I started reading Hail Holy Queen by Scott Hahn. Close to the start of the book (I don’t have the book with me so I can’t give a page number but, If one wishes one I shall quickly go get one) it was stated that Mary was the Spouse of the Father. I find this odd. Was this a misunderstanding on my part of what he meant to say or is he saying what I think he is saying? And if he is, is it orthadox? Thanks and God bless.
Traditional Catholic teaching states that Mary, is the Spouse of the Holy Spirit, Daughter of God, the Father, and Mother of the Son.
I have read the book myself. I never did came across it though, perhaps I missed Scott Hahn’s commentary…Anyways, I don’t think Scott Hahn’s idea that Mary being the Spouse of the Father is generally believed by all Catholic scholars.
I recently read Hail Holy Queen for the second time, but don’t remember any reference to Mary as “Spouse of the Father”. Hahn explains many other titles like “Mother of God” and “New Eve” and “Ark of the New Covenant” and “Queen Mother” but not “Spouse of the Father”. Are you really sure? Where? It might be better to give the page number in the first place, instead of just going from memory.
I’ve read it as well and I do not remember that.
As everyone else has said, the common idea is Mary is the spouse of the Holy Spirit.
What is meant when it is said that she is the “spouse”? I mean, I would think that the Church would shy away from the concept that God is married…
When she’s referred to as ‘spouse’ of the Holy Spirit it is because she conceived Jesus through the power of the Holy Spirit, as the Creed states. It’s a prerogative of spouses to create children together, normally, so it’s considered that in some sense she is indeed the Spirit’s ‘spouse’.
And it’s not that odd a concept - St Catherine of Siena went through what was called a mystical betrothal with Christ - formal ceremony (given a ring by an angel in a vision) and all. St Teresa of Avila called the highest level of contemplative prayer, union with God, ‘spiritual espousals’ or some such. And nuns are commonly referred to as ‘brides of Christ’.
Meh, I never liked that terminology. It does bother me when the Church is called “the Bride of Christ” and such. I have humbly submitted to the fact that it is acceptable, but it still bugs me…
Calling the Church the Bride of Christ is entirely scriptural, you know, so it’s nothing to be bugged by. Christ called HIMSELF the Bridegroom, remember??
Yes, I know. Why it bugs me, I cannot say…
What honor to her should be done
who had God for Father, Spouse and Son?
Especially when it implies that Christ is born of incest, adultery & bigamy :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: God has no spouse. God does not marry. God does not engage in animal or material or bodily activities - becase God is not animal or material or corporeal, but is Spirit.
Nothing but evil can come of trying to apply Christological language to the BVM; it turns the Blessed Virgin into a non-virgin of very dubious moral character, Saint Joseph into a cuckold, & the angel into a pimp. :eek: