Is father an acceptable title for clergy?

Question

My commentary is available here:

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-S6YMuFYyaa9ESBoW5DFwEjL_HhqA

Answer 1

Absolutely.

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).

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.

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.

Jesus is not forbidding us to call men "fathers" who actually are such—either literally or spiritually. 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.

Answer 2

persons are so used to listening to priests stated as “Reverend,” “well being care expert” or “Father” that they seldom question the well being of those honorary titles. yet if any professed Christian will study his Bible he will hit upon that Christ Jesus, the founding father of Christianity, easily refused creature-honoring titles. The clergy, although, ever as a results of fact the days of Jesus, have been prepared on severe-sounding titles. while stated as basically “Mister” or perhaps “Brother,” the clergy oftentimes respond with words and mannerisms indicating that they sense they have been addressed in words below their dignity. So there's little doubt that honorary titles tickle the ears; they sound sturdy. The status produced by potential of titles which incorporate “bishop,” “deacon,” “Reverend well being care expert” and “Father” gratifies a want for honor and compliment of adult males. Titles additionally make one sense distinctive, break away others. yet Christ suggested: “All you're brothers.” this could instantaneous us to seek the Bible to make certain whether honorary titles befit real Christians.—Matt. 23:8, NW. To appraise honorary titles intelligently we could renowned what the effect of utilising them is. when you consider that they seem to be a designation implying large distinction and dignity, they create classification differences. that's what exists between professed Christians at the instant: the clergy and laity classification differences. Early Christians have been all brothers. that they had no classification differences, not the slightest hint of a hierarchy. If classification differences cropped up, they have been condemned and uprooted. classification differences have been under no circumstances condoned, as a results of fact the Bible author James confirmed: “you have classification differences between yourselves and you have grow to be judges rendering corrupt judgements, is that not so?” (Jas. 2:4, NW) when you consider that honorary titles create classification differences, could desire to they actually befit Christians?

Answer 3

Paul used the word "father" to mean your guide in your new life as a member of the Body of Christ: "For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel" (1 Cor. 4:14–15).

Protestants react to this usage (though they exempt Paul from criticism) because they misinterpret Matt. 23:9: "Call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven."

In context, it becomes clear that Jesus was criticizing 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). He is warning against pride and seeking status and prestige--a constant theme in his teaching.

Jesus often used figurative language. Here he used hyperbole (exaggeration to make a point) to indict the pride of scribes and Pharisees who did not look to God as the source of all authority and fatherhood and teaching, but set themselves up as the ultimate authorities, father figures, and teachers.

Protestants would avoid such misinterpretations of they abandoned their pride and arrogance in imagining that they can individually interpret scriptures without the help of 2000 years of Christian scholarship in the Church.

Cheers,
Bruce

Answer 4

Yes and perfectly biblical.
1 John 2:13-14 calls presbyters(priests,elders) "Fathers"
St Paul calls himself a spiritual father in1 Cor 4:14-15 .

A clergyman is called to be a spiritual father to his congrgational family and a shephrd(Pastor) to his spiritual flock.

Answer 5

Very appropriate, Father

Answer 6

Absolutely Father,


Matthew 23:1-12:
Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.


He is admonishing those who would raise themselves up as "holier than thou," are spiritually prideful, and boasters. He is saying that we are not to put any man, including ourselves, including the Pope, above God, simple as that. He is not saying that we are not to literally ever call a man father or rabbi or teacher or master; to believe otherwise is to call Him a liar because He Himself calls people father, in both the physical and spiritual sense (in that same chapter, even, in Mark 7, Mark 10, Mark 13, Luke 6, etc.) and doesn't admonish those who refer to "our father David" as they greet Him during His triumphant entry into Jerusalem. The four evangelists speak the same way, Christ's Mother speaks the same way, as does Paul who refers numerous times to our "father Abraham."


More important to the argument is Paul's acknowledging his own spiritual fatherhood, I Corinthians 4:14-17 being among the most explicit in which he says "I have begotten you through the Gospel,"as "I became your father through the Gospel." Tellingly, in this verse he even distinguishes between people who teach about Christ and "fathers" in Christ . ., he differentiates between all Christians, who are exhorted to teach about Christ, and "spiritual fathers," who are ordained priests.

In addition, he is constantly referring to his "children," calls Timothy and Oneismus his "sons," and indicates that the other elders (presbyteros, priests) do the same: 1 Thessalonians 2:11-12: "As ye know how we exhorted and comforted and charged every one of you, as a father doth his children." Spiritual fatherhood is a New Testament reality.

If those who want to interpret the above verses to mean that Catholics are woefully sinning by calling their priests "Father," and that Jesus meant we are to never literally call anyone "father," "rabbi," "mater," or "teacher," then for consistency's sake they'd better stop using the following words and phrases: Mister (means "Master"), Master of Ceremonies, Maitre d', master of the house, master sergeant, magistrate (from the Latin "magistratus" for "master"), Master of Arts (M.A.), founding father, city father, snake doctor, and witch doctor, teacher, substitute teacher, student teacher, and so forth. And they'd best never let me hear you calling your Dad "father" and they'd better start addressing the guy who works at the synagogue as "hey, you" and wax as indignant toward Jews who won't buy your ideas as you are toward Catholics. They might also want to start getting extremely indignant at the forced blasphemy every time they fill in a government form asking for "Father's Name."



So, : was Jesus being figurative in Matthew 23:1-12 and making a point about the spiritually prideful and those who are impressed by them -- or did He contradict Himself when He went on to refer to people as "fathers" in that very same chapter? Was He being literal or were the evangelists correct in referring to both physical and spiritual fathers? Is it OK to consider the presbyters "fathers" or were Paul and the other priests making a big mistake?

Answer 7

In the Roman Catholic Church, yes.

Answer 8

The Apostle Paul seemed to think so.

Answer 9

The Catholics will tell you yes.

Most Protestants will tell you no.

The Religious Scientists (that's me) will ask - "Oh Goodness - what difference does it make?

Namaste!

Answer 10

Absolutely not I have two fathers only, my Heavenly Father and my worldly father all others to me are frauds.

Answer 11

NO !!!
"Do not call anyone on earth your father, for one is your Father, He who is in heaven."