Men in Church and "Bridal Mysticism"?

[Yeoman]

Yesterday I heard a podcast by Protestant writer David Murrow in which he claimed that part of the reason that most branches of Christianity see more women in the pews than men is that the Latin branch of the Church went in for “Bridal Mysticism” (a new word for me) in the Middle Ages and that began to alienate men (or, if you take his claim a bit further, “straight” men). In looking up the term “Bridal Mysticism” I see where a Leon Podles, who might be a Catholic writer, advanced this thesis back in the last decade. Both authors claim that the lack of Bridal Mysticism in the Eastern churches is why the Orthodox churches see men well represented in the pews.

I’m skeptical on this thesis, although I am somewhat receptive to the idea that a decline in manliness, if you will, in the Priesthood would have had somewhat of an impact.

Anyone familiar with this thesis and what do you think about it?

 

[GEddie]

Makes sense to me.

I once asked a Padre whom I wholeheadedly trust, how I as a male should understand the matter of the “Bride of Christ.” After all, He too is male.

The Padre told me that in the same manner that the Virgin Mary is the “new Eve,” the life everlasting is bodily but not sexual. Therefore, our LORD’s embrace, whilst as close as in a “nuptial” setting, does not imply anything sexual.

He also pointed out that women would not take the “bridal” aspect literally per se.

But I can imagine why some men might a priori be put off by it, as it would suggest that involvement in the Church was something feminine.

ICXC NIKA

 

[TK421]

Bridal Mysticism is based on scripture.

It’s one of many descriptions used to explain our relationship with Jesus Christ. It’s not like you hear it every single time you walk into Mass. So I would say that a (significant) number of men leaving because of a single analogy seems very unlikely.

Christ’s love is “spousal” towards us in the sense that he sacrificed both physically and spiritually.

 

[GLam8833]

St. Paul wrote at length about the Church
as Christ’s Bride, and this, he stresses is
why we should strive for holiness in living
CHASTE lives that pleases our Lover, the
One described as Holy, Innocent, undefiled,
set apart from sinners and exalted above
the heavens(Heb. 7:26).
I see the concept of the Bride of Christ and
the Kingdom of God as separate entities,
some who “make it” into the Kingdom of God
may not qualify as the Bride of Christ. Just
as not all will reign w/ Christ “for a thousand
years” Rev. 20:4ff and be included in the
First Resurrection(v.6)!!

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Bridal Mysticism goes back the the Old Testament in the book, The Song of Songs.

St John of the Cross used the Song of Songs to describe the relationship between the soul, the bride, and the Bridegroom. Jesus Christ in the Spiritual Canticle.

The concept isn’t limited to the Catholic Church.

Jim

 

[Irishmom2]

Makes sense to me.

I once asked a Padre whom I wholeheadedly trust, how I as a male should understand the matter of the “Bride of Christ.” After all, He too is male.

The Padre told me that in the same manner that the Virgin Mary is the “new Eve,” the life everlasting is bodily but not sexual. Therefore, our LORD’s embrace, whilst as close as in a “nuptial” setting, does not imply anything sexual.

He also pointed out that women would not take the “bridal” aspect literally per se.

But I can imagine why some men might a priori be put off by it, as it would suggest that involvement in the Church was something feminine.

ICXC NIKA

Very good points.

I would like to point out that I am not sure that everyone has even heard of Bridal Mysticism, so it would not explain why some men are not going to church.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

Very interesting question/points. I’ve wondered about this myself, since the primary argument for the male priesthood is that they are acting as stand-ins for the Bridegroom (Jesus).