English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

what about calling your biological father "father", does God see that as an offense to Him?

2007-11-08 22:42:42 · 17 answers · asked by Perceptive 5 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

babo1dm, I am a Catholic, and as a Catholic, I know for sure that a simple use of the word "father" is not what God has prohibited. I am just trying to get the opinion of Bible-fundamentalists, so don't even try to sound so smart there, because it wouldn't even be convincing even if you try harder.

2007-11-08 22:50:03 · update #1

17 answers

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).

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).

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).

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.

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.

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).

Hope this helps.

2007-11-08 23:19:09 · answer #1 · answered by lundstroms2004 6 · 6 0

Not at all.

In Matthew 23:9 Jesus says, “And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven.” Many people interpret this to mean, “Do not call a priest “father,” and do not call your dad “father.”

But this is the flawed, fundamentalist approach to interpreting Scripture.

If we believe these opinions, then what are we to make of the Scriptures that contradict this one? For example, in Mark 7:9-13, Jesus criticizes the Pharisees and scribes for not honoring their “fathers.”

Furthermore, calling the apostles and their successors “father” was common within the early Christian communities (1 Cor. 4:15, 1 Jn. 2:12, Acts 7:2, 22:1). As in the case of all scriptural interpretations, we must understand this passage in light of the rest of Scripture (cf. 2 Pet. 1:20; 3:16).

In the physical and spiritual orders we have fathers. Those who give us life via procreation, and those who give us life via the sacraments (i.e. the priests).

Pax Vobiscum+

2007-11-09 00:23:55 · answer #2 · answered by Veritas 7 · 6 0

NoSts Stephen, Paul,John(1 jn 2:13-14 even calls priests/presybters/elders fathers) and Jesus Himself(Lk 14:26) call men fathers.

2007-11-10 00:55:36 · answer #3 · answered by James O 7 · 2 0

"Jesus objected to the word being applied as a title" ????

That's a new one on me. A re-read of the Gospels seems to be in order; Jesus applied the word as a "title" rather often.

I know who my biological father is, and refer to him as my father though I call him "Dad" rather than his given name of John. I also know who my heavenly Father is ... and call him Father. And I call my spiritual "father", my parish priest ... Father. I have no problem sorting out who is who. And calling either of the humans "father/Father" as a title takes absolutely nothing away from my heavenly Father.

It's just one of many cherrypicked Bible verses tossed around as a veiled indictment of any practices that do not fall rigidly in line with "Bible Christianity".

2007-11-09 04:25:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

The word father used between family members is an appropriate use.

Jesus objected to the word being applied as a tittle because there is only one Father, the heavenly one, God the Almighty.

2007-11-08 22:54:48 · answer #5 · answered by Fuzzy 7 · 0 5

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.

OK, so what's He saying here? What's His point? 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," translated in the NIV and NASB (among others) 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 (see verse below) -- i.e., 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.

2007-11-09 01:30:51 · answer #6 · answered by tebone0315 7 · 5 0

no, God sees what's in your heart; unless you are calling someone father, making them seem like a deity, then it's fine.

2007-11-08 22:47:14 · answer #7 · answered by Lo 2 · 2 0

The term "Father" as used in certain scriptures, comes about because at the times they were written, Ancestor worship was the order of the day.

2007-11-08 23:23:55 · answer #8 · answered by first_pagan_wiccan_church 3 · 0 5

you're asking the fundies? they are literalists, don't expect an intelligent answer from them. you're just wasting your time.

2007-11-08 22:58:25 · answer #9 · answered by Ťango 3 · 6 0

yes, God is our only father, unless you're speaking biologically.

2007-11-08 23:25:05 · answer #10 · answered by paula r 7 · 0 5

of course no!Our creator is all mighty.He knows everything.Before you thought of dis qustion,he already has d answer...

2007-11-08 22:51:28 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers