There is a famous Christological statement by Gregory Nazianzen that “that which is not assumed is not saved.” This is a vital statement with deep import to our salvation. Christ had to become man in order that men might be saved; if only half of Adam’s nature had been taken on, then only half of Adam would have been saved. Had Christ not had a mind that was fully human, our bodies, perhaps, would have been taken up into heaven as zombies, while our intellects rotted down in hell below.
That which is not taken up is not saved, or, conversely, that which is saved is taken up. This is why we will be “taken up together… in the clouds.” That which is made immortal will be separated from that which is mortal, and, like the purest oil rising to the top of a solution, ‘skimmed off’ and separated. We will undergo this at the end of time, when we participate in our own assumption.
Christ already ascended into heaven. He ascended, under his own power, that he might be the firstborn among the dead, and our elder in the faith. This is the basis of the new covenant: sealed in the blood of the cross, it is the promise of our future resurrection and total reconciliation to God.
Christ, of course, is fully human. His ascension into heaven is sufficient to satisfy the terms of our maxim: being assumed and lived-out from incarnation to ascension, our humanity is saved from birth to death (and beyond). But there is a certain sense in which there is still something lacking and incomplete, which still needs to be ‘fulfilled in the redemption of Christ’ (cf. Col. 1:24; make note, fundamentalists!). Christ is one person, and that person is divine. This is not a Christological fact that is often-discussed; the emphasis is almost universally on the fact that his natures are two-fold. This is the basis of our salvation: our human nature, in Christ, is saved by tagging on to the divine nature. In the end, the Father is the One Who Saves: Christ participates in salvation by submitting himself to the Father through his divinity, and our humanity participates through being united in turn to Christ, who took our full humanity upon himself.
But this participation in salvation which Christ effectuates is still performed by a divine person. Christ is not a human person, even with his human nature. If the story merely began and ended with Christ’s birth, death, resurrection, and ascension, man would be saved, but man would not yet participate in his salvation personally. This creates the call of St. Paul to ‘fulfill what is lacking’ in Christ. Our humanity is saved, redeemed, and made anew, but in order to become a new person in Christ, we still need to personally participate in this redemption. Christ made this participation possible, but because he is not human he is unable to do it for us.
This is why, even after being redeemed, we still need to die. We are still haunted by sin, because our nature has been redeemed through dying on the cross and resurrecting, but our person has not yet done either of these things. The fullness of our redemption will only come in the last days, when we are given back our bodies in the resurrection of the dead. Until that day we are pilgrims, always moving towards a destination which has been promised to us as our inheritance, but which we have not yet inherited.
This is the context for my argument that the Assumption of Mary is not just a pious accretion to our faith, but an actual Christological necessity. I don’t mean by this that Mary saves us (of course not). But I do mean that we are not saved until Mary is, and if Mary is not saved, no one is.
As I mentioned before, salvation is not just ‘something that happens’ to a person by an act of divine fiat. It needs to be undergone, participated in. Christ is unable to do this for us. Only a human person can participate in his proper role for salvation. If Christ had merely ‘opened the door’ to our salvation by redeeming our nature, but had not actually saved anyone, then his task would be not only incomplete, but a failure. God’s universal will for salvation is not simply something he states—his Word goes out from him, and it ‘does not return empty-handed.’ God really did come to earth to save, not just himself in Christ, but us. This is the basis of the new covenant: that we are saved and will rise from the dead, even though as pilgrims we haven’t experienced our salvation yet. So, which is it? Are we already saved? Are we not yet saved?
Theologians, to explain this seeming paradox, will often draw distinctions between salvation as justification and salvation as sanctification—we are justified (already saved) but not fully sanctified (not yet fully saved). I will not fully deconstruct this distinction here. Suffice to say, if Christ had not really fully saved us, his mission would not yet be complete, and he would have been unable to return to the Father. How could Christ, having been promised ‘the gentiles for his inheritance,’ return to the Father after his mission on earth with nothing but this very same promise, just in the form of an ‘IOU’ to be cashed out in the future? The Father’s promise, and Christ’s mission, are predicated upon actual, accomplished, and total salvation.
This is where Mary’s Assumption comes into play. Mary’s assumption is not just about her rising up on a cloud of putti, like in a dramatic Renaissance painting. I certainly don’t care about whether or not that actually happened; it has no significance for my faith. Protestants, looking at the terminal online discussions between Eastern and Western Christians about whether Mary ‘died’ or ‘dormitioned’ for the Assumption, are right to recognize the terms of this fight as made-up, and consequently reject it as a merely pious fable.
The meaning of the Assumption is this: that Mary, who is fully (and only) human, a person just like you or me, died and was resurrected. If the new covenant requires a sign to be ratified, Mary’s Assumption is that sign. To my Protestant brothers and sisters, who would say that Christ is the sign, I respond: Christ is the sign that my nature is saved, but if my nature is saved while my person is damned to eternal hell, then that benefits me for nothing. That which is not assumed is not saved. To be really saved, and to hope in that salvation, faith requires the assumption of a human person. When Mary was resurrected and assumed, following Christ, this wasn’t merely the sequela of Christ’s already-accomplished mission: it was the very final act which accomplished the entirety of the mission. In her Assumption, Mary becomes Christ’s inheritance, and the Father’s promise is made complete: Christ does not return empty-handed, but with his Mother, made now truly and fully a Daughter of the Father such that all can look in awe and hope for their own salvation. If Mary is not assumed, we have no basis to trust or hope for our full and total salvation. If Mary is not assumed, Christ’s mission is a failure. For Christ to succeed, he needs to bring a human person into his resurrection, and this is the Christological necessity of Mary’s Assumption.
And so with thousands of angels, and tens of thousands of archangels, and with thrones and dominions and powers and principalities, let us praise and glorify God for his salvation which he has made manifest, and most especially for the gift of our Mother who is the visible sign and manifestation of hope that we can have for our own salvation. Our Lady, Assumed into Heaven, pray for us who have recourse to thee.
