What caused Mary to die?

[babochka]

The Church concluded that we don’t know for sure if she died first, and thus did not include that part in the infallible dogma that all Catholics must believe.

I don’t agree that Church concluded that we don’t know if she died. The Church concluded that it was not prudent or necessary to include in the dogmatic definition of the fact of her death.

I don’t understand how one can conclude, given the overwhelming evidence from the Church Fathers and the existence of an ancient feast honoring her death, that the Church does not teach that she died. The very document that proclaims the dogma of her assumption into heaven presumes her death. The text of the Divine Liturgy for the Dormition proclaims that even the grave could not hold her:

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.

Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi

Does the liturgy not proclaim the teaching of the Church? Is there contradictory teaching anywhere to be found in the liturgies or formal documents of the Church?

 

[babochka]

it is death or dormition

Death and Dormition are synonymous. Scripture refers to the death of a Christian as falling asleep in the Lord. In the Byzantine Church, we still use this terminology.

 

[babochka]

She had no original sin, therefore she could not die.

How do you reconcile this very firm belief with the clear tradition of your own Ukrainian Church? We just celebrated the Feast of the Dormition. The tradition is clear. The liturgical texts are clear. The iconography is clear, showing the separation of soul and body. To say that she did not die is a significant departure from the Eastern tradition.

 

[Aulef]

No, they aren’t.

Death is due to natural decay which is consequence of Original sin, whereas dormition is just a singular state of deep sleep which only Adam (when God took the woman out of him) and the Virgin Mary (maybe) experienced.

And by the way, those who use the argument of Jesus Christ 's death in favor of the theory of her death, know that death caused by external agents is completely different from natural death (death by decay).

 

[babochka]

No, they aren’t.

Christ’s own euphemism for death, also used by St. Paul, is to fall asleep.

John 11-14 makes it clear.

After he had said this, he went on to tell them, “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up.” His disciples replied, “Lord, if he sleeps, he will get better.” Jesus had been speaking of his death, but his disciples thought he meant natural sleep. So then he told them plainly, "Lazarus is dead, and for your sake I am glad I was not there, so that you may believe.

Dormition means “sleep”. Following the example of scripture, “falling asleep in the Lord” unambiguously means death in the Christian tradition. The Feast of the Dormition unquestionably celebrates the death, resurrection and assumption of the Theotokos.

 

[Aulef]

The Scrpitures also says Jesus Christ has “brothers”, however you and I both know this isn’t true. This is why we need to check the real meaning of the word “sleep” by its circumstances when the word “death” is not used.

And this passage you showed proves what I am saying, that is, two understandings of the word “sleep”, and at a point it clarifies which meaning of “sleep” is used by Our Lord.

Jesus had been speaking of his death, but his disciples thought he meant natural sleep

Notice I am not questioning the feast of the Dormition of Theotokos. Actually, it is very fitting it is “Dormition” instead of “Death” of the Mother of God.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Regarding “The Church does not teach that she died”, while I agree that there is a tradition that Mary died, it is not official Church teaching. This means:

• The official Catechism of the Church does not state that Mary died
• The Church does not require its faithful to believe that Mary died, but rather, permits its faithful to believe that Mary died, or alternatively that Mary did not die.

In short, the Church has not taken a definitive position on whether Mary did or didn’t die before the Assumption. Therefore, one cannot say that the Church teaches she died. One also cannot say that the Church teaches she didn’t die.

The Catholic Culture source that I posted in an earlier post in my thread goes into great detail about the history of this.

I will add an additional source here from Catholic Digest Magazine’s “Ask Father” apologist column. It states in pertinent part:

[The question of whether Mary died] is one that has prompted theological speculation for centuries, but has not yet been answered in any definitive way. Some refer to the “blink” of death as Mary left this Earth and was assumed into heaven. Eastern Catholic liturgies refer to the “dormition” (“falling asleep”) of Mary. The Roman Church and Latin rites celebrate the Assumption but are silent on the question of whether she did in fact die, as we know death.

http://www.catholicdigest.com/from-the-magazine/ask-father/200801-01did-the-virgin-mary-die/

 

[babochka]

The Scrpitures also says Jesus Christ has “brothers”, however you and I both know this isn’t true. This is why you need to check the real meaning of the word “sleep” by its circumstances when the word “death” is not used.

And this passage you showed proves what I am saying, that is, two understandings of the word “sleep”, and at a point it clarifies which meaning of “sleep” is used by Our Lord.

Jesus had been speaking of his death, but his disciples thought he meant natural sleep

When used in a Christian context, “falling asleep in the Lord” means death. It is synonymous. It does not mean sort of, but not really death. It means death in the hope of the Resurrection. The Feast of the Dormition commemorates when the Mother of God fell asleep (died - separation of soul from body), was resurrected, and assumed into heaven.

http://ww1.antiochian.org/content/falling-asleep-his-eminence-kyrill

Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco • Home for Greek Orthodoxy in the Western United States

Home for Greek Orthodoxy in the Western United States

sanfran.goarch.org

Fallen Asleep: In Memoriam | Archeparchy of Pittsburgh

https://www.byzcath.org/index.php/news-mainmenu-49/5752-bishop-milan-sasik-falls-asleep-in-the-lord

The (secular) dictionary definition of Dormition:

dormition

(dɔːˈmɪʃən)

n

1. the process of falling asleep

2. death

3. Christianity the Virgin Mary’s assumption into heaven

Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014 © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014

dormition​

• A peaceful and painless death, as well as the act of sleeping or falling asleep.

See also related terms for sleeping.

Believe what you will about Mary’s death or lack thereof. The Eastern tradition is clear. The language of falling asleep is clear in context of the Christian tradition.

 

[babochka]

There seems to be a variety of answers on this question. Here is one from Catholic Answers:

Did Mary Die? | Catholic Answers Q&A

Yes, it is the common teaching in the ordinary Magisterium of the Church and in its liturgical worship that Our Lady underwent bodily death. This is the unanimous teaching of all the Fathers of the Church in the context of their teaching on her Assumption. The fact that the Venerable Pius XII did not define that Our Lady died when he defined her bodily Assumption has been taken by many to mean that she did not die; but in the very bull of definition itself he brings forth the teaching of the Fathers that she died, was resurrected, and then assumed into heaven.

Maybe it comes down to semantics with the word “teach”.

 

[Dovekin]

Maybe it comes down to semantics with the word “teach”.

It does. Canon Law has a profession of faith that distinguishes between 3 levels of teachings. There are dogmas, doctrine that we believe like the Assumption. There are other teachings that we hold because we believe God guides those who teach. Mary’s death would fall into this category. And then there is everything else, about which there are diverse opinions.

The first two categories both elicit unconditional agreement, though of different kinds.

 

[babochka]

babochka:

Maybe it comes down to semantics with the word “teach”.

It does. Canon Law has a profession of faith that distinguishes between 3 levels of teachings. There are dogmas, doctrine that we believe like the Assumption. There are other teachings that we hold because we believe God guides those who teach. Mary’s death would fall into this category. And then there is everything else, about which there are diverse opinions.

The first two categories both elicit unconditional agreement, though of different kinds.

So in your understanding, it would be accurate to say that the Church teaches that Mary died, but disagreement is possible? What other teachings would fit into this category?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

We already posted and discussed the Catholic Answers response earlier in the thread, in Posts 10 and 11.
Please see the response to it that I already wrote in Post 11.

What caused Mary to die? Moral Theology

Vico gave the correct answer regarding this. The CA apologist gives the correct information regarding the teaching, but he wrote it in a misleading way: Yes, it is the common teaching in the ordinary Magisterium of the Church and in its liturgical worship that Our Lady underwent bodily death. This is the unanimous teaching of all the Fathers of the Church in the context of their teaching on her Assumption. The fact that the Venerable Pius XII did not define that Our Lady died when he defined …

I myself do not use the words “The Church Teaches XYZ” on here unless the Church has taken a definite position on the issue and it is stated in the Catechism.

To me, “The Church Teaches XYZ” means “The correct teaching is XYZ” and usually, “All Catholics must believe XYZ”. The Church in this case has one tradition going back to the Church Fathers that Mary died, and another teaching that I understand is heavily supported by the theology of Bl. John Duns Scotus, who is Western, came along later in the 1200s, and is responsible for developing the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. The Church allows both schools of thought to exist among Catholics. It has not definitively answered the question, has not taken a formal position, etc.

Therefore, I am not going to say on here “The Church Teaches…” when it has not taken a position, stated it in the Catechism, and required all Catholics to believe that position.

I appreciate that the Eastern churches have a Feast of the Dormition. Western churches do not, and I have also heard priests at Latin Mass give quite impassioned homilies and talks on how Mary never died. Sometimes we just have to accept that the Church allows people a choice of beliefs on a matter. I personally do not have a strong bias one way or the other on this as to me we cannot know for sure and I also don’t see getting a definitive answer as being theologically important.

 

[babochka]

I myself do not use the words “The Church Teaches XYZ” on here unless the Church has taken a definite position on the issue and it is stated in the Catechism.

Okay. This helps me to understand that we don’t actually disagree on this topic. I hold the position that it is the teaching of the Church, but it is possible to hold a different position (be wrong ) and still be a Catholic in good standing. You are using a narrower definition of “teaching of the Church” than I am, though @Dovekin’s post confirmed that my definition is not incorrect.

In my research, I found this article from Jimmy Akin that very clearly explains the various levels of church teaching.

How to Weigh Church Teachings | Catholic Answers Magazine

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I don’t think any Catholics believe, and the Church certainly does not teach, that John the Baptist was conceived without original sin. There is a traditional belief that John the Baptist’s original sin was removed in the womb when he leapt at the approach of Mary pregnant with Jesus, that the leap signified his being filled with God’s grace as he would have been via a Catholic baptism. So accordng to the traditional belief, which is not official Church teaching, he would have been conceived with original sin, but purified prior to his birth.

I had never heard that, I would have just assumed that John the Baptist, holy man though he was, was both conceived and born in original sin, and would have rested in the Bosom of Abraham for those few short years between his death and Christ’s “harrowing of hell”. Of course, since heaven was closed to everyone (so I assume) until then, the fact of his having no original sin on his soul, would not by itself have opened heaven to him. Or would it?

I’m not saying I believe it or I don’t believe it, but typically I suspend judgment on anything that the Church herself does not teach.

When used in a Christian context, “falling asleep in the Lord” means death. It is synonymous. It does not mean sort of, but not really death. It means death in the hope of the Resurrection. The Feast of the Dormition commemorates when the Mother of God fell asleep (died - separation of soul from body), was resurrected, and assumed into heaven.

I have always understood that Eastern Christians do not recognize the concept of “death” for a Christian — the Christian “reposes” or “falls asleep in the Lord”.

My question would be “did the soul of Mary leave her body?”. If she merely quit breathing, her heart stopped beating, and her brain waves shut down, yes, clinically she would have “died”, but if her soul had not yet left her body, then she would not be “dead” in the theological sense. And if her soul did leave her body, then did it return to her body before she was assumed into heaven? And where did it go for that period of time? Went to heaven, then came back down to earth and re-entered her body at the moment she was assumed body and soul into heaven? That doesn’t make sense (or it doesn’t make sense to me, anyway).

Whatever. If God had meant us to know one way or another, the Church would teach one way or another. She doesn’t. Personally the “she physically died but her soul remained in her body” idea makes the most sense. But I can’t prove that, and it’s not something I spend much time thinking about.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Yes, it’s not necessary to believe that John the Baptist was born free of original sin.

In any event, whether or not he was born free of original sin, I think it’s unlikely he would have gone straight into Heaven when he died, since Heaven was not yet open when he died, and also he, like all humans other than Mary, was not sinless during his life on earth. He would have gone to the Limbo of the Fathers with other deceased righteous persons.

 

[babochka]

My question would be “did the soul of Mary leave her body?”.

The iconography, which is theology in pictures, shows that her soul left her body.

 

[twf]

As a Latin, I agree with this completely. The liturgy, iconography, and Patristic witness is clear that she did indeed die.

 

[Margaret_Ann]

Our liturgical propers were written centuries before the dogmatic definition of the Dormition/Assumption, so obviously they’d mention death.

True trivia tidbit: Pope Pius XII was going to put that Mary died in the definition. Our Lady appeared to a young boy in Rome and told him to tell the Holy Father that She did not die. Pope Pius XII found out about it and revised his text accordingly. So that’s why it’s not in the dogmatic definition.

 

[babochka]

Our liturgical propers were written centuries before the dogmatic definition of the Dormition/Assumption, so obviously they’d mention death.

True trivia tidbit: Pope Pius XII was going to put that Mary died in the definition. Our Lady appeared to a young boy in Rome and told him to tell the Holy Father that She did not die. Pope Pius XII found out about it and revised his text accordingly. So that’s why it’s not in the dogmatic definition.

Then why is it in the document so many times, quoting so many Church Fathers, with no caveat?

Can you share a link with the story of the young boy in Rome to whom Mary appeared? In all my research, I have never come across this story. Or, if there’s no link, is there a book where I can find it?

 

[Isaac14]

Our liturgical propers were written centuries before the dogmatic definition of the Dormition/Assumption, so obviously they’d mention death.

Wouldn’t it make sense to revise the propers then to reflect correct Catholic Mariology? Why retain propers that contradict dogma?