M
marlo
Guest
Hi brethen
How do you defend that Mary is the Spouse of the Holy Spirit
thanks
marlo
How do you defend that Mary is the Spouse of the Holy Spirit
thanks
marlo
- Status
D
DavidFilmer
Guest
What’s to defend (at least, as far as Christians are concerned)? She conceived BY THE HOLY SPIRIT. *No *Christian would deny that.
Obviously, Mary was not “married” to the Holy Spirit in the ordinary sense of the term (there was no wedding, etc). So the “bond of matrimony” here is mystical. But, if no such bond existed, the Holy Spirit would have been a fornicator, and Jesus would have been a bastard!
I don’t think any Christian wishes to assert either of these conclusions.
O
Oren
Guest
Well Mary and The Holy Spirit had a baby together. That’s usually what spouses do right? Like the previous poster said…I don’t know what there is to defend?
M
marlo
Guest
what i mean is “How do you defend the doctrine with bible text”
to a protestant
to a protestant
G
gus
Guest
Read Luke Chapter 1
A
awalt
Guest
We as Catholics believe in the teaching of the Church, whose teachings are very clear in the CCC. So I would say why don’t you read it, and then answer what is it in this teaching that you dispute and on what basis?
R
RyanL
Guest
From EWTN.com
…We also have to take into consideration that when Mary was told by the archangel Gabriel “Behold, you shall conceive in your womb, and bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus” (Lk 1:31), he also added that this was to come about because “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the Holy one to be born shall be called the Son of God” (Lk 1:35). By stating it in those terms the archangel declared to Mary that God would enter into a marital relationship with her, causing her to conceive His Son in her womb, For “to lay one’s power <(reshuth)> over a woman” <(Targum to Dt> 21:4) was a euphemism for “to have a marital relationship with her.” Likewise “to overshadow” (Lk 1:35) by spreading the “wing” or “cloak” over a woman was another euphemism for marital relations. Thus, the rabbis commented <(Midrash Genesis Rabbah> 39.7; 3.9) that Ruth was chaste in her wording when she asked Boaz to have marital relations with her by saying to him “I am Ruth you handmaid, spread therefore your cloak ( literally, “wing”: over your handmaid for you are my next-of-kin” (Ruth 3:9). , another Aramaic-Hebrew word for cloak, is derived from = shadow. Thus, “to spread one’s cloak <(tallith)> over a woman” means to cohabit with her <(Kiddushin> 18b, see also . Did not the Lord say to His bride Israel: “I am married to you” (Jr 3:14) and “your Maker is your husband”? (Is 54-5:5; Jr 31:32)? And what is more intimate than what the Lord said to His bride: “You developed, you grew, you came to full womanhood; your breasts became firm and your hair grew… you were naked… and I saw that you were now old enough for love so I spread my cloak over you… I gave you My oath, I entered into a covenant with you and you became Mine, says the Lord God” (Ezk 16:7, 8).
God Bless,
RyanL
…We also have to take into consideration that when Mary was told by the archangel Gabriel “Behold, you shall conceive in your womb, and bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus” (Lk 1:31), he also added that this was to come about because “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the Holy one to be born shall be called the Son of God” (Lk 1:35). By stating it in those terms the archangel declared to Mary that God would enter into a marital relationship with her, causing her to conceive His Son in her womb, For “to lay one’s power <(reshuth)> over a woman” <(Targum to Dt> 21:4) was a euphemism for “to have a marital relationship with her.” Likewise “to overshadow” (Lk 1:35) by spreading the “wing” or “cloak” over a woman was another euphemism for marital relations. Thus, the rabbis commented <(Midrash Genesis Rabbah> 39.7; 3.9) that Ruth was chaste in her wording when she asked Boaz to have marital relations with her by saying to him “I am Ruth you handmaid, spread therefore your cloak ( literally, “wing”: over your handmaid for you are my next-of-kin” (Ruth 3:9). , another Aramaic-Hebrew word for cloak, is derived from = shadow. Thus, “to spread one’s cloak <(tallith)> over a woman” means to cohabit with her <(Kiddushin> 18b, see also . Did not the Lord say to His bride Israel: “I am married to you” (Jr 3:14) and “your Maker is your husband”? (Is 54-5:5; Jr 31:32)? And what is more intimate than what the Lord said to His bride: “You developed, you grew, you came to full womanhood; your breasts became firm and your hair grew… you were naked… and I saw that you were now old enough for love so I spread my cloak over you… I gave you My oath, I entered into a covenant with you and you became Mine, says the Lord God” (Ezk 16:7, 8).
God Bless,
RyanL
D
Della
Guest
I’d answer that they misunderstand what the Bible is. It is not a mere proof-text for beliefs. It is the witness to the life of Christ and of his Church in the world.
Secondly, the Bible is a part of Sacred Tradition, the written words of the Gospels and the Epistles and Revelation. The oral teaching of the Apostles and the Bible make up the deposit of the Christian faith as interpreted by the Magisterium, not the Bible alone.
And thirdly, as others have said, the archangel Gabriel declared to Mary that she would “conceive of the Holy Spirit”. This is the true witness to the fact that God the Holy Spirit and Mary were the persons through whom God the Son was given to us. If they cannot accept that then they cannot accept the clear words of Scripture they claim to believe in.
J
joe371
Guest
Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit and Mary’s relationship to the Holy Spirit can be thought of in a mystical way similar to that of a spouse: “But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.”
J
joe371
Guest
:yup:I’d answer that they misunderstand what the Bible is. It is not a mere proof-text for beliefs. It is the witness to the life of Christ and of his Church in the world.
Secondly, the Bible is a part of Sacred Tradition, the written words of the Gospels and the Epistles and Revelation. The oral teaching of the Apostles and the Bible make up the deposit of the Christian faith as interpreted by the Magisterium, not the Bible alone.
And thirdly, as others have said, the archangel Gabriel declared to Mary that she would “conceive of the Holy Spirit”. This is the true witness to the fact that God the Holy Spirit and Mary were the persons through whom God the Son was given to us. If they cannot accept that then they cannot accept the clear words of Scripture they claim to believe in.
E
Evan
Guest
I would say that “the Spouse of the Holy Spirit” is a metaphor. The relation between Mary and the HS has some aspects as you would expect of a marriage. This marriage is spiritual in that the HS supported her, inspired her, protected her, guided her.
But the metaphor breaks down if you push it too far. The HS never took her into his home to live, did not provide her daily bread, a place to live, physical assistance. The HS never entered into marriage as either a sacrament or contract, so was never legally married to her.
She never referred to the HS as the father of Jesus, it was always her chaste spouse Joseph, the legal father of her son.
T
TimothyH
Guest
This thread was started before Vatican II.
Mary Spouse of the Holy Spirit is dogma by now.
-Tim-
Mary Spouse of the Holy Spirit is dogma by now.
-Tim-
J
joe371
Guest
S
steve_b
Guest
You meant to say before Vat II ended.This thread was started before Vatican II.
http://timhollingworth.webs.com/img/Drawing1.jpg
Mary Spouse of the Holy Spirit is dogma by now.
-Tim-
I
Ion
Guest
You can say about Virgin Mary “Spouse of the Holy Spirit” but do not forget that is together with Saint Joseph, Spouse includes Saint Joseph.
You are wrong if you consider the “Spouse” relationship only through Jesus incarnation and Mary virginity.
You are wrong if you consider the “Spouse” relationship only through Jesus incarnation and Mary virginity.
E
empther
Guest
I have never heard of Mary as the “spouse of the Holy Spirit” and I was going to Catholic schools in 1954.
I’d say the phrase is inaccurate and meaningless.
One more excuse for Protestants to attack us.
I’d say the phrase is inaccurate and meaningless.
One more excuse for Protestants to attack us.
J
joe371
Guest
The popes through the ages are the one’s you seem to have a problem with. However you did say:I have never heard of Mary as the “spouse of the Holy Spirit” and I was going to Catholic schools in 1954.
I’d say the phrase is inaccurate and meaningless.
One more excuse for Protestants to attack us.
“Catholic loyal to the Pope, don’t even try to change me!”
cuttingedge.org/articles/rc126.htm
Kontakion One from the Byzantine Rite, Akathist to the Theotokos calls the Mother of God, “Bride unwedded”.
To thee the Champion Leader, we thy servants dedicate a feast of victory and thanksgiving, as ones rescued out of sufferings, O Theotokos; but as thou art one with might which is invincible, from all dangers that can be, do thou deliver us, that we may cry to thee: Rejoice, thou Bride unwedded!
To thee the Champion Leader, we thy servants dedicate a feast of victory and thanksgiving, as ones rescued out of sufferings, O Theotokos; but as thou art one with might which is invincible, from all dangers that can be, do thou deliver us, that we may cry to thee: Rejoice, thou Bride unwedded!
G
garysibio
Guest
When was this title first used of Mary? What is the purpose of calling Mary the “Spouse of the Holy Spirit?”
- Status