Question about the Virgin being sinless

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

I added this to my post after you had replied and would appreciate if you could answer this:
What do the prayers and hymns for the feast day of the Assumption say regarding her passing? Do they mention her death at all?

Collect of the day / church prayer:
Almighty ever-living God,
who assumed the Immaculate Virgin Mary, the Mother of your Son,
body and soul into heavenly glory,
grant, we pray,
that, always attentive to the things that are above,
we may merit to be sharers of her glory.
Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever.

Prefacio/ Preface:

V. The Lord be with you.
R. And with your spirit.
V. Lift up your hearts.
R. We lift them up to the Lord.
V. Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.
R. It is right and just.

It is truly right and just, our duty and our salvation,
always and everywhere to give you thanks,
Lord, holy Father, almighty and eternal God,
through Christ our Lord.

For today the Virgin Mother of God
was assumed into heaven
as the beginning and image
of your Church’s coming to perfection
and a sign of sure hope and comfort to your pilgrim people;
rightly you would not allow her
to see the corruption of the tomb
since from her own body she marvelously brought forth
your incarnate Son, the Author of all life.

And so, in company with the choirs of Angels,
we praise you, and with joy we proclaim:

Holy, Holy, Holy Lord God of hosts...

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

I dont mean to teach in here or to be rude, but as I came by this thread it seemed as if it needed some correction of what Catholics actually believe.

Forgive me if I'm trespassing

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

So, body and soul is explicitly described in the collect and her death is implicitly mentioned in the prefacio.

 

[prodromos]

So, body and soul is explicitly described in the collect and her death is implicitly mentioned in the prefacio.

It doesn't state unambiguously that she died whereas it is explicitly taught in the feast of the Dormition which Rome originally celebrated. For the Orthodox Church, the faith is explicitly expressed in the Liturgy, "we pray what we believe, we believe what we pray". By removing the explicit references to her death from the feast day, the Catholic Church has changed her teaching and allowed error to flourish. I don't believe there is any question of that reality. For me personally, this demonstrates how bankrupt the concept of "development of doctrine" is in Catholic theology. Development of doctrine is supposed to clarify the teaching of the Church, make it more precise, and yet here we have something which was clearly taught by the early Church becoming vague and subject to interpretation in Rome.

 

[prodromos]

I apologise if the above comes across as 'fightin words'. It isn't my intention to provoke you.

 

[Tolworth John]

Immaculate Conception, the Roman Catholic schismatic idea that God made Mary incapable of sin at her birth.

Thank you for explaining.

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

I apologise if the above comes across as 'fightin words'. It isn't my intention to provoke you.

I'm not provoked brother, but I'm sometimes forgetting where I am. I'm sorry if Im harassing you in your own safehaven. It's easy to get carried away.
For this very reason I'll leave no further replies in this thread.

God bless you brother.

 

[prodromos]

I'm not provoked brother, but I'm sometimes forgetting where I am. I'm sorry if Im harassing you in your own safehaven. It's easy to get carried away.
For this very reason I'll leave no further replies in this thread.

God bless you brother.

You've done nothing that could be considered harassing. If we are posting incorrect information regarding another Churches belief then we welcome correction, but I believe you also admit that what we have posted is indeed what many Catholics believe and is taught by some of your hierarchy.

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

You've done nothing that could be considered harassing. If we are posting incorrect information regarding another Churches belief then we welcome correction, but I believe you also admit that what we have posted is indeed what many Catholics believe and is taught by some of your hierarchy.

Absolutely, which is unfortunate from any POV.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

This is a statement from Did the Virgin Mary die? - Catholic Digest

"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." - Rev. William Byron, S.J.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Well I'd highly recommend you not to ask around about Catholicism, but instead to directly to the source CCC.
We have a catechism that treats pretty much every topic there is to have an opinion about.

Laymen and clergy err all of the time and adhere to their own perceptions rather to that of the church.

As for your second question, I'll answer it with a question on my own. Why did Judas betray Christ? He's spoken of as a traitor even before he betrayed the Son of Man. How about pharaohs hardened heart?

This touches upon one of the greatest mysteries of God. The free will and predestination. This topic would deserve a thread of it's own. It's as I'm sure you know a HUGE theological issue.

So why did he do this with Mary and not with you and I? Well, we'll never know, but each one of us serves a purpose and hers are just different and greater than ours.

as to your first point, how do I know that you aren't incorrect and those who say she didn't die are?

to your second, that implies that fulfilling God's will can be done with or without the removal of the stain of original sin, so again, why didn't He remove everyone's stain?

 

[prodromos]

Well I'd highly recommend you not to ask around about Catholicism, but instead to directly to the source CCC.

I went to the CCC and it only makes indirect mention of her death by quoting the troparion for the feast of the Dormition, which they no longer use in the liturgy.
Catechism of the Catholic Church - IntraText
Clause 966 for those who are interested.

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

as to your first point, how do I know that you aren't incorrect and those who say she didn't die are?

to your second, that implies that fulfilling God's will can be done with or without the removal of the stain of original sin, so again, why didn't He remove everyone's stain?

1: there are a lot of examples of paintings in the post tridentine church where Mary is being painted dead. This is not something that has been vilified at all. In the baroque era realism was as you know important.

Sometimes this went a bit to far in the eyes of the church which is why Caravaggios picture of the dead lady was declined. That being said there are other examples of art like his in the same area. For example Rubens among others.

Why am I bringing up art? Well sometimes art tells us more about the perception of catholic piety than just reading the CCC, which is a rather new concept anyway.

Why would anyone paint the blessed virgin dead if she wasnt believed to be dead at some point? Besides we had inquisition at that time so no "ungodly" or heretical paintings were allowed this is the period after the council of Trent 1545-63 and until far into the 17th century.

2. As for the other question I feel like this is kind of like eisegesis to be honest. I fully support the thoughts of St. Augustine when he said that God could've saved mankind in as many ways as he liked, but that the path He chose was the most tender and loving one there is.

Echoing St. Augustine I'd say that the salvation mystery of God in the incarnation of Christ is truely the most expressive form of love there is.
God became man and died so that we may live with him forever. Its truely wonderful.

So why didnt he do it differently? Well, we cannot know the answer to that. What we do know is that God did what He did out of love.
To speculate in the reasoning within the transcendent triune God is meaningless. We'll never grasp Hes inner motions and intentions.

This is the kind of questions that fueled the entire scholastic tradition. Placing God into a human box through excessive use of eisegesis. It's all in vain.

Why did he harden pharaohs heart? Why did he use the babylonian kings to punish israel only to use it against the babylonians later on? Why did St. Anna conceive Mary immaculately? Why did he allow for Hagar and Ismael to live? Why does he allow the raise of Islam etc?

To answer this leads us into scholasticism and extensive use of eisegesis.

 

[ArmyMatt]

1. but that doesn't address the idea that one can be a Catholic in good standing and openly say that she never died. I have met many a Catholic, to include clergy, who defend that position.

2. well, if the removal of the stain of original sin doesn't impede free will, then the most tender and loving thing would be to remove it from everyone, not just one person.

 

[JohnTh]

'IC' ? What is 'IC'

Immaculate Conception.

 

[JohnTh]

He's spoken of as a traitor even before he betrayed the Son of Man. How about pharaohs hardened heart?

Read here. We have free will. There is tendency and prescience - not predetermination.

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

1. but that doesn't address the idea that one can be a Catholic in good standing and openly say that she never died. I have met many a Catholic, to include clergy, who defend that position.

2. well, if the removal of the stain of original sin doesn't impede free will, then the most tender and loving thing would be to remove it from everyone, not just one person.

Answer nr1: you'll meet as many orthodox who has gone astray and claims to be orthodox in good standing nevertheless.
It's the same thing going on in our camp.

Lesbians who say that they're faithful and devoted Catholics except this one thing in their lives.
Orthodox who dont believe in hell, but according to themselves are far more pious than their legalistic brethren who believe in such nonsense.
The list only goes on and on. So what's the purpose of your question?

2. That's your personal opinion. That may very well as we know, strive from Gods opinion and plan.
What's most gracious and love filled? Well, God is. I firmly believe that Gods love is the purest form of love there is. Actually the love bonds within the trinity is said to be the strongest and purest love there is.

But, you do see how you're asking for eisegesis right? No one could possibly answer your question by the use of exegesis and orthodox theology.
That being said, one could ask the question why its needed to express such theology in dogmatism.

I believe this could be a interesting theological opinion of the church without dogmatizing it. At least it's strange that those who believe she didnt die actually are considered anathema.

I mean how essential is the IC anyway, as far as salvation goes?

 

[ArmyMatt]

Answer nr1: you'll meet as many orthodox who has gone astray and claims to be orthodox in good standing nevertheless.
It's the same thing going on in our camp.

Lesbians who say that they're faithful and devoted Catholics except this one thing in their lives.
Orthodox who dont believe in hell, but according to themselves are far more pious than their legalistic brethren who believe in such nonsense.
The list only goes on and on. So what's the purpose of your question?

2. That's your personal opinion. That may very well as we know, strive from Gods opinion and plan.
What's most gracious and love filled? Well, God is. I firmly believe that Gods love is the purest form of love there is. Actually the love bonds within the trinity is said to be the strongest and purest love there is.

But, you do see how you're asking for eisegesis right? No one could possibly answer your question by the use of exegesis and orthodox theology.
That being said, one could ask the question why its needed to express such theology in dogmatism.

I believe this could be a interesting theological opinion of the church without dogmatizing it. At least it's strange that those who believe she didnt die actually are considered anathema.

I mean how essential is the IC anyway, as far as salvation goes?

1. because those modernists who look to stuff like the LGBTQ openly seek to update the teaching, not defend it as the traditional belief. those who defend that Mary never died, do so from Rome's tradition.

2. the IC would have to be essential to salvation, because it deals with the Incarnation and God doesn't do stuff at random, and everything that deals with the Incarnation is essential for man's salvation.

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

1. because those modernists who look to stuff like the LGBTQ openly seek to update the teaching, not defend it as the traditional belief. those who defend that Mary never died, do so from Rome's tradition.

2. the IC would have to be essential to salvation, because it deals with the Incarnation and God doesn't do stuff at random, and everything that deals with the Incarnation is essential for man's salvation.

But you do agree that art from the 16th century picturing Mary as dead kind of provides some legitimacy to my claims?
They were accepted through an inquisition and believe me they refused art too...

As for the IC I believe it serves as an excellent example of forcing human logic upon the mysteries of God.
If one follows along that path one will find that human wisdom is nonsense to God.

But then again we have the spirit of God to accompany us so we cant know if its self deception or truely from God. We can try it in the church and vote over it as we do, but even then.
We hardly find it in scripture. Mary is mentioned only a few times.

I'm sceptical towards the western idea of doctrinal development and I'd rather see more room left for mysteries. This is both a weakness and a straight as I see it. Because of our ecclesiastical structure we can actually unite against something, like for example abortion.

The head can make a decision and speak on the behalf of the entire church, but then again you'll have the goods and evils of scholasticism too.

If you ask me personally, I'd rather see that we didnt forced the IC as dogma, but rather kept it as one of many opinions. I have a great deal of problems with the papacy as its put fourth by Pastor Aeternus.

I tend to favor Counciliarism in the Orthodox sense of it.

 

[Tolworth John]

Immaculate Conception.

Thank you.