Childbirth without original sin

What did it look like? How does it differ? It would have been what Eve would have experienced had she remained in the garden, therefore Mary is the only woman who will ever know what it is like.

Canterbury Tales and New Theological Movement have been posting considerably on the subject, quoting many Church Fathers and the visions of St. Bridget and Anne Catherine Emmerich who describe Jesus as simply emerging from Mary in the same manner as Jesus passing through doors after his Resurrection.

They caution commenters like me- who are skeptical- that we cannot deny Jesus Christ's divinity in our effort to maintain his humanity. Yet, they seem to me to be at risk of presenting Mary as a caricature of womanhood.

The key question in my mind is- given pain during childbirth was a result of Eve's sin-- how much of childbirth is a result of original sin and how much of childbirth is part of God's design? Could not have Mary experienced some type of contraction that was NOT painless? Could she not have delivered vaginally and still have done so with no pain? That seems more plausible than describing the birth of Jesus as a flash of light, which completely denies that Mary both a.) had a vagina and b.) used it for the beautiful creation that it is and so confirms every woman's vagina sacred, which concept is current with the papal teaching in the Theology of the Body, which teaching we know the church fathers, as wise as they were, did not know.
Lumen Gentium 57 upholds the doctrine that Christ's birth did not diminish Mary's virginal integrity but sanctified it. Would his painless passage through her birth canal diminish her virginal integrity? Hardly! Rather, his passage through it, as through the waters of baptism, did indeed sanctify it. If we can accept that God became man, that wine becomes blood, can we not also accept that in the miraculous vaginal delivery of Christ, his mother's hymen remained intact? Even if it did not, does that mean she was no less a virgin? The intact hymen, as we know, is hardly an infallible indicator of virginity.  


I think the magisterium of Blessed Pope John Paul Magnus is still trickling down to distinguished thinkers like Dr. Marshall and Fr. Erlenbush. I agree with them that far too many theologians in the past 40 years have overemphasized Christ's humanity, yet I also believe we should avoid the opposite extreme. JPII struck exactly the right balance when he- and his successor, in Deus Caritas Est- have taught us that the penis and vagina are sacred too. Otherwise the Incarnation was not what we say it was.

Let's affirm the sacred beauty of Motherhood by affirming the beautiful vaginal delivery of Jesus.

I found two discussion threads on this subject that reveal how much this mystery eludes and inspires us:

http://scecclesia.com/?p=4933&cpage=1#comment-26771

http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/61521-must-we-believe-this-teaching-on-the-perpetual-virginity-of-mary/