Now, I recognize that the text of the Akathist isn’t calling her Bride of the Holy Spirit (maybe it does elsewhere in the text, I’m not sure). I also recognize that calling her the “Bride of God” or the “Bride of the Holy Spirit” could just be poetic reflection. But poetic reflection - especially liturgical poetry - always speaks into a deeper truth.
Hail, Bride of the Holy Ghost.Thank-you for your post, @Vico - St. John very apparently did himself believe that the Blessed Virgin is the Bride of the Holy Spirit, which from my pov shows that sainthood does not bequeath infallibility!
Because it is an easy matter, humanly speaking, to ascribe such a marital relationship by pointing out that it was the Holy Spirit Who impregnated her… When He “came upon” her… And it is also easy enough to extend from Her role as the Bride of God, unto being by extension the Bride of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit… But all of these are conclusions drawn by fallen human inference, based on fallen human definitions, when the terms themselves are but descriptive and evocative of matters not so based at all…
I must say that Russia was under heavy western influence at this time, and John was in all likelihood writing pastorally, and not dogmatically, and if this idea was prevalent in his flock and he at least saw no harm in it and perhaps even believed it, then using it to encourage and exhort is without much harm, I should hope… Although God did put His Russian Church under the purgation of the rule of the Atheists for some 80 - So perhaps my hope is vain…
Vico:
Forgive my ignorance of Slavonic - Might you translate this for me?
So is this idea common among the Russian Saints? That the Holy Spirit is the Spouse of the Blessed Virgin, and perhaps thereby the real Father of Christ, instead of God the Father?
geo
Ref: Hilda Graef, Mary: A History of Doctrine and Devotion , vol. 1, New York: Sheed & Ward, 1963.
http://www.saintjonah.org/services/
Well, he is, as always, speaking poetically. In the same Nativity hymn, he says (actually, the way the hymn is framed, it is Mary who is saying all this to Christ) that Mary is Christ’s Mother, bride, sister, handmaiden and daughter. Ephrem sees Mary in multiple typological ways. I don’t know of any instances of Ephrem emphasizing Mary as the Bride of Christ, or stand alone references.
An actual sample, Hymn XI, “The Virgin Mother to Her Child” by St. Ephraim the Syrian:Vico:
Well, he is, as always, speaking poetically. In the same Nativity hymn, he says (actually, the way the hymn is framed, it is Mary who is saying all this to Christ) that Mary is Christ’s Mother, bride, sister, handmaiden and daughter. Ephrem sees Mary in multiple typological ways. I don’t know of any instances of Ephrem emphasizing Mary as the Bride of Christ, or stand alone references.
The Syriac typology of Mary is endless.
Right back to what was first posted that the faithful have friendship with The Holy Trinity!
Slavonic is also the official liturgical language of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church.
Not true. If Quinisext taught heresy, we would care. If it taught truth, we would care as well. After all, Quinisext council was more of a disciplinary than dogmatic IIRC. Anyway, Latins did care about Quinisext historically- but not in a way where they would accept it.
and Chalcedon was Greek. Can Latins just freely reject it? Sure, Latins actually attended in small number- but Byzantines from Italy had impact on Trent (if they didn’t attend it explicitly, their practices were taken into account when Fathers of Trent got informed about them).
Might be!
That is sad and wrong, but also disobedient to Church.
There is nothing to apologize for. I am glad we understand each other now- I have misunderstood your views too. Thank you for clarification.
So do Latin Rite Catholics affirm St. Gregory Palamas?
I’m sorry could you elaborate? I don’t quite see who ABC are in this scenario
Yes, we are required to affirm Catholic Church in it’s entirety. If Eastern Catholics confess something we must affirm it positively. Otherwise unity would be a false pretension.
A = Latin Rite
Latins affirm Eastern Catholicism in it’s entirety. Eastern Catholicism affirms majority of Eastern Orthodoxy (if not everything except ecclesiology I guess). At the same time, Latin Catholics affirm majority of Eastern Orthodoxy (precisely same points Eastern Catholics affirm). However, nor Eastern Catholics nor Latins Catholic affirm anything contrary to what Catholic Church handed down to us, neither do we fail to affirm that which She has handed. Note that “affirmation” is a bit different than openly professing something. Eastern Catholics “affirm” Purgatory in a sense that they do not deny it’s validity. Latin Catholics “affirm” Palamism in a sense that they do not deny it’s validity. However, Palamism in itself is not official theology of Latin Church that we profess and neither is Purgatory official theology of Eastern Catholic Churches that they profess.
No, not really. Either way, same way Eastern Orthodoxy affirms St. George the Hagiorite but not his views on Papacy, St. Gregory the Great but not his views on Papacy, St. Athanasius but not his views on Filioque (or at least some don’t), St. Augustine but not majority of his theology (at least nowadays)… we affirm Palamism as correct and valid theology. We do not affirm everything Saint Gregory Palamas said or did- especially if those things contradict Faith handed down to us by the Church.
)