I am getting closer to starting OCIA, but Mary is still the area where I slow down the most.
Mother of God makes sense to me now because it protects who Jesus is. Perpetual virginity has a real cumulative biblical and historical case. The Immaculate Conception and Assumption are harder.
WHAT I AM STUDYING
I am going back through Luke 1, Mary as the New Eve, the Ark imagery, Jerome against Helvidius, Augustine and Ambrose, the Dormition traditions, Revelation 12, and the formal Catholic definitions.
I am especially checking whether early writers are being summarized fairly. I do not want a vague statement about Mary’s holiness turned into a quotation supporting the full 1854 definition.
A FEW THINGS I AM LEARNING
The Immaculate Conception does not teach that Mary does not need a Savior. The claim is that Christ saves her preventively.
The Assumption does not have a New Testament passage that simply narrates the event. Catholics should say that honestly.
WHAT I AM STILL UNSURE ABOUT
The Assumption study still feels weak when it only repeats that the Church teaches it. I want actual evidence for the historical tradition and an honest explanation of how much that evidence can establish.
WHAT I WANT TO LOOK AT NEXT
I am going to take perpetual virginity first, then return to the Immaculate Conception and Assumption with stronger sources.