The Assumption of Mary

[narnia59]

Ancient churches or ancient church? It seems that this belief wasn't propogated until after the church had been established for quite a spell.

Your assertion that it wasn't propogated until later is based on what? The Bible alone? Something written surviving?

You're totally right, she was obedient to God just as so many others have been before her lifetime, during, and after her lifetime. She gave birth to the Messiah, the son of God, but her obedience wasn't any greater than Elizabeth's or Ruth's or Esther's. Yet, though they all had the same heart towards God and His will, why do we only honor Mary in this way?

First of all, we honor all the saints -- ever check out our church calendar?

Do we have a special heart for Mary? Yes. Why? Because God honored only Mary when it came time to take flesh from a woman, and to choose a mother. Jesus honored his mother, but we should not because that somehow makes us less than?

This goes back to whether one sees the Incarnation as simply being a required means to reach an end, or the divine plan for the fulness of time.

I hadn't heard of this, but that's interesting. Is this story documented in some way before the advent of Christ or is it speculated to originate predating the Messiah?

You find all those things prior to Christ, but in pieces across different times and cultures. You can research virgin births in mythology for example, and discover it wasn't "new".

After Christ, you begin to see 'copycats' (especially Mithras) where people have combined these pieces into one composite deity. That's when you find lists that so closely parallel Christ. Mithras pre-dated Christ; Mithras in that form did not.

Hmm, my bible says according to the measure of our faith. I suppose we could argue that she indeed has more grace than most of us (even if an angel told me I'd give birth to a healthy son, it would take more than a lionshare of faith for me to believe that too.)



Never thought of it this way... so it's a hierarchal type thing? When not satisfied with lower management, we go to the boss? He won't listen to me, but he'll have to listen if his mom asks him to do it! (This is a joke and even though it's really not funny, please don't be offended. But the idea is still really repugnant to me.)

You are correct that our rewards will be based upon our heavenly works to further God's kingdom. Does that mean that God cares more about what you pray about if the twelve apostles pray with you than if twelve disciples pray with you? Or will grace be dispensated upon you according to the faith that works in you? (Or maybe the apostles just had more faith than we can ever hope to have... am I just living a pipe dream?)

Do you have the concept of a "prayer warrior" in your faith tradition? Someone who is so devoted to the Lord and so in line with His holy will, people inadvertently turn to them in times of trouble because they have a sense that they have a direct line?

It has nothing to do with thinking Christ won't listen to us. It has everything to do with realizing that our faith needs bolstering and strengthening from those around us and we benefit by their prayers -- especially from those whose lives so reflect his glory their prayers "availeth much". It's an understanding that as we grow in the Lord our prayers become purer, more in line with His will, and yes, more effective.

You are not living a pipe dream. You are simply still a work in progress. They have finished the race.

And while I would never say that Jesus 'has' to listen to his mom, I have no problem saying that her requests more than any of ours lie perfectly within His will and reflect his glory. And did the command to honor his mother at some point cease?

Please don't take my lack of response to any response you have personally -- I'm about to leave for vacation and will have limited computer access.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Your assertion that it wasn't propogated until later is based on what? The Bible alone? Something written surviving?

First of all, we honor all the saints -- ever check out our church calendar?

Do we have a special heart for Mary? Yes. Why? Because God honored only Mary when it came time to take flesh from a woman, and to choose a mother. Jesus honored his mother, but we should not because that somehow makes us less than?

This goes back to whether one sees the Incarnation as simply being a required means to reach an end, or the divine plan for the fulness of time.


You find all those things prior to Christ, but in pieces across different times and cultures. You can research virgin births in mythology for example, and discover it wasn't "new".

After Christ, you begin to see 'copycats' (especially Mithras) where people have combined these pieces into one composite deity. That's when you find lists that so closely parallel Christ. Mithras pre-dated Christ; Mithras in that form did not.



Do you have the concept of a "prayer warrior" in your faith tradition? Someone who is so devoted to the Lord and so in line with His holy will, people inadvertently turn to them in times of trouble because they have a sense that they have a direct line?

It has nothing to do with thinking Christ won't listen to us. It has everything to do with realizing that our faith needs bolstering and strengthening from those around us and we benefit by their prayers -- especially from those whose lives so reflect his glory their prayers "availeth much". It's an understanding that as we grow in the Lord our prayers become purer, more in line with His will, and yes, more effective.

You are not living a pipe dream. You are simply still a work in progress. They have finished the race.

And while I would never say that Jesus 'has' to listen to his mom, I have no problem saying that her requests more than any of ours lie perfectly within His will and reflect his glory. And did the command to honor his mother at some point cease?

Please don't take my lack of response to any response you have personally -- I'm about to leave for vacation and will have limited computer access.

'My soul doth magnify the Lord.' ~ Mary.

Moses, Henoch, and Elijah never said such a thing...
Nor did their souls magnify the Lord - but Mary's did and somehow God would have left her on earth compared to them?

She was flesh of His flesh.
All His human dna came completely from her.
Match for match.

So truly, no one else has greater status in His eyes than the Handmaid of His own Flesh.

She is called the New Eve over and over in ancient times.
Just as the first Eve caused us to participate in our fall, so too the New Eve gave over to participate in our redemption.

No one, and i dont care who you are or what good was past done, no one can ever claim this truly aside from her....in aiding humanity to come to Her Son.

No, her body was NOT left to decay which is part of the fall of humanity.
No her body did not become corrupted by the hand of satan, which was our due from our acceptance to sin.

Death, decay which a corruption of the body - not left for Moses, it certainly would not be for Mary who embodied the Lord and HER soul DOTH magnify the Lord.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

.

Dogma was based one a few things. Scripture: Henoch, Moses and Elijah all rose bodily...

Yes, they did arise. I fail to see what that means or proves.... IF Obama is president, does that make it dogma that I am? Peter was an Apostle, does that make it dogma that Joseph Smith was?

Witnesses: Wiritngs on the testimony that she disappeared.

Would you please share the written witness of one who saw Her be assumed?

Science: Her remains are no where on earth.

No remains of great uncle, either. Proof he was assumed? At least he was a male - like all the biblical examples. At least there is testimony CONTEMPORARY to the event....





Understand, brother, I'm NOT saying it ain't so. Nor am I disregarding the faith. It's just that (well, take this kindly).... Mormon apologetics is typically a LOT more substantial - and I have a hunch you'd dismiss such out of hand (as frankly, I do too). I think if you read what you wrote objectively, in the same way you'd read something from a Baptist for example - well.... I'm just not SURE you'd be quick to shout: AHHA! A dogmatic fact of highest importance, relevance and certainty of Truth!" I could be wrong about that - I probably am - but it's my HUNCH.







.

 

[Thekla]

At least he was a male - like all the biblical examples.

Why would gender matter ?

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Why would gender matter ?

You seemed to be suggesting that because 3 men were assumed (out of perhaps 10,000,000,000 males in history), egro - Mary was.

I not only find that "Scriptural PROOF" amazingly otherwise, but you seem to be contradicting your own point - Mary wasn't a man.



Your other point that Mary's bones have never been found, and this is proof to the point of dogmatic fact that ergo she MUST have been assumed into Heaven almost as amazingly baseless.... my great uncles' bones have never been found, either - and yet I don't see in my Catholicism any Dogma of The Assumption of Art.


And your other point, about the written evidence of eye-witnesses to the event, I'm waiting for you to supply those.



Thank you.


Pax


- Josiah




.
















[/quote]

 

[Thekla]

You seemed to be suggesting that because 3 men were assumed (out of perhaps 10,000,000,000 males in history), egro - Mary was.

I not only find that "Scriptural PROOF" amazingly otherwise, but you seem to be contradicting your own point - Mary wasn't a man.



Your other point that Mary's bones have never been found, and this is proof to the point of dogmatic fact that ergo she MUST have been assumed into Heaven almost as amazingly baseless.... my great uncles' bones have never been found, either - and yet I don't see in my Catholicism any Dogma of The Assumption of Art.


And your other point, about the written evidence of eye-witnesses to the event, I'm waiting for you to supply those.



Thank you.


Pax


- Josiah

[/quote]

Not at all what I said.

I am only interested in your remark about gender - again, why do you think gender matters in this context ?

 

[justinangel]

"But beyond these Scriptural sayings, let us look at the very tradition, teaching and faith of the Catholic Church from the beginning, which the Lord gave, the apostles preached, and the Fathers kept."
Athanasius, Four Letters to Serapion of Thmuis, 1:28 [A.D. 360]

He had to look into traditions because Scripture didn't agree with him.

Romans 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

So I take it you wholeheartedly agree with the heretic Arius that Jesus, though more than an average man, was not the eternal God incarnate, but was created by God in time.

 

[justinangel]

I feel that I should add something.

Jesus Christ had another opportunity -even a better one than the one above- to show that Christians should treat Mary in a more special way:

"And it happened, as He spoke these things, that a certain woman from the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, "Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts which nursed You!" But He said, "More than that, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it." (Luke 11:27-28)
​

Jesus had the perfect opportunity to elevate Mary for bringing Him into the world and raising Him but He didn't. He actually taught us the contrary! Mary is just as blessed as any other person who hears the word of God and keeps it! Is Mary blessed? Indeed, for she obeyed God. But also every other person who obeys God is blessed. This means that if one is to raise Mary because she was blessed for nursing our Lord, then that person should also raise to the same level all people that hear the word of our Lord and keep it!

To the Lord, Mary is not elevated far above the rest of the Christians. True it is that she had a special calling, but she si not the only one.

No. If we are part of the body of Christ, Mary is our sister, because she was part of the same body we are. Or are you saying she was not part of the body of Christ? I hope not.

Your private interpretation of the scriptures is inconsonant with the sacred Marian traditions of the Church. The Judeo-Christians of apostolic time would surely beg to disagree with you on your individual perception of Mary. They, on the contrary, acknowledged and appreciated the essential role God favoured her with in his plan of redemption by virtue of her act of faith working through love (Gal 5, 5-6) at the Annunciation which resulted in the incarnation of God our Saviour. The Christian community of the nascent church devoted themselves to the Mother of our Lord in a lively spirit of gratitude and praise reminiscent of the devotion that was lavished upon the ancient Jewish heroine Judith by Uzziah and God's chosen people for having faithfully helped deliver the Israelites from slavery and oppression at the hands of their enemies as the Father's collaborator. Mary was honoured as holding a pre-eminent place in the order of grace by the faithful of the new dispensation, as Judith was by those of the old dispensation. Indeed, Mary was seen as having been prefigured by Judith.

"Blessed are you daughter, by the Most High God, above all the women on earth, and blessed be the Lord God, the creator of heaven and earth, who guided your blow at the head of the chief of our enemies. Your deeds of hope will never be forgotten by those who tell of the might of God."
Judith 13, 18-19


Luke acknowledges a Marian tradition that had begun to sprout within the first Christian community as an offshoot of its Judaic heritage. In literary form it is expressed in the words of Mary's cousin Elizabeth, who was filled with the Holy Spirit when she pronounced these words:


"Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. Blessed are you who believed that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled."
Luke 1, 42, 45 [NAB]

"There is a great mystery here: that just as death comes to us through a woman [Eve], so life is born to us through a woman [Mary]."
St. Augustine, the Christian Combat 22:24 (A.D. 396)


"Hail, Mary, you are the most precious creature in the whole world; hail, Mary, incorrupt dove; hail, Mary, inextinguishable lamp; for from you was born the Sun of justice...through you every faithful soul achieves salvation."
St. Cyril of Alexandria, Homily 11 at the Council of Ephesus (A.D. 431)


In Luke 11, the Greek word for "rather" is menounge. What Jesus actually says in direct context is that his mother Mary is "more" blessed on account of her living faith than she is for having conceived and borne him. And our Lord is also suggesting that his mother's faith should serve as a pre-eminent model for our own. Mary's faith was representative of our own faith insofar that it merited for us the universal gift of salvation (Gen 3,15).

The apostle Paul metaphorically described faith as the abilty to "move mountains", but he suggested to the Christian community at Corinth that a person cannot actually perform a supernatural act of faith to his merit if love is absent. Charity (caritas) must be added to faith in order to perfect and complete one's justification before God. By her act of faith in love - for God and humankind - Mary helped make satisfaction for Eve's disobedience and so merited for us the principle Source of all grace by his coming into the world, through whose sacred merits the grace of justification has been offered us. In the words of John Damascene: "In her God became man and man became God," by partaking in the divine life through sanctification and justification.

All this is for the glory of God above all, as acknowledged by Augustine: "In crowning their merits, you are crowning your own gifts." Our Blessed Mother Mary is the crown of God's handiwork next to Jesus, and so we must believe that our heavenly Father would take no pleasure in allowing the work of his hands to be spoiled by corruption. After all, our Lord took his sacred body and precious blood from her in order to redeem us. In the order of grace, Mary has preceded us in the redemption of our bodies on the last day in virtue of her divine motherhood and in honour of the Son, the firstfruits. Her individual merits take second place and depend on the Source of all human merit by the grace of God.

Mary's flesh and blood made the Incarnation possible and served to complete the Divine initiative. There is no reason to disbelieve in Our Lady's corporeal assumption into heaven unless we doubt whether God himself became a corporeal creature in his divinity or believe his assumed flesh and blood had been tainted with corruption. However, in his infinite wisdom and mercy, God the Father provided a perfect Mother for a perfect Son, the Woman (Mother of the new order of creation in Christ) who had always been endowed with God's sanctifying grace ever since God fashioned her soul at the first instant of her conception and preserved her free from the stain of original sin (Lk 1, 28, 30).

And Mary said, "My soul proclaims the glory of the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my saviour, for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden."
Luke 1, 46

You stretch out your hand and save me, your hand will do all things for me. Your love, O Lord, is eternal, discard not the work of your hands.
Psalm 138, 7-8

"He was the ark formed of incorruptible wood. For by this is signified that His tabernacle [Mary] was exempt from putridity and corruption."
St. Hippolytus, Orations Illinud, Dominus pacit me (ante A.D. 235)

Pax Christu,
J.A.

 

[datgnat]

I once again have a few questions for you guys and gals.

Why is this important to your faith?

At what part of her life do you believe she was taken?

Why didn't she just go when Jesus departed?

She was Jesus's mother on the earth, but does that apply to Him after his crucifixion, burial, and resurrection as He was born anew?

If after His resurrection, Jesus still had the responsibilities due His mother and everything that connotates to the eldest male in a family in those times--why would He tell John to take care of her by appointing John as her son in a few of His last words? Couldn't He have just said, "Keep an eye on her til I get back?"?


I highly esteem Mary and look up to the amount of faith required to complete God's will for her life. I think that women in today's society would do well to exhibit the amount of faith that she, or any of the other matriarchs in the bible possess.

However, I fail to see the point of adding more to the account than what the prophets and disciples recorded. It's not edifying to my personal spiritual life and it doesn't bear witness with the Holy Spirit within me.

It appears to me that certain doctrines, statements, and dogmas were made and it simply snowballed into creating more theological leaps into uncharted territory. It is a habit of human nature to make things more complicated than they really are. To overexamine something as simple as salvation, prayer, or sanctification and turn it into a system of complex patterns of rules and guidelines.

The bible wasn't written to be difficult to understand or with complex machines of action to beget results (although some of the more modern translations might have been ). If God had wanted to inspire scripture that was over our head or hidden some deep meaning for other doctrines within the pages of the new testament, it would've been easier than breathing out stars, I'm certain of that! Good thing he kept it understandable for all men. (I'm pretty sure he employed the K.I.S.S method )

 

[justinangel]

=datgnat;57731139]I once again have a few questions for you guys and gals.
Why is this important to your faith?

"It is our hope that belief in Mary's bodily assumption into heaven will make our belief in our own resurrection stronger and render it more effective."
Pope Pius Xll, Apostolic Constitution: Munificentissimus Deus (1 November1950) [Defining the Assumption]

When defining the Assumption of Mary into heaven in his encyclical, Pope Pius confirmed our belief in the righteousness of the Son, that as "the perfect observer of God's law, he could not do otherwise than to honour, not only his eternal Father (who overshadowed Mary and begot the Child together with her: my emphasis), but also his most beloved mother." For it was she "who conceived Christ, brought him forth, nursed him with her milk, held him in her arms, and clasped him to her breast." We would seriously have to question our belief in the perfect righteousness of our Lord and his absolute love for his mother if he willed to keep her "apart from him in body, even though not in soul, after this earthly life." We would also have to seriously question our belief in the distribution of our heavenly rewards, which according to Paul differ in magnitude in accordance with our merits in the divine order of God's gratuity. Since Mary "most merited" to conceive and bear God's Only-begotten Son, and intimately collaborated with him in the redemption of souls, it is fitting that she precede the rest of us in the redemption of our bodies on the last day. Indeed, we have less reason to believe in our bodily resurrection and the Incarnation if there exists the slightest contradiction in our perception of the righteousness of the Father and the Son. Once Protestants rid themselves of their erroneous conception of the Atonement as being purely a legal transaction, through which Christ's righteousness is imputed to our account, they might better appreciate the "great things" our heavenly Father has mercifully done for Mary, in view of the redemptive merits of his Son, and not begrudge her the special blessings she has been given from God by virtue of her divine motherhood in the order of grace.

"And who, I ask, could believe that the ark of holiness, the dwelling place of the Word of God, the temple of the Holy Spirit, could be reduced to ruin? My soul is filled with horror at the thought that this virginal flesh which had begotten God, had brought him into the world, had nourished and carried him, could have been turned into ashes or given over to be food for worms."
St. Robert Bellarmine [quoted by Pope Pius Xll in his encyclical]

At what part of her life do you believe she was taken?

There is no certain tradition as to the year of Mary's death, but a tradition espoused by the Church Father, Clement of Alexandria, indicates A.D. 48.

Why didn't she just go when Jesus departed?

You'll have to ask Jesus. You may as well ask why Michael Jackson didn't die earlier than he did. God only knows.

She was Jesus's mother on the earth, but does that apply to Him after his crucifixion, burial, and resurrection as He was born anew?

Scripture only reveals that in the resurrection we will no longer marry or be given in marriage (cf. Lk 20, 35). There is no question raised whether our fathers and mothers will still be our natural parents in the eyes of God. The expression "until death do us part" applies to the sacrament of Holy Matrinomy, not our relationship with our parents. We should note that the Gospels unqualifiably refer to Mary as the mother of Jesus. The sacred texts were written after Jesus had risen from the dead and ascended into heaven and after Marys transition.

If after His resurrection, Jesus still had the responsibilities due His mother and everything that connotates to the eldest male in a family in those times--why would He tell John to take care of her by appointing John as her son in a few of His last words? Couldn't He have just said, "Keep an eye on her til I get back?"?

I am sure that our Lord remained with his mother in spirit while she was still alive just as he had remained with his apostles in spirit before they died. Jesus assured his disciples that he would be with his Church in spirit until the end of time (cf. Mt 28, 20). I am sure our Lord kept an even more watchful eye over his mother from his heavenly throne out of mutual love for her, since there is no human love such like God's love for us than the love a mother has for her child (cf. 1 Cor 13, 4-7). Jesus must have always appreciated this truth in his relationship with Mary and so could not have neglected or remain apart from her in spirit after his ascension.

I highly esteem Mary and look up to the amount of faith required to complete God's will for her life. I think that women in today's society would do well to exhibit the amount of faith that she, or any of the other matriarchs in the bible possess.

There is no biblical matriarch other than Mary who conceived and bore the One who inherited the throne from his father David to reign on his throne for all eternity in the kingdom of heaven (cf. Lk 1, 32).

" Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb."
( Lk 1, 42 [NAB]).

On your right hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir.
Psalm 45, 9

However, I fail to see the point of adding more to the account than what the prophets and disciples recorded. It's not edifying to my personal spiritual life and it doesn't bear witness with the Holy Spirit within me.

So what you do find edifying is that the Son would dishonour the Mother by casting the curse of Eve upon her and dismissing his own word (cf. Mt 15, 4; Lev 20, 9).

Dearly beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits if they be of God.
1 John 4, 1

It appears to me that certain doctrines, statements, and dogmas were made and it simply snowballed into creating more theological leaps into uncharted territory. It is a habit of human nature to make things more complicated than they really are.

Jews and Muslims feel the same way about our Trinitarian and Christological dogmas. However, "the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Tim 3, 15; cf. Isa 35, 8; 54, 13-17). The Church - not Scripture - is the final authority on matters of faith and morals (cf. Mt 18, 17-18). Her dogmas have always been promulgated by the proper apostolic teaching authority with the infallibe guaranty of the Holy Spirit under his guidance. (cf. Jn 16, 12-13; Acts 20, 28; 1 Pet 2, 25).

The bible wasn't written to be difficult to understand or with complex machines of action to beget results... If God had wanted to inspire scripture that was over our head or hidden some deep meaning for other doctrines within the pages of the new testament, it would've been easier than breathing out stars, I'm certain of that!

The Scriptures can indeed be difficult to understand and can be distorted by the ignorant to their destruction (cf. 2 Pet 3, 16). God did not intend that the Holy Spirit should lead each and every individual to an infallible interpretation and understanding of his written word (cf. 2 Pet 1, 20) which the false Protestant doctrine of sola Scriptura presupposes.

Good thing he kept it understandable for all men.

Which explains why Protestantism has been doomed from the beginning in the 16th century to constitute a divided house in matters of faith and morals.

Pax Christu,

 

[Ave Maria]

Here are some links defending the infallible dogma of the Assumption of Mary:

Scripture Catholic - THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY

Scripture Catholic - THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY

Immaculate Conception and Assumption | Catholic Answers

Where in the Bible does it say that Mary was assumed into heaven? | Catholic Answers

The Assumption of Mary

Turris Fortis - The Assumption of Mary

Mark Brumley

Karl Keating

The Assumption Of Mary: A Belief Since Apostolic Times - Father Clifford Stevens

THE PROTESTANT REFORMERS ON MARY