Defending the Assumption

[ConstantineTG]

Hello. I’m posting this in the hope that some of you might be able to help me in my efforts to explain, defend, and, if it’s God’s will, assist in the conversion of my parents.

I converted to Catholicism from the protestant tradition and am the only person in my family to have done so. My parents, who are faithful Baptists, have always been supportive of me, attend Mass with my family and me when they visit, and have always indicated that they find Mass to be deeply meaningful.

Lately, they’ve begun to develop more interest in our faith and I have begun to send them books and c.d.'s explaining the Eucharist, confession, etc…, all of which I feel comfortable defending and discussing with them.

One area where I expect more difficulty is in explaining, fully, our devotion to and reverence for the Blessed Virgin. Although, comfortable explaining parts of it, one question I sort of anticipate and don’t have a good answer for is this:

Part of the evidence for the Assumption presented here on Catholic Answers is actually the LACK of evidence. The fact that there are no relics of the Blessed Virgin, no tomb, etc… is put forth as evidence that there was no tomb and no body from which to collect relics. I can accept this to a point, however, could one who is, perhaps, struggling to believe or in outright denial not posit that the lack of a known tomb/relics indicates that early Christians did not revere Mary in the way we now do and, therefore, did not think it necessary to mark the location of her tomb and/or collect and pass down her relics?

Thanks in advance for your help with this. I want to be as prepared as I can possibly be to answer questions adequately and convincingly.

There is no lack of a known tomb. There is a place where Mary’s tomb is located. Like the tomb of Christ, it is empty.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Well, Luther probably believed it for the same reasons given today - which I don’t find convincing.

What really bugs me is that the Assumption is a Holy Day of Obligation while far,far more important events like Good Friday or Holy Thursday aren’t. It really does reek of Marianism and I sadly have to agree with many of the Protestants who see the Catholic Church as being rife with idolatory.

You need to go to Mass to fulfill your Obligation. Problem is, there are no Masses during Good Friday and Holy Saturday. So how do you fulfill your obligation?

 

[ConstantineTG]

The difference is that, in Luther’s time, there was no ex cathedra statement on the Assumption. No Catholic was required to believe it. Luther believed it without such a dogmatic statement. ISTM that no Catholic prior to 1950 can be held anathema for not believing in the Assumption, based on the 1950 dogmatic declaration. That would be ridiculous.

Jon

The Dormition of the Theotokos (which includes the Assumption) has been a belief held by the Church from its early days. Its one beef Eastern Christians has over the West, why the need to dogmatically define things we have believed in for so long?

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

This is a topic that is near and dear to my heart. I fully understand the concerns of many regarding the Assumption of the Blessed Mother, however I believe that the majority of the problems have to do with false presuppositions about a few things. I also think that a major contributing factor to the debates about this issue is the use of apologetic “proof-texting” (ironically what we accuse protestants of) as if a verse from one of the Psalms emphatically proves what we believe. It has never been so. The loving arms of the Church contain many whispers of her belief an the love letter that both comes from the Church, and yet feeds the Church, as the One Body of Christ. To rip a sentence out of a love letter and exclaim triumphantly, “See, this sentence proves that He loves her!” seems remarkably crass, and truthfully, pointless. Our faith, our one true faith, is contained all through Scripture, surrounds it, and gives us the eyes and ears to see and hear. The Church believes in the Assumption of the Woman because it is true, and the Church may read Her love letter to point out examples as She wishes.

It would seem to be a grave error to ask the Church: Who gave you the right? Why must we believe this now? The Church has said it is true because the Church is the Body of Christ, and Christ therefore has said it is true. Infallibility is implied, not so much from a proof-text of “binding and loosing,” but from understanding that the organic bride of Christ is one with him, and so will not be allowed to fall into error. It is not a case of “we declare it and therefore heaven must say it is so.” Rather, it is a case of heaven has declared it as so, and the head will not steer us wrong, for as the head goes, the Body must follow. If the Head of our Holy Mother Church wishes us in this day and age to have a deepening understanding of His mother and her significance for us, then that is how it shall be. Infallibility is a necessity due to who we are one flesh with, and no, it does not depend on documents such a set number of Church Fathers in specific centuries. Christ is the head and we are the parts of the One Body, and yet St. Paul goes on to describe body parts that are themselves found on the head; so close is our union with Him. The Blessed Mother being raised is an historical fact that happened at a set moment in time; how long it takes us to find out about this past event is irrelevant, since it is not, in fact, new revelation. Christ said that He would guide us in all spirit and truth, and so He has. If your eldest brother told you nothing of your mother’s end after she disappeared one day, and the other brothers and sisters whispered about it time and again, but said little on the matter, and then your eldest brother finally told you the truth…What would you say? “I will not believe that, I didn’t have to believe it before, so therefore it didn’t happen.” Well, yes. It did. The brother told you now, when he felt you were ready. As Christ, and therefore the Church, has done with us.

Mary’s significance lies in the fact that she is the nexus, the link, the “righteous remnant” that the prophets spoke of. As the bodies of the Israelites were scattered over the desert, and only a couple made it into the Promised Land, Mary is a child of the Old that is also to partake of the New. She is a living, breathing witness to the covenant fidelity of God, that He would come back and clean His fallen, harlot bride (and through her immaculate conception, He in fact did). She is Daughter Zion, and represents typologically the people of God, through the Old and the New. As she is a mother to Christ, she is a mother to His One Body the Church, even as she symbolizes it. In case the words of Christ at the cross were unclear as to the nature of her spiritual motherhood, St. Paul’s theology of the Body of Christ necessitates it.

.cont…

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

…cont.

However, precisely due to her role as a type of the Church, she must serve as First Fruits of the promises given to the Church, or she is not a type at all. As in the “Hail, Holy Queen,” Mary is our hope, not because she is the source of our salvation, but because she is, in fact, the embodiment and type of our Christian hope: Bodily Resurrection to be with our Lord. The anti-type would precede the type in receiving the Covenant promises, and the two portrayed so firmly together in the passage of Genesis 3:15 are inexplicably split in two as Mary, a symbol of Zion the people of God, is left in the grave to rot; as Adam has left His Eve. This is theologically untenable, and more than that, it is repugnant to the very heart of the Church, guided in all truth by the Holy Spirit. It is repugnant to the fullness of the Gospel and Covenant Promises of God Himself. Lest one, in spite of all this, not consider this sufficient grounds for a dogma, keep in mind that the covenant faithfulness of Yahweh was precisely the reason that the Jews began to believe slowly in an afterlife to begin with. It is fitting that Jesus should glorify His mother in accordance with both the prophecies and the Decalogue, in a most perfect way. And again, the “argument from fittingness” is well-used by the author of the epistle to the Hebrews. Would this line of argumentation work as an apologetic? Perhaps not, but truth is not about apologetics.

Given this understanding of Holy Mary as only Christ’s One Body can, what would one think then, when one reads these words by Saint Ephraim?

“The Babe that I carry carries me, saith Mary, and He has lowered His wings, and taken and placed me between His pinions, and mounted into the air; and a promise has been given me that height and depth shall be my Son’s.”

“The Son of the Most High came and dwelt in me, and I became His Mother; and as by a second birth I brought Him forth so did He bring me forth by the second birth, because He put His Mother’s garments on, she clothed her body with His glory.” Early 4th Century

Is it a proof? Nope. But we know what it means.

Psalm 45
Your throne, O God,* stands forever;c
your royal scepter is a scepter for justice.

8 You love justice and hate wrongdoing;

therefore God, your God, has anointed you

with the oil of gladness above your fellow kings.

9 With myrrh, aloes, and cassia

your robes are fragrant.

From ivory-paneled palaces
stringed instruments bring you joy.

10 Daughters of kings are your lovely wives;

a princess arrayed in Ophir’s gold
comes to stand at your right hand.

11 Listen, my daughter, and understand;

pay me careful heed.

Forget your people and your father’s house,*
12 that the king might desire your beauty.

He is your lord;

13 honor him, daughter of Tyre.

Then the richest of the people

will seek your favor with gifts.

14 All glorious is the king’s daughter as she enters,e
her raiment threaded with gold;

15 In embroidered apparel she is led to the king.

The maids of her train are presented to the king.

16 They are led in with glad and joyous acclaim;

they enter the palace of the king.

17 The throne of your fathers your sons will have;

you shall make them princes through all the land.

18 I will make your name renowned through all generations;

thus nations shall praise you forever.

 

[JonNC]

The Dormition of the Theotokos (which includes the Assumption) has been a belief held by the Church from its early days. Its one beef Eastern Christians has over the West, why the need to dogmatically define things we have believed in for so long?

They’ll say because the beliefs were challenged, but I’m inclined to agree with the eastern positon you state here.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

=razredge;8287928]Well, Luther probably believed it for the same reasons given today - which I don’t find convincing.

What reasons would those be, since the Church had not yet dogmatically defined the belief, binding the consciences of the faithful to it?

What really bugs me is that the Assumption is a Holy Day of Obligation while far,far more important events like Good Friday or Holy Thursday aren’t. It really does reek of Marianism and I sadly have to agree with many of the Protestants who see the Catholic Church as being rife with idolatory.

Remembering that I’m on the outside looking in, but I don’t see evidence that, in terms of Church teaching, that the CC is rife with idolatry or marialotry.

Jon

 

[Road2Damascus]

The “Dormition” was discussed in the Eastern Catholicism thread for additional info: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=585690&page=3

Apocrypha, Transistus Mariae interfaith.org/christianity/apocrypha-transitus-maria/ But then again, she may have ended her earthly life in Ephesus.

So this differing information does puzzle me, but Rev 12 is helpful too. Check links to famous paintings additionally in the other thread.

Also, every day is Jesus’ day and there are Adoration Chapels too in many places.

 

[Road2Damascus]

Also, when the Eastern Catholic Church has Icons and all of this and venerate her as well, that is the old Church. They do it too so what gives? It must be okay.

Founder of the Methodists, Wesley, seems to have thought highly of her as well.

 

[razredge]

You need to go to Mass to fulfill your Obligation. Problem is, there are no Masses during Good Friday and Holy Saturday. So how do you fulfill your obligation?

Last time I checked there was Mass on Holy Thursday and Easter, both of which are not usually Days of Obligation, despite being of vastly more theological import than the Assumption.

What reasons would those be, since the Church had not yet dogmatically defined the belief, binding the consciences of the faithful to it?

I don’t know, the reasons the CC gives now - what the Church Fathers thought, tradition, musings on Original Sin & death etc.

Remembering that I’m on the outside looking in, but I don’t see evidence that, in terms of Church teaching, that the CC is rife with idolatry or marialotry.

Possibly not in teaching, but in practice it can get quite out of hand.

 

[ConstantineTG]

They’ll say because the beliefs were challenged, but I’m inclined to agree with the eastern positon you state here.

Jon

I guess its a difference of approach. The East will always say that this is how we were taught by the Church Fathers, therefore we cannot change or challenge it. We always see the Church Fathers as having a closer link to Christ because they lived during or not so long after His time. There’s nothing they know about Christ that can be challenged today.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Last time I checked there was Mass on Holy Thursday and Easter, both of which are not usually Days of Obligation, despite being of vastly more theological import than the Assumption.

Actually the entire Easter Triduum is considered one Liturgical Feast. Christ’s couldn’t have resurrected if he hadn’t died. If Christ didn’t resurrect, his death would have been meaningless. The entire passion, death and resurrection is taken as one, no separate from one another. There is no need to declare the other days as Holidays of Obligation when Easter itself is the Feast of Feasts.

 

[razredge]

There is no need to declare the other days as Holidays of Obligation when Easter itself is the Feast of Feasts.

I don’t think so, as Canon 1247 and 1246 state:

On Sundays and other holy days of obligation, the faithful are obliged to participate in the Mass.
Moreover they are to abstain from those works and affairs which hinder the worship to be rendered to God, the joy proper to the Lord’s day, or the suitable relaxation of mind and body.

§1. Sunday, on which by apostolic tradition the paschal mystery is celebrated, must be observed in the universal Church as the primordial holy day of obligation. The following days must also be observed: the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Epiphany, the Ascension, the Body and Blood of Christ, Holy Mary the Mother of God, her Immaculate Conception, her Assumption, Saint Joseph, Saint Peter and Saint Paul the Apostles, and All Saints.
§2. With the prior approval of the Apostolic See, however, the conference of bishops can suppress some of the holy days of obligation or transfer them to a Sunday

There is no mention of Good Friday and Holy Thursday.

 

[RaphaelJ]

It may not be totally necessary because one can see the entire Easter Triduum as being just exactly one. Perhaps, it is because had the life of Christ stopped on Good Friday then what can we boast about? Easter itself is the very high feast. (Actually, that and the fact that they’re next to each other. I think that the Church doesn’t want to burden the people with so many obligatory days next to each other). Also, don’t forget that certain days can be transferred to the nearest Sunday. It could be that these two days may be celebrated as one during Easter. But my family always go during Good Friday.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I don’t think so, as Canon 1247 and 1246 state:

There is no mention of Good Friday and Holy Thursday.

In the Byzantine Rite there is also no mention of Holy Thursday or Good Friday. Again, the entire Holy Week is seen as the entire Passion of Christ. Every day is a greater preparation towards Easter.

 

[razredge]

It may not be totally necessary because one can see the entire Easter Triduum as being just exactly one. Perhaps, it is because had the life of Christ stopped on Good Friday then what can we boast about? Easter itself is the very high feast.

So you’re saying that Good Friday and Holy Thursday are less important the Assumption?

And Easter isn’t specially mentioned in the Canons since all Sundays are days of obligation.

 

[GraceSofia]

So you’re saying that Good Friday and Holy Thursday are less important the Assumption?

And Easter isn’t specially mentioned in the Canons since all Sundays are days of obligation.

No, he is NOT saying that. Constantine pointed us in the right direction when he said, “Actually the entire Easter Triduum is considered one Liturgical Feast.”

The Sacred Triduum, Holy Thursday, Good Friday, and the Resurrection of the Lord, are the epicenter of the Liturgical Year.

It is more helpful to look at the GENERAL NORMS FOR THE LITURGICAL YEAR AND THE CALENDAR.

I. Easter Triduum

1. Christ redeemed us all and gave perfect glory to God principally through his paschal mystery: dying he destroyed our death and rising he restored our life. ***Therefore the Easter triduum of the passion and resurrection of Christ is the culmination of the entire liturgical year. Thus the solemnity of Easter has the same kind of preeminence in the liturgical year that Sunday has in the week. ***

1. The Easter triduum begins with the evening Mass of the Lord’s Supper, reaches its high point in the Easter Vigil, and closes with evening prayer on Easter Sunday.

1. On Good Friday and, if possible, also on Holy Saturday until the Easter Vigil, the Easter fast is observed everywhere.

1. The Easter Vigil, during the holy night when Christ rose from the dead, ranks as the “the mother of all vigils.” Keeping watch, the Church awaits Christ’s resurrection and celebrates it in the sacraments. Accordingly, the entire celebration of this vigil should take place at night, that is, should either begin after nightfall or end before the dawn of Sunday.

 

[GraceSofia]

So you’re saying that Good Friday and Holy Thursday are less important the Assumption?

And Easter isn’t specially mentioned in the Canons since all Sundays are days of obligation.

Blessed John Paul II said that canonical norms refer to a reality that transcends them.

The Catechism is beautiful here:

1168 Beginning with the Easter Triduum as its source of light, the new age of the Resurrection fills the whole liturgical year with its brilliance. Gradually, on either side of this source, the year is transfigured by the liturgy. It really is a "year of the Lord’s favor."42 The economy of salvation is at work within the framework of time, but since its fulfillment in the Passover of Jesus and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, the culmination of history is anticipated “as a foretaste,” and the kingdom of God enters into our time.

1169 Therefore Easter is not simply one feast among others, but the “Feast of feasts,” the “Solemnity of solemnities,” just as the Eucharist is the “Sacrament of sacraments” (the Great Sacrament). St. Athanasius calls Easter "the Great Sunday"43 and the Eastern Churches call Holy Week “the Great Week.” The mystery of the Resurrection, in which Christ crushed death, permeates with its powerful energy our old time, until all is subjected to him.

 

[GraceSofia]

Blessed John Paul II said that canonical norms refer to a reality that transcends them.

The Catechism is beautiful here:

1168 Beginning with the Easter Triduum as its source of light, the new age of the Resurrection fills the whole liturgical year with its brilliance. Gradually, on either side of this source, the year is transfigured by the liturgy. It really is a "year of the Lord’s favor."42 The economy of salvation is at work within the framework of time, but since its fulfillment in the Passover of Jesus and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, the culmination of history is anticipated “as a foretaste,” and the kingdom of God enters into our time.

1169 Therefore Easter is not simply one feast among others, but the “Feast of feasts,” the “Solemnity of solemnities,” just as the Eucharist is the “Sacrament of sacraments” (the Great Sacrament). St. Athanasius calls Easter "the Great Sunday"43 and the Eastern Churches call Holy Week “the Great Week.” The mystery of the Resurrection, in which Christ crushed death, permeates with its powerful energy our old time, until all is subjected to him.

 

[razredge]

Ok, so despite what the canons say - Holy Thursday & Good Friday are days of obligation?