Replies

Here is a Catholic argument for the Assumption

First of all, Enoch and Elijah were both assumed into heaven. See Heb. 11:5 and 2 Kgs. 2:11. Other saints were assumed from their graves. See Matthew 27:52-53. If God received the glorified bodies of other saints, why would he neglect to assume the body that of His mother, whose virginity and purity would have made her incurruptible? It wouldn't make sense to argue otherwise. The alternatives are even more inconcievable when we consider that Christ promised to glorify all those who suffered with Him (see Rom. 8:17), or would suffered more than Mary, our Lord's mother, as she watched her son die an agonizing death?

The above argument is strengthened if we consider that Christ was born under and bound to the law (Gal. 4:4) to honor his father and mother. What kind of honor would it be to allow His mother's body to rot in the earth rather than to assume Her into Heaven to be with Him in Eternity? Doesn't make much sense to me that Christ would do that.

Also, in Revelations, Mary is identified as the Ark of the Convenant (Rev. 11-12). In Judaic tradition, the defilement of the Ark was forbidden and would cost any person who touched it his life (2 Sam. 6:6-7). So, of course the Ark would rise with the Glory of the Lord who, as the Lord made Flesh, surpassed the old convenant and ushered in the New Convenant, thanks to Mary's "yes" to Gabriel, by which she became the new Ark. And thus we can examine with new eyes Psalm 132:8, which says, "Arise, O Lord, into they resting place; thou and the ark which thou hast sanctified."

As St. Robert Bellarmine wrote, "Who could believe that the ark of holiness, the dwelling of God, the temple of the Holy Spirit [i.e. Mary], crumbled into dust? I shudder at the very thought that the virginal flesh of which God was conceived and born, which nourished Him and carried Him should have turned to ashes or been given as food to worms." What true believer can entertain this thought???

Also, of course Mary would reign in Heaven with the Lord, as it was Judaic tradition for the Mother of the King to reign as Queen, as we know from the story of King Solomon and his mother Bethsheba, the wife of King David.

Or one can turn to the early Church Fathers, such as Epiphanius, who in A.D. 377, wrote: "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."

In the 3rd century, Ephraem described Mary has having been glorifid by Christ and carried through the air to haven.

Who has ever found her grave? When has anyone ever worshipped her relics? Can you think of a single other saint in the history of the Church that did not have at least a single relic? WHY NOT MARY????

Nevermind the infallible teachings of the Church. Just use logic and common sense. It would be absurd, from within the context of Scripture, to conclude anything other than the Assumption of Mary.