Habakkuk's Assumption Mentioned While Mary's Isn't

I've often discussed how much attention figures like Enoch, Elijah, Jesus, and Paul get in scripture and in the early extrabiblical sources because of being bodily assumed to heaven or carried up in a supernatural manner in some other context. See here, for example, among many other relevant posts in our archives.

One of the most striking examples I've cited is the account of Habakkuk being supernaturally transported from Israel to Babylon in an Apocryphal addition to the book of Daniel, Daniel 14:32-38. In an earlier post, I noted how significant it is that Cyril of Jerusalem, for example, wrote about the assumptions or assumption-like experiences of so many figures, even an example as insignificant as the passage about Habakkuk in an Apocryphal document, yet said nothing of an assumption of Mary.

There's another example of this kind of thing in Chromatius of Aquileia. As far as I know, he never advocated the assumption of Mary anywhere in his writings. Yet, he does discuss the transporting of Habakkuk to Babylon (Thomas Scheck, trans., Chromatius Of Aquileia: Sermons And Tractates On Matthew [Mahwah, New Jersey: The Newman Press, 2018], approximate Kindle location 4741). The context Chromatius is addressing is God's provision of food for his people, such as God's provision for Daniel through Habakkuk. I wouldn't expect Mary to be mentioned in that context, even if Chromatius believed in her assumption. My point isn't that Mary should have been mentioned by Chromatius in that passage if he believed in her assumption. Rather, my point is that even something as insignificant as the material on Habakkuk in the Apocrypha gets mentioned sometimes, whereas the assumption of Mary keeps going conspicuously unmentioned, even when people are addressing issues that are highly relevant (assumptions, resurrections, people who are currently in heaven in an embodied state, etc.).

Souls Brightened By Reading

"I beg and exhort with great humility that whoever receives this little book in his hands should both read it frequently himself and instil it into others, as well as giving it to them to read and transcribe. Thus a man may receive a double reward from the Lord as a result of his own progress and that of others. I mention this fact, because many people, and perhaps pious ones, want to keep their numerous books shining and beautifully bound; they keep them locked up in chests, so that they may not read them themselves or give them to others to read. They do not know that it is of no advantage to have books and not read them because of worldly hindrances. If a book is well covered and shining but not read, it does not make the soul bright; but one which is continually read, and because of the fact that it is often unrolled is not beautiful on the outside, makes a soul beautiful within." (Caesarius of Arles, Mary Magdeleine Mueller, trans., St. Caesarius: Sermons, Volume I [1-80] [Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2004], Sermon 2, pp. 24-25)

Haunted Cosmos' Episode On The Enfield Poltergeist

They recently covered Enfield. It's easy to get some things wrong about a case that's so large and complicated. I typically don't criticize people if they're only wrong about a small amount. But there's enough wrong with what Haunted Cosmos has done to warrant a response.