Posted on 08/15/2010 3:56:22 PM PDT by TaraP
The Assumption is not a metaphor...
We must be very clear on this point: The Assumption is not a metaphor. The Blessed Virgin Mary was really taken up, her physical body was transformed. Pope Pius XII in Munificentissimus Deus (1950) declared that Mary, “after the completion of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into the glory of heaven.” Both BODY and SOUL!
This means that her physical body was transformed and glorified (in a manner identical to Christ’s after his Resurrection), her soul was perfected with the Beatific Vision, and she was taken up.
Is heaven a place? In the General Audience of 21 July 1999, Pope John Paul II stated that heaven “is neither an abstraction nor a physical place in the clouds, but a living, personal relationship with the Holy Trinity.”
In this statement, as (almost) always, the great Holy Father was in perfect accord with St. Thomas Aquinas – “Incorporeal things are not in place after a manner known and familiar to us, in which way we say that bodies are properly in place; but they are in place after a manner befitting spiritual substances, a manner that cannot be fully manifest to us”.
What John Paul II wished to stress, and what is especially important to consider today, is that heaven is not to be understood in terrestrial terms.
Heaven is primarily a state of being and is certainly not a ‘place’ in the worldly sense of the term. Nevertheless, we come to a difficulty when we ask:
Where did Mary’s (and Christ’s) body go?
The simplest answer is: Heaven! But then we wonder: If heaven isn’t a place in the ordinary sense of the word, how could there be real human bodies present there?
The words of Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange (who taught John Paul II and oversaw his doctoral work) are most helpful: “Heaven means this place, and especially this condition, of supreme beatitude. Had God created no bodies, but only pure spirits, heaven would not need to be a place; it would signify merely the state of the angels who rejoice in the possession of God.
But in fact heaven is also a place. There we find the humanity of Jesus, the Blessed Virgin Mary, the angels, and the souls of the saints. Though we cannot say with certitude where this place is to be found, or what its relation is to the whole universe, revelation does not allow us to doubt of its existence.”
Now do not think that John Paul II had contradicted his teacher when he said that heaven is not a physical place in the clouds! Garrigou-Lagrange and the great Pontiff are both getting at the same point: Heaven is first and foremost union with God; secondarily, heaven is the place where the bodies of Jesus and Mary abide, but this ‘place’ is not like every other place we think of – its relation to our universe is not clear.
Glorified bodies are very different than non-glorified bodies (though they are essentially the same). A glorified body does not move and take up space in exactly the same way as a non-glorified body does. Still, the glorified bodies of Jesus and Mary are somewhere, but this ‘somewhere’ will necessarily be a ‘place’ which is ‘glorified’ – just as the glorified body is different from non-glorified body, it resides in a ‘glorified place’ which is different from a non-glorified physical place.
Where is heaven? The simple answer is: This has not yet been revealed to us. However, we can say that it is certainly not on earth. Neither is it within the earth. It is not in clouds either. Heaven may be somewhere in our universe, far off – though we must be careful not to fall back into our terrestrial categories of space, distance, and location.
Perhaps it is most likely that heaven is outside the universe in what some Thomists have called “uncontained place”. In ST III, q.57, a.4, ad 2 (which is not in the oldest and best manuscripts) we read: “A place implies the notion of containing; hence the first container has the formality of first place, and such is the first heaven. Therefore, bodies need themselves to be in a place, insofar as they are contained by a heavenly body. But glorified bodies, Christ’s especially, do not stand in need of being so contained, because they draw nothing from the heavenly bodies, but from God through the soul.
So there is nothing to prevent Christ’s body from being beyond the containing radius of the heavenly bodies, and not in a containing place. Nor is there need for a vacuum to exist outside heaven, since there is no place there, nor is there any potentiality susceptive of a body, but the potentiality of reaching thither lies in Christ.”
This argument from the Summa claims that, because the glorified body in no way relies upon the non-glorified world, neither does it need to be contained in the universe. Thus, the bodies of Jesus and Mary may in fact be outside of the universe, outside of space and time, no longer contained by place. There is no space or place outside of the universe, but this is where the bodies of Christ and Mary are; since they need not be contained by physical place.
Therefore, it seems most likely that heaven is outside of our universe. It is not a ‘place’ as we usually think of ‘place’, but is a ‘non-containing place’, a ‘glorified place’. The glorified physical bodies of Jesus and Mary reside there
“The sin nature is transmitted through the man ... not the woman.”
You can’t be serious. Is that what Catholics believe???
“if he did not posess the sinfull nature of fallen man he would not have been able to defeat Satan.”
Whew. You jumped the shark. Okay, then we don’t have much in common. You believe in a Christianity I do not recognize. “Like unto us in all things but sin” (sin is not natural but unnatural to us), is the way I thought the Scripture read. Maybe you read a different Bible.
Such a contention ignores Genesis and the creation of woman from man, as well as modern genetics. The X chromosome comes from man. Two of them make a woman.
All are fallen, none are sinless other than Jesus Christ himself. Mary was a sinner in need of salvation. The Bible tells us this.
And where did Jesus say that his mother died? Last I checked, he died before she did, since Scripture, get that, Scripture, says that she was present under the cross.
I know you don’t believe in the communion of saints but the Church has from the beginning—the Apostles Creed, which goes back to a statement of faith recited at baptism in the early centuries, says that. In Christ, the saints in heaven are alive and in communion with us here on earth. Hence we can and do ask them to intercede just as we ask our Aunt Suzies.
If you want to turf everybody out of the Body of Christ just because they die, go ahead. But prima facie it’s absurd to think that just because Christians who die in faith in Christ are dead, they are no longer part of his Body. And if they are part of his Body, then they are intercessors.
Take a close look at Revelation. Looks to me like the folks in heaven are not dead but alive and having a grand old time worshiping the Lamb. Looks like they’re in the Body of Christ to me.
But what do I know?
This is the kind of stuff that makes me believe Catholicism is a cult.
Lets paste Luke 11.27-28 in here ...
27 While Jesus was saying these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, "Blessed is the womb that bore You and the breasts at which You nursed."
28 But He said, "On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it."
Now where in this universe is there anything mentioned about Jesus elevating Mary to a position of honor in this passage?
The Greeks speak of the Domition of Mary. But the teaching is the same. At the end of her life she was brought to heaven to stand by the side of her son. A church dedicated to the Domition is in the Holy Land and it dates to the 4th Century. But some Protestants think that the dogma was something made up by Pius XII in 1950.
Just for the record, we are agnostic on whether Mary died or not. We are not agnostic on her Assumption into heaven. But as the article states, she might have gotten there after dying first or without dying; we don’t presume to know.
You, on the other hand, apparently know that Jesus said that she died. That’s more than I know. It’s not in Scripture. So, I guess, you must have added something to Scripture. You and Jesus have a special connection, I guess.
No, it’s not what Catholics believe. What makes you think he’s Catholic? He must have gotten this from Pastor Billy Bob.
Persevero and Tarap:
Neither Elijah or Mary was “ascended into heaven”, which in Catholic and Orthodox Theology means ascended by ones own power. That would only relate to Christ. Elijah was assumed by the Power of God, as was Mary.
Now, lets look at this in more detail. The fact that the Scriptures and Sacred Tradition [Apostles and Nicene Creed] speak of the “resurrection of dead” logically implies that all of us who are baptized into the Holy Trinity and remain faithful to God will one day “be assumed into heaven” by God’s power.
The Assumption of Mary is a prefiguration of the Resurrection of the Dead and thus the Assumption of all of us.
““Like unto us in all things but sin””
That quote is not in the Bible but it is in “The Christian Faith 2001:227” which is a Catholic teaching.
The without sin part means that he did not sin (was able to resist sin) as is tought in the Bible. If he had truly been “without sin” in the sense that he was without a sinful nature he would not have been “truly man”.
Im not Catholic, and I dont think Catholics support Traducianism ... and Im too tired to go into it ... but the sin nature is transmitted through the man not the woman.
You continue to put your argument on a human level...as if my sons relationship to me is even remotely a comparison. My son is not the Christ....my son is no the Savior of mankind.
If you are going to use the ridiculous comparison of our human relationships then let me say any Mother who would see her son go thru all Christ did would be rolling in her grave if you elevated her. Mothers are proud of their sons accomplishments...they are warmed in heart and mind...but never want any praise themselves for their sons accomplishments....They want their sons to have the glory due them....and never desire such themselves....so if you are going to use such a crazy comparison due it right!
Jesus asks me to honor Him above all else...I don't need nor do I desire to seek his dead mother for anything and neither should anyone else. We are called to serve Him...not Mary...to love and adore Him...not Mary....to Worship ONLY Him...not Mary or anyone else who sets themselves up above or equal to Christ.
One can honor Mary for giving birth to our Savior without parading phony plastic statues thru the streets or bowing down before them. That is just way off the scale God ever intended. You people fail to hear even Mary's own words saying....”Whatever He asks..do” .....not at all related to her she directs the people to Him....dah!
You catholics see Mary far more than special as Christ's mother.....your own literature and prayers magnify her and worship her....some even place her as equal to and or above Christ...this is just plain wrong and I have no problem stating this is so.
The body of the woman was created from the rib.
as well as modern genetics. The X chromosome comes from man. Two of them make a woman.
Again, you are talking about physical body stuff ... not sin nature.
Nope, we Protestants think that the dogma was made up in the 4th century.
It's not necessarily what you don't know that will hurt you. It's what you know that ain't so. (Most of which is attributed to Will Rogers...who may or may not have said it.)
Okay, you asked for it.
The woman praises, honors, His Mother, just because she is his Mother, because that’s her way of saying, Hey, Jesus, you are Something Special, you are really Great, which means that your mother is to be honored PRECISELY for YOUR (Jesus’) sake.
Jesus says, “Yes, indeed, but more than that, everyone who hears the word of God and keeps it is blessed.”
Now, Luke went out of his way to portray Mary as the one who more than anyone else heard the word of God and kept it. She kept it by obeying it. She kept it by being the first to believe in the Incarnation, being the first human to know about it. She kept the Word hidden beneath heart as the tiny Baby who was God Incarnate. She kept the Word up one side and down the other. She heard the Word, she was the first to Hear the Gospel, the Good News of the Birth of the Messiah. She heard the Word and kept it.
Now, if Luke has put all that stuff earlier in Luke, don’t you just kinda sorta think that maybe just perhaps Luke wanted you, dear reader, to notice the connection?
See, in the old days, writers like to be a tad subtle. They liked to insert little connections that were clear but a bit hidden so that you, Dear Reader, could delight in discovering them.
This is classic Christian exegesis, practiced by all the great exegetes of the Church over many centuries. It was practiced by Jewish exegetes before the Christians.
So, when Jesus said, “Yes, indeed, lady, the woman that bore me and her nursing breasts deserve honor, not just because she is my mother, though she is that and as such deserves your honor, but also and more importantly, because she heard the word of God and kept it, and you, dear lady and others can do that to” the people around him didn’t say, “Hey man, don’t give his Mother the slightest honor whatsoever or Jesus will slap you upside the head.”
No, they “got it.”
And before you object that Jesus began by saying “No, lady,” look up the Greek word. It’s used to mean, “Yes, rather” or “Yes indeed but more than that”
more often that it’s used to mean “No, on the contrary.”
If you want to insist that it means “On the contrary,” you are free to do so. But I have all the intertextual evidence supporting my reading and the sheer philological evidence can go either way.
By ALL the rules of standard exegesis, my reading makes more sense. And thus it has been interpreted for centuries.
Besides, can God Incarnate forbid a woman from honoring his mother when the Ten Commandments obligate him to honor her? Could any reasonable person think he is saying to the woman, “No, on the contrary, my mother is not blessed and the breasts that nursed me are not blessed.” All of us should be saying that about our own mothers, on pain of violating God’s law. Would Jesus do any less than keep the law? You cannot reasonably interpret this as “No, on the contrary.”
No that is not true...Christ's Resurrection from the dead is. He has the power over death and that power was never given to Mary.... Further by stating that Mary is you have usurped Christ in every way.
“You, on the other hand, apparently know that Jesus said that she died.”
The Bible teaches that “it is appointed for all men to die”. Therefore I know that Mary had to have died or she is yet to die which the Bible surely would have mentioned as it did Elijah.
Although I do have a personal conection to Jesus through prayer, that part of my knowledge comes from the Bible.
“You, on the other hand, apparently know that Jesus said that she died.”
The Bible teaches that “it is appointed for all men to die”. Therefore I know that Mary had to have died or she is yet to die which the Bible surely would have mentioned as it did Elijah.
There is no need to get snotty. Although I do have a personal conection to Jesus through prayer, that part of my knowledge comes from the Bible.
And you’re speaking of the physical regarding gender, and extrapolating a peculiar belief regarding original sin to support an extra-Biblical belief.
A rib contains chromosomes too, you know.
Jesus Christ was born to Mary and to his legal father Joseph as a fulfillment of prophecy. There is no plausible way to elevate Mary, a sinner just as we all are sinners, to some extraordinary level of sinlessness within the context of the Bible. She was favored of God, that she was told and we are told. Her descent was not without the taint of sin, however.
All means all. Gender has nothing to do with it. For all you and I know, Mary may have carried the baby Jesus to term without being His natural mother. That’s possible with mere mortals now, no reason it wasn’t possible then as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.