Mary before she died

[Evan]

If you look in the Catechism it talks about Mary’s Dormition. What is her Dormition if it isn’t her death?

Keep in mind the Catechism is binding since it is authoritative.

Dormition means to fall asleep.

Portuguese: Dormir … to sleep
Spanish: Dormir … to sleep
Italian: Dormire … to sleep
French: Dormir … to sleep

 

[Usagi]

Dormition means to fall asleep.

Portuguese: Dormir … to sleep
Spanish: Dormir … to sleep
Italian: Dormire … to sleep
French: Dormir … to sleep

And “to fall asleep,” when used by early Christians as far back as the New Testament (possibly following the example of the Lord Himself in His description of Lazarus’ death) is a euphemism for “to die.”

Usagi

 

[Evan]

And “to fall asleep,” when used by early Christians as far back as the New Testament (possibly following the example of the Lord Himself in His description of Lazarus’ death) is a euphemism for “to die.”

Usagi

Quite True. I assume it was also used to refer to falling asleep.

The term cemetery also refers to a place of sleep. As does RIP.

So in the case of BVM, it could mean either, or both.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Throwing away what?

I don’t know how many times I have to repeat this but Christ established the Catholic Church and gave it authority to bind and loose in matters of faith and morals. Therefore, whatever the Church teaches has the full authority of God behind the teachings and we are bound by these teachings. The Church binding us is God binding us.
In matters, for example, like Limbo for Infants, or if Mary died or did not die the Church does not know the answer and therefore allows Catholics to believe what they want, e.g. that Limbo for Infants does or does not exist, and that Mary did or did not die.
The Church says we are free to believe either in such cases so why do you have a problem with that when the Church does not??

The Catholic Church is not above tradition. Scripture, Tradition and Magisterium is on equal footing. Magisterium cannot trump Tradition, lest we succumb to becoming a cult who unquestionably follows whatever the words of its leader is.

As to comparing Mary and Elijah, you cannot. Elijah lived at a time when death was the end. One who died remained dead. Jesus, through his death, conquered death itself. When Mary died, death is no longer the end, it no longer is the final state of the human body. That is why it is important that as part of our belief that Mary died, was resurrected by Christ and assumed into heaven with her glorified body because that is the fulfillment of God’s plan of salvation for us.

 

[thistle]

The Catholic Church is not above tradition. Scripture, Tradition and Magisterium is on equal footing. Magisterium cannot trump Tradition, lest we succumb to becoming a cult who unquestionably follows whatever the words of its leader is.

As to comparing Mary and Elijah, you cannot. Elijah lived at a time when death was the end. One who died remained dead. Jesus, through his death, conquered death itself. When Mary died, death is no longer the end, it no longer is the final state of the human body. That is why it is important that as part of our belief that Mary died, was resurrected by Christ and assumed into heaven with her glorified body because that is the fulfillment of God’s plan of salvation for us.

Scared Scripture,** Sacred** Tradition, and the Magesterium are the three pillars of our faith. Nothing outside this is required for our salvation.
“tradition” with a small “t” (which is NOT Sacred Tradition) does not form any teaching that binds Catholics.
You don’t seem to understand the difference between Sacred Tradition and tradition.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Scared Scripture,** Sacred** Tradition, and the Magesterium are the three pillars of our faith. Nothing outside this is required for our salvation.
“tradition” with a small “t” (which is NOT Sacred Tradition) does not form any teaching that binds Catholics.
You don’t seem to understand the difference between Sacred Tradition and tradition.

It is Sacred Tradition. It is found in the icons of the Church. Icons are not just pretty drawings, they are scripture in visual form.

 

[thistle]

It is Sacred Tradition. It is found in the icons of the Church. Icons are not just pretty drawings, they are scripture in visual form.

You are wrong. It is NOT Sacred Tradition that Mary died first. Its NOT and NEVER has been a Church doctrine.
Catholics are only bound by Church doctrine. We are NOT bound to believe Mary died.

Icons are simply the Eastern Church equivalent of statues in the Western Church.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

It is Sacred Tradition. It is found in the icons of the Church. Icons are not just pretty drawings, they are scripture in visual form.

You have to try to understand that some Latins have a very legalistic (Pharisaic) view of their Faith. It is unfortunate, but true. The Eastern Church seems to have a more holistic (as opposed to the Western analytical) approach. Therefore you are talking at cross purposes when you get into a discussion of Tradition or tradition.

 

[ConstantineTG]

You are wrong. It is NOT Sacred Tradition that Mary died first. Its NOT and NEVER has been a Church doctrine.
Catholics are only bound by Church doctrine. We are NOT bound to believe Mary died.

Icons are simply the Eastern Church equivalent of statues in the Western Church.

You are wrong! Icons are not simple Eastern versions of Western statues. Icons only depict truths in our faith. They are not pretty painting people can make out of their own artistic impression and interpretation. They must show TRUTH. States do not have the same rules, anyone can make a statue to depict a saint or even God. Iconography isn’t just paint the saint or Jesus. Icons are not made for the sake of it.

Oh, and by the way, Dormition is a Great Feast of the Church. A Great Feast.

St. Francis de Sales (a Western Saint) says, “What son would not bring his mother back to life and would not bring her into paradise after her death if he could?”

So lets see, who should I believe, St. Francis de Sales or anonymous internet guy?

 

[fames]

St. Francis de Sales (a Western Saint) says, “What son would not bring his mother back to life and would not bring her into paradise after her death if he could?”

So lets see, who should I believe, St. Francis de Sales or anonymous internet guy?

As thistle pointed out many times, you free to believe whatever you want. The physical death of Mary is not a dogma.

The Church just affirms that : 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.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

As thistle pointed out many times, you free to believe whatever you want. The physical death of Mary is not a dogma.

The Church just affirms that : 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.

The interesting thing about everyone using that phrase as a REASON to believe anything they want, is that before that statement, the death of the Virgin Mary was not a subject of debate. It is only since that statement that the hairsplitters have taken it and run with it. That a Papal Encyclical would be the cause of losing sight of the Truth is sad indeed. However, the statement EVEN AS IT IS WORDED, still means after the Virgin Mary died. No where does the Church use such a statement as a way of saying someone did NOT die. It is for you and your comrades, to PROVE that the obvious intent of the statement does NOT mean death.

Furthermore, that statement, in and of itself, even if we ERASE the past 2000 years of Church history, would still NOT mean that the Virgin Mary did not die.

However, as Catholics, WE MUST ALWAYS LOOK AT PAPAL DOCUMENTS in light of the history of the Church, and Church Tradition. They are not pronounced in a vacuum.

The Church used this way of describing Mary’s death precisely because it is shrouded in Tradition, not in Scripture. Therefore in deference to the Church of the East, the statement was worded in such a way, so that both the Eastern and Western Church could agree on the substance of the Dogma, which is the Glorious Assumption of Mary itself.

Therefore, as Catholics, we know, based on the doctrines of the Resurrection, and the Teachings of Jesus and the Deposit of Faith, that the seed must first die, before it can be resurrected to Glory. Jesus is the Resurrection and the Life. How can the Virgin Mary NOT have had a resurrection, as Jesus taught, and as we all know? There can be no Assumption without a Resurrection. It was the Glorified body of the Virgin Mary that was assumed into Heaven. Not a human living body without a Resurrection.

It is a mistake to believe that the Church “doesn’t know” or that we can believe “anything we want.”

We must believe, according to the doctrine of the Assumption, that the Virgin Mary COMPLETED the course of her earthly life. Meaning she died. The Dogma doesn’t say “At the end of her earthly life” but she “HAVING COMPLETED.” It was finished and over.

As has been said, the Church uses words very carefully. If the Church wanted to be vague, it would have said “at the end of her life”, which is ambiguous. “HAVING COMPLETED” is NOT ambiguous but clear.

 

[fames]

The interesting thing about everyone using that phrase as a REASON to believe anything they want, is that before that statement, the death of the Virgin Mary was not a subject of debate. It is only since that statement that the hairsplitters have taken it and run with it. That a Papal Encyclical would be the cause of losing sight of the Truth is sad indeed. However, the statement EVEN AS IT IS WORDED, still means after the Virgin Mary died. No where does the Church use such a statement as a way of saying someone did NOT die. It is for you and your comrades, to PROVE that the obvious intent of the statement does NOT mean death.

Furthermore, that statement, in and of itself, even if we ERASE the past 2000 years of Church history, would still NOT mean that the Virgin Mary did not die.

However, as Catholics, WE MUST ALWAYS LOOK AT PAPAL DOCUMENTS in light of the history of the Church, and Church Tradition. They are not pronounced in a vacuum.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=919641&postcount=2

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Is it possible that Mary died and awakened half way up from earth to heaven?

In other words that Mary wasn’t dead very long?

That’s what I believe–though I will say that the Catholic Church has not formally DEFINED that she died but it sure does appear that way to most.

I think Jesus LET Mary die as a favor to Mary who wanted to follow after her Son and experience death like He did.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

The Church technically accepts both death (calling it “dormition” or a temporary state) and assumption while living. The former hasn’t been common for probably 50 years or more.

Not quite.

The Byzantine Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Churches celebrate the Dormition of our Lady instead of the Assumption.

 

[ConstantineTG]

The Church technically accepts both death (calling it “dormition” or a temporary state) and assumption while living. The former hasn’t been common for probably 50 years or more.

Dormition doesn’t exclude Assumption. The entire tradition is that Mary had a light falling asleep (painless death), and on the third day she was resurrected by her Son and immediately assumed body and soul into heaven. The Great Feast of the Dormition of the Theotokos doesn’t end with her death.

 

[thistle]

The interesting thing about everyone using that phrase as a REASON to believe anything they want, is that before that statement, the death of the Virgin Mary was not a subject of debate. It is only since that statement that the hairsplitters have taken it and run with it. That a Papal Encyclical would be the cause of losing sight of the Truth is sad indeed. However, the statement EVEN AS IT IS WORDED, still means after the Virgin Mary died. No where does the Church use such a statement as a way of saying someone did NOT die. It is for you and your comrades, to PROVE that the obvious intent of the statement does NOT mean death.

Furthermore, that statement, in and of itself, even if we ERASE the past 2000 years of Church history, would still NOT mean that the Virgin Mary did not die.

However, as Catholics, WE MUST ALWAYS LOOK AT PAPAL DOCUMENTS in light of the history of the Church, and Church Tradition. They are not pronounced in a vacuum.

The Church used this way of describing Mary’s death precisely because it is shrouded in Tradition, not in Scripture. Therefore in deference to the Church of the East, the statement was worded in such a way, so that both the Eastern and Western Church could agree on the substance of the Dogma, which is the Glorious Assumption of Mary itself.

Therefore, as Catholics, we know, based on the doctrines of the Resurrection, and the Teachings of Jesus and the Deposit of Faith, that the seed must first die, before it can be resurrected to Glory. Jesus is the Resurrection and the Life. How can the Virgin Mary NOT have had a resurrection, as Jesus taught, and as we all know? There can be no Assumption without a Resurrection. It was the Glorified body of the Virgin Mary that was assumed into Heaven. Not a human living body without a Resurrection.

It is a mistake to believe that the Church “doesn’t know” or that we can believe “anything we want.”

We must believe, according to the doctrine of the Assumption, that the Virgin Mary COMPLETED the course of her earthly life. Meaning she died. The Dogma doesn’t say “At the end of her earthly life” but she “HAVING COMPLETED.” It was finished and over.

As has been said, the Church uses words very carefully. If the Church wanted to be vague, it would have said “at the end of her life”, which is ambiguous. “HAVING COMPLETED” is NOT ambiguous but clear.

“Having completed the course of her earthly life” was carefully worded by the Pope to allow for both views. Do you think the Pope is so stupid he could not have simply used the word “died”.

MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS is the dogma of Mary’s Assumption and NOT her death.

Catholics are NOT obliged to believe Mary died, albeit as I said earlier I personally believe she died but Catholics are free to believe either way.
What you are saying is that any Catholic who does not believe Mary died first before being assumed is a state of mortal sin and that is simply untrue. They are not.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

thistle:

What you are saying is that any Catholic who does not believe Mary died first before being assumed is a state of mortal sin and that is simply untrue.

No, I never said that, nor did I imply it. I merely gave my opinion. What I said was it was a mistake to think that the Church “doesn’t know,” or that “we can believe whatever we want.”

Is it possible for you to regard the Truth as worth seeking for it’s own sake, or must the Church command you under pain of mortal sin to believe something for you to take any pains at discovering it? Is that the attitude you wish to preach to your fellow Christians?

That is what you are preaching, whether you realize it or not. If you yourself believe that the Virgin Mary died, and you have a good reason for believing so, then why would you try to cover the light with a bushel basket, and direct other people in the opposite direction?

It’s not a question of what’s the absolute least one needs to believe, but a question of seeking the Truth, both in the matter of the Virgin Mary’s death, and the correct understanding of the Papal Encyclical.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Dormition doesn’t exclude Assumption. The entire tradition is that Mary had a light falling asleep (painless death), and on the third day she was resurrected by her Son and immediately assumed body and soul into heaven. The Great Feast of the Dormition of the Theotokos doesn’t end with her death.

The Western Church also believes this, from ancient times till today. It is only in today’s poorly catechized West, that we see this mostly discredited theory of Mary never dying popping up with alarming virulence.

 

[thistle]

“Having completed the course of her earthly life” was carefully worded by the Pope to allow for both views. Do you think the Pope is so stupid he could not have simply used the word “died”.

MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS is the dogma of Mary’s Assumption and NOT her death.

Catholics are NOT obliged to believe Mary died, albeit as I said earlier I personally believe she died but Catholics are free to believe either way.
What you are saying is that any Catholic who does not believe Mary died first before being assumed is a state of mortal sin and that is simply untrue. They are not.

 

[ConstantineTG]

It’s funny thistle that you view Christian faith as such, that de fide means nothing more than, “believe this or you’re going to hell” (ie. mortal sin) and that if it is not de fide then it is something that can be thrown out. For sure Christian faith was never that way and it is never the intention of the Roman Catholic Church for such level of legalism to understand the faith. Laws are there to enforce the truth, not to be the truth themselves. You need to sit down and look at what the Dormition of Mary brings to us believers, not whether a Papal mandate you must believe it without question.