Your gift counts double until 5/31: $17,214 to go in our Easter Campaign. Please help now!
 In Depth Analysis

The Assumption, Tradition, and a Pledge for You and Me

By Dr. Jeff Mirus (bio - articles ) | August 15, 2012 6:27 PM

The Feast of the Assumption calls to mind the importance of Tradition as a source of Revelation, and the importance of the Magisterium as the only authority that can determine what is part of Sacred Tradition, and what is not. There is, of course, a strong argument for the “fittingness” of the Assumption, but “fittingness” is the weakest possible philosophical or theological argument. While we ought to be able to see from Catholic doctrine that God acts in “fitting” ways, Church teaching is never based on human notions of “fittingness”. It is based on what God has revealed.

Thus it is certainly fitting that God should honor the mother of His Son by sparing her the corruption of death and bringing her body and soul into heaven to be with her Son and Lord for all eternity. But beyond fittingness, there is also a strong theological connection between Mary’s freedom from the corruption of death and her Immaculate Conception, a dogma which was defined prior to that of the Assumption. One can argue that if Mary were free from Original Sin, she had to have been free from the interior effects of that Sin, including the corruption of death. Her death (if it happened at all) would have been more of a peaceful “falling asleep”, as in the Eastern tradition of her Dormition. She could not, presumably remain in the grave and decay. But in earlier times, not even the Immaculate Conception was defined. That did not happen until 1854, and there were some fine theologians (Thomas Aquinas among them) who thought, on balance, that Mary was not immaculately conceived. Therefore, the history of the dogma of the Assumption compels us to return to Tradition.

What we find is that the Assumption is independently mentioned in quite a few apocryphal documents purporting to be very early, and mentioned in writings that can be traced definitively back at least as early as the fifth century, and perhaps to the fourth. Liturgical celebrations of a Feast of the Assumption can be traced to a similar period. Far from suggesting the Assumption was a “late” development, the fact that so much has been lost from the first few hundred years of Church history makes it likely that many Catholics recognized and believed in the Assumption far earlier, and that this was expressed in the way they worshipped.

In other words, the idea that Mary was assumed body and soul into heaven is found in the Church at an early date, it circulated widely, and it was gradually recognized by all (that is, “all” in the moral sense of the term). For example, by the time Pope Benedict XIV (1675 – 1758) wrote his treatise on the feasts of Christ and the Virgin Mary, he was able to state that the Assumption was a probable opinion which, at the very least, it would be impious and blasphemous to deny. Roughly a century later, Pope Pius IX, who received increasing numbers of petitions to proclaim the Immaculate Conception, polled the world’s bishops concerning the Assumption. Ninety percent of them requested that the Assumption be proclaimed a dogma as well.

Pius did proclaim the Immaculate Conception in 1854. Interestingly, six years earlier he had already granted the request of the American bishops to make Mary the patron of the United States under her title of the Immaculate Conception—a reminder that there is much implicit in Tradition which may go undefined. A few years later, at Vatican I, an effort to dogmatize the Assumption was resisted primarily by the German bishops, and even the Pope was leery of proclaiming two Marian dogmas within so short a time span. But there is no question, as we have already seen, that the theological understanding of the Assumption is tied to the Immaculate Conception. The proclamation of the one threw the other into sharper relief. So from this point on, perhaps, it was just a matter of time.

In any case, after another century’s delay, Pope Pius XII proclaimed the dogma of the Assumption in 1950 in Munificentissimus Deus. In this, of course, he was not making up anything new. He was responding to constant requests from Catholics, especially bishops, around the world who firmly believed the Assumption was part of Divine Revelation, known to the Church from Tradition. His ultimate decision was that this is in fact the case.

While the dogma of the Assumption is not based on any theoretically indisputable passage in Scripture, it is interesting how many passages in Scripture can be read as referring to the Assumption in the light of Faith. Chief among these is the “great portent” which “appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun…; and she was with child” (Rev 12:1-2). When the woman and her child were taken beyond the dragon’s grasp, he “was angry against the woman, and went off to make war against the rest of her seed” (Rev 12:7). Among other passages which preachers, theologians, bishops and popes down through the ages have applied to the Assumption are these:

One may read Munificentissimus Deus to see how the Pope applies these passages. In the last two, of course, what is done for Mary in a special way is a sign and a promise for us all. Indeed, the Assumption of the Immaculata may rightly be taken as a pledge for us sinners. May God, in his surpassing generosity, be forever praised!

An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:

Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach five million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!

Easter Campaign:
Progress toward our Spring 2013 goal ($17,214 to go):
$80,000.00 $62,786.45
22% 78%
Sound Off! CatholicCulture.org supporters weigh in.

All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!

Show 2 Comments? (Hidden)Hide Comments
  • Posted by: Jeff Mirus - Aug. 20, 2012 6:08 PM ET USA

    mclom2107: Yes, both Elijah (2 Kings 2:11) and the Patriarch Enoch (Genesis 5:24; cf. Hebrews 11:5; Sirach 46:16, 49:14) are revealed in Scripture to have been taken up into Heaven body and soul. These instances make it even more likely that Our Lord would have granted the same privilege to His own mother, who was full of grace.

  • Posted by: mclom2107 - Aug. 19, 2012 4:06 PM ET USA

    Thank you very much for this article. I learned a lot from it. May I ask, was the prophet Elijah also assumed? It does sound like it when one reads how he was caught up. I cannot find the passage but feel sure it is there.

Think with the Catholic Leaders: Subscribe to Catholic Culture Insights Newsletter
Donate to Support this Site: Your contribution will be put to good work.
Tour the CatholicCulture.org Site
Shop Amazon to Raise Money for Catholic Culture

Recent Catholic Commentary

Revealing News, and Revealing Christ 22 hours ago
The Russell Ford problem 22 hours ago
Fr. Thadeus Nguyen Van Ly: Your Letter May Help May 24
The Rise and Fall of the (American?) Church May 23
The Ideal of Pope Francis: the Servant Church May 23

Top Catholic News

Most Important Stories of the Last 30 Days
Pope strongly supports call for reform in religious life CWN - May 8