The end of the Virgin Mary's life.

[silouanathonite]

This is not an attempt to troll or anything of the sort. My question is what is the official Roman Catholic teaching on the end of Mary's life. I know the Roman Catholic Church believes in the assumption, but do you believe that she died or was just assumed. Thank you in advance for your response.

 

[InTheCloud]

In the Early Church there was the tradition that something extraordinay happened to the Blessed Mary in the end. When the wife of Emperor Constantine tried to do a luxury mausoleum for Mary the bishops said she left no earthy body.
The Dormition of Mary (the most common Eastern Orthodox position) and the Assumption were the most common explanations. in the 1950s the CC adopted the Assumption as the official teaching. The Dormition said that she died and then was assumed.The Assumptios said she was assumed alive, like Eliah or Enoch.

 

[Tonks]

The Assumptios said she was assumed alive, like Eliah or Enoch.

This is not entirely true. Munificentissimus Deus is rather silent on the matter (as was Pius XII). Catholics are allowed to believe that she died or that she was she was assumed alive as it really isn't the important part of the dogma.

Writings of Church Fathers (both East & West) tend towards death but it certainly isn't a dogmatic point. Though I'll note that even Christ's body was subject to the law of death.

 

[Gwendolyn]

I don't spend too much time thinking about it, but people have said to me that if she had no original sin she couldn't have died. But Christ didn't have original sin and He still died.

What are the key differences between the Dormition and the Assumption?

 

[a.d.ivNonasNovembres]

I heard a story which I guess is not official that Mary being sinless didn't have to die, but she died anyway in order to unite her more firmly with the suffering of her Son.

 

[AMDG]

This is not entirely true. Munificentissimus Deus is rather silent on the matter (as was Pius XII). Catholics are allowed to believe that she died or that she was she was assumed alive as it really isn't the important part of the dogma.

Writings of Church Fathers (both East & West) tend towards death but it certainly isn't a dogmatic point. Though I'll note that even Christ's body was subject to the law of death.

Yep. And I think it needs to be acknowledged that the Catholic Church is both the Latin Rite and the Eastern Catholic Rites under the Pope, the successor of Peter. (The Latin Rite and the Eastern Catholic Rites are not considered separate churches. They both basically have the same Sacraments (although in the Eastern Catholic Rites, they are known as Mysteries.)

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, The Feast of the Assumption is from the early Church's Feast of the Dormition celebrated in the 500s. Yes, the Latin Rite does not mention specifically that Mary died, but the Eastern Rite (Byzantine Rutherian) does recall that Mary's tomb was empty save for her sash and they celebrate the Dormition on the same day. Different name, same concept in that after Mary's life on earth was complete, she was taken to heaven by her Son Jesus. (I am Latin Rite, but once an Eastern Catholic Byzantine priest did help out our Latin Rite chapel, I've gone to Divine Liturgies and have received Communion in a Byzantine Rutherian church (Eastern Catholic Rite.) My Secular Carmelite (Latin Rite) friend was born into the Byzantine Rite (not sure which one), married in the Latin Rite, but has attended the Rutherian Rite along with me and has not only received Communion there, but also went to Confession there too although still belonging to a Latin Rite parish.) Anyway, because of this, IMO, whether or not there is an actual statement "Mary died" does not "take away" from the Feast of the Assumption. To me the Dormition/Assumption is all one.

 

[Tonks]

I should note, that my response was only directed towards dogmatic issues within Catholicism. I'm not entirely sure how the Eastern Rites square up with everything because the death of the Theotokos is dogmatic within Orthodoxy. This is why we can say the Theotokos was sinless and immaculate but not free from the inherited fruits of ancestral sin: which is death.

At any rate, this gets into some theological weeds best left untended at the moment. I'm guessing the Eastern Rites square it much like they do the filioque etc where they affirm it is a legitimate Western expression but do not have to hold to it themselves, IIRC.

 

[Reader Antonius]

Never mind......deleted post

 

[Rhamiel]

I do not think it is clear if our Lady died first or if it was more like a deep sleep or coma, we believe at the end of her life God took her to heaven, "dormation" or "end of life" can be kinda unclear, I am not really looking at it from a medical standpoint, also since the Eastern Church believes she died first I see no reason to not trust them on this

 

[Ave Maria]

I believe she was assumed. I may be wrong about this and if I am, I hope someone will correct me but she was not subject to the effects of original sin and death is one of the effects of original sin so I don't believe she died.

 

[Tu Es Petrus]

On November 1, 1950, Pope Pius XII solemnly declared:

By the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory (Constitution Munificentissimus Deus, no 44 )

Since the declaration of Papal Infallibility by Vatican I in 1870, this declaration by Pius XII has been the only ex cathedra use of Papal Infallibility.

 

[Reader Antonius]

also since the Eastern Church believes she died first I see no reason to not trust them on this

My feelings exactly!

The Rock of Orthodoxy only spoke concerning the Assumption, that is the bodily and spiritual assumption of the Deipara into heaven.....NOT whether she died.

The Holy Spirit did not see it fit to go beyond this dogmatically.

How fitting that the Patriarchates of the East (i.e. Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria, Babylon, and Cicilia) "complete" the dogmatic definition of the See of St. Peter.

And yet not dogmatically. After all the other Patriarchates have no power to define dogma without an Ecumenical Council, only the Pope of Rome can speak from the See of Peter and define something outside of an Ecumenical Synod (however, even still Papal infallibility is meek compared to the way the Holy Spirit works in Ecumenical Councils, one could think of it as a safe-guard rather than the norm).

In any case this is an instance where we, as Catholics, must breathe through BOTH our lungs:

East and West. The Rock of Orthodoxy, which stands in the West, was given the grace to define the Assumption......the East, while not definitive, has kept the ancient truth that the Deipara actually did die.

There is no reason not to trust the East on this. I also cannot see how one can deny the death of the Deipara and stand well Patristically and even theologically.



(NOTE: All references to the "East" in this post are solely refering to the Churches of the East that are in communion with the Pope of Rome).

 

[Reader Antonius]

I believe she was assumed. I may be wrong about this and if I am, I hope someone will correct me but she was not subject to the effects of original sin and death is one of the effects of original sin so I don't believe she died.

This is theologically faulty, with all due respect.

The Lord too was not under the effects of Original Sin and yet He too died.

Also, the Blessed Virgin was the perfect disciple, it is only fitting that she follow her Son into death.

Also it is the CONSTANT tradition of the Catholic East that she died, as I said the Pope of Rome only was given the grace to define the Assumption, not whether she died.

I do not see anyway to argue that she did not die without conflicting with the Church Fathers or with the "other lung" of the Catholic Church.

This is why the vast majority of theologians, West and East, agree that she did, in fact, die.

 

[Rhamiel]

Also, the Blessed Virgin was the perfect disciple, it is only fitting that she follow her Son into death.

agree with that, I used to think she was alive when she was assumed into heaven, then someone pointed this out to me and it really just spoke to my heart

 

[MoNiCa4316]

I don't know if Mary died before the assumption or not.... it doesn't seem like there is a dogma about this. We're only required to believe in the Assumption

so does this mean that only Jesus and Mary have their bodies in Heaven, and the rest of us are awaiting the Resurrection...? (seems so to me)

what are the implications of Mary having a glorified body now.. is this maybe how the apparitions are possible?

 

[a.d.ivNonasNovembres]

I don't know if Mary died before the assumption or not.... it doesn't seem like there is a dogma about this. We're only required to believe in the Assumption

so does this mean that only Jesus and Mary have their bodies in Heaven, and the rest of us are awaiting the Resurrection...? (seems so to me)

what are the implications of Mary having a glorified body now.. is this maybe how the apparitions are possible?

I could be wrong but I think when Jesus resurrected some other people did at the same time...
Even if I am wrong, surely Enoch will have his body there?

 

[Romans 13:3]

I could be wrong but I think when Jesus resurrected some other people did at the same time...
Even if I am wrong, surely Enoch will have his body there?

And Elijah.

 

[Rhamiel]

Monica

what are the implications of Mary having a glorified body now.. is this maybe how the apparitions are possible?

well there have been apparitions of angels and other saints who have died, so God will use the souls of saints who have not had a bodily ressurection for apperitions as well

 

[Tu Es Petrus]

also since the Eastern Church believes she died first I see no reason to not trust them on this

Hmmm. I'll stick with the pope

 

[Rhamiel]

Hmmm. I'll stick with the pope

what does the Pope say?
has he come out in favor of one theological/historical view over the other?
and I said Eastern Christian, not Eastern Orthodox, as far as I know, the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches also believe in the Dormation, if I am mistaken please correct me.