Posted on 11/14/2004 9:30:36 AM PST by Land of the Irish
Uh, no. I don't know what burr is under his saddle, but that premise is nowhere to be found in any sort of tradition.
"I just pinged you in case you wanted to see the info supplied by a gentleman who corrected Sungenis and The Remnant crowd."
I appreciated the ping and read the linked article, but without Hahn's original, it was still a bit hard to comment beyond what I said.
My concern with what Hahn is alleged by Sungenis to have written wasn't so much that it supposedly didn't have the support of Eastern Fathers, but rather that it seemed to be an attempt to express or understand something already revealed about the nature of God but in terms which would appeal to a certain element in the Church, namely feminists, the quintessential creatures of the Spirit of the Times. If what Hahn was doing was to speculate in order to make the Church "relevant" to the Age, something which some theologians certainly are trying to do, then as an Orthodox Christian I think that's wrong. I certainly could be completely off the mark as to his motives, but I haven't got the original.
By the way, I thought the linked article was a better piece of theology, at least from an Eastern perspective than the Sungenis piece.
Neither Sungenis nor Hahn are "guacks." They are very intelligent men, steeped in scholarship. But neither are they infallible.
guacks=quacks
But the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever I shall have said to you. John 14,26
*Nor is your spelling impeccable :)
Amen, brother. One could say Tradition recognizes the Holy Spirit is capable of being described both ways.
That is not Tradition, that's YOPIOS.
YOPIOS? If you read what was posted, you'll realize that the Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church are not in error on this point.
YOPIOS? If you read what was posted, you'll realize that the Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church are not in error on this point.
Leave it to you to quibble about my spelling. It was obviously a typo. I corrected the error myself before you brought it up.
Who does the Catholic Church consider the Queen of Heaven and Earth?
The Blessed Virgin Mary or the Holy Ghost?
Who is the Mother of Jesus Christ, the Son of God?
The Blessed Virgin Mary or the Holy Ghost?
Who is Our Mother in Heaven?
The Blessed Virgin Mary or the Holy Ghost?
Did Jesus have two Mommies?
Mr. Fields says: "Our Saints have repeatedly shown that the Holy Spirit never acts without His Spouse, Our Lady."
What does that mean exactly? In performing His job, which as I understand it is bringing knowledge and Grace, He is directed by His spouse? It's like saying He is whipped. Whoever made that one up?
I could understand the Holy Ghost would be extremely solicitous to the wishes of His spouse and the mother of Jesus, but I would also imagine He is capable of acting independently. In fact I believe that is His mandate.
"Even in Catholic tradition the mother of a natural family is seen to be the heart of the home because she unites by love the members of the family with each other and with their head, the father. Where wisdom and justice are usually associated with the man's role as head of the family, unitive charity preeminently belongs to the mother's role, the very heart (love) of the family."
The author gets it right, the mother is feminine and the father is masculine. The father might aquiesce to the mother that which is the mothers, but he doesn't become feminine - unless he is whipped.
"It should not be hard to see that if Mary's maternal role is an analogous role to the Holy Spirit then conversely the Holy Spirit must possess the perfections (not the imperfections) of maternity which are imaged in and participated in by His Spouse, Our Lady."
Whaaaat? If Mary's role is analagous to the Holy Ghost, in that she also leads us to Christ, She brings her own qualities to the mix rather than conferring them on the Spirit of God. They may work as complements to each other in vastly different roles.
"Sound theology teaches that we must predicate by analogy the perfections of all created things into God, their foundation. Though this perfection of natural maternity (unitive charity) belongs by essence to all three Persons of the Trinity (and to Christ), it has always been proper to appropriate charity in a special way to the Holy Spirit, who traditionally is said to be, within the Trinity itself, the very bond of charity between the Father and the Son. The work of Sanctification and Love has always been attributed by the Church to the Holy Spirit in a special way. It is under this aspect (not under the aspect of origin, which is absurd) that the Holy Spirit, in a special way, is "like" a mother in the Blessed Trinity."
And this is so because this guy says it? Does the Holy Ghost, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, miraculously become feminine (like a mother) in the transition?
"Just like the Holy Spirit (with His spouse Mary) is the very union of charity between Jesus (Head of the Church) and the members (offspring of the Church), so also in the Trinity itself the Holy Spirit is the very union of charity between the Father (Head of the Trinity) and the Word (eternal Son or offspring in the Trinity)".
Why the need to confer femininity on a Spirit at all? Especially so, a Spirit that has the qualities of God Himself, in fact is God Himself in some way. God conferring His gifts on us does not make Him a woman.
You really couldn't tell my post was tongue-in-cheek, good-natured humor?
Birth Mother.
Holy Mother Church.
Mary
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.