Having a lay person tell me what the Sacred Scriptures mean is not a rule of Faith for me. It should not be a rule of Faith for anyone.
Having the Holy Spirit enlighten me as I read he holy books, which of themselves are a rule of Faith for me, that is the mode I use.
In the same vein, I have no authority to expound upon the meaning and interpretations of the sacred texts than any other lay person.
In Matt 23 is found a condemnation of self-centered spirituality of the Scribes and Pharisees, who take upon themselves he appellation of “Rabbi” or “Father” as a mark of distinction and pride. In the Catholic tradition the priest is the grain of wheat that falls to the ground to die and yield 100fold. He is the servant that has received a commission in the laying on of hands from Jesus Christ Himself through his Apostles. If a priest had not received such a commission for a sacrificial life in the service of the Gospel, it would be foolish to call him father.
Here is a modern twist on Mark 23: “Call no man Pastor”. This applies to those who take up positions of authority and preach the Gospel without having received a commission through the laying on of hands from the Apostles.
You may recall Paul did not have a "commission" from the Apostles.
He received his straight from Jesus.
Are you saying Jesus can no longer call men into His service?
But even then, as per Roman Catholicism and what many have told us on these threads, you cannot understand the texts without a priest to explain them to you.
Has the Vatican issued a formal ruling/interpretation of the passage in question?
You can make all the excuses you want.
The Catholic church is wrong for addressing its priests as *father*.
It is direct disobedience of Jesus command and no amount of rationalization can change that.
Like Slick Willy and the definition of IS; now we have an example of someone having a hard time defining what NO really means.