Oh, please. I don't think so. One would wonder why the Orthodox hasn't adopted it, if that were the case; or why it took 1500 years to finally agree to it. It's invented. In fact, what you are suggesting is that either the Orthodox or Rome have not been able to correctly decipher doctrine. Considering the fact that the Roman Catholic Church consider things of this nature, coming from the chair of Peter, to be infalible, one would have to conclude the Orthodox is in error.
One of my non-Christian heroes is Socrates and I work really hard at not saying "know" unless I know.
As far as Socrates goes, personally I think he makes a pretty poor role model and anyone who claims to hear "inner voices" I tend to avoid. While you may not "know" what is the status of the "co-redeptix" of Mary, it is apparent it doesn't trouble you whatever the Church decides.
Oh, please. I don't think so
What are you suggesting? Can we be clear here?
One would wonder why the Orthodox hasn't adopted it, if that were the case; or why it took 1500 years to finally agree to it.
There are a number of Russian Orthodox Churches dedicated to the Assumption. Check it out. And the Dormition of the Theotokos is a major aspect of Orthodox Spirituality. Celebrations have been occurring since the 6th century, about 1,500 years ago, as I said. So as to the matters of fact in my post, my opinion might be wrong, but it certainly is widely held, whether or not you think so.
In fact, what you are suggesting is that either the Orthodox or Rome have not been able to correctly decipher doctrine.
What you are indicating is that you do not understand how doctrinal statements arise. Mostly they arise in response to questions or controversy, not as an attempt to write a complete compendium of "God, the Universe, and Everything". Evidently there was no outcry for a definitive declaration, so none was made one way or the other.
. Considering the fact that the Roman Catholic Church consider things of this nature, coming from the chair of Peter, to be infalible, one would have to conclude the Orthodox is in error.
Clearly there are differences between us, but the Orthodox, as has been shown by the names they give their churches generally s eem to support the idea that our Lady currently enjoys what all the blessed will enjoy someday. The only disgreement is about whether or not that needs to be declared de fide.
Socrates certainly admitted to a daemon, but he made every effort to avoid claiming to know what he did not know. I think he did pretty well for someone outside the Covenants.
While you may not "know" what is the status of the "co-redeptix" of Mary,
Neither of us knows. The difference is that you claimed to know what you did not know.
it is apparent it doesn't trouble you whatever the Church decides.
I trust the promise of God to guide my Church into Truth. My personal preference is that it not be made de fide. As I have said, I do not think it is radical theology at all, but the term evidently seems to upset those who prefer hyperventilation to thought, and we have an obligation to be concerned for them even though they suggest we are liars and fools.
Harley, I get that you think we're just awful, okay?
"One would wonder why the Orthodox hasn't adopted it, if that were the case; or why it took 1500 years to finally agree to it. It's invented."
Harley, personally I don't know a single Orthodox person or hierarch who does not believe in the bodily Assumption of the Theotokos into heaven after her death. We simply haven't made it a dogma while Rome has. Rome dogmatizes things more than we do, far more actually but that may say more about the Western mindset or the challenges faced by the Western Church than anything else. We have believed in the Assumption for at least 1500 years.