Not sure I can give you a satisfactory answer (and certainly not a scriptural one), but…
One of the big differences between Catholicism and most other Christian denominations is that scripture and tradition are given basically equal weight. This, according to the Council of Trent. Not sure what their reasoning was, but my hunch is that they started with a pragmatic necessity and then worked backwards to a convoluted doctrinal justification for it.
None of the women in Christ’s life are discussed at length in the gospels, and pretty much everything we “know” about them comes from some oddball tradition which, though the power of faith (the same faith that transubstantiates wafers and wine into the body and blood of Christ), becomes an accepted fact.
The fact that many of these traditions are rooted in paganism is unimportant. After a while, we just stop worrying about it.
This article from the Catholic Encyclopedia on the Feast of the Assumption of Mary notes the ancient tradition (and the non-scriptural works in which the tradition is recorded).
Well, the fact is that placing Scripture ahead of tradition is a little backwards however you look at it, and I say that as a non-Catholic. I mean, Jesus didn’t appear and give everyone a list of cannonical writings and say “These are the Word of God. Listen to them.” Even the claims some Protestants make about Scripture’s self-proclamation are shakey–Scripture seldom or never makes a claim about its own authority, and then it’s not always clear which Scriptures are being referred to. (Hint: It’s never the New Testament as we have it.)
So how do Christians know that certain books are authoritative? Some books have simply been widely recognized as such from very early on, and the cumulative experience of the Church over the past nigh-2000 years has confirmed this, both formally and informally.
Let’s see–there’s a name for this process; I forget what it is. I think it starts with a “T”.
Are you sure she was resurrected, Thea? I know she was bodily assumed into Heaven, but I’ve never read that she was resurrected in the same fashion as Christ. That seems theologically shaky- Christ rose through His own power, being God and all. Mary might have been resurrected, but I would think hers would be like Lazarus- called out from death through God’s power.
Lazarus was brought back from the dead, but it wasn’t a true resurrection. He didn’t have a glorified, immortal body. He was murdered soon after his return.
Mary was truly resurrected, by the power of God, and is now in Heaven, body and all. The way all Christians hope to be after the final judgement.
The Eastern Churches had a tradition that Mary did indeed physically die. Then, was bodily resurrected, then bodily assumed into heaven. Indeed there are several traditional burial places of Mary identified by various Eastern Churches.
The Western Church had a tradition that it wouldn’t have been fitting for Mary to have been contaminated by any stain of death, and so, its tradition is that Mary didn’t die, but was bodily assumed into heaven without experiencing physical mortal death.
The Roman Catholic Church, in defining the infallible teaching on the Assumption, did not want to disrespect the tradition of the Eastern Churches, and so, it used the formula “at the end of her life” without saying whether she physically died first or not. IOW, the official teaching of the RCC is that it is agnostic on the issue of whether Mary physically died before Assumption; it simply affirms the bodily Assumption.
Correct, and Mary’s “death” (or end of her life) is often referred to as her “dormition,” or “falling asleep” since she may not have died in the usual sense. Here is a little more information on the dormition, from a devotional work.
So, catholics do not worship saints, although they ask them to intercede on their behalf.
Where in the bible does it say that anyone besides God is omniscient? How are the saints hearing their prayers? Wouldn’t relying on saints to intervene for you interfere with having a personal relationship with God?
When growing up as a Catholic, I always thought the tradition of each saint having a different area of responsibility was really cool. Lost something? Pray to St. Anthony and you’ll find it. Going on a trip? St. Christopher was your man.
My personal favorite was Saint Barbara, the patron saint of high explosives.
That’s a very protestant question
Catholics* believe many things that can’t be found in the bible, including but not limited to the saint “system.” Krokodil already gave the basic reason, the weight put on tradition. Backing from the bible is not required.
