assumption of mary

[tagyourit]

I have been trying to follow confessional Lutheranism a bit more lately and one of the things I'm following is the Church Calendar of the Lutheran Church.

Catholics believe Mary was "born without the handicap of original sin" and also that Mary was assumed into Heaven.

Do Lutherans believe Mary was without Sin an do you believe she was assumed?

I've read a few blogs from some LCMS folks and looked at the historiclectionary dot com site and I think I know the answer to my first question, but wasn't sure. Thanks.

 

[Zecryphon]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I do not believe Mary was without sin and I do not believe she was bodily assumed into heaven as the Catholics teach. I just don't see any support for either teaching in Scripture. Take the Catholic teaching that Mary was without sin. These scriptures here, disprove that:

Luk 1:46 And Mary said, "My soul magnifies the Lord,
Luk 1:47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,

If Mary was indeed sinless as the Catholics teach, why would she rejoice in God her Savior? She wouldn't need a Savior, for she had no sin that needed to be atoned for. And the second teaching, I have no idea where they get that from, because the last mention we see in Scripture of Jesus' mother is here:

Act 1:13 And when they had entered, they went up to the upper room, where they were staying, Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot and Judas the son of James.
Act 1:14 All these with one accord were devoting themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers.

There is no mention of Mary's life after this event and there is no mention of her death or what happened to her body after she died. I found this Catholic page that admits that Scripture does not teach the bodily assumption of Mary and that this teaching did not become Church dogma until Pope Pius XII made it so in 1950. So this is a really recent teaching.

The Assumption of Mary

 

[DaRev]

Do Lutherans believe Mary was without Sin an do you believe she was assumed?

Was Mary born without original sin? The answer is most likely no. The Scripture is silent on the conception and birth of Mary. One thing that strongly points to "no" is her song in Luke 1, the Magnificat. In her song to Elizabeth she says "My soul magnifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior." She acknowledges that she needs a savior. If she were not a sinner, would she need a savior?

Was she bodily assumed into heaven prior to her death? Again, the Scriptures are absolutely silent in this matter. So we must'nt make that assumption either (forgive the pun ).

While these are pious thoughts, they are not to be made into doctrinal statements, and belief in such is most certainly not required for salvation. All we know, and all we need to know, about Mary is what we read in Scripture.

 

[tagyourit]

Thank you Zecryphon and DaRev.

 

[Aibrean]

Well Paul certainly must have forgot about her being sinless when he wrote "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God".

 

[Studeclunker]

When the young man addressed Christ as 'Good Teacher,' He replied, "Why do you call me 'Good'? No one is good, but God alone!" If Mary was born sinless, I doubt He would have said this quite that way.

As to the teachings of the Roman Catholics, Jesus stated it well (though regarding the religious teachers of his day): "This People honours me with thier lips; But their heart is far from me. But in vain do they worship me, teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men." In fairness, the R.C. aren't the only ones guilty of this. It's rampant throughout the Protestant churches as well, though not to the extent of the R.C. (which is why it's so easy to pick on them).

 

[WildStrawberry]

If Mary were born without Original Sin and lived a sinless life (another Roman teaching) then why was Jesus needed? If mankind could live a sinless life, they could redeem themselves...right?

Frustrates my Roman friends when I use this argument.

 

[tagyourit]

Well said.

 

[Studeclunker]

If Mary were born without Original Sin and lived a sinless life (another Roman teaching) then why was Jesus needed? If mankind could live a sinless life, they could redeem themselves...right?

Frustrates my Roman friends when I use this argument.

Well said.

I quite agree, that was very well said Strawberry.

Not only Mary would have had to lived a perfect life, but three generations behind her. The Lord holds our sins for three generations. Therefore for her to have been sinless and blameless, she would have had to be born from sinless/blameless parents, grandparents, and great grandparents. Quite an accomplishment in and of itself. Also, quite impossible.

That's exactly the problem with mankind in general though. We want to be able to do something ourselves toward our salvation. To lie prostrate and allow the Lord and Holy Spirit to do everything is just... against our nature. Then again... our nature is the root of the problem, is it not?

 

[WildStrawberry]

Thanks. I use the same basic argument against purgatory. If we can earn our way to heaven, then Jesus' death was not only unnecessary but cruel to boot.

Drives 'em batty, I tells ya.

(forgive the spelling errors if there are any. I'm...uh...a bit under the influence of some prescription happy pills. Hehehehehehehe )

 

[Zecryphon]

Thanks. I use the same basic argument against purgatory. If we can earn our way to heaven, then Jesus' death was not only unnecessary but cruel to boot.

Drives 'em batty, I tells ya.

(forgive the spelling errors if there are any. I'm...uh...a bit under the influence of some prescription happy pills. Hehehehehehehe )

Alright you! Stop hoardin' the pills. Time to share with an interested Lutheran. Whadd'ya got?

 

[WildStrawberry]

Do you think I'd share, LouLou? Ha! It was heck getting the doc to rx for me. lol. I have heard that the FDA is considering using a new drug...a date rape one!!!...for the treatment if fibro pain. Very tightly controlled of course.

 

[Zecryphon]

Do you think I'd share, LouLou? Ha! It was heck getting the doc to rx for me. lol. I have heard that the FDA is considering using a new drug...a date rape one!!!...for the treatment if fibro pain. Very tightly controlled of course.

After all I've done for you, this is the thanks I get? I allowed you to advertise your Gold Canyon Candles in the Lutheran forum at the other site, I bought a rosary from you and have now ordered another one. How's that one coming by the way? I'd share my Vicodin with you if you needed or wanted it. But I see how it is now. No, no, it's okay. I just thought we were friends in deed and in pills, but I can see I assumed waaaay too much here. I'll get over it.

 

[QuiltAngel]

Zec, no one shares their pills. You know, a person just might need them for their own use.

 

[Zecryphon]

Zec, no one shares their pills. You know, a person just might need them for their own use.

I know people who share pills with other people. It's not totally unheard of. She's got a whole bottle, she could spare one or two. Just like I'd toss a Vicodin to either of you if you needed it. One hand washes the other.

 

[Dark_Lite]

I found this Catholic page that admits that Scripture does not teach the bodily assumption of Mary and that this teaching did not become Church dogma until Pope Pius XII made it so in 1950. So this is a really recent teaching.

The Assumption of Mary

Just want to point out that that page is not connected with the Catholic Church, but rather something very different.

 

[Zecryphon]

Just want to point out that that page is not connected with the Catholic Church, but rather something very different.

Why does it have to be connected to the RCC to be accurate? I mean anyone would think a site called:

www.justforcatholics.org is Catholic in origin. Is the information contained there wrong? If it is, can you please post accurate info on what the RCC teaches on this matter?

 

[Dark_Lite]

Why does it have to be connected to the RCC to be accurate? I mean anyone would think a site called:

Just for Catholics: Mainpage is Catholic in origin. Is the information contained there wrong? If it is, can you please post accurate info on what the RCC teaches on this matter?

The website you linked to do is an "evangelical ministry is dedicated to Roman Catholics who desire to know how to be saved. It is our sincere desire to proclaim to you the Good News of Jesus Christ, because the Gospel is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes." That's straight from the top of their front page. They even include the emphasis on evangelical. So it's not Catholic in origin. Their self-proclaimed mission is to "evangelize" Catholics.

It is true that the dogma was not defined until 1950, but it was a belief already present in Catholicism. Things only get proclaimed dogma when essential beliefs start to be questioned. When the Church declares it dogma, that ends all debate on the matter. The Orthodox have a similar belief known as the Dormition of Mary, so this goes back even before the Great Schism.

Suffice it to say, the Catholic Church has a different idea than justforcatholics.org about the history of the dogma of the Assumption. To say much more than that is floating into the realm of debate. If you want to have a full debate on the matter, you can probably get plenty of replies in the theology forums from both sides of the issue.

 

[Zecryphon]

The website you linked to do is an "evangelical

It is true that the dogma was not defined until 1950, but it was a belief already present in Catholicism. Things only get proclaimed dogma when essential beliefs start to be questioned. When the Church declares it dogma, that ends all debate on the matter. The Orthodox have a similar belief known as the Dormition of Mary, so this goes back even before the Great Schism.

Suffice it to say, the Catholic Church has a different idea than justforcatholics.org about the history of the dogma of the Assumption. To say much more than that is floating into the realm of debate. If you want to have a full debate on the matter, you can probably get plenty of replies in the theology forums from both sides of the issue. ministry is dedicated to Roman Catholics who desire to know how to be saved. It is our sincere desire to proclaim to you the Good News of Jesus Christ, because the Gospel is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes." That's straight from the top of their front page. They even include the emphasis on evangelical. So it's not Catholic in origin. Their self-proclaimed mission is to "evangelize" Catholics.

Well the author of the site used to be RCC and does still read the writings of the RCC. So while he may no longer be RCC, he is familiar with their teachings. But the website is not the point here, the teaching that Jesus' mother Mary was bodily assumed into heaven is. So could you please post what the RCC teaches on this and where they get their support for this belief?

 

[WildStrawberry]

Zec, I get 10 pills a month. For the amount of pain I'm in, I ration those pills VERY carefully. Also, sharing pills, while a common practice for some, is quiet illegal. As the sister of a cop...I tend to do things BTL.

Also, you didn't BUY the first rosary! I made it for you for free. Remember?? I haven't begun the other one yet. I'm pricing things out and will send you an estimate asap.

Kae