Η εισήγηση του Daniel Mihoc, στο 14ο Διεθνές Συνέδριο της Ελληνικής Εταιρείας Βιβλικών Σπουδών με θέμα: «Το πρόσωπο της Μητέρας του Χριστού στην Αγία Γραφή»
1. INTRODUCTION
1. INTRODUCTION
Rev 12, one of the most amazing and controversial sections of the Holy Scripture, speaks about the birth of Christ. The event is part of a great allegorical story into which the most striking element is a feminine character of cosmic dimensions who gives birth to the Messiah and, enjoying God’s special assistance, overcomes all satanic attempts to destroy her. Like her Son, she is invincible. But Satan discovers something vulnerable belonging to her, namely „the rest her offspring, the ones who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus”.
The large variety of exegetical approaches the history of the interpretation of this text records witnesses the fact that we are in front of a very complex and difficult prophetic page. Data recalling the OT Israel, the Theotokos, Christ’s salvific work, the reality of the Church and its already harsh history of confrontation with the pagan world are used by the Prophet John with an amazing dexterity in the light of Christ’s Revelation, of early Christian theology and his own pneumatical-theological experience to create this wonderful allegorical story. Usually commentators display positions influenced by their own theological and confessional context. Can an Orthodox exegete – living within the same ecclesiological, theological and liturgical Tradition into which the Prophet John himself lived – contribute to a better understanding of the meaning of this text?
2. THE STORY
The story is short, simple and yet highly controversial. A pregnant woman adorned with the sun, the moon and a garland of twelve stars is experiencing the pains of birth. In front of her stands a fiery dragon, which is identified as Satan, ready “to devour her Child as soon as it was born”. Despite the efforts of Satan to devour the Child, He was „caught up to God and His throne”. Then the woman flees in the wilderness, in a place prepared by God, where she is protected from the fury of the dragon. However the dragon, cast from heaven to earth, is able “to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ”.
3. WHO IS THE CHILD?
The first great difficulty of our text comes from the fact that neither the Woman, nor her Son are named. This simple fact seems paradoxical given that in the same context the Prophet is very careful to establish the identity of the dragon using names and characteristics known from the biblical tradition (v. 9: ὁ ὄφις ὁ ἀρχαῖος, ὁ καλούμενος Διάβολος καὶ ὁ Σατανᾶς, ὁ πλανῶν τὴν οἰκουμένην ὅλην). This obvious contrast combined with the cryptic data the text provides for the Woman must make us ask ourselves if there is not an intended ambiguity which, on the one hand, opens before the interpreter more leads, and, on the other hand, compels him to give to each one the due attention.
Let us start from what is obvious: the identity of the Son. He is not named, but his identity is revealed by the affirmation that He is the one who will fulfill the prophecy of Ps 2, 9 (ἔτεκεν υἱὸν ἄρσεν, ὃς μέλλει ποιμαίνειν πάντα τὰ ἔθνη ἐν ῥάβδῳ σιδηρᾷ) and the consequences of His birth. Thus, one question is clarified: The Child is Jesus Christ 4. WHO IS THE WOMAN-MOTHER?
If the Child is Jesus Christ, one could conclude quickly that the woman must be His Mother. But this conclusion seems immediately too hasty and raises problems. How could be reconciled the details of the woman’s image and her pains with what we know about the Holy Virgin Mary and her joyful and painless birth in Bethlehem? How does the flight of the woman fit into the personal history of the Mother of Jesus? And how can the ones who “keep the commandments of God and have the witness of Jesus” be the offspring of the Blessed Virgin Mary?
We are in front of a great mystery. How can we understand it? Let us see some data the text provides us.
The Heavenly Temple
In the introductory phrase we find some details which recall the Solomon’s Temple and earlier references of the book, as well as a mix of elements which herald a Theophany. The seer sees (ὤφθη) the heavenly temple opening (Καὶ ἠνοίγη ὁ ναὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ ὁ ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, 11, 19a). This is not the first place where the temple is mentioned in the Apocalypse. It is already present in:
3, 12: Ὁ νικῶν ποιήσω αὐτὸν στῦλον ἐν τῷ ναῷ τοῦ Θεοῦ
7, 15: The 144.000 εἰσιν ἐνώπιον τοῦ θρόνου τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ λατρεύουσιν αὐτῷ ἡμέρας καὶ νυκτὸς ἐν τῷ ναῷ αὐτοῦ
11, 1: Καὶ ἐδόθη μοι κάλαμος ὅμοιος ῥάβδῳ, λέγων· ἔγειρε καὶ μέτρησον τὸν ναὸν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον καὶ τοὺς προσκυνοῦντας ἐν αὐτῷ.
In all these places the word ναός stands for a spiritual reality which is made available only in Christ. The earthly ναός from Jerusalem was a space and sign (σημείο) of God’s presence amidst His people. It was the place where His glory was abiding and where His people could meet Him. There is a fundamental difference between the two: if the first could be geographically located, the second one can be identified only in Christological terms. The entrance in the ναός of the Apocalypse is granted only to those who follow Christ with all faithfulness. Actually, these people are in the ναός τοῦ Θεοῦ ὁ ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ where they continually worship God (7, 15).
The Ark of God’s Covenant
According to a tradition witnessed in 2 Mac 2, 7-8, the prophet Jeremiah prophesied that no one will know the place where the ark was hidden
“until God Gathers His people together again and shows them mercy. At that time He will reveal where these things are hidden, and the dazzling light of his presence will be seen in the cloud, as it was in the time of Moses and on the occasion when Solomon prayed that the Temple might be dedicated in holy splendor.”
The ark which is seen by the prophet in the heavenly temple symbolizes this new Parousia of God amidst human race.
Therefore, the mere mention of the heavenly temple and, immediately after, of the ark of the covenant in the beginning of the scene opens a Christological-ecclesiological perspective on the vision which follows.
A Great Sign
Then, with a second ὤφθη the Prophet introduces the feminine character which is to give birth to the Messiah. First he warns us that there is a σημεῖον μέγα. It is the first of the three signs we encounter in the book. The warning is very meaningful in view of what follows. When we will find ourselves perplexed in front of the image of the wonderful Women-Mother we have to remember that warning. What could it mean? The LXX and the New Testament provide a wide range of meanings for the term σημεῖον. From all of them we have to pay attention to those related to the Messiah and His work. We find it in
Isa 7, 14 (δώσει κύριος αὐτὸς ὑμῖν σημεῖον· ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν, καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Εμμανουηλ),
in Luke 2, 34 (Συμεὼν ... εἶπεν πρὸς Μαριὰμ τὴν μητέρα αὐτοῦ· ἰδοὺ οὗτος κεῖται ... εἰς σημεῖον ἀντιλεγόμενον),
in John 2, 11 (where Jesus’ miracles are labeled as σημεῖα),
and on the lips of Jesus in the expression „the sign of Jonah” (Mt 12, 38-39 and 16, 1-4), a prophetic reference to His death and resurrection.
All these occurrences of the term σημεῖον provide us a Christological key which will be confirmed by the great vision that follows. And – highly relevant for our topic! – the first three are related to the Mother of Christ.
A Cosmos-Embracing Glorious Being
Now let us see what the text tells us about the Woman. First, we note the cosmic dimensions pointed out by the reference to the celestial bodies that adorn her: περιβεβλημένη τὸν ἥλιον, καὶ ἡ σελήνη ὑποκάτω τῶν ποδῶν αὐτῆς καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτῆς στέφανος ἀστέρων δώδεκα (12, 1). Most probably here the sun, the moon and the twelve stars represent firstly the material world. The fact that it adorns her can signify that the cosmos was created for her and that must conform to her.
These celestial bodies were known biblical symbols. In Gen 37, 9 the sun, the moon and eleven stars represent Jacob, his wife and eleven tribes of Israel. These worship (προσεκύνουν) Joseph. There are two important things one could see here:
1. Could the celestial bodies in our text represent, as in Joseph’s dream, the people of Israel?
2. In the Tradition of the Church Joseph is seen as a type of Christ. As Joseph, Jesus Christ fulfills His mission as lord and servant of His brothers, i.e. of His people. This brings a Christological perspective on the Woman.
In Song of Songs 6, 10 the bride is described as being καλὴ ὡς σελήνη, ἐκλεκτὴ ὡς ὁ ἥλιος. In Judaism the image was interpreted metaphorically as referring to Israel, and in the Christianity was identified as the Church, the Bride of Christ.
In Isa 60, 19-20 the renewed Israel is described in terms which bring in mind the above quoted Song 6, 10: καὶ οὐκ ἔσται σοι ὁ ἥλιος εἰς φῶς ἡμέρας, οὐδὲ ἀνατολὴ σελήνης φωτιεῖ σοι τὴν νύκτα, ἀλλ᾽ ἔσται σοι κύριος φῶς αἰώνιον καὶ ὁ θεὸς δόξα σου. οὐ γὰρ δύσεται ὁ ἥλιός σοι,
καὶ ἡ σελήνη σοι οὐκ ἐκλείψει· ἔσται γὰρ κύριός σοι φῶς αἰώνιον, καὶ ἀναπληρωθήσονται αἱ ἡμέραι τοῦ πένθους σου.
A Mother Preparing to Bring Forth a Child
The second verse brings two new elements: The Woman is pregnant (ἐν γαστρὶ ἔχουσα) and is suffering the birth pains (κράζει ὠδίνουσα καὶ βασανιζομένη τεκεῖν). There is a surprising contrast between the glory of the first image and this one. The verb βασανίζω, which is not found anywhere else in the ancient Greek literature in connection with the birth pains, underlines the exceptionality of the situation. But in the Apocalypse it expresses the troubles experienced by the enemies of the Church and the demons. Sure, St John has his reason: to point out the uniqueness, the complexity and the tragic of this birth.
The Birth
As we have already pointed out, the mention of these terrible pains seems to exclude any reference to the joyous birth of Bethlehem, and as a logic consequence, to the Holy Virgin Mary. However, St John uses a quite different logic. Even the short mention to the Christ’s story after his birth defy our logic, as he says that, once born, He is “caught up to God and His throne” (v. 5). But here is also one of the keys of our text. As J. Jeremias has observed, St John uses a Semitic way of expression, which consists in referring to an action by pointing out only its beginning and end, without mentioning the intermediate time. This perspective clarifies our text. All the earthly activity of our Lord is summarized here. And if we consider that His work of salvation was fulfilled through the Cross, we have a clue to the understanding of the pains of the Woman.
Here it would be useful to remember that our text is related to the Fourth Gospel. I would like to point out some Johannine data which could open some perspectives on our text.
After the Last Supper, Jesus says to His disciples:
ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι κλαύσετε καὶ θρηνήσετε ὑμεῖς, ὁ δὲ κόσμος χαρήσεται· ὑμεῖς λυπηθήσεσθε, ἀλλ’ ἡ λύπη ὑμῶν εἰς χαρὰν γενήσεται. ἡ γυνὴ ὅταν τίκτῃ λύπην ἔχει, ὅτι ἦλθεν ἡ ὥρα αὐτῆς· ὅταν δὲ γεννήσῃ τὸ παιδίον, οὐκέτι μνημονεύει τῆς θλίψεως διὰ τὴν χαρὰν ὅτι ἐγεννήθη ἄνθρωπος εἰς τὸν κόσμον. καὶ ὑμεῖς οὖν νῦν μὲν λύπην ἔχετε· πάλιν δὲ ὄψομαι ὑμᾶς, καὶ χαρήσεται ὑμῶν ἡ καρδία, καὶ τὴν χαρὰν ὑμῶν οὐδεὶς αἴρει ἀφ’ ὑμῶν. (John 16, 20-22)
The disciples just took part in the Holy Eucharist. Through the Eucharist they are united with Christ, participate in His life and His Church which is being made.
The Holy Mother of Christ is named two times, close to the beginning and to the end of the Fourth Gospel (could one see here the same all-embracing perspective?), and that in both cases Jesus calls her “woman” (2, 4; 19, 26). In the first case, she is related to the first “sign” of Jesus; in the second, she is standing under the cross, participating at the pains of her Son and (thus?) receiving the motherhood of the new humanity.
THE CHURCH? THE THEOTOKOS?
If the first text brings an ecclesiological perspective, the two references to the Mother of Jesus help us to develop a Mariological one. Moreover, the same relationship between the Fourth Gospel and the Apocalypse makes almost compulsory this last one because hardly could one imagine that such an author as St John could speak about the birth of Christ ignoring entirely His Holy Mother. Of course, mainly because of specific confessional backgrounds, many interpreters do not agree with such a perspective. Aside from the concept of motherhood, they cannot find any other common element between the woman of Rev 12 and the Virgin Mary. On the other hand, the Orthodox and Roman-Catholic Traditions see the Church so closely related to the Theotokos so that any ecclesiological approach inside them would be at least incomplete if it ignores the Mariological data. Our text contains enough data for an ecclesiological interpretation, but the same biblical elements were and are understand and used by the Church as Mariological. On one hand, our text speaks about the temple, the ark of covenant, the glory of the Woman; on the other, the Church names the Virgin Mary temple, ark, sun, and, most of all, mother of Christ, Theotokos and Mother of all Christians.
Rev 12 uses a lot of space for Satan, who is identified, between other characteristics and names, as “the ancient serpent” (ὁ ὄφις ὁ ἀρχαῖος) and “the one who deceives the whole world” (ὁ πλανῶν τὴν οἰκουμένην ὅλην). We can be sure that the author wants to bring our attention back to his role in the fall of the Eve, which in the narrative of Gen 3 is named “woman” (γυνή). This points out another correspondence: in Gen 3, 15 we have the prophecy about the destruction of the serpent and in Rev 12 through the woman comes the fall of the dragon. Again we should see a double reference to the Church and the Holy Virgin Mary.
5. CONCLUSIONS
Under the light of the Holy Tradition it is clear that the feminine character from Revelation 12 represents both the Church and the Theotokos. St John proves an amazing understanding of the unique place the Theotokos has in the history of salvation. In his view, she does not stand alongside the Church, but is identified with the Church. If the Church is the space where humans are getting into perfect communion with God, through her perfect faith, she becomes Church receiving within her body the One through Whom πάντα ἐγένετο (John 1:3). What the Temple was heralding prophetically through its imperfectness is fulfilled through her perfect submission to the will of God. She becomes the Temple of the Living God. That’s why she stands in the middle of the history, not only as a separating element, but also as a unifying one. And she can be represented with cosmic dimensions, as St John does, because she becomes the unifying place of Heaven and Earth. Receiving the most high participation in the humanity of Christ, she has become the archetype and the realization of the Church.