J
Jeannie52
Guest
I appreciate that you included what Pople John Paul II stated.Early Christian accounts teach that the she died, including the Life of the Virgin by St. Maximos the Confessor, which is the earliest complete biography of her life. All Eastern Christians (including Eastern Catholics) continue to believe that she died and we even have a liturgical feast dedicated to the commemoration of her death. As for Roman Catholics, there is no reason to reject the belief in her death, as taught by Holy Tradition. Indeed, even Pope JPII said that “the opinions that wish to exclude her from death by natural causes seem groundless.” x]
Death is a consequence the Fall. It is something that all post-Fall humans are afflicted with. Even Christ, by undergoing birth, acquired this consequence. It seems quite preposterous to say that the Theotokos was exempted from death, as that would mean that she would have had to possess a new unfallen human nature. Had she had such an unfallen human nature, she would not have been affected by any consequences of the Fall (e.g. death) and, therefore, Christ would not have taken on any consequences of the Fall (e.g. death) through His birth to her.The problem? Christ’s victory over death is predicated on Him having made Himself subject to death by inheriting that consequence of the Fall from Adam by undergoing birth. Take away the mortality of the Theotokos, and you undermine the salvific role of Christ.
With that all being said, I will go out on a limb here and state that I not only find the idea that the Theotokos didn’t die to be contrary to the ancient tradition of Christianity, but, insofar as the idea undermines the salvific role of Christ, it is an inherently anti-Christian teaching, imho. I would suggest listening to your newly canonised saint, Pope JPII; there are no grounds to reject her having died, as his above quote states.
Just my :twocents: