The Apostles and the Assumption

[Memaw]

Her death was long celebrated in the liturgy of the Church before the great schism (the feast of the Dormition of Mary), so the fact of her death prior to her bodily assumtion was definitely the teaching of the Catholic Church. If it is in the liturgy, it is the teaching of the Church, no question.

If the Catholic Church “definitely” taught that Mary “died” then why wasn’t that stated 'definitely" in the Dogma of the Assumption?? It is NOT a definite teaching or the Church would not let us believe either way!! Can’t have it both ways !! God Bless, Memaw

 

[Whemsworth]

Yeah, just about enough to hit CTRL+C and CTRL+V on my keyboard.

And I thank you for doing so.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

If the Catholic Church “definitely” taught that Mary “died” then why wasn’t that stated 'definitely" in the Dogma of the Assumption?? It is NOT a definite teaching or the Church would not let us believe either way!! Can’t have it both ways !! God Bless, Memaw

Unfortunately, you have put yourself into the camp of those who only believe dogmatic definitions of the Church. How much of what the Church teaches do you suppose is dogmatically defined? 10, 20, 25%? MOST of what the Church teaches is NOT dogmatically defined. Can you find a dogmatic declaration that only men can be priests? That birth control and abortion are dogmatically defined as intrinsically evil? NO! They are church teachings, but they are not dogmatically defined.

 

[prodromos]

Unfortunately, you have put yourself into the camp of those who only believe dogmatic definitions of the Church. How much of what the Church teaches do you suppose is dogmatically defined? 10, 20, 25%? MOST of what the Church teaches is NOT dogmatically defined. Can you find a dogmatic declaration that only men can be priests? That birth control and abortion are dogmatically defined as intrinsically evil? NO! They are church teachings, but they are not dogmatically defined.

The “dogmatic only” view would also leave the Catholic Church with a few Saints, indeed I doubt that any of the Apostles have been dogmatically declared as Saints. What kind of ‘church’ would that be?

 

[Memaw]

Unfortunately, you have put yourself into the camp of those who only believe dogmatic definitions of the Church. How much of what the Church teaches do you suppose is dogmatically defined? 10, 20, 25%? MOST of what the Church teaches is NOT dogmatically defined. Can you find a dogmatic declaration that only men can be priests? That birth control and abortion are dogmatically defined as intrinsically evil? NO! They are church teachings, but they are not dogmatically defined.

Oh NO, I have NOT, and I DO understand the difference. You totally misunderstand my reasons for not insisting the Blessed Mother died!!, We simply DO NOT KNOW and the Church has not even said she did, NOT EVER ( That is ALL I have ever said) but you insist I don’t have the right to believe that, WHY??? . We can have our own opinion but guess what, You may be wrong too. Birth Control and abortion ARE intrinsically EVIL, NO comparison!! AND Pope John Paul did say that male priesthood was instituted by Christ and the POPE cannot change that. Very clear!!! God Bless, Memaw

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Oh NO, I have NOT, and I DO understand the difference. You totally misunderstand my reasons for not insisting the Blessed Mother died!!, We simply DO NOT KNOW and the Church has not even said she did, NOT EVER ( That is ALL I have ever said) but you insist I don’t have the right to believe that, WHY??? . We can have our own opinion but guess what, You may be wrong too. Birth Control and abortion ARE intrinsically EVIL, NO comparison!! AND Pope John Paul did say that male priesthood was instituted by Christ and the POPE cannot change that. Very clear!!! God Bless, Memaw

I understand your position that you have a right to believe that the BVM did not die. It is equivalent to the position before 1950 that the BVM was not assumed body and soul into heaven. IOW, it was not dogmatically defined as De Fide until then, so TECHNICALLY, theologians were free to speculate otherwise. But it was taught ALWAYS and EVERYWHERE, that the BVM was assumed into heaven since ancient times. Before 1950 would you have said the Church teaches that I am free to believe that the BVM was never assumed into heaven?

 

[prodromos]

Apolytikion (First Tone)
In birth, you preserved your virginity; in death, you did not abandon the world, O Theotokos. As mother of life, you departed to the source of life, delivering our souls from death by your intercessions.

Kontakion (Second Tone)
Neither the grave nor death could contain the Theotokos, the unshakable hope, ever vigilant in intercession and protection. As Mother of life, He who dwelt in the ever-virginal womb transposed her to life.

 

[Memaw]

I understand your position that you have a right to believe that the BVM did not die. It is equivalent to the position before 1950 that the BVM was not assumed body and soul into heaven. IOW, it was not dogmatically defined as De Fide until then, so TECHNICALLY, theologians were free to speculate otherwise. But it was taught ALWAYS and EVERYWHERE, that the BVM was assumed into heaven since ancient times. Before 1950 would you have said the Church teaches that I am free to believe that the BVM was never assumed into heaven?

I was taught even before 1950 that the Blessed Mother was Assumed into Heaven, Body and Soul. I was never taught she had to die first. If the Church ever dogmatically defines that She did die, then I will be the first in line to agree. All I am saying is we do not know for sure and the Church has never defined it so. God Bless, Memaw

 

[epostle]

I was taught even before 1950 that the Blessed Mother was Assumed into Heaven, Body and Soul. I was never taught she had to die first. If the Church ever dogmatically defines that She did die, then I will be the first in line to agree. All I am saying is we do not know for sure and the Church has never defined it so. God Bless, Memaw

Agreed. The Church can’t define what She doesn’t know, or what hasn’t been revealed. Maybe Our Blessed Mom will appear again and straighten out the matter. Or maybe she fell into a deep coma, simulating death, and we are all wrong.

I really don’t care whether she died or not, (my inclination is that she did die),
BOTTOM LINE: my belief in the Assumption is unshakable.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Agreed. The Church can’t define what She doesn’t know, or what hasn’t been revealed. Maybe Our Blessed Mom will appear again and straighten out the matter. Or maybe she fell into a deep coma, simulating death, and we are all wrong.

I really don’t care whether she died or not, (my inclination is that she did die),
BOTTOM LINE: my belief in the Assumption is unshakable.

It’s not a matter of what the Church “knows.” After all Jesus Christ is the head of the Church (and he knows all), The BVM, Apostles and Saints in heaven are also a part of the Church (and they know too.) What actually happens is that the Church guided by the Holy Spirit, in compliance with God’s Economy for our Salvation, reveals deeper truths when the time is appropriate.

For example, The Assumption was taught since ancient times. It’s not as if the Church didn’t “know” that the BVM was assumed until 1950. Rather it was finally deemed timely to make this teaching “de Fide” for the Universal Church.

Another: Papal infallibility didn’t just get “discovered” in 1870. It was always taught. But then it was deemed timely to make a dogmatic declaration for the Universal Church.

Some of the reasons that prevent the Church from making a solemn declaration is that there are usually a number of other tangent beliefs that may be impacted by the declaration. Therefore it must be carefully integrated into the Church’s whole fabric of teaching, and this may take time.

Right now there is a lot of argument about whether the BVM died. It’s NOT that the Church doesn’t know one way or the other. Jesus Christ our King knows. His Mother certainly knows. The Angels and Saints in heaven all know. The Church has ALWAYS taught that she died (until these latter days, when suddenly there was some doubt.) IOW, the Church knows that she died. But it has not been deemed timely to make the teaching of her death de Fide for the Universal Church.

That is why in M.D. the teaching of the death of the BVM used poetic language rather than legal terms. “Having completed the course of her earthly life” is a poetic way of saying when she died. If they had used legal terms, the tangent beliefs of the resurrection and glorification of her body would need to have been addressed. That would have distracted from the ONLY POINT of M.D. which was to affirm the Assumption of the BVM.

That is why St. Pope JP II said it was not explicitly stated in M.D. But that otherwise, there should be no doubt that she died.

 

[prodromos]

We simply DO NOT KNOW and the Church has not even said she did, NOT EVER

This is where you are completely wrong. If it is in the Liturgy of the Church then it is what is taught by the Church. Pre-schism, the Catholic Church taught that the Theotokos died and was later assumed bodily into heaven. Even the non-Chalcedonians teach the same, and they split off in the middle of the 5th century.

 

[truetofaith]

This is where you are completely wrong. If it is in the Liturgy of the Church then it is what is taught by the Church. Pre-schism, the Catholic Church taught that the Theotokos died and was later assumed bodily into heaven. Even the non-Chalcedonians teach the same, and they split off in the middle of the 5th century.

The dogma of the Assumption says the BVM was assumed into heaven…it doesn’t say whether she was alive or she died.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

The dogma of the Assumption says the BVM was assumed into heaven…it doesn’t say whether she was alive or she died.

prodromos is saying that the Church DOES teach that the Virgin Mary died by way of her Liturgy. However, M.D. the dogmatic statement also says she died, over and over again in the historic quotes they use in justifying the dogma of the Assumption.

 

[Mintaka]

The idea that Mary didn’t have to die was a late idea, from Europe in the late Middle Ages. It largely derived from art and poetry, not from theologians. It went against early Christian literature and early Christian homilies about Mary, and the only reason it wasn’t slapped down was that it didn’t seem important enough, with all the other stuff going on.

At this time, we are free to believe that Mary did not die. But… logically… a tradition that starts as late as the Middle Ages, in a different part of the world than where Mary lived – that is not a reliable historical tradition.

The reason that the popes haven’t slapped it down now is that they don’t want to cause scandal to innocent Catholics. On the whole, it still doesn’t matter a lot, on the scale of super-de-duper dogma vs ordinary doctrines. But it’s pretty clear from all the official teachings that the popes believe that Mary died and then was assumed into Heaven.

When I first realized this, I was very angry and defensive about it, much as I was angry and defensive when I found out that the Church still expected us to abstain from meat or do something else penitential every Friday. I was angry because I’d been lied to, by unofficial sources. I got over it in about ten years, and began to see the beauty of Mary’s death as well as her Assumption. Like Joseph and Jesus, Mary can help us at the hour of death because she’s gone through it.

 

[prodromos]

There is no dogmatic declaration that Apostle Peter is a Saint. Does that then mean Catholics are free to believe that Peter is not a Saint?