FK: "I don't know why she would escape Judgment. Even within the construct, she could simply be adjudicated innocent on all counts. This line would also seem problematic with all the scripture on the Judgment (i.e., no exceptions)."
But her assumption would be exactly that adjudication. Having received particular judgment upon her death, she was absolved of everything and assumed to heaven. we also believe that all the Saints of the Church are in heaven and not in an intermediate state.
But what does this mean about the other two Biblical assumptions? It would seem to put Elijah and Enoch on a par with Mary. That is, on a higher "tier" than the Apostles, etc. Or, are you saying that since the Saints are in the same place, that assumption really isn't that big a deal, but more just as one means to an end?
By the way, +Paul obviously was not of that opinion, for he would have qualified his statement that all have sinned. In other words, +Paul did not think Mary was pure and blameless.
Yes, absolutely. I could not possibly agree more. :) Paul elsewhere said that Jesus was sinless, but I don't see where he had room for any other exceptions. And, he was the first to include himself in with the rest of us. :)
I have no clue. Elijah actually didn't die. I think he is supposed to come back to die!
Another thing about bodily assumption: heaven and hell are not 'physical' places to be taken to. We think of hell as a "state" of the soul of a person who was unable to let go of anger and love for the world and other passions.
But that goes directly against the liturgical tradition of Orthodoxy where we sing "Thou [Christ] didst descent into hell." The Apostolic Creed also establishes that. Even the Gospel expression "the gates of hell" suggests a physical place.
All this sounds like some left-over paganism that no one bothered to correct. Where is heaven and where is hell, and where is God the Father and how can Christ sit to the tight of Him? These are some very visual descriptions of physical entities and yet the Church does not teach hell or heaven to be a "place."
Did he? Paul's authorship of Hebrews is doubtful. Did Paul mention this elsewhere?
I am going to go out on a limb and give you my opinion. I do not think that Paul knew everything about Christianity that we do today. It is very unlikely, for example, that Paul's theology regarding the Trinity was largely undeveloped and took the Church many years to understand what had been revealed to the Church. I will say the same regarding Paul's thought on Mary. It is unlikely that Paul had considered that Mary was the archtype for the Church - pure and spotless (as he writes in Ephesians). It is Paul who ALSO writes about the "New Adam". Naturally, he didn't appear to had plumbed the depths of discovery that Mary would have been the "New Eve". Thus, Paul DID set the ground work for the later connection between Mary and the Church.
What we DO know is that Christianity very soon after Paul DID realize that Mary was something more than in incubator for the Christ - which is how Protestants seem to "honor" Mary... This was a result of prayerful meditation of the Scriptures and the Apostolic teachings given to the successors of the Apostles.
Regards