The Assumption Of The Blessed Virgin

[CaliforniaJosiah]

But the scripture doesn't say anything about her death. So NOW where do you turn to?

Why would one need (or want) to turn anywhere?

IMHO, it's too bad that Catholicism has essentially lost all concept of mystery; it still uses the word but seems to have lost all awareness or appreciation of it. IMHO, we don't know everything - and don't need to. What happened to her body at her death (or undeath depending on your view), how often she and Joseph had sex after Jesus was born, what was Mary's shoe size, did Mary like matzaball soup, oh - a lot of things that seem moot to none of our business are issues God chose not to reveal to us in His Holy Scriptures. Some are willing to leave it at that, some want to look to "other things," eventually coming up with their own interesting "replies" to their own questions - and perhaps eventually calling such dogma, the highest level of certainty.


Just my personal, humble perspective....


Pax!





.

 

[PETE_]

Yet you seem to assume the opposite, which is an even BIGGER assumption

we have multiple billions that create a pattern with 2 known exceptions

seems billions is a better bet

 

[Secundulus]

IMHO, it's too bad that Catholicism has essentially lost all concept of mystery;

Protestantism is who has lost all concept of mystery. Protestantism is like medieval scholasticism on steroids, attempting to explain everything according to reason only.

For proof of my premise, look only to the denial of Christ in the Eucharist.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Protestantism is who has lost all concept of mystery. Protestantism is like medieval scholasticism on steroids, attempting to explain everything according to reason only.

For proof of my premise, look only to the denial of Christ in the Eucharist.

I tend to agree with you, in many cases. I do think it's worse in Catholicism (just compare the size of the Catholic Catechism with the official statements of faith in most Protestant churches!!!). But, yes, in practice, I think that many "Evangelical" type churches have essentially lost this, too. BTW, this is one of the things I deeply respect about Orthodoxy and conservative/traditional Anglicanism (yes, Virginia, such DOES exist, lol) as well as my own Lutheranism. IMHO, we ALL probably could use a dose of humility and a reminder that we aren't called to be "know-it-alls" but to fall at the feet of God in awe and wonder.


BTW, Orthodox, Lutherans and many Anglicans accept the literal, Real Presense of Christ. They don't embrace as DOGMA Catholic Scholasticism's medieval invention of Transubstantiation (which kinda confirms my point with another example; the Council of Trent just could not leave the mystery as mystery).


That's MY perspective.


Pax


- Josiah




.

 

[Secundulus]

BTW, Orthodox, Lutherans and many Anglicans accept the literal, Real Presense of Christ. They don't embrace as DOGMA Catholic Scholasticism's medieval invention of Transubstantiation (which kinda confirms my point with another example; the Council of Trent just could not leave the mystery as mystery).

I agree that the Western Church has a tendency to try to explain everything. This is a legacy of Western Philosophy quite apart from anything to do with Christianity. It is simply who we are. Sometimes this works to our disadvantage.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

I agree that the Western CHurch has a tendency to try to explain everything. This is a legacy of Western Philosophy quite apart from anything to do with Christianity. It is simply who we are. Sometimes this works to our disadvantage.

I agree.

You might be interested in my thread (buried somewhere here at GT on some back page) "Theology and Humility."




.

 

[Tu Es Petrus]

we have multiple billions that create a pattern with 2 known exceptions

seems billions is a better bet

It would be if any of those billions were also the Mother of God. But they are not.

 

[Tu Es Petrus]

IMHO, it's too bad that Catholicism has essentially lost all concept of mystery;

I have never heard of protestant mystics, just Catholic ones.

 

[prodromos]

Well, if you want to go strictly by the preponderance of evidence, then the evidence favors the Assumption, because there is NO early Christian testimony that says she died & was buried anywhere and the scriptures are silent on her death.

What on earth is the Church of the Sepulcher of the Mother of God in Gethsemane doing there if she had not died and been buried?

 

[Tu Es Petrus]

I've never heard of that Church.
I have a feeling that Catholics are not connected to that Church as we are to other Holy Land churches. Am I correct?

 

[Brennin]

Well, if you want to go strictly by the preponderance of evidence, then the evidence favors the Assumption, because there is NO early Christian testimony that says she died & was buried anywhere and the scriptures are silent on her death.

Your "evidence" dates to 400-500 years after the fact, and is bogus. Early Christians did not remark on the death of the mother of our Lord because it was unremarkable.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Your "evidence" dates to 400-500 years after the fact, and is bogus. Early Christians did not remark on the death of the mother of our Lord because it was unremarkable.

Now I understand the substantiation for this dogmatic fact of the highest certainty. And I now realize that my father's uncle (or is it great uncle?) was assumed into heaven - that's a dogmatic fact of highest certainty! See, he served on a sub during WW2. The sub (and the men on board) were never found and there is no grave for this great (or great-great) uncle of mine. Thus, the RCC would insist that it is a matter of highest certainty that he was assumed into Heaven. I guess my next question would be: So what? But that's another issue for another day, I suppose. It's maybe enough to know that it's a dogmatic fact of greatest certainty that he was Assumed into heaven at his death (or was it thereby an undeath?).




.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by Tu Es Petrus Well, if you want to go strictly by the preponderance of evidence, then the evidence favors the Assumption, because there is NO early Christian testimony that says she died & was buried anywhere and the scriptures are silent on her death.

What on earth is the Church of the Sepulcher of the Mother of God in Gethsemane doing there if she had not died and been buried?

quote TEP: I've never heard of that Church.
I have a feeling that Catholics are not connected to that Church as we are to other Holy Land churches. Am I correct?

Panagia Ierosolymitissa - OrthodoxWiki

Panagia Ierosolymitissa (Gr. Ιεροσολυμίτισσα - Most Holy Lady of Jerusalem) is a very popular icon of the Theotokos because it overlooks the empty tomb of the Most Holy Theotokos at the Sepulcher of the Mother of God in Gethsemane—blessing the numerous pilgrims visiting the Holy Land of Jerusalem. The underground tomb of the Virgin Mary is situated in the Kidron Valley, on the foothills of the Mount of Olives, where the Saviour often prayed with His disciples. It is attributed to the Theotokos since it is believed that the Apostles gathered at this location and buried the most-pure body of the Mother of God. Her icon remains there as an endless spring of blessings for all the Christians, celebrated (or venerated) by the name "Panagia Ierosolimitissa."citation needed

 

[bbbbbbb]

It seems to me that an event as spectacular as the Assumption would have merited at least one verse in scripture if it was witnessed by the Apostles as is alleged. After all, much less spectacular events such as Paul rebuking Peter were reported.

On the other hand, if Mary died like the rest of humanity and was buried in the sepulchre in Gethsemane, then I can understand why it was not recorded.

In the meantime we have neato events happening like the miracle of Loreto, which are truly unsubstantiated. See this link for further details - CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Santa Casa di Loreto (Holy House of Loreto)

 

[Tu Es Petrus]

Your "evidence" dates to 400-500 years after the fact..........

Thats funny: So does the canon of the NT (almost). LOL

And even then, its more evidence than you have against it, because you have NONE against it. None, Zip, Zilch, Nada, Nathan.

 

[MamaZ]

We know through the reading of scripture that is is appointed for men to die once. So therefore we know that Mary died.. Now we see that when Jesus ascended it was note worthy and was written about. When Enoch was taken it was noteworthy and written about. Same with Elijah.. But with Mary not even a mention of it in the scriptures therefore I doubt the assumption of Mary.

 

[Brennin]

Thats funny: So does the canon of the NT (almost). LOL

That's an erroneous claim. LOL.

And even then, its more evidence than you have against it, because you have NONE against it. None, Zip, Zilch, Nada, Nathan.

You have no evidence that Mary did not live in a cloud castle! You have no evidence that Mary did not ride a flying horse!

I, however, have evidence that you have not studied logic and critical thinking.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

That's an erroneous claim. LOL.



You have no evidence that Mary did not live in a cloud castle! You have no evidence that Mary did not ride a flying horse!

I, however, have evidence that you have not studied logic and critical thinking.

No horse is needed

YouTube - Flying Nun original opening with Colgate!

 

[Tu Es Petrus]

I, however, have evidence that you have not studied logic and critical thinking.

Oh ya?
Well I'm rubber and you're glue.
So whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you.

How's THAT for critical thinking

 

[prodromos]

I've never heard of that Church.
I have a feeling that Catholics are not connected to that Church as we are to other Holy Land churches. Am I correct?

I don't know why not. The church was built over the site long before the schism when we were still one Church, and the site was venerated continuously by local Christians prior to that. I recall posting in another thread that Rome originally celebrated the feast day of the Dormition of Mary as it was, and still is celebrated in the East, but they later changed the focus to the Assumption of Mary, changing the name of the feast day and seemingly forgetting that she had even died. Later developments in Latin theology even asserted that she could not die. So over the centuries the Latin Church has gone from a clear knowledge that Mary had died ("Lex orandi, lex credendi") with the feast day of the Dormition being celebrated, but now holds a position where it is acceptable to believe that she didn't die. And I thought "development of doctrine" was supposed to clarify the faith, not make it vague and uncertain.

John