and his love for her is constantly also emphasized.

She is compared to all women and found superior, she is raised up to royalty, she is a virgin (Song of Songs 4:12), she is conceived at a tree that brings forth life, like the Tree of Life through whom Mary is Immaculately Conceived, and she is assumed into Heaven (3:6, 8:5). She is the “Litter of Solomon” (3:7), Solomon being a type of the Prince of Peace . . . Mary held Jesus on her lap, truly serving as His litter. John the Baptist, the greatest prophet, found himself unworthy to untie Jesus’ sandals, yet God found Mary worthy of bearing Him in her womb for 9 months.*

The Song of Songs is the Biblical prophecy that Revelation 12:1 most perfectly fulfills.

The figure of the pregnant woman in Re 12 does not reference Mary. It may seem attractive to those who venerate her (not me), but as you have indicated it involves problems. You then have to deal with the reference to “the rest of her children” which does not agree with Roman Catholic dogma.

On the contrary, this fully is in accord with Mary’s identity as Mother of all Christians.

This role was typologically foreshadowed many times in the Old Testament. A couple examples that immediately spring to mind are Eve and Sarah. Eve is described in Genesis as “mother of all the living.” She also gave birth to a type of Christ, Abel. Through Eve, all came to physical life, even as through Mary’s assent to God’s request to bring forth His Son in her, all who believe in Him receive spiritual life.

Sarah gave birth to Isaac, an obvious type of Christ. Remember the scene where he is offered to God on an altar, and the fact that through him comes all Israel, even as through Christ, all the New Israel comes to life.

Sarah was a barren woman, too old to give birth, even as Mary was a virgin. Sarah brings forth Isaac miraculously, even as Mary miraculously brings forth Christ. Sarah is commended for her faith (Heb. 11:11), even as Mary was (Luke 1:45). In Genesis 12:11-13, we learn that Sarah has extraordinary beauty, paralleling the beauty of the woman of Song of Songs, as well as the Virgin Mary’s angelic spiritual beauty.

Sarah becomes the “mother of nations.” In 1 Peter 3:5-6, Peter says that Sarah is still our mother, if we obey God and do His will.

In very much the same way, only more gloriously, through faith, Mary has become the Mother of all Christians.

This reference in Revelation 12 does not in any way contradict Mary’s Perpetual Virginity. In fact, it explicitly describes a spiritual childbirth, for it says that the woman’s children are “those who keep God’s commandments and bear witness to Jesus” (12:17).

 

[Axion]

A. The figures that appear in Revelation 12 are actually the same as those that appear in the proto-gospel of Genesis.

Genesis 3:15. “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.”

Satan is the Serpent of Genesis, he is also the Dragon of Revelation. Jesus is the “seed” who will crush the serpent in Genesis, and the child who will rule with a rod of iron in Revelation. In both, He and His mother, the Woman, are at permanent enmity with the serpent. So the Woman of Genesis 3 and of Revelation 12 are the same. However no one suggests that the woman of Genesis 3 is Israel.

B. Similarly, the Woman of Revelation 12 is introduced as a great sign in Heaven. Where else in the bible can we see a Woman announced as a great sign? Look at Isaiah 7:14 “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son.” We can see that this is exactly the same sign as in Revelation 12, confirming that the Woman in both occurences is Mary.

 

[Lief_Erikson]

I like how you link the sign in Isaiah 7 to the sign in Rev. 12, Axion . I’d never noticed that connection before.

 

[philipmarie]

I love this thread. It is Mary who alone who has from Her Son the power to save us(to Jesus through Mary so as to not get some crazy person insulting me that I adore Mary).

But, there is something which I am rather fond of and which in no way contradicts CHurch teaching: it is that, maybe the Blessed Virgin is actually the Catholic Church Herself. That is, Mary and the Church are one and the same thing. Just look at the evidence:

Mary of Agreda alluded to this when she said that the Blessed Virgin was the Mystic Church; Christ found the Catholic Church at the foot of the cross, most probably when he said “Woman, behold thy Son”.

I think this is a very logical explanation. We are members of the Catholic CHurch(those in communion with the Pope), the Blessed Virgin is the Church, the Church is a Mother and so is the Blessed Virgin our Mother. Christ only does things through Mary, so if the Blessed Virgin is the Church who bears to God His children, He would be doing things through Mary and through the Church.

There is certianly nothing contrary to Church teaching about this, as it delves even mor einto the mystery of the CHurch as the brid eof CHist and of the Trinity. All the three Persons of the Trinity have children by the Church and Mary, and not one person has a few children by Mary only, or another by the Church only, etc,…

I am not comfortable with the idea of having Jesus as my Spouse. Obcviously, I love my ‘dear little Child Jesus’ but, you can understand my aversion to this thesis. True, many men Saints loved being called Spouses of Christ, but I think it is more becoming for men to be Spouses of the Blessed Virgin and for the women to be Spouses of Christ(thids applies also to those who are sacramentally married, for even these can be Spuses of Mary and Jesus. Concepcion Cabrera de Armida said something about getting mystically married sometime in her married life, for example). It is even more natural and mor ein comformity with the order of nature.

This, I think explains why the ‘sign’ of revelation seems to speak simultanously about the Blessed Virgin and the Church. What do you think. Right now, I can’t answer much. I’m working on my book so it could be a while for an answer to be sent.

(when I come to think and speculate about Mariology, I am completely unscrupulous, and I know I am not even sinning, not even venially. Heck, in fact, I’m not even commiting the slightest fault for Pete’s sake!).