Mary & Pain, Part Trois

[Veridicus]

Biologically speaking this has always been a difficult issue for me to comprehend, especially since I started medical school last fall and I've been doing nothing but study anatomy and neurobiology and physiology and....

Raphael/St. Colette have stated that the scriptures attribute the pains of childbirth as a direct result of Original Sin. Yet Genesis 3:16 states, "...I will [b]greatly multiply your pains in childbirth[/b]. In pain you will bring forth children, ..." Not to disagree with the Church Fathers and Popes and the countless brilliant theologians in the last two-thousand years, but mathematically speaking you cannot "multiply pain" unless there was at least some actual amount of pain there with which to start. It seems the verse is speaking about an extant pain which would be increased exponentially because of Eve's disobedience and contribution to the Fall of Man. Perhaps by the first "pain" it is simply meant "discomfort" or something... And I assume the "childbirthing" in Revleations 11 is meant to be taken as a 'spiritual' laboring?

So yeah, WHY precisely did the Church Fathers think there was no childbirthing pain in light of the passage stating extant pain would be multiplied? Is this just something gets lost in translation?

[StColette]

Micah and I are both working on this. Going back to Hebrew takes time especially if you are a little out of practice. I promise we'll have an answer as soon as possible. I don't like giving the generic "because the Church Fathers says so and that's enough for us" answer. So bear with us.



I can answer the part about Revelation relatively quickly thought. In the Revelation, which can be very confusing, the verses refer to Mary, Israel, and the Church.

Haydock Commentary

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 Virgin Mary]. 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. (Challoner) --- 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. (Witham)

Ver. 2. With child, &c., to signify that the Church, even in the time of persecutions, brought forth children to Christ. (Witham) --- It likewise signifies the difficulties which obstructed the first propagation of Christianity. (Pastorini)


My other commentaries are at home, so I hope this will do for now about Revelation, at least.

[StColette]

The following is a PM received from the original poster

[quote]I wish I could respond on the Q&A board...

I appreciate the quick response on the Mary question; And I understand the symbolism and typology of Revelations (I've read Hail Holy Queen which helped a lot). However, while the Haydock Commentary you posted in the response addresses the "who" Revelations 12, it doesn't actually address the issue "were the pains of the woman which represents Mary in Revelations signifying actual labor pains." Again, it could be a spiritual metaphor; but I don't know that that holds because in using Mary as the 'type' for the woman in Revelations we see that she gave birth to Christ in physicality not spirituality. It still seems like it would be mincing approaches to use Revelations to show Mary's generational physical relationship to Jesus but then say that the labor pain was "spiritual" or "emotional."

Again it can be said that the labor pains apply only to the symbol of the Church in the woman or of Israel; but again this seems to fall short of the reality that Israel, Mary, and the Church all three seem to fully satisfy the imagry of Revelations 12...with the exception of the traditional view of Mary not experiencing labor pains. It seems superfluous to make this exception OUTSIDE of the tradition that she did not experience labor pain.

It just seems like between this and Genesis 3:16..the bible is suggesting that Mary did indeed experience labor pain of some sort; Now whether this was some sort of "outside the central nervous system" pain or whatnot is obviously not going to be demonstrated conclusively from the relevant scripture. It may have been more "discomfort" than pain or something as well...like the difference between pressure on your arm and crushing weight on your arm. Still trying to work through this...[/quote]

[Thy Geekdom Come]

Typologies are never meant to be entirely literal. Neither are prophecies or apocalyptic texts. The woman in Revelation represents several different things; we are to accept that at least one of those meanings refers to Mary, but that does not mean that all the aspects of the text refer to her. Further, the suffering in which she finds herself could relate to Mary if we understand it in a spiritual sense; she suffered in bringing forth Christ in the sense that she suffered in raising Him, suffered in her share in His ministry, suffered in handing Him over and allowing Him to suffer.

Trying to take a metaphor and link up every aspect to a literal meaning defies the purpose of a metaphor. It would be like CS Lewis being unhappy with Narnia and trying to include more and more parallels with the Gospel until there was virtually no difference. Then the metaphor would lose its purpose entirely.

The Hebrew for pain also means suffering, sorrow, grief. This we know Mary experienced, not as though she were subject to suffering (being who she was, she had to have access to complete joy at every moment), but because she was subject to love, and one who loves suffers when the beloved suffers. One who suffers out of love can suffer and be joyful all at once. Someone filled with her faith, hope, and love could especially do this. This is suffering on the supernatural order, it is divine compassion, much like God, who "cannot suffer, but can suffer-with." However, in the natural order, she was not subject to suffering. Her suffering came from her willingness to be joined to Christ.

Nonetheless, we understand that she had no labor pains because we understand that Christ did not open the birth canal.

I hope this helps.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

d.USt! w.hy m.ust y.ou d.o t.his f.or Α.pril F.ool's D.ay?

[StColette]

Especi[i]a[/i]lly t[i]o[/i] th[i]e[/i] Q &[i]A[/i] bo[i]a[/i]rd!

[StColette]

The Hebrew word for multiply is rahab and is used in the Hipil form in Genesis 3:16. The Hipil form means that the word is being used in the causative way.

According to a Hebrew Lexicon, the word rahab in the Hipil form means:

1. • to make much, make many, have many 1c
• to multiply, increase 1c
• to make much to do, do much in respect of, transgress greatly 1c
• to increase greatly or exceedingly
1. to make great, enlarge, do much

Keeping those definitions in mind one must think back to before the Fall of man. Before the Fall, pain and death had not entered into the world, so by your observation you cannot multiply something that isn’t already there. Which makes me believe that when translated from the Hebrew it would read more correct as “I will make great” or “I will make many” your sorrows? It is also interesting to keep in mind that according to both the Greek Septuagint, Latin Vulgate, and the Hebrew translation it says I will multiply (increase) your sorrows and thy conception and then goes on to say that in sorrow you will bring forth children. It separates the two things sorrows and conception. Now when reading Sacred Scripture we can see that a conception of a child has not yet taken place. So again, how can something that hasn’t take place yet be increased. I believe this is answered by what I stated previously. That the verse would read more correct as “I will make many” or “I will make great” thy sorrows and thy conception. It clears up the problem of multiplying something that does not yet exist, like pain and death.

As Micah pointed out and I did as well in a previous post on one of the other threads, the Church teaches that Mary did not suffer birth pains because Christ did not open the womb. In the dogma on the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, it is understood that Mary remained a Virgin before, during, and after the birth of Christ. It is the “during the birth” that the Church made sure to clarify. Because labor pains come from the opening of the womb, the cervix opening etc., Mary did not experience this because her womb remained unopened, unaltered, or unchanged. Her virginity remained in tact because her womb had never been opened in this way. That’s why the Council of Trent established the concept of understanding Christ’s birth as light passing through a glass window. The window remained unopened, unbroken and unchanged.

Hope this helps, if not post part 4 lol!
God Bless,
Jennie