One of my last issues

[bengal_fan]

this question still has not been answered to my satisfaction. i know that sounds very prideful but we are talking about a life-altering decision and i need to be sure. much prayer, reading, and question asking has proceeded this so please take it with the charity and deep seeking that is behing it.

i am having trouble with the assumption of Mary (bodily). what is the earliest writing we have about this doctrine? shouldn’t it be fairly soon after it happened? yet i don’t find it until much later. i believe in her perpetual virginity. i believe in seeking the intercession of the saints and especially the Queen Mother of our King. i am just having trouble with this being a defined doctrine of the church. if the church is wrong on this, then perhaps she is wrong on other things. i’m not saying it makes or breaks my conversion as i find stuff wrong in every other Christian denomination. but where did we get this doctrine. revelations 12 is not a good enough answer as the “woman” could be interpreted as the church or even as israel. please help me with this issue. thank you to all who respond charitably.

 

[germys9]

1. It sounds like you have done a little homework so you are probably familiar with the concept that Mary is the new ark in the New Covanent. Remember, the ark is seen in heaven right before mention of the woman. Coincidence, probably not.
2. Also, the Church has relics, bones, and traditions stating the burial places of almost all the saints including St. Peter and St. Paul. It would seem reasonable that the early Church would have kept something of hers, yet there is nothing that is claimed to have been from the Blessed Mother.
3. The assumption definitely has biblical precedence because Enoch and Elijah (I think) were both taken body and soul into heaven. Is it really a stretch to say that the Lord would also take his own mother body and soul into heaven?
4. It gives us hope that we too will be resurrected one day and taken body and soul into heaven just as Mary was.
5. If the Catholic Church is right on everything else, you should be comfortable giving her the benefit of the doubt for she would never do anything to lead you astray.
6. Submit your will to the authority of Christ’s Church and you will feel like all power and wisdom on earth has been given to you.

 

[Catholic_Tom]

My immediate thought here was, if you have come this far, and you accept the authority of the Catholic Church to teach infallibly on matters of faith and morals, this should not be a problem then. Consider the following:

Gen. 5:24, Heb. 11:5 - Enoch was bodily assumed into heaven without dying. Would God do any less for Mary the Ark of the New Covenant?

2 Kings 2:11-12; 1 Mac 2:58 - Elijah was assumed into heaven in fiery chariot. Jesus would not do any less for His Blessed Mother.

Psalm 132:8 - Arise, O Lord, and go to thy resting place, thou and the Ark (Mary) of thy might. Both Jesus and Mary were taken up to their eternal resting place in heaven.

2 Cor. 12:2 - Paul speaks of a man in Christ who was caught up to the third heaven. Mary was also brought up into heaven by God.

Matt. 27:52-53 - when Jesus died and rose, the bodies of the saints were raised. Nothing in Scripture precludes Mary’s assumption into heaven.

1 Thess. 4:17 - we shall be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air and so we shall always be with the Lord.

Rev. 12:1 - we see Mary, the “woman,” clothed with the sun. While in Rev. 6:9 we only see the souls of the martyrs in heaven, in Rev. 12:1 we see Mary, both body and soul.

2 Thess. 2:15 - Paul instructs us to hold fast to oral (not just written) tradition. Apostolic tradition says Mary was assumed into heaven. While claiming the bones of the saints was a common practice during these times (and would have been especially important to obtain Mary’s bones as she was the Mother of God), Mary’s bones were never claimed. This is because they were not available. Mary was taken up body and soul into heaven.

 

[Catholic_Tom]

continued…

IV. Mary’s Assumption into Heaven

“If the Holy Virgin had died and was buried, her falling asleep would have been surrounded with honour, death would have found her pure, and her crown would have been a virginal one…Had she been martyred according to what is written: ‘Thine own soul a sword shall pierce’, then she would shine gloriously among the martyrs, and her holy body would have been declared blessed; for by her, did light come to the world."
Epiphanius, Panarion, 78:23 (A.D. 377).

“[T]he Apostles took up her body on a bier and placed it in a tomb; and they guarded it, expecting the Lord to come. And behold, again the Lord stood by them; and the holy body having been received, He commanded that it be taken in a cloud into paradise: where now, rejoined to the soul, [Mary] rejoices with the Lord’s chosen ones…” *Gregory of Tours, Eight Books of Miracles, 1:4 (inter A.D. 575-593). *

“As the most glorious Mother of Christ, our Savior and God and the giver of life and immortality, has been endowed with life by him, she has received an eternal incorruptibility of the body together with him who has raised her up from the tomb and has taken her up to himself in a way known only to him.” *Modestus of Jerusalem, Encomium in dormitionnem Sanctissimae Dominae nostrae Deiparae semperque Virginis Mariae (PG 86-II,3306),(ante A.D. 634). *

“It was fitting …that the most holy-body of Mary, God-bearing body, receptacle of God, divinised, incorruptible, illuminated by divine grace and full glory …should be entrusted to the earth for a little while and raised up to heaven in glory, with her soul pleasing to God.” *Theoteknos of Livias, Homily on the Assumption (ante A.D. 650). *

“You are she who, as it is written, appears in beauty, and your virginal body is all holy, all chaste, entirely the dwelling place of God, so that it is henceforth completely exempt from dissolution into dust. Though still human, it is changed into the heavenly life of incorruptibility, truly living and glorious, undamaged and sharing in perfect life.” *Germanus of Constantinople, Sermon I (PG 98,346), (ante A.D. 733). *

“St. Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, at the Council of Chalcedon (451), made known to the Emperor Marcian and Pulcheria, who wished to possess the body of the Mother of God, that Mary died in the presence of all the Apostles, but that her tomb, when opened upon the request of St. Thomas, was found empty; wherefrom the Apostles concluded that the body was taken up to heaven.” *John of Damascene, PG (96:1) (A.D. 747-751). *

“It was fitting that the she, who had kept her virginity intact in childbirth, should keep her own body free from all corruption even after death. It was fitting that she, who had carried the Creator as a child at her breast, should dwell in the divine tabernacles. It was fitting that the spouse, whom the Father had taken to himself, should live in the divine mansions. It was fitting that she, who had seen her Son upon the cross and who had thereby received into her heart the sword of sorrow which she had escaped when giving birth to him, should look upon him as he sits with the Father, It was fitting that God’s Mother should possess what belongs to her Son, and that she should be honored by every creature as the Mother and as the handmaid of God.” *John of Damascene, Dormition of Mary (PG 96,741), (ante A.D. 749). *

“Venerable to us, O Lord, is the festivity of this day on which the holy Mother of God suffered temporal death, but still could not be kept down by the bonds of death, who has begotten Thy Son our Lord incarnate from herself.” *Gregorian Sacramentary, Veneranda (ante A.D. 795). *

“[A]n effable mystery all the more worthy of praise as the Virgin’s Assumption is something unique among men.” *Gallican Sacramentary, from Munificentis simus Deus (8th Century). *

“God, the King of the universe, has granted you favors that surpass nature. As he kept you virgin in childbirth, thus he kept your body incorrupt in the tomb and has glorified it by his divine act of transferring it from the tomb.” *Byzantine Liturgy, from Munificentis simus Deus (8th Century). *"[T]he virgin is up to now immortal, as He who lived, translated her into the place of reception." *Timotheus of Jerusalem (8th Century). *

 

[Catholic_Tom]

Last point, remember that the book of Revelation was not accepted into the Canon until the end of the fourth century. Also remember that there was no refutation of this teaching at all, and the early church fathers were quick to condemn false teaching. This would have definitely fallen into that category if that was the case.

Hope this helps.

 

[serendipity]

Patrick Madrid’s book Any Friend of God is a Friend of Mine gives a thorough and accessible examination of the Church’s teaching on the communion of saints, and has quite a bit specifically on Mary. I think Scott Hahn’s Hail Holy Queen may havemroe details in regards to Mary.

For me it makes perfect sese that we shoudl be able to aks those in heaven to pray with us for our needs to God, as if asking some one one earth to remmber you in a prayer chain, excpet better becuase they are less likely to forget and because they are closer to God’s ears.

Kind of like if you are looking for a job, you feel thatit helps if you know some one inside the company who can make sure that the person who has the ability to hire will at least look at your application, and that it does not get blocked in human resources. With the great difference, of course, that God is all knowing, so an office resembling hr has no ability to keep you from his sight. But the impession given in the Bible and from the writings of the Church’s doctors, is that is that the more we pray, the more he is moved to mercy, and that the more voices joined in prayer, the greater the mercy to which he might be moved.

In terms of physical evdience for Mary’s assumption and crowning in heaven, this is something that I have difficulty with times too, and probably why I prefer the glorious mysteries less than any other form the original, because I have difficutly in making a connection to those events, biblical evidence, and thougths for meditation in my life. When I come to them in the rosary, my meditation is that I may know the truth better and believe it mroe ardently. No offense meant to Mary, I believe she is a powerful interceder on our behalf, played a very important roles in the Bible, and cares very much for our welfare on Earth, but I have difficulty in believing the assumption, since it was not int he Bible. At the end of the day, faith is a gift.

Catholic scholars have pointed out that it if she ahd died on erth, than there would likely be a shrine noted to her, and given her prominant role in the formation of Christianty, that is is unlikely that she has an earthly burial place, beucase if she did it would be noted, and relics from her body might have been in circulation, but there does not seem to be proof that this was ever the case.

In terms of her being crowned as Queen of Heaven, I think she must have the highest role in heaven, because she ahs had the closest association with the trinity of any one. Also, with all the apparitions that have been claimed since over the last 2,000 years, I do not believe that all of them could have been false, and I don’t think they would have been likely if she did not have a prominent role in heaven.

 

[SPOKENWORD]

Hi Bengal, What do you make of 1Corint 15,vs 50. Flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of Heaven? God Bless.

 

[bengal_fan]

Catholic Tom:

Last point, remember that the book of Revelation was not accepted into the Canon until the end of the fourth century. Also remember that there was no refutation of this teaching at all, and the early church fathers were quick to condemn false teaching. This would have definitely fallen into that category if that was the case.

Hope this helps.

my question is where did the early church fathers teach the bodily assumption? the earliest quote is from 377a.d. one of my issues is the infallibility of the church because of this. i want to believe it. i can find early evidence for everything (almost but i don’t want to deal with those issues right now) except the assumption. it’s not for another 300 years that we hear any mention of this in writing.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

First, I agree that the Assumption is a difficult doctrine to accept through reason alone, although I believe there are good logical arguments to make in favor of the assumption of Mary. At some point, faith has to enter into the equation, IMHO.

Second, there are some Scriptures that support the assumption indirectly other than the one you noted from Revelation. Enoch was taken to Heaven without dying. (Heb. 11:5.) Elijah went to Heaven in a fiery chariot. (2 Kg 2:11.) And Matthew suggests a bodily assumption into Heaven at the time of the Second Coming. (Mt 27:52) Maybe it would help if you think of Mary as the first human being to be “raptured” into Heaven? I don’t know your faith tradition, but if you’ve grown up believing in that doctrine, perhaps you can get your hands around the doctrine of the Assumption by coming at it from that direction.

Third, perhaps you could study the history behind the papal declaration on the assumption. Although it’s too lengthy to discuss in detail on this forum, my understanding is that the statement was an affirmation of what the majority of the Church already believed, rather than a “top-down” decision that changed perceived dogma. My point is that if most people already accepted the Assumption as true prior to the Pope’s declaration on the matter, then is that not some evidence of truth?

Fourth, try praying the glorious mysteries of the Rosary, which include meditations both on Christ’s Ascension and Mary’s Assumption. Both events evidence the power and grace of God. The assumption is not about the deification of a human being. Mary did not ascend into Heaven on her own as Christ did. She was assumed into Heaven by the power of God. Thus, the Assumption is more a statement of God’s amazing grace than it is a doctrine ascribing supernatural power to Mary.

I agree that none of these arguments clinch the issue one way or the other, but I just thought I’d throw them out as points to ponder, meditate and pray upon. I hope I helped.

Peace, Hope, Charity,

 

[bengal_fan]

germys9:

…2. Also, the Church has relics, bones, and traditions stating the burial places of almost all the saints including St. Peter and St. Paul. It would seem reasonable that the early Church would have kept something of hers, yet there is nothing that is claimed to have been from the Blessed Mother.

isn’t the brown scapular a piece of her clothing? isn’t her house (i read this somewhere but it escapes me right now so sorry that i don’t have the reference handy) somewhere in italy (because it was miraculously moved)? so to say we have nothing of hers isn’t exactly true. but i understand your point. my point is not looking at the lack of evidence for her not being assumed, but what is the evidence of her assumption?

 

[Catholic_Tom]

Catholic Tom:

Last point, remember that the book of Revelation was not accepted into the Canon until the end of the fourth century. Also remember that there was no refutation of this teaching at all, and the early church fathers were quick to condemn false teaching. This would have definitely fallen into that category if that was the case.

Hope this helps.

I think that this should have helped you. If the book of revelation was still being argued for canonicity for 300 years then it would be quite difficult to find early writings on something not definitively in the Canon. The bones of the Virgin Mary were never found, then it’s only logical and fitting that we have the assumption of Mary.

Also, I’m assuming you accept her to be the New ark of the covenant…well the old one was made of uncorruptable wood and assumed into heaven, why wouldn’t the new one be assumed as well?

Also, remember that there is no refutation of the Assumption once we see it being taught. Surely in a time where heresy was rampant and dealt with accordingly, this would have been swiftly quashed if it was not held universally.

 

[mtr01]

SPOKENWORD:

Hi Bengal, What do you make of 1Corint 15,vs 50. Flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of Heaven? God Bless.

Interesting. You wouldn’t happen to be a latter day Sadducee who denies the resurrection, would you?

I mean after all, our Lord Jesus Himself ascended to heaven in a glorified body. Are you suggesting he can’t be in the Kingdom of Heaven because of his bodily resurrection?

 

[bengal_fan]

serendipity:

… I think Scott Hahn’s Hail Holy Queen may havemroe details in regards to Mary.

yes, it is a great book!

serendipity:

… Also, with all the apparitions that have been claimed since over the last 2,000 years, I do not believe that all of them could have been false, and I don’t think they would have been likely if she did not have a prominent role in heaven.

but she would not need a physical body to appear in an apparition.

 

[bengal_fan]

Catholic Tom:

I think that this should have helped you. If the book of revelation was still being argued for canonicity for 300 years then it would be quite difficult to find early writings on something not definitively in the Canon. The bones of the Virgin Mary were never found, then it’s only logical and fitting that we have the assumption of Mary.

yes it does help a little. but all other matrydoms were recorded. Jesus’ ascension was plainly recorded. why not the same with Mary’s assumption?
Catholic Tom:

Also, I’m assuming you accept her to be the New ark of the covenant…well the old one was made of uncorruptable wood and assumed into heaven, why wouldn’t the new one be assumed as well?

i thought the original ark was hidden by jeremiah? where does it say it was taken into heaven? didn’t indiana jones find it? (a little levity, but the first question is legit)
Catholic Tom:

Also, remember that there is no refutation of the Assumption once we see it being taught. Surely in a time where heresy was rampant and dealt with accordingly, this would have been swiftly quashed if it was not held universally.

i agree that this is something to consider

 

[Ahimsa]

August 14, 2004, 09:59 PM

                       [Fr Ambrose](http://forums.catholic-questions.org/member.php?u=8802) file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CEric%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_image001.gif  vbmenu_register("postmenu_151078", true);      

 Senior Member

            

           Join Date: July      20, 2004

 Location: Middle Earth

 Posts: 668 

           

         file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CEric%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_image002.gif**The Assumption -   something historical**

Here’s an interesting historical account of the Assumption - The Dormition… You might say this is a case of knowing how to keep a secret. The history of the end of Mary’s life was genuinely new to most of the Church when it was made public in the fifth century. The facts of the matter were kept private among the clergy of the Jerusalem Church, and only became public during the Council of Chalcedon. This was a case where there was a Tradition - a passing-along of knowledge - that was intentionally kept private. I personally suspect the remarkable near-silence of Scripture about the Mother of God was deliberate on the part of the Apostles; St John (her guardian) and the rest of the Evangelists kept her privacy.

The more picturesque details of the “transitus Mariae” literature had yet to be developed, but in the mid-400’s some basic information was revealed by the Jerusalem clergy. I’m attaching a quote from the “Euthymiac History” quoted by St John of Damascus, for details.

---

In his second homily on the Dormition of the Mother of God, Saint John of Damascus refers to events recounted in the 40th chapter of the Life of St Euthymios:

It was said above that Saint Pulcheria erected many churches for Christ in Constantinople. One of these is the church in Blachernae, built at the beginning of the reign of the divinely-appointed Emperor Marcian . When the two of them built a worthy house there for the all-glorious and all-holy Mother of God, the ever-virgin Mary, and adorned it with every sort of decoration, they hoped to find her holy body, which had been the dwelling-place of God. And summoning Juvenal, the Archbishop of Jerusalem, and those bishops from Palestine who were staying in the capital because of the synod then being held in Chalcedon , they said to them: We have heard that the first and most outstanding church of the all-holy Mother of God, the ever-virgin Mary, is in Jerusalem, in the place called Gethsemane, where her life-giving body was put in a coffin. We now wish to bring this relic here, to protect this royal city."

continued…

Last edited by Fr Ambrose : August 14, 2004 at 10:00 PM.* Reason: spelling *

file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CEric%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_image003.gif
​

 

[bengal_fan]

SPOKENWORD:

Hi Bengal, What do you make of 1Corint 15,vs 50. Flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of Heaven? God Bless.

i think it means that heaven isn’t something that we can earn, buy, sell, trade. that it is has nothing to do with our bodies. i don’t think it means that our bodies won’t enter heaven because it is clear that paul taught the resurrection of the body, plus Jesus went into heaven in His body.

 

[Ahimsa]

[The below was previously posted by Father Ambrose]

Here’s an interesting historical account of the Assumption - The Dormition… You might say this is a case of knowing how to keep a secret. The history of the end of Mary’s life was genuinely new to most of the Church when it was made public in the fifth century. The facts of the matter were kept private among the clergy of the Jerusalem Church, and only became public during the Council of Chalcedon. This was a case where there was a Tradition - a passing-along of knowledge - that was intentionally kept private. I personally suspect the remarkable near-silence of Scripture about the Mother of God was deliberate on the part of the Apostles; St John (her guardian) and the rest of the Evangelists kept her privacy.

The more picturesque details of the “transitus Mariae” literature had yet to be developed, but in the mid-400’s some basic information was revealed by the Jerusalem clergy. I’m attaching a quote from the “Euthymiac History” quoted by St John of Damascus, for details.

---

In his second homily on the Dormition of the Mother of God, Saint John of Damascus refers to events recounted in the 40th chapter of the Life of St Euthymios:

It was said above that Saint Pulcheria erected many churches for Christ in Constantinople. One of these is the church in Blachernae, built at the beginning of the reign of the divinely-appointed Emperor Marcian . When the two of them built a worthy house there for the all-glorious and all-holy Mother of God, the ever-virgin Mary, and adorned it with every sort of decoration, they hoped to find her holy body, which had been the dwelling-place of God. And summoning Juvenal, the Archbishop of Jerusalem, and those bishops from Palestine who were staying in the capital because of the synod then being held in Chalcedon , they said to them: We have heard that the first and most outstanding church of the all-holy Mother of God, the ever-virgin Mary, is in Jerusalem, in the place called Gethsemane, where her life-giving body was put in a coffin. We now wish to bring this relic here, to protect this royal city."

continued…

 

[Ahimsa]

[The below was previously posted by Father Ambrose]

Here’s an interesting historical account of the Assumption - The Dormition… You might say this is a case of knowing how to keep a secret. The history of the end of Mary’s life was genuinely new to most of the Church when it was made public in the fifth century. The facts of the matter were kept private among the clergy of the Jerusalem Church, and only became public during the Council of Chalcedon. This was a case where there was a Tradition - a passing-along of knowledge - that was intentionally kept private. I personally suspect the remarkable near-silence of Scripture about the Mother of God was deliberate on the part of the Apostles; St John (her guardian) and the rest of the Evangelists kept her privacy.

The more picturesque details of the “transitus Mariae” literature had yet to be developed, but in the mid-400’s some basic information was revealed by the Jerusalem clergy. I’m attaching a quote from the “Euthymiac History” quoted by St John of Damascus, for details.

---

In his second homily on the Dormition of the Mother of God, Saint John of Damascus refers to events recounted in the 40th chapter of the Life of St Euthymios:

It was said above that Saint Pulcheria erected many churches for Christ in Constantinople. One of these is the church in Blachernae, built at the beginning of the reign of the divinely-appointed Emperor Marcian . When the two of them built a worthy house there for the all-glorious and all-holy Mother of God, the ever-virgin Mary, and adorned it with every sort of decoration, they hoped to find her holy body, which had been the dwelling-place of God. And summoning Juvenal, the Archbishop of Jerusalem, and those bishops from Palestine who were staying in the capital because of the synod then being held in Chalcedon , they said to them: We have heard that the first and most outstanding church of the all-holy Mother of God, the ever-virgin Mary, is in Jerusalem, in the place called Gethsemane, where her life-giving body was put in a coffin. We now wish to bring this relic here, to protect this royal city."

continued…

…continued

Juvenal answered on behalf of them all:

"There is nothing in the holy, inspired Scripture about the death of Mary, the holy Mother of God; but we know from ancient and wholly reliable tradition that at the time she so gloriously fell asleep, all the holy Apostles who were traveling the world for the salvation of the peoples were lifted up in a single instant of time and were gathered at Jerusalem. And as they stood by her, they saw a vision of angels, and heard the divine chanting of the higher powers. So it was that she gave her soul in an ineffable way into God’s hands, surrounded by the glory of God and all heaven.

“Her body, which had been God’s dwelling place, was brought for burial amidst the singing of the angels and the Apostles, and laid to rest in a coffin in Gethsemane; and the angelic dancing and singing continued without pause in that place for three days. But after three days the song of the angels ceased; the Apostles were there, and since one of them - Thomas - had not been present and came at he end of three days, and wished to reverence that body which had housed God, they opened the coffin. And they could not find her body, which had been the object of such praise; all that they found were her burial wrappings. And being overcome by the ineffable fragrance that came out of the wrappings, they closed the coffin again. Amazed by this miraculous discovery, they could only draw a single conclusion: The one who had deigned to become flesh in her own person and to take his humanity from her, the one who willed to be born in human flesh as God the Word, the Lord of glory, and who had preserved her virginity intact even after childbirth, now chose, after her departure from this world, to honour her pure and immaculate body with the gift of incorruptibility, and with a change of state even before the common, universal resurrection.”

When the imperial couple heard this, they asked Archbishop Juvenal to send them the holy coffin, properly sealed, with the funeral garments in it of the glorious, all-holy Mary, Mother of God. And when he had sent it, they placed it in the church of the holy Theotokos that had been built at Blachernae.

 

[Theodred]

SPOKENWORD:

Hi Bengal, What do you make of 1Corint 15,vs 50. Flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of Heaven? God Bless.

Wow. Way to yank that out of context. You would have Saint Paul deny the Resurrection of the dead? That should go into the Quoting Scripture Out of Context Fall of Fame! Saint Paul is obviously talking about our bodies being transformed into “incorruptable” resurrected bodies.

 

[bengal_fan]

Ahimsa:

… But after three days the song of the angels ceased; the Apostles were there, and since one of them - Thomas - had not been present and came at he end of three days, and wished to reverence that body which had housed God, they opened the coffin…

i wonder if Thomas was late for his own funeral?!!