Mary's Assumption

[Vico]

It’s a simple question I put to you MM.
Either the Pope clearly stated Mary died (three times at least) in his Encyclical or he didn’t. Why do you deny this?

St. Pope John Paul II stated in 1997:2. On 1 November 1950, in defining the dogma of the Assumption, Pius XII avoided using the term “resurrection” and did not take a position on the question of the Blessed Virgin’s death as a truth of faith. The Bull * Munificentissimus Deus *limits itself to affirming the elevation of Mary’s body to heavenly glory, declaring this truth a “divinely revealed dogma”.

w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/audiences/1997/documents/hf_jp-ii_aud_02071997.html

 

[Blue_Horizon]

St. Pope John Paul II stated in 1997:2. On 1 November 1950, in defining the dogma of the Assumption, Pius XII avoided using the term “resurrection” and did not take a position on the question of the Blessed Virgin’s death as a truth of faith. The Bull * Munificentissimus Deus* limits itself to affirming the elevation of Mary’s body to heavenly glory, declaring this truth a “divinely revealed dogma”.

w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/audiences/1997/documents/hf_jp-ii_aud_02071997.html

I think we all understand he did not at this time declare an infallible defined position.
But he clearly taught a non infallible position in the same Encyclical didn’t he?

 

[rinnie]

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.

We are taught that Mary was asleep in Christ. The reason we know that she did not die, in the sort of death we all die, is because when a person dies their body’s begin to decay right away.

Our Blessed Mother’s body never was buried or decayed because she was assumed body and soul into heaven with her son Jesus.

So we are taught that we can believe that she died to this world and rose to the next body and soul and was in a deep sleep.

 

[RyanBlack]

We are taught that Mary was asleep in Christ. The reason we know that she did not die, in the sort of death we all die, is because when a person dies their body’s begin to decay right away.

Our Blessed Mother’s body never was buried or decayed because she was assumed body and soul into heaven with her son Jesus.

So we are taught that we can believe that she died to this world and rose to the next body and soul and was in a deep sleep.

We do not know that she was not buried. In fact, in the Eastern Catholic Churches (at least those of the Byzantine tradition), we follow a tradition that she was indeed buried by the Apostles (minus St. Thomas), and that when they visited the tomb three days later, accompanied by St. Thomas, the tomb was empty.

 

[ffg]

My thoughts on the subject and OP -

If Mary was conceived without Original Sin, then she did not have that stain from Eve, thus the two Eve’s would be equivalent in that both ‘Eve’s’ started sinless.

Since with the first Eve, sin brought death.

The second Eve, Mary, who did not sin, did not see death.

Take care,

mike

 

[Peregrinans]

My thoughts on the subject and OP -

If Mary was conceived without Original Sin, then she did not have that stain from Eve, thus the two Eve’s would be equivalent in that both ‘Eve’s’ started sinless.

Since with the first Eve, sin brought death.

The second Eve, Mary, who did not sin, did not see death.

Take care,

mike

Jesus was conceived without original sin and he suffered and died.

 

[Peregrinans]

We are taught that Mary was asleep in Christ. The reason we know that she did not die, in the sort of death we all die, is because when a person dies their body’s begin to decay right away.

So Mary is not like all of us who are fully human?

Was Lazarus not really dead? Not much of a miracle then huh? (Jn 11-14) “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I go, so that I may awaken him out of sleep.” 12The disciples then said to Him, “Lord, if he has fallen asleep, he will recover.” 13Now Jesus had spoken of his death, but they thought that He was speaking of literal sleep. 14So Jesus then said to them plainly, "Lazarus is dead,…”
Therefore, fallen asleep = dead…real death not pretend. Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead not a sleep that had the appearance of death to the world.

It used to be taught that she DID die like everyone else. When did this new revelation occur? Who was it revealed to?

I believe this line of thinking is the result of the increasing mythologization of Mary and it undermines our understanding of the dual natures of Christ.

In order to have an unique and perfect sacrifice God became fully human and took upon Himself the sins of the world. And as the Lamb of God only His suffering is redemptive and only His triumph over death opened up the door/gate as a way to salvation. Jesus wasn’t a spirit that really didn’t suffer, die and was resurrected, nor was He just a man, who obeyed God.

In order for His sacrifice to have been perfect, He had to be fully God AND fully man. Jesus existed from all eternity , He is divine and became incarnated and fully human when Mary, a fully human woman, conceived by the power of the Most High. And fully human woman die real deaths. If she didn’t die then something else was going on. What? She wasn’t fully human? She was a human/divine hybrid? Jesus after all died prior to His resurrection. So she had some special qualities even greater than Jesus? If so, then Jesus’ sacrifice wasn’t perfect. Because then He was not fully God/ fully human, He instead is fully God, and fully Son of a non-representative of other humans woman.

Not only that, but it is also contrary, to what most people believed from the very start and for hundreds of years. That Mary died, was entombed then after the tomb was opened her body was gone and it was presumed to have been assumed into Heaven. Viola! Mary’s body avoided decomposition, and therefore wasn’t corrupted, and she is up in heaven with her son soul and body. Her body just followed after her soul. Why is this teaching lacking? Why does it need to by improved upon? For that matter, why is it even necessary? What’s it got to do with Jesus and His sacrifice and His resurrection? Our Savior? What’s it got to do with our salvation through Christ?

But, here we arguing about doctrines, dogmas, about what this Pope said and what that Saint thought and mythologizing, debating, adding, subtracting, and causing confusion about something when it gets right down to it doesn’t do anything, but detract our focus off of Christ.

 

[Memaw]

It’s a simple question I put to you MM.
Either the Pope clearly stated Mary died (three times at least) in his Encyclical or he didn’t. Why do you deny this?

Did I ever say I denied what the Pope stated in his Encyclical? I am agreeing with what the Pope said Infallibly, thank you, Why in the world does that bother you soooo? (simple question !) God bless, Memaw

 

[ffg]

Jesus was conceived without original sin and he suffered and died.

Yes, key distinction -

Jesus’ were by choice.

On both ends technically, though the front end would be obvious ‘for God’.

Edit: whatever happened to Mary would be by Jesus’ choice too as God, both ends (conceived and Assumed).

Take care,

Mike

 

[Memaw]

So Mary is not like all of us who are fully human?

Was Lazarus not really dead? Not much of a miracle then huh? (Jn 11-14) “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I go, so that I may awaken him out of sleep.” 12The disciples then said to Him, “Lord, if he has fallen asleep, he will recover.” 13Now Jesus had spoken of his death, but they thought that He was speaking of literal sleep. 14So Jesus then said to them plainly, "Lazarus is dead,…”
Therefore, fallen asleep = dead…real death not pretend. Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead not a sleep that had the appearance of death to the world.

 

[Memaw]

Amazing how our imagination can come up with all kinds of things. Mary is God’s “Masterpiece” from the moment of her conception till the Moment of Her Assumption. HE is the ONLY one that knows for sure what took place at Her Assumption. I don’t ever claim to know better!! God Bless, Memaw

 

[Memaw]

Tell that to those who don’t like my position! God Bless, Memaw

 

[Peregrinans]

Yes, key distinction -

Jesus’ were by choice.

On both ends technically, though the front end would be obvious ‘for God’.

Edit: whatever happened to Mary would be by Jesus’ choice too as God, both ends (conceived and Assumed).

Take care,

Mike

If she didn’t die first, and she was never going to die. Why did Jesus make her wait? Why didn’t He take her up with Him when He ascended? Did He make her wait a year? Ten years? And if so, why? What was He waiting for if not her death? Did He want her to suffer some without Him before He brought Her up to Him? To be in paradise? He told the thief that he would join Him that day in paradise. But He was going to make His, unable to die, mother wait?

And do you believe the people who originally taught that she died in the presence of the apostles and was entombed, were wrong? Do you believe our Orthodox brothers and sisters are wrong?

 

[Memaw]

Isn’t it funny that we try to tell God what to do but when HE tells us what to do we jump back. We come up with all kinds of reasons to disagree with HIM ! God Bless, Memaw

 

[ffg]

If she didn’t die first, and she was never going to die. Why did Jesus make her wait? Why didn’t He take her up with Him when He ascended? Did He make her wait a year? Ten years? And if so, why? What was He waiting for if not her death? Did He want her to suffer some without Him before He brought Her up to Him? To be in paradise? He told the thief that he would join Him that day in paradise. But He was going to make His, unable to die, mother wait?

And do you believe the people who originally taught that she died in the presence of the apostles and was entombed, were wrong? Do you believe our Orthodox brothers and sisters are wrong?

Thanks for the reply.

See post 93 (the one right before your original here). I gave my 2 cents.

You can ask Jesus all those questions when you see Him.

In the mean time, here is an interesting read -

ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2bvm52.htm

Snip -

“We have no information about Mary’s activity in the early Church, but we may suppose that after Pentecost her life would have continued to be hidden and discreet, watchful and effective. Since she was enlightened and guided by the Spirit, she exercised a deep influence on the community of the Lord’s disciples.”

Why might she have influenced the early community?
Perhaps something related to Mary’s introduction to John as his Mother at the Cross, as mother’s tend to have influence. Many times in that quiet motherly way.

Take care,

Mike

 

[RyanBlack]

If she didn’t die first, and she was never going to die. Why did Jesus make her wait? Why didn’t He take her up with Him when He ascended? Did He make her wait a year? Ten years? And if so, why? What was He waiting for if not her death? Did He want her to suffer some without Him before He brought Her up to Him? To be in paradise? He told the thief that he would join Him that day in paradise. But He was going to make His, unable to die, mother wait?

And do you believe the people who originally taught that she died in the presence of the apostles and was entombed, were wrong? Do you believe our Orthodox brothers and sisters are wrong?

Not just our Orthodox brothers and sisters, but Eastern Catholics also.

 

[Memaw]

This thread would have been a lot shorter if that were true. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Vico]

I think we all understand he did not at this time declare an infallible defined position.
But he clearly taught a non infallible position in the same Encyclical didn’t he?

Yes. Death (falling asleep) is a prevalent belief. Also in the Catechism 966 is seen:

In giving birth you kept your virginity; in your Dormition you did not leave the world, O Mother of God, but were joined to the source of Life. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death.509
509 Byzantine Liturgy, Troparion, Feast of the Dormition, August 15th.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Did I ever say I denied what the Pope stated in his Encyclical?

Yes. Pope Pious clearly stated in his Encyclical taught (non-infallibly) that Mary died and this is therefore an official (not yet infallible) teaching.

You appear to come to this conclusion merely because he was not prepared to state that infallibly this time.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Yes. Death (falling asleep) is a prevalent belief. Also in the Catechism 966 is seen:

In giving birth you kept your virginity; in your Dormition you did not leave the world, O Mother of God, but were joined to the source of Life. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death.509
509 Byzantine Liturgy, Troparion, Feast of the Dormition, August 15th.

The Catechism prob doesn’t teach that Mary died as clearly as Pope Pious did.

Though the ancient Feast of the Dormition (as opposed to the Feast of the Assumption) in fact celebrates the Death of Mary - in the Early Church and the East sleep is a euphemism for death. But most Western Catholics don’t seem to appreciate this subtle point.