[metmom]

Are you saying that the absence of evidence of Mary after Acts - is evidence of her absence?

No, that's Catholic thinking.

Scripture is silent on her fate.

So, please, be the first Catholic on this thread to address the topic of the thread.

Some of your early popes said the assumption of Mary was heresy.

Now others say it's OK.

Who is right?

And how did this change from the church that (supposedly) has not changed since its inception?

[LurkingSince'98]

Simple I choose to believe in the dogma of the Assumption as illuminated in the Catechism as presented elsewhere on this thread.

And yes that is Catholic thinking and I am Catholic.

Keep in mind that most of the Catholics on this thread believe the dogma of the Assumption exactly as written.

Why does it concern you or other prots what I or any other Catholics believe?

I certainly don’t care one jot what you believe, why would you care what I believe I just find it strange.

BTW keep up the good work on ARTH, the hits you put up keep getting better and better,

For the Greater Glory of God

[ronnietherocket3]

Some of your early popes said the assumption of Mary was heresy.

Where do any Popes state that it is heresy to believe the Assumption? Keep in mind this must be a condemnation specifically of the Assumption. If it is a condemnation of a group, keep in mind that would mean the Church can't teach that Christ was crucified, as the Arians believed this (their problem was in denying the divinity of Christ).

[NKP_Vet]

“And how did this change from the church that (supposedly) has not changed since its inception”

I thought an expert on all things Catholicism could tell us.
Take it away.