What was Mary's age at her death?

[Crimsonflyboy]

It isn’t officially defined, but the traditional idea is that she did, which is what is commemorated in the Eastern feast of the Dormition (Koimēsis) of the Theotokos. Munificentissimus Deus did leave open the question of whether or not Mary actually underwent death in connection with her departure, but it also alludes to the tradition of her death.

14. Christ’s faithful, through the teaching and the leadership of their pastors, have learned from the sacred books that the Virgin Mary, throughout the course of her earthly pilgrimage, led a life troubled by cares, hardships, and sorrows, and that, moreover, what the holy old man Simeon had foretold actually came to pass, that is, that a terribly sharp sword pierced her heart as she stood under the cross of her divine Son, our Redeemer. In the same way, it was not difficult for them to admit that the great Mother of God, like her only begotten Son, had actually passed from this life. But this in no way prevented them from believing and from professing openly that her sacred body had never been subject to the corruption of the tomb, and that the august tabernacle of the Divine Word had never been reduced to dust and ashes. Actually, enlightened by divine grace and moved by affection for her, God’s Mother and our own dearest Mother, they have contemplated in an ever clearer light the wonderful harmony and order of those privileges which the most provident God has lavished upon this loving associate of our Redeemer, privileges which reach such an exalted plane that, except for her, nothing created by God other than the human nature of Jesus Christ has ever reached this level.

…]

17. In the liturgical books which deal with the feast either of the dormition or of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin there are expressions that agree in testifying that, when the Virgin Mother of God passed from this earthly exile to heaven, what happened to her sacred body was, by the decree of divine Providence, in keeping with the dignity of the Mother of the Word Incarnate, and with the other privileges she had been accorded. Thus, to cite an illustrious example, this is set forth in that sacramentary which Adrian I, our predecessor of immortal memory, sent to the Emperor Charlemagne. These words are found in this volume: “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 your Son our Lord incarnate from herself.” (Sacramentarium Gregorianum)

…]

20. 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.

Dormition means sleep, not death.

 

[patrick457]

Dormition means sleep, not death.

Yes, but “falling asleep” is a common Christian expression for death since the first generations of Christianity. For instance, Stephen “fell asleep” (ekoimēthē) when he was stoned (Acts 7:60), but it is a bit of a stretch to think that Stephen merely dozed off while the mob was throwing rocks at him. In addition, there is also an Eastern feast named the Dormition of St. Anna (July 25): I highly doubt that the feast commemorates St. Anne literally just, well, sleeping.

 

[Crimsonflyboy]

Yes, but “falling asleep” is a common Christian expression for death since the first generations of Christianity. For instance, Stephen “fell asleep” (ekoimēthē) when he was stoned (Acts 7:60), but it is a bit of a stretch to think that Stephen merely dozed off while the mob was throwing rocks at him. In addition, there is also an Eastern feast named the Dormition of St. Anna (July 25): I highly doubt that the feast commemorates St. Anne literally just, well, sleeping.

The point is that the question is still open, and I for one believe that Our Lady did not die but simply was assumed into heaven.

 

[Battleaxe]

The point is that the question is still open, and I for one believe that Our Lady did not die but simply was assumed into heaven.

Someone should notify the Greek Orthodox guardians of her empty tomb.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

The point is that the question is still open, and I for one believe that Our Lady did not die but simply was assumed into heaven.

So you think Blessed Pope John Paul II was wrong when he taught:

"3. It is true that in Revelation death is presented as a punishment for sin. However, the fact that the Church proclaims Mary free from original sin by a unique divine privilege* does not lead to the conclusion that she also received physical immortality. **The Mother is not superior to the Son who underwent death, giving it a new meaning and changing it into a means of salvation.

Involved in Christ’s redemptive work and associated in his saving sacrifice, Mary was able to share in his suffering and death for the sake of humanity’s Redemption. What Severus of Antioch says about Christ also applies to her: “Without a preliminary death, how could the Resurrection have taken place?” (Antijulianistica, Beirut 1931, 194f.). **To share in Christ’s Resurrection, Mary had first to share in his death." ***

 

[Crimsonflyboy]

So you think Blessed Pope John Paul II was wrong when he taught:

"3. It is true that in Revelation death is presented as a punishment for sin. However, the fact that the Church proclaims Mary free from original sin by a unique divine privilege* does not lead to the conclusion that she also received physical immortality. ***The Mother is not superior to the Son who underwent death, giving it a new meaning and changing it into a means of salvation.

Involved in Christ’s redemptive work and associated in his saving sacrifice, Mary was able to share in his suffering and death for the sake of humanity’s Redemption. What Severus of Antioch says about Christ also applies to her: “Without a preliminary death, how could the Resurrection have taken place?” (Antijulianistica, Beirut 1931, 194f.). **To share in Christ’s Resurrection, Mary had first to share in his death." **

Blessed John Paul II was not speaking ex cathedra here, and as a Catholic I am fully within my rights to disagree, and I do.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Blessed John Paul II was not speaking ex cathedra here, and as a Catholic I am fully within my rights to disagree, and I do.

Ah. Another Catholic who only listens if the Pope speaks ex cathedra, meaning infallibly, which is rare. One who can believe whatever he wants, as long as there isn’t a specific infallible statement clearly and unquestionably stopping him.

 

[Crimsonflyboy]

Ah. Another Catholic who only listens if the Pope speaks ex cathedra, meaning infallibly, which is rare. One who can believe whatever he wants, as long as there isn’t a specific infallible statement clearly and unquestionably stopping him.

The Pope is allowed to give his opinion. Here’s the thing about Our Lady’s dormition: Our Lord obviously was without sin, but His death redeemed mankind, so he chose to give His life. Our Lady’s death would not have redeemed mankind, Her Son had already done that. And, being that Our Lady was completely without sin, there is no reason to think she would have been subject to the corruption of the grave. Death is the punishment for sin, and without sin there should be no death. Of course Our Lord died, but he chose to do so in order to redeem mankind, so that’s not the same.

Many well respected churchmen did not believe in the assumption of Our Lady until it was defined by HH Pope Pius XII, then they accepted the doctrine as dogma. If Holy Mother Church ever defines that Our Lady died, I will accept that. But, until that imaginary time I believe strongly that Our Lady simply fell asleep and was taken into heaven body and soul, because, without sin, she was not subject to the corruption of the grave. It’s a nice debate point though. God bless.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

The Pope is allowed to give his opinion. Here’s the thing about Our Lady’s dormition: Our Lord obviously was without sin, but His death redeemed mankind, so he chose to give His life. Our Lady’s death would not have redeemed mankind, Her Son had already done that. And, being that Our Lady was completely without sin, there is no reason to think she would have been subject to the corruption of the grave. Death is the punishment for sin, and without sin there should be no death. Of course Our Lord died, but he chose to do so in order to redeem mankind, so that’s not the same.

Many well respected churchmen did not believe in the assumption of Our Lady until it was defined by HH Pope Pius XII, then they accepted the doctrine as dogma. If Holy Mother Church ever defines that Our Lady died, I will accept that. But, until that imaginary time I believe strongly that Our Lady simply fell asleep and was taken into heaven body and soul, because, without sin, she was not subject to the corruption of the grave. It’s a nice debate point though. God bless.

Psalm 16:10 says that Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; nor wilt thou give thy holy one to see corruption. That was spoken first of all, about our Lord Jesus. But it equally applies to our Virgin Mother Mary. So you can see that death is not being spoken of, but rather the grave. Jesus rose on the 3rd day, and the Virgin Mary arose and was assumed soon after her death.

The Pope wasn’t really just giving “his” opinion. He was teaching us what the Catholic Church has traditionally taught; i.e. That the Virgin Mary died and then was Assumed in a risen, glorified body to heaven. There can be no glorified body without a resurrection from the dead. That is the Gospel.

You should also pay particular attention to where the Pope says "Involved in Christ’s redemptive work and associated in his saving sacrifice, Mary was able to share in his suffering and death for the sake of humanity’s Redemption. "

Do you know that St. Paul says we all participate with Jesus in the work of Redemption?

 

[Crimsonflyboy]

Psalm 16:10 says that Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; nor wilt thou give thy holy one to see corruption. That was spoken first of all, about our Lord Jesus. But it equally applies to our Virgin Mother Mary. So you can see that death is not being spoken of, but rather the grave. Jesus rose on the 3rd day, and the Virgin Mary arose and was assumed soon after her death.

The Pope wasn’t really just giving “his” opinion. He was teaching us what the Catholic Church has traditionally taught; i.e. That the Virgin Mary died and then was Assumed in a risen, glorified body to heaven. There can be no glorified body without a resurrection from the dead. That is the Gospel.

You should also pay particular attention to where the Pope says "Involved in Christ’s redemptive work and associated in his saving sacrifice, Mary was able to share in his suffering and death for the sake of humanity’s Redemption. "

Do you know that St. Paul says we all participate with Jesus in the work of Redemption?

I understand what Our Holy Father says, but it isn’t defined.

 

[thistle]

Psalm 16:10 says that Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; nor wilt thou give thy holy one to see corruption. That was spoken first of all, about our Lord Jesus. But it equally applies to our Virgin Mother Mary. So you can see that death is not being spoken of, but rather the grave. Jesus rose on the 3rd day, and the Virgin Mary arose and was assumed soon after her death.

The Pope wasn’t really just giving “his” opinion. He was teaching us what the Catholic Church has traditionally taught; i.e. That the Virgin Mary died and then was Assumed in a risen, glorified body to heaven. There can be no glorified body without a resurrection from the dead. That is the Gospel.

You should also pay particular attention to where the Pope says "Involved in Christ’s redemptive work and associated in his saving sacrifice, Mary was able to share in his suffering and death for the sake of humanity’s Redemption. "

Do you know that St. Paul says we all participate with Jesus in the work of Redemption?

Catholics are BOUND by Church teachings. We are not bound to believe Mary died first before being assumed. Catholics are free to believe she died first or did not die. Personally, I believe she died first but I cannot say to anyone who holds the view that Mary did not die they are wrong.

 

[Jimmygill88]

The Assumption is definitely an article of faith. We HAVE to believe that

 

[thistle]

The Assumption is definitely an article of faith. We HAVE to believe that

The Assumption yes but Mary dying first no.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

I understand what Our Holy Father says, but it isn’t defined.

That is usually the ultimate reason given by those who believe she was immortal. I have never seen a convincing argument of Mary’s immortality, or at least not one that is consistent with the Gospel and the teachings of the Catholic Church.

On this Holy Feast of her Nativity, I don’t wish to sound as though I condemn those who believe Mary was immortal, because I don’t. My signature says it all. My motive has always been to prod those who believe it, to offer something convincing by way of argument.

 

[faithfulservant]

i was always of the opinion that as closely aligned as our Lady was to our Lord that She would wish to follow Him in death… and that our Lord granted Her this desire… just always made sense to me

 

[CaptFun]

Just for fun (and in case it’s TRUE … ) what if Mary DIDN"T die but was taken to heaven without having first died. There is biblical precedent for that in Enoch and Elijah - and the following three scriptures mention “some” who in the future (from when the words were spoken or written) would not die or “fall asleep” before being taken to heaven.

1 Corinthians 15:51 Behold, I tell you a mystery. We shall not all fall asleep, but we will all be changed, 52 in an instant, in the blink of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

53 For that which is corruptible must clothe itself with incorruptibility, and that which is mortal must clothe itself with immortality. 54 And when this which is corruptible clothes itself with incorruptibility and this which is mortal clothes itself with immortality, then the word that is written shall come about: "Death is swallowed up in victory.

55 Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?" 56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 57 But thanks be to God who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

58 Therefore, my beloved brothers, be firm, steadfast, always fully devoted to the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labor is not in vain.

Had Mary been in Corinth, this might have literally taken place in her case - and she is still “not dead”. She of course is just one person, so not of herself a “we” - but St. Paul puts forth the teaching that for some this will be what happens to them. St. Paul himself, although using the “we”, was himself not one of those as he was beheaded in Rome and martyred.

Luke 9:27 Truly I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God."

28 About eight days after he said this, he took Peter, John, and James and went up the mountain to pray. 29 While he was praying his face changed in appearance and his clothing became dazzling white.

30 And behold, two men were conversing with him, Moses and Elijah, 31 who appeared in glory and spoke of his exodus that he was going to accomplish in Jerusalem.

32 Peter and his companions had been overcome by sleep, but becoming fully awake, they saw his glory and the two men standing with him.

The “some standing here” would seem to have been Peter, James and John from the verses that follow – but if His Mother, Mary was there at the sermon … her literal Assumption without having died would be a match also.

Matt 16:27 For the Son of Man will come with his angels in his Father’s glory, and then he will repay everyone according to his conduct. 28 Amen, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

This final verse ENDS Chapter 16 of Matthew …but Chapter 17 begins with Peter, James and John going up to the Mount of Transfiguration again (context).

The prediction of a sword piercing Mary (or her heart) given on the day infant Jesus was presented in the Temple may be figurative (the sword of sorrow piercing her heart as she watched her beloved son be abused, insulted and crucified in shame). And the Church
does not teach “how” or even “that” Mary died - just that "at the end of her days " she was taken into heaven.

In 1950 Pope Pius XII defined the doctrine of the Assumption, but not included in that were the facts as to whether she’d died first or not at all. It remains an open question (even though, of course, there IS a truth to the matter - treated though as an insignificant detail to the magnificent news of the Assumption itself).

freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2298170/posts < Fulton Sheen on the Assumption (doesn’t address the die/not die issue so much as to cast light on God’s message to us in the Assumption).

 

[AmbroseSJ]

The whole Enoch, Elijah and Moses never dying myth (because that is what it is) flies in the face of the Gospel (John 3:13 ="And no man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven. ") and Church teaching on original sin, justification and redemption. Further there are excellent sources (even from Biblical literalists) who have shown the error of this myth here: Did Enoch, Elijah and Moses die?

So that line of thinking is totally false and unrealistic.

Your quote from Corinithians 15:51 is obviously talking about the last judgement, which is what we believe, not about one or two certain people being immortal. Also, this passage is not about death being eliminated, but about the “sting” of death being overcome. This was a very important concept to early Christians. It is why they always speak of the Saints “falling asleep in the Lord” and why we have the Dormition of Mary being an ancient and steadfast Truth.

Your reference to the synoptics saying “there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God” has a much more natural and traditional interpretation:

“It seems most natural to interpret this promise in Matthew 16:28; Mark 9:1; and Luke 9:27 as a reference to the transfiguration, which “some” of the disciples would witness only six days later, exactly as Jesus predicted. ***In each Gospel, the very next passage ***after this promise from Jesus is the transfiguration, which shows Jesus in all His glory which will be seen again in the Kingdom of God. The contextual links make it very likely that this is the proper interpretation.”

Secondly: The passage says “who will not taste death UNTIL they see the kingdom of God” IOW, they WILL die, but not until they see the Kingdom of God. Just as actually happened with Peter, James and John. (and Mary too, if she were theoretically present)

Thirdly: The passage says “some here” so we are not referring to the BVM, or it would say there is ONE here. And if it is some, and if it means they will NOT die, then who are they? Does the Church teach that ANYONE from the Apostolic age till now was immortal? No of course not. It is contrary to the Gospel.

The Doctrine of Mun. Deus has been interpreted for us by none other than Blessed Pope John Paul II, addressing this very question of Mary being immortal. vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/1997/documents/hf_jp-ii_aud_25061997_en.html

He says:

"3. It is true that in Revelation death is presented as a punishment for sin. However, the fact that the Church proclaims Mary free from original sin by a unique divine privilege ***does not lead to the conclusion that she also received physical immortality. ***The Mother is not superior to the Son who underwent death, giving it a new meaning and changing it into a means of salvation. "

and:

"4. The New Testament provides no information on the circumstances of Mary’s death. This silence leads one to suppose that it happened naturally, with no detail particularly worthy of mention.*** If this were not the case, how could the information about it have remained hidden from her contemporaries and not have been passed down to us in some way?*** "

and:

"As to the cause of Mary’s death, the opinions that wish to exclude her from death by natural causes seem groundless. It is more important to look for the Blessed Virgin’s spiritual attitude at the moment of her departure from this world. In this regard, St Francis de Sales maintains that Mary’s death was due to a transport of love. He speaks of a dying “in love, from love and through love”, going so far as to say that the Mother of God died of love for her Son Jesus (Treatise on the Love of God, bk. 7, ch. XIII-XIV). "

This last thought would also make the Virgin Mary Queen of the Martyrs.

Lastly, I doubt that any Church theologian or doctor of the Church, or any other Church Authority has ever used the above passages as referring (even slightly) to the immortality of the Virgin Mary.

Nevertheless, it is better to have some positive reason to believe something than the negative: that we are not forbidden.

 

[CaptFun]

CaptFun responds in RED

The whole Enoch, Elijah and Moses never dying myth (because that is what it is) flies in the face of the Gospel (John 3:13 ="And no man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven. ") and Church teaching on original sin, justification and redemption. Further there are excellent sources (even from Biblical literalists) who have shown the error of this myth here: Did Enoch, Elijah and Moses die?

So that line of thinking is totally false and unrealistic. Hi Ambrose SJ. I enjoyed that link very much. Thanks for responding to my serendipidous query and “take” from the " … what if Mary did not die …" side of the question. And for your other posts here.

Perhaps I shall shake your tree further to gain additional plums of theological wisdom. I certainly don’t want to fly in the face of the Gospel - if indeed that’s what I have done.
But I’m stlll left with some questions on the matter so … here goes.

Moses: I didn’t include Moses in the “possibly did not die …” pile. I know he died on the other side of the Jordan after seeing the Promised Land. He IS interesting for other reasons I’ll grant you - exceptional reasons. St. Michael and Satan fighting over the body of Moses is included in the Bible for some reason. And he is seen - vision or no - as having some sort of body (glorified or no?) on the Mt. of Transfiguration. But he’d died - so not in the Enoch and Elijah “pile”.

**Enoch and Elijah - **two Old Testament figures who for some reason are not said to have died (yet?). Your link reasons that they did. I’m not a Bible literalist, but neither am I one that needs to explain away every miracle in the Bible with a natural explanation. I believe in miracles - with the qualifier that for GOD, that which we call miracles aren’t even hard.

The “yet?” acknowledges that some who believe Enoch and Elijah have not died but WILL when they are literally the “two witnesses” of Revelation. I don’t think this is a Catholic teaching … and I’m not sure if it’s something that may be believed. It would leave Mary all alone in the “never died pile” theoretically (or with the 1 Cor. 15:51 caught in the air and changed folks).

I had Mary “joining” Enoch and Elijah somewhat due to Church teaching on the Assumption (or what it leaves out - that she died, how she died and where she died …and with an open door as to even IF she died).

Your link above spoke of three heavens. Two of the natural world (the “heavens” of the sky which birds fly in and the “heavens” beyond that including the atmosphere, outer space and the stars). Then it mentioned “heaven” where God dwells, quotes John 3:13 as you did and emphasizes that only Jesus who had come from there had been there.

All well and good (so far as I can see, I’m still thinking about things - but not rebelliously).

And YET: there are some qualifiers. Jesus tells the “good thief” that (later) that day he will be with Jesus “in Paradise”. Two days later the risen Christ tells Mary Magdalen He has not yet “ascended to the Father.”

Presumably St. Dismas the thief was in “Paradise” … but not yet “ascended to the Father” either. Perhaps he was with Abraham and Lazarus (and Samuel?) in that afterlife “place” of rest that was not heaven … but not hell or that “place” where spirits were “in prison” (like the “rich man” in pain who could see Abraham and Lazarus ?).

Perhaps this “did not die” detail is a straining at of a gnat … and the mysteries of our salvation are the far greater matter than the mysteries of certain exceptional people of the Bible. But if Enoch and Elijah were taken to “Abraham’s place of rest/waiting …” without dying … " what’s it to me? God can do what He wishes.

Mary of course was still living when Jesus opened heaven … the one your link speaks of.

We are told she was Assumed body and soul into heaven “at the end of her days…” (on Earth presumably as she is certainly alive NOW and reigning with her son - whether she “fell asleep” or was taken up in a manner like 1 Corinthians 15:51 (i.e. “changed in the blink of an eye” and clothed with immortality). I assume Mary aged while on Earth and may have looked like she was going to die like everyone does.

I further know that “it is appointed for man to die and after this comes judgement” and "…a servant is not greater than his master (nor would a handmaid be … and Jesus died …); and as Mary seemed to be the quintessential follower of Christ (albeit an exceptional case in MANY ways) would she not have “picked up her cross and followed Him …” even to death? All good stuff to consider I suppose. But we still don’t know.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

CaptFun:

But we still don’t know.

That about sums it up.

 

[CaptFun]

That about sums it up.

Given enough time we can be concise.

Personally I will miss beating this to death though. :takeoff: