Vatican Archbishop: I Do Not Agree With The Title ‘Pope Emeritus’

The Catholic Herald (UK) ^ | 5/4/17 | Staff Reporter

[marshmallow]

The President of the Pontifical Council for the New Evangelisation said the title creates more theological problems than it solves

Archbishop Rino Fisichella, President of the Pontifical Council for the New Evangelisation, has said he does not agree with calling Benedict XVI “Pope Emeritus’.

Speaking at a presentation of the book Il Papa del coraggio (the Pope of courage) by Italian journalist Mammo Muolo, the archbishop said the title “theologically creates more problems rather than solving them”.

“I respect it, but I will not use it,” he added, saying he would wait for “another expression” to describe the former pontiff.

In an interview with the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Benedict XVI said he wanted simply to be known as “Father Benedict” after stepping down as Pope but felt too weak and tired to push the decision through.

Last year, Bishop Giuseppe Sciacca, Secretary of the Apostolic Signatura, a close confidant of the former pope, also said he did not agree with the title.

[ealgeone]

It’s terribly sad that Protestants have a religion that’s so stripped down to nothing that they can’t even do anything as normal as call their own father “Father,” or give someone with a new position in the Church a new title.

There is no Biblical injunction against calling your biological dad father if you want to.

I just called mine dad.

How horrible to have your hands tied so that you can’t do common sense things.

And you still haven’t answered my question as to where in the Bible it says that you can’t give a new church position a new title.

A title given to a religious leader should be one found in the NT. So much of the RCC leadership is not found in the NT.

Pope

Cardinal

Metropolitan

Primate

Archbishop

Territorial Prelate

Territorial Abbot

Vicar Apostolic

Prefect Apostolic

Permanent Apostolic Administrator

[ealgeone]

Let's have 1 Corinthians 4:15 in context.

How do you explain this? (1 Corinthians 4:15) "Indeed, in Christ Jesus I became your Father through the gospel."

For if you were to have countless tutors in Christ, yet you would not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. 1 Corinthians 4:15 NASB

The way you posted it one would think that's the whole verse.

Second, as Roman Catholics so often like to do you capitalized a word that shouldn't be in caps. Your rendering of the verse is a bit misleading on your part.

The Greek rendering of the part of this verse in question reads as follows:

...ἐγὼ ὑμᾶς ἐγέννησα

I you have begotten

ἐγέννησα is a verb. It is not a noun. That's a huge difference and a distinction that needs to be noted.

The verb carries the meaning of bringing forth, to produce offspring.

In this context Paul is not telling anyone to call him father. Rather, he is merely saying he was the one who lead them to Christ through the Gospel.

This harkens back to John and Jesus's conversation with Nicademous and the need to be born again.

If understood in proper context there is no contradiction to the words of Christ to call no man father.

[BlessedBeGod]

A title given to a religious leader should be one found in the NT.

Where in the Bible does it say that? You still haven't answered the question.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Ah. Now we’re getting somewhere. In that same context, the Christian practice of calling priests and monks “father,” or “Abba” or the equivalent, is in no contradiction to the words of Christ. And the same is true for the words “teacher” and “master” and their cognates (which I’d like for you to address).

The one place where I would differ from you, is that I would point out the tightly related significance of noun and verb. All these nouns have a meaning directly derived from, and dependent upon their verbs.

A teacher teaches.

A master masters.

A father fathers.

It is misleading to think of the nouns as if they were apart from their verbs, e.g. a teacher who does not teach? The noun not only implies, but requires the verbs.

A farmer farms.

A mother mothers.

A just man, as G.M.Hopkins says, justices.

[Mrs. Don-o]

The head of the Church is Christ, not the pope. We all agree to that.

[ealgeone]

Ah. Now we’re getting somewhere. In that same context, the Christian practice of calling priests and monks “father,” or “Abba” or the equivalent, is in no contradiction to the words of Christ.

Well, yes it does.

And the same is true for the words “teacher” and “master” and their cognates (which I’d like for you to address).

If you're referring to Matthew 23:10 the word for teacher/master, depending on your translation, is καθηγητής . From HELPS Word-studies we have this definition:(from 2596 /katá "down" and 2233 /hēgéomai, "to lead") – properly, a leader; someone bringing others "down the road of learning" by giving needed instruction; a master-teacher. (In Modern Greek this term refers to a "professor," Abbott-Smith.)

It is only used in Matthew 23:10.

The one place where I would differ from you, is that I would point out the tightly related significance of noun and verb. All these nouns have a meaning directly derived from, and dependent upon their verbs.

However, the verb used in 1 Cor 4:15 which some have translated as "father" has no such association. That's the significant difference that needs to be understood.

[ealgeone]

Ah. Now we’re getting somewhere. In that same context, the Christian practice of calling priests and monks “father,” or “Abba” or the equivalent, is in no contradiction to the words of Christ.

Well, yes it does.

And the same is true for the words “teacher” and “master” and their cognates (which I’d like for you to address).

If you're referring to Matthew 23:10 the word for teacher/master, depending on your translation, is καθηγητής . From HELPS Word-studies we have this definition:(from 2596 /katá "down" and 2233 /hēgéomai, "to lead") – properly, a leader; someone bringing others "down the road of learning" by giving needed instruction; a master-teacher. (In Modern Greek this term refers to a "professor," Abbott-Smith.)

It is only used in Matthew 23:10.

The one place where I would differ from you, is that I would point out the tightly related significance of noun and verb. All these nouns have a meaning directly derived from, and dependent upon their verbs.

However, the verb used in 1 Cor 4:15 which some have translated as "father" has no such association. That's the significant difference that needs to be understood.

[ealgeone]

>>A title given to a religious leader should be one found in the NT.<<

Where in the Bible does it say that? You still haven't answered the question.

Perhaps I should be a little clearer. What offices does the NT describe?

The burden is now on the Catholic to explain all of the offices of the RCC in relation to the NT.

I ping daniel1212 as he has written extensive posts on this topic that surpass any effort I could cobble together.

[narses]

“I’ve learned a lot participating in these debates.”

Not that anyone else can tell.

[ealgeone]

>>“I’ve learned a lot participating in these debates.”<<

Not that anyone else can tell.

Says he who thinks the "Force" in Star Wars has Christian origins.

[af_vet_1981]

However, the verb used in 1 Cor 4:15 which some have translated as "father" has no such association. That's the significant difference that needs to be understood.

For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.

First Corinthians, Catholic chapter four, Protestant verse fifteen,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James

That verse has the noun πατέρας·(pateras) which translates as "fathers."
String's concordance number 3962
in close association with the verb you cite,
ἐγέννησα (egennēsa) which translates as "have begotten."
String's concordance number 1080, which shows there are 97 occurrences of this verb in the New Testament, and look here:
the first occurrences, begat, begat, begat: fathers begetting sons: one cannot do away with this geneaology and the clear relationship between the verb (begat, have begotten) and the noun (father).

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

Matthew, Catholic chapter one, Protestant verses one to two,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James

[ealgeone]

Nice cut and paste. Go back and pull my quote in context.

[af_vet_1981]

Your assertion that the verb in the First Corinthians passage "which some have translated as "father" has no such association" when the verb is related to the noun is contradicted by the scriptures which I listed. Matthew clearly shows those doing the "begetting" are "fathers." There is a direct correlation between the verb and the noun in the First Corinthians passage, whether a particular translation uses "fathered" or "have begotten" (which the KJV does).

Thus is does not matter which translation one uses for the verb in the Corinthians passage. It still means though Timothy had many teachers in the Messiah, he did not have many fathers, because the Apostle Paul fathered, or begot, him in the Gospel. Thus the Apostle Paul was a spiritual father to Saint Timothy.

[ealgeone]

Let's get the context of the conversation in proper perspective first. Your cut and past job misses that.

mrs.don-o: The one place where I would differ from you, is that I would point out the tightly related significance of noun and verb. All these nouns have a meaning directly derived from, and dependent upon their verbs.

>> However, the verb used in 1 Cor 4:15 which some have translated as "father" has no such association. That's the significant difference that needs to be understood. <<<

My point to mrs.d was the verb in 1 Corinthians 4:15, which many have understood to be a noun, is not derived from patera. Nor was it to be capitalized as she did in her original post.

More from Strongs.

b. in a Jewish sense, of one who brings others over to his way of life: ὑμᾶς ἐγέννησα I am the author of your Christian life, 1 Corinthians 4:15; Philemon 1:10 (Sanhedr. fol. 19, 2 "If one teaches the son of his neighbor the law, the Scripture reckons this the same as though he had begotten him"; (cf. Philo, leg. ad Gaium § 8)).

Context is again your friend in understanding Scripture.

Paul is not saying he should be called "Father" as used by the RCC today.

Nor is this justification for the RCC priesthood and calling their priests "Father".

To infer such is a huge leap...but that hasn't stopped Roman Catholicism in the past nor do I doubt it will stop it in the future.

The injunction against calling "no man father" remains with no contradiction.

[af_vet_1981]

My point to mrs.d was the verb in 1 Corinthians 4:15, which many have understood to be a noun, is not derived from patera.

My point remains unrefuted. The verb ἐγέννησεν (same Strong's number as ἐγέννησα you mention, 1080 gennaó: to beget, to bring forth), is used in the first passsage in Matthew to show that the verb is symmetric to the noun. He who begets, or fathers, is the father.
1. Abraham begat Isaac; Abraham is his father.
2. Isaac begat Jacob; Isaac is the father of Jacob.
3. Jacob begat Judas and his brethren; Jacob is the father Judas and his brethren.
4. Paul wrote to Timothy "I have begotten you through the gospel"; Paul is the (spiritual) father of Timothy.

Nor was it to be capitalized as she did in her original post.

Are you certain ? This one, and others, claim :

All of the Greek New Testament originals were written in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS with no spaces and probably no punctuation, and all of the earlier manuscripts are in this style, whether on parchment or papyrus. This is because the Greek alphabet did not have punctuation until at least the II century, and there were no minscule (lower case) letters until much later.

More from Strongs.

b. in a Jewish sense, of one who brings others over to his way of life: ὑμᾶς ἐγέννησα I am the author of your Christian life, 1 Corinthians 4:15; Philemon 1:10 (Sanhedr. fol. 19, 2 "If one teaches the son of his neighbor the law, the Scripture reckons this the same as though he had begotten him"; (cf. Philo, leg. ad Gaium § 8)).

Context is again your friend in understanding Scripture.

Okay, so it seems to me you agree that there is a traditional sense that someone can be a spiritual father.

Paul is not saying he should be called "Father" as used by the RCC today.

Nor is this justification for the RCC priesthood and calling their priests "Father".

Okay, will you settle for FATHER like the original Greek ?

To infer such is a huge leap...but that hasn't stopped Roman Catholicism in the past nor do I doubt it will stop it in the future.

You make a very profound point here with respect historicity and endurance.

The injunction against calling "no man father" remains with no contradiction.

Undoubtably the scripture remains:

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

...

But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

...

And there went great multitudes with him: and he turned, and said unto them, If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

Matthew, Catholic chapter five, Protestant verses seventeen to twenty,
Matthew, Catholic chapter fifteen, Protestant verses three to four,
Luke, Catholic chapter fourteen, Protestant verses twenty five to twenty six,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James

[ealgeone]

>>Nor was it to be capitalized as she did in her original post.<<

Are you certain ? This one, and others, claim :

Yes, I'm very aware how the Greek was originally written.

My point is that she only put father in caps. If you want to put the whole verse in caps, that would be ok as well. If we translate it to English though, father is not in caps.

My point remains unrefuted. The verb ἐγέννησεν (same Strong's number as ἐγέννησα you mention, 1080 gennaó: to beget, to bring forth), is used in the first passsage in Matthew to show that the verb is symmetric to the noun. He who begets, or fathers, is the father.

However, that was not the original point made by mrs.d.

>>Context is again your friend in understanding Scripture.<<

Okay, so it seems to me you agree that there is a traditional sense that someone can be a spiritual father.

That is what the verb indicates hence the reason I put the information in my post.

However, as Paul introduced the Gospel to Timothy you would then make the argument that anytime someone introduces the Gospel to someone and they become saved that person is their "spiritual father". Again, there is nothing in this passage to support the RCC claim to a priesthood or calling their priests "Father".

>>To infer such is a huge leap...but that hasn't stopped Roman Catholicism in the past nor do I doubt it will stop it in the future.<<

You make a very profound point here with respect historicity and endurance.

My point remains. Roman Catholicism has a negative history of eisegesis.

Undoubtably the scripture remains:

You can quote all you want...the injunction remains...call no one Father. Unless you're saying Jesus is somehow contradicting Himself.

Paul did not call himself a "father" in the verse in question.

The RCC practice of calling their priests "father" is not supported by the NT. But again, that's never stopped the RCC before.

[wardaddy]

Lumping all non Catholics into this generic term Protestants is like saying all Spanish speaking folks speak Mexican

You guys just don’t know but a traditional southern baptist or True Presbyterian is more like you ..if you’re a literalist Catholic ...and yes it’s a stretch than we are are Congregationalists or Disciples of Christ...
The liberal prods

Reverence wise and placing emphasis on the Bible

Your faith ..literally..is closer to mine than it is your Mary Knolls

I assume or you wouldn’t be here

[af_vet_1981]

However, as Paul introduced the Gospel to Timothy you would then make the argument that anytime someone introduces the Gospel to someone and they become saved that person is their "spiritual father".

Perhaps you made a mistake here. Please take a second look at the passage in question and reference the translation you are using. All the translations I read show that the Apostle Paul fathered (begot) Timothy through the Gospel.
There is nothing there about introducing. So fixing the assertion to match the scriptures we have "anytime someone fathers another through the Gospel, he becomes his or her spiritual father." That seems to work.

[af_vet_1981]

My point is that she only put father in caps. If you want to put the whole verse in caps, that would be ok as well. If we translate it to English though, father is not in caps.

By what standard ? Do you object to titles being capitalized in English translations ?

[ealgeone]

Except it is not a title much as the Catholic wants it to be.