Mary's assumption

[AmbroseSJ]

ALMOST UNIVERSAL CONSENSUS is NOT Infallible. If the Pope would have wanted that to be an Infallible teaching I am sure he would have included it in his his Infallible Dogma of the Assumption. I am nearly 80 years old and I had NEVER heard of Mary having died until maybe the past 30 or so years. I know many priest that do NOT say she died. So your guess is as good as mine for now. Personally I’d rather she didn’t have to die if it was up to me. We’ll find out when we get there! God Bless, Memaw

We should seek the Truth, not what we personally would rather.

The entire Eastern Church has ALWAYS taught that the Virgin Mary died. The entire Western Church has been in complete agreement with the Eastern Church on this question until very recently. The language of Munificentissimus Deus has raised to the boiling point this debate about whether the Virgin Mary died.

I have posted biblical, logical, theological, and liturgical reasons all confirming that the Virgin Mary died in many threads here in the past.

Ask yourself this question: We know the Virgin Mary was not deserving of death because of her Immaculate Conception. But was the Virgin Mary deserving of ANY suffering that she endured in this life? No. of course not. Why did she suffer in this life? For same reason that Jesus did: to offer intercessory prayers and sacrifices to the Father on behalf of sinners. Is it so hard to believe that the Virgin Mary would embrace death, for the sake of sinners, as her own Son did? Do you wish the Virgin Mary did NOT offer prayers and sacrifices for you and me and all sinners? No. of course not.

Furthermore, denying the death of the Virgin Mary, also denies her Resurrection, which is ALSO implicit in the doctrine of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary.

Beware! Take Care! Do not follow the folly of modern times and its misguided “feel good” warm fuzzies. The Gospel is a rigorous doctrine for all.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

We should seek the Truth, not what we personally would rather.

The entire Eastern Church has ALWAYS taught that the Virgin Mary died. The entire Western Church has been in complete agreement with the Eastern Church on this question until very recently. The language of Munificentissimus Deus has raised to the boiling point this debate about whether the Virgin Mary died.

I have posted biblical, logical, theological, and liturgical reasons all confirming that the Virgin Mary died in many threads here in the past.

Ask yourself this question: We know the Virgin Mary was not deserving of death because of her Immaculate Conception. But was the Virgin Mary deserving of ANY suffering that she endured in this life? No. of course not. Why did she suffer in this life? For same reason that Jesus did: to offer intercessory prayers and sacrifices to the Father on behalf of sinners. Is it so hard to believe that the Virgin Mary would embrace death, for the sake of sinners, as her own Son did? Do you wish the Virgin Mary did NOT offer prayers and sacrifices for you and me and all sinners? No. of course not.

Furthermore, denying the death of the Virgin Mary, also denies her Resurrection, which is ALSO implicit in the doctrine of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary.

Beware! Take Care! Do not follow the folly of modern times and its misguided “feel good” warm fuzzies. The Gospel is a rigorous doctrine for all.

The bolding in Ambrose’s post is mine. To me, that says everything, about Mary and about our entire deposit of faith. The Truth should be what matters, whether we like it that way or not. There are things I would prefer to be slightly different, but I accept things as they are and am grateful when I do know the truth from a falsehood (even when not deliberate).

 

[DavidFilmer]

Why is the church deliberately ambiguous about it?

We don’t know.

If they don’t know the answer…they would just say so, wouldn’t they?

Not necessarily. The Church has withheld definitive pronouncements until such time as certain objections could be answered. This was the case with Immaculate Conception, after Aquinas objected that the doctrine, as understood in his day, would suggest that Mary had no need of a savior. As the Faith matured, the Church came to the understanding that the merits of Our Lord’s Sacrifice were applied to Mary in anticipation of Calvary.

But if they know, what would be the reason for being deliberately ambiguous about such an important moment for such an important person?.

It might be about an important person, but it is not an important point, according to our current understanding. It really doesn’t matter one way or another.

It’s possible that our understanding of the Assumption will continue to develop, to the point that it becomes significant whether or not Mary experienced earthly death. This is the point at which the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, would likely make the distinction known.

 

[Memaw]

The bolding in Ambrose’s post is mine. To me, that says everything, about Mary and about our entire deposit of faith. The Truth should be what matters, whether we like it that way or not. There are things I would prefer to be slightly different, but I accept things as they are and am grateful when I do know the truth from a falsehood (even when not deliberate).

Like I said before, I go with the Church!! God Bless, Memaw

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Like I said before, I go with the Church!! God Bless, Memaw

And the clear teaching of the Church since year dot is that Mary died Memaw.
The view you (and many other less well informed Catholics) personally hold was invented outside of the Magisterium 300 years ago and the Popes have always opposed it.

However the Church in its compassion tolerates your view and it is not, at the moment, heretical to hold it…but lets not pretend the doors aren’t closing.

As you are a Catechist it is disappointing you are still unable to accept these fine points since I last demonstrated them to you .

*"Some theologians have in fact maintained that the Blessed Virgin did not die and and was immediately raised from earthly life to heavenly glory. However, this opinion was unknown until the 17th century, whereas a common tradition actually exists which sees Mary’s death as her entry into heavenly glory.

“ ‘The Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, when her earthly life was over’ … with this formula my Venerable Predecessor Pius XII made no pronouncement on the question of Mary’s death. Nevertheless, he did not intend to deny the fact of her death, he merely did not judge it opportune to affirm it…" *
JPII, 1997.

 

[DavidFilmer]

As you are a Catechist it is disappointing you are still unable to accept these fine points since I last demonstrated them to you .

This is rather presumptuous. Do you consider yourself an authority to which Catechists should simply yield their opinions?

"Some theologians have in fact maintained that the Blessed Virgin did not die and and was immediately raised from earthly life to heavenly glory. However, this opinion was unknown until the 17th century, whereas a common tradition actually exists which sees Mary’s death as her entry into heavenly glory.
If this were true, it would prove nothing (other than, perhaps, the Doctrine that Doctrine may develop). The Limbo of Infants was the common belief of the Church (including seven Popes and many Doctors and Saints of the Church) for centuries. I was alive (but just a baby) when the first cracks in that wall began to appear, mainly due to the efforts of Josef Ratzinger and Ludwig Ott. With the publication of the CCC, it appears the Church has abandoned this doctrine (although any faithful Catholic is still permitted to accept it).

Nevertheless, he did not intend to deny the fact of her death, he merely did not judge it opportune to affirm it…" [JPII, 1997]

Which is exactly what I said. By logical extension, he did not intend to affirm the fact of her death, but merely did not judge it opportune to deny it.

He clearly did not intend to EITHER confirm OR deny her earthly death.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Do you consider yourself an authority to which Catechists should simply yield their opinions?

You are mistaken. Of course you may currently hold a tolerated view that is not taught by either the Magisterium or by tradition.

I am simply observing that it is undeniable that both tradition and the Popes have always taught from year dot that Mary died. Memaw, from discussions we had some 12 months ago, denies that and still appears to here. I have provided solid quotes to support my assertion.

Quote:
Nevertheless, he did not intend to deny the fact of her death, he merely did not judge it opportune to affirm it…" [JPII, 1997]

He clearly did not intend to EITHER confirm OR deny her earthly death.

I don’t think so. Pius clearly confirmed Mary’s death in his Encyclical at least three times, even quoting from tradition. What he did not do was to “formally define” her death when formally defining that she rose incorrupt to heaven body and soul.

If a consequent Pope says “it was not opportune for him to do so” that fairly clearly means he is certain that Mary died and it is a teaching but for practical reasons refrained from banning (by formal definition) the mistaken but harmless opposing view known to be piously held by large numbers of faithful who are less than well appraised of the traditional teaching on this matter.

The problem I believe is that large numbers of Catholics cannot comprehend that a teaching can exist and be certainly true even if the Magisterium intentionally refrains, at this time in history, from formally defining it as a “Dogma” for prudential reasons.

 

[Memaw]

This is rather presumptuous. Do you consider yourself an authority to which Catechists should simply yield their opinions?

If this were true, it would prove nothing (other than, perhaps, the Doctrine that Doctrine may develop). The Limbo of Infants was the common belief of the Church (including seven Popes and many Doctors and Saints of the Church) for centuries. I was alive (but just a baby) when the first cracks in that wall began to appear, mainly due to the efforts of Josef Ratzinger and Ludwig Ott. With the publication of the CCC, it appears the Church has abandoned this doctrine (although any faithful Catholic is still permitted to accept it).

Which is exactly what I said. By logical extension, he did not intend to affirm the fact of her death, but merely did not judge it opportune to deny it.

He clearly did not intend to EITHER confirm OR deny her earthly death.

Thank you David . I do not let the presumptuous attitude of others bother me at all, It just shows their “presumptuous attitude.” The Pope had a perfect opportunity to confirm Mary’s death if it were intended by the Holy Spirit to do so and he didn’t. I believe that moment was so precious to God that HE didn’t intend to share it with us and HE need not. HE did want us to know, with all certainty, that He took her, Body and Soul, (together) into Heaven. Like I said several times already, I am with the Church. God Bless, Memaw

 

[thistle]

I don’t know why this topic is debated so often.

Catholics are bound by infallible and non-infallible teachings. As Catholics are not bound to believe Mary died it is clear it is neither an infallible nor non-infallible teaching that she died.

Personally, I believe she died but I do not have the right to tell or even suggest to other Catholics that they should believe likewise. The Church allows us to believe she died or did not die before being assumed. It should be left at that unless/until the Church takes a definitive position and binds all Catholics to it.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

I don’t know why this topic is debated so often.

Catholics are bound by infallible and non-infallible teachings. As Catholics are not bound to believe Mary died it is clear it is neither an infallible nor non-infallible teaching that she died.

Personally, I believe she died but I do not have the right to tell or even suggest to other Catholics that they should believe likewise. The Church allows us to believe she died or did not die before being assumed. It should be left at that unless/until the Church takes a definitive position and binds all Catholics to it.

The problem I have with your statement is that you are dismissing Church teachings if they are liturgical or papal. IOW, the Church through her liturgy, and through Papal statements has said over and over that the Virgin Mary died. Even in Munificentissimus Deus her death is discussed at length!

So when you say that you BELIEVE that the Virgin Mary died yourself, but do not feel that you have the right to even SUGGEST that the Virgin Mary died, when there is 2000 years of Church teaching and tradition saying she died, I do not understand.

What myself, and many others are TRYING to accomplish (I think) is to make it clear to all of those who want to know, that there HAS ALWAYS BEEN Church teaching and tradition that says that the Virgin Mary died. It IS our right (and our responsibility) to SUGGEST this teaching as the Truth.

You are correct in saying that it is NOT de fide to believe the Virgin Mary died. But for those who wish to know what the Church teaches and what the ancient tradition is, it should be told them, that the Virgin Mary died.

Just as the Assumption of the Virgin Mary was always taught and believed throughout the 2000 year history of the Church, yet it was only taught as de fide recently, does not mean that the Truth of the matter was only settled recently. No. The Truth of the matter was settled in ancient times. It was only necessary to make the teaching dogmatic in our own times, because of the infidelity of our times. Just as ALL dogmatic definitions are made to combat the infidelity of the times.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

I don’t know why this topic is debated so often.

Catholics are bound by infallible and non-infallible teachings. As Catholics are not bound to believe Mary died it is clear it is neither an infallible nor non-infallible teaching that she died.

Personally, I believe she died but I do not have the right to tell or even suggest to other Catholics that they should believe likewise. The Church allows us to believe she died or did not die before being assumed. It should be left at that unless/until the Church takes a definitive position and binds all Catholics to it.

You misunderstand Thistle, just as does David.
One may currently believe Mary did not die, this view is tolerated even though the Church or tradition has never taught this.

However one would be mistaken to hold that the Church and tradition has no teaching that Mary died.

 

[thistle]

The only teachings that matter are the OFFICIAL Church infallible and non-infallible teachings which bind Catholics. Anything else the Church allows me to take or leave.
If a teaching is not an official infallible or non-infallible teaching (see CCC for Church teachings) then nobody should be trying to ram anything else down a Catholic’s throat thereby putting themselves above the Church.

 

[DavidFilmer]

You misunderstand Thistle, just as does David.
One may currently believe Mary did not die, this view is tolerated even though the Church or tradition has never taught this.

David Who? David Me?

I don’t think either Thistle nor I lack understanding.

Didn’t I say, in post #4 of this thread,

Since the Church is deliberately ambiguous on the topic, a Catholic is free to believe either way.

However one would be mistaken to hold that the Church and tradition has no teaching that Mary died.

Just as one would be mistaken to hold that the Church and Tradition has no teaching about the Limbo of Infants.

The modern Church seems to have backed away from (ie, abandoned) both doctrines, leaving Catholics in a position where we are perfectly free to accept either doctrine, but we will find no support from the Magestrium in doing so.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

The only teachings that matter are the OFFICIAL Church infallible and non-infallible teachings which bind Catholics. Anything else the Church allows me to take or leave.
If a teaching is not an official infallible or non-infallible teaching (see CCC for Church teachings) then nobody should be trying to ram anything else down a Catholic’s throat thereby putting themselves above the Church.

This I believe is where both yourself and Memaw are mistaken Thistle.

The Catholic Church certainly has teachings that are not dogma or formally defined.
That Mary died is one of them.
That she did not die isn’t, but you may hold this view as it is not condemned…yet.

 

[Memaw]

This I believe is where both yourself and Memaw are mistaken Thistle.

The Catholic Church certainly has teachings that are not dogma or formally defined.
That Mary died is one of them.
That she did not die isn’t, but you may hold this view as it is not condemned…yet.

Please, I would certainly appreciate it if you DIDN’T put words in my mouth. You’ve got it all wrong. The Church has NEVER officially said that Mary did die. The Church doesn’t teach that because to put it simply, the Church just doesn’t know for sure what took place at the moment of her Assumption. God Bless, Memaw

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Please, I would certainly appreciate it if you DIDN’T put words in my mouth. You’ve got it all wrong. The Church has NEVER officially said that Mary did die. The Church doesn’t teach that because to put it simply, the Church just doesn’t know for sure what took place at the moment of her Assumption. God Bless, Memaw

Does the Church know what happened at the moment of the Virgin Mary’s Conception?

I think you will agree she does, and she has said so.

What makes you think the Church doesn’t know what happened at the moment of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary? Do you not realize that Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church. That the Angels and Saints in Heaven are members of the Church? That the Holy Spirit guides the Church to all Truth? I think the Church definitely knows what happened at the moment of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary.

As I said before, the infidelity of this age will precipitate a dogmatic declaration eventually, in due season.

Meanwhile you are mistaken to believe the Church doesn’t teach that the Virgin Mary died. Where you are mistaken is that you believe only dogmatic definitions are teachings of the Church. We are also taught through the Liturgy and through the Pope, as well as through our local bishop and his priests. So there is MUCH more teaching going on then just what you can find declared dogmatically.

Don’t misunderstand. I am not trying to say that the Church has taught dogmatically that the Virgin Mary died, or that you MUST believe it. No. I am just trying to illustrate that Church teaching is NOT JUST dogmatic declarations. So while the Church has ALWAYS taught that the Virgin Mary died, it wasn’t actually questioned until fairly recently. That is WHY the Church never deemed it necessary before now to make a dogmatic declaration.

But Saint Pope John Paul II has ASSURED us that the Virgin Mary did die, and that the reason Munificentissimus Deus was left somewhat vague about the actual death of the Virgin Mary, was because it was NOT THE TIME to go into her death.

Do you understand why? It is because once the death of the Virgin Mary has been declared dogmatically, her implicit Resurrection will also need to be addressed as well. (Even though that Truth is IMPLICIT in her Glorious Assumption.) Pope Pius XII, did not want to over-burden the issue of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary with these further issues BECAUSE they will require a definition of their own. He wanted to simply dogmatically declare the Assumption of the Virgin Mary. In time the other issues will be addressed.

But in the meantime, if you want to know the mind of the Church, then know that the Church has always taught that the Virgin Mary died.

If you want proof that the Church has always taught that the Virgin Mary died, simply read Munificentissimus Deus, where her death is spoken of often!

 

[Memaw]

Does the Church know what happened at the moment of the Virgin Mary’s Conception?

I think you will agree she does, and she has said so.

What makes you think the Church doesn’t know what happened at the moment of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary? Do you not realize that Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church. That the Angels and Saints in Heaven are members of the Church? That the Holy Spirit guides the Church to all Truth? I think the Church definitely knows what happened at the moment of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary.

As I said before, the infidelity of this age will precipitate a dogmatic declaration eventually, in due season.

Meanwhile you are mistaken to believe the Church doesn’t teach that the Virgin Mary died. Where you are mistaken is that you believe only dogmatic definitions are teachings of the Church. We are also taught through the Liturgy and through the Pope, as well as through our local bishop and his priests. So there is MUCH more teaching going on then just what you can find declared dogmatically.

Don’t misunderstand. I am not trying to say that the Church has taught dogmatically that the Virgin Mary died, or that you MUST believe it. No. I am just trying to illustrate that Church teaching is NOT JUST dogmatic declarations. So while the Church has ALWAYS taught that the Virgin Mary died, it wasn’t actually questioned until fairly recently. That is WHY the Church never deemed it necessary before now to make a dogmatic declaration.

But Saint Pope John Paul II has ASSURED us that the Virgin Mary did die, and that the reason Munificentissimus Deus was left somewhat vague about the actual death of the Virgin Mary, was because it was NOT THE TIME to go into her death.

Do you understand why? It is because once the death of the Virgin Mary has been declared dogmatically, her implicit Resurrection will also need to be addressed as well. (Even though that Truth is IMPLICIT in her Glorious Assumption.) Pope Pius XII, did not want to over-burden the issue of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary with these further issues BECAUSE they will require a definition of their own. He wanted to simply dogmatically declare the Assumption of the Virgin Mary. In time the other issues will be addressed.

But in the meantime, if you want to know the mind of the Church, then know that the Church has always taught that the Virgin Mary died.

If you want proof that the Church has always taught that the Virgin Mary died, simply read Munificentissimus Deus, where her death is spoken of often!

Then what ARE you “trying” to say ?? You can’t have it both ways ! Either she did or she didn’t die as we do or will. I don’t understand why there is sooo much pressure on insisting we believe she “died”. As for her Resurrection, that took place at her Assumption, body and soul, TOGETHER, when she left this earth. She didn’t HAVE to die for that. And she doesn’t HAVE to await for that at the end of time, like we do.

(Ambrose, you said, " What makes you think the Church doesn’t know what happened at the moment of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary? Do you not realize that Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church. That the Angels and Saints in Heaven are members of the Church? That the Holy Spirit guides the Church to all Truth? I think the Church definitely knows what happened at the moment of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary." )

Aren’t you assuming an awful lot about what I believe or “don’t realize” That’s a bit judgmental don’t you think? Just because I don’t agree with you on one point doesn’t mean you should attack me on others. Maybe you should go back and read some of my previous posts. I am with the Church and the Church has NEVER said Mary died as we do or will. And she could have clearly stated that when she proclaimed the Infallible Dogma of the Assumption. Her Resurrection took place the moment she was Assumed, body and soul, into Heaven, she didn’t have to “die” for that to take place. NOW to make it VERY clear, I will await the Church for future Dogmas to be made on any future subject. God Bless, Memaw

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Aren’t you assuming an awful lot about what I believe or “don’t realize” That’s a bit judgmental don’t you think? Just because I don’t agree with you on one point doesn’t mean you should attack me on others. Maybe you should go back and read some of my previous posts. I am with the Church and the Church has NEVER said Mary died as we do or will. And she could have clearly stated that when she proclaimed the Infallible Dogma of the Assumption. Her Resurrection took place the moment she was Assumed, body and soul, into Heaven, she didn’t have to “die” for that to take place. NOW to make it VERY clear, I will await the Church for future Dogmas to be made on any future subject. God Bless, Memaw

There is no point in having a message forum if we can’t make “judgements” about what a person is saying, or disagree with that person without considering it to be an attack.

I disagree with you in one point only. That is this: The Church has always taught that the Virgin Mary died.

Your disagreement with me (which I don’t take personally at all) is that you consider only dogmatic declarations by the Church to be valid Church teachings.

My entire previous post was addressing this disagreement.

 

[Memaw]

There is no point in having a message forum if we can’t make “judgements” about what a person is saying, or disagree with that person without considering it to be an attack.

I disagree with you in one point only. That is this: The Church has always taught that the Virgin Mary died.

Your disagreement with me (which I don’t take personally at all) is that you consider only dogmatic declarations by the Church to be valid Church teachings.

My entire previous post was addressing this disagreement.

If the “judgments” you make are on something I have said, that would be different. You can disagree with me all you want! I have NEVER said that I consider “only” dogmatic declarations. You are assuming again. Why does it bother you so if I don’t believe it was necessary for Mary to die as we know it, separation of body and soul, before she was Assumed into Heaven. Only God knows and HE didn’t see fit to reveal that to us at the time of the Infallible Dogma of the Assumption. HE could have, you know, if it would have been HIS Will. Like I said before, I will wait for the Church. Guess you’ll just have to “tolerate” my thoughts. God Bless, Memaw

 

[AmbroseSJ]

If the “judgments” you make are on something I have said, that would be different. You can disagree with me all you want! I have NEVER said that I consider “only” dogmatic declarations. You are assuming again. Why does it bother you so if I don’t believe it was necessary for Mary to die as we know it, separation of body and soul, before she was Assumed into Heaven. Only God knows and HE didn’t see fit to reveal that to us at the time of the Infallible Dogma of the Assumption. HE could have, you know, if it would have been HIS Will. Like I said before, I will wait for the Church. Guess you’ll just have to “tolerate” my thoughts. God Bless, Memaw

Maybe we can approach this from another angle.

Before the first council of Nicea, did Christians believe that Jesus was God, and equal with the Father?

The answer is yes. Although up until that time, there had never been a dogmatic declaration by a Church Council (since it was never necessary before that.)

Therefore, the Church teaches things BEFORE they are dogmatically pronounced. NOT VISA VERSA
Another example:

If St. Peter (the Vicar of Christ on earth) was teaching the early Christians, do you suppose they would have said, “I will have to wait and see if the Church dogmatically declares what you have said before I can believe it.”

BTW, the “judgement” I made about what you said was this:

The Church doesn’t teach that because to put it simply, the Church just doesn’t know for sure what took place at the moment of her Assumption.

Therefore I “judged” that you thought the Church didn’t know what took place at the moment etc. since THAT IS WHAT YOU SAID.

That is why I responded about WHO makes up the Church, and WHAT THE CHURCH knows. It was entirely based on what you said.

I respect your posts generally. And I imagine you are good faithful Catholic. The reason I have been arguing with you in this is that IT APPEARS that you MAY have succumbed to a VERY common error in today’s Church. Viz. The belief that only dogmatic pronouncements of the Church constitute Church teaching. IOW, if there is no dogmatic pronouncement, then it is NOT being taught. E.G. the death of the Virgin Mary.

But it IS and ALWAYS HAS been taught, through the Divine Liturgy and by Popes (not to mention the Fathers, Saints and Martyrs of the Church.)

I am PERFECTLY OK WITH YOU BELIEVING the Virgin Mary NEVER died.

BUT

Just don’t say that it is because the Church doesn’t know, or that the Church does not teach that she did.

That is my beef!

I told you earlier, for PROOF that the Church has always taught this, simply read Munificentissiumus Deus.