The Virgin Mary and the General Judgment

[aquinas138]

To follow on my use of the corporal work of mercy bury the dead as it regards our lady, according to the thinking of those who say she died and was buried, we should likewise pray for mercy to be had on her as we would pray for the living and the dead.  But, that is clearly absurd.  Mary is ever virgin.  Mary is spouse of the Holy Ghost.  Is there even a prayer "for Mary" found in tradition?  Why would there be a separation in corporal and spiritual matters in this regard?  It is obvious and simple.  Mary was not buried.  If she was not buried, she did not die.  "Full triumph over sin and its consequences(death)" is in the assumption definition itself.

In fact there is a very conspicuous prayer "for Mary" if you broaden your search beyond recent-century Roman-rite speculation. The anaphora (the analogue of the Roman Canon) of the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom prays explicitly for the Virgin and all the saints:

"Moreover, we offer you this spiritual sacrifice for those departed in faith: the forefathers, fathers, patriarchs, prophets, apostles, preachers, evangelists, martyrs, confessors, ascetics, and for every just spirit brought to perfection in faith, especially for our most holy, most pure, most blessed and glorious Lady, the Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary."

Note that this includes the Virgin among those "departed in faith."

[Philip G.]

To follow on my use of the corporal work of mercy bury the dead as it regards our lady, according to the thinking of those who say she died and was buried, we should likewise pray for mercy to be had on her as we would pray for the living and the dead.  But, that is clearly absurd.  Mary is ever virgin.  Mary is spouse of the Holy Ghost.  Is there even a prayer "for Mary" found in tradition?  Why would there be a separation in corporal and spiritual matters in this regard?  It is obvious and simple.  Mary was not buried.  If she was not buried, she did not die.  "Full triumph over sin and its consequences(death)" is in the assumption definition itself.

In fact there is a very conspicuous prayer "for Mary" if you broaden your search beyond recent-century Roman-rite speculation. The anaphora (the analogue of the Roman Canon) of the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom prays explicitly for the Virgin and all the saints:

"Moreover, we offer you this spiritual sacrifice for those departed in faith: the forefathers, fathers, patriarchs, prophets, apostles, preachers, evangelists, martyrs, confessors, ascetics, and for every just spirit brought to perfection in faith, especially for our most holy, most pure, most blessed and glorious Lady, the Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary."

Note that this includes the Virgin among those "departed in faith."

Can you provide a western example? 

[Philip G.]

At some point, like right now, we are going to have to stop using the schismatic and heretical easterners as a guide and certainly not as a rule in this discussion.  I already stopped by no longer using the term "falling asleep".  The orthodox do not even believe in the assumption dogma or the immaculate conception.   So, I am not surprised that they pray "for" the virgin mary in their liturgy.    In fact, it makes perfect sense that they do.  They are heretics.   

[aquinas138]

At some point, like right now, we are going to have to stop using the schismatic and heretical easterners as a guide and certainly not as a rule in this discussion.  I already stopped by no longer using the term "falling asleep".  The orthodox do not even believe in the assumption dogma or the immaculate conception.   So, I am not surprised that they pray "for" the virgin mary in their liturgy.    In fact, it makes perfect sense that they do.  They are heretics.   

To follow on my use of the corporal work of mercy bury the dead as it regards our lady, according to the thinking of those who say she died and was buried, we should likewise pray for mercy to be had on her as we would pray for the living and the dead.  But, that is clearly absurd.  Mary is ever virgin.  Mary is spouse of the Holy Ghost.  Is there even a prayer "for Mary" found in tradition?  Why would there be a separation in corporal and spiritual matters in this regard?  It is obvious and simple.  Mary was not buried.  If she was not buried, she did not die.  "Full triumph over sin and its consequences(death)" is in the assumption definition itself.

In fact there is a very conspicuous prayer "for Mary" if you broaden your search beyond recent-century Roman-rite speculation. The anaphora (the analogue of the Roman Canon) of the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom prays explicitly for the Virgin and all the saints:

"Moreover, we offer you this spiritual sacrifice for those departed in faith: the forefathers, fathers, patriarchs, prophets, apostles, preachers, evangelists, martyrs, confessors, ascetics, and for every just spirit brought to perfection in faith, especially for our most holy, most pure, most blessed and glorious Lady, the Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary."

Note that this includes the Virgin among those "departed in faith."

Can you provide a western example?

I cannot, which is not to say none exist (they may or may not, they may have at one time or maybe never did), but this portion of the Divine Liturgy of John Chrysostom is quite ancient, and has parallels in the liturgies of the other Eastern Churches.

[aquinas138]

At some point, like right now, we are going to have to stop using the schismatic and heretical easterners as a guide and certainly not as a rule in this discussion.  I already stopped by no longer using the term "falling asleep".  The orthodox do not even believe in the assumption dogma or the immaculate conception.   So, I am not surprised that they pray "for" the virgin mary in their liturgy.    In fact, it makes perfect sense that they do.  They are heretics.

The translation was taken purposely from Byzantine Catholic sources. And Rome was in communion with Christians praying those prayers until the Great Schism. This is not a post-schism development.

[sedmohradsko]

I thought the Eastern tradition was that she fell asleep?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dormition_of_the_Mother_of_God

That's what we call it, but it's a euphemism.  Like how St. Paul refers to people who have fallen asleep in the Lord.  He was speaking of physical death.

[Philip G.]

At some point, like right now, we are going to have to stop using the schismatic and heretical easterners as a guide and certainly not as a rule in this discussion.  I already stopped by no longer using the term "falling asleep".  The orthodox do not even believe in the assumption dogma or the immaculate conception.   So, I am not surprised that they pray "for" the virgin mary in their liturgy.    In fact, it makes perfect sense that they do.  They are heretics.

The translation was taken purposely from Byzantine Catholic sources. And Rome was in communion with Christians praying those prayers until the Great Schism. This is not a post-schism development.

Do you think that there exists pre-schism originals of this liturgy/prayer?  I don't.  Or, are we trusting in the authenticity of the eastern copies/transcriptions?  Do we trust their scriptures?  No.

[sedmohradsko]

Mary on the other hand "fell asleep".  It is a corporal mercy of the church to "bury the dead".  When Mary fell asleep, she was not buried, because she was not in need of mercy in this regard.  Sin and death are always together.  Mary did not sin, and Mary did not die.  I think she was assumed as the definition says "in a secret manner".  That means Mary fell asleep, and there is no earthly(apostolic or not) witness of a death. "In like manner" must mean as what directly follows, and only that, that she rose into heaven body and spirit like Christ unlike the rest of creation which must wait until the end of the world/the general judgment.  Mary was not covered with earth, and she does not give up the ghost.  Christ was covered with earth, and he gave up the ghost.  Mary was covered with a cloud/overshadowed by the holy ghost.  "In like manner" refers only to the unity of the body and spirit into heaven, which is the dogma.

Sorry, I think you're grasping at straws.  The Church does not officially teach that she died or that she didn't, so Catholics are free to believe either.  According to tradition, Mary was laid in a tomb.  So the apostles at least thought she was dead, even if she was only asleep in reality.  Neither Mary nor Christ were covered in earth - they were lain in tombs hewn from stone.  If Mary could lie asleep and appear dead to all around, one could then say that Christ did the same, not really dying, but merely sleeping for a while.  You're hoisting speculations to the status of doctrine.

[sedmohradsko]

At some point, like right now, we are going to have to stop using the schismatic and heretical easterners as a guide and certainly not as a rule in this discussion.  I already stopped by no longer using the term "falling asleep".  The orthodox do not even believe in the assumption dogma or the immaculate conception.   So, I am not surprised that they pray "for" the virgin mary in their liturgy.    In fact, it makes perfect sense that they do.  They are heretics.

The liturgies of the Orthodox churches are Catholic liturgies.  They were formed in the context of Catholicism, and their words are Catholic.  At this point, you are acting like a Protestant who ignores all the history prior to your self-created theology, and has the audacity to call that which pre-existed it heresy, because it doesn't agree with what you are trying to postulate.

[aquinas138]

At some point, like right now, we are going to have to stop using the schismatic and heretical easterners as a guide and certainly not as a rule in this discussion.  I already stopped by no longer using the term "falling asleep".  The orthodox do not even believe in the assumption dogma or the immaculate conception.   So, I am not surprised that they pray "for" the virgin mary in their liturgy.    In fact, it makes perfect sense that they do.  They are heretics.

The translation was taken purposely from Byzantine Catholic sources. And Rome was in communion with Christians praying those prayers until the Great Schism. This is not a post-schism development.

Do you think that there exists pre-schism originals of this liturgy/prayer?  I don't.  Or, are we trusting in the authenticity of the eastern copies/transcriptions?  Do we trust their scriptures?  No.

You don't based on what, exactly? You don't like the data? And the Slavonic version of Chrysostom says the same thing "for," and it was translated before the Schism by saints. The existence of these prayers is so well-known that Reformers attempted to use it to argue that the invocation of saints was not believed in the early Church.

And what do you mean "do we trust their scriptures"? We have the same scriptures.

[Philip G.]

At some point, like right now, we are going to have to stop using the schismatic and heretical easterners as a guide and certainly not as a rule in this discussion.  I already stopped by no longer using the term "falling asleep".  The orthodox do not even believe in the assumption dogma or the immaculate conception.   So, I am not surprised that they pray "for" the virgin mary in their liturgy.    In fact, it makes perfect sense that they do.  They are heretics.

The liturgies of the Orthodox churches are Catholic liturgies.  They were formed in the context of Catholicism, and their words are Catholic.  At this point, you are acting like a Protestant who ignores all the history prior to your self-created theology, and has the audacity to call that which pre-existed it heresy, because it doesn't agree with what you are trying to postulate.

The novus ordo is also formed in the context of catholicism.  Liturgy is not infallible.  And, denial of the assumption and the immaculate conception is heresy, which was the focus of my use of the word. 

[sedmohradsko]

The novus ordo is also formed in the context of catholicism.  Liturgy is not dogma.  And, denial of the assumption and the immaculate conception is heresy, which was the context of its application.

The assumption does not mean that Mary didn't die, only that her body was taken into heaven at the end of her earthly life.  The immaculate conception does not demand that Mary not die, only that her death could not have been a consequence of original sin, since she didn't have it.  The Eastern understanding in no way denies these doctrines.

[Philip G.]

I would like to get back to the other subject I started discussing in this thread, and that is the general judgment.  Who here present believes that there are other faithful departed whose bodies are united with their souls and in heaven?  And, what is your reasoning?  I contend that aside from the virgin mary and Jesus, there are none.  And, their will be none until the end of the world.  Can I get an amen?   

[Philip G.]

The novus ordo is also formed in the context of catholicism.  Liturgy is not dogma.  And, denial of the assumption and the immaculate conception is heresy, which was the context of its application.

The assumption does not mean that Mary didn't die, only that her body was taken into heaven at the end of her earthly life.  The immaculate conception does not demand that Mary not die, only that her death could not have been a consequence of original sin, since she didn't have it.  The Eastern understanding in no way denies these doctrines.

The eastern schismatic orthodox do not believe that the assumption and the immaculate conception as catholics require them to be believed are binding dogmatic teaching.  For them, it is debatable theology.  Heresy.  Such will hold no sway if I have any say on particulars proximate to such discussions, such as this current one about the end of Mary's earthly life. 

[TheReturnofLive]

The first immediate Western example that comes to mind is the Mosaic of the Dormition in Santa Maria Maggiore, completed in 1296, 250 years after the East-West schism, in Rome, Italy



If it's such a closed issue with the West being contaminated by those nasty Easterners, how do you explain this?