Enoch v. Mary

[AmbroseSJ]

Fr of Jazz:

I have my doubts that one can hold that the NT positively asserts Jesus had siblings as we understand them.

My point exactly. I have my doubts that one can hold that the NT positively asserts that Enoch never died but was assumed body and soul into heaven, as we understand the BVM was. There are many interpretations for that single passage in Hebrews 11:5

It is obvious that the author of Hebrews is speaking of Faith pleasing God, and justifying those OT saints. It is not aimed at proving that Enoch was eternal. It is open to speculation as to exactly what the significance of Enoch is. But we know virtually nothing about him other than 1 or 2 verses in the entire Bible.

That is why I say that the Dogma of the Catholic Church regarding Original Sin and Redemption would not permit us to maintain that Enoch never died, or was assumed directly into Heaven.

I also personally reject the speculations of the Zombie Apocalypse crowd that says Elijah and Enoch are floating around somewhere (they know not where) as the undead to return at the End of the Word.

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

My point exactly. I have my doubts that one can hold that the NT positively asserts that Enoch never died but was assumed body and soul into heaven, as we understand the BVM was. There are many interpretations for that single passage in Hebrews 11:5

It is obvious that the author of Hebrews is speaking of Faith pleasing God, and justifying those OT saints. It is not aimed at proving that Enoch was eternal. It is open to speculation as to exactly what the significance of Enoch is. But we know virtually nothing about him other than 1 or 2 verses in the entire Bible.

That is why I say that the Dogma of the Catholic Church regarding Original Sin and Redemption would not permit us to maintain that Enoch never died, or was assumed directly into Heaven.

I also personally reject the speculations of the Zombie Apocalypse crowd that says Elijah and Enoch are floating around somewhere (they know not where) as the undead to return at the End of the Word.

Got it.

But I don’t think the Church has pronounced on either the passage or destiny of Enoch and Elijah. So the statement–“the Dogma of the Catholic Church regarding Original Sin and Redemption would not permit us to maintain that Enoch never died, or was assumed directly into Heaven”–is a conclusion you have drawn regarding a question that, to my knowledge (at least regarding Enoch and Elijah), has not been definitively settled by the Church even though it may have points to recommend it.

I’m not a fan of Zombie Apocalypses either.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Got it.

But I don’t think the Church has pronounced on either the passage or destiny of Enoch and Elijah. So the statement–“the Dogma of the Catholic Church regarding Original Sin and Redemption would not permit us to maintain that Enoch never died, or was assumed directly into Heaven”–is a conclusion you have drawn regarding a question that, to my knowledge (at least regarding Enoch and Elijah), has not been definitively settled by the Church even though it may have points to recommend it.

I’m not a fan of Zombie Apocalypses either.

You’re right, the Church has not pronounced on the passages (and I don’t believe the Church EVER “pronounces” on passages of the Bible.) However your objection that since no definitive pronouncement has been made, we are therefore free to speculate in CONTRADICTION to the doctrines of Original Sin and the Redemption seems shaky at best. IOW, in such a situation, it is certainly safe and orthodox to say that Enoch and Elijah suffered the common fate of ALL mankind, i.e. dying. There are many highly plausible explanations for the wording of the Biblical passages which at first glance may seem to be saying that Enoch and Elijah did not die. That is why I mentioned the Brothers and Sisters of the Lord. The Bible is not so easily understood as a casual reading might seem to indicate. We certainly don’t want to twist our theology into pretzels in justification of our own misreading of Biblical passages.

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

You’re right, the Church has not pronounced on the passages (and I don’t believe the Church EVER “pronounces” on passages of the Bible.) However your objection that since no definitive pronouncement has been made, we are therefore free to speculate in CONTRADICTION to the doctrines of Original Sin and the Redemption seems shaky at best. IOW, in such a situation, it is certainly safe and orthodox to say that Enoch and Elijah suffered the common fate of ALL mankind, i.e. dying. There are many highly plausible explanations for the wording of the Biblical passages which at first glance may seem to be saying that Enoch and Elijah did not die. That is why I mentioned the Brothers and Sisters of the Lord. The Bible is not so easily understood as a casual reading might seem to indicate. We certainly don’t want to twist our theology into pretzels in justification of our own misreading of Biblical passages.

I think we’re roughly in the same ball park. But first when I said “passage” I didn’t mean a biblical passage: I meant their going from earth to God; and by “destiny” I was referring to what happens to them in the future. Perhaps I could have chosen better words.

In liturgies and sermons throughout history the church has certainly commented affirmatively that Elijah was carried off to heaven. The theological question regarding whether he died first or as he was carried off and where he was until the redeeming work of Christ was completed was generally not made an issue. He (and Mary in a certain sense) had to “die” in some manner in the process. To that extent the church has not pronounced on the very theological (not hermeneutic) point you call into question–as you are free to do. It has, however, pronounced on the question of whether Jesus has brothers or sisters which, as you point out, is also based on biblical references.

To your point I’d say it would seem E & E would be with all the other righteous people of the OT prior to Christ completing His work as the NT discusses . . . although that is based on scriptural texts too with the limitations you highlight. It does seem unlikely that prior to that he would be “in heaven” as we hope to be, although they were likely in heaven prior to Mary. Can we say their being bodily in heaven at that time is positively ruled out given the scriptural texts? I’m not so sure. There were the “bodies of many saints” who were “raised” “came forth from their tombs,” “entered the holy city,” and “appeared” to many after the death of Jesus. (Mt 27:51-53).

I would also note with Louis Boyer that the Immaculate Conception itself (defined to be an act of redemption) was an OT grace. And, as with all OT graces, they are in view Christ’s work not yet completed in time. No grace can come apart from that source.

The effect of Redemption on Original Sin is not time-bound regarding sequence. That for sure is not pretzel logic.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Fr of Jazz:

The effect of Redemption on Original Sin is not time-bound regarding sequence. That for sure is not pretzel logic.

The Church has solemnly pronounced this to be the case with the BVM. Whether that Grace, which was intrinsic to the Incarnation, and which took the Church 2000 yrs. to define, can be extended to sundry other OT saints (mainly due to the wording of a few isolated Biblical passages) seems implausible, at least to me. But thank you for your view.

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

The Church has solemnly pronounced this to be the case with the BVM. Whether that Grace, which was intrinsic to the Incarnation, and which took the Church 2000 yrs. to define, can be extended to sundry other OT saints (mainly due to the wording of a few isolated Biblical passages) seems implausible, at least to me. But thank you for your view.

My views on this subject are a work in progress. Nothing solidified yet.

Good discussion. Thank you.

 

[Bodyandblood999]

New here…I posted this question elsewhere, but didn’t get a response. It is slightly off thread, but maybe not, in light of some of the above. This was recently sent to me and I wanted to get some help ideas on how to respond. Thanks:

"The Holy Spirit saw to it that she [Mary] is NEVER mentioned in ANY of the instruction of the New Testament written by Paul, Peter, John, James and Jude. Zip! When God had Paul and Peter and the rest lay out all the doctrine and all the necessities of Church practice for ages to come, He excluded anything about Mary!

Other than in the gospels, she is mentioned only one time, and that is in Acts chapter one, in a list of people who were in the upper room with the disciples: “ These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers.”—Acts 1:14 So she in included in a list of followers and, by the way, she was with her other offspring—Jesus’ brothers!

In the one place where it might have looked like someone was attempting to worship Mary, Jesus quickly shut them down: “ While Jesus was saying these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, “Blessed is the womb that bore You and the breasts at which You nursed.” But He said, “On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it.”—Luke 11:27-29"

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

New here…I posted this question elsewhere, but didn’t get a response. It is slightly off thread, but maybe not, in light of some of the above. This was recently sent to me and I wanted to get some help ideas on how to respond. Thanks:

"The Holy Spirit saw to it that she [Mary] is NEVER mentioned in ANY of the instruction of the New Testament written by Paul, Peter, John, James and Jude. Zip! When God had Paul and Peter and the rest lay out all the doctrine and all the necessities of Church practice for ages to come, He excluded anything about Mary!

Other than in the gospels, she is mentioned only one time, and that is in Acts chapter one, in a list of people who were in the upper room with the disciples: “ These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers.”—Acts 1:14 So she in included in a list of followers and, by the way, she was with her other offspring—Jesus’ brothers!

In the one place where it might have looked like someone was attempting to worship Mary, Jesus quickly shut them down: “ While Jesus was saying these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, “Blessed is the womb that bore You and the breasts at which You nursed.” But He said, “On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it.”—Luke 11:27-29"

I’m going to try to get back to this, but two facts immediately come to mind. The author left out mention of Revelation 12. Also, if saying “Blessed is the womb . . .” is an attempt to worship Mary, is Jesus telling us to worship the poor and hungry, etc. in Lk 6:20-22 when he says “Blessed are the poor . . .?”

Further the author seems to have an understanding of the NT as a charter for literal reenactments down through history. But behind all of that is sola scriptura which is rarely justified from scratch vis-à-vis Scripture, Tradition and Church as the means to hand on God’s word down through time, i.e., “for ages to come.”

 

[Bodyandblood999]

Thanks. I want to get a reply for that!

 

[Bodyandblood999]

People read TOO much into some passages, including theologians (who are fallible.)

Every human ever born has died. To speculate differently may be possible based on certain theological principles, and because the Church has not declared on this categorically.

However, because it is possible to speculate theologically does not negate other theologies, or that theology is false. We know from the Bible that everyone descended from Adam and Eve are marked with Original Sin. We also know this as a dogma of the Church. The Church has only recognized the exemption of ONE PERSON ever, from this fate of all Humanity (expecting of course Our Savior,) and that person is the BVM.

Therefore the ONLY person that we MAY speculate to have been exempted from death is the BVM.

On the other hand, we have been taught by Blessed Pope John Paul II, that the doctrine declaring the death of the Virgin Mary was not included in Munificentissimus Deus NOT because her death was doubtful, but because it was not an opportune moment to declare yet another doctrine within a main one. He did say and teach (while Pope) explicitly that the Virgin Mary did indeed die. Now some doubting Catholics will say they will ONLY believe infallible Dogmas. (I don’t know how they arrive at these select beliefs) but, when the Pope categorically teaches something, even though not in a dogmatic framework, we are still under an obligation to hear him humbly, unless it is actual heresy. We can’t just dismiss the Pope’s teaching as “another man’s opinion.” The Pope’s opinion will weigh HEAVILY with future Popes and Councils. We also have the ancient tradition of the Dormition of the Virgin Mary in the Eastern Church. That alone is enough to settle the question in most religious minds. And lastly, we have an ancient unbroken tradition of Mary dying in the Western Church too.

Clearly every human has not died. If the church were to say that Enoch and Elijah died, that would be a clear contradiction of what Scripture states. Regarding Enoch, we know… “By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and he was not found, because God translated him” (Hebrews 11:5). It is interesting that anyone would contradict scripture on these two men, yet assert what is never mentioned in sacred scripture-that Mary didn’t die!