Mary's Assumption

[RedSoxFan45]

Hello all! Mary’s Assumption is something I have not had a problem with until recently. How can something that happened after the time of Christ be required to be believed for salvation? I thought all public revelation stopped after Christ ascended into heaven. If a person has a problem with this dogma, then how can they be required to believe it?

 

[Biggie]

Hello all! Mary’s Assumption is something I have not had a problem with until recently. How can something that happened after the time of Christ be required to be believed for salvation? I thought all public revelation stopped after Christ ascended into heaven. If a person has a problem with this dogma, then how can they be required to believe it?

If all public revelation stopped after the Ascension, none of the Gospels are to be believed all of which were written and codified many years after Christ. Tradition precedes the Gospels and the Gospels themselves were the subject of selection by the Church.

If a person has a problem with dogma, humility is required.

 

[Irish_Catholic_1]

Hello all! Mary’s Assumption is something I have not had a problem with until recently. How can something that happened after the time of Christ be required to be believed for salvation? I thought all public revelation stopped after Christ ascended into heaven. If a person has a problem with this dogma, then how can they be required to believe it?

Because it is dogma. All dogmatic definitions must be believed by Catholics. If you are a Catholic, then you will believe what the Catholic Church teaches. And the Catechism states:

CCC 82: As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, “does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.”

CCC 87 Mindful of Christ’s words to his apostles: “He who hears you, hears me”, the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms.

 

[ChadS]

I believe that the Catechism states that all new revelation ceased with the death of the last apostle. It is quite possible then that Mary’s Assumption occurred prior to the death of the last apostle. That would place it squarely in the time line where new revelations were possible.

ChadS

 

[JMJ_coder]

I thought all public revelation stopped after Christ ascended into heaven.

Wrong. Public revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle, Saint John (~100 AD).

 

[Pax]

Hello all! Mary’s Assumption is something I have not had a problem with until recently. How can something that happened after the time of Christ be required to be believed for salvation? I thought all public revelation stopped after Christ ascended into heaven. If a person has a problem with this dogma, then how can they be required to believe it?

If we pick and choose based upon our own wisdom, then the Assumption will be but one in a long list of things that people might discard.

 

[zach_dunn]

Hello all! Mary’s Assumption is something I have not had a problem with until recently. How can something that happened after the time of Christ be required to be believed for salvation? I thought all public revelation stopped after Christ ascended into heaven. If a person has a problem with this dogma, then how can they be required to believe it?

Public Revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle. All of the New Testament was written after the Ascension, that doesn’t mean we should get rid of it. The Trinity was defined until the second century, should that not be believed because it was defined after Jesus’ Ascension? Nope. Revelation might have ended, but we are still learning about the faith and there is much more to learn. It’s called the development of doctrine.

 

[Doxiemom]

It can be explained and accepted because Scripture says that the dead in Christ shall rise and be taken up.

While there may be no new revelation, there can be a deeper understanding given to you by the Holy Spirit.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother RedSoxFan,

Hello all! Mary’s Assumption is something I have not had a problem with until recently. How can something that happened after the time of Christ be required to be believed for salvation? I thought all public revelation stopped after Christ ascended into heaven. If a person has a problem with this dogma, then how can they be required to believe it?

I am not a Latin Catholic, but a Coptic Catholic from the Oriental Tradition. Please permit me to give a non-Latin perspective.

There are non-Catholic apostolic Christians who believe that the declaration of the dogma of the Assumption was unnecessary. But it is not because the content of the dogma is denied. The belief that Mary was assumed body and soul into heaven is a belief of the Church that has UNANIMOUS consent (even from non-Catholic apostolic Christians). The requirement for its belief is standard, even among non-Catholic apostolic Christians. In fact, every non-Catholic apostolic Church celebrates the Feast of the Assumption (or “Dormition,” as it is more popularly called in Eastern Christendom; in Oriental Christendom, “Assumption” is also commonly used), and it is a Great or Major Feast.

There is no disagreement among all apostolic Christians as it relates to both the teaching and its requirement for belief. What non-Catholic apostolic Christians complain of is simply the manner by which it was declared a dogma (i.e., through the infallible authority of the Pope). IMO, the complaint is groundless. Even if they did not believe in papal infallibility, such a unanimous belief by the Church universal (Catholic and Orthodox and COE alike) can certainly be declared as a dogma by the bishop who holds the primacy, even if one believes that the head bishop can only be a spokesman for the Church, and not a legislator.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Peter_Dawson]

Pax says, "If we pick and choose based upon our own wisdom, then the Assumption will be but one in a long list of things that people might discard."

**Irish_Catholic says, "Because it is dogma. All dogmatic definitions must be believed by Catholics. If you are a Catholic, then you will believe what the Catholic Church teaches. And the Catechism states:

CCC 82: As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, “does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.”

CCC 87 Mindful of Christ’s words to his apostles: “He who hears you, hears me”, the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms."**

Such statements seem clear and wonderful and because they are so common-sensical they generate a feeling of security.

But in practice it doesn’t come out so neatly and cleanly.

 

[ChadS]

Pax says, “If we pick and choose based upon our own wisdom, then the Assumption will be but one in a long list of things that people might discard.”

Irish_Catholic says, "Because it is dogma. All dogmatic definitions must be believed by Catholics. If you are a Catholic, then you will believe what the Catholic Church teaches. And the Catechism states:

CCC 82: As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, “does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.”

CCC 87 Mindful of Christ’s words to his apostles: “He who hears you, hears me”, the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms."

Such statements seem clear and wonderful and because they are so common-sensical they generate a feeling of security.

But in practice it doesn’t come out so neatly and cleanly.

Could you explain what you mean about things not being nearly so neat or clean in practice?

ChadS

 

[Allen_Scott]

I am not concerned with the authenticity of the Assumption. I just want to know exactly where did it occur? I have read in the Politics of the Crucifixion that HIs uncle, Joseph of Aramethea, gathered Mary’s entourage and transported them to England because the the political unrest following Christ’s death. What is the answer?

 

[antonabe]

I think we are not recognising the true facts of the situation.Mary is the Immaculate Conception the Mother of our Lord Jesus Christ whom we all Catholics believe to be God.She had a beginning at birth and she was born unlike others without Original Sin.How did her life end.Did she have to suffer the fate of a normal Human Being and suffer corruption?The Church teaches us that she did not suffer corruption of her body and was assumed into heaven body and soul.This has been done after much investigation and debate.If we belive in our Lord Jesus Christ,in his Resurrection,and Ascention don’t you think that Jesus in his divine nature could have raised his Mother too to heaven?.

 

[Duc_in_Altum]

I am not a Latin Catholic, but a Coptic Catholic from the Oriental Tradition. Please permit me to give a non-Latin perspective.

Thank you for your post. It was goo to see the Assumption from this point of view!

God bless!

 

[Allen_Scott]

I am Catholic, I believe in the Assumption. I just want to know geographically where did it, the Assumption occur on this earth. Please this is a simple question but maybe a complex answer. Thanks, Allen Scott

 

[LilyM]

Isn’t Christ’s Second Coming required belief?

Aren’t the facts of our final judgement and the consignment of our souls to heaven or hell required belief?

Isn’t the fact that ALL our bodies are going to be resurrected and, for those whose final destiny is heaven, assumed there as Mary’s was, also required belief?

Aren’t all of THOSE things that haven’t even happened yet, more than 1900 years after Mary was assumed into heaven?

Why then is the timing of Mary’s Assumption an issue?

 

[jazzbass981]

From my OWN personal perspective - If I were Jesus, there is no way I would let my mother ever die! That woman suffered throughout her entire life for the cause of her Son. Now, I ask you - Would YOU want YOUR mother to die if you were Jesus? To me, it’s a common sense thing. Just my .02 cents.

 

[zach_dunn]

I am not concerned with the authenticity of the Assumption. I just want to know exactly where did it occur? I have read in the Politics of the Crucifixion that HIs uncle, Joseph of Aramethea, gathered Mary’s entourage and transported them to England because the the political unrest following Christ’s death. What is the answer?

England? Was England even around then (not geographically, of course, but as a country)? I’ve never heard that before . . .

 

[zach_dunn]

I am not concerned with the authenticity of the Assumption. I just want to know exactly where did it occur? I have read in the Politics of the Crucifixion that HIs uncle, Joseph of Aramethea, gathered Mary’s entourage and transported them to England because the the political unrest following Christ’s death. What is the answer?

**Considering Mary was given to St. John, a likely place for her Assumption to take place would probably have been Ephesus, where John was Bishop (I believe).

Another tradition says that Mary went to Jerusalem and was Assumed from there. I’m not sure, I haven’t researched it much. My money would be on Ephesus.**

 

[yusef]

Public Revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle. All of the New Testament was written after the Ascension, that doesn’t mean we should get rid of it. The Trinity was defined until the second century, should that not be believed because it was defined after Jesus’ Ascension? Nope. Revelation might have ended, but we are still learning about the faith and there is much more to learn. It’s called the development of doctrine.

However, the Trinity is a doctrine taken directly from Holy Scripture and the Christ’s own description of the relationship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The issue here is an historical event, such as the transfiguration and the Ascension (which are described in Scripture). The event of the Assumption is not described in scripture. I have not studied this issue, but would like to know if there are any historical accounts of the assumption, when was the first mention of the assumption, and why only recently (relatively!!) was it made into a dogma?