The Assumption of Our Lady was only defined as dogma in relatively recent times (roughly half a century a go)…yet contrary to what some claim, it is part of the ancient Tradition of the Universal Church. This morning, I was looking at a book in my school library on the Western Asian Christian nation of Armenia. Armenia has a very ancient Christian tradition, and was the first country to make Christianity the state religion, doing so in the fourth century. The Armenian Church has not been in communion with Rome since the 6th century, and is very independent (though there is an Armenian Catholic Church, the work of the Spirit through Jesuits I believe, that retains the ancient Armenian customs and liturgy, but is in union with the See of Peter), and is considered one of the six Oriental Orthodox Churches (along with the Coptic Church of Egypt, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, the Eritrean Orthodox Church, the Syriac Orthodox Church and the Malankara or Indian Orthodox Church)—see cnewa.org/ecc-oriental-orthod.htm for info on this group of ancient apostolic churches. Anyway, I learned through this book that the Feast of the Assumption of Mary is a major festival of the Armenian people. I thought it was interesting that the Armenians, who have not been in communion with Rome for some 1400 years, and who I understand were quite removed from the West even before that, place significant emphasis on their own Tradition of our Lady’s assumption into heaven. (They even have a story to accompany it…according to this book, our Lady died 15 years after our Lord ascended into heaven. The Apostles burried her, but Batholomew was establishing the Church in Armenia, and was not present. He arrived later, and begged the other Apostles to let him see the body of our Lady. When they did, they found the tomb empty—our Lord had taken His Mother to be with Him).
I understand that the Eastern (Greek) Orthodox Churches also have a tradition of Our Lady’s Assumption. So what is the issue with this doctrine?