The sticking point with "Assumption" is that it does not in itself make reference to the actual death of the Mother of God.
That's right. However, one could just as easily say that the sticking point with the term Dormition
is that it does not in itself make reference to the resurrection of the Mother of God. Personally, I use the terms interchangeably, depending on which will be more readily understood by my audience. Traditional Anglicans tend to be more comfortable with Dormition
, partly because some of them were unhappy with the associations Assumption
has with the Latin definition and partly because some of the early "enhanced" materials tobe used with the Prayer Book referred on the 15th of August to the Falling Asleep of the Blessed Virgin Mary
. Roman Catholics and Anglo-Catholics seem happier with Assumption
. Many Eastern Orthodox people don't know the word Assumption
so I just use Dormition
when talking to them. Western Rite Orthodox tend to use one or the other depending on which tradition they're from.
But back to your comment...
The 20th-century Latin definition of their dogma of the Assumption of the Mother of God does indeed deliberately leave open the question of whether or not she reposed first. The actual papal pronouincement uses some vague term such as, 'at the end of her earthly life', which could be read either way. This was the matter of some debate in the Latin church at one time. I am told, though, by a couple of Catholic deacons who are both scholars of Latin theology, that most of their theologians today and general thought on the matter says that she did indeed repose before she was assumed.