The assumption of Mary

  • Thread starter Thread starter homer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

homer

Guest
There is no biblical reference to the assumption of Mary. The Gospel of John was written around 90 A.D., which is more than 100 years after Mary was born. (Surely Mary was more than ten years old when Jesus was conceived.) If Mary had been supernaturally assumed into Heaven, wouldn’t John (the disciple that Mary lived with) have mentioned it? When Enoch and Elijah were taken up to Heaven, the Bible recorded it. With Elijah it was recorded in some detail. (See Genesis 6:24 and 2 Kings 2:1 18.)

The Assumption of Mary was officially declared to be a dogma of the Roman Catholic faith in 1950. This means that every Roman Catholic is required to believe this doctrine without questioning it. The teaching of the Assumption originated with heretical writings which were officially condemned by the early Church.
In 495 A.D., Pope Gelasius issued a decree which rejected this teaching as heresy and its proponents as heretics. In the sixth century, Pope Hormisdas also condemned as heretics those authors who taught the doctrine of the Assumption of Mary. The early Church clearly considered the doctrine of the Assumption of Mary to be a heresy worthy of condemnation. Here we have “infallible” popes declaring something to be a heresy. Then in 1950, Pope Pius XII, another “infallible” pope, declared it to be official Roman Catholic doctrine. (Mary Ann Collins: Mary Worship?)
On what is based the idea of the assumption of Mary?
 
John himself tells us that many, many other things happened which are not recorded in his gospel, so it is not particularly remarkable that the assumption of Mary is not mentioned there.

The doctrine of the assumption makes sense logically. Would not Jesus want to honor his mother by bringing her body and soul to heaven personally? Note that if Mary’s body had been buried, the tomb would certainly have been venerated, and its location would be known.

I am not familiar with the documents you quoted condemning the doctrine of the assumption, but I can tell you that this doctrine has always been believed in the eastern churches under a different name, the Dormition of Mary.
 
You claim that two popes, teaching on matters of faith, condemn the teaching that Mary was bodily assumed into heaven. Im sure everyone on this website would appreciate you backing up your claim and provide whatever legitimate sources you get your information.

Its seems that you have fallen victim to some of the abundant anti-Catholic material that is strewn about!
 
40.png
arnulf:
John himself tells us that many, many other things happened which are not recorded in his gospel, so it is not particularly remarkable that the assumption of Mary is not mentioned there.
Click to expand...
Does this give you the right to invent things? There is not a single proof about Mary being assumpted.
So by your logic i can invent anything and tell you that it is one of the things not mentioned in the Bible and therefore it will be true! It doesn’t make any sens.

Two more points. First, the Bible contains the essential informations that we need because God will not give us a Bible missing stuff that are essential to the way we most practice Christianity.
Second, i am sure that if Mary did get assumpted, it would have been mentioned in the Bible for sure! Think about it.
 
while i might agree with you homer about the assumption, i think you need to give your evidence so that you don’t look like a rambling fool. give us the quotes from the popes and others who denounced this doctrine in the early church. i have seen evidence that says the opposite (you see how easy that was, i didn’t have to quote anything but i just shed doubt on your argument. that is why we all need to document claims that we make).
 
40.png
homer:
Two more points. First, the Bible contains the essential informations that we need because God will not give us a Bible missing stuff that are essential to the way we most practice Christianity.
Second, i am sure that if Mary did get assumpted, it would have been mentioned in the Bible for sure! Think about it.
Click to expand...
God gave us the Bible, true, but how? Did it appear miraculously one day, in the hands of someone, in the first century?

Regards.
 
Personally, a case of a needless arguement. Does this have any bearing on our salvation? NO.God can do whatever He wants because he is God. He doesnt have to prove anything to us unless He wishes to. So what if Mary was assummed, Ill wait for my ride into the kingdom. 👍
 
First of all, your premise that something must be printed in the bible to be believed is wrong. For example, the trinity is not found in the bible but the Church has taught it from the beginning. The Catholic Church has always been guided by the Holy Spirit through Sacred Scripture and Holy Tradition. The teaching about the assumption of Our Lady is protected by the Holy Spirit in the teaching of Tradition from the beginning.

The Catholic Church, established by Jesus Christ himself, has the authority, given by Jesus Christ himself to Peter, the first pope, and also to the apostles and to all their sucessors, to interpret Sacred Scripture and hold the Traditions taught orally or written. (2 Thess. 2:15)

The teachings of the early popes have not been overturned by more recent popes. Sometimes things have been further explained and the understanding has been built up over time. But there is no contridiction. (Please show proof of the popes you say claimed the Assumption of Mary was a heresy).

But if you do need scriptural reference, check out Revelation 11:19 - 12:1. The Blessed Virgin Mary is the ark in heaven, the woman clothed with sun.

God Bless,
Denise
 
homer, homer, homer, when will you learn? You are cutting and pasting from a “former nun” that was never a nun.

Her claims are half-truths…who else teaches half-truths, homer?

(one of these half truths is her claims that previous popes condemned the teaching…WRONG!..they simply condemned some WRITINGS that happened to contain references to the assumption, not the assumption itself)

And homer, who wrote Revelation? John. What does Revelation say about Mary?
 
Since homer won’t cite his own sources with links, here is where he got this trash…

catholicconcerns.com/MaryWorship.html

This “former nun” was never a nun. She is a liar and twister of the truth. Too bad some people fall for it.

“Whoever does not wish to have Mary Immaculate as his Mother will not have Christ as his Brother either…” - St Maximilian Kolbe

“Let no one presume to expect mercy from God, who offends his holy Mother.” - St. Louis de Montfort

“If you say you have a Father, but no mother, then the devil is your father.” - St. Louis de Montford
 
40.png
homer:
Does this give you the right to invent things? There is not a single proof about Mary being assumpted.
So by your logic i can invent anything and tell you that it is one of the things not mentioned in the Bible and therefore it will be true! It doesn’t make any sens.

Two more points. First, the Bible contains the essential informations that we need because God will not give us a Bible missing stuff that are essential to the way we most practice Christianity.
Second, i am sure that if Mary did get assumpted, it would have been mentioned in the Bible for sure! Think about it.
Click to expand...
Just because the assumption is not mentioned in the Bible does not mean that I, or anyone else, “invented” it. The reason we venerate the assumption is that is was passed down to us by our predecessors in the holy tradition, who witnessed it.

For your information, what you call the “Bible” has also been passed down to us from the same holy tradition. It is from God, as you say, but it was passed on to us from the Catholic Church. The Bible is a Catholic book. The New Testament was written by Catholics, about Catholics, and for Catholics. You are welcome to study it, of course, but please understand that the Bible you are reading is part of the same catholic tradition that you condemn!
 
homer, how old are you? I dont want to be mistreating a kid or something.

“Second, i am sure that if Mary did get assumpted, it would have been mentioned in the Bible for sure! Think about it.”

There is no such word as “assumpted.” Learn to spell and I might “think about it” as you suggest.
 
40.png
arnulf:
I am not familiar with the documents you quoted condemning the doctrine of the assumption, but I can tell you that this doctrine has always been believed in the eastern churches under a different name, the Dormition of Mary.
Click to expand...
That is not quite true. The Dormition of Mary specifically refers to her death. The Orthodox Church does teach that Mary was resurrected after her death and assumed to heaven but it doesn’t quite have the force of Catholic dogma. They also deny the Immaculate Conception. I’ve seen some feisty Orthodox attach the word “heresy” to those doctrines but Bishop Kalistos Ware is more concillatory:

"But Orthodoxy, while for the most part denying the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary, firmly believes in her Bodily Assumption… Like the rest of mankind, Our Lady underwent physical death, but in her case the Resurrection of the Body has been anticipated: after death her body was taken up or ‘assumed’ into heaven and her tomb was found to be empty. She has passed beyond death and judgement, and lives already in the Age to Come…

Belief in the Assumption of the Mother of God is clearly and unambiguously affirmed in the hymns sung by the Church on 15 August, the Feast of the ‘Dormition’ or ‘Falling Asleep.’ But Orthodoxy, unlike Rome, has never proclaimed the Assumption as a dogma, nor would it ever wish to do so. The doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation have been proclaimed as dogmas, for they belong to the public preaching of the Church; but the glorification of Our Lady belongs to the Church’s inner Tradition…"

-C
 
40.png
homer:
Two more points. First, the Bible contains the essential informations that we need because God will not give us a Bible missing stuff that are essential to the way we most practice Christianity.
Click to expand...
But, Homer, that is precisely what we deny. You argue from prejudice of without proving that the Bible is to be used as you say it is. Please address this in the “challenge” thread.

Justin
 
Hey Homer,

Catholics base the Assumption of Mary on first, the Biblical passages that refer to Assumption of others. These include: Gn 5:24(Heb 11:5) Enoch was taken; 2Kg 2:11 Eligah assumed into heaven; Mt 27:52 many saint who had fallen asleep were reaised; 1 Thess 4:17 caught up to meet the Lord in the air; There are a few more, but since I know you do not doubt that others were assumed body and soul into heaven I will stop the list there.

As to Bible verses that refer to Mary’s assumption, someone already gave it to you, Rev 11:19 - 12:1. Catholics believe this is refering to Mary and her assumption.

We also base it off of Oral Tradition. Since the Bible says His word will never pass away, we hold that His word includes the Oral Tradition, since the Bible tells us in Jn 21:23 (and other places as well refer to the oral words given) that there were so many things of Christ, there are not enough books could contain it.

I know you reject Oral Tradition, but you may not agree with the interpretation of the Bible scripture we quoted, but it is in the Bible according to the Catholic churches interpretation guided in all truth by the Holy Spirit.

As to the references to the pope, if you give me a verifiable catholic source for it, I would sincerely like to look at them.

God Bless
 
Wait a second…

The assumtion of Mary…

From the Catholic perspective…
is it that we believe she was assumed into Heaven without dying first (like Elijah and Moses)

or

did she die and then her entire body was assummed (with or without life inside it)

or

did she die, come back to life (as Jesus did), then get assumed?

I never really gave it much thought before now. But a Methodist co-worker was asking about this the other day and I realize now I may have given the wrong answer.
 
40.png
YinYangMom:
Wait a second…

The assumtion of Mary…

From the Catholic perspective…
is it that we believe she was assumed into Heaven without dying first (like Elijah and Moses)

or

did she die and then her entire body was assummed (with or without life inside it)

or

did she die, come back to life (as Jesus did), then get assumed?

I never really gave it much thought before now. But a Methodist co-worker was asking about this the other day and I realize now I may have given the wrong answer.
Click to expand...
It isn’t defined whether she died first or not.
 
According to Byzantine Tradition, the Theotokos died and her body was then assumed into heaven…

This is why August 15th is the Dormition of The Most Holy Mother of God and Ever-Virgin Mary.
 
everything i have read has her dying first. the question is whether she was raised (as only Jesus can “rise” from the dead as rising is under one’s own power while being raised means some one else is doing the raising and only God can do that) from the dead and then assumed or whether her body was taken up as moses was (he died and michael fought for his body).

also, i should just tell you that the argument of catholics saying that if you believe in the bible alone you can’t believe in the trinity doesn’t hold water. it is a different issue than the doctrines of mary. the trinity (although the word is never used) is talked about repeatedly in the bible. over and over again the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are put on the same level as the same person. the marian doctrines however have to really be interpreted through allegory, symbolism, and the like. the trinity is explicit, marian doctrines are not explicit but (might be, i’m still researching) implicit.
 
40.png
bengal_fan:
everything i have read has her dying first. the question is whether she was raised (as only Jesus can “rise” from the dead as rising is under one’s own power while being raised means some one else is doing the raising and only God can do that) from the dead and then assumed or whether her body was taken up as moses was (he died and michael fought for his body).

also, i should just tell you that the argument of catholics saying that if you believe in the bible alone you can’t believe in the trinity doesn’t hold water. it is a different issue than the doctrines of mary. the trinity (although the word is never used) is talked about repeatedly in the bible. over and over again the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are put on the same level as the same person. the marian doctrines however have to really be interpreted through allegory, symbolism, and the like. the trinity is explicit, marian doctrines are not explicit but (might be, i’m still researching) implicit.
Click to expand...
Ah, well I know I read elsewhere on this site and heard on Relevant Radio that Mary was definitely assumed by the power of God. But I’ve yet to hear or read whether it was in lieu of death or after. I had always thought it was in lieu of death.

As for the Moses story…that sounds really interesting…can you share the rest? I wasn’t aware Michael fought for him. I just knew he was taken into heaven…didn’t know he died first though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top