John A. Broussard

In looking up the basis for the belief that Mary ascended bodily into heaven, I've been able to trace it back to 5th Century sources, but I haven't been able to find a connection between those and the bible. Does anyone know of any justification, however remote and strained the connection may be, between this infallible dogma of the Catholic church and the scriptures?

andrewcriddle

IIUC the Roman Catholic Church would justify the dogma on the ground that, given other doctrines about Mary which have some at least arguable support in scripture, it is only appropriate that Mary should have already achieved the glorified state that other members of the faithful will only attain at the resurrection.

Andrew Criddle

Mageth

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02006b.htm

Magus55

The assumption of Mary has no scriptural backing. Its based on Catholic tradition.

John A. Broussard

Thanks, but that produces:

"The belief in the corporeal assumption of Mary is founded on the apocryphal treatise De Obitu S. Dominae, bearing the name of St. John, which belongs however to the fourth or fifth century."

So that brings me back to my original question. I may have to simply accept Magus55's explanation.

As a side issue, since Benedict XVI's avowed intention is to bring Protestant groups back into the fold, won't it mean that these reconverted Christians will then have to renounce biblical innerancy in this instance (since it's unsupported by the bible) and accept Papal infallibility? Because Mary's assumption was directly revealed to the pope and didn't come from scriptures, that would seem to follow.

Just a thought.

Chris Weimer

Well, you can have Biblical Inerrancy and still have Papal Infallibility on this one: just because it's not mentioned in the Bible doesn't mean it didn't happen.

John A. Broussard

The problem with this is that when I discuss any religious issues with non-Catholic theists, they point to the bible to support their beliefs. That may not be the first refuge, but it's the ultimate one. It's going to take some doing for them to shift to papal pronouncements.

But, then, after the Jonestown massacre I should accept the fact that human beings have a capacity to accept any belief.

Chris Weimer

John, unless one is completely delusional, one cannot look entirely to the Bible for all the answers. Even Protestants accept some sort of extra-biblical logic or "may preacher said this" kind of stuff. Several churches who don't accept drinking alcohol say that Jesus turned water into grape juice (nevermind the thing didn't exist) which doesn't have biblical support at all.

Mageth

And, since the Catholic Church does not hold to Sola Scriptura, that would only appear to be problematic to Protestants who do, and not to Catholics.

Oh, and other things which are more based on "Catholic tradition" and extrabiblical theology than on actual scriptural backing include the concept of the Trinity that most modern Christians hold.

Magus55

Which means they can make up absolutely any doctrine they want, even if it conflicts with scripture. They say Mary was born sinless. Not only is that not mentioned in the Bible, it is directly contradicted by the Bible. So does not holding to Sola Scriptura mean they can contradict scripture too? You don't need to be protestant to see the corruption and problems with the Catholic Church and its "tradition".