Immaculate Conception of Mary and Genesis

[Stigma]

Hello Friends,

I was reading Aquinas Study Bible and read this part in Genesis

2:17 die the death: In the original state of Adam and Eve they would have never died physically nor spiritually had they not sinned. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says, “Bodily death, from which man would have been immune had he not sinned…” (CCC 1008). According to St. Thomas Aquinas their bodies would have been preserved from death by the power of the soul because the body was entirely subject to the soul. Eating of that tree would also bring spiritual death, which is the soul being totally deprived of God. (John Litteral) CCC 376 396 400 1006 1008

My question is that if Mary was born without sin, then she “would have never died physically nor spiritually”

From my understanding is that Mary both body and soul rose to Heaven, but did Mary die first? What does the church say about this? Were there any witness to our Mother ascension into Heaven?

The more I think about it, the more I love our faith, so mystical.

Thank-you
God Bless

 

[Skye_Ariel]

I believe Mary was taken up to heaven without dying the way Enoch & Elijah were.

 

[R_C]

Great question. In fact, still a great mystery!

Some Ask an Apologist replies: (1), (2), (3), (4)

An interesting article here.

 

[JM3]

origin.ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage.asp?number=530449&Pg=Forum3&Pgnu=1&recnu=4

 

[thistle]

Hello Friends,

I was reading Aquinas Study Bible and read this part in Genesis

2:17 die the death: In the original state of Adam and Eve they would have never died physically nor spiritually had they not sinned. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says, “Bodily death, from which man would have been immune had he not sinned…” (CCC 1008). According to St. Thomas Aquinas their bodies would have been preserved from death by the power of the soul because the body was entirely subject to the soul. Eating of that tree would also bring spiritual death, which is the soul being totally deprived of God. (John Litteral) CCC 376 396 400 1006 1008

My question is that if Mary was born without sin, then she “would have never died physically nor spiritually”

From my understanding is that Mary both body and soul rose to Heaven, but did Mary die first? What does the church say about this? Were there any witness to our Mother ascension into Heaven?

The more I think about it, the more I love our faith, so mystical.

Thank-you
God Bless

First, there was no ascension of Mary into Heaven. Only Jesus ascended (under his own power as God). Mary was assumed (by the power of God and not her own power) into Heaven. Ascension and Assumption are different.

Second, the Church teaches (as dogma) that Mary was assumed into Heaven. However, the Church does not know if Mary died or not before being assumed which is why it has no teaching on that. Catholics are free to believe Mary died or did not die first.

Personally I believe Mary died, based on the testimony of several early Church fathers.

 

[Genesis315]

All the Fathers and Saints I have com across on this issue says she died, as do the Magisterial texts I have seen that address it (Pius XII’s Constitution on the Assumption and a letter of Adrian I on this feast). Jesus died too, even though He was without sin. I think St. Alph andnsus Liguori provides a good explanation of why she died is in his book, Glories of Mary. See Discourse VII on the Assumption, which is divided into two parts:

I.How precious was the death of Mary on account of the special favors that accompanied it

II.How precious was the death of Mary on account of the manner in which it took place

archive.org/details/thegloriesofmary00liguuoft

 

[pocohombre]

was it jerome or ambrose that that said, “of her end no one knows” ? Did a pope declare a book dealing with some testimony about Mary and these “mysteries” as spurious around 4-5 th century, along with a bunch of other books ?

 

[MarcoPolo]

From my understanding is that Mary both body and soul rose to Heaven, but did Mary die first?

Regarding Mary’s Assumption, the document proclaiming the dogma, Munificentissimus Deus, does not specify the answer in the defining paragraph:*#44 - the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.*You see the term death avoided there.

However, in earlier paragraphs in the same document, it suggests she did experience temporal death, although it did not retain her. *#17 - In the liturgical books which deal with the feast either of the dormition or of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin there are expressions that agree in testifying that, when the Virgin Mother of God passed from this earthly exile to heaven, what happened to her sacred body was, by the decree of divine Providence, in keeping with the dignity of the Mother of the Word Incarnate, and with the other privileges she had been accorded. Thus, to cite an illustrious example, this is set forth in that sacramentary which Adrian I, our predecessor of immortal memory, sent to the Emperor Charlemagne. These words are found in this volume: “Venerable to us, O Lord, is the festivity of this day on which the holy Mother of God suffered temporal death, but still could not be kept down by the bonds of death, who has begotten your Son our Lord incarnate from herself.”

#21 - It was fitting that she, who had kept her virginity intact in childbirth, should keep her own body free from all corruption even after death.
*Experiencing temporal death, of course does not mean one had original sin, as the example of Jesus demonstrates. If you have original sin, you experience temporal death. But logically speaking, it does not mean if someone experience temporal death, they did so as a result of original sin.

 

[pocohombre]

Regarding Mary’s Assumption, the document proclaiming the dogma, Munificentissimus Deus, does not specify the answer in the defining paragraph:#44 - the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.You see the term death avoided there.

However, in earlier paragraphs in the same document, it suggests she did experience temporal death, although it did not retain her. #17 - In the liturgical books which deal with the feast either of the dormition or of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin there are expressions that agree in testifying that, when the Virgin Mother of God passed from this earthly exile to heaven, what happened to her sacred body was, by the decree of divine Providence, in keeping with the dignity of the Mother of the Word Incarnate, and with the other privileges she had been accorded. Thus, to cite an illustrious example, this is set forth in that sacramentary which Adrian I, our predecessor of immortal memory, sent to the Emperor Charlemagne. These words are found in this volume: "Venerable to us, O Lord, is the festivity of this day on which the holy Mother of God suffered temporal death, but still could not be kept down by the bonds of death, who has begotten your Son our Lord incarnate from herself."

#21 - It was fitting that she, who had kept her virginity intact in childbirth, should keep her own body free from all corruption even after death.
Experiencing temporal death, of course does not mean one had original sin, as the example of Jesus demonstrates. If you have original sin, you experience temporal death. But logically speaking, it does not mean if someone experience temporal death, they did so as a result of original sin.

Thank-you. One thing is to experience death "naturally’ or of natural causes, which implies a breakdown, a consequence of the fall, as in the apparent case of Mary. Jesus was put to death. Even perfect Adam (before the fall ) could have been murdered/killed, otherwise his body was built to last forever. Do you still think Jesus and Mary are apples to apples on this issue of death/original sin consequence ? Have you ever thought that Jesus could have lived forever had he not been crucified ? Did he age, that is grow-up, level off and then begin to decline ( oh those nasty free radicals), as we do, even at the age of 33 ? Is it still not a valid question that why should the second perfect “Eve” suffer the consequence of the first Eve’s sin ? Isn’t this one of the main reasons many Catholic theologians debated her Immaculateness for centuries ? He does say that the wages of sin is death, justly so.

 

[pocohombre]

Did not St Thomas say Jesus was above Mary in not having original sin, but saying Mary was without mortal or venial sin? Apparently Mary was thought to be sinless, but not from conception (or having original sin) was another matter. Has anyone read that later statements from the saint were forged/misinterpretation/mistranslation to show she was free also from original sin ?

 

[MarcoPolo]

Do you still think Jesus and Mary are apples to apples on this issue of death/original sin consequence ?

In the context that I compared them, yes. Let me explain another way. All persons with original sin are people that will die. In other words, “all A are B.” So does that mean anyone who is B is A? No. If I said every player in the NBA is over 5’6", that translates again to all A are B. So does that mean anyone who is over 5’6" is in the NBA? No. You can’t say “all B are A” based on the premise “all A are B.” In the same way, you cannot say because Mary or Jesus experienced temporal death, they therefore must have had original sin.

 

[MarcoPolo]

Did not St Thomas say Jesus was above Mary in not having original sin, but saying Mary was without mortal or venial sin? Apparently Mary was thought to be sinless, but not from conception (or having original sin) was another matter. Has anyone read that later statements from the saint were forged/misinterpretation/mistranslation to show she was free also from original sin ?

As near as I can tell, Aquinas ultimately accepted Mary’s Immaculate Conception in his later writings, not that his voice alone would make or break the dogma anyway… I’m not aware of forgeries.

 

[pocohombre]

In the context that I compared them, yes. Let me explain another way. All persons with original sin are people that will die. In other words, “all A are B.” So does that mean anyone who is B is A? No. If I said every player in the NBA is over 5’6", that translates again to all A are B. So does that mean anyone who is over 5’6" is in the NBA? No. You can’t say “all B are A” based on the premise “all A are B.” In the same way, you cannot say because Mary or Jesus experienced temporal death, they therefore must have had original sin.

For sure all people who died natural death (old age ,even disease) did so because of the consequence of sin ,stemming from Eve. I am not sure you have to die though, even with original sin (Elijah/Enoch apparently never diedbut were translated, those that will be raptured at end times). Again , I understand if you die it doesn’t mean it was cause of sin, as in Jesus’s case, where one is murdered. Your analogy does not differentiate between the two types of death.

 

[pocohombre]

As near as I can tell, Aquinas ultimately accepted Mary’s Immaculate Conception in his later writings, not that his voice alone would make or break the dogma anyway… I’m not aware of forgeries.

Thanks . I have to double check sources that say the later statement was not accurate translation .The few times I have read his last statement it is prerequisited with the fact that it is a genuine statement . Why state that if indeed it is true like, a sales pitch. It seems like there has been some trouble in the past with some of his writings, not sure.

 

[pocohombre]

Not sure there should be mysteries when it comes to dogma. Paul calls things that God wishes to reveal to a humble regenerated hearts, things that the “world” can not “see”, as a mystery. It is not a mystery to the believer. Yes we see thru a glass veiled somewhat now, according to Paul, relative to how we will “see” in heaven. But John also states that we can know all things thru Christ. This good question posed here is indicative at least to some , of the frailty of some doctrines concerning Mary. Yes one could say the trinity took three centuries to congeal for some, and we all believe in that. But to take up to 1800 years for the final pronouncement on her Immaculateness is evidence enough to show it’s theological troubles. On my side of the fence I’d say maybe we shouldn’t be treading into such issues. One might say that it is Truth, but aren’t we to be busy with more central, catholic (universal) Truths ? The first churches were and apparently had no time for Marion theology, save what is found in the tradition of sacred scripture. Just as Catholics have a great company of witnesses to the effectual experience of faith in their Marion doctrine going back centuries, so do others in their faith without it (ie. the first churches, or Protestants today)…So how could Mary be born, no conceived perfectly, and lived sinless, and still suffer one of sin’s ultimate consequences (aging/death) ? Again, the posed question maybe a wonderful mystical opportunity for faith, or it may be a divine red flag to the doctrine (Immaculateness) itself.

 

[MarcoPolo]

. Your analogy does not differentiate between the two types of death.

You are asserting there are 2 types of temporal death?

 

[garysibio]

Hello Friends,

I was reading Aquinas Study Bible and read this part in Genesis

2:17 die the death: In the original state of Adam and Eve they would have never died physically nor spiritually had they not sinned. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says, “Bodily death, from which man would have been immune had he not sinned…” (CCC 1008). According to St. Thomas Aquinas their bodies would have been preserved from death by the power of the soul because the body was entirely subject to the soul. Eating of that tree would also bring spiritual death, which is the soul being totally deprived of God. (John Litteral) CCC 376 396 400 1006 1008

My question is that if Mary was born without sin, then she “would have never died physically nor spiritually”

From my understanding is that Mary both body and soul rose to Heaven, but did Mary die first? What does the church say about this? Were there any witness to our Mother ascension into Heaven?

The more I think about it, the more I love our faith, so mystical.

Thank-you
God Bless

Jesus died and He was sinless.

 

[pocohombre]

You are asserting there are 2 types of temporal death?

Actually in the context of our discussion there are many types of temporal death, for we have mentioned two: by murder and by natural causes. Of course the word “type” is wrong. We were talking about the “cause”, the different causes of death. But oh mighty warrior, I sense I can not penetrate your protective armor with my simple language, or my poor use of it .Sorry.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Hello Friends,

I was reading Aquinas Study Bible and read this part in Genesis

2:17 die the death: In the original state of Adam and Eve they would have never died physically nor spiritually had they not sinned. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says, “Bodily death, from which man would have been immune had he not sinned…” (CCC 1008). According to St. Thomas Aquinas their bodies would have been preserved from death by the power of the soul because the body was entirely subject to the soul. Eating of that tree would also bring spiritual death, which is the soul being totally deprived of God. (John Litteral) CCC 376 396 400 1006 1008

My question is that if Mary was born without sin, then she “would have never died physically nor spiritually”

From my understanding is that Mary both body and soul rose to Heaven, but did Mary die first? What does the church say about this? Were there any witness to our Mother ascension into Heaven?

The more I think about it, the more I love our faith, so mystical.

Thank-you
God Bless

Stigma Welcome.
As a new member you may not realise it is always good to search here for answers before positing questions. It is not unusual that questions we think are original are in fact often old chestnuts .

Try here forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=701713
20 pages worth of in depth, high octane discussion on this topic.

In short yes Mary did die, but many Christians may not realise that the “Dormition” (an expression that arose in early Eastern Catholicism) is just a nice way of saying dead in that culture.

Death, in Catholicism, is defined as the separation of soul and body. That is why in some early Eastern icons you will see jesus in heaven holding a little man in his arms. That is Mary’s soul.

The reason why “Dormition” title is also apt is because Mary’s body remained incorrupt until it was shortly assumed to heaven. How could this be as it is the vivifying soul that stops corruption? We can only conclude it was by a singular act of God. If you call that “alive” then this is also an acceptable Catholic position (but a minority one) and you won’t be condemned . The Papal definition re the Assumption in 1950 appears to have been deliberately vague on this point saying “Mary … having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.”

There were no witnesses but the angels. Some apochryphal “Transitus” legends hint otherwise but they are have no standing as they are full of other nonsense.

In the above link I opined that Western depictions of Mary ascending alive and standing
may give a wrong impression. Eastern depictions generally have her prone and eyes closed.

The difference? Well, was soul united to body before she ascended (but no witnesses to her “resurrection”) or “at the top” as it were. And was she glorified before ascending or after ascending? Who knows.

I believe Mary’s “resurrection” is quite different from that of Jesus. The Assumption is not simply “resurrection” + “immediate ascension” = Assumption. That is why these other titles are rarely applied to Mary or any Church.

 

[brb3]

Not sure there should be mysteries when it comes to dogma. Paul calls things that God wishes to reveal to a humble regenerated hearts, things that the “world” can not “see”, as a mystery. It is not a mystery to the believer. Yes we see thru a glass veiled somewhat now, according to Paul, relative to how we will “see” in heaven. But John also states that we can know all things thru Christ. This good question posed here is indicative at least to some , of the frailty of some doctrines concerning Mary. Yes one could say the trinity took three centuries to congeal for some, and we all believe in that. But to take up to 1800 years for the final pronouncement on her Immaculateness is evidence enough to show it’s theological troubles. On my side of the fence I’d say maybe we shouldn’t be treading into such issues. One might say that it is Truth, but aren’t we to be busy with more central, catholic (universal) Truths ? The first churches were and apparently had no time for Marion theology, save what is found in the tradition of sacred scripture. Just as Catholics have a great company of witnesses to the effectual experience of faith in their Marion doctrine going back centuries, so do others in their faith without it (ie. the first churches, or Protestants today)…So how could Mary be born, no conceived perfectly, and lived sinless, and still suffer one of sin’s ultimate consequences (aging/death) ? Again, the posed question maybe a wonderful mystical opportunity for faith, or it may be a divine red flag to the doctrine (Immaculateness) itself.

Jesus’ body aged …he had fully human body, just like ours…getting his flesh via line of David, Tribe of Judah, fully Jewish … ( FULLY MAN - FULLY GOD)