Did Mary die or not?/Assumption

  • Thread starter Thread starter RileyG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
  1. That privilege has shone forth in new radiance since our predecessor of immortal memory, Pius IX, solemnly proclaimed the dogma of the loving Mother of God’s Immaculate Conception. These two privileges are most closely bound to one another. Christ overcame sin and death by his own death, and one who through Baptism has been born again in a supernatural way has conquered sin and death through the same Christ. Yet, according to the general rule, God does not will to grant to the just the full effect of the victory over death until the end of time has come. And so it is that the bodies of even the just are corrupted after death, and only on the last day will they be joined, each to its own glorious soul.
  1. Now God has willed that the Blessed Virgin Mary should be exempted from this general rule. She, by an entirely unique privilege, completely overcame sin by her Immaculate Conception, and as a result she was not subject to the law of remaining in the corruption of the grave, and she did not have to wait until the end of time for the redemption of her body.
This is the essence of the teaching. Mary’s body was not subject to corruption after death - the “corruption of the grave”. It does not say that she was spared death, but rather the corruption of the body that naturally occurs after death. Further, she was joined body and soul immediately afterward, ahead of all the just, not having to wait until the Final Judgment as she was already in a perfected state of grace.
 
This is the essence of the teaching. Mary’s body was not subject to corruption after death - the “corruption of the grave”. It does not say that she was spared death, but rather the corruption of the body that naturally occurs after death. Further, she was joined body and soul immediately afterward, ahead of all the just, not having to wait until the Final Judgment as she was already in a perfected state of grace.
In Jewish understanding, corruption of the body only occurs from the 4th day after death. That is why Jesus and Mary resurrected on the 3rd day. Also why Jesus intentionally came to Lazarus on the 4th day, to show his power over death that even those bodies that have suffered corruption can still be resurrected.

Bible Study 101 👍
 
In Jewish understanding, corruption of the body only occurs from the 4th day after death. That is why Jesus and Mary resurrected on the 3rd day. Also why Jesus intentionally came to Lazarus on the 4th day, to show his power over death that even those bodies that have suffered corruption can still be resurrected.
Yep 👍
 
It seems to me that Mary’s death would be a further testament to the unity between the Mother and her Son. Although she certainly didn’t have to die in order to accomplish God’s plan of salvation, she is united with Jesus in the experience of death as she was so united in every other aspect of her life. She walked the path He walked and it males me love and respect her all the more. Some mystics say that the Lord gave her the choice to die or not and she chose death because He did. Of course, we are under no obligation to believe in mystics. However, the thought of that kind of unity seems to fit more with who Mary always showed herself to be. These are just random thoughts on the subject and nothing binding, however more compelling than this is that the overwhelming evidence that the Church always taught that she died. This, combined with Blessed JPII’s letter, settles the matter for me personally.
I like what you have posted. Just to add a little, when you think of adam and eve and then the new adam and new eve, the similarity is such that the original pair sinned together. The new ones may have done things in common also which tilts the meter towards “she did die”. I can accept that because they are working in tandem for us. Her death would be a participation in the heavenly action and she is called a co-redemptorix for some reason.
mdcpensive1
 
It is moronic and foolish to believe that Mary didn’t die simply because Munificentisimus Deus, the Apostolic Constitution which defined the assumption teaches it explicitely. It says several times that Mary died. It would be irrational to say that, even though they say explicitely that she died, they then intend to leave it open whether she died when they say she reached the end of her earthly life.

It is even more foolish when you realize that the whole tradition speaks of her dying before the assumption and there isn’t one ancient document that leaves it as an open question whether she died.

Further, it is an insult to us eastern Catholics who are just as Catholic as you in the west. Is it only western theology that matters? Are you going to reject the fact that in the east the Dormition of Mary is a feast? Or is it simply that the liturgy is irrelevant to doctrine in your view? Do we fast before a feast that is merely a hypothetical event? Again, only a fool would believe this.

Regarding this concept of it binding under pain of mortal sin. Is that really the extent of your opinion of doctrine? Doctrine is the minimum that must be accepted to avoid hell? You’ve reduced it to legalism, rather than something that should be an event to rejoice about. Is that why we have the feast, so that we can celebrate the base line for avoiding hell? Or is it actually a historical event that is being celebrated? The fact is that the dormition is part of the historical event as taught by the tradition of Christianity, as well as the liturgy of the Church. To remove the dormition from the assumption is to destroy the whole idea of the feast, because you are removing it from its historical context.
I guess I’m a fool then. I’ve been called worse for my devotion to my Mother. I’ll take it and wear it with honor.

If ELIJAH didn’t die, then the Blessed Mother certainly outranks him.
I am not under mortal sin, thanks for your concern that this fool, idiot, moron (let me see if I got all the names on here)…might burn in hell.

I never said anyone COULDN’T believe the Blessed Mother died. Since we don’t know and there are many interpretations I don’t see how my “moronic, idiotic” opinion will change your Church calendar. Trust me they won’t cancel Christmas if I don’t fall down and accept what you are saying. I never said you couldn’t believe what you believe, you are the one saying I am a moron for what I believe.

That’s OK, it’s all good.

Lorrie
 
I’ll ask my ex-husband’s Rabbi about this. My ex is Jewish and most don’t even believe in an afterlife at all, they bury the dead within 24 hours and there is no mention of corruption, because it’s their sincere desire to decay into the ground as fast as possible. Some Orthodox actually request holes be drilled in their caskets so they can decompose quicker.
 
I’ll ask my ex-husband’s Rabbi about this. My ex is Jewish and most don’t even believe in an afterlife at all, they bury the dead within 24 hours and there is no mention of corruption, because it’s their sincere desire to decay into the ground as fast as possible. Some Orthodox actually request holes be drilled in their caskets so they can decompose quicker.
Feel free, just a note of caution, as context is everything.

All that CTG mentioned has biblical foundation and reflects beliefs and practices at the time of Christ.

Jews were buried quickly, but as we know well from the resurrection accounts, the entombed bodies were also annointed with oils and frangrant spices to slow the process of bodily corruption. I doubt that such practices are universally followed in the modern era by Jews in the diaspora.
 
In Jewish understanding, corruption of the body only occurs from the 4th day after death. That is why Jesus and Mary resurrected on the 3rd day. Also why Jesus intentionally came to Lazarus on the 4th day, to show his power over death that even those bodies that have suffered corruption can still be resurrected.
I’ll ask my ex-husband’s Rabbi about this. My ex is Jewish and most don’t even believe in an afterlife at all, they bury the dead within 24 hours and there is no mention of corruption, because it’s their sincere desire to decay into the ground as fast as possible. Some Orthodox actually request holes be drilled in their caskets so they can decompose quicker.
Further, we need to look no further than our own Tradition (capital “T”) to hold these observations as true and valid. Everything that CTG states is indeed “Bible Study 101”.

Jesus rose on the third day

Mary was assumed on the third day

Lazarus was raised on the fourth day

The only difference between the three is that two are Scripturally supported, and the fourth is supported by Apocryphal writings that has already been cited here and accepted in supporting Tradition as consistently taught throughout the centuries.
 
I guess I’m a fool then. I’ve been called worse for my devotion to my Mother. I’ll take it and wear it with honor.

If ELIJAH didn’t die, then the Blessed Mother certainly outranks him.
I am not under mortal sin, thanks for your concern that this fool, idiot, moron (let me see if I got all the names on here)…might burn in hell.

I never said anyone COULDN’T believe the Blessed Mother died. Since we don’t know and there are many interpretations I don’t see how my “moronic, idiotic” opinion will change your Church calendar. Trust me they won’t cancel Christmas if I don’t fall down and accept what you are saying. I never said you couldn’t believe what you believe, you are the one saying I am a moron for what I believe.

That’s OK, it’s all good.

Lorrie
Actually, the Tradition is quite clear. Everyone who ever spoken of the Assumption attatched it to the Dormition until the last century. You can’t have one without the other. You’ve destroyed the whole doctrine by removing it from the Dormition. The Liturgy is quite clear, and as MD makes clear, the Liturgy is doctrinal and dogmatic because it springs from the faith. It is our source of knowledge. Since the Dormition is a feast of the Church, it is dogma. By rejecting the Dormition you have rejected the Tradition of the Church.
 
Further, we need to look no further than our own Tradition (capital “T”) to hold these observations as true and valid. Everything that CTG states is indeed “Bible Study 101”.

Jesus rose on the third day

Mary was assumed on the third day

Lazarus was raised on the fourth day

The only difference between the three is that two are Scripturally supported, and the fourth is supported by Apocryphal writings that has already been cited here and accepted in supporting Tradition as consistently taught throughout the centuries.
I don’t agree because if it was that “set” in the mind of the Church it would not be allowed to be debated.
 
I don’t agree because if it was that “set” in the mind of the Church it would not be allowed to be debated.
Read all of Munificentisimus Deus. You will see how clear in the Tradition it is that Mary died.
 
But again we should also ask what the significance of the death of Mary or anyone for that matter. Because it is a moot point if it serves no greater purpose than random guys trying to win an internet debate, isn’t it?

But it is important that we need to transition from our current bodies inherited from our forefathers, which is the “fallen” human nature. Remember prior to the fall Adam and Eve did not experience pain, they did not experience death. But after the fall, Adam and Eve became subject to sin and death, and all their descendants. Jesus did not change how we are born into this world, this is to preserve our humanity as descendants of Adam and Eve. If Jesus made us perfect like Adam and Eve before the fall, then we are new creations, not descendants of Adam and Eve. We are completely different beings. What Jesus did was conquer sin and death so that death is not the end for us anymore, but rather a transition into glorified bodies which we all will receive at the end of time. THIS is why it is important that Mary died. Like us all, she still needed to be perfected. Being sinless doesn’t mean our physical nature changed, Mary needs to achieve that by dying and being resurrected by God. It is the same thing we will receive at the end of time. The only privilege Mary received in this instance is that she was resurrected prior to her body suffering corruption. Every one of us will suffer physical corruption but as Jesus showed with Lazarus, it is not beyond his power to resurrect us at the end of ages.

The significance of the Feast of the Dormition, or Assumption if you wish, in not to commemorate an event in Mary’s like that is unique to her, but it is God’s way of showing us what awaits us at the end of ages.
 
Read all of Munificentisimus Deus. You will see how clear in the Tradition it is that Mary died.
It is not clear at all. The entire thrust of MD is the Assumption of Mary and not her death. You should read the document properly. Its about the Assumption.
Referencing one Church Father who also believed she died before being assumed does not make it Sacred Tradition. Even that reference is to focus on the Assumption. How many early Church Fathers were there and how many said Mary died before being assumed.
MD is not about Mary’s death and it most certainly does not constitute a Church teaching that Mary died.
Catholics are free to believe Mary died or not.
 
But again we should also ask what the significance of the death of Mary or anyone for that matter. Because it is a moot point if it serves no greater purpose than random guys trying to win an internet debate, isn’t it?

But it is important that we need to transition from our current bodies inherited from our forefathers, which is the “fallen” human nature. Remember prior to the fall Adam and Eve did not experience pain, they did not experience death. But after the fall, Adam and Eve became subject to sin and death, and all their descendants. Jesus did not change how we are born into this world, this is to preserve our humanity as descendants of Adam and Eve. If Jesus made us perfect like Adam and Eve before the fall, then we are new creations, not descendants of Adam and Eve. We are completely different beings. What Jesus did was conquer sin and death so that death is not the end for us anymore, but rather a transition into glorified bodies which we all will receive at the end of time. THIS is why it is important that Mary died. Like us all, she still needed to be perfected. Being sinless doesn’t mean our physical nature changed, Mary needs to achieve that by dying and being resurrected by God. It is the same thing we will receive at the end of time. The only privilege Mary received in this instance is that she was resurrected prior to her body suffering corruption. Every one of us will suffer physical corruption but as Jesus showed with Lazarus, it is not beyond his power to resurrect us at the end of ages.

The significance of the Feast of the Dormition, or Assumption if you wish, in not to commemorate an event in Mary’s like that is unique to her, but it is God’s way of showing us what awaits us at the end of ages.
What you’re saying about the fall does not apply to the Blessed Mother. She was not tainted with original sin. And you are right, before the fall there was no death. She was sinless and had no stain of original sin…so you just confirmed my whole point. She merely needed her body glorified. God doesn’t NEED anything. God can do anything at anytime. Mary did not have a sinful nature. So her body could be changed in an instant and she is assumed into heaven. Elijah was assumed into heaven without dying. It has been done.
 
Originally Posted by ConstantineTG
But again we should also ask what the significance of the death of Mary or anyone for that matter. Because it is a moot point if it serves no greater purpose than random guys trying to win an internet debate, isn’t it?

I agree, what is next? Who is the greatest in heaven??
 
What you’re saying about the fall does not apply to the Blessed Mother. She was not tainted with original sin. And you are right, before the fall there was no death. She was sinless and had no stain of original sin…so you just confirmed my whole point. She merely needed her body glorified. God doesn’t NEED anything. God can do anything at anytime. Mary did not have a sinful nature. So her body could be changed in an instant and she is assumed into heaven. Elijah was assumed into heaven without dying. It has been done.
There are SO many reasons to believe in the Dormition of Mary, but certainly of VERY heavy weight is the Ancient tradition of the Eastern Church, in both her Liturgy and her Icons. Then we also have this tradition in the Western Church as well. It has been established for as long as the Eastern Church’s tradition. Then we have the teachings of Popes (including the Blessed John Paul II, who explicitly stated that the wording of the document “MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS” means, without any doubt that Mary died. Then we have the teachings of Saints and Theologians going back to ancient times. Then we have Theological reasons as well, which I will get to in a minute.

The reasons for believing Mary never died are poorly thought out, employ sloppy Biblical exegesis and theology, not to mention a faulty understanding of how to read Papal documents, while failing to recognize the true teaching authority of the Church (The Universal Church from ancient times until now,) and substituting a wrong headed concept of only believing infallible documents (as poorly interpreted by themselves.)

The main reasons for believing Mary never died (as often seen in this forum are) :

Enoch and Elijah were “Assumed” into heaven while still living, and more probably also Moses (and maybe some others yet to be named?)

This is false on many grounds. First, on Biblical exegesis. It is very probable, if not certain that the writers of these passages were using a poetic euphemism for a funeral pyre (in Elijah’s case) or just a mysterious passing (in Enoch’s) case. The idea of an “Assumption” is totally foreign to Ancient Jewish culture. Heaven (as Christians understand it today) was not taught or understood. It was the bosom of Abraham, in the underworld where good Jews reposed. But it was THIS life that mattered, not the next, in the Jewish religion.

Further, Christians believe that the CENTRAL reason for the Incarnation and Redemption of Jesus Christ was to RE-OPEN the gates of Heaven, which had been shut up since the fall of Adam & Eve. To think that random people throughout the Old Testament were in fact being "ASSUMED’ into heaven while living is a direct ASSAULT on the doctrine of the Redemption.

Further, Jesus Christ Himself said that St. John the Baptist was the greatest of all the prophets, and yet HE was beheaded! How do we reconcile that? Old Testament Assumptions are merely “modes” of dying for SOME holy prophets but not others? It is TOO ridiculous a thought! It DEGRADES AND DEBASES the MOST Holy Assumption of the Virgin Mary.

Another faulty argument in favor of Mary being assumed while living is that she was sinless, and therefore was also created immortal, unlike the rest of mankind since the fall of Adam and Eve.

But it is an error to believe Mary was created sinless (the Immaculate Conception) for her own sake. The Immaculate Conception was an extraordinary favor of God bestowed upon Mary FOR THE SAKE OF THE INCARNATION. It was that Jesus Christ, THE MOST HIGH, would have need for a perfect, unstained tabernacle. This special favor was granted the Virgin Mary IN ANTICIPATION of HER REDEMPTION by her Son. IOW, Mary did not merit the Immaculate Conception, it was for the sake of the Incarnation. Mary therefore was NOT created as an immortal human, but given an extraordinary grace in anticipation of her role as the Mother of God. Mary’s cooperation with God’s grace was heroic, instantaneous and pure. That is what raises her above all the Angels and Saints; her extraordinary holiness in cooperating with God’s abundant grace and Holy Will. Therefore it is only fitting that Mary would die, like her Son, and all the rest of mankind.

Further, Jesus Christ Himself said that the servant is NOT above his master. Therefore it is a mistake to believe that Mary, the handmaid of God, would be above her Master, the Son of God.

Further, Jesus said that the seed MUST fall to the ground and die so that it can bear much fruit. John 12:20-36 Catholics believe Mary has born more fruit than any other person in the history of Salvation.

Further, as Pope John Paul II says, it would have been our Blessed Mother’s Will to share IN EVERY RESPECT with her Son Jesus Christ, in the work of Redemption, which included death, which Jesus Christ had elevated and made Holy, by His own suffering and Death. It would have been CONTRARY to the Gospel Doctrine for God to consider death (after the Redemptive work of Jesus) to be merely a punishment for the sin of Adam.

Further consequences of believing Mary never died:

She was DENIED a resurrection from the dead, whereby we ALL including Jesus, receive our GLORIFIED BODY, which is necessary for entering Heaven.

The Resurrection of Mary is CENTRAL to the belief in the Assumption of Mary, with her glorified body and soul into Heaven.

There are many other simpler arguments for the belief that Mary died. For example the question of witnesses arises. Did anyone witness this event of Mary passing from this life directly into immortality? If so, who? Why would they cover this up if they were witnesses? If there were no witnesses, then what would the Apostles suppose when Mary just “disappeared” without a trace? Christians were under persecution, was she kidnapped, murdered?

In short, believing that Mary never died, requires a tortured twisting of Biblical passages, Papal documents, and common Church doctrines and dogmas, taught from ancient times, as well as a suspension of common sense. It is a relatively new concept as well, arising (as far as I have been able to tell) AFTER the Reformation, when so much error abounded in Western Christianity.
 
There are SO many reasons to believe in the Dormition of Mary, but certainly of VERY heavy weight is the Ancient tradition of the Eastern Church, in both her Liturgy and her Icons. Then we also have this tradition in the Western Church as well. It has been established for as long as the Eastern Church’s tradition. Then we have the teachings of Popes (including the Blessed John Paul II, who explicitly stated that the wording of the document “MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS” means, without any doubt that Mary died. Then we have the teachings of Saints and Theologians going back to ancient times. Then we have Theological reasons as well, which I will get to in a minute.

The reasons for believing Mary never died are poorly thought out, employ sloppy Biblical exegesis and theology, not to mention a faulty understanding of how to read Papal documents, while failing to recognize the true teaching authority of the Church (The Universal Church from ancient times until now,) and substituting a wrong headed concept of only believing infallible documents (as poorly interpreted by themselves.)

The main reasons for believing Mary never died (as often seen in this forum are) :

Enoch and Elijah were “Assumed” into heaven while still living, and more probably also Moses (and maybe some others yet to be named?)

This is false on many grounds. First, on Biblical exegesis. It is very probable, if not certain that the writers of these passages were using a poetic euphemism for a funeral pyre (in Elijah’s case) or just a mysterious passing (in Enoch’s) case. The idea of an “Assumption” is totally foreign to Ancient Jewish culture. Heaven (as Christians understand it today) was not taught or understood. It was the “bosom of Abraham.”

Further, Christians believe that the CENTRAL reason for the Incarnation and Redemption of Jesus Christ was to RE-OPEN the gates of Heaven, which had been shut up since the fall of Adam & Eve. To think that random people throughout the Old Testament were in fact being "ASSUMED’ into heaven while living is a direct ASSAULT on the doctrine of the Redemption.

Further, Jesus Christ Himself said that St. John the Baptist was the greatest of all the prophets, and yet HE was beheaded! How do we reconcile that? Old Testament Assumptions are merely “modes” of dying for SOME holy prophets but not others? It is TOO ridiculous a thought! It DEGRADES AND DEBASES the MOST Holy Assumption of the Virgin Mary.

Another faulty argument in favor of Mary being assumed while living is that she was sinless, and therefore was also created immortal, unlike the rest of mankind since the fall of Adam and Eve.

But it is an error to believe Mary was created sinless (the Immaculate Conception) for her own sake. The Immaculate Conception was an extraordinary favor of God bestowed upon Mary FOR THE SAKE OF THE INCARNATION. It was that Jesus Christ, THE MOST HIGH, would have need for a perfect, unstained tabernacle. This special favor was granted the Virgin Mary IN ANTICIPATION of HER REDEMPTION by her Son. IOW, Mary did not merit the Immaculate Conception, it was for the sake of the Incarnation. Mary therefore was NOT created as an immortal human, but given an extraordinary grace in anticipation of her role as the Mother of God. Mary’s cooperation with God’s grace was heroic, instantaneous and pure. That is what raises her above all the Angels and Saints; her extraordinary holiness in cooperating with God’s abundant grace and Holy Will. Therefore it is only fitting that Mary would die, like her Son, and all the rest of mankind.

Further, Jesus Christ Himself said that the servant is NOT above his master. Therefore it is a mistake to believe that Mary, the handmaid of God, would be above her Master, the Son of God.

Further, Jesus said that the seed MUST fall to the ground and die so that it can bear much fruit. John 12:20-36 Catholics believe Mary has born more fruit than any other person in the history of Salvation.

Further, as Pope John Paul II says, it would have been our Blessed Mother’s Will to share IN EVERY RESPECT with her Son Jesus Christ, in the work of Redemption, which included death, which Jesus Christ had elevated and made Holy, by His own suffering and Death. It would have been CONTRARY to the Gospel Doctrine for God to consider death (after the Redemptive work of Jesus) to be merely a punishment for the sin of Adam.

Further consequences of believing Mary never died:

She was DENIED a resurrection from the dead, whereby we ALL including Jesus, receive our GLORIFIED BODY, which is necessary for entering Heaven.

The Resurrection of Mary is CENTRAL to the belief in the Assumption of Mary, with her glorified body and soul into Heaven.

There are many other simpler arguments for the belief that Mary died. For example the question of witnesses arises. Did anyone witness this event of Mary passing from this life directly into immortality? If so, who? Why would they cover this up if they were witnesses? If there were no witnesses, then what would the Apostles suppose when Mary just “disappeared” without a trace? Christians were under persecution, was she kidnapped, murdered?

In short, believing that Mary never died, requires a tortured twisting of Biblical passages, Papal documents, and common Church doctrines and dogmas, taught from ancient times, as well as a suspension of common sense. It is a relatively new concept as well, arising (as far as I have been able to tell) AFTER the Reformation, when so much error abounded in Western Christianity.
I like your understanding of the question and the rational use of the historical critical method. But could you please respond to the issue of the bones of Mary never being found and used in relics. I am told that it was a very important thing in the early Church.
mdcpensive1
 
I like your understanding of the question and the rational use of the historical critical method. But could you please respond to the issue of the bones of Mary never being found and used in relics. I am told that it was a very important thing in the early Church.
mdcpensive1
I’m not sure what the point would be. Whether Mary died or not, would not change the fact that Mary was Assumed into heaven, leaving no mortal remains. So if anything it would be an argument in favor of the Assumption. Do I understand you correctly?
 
Yes, everything other than the boldface-typed passage, which seems to be the only thing read and considered, at times.

Munificentissimus Deus (EWTN Library)
And the problem is that the phrase “having completed the course of her earthly life” only becomes subject to interpretation if you do not read the entire document. There is no other interpretation if you read the entire document. Trust me, I am a business analyst. I write a lot of one-liner requirements and if you just read the requirement alone without understanding the entire document or the entire system, then there could be different interpretation. But requirements are supposed to be clear, and I can’t write a pages worth of words for one requirement to cover all my bases. Thus it is expected that the entire document be read for every requirement be understood. Otherwise I am writing the same thing over and over again.

The same principle applies in general to writing other documents, like legal, etc. The highlighted part is highlighted because it is the most important. But that doesn’t mean you just throw the rest of the document out. You can’t interpret one bible verse in isolation from the rest of the bible, you can’t interpret that line in isolation from the rest of the document.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top