Did Mary experience physical death before her assumption?

[Maximos]

How dare you claim my posts were offensive, this sir/ma’am, is an OFFENSIVE post, not anything I nor Gary Taylor has said was even remotely offensive.

You posted:

For those of you who claim that Blessed Mother Mary’s death was a sure thing:

You belittle our belief. That is offensive. Just because your modern tradition doesn’t take a position on the issue doesn’t mean our historic Tradition hasn’t. You came into our forum and posted your patronizing quote for no reason. If you cannot respect Eastern Theology then why do you insist on coming into our forum and treating us like we are silly children?

Please, I’ve read many of your posts in other threads. You obviously dislike Eastern Christianity. Why do you hate us so much?

 

[josie_L]

You posted:

You belittle our belief. That is offensive. Just because your modern tradition doesn’t take a position on the issue doesn’t mean our historic Tradition hasn’t. You came into our forum and posted your patronizing quote for no reason. If you cannot respect Eastern Theology then why do you insist on coming into our forum and treating us like we are silly children?

Please, I’ve read many of your posts in other threads. You obviously dislike Eastern Christianity. Why do you hate us so much?

You are and will be reported, nothing I said was remotely offensive, get a grip. Hate is horrible thing to accuse someone else of, I would suggest you watch what you say.

 

[Maximos]

You are and will be reported, nothing I said was remotely offensive, get a grip.

You patronizingly denounce our theology in our own forum, how am I not to be offended by your remarks? You have no respect for us. You come into our home and disrespect our sacred traditions.

 

[josie_L]

You patronizingly denounce our theology in our own forum, how am I not to be offended by your remarks? You have no respect for us. You come into our home and disrespect our sacred traditions.

Hate is a horrible thing to accuse another person of, and that is what you are guilty of, I will not stand condemned by someone who knows absolutely nothing about me.

p.s. I am not disrespecting anyone’s tradition I am having a debate about what the Church states concerning the Blessed Mary’s assumption (and I said that you can either believe she died or didn’t).

 

[josie_L]

You patronizingly denounce our theology in our own forum, how am I not to be offended by your remarks? You have no respect for us. You come into our home and disrespect our sacred traditions.

Third post I had to report.

 

[Maximos]

Hate is a horrible thing to accuse another person of, and that is what you are guilty of, I will not stand condemned by someone who knows absolutely nothing about me.

p.s. I am not disrespecting anyone’s tradition I am having a debate about what the Church states concerning the Blessed Mary’s assumption (and I said that you can either believe she died or didn’t).

Why do you think we care about what “the Church” allows me to believe? When you say “the Church” you mean the Latin Church. Your tradition is a MINORITY position, only held by one out of twenty two Catholic Churches of equal dignity. You should defer to our wisdom and not insist on patronizing us by “allowing” us to believe what we have always believed.

 

[josie_L]

Why do you think we care about what “the Church” allows me to believe? When you say “the Church” you mean the Latin Church. Your tradition is a MINORITY position, only held by one out of twenty two Catholic Churches of equal dignity. You should defer to our wisdom and not insist on patronizing us by “allowing” us to believe what we have always believed.

When did I say you cannot believe she died, I said both views are acceptable in the Church, it is the other posters WHO ARE INSISTING THAT WE SHOULD BELIEVE THAT SHE DIED., i.e., insisting that it was what the Church always believed.

 

[Maximos]

When did I say you cannot believe she died, I said both views are acceptable in the Church, it is the other posters WHO ARE INSISTING THAT WE SHOULD BELIEVE THAT SHE DIED.

Of course you should believe it. There is no room what so ever for debate. Just because Pope Pius was vague in one sentence does not give anyone permission to ignore the rest of his document or the consensus of the a Fathers and Teachers of all of the other Apostolic Churches. We do not accept the premise that vagueness on the part of one person can constitute a blanket permission to dismiss the consensus is Christian thought for two thousand years.

The Church is more than one document by the Latin Church. You must admit that the Deposit of Faith is more than just that. Please, you are completely erasing the totality of Eastern Christianity.

 

[josie_L]

Of course you should believe it. There is no room what so ever for debate. Just because Pope Pius was vague in one sentence does that give anyone permission to ignore the rest of his document or the consensus of the a Fathers and Teachers of all of the other Apostolic Churches. We do not accept the premise that vagueness on the part of one person can constitute a blanket permission to dismiss the consensus is Christian thought for two thousand years.

The Church is more than one document by the Latin Church. You must admit that the Deposit of Faith is more than just that. Please, you are completely erasing the totality of Eastern Christianity.

No room for debate, and yet you insist I"m the one imposing MY BELIEFS/TRADITIONS on you. Are you for real?

 

[Catherine_Grant]

Note from Moderator:
The focus of this forum is to provide a community for Eastern Catholics and to help Latin Catholics better appreciate the Church’s Eastern heritage. Non-Catholics are welcome to participate in compliance with the stated purpose of the forum.

We understand that there is a wide diversity of expression of theology, spirituality, and discipline between and within the Eastern, Oriental, and Western rites and churches. Members are free to discuss, dialogue, question, disagree with, and debate the liturgy, theology, spirituality, discipline, culture, and history of Eastern, Oriental, and Western Catholicism. However, all discourse must be civil and charitable. Please review our forum guidelines on [charity (http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=132852) before posting.

I am deleting several personal attacks and conversations related to them. Please return to the thread topic, adhering to the forum debate guidelines.

****Debate Guidelines for Eastern Catholicism
****No direct or implied you statements unless it is genuine praise.

• You said…
• You need to…
• You don’t get it.
• Why don’t you…
• If only you…
• It is you who…
• You are wrong.
• You misunderstood.
• I’m not the one who…
• Some people here…

No indication of what the other needs to do unless it is genuine praise.

• You need to…
• Why don’t you…
• If you’d only…
• Those of us who have…

Use non-controversial words which have meanings everyone can agree on whenever possible.
Spend your time discussing the substance of the topic and not arguing tangents on words that instigate or inflame the other side.

Use bolds, underlines, font size increases, or other emphases very sparingly.

No hyperbole and no sarcasm in a debate.

• This conversation always…
• Every single time this comes up…
• Aren’t you a saint?

Please remember that there are many people lurking who are judging your position and all those who are in your communion by your behavior alone. It does not matter what anyone else says; you should be a model of charitable dialogue. If someone else is not, please do not respond in kind. Let the moderator know and it will be handled as necessary.

CAF’s General Guidelines for Posting in a Religious Discussion

• Always abide by the forum rules.
• Civility and a respect for each other should be foremost.
• Posters are expected to treat each other as equals with equal expectations of each other in terms of research, logic, challenges, and portrayal of Catholic teaching.
• Questions are a better approach than assertions, unless the latter are framed in a non-confrontational and non-accusatory manner.
• Don’t answer a question with a question. If you don’t know the answer, say so.
• Rhetorical questions may be used to introduce a new aspect of inquiry but not to evade challenges or to call into question the intelligence, education, or any other personal qualities of another poster.
• It is acceptable to question policies and practices.
• It is never acceptable to question the sincerity of an individual’s beliefs.
• It is never acceptable to assume or say you know what another person thinks or needs.
• If you aren’t going to go into the discussion with the resolution that you could just possibly have your view broadened, you may as well not go into it.
• Terms of derision, derogatory remarks, baiting, and inflammatory statements are prohibited.
• Avoid categorizing people by a term which could be considered derogatory (e.g., Nazi or neocon) unless they have embraced that title. In which case, you may qualify them with the term as long as you preface it with the word “avowed.” Posters are asked to use their best judgement when posting articles using such terms. Do not abbreviate terms.

Sarcasm, Making Corrections and Jumping Threads

• On the use of sarcasm: Use emoticons when possible to convey your intent. A smiley-face or a wink can demonstrate that you are not intending malice. End the post on a positive note, devoid of sarcasm. A pleasant ending can act like sugar helping the medicine go down. Think of sarcasm like salt. Just as you wouldn’t dump a shakerful on your food, don’t dump a load of sarcasm into a post. Use it sparingly.
• Don’t jump threads. If you get involved in an argument in one thread, it’s considered poor manners to restart the previous argument in the middle of an unrelated thread. Also, if the moderator closes a thread, consider the subject closed and do not begin it anew in another thread.
• It is easy to stray from the rules in the heat of battle. Try to make corrections gently, with the assumption that no offense was meant. It usually is not. Also, keep in mind that some people are thick-skinned. What seems a vicious attack to you may seem a light-hearted spar to them.

Praise

• When you agree with a part of what someone said, tell them. It doesn’t hurt your position to agree with some part of an opposing argument. In fact, it lets others know that you are listening.

What to look for in your post before you press submit:

• Is the post civil and charitable?
• Does the post challenge those to whom it is directed or does it bash them?
• And remember: always, do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

 

[Maximos]

No room for debate, and yet you insist I"m the one imposing MY BELIEFS/TRADITIONS on you. Are you for real?

p.s. You can continue this DEBATE without me.

You came into the Eastern Catholicism forum imposing modern Latin innovative thought upon defenseless Easterners who have no power to stop you. We didn’t come into a Latin forum, instigate a debate, and force our position upon you.

This happens so often and not once had a Latin poster been banned or made a public example out of for doing so. This is our one refuge amidst a sea of Latin dominance and we can’t even be comfortable in our own home. We constantly have to defend ourselves against over zealous Latin posters who ignore the fast that this isn’t their forum to speak authoritatively in. When a poster comes here to ask a question about Eastern Cathlolicism how do you think we feel when a Latin poster ignores the name of the forum and jumps in and posts a contradictory response that confuses people who honestly seek information from our perspective?

The OP posted in the Eastern Catholicism forum, and Eastern Theology teaches that the Theotokos died before her Assumption into Heaven. It is not the place of a Latin to come in here and offer the perspective of the Latin Church and say that it is the position of the Eastern Catholic Churches.

We teach definitively that she suffered death. There is no further need of Latin confusion. This is not a forum that concerns itself with Latin thought.

 

[josie_L]

You came into the Eastern Catholicism forum imposing modern Latin innovative thought upon defenseless Easterners who have no power to stop you. We didn’t come into a Latin forum, instigate a debate, and force our position upon you.

This happens so often and not once had a Latin poster been banned or made a public example out of for doing so. This is our one refuge amidst a sea of Latin dominance and we can’t even be comfortable in our own home. We constantly have to defend ourselves against over zealous Latin posters who ignore the fast that this isn’t their forum to speak authoritatively in. When a poster comes here to ask a question about Eastern Cathlolicism how do you think we feel when a Latin poster ignores the name of the forum and jumps in and posts a contradictory response that confuses people who honestly seek information from our perspective?

The OP posted in the Eastern Catholicism forum, and Eastern Theology teaches that the Theotokos died before her Assumption into Heaven. It is not the place of a Latin to come in here and offer the perspective of the Latin Church and say that it is the position of the Eastern Catholic Churches.

We teach definitively that she suffered death. There is no further need of Latin confusion. This is not a forum that concerns itself with Latin thought.

I am not imposing any LATIN INNOVATIONS, there was never UNIVERSAL consensus regarding the death of Mother Mary, that is why the Catholic Church did not define whether or not blessed Mother Mary did or didn’t die, therefore both positions are acceptable to maintain, in other words, I am not trying to IMPOSE anything on anyone, simply advocating the beliefs of the CHURCH as a WHOLE.

You can keep your traditions, but LET ME KEEP MINE as clarified by the Catholic Church.

 

[Maximos]

I am not imposing any LATIN INNOVATIONS, there was never UNIVERSAL consensus regarding the death of Mother Mary, that is why the Catholic Church did not define whether or not blessed Mother Mary did or didn’t die, therefore both positions are valid, in other words, I am not trying to IMPOSE anything on anyone, simply advocating the beliefs of the CHURCH as a WHOLE.

You can keep your traditions, but LET ME KEEP MINE as clarified by the Catholic Church.

John Paul II admitted that no single Christian ever believe Mary did not die until the 17th Century at the earliest. By Eastern standards that is most assuredly a modern innovation.

Also, there was universal consensus among East Orient and West for almost the entirety of Church History. It was only until a minority group within the Latin Church decided to question that consensus did the thought of her unnatural un-dying even come about.

I am so distraught why you keep confusing the Latin Church with the Catholic Church. It is very distressing. Pope Pius XII taught that the Theotokos died, John Paul II clarified and reiterated that the Theotokos died.

Just because the word “died” was not included in the “magic infallible sentence” does not mean that Pius did not intend for Christians to believe that she died. Modern Latins are putting words in Pius XII’s mouth by saying that because he didn’t include one word that he intended to allow people to question immemorial Tradition.

The Latin Church may not have solemnly defined her death, but the Eastern and Oriental Churches - with which you are in Communion and must submit to our beliefs as well when they are defined - have most assuredly defined (in our own way - i.e. through our liturgy and the teaching of our Fathers) that she in fact did die.

Either you admit that the Eastern and Oriental Catholic Churches are in communion with the Latin Church or you are saying that we are in schism. If we are in communion, then you must submit to our definitively held beliefs - the Theotokos died a natural death as has been held by the consensus of the Universal Fathers for 2000 years. If you deny that you must believe this then you question the bonds of communion that exist between our Churches.

 

[prodromos]

It would be easier to accept the existence of this oral tradiation and its adherence within the church, if the idea were not contradicted in the writings of Epiphanius.

If we had nothing else to go by, certainly, but the Church also posesses the sash which Panagia wore and passed on to the Apostle Thomas as she was assumed into heaven. Many women who were unable to have children have conceived by Panagia’s prayers through the grace overflowing from her sash.

 

[Miserissima]

I’m sorry its a very good question which at this point everyone should be asking themselves.

In school I was taught, “Mary was assumed into Heaven. We don’t know if she died.” I hadn’t thought of that in years.

As a child growing up in the Latin Church, I accepted that as a fact. This was one of the few areas I didn’t try to “pick apart” to understand.

I went through school and “got all sorts of smart,” parsing different answers to the Great Questions.

I even pitted the Saints’ words against each other, saying that if Saint A was wrong about Topic X, then Saint A must be wrong about Topic Y, too. So I’ll trust Saint B. Yeah, real smart of me!

And now, I’ve been humbled by talking to an Orthodox brother who giggles when I ask his view of the Great Questions – because I learned this: in my humility, I am not God, nor am I going to understand Him by deducing anything with my limited intellect. We get glimpses of God’s nature, but we should never presume to know how (or why) God works the way He does.

And so, after all the academics are laid aside, I only have childlike faith left.

All I need to know is that He assumed the Theotokos. The “how” was up to Him. Knowing the mechanics (or not) doesn’t shake my faith.

Lord, I believe that the Virgin Mary was apotheosized. Please help my unbelief by not understanding how, and thank you for teaching me not to rely on my own understanding over the goodness You have shown. May I come to learn about Your ways if I should be worthy to ever be in Your presence. Amen.

 

[josie_L]

In school I was taught, “Mary was assumed into Heaven. We don’t know if she died.” I hadn’t thought of that in years.

As a child growing up in the Latin Church, I accepted that as a fact. This was one of the few areas I didn’t try to “pick apart” to understand.

I went through school and “got all sorts of smart,” parsing different answers to the Great Questions.

I even pitted the Saints’ words against each other, saying that if Saint A was wrong about Topic X, then Saint A must be wrong about Topic Y, too. So I’ll trust Saint B. Yeah, real smart of me!

And now, I’ve been humbled by talking to an Orthodox brother who giggles when I ask his view of the Great Questions – because I learned this: in my humility, I am not God, nor am I going to understand Him by deducing anything with my limited intellect. We get glimpses of God’s nature, but we should never presume to know how (or why) God works the way He does.

And so, after all the academics are laid aside, I only have childlike faith left.

All I need to know is that He assumed the Theotokos. The “how” was up to Him. Knowing the mechanics (or not) doesn’t shake my faith.

Lord, I believe that the Virgin Mary was apotheosized. Please help my unbelief by not understanding how, and thank you for teaching me not to rely on my own understanding over the goodness You have shown. May I come to learn about Your ways if I should be worthy to ever be in Your presence. Amen.

I agree, (I personally don’t know if she did or didn’t), even though there was no universal consensus or clarity on this particular aspect of her life. My argument is simply that we can accept both views, as such, this is not Latin vs. Eastern as some have argued.

 

[Cavaradossi]

I agree, but there are others who are trying to force the issue, i.e., that she did die (I personally don’t know if she did or didn’t), even though there was no universal consensus or clarity on this particular aspect of her life. My argument is simply that we can accept both views, as such, this is not Latin vs. Eastern as some have argued.

It is most certainly not a Latin vs. Eastern issue as the Latins taught the death of the virgin for many centuries (it was in fact a common depiction in Western art), and both East and West felt that they should include hymns alluding to the Theotokos’ bodily death in their liturgical texts. On this basis, I think it is far better to affirm with the liturgical texts of both East and West and the numerous saints that the virgin experienced bodily death, rather than to cling to the words of a minority of fathers, many of whom merely left open the possibility that she did not die or expressed some sort of agnosticism concerning what happened to the Theotokos.

 

[StMarkofEphesus]

It is most certainly not a Latin vs. Eastern issue as the Latins taught the death of the virgin for many centuries (it was in fact a common depiction in Western art), and both East and West felt that they should include hymns alluding to the Theotokos’ bodily death in their liturgical texts. On this basis, I think it is far better to affirm with the liturgical texts of both East and West and the numerous saints that the virgin experienced bodily death, rather than to cling to the words of a minority of fathers, many of whom merely left open the possibility that she did not die or expressed some sort of agnosticism concerning what happened to the Theotokos.

Indeed, it is most disturbing to see such a blatant disregard for the consensus of the Fathers - Greek, Latin, Syriac, Armenian, and Coptic over this. Rarely did all of the traditions agree and on this point the overwhelming consensus - a truly catholic consensus if I have ever seen one - found in the teachings of the Fathers, theologians, hymnody, liturgical texts, iconography, and pious tradition all point to the fact that she did die. Even Pius XII referred multiple times to the Theotokos’ death in his decree. The fact that he was imprecise in one sentence in the document cannot and will not ever abrogate a belief held by the universal Church for 2000 years.

I am saddened by the infatuation some people have with degrading the common heritage the Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Churches have with the Roman Church. We all believe that the Theotokos died - as is fitting - and because a very small, infinitesimally small in comparison to the consensus of the Fathers over 2000 years, group of theologians influenced by yet another misinterpretation of the consequences of “Original Sin” decided to question her death, now Latin faithful think it is appropriate to destroy one of the few points we can all agree on.

Eastern Catholics and Orthodox do not have to adopt a “Latin mind” and reduce our faith - dogmatic minimalism - to a list of dogmas and disregard everything else as “debatable.” How can we ever think of eventual re-union when the people in the pews of the Roman Church think everything else is fluff? This has taken “Cafeteria Catholicism” to a whole new level.

If the Roman Church holds the definitive beliefs of the Eastern Catholic Churches in such disregard are they truly in communion? I posit that the Roman Church is no longer in communion with any other Church because of its theological arrogance. They have removed themselves from communion with even their Eastern Catholic Churches because they dismiss their theology as inconsequential and unnecessary. Perhaps it is time that the Eastern Catholics realize that they really won’t have a home in the Roman Communion if they want to retain their own theology.

 

[josie_L]

Indeed, it is most disturbing to see such a blatant disregard for the consensus of the Fathers - Greek, Latin, Syriac, Armenian, and Coptic over this. Rarely did all of the traditions agree and on this point the overwhelming consensus - a truly catholic consensus if I have ever seen one - found in the teachings of the Fathers, theologians, hymnody, liturgical texts, iconography, and pious tradition all point to the fact that she did die. Even Pius XII referred multiple times to the Theotokos’ death in his decree. The fact that he was imprecise in one sentence in the document cannot and will not ever abrogate a belief held by the universal Church for 2000 years.

I am saddened by the infatuation some people have with degrading the common heritage the Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Churches have with the Roman Church. We all believe that the Theotokos died - as is fitting - and because a very small, infinitesimally small in comparison to the consensus of the Fathers over 2000 years, group of theologians influenced by yet another misinterpretation of the consequences of “Original Sin” decided to question her death, now Latin faithful think it is appropriate to destroy one of the few points we can all agree on.

Eastern Catholics and Orthodox do not have to adopt a “Latin mind” and reduce our faith - dogmatic minimalism - to a list of dogmas and disregard everything else as “debatable.” How can we ever think of eventual re-union when the people in the pews of the Roman Church think everything else is fluff? This has taken “Cafeteria Catholicism” to a whole new level.

If the Roman Church holds the definitive beliefs of the Eastern Catholic Churches in such disregard are they truly in communion? I posit that the Roman Church is no longer in communion with any other Church because of its theological arrogance. They have removed themselves from communion with even their Eastern Catholic Churches because they dismiss their theology as inconsequential and unnecessary. Perhaps it is time that the Eastern Catholics realize that they really won’t have a home in the Roman Communion if they want to retain their own theology.

Funny, all these new memberships (one of whom got banned this very day) with the same critical bent even though it is absolutely unwarranted, i.e., the CC accepts both views, i.e., those whose believe she died and those who don’t (because according to historical accounts there was no universal consensus or clarity regarding her death), so I don’t see how Eastern theology is being disparaged or impugned. Moreover, if anyone is doing the impugning, it is you, sir. Please recollect where you are posting.

The question of the death of Mary is not treated as a subject bearing upon the Assumption. **True, the Holy Father frequently mentions the death of the Blessed Virgin in the body of the document, but in every instance he quotes someone else. He does not give his own views on the subject. Consequently, I believe we can say with Father Roschini that “the question of Mary’s death is a matter for free discussion.”**27

Finally, we should note here that whether Mary died or not, she was not subject to the law of death, the corruption of the grave. If she died, then she was assumed into heaven before her sacred body saw corruption. For, so long as the bodies of the just remain in the dust of the earth, they are under the dominion of death, and they sigh for the ultimate redemption of their bodies.28

God bless.

 

[josie_L]

It is most certainly not a Latin vs. Eastern issue as the Latins taught the death of the virgin for many centuries (it was in fact a common depiction in Western art), and both East and West felt that they should include hymns alluding to the Theotokos’ bodily death in their liturgical texts. On this basis, I think it is far better to affirm with the liturgical texts of both East and West and the numerous saints that the virgin experienced bodily death, rather than to cling to the words of a minority of fathers, many of whom merely left open the possibility that she did not die or expressed some sort of agnosticism concerning what happened to the Theotokos.

Yes, there were Latins who did believe she died, but I have already delineated the reasons as to why Pope Pius XII did not express her death in his declaration, i.e., there was no universal consensus or clarity as to whether she died (even prior to the dogmatic announcement there was still debate on this matter).