Works › The Mariale: Questions on “Missus est”
Volume 37 · pp. 184–187
Question 132. Whether she was immediately assumed in body and soul?
A marker with ≈ is an approximate page boundary, placed by measure of the text; the page photographs remain the authority. In the paired views, clicking a page marker brings that page into view.
QUAESTIO CXXXII. Utrum statim in corpore et anima assumpta fuerit?
Postea quaeritur, si statim in anima et corpore assumpta fuerit?
Et videtur, quod non.
1. Primo per sermonem Hieronymi: « Cogitis me, o Paula, » etc. ubi dicit: « Multi nostrorum dubitant. »
2. Item, Augustinus: « Vera de ejus assumptione sententia haec esse probatur, ut secundum Apostolum sive in corpore, sive extra corpus, ignorantes, assumptam super Angelos eam esse credamus. » Item, Hieronymus: « Humanum judicium non apponat manifestum, quod Deus voluit esse occultum. »
3. Item, Quidquid non separatur a culpa, nec a poena: sed omnes in Adam peccaverunt: ergo omnes in suo peccato vel pro suo peccato puniri debent: sed ei imponitur poena, Genes. III, 19: Pulvis es, et in pulverem reverteris, etc.: ergo omnes in peccato nati corporaliter debent incinerari.
Contra:
1. Gregorius in Collecta: « Nec tamen mortis nexibus deprimi potuit, quae Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum de se genuit incarnatum. » Modo quaero, quid appellatur nexus mortis? vel est bonum, vel est malum. Non bonum: quia omnis boni capax fuit. Item, bonum non deprimit, sed elevat. Ergo nexus non nominat ibi aliquid boni. Si autem est malum, aut est malum culpae, aut malum poenae. Non culpae: quia mors non est nexus ad culpam: quia post mortem non est status culpae, sed poenae. Item, nihil dictum esset, quod post mortem non posset peccare, quia esset mater Dei, cum post mortem nullus peccet. Si autem est malum poenae, quaero quam poenam importat? Non gehennae: quia ad illam non nectit mors: quia multi moriuntur, qui non vadunt ad gehennam. Eadem ratione nec ad purgatorium: quia multi moriuntur, qui non vadunt ad purgatorium. Nec etiam potest dicere poenam temporalem: quia ad illam non nectit mors, sed absolvit ab illa. Item, non potest dicere poenam mortis: quia beatissima Virgo vere mortua fuit. Ergo relinquitur, quod non potest significare nisi incinerationem: ergo erit sensus: Non potuit nexibus mortis deprimi, id est, non potuit incinerari. Et nisi statim resurrexisset, fuisset incinerata ut alia corpora. Ergo vere surrexit.
2. Item, Quod non fuerit incinerata, intelligitur manifeste in figura de arca foederis Domini, per quam significabatur Maria, quae quidem arca constructa fuit de lignis setim, quorum natura talis est, quod numquam a vermibus roduntur nec perforantur, nec in aquis submersa umquam putrescunt, sicut solent alia ligna facere: ergo sine omni putrefactione surrexit.
3. Hoc idem etiam et clara luce praevidens Psalmista, clamat cum audacia, Psal. CXXXI, 8: Surge, Domine, in requiem tuam. Et statim subinfert: Tu et arca sanctificationis tuae. Quae manifeste dicta creduntur et in figura de Maria, cujus corpus fuit arca corporis Christi: sed caelum nulla figura, sed solum rei veritas possidet.
QUESTION 132. Whether she was immediately assumed in body and soul?
Afterwards it is asked whether she was immediately assumed in soul and body.
And it seems that she was not.
1. First, through the sermon of Jerome, “You compel me, O Paula,” etc., where he says, “Many of our people doubt.”
2. Likewise, Augustine says: “The true opinion concerning her assumption is proved to be this, that according to the Apostle, whether in the body or outside the body, not knowing, we should believe that she was assumed above the Angels.” Likewise, Jerome says: “Let human judgment not make manifest what God wished to be hidden.”
3. Likewise, whatever is not separated from fault is not separated from punishment. But all sinned in Adam. Therefore all ought to be punished in their own sin or for their own sin. But the punishment is imposed on her, Genesis 3:19: You are dust, and into dust you shall return, etc. Therefore all who are born in sin ought bodily to be reduced to ashes.
To the contrary:
1. Gregory in the Collect says: “Nor yet could she be weighed down by the bonds of death, who from herself generated our Lord Jesus Christ incarnate.” Now I ask what is called the bond of death? Either it is good, or it is evil. It is not good, because she was capable of every good. Likewise, good does not weigh down, but elevates. Therefore bond there does not name something good. But if it is evil, either it is an evil of fault or an evil of punishment. It is not of fault, because death is not a bond to fault, since after death there is not a state of fault, but of punishment. Likewise, nothing would have been said by saying that after death she could not sin because she was Mother of God, since after death no one sins. But if it is an evil of punishment, I ask what punishment it imports. Not that of Gehenna, because death does not bind to that, since many die who do not go to Gehenna. By the same reason neither to purgatory, because many die who do not go to purgatory. Nor can it mean temporal punishment, because death does not bind to that, but absolves from it. Likewise, it cannot mean the punishment of death, because the most blessed Virgin truly died. Therefore it remains that it can signify nothing except reduction to ashes. Therefore the sense will be: She could not be weighed down by the bonds of death, that is, she could not be reduced to ashes. And unless she had risen immediately, she would have been reduced to ashes like other bodies. Therefore she truly rose.
2. Likewise, that she was not reduced to ashes is understood manifestly in the figure of the ark of the covenant of the Lord, by which Mary was signified. That ark was constructed from setim woods, whose nature is such that they are never gnawed or bored through by worms, nor, when submerged in waters, do they ever rot, as other woods are accustomed to do. Therefore she rose without any putrefaction.
3. The Psalmist, foreseeing this same thing also in clear light, cries with boldness, Psalm 131:8: Arise, O Lord, into your rest. And immediately he adds: You and the ark of your sanctification. These words are believed to have been said manifestly also in figure concerning Mary, whose body was the ark of the body of Christ. But heaven possesses no figure, but only the truth of the thing.
4. Item, Augustinus: « Maria quadam speciali praerogativa honoratur a Filio, possidens in Christo corpus suum quod genuit: quare non et corpus per quod genuit? Nisi obviaverit auctoritas nondum perspecta, vere credo quod et per quod genuit 1. » Item, Idem in eodem: « Thronum Dei, thalamum Domini, domum atque tabernaculum Christi dignum est ibi esse ubi ipse est. Tam pretiosum enim thesaurum dignius est caelum servare quam terra. » Item, Augustinus in eodem: « Videtur laetari Maria laetitia inenarrabili, anima et corpore 2. » Et infra: « Sit integraliter vivens, quae omnium integram perfectamque genuit vitam. »
5. Item, Dionysius in libro de Divinis nominibus: « Quoniam et apud ipsos Deo acceptos nostros hierarchas, quando et nos, ut nosti, et ipse et multi sanctorum nostrorum fratrum convenimus ad visionem corporis, vitae principis, et quod Deum susceperat. Aderat autem et frater Domini Jacobus et Petrus summa et provectissima Theologorum summitas 3. » Super hunc locum Glossa Maximi vult, quod in dormitione nostrae Dominae fuerunt Apostoli et beatus Dionysius et magister suus Ierotheus, et post assumptionem corporis fecerunt collationem, et Ierotheus raptus fuit. Et sic videtur approbare iste textus Dionysii cum suis Glossis illud quod invenitur de assumptione beatae Mariae Virginis corporali.
6. Item, Bernardus: « Non decuit ut carnem matris sine honore in terra relinqueret, qui honorem parentum sub praecepti districtione posuit. » Item, Bernardus: « Si anima parvuli nondum nati liquefacta est ut Maria locuta est, quid putas quaenam illa fuerit exsultatio caelestium civium, qui vocem audire et faciem videre et beata ejus praesentia frui meruerunt? » Item, Bernardus: « Nec in terris locus dignior virginali templo in quo Filium Dei Maria suscepit, nec in caelis regali solio in quo Mariam Mariae Filius sublimavit 4. » Item, Bernardus: « Tempus loquendi est omni carni cum assumitur incarnati Verbi mater in caelum: nec cessare debet a laudibus humana mortalitas, cum hominis sola natura super immortales spiritus exaltatur in Virgine Maria 5. »
7. Item, Augustinus: « Tantam integritatem merito incorruptibilitas, non aliqua resolutio putredinis sequitur 6. » Item, Augustinus: « Qui in vita prae caeteris illam gratia sui conceptus honoravit, pium est credere singulari salvatione eam in morte et speciali gratia honorasse. » Item: « Si merito vivens prae omnibus dotata est gratia, cur mortua non erit honoranda? » Item, Idem in eodem: « Quid aestimandum est de matre ubi digna sit haberi, nisi in praesentia Filii? »
Item, Quaecumque sunt ejusdem naturae, eumdem locum occupant. Si igitur mater et Filius sunt ejusdem naturae, necesse est ut sit cum Filio mater.
4. Likewise, Augustine says: “Mary is honored by the Son with a certain special prerogative, possessing in Christ the body which she generated; why not also the body through which she generated? Unless an authority not yet examined has stood in the way, I truly believe that also through which she generated 1.” Likewise, the same author in the same place says: “The throne of God, the chamber of the Lord, the house and tabernacle of Christ, is worthy to be where he himself is. For heaven is more worthy to preserve so precious a treasure than earth.” Likewise, Augustine in the same place says: “Mary seems to rejoice with unspeakable joy, in soul and body 2.” And below: “Let her be living integrally, who generated the integral and perfect life of all.”
5. Likewise, Dionysius in the book On the Divine Names says: “Because also among those hierarchs acceptable to God, when we also, as you know, and he himself and many of our holy brothers, came together to see the body, the source of life, and that which had received God. And there was also James, the brother of the Lord, and Peter, the highest and most advanced summit of theologians 3.” On this place the Gloss of Maximus wills that at the dormition of our Lady there were the Apostles and blessed Dionysius and his teacher Hierotheus, and after the assumption of the body they held a conference, and Hierotheus was rapt. And thus this text of Dionysius with its Glosses seems to approve that which is found concerning the bodily assumption of the blessed Virgin Mary.
6. Likewise, Bernard says: “It was not fitting that he should leave the flesh of his mother without honor on earth, who placed the honor of parents under the strictness of a precept.” Likewise, Bernard says: “If the soul of the little unborn child was melted when Mary spoke, what do you think that exultation of the heavenly citizens was, who merited to hear her voice and see her face and enjoy her blessed presence?” Likewise, Bernard says: “Neither on earth is there a place more worthy than the virginal temple in which Mary received the Son of God, nor in heaven a royal throne in which the Son of Mary exalted Mary 4.” Likewise, Bernard says: “It is time for all flesh to speak when the mother of the incarnate Word is assumed into heaven; nor ought human mortality to cease from praises, when the nature of man alone is exalted above the immortal spirits in the Virgin Mary 5.”
7. Likewise, Augustine says: “Incorruptibility deservedly follows so great an integrity, not any dissolution of decay 6.” Likewise, Augustine says: “He who in life honored her beyond the rest by the grace of his conception is piously believed to have honored her in death by singular salvation and special grace.” Likewise: “If, while living, she was deservedly endowed with grace before all, why when dead will she not be honored?” Likewise, the same author in the same place says: “What must be judged concerning the mother, where she is worthy to be held, except in the presence of the Son?”
Likewise, whatever things are of the same nature occupy the same place. Therefore if mother and Son are of the same nature, it is necessary that the mother be with the Son.
Item, Si quis diceret, quod bene posset esse opinio et non manifesta veritas. Contra: Dicit Bernardus: « Sane ibi unusquisque in suo sensu abundat, ubi vel certae rationi, aut non contemnendae auctoritati quod sentitur non obviat 7. » Item, Augustinus ad idem: « Quaerendum est ratione quod conveniat veritati: fiatque ipsa veritas auctoritas, sine qua nec est, nec valet auctoritas. Si ergo voluit servare integrum Mariae virginitatis pudorem, cur non velit incorruptam a putredinis servare foetore? » Item, Augustinus: « Si vera sunt quae scripsi, tibi gratias ago, Christe, quia de sancta Virgine matre tua, nisi quod pium est ac dignum visum, sentire non potui 8. »
Ecce testimonio ipsius Papae Gregorii et duorum Episcoporum, Augustini et Dionysii, et unius abbatis Bernardi, imo ipsorum Apostolorum Petri et Jacobi, probatum est beatam Virginem in corpore et anima gloriosissime esse assumptam.
8. Quod et rationibus perspicuum est. In peccato enim duo sunt, scilicet aversio a bono incommutabili, et conversio ad bonum commutabile. Istis respondent duo in poena: quia anima avertit se a sua vita, incidit in necessitatem aversionis a corpore cujus anima est vita: ex conversione ad nihilum, incidit in necessitatem redeundi in quasi nihilum, id est, in pulverem. Sed beatissima Virgo aversa fuit per originale, unde debuit mori: sed numquam fuit conversa actualiter ad aliquod nihilum: ergo non debuit incinerari.
9. Item, Anselmus: « Ad omne conveniens Deo cui major ratio non repugnat, sequitur necessarium: istud est tale: ergo istud necessarium. »
10. Item, A nullo illustrium vincitur: sed dicit Evangelium, Matth. XXVII, 52: Multa corpora sanctorum qui dormierant surrexerunt, scilicet cum Jesu, etc. Ergo et ipsa hoc accepit.
11. Item, Dionysius dicit: « Omnes proprietates inferiorum habent superiores cum excellentia: » ergo cum illud datum est sanctis inferioribus, ut dicit Evangelium, ergo et supremae omnium in patria.
12. Item, Ecclesiae argumentum est illud: Joannes sanctificatus est in utero: ergo et beata Virgo: sed Ecclesia conclusionem concedit et celebrat ejus nativitatem: ergo hoc modo arguo a simili: multa corpora sanctorum surrexerunt: ergo et beatissimae Virginis corpus surrexit 9.
His rationibus et auctoritatibus et multis aliis manifestum est, quod beatissima Dei mater in corpore et anima super choros Angelorum est assumpta. Et hoc modis omnibus credimus esse verum.
Satis ergo patet qualiter beatissima Virgo habuit omnes gratias speciales mortem circumstantes.
Solutio objectorum.
Ad illud autem quod objectum est de ejus morte, credimus quod mortua est prae amore sine dolore. Et non est etiam eadem ratio de morte Domini: quia cum illa debuit esse satisfactoria in summo, conveniebat et oportebat, quod esset poenalis in summo, et etiam voluntaria in summo: unde ita fuit spiritu permittente carni impropria, ut ibi simul in summo fuerit motus naturalis et rationalis: unde summum gaudium et summus dolor: et unum fuit materia alterius: quia summe gaudebat, quod per summum dolorem humanum genus redimebat: hic autem, scilicet in Maria, motus rationalis gratia informatus motum naturalem sopiebat et vincebat, ita ut cum esset charitate vulnerata in summo, et in sursum trahebatur, et vinculum impediens, scilicet alligantiam corporis, dissolvebat.
Likewise, if someone were to say that this could well be an opinion and not manifest truth. To the contrary: Bernard says, “Certainly each person abounds in his own sense there, where what is thought is opposed neither to certain reason nor to authority that should not be despised 7.” Likewise, Augustine to the same point says: “One must seek by reason what accords with truth; and let truth itself become authority, without which authority neither exists nor has force. Therefore if he willed to preserve whole the modesty of Mary’s virginity, why would he not will to preserve her incorrupt from the stench of decay?” Likewise, Augustine says: “If the things I have written are true, I give you thanks, Christ, because concerning the holy Virgin, your mother, I could think nothing except what seemed pious and worthy 8.”
Behold, by the testimony of Pope Gregory himself and of two bishops, Augustine and Dionysius, and of one abbot, Bernard, indeed of the Apostles themselves, Peter and James, it has been proved that the blessed Virgin was most gloriously assumed in body and soul.
8. This is also clear by reasons. For in sin there are two things, namely turning away from the incommutable good and turning toward a commutable good. To these two things correspond two things in punishment: because the soul turned itself away from its life, it fell into the necessity of turning away from the body of which the soul is the life; from conversion toward nothing, it fell into the necessity of returning into something like nothing, that is, into dust. But the most blessed Virgin was turned away through original sin, whence she ought to die; but she was never actually turned toward any nothing. Therefore she ought not to have been reduced to ashes.
9. Likewise, Anselm says: “To everything fitting to God, to which no greater reason is opposed, the necessary follows: this is such a thing; therefore this is necessary.”
10. Likewise, she is surpassed by none of the illustrious. But the Gospel says, Matthew 27:52: Many bodies of the saints who had slept rose, namely with Jesus, etc. Therefore she too received this.
11. Likewise, Dionysius says: “Superiors have all the properties of inferiors with excellence.” Therefore since that was given to inferior saints, as the Gospel says, it was also given to the supreme one of all in the homeland.
12. Likewise, the argument of the Church is this: John was sanctified in the womb; therefore so also the blessed Virgin. But the Church grants the conclusion and celebrates her nativity. Therefore in this way I argue from a like case: many bodies of saints rose; therefore also the body of the most blessed Virgin rose 9.
By these reasons and authorities and many others it is manifest that the most blessed Mother of God was assumed in body and soul above the choirs of Angels. And in every way we believe this to be true.
Therefore it is sufficiently clear in what way the most blessed Virgin had all the special graces surrounding death.
Solution of the objections.
But to that which was objected concerning her death, we believe that she died from love without pain. And the same reasoning does not hold concerning the death of the Lord, because since his death ought to be satisfactory in the highest degree, it was fitting and necessary that it be penal in the highest degree, and also voluntary in the highest degree. Hence with the spirit permitting what was improper to the flesh, there at the same time in the highest degree there was natural and rational motion: hence the highest joy and the highest pain; and one was the matter of the other, because he rejoiced supremely that through the highest pain he was redeeming the human race. But here, namely in Mary, rational motion informed by grace was soothing and conquering natural motion, so that when she was wounded by charity in the highest degree and was drawn upward, it dissolved the impeding bond, namely the binding of the body.
Ad auctoritates quae oppositae sunt ad carnalem assumptionem Virginis Mariae, respondemus quod quatuor sunt generationum supponibilium.
Primum est quod ex sacra Scriptura ita expresse est determinatum, quod nec dubitatio nec opinio potest circa contrarium. De hoc dicit Damascenus: « Omnia quae tradita sunt per legem, per Prophetas, per Apostolos, et Evangelistas, suscipimus et veneramur et cognoscimus, nihil ultra requirentes. »
Alterum genus per oppositum ad hoc est, quod est omnino incertum et quantum ad sententiam et auctoritatem, et hoc est simpliciter apocryphum: vel est incertum quantum ad auctoritatem, sed non quantum ad sententiam, et hoc est apocryphum secundum quid, et illud ponitur dubium. Inter haec duo sunt duo media.
Tertium igitur et primum medium est, quando aliquid non est determinatum ex Scriptura, nec per rationem necessariam potest probari, nec etiam patet ex evidentia sui, sed ex consequentiis Scripturarum et apparentiis rationum potest et ipsum et suum oppositum aequaliter videri et persuaderi, et hoc proprie potest vocari opinabile, ut sunt quaedam opiniones sanctorum, ut est illa, utrum omnia simul sunt creata? et illa, utrum Angeli sunt in gratuitis creati? et similia.
Quartum genus et secundum medium est, quod quidem in Scriptura Bibliae non est expresse determinatum, nec ex evidentia sui manifestum, tamen ex consequentia Scripturae et apparentia rationum ita est probabile, quod nulla Scriptura et nulla ratio habet aliud opponere in contrarium, et illud est pie credendum.
Unde primum est expresse determinatum, secundum est pie credendum, tertium opinatum, quartum apocryphum. Hieronymus igitur qui fuit interpres Bibliae, loquitur ut interpres, nihil volens interserere nisi quod per Bibliam est expressum. Augustinus autem ut expositor et investigator, non tantum ponit vel supponit ea quae sunt principia scientiae, sed ea quae necessario consequuntur, nulla ratione vel auctoritate repugnante.
Et sic manifestum est qualiter beatissima Virgo habuit gratias omnium communes et speciales.
To the authorities which are opposed to the fleshly assumption of the Virgin Mary, we respond that there are four genera of supposable things.
The first is what has been so expressly determined from sacred Scripture that neither doubt nor opinion can concern the contrary. Concerning this Damascene says: “All things which have been handed down through the law, through the Prophets, through the Apostles, and the Evangelists, we receive and venerate and know, seeking nothing beyond.”
The other genus, opposite to this, is what is wholly uncertain both as to meaning and authority, and this is simply apocryphal; or it is uncertain as to authority but not as to meaning, and this is apocryphal in a qualified sense, and that is posited as doubtful. Between these two are two middle kinds.
The third, therefore, and first middle kind is when something is not determined from Scripture, nor can it be proved through necessary reason, nor is it clear from its own evidence, but from consequences of the Scriptures and appearances of reasons both it and its opposite can equally be seen and persuaded; and this can properly be called a matter of opinion, as are certain opinions of the saints, such as whether all things were created at once, and whether the Angels were created in gratuitous gifts, and similar things.
The fourth genus and second middle kind is what indeed is not expressly determined in the Scripture of the Bible, nor manifest from its own evidence, yet from the consequence of Scripture and the appearance of reasons is so probable that no Scripture and no reason has anything else to oppose to the contrary; and that is to be piously believed.
Hence the first is expressly determined, the second is to be piously believed, the third is opined, and the fourth is apocryphal. Therefore Jerome, who was the interpreter of the Bible, speaks as an interpreter, wishing to insert nothing except what is expressed through the Bible. But Augustine, as expositor and investigator, not only posits or supposes those things which are principles of knowledge, but those things which necessarily follow, with no reason or authority opposing.
And thus it is manifest in what way the most blessed Virgin had the common and special graces of all.
Notes
- St. Augustine, Book On the Assumption, chapter 6. (S. Augustinus, Lib. de Assumptione, cap. 6.) ↩
- The same author, in the same place, chapter 8. (Idem, ibidem, cap. 8.) ↩
- St. Dionysius, Book On the Divine Names, chapter 5. (S. Dionysius, Lib. de Divinis nominibus, cap. 5.) ↩
- St. Bernard, Sermon 1 On the Assumption. (S. Bernardus, Serm. 1 de Assumptione.) ↩
- The same author, Sermon 4 On the Assumption. (Idem, Serm. 4 de Assumptione.) ↩
- St. Augustine, Book On the Assumption, chapter 6. (S. Augustinus, Lib. de Assumptione, cap. 6.) ↩
- St. Bernard, Letter 77 to Master Hugh of Saint Victor. (S. Bernardus, Epist. 77 ad magistrum Hugonem de S. Victore.) ↩
- St. Augustine, Book On the Assumption, chapter 9. (S. Augustinus, Lib. de Assumptione, cap. 9.) ↩
- For the solution of the objections, see immediately below. (Pro solutione objectorum, vide immediate infra.) ↩
If a page does not appear, its photograph has not been uploaded yet.