IN DEFENCE OF THE WOMAN CLOTHED WITH THE SUN Revelation 12: The Woman and the Dragon A great portent appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.She was pregnant and was crying out in birth pangs, in the agony of giving birth. Then another portent appeared in heaven: a great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems on his heads. His tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth. Then the dragon stood before the woman who was about to bear a child, so that he might devour her child as soon as it was born. And she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron. But her child was snatched away and taken to God and to his throne; and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, so that there she can be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days. A THEOLOGICAL INCONSISTENCY The Virgin Mary is a divisive figure, as much as her Magdalene counterpart ever was. Her name inspires either devotion or derision -- Catholics are her renowned devotees, and many Protestants, especially those of an evangelical persuasion, still baulk at what they perceive as at best an over-exuberance in the elevation of Mary to a semi-divine status. Worship, they argue, belongs only to God. My personal study of Mariology was inspired by my reading Presbyterian-turned-Catholic apologist Scott Hahns autobiographical book, Rome Sweet Home. In this book, Scott and his wife Kimberley describe how their anti-Catholic perspective was changed as they sought to reconcile the Bible with the doctrines of the Roman Church. That such a reconciliation of dogmas ranging from Transubstantiation, the Mass and the sacrament of Confession was not only possible but indisputable, they had no choice but to admit. The Bible, they concluded, was the cornerstone of the foundation of Catholic doctrine -- including the role of the Virgin Mary. In this argument, the twelfth chapter of Revelation is key. It is among the most well-known Biblical passages, and is frequently quoted to support the Catholic view of the Virgin Mary. Evangelical Protestants meanwhile tend to ditch their literal interpretation of the Bible at this point and stress the purely symbolic nature of the text in question. But herein lies a great theological inconsistency. Why? Because almost all Evangelical commentators when expounding upon this chapter identify the male child as the Messiah, and the great red dragon as a personification of Satan. But then against all the logic of their own interpretative method, they opt to attach a purely symbolic nature to the figure of the woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet. Why should this be the case, if not because ancient religious prejudices surface and override open-minded Scriptural exposition? I said that Revelation 12 is key, but it does not stand alone. It can be linked to several other Biblical passages and events to demonstrate that thegreat central apparition holding centre stage is indeed the lowly maiden of Nazareth in glorified form.Let us look at them briefly: Gospel of John Ch.2: On the third day there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding. When the wine gave out, the mother of Jesus said to him, ‘They have no wine.’ And Jesus said to her, ‘Woman, what concern is that to you and to me? My hour has not yet come.’ Gospel of John Ch.19: Meanwhile, standing near the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing beside her, he said to his mother, ‘Woman, here is your son.’ Then he said to the disciple, ‘Here is your mother.’ And from that hour the disciple took her into his own home. As we can see, in both of these excerpts Jesus addresses his mother in a purely generic term -- Woman. But what, if any, significance are we to attach to this? Certainly not that Jesus was being intentionally disrespectful. He was a devout Jew who fulfilled the Law perfectly, not least the divine exhortation to honour ones parents. And once we realise the real significance behind Jesus term of address for Mary, then we see that the honour which Jesus conferred on his mother was infinitely glorious! THE PROPHETIC WOMAN We can be sure that Jesus did not use this term of address without reason. He never minced his words or uttered anything but that it conveyed some message to his ardent listeners. The fact is, pure and simple, that when Jesus referred to his mother as woman, he was doing so to reinforce the truth of his own identity as the Promised Messiah. To discover this, we must follow the prophetic trail back through the Biblical record to where the very first promise of a redeemer is mentioned. And this initial, foundational Messianic prophecy -- often called the protoevangelium, or first gospel -- we find in the third chapter of the Book of Genesis: I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will strike your head, and you will strike his heel.’ Note the exact same use of the word woman. Here the Messiah is first avowed, and here that redemptive figure is called simply the seed of the woman. Here we find the very first indication that the Saviour of Mankind will have no earthly father, and thus we see that by referring to Mary as woman Jesus was effectively claiming that she was the daughter of Eve whose womb had produced the promised Redeemer. It was a bold claim, and many who heard it would have understood its significance -- not least those enemies of Jesus who were so conversant with the Old Testament scriptures. We can be sure that this would have caused them to bristle with indignation and called from their lips charges of blasphemy against Jesus. It was the controversial evangelical theologian and apologist David Pawson who held firm to the mantra that a text taken out of context is a pretext. And certainly if Revelation 12 stood isolated within the canon then we would be hard pressed to argue that it was to be understood as anything other than figurative. But we can see here that it in no way stands in isolation, and that the real identity of the woman clothed with the sun is beyond doubt.
Posted on: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 06:53:08 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015