CHALLENGING mary's assumption

[stompalot]

sorry guys for being a little “upfront”, but i am a Protestant attending a catholic school. i hear that catholics teach that “mary assended body and soul to heaven before she died”.

hmmmm, where do catholics get this idea from? i mean, as far as i am concerned, the Bible never mentions this. and, isnt that the only source of christian knowledge?

at the moment, i totally disagree with this teaching. but, no one at school has been able to argue their beliefs to me (they all thought it was taught in the bible). please, i am open to debate, i want to know the reasons why catholics believe this so that i am not simply blindly denying this teaching.

 

[gamesport]

A lot of question about catholicism can be answered by going to the main website on catholic.com but for your specific questions about Mary, go here catholic.com/library/mary_saints.asp

 

[gradstud35]

Does everything in the Bible have to be spelled out for you lock stock and key? Does Jesus who love for **you **is infinite would not love his Mother, who is sinless 1000 times more than that? He chose this Woman to be his Mother

If you think about it, who suffered more in the Bible than Mary? There is no greater pain in life than a parent than watching their child suffer and die. Mary watched Jesus being crucifixed every step of the way. She also nursed Elizabeth while she was pregnant with John the Baptist and witnessed John’s beheading during her lifetime too. So that must have caused her great emotional pain as well.

So the question I have for you, what is your proof that He would let Her endure death?

 

[andzy]

the Bible never mentions this.

True, there isn’t an explicit mention of this doctrine in the Scriptures (just like with the Holy Trinity), but it is mentioned implicitly in Rev.12 (historycycles.tripod.com/mary5.html).

the Bible never mentions this. and, isnt that the only source of christian knowledge?

No, the Bible is not the only source of Christian knowledge. The Bible never ever says it is (Martin Luther came up with the Sola Scriptura idea in order to support his Sola Fide teaching), besides the foundation of all Christian knowledge was gathered and tough centuries before the Bible even existed.

 

[stompalot]

True, there isn’t an explicit mention of this doctrine in the Scriptures (just like with the Holy Trinity), but it is mentioned implicitly in Rev.12 (historycycles.tripod.com/mary5.html).

No, the Bible is not the only source of Christian knowledge. The Bible never ever says it is (Martin Luther came up with the Sola Scriptura idea in order to support his Sola Fide teaching), besides the foundation of all Christian knowledge was gathered and tough centuries before the Bible even existed.

firstly, i havnt heard of any synoptic texts refering to mary’s assumption. also, rev12 does not “explicitly” mention marys assumption. the whole book is written in symbolism. and, even if it is refering to mary, this only proves that she “will” be in heaven as the book is talking in future tense of the final daye.

 

[Fuerza]

sorry guys for being a little “upfront”, but i am a Protestant attending a catholic school. i hear that catholics teach that **“mary assended body and soul to heaven before she died”. **
hmmmm, where do catholics get this idea from? i mean, as far as i am concerned, the Bible never mentions this. and, isnt that the only source of christian knowledge?

at the moment, i totally disagree with this teaching. but, no one at school has been able to argue their beliefs to me (they all thought it was taught in the bible). please, i am open to debate, i want to know the reasons why catholics believe this so that i am not simply blindly denying this teaching.

The first thing that you have to realize is that while there are people who believe that Mary never died, the Church has made no official statement and allows for the belief that she did in fact die before being assumed. Actually, the belief that she did die before her assumption is more common despite what many seem to think. There was recently a thread about this in the Eastern Christianity forum. The only difference here between the Catholic and Orthodox traditions is that the Orthodox absolutely believe that she died first and the Catholics can believe either way (again, with death being the more common and traditional belief).

I think it is important to point out that all the Eastern Apostolic Churches which existed before the protestant reformation (Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Non-Chalcedonian Orthodox, Assyrian Church of the East) believe in the Assumption of Mary and have writings proving that they believed it even in the beginning when we were all one Church. Since the Orthodox Churches often debate with Catholics over seemingly the smallest ideas, it speaks volumes that they agree with us on this.

Also, the Bible is not the only source of Christian faith since it was not fully written and compiled for several centuries after the Resurrection. The Bible itself says that it is not the sole rule of faith. How much clearer can it get than that?

 

[LilyM]

firstly, i havnt heard of any synoptic texts refering to mary’s assumption. also, rev12 does not “explicitly” mention marys assumption. the whole book is written in symbolism. and, even if it is refering to mary, this only proves that she “will” be in heaven as the book is talking in future tense of the final daye.

He said the reference in Revelations was IMplicit, not EXplicit.

Again, not everything needs to be mentioned in the Bible to be truth - how do we know that Jesus was true God and true man, two natures hypostatically united in one person, from reading the Bible? THAT is nowhere mentioned - not implicitly nor explicitly.

How much explicit support is there for the doctrine of the Holy Trinity in scripture? The closest we get is when Jesus says ‘the Father and I are one’ - which isn’t even proof of Jesus’ own divinity if you take it that they are one in a metaphoric sense rather than a literal one.

Neither is the canon of the Bible itself in scripture - we absolutely can’t know from reading any of the scriptures which books are supposed to be included. Not a single implicit reference even to help us there.

Besides which, what is wrong with believing that Mary was assumed body and soul to heaven? Isn’t that what we all expect will happen to all believers and what we hope for for ourselves? And if Enoch and Elijah have also been assumed, and that without dying, which is more than we can be sure of for Mary, then why not her?

Jesus wouldn’t be ‘honouring thy mother’, as the commandments bid, very well at all if he handed out such honours to others and neglected the woman from whom he took both his flesh and his whole human nature.

 

[Mag_Uidhir]

The Assumption.

How much explicit support is there for the doctrine of the Holy Trinity in scripture? The closest we get is when Jesus says ‘the Father and I are one’ - which isn’t even proof of Jesus’ own divinity if you take it that they are one in a metaphoric sense rather than a literal one.

I do think for me at least, that the Trinity is manifested in the Baptism of Jesus in the Jordan.

 

[Seminarian_Matt]

The Assumption has been believed and celebrated since the earliest times of Christianity. The feast was celebrated under various names (Commemoration, Dormition, Passing, Assumption) from at least the fifth or sixth century. Homilies concerning the Assumption go back to at least the Sixth Century. However, in order to make it a dogma of the faith meaning all Catholics must believe it, Pope Pius XII dogmatically declared Mary’s Assumption into Heaven in 1950:

“… by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory” (Munificentissimus Deus)

Gen. 5:24, Heb. 11:5 - Enoch was bodily assumed into heaven without dying. Would God do any less for Mary the Ark of the New Covenant?

2 Kings 2:11-12; 1 Mac 2:58 - Elijah was assumed into heaven in fiery chariot. Jesus would not do any less for His Blessed Mother.

Psalm 132:8 - Arise, O Lord, and go to thy resting place, thou and the Ark (Mary) of thy might. Both Jesus and Mary were taken up to their eternal resting place in heaven.

2 Cor. 12:2 - Paul speaks of a man in Christ who was caught up to the third heaven. Mary was also brought up into heaven by God.

Matt. 27:52-53 - when Jesus died and rose, the bodies of the saints were raised. Nothing in Scripture precludes Mary’s assumption into heaven.

1 Thess. 4:17 - we shall be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air and so we shall always be with the Lord.

Rev. 12:1 - we see Mary, the “woman,” clothed with the sun. While in Rev. 6:9 we only see the souls of the martyrs in heaven, in Rev. 12:1 we see Mary, both body and soul.

2 Thess. 2:15 - Paul instructs us to hold fast to oral (not just written) tradition. Apostolic tradition says Mary was assumed into heaven. While claiming the bones of the saints was a common practice during these times (and would have been especially important to obtain Mary’s bones as she was the Mother of God), Mary’s bones were never claimed. This is because they were not available. Mary was taken up body and soul into heaven.

scripturecatholic.com/blessed_virgin_mary.html#the_bvm-VI

Do you really seek to undestand this teaching? If so, pick up a copy of “Hail, Holy Queen” by Scott Hahn, a former protestant minister who is a Scriptural Expert.

 

[PatienceAndLove]

Oh Sem Matt, I pray for your students when you’re a parish priest. They are going to get a VERY smart priest. I don’t think they’ll know what to do with themselves

To the OP: Read SM’s post over a few times, read the Bible passages, and then pray about it. After that, read it again, read the bible passages, read the Catholic Answers article (and this article), and then pray about it, again.

You know that you cannot get any answers without through investigation, reading, and LOTS and LOTS of prayer.

 

[tm30]

In addition to the great Scriptural references posted here, I would like to add that, even from a cultural standpoint, the fact that no community claimed her expired body as a holy relic is absolutely unthinkable.

 

[VociMike]

sorry guys for being a little “upfront”, but i am a Protestant attending a catholic school. i hear that catholics teach that “mary assended body and soul to heaven before she died”.

hmmmm, where do catholics get this idea from? i mean, as far as i am concerned, the Bible never mentions this. and, isnt that the only source of christian knowledge?

No, the bible is not the only source of Christian knowledge. Did the Apostles have the New Testament at Pentecost? Where did you get that idea?

at the moment, i totally disagree with this teaching. but, no one at school has been able to argue their beliefs to me (they all thought it was taught in the bible). please, i am open to debate, i want to know the reasons why catholics believe this so that i am not simply blindly denying this teaching.

We have only one reason for believing that Mary was assumed into heaven, but it’s a pretty good reason. We believe it because God revealed it to his Church, and his Church has passed that revelation down through the ages.

 

[FCEGM]

sorry guys for being a little “upfront”, but i am a Protestant attending a catholic school. i hear that catholics teach that “mary assended body and soul to heaven before she died”.

hmmmm, where do catholics get this idea from? i mean, as far as i am concerned, the Bible never mentions this. and, isnt that the only source of christian knowledge?

at the moment, i totally disagree with this teaching. but, no one at school has been able to argue their beliefs to me (they all thought it was taught in the bible). please, i am open to debate, i want to know the reasons why catholics believe this so that i am not simply blindly denying this teaching.

These two articles offer excellent material regarding our Catholic belief re the Holy Virgin’s Assumption:

catholic-legate.com/articles/immacconcept.html

catholic-legate.com/articles/trueassumption.html

 

[Tantum_ergo]

What does your religion teacher say? Have you asked?

 

[kaycee]

sorry guys for being a little “upfront”, but i am a Protestant attending a catholic school. i hear that catholics teach that “mary assended body and soul to heaven before she died”.

hmmmm, where do catholics get this idea from? i mean, as far as i am concerned, the Bible never mentions this. and, isnt that the only source of christian knowledge?

at the moment, i totally disagree with this teaching. but, no one at school has been able to argue their beliefs to me (they all thought it was taught in the bible). please, i am open to debate, i want to know the reasons why catholics believe this so that i am not simply blindly denying this teaching.

The first time the “assumption” is heard is the fifth century from a Gnostic writing known as the Transitus Beatae Mariae. This document was condemned by pope Gelasius around the year 495 and again by pope Hormisdas in 520. This gnostic legend crept back into the church a couple of hundred years later and was eventually accepted.

christiantruth.com/assumption.html

 

[Sr_Sally]

In addition to the great Scriptural references posted here, I would like to add that, even from a cultural standpoint, the fact that no community claimed her expired body as a holy relic is absolutely unthinkable.

This is such an amazing proof to me. We Catholics save everything! We have relics of knucklebones and St’s old hankies. There is a strong tradition about where Mary lived with John on Ephesis, but nothing about where she was buried and certainly no one has ever claimed to have her body. Amazing!

 

[fellowChristian]

Where in scripture does it say Mary wasn’t assumed?

Where did Jesus get His flesh from?

Mary.

Where did Jesus get His blood from?

Mary.

Jesus and Mary share flesh and blood.

Doesn’t it make sense that Jesus would raise His flesh and blood?

:yup:

 

[heisenburg]

There are several key things to understand here when discussing the assumption of Mary.

1. First and foremost, the original poster is absolutely correct. The Assumption of Mary is NOT in the bible…

But why?

There are two possible reasons. The first reason, as has already been mentioned, It didn’t happen.

But Is this really a valid reason?

Tradition holds that Mary was roughly 14 when she gave birth. In other words, very young. So, when Jesus died at roughly 30, Mary would have only been 44ish. Why do I say this? Because Tradition also holds she stayed on this earth to a ripe old age.

Point 1) If she ‘died’ any later than say 70AD, all of the books save Revelations were already written. Why would someone write about the assumption of Mary if it hadn’t yet happened? This is VERY plausible because she would have been roughly 84. An age that is not unheard of, even in this era. Therefore, it would be Impossible for Mary’s Assumption to be in the bible, she left this earth AFTER all the books were written.

Point 2) Assumption is very biblical. There are two explicit cases of special people being bodily assumed. No need for any contention here, its in the bible.

Point 3) Who gets assumed? Only the very very very very special in Gods eyes.

Point 4) The Bible Says that All Generations shall call her blessed. The Bible says the angel greeted Mary with “Hail Mary full of grace, the lord is with thee, Blessed art though amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb Jesus”. The Bible says the Sarah greeted addressed Mary as the Mother of Her Lord. By this the Bible says Mary was Very very very very very special in Gods eyes.

Point 5) Wouldn’t the Lord look more favorably on ‘the mother of our lord’ than almost anyone else in all of history?

Point 6) If Mary did have such favor with the lord, as can be shown biblically, then if God Assumed other servants, wouldn’t he also assume the very Mother of Jesus?

Nothing anti Biblical…

Yes, I believe it completely. Not because the bible tells me explicitly, but because the Lord is a constant lord and does not Change.

So, which is more likely, Because it is not in the Bible, Mary was not Assumed? Or is it more likely that God was consistent with the OT and did in fact assume the most blessed women ever to walk the earth?

In Christ

 

[NMJenny]

i hear that catholics teach that “mary assended body and soul to heaven before she died”.

Let me make a technical point here–Christ ascended into heaven by His own power, Mary was assumed into heaven by the power of God…

 

[VociMike]

The first time the “assumption” is heard is the fifth century from a Gnostic writing known as the Transitus Beatae Mariae. This document was condemned by pope Gelasius around the year 495 and again by pope Hormisdas in 520. This gnostic legend crept back into the church a couple of hundred years later and was eventually accepted.

Yeah, and not one bishop opposed it. Not one council taught against it. Not one pope spoke out against it. Even though the legend took a couple of hundred years (your own words) to be fully accepted into the Church, not once during those couple of hundred years did anybody say, “hey wait, this isn’t the faith handed down by the Apostles!”

And when you can explain how the Church absorbed a lie (legend, as you say) over a couple of hundred years without the slightest peep of protest, then we might view your own story here as more than a Protestant legend.

But not until then.