Nobody said it ok to just come up with ideas. We didn't make up the Assumption. It happened and is attested to. Just not in any canonical writings.
Likewise, Peter was martyred in Rome and the other Apostles were not Assumed. If they were, we'd have the Traditional belifs about it.
You see, we didn't read the Book and then make up stories outside of it. We wrote the Book and we were there in history when these things truly happened.
If her redemption from sin took place at the moment of her conception, then that means she didn't need Jesus' crucifiction to grants her forgiveness from sin...
God granted her a singular favor, because of her role in salvation, to grant the merits of Christ's sacrifice prior to it happening in time.
Do you think God had to "wait" for Christ to be sacrificed? God does not operate in time as we do. To Him the sacrifice of Christ has always been present, and He has always been able to use its merits for the salvation of souls.
The history only had to play out in time for our benefit here in creation.
If anything, I'm pulled toward Lutheranism, but cannot quite believe in the Real Presence, (or Contransubstantiation?).
Lutherans believe, generally, in consubstantiation. That the Body and Blood of Christ are present "with" the bread and wine.
Catholics believe in transubstantiation, that the Body and Blood are present because the bread and wine have changed permanently.
SD
Because they were not. As you know, from the earliest times the Church has venerated the relics of the saints. St. Peter's body is under his Basilica in Rome, St. James is at Compostella in Spain, etc.
No one, anywhere, at any time, has claimed to have the smallest fragment of the body of the Blessed Virgin Mary. I think this is the firmest proof, given the known predisposition of the Church for holding on to such things, that Mary was assumed into heaven.
If her redemption from sin took place at the moment of her conception, then that means she didn't need Jesus' crucifiction to grants her forgiveness from sin...
If God didn't need Jesus' sacrifice to grant Mary forgiveness of sins, then why didn't He just apply that same method of salvation to the rest of the world, and spare His Son from crucifixtion?
Of course Christ's sacrifice was necessary. Mary was a human being, and no human has ever been redeemed without the application of Christ's sacrifice to them. Mary happened to have it applied to her at the moment of conception, as opposed to at circumcision (old law) or Baptism (new law). Mary did not need a redeemer to take away her personal sins, since she had none, but to prevent her from contracting original sin so as to make her a fitting habitation of the Almighty. Mary was redeemed from the sin she would have incurred as a member of the human race by a singular grace of God. This could only be done in anticipation of the sacrifice of Christ.
But it also doesn't make sense because it's not mentioned anywhere in the Bible that there were TWO people born without being subject to Original Sin, Jesus and Mary...in fact, the record states that Jesus was the only one born not subject to Original Sin.
Jeremiah the Prophet and St. John the Baptist were both sanctified in the womb (Jeremiah 1.5, Luke 1.15).
If anything, I'm pulled toward Lutheranism, but cannot quite believe in the Real Presence, (or Contransubstantiation?).
"This is my body ... this is my blood." All we do is take what Christ said literally. He didn't say, represents, or symbolizes, but "is". We don't make a Clintonian parsing of this word. Since it really "is" His Body and Blood, the seperate consecration re-presents his sacrifice on the Cross, where His Body was drained of the Most Precious Blood for our redemption. "For as often as you shall eat this bread and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come." (1 Cor. 11.26)
Bread and wine are used to make the sacrifice a clean oblation (physically without blood, although transubstantiation changes the substance of the wine into blood), as prophesied in Malachi 1.11:
"For from the rising of the sun even to the going down, my name is great among the Gentiles, and in every place there is sacrifice, and there is offered to my name a clean oblation: for my name is great among the Gentiles, saith the Lord of hosts."
And also bread and wine are used to make Christ's offering one that is in line with the sacrifice of Melchizedek, who also offered bread and wine. "For he testifieth: Thou art a priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech." (Hebrews 7.17). Its difficult to see how Protestants, denying the sacrifice of the Mass, can make this prophesy make sense, since according to them Christ never offered a sacrifice of bread and wine, and they certainly deny making any such offering themselves.