Think about it, memom. You're a sensible person.
Second, my arguments about "father" are all Scriptural. Any Scriptural argument could be mistaken --- that's one reason why Scriptural interpretation by any one in-DUH-vidual like myself, can be debated --- but a Scriptural argument should be debated, not just blown off, either.
Love you, metmom. No offense to God.
Check out Romans 13:8
"Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law." Makes a good tagline.
I can see why YOU would say this! ;^)
Well, yeah, but who ever proposed such an idea?
What is being addressed isn't loving Mary, it's committing one's entire being to Mary.
Second, my arguments about "father" are all Scriptural. Any Scriptural argument could be mistaken --- that's one reason why Scriptural interpretation by any one in-DUH-vidual like myself, can be debated --- but a Scriptural argument should be debated, not just blown off, either.
Well, taken in context, Jesus is addressing the apostles and addressing titles given to religious leaders.
He no more meant that children should not call their male parental unit *Father* then He meant that we should not love others because we are to love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength.
I've seen all the arguments trying to justify calling religious leaders by the title *Father* and they all basically end up with absurd, shall I say< reasoning? Well, everyone else calls their male parent *Father* so either they're all sinning or it's OK for us to call priests *Father* (and to violate a clear command of Jesus).
In a word, No. That just doesn't work.
Like my mother used to say, *Just because someone else jumped over Niagara Falls, doesn't mean you should too.*
Blessings on you now and always.