THE ASSUMPTION OF MARY: Condemned as Heretical by 2 Popes in the 5th and 6th Centuries

christiantruth.com ^ | William Webster

[Salvation]

**Mary admitted her depravity saying "God my Savior".**

Wrong -- she is praising God her savior, and declares that she is the Handmaid of the Lord.......!

Please read the entire Magnificat:

The Magnificat

 

My soul magnifies the Lord
And my spirit rejoices in God my Savior;
Because He has regarded the lowliness of His handmaid;
For behold, henceforth all generations shall call me blessed;
Because He who is mighty has done great things for me,
and holy is His name;
And His mercy is from generation to generation
on those who fear Him.
He has shown might with His arm,
He has scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart.
He has put down the mighty from their thrones,
and has exalted the lowly.
He has filled the hungry with good things,
and the rich He has sent away empty.
He has given help to Israel, his servant, mindful of His mercy
Even as he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his posterity forever.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Binding? Binding. Hmmmm.... (tapping finger on desktop)That reminds me of something.

Well, just for starters, according to the authority we both share --- the Bible ---who has the power to bind and loose?

Matthew 16:19
And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

Matthew 18:18
“Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Who's He talking to here? Who has this power in your church?

[trisham]

Best not to tarry here.

[Gumdrop]

“Sometimes it seems that Catholics will pray to anything that was even mentioned in scripture, maybe even the donkey Jesus rode in will have churches named after it someday.”

---

That is your opinion, and you are welcome to it. But, just because it ‘seems so” does not make it correct.

[NKP_Vet]

Tradition, with goes hand in hand with scripture. Something that lapsed Catholics used to believe in. Once they start touting the protestant line, anything and everything the Catholic Church has ever in 2000 years is wrong.

[NKP_Vet]

The History Channel is liberal propaganda.

[NKP_Vet]

Protestants love the “protestant” things about Luther, but he can just keep all those “Catholic things” he believed in till the day he died.

[dsc]

Catholicism has never been liked here.

[mlizzy]

As the stench grows so does the feeling that the Catholic conservative is no longer welcome here. Your thoughts?

One wonders if allowing these threads to continue is ONLY to bring more hits to the site, because they aren't very comforting to the Catholic conservative, that's true. Some of those who disrespect the Church (via their commentary on this site), do not even check out the conservative news.

That being said, if the nons are still fighting the Catholic Church with tall tales (or partial truths which are the worst lies of all), it's not necessarily a bad sign. That we stand by Her even in tough times (the scandals), shows that the Eucharist is definitely worth it. It's like a troubled marriage; some battle through the aid of the Church until their union (the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony) shines and shines. Others just give up.

[GeronL]

One wonders if allowing these threads to continue is ONLY to bring more hits to the site, because they aren't very comforting to the Catholic conservative

I guess we'll just gloss over all those "Protestants are not real Christians" type threads while we are at it. Oh I'm sorry, they are "Protties" now, rhymes with Potty and nicknamed like Rottweilers.

[mlizzy]

I thought it was sweet; I enjoy the words of Archbishop Sheen.

[ronnietherocket3]

But if some think us mistaken, let them search the Scriptures. They will not find Mary’s death; they will not find whether she died or did not die; they will not find whether she was buried or was not buried ... Scripture is absolutely silent [on the end of Mary] ... For my own part, I do not dare to speak, but I keep my own thoughts and I practice silence ... The fact is, Scripture has outstripped the human mind and left [this matter] uncertain ... Did she die, we do not know ... Either the holy Virgin died and was buried ... Or she was killed ... Or she remained alive, since nothing is impossible with God and He can do whatever He desires; for her end no-one knows.’ (Epiphanius, Panarion, Haer. 78.10-11, 23. Cited by juniper Carol, O.F.M. ed., Mariology, Vol. II (Milwaukee: Bruce, 1957), pp. 139-40)

Interestingly, in your rush to discredit the Assumption of Mary, you have quoted someone who calls her the holy Virgin. Epiphanius states 3 possibilities in this quote. The first is that she died and was buried, the second is that she was killed [no comment on burial] or she is still alive (about 400 years after her birth). So this does not disprove the Assumption, all it says is that no one knows what happened to her. It would be completely logical to claim that she was definitely dead after 400 years; however, we are already talking about a woman who conceived as a virgin by the power of God. So we are back to Epiphanius's statement "nothing is impossible with God and He can do whatever He desires". However, Epiphanius does not appear to argue against the

The next Church Father mentioned is Jerome In addition to Epiphanius, there is Jerome who also lived in Palestine and does not report any tradition of an assumption.

Interesting choice since Jerome wrote a treatise Against Helvidius which supports the Perpetual Virginity of Mary.

Isidore of Seville, in the seventh century, echoes Epiphanius by saying that no one has any information at all about Mary’s death.

At best this means one is free to believe what one chooses.

Pope Gelasius explicitly condemns the authors as well as their writings and the teachings which they promote and all who follow them. And significantly, this entire decree and its condemnation was reaffirmed by Pope Hormisdas in the sixth century around A.D. 520. (Migne Vol. 62. Col. 537-542). These facts prove that the early Church viewed the assumption teaching, not as a legitimate expression of the pious belief of the faithful but as a heresy worthy of condemnation.

I do not see how you arrive at the conclusion (on the basis of cited paragraphs) that the Assumption was considered a Heresy.

Tertullian says that we can know if God has done something by validating it from Scripture. Not to be able to do so invalidates any claim that a teaching has been revealed by God. This comes back again to the patristic principle of sola scriptura, a principle universally adhered to in the eaerly Church.

Something I find perplexing about the claims that the early Church adhered to Sola Scriptura, is that the Sola Scriptura branches of Judaism and Christianity never do particularly well. The branches are Sadducees, Karaites, Protestants, and this supposed Patristic Sola Scriptura group. The Sadducees died off after the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 A.D. The Karaites did fairly well for a few centuries but are now down to less than 100,000 adherents. There are fewer Protestants than Catholics. And this supposed Patristic Sola Scriptura belief appears to have died out by about 600 A.D. I can never get a date on when the Catholic Church was supposedly founded. On the one hand, Constantine is usually cited; however, Protestants typically cite people after this date.

[sr4402]

**Mary admitted her depravity saying "God my Savior".**

The Key words here are "my Savior". The words are not trivial. "Savior" is one who saves. A perfect and sinless person does not need a "Savior".

[firebasecody]

I fail to understand why folks find it necessary to undermine others’ beliefs. I do find it telling that the anti-Catholics seem to be totally unaware of the Eastern Church. We do point to AD 33 as the year of the founding of our Church. And yes, we are Catholic, just not Roman Catholic. Gospodi pomiluj.

[metmom]

One wonders if allowing these threads to continue is ONLY to bring more hits to the site, because they aren't very comforting to the Catholic conservative, that's true.

Well, the history of your church is not any body else's responsibility but your church's.

WE don't make its decisions for them. They do that all by themselves.

If you don't like the way it reflects on Catholicism, take it up with your church.

[narses]

And every bit as orthodox as the rest of the Sacramental Christendom, so much so that a Catholic in times of need, may resort to the Orthodox for Sacramental assistance. And vice a versa.

[metmom]

I fail to understand why folks find it necessary to undermine others’ beliefs.

How is posting the history of the doctrine of the assumption of Mary *undermining others' beliefs*?

IF a belief is wrong, do you not agree that it should be corrected?

Or do you think that people should have to go along believing something that is not true?

[CynicalBear]

Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

All Catholics need to do is show from an infallible source that the apostles taught the assumption of Mary. If they cannot then we must consider those who teach it accursed.

[Karl Spooner]

Catholicism has never been liked here.

'The synagogue of Satan has never been liked here' would be more appropriate. Most everything they believe is either a tradition or a clever bending of God's word. That doesn't mean that the rank and file cannot escape the lies. But if you choose to believe lies, the Lord will help you to believe lies. It is written and woe to you.