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
Are you going to apologize to Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary at the moment of your death for not believing in her holiness.
The Blessed Virgin Mary is not a myth.
Thank you. I've just had a moment.
Would that also imply that hell is complete isolation from God?
church ping
First Fabrications 3:10
Your tagline is brilliant!
Does the Bible say that Mary was sinless?
My wife would probably disagree, LOL!
priosner6
What book describes Mary’s assumption?
So Paul went up to the third sky, eh???
Also, the event described in 2 Corinthians 12:2-4 is a vision and the "man in Christ" spoken of didn't actually go to the location of God's throne
Paul says whether in the body, or out of the body, he can't tell...
All I am saying is the ascension of Mary isn’t in the bible, it’s a myth. This was made up due to the “Emaculate Conception” catholic doctrine which states that Mary was without sin, so they had to come up with the ascension because if she was without sin then she never would have died, the ascension is actually a relatively recent doctrine even.
We all have one of those in our family.
I was sitting around a table in Cleveland this weekend when the subject of Sarah Palin came up. Everyone hated her.
When we left, my 10-year-old said, “I thought they were smarter than that.”
Nuff said.
Seems like the event “Queen of Heaven being assumed” and seated at the right hand of Christ would be a little more important of an event than Enoch being assumed; therefore it should be one of the major events in the book of Acts.
But it is not. She is mentioned a few times in the Gospels, once in Acts, and nowhere in the epistles. Seems like if Peter is subject to her authority he would have said something in any one of his epistles. If Paul had a vision of Christ, would he have also seen Mary at his side ... but nothing. James, Jude, nothing ... then there is John ... who became her son at the cross ... he saw a vision of Christ on the throne ... no Mary to be found.
Without Biblical evidence there can be only one conclusion ... Mariology is false doctrine propogated by false teachers whose purpose is to mystify Christian soteriology into another gospel.
Repeating this: Catholics believe that Mary was assumed into heaven. That means carried in some fashion. If you were only to read of the Early Church Fathers and the accounts of the apostles about how they were all miracuously transported from all over the world to her bedside as she died.......sigh.......it's on the Daily Readings thread.
Are you talking about the Bible or some other book. Please be more specific.
Mary was not sinless. If she was, she wouldn’t have needed a Christ.
Mary was not taken up, she died with John, and was buried.
This is more of the same pap that seeks to slowly make Mary a co-redemptrix.
It is sick, blasphemous, and utterly against all biblical understanding.
Paul mentions Mary not once. NO ONE mentions Mary outside of the first four gospels. If she is such an important person...
You would no more pray to Mary, than to any apostle, or your uncle Jim Bob.
This is why I broke with Catholicism many years ago. While there are many good Catholics, they are fed pap.
Be a disciple, have a personal relationship, thank God for all the Martyrs, and Mary for being such an upright vessel.
She is not God, she was Godly, she did not ascend, she died and will ascend with the rest of us.
EOS.
“an someone help me find King James and Pat Boone in the Bible?”
Why, they are right there next to the assumption of Mary ;)
“So, Mary, without sin”
That’s your problem right there. The Bible says all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Mary was not granted an exception.
Are you actually responding to me?
First, my post has nothing to do with your response.
Second, I don’t remember asking your opinion.
Thanks.
Expanding on the idea of the "celestial glory" to which Mary arrived, Pope Benedict noted that people today are conscious that by "'heaven' we are not referring to just any place in the universe, to a star or something similiar" but "to something much bigger and more difficult to define with our limited human concepts.
Not as man thinks, but as God thinks.
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.