Posted on 02/09/2015 2:55:55 PM PST by NYer
Q: A Baptist friend asked me, “Why do we call priests ‘Father’ when Jesus told us not to call anyone on earth ‘father?'” How would you answer this question?
This question refers to Jesus’s teaching found in the Gospel of St. Matthew, when He said, “Do not call anyone on earth your father. Only One is your Father, the One in heaven” (Mt 23:9). Taken literally, we would have to wonder why we do use this title “Father” when Jesus seems to forbid it. First, we must remember the context of the passage. Jesus is addressing the hypocrisy of the scribes and the Pharisees — the learned religious leaders of Judaism. Our Lord castigates them for not providing a good example; for creating onerous spiritual burdens for others with their various rules and regulations; for being haughty in exercising their office; and for promoting themselves by looking for places of honor, seeking marks of respect and wearing ostentatious symbols. Basically, the scribes and the Pharisees had forgotten that they were called to serve the Lord and those entrusted to their care with humility and a generous spirit.
Given that context, Jesus says not to call anyone on earth by the title “Rabbi,” “Father,” or “teacher,” in the sense of arrogating to oneself an authority which rests with God and of forgetting the responsibility of the title. No one must ever take the place, or usurp the privileges and respect that belongs to the heavenly Father. As Jesus said, only the heavenly Father is the true Father, and only the Messiah is the true teacher and rabbi. In a similar vein, Jesus said, “Whoever loves father or mother, son or daughter, more than Me is not worthy of Me” (Mt 10:37). Because of the authority of the heavenly Father and the respect due to Him, Jesus freely referred to His heavenly Father as “Father,” and taught us to pray the “Our Father” (Mt 6:9-13).
Moreover, our Lord Himself used the title “father” for several characters in His parables: In the parable of the rich man and the beggar, Lazarus, the rich man, cries out from the depths of Hell, “Father Abraham, have pity on me,” and the usage of the title “father” occurs three times (cf. Lk 16:19-31). One has to wonder: if Jesus prohibited the use of the title “father,” why does He instruct the people with a parable in which the characters use the title? To do so seems to be contradictory and actually misleading to the audience. The same is true in the parable of the Prodigal Son: The young prodigal son, upon his return, says, “Father, I have sinned against God and against you” (cf. Lk 15:11-32). Given the way our Lord used the title “father” in so many teachings, including when repeating the fourth commandment, our Lord did not intend to prohibit calling a father by the title “father”; rather, He prohibited misusing the title.
We do use these titles in our common parlance: We call those who instruct us and others “teacher”; our male parent, “father”; and Jewish religious leaders, “rabbi.” Especially in a religious sense, those who serve the Lord and represent His authority, as a teacher, parent and especially a priest, must be mindful of exercising it diligently, humbly and courageously. To use this authority for self-aggrandizement is pure hypocrisy. Jesus said at the end of this passage, “Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled, but whoever humbles himself shall be exalted.”
Since the earliest times of our Church, we have used the title “Father” for religious leaders. Bishops, who are the shepherds of the local Church community and the authentic teachers of the faith, were given the title “Father.” Consequently, St. Peter may well have been addressed as “Father Peter,” in that sense of spiritual father. The likelihood of this address is supported by St. Paul who identifies himself as a spiritual father. In writing to the Corinthians, he said, “I am writing you in this way not to shame you but to admonish you as my beloved children. Granted you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you have only one father. It was I who begot you in Christ Jesus through my preaching of the Gospel. I beg you, then, be imitators of me. This is why I have sent you Timothy, my beloved and faithful son in the Lord” (1 Cor 4:14-17).
Until about the year 400, a bishop was called “father” (“papa”); this title was then restricted solely to addressing the Bishop of Rome, the successor of St. Peter, and in English was rendered “pope.” In an early form of his rule, St. Benedict (d. c. 547) designated the title to spiritual confessors, since they were the guardians of souls. Moreover, the word “abbot,” denoting the leader in faith of the monastic community, is derived from the word abba, the Aramaic Hebrew word father, but in the very familiar sense of “daddy.” Later, in the Middle Ages, the term “father” was used to address the mendicant friars — like the Franciscans and Dominicans — since by their preaching, teaching and charitable works they cared for the spiritual and physical needs of all of God’s children. In more modern times, the heads of male religious communities or even those who participate in ecumenical councils, such as Vatican II, are given the title “father.” In the English-speaking world, addressing all priests as “Father” has become customary.
On a more personal note, the title for me is very humbling. As a priest, “Father” reminds me that I am entrusted with a grave responsibility by our Lord — His faithful people. Just as a father must nourish, instruct, challenge, correct, forgive, listen and sustain his children, so must a priest do so for his spiritual children. The priest must especially meet the spiritual needs of those entrusted to his care, providing them with the nourishment of our Lord through the sacraments. He must preach the Gospel with fervor and conviction in accord with the mind of the Church, challenging all to continue on that path of conversion which leads to holiness. He must correct those who have erred, but with mercy and compassion. In the same spirit as the father with his prodigal son, the priest must reconcile sinners who have gone astray but seek a way back to God. As a father listens to his child, so must a priest listen to his spiritual children, providing counsel and consolation. A priest must also be mindful of the “physical” needs of his flock — food, housing, clothing and education.
While priests may be celibate, the words of our Lord to His Apostles ring true: “I give you my word, there is not one who has given up home, brothers or sisters, mother or father, children or property, for me and for the Gospel who will not receive in this present age a hundred times as many homes, brothers and sisters, mothers, children and property — and persecution besides — and in the age to come, everlasting life” (Mk 10:29-30). Actually celibacy frees a priest to be a generous father for his spiritual children. All of us must pray for our priests, especially those who serve in our own parishes and those newly ordained for our diocese, that by God’s grace they may strive to fulfill the responsibility of being “Father.”
You are wrong, presenting a tangled-up, self-refuting mess of conditional contradictions.
If these others (other than God the Father) are "spiritual fathers" (need I quote where and how you used that term? why should I need to?) then they are offspring not of God, but of these other mens' perceptions, and also, limitations.
Look at history, and see how being 'sons of' men, in religious and even (so-called) spiritual sense, has not uniformly produced positive results.
When those negatives are too well blended with that which is otherwise pure, coming to us from on high, then the lesser elements will become mistaken for the Higher.
About the best one could do, is not to be others spiritual birth-father (lest they be sons and daughters of those persons, rather than God) but instead to help arrange things so that others can be adopted by God as sons and daughters, themselves.
So what is this discussion anyway, but one more in a long succession of struggles over word usages?
This ending, limiting, qualifying sort of statement from Martignoni;
As long as we do not allow...
Ok. Hey, he's got it. Almost...
But why continually tempt and test that necessary conditionally qualifying limitation by demanding that everyone call priests "father"?
Step away from the buffet table.
[and said in best china-american singsong voice]
Thank you for an excellent question. Catholics emphasize both the crucifixion and the resurrection, not minimizing or downplaying the importance of either. In our manger scenes, stained glass windows, and statues, we also depict the Lord as a baby in the manger, as a toddler in his mother’s arms, and as a young man teaching the rabbis in the Temple. Each of these stages of the Lord’s life are worthy of depiction. But the focal point and purpose of Christ’s Incarnation and ministry is his death on the cross. As he himself said, “For this I was born, and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth” (Jn 18:37).
Catholics use crucifixes to avoid what St. Paul warned about, that the cross be "emptied of its power" (1 Cor 1:17). Christ's supreme act was to die on the cross as atonement for our sins. His resurrection was proof that what he did on the cross worked -- he conquered death -- and it demonstrated beyond any doubt that he was who he claimed to be: God. The crucifixion was the act that changed history. The resurrection demonstrated the efficacy of that act.
St. Paul emphasized the crucifixion saying, "When I came to you, brethren, I did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God in lofty words or wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified" (1 Cor 2:1-2). Recall the scene of the crucifixion Some in the crowd that was present at Calvary shouted at Christ as he was dying: "Come down off your cross!" (cf. Mt 27:40; Mk 15:30).
We Catholics strive to emulate St. Paul's [words] to "know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified" (1 Cor 2:2; cf. 1 Cor 1:17-18).
I don’t know any iman’s you’ll have to ask the marines.
Oh, Catholics make up all kinds of things not in the bible. In this case priests. It is not a NT church office or role. Contrast this with a committee or admit role.
.
“Elder” carries a distinct spiritual connotation, that being strong evidence that that person workes broadly in the gifts of the spirit.
We see very few such individuals these days.
.
Yet; Catholics violate that command jumping thru hoops trying to work their way around and thru scriptures to justify it...And then they call some guy 'Holy Father'...A title specifically reserved for God...
Perhaps God inspires them to call each other father to make it easier for his church to recognize who to avoid...
.
How can “things made with hands” be called “sacred?”
That is distinctly pagan behavior.
.
In other words, to me, Yeshua was saying call no man "Father of Creation" - so calling a priest father is just a form of respect as in Father Brown for instance ....
So others who do not develop your private interpretation may be going around calling other men Father of Creation???
Your priests are the Pharisees...
.
You keep posting strawmen in response to others serious comments.
You risk making yourself an irrelevent popping jay.
.
I guess some of these people don’t believe St. Paul and Scripture. Sad.
.
The RCC “priests” are the modern day Pharisees!
.
.
>> “I guess some of these people don’t believe St. Paul and Scripture” <<
.
Where do you want to start?
.
-—Where do you want to start?-—
Call No Man “Father”?
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/call-no-man-father
Spiritual Fatherhood
Perhaps the most pointed New Testament reference to the theology of the spiritual fatherhood of priests is Paul’s statement, “I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (1 Cor. 4:14–15).
Peter followed the same custom, referring to Mark as his son: “She who is at Babylon, who is likewise chosen, sends you greetings; and so does my son Mark” (1 Pet. 5:13). The apostles sometimes referred to entire churches under their care as their children. Paul writes, “Here for the third time I am ready to come to you. And I will not be a burden, for I seek not what is yours but you; for children ought not to lay up for their parents, but parents for their children” (2 Cor. 12:14); and, “My little children, with whom I am again in travail until Christ be formed in you!” (Gal. 4:19).
John said, “My little children, I am writing this to you so that you may not sin; but if any one does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 John 2:1); “No greater joy can I have than this, to hear that my children follow the truth” (3 John 4). In fact, John also addresses men in his congregations as “fathers” (1 John 2:13–14).
By referring to these people as their spiritual sons and spiritual children, Peter, Paul, and John imply their own roles as spiritual fathers. Since the Bible frequently speaks of this spiritual fatherhood, we Catholics acknowledge it and follow the custom of the apostles by calling priests “father.” Failure to acknowledge this is a failure to recognize and honor a great gift God has bestowed on the Church: the spiritual fatherhood of the priesthood.
Catholics know that as members of a parish, they have been committed to a priest’s spiritual care, thus they have great filial affection for priests and call them “father.” Priests, in turn, follow the apostles’ biblical example by referring to members of their flock as “my son” or “my child” (cf. Gal. 4:19; 1 Tim. 1:18; 2 Tim. 2:1; Philem. 10; 1 Pet. 5:13; 1 John 2:1; 3 John 4).
All of these passages were written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and they express the infallibly recorded truth that Christ’s ministers do have a role as spiritual fathers. Jesus is not against acknowledging that. It is he who gave these men their role as spiritual fathers, and it is his Holy Spirit who recorded this role for us in the pages of Scripture. To acknowledge spiritual fatherhood is to acknowledge the truth, and no amount of anti-Catholic grumbling will change that fact.
Sorry, but it’s not my private interpretation.
No Catholic ‘priest’ can claim the kind of spiritual fatherhood Paul did, since they lead away from Yeshua, not to him.
The term “son” used by Paul and Peter is from their mentoring of younger men to go forward in the ministry. This does not relate at all to the occultic coven-like nature of the RCC priesthood.
.
.
Anything that is not the plain text of scripture is a “private interpretation.”
.
Whatever
Sorry, but it’s not my private interpretation.
That's a private interpretation...
Since you have a computer, do some research.
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.