Call no man father

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 19 posts - 1 through 19 (of 19 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #148185
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi,
    The catholic church wants to be seen as your father. It wants you to look up to them as your leaders and the ones who dispense to you the forgiveness and the graces of God.

    Thus they want you to not feed on the bread of life and let them mouli it up with their own teachings and spoon feed you as their babies.

    They have no power and no authority and their ways are not of God so ignore their posturing and arrogant paternalism. They have not gone through the gate of Jesus themselves so cannot have authority over anyone else.

    #148187
    942767
    Participant

    Hi Nick:

    This is what Jesus had to say about this:

    Quote
    Mat 23:8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, [even] Christ; and all ye are brethren.
    Mat 23:9 And call no [man] your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
    Mat 23:10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, [even] Christ.
    Mat 23:11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.

    Love in Christ,
    Marty

    #148210
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi,
    The teachings of the catholic church are so wacky that anyone with a smidgeon of scriptural knowledge would be alarmed at reading them.

    However they demand complete control claiming they have the right to teach what they will because they are anointed to do so.

    Such invalid claims and mind controls are very effective as they are the most popular cult in the world by far.

    #148212
    942767
    Participant

    Hi Nick:

    I was raised by Catholic parents, but even as before I was born again, I knew that their doctrines were not correct. I cannot understand how anyone cannot see this. Do they not read the bible?

    Love in Christ,
    Marty

    #148214
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi 94,
    There is a huge reliance on family ties, friendships, cultural bonds and religious loyalties bolstered by the assurance that they alone are really saved.

    Of course guilt caused them to invent purgatory because their hearts know it can't be true

    #148216
    georg
    Participant

    Quote (942767 @ Oct. 02 2009,12:09)
    Hi Nick:

    I was raised by Catholic parents, but even as before I was born again, I knew that their doctrines were not correct.  I cannot understand how anyone cannot see this.  Do they not read the bible?

    Love in Christ,
    Marty


    Marty! We never read the Bible, until God called us out of that Church, when my Husband was 47 and I was 46. That is now 25 years ago. But when we finally did, read the Bible- WoW. I have an article and it is my last one to the Catholic. I mentioned most of their practices, if you want to read it. It is in the Truth or Tradition tread under Sola Scripture. I can't for the world understand that the Catholic is defending the Church, when the Bible shows for instant that Maria had other Children and did not stay a Virgin.
    I am not going to post to him anymore, because there is no good fruit in it. He is not going to change. I wonder if he does not want others to follow him into that church, and that is why he post so much. WHO know's what goes through his mind.
    Irene

    #148218
    942767
    Participant

    Quote (georg @ Oct. 02 2009,12:38)

    Quote (942767 @ Oct. 02 2009,12:09)
    Hi Nick:

    I was raised by Catholic parents, but even as before I was born again, I knew that their doctrines were not correct.  I cannot understand how anyone cannot see this.  Do they not read the bible?

    Love in Christ,
    Marty


    Marty!  We never read the Bible, until God called us out of that Church, when my Husband was 47 and I was 46. That is now 25 years ago.  But when we finally did, read the Bible-  WoW.   I have an article and it is my last one to the Catholic.  I mentioned most of their practices, if you want to read it.  It is in the Truth or Tradition tread under Sola Scripture.  I can't for the world understand that the Catholic is defending the Church, when the Bible shows for instant that Maria had other Children and did not stay a Virgin.
    I am not going to post to him anymore, because there is no good fruit in it.  He is not going to change.  I wonder if he does not want others to follow him into that church, and that is why he post so much.  WHO know's what goes through his mind.
    Irene


    Hi Mrs.

    As I said, I too was a Catholic and also, I have sisters that still belong to the Catholic church, and so, I am well aware of their doctrines and practices.

    Love in Christ,
    Marty

    #148219
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi 94,
    Catholicism would disappear off the face of the earth if men would not be so timid and submissive to lying men and take responsibility for themselves and their family before God.

    #148222
    georg
    Participant

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 02 2009,13:03)
    Hi 94,
    Catholicism would disappear off the face of the earth if men would not be so timid and submissive to lying men and take responsibility for themselves and their family before God.


    Nick you are right, but they are aso indoctrinated, that they don't even see. Most if I can recall never read the Bible. Let me tell you what Georg's Mother said when we told Her that Maria did not stay a Virgin, and that is what the Bible said. And I quote” If that is what the Bible says then through the thing away.” I am so glad that She was in Germany, and we did not have to deal with Her on a daily basis.
    Irene

    #148240
    942767
    Participant

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 02 2009,13:03)
    Hi 94,
    Catholicism would disappear off the face of the earth if men would not be so timid and submissive to lying men and take responsibility for themselves and their family before God.


    Hi Nick:

    My experience with most Catholics, is that they have believed the teaching of the church that the Catholic Church is the ony way that one can be saved.

    They have been instructed not to listen to evangelicals, and they have been indoctrinated in defending the “faith”.

    Love in Christ,
    Marty

    #148241
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi 94,
    It is not surprising that since they say salvation is by infant baptism, catholic confirmation and reception of communion at their denomination that they are smug in their assumed security and their support for any other ways of salvation is lukewarm at best.
    All rubbish of course.

    Their prayer

    “HOLY MARY MOTHER OF GOD PRAY FOR US SINNERS NOW AND AT THE HOUR OF OUR DEATH “

    pretty well sums up the useless spiritualism, like the witch of Endor's, unrelated to faith

    #148243
    942767
    Participant

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 02 2009,15:42)
    Hi 94,
    It is not surprising that since they say salvation is by infant baptism, catholic confirmation and reception of communion at their denomination that they are smug in their assumed security and their support for any other ways of salvation is lukewarm at best.
    All rubbish of course.

    Their prayer

    “HOLY MARY MOTHER OF GOD PRAY FOR US SINNERS NOW AND AT THE HOUR OF OUR DEATH “

    pretty well sums up the useless spiritualism, like the witch of Endor's, unrelated to faith


    It is time to pray asking God to do all that is within His power to deliver them out of Babylon.

    Love in Christ,
    Marty

    #148269
    georg
    Participant

    Marty and Nick! A Catholic is a Catholic for Life, unless God will call them out of that Church. To pray to them is about the only thing that we can do for them. We can talk to them until we're blue in the face.
    Peace and Love Irene

    #148326

    Call No Man “Father”?

    Many Protestants claim that when Catholics address priests as “father,” they are engaging in an unbiblical practice that Jesus forbade: “Call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven” (Matt. 23:9).

    In his tract 10 Reasons Why I Am Not a Roman Catholic, Fundamentalist anti-Catholic writer Donald Maconaghie quotes this passage as support for his charge that “the papacy is a hoax.”

    Bill Jackson, another Fundamentalist who runs a full-time anti-Catholic organization, says in his book Christian’s Guide To Roman Catholicism that a “study of Matthew 23:9 reveals that Jesus was talking about being called father as a title of religious superiority . . . [which is] the basis for the [Catholic] hierarchy” (53).

    How should Catholics respond to such objections?

    The Answer

    To understand why the charge does not work, one must first understand the use of the word “father” in reference to our earthly fathers. No one would deny a little girl the opportunity to tell someone that she loves her father. Common sense tells us that Jesus wasn’t forbidding this type of use of the word “father.”

    In fact, to forbid it would rob the address “Father” of its meaning when applied to God, for there would no longer be any earthly counterpart for the analogy of divine Fatherhood. The concept of God’s role as Father would be meaningless if we obliterated the concept of earthly fatherhood.

    But in the Bible the concept of fatherhood is not restricted to just our earthly fathers and God. It is used to refer to people other than biological or legal fathers, and is used as a sign of respect to those with whom we have a special relationship.

    For example, Joseph tells his brothers of a special fatherly relationship God had given him with the king of Egypt: “So it was not you who sent me here, but God; and he has made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house and ruler over all the land of Egypt” (Gen. 45:8).

    Job indicates he played a fatherly role with the less fortunate: “I was a father to the poor, and I searched out the cause of him whom I did not know” (Job 29:16). And God himself declares that he will give a fatherly role to Eliakim, the steward of the house of David: “In that day I will call my servant Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah . . . and I will clothe him with [a] robe, and will bind [a] girdle on him, and will commit . . . authority to his hand; and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah” (Is. 22:20–21).

    This type of fatherhood not only applies to those who are wise counselors (like Joseph) or benefactors (like Job) or both (like Eliakim), it also applies to those who have a fatherly spiritual relationship with one. For example, Elisha cries, “My father, my father!” to Elijah as the latter is carried up to heaven in a whirlwind (2 Kgs. 2:12). Later, Elisha himself is called a father by the king of Israel (2 Kgs. 6:21).

    A Change with the New Testament?

    Some Fundamentalists argue that this usage changed with the New Testament—that while it may have been permissible to call certain men “father” in the Old Testament, since the time of Christ, it’s no longer allowed. This argument fails for several reasons.

    First, as we’ve seen, the imperative “call no man father” does not apply to one’s biological father. It also doesn’t exclude calling one’s ancestors “father,” as is shown in Acts 7:2, where Stephen refers to “our father Abraham,” or in Romans 9:10, where Paul speaks of “our father Isaac.”

    Second, there are numerous examples in the New Testament of the term “father” being used as a form of address and reference, even for men who are not biologically related to the speaker. There are, in fact, so many uses of “father” in the New Testament, that the Fundamentalist interpretation of Matthew 23 (and the objection to Catholics calling priests “father”) must be wrong, as we shall see.

    Third, a careful examination of the context of Matthew 23 shows that Jesus didn’t intend for his words here to be understood literally. The whole passage reads, “But you are not to be called ‘rabbi,’ for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called ‘masters,’ for you have one master, the Christ” (Matt. 23:8–10).

    The first problem is that although Jesus seems to prohibit the use of the term “teacher,” in Matthew 28:19–20, Christ himself appointed certain men to be teachers in his Church: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations . . . teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” Paul speaks of his commission as a teacher: “For this I was appointed a preacher and apostle . . . a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth” (1 Tim. 2:7); “For this gospel I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher” (2 Tim. 1:11). He also reminds us that the Church has an office of teacher: “God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers” (1 Cor. 12:28); and “his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers” (Eph. 4:11). There is no doubt that Paul was not violating Christ’s teaching in Matthew 23 by referring so often to others as “teachers.”

    Fundamentalists themselves slip up on this point by calling all sorts of people “doctor,” for example, medical doctors, as well as professors and scientists who have Ph.D. degrees (i.e., doctorates). What they fail to realize is that “doctor” is simply the Latin word for “teacher.” Even “Mister” and “Mistress” (“Mrs.”) are forms of the word “master,” also mentioned by Jesus. So if his words in Matthew 23 were meant to be taken literally, Fundamentalists would be just as guilty for using the word “teacher” and “doctor” and “mister” as Catholics for saying “father.” But clearly, that would be a misunderstanding of Christ’s words.

    So What Did Jesus Mean?

    Jesus criticized Jewish leaders who love “the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues, and salutations in the market places, and being called ‘rabbi’ by men” (Matt. 23:6–7). His admonition here is a response to the Pharisees’ proud hearts and their g.asping after marks of status and prestige.

    He was using hyperbole (exaggeration to make a point) to show the scribes and Pharisees how sinful and proud they were for not looking humbly to God as the source of all authority and fatherhood and teaching, and instead setting themselves up as the ultimate authorities, father figures, and teachers.

    Christ used hyperbole often, for example when he declared, “If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell” (Matt. 5:29, cf. 18:9; Mark 9:47). Christ certainly did not intend this to be applied literally, for otherwise all Christians would be blind amputees! (cf. 1 John 1:8; 1 Tim. 1:15). We are all subject to “the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life” (1 John 2:16).

    Since Jesus is demonstrably using hyperbole when he says not to call anyone our father—else we would not be able to refer to our earthly fathers as such—we must read his words carefully and with sensitivity to the presence of hyperbole if we wish to understand what he is saying.

    Jesus is not forbidding us to call men “fathers” who actually are such—either literally or spiritually. (See below on the apostolic example of spiritual fatherhood.) To refer to such people as fathers is only to acknowledge the truth, and Jesus is not against that. He is warning people against inaccurately attributing fatherhood—or a particular kind or degree of fatherhood—to those who do not have it.

    As the apostolic example shows, some individuals genuinely do have a spiritual fatherhood, meaning that they can
    be referred to as spiritual fathers. What must not be done is to confuse their form of spiritual paternity with that of God. Ultimately, God is our supreme protector, provider, and instructor. Correspondingly, it is wrong to view any individual other than God as having these roles.

    Throughout the world, some people have been tempted to look upon religious leaders who are mere mortals as if they were an individual’s supreme source of spiritual instruction, nourishment, and protection. The tendency to turn mere men into “gurus” is worldwide.

    This was also a temptation in the Jewish world of Jesus’ day, when famous rabbinical leaders, especially those who founded important schools, such as Hillel and Shammai, were highly exalted by their disciples. It is this elevation of an individual man—the formation of a “cult of personality” around him—of which Jesus is speaking when he warns against attributing to someone an undue role as master, father, or teacher.

    He is not forbidding the perfunctory use of honorifics nor forbidding us to recognize that the person does have a role as a spiritual father and teacher. The example of his own apostles shows us that.

    The Apostles Show the Way

    The New Testament is filled with examples of and references to spiritual father-son and father-child relationships. Many people are not aware just how common these are, so it is worth quoting some of them here.

    Paul regularly referred to Timothy as his child: “Therefore I sent to you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ” (1 Cor. 4:17); “To Timothy, my true child in the faith: grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord” (1 Tim. 1:2); “To Timothy, my beloved child: Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord” (2 Tim. 1:2).

    He also referred to Timothy as his son: “This charge I commit to you, Timothy, my son, in accordance with the prophetic utterances which pointed to you, that inspired by them you may wage the good warfare” (1 Tim 1:18); “You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 2:1); “But Timothy’s worth you know, how as a son with a father he has served with me in the gospel” (Phil. 2:22).

    Paul also referred to other of his converts in this way: “To Titus, my true child in a common faith: grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior” (Titus 1:4); “I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I have become in my imprisonment” (Philem. 10). None of these men were Paul’s literal, biological sons. Rather, Paul is emphasizing his spiritual fatherhood with them.

    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.

    NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
    presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
    Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004

    IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
    permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
    +Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004

    #148329
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi CA,
    Rather catholicism, in it's subservience to all it's self appointed leaders, fully explains why Jesus abhorred such attitudes which are anathema.

    #148401
    Is 1:18
    Participant

    Quote (CatholicApologist @ Oct. 03 2009,07:45)
    Call No Man “Father”?

    Many Protestants claim that when Catholics address priests as “father,” they are engaging in an unbiblical practice that Jesus forbade: “Call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven” (Matt. 23:9).

    In his tract 10 Reasons Why I Am Not a Roman Catholic, Fundamentalist anti-Catholic writer Donald Maconaghie quotes this passage as support for his charge that “the papacy is a hoax.”

    Bill Jackson, another Fundamentalist who runs a full-time anti-Catholic organization, says in his book Christian’s Guide To Roman Catholicism that a “study of Matthew 23:9 reveals that Jesus was talking about being called father as a title of religious superiority . . . [which is] the basis for the [Catholic] hierarchy” (53).

    How should Catholics respond to such objections?

    The Answer

    To understand why the charge does not work, one must first understand the use of the word “father” in reference to our earthly fathers. No one would deny a little girl the opportunity to tell someone that she loves her father. Common sense tells us that Jesus wasn’t forbidding this type of use of the word “father.”

    In fact, to forbid it would rob the address “Father” of its meaning when applied to God, for there would no longer be any earthly counterpart for the analogy of divine Fatherhood. The concept of God’s role as Father would be meaningless if we obliterated the concept of earthly fatherhood.

    But in the Bible the concept of fatherhood is not restricted to just our earthly fathers and God. It is used to refer to people other than biological or legal fathers, and is used as a sign of respect to those with whom we have a special relationship.

    For example, Joseph tells his brothers of a special fatherly relationship God had given him with the king of Egypt: “So it was not you who sent me here, but God; and he has made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house and ruler over all the land of Egypt” (Gen. 45:8).

    Job indicates he played a fatherly role with the less fortunate: “I was a father to the poor, and I searched out the cause of him whom I did not know” (Job 29:16). And God himself declares that he will give a fatherly role to Eliakim, the steward of the house of David: “In that day I will call my servant Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah . . . and I will clothe him with [a] robe, and will bind [a] girdle on him, and will commit . . . authority to his hand; and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah” (Is. 22:20–21).

    This type of fatherhood not only applies to those who are wise counselors (like Joseph) or benefactors (like Job) or both (like Eliakim), it also applies to those who have a fatherly spiritual relationship with one. For example, Elisha cries, “My father, my father!” to Elijah as the latter is carried up to heaven in a whirlwind (2 Kgs. 2:12). Later, Elisha himself is called a father by the king of Israel (2 Kgs. 6:21).

    A Change with the New Testament?

    Some Fundamentalists argue that this usage changed with the New Testament—that while it may have been permissible to call certain men “father” in the Old Testament, since the time of Christ, it’s no longer allowed. This argument fails for several reasons.

    First, as we’ve seen, the imperative “call no man father” does not apply to one’s biological father. It also doesn’t exclude calling one’s ancestors “father,” as is shown in Acts 7:2, where Stephen refers to “our father Abraham,” or in Romans 9:10, where Paul speaks of “our father Isaac.”

    Second, there are numerous examples in the New Testament of the term “father” being used as a form of address and reference, even for men who are not biologically related to the speaker. There are, in fact, so many uses of “father” in the New Testament, that the Fundamentalist interpretation of Matthew 23 (and the objection to Catholics calling priests “father”) must be wrong, as we shall see.

    Third, a careful examination of the context of Matthew 23 shows that Jesus didn’t intend for his words here to be understood literally. The whole passage reads, “But you are not to be called ‘rabbi,’ for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called ‘masters,’ for you have one master, the Christ” (Matt. 23:8–10).

    The first problem is that although Jesus seems to prohibit the use of the term “teacher,” in Matthew 28:19–20, Christ himself appointed certain men to be teachers in his Church: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations . . . teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” Paul speaks of his commission as a teacher: “For this I was appointed a preacher and apostle . . . a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth” (1 Tim. 2:7); “For this gospel I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher” (2 Tim. 1:11). He also reminds us that the Church has an office of teacher: “God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers” (1 Cor. 12:28); and “his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers” (Eph. 4:11). There is no doubt that Paul was not violating Christ’s teaching in Matthew 23 by referring so often to others as “teachers.”

    Fundamentalists themselves slip up on this point by calling all sorts of people “doctor,” for example, medical doctors, as well as professors and scientists who have Ph.D. degrees (i.e., doctorates). What they fail to realize is that “doctor” is simply the Latin word for “teacher.” Even “Mister” and “Mistress” (“Mrs.”) are forms of the word “master,” also mentioned by Jesus. So if his words in Matthew 23 were meant to be taken literally, Fundamentalists would be just as guilty for using the word “teacher” and “doctor” and “mister” as Catholics for saying “father.” But clearly, that would be a misunderstanding of Christ’s words.

    So What Did Jesus Mean?

    Jesus criticized Jewish leaders who love “the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues, and salutations in the market places, and being called ‘rabbi’ by men” (Matt. 23:6–7). His admonition here is a response to the Pharisees’ proud hearts and their g.asping after marks of status and prestige.

    He was using hyperbole (exaggeration to make a point) to show the scribes and Pharisees how sinful and proud they were for not looking humbly to God as the source of all authority and fatherhood and teaching, and instead setting themselves up as the ultimate authorities, father figures, and teachers.

    Christ used hyperbole often, for example when he declared, “If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell” (Matt. 5:29, cf. 18:9; Mark 9:47). Christ certainly did not intend this to be applied literally, for otherwise all Christians would be blind amputees! (cf. 1 John 1:8; 1 Tim. 1:15). We are all subject to “the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life” (1 John 2:16).

    Since Jesus is demonstrably using hyperbole when he says not to call anyone our father—else we would not be able to refer to our earthly fathers as such—we must read his words carefully and with sensitivity to the presence of hyperbole if we wish to understand what he is saying.

    Jesus is not forbidding us to call men “fathers” who actually are such—either literally or spiritually. (See below on the apostolic example of spiritual fatherhood.) To refer to such people as fathers is only to acknowledge the truth, and Jesus is not against that. He is warning people ag
    ainst inaccurately attributing fatherhood—or a particular kind or degree of fatherhood—to those who do not have it.

    As the apostolic example shows, some individuals genuinely do have a spiritual fatherhood, meaning that they can be referred to as spiritual fathers. What must not be done is to confuse their form of spiritual paternity with that of God. Ultimately, God is our supreme protector, provider, and instructor. Correspondingly, it is wrong to view any individual other than God as having these roles.

    Throughout the world, some people have been tempted to look upon religious leaders who are mere mortals as if they were an individual’s supreme source of spiritual instruction, nourishment, and protection. The tendency to turn mere men into “gurus” is worldwide.

    This was also a temptation in the Jewish world of Jesus’ day, when famous rabbinical leaders, especially those who founded important schools, such as Hillel and Shammai, were highly exalted by their disciples. It is this elevation of an individual man—the formation of a “cult of personality” around him—of which Jesus is speaking when he warns against attributing to someone an undue role as master, father, or teacher.

    He is not forbidding the perfunctory use of honorifics nor forbidding us to recognize that the person does have a role as a spiritual father and teacher. The example of his own apostles shows us that.

    The Apostles Show the Way

    The New Testament is filled with examples of and references to spiritual father-son and father-child relationships. Many people are not aware just how common these are, so it is worth quoting some of them here.

    Paul regularly referred to Timothy as his child: “Therefore I sent to you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ” (1 Cor. 4:17); “To Timothy, my true child in the faith: grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord” (1 Tim. 1:2); “To Timothy, my beloved child: Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord” (2 Tim. 1:2).

    He also referred to Timothy as his son: “This charge I commit to you, Timothy, my son, in accordance with the prophetic utterances which pointed to you, that inspired by them you may wage the good warfare” (1 Tim 1:18); “You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 2:1); “But Timothy’s worth you know, how as a son with a father he has served with me in the gospel” (Phil. 2:22).

    Paul also referred to other of his converts in this way: “To Titus, my true child in a common faith: grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior” (Titus 1:4); “I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I have become in my imprisonment” (Philem. 10). None of these men were Paul’s literal, biological sons. Rather, Paul is emphasizing his spiritual fatherhood with them.

    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.

    NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
    presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
    Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004

    IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
    permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
    +Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004


    Another cut and paste with no reference….

    http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/35394

    #148404
    georg
    Participant

    To all! It is not just about calling the Pope Holy Father. What is so wrong is the Maria worship that goes on every day. Hail Maria full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed art thou among woman and blessed is the fruit of thy womb Jesus, Holy Maria Mother of God pray for us now and at the hour of our death. Amen
    This prayer is said after the Our Father. The rosery is 10 Our Fathers and 10 Hail Maria's. Each set was the way of the Cross. I don't remember those, but there were 10 of them too. The rosery is also said on the T.V.
    So many abomination to God and our Savior Jesus Christ.
    So very sad. We need to pray for all of them.
    Peace and Love Irene

    #148826

    Quote (georg @ Oct. 03 2009,13:46)
    To all!  It is not just about calling the Pope Holy Father.  What is so wrong is the Maria worship that goes on every day.  Hail Maria full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed art thou among woman and blessed is the fruit of thy womb Jesus, Holy Maria Mother of God pray for us now and at the hour of our death. Amen
    This prayer is said after the Our Father.  The rosery is 10 Our Fathers and 10 Hail Maria's. Each set was the way of the Cross.  I don't remember those, but there were 10 of them too.  The rosery is also said on the T.V.
    So many abomination to God and our Savior Jesus Christ.
    So very sad.  We need to pray for all of them.
    Peace and Love Irene


    Irene,

    You can't refute what I wrote so you say “that's not all that is wrong…”

    Hilarious!

    #148834
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi,
    The bible was written under the inspiration of God's Spirit.
    But the catholic church has no authority over anyone, except those who give her such power.
    The controlling paternalism of the blind and deceived who offer to lead and teach men must be abhorred.

Viewing 19 posts - 1 through 19 (of 19 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 1999 - 2024 Heaven Net

Navigation

© 1999 - 2023 - Heaven Net
or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account