Honouring of Mary and her assumption to heaven by the HS

[Esdra]

Hi all,

This was a talk about the honouring of Mary.

I started a new thread because I want to know where in Revelation it says that Mary was assumed into heaven by the Power of the Holy Spirit!

guanophore:

What standard are you using to determine what is “most important”?

Yes, I know that’s a tough one… What is most important? - Well I would say all the things which ALL denominations believe in. Like the Trinity, that Jesus is the Christ that he saved us from our sins on his death on the cross. - well actually even the Holy Bible belongs to that! I hope it is clear now. PRmerger has also asked me that question very often!!

Do you realize that this concept is not found in Scripture?

Esdra:

Did you realise that the concept of infant baptism or the honouring of Mary and the teaching that she was lifted up in heaven with her whole body just like Jesus is ALSO NOT IN THE SCRIPTURE!?

rinnie+Esdra:

If she were just like me, why was she assumed into heaven by the Power of the Holy Spirit?

This is not biblical!! Otherwise show me the verse!

guanophore:

**"Have you read the book of Revelation recently? Do you know who that Woman is, who gave birth to the One who saved the world from sin? **

Esdra:

I am not sure if we are talking about the same woman in Revelation. I had a quick glance in my Concordance and I found only a woman who is referred to be the new City of Jerusalem (like it is often written in the OT. That the bride = Jerusalem and God it’s bridegroom!)
Please write me down the verses you are referring to!

guanophore:

I think it is a bit off topic here. There is a woman, clothed with the sun, with a crown in the heavens.

 

[Dennislp3]

Even though there is the references to a woman in Revelation they do not prove or hint to the idea that she was taken up to heaven like Jesus. Even if they are referring to her (and there are plenty of things that suggest it could be her) it still does not support the assumption of her ascension into heaven.

Also John had seen Mary plenty…so why would he not say that it was Mary specifically? My only real guess there is that if maybe he was told not to disclose her identity…but I do not know why this would be.

Anyways…my 2 cents on the issue

 

[Berean2]

Esdra, thanx for posting this. I, too, have wondered the same thing.

 

[workingman]

As a recent convert this is a great question. I will say this is not the easiest thing to get scripture to point to. It comes more from apostolic tradition.

I

• n Gen 5:24 Enoch was assumed into heaven. One can also ref Heb 11:5 for this.
• In 2Kings 2:11-12 is where Elijah was taken up in a fiery chariot. You could also ref 1Mac 2:58 for this.

Now if God does this for his great prophets why would no less be done for Mary the mother of God?

• Rev. 12:1 Refers to or for those in doubt about it points to Mary being seen body and soul in heaven. (she is clothed in the sun and a moon at her feet). Below I put the Haydoc commentary on Rev 12:1
• Ver. 1. A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet. By this woman, interpreters commonly understand the Church of Christ, shining with the light of faith, under the protection of the sun of justice, Jesus Christ. The moon, the Church, hath all changeable things of this world under her feet, the affections of the faithful being raised above them all. — A woman: the Church of God. It may also, by allusion, be applied to our blessed Lady[the Virgin Mary]. The Church is clothed with the sun, that is, with Christ: she hath the moon, that is, the changeable things of the world, under her feet; and the twelve stars with which she is crowned, are the twelve apostles: she is in labour and pain, whilst she brings forth her children, and Christ in them, in the midst of afflictions and persecutions. (Challoner) — Under the figure of a woman and of a dragon, are represented the various attempts of Satan to undermine the Church. — On her head…twelve stars, her doctrine being delivered by the twelve apostles and their successors. (Witham)
• Then we are told by Paul this in 2Thes. 2:14 14 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.
• So though you ask for this by the Holy Scriptures the Scriptures clearly state that we are to hold to Scripture and Tradition.

 

[KathleenGee]

Of all the beliefs in the Catholic Church, the one I had problems with, including my mother – a convert, was Mary’s assumption into heaven. I learned enough as a Catholic to see that everything prior to that was indeed the truth, and all my beliefs resonated and fulfilled every day life, its conditions and problems. So I put everything on the back burner for the Holy Spirit in the Church to teach me when I was ready.

Now, – as the previous poster just shared, her assumption in itself is not an issue, as I remember some of the prophets being taken up into heaven like Elijah that is in Scripture.

I have to note here as well, there is now a doctor of the Church in Mariology – St. Louis de Montfort. John Paul II had to read his ‘True Devotion’ to Mary two times to understand it, same with my dad.

I have done the consecration to Mary according to St. Montfort’s directive, but my personality is most at home with my Society of Mary consecration – a fraternity of shared charism.

 

[KathleenGee]

The other issue is that although revelation ended with Jesus Christ, there is a new dimension to faith and salvation history, and that is the faith walk of Christianity…and you see the same human issues of people being faithful to God through Christ and then being unfaithful…the same cycle…

Within the truth of the Church is the testimonies of faith of Christians…and what is said about how faith in Christ is responded to, lived out, and the fruition of faith. We have the communion of saints. Ours is a universal church.

And as the Holy Spirit is recognized in His working to make our church universal, what is interesting about the communion of saints is that each individual goes about with his or her life responding to the individual specific demands, but that the fruit is always the same: the ways and charisms are different but they all in the end image the same fruit: Jesus Christ. So we learn to grow in Christ, not only from the Gospels and preaching, but learning from others how they grew in the Lord, accepted His cross, their sufferings and how they achieved living a holy life.

And so it is with Mary. Mary, like all the other saints, has her story for us to study and reflect upon to help us be better Christians as all the other saints do.

The Church’s catechism has another section on prayer, spirituality. We have the doctors of the church of spirituality…a new doctor of the church is St. Louis de Montfort, his area – Mariology.

It took the church almost 2,000 years to define the Immaculate Conception, so it is in no haste to make Mary more than she is.

More on class Catholic spirituality and understanding Mary’s assumption into heaven later.

 

[KathleenGee]

Finally,

The other issue I have with fundamentalism is that you have no saints…no one to look to … like whatever work Christ did for us is little compared to the figures of the Old Testament.

I believe the work done in each one of us through Jesus Christ is greater than what happened in the Old Testament…not of ourselves, but in Jesus Christ. Ordinary people are the hidden ones who pray and sacrifice and try to be faithful with no recognition from anyone. Mary supports us…her heel…the nobodies.

But there are indeed great saints who deserve recognition. Each one contributes to our understanding of Jesus Christ in the every day walk and in helping us not be overcome by life’s hardships.

The more we focus on God alone and not recognize the humanity of Jesus Christ in our neighbor, it is my conviction that then more the Word of God is warped and instead is used as a tool by Christians to fight one another.

Mary is the greatest of all saints and is the one who gave Christ His humanity.

 

[wmscott]

Of all the beliefs in the Catholic Church, the one I had problems with, including my mother – a convert, was Mary’s assumption into heaven. I learned enough as a Catholic to see that everything prior to that was indeed the truth, and all my beliefs resonated and fulfilled every day life, its conditions and problems. So I put everything on the back burner for the Holy Spirit in the Church to teach me when I was ready.

Now, – as the previous poster just shared, her assumption in itself is not an issue, as I remember some of the prophets being taken up into heaven like Elijah that is in Scripture.

I have to note here as well, there is now a doctor of the Church in Mariology – St. Louis de Montfort. John Paul II had to read his ‘True Devotion’ to Mary two times to understand it, same with my dad.

I have done the consecration to Mary according to St. Montfort’s directive, but my personality is most at home with my Society of Mary consecration – a fraternity of shared charism.

I am a convert also, I came from a Southern Baptist background. I guess those that are considering the Catholic faith have differing stumbling blocks.

My issue was not with the Blessed Mother, mine was with the graven images thing. I had a lot of “Baggage” from my non-Catholic days that I had to get through. Sad thing is that if I had came by these bigoted and ignorant beliefs on my own, I may have had an easier time realizing and understanding what the truth was. However, a lot of the anti Catholic beliefs I learned was from the pulpit, those in authority of what ever church I was attending, and the misguided and ill informed life at the time that perpetuated it.

Marian Doctrine never really bothered me, I for some reason have always had a respect for the Mother of God, no matter what I was told.

 

[Esdra]

Finally,

The other issue I have with fundamentalism is that you have no saints…no one to look to … like whatever work Christ did for us is little compared to the figures of the Old Testament.

I believe the work done in each one of us through Jesus Christ is greater than what happened in the Old Testament…not of ourselves, but in Jesus Christ. Ordinary people are the hidden ones who pray and sacrifice and try to be faithful with no recognition from anyone. Mary supports us…her heel…the nobodies.

But there are indeed great saints who deserve recognition. Each one contributes to our understanding of Jesus Christ in the every day walk and in helping us not be overcome by life’s hardships.

The more we focus on God alone and not recognize the humanity of Jesus Christ in our neighbor, it is my conviction that then more the Word of God is warped and instead is used as a tool by Christians to fight one another.

Mary is the greatest of all saints and is the one who gave Christ His humanity.

Well, we believe that the community of Christ is ALL of us. All who accepted Christ as His Saviour.

But, if i would have gotten to know people like you, Kathleen in my time of search eight years ago, I think I would have never left the CC. Nobody told me.
It’s really nice reading your three posts in this thread.
I am impressed.

Esdra

 

[workingman]

I just thought I would share this link that talks about this topic at hand. Read and enjoy.

fanatholic.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=59

 

[guanophore]

Even though there is the references to a woman in Revelation they do not prove or hint to the idea that she was taken up to heaven like Jesus. Even if they are referring to her (and there are plenty of things that suggest it could be her) it still does not support the assumption of her ascension into heaven.

Also John had seen Mary plenty…so why would he not say that it was Mary specifically? My only real guess there is that if maybe he was told not to disclose her identity…but I do not know why this would be.

Anyways…my 2 cents on the issue

You are right, Mary is a creature, and had to be assumed. Jesus is God, and He ascended into heaven by His own power.

I also agree that the doctrine of the assumption is not clarified in Scripture. We know she was assumed because this is the teaching of the Church, not because we can find it clearly in the Scxripture.

John was writing about a vision. It is a multivalent image with many meanings. The Church, and Israel, can also both be said to have given birth to Christ.

 

[Hesychios]

Hi all,

This was a talk about the honouring of Mary.

I started a new thread because I want to know where in Revelation it says that Mary was assumed into heaven by the Power of the Holy Spirit!

I don’t know about a reference in Revelation. That’s pure speculation on the part of later thinkers and is not a source for the belief.

Belief in the bodily death, burial and assumption to heaven of Mary is Orthodox, and came to the Latin church from the east. It is a longstanding tradition, which is all we Orthodox need in order to believe it.

This is remembered every year on the Feast of the Dormition (Koimisis) which is preceded by a two week fast.

The event is depicted iconographically.



Note that Jesus Our Lord is holding her soul, wrapped in swaddling clothes which look like a burial shroud.

We Christians believe in the bodily resurrection and Mary the mother of God is among the first fruits of the Promise.

There is a legend from Apostolic times, and although it has to be considered apocryphal in it’s details it explains why there have never been relics of the Holy Theotokos to venerate.

A brief summary of the Apostolic Christian belief:
Following the day of Pentecost, the Theotokos remained in the city of Jerusalem, comforting the infant Christian community. She was living in the house of the beloved Apostle John, later the Evangelist. At the time of her death (tradition states she was in her early fifties) many of the Apostles were scattered throughout the world preaching the Gospel. All but Thomas were miraculously brought to the Virgin aloft on clouds.

As they stood around her bedside, she commended her spirit to the Lord and Jesus descended from Heaven, taking up her soul in His arms. The Apostles sang the funeral hymns in her honor and carried her body to a tomb in Cedron near Gethsemane. …

The Apostle Thomas arrived on the third day (late again ) and wished to see the Virgin for the last time. They discovered an empty tomb. Church tradition relates that the Theotokos was resurrected bodily and taken to heaven, the same reward that awaits all the righteous on the Last Day.
The Dormition of the Theotokos

Neither the grave nor death could contain the Theotokos, the unshakable hope, ever vigilant in intercession and protection. As Mother of life, He who dwelt in the ever-virginal womb transposed her to life.
Kontakion of the Feast of the Dormition

 

[workingman]

I don’t know about a reference in Revelation. That’s pure speculation on the part of later thinkers and is not a source for the belief.

Belief in the bodily death, burial and assumption to heaven of Mary is Orthodox, and came to the Latin church from the east. It is a longstanding tradition, which is all we Orthodox need in order to believe it.

This is remembered every year on the Feast of the Dormition (Koimisis) which is preceded by a two week fast.

The event is depicted iconographically.

http://onlinechapel.goarch.org/images/SMALL/DORMITIO.JPG

Note that Jesus Our Lord is holding her soul, wrapped in swaddling clothes which look like a burial shroud.

We Christians believe in the bodily resurrection and Mary the mother of God is among the first fruits of the Promise.

There is a legend from Apostolic times, and although it has to be considered apocryphal in it’s details it explains why there have never been relics of the Holy Theotokos to venerate.

A brief summary of the Apostolic Christian belief:
Following the day of Pentecost, the Theotokos remained in the city of Jerusalem, comforting the infant Christian community. She was living in the house of the beloved Apostle John, later the Evangelist. At the time of her death (tradition states she was in her early fifties) many of the Apostles were scattered throughout the world preaching the Gospel. All but Thomas were miraculously brought to the Virgin aloft on clouds.

As they stood around her bedside, she commended her spirit to the Lord and Jesus descended from Heaven, taking up her soul in His arms. The Apostles sang the funeral hymns in her honor and carried her body to a tomb in Cedron near Gethsemane. …

The Apostle Thomas arrived on the third day (late again ) and wished to see the Virgin for the last time. They discovered an empty tomb. Church tradition relates that the Theotokos was resurrected bodily and taken to heaven, the same reward that awaits all the righteous on the Last Day.
The Dormition of the Theotokos

Neither the grave nor death could contain the Theotokos, the unshakable hope, ever vigilant in intercession and protection. As Mother of life, He who dwelt in the ever-virginal womb transposed her to life.
Kontakion of the Feast of the Dormition

Thank you for the posting. I like the link and the history of the tradition revealed here. As a recent convert to the CC I am still learning more about it including from a Easter Orthodox perspective. I love the Icon pictured to. Thank you again.

 

[Joshua27]

:doh2:

If there isn’t a common foundation that all can reference back to, a foundation that all - even Church Authority - must be bound by, then anyone (in a position of Church Authority) can establish anything as truth, can’t they?

Here’s a real world example of what I mean:

---

The FDA has established a law that says “only a drug can cure or prevent a disease…and all drugs must be approved by the FDA before they can be sold and distributed”.

John discovers that leaves from the naturally growing “jerijugu” plant, when eaten, cures cancers. So John starts a garden and sells baby plants at $50 each. He wants the recognition of being the one who discovered the cure for cancer so he doesn’t charge much…and word gets around to the FDA.

The FDA raids John’s home (with semi-automatic weapons), confiscates and/or destroys all of John’s plants and pots and then threatens John with a huge fine and Jail time if he continues to sell anymore.

Why?

Because the naturally growing plant has been labeled by the FDA as a drug (since it successfully cures cancer), and if it is now a drug, John is illegally distributing drugs (without paying a licensing fee or receiving approval from the FDA).

You see, the FDA has made itself the foundation (legislator) of medical truth (deciding what the only means of curing or preventing diseases is) while also becoming the judge and enforcer of that truth, whereby the FDA completely controls what is medical truth.

---

If Church Authority isn’t bound by an unchanging foundation of truth (such as the scriptures) then the Church can establish any religous truth that it wants…and because “only the Church can accurately interpret scripture” and “the Church’s authority in religous matter is above sacred scripture” and “the human head of the Church Authority is infallible”, no laity can possibly protest against any “truth” (that doesn’t syncronize) for fear of excommunication (or worst in the past).

To be honest, many protestants would rather NOT be labeled protestants - and would actually like to reunify with the Universal Church - IFF the (lay) people had a right to correct leaders and say “ok, leaders…this truth you’re promoting doesn’t agree with the gospel or with what Christ and the prophets are recorded saying about this same issue”.

Whenever the scripture wanted the believer to know when an “ascension” occurred for an individual, the scripture told us…even in the gospels. The gospels detail that the firstfruits of the dead rose from their graves during the last moments of Christ’s life while one the cross. At the end of the gospels we’re told that Mary Magdaline (and “the other women”) and the disciples came to the tomb to see that Christ was resurrected…we know that Mother Mary was now in John’s charge so she was there too. Later in Acts, scripture details that Christ ascended to heaven in a cloud 40 days after his own resurrection.

But then we extrapolate and reason that - because Mary was the Mother of Jesus - Mary must’ve been raptured/ascended as well (because all other “MOST important” figures of biblical history were) and we believe “she is also ‘MOST important’, so sure, why not?” And yet again, no faithful Catholic - who disagrees with this - will argue or question this “truth” (for it’s lack of foundational evidence) because they risk being labeled “not really Catholic” or maybe they’re challenged to leave the Church (if they don’t believe).

…whereby the CA completely controls what is religous truth.

---

The answer to the thread question is - as someone has already said - there is no reference in the book of Revelation about Mary…even the “woman” (detailed in Rev.12) is described later on in the chapter as “fleeing into the wilderness for safety (from the dragon) AFTER the man-child is birthed and taken back to heaven, where she is nourished for a time on earth…the dragon then dispatches a flood and the Beast of the Sea to attack the woman and the remnant of her seed”.

 

[Esdra]

:doh2:

If there isn’t a common foundation that all can reference back to, a foundation that all - even Church Authority - must be bound by, then anyone (in a position of Church Authority) can establish anything as truth, can’t they?

Here’s a real world example of what I mean:

---

The FDA has established a law that says “only a drug can cure or prevent a disease…and all drugs must be approved by the FDA before they can be sold and distributed”.

John discovers that leaves from the naturally growing “jerijugu” plant, when eaten, cures cancers. So John starts a garden and sells baby plants at $50 each. He wants the recognition of being the one who discovered the cure for cancer so he doesn’t charge much…and word gets around to the FDA.

The FDA raids John’s home (with semi-automatic weapons), confiscates and/or destroys all of John’s plants and pots and then threatens John with a huge fine and Jail time if he continues to sell anymore.

Why?

Because the naturally growing plant has been labeled by the FDA as a drug (since it successfully cures cancer), and if it is now a drug, John is illegally distributing drugs (without paying a licensing fee or receiving approval from the FDA).

You see, the FDA has made itself the foundation (legislator) of medical truth (deciding what the only means of curing or preventing diseases is) while also becoming the judge and enforcer of that truth, whereby the FDA completely controls what is medical truth.

---

If Church Authority isn’t bound by an unchanging foundation of truth (such as the scriptures) then the Church can establish any religous truth that it wants…and because “only the Church can accurately interpret scripture” and “the Church’s authority in religous matter is above sacred scripture” and “the human head of the Church Authority is infallible”, no laity can possibly protest against any “truth” (that doesn’t syncronize) for fear of excommunication (or worst in the past).

To be honest, many protestants would rather NOT be labeled protestants - and would actually like to reunify with the Universal Church - IFF the (lay) people had a right to correct leaders and say “ok, leaders…this truth you’re promoting doesn’t agree with the gospel or with what Christ and the prophets are recorded saying about this same issue”.

Whenever the scripture wanted the believer to know when an “ascension” occurred for an individual, the scripture told us…even in the gospels. The gospels detail that the firstfruits of the dead rose from their graves during the last moments of Christ’s life while one the cross. At the end of the gospels we’re told that Mary Magdaline (and “the other women”) and the disciples came to the tomb to see that Christ was resurrected…we know that Mother Mary was now in John’s charge so she was there too. Later in Acts, scripture details that Christ ascended to heaven in a cloud 40 days after his own resurrection.

But then we extrapolate and reason that - because Mary was the Mother of Jesus - Mary must’ve been raptured/ascended as well (because all other “MOST important” figures of biblical history were) and we believe “she is also ‘MOST important’, so sure, why not?” And yet again, no faithful Catholic - who disagrees with this - will argue or question this “truth” (for it’s lack of foundational evidence) because they risk being labeled “not really Catholic” or maybe they’re challenged to leave the Church (if they don’t believe).

…whereby the CA completely controls what is religous truth.

---

The answer to the thread question is - as someone has already said - there is no reference in the book of Revelation about Mary…even the “woman” (detailed in Rev.12) is described later on in the chapter as “fleeing into the wilderness for safety (from the dragon) AFTER the man-child is birthed and taken back to heaven, where she is nourished for a time on earth…the dragon then dispatches a flood and the Beast of the Sea to attack the woman and the remnant of her seed”.

Very, very good post!
I have never seen the CC from that perspective.
Especially the parable is very nice.
Thank you very much.

Esdra

²Hesychios

I didn’t know that the assumption of Mary wasn’t part of the “original” Catholic Church.
Thank you also.

 

[Ceil-1]

To be honest, many protestants would rather NOT be labeled protestants - and would actually like to reunify with the Universal Church

If the holy matyrs, mystics and those who chose it knowing they wee assured persecution, suffeing and death for the Faith got it wrong and messed it up, IYO, how on earth do you expect us to trust the likes of malcontents and know-it-alls? Thanks, I’ll stick to those who walked the walk, and don’t just talk the talk.

Extrapolating is not the correct term for the Marian doctrine of the Assumption. It is much more than that, and that has been illustrated in abundance. You are refusing to see the situation as it is. I consider it denial, a coping mechanism. You cannot humble yourself sufficiently to accept it. On the contrary, you want to be the leader of it all.

 

[campeador]

Joshua27,

The FDA is a great analogy for The Catholic Church.

Let’s take it a step further:

Yes, John may have been mistreated by the FDA but his “jerijugu” plants were actually killing more people than they were curing because people were overdosing.

Why didn’t john just cooperate with the FDA in the first place and set up some clinical trials to see what the best dosage would be? He could have easily had them check it out officially to make sure it was not some hoax but actually the real deal. Was it greed or arrogance? I mean, this is a cure for cancer we’re talking about!

John thought he knew better than the FDA. He didn’t think he needed the approval of the largest and best authority on drugs in the world. Now he’ll have some explaining to do when the Judge asks him about all that died using his cure.

Now let’s say that we do away with that ‘evil institution’, the FDA. What do you suppose will happen?

Chaos…

 

[guanophore]

:doh2:

If there isn’t a common foundation that all can reference back to, a foundation that all - even Church Authority - must be bound by, then anyone (in a position of Church Authority) can establish anything as truth, can’t they?

Yes.

Jesus founded his church upon the Apostles and Prophets, with Himself as the cornerstone. When people separated from that Foundation, and began using the bible only as a foundation, this is exactly what happened. “anything” can be established, and disunity fourishes.

You seem to be trying to say that the Catholic Church has made of itself an authority.

If Church Authority isn’t bound by an unchanging foundation of truth (such as the scriptures) then the Church can establish any religous truth that it wants…

The Foundation of Apostles and Prophets upon which Jesus established the Church IS such an unchanging anchor.

The Church founded by Christ does not have the freedom to establish “any religions truth it wants”. Unlike Protestant communities, we are bound to hold to the Sacred Traditions. We cannot create that which is not part of the one deposit of faith delivered once for all to the Church. We cannot invent new doctrine like sola scriptura, because such activities constitute “a different gospel”, for which we will be accursed.

and because "only the Church can accurately interpret scripture" and "the Church's authority in religous matter is above sacred scripture"

I would like to see the Catholic document from which you gleaned this one.

and “the human head of the Church Authority is infallible”,

It appears that you have misunderstood the gift of infallibility.

no laity can possibly protest against any “truth” (that doesn’t syncronize) for fear of excommunication (or worst in the past).

Plenty of laity have protested against the Truth. Most of them have excommunicated themselves. What makes you think this is not possible?

To be honest, many protestants would rather NOT be labeled protestants - and would actually like to reunify with the Universal Church - IFF the (lay) people had a right to correct leaders and say "ok, leaders...this truth you're promoting doesn't agree with the gospel or with what Christ and the prophets are recorded saying about this same issue".

What makes you think this does not happen every day? You obviously know very little about Catholicism.

Whenever the scripture wanted the believer to know when an “ascension” occurred for an individual, the scripture told us…even in the gospels. The gospels detail that the firstfruits of the dead rose from their graves during the last moments of Christ’s life while one the cross.

It seems that you have an abherrant understanding of scripture. Scripture, holy as it is, is not a person. It is not possible for “Scripture to want us to know” anything.

Furthermore, no one has ascended into heaven but Christ. Creatures do not have the power to ascend. They must be assumed.

At the end of the gospels we're told that Mary Magdaline (and "the other women") and the disciples came to the tomb to see that Christ was resurrected...we know that Mother Mary was now in John's charge so she was there too. Later in Acts, scripture details that Christ ascended to heaven in a cloud 40 days after his own resurrection.

Not sure what point you are making here. Do you think what you have said here is not consistent with Catholism?

But then we extrapolate and reason that - because Mary was the Mother of Jesus - Mary must've been raptured/ascended as well   (because all other "MOST important" figures of biblical history were) and we believe "she is also 'MOST important', so sure, why not?"

No one has extrapolated or reasoned any such thing. You are arguing against a strawman. You have made this up, or gotten it from some other source that does not understand Catholicism. If you want to argue with us about what we believe, why not argue against what we actually believe, instead of constructing fantasies then knocking them down?

And yet again, no faithful Catholic - who disagrees with this -

No faithful Catholic CAN agree to it. We are not at liberty to depart from the Teachings of the Apostles. The Catholic Church does not teach what you have written here.

will argue or question this "truth" (for it's lack of foundational evidence) because they risk being labeled "not really Catholic" or maybe they're challenged to leave the Church (if they don't believe).

…whereby the CA completely controls what is religous truth.

The fact that you reject the authoritative Foundation upon which Christ built the Church does not make it cease to exists.

It may hold no “evidence” for you, because you wish to cover your eyes, but there is plenty of evidence for us.

The CC does not have the power to “control what is religions Truth”. The Truth has been revealed to the Church by God, and it is our duty to preserve that which was handed down to us.

 

[guanophore]

The answer to the thread question is - as someone has already said - there is no reference in the book of Revelation about Mary…even the “woman” (detailed in Rev.12) is described later on in the chapter as "fleeing into the wilderness for safety (from the dragon)

Why do you think she went to Egypt? Do you think Herod’s desire to kill her Son was not spiritually motivated by the dragon?

AFTER the man-child is birthed and taken back to heaven, where she is nourished for a time on earth…the dragon then dispatches a flood and the Beast of the Sea to attack the woman and the remnant of her seed".

It is a multivalent image, it is true. Who do you think gave birth to the Redeemer of the World?

 

[guanophore]

Joshua27,

The FDA is a great analogy for The Catholic Church.

No, i don’t think so. The FDA, as he pointed out, makes up their own ideas of what is lawful and what is not, based upon their own authority.

The Church is not at libery to do this, but instead, receives the Truth from Jesus through the Apostles. Her authority comes from Him, not from herself.

She can only take what has been revealed to her by God, and preserve it.

Now let’s say that we do away with that ‘evil institution’, the FDA. What do you suppose will happen?

Chaos…

He is also saying that the Church is justified in attacking those that depart from the standards that have been formed.

It is not appropriate to use violence to prevent chaos.