I
itullian
Guest
you deduce it,like the Trinity.
- Status
P
pablope
Guest
Can you provide the actual statements of Ott? Link, page and paragraph?
Let me ask you…why would the Catholic Church declare dogma something that does not have a basis from Sacred Tradition?
ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/p12munif.htm
These studies and investigations have brought out into even clearer light the fact that the dogma of the Virgin Mary’s Assumption into heaven is contained in the deposit of Christian faith entrusted to the Church.
- However, since the liturgy of the Church does not engender the Catholic faith, but rather springs from it, in such a way that the practices of the sacred worship proceed from the faith as the fruit comes from the tree, it follows that the holy Fathers and the great Doctors, in the homilies and sermons they gave the people on this feast day, did not draw their teaching from the feast itself as from a primary source, but rather they spoke of this doctrine as something already known and accepted by Christ’s faithful. They presented it more clearly. They offered more profound explanations of its meaning and nature, bringing out into sharper light the fact that this feast shows, not only that the dead body of the Blessed Virgin Mary remained incorrupt, but that she gained a triumph out of death, her heavenly glorification after the example of her only begotten Son, Jesus Christ-truths that the liturgical books had frequently touched upon concisely and briefly.
I
itullian
Guest
how do you think God/Jesus should have treated Her?
T
Trebor135
Guest
Liturgical evidence for the assumption of St. Mary is definitely worth investigating–it doesn’t come up very much in discussions of early Christian theology.
One interesting scriptural reference I have seen for this Catholic dogma and Eastern/Oriental Orthodox doctrine is found in Psalm 132 (emphasis added):
[1] Remember, O LORD, in David’s favor,
all the hardships he endured;
[2] how he swore to the LORD
and vowed to the Mighty One of Jacob,
[3] “I will not enter my house
or get into my bed;
[4] I will not give sleep to my eyes
or slumber to my eyelids,
[5] until I find a place for the LORD,
a dwelling place for the Mighty One of Jacob.”
[6] Lo, we heard of it in Eph’rathah,
we found it in the fields of Ja’ar.
[7] “Let us go to his dwelling place;
let us worship at his footstool!”
[8] Arise, O LORD, and go to thy resting place,
thou and the ark of thy might.
[9] Let thy priests be clothed with righteousness,
and let thy saints shout for joy.
[10] For thy servant David’s sake
do not turn away the face of thy anointed one.
[11] The LORD swore to David a sure oath
from which he will not turn back:
“One of the sons of your body
I will set on your throne.
[12] If your sons keep my covenant
and my testimonies which I shall teach them,
their sons also for ever
shall sit upon your throne.”
It is important to recall that St. Mary has been given the title Ark of the New Covenant, implicitly confirmed by the Gospel of St. Luke–see here for details.
This teaching is probably the hardest to accept. What the commentators have made of Psalm 132 in general and v. 8 in particular over the centuries would be interesting to find out as well.
J
Joe_Kelley
Guest
Note that no one has ever claimed to have Mary’s body or relics from it. While it is negative evidence it seems quite strong. It is hard to imagine that it would not be the object of great veneration if it were accessible.
T
Trebor135
Guest
Do we have the body of or relics from all of the twelve disciples, though?
P
patrick457
Guest
Excepting Judas Iscariot, yeah, I think most, if not all the Apostles have relics ascribed to them, though I could be wrong.
P
pablope
Guest
The ones I know…Peter under the Vatican, Thomas in India, James in Spain…I also read an article that the burial site of Phillip was just recently found somewhere in Turkey (?)…John…forgot where, but in Turkey somewhere…the rest I do not know…perhaps some others can post.
K
Kingtroll1
Guest
No. I can’t find that in my bible. If there is evidence I would like to know.
P
patrick457
Guest
No offense meant, but for something light-hearted: I don’t find any explanation of how the respiratory system works in the Bible either. Can somebody tell me a passage to that effect?
P
patrick457
Guest
No offense meant, but for something light-hearted: I don’t find any explanation of how the respiratory system works in the Bible either. Can somebody point out to me a passage to that effect?
B
Boywonder23k
Guest
Personally I find the biblical verses used an absolute stretch. The best case I have personally ever heard made for the bodily assumption was by Robert Sungenis. He basically appeals to the various Marian apparitions and says that if Mary asnt bodily assumed then she could not bodily come back to earth. Also, sungenis states that even though there is not much of a case that can be made through either tradition or scripture, there is biblical presidence for the Church still having the authority to define dogma in such a circumstance. For example when Peter authoritatively stated that circumcision would not be necessary for the Gentiles. There was absolutely no biblical reason to think that circumcision would stop EVER. There was no tradition to fall on either… Yet still… The Church authoritatively stated that the Gentiles would not require circumcision. In my opinion this is a much more interesting line of argumentation than trying to search the liturgy or force some horrible exegeses on scripture.
A
Ancient1
Guest
Evidence? Proof? Quotations? Biblical references? Did I somehow switch from Catholic Answers to a Pat Robertson’s website?
Catholic Faith is not solely dependent upon Scripture, much less is Catholic Dogma. Remember in sixth grade folks when we learned about the foundation of the One True Church? Scripture and SACRED TRADITION. And that this is why our faith is complete, and the Protestant off-shoots are missing a great deal.
If we relied only on the Bible, out goes about 75% of our Faith. Many things are true, many things are revealed by God, that are not in the Bible. If you’re Catholic you’ve got to get over this Bible obsession, as if if is the ONLY source of Truth. We have the Magisterium. We also know many things in the Bible are NOT true (literally that is).
When a dogma is declared, usually it’s a decision by the Pope to officially confirm what has been held by the vast majority of Catholics in every country and culture for hundreds of years. The Pope did not just wake up one morning and say, “I think I’ll tell everyone they have to believe in the Assumption.” Everyone already believed it!
BTW, it is one of the 4 Marian Dogmas, and Assumption comes from the Latin “assumare” meaning “to be lifted up”.
Hail Mary, full of Grace!
Catholic Faith is not solely dependent upon Scripture, much less is Catholic Dogma. Remember in sixth grade folks when we learned about the foundation of the One True Church? Scripture and SACRED TRADITION. And that this is why our faith is complete, and the Protestant off-shoots are missing a great deal.
If we relied only on the Bible, out goes about 75% of our Faith. Many things are true, many things are revealed by God, that are not in the Bible. If you’re Catholic you’ve got to get over this Bible obsession, as if if is the ONLY source of Truth. We have the Magisterium. We also know many things in the Bible are NOT true (literally that is).
When a dogma is declared, usually it’s a decision by the Pope to officially confirm what has been held by the vast majority of Catholics in every country and culture for hundreds of years. The Pope did not just wake up one morning and say, “I think I’ll tell everyone they have to believe in the Assumption.” Everyone already believed it!
BTW, it is one of the 4 Marian Dogmas, and Assumption comes from the Latin “assumare” meaning “to be lifted up”.
Hail Mary, full of Grace!
P
patrick457
Guest
Here’s a sort of ‘where they are now’.
Note that this is by no means an exhaustive list (I’m sure I missed some spots), nor is this supposed to be a list of areas which hold ‘true’ relics (i.e. I merely include a place if they claim to have, or had, a relic of a certain apostle). Locations in italics indicate sites where a purported apostolic relic existed previously or rival locations:Simon Peter: Basilica of St. Peter, Vatican (tomb + relics, traditional location); Basilica of St. John Lateran, Rome (relic: skull); Sant Pere de Rodes (relics: right armbone, skull)
Andrew: Basilica of St. Andrew, Patras (relics: small finger, part of cranium, small portions of cross); Cathedral of St. Andrew, Amalfi (relics; taken from Constantinople in 1206); St. Mary’s, Edinburgh (relics); Church of St. Andrew the Apostle and St. Brother Albert, Warsaw (relics); Skete of St. Andrew, Mount Athos (relic: portion of skull); St. Peter’s Basilica (relics; sent to Patras in 1964); Church of the Holy Apostles, Constantinople (relics; taken from Patras ca. 357); Cathedral of St. Andrew, St Andrews, Fife (relics)
James of Zebedee: Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela, Galicia (tomb + relics, traditional location); Basilica of St. Sernin, Toulouse (relics; rival location)
John: Basilica of St. John, Selçuk (tomb; traditional location*)
Philip: Martyrium of St. Philip, Hierapolis (tomb?); Santi Apostoli, Rome (relics; taken from Constantinople ca. AD 560); Constantinople (relics); Stavros Monastery, Omodos (relic: skull)
Bartholomew: Basilica of St. Bartholomew on the Island, Rome (relics); Frankfurt Cathedral (relic: skull); Basilica of St. Bartholomew, Lipari (relics); Church of St. Bartholomew, Benevento (relics: transported to Rome late 10th-early 11th century); Canterbury Cathedral (relic: arm)
- John of Zebedee is unique among the apostles in that virtually no church aside from the Basilica in Selçuk near Ephesus claims to own his bodily remains. In fact, there was a legend that John is not really dead, but merely lying asleep within his earthen grave. It is claimed that each time he breathed, he would cause the dust around the altar over his tomb to stir: this holy dust, known as the ‘manna of St. John’, was a popular pilgrimage item. Another legend even claims that John was taken up to Heaven either before he was about to die or after his death (just like Our Lady?), which explains the virtual absence of any relics.
T
Trebor135
Guest
Fortunately not–if such were the case, we’d have heard the accusation of idolatry thrown about at least a few times by now.
But the assumption of St. Mary has very little support in Sacred Tradition.
It would be interesting to do a study of the issue. The faith came before the Bible: the faith did not come from the Bible.
The tendency to look to Scripture for conclusive evidence in support of all theological beliefs is probably a result of the Protestant milieu in which most Catholics on CAF find themselves and a Western culture which emphasizes the great importance of setting everything down on paper.
Indeed.
Pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death! Amen.
P
PJM
Guest
Like other exceptionally good people Mary was “Assumed” into heaven. This means that it is upon God’s iniative.
Gen. 5: 22-24 Enoch walked with God after the birth of Methu’selah three hundred years, and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Enoch were three hundred and sixty-five years. **Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him. **[ASSUMED Body and Soul into Heaven].
2nd. Kings 2: 8-14 Then “Eli’jah took his mantle, and rolled it up, and struck the water, and the water was parted to the one side and to the other, till the two of them could go over on dry ground. When they had crossed, Eli’jah said to Eli’sha, “Ask what I shall do for you, before I am taken from you.” And Eli’sha said, “I pray you, let me inherit a double share of your spirit.” And he said, “You have asked a hard thing; yet, if you see me as I am being taken from you, it shall be so for you; but if you do not see me, it shall not be so.” And as they still went on and talked, behold, a chariot of fire and horses of fire separated the two of them. And Eli’jah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. And Eli’sha saw it and he cried, “My father, my father! the chariots of Israel and its horsemen!” And he saw him no more. Then he took hold of his own clothes and rent them in two pieces. And he took up the mantle of Eli’jah that had fallen from him, and went back and stood on the bank of the Jordan. Then he took the mantle of Eli’jah that had fallen from him, and struck the water, saying, “Where is the LORD, the God of Eli’jah?” And when he had struck the water, the water was parted to the one side and to the other; and Eli’sha went over.”
So if God did this very act for these good and holy men; what is to prevent Him from doing the same for His Perfect[ed] Mother/
Further evidence is in the the Appriations of Fatima, Lourdes, and Guadalupe; all independenly confirned. In addition are the numerous miracles attributed to Mary; Mother of Our God.
God Bless and have a Blessed Mothers day,
pat/PJM
I
itullian
Guest
couldn’t “for God took him” mean he just died?
M
Mickey_Finn
Guest
I think thats covered in Genesis.No offense meant, but for something light-hearted: I don’t find any explanation of how the respiratory system works in the Bible either. Can somebody point out to me a passage to that effect?
But speaking of evidence of Mary’s assumption. Why would God leave evidence of his actions in the first place? Leaving evidence would have to be a conscious effort on his part. Why exactly, would God do that?
ATB
J
Joe_Kelley
Guest
Pondering this further, I think the lack of fake relics even better proof. Mary’s Assumption must have been widely believed from the earliest days. No one has ever found a profit in trying to fool people with fake relics.
Two sites claim to be her tomb, but neither claims to have a body to go with the tomb.
P
patrick457
Guest
Are you talking about Enoch? In context, Enoch is the only patriarch of whom it is said that “God took him;” all the other patriarchs in the genealogy are explicitly said to have “died.”
…When Jared had lived 162 years he fathered Enoch. Jared lived after he fathered Enoch 800 years and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Jared were 962 years, and he died.
When Enoch had lived 65 years, he fathered Methuselah. Enoch walked with God after he fathered Methuselah 300 years and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Enoch were 365 years. Enoch walked with God, and he was not, for God took him.
When Methuselah had lived 187 years, he fathered Lamech. Methuselah lived after he fathered Lamech 782 years and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Methuselah were 969 years, and he died.
There is indeed an opinion expressed by the medieval French rabbi Rashi that Enoch actually died. According to him Enoch was righteous but could be easily swayed to evil, hence God caused him to die before his appointed time: Scripture only changed the wording of his demise “to complete his years.” However, his is a minority opinion: most other Jewish and Christian traditions take the passage to mean Enoch was taken by God alive.
- Status