At left is a map of the Ancient Rome.  The red line shows teh walls of the ancient city and how it surrounded the original 7 hills.  Vatical Hill is on the other side of the river, outside of ancient Rome.  This is what Rome looked like at the time the book of Revelation was written.  Rome would have been a city that sat on 7 hills.

Modern day Rome is bigger than ancient Rome.  It has expanded in all 4 directions, has expanded across the river, and completely surrounds Vatican Hill.  But it does not include Vatican Hill.  If it did, Rome would have expanded to being a city on 8 hills.  But instead, Vatican City is a City surrounded by Rome, and sits on one hill, so Rome remains a city of 7 hills since Rome does not actually include that one hill.  When Rome expanded, they kind of didn't want that one hill, because it messed up their legend of being The City of Seven Hills.

Whether the Catholic Church is "inside" Rome is a matter of interpretation.  Officially its not, culturally it is.  But whether it sits on 7 hills is not a matter of interpretation.  If you include the Vatican, you have an 8th hill, and you cannot say that the Catholic Church sits on 7 hills, because you have to include Vatican Hill if you identify the Catholic Church.  And if you are counting how many hills the Catholic Church sits on, you can't exclude Vatican Hill.

We're told the woman on the beast is a city.  You can't include Vatical Hill as part of the city without counting it in the number of hills, and thus having 8 for Rome, and thus excluding Rome as the city in question.  So either the Woman in Rev 17 is Rome WITHOUT the Vatican, or it is another city.  I explained at http://www.fivedoves.com/letters/feb2013/jovial226-1.htm how Brussells also sits on 7 hills and is a legitimate candidate for the city of Revelation 17 too.

 

Shalom, Joe