Scott Hahn, the Holy Spirit and Rob Sungenis


#1

I am sure this has been discussed before but I would like some of you thoughts on Bob Sungenis’s remarks (critiques) of Scott Hahn’s references to the Holy Spirit in a “feminen” way. Is Sungenis’ criticism valid??? Has the Church ruled that the Holy Spirit can never be refered to ina fem way?? Also if any of you have any thoughts on Hahn’s notion as the Trinity as a family?? Sungenius also says this is wrong. Any thoughts or links to prior discussion would be greatly appreciated.


#2

Where were these comments made, is there a link? I would be interested in reading something about it.


#3

Well, in the spirit of those conversations I often have all alone in my room. I am now answering my own posts. :smiley:

Here are some links that I found.

catholicintl.com/catholicissues/sungenis-michael1.htm

catholicintl.com/catholicissues/triple1.htm


#4

As regards the “familial” aspect of the Trinity, our current speaks about it in the context of his Theology of the Body. The fruitfullness as a result of the mutual self-donation of man and wife is supposed to mirror the fruitfullness as a result of the mutual self-donation of the Father and Son. The fruit being the Holy Spirit who proceeds from them…


#5

[quote=marineboy] Has the Church ruled that the Holy Spirit can never be refered to ina fem way?? Also if any of you have any thoughts on Hahn’s notion as the Trinity as a family?? Sungenius also says this is wrong. Any thoughts or links to prior discussion would be greatly appreciated.
[/quote]

I don’t know about the feminine issue, but if Sungenius disagrees with Hahn’s calling the Trinity a family, then he also disagrees with Pope John Paul II. In the Pope’s weekly audience on Human sexuality which he did from 1979-84 (refered to as “The Theology of the Body”), he calls the Trinity the first family. for more info on The Theology of the Body, pick up Steve Kellmeyer’s book, Sex and the Sacred City

EDIT: John_Henry, sorry somehow i missed your post. Mine says pretty much the same thing. I’ll leave it though since I include the reference to Steve Kellmeyer’s book :slight_smile:


#6

There have been attempts (not by catholic’s, thank God!!) to make the bible either inclusive or gender neutral. The Catholic church doesn’t accept this. It is seen as “new age” doctrine or just plain heresy. God has been referred to as male since the very beginning. Just go back to Genesis and read how “HE” created the heavens and the earth.


#7

The most recent issues of the New Oxford Review have taking up the criticism of Scott Hahn’s Theology regarding the Holy Spirit both pro and con. the most recent issue wrote in response to letter defending
the holy spirit as a mother:

“…When a liberal catholic says the Holy Spirit is feminine (thus giving Jesus two mommies and implicitly validating ‘gay marriage’)
surely you wouldn’t believe it, but when Scott Hahn says so appear willing to swallow it.” (NOR, 1/2000, P. 6).

I assume by two mommies they are referring to scripture which where Mary is told the Holy Spirit will come upon her since she knows not a man.

Disclaimer: I’m a reader of Scott Hahn and have learned a lot from him and am currently waiting for one of his books from AMAZON. I just wanted to throw this out there for comment.


#8

Isn’t Sugenis a traditionalist? (pre-vatican II) :confused:


#9

I have had problems with some of Scott’s writing before, and I think this is probably another example that he’s leaving mainline Catholics and heading for the liberal fringe. The Holy Spirit is never described in feminine terms within Scripture…


#10

Does anyone have Hahn’s specific comments that are being objected to? I have seen/hear all kinds of objections but nobody ever says exactly what they are objecting to. Can someone provide the text/context? Thanks!


#11

[quote=Writer]I have had problems with some of Scott’s writing before, and I think this is probably another example that he’s leaving mainline Catholics and heading for the liberal fringe. The Holy Spirit is never described in feminine terms within Scripture…
[/quote]

I don’t think that is a fair assessment at all. Hahn’s Bible studies are very conservative (orthodox), he teaches at a very conservative school, and his talks are very conservative. A few statements here and there does not make him liberal.


#12

[quote=Writer]I have had problems with some of Scott’s writing before, and I think this is probably another example that he’s leaving mainline Catholics and heading for the liberal fringe. The Holy Spirit is never described in feminine terms within Scripture…
[/quote]

To describe Scott Hahn as heading to the liberal fringe is to seriously redefine the word “conservative”. I haven’t got a clue what he said. People may be misunderstanding him. Maybe not. Maybe he picked the wrong forum for his writing (something I heard Karl Keating say). If he has openly contradicted the magisterium, I am sure he will be the first to apologize. But please don’t start jumping to conclusions and assuming his liberalization.


#13

[quote=Writer]I have had problems with some of Scott’s writing before, and I think this is probably another example that he’s leaving mainline Catholics and heading for the liberal fringe. The Holy Spirit is never described in feminine terms within Scripture…
[/quote]

Not only is the Holy Ghost never described in feminine terms, but He is explicitly referred to as He:

“But when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will teach you all truth. For he shall not speak of himself; but what things soever he shall hear, he shall speak; and the things that are to come, he shall shew you. He shall glorify me; because he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it to you” (St. John 15:13-14)

Nine time in one two verses Jesus refers to the Holy Ghost as He. That should end the debate between Robert Sungenius and Scott Hahn.


#14

[quote=Brad]Does anyone have Hahn’s specific comments that are being objected to? I have seen/hear all kinds of objections but nobody ever says exactly what they are objecting to. Can someone provide the text/context? Thanks!
[/quote]

The New Oxford Review ran an article in June 2004 by Edward O’Neil
called “Scott Hahn’s Novelties” which provoked much comment in the magazine for months. In fact, Scott Hahn himself wrote a response which has printed in the Letters section of the New Oxford Review. The above article references quotations from First Comes Love (especially P. 138) regarding the feminity of the Holy Spirit.

I continue respect Mr. Hahn for all the good he has done and look forward to reading his book on the sacraments.


#15

[quote=Brad]I don’t think that is a fair assessment at all. Hahn’s Bible studies are very conservative (orthodox), he teaches at a very conservative school, and his talks are very conservative. A few statements here and there does not make him liberal.
[/quote]

You could be right, but I have been hearing more and more about Hahn’s comments lately, and some of them (like the reference here) seem pretty disturbing. In the one book I have read of his, his arguments seem unnecessarily complex, and I noticed he seems to have a pattern of name-dropping for unclear reasons. Makes for distracting reading and gives me reason to suspect this guy may not be operating on all cylinders, but yes I hope I am wrong, too…


#16

[quote=Writer]I have had problems with some of Scott’s writing before, and I think this is probably another example that he’s leaving mainline Catholics and heading for the liberal fringe. The Holy Spirit is never described in feminine terms within Scripture…
[/quote]

Then perhaps you might read the wisdom literature in the Bible.


#17

[quote=Writer]I have had problems with some of Scott’s writing before, and I think this is probably another example that he’s leaving mainline Catholics and heading for the liberal fringe. The Holy Spirit is never described in feminine terms within Scripture…
[/quote]

Scott Hahn is a long, long way from the liberla fringe. You need to read a little bit of what the true liberal fringe has been writing for the last 30 years.


#18

[quote=RSiscoe]Not only is the Holy Ghost never described in feminine terms, but He is explicitly referred to as He:

"But when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will teach you all truth. For he shall not speak of himself; but what things soever he shall hear, he shall speak; and the things that are to come, he shall shew you. He shall glorify me; because he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it to you" (St. John 15:13-14)

Nine time in one two verses Jesus refers to the Holy Ghost as He. That should end the debate between Robert Sungenius and Scott Hahn.
[/quote]

Without denying anything you said, Biblical scholarship is not reduced to simply quoting one passage of Scripture and assuming that answers all questions. Perhaps you might want to read what Dr. Hahn has said before responding thus.


#19

Sungenis has been refuted by Mr. Field and Jake Michael. You can also go here:

lidless-eye.blogspot.com


#20

[quote=Writer]You could be right, but I have been hearing more and more about Hahn’s comments lately, and some of them (like the reference here) seem pretty disturbing. In the one book I have read of his, his arguments seem unnecessarily complex, and I noticed he seems to have a pattern of name-dropping for unclear reasons. Makes for distracting reading and gives me reason to suspect this guy may not be operating on all cylinders, but yes I hope I am wrong, too…
[/quote]

He is most definitely operating on all cylinders.

Part of the problem of the complexity you cite is that he is trying to walk a line between a scholarly journal piece and something for consumption of the average, relatively unsophisticated, reader. And some of the name dropping is something that otherwise might be done by footnotes, but to one who is more widely read on the subject, it should have more meaning.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.