Assumption of the Blessed Virgin - Help!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tannhauser
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tannhauser

Guest
The Blessed Virgin and the Church dogmas concerning her are, for me, a high point of my Catholic faith. For me, Mary is a really wonderful example of everything that we celebrate in Christianity, and gives us an incredible example of pure, devotional, sinless love.

One of the dogmas that means the most to me is the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin, and I am noticing a certain lack of Biblical evidence supporting it (and moreover it seems that this particular belief derives some of its force from an apocryphal writing De Obitu S. Dominae.)

I love the Catholic faith and I trust what she teaches, and with this particular dogma I realise that I would find it incredibly difficult to justify (without recourse to “ex cathedra”).

Can somebody help me with this
Thank-you thank-you thank-you.
 
Tannhauser said:
The Blessed Virgin and the Church dogmas concerning her are, for me, a high point of my Catholic faith. For me, Mary is a really wonderful example of everything that we celebrate in Christianity, and gives us an incredible example of pure, devotional, sinless love.

One of the dogmas that means the most to me is the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin, and I am noticing a certain lack of Biblical evidence supporting it (and moreover it seems that this particular belief derives some of its force from an apocryphal writing De Obitu S. Dominae.)

I love the Catholic faith and I trust what she teaches, and with this particular dogma I realise that I would find it incredibly difficult to justify (without recourse to “ex cathedra”).

Can somebody help me with this
Thank-you thank-you thank-you.
Click to expand...
Since the Bible does not record the end of Mary’s life, why do you expect to find an explicit description of the Assumption there?
 
Tannhauser said:
I have no idea why as Catholics we believe in the Assumption, other than it was declared infallibly.
Click to expand...
The Church passed down this wonderful even via Sacred Tradition. We believe it because it is true.
 
1ke said:
The Church passed down this wonderful even via Sacred Tradition. We believe it because it is true.
Click to expand...
But… there’s no evidence for it, scripturally or otherwise. And it was originally mentioned in an apocryphal writing :

*The belief in the corporeal assumption of Mary is founded on the apocryphal treatise De Obitu S. Dominae, bearing the name of St. John, which belongs however to the fourth or fifth century. It is also found in the book De Transitu Virginis, falsely ascribed to St. Melito of Sardis, and in a spurious letter attributed to St. Denis the Areopagite. If we consult genuine writings in the East, it is mentioned in the sermons of St. Andrew of Crete, St. John Damascene, St. Modestus of Jerusalem and others. In the West, St. Gregory of Tours (De gloria mart., I, iv) mentions it first. The sermons of St. Jerome and St. Augustine for this feast, however, are spurious. St. John of Damascus (P.G., I, 96) thus formulates the tradition of the Church of Jerusalem:

St. Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, at the Council of Chalcedon (451), made known to the Emperor Marcian and Pulcheria, who wished to possess the body of the Mother of God, that Mary died in the presence of all the Apostles, but that her tomb, when opened, upon the request of St. Thomas, was found empty; wherefrom the Apostles concluded that the body was taken up to heaven. *

“Catholic Encyclopedia”
 
1ke said:
So what?

Certainly there is “otherwise.” Sacred Tradition, from whence it comes.
Click to expand...
Well there’s really no response to that. The argument for believing in the Assumption is essentially “because we are told to believe” and we are not given a shred of evidence to support this belief except the fact a load of Church fathers have believed it to be so… where *they * believed it to be so is anybody’s guess…

but then I suppose when we cannot rationally explain why we believe something as Catholics, and why the Church fathers believed also, we have no explanation except the Holy Ghost must have told them so.

And I don’t have a problem with that, but I feel uncomfortable believing for no other reason than being told to believe.
 
Tannhauser said:
Well there’s really no response to that. The argument for believing in the Assumption is essentially “because we are told to believe” and we are not given a shred of evidence to support this belief except the fact a load of Church fathers have believed it to be so… where *they * believed it to be so is anybody’s guess…

but then I suppose when we cannot rationally explain why we believe something as Catholics, and why the Church fathers believed also, we have no explanation except the Holy Ghost must have told them so.

And I don’t have a problem with that, but I feel uncomfortable believing for no other reason than being told to believe.
Click to expand...
The assumption flows logically from the Immaculate Conception. There are very good and deep theological writings on both. The idea that something must be in scripture for it to be believed is such an odd-- and false-- notion.
 
1ke said:
The assumption flows logically from the Immaculate Conception. There are very good and deep theological writings on both. The idea that something must be in scripture for it to be believed is such an odd-- and false-- notion.
Click to expand...
Writings of men all the same. There are brilliant theological writings on many things.

There is also no actual - and by actual I mean Scriptural - evidence for the Immaculate Conception, except a greeting by an Archangel, so saying that one dogma flows from another means little.

I am not denying these dogmas, but wondering whether it does not fraustrate that we have only the word of men to go on for these dogmas… (men that because they have had hands laid upon them have inspiration which is true… despite many holy man having been responsible for heresy). How is it that one is defined from the other.
 
Tannhauser said:
St. Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, at the Council of Chalcedon (451), made known to the Emperor Marcian and Pulcheria, who wished to possess the body of the Mother of God, that Mary died in the presence of all the Apostles, but that her tomb, when opened, upon the request of St. Thomas, was found empty; wherefrom the Apostles concluded that the body was taken up to heaven.
Click to expand...
“Catholic Encyclopedia”

This makes it Sacred Tradition.

If you can’t believe the Apostles, who will you believe?
 
Tannhauser said:
The Blessed Virgin and the Church dogmas concerning her are, for me, a high point of my Catholic faith. For me, Mary is a really wonderful example of everything that we celebrate in Christianity, and gives us an incredible example of pure, devotional, sinless love.

One of the dogmas that means the most to me is the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin, and I am noticing a certain lack of Biblical evidence supporting it (and moreover it seems that this particular belief derives some of its force from an apocryphal writing De Obitu S. Dominae.)

I love the Catholic faith and I trust what she teaches, and with this particular dogma I realise that I would find it incredibly difficult to justify (without recourse to “ex cathedra”).

Can somebody help me with this
Thank-you thank-you thank-you.
Click to expand...
Some things we just have to take by faith.
 
Tannhauser said:
Writings of men all the same. There are brilliant theological writings on many things.

There is also no actual - and by actual I mean Scriptural - evidence for the Immaculate Conception, except a greeting by an Archangel, so saying that one dogma flows from another means little.

I am not denying these dogmas, but wondering whether it does not fraustrate that we have only the word of men to go on for these dogmas… (men that because they have had hands laid upon them have inspiration which is true… despite many holy man having been responsible for heresy). How is it that one is defined from the other.
Click to expand...
The scriptures themselves, declare “…not all the things accomplished and taught by JESUS are included within this book…” - very rough paraphrase.

So the Bible thus produces the evidence that it does not have all the evidence of things JESUS said or did. That is scriptural. From your position you can get your head around that - the Bible is NOT sola anything by it’s own text.

Secondly, it is not “…just the word of men…”, it is the word of He who keeps the Keys, which were given directly by JESUS.

You are arguing yourself out of the faith while standing in the bright light of TRUTH - all of which is scriptural, i.e. the authority of the Pope, and the declaration by the Bible on the total lack of evidence contained within the Bible.

You are your own manifest destiny of free will, it is your choice to believe or not to believe. But your choice will never change the truth.
 
I think the more important question for you to ask is why do you believe Scripture?

You have complete confidence in the reliability of Scripture, and want to have everything related to the Christian faith contained therein. But you need to realize why you believe the Scriptures are holy. And it is because the Church told you they were. The same Church which compiled and verified the holiness of the Bible is the same Church which tells you Mary was assumed into Heaven.

Remember, the Scriptures also explicitly state that everything Jesus did is NOT contained in Scripture. This is one of them. Doesn’t change the fact that it is true.
 
Hence if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith

MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS

Have I just called into doubt this dogma? How are we as Catholics supposed to wrestle with these questions, even if we continually reaffirm our belief in Catholic Truth, without calling dogmas into doubt…?

:-S
 
Tannhauser said:
The Blessed Virgin and the Church dogmas concerning her are, for me, a high point of my Catholic faith. For me, Mary is a really wonderful example of everything that we celebrate in Christianity, and gives us an incredible example of pure, devotional, sinless love.

One of the dogmas that means the most to me is the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin, and I am noticing a certain lack of Biblical evidence supporting it (and moreover it seems that this particular belief derives some of its force from an apocryphal writing De Obitu S. Dominae.)

I love the Catholic faith and I trust what she teaches, and with this particular dogma I realise that I would find it incredibly difficult to justify (without recourse to “ex cathedra”).

Can somebody help me with this
Thank-you thank-you thank-you.
Click to expand...
This might seem like a roundabout answer. Here goes:

We believe Mary was born without original sin… Think about it: Only Adam, Eve, Jesus and Mary were like this. (That’s why we call Jesus the “new Adam” and Mary the “new Eve”-- because all of them were born without original sin, but Adam and Eve ruined that, whereas Jesus and Mary succeeded where Adam and Eve failed.) Anyways, so, when Adam and Eve sinned, they introduced death into the human race (Genesis). So, logically, if they had succeeded at maintaining their original purity, then they would have never died.
Well, Jesus and Mary both succeeded at maintaining their original purity. Logically, neither of them could have been overcome by death: That is one reason why Jesus was resurrected and he ascended, and that is why Mary ascended also. They had no original sin, and so they were preserved from death, because death is the result of original sin.
There is little-to-no Biblical commentary on the assumption itself, but there is nothing in the Bible that contradicts it. Perhaps that is why we call it the assumption-- It makes logical sense, but there isn’t an obvious Biblical passage on it. But that doesn’t make it false. It just makes it more of a theological gem revealed from God. Notice that Jesus says that the holy spirit will teach the apostles more than he has told them directly. 😉
 
Tannhauser said:
Hence if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith

MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS

Have I just called into doubt this dogma? How are we as Catholics supposed to wrestle with these questions, even if we continually reaffirm our belief in Catholic Truth, without calling dogmas into doubt…?

:-S
Click to expand...
The key is to not refuse to believe something just because you don’t yet understand it. Ask as many questions as you like, keep learning, and pray for understanding from God to understand His Truth that His Church teaches. And if you haven’t yet understood something, have faith in Christ and His Church that He won’t lead you astray.
 
Tannhauser said:
Writings of men all the same. There are brilliant theological writings on many things.

There is also no actual - and by actual I mean Scriptural - evidence for the Immaculate Conception, except a greeting by an Archangel, so saying that one dogma flows from another means little…
Click to expand...
I think you are confusing the Annunciation with The Immaculate Conception. The Archangel appeared to Mary to ask if she would become the the Mother of Jesus, in so many words. The Immaculate Conception was the conception of Mary whose soul was not stained by original sin. There is no scriptural basis for that (that I can think of) but it has been passed down through Sacred Tradition (with a capital “T”).

Much of what we know has been passed down through Sacred Tradition. Many things were written down later by historians such as Josephus and over time, with much prayer and study, the truths of what God has revealed to us, is more clearly understood. What we do know is that ALL of what God wants to reveal to us has already been revealed. The Magesterium is continuously working to understand those revelations as fully as possible and to then share them with the faithful.

Amy
 
Tannhauser said:
Hence if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith

MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS

Have I just called into doubt this dogma? How are we as Catholics supposed to wrestle with these questions, even if we continually reaffirm our belief in Catholic Truth, without calling dogmas into doubt…?

:-S
Click to expand...
S

Belief, like faith, is not a “feeling.” It is a choice. Either you do or you don’t. What you are doing is trying to understand and that is perfectly normal. But as the one person said, don’t talk yourself out of faith while standing in the light of truth. It is okay to study the origins of a doctrine or dogma but always hold it in your heart, as you seem to be doing, that it is truth and that if you are led away from the Catholic teachings, you need to ask…which you are doing.

A few years ago a homily about the Assumption made it easier for me to understand. Father simply asked…“Would Jesus allow decay to touch the holy body of his most Beloved Mother.” I could answer that in my heart instantaneously and have not questioned it since. I hope this helps.
Amy
 
Tannhauser said:
The Blessed Virgin and the Church dogmas concerning her are, for me, a high point of my Catholic faith. For me, Mary is a really wonderful example of everything that we celebrate in Christianity, and gives us an incredible example of pure, devotional, sinless love.

Can somebody help me with this
Thank-you thank-you thank-you.
Click to expand...
Happy reading…pages.uoregon.edu/sshoemak/texts/dormitionG2/dormitionG2.htm

Intro only:

The Account of St. John the Theologian
of the Dormition of the Holy Mother of God

As the all-holy glorious mother of God and ever-virgin Mary, as was her wont, was going to the holy tomb of our Lord to burn incense, and bending her holy knees, she was importunate that Christ our God who had been born of her should return to her. And the Jews, seeing her lingering by the divine sepulchre, came to the chief priests, saying: Mary goes every day to the tomb. And the chief priests, having summoned the guards set by them not to allow any one to pray at the holy sepulchre, inquired about her, whether in truth it were so. And the guards answered and said that they had seen no such thing, God having not allowed them to see her when there. And on one of the days, it being the preparation, the holy Mary, as was her wont, came to the sepulchre; and while she was praying, it came to pass that the heavens were opened, and the archangel Gabriel came down to her and said: Hail, thou that didst bring forth Christ our God! Thy prayer having come through to the heavens to Him who was born of thee, has been accepted; and from this time, according to thy request, thou having left the world, shall go to the heavenly places to thy Son, into the true and everlasting life.

And having heard this from the holy archangel, she returned to holy Bethlehem, having along with her three virgins who ministered unto her. And after having rested a short time, she sat up and said to the virgins: Bring me a censer, that I may pray. And they brought it, as they had been commanded. And she prayed, saying: My Lord Jesus Christ, who didst deign through Thy supreme goodness to be born of me, hear my voice, and send me Thy apostle John, in order that, seeing him, I may partake of joy; and send me also the rest of Thy apostles, both those who have already gone to Thee, and those in the world that now is, in whatever country they may be, through Thy holy commandment, in order that, having beheld them, I may bless Thy name much to be praised; for I am confident that Thou hearest Thy servant in everything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top