In Sacred Scripture, the relationship between God and the individual soul, and between God and his people, is often enough presented in terms of espousal and marriage. We see this in the prophets and in the psalms and, of course, in the Wisdom literature, especially the Song of Songs. So it is not surprising that in the case of Our Lady, who, quite literally, became the mother of God made man, she is in a certain sense the spouse of the Holy Spirit by whose creative power she became a virgin mother.
Thus it is that some spiritual writers use the expression “spouse of the Holy Spirit.” This expression is entirely in line with the description of the Holy Spirit’s relationship with her in St. Luke’s Gospel.
The thing I love about Mary the most is that she always points to God, and specifically her Son, rather than herself. She's a stumbling block. It's a great test of what one truly believes about the Trinity. Not Mary, but the Trinity.
When some reject calling her the Mother of God, for example, they're actually rejecting Christ. For they demonstrate that they don't believe he's God, by rejecting his mother's title. And when people reject calling her the spouse of the Holy Spirit, they reject the act of God that made Christ's incarnation possible. This is no surprise though, since most Protestants reject the virgin birth. And they show themselves as people who are dismissive and take pleasure in defiling holy things. For if God dwelled in her and the Holy Spirit came upon her, she became a vessel and a temple of God. To think she should be touched again by mortal hands shows how sacrilegious these people are. To think Joseph was careless about this also shows how little they think of him as well. But this is no surprise, as their so called "churches" are void and lack sacraments. They destroyed sacramental life from their beliefs long ago, so I could never expect them to understand the sacramental nature of the human vessel that was Mary. They hate even small expressions of this, so they'd never understand larger ones.
The kicker however is that I'm not even Catholic, and people like you are still a joke. You literally have nothing left to your "religion" except "pastorism".
Luke Long
He wont because he knows it's not true. Ironically, people that claim we worship Mary unironically worship the bible.
Luke Moore
Lmao
Evan Gray
I often struggled with both Jesus and Mary. Jesus because I saw him as an obstacle before the Lord. I really disliked that I have to go through a middle man. And then Mary because I just dislike women a lot in general. I wonder why this is so hard for me, but one should jsut keep going with prayer no matter what.
Owen Hernandez
Is this the current state of Catholicism? "Mary is the wife of the Holy Spirit" tier? Are you going to say the Son proceeds from Mary and the Holy Spirit, next?
God's bride is the Church. Mary sometimes personifies the Church, because she is the first and greatest example of a saint, and the spiritual mother of all believers. But you're taking it way too far, OP.
Sebastian Thompson
What is this weird incest shit?
Connor Martin
It's not just the OP. That specific title goes back to at least Louise De Montfort (1600s.. St. Louis to the Catholic). I'm not a Catholic, but I do defend Mary. It's not an out of line title. As I said earlier, these titles are actually stumbling blocks. It sifts out how many liars are in Protestantism. Very few of you are actually Trinitarian. You're Unitarian.
Another of their saints who promoted that title is Maxmilliam Kolbe. Who died in Auschwitz for his beliefs. So yeah, if he's anything to go by, I don't think you have a chance to change their minds.
John Clark
Are you accusing me specifically of being Unitarian?
Caleb Watson
That's what I said. I can count on one finger how many Protestants are actually Trinitarian, just by their nastiness about Mary.
Funnily, none of the original Reformers were like this.
James Clark
I'm not a Protestant. But I find it funny that you would call me a non-Trinitarian for daring to not identify Mary as the wife of the Holy Spirit. I assume you're a Sophianist who thinks Mary is the incarnation of the Holy Spirit and therefore finds the OP's Mary-worship endearing. Am I correct?
Liam Scott
"One finger". Hah, Freudian slip. I meant one hand, but maybe finger is giving away just how little I think of this.
Jonathan Reyes
How you came to that conclusion is beyond me. It makes no sense. If I say I'm OK that Spouse of the Holy Spirit is a decent title, that excludes the idea that she's the incarnation. There is no incarnation of the Holy Spirit anyways. He works through all of the Church. She was just "full of Grace", more than the usual Christian, and the extremely blessed for having been the mother of our Lord. Not only did she have the grace of the Incarnation, but also the presence and teaching of her Son on earth day in day out. There is no greater or blessed saint than this.
But that by no means means I equate her God/Holy Spirit or "Sophia".
Gabriel Kelly
Such a bizarre correlation between the hypostases of Mary and of the Holy Spirit that goes beyond what is possible for any other Christian puts her above mankind, and "Mary and the person of the Holy Spirit are 'one' in a sense or another" is pretty much the basis of a lot of heterodox glorification of Mary, whether that is among the Catholics, the Sophianists, or even the Collyridians that Muhammad encountered.
This is very much orthodox, so why do you find "spouse of the Holy Spirit" a proper title at all? The Church is the bride of Christ. Individually, we should not be called the spouses of Christ - both because it obscures our own distinct sexuality (male or female) and because it loses sight of the fact we are united to Christ by being members of the Church, but no member of the Church, on its own, can be called the Church. Therefore no single member of the Church, on its own, can be called the spouse of Christ. Not even the Theotokos, however blessed she is. It is only in a very allegorical way that she could be called the spouse of Christ, if we consider that she represents the Church. But because of how non-literal this is, I think this can only be conveyed properly in iconography, not with words. Iconography can put her in a position where it can be clearly seen that she stands for the Church as a whole, because Christ got our humanity from her and because she was the first Christian, properly speaking. But even then I'm not sure I can think of an instance where I actually saw the "bride of Christ" theme be used between the Theotokos and Christ, although I'm sure this could be done.
But even with all this being said, "spouse of the Holy Spirit" remains an imprope title for the Church, and especially for any one individual believer, and especially for the Theotokos. I don't care that a couple of post-schism Catholic saints have decided that it is a good idea - they have stopped believing in the true God centuries ago.
Michael Foster
Wow that's pretty edgy of you my man.
Lincoln Wood
The scriptures itself say she is different from the rest of us. She had Christ dwell within her - it's never happened before and never will again. It's a specific moment in history that is unmatched. And then to top it off, she lived with Jesus practically his whole life in the most mundane sense. She's blessed in more ways than one. St. Elizabeth points out her difference as well: "Blessed are you among women." She is different. She also represents the Church herself in some sense. She was the FIRST to hear the Gospel by Gabriel's entrance, the FIRST to meet Christ personally, and then was there at the Crucifixion as well as Pentecost. It's impossible to separate her from everything that represents the Church. She's basically the firstfruits of the Church. Deal with it.
Even if I don't rely on the Marian traditions of Catholics, their titles are not far off in the abstract sense. And like I said, it weeds out the Unitarians. I like it for that alone. Just like "Mother of God" weeds out Unitarians. When I see people repulsed by that title, I see a person repulsed by the idea that Christ was God. They only hide it by saying they're only upset at the "Mother" part. At best, some may actually be Trinitarian, but they learned from Unitarian heretics and repeat their words. I would suggest they actually think about they say then and get away from these teachers.
And on a sidenote, icons and images of Christ also weed out Unitarians. They think like Jews and Muslims and still consider God only as the invisible God. When they attack images, they attack the idea that Christ was God, for he is the image of God (Col 1:5). They don't adapt to the New Testament idea of God revealing himself through Christ - not really - In their actual actions and iconoclastic tendencies, they still behave like Jews and rely on old revelation like Jews.
Ethan Scott
Oh, yes.. forgot one other moment: She was there at Christ's opening of his ministry and his first miracle of changing water into wine. And her words there are the same as all of these titles: "Do whatever he tells you."
She is ALWAYS pointing back to Christ. Do whatever he tells you. "Mother of God" - that's pointing back to Christ as well. Everything that Protestants get upset about Mary are things that actually point back to Christ. That's why I've come to the conclusion that you're actually Unitarian. That you don't believe he's God, for you're always insulting the woman pointing to you to him as God.
And yet the Orthodox service of baptism makes a relation between her "fiat" at the Annunciation and our "fiat" at baptism, through the creed (which is repeated every Sunday). And the Orthodox service of marriage makes a relation between Christ's incarnation in Mary (taking upon flesh from her and being born of her) and Christ's incarnation in the couple (the man and woman becoming, mysteriously, an icon of Christ and the Church). Yes, Mary is unique in that it is through her that Christ took upon human nature, but this human nature is not unique to her alone either. She is the new Eve, but in such a sense that she is the nexus through which the rest of mankind can be united to Christ, solely by virtue of being human like her (which includes original sin).
This is perfectly correct. That is why I said she is used as a stand-in for the Church, not only in the Book of Revelation but also in iconography (see pics related). What is there for me to "deal with"? The Church is never called the "spouse of the Holy Spirit".
Sadly, "not being far off in the abstract sense" is not a good enough norm of orthodoxy.
So is John the Forerunner. Both Mary and John link the Old Testament to the New Testament and both announced Christ and pointed to Him, "erasing" themselves in the process, out of humility for their Master. That is why you will often see Mary and John to the left and right of Christ, pointing to Him. I'll post two examples in a second post.
You're the one insulting the Trinity, by treating Mary as a goddess and treating the Son and the Holy Spirit as the same person. You believe in the kind of "Trinity" that the Mohammedians criticize.
Holy shit, what is wrong with Catholics? This is literally the Mary-veneration-as-goddess-worship that Protestants are always talking about. Tone it down and stop worshipping a creature instead of the creator.
I'm sorry for adding that part at the end about Catholics worshipping Mary. I need to care less about Internet Catholics and more about the Catholics I encounter in real life. But stupid nonsense like "Mary is the spouse of the Holy Spirit" and "the hypostases of God are the essence" and "the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Pope" and other crap I've heard here and on other websites is seriously hurting the little hope I have left in the salvation of Catholics. Start teaching the Gospel instead of some pseudo-intellectual garbage that leads you to non-Trinitarianism and idolatry and maybe you'll be taken seriously by non-Catholics.
Julian Cox
Oh, so you alone know how to read scripture and the way you like it is the only real way huh? Pride is the most deadly of sins my friend and you have it in spades.
I'm not going to pray for you because there are more worthy subjects but I hope that god sees fit to push you off your high horse for good.
Grayson Parker
I'm prideful for following the traditional Orthodox doctrine but you're not prideful for following the traditional Catholic doctrine (as far as Catholicism is traditional anyway). This is not solid reasonment. Incidentally, "I'm not going to pray for you because there are more worthy subjects" is some of the most prideful filth I've had to read here in a long time. Especially if you're going to say immediately afterward "I hope that god sees fit to push you off your high horse for good". If that's what you believe is right, why are you too lazy to pray for it? "I hope you will be saved but I'm not bothered to pray for it because there's more important stuff" is one more bullet point to add on the list of "Catholic self-condemnation" in this thread. Nice job…
Here's a light-hearted spurdo before this discussion pushes me to anger.
I've always wondered how you do that. Do you start your prayers with "Please Lord, help that one user from Zig Forums?"
Joseph Hill
Well, God knows what it's in my heart before I can even realize it, so the wording isn't important, but I usually just do Jesus Prayers. "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on this Christanon", or "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on Your servant". I add the reason for praying for this person if it's a prayer request too (so, for instance, "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on your servant who seeks You but cannot go to church"). Unfortunately I don't think to stop browsing, so I only say one prayer, but when I'm less absent-minded I take some time off to do 10 to 50 prayers for the person concerned (my prayer rope has 10 divisions of tens so I can easily count how many I've prayed). But it's true that it's a problem that we're all anonymous. Having an actual name to put on someone helps in prayer. But, eh, God knows what's up.
Cooper Brooks
This, God knows. I usually just visualize in my heart who I'm talking about.
Owen Jackson
Source?
Michael Brown
I'm not saying it's from an article or something. Just some nonsense I've seen on certain Christian forum boards (I've seen it once on leddit and once here). I know this isn't a mainstream belief at all, but that I would need to even argue about this to begin with is very annoying. It's probably a sign that I should stop using the Internet though.
Elijah Sanders
Mary was married to Joseph in a human natural marriage, in her earthly life (see Matthew 1:25). However. In her spiritual marriage as a member of the Church (the body of Christ/the bride of Christ, see Ephesians 5:22) She is married to Jesus, the express image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15 & Hebrews 1:3). To the natural understanding people think that is strange, as though she is married to her Son. But it is her spiritual union being united and married back to her Creator.
In Jesus (the spirit of Christ) there is neither male nor female (Galatians 3:28). Therefore, men and women are in truth married to the Spirit of Jesus Christ. Yet as it is spiritual union, Mary being married to Jesus (in the Spirit) is not incest, and men being married to Jesus (in the spirit) is not homosexual, as family relationships and gender is a human finite limitation, but that is done away in Christ.
The Holy Spirit give you revelation.
Julian Johnson
Then say this upfront. Don't put it inside quotes. Because the only results I've got from it with quotes were six hits: two from the same article from a James Likoudis where he mentions the remark from an unmentioned Orthodox priest in England, in quotes, "the ideology of papism, this ideology known as the filioque and stating that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Pope of Rome"; three from a blog called orthodoxengland.org.uk, which I presume must receive posts from the above mentioned priest, as they are very similar in wording; one from a 2007 thread in CatholicAnswers about the Filioque, where a poster says that "the Orthodox thought the Pope was self promoting himself to the level of infallibility (I guess as if to say the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Pope too)"; one last from r/OrthodoxChristianity, where the OP mentions hearing it on a podcast and to which someone in the thread replied "the Catholic Church does NOT by ANY means teach the Holy Spirit Proceeds from the Pope."
… I already did. I was talking about forum boards. Not mainstream things and definitely not something I would have encountered outside of the Internet.
Incidentally I didn't know that this is an attack we throw at the Catholics too.
Jonathan Jones
Also, if that makes you feel better, I see horrible shit from Orthodox online too. The worst probably being "there is no eternal relationship between the Son and the Holy Spirit", together with "the Holy Spirit temporally proceeds from all Orthodox Christians".
