The Assumption, also known as the Dormition of the Theotokos in the Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Churches, was first defined as dogma on November 1, 1950 by Pope Pius XII in Munificentissimus Deus (however, it was a belief long before this infallible definition). It was a feast day, however, long before 1950 (about 1600 years earlier) and there are writings about it as late as the 4th century.
The Assumption must be separated from the Ascension, which was where Christ (by His own power) went into Heaven; whereas the Assumption is where Mary was brought, body and soul, into Heaven by Christ (a.k.a. not of her own power). It is also not of dogmatic nature whether Mary was assumed before or after her death. As the picture to the left shows, Mary is looking to G-d, who is the instigator of the Assumption. Mary's focus is not on herself, but on G-d.
Let's first look to see if there is anything in Scripture that contradicts the Assumption, and the answer is no. In fact, there are two people who are mentioned as being "assumed" into Heaven (Enoch and Elijah). Both of these people, according to Scripture, were assumed, body and soul, into Heaven. Elijah, as far as we can tell in Scripture, didn't die before being assumed. So the answer to whether an assumption is contradictory to Scripture, one can answer firmly "no". There are other verses that hint to assumptions occurring, but because they only hint and don't outright prove it, I'll reserve them.
There is a common sense argument: Where are the bones of Mary? It is of historical record that cities and Christian communities vied for the bones and relics of saints, especially the famous ones. They were jealously guarded, and were prized possessions. Some of these cities even had the bones and relics of saints we know little to nothing about. But no city or Christian community claimed the bones of Mary (there was some competition over who had her empty tomb). This is called negative historical proof, and is often used by Christian apologists to help show that Christ rose from the dead, because there are no bones.
And we can't forget the Church Fathers, which shows an early belief in the Assumption (against the idea that Fundamentalists have that the Assumption wasn't believed by the early Church). Let's see, we have:
Epiphanius in A.D. 377, "Let them search the scriptures. They will not find Mary's death; they will not find whether she died or did not die; they will not find whether she was buried or was not buried. More than that: John journeyed to Asia, yet nowhere do we read that he took the holy Virgin with him. Rather, Scripture is absolutely silent [on Mary's earthly end] because of the extraordinary nature of the prodigy, in order not to shock the minds of men. . . . Neither do I maintain stoutly that she died. . . .
"Did she die? We do not know. At all events, if she was buried, she had no carnal intercourse. . . . Or she remained alive, since nothing is impossible with God and he can do whatever he desires" (Panarion, haer. 78, nn. 10-11,23: G.C.S., 37, 461-462; 474).
It is only in the 8th century that the first person argues against the Assumption. Neither Jerome, Origen, Athanasius, Ambrose, nor Augustine contested Epiphanius in what he had written regarding Mary, and if Epiphanius had written something contrary to what was believed by these men, they would have let him know it!
The Assumption is not simply an assumption, but it based upon VERY early Christian tradition and belief. It is not contradictory to Scripture, and proof in the Assumption can be drawn from common sense and the lack of her bones.
Here is a list of articles if you would like to read more (or need more proof)
Here is Pope Benedict XVI's Homily on Feast of Assumption (please understand that when Catholics speak of Mary, we often employ poetic literary devices. For example, I might say that my fiancée is my "everything, the love of my life". This is partially true, but it is really G-d that is my everything and the love of my life. Please read the Homily in that context)
No comments:
Post a Comment