Avoiding the “Ark of the New Covenenant” problem; as one who is struggling to come into some sort of reconciliation with the Assumption, I have to point out that the “Wold God do any less for…” type of argument is very wanting, and lacks any form of persuasion.
Sure, if God were of the Grecio-Roman Pagan type, consumed with an overabundance of human Passions, then such an argument would have some, minor, weight of persuasion.
Further, such an argument has no “positive” evidence, simply a rhetorical pressure; this argument does not present any actual real evidence of action.
Afterall, as the argument goes, are we not all His sons and Daughters? Were you God, would you (under the assumptions of this train of argument), really consign your precious children, who you have already reconciled to yourself through the blood of Christ, to rot in the grave; or would you, as this argument suggests, out of Love be utterly repulsed by such an idea, to the point of not leaving them here in such a condition? I don’t know about you, but I am far more emotionally attatched to my Children, than the mother I, scripturally, must have left in order to produce them. Or is it that God is more of a “Son” than he is a “Father”?
As, I presume, we are all Trinitarians, I would not seriously suggest that any Marianist would suggest such a disparity of persons within the Divine Economy, an yet, sometime the exuberance used to express this Dogma (the Assumption, as well as its companion, the IC) leads down very heretical paths.
Frankly, the “lack of relics for veneration” argument is far more persuasive, even if it is likewise logically found wanting (as there are several counter arguments to counter it with equal validity; never fun trying to defend from the absence of evidence).
But anyway, I am not trying to be contentious, just pointing out holes in an area of inquiry of importance to me as a former Prot trying to become a Catholic. I realize that most marianists (as I have seen in these forums) are very emotional about these matters; I must insist, conversationally, that just because I am questioning, I am not trying to dishonor Mary. I am trying to embrace something that I have been given no adequet reason to support such (meaning something that is consistent with the entirety of the known gospel as taught by the Church). So, please take it for what it is intended for; as one who is serching for this answer, please provide something else than rhetorical answers that don’t in actuality address the issue. Though it is an old argument, it is no less specious for it.
Thanks
