Mary's Assumption

[rinnie]

The teaching of the Catholic Church that Mary was taken bodily up to heaven. What is the biblical support for this teaching? And to other Non-Catholic religions teach/believe this as well?
Thank you!

St Thomas, remember him? Better known as doubting Thomas. Claims he saw it right before his eyes.

 

[steido01]

Both are Infallible and MUST be believed by all Catholics so not really any actual difference. Both part of Divine Revelation. God Bless, Memaw

So it’s just as important as believing that God created the universe? Or that Christ died to forgive our sins and save us?

If so, what actually saves us? Belief in Christ, or belief in rules?

 

[Memaw]

So it’s just as important as believing that God created the universe? Or that Christ died to forgive our sins and save us?

If so, what actually saves us? Belief in Christ, or belief in rules?

Both, can’t have one without the other!!! HE died for our sins so as to give us the Grace to follow HIS rules. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Memaw]

I still don’t understand. The Assumption of Mary was dogmatically defined by Pope Pius XII on November 1, 1950, in the apostolic constitution Munificentissimus Deus. That’s over four hundred years after the start of the Protestant Reformation? Thanks.

Blessings

To reverse the protestant influence on the Catholic Faithful and return them to what the Catholic Church has always believed and taught about Mary. God Bless, Memaw

 

[eddie_too]

Jesus said that if we love Him we will keep HIS RULES. Jesus was seldom, if ever, confusing.

 

[The_Serpent]

“And the Temple of God was opened in heaven: and the ark of his testament was seen in his temple, …” Revelation 11:19

This is a symbolic reference to the Virgin Mary being in heaven, and perhaps to her Assumption. Mary is the New Ark that carried the word of God… Jesus.

Patristic writings support the Assumption, and can be found in the book at this link:
svspress.com/on-the-dormition-of-mary/

 

[QNDNNDQDCE]

I think the Church permits the belief that Mary remained alive. It is my understanding that most of the Church Fathers said she died, but there are some who seem to suggest that she did not, or at least that she possibly did not.

Epiphanius professes ignorance about the circumstances surrounding her death entirely as I recall, but I don’t know of any early Church father who denies her death. The Church permits it in the sense that she has not condemned anyone for this belief, but it has no support in the Church’s tradition (especially the liturgical tradition).

 

[adrift]

Epiphanius professes ignorance about the circumstances surrounding her death entirely as I recall, but I don’t know of any early Church father who denies her death. The Church permits it in the sense that she has not condemned anyone for this belief, but it has no support in the Church’s tradition (especially the liturgical tradition).

I posted this in another thread it is well balanced.

Mary’s Death and Bodily Assumption

 

[multitude]

To reverse the protestant influence on the Catholic Faithful and return them to what the Catholic Church has always believed and taught about Mary. God Bless, Memaw

I’m very glad that Pope Pius XII defined this ex cathedra. There would be more than a few lost Catholics otherwise. Anyways, I’ve thought the Orthodox hold to that belief as well, so it’s not as if this is new.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Mary’s Assumption is not entirely without precedent. Before her were Enoch (Gen 5:24) and Elijah (2 Kings 2:11), both of whom were assumed into heaven in some manner.

Not exactly.
This “heaven” is quite different from the heaven that Mary entered. More like “sky” (as in tornado and the Wizard of Oz).
Also, Mary’s heaven was only opened after Jesus died.
Had Enoch or Elijah tried to “stargate” into her heaven they would have found the “shield” was up .

 

[Blue_Horizon]

…but in the Catholic Church it is also common to believe that she did not die. Either belief is currently permitted as long as we believe she was taken body and soul into heaven.

Its a little more complicated than this I believe.

The “common teaching” is actually that Mary died (held unanimously until C17) and always taught by the Popes (if they taught) who up to today have always taught Mary died.

However the unusual and contradictory, recent, belief that she did not die has been formally permitted by the Popes so far. This is not the official teaching though.

Some Catholics find it difficult to understand that the Church can have an “official teaching” yet be allowed to hold otherwise.

This is because we have different grades of “official teachings.”

If the highest grade of “official teaching” is one that is dogmatically defined then we are no longer permitted to hold a view different from that one.

Mary’s death has not yet been dogmatically defined.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

The Church has no official stance on whether she died first or not. It only asserts that Mary, at some time and place, either alive or dead, was taken up to heaven. The Church declared this as a requirement in the 1950s, so every Catholic must adhere to this belief…

Good stuff you wrote here.
The only small correction I would suggest is your above point.

The Church does have an **official **stance (if you consider Encyclicals “official”).
Munificentissimus Deus states clearly, at least 3 times, that Mary died.
And the Popes have always taught this.

I think what you may be confused about is whether her death was **Dogmatically **defined. No it wasn’t.
It was purposely left ambiguous at this level because the Pope said it wasn’t yet the right time to Dogmatically define her death. (Because significant numbers in more recent believe she did not die).

 

[Memaw]

Good stuff you wrote here.
The only small correction I would suggest is your above point.

The Church does have an **official **stance (if you consider Encyclicals “official”).
Munificentissimus Deus states clearly, at least 3 times, that Mary died.
And the Popes have always taught this.

I think what you may be confused about is whether her death was **Dogmatically **defined. No it wasn’t.
It was purposely left ambiguous at this level because the Pope said it wasn’t yet the right time to Dogmatically define her death. (Because significant numbers in more recent believe she did not die).

The Holy Spirit guides the Church, not “significant numbers” ! And the Pope did NOT dogmatically state that Mary died when he could have very easily defined it. We just DON"T know for sure in spite of all the pious thought about it. There were NO witnesses to her “falling asleep” or her Assumption. Only God knows and for His own reasons He has NOT revealed that to us. Such a precious moment between her and her God. Just one of God’s Great Mysteries. God Bless, Memaw

 

[RyanBlack]

The Holy Spirit guides the Church, not “significant numbers” ! And the Pope did NOT dogmatically state that Mary died when he could have very easily defined it. We just DON"T know for sure in spite of all the pious thought about it. There were NO witnesses to her “falling asleep” or her Assumption. Only God knows and for His own reasons He has NOT revealed that to us. Such a precious moment between her and her God. Just one of God’s Great Mysteries. God Bless, Memaw

How do you know there were no witnesses to her falling asleep? In fact, the tradition in the Eastern churches is that the Apostles, except for St. Thomas, did witness the death of the Theotokos.

 

[rcwitness]

There is little biblical support for it, hence not a doctrine in Lutheranism. Neither is the belief in it prohibited. I the day to generally agree with Luther that she is with her Son, though it isn’t known how it happened.

Jon

I agree there isn’t much biblical evidence. Yet, it also is NOT in conflict with Scripture.

I think most of Scripture was written before her Assumption, right?

And mamaybe most Apostles martryred? It’s fitting, then that John, who lived the longest was given the heavenly vision of her presence there. And we believe it is a Tradition known and testified by the Apostles who were aware of it (still alive).

The fact that there is no strong tradition about her burial place speaks heavily to me, also.

 

[Peregrinans]

Good stuff you wrote here.
The only small correction I would suggest is your above point.

The Church does have an **official **stance (if you consider Encyclicals “official”).
Munificentissimus Deus states clearly, at least 3 times, that Mary died.
And the Popes have always taught this.

I think what you may be confused about is whether her death was **Dogmatically **defined. No it wasn’t.
It was purposely left ambiguous at this level because the Pope said it wasn’t yet the right time to Dogmatically define her death. (Because significant numbers in more recent believe she did not die).

Yes, I did mean domestically defined, thanks. In the past, I, and others, have brought up Encyclicals as well as other early church writings, as proof that the Church teaches, or used to teach, that Mary died prior to the Assumption only to be told that it wasn’t “officially” declared and that the dogmatic declaration in 1950 was open for interpretation. So, as usual, confusion abounds. I personally have no doubt that she died since: 1) she is human and all humans die, 2) it would have been odd, to say the lest, that Mary was entombed while still alive and 3)if she were alive (not in a tomb) and was swept up to Heaven…don’t you think it would be BIG news at the time? Even perhaps included in the bible? Just saying. But, apparently, the Church is cool with the belief that she didn’t die.

 

[Memaw]

How do you know there were no witnesses to her falling asleep? In fact, the tradition in the Eastern churches is that the Apostles, except for St. Thomas, did witness the death of the Theotokos.

John who was the closest to Her would have known, and yet never mentioned it, Doesn’t seem likely. No one even knows when She was Assumed into Heaven so how would any one know what actually took place at that time. Divine Revalation ends with the death of the last Apostle. God Bless, Memaw

 

[RyanBlack]

John who was the closest to Her would have known, and yet never mentioned it, Doesn’t seem likely. No one even knows when She was Assumed into Heaven so how would any one know what actually took place at that time. Divine Revalation ends with the death of the last Apostle. God Bless, Memaw

But you cannot say that there were no witnesses. You simply don’t know that.

There is a tradition believed and taught in the Eastern Churches (including Eastern Catholic Churches) that all of the Apostle except for St. Thomas were miraculously transported to the bedside of the Theotokos, were present with her when she died, and buried her. Then, when St. Thomas arrived a few days later, they visited her grave and found it empty. While this tradition does not carry the same weight as Holy Scripture, for you simply to dismiss it as unlikely because you think St. John would have mentioned it in Holy Scripture seems to me to be rather insensitive towards the traditions of Eastern Catholics, with whom you are in communion.

 

[Memaw]

But you cannot say that there were no witnesses. You simply don’t know that.

There is a tradition believed and taught in the Eastern Churches (including Eastern Catholic Churches) that all of the Apostle except for St. Thomas were miraculously transported to the bedside of the Theotokos, were present with her when she died, and buried her. Then, when St. Thomas arrived a few days later, they visited her grave and found it empty. While this tradition does not carry the same weight as Holy Scripture, for you simply to dismiss it as unlikely because you think St. John would have mentioned it in Holy Scripture seems to me to be rather insensitive towards the traditions of Eastern Catholics, with whom you are in communion.

And you simply don’t know that there were witnesses. The Church has NEVER defined it so. The tradition believed and taught in the Eastern Church is just that, a tradition with a lower case t. I will stay with what the Church says. God Bless, Memaw

 

[RyanBlack]

And you simply don’t know that there were witnesses. The Church has NEVER defined it so. The tradition believed and taught in the Eastern Church is just that, a tradition with a lower case t. I will stay with what the Church says. God Bless, Memaw

And I have never declared for certain that there were witnesses. What I have stated is a very old, highly honored tradition. You, on the other hand, have definitively claimed that there were no witnesses. And on what basis? Certainly not on the basis of what the Church says.