I agree. I don’t know how the end of the earthly days of the Theotokos can be compared with celibacy in the priesthood
Apples, meet oranges.
The point is that there was a CHANGE, and nobody went around claiming that the Scripture passages which spoke of bishops having ‘one wife’ meant priests HAD to be married (unlike a couple centuries down the road). They were able to understand that even though a person would read, or hear, “The bishop must be the husband of only one wife”, they would be able to say and understand, “Yes, that would still be the case, but the Holy Spirit has deepened our understanding so that we now realize it would be better for the man to be unmarried.” They would point to Scripture that supported this (St Paul, "the unmarried man is concerned for God but the married man must also be concerned for his wife).
Now, take the concept of Christian death, in which we already know that there will be a resurrection on the last day (Martha, to Jesus) and in which we fully expect that a person will have to die the death because ‘the wages of sin is death’ though “Christ died for all, death has no more power over Him”.
OK. Did Mary sin? Despite Scripture of “All have sinned” we know that Mary did not. Scripturally and traditionally speaking, we know that the sinless Christ did not HAVE to die, but chose to. We HEAR (from oral tradition) that Mary also ‘chose’ to die but strictly Scripturally and traditionally speaking, and indeed one of the reasons given for her assumption, was that she had not sinned and thus the normal passage from life on earth to life in heaven through the death earned by ORIGINAL SIN (sorry, my Orthodox brethren) would not have been necessary.
IOW, the possibility that Mary need NOT have died in order to be assumed is both Scriptural and traditional.
And what we have on the subject are translations from the Latin taken out of context and with the intent NOT fully known, That being said, we rely on the Church to interpret and explain its teachings to us.
And --so far–the Church HAS NOT STATED that ANYBODY who thinks there might be a POSSIBILITY that Mary did not actually die, but only ‘appeared’ to do so --is guilty of SIN.
Would you please point me out to the Canon Law or to the passage in the Catechism which states that a Catholic MUST believe in the physical DEATH of Mary as a dogma?
Mind you, my own PERSONAL feeling in the matter is that Mary would have asked God to allow her to suffer physical death, in order to imitate, in obedience and love, the sacrifice her Son made.
IOW, my own PERSONAL feeling, inclination, and belief is that I THINK that she did die, and the reasons for my belief I think are good ones.
But that being said, provided that any person believes in the doctrine of the Assumption, but SPECULATES or thinks that there is a possibility that God, for His own reasons, which could have been those of love and honor, permitted Mary to be assumed just PRIOR to her death, I think that person is not denying the Assumption, is not denying the teaching of the Church, and thus, is not sinning.
