On the Dogmatics of the Bodily Assumption of Mary

Part of a conversation on X. 

Thank you for this. I'm taking advantage of this interchange for hopefully a respectful wider discussion. I know nothing else about of any of you except these few posts. 

"Can I be a Christian without believing in the bodily assumption of Mary into heaven?" (@Curi_Christian). That was the question. 

-A Catholic's response:

“Yes. I’m Catholic and I don’t believe it.” (@bowslingercraft).

-Your reply (in part):

“Well you might want to reconsider being Catholic then. It is a dogma and you are considered in danger of hell for rejecting it…”

-Another apparently professing Catholic responding to you:

“Name your source for this ignorant take.” (@Dark_Justice_21).

Fair enough. And grace to all. 

-An infallible Roman Catholic statement on it: 

“44...By the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.” Immediately after that, pope Pius XII adds: “45. Hence if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith.” (Source: APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION OF POPE PIUS XII. MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS. DEFINING THE DOGMA OF THE ASSUMPTION. November 1, 1950. (http://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_p-xii_apc_19501101_munificentissimus-deus.html)). Let’s add paragraph 47 in for clarity: “It is forbidden to any man to change this, our declaration, pronouncement, and definition or, by rash attempt, to oppose and counter it. If any man should presume to make such an attempt, let him know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.” (Same source).

Ma'am (@bowslingercraft), you, and apparently you too (@Dark_Justice_21), are on your way to hell today if you die and don't believe in Mary's assumption. I didn't say it, God's vicar did. The language here isn't purgatory, it's hell. You have, "...fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith.” That's not language for someone headed to purgation. Everything else you believe is ultimately irrelevant, this dogma is your sure bar to heaven and your sure entrance to hell. You both will, without a possibility of error on their part, "...incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul" if the Roman Catholic Church is what it claims to be. 

————————

So, back to the original question there are at least two answers to consider. 

1) The answer to the question biblically is "yes." In the biblical/apostolic faith, Mary's bodily assumption has no part at all. 

2) According to the Romanists since 1 November of 1950 (note: that's not AD 50, it's 1950), the answer is “no.” On October 31st of 1950, a man (especially a Catholic man) could maybe deny it and still be saved, but not since 24 hours later. So no, you cannot be a Catholic/thus cannot expect heaven (see above)/should have your local priests barring you from the table, counseling and praying with you, and then excommunicating you if you still deny it since you know what the Catholic Church infallibly teaches about Mary’s bodily assumption and you deny it. You are both vincibly ignorant.

Respectfully, this is a good lesson for us all. This is another evidence of how anyone familiar with the false claims of the modern RCC on "apostolic unity" over and against those without their infallible voice, etc. is not now and never has been true. Division, schism, confusion, etc., is something that no group is immune to, sure, but this is the case even when you say you have an infallible voice in popes as we see here. Also consider how foolish and unstable it is to add a requirement like this in 1950 and then dare to pretend it's apostolic. To call this postmodern idea "the unified faith of the fathers" etc., as they surely and rather obnoxiously do, one would have to ask all the "fathers"- 1) if they agree it's true, and then 2), don't miss this, if it is "dogmatically" true? That it's to be required or be damned? That's two very different questions they'd have to have the answers to to claim unanymity. 

I’m not seeking to misrepresent the postmodern RC assumption view here; I’m seeking to represent it rightly and against two professing Catholics who are not, and to deduce a few things. 

Of course, if Rome is right nothing I'm saying here challenges anything from Pius 12. These two professing Catholics are just damnable heretics and the wrath of God is upon them. Done. But we all know they're probably not told this as Catholics. They maybe go to a "church" every week, maybe every day, and are yet are fully under the wrath of God and Peter and Paul, etc., and no one's telling them. They can repent and be saved they'd say, sure, but they need to. And it's not just because Mary was assumed up bodily per se. It is that, but it's really because the RCC (since November 1 1950) in its infallible authority said she was that they need to now repent or perish. Think about it. 

No one can control the views of everyone in any pews, that's a fact. All I'm saying is that Roman Catholic idea of how schism only happens outside of it in their unity is made evident like this every day on the street.

To these two (apparently fake) Catholic respondents I say in all humility, "Repent, believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and come to him today." Leave the RCC today. I'll help you find a Bible-believing church. In fact, here's one place to start: https://www.9marks.org/church-search/. The idea of Mary's bodily assumption is debatable. I've read that one passage in Revelation where it's supposedly found. That's not what it's about. But again, we're talking about dogma here, not just anyone's possible interpretation. I won't extend this post any further to talk of it. I deny it, but it's debatable outside of Romanist dogmatics and we can consider it. 

Here to discuss all this respectfully. Grace to you. 

Please, consider this short video from me today:   https://subsplash.com/u/bibleciacom/media/d/yhyg24x-gospel-message-may-2018