The objection in Matthew 23 is not the function of teaching or the function of having the role of a father, either biologically or spiritually. The prohibition in view is ecclesiastical titles. *Call* no man father." The context clearly refers us to an existing practice of title-giving which the disciples were to avoid. Jesus expanded it from just Rabbi to Father, Teacher, etc., because 1) only the heavenly Father should be called by that title, and 2) the giving of such titles tends to reinforce human pride, a corrupting influence Jesus wants His disciples to be free of.
So basically, functioning as a teacher or father is fine. Imposing that as a title is still prohibited.
As for in what manner the body and blood are food, the burden of proof is on those who would claim the saying is literal, because in each passage where it is discussed there is abundant evidence for metaphor.
John 6 for example. In John's Gospel we see that Jesus has repeatedly resorted to metaphors about Himself (Door, Vine, Bread of Life, Way, etc.). This is necessary because He is a one-of-a-kind experience for those who encounter Him. Metaphor is precisely what one uses when one wishes to teach about something new and unfamiliar using analogy to something familiar.
In John 6, we are given clue after clue that this too is metaphorical teaching. For just one prominent example, see verse 35:
And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
(John 6:35)
You see here how Jesus satisfies hunger to those who come to Him, thirst to those who believe in Him. Here you have a perfect example of the classic two-domain comparison that is the hallmark of metaphor. For example, thirst is a physical primitive, universal to the human experience. It is the known domain. Believing on Jesus is the unknown domain, something new to human experience. A metaphor sets up a comparative relationship between these two distinct domains, such that we can learn about the one from the other. A teaches us about B.
And if you have all that, the human mind automatically looks for the lesson of the metaphor. Romeo says of Juliet that she is lovely as a summer day. Almost anyone instantly gets what Romeo is saying, that Juliet brings to him a kind of comfort and loveliness we associate with pleasant summer weather, clear blue skies, warming sunlight, a cool breeze, all the richness of it, and all in such a small and elegant passage. A well chosen metaphor is a powerful way to communicate complex truth.
In John 6, the crowd is stuck on the rumbly in their tummy (to quote Winnie the Pooh). But Jesus, as steady as a drum, has been directing them to faith in Him, a spiritual exercise. Back in chapter 3 Jesus directs Nicodemas to not look at physical birth, but spiritual. In chapter 4, Jesus tells the woman at the well to look past the physical location of the temple to the worship that flows from spirit and truth. John 6 is a continuation of that theme. It drives the whole of John's Gospel.
And here in chapter 6, verse 35 (see above) makes it unmistakable. The subject is food, and so hunger, but hunger that is satisfied by an act of belief in Jesus, in receiving Him as the Messiah, the Son of God. Clear, unambiguous, elegant metaphor, teaching us the benefits and necessity of faith in Christ.
But the crowd was not disposed to learn that lesson, and cognitive science informs us that when the mind is resistant to the lesson of the metaphor, the metaphor can be misunderstood, just as it was here.
And as if that were not enough, Jesus spells it out in verse 63. He's working in the category of spirit, not flesh.
And at the end of the passage, Peter brings it home one more time. He doesn't ask Jesus how he may eat His body and so gain eternal life. He says, to whom else can we go, because you (Jesus) have the words of eternal life, and we do have faith in you as the Messiah, the Son of God. Peter gets the metaphor.
So the preponderance of the evidence weighs heavily in favor of metaphor, both here and in each of the other relevant passages. To escape the weight of that evidence, it is you who must come up with a reason why this passage should be understood as describing a form of crypto-cannibalism, in defiance of divine law. Occam's razor, FRiend. The explanation requiring the least gymnastics that gives a full account of the facts has the better claim to being the truth. Here, that explanation is metaphor.
Peace,
SR
John 6 for example. In John's Gospel we see that Jesus has repeatedly resorted to metaphors about Himself (Door, Vine, Bread of Life, Way, etc.). This is necessary because He is a one-of-a-kind experience for those who encounter Him. Metaphor is precisely what one uses when one wishes to teach about something new and unfamiliar using analogy to something familiar. I see abundant use of metaphor in the "I am the X" constructs, yet in the "This is/these are my X" sayings, only statements of literal truths, similar to the Resurrection and Ascension.
Here is a set from the books of the New Testament books: This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.
And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body. And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it. And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.
For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
John, Catholic chapter fifteen, Protestant verse twelve,
Like, Catholic chapter twenty four, Protestant verse forty four,
Matthew, Catholic chapter twenty six, Protestant verses twenty six to twenty eight,
Mark, Catholic chapter fourteen, Protestant verse twenty two to twenty four,
First Corinthians, Catholic chapter eleven, Protestant verses twenty three to twenty six,
as authorized, but not authored by, King James