Matthew 23:9

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Thorwald

Member
Apr 7, 2011
81
1
8
74
Thunder Bay
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Matthew 23:9 KJV Bible states, "And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your father, which is in heaven."

Why do Catholics call their ministers, "Father", and the Pope, "Holy Father?"
 

justaname

Disciple of Jesus Christ
Mar 14, 2011
2,348
149
63
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
This is an interesting topic. I had it answered to me it was a sign of respect.

Yet to examine a bit the word "father" was not used as the verse was actually written in Greek. So then we must decide on whether we are look at the exact word or the meaning behind the word. I tend to rest in the latter, the intent and meaning behind the word. So Jesus had a specific intent in mind when He Made this statement.

I find it here:

5 They do all their deeds to be seen by others. For they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long,
6 and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues - Matthew 23:5-6

Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted. - Matthew 23:12

These titles we earn or demand are to be reserved for God for He is the Teacher, the Instructor, the Father. Let us remain humble before God and give Him the honor in our minds and speech.
 

Thorwald

Member
Apr 7, 2011
81
1
8
74
Thunder Bay
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
justaname said:
This is an interesting topic. I had it answered to me it was a sign of respect.

Yet to examine a bit the word "father" was not used as the verse was actually written in Greek. So then we must decide on whether we are look at the exact word or the meaning behind the word. I tend to rest in the latter, the intent and meaning behind the word. So Jesus had a specific intent in mind when He Made this statement.

I find it here:

5 They do all their deeds to be seen by others. For they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long,
6 and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues - Matthew 23:5-6

Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted. - Matthew 23:12

These titles we earn or demand are to be reserved for God for He is the Teacher, the Instructor, the Father. Let us remain humble before God and give Him the honor in our minds and speech.
Great answer, thanks. To me, Catholics are trying to put their leaders on a pedestal, where they do not belong. They also refer to themselves, as 'Apostles', carrying on the work of the Apostles who were chosen by God/Christ to be above Prophets, Teachers, and those who were given special powers of healing, ability to speak in many languages, and so on.
 

justaname

Disciple of Jesus Christ
Mar 14, 2011
2,348
149
63
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
StanJ said:
The word father as Jesus used it was in relation to a spiritual father, not a physical father or mentor.
I agree here also.
 

Thorwald

Member
Apr 7, 2011
81
1
8
74
Thunder Bay
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
StanJ said:
The word father as Jesus used it was in relation to a spiritual father, not a physical father or mentor.
I understand this. However, what is the purpose behind the Catholic minister being referred to as "Father"? Is it to 'elevate' a Catholic minister in the eyes of the general congregation/public? They are neither my carnal father, nor my spiritual Father. This is why we refer to ministers of the Word, as 'Ministers' [teachers].
 

Thorwald

Member
Apr 7, 2011
81
1
8
74
Thunder Bay
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
StanJ said:
Here is the official position of the Catholic Church and having read it I obviously don't agree with it whatsoever and find it quite contradictory in certain parts but that is their position. Unless someone from the RCC wants to argue this point I don't think there is much more that can be said.

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/call-no-man-father
Thanks for the info. I think the real problem, is ASSUMING one's 'connection to God'. When the Apostles were chosen by Christ to carry out His work, they were given their authority to do so, by God. In today's world, academic achievement determines a minister's status, even though the minister may not be approved by God. Does this make sense?
 

StanJ

Lifelong student of God's Word.
May 13, 2014
4,798
111
63
70
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Thorwald said:
Thanks for the info. I think the real problem, is ASSUMING one's 'connection to God'. When the Apostles were chosen by Christ to carry out His work, they were given their authority to do so, by God. In today's world, academic achievement determines a minister's status, even though the minister may not be approved by God. Does this make sense?
This is a reality and does make sense but sadly it's the only way we can ensure that the majority of leadership are qualified to lead. This does not mean that all leadership has to have a PhD in theology, but as Paul exhorts us in 2 Timothy 2:15, we are to study to show ourselves approved.
 

Thorwald

Member
Apr 7, 2011
81
1
8
74
Thunder Bay
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
StanJ said:
This is a reality and does make sense but sadly it's the only way we can ensure that the majority of leadership are qualified to lead. This does not mean that all leadership has to have a PhD in theology, but as Paul exhorts us in 2 Timothy 2:15, we are to study to show ourselves approved.
True. The big question is, "Do we need academic-based teachers to provide us with wisdom, knowledge and understanding of The Word, or do we individually, ask God for this?" With all the different bibles being created, and the different practices being carried out (many of which are not correct), who do we really seek advice from? Who can we trust? We have only this short life, in order to 'get it right'. Do we put our one chance for salvation in ANY man's hands, or do we turn to God for the truth?
 

StanJ

Lifelong student of God's Word.
May 13, 2014
4,798
111
63
70
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Thorwald said:
True. The big question is, "Do we need academic-based teachers to provide us with wisdom, knowledge and understanding of The Word, or do we individually, ask God for this?" With all the different bibles being created, and the different practices being carried out (many of which are not correct), who do we really seek advice from? Who can we trust? We have only this short life, in order to 'get it right'. Do we put our one chance for salvation in ANY man's hands, or do we turn to God for the truth?
The short answer is both. In fact I myself have very little academic training in the Bible and then mostly self taught. Paul's admonition to study is for everyone not just for those who pursue academia. The fact is though that Paul was indeed train in the Old Testament and was a Pharisee. As such he himself sat in the place of Moses and was schooled in the Mosaic and Levitical laws to properly interpret them. Not everyone needs that kind of formal training as is evidenced by Peter and his lack of formal training. No man is an island and that holds true within Christianity as well. I've been studying the Bible for over 45 years and I'm sure I'll never stop learning and I'll ever stop wanting to but I can tell you that for the most part studying the word of God does force you to recognize that there is consensus among Scholars as to the basics of Christianity and that for the most part Christendom is 1 in about 95% of the issues and differ on only about 5%. Only Jesus saves and that is not in dispute but we are instructed in no uncertain terms but knowing God's word is the beginning of understanding him so in that regard as far as I am concerned it is the only way to get to know God.
 

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
StanJ said:
Here is the official position of the Catholic Church and having read it I obviously don't agree with it whatsoever and find it quite contradictory in certain parts but that is their position. Unless someone from the RCC wants to argue this point I don't think there is much more that can be said.

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/call-no-man-father
It's not an official answer. Catholic Answers is not an official body within the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.

My answer is that we do not 'call' our priests father. We address them as father. Not the same. :)
 

StanJ

Lifelong student of God's Word.
May 13, 2014
4,798
111
63
70
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Mungo said:
It's not an official answer. Catholic Answers is not an official body within the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.
My answer is that we do not 'call' our priests father. We address them as father. Not the same. :)
It is indeed official as the end of every article has the following statement.

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
 

Thorwald

Member
Apr 7, 2011
81
1
8
74
Thunder Bay
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Mungo said:
It's not an official answer. Catholic Answers is not an official body within the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.

My answer is that we do not 'call' our priests father. We address them as father. Not the same. :)
Pray tell, explain your purpose for 'addressing' them, as 'father'. They may be YOUR carnal/spiritual father, but they certainly are NOT mine.
 

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
StanJ said:
It is indeed official as the end of every article has the following statement.

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
You misunderstand what a 'nihil obstat' and an 'imprimatur' are. They do not make anything the official teaching of the Church nor indicate they come from an official source. As this one says they merely state that they are free from moral or doctrinal errors. They do noy even mean that the censor or Bishop agrees with what is stated. As calling a priest "father" is neither a doctrinal or moral issue the nihil obstat and imprimatur are irrelevant.
 

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
Thorwald said:
Pray tell, explain your purpose for 'addressing' them, as 'father'. They may be YOUR carnal/spiritual father, but they certainly are NOT mine.
Priests are like spiritual fathers to us.

Paul writes to Timothy:
“To Timothy, my true child in the faith” (1Tim 1:2)
He writes to the Corinthians:

“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.” (1Cor 4:15)

In the Old Testament there is an interesting incident in the book of Judges. A Levite is journeying and comes to the house of Micah who asks him to stay, saying: ““Be father and priest to me, and I will give you ten silver shekels a year, a set of garments, and your food.” (Jdg 17:10)


As to "They may be YOUR carnal/spiritual father, but they certainly are NOT mine." No-one has asked you to call a Catholic priests father.
 

StanJ

Lifelong student of God's Word.
May 13, 2014
4,798
111
63
70
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Mungo said:
You misunderstand what a 'nihil obstat' and an 'imprimatur' are. They do not make anything the official teaching of the Church nor indicate they come from an official source. As this one says they merely state that they are free from moral or doctrinal errors. They do noy even mean that the censor or Bishop agrees with what is stated. As calling a priest "father" is neither a doctrinal or moral issue the nihil obstat and imprimatur are irrelevant.
I'm pretty sure I don't miss understand but if you want to equivocate about it I'm not really interested. As far as I'm concerned it means; a certification by an official censor that a book is not objectionable on doctrinal or moral grounds. To me that's official despite the equivocal nature of this statement.
 

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
StanJ said:
I'm pretty sure I don't miss understand but if you want to equivocate about it I'm not really interested. As far as I'm concerned it means; a certification by an official censor that a book is not objectionable on doctrinal or moral grounds. To me that's official despite the equivocal nature of this statement.
For those reading this let me explain in more detail - at least this is my understanding.

If some writing is given to a bishop for a nihil obstat/imprimatur the bishop gives the writing to a theologian to check that it contains no doctrinal error against defined doctrines (faith or morals). It doesn't matter whether the theologian agrees with it. Nor does anything that concerns only practices or disciplines come under his scrutiny. If he finds nothing against defined Church teaching (i.e. no heresy) then he is obliged to give it a nihil obstat (nothing obstructs). He then gives it back to the bishop. Again it doesn't matter whether the bishop agrees with it or not; he will give it an imprimatur (let it be printed) unless there is some serious reason why he should reject it.

Let me give an example. The Assumption of Mary is a defined dogma. However the Church has never defined whether she was assumed into heaven before or after death.

I could write a tract arguing that she died before being assumed into heaven and it could get a nihil obstat/imprimatur.

I could also write a tract arguing that she did not die before being assumed into heaven and it could get a nihil obstat/imprimatur.

Neither of these viewpoints are the official teaching of the Church, indeed they contradict each other.

On the other hand if I wrote a tract denying that Mary was assumed into heaven it would be denied a nihil obstat/imprimatur.
 

StanJ

Lifelong student of God's Word.
May 13, 2014
4,798
111
63
70
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Mungo said:
For those reading this let me explain in more detail - at least this is my understanding.

If some writing is given to a bishop for a nihil obstat/imprimatur the bishop gives the writing to a theologian to check that it contains no doctrinal error against defined doctrines (faith or morals). It doesn't matter whether the theologian agrees with it. Nor does anything that concerns only practices or disciplines come under his scrutiny. If he finds nothing against defined Church teaching (i.e. no heresy) then he is obliged to give it a nihil obstat (nothing obstructs). He then gives it back to the bishop. Again it doesn't matter whether the bishop agrees with it or not; he will give it an imprimatur (let it be printed) unless there is some serious reason why he should reject it.

Let me give an example. The Assumption of Mary is a defined dogma. However the Church has never defined whether she was assumed into heaven before or after death.

I could write a tract arguing that she died before being assumed into heaven and it could get a nihil obstat/imprimatur.

I could also write a tract arguing that she did not die before being assumed into heaven and it could get a nihil obstat/imprimatur.

Neither of these viewpoints are the official teaching of the Church, indeed they contradict each other.

On the other hand if I wrote a tract denying that Mary was assumed into heaven it would be denied a nihil obstat/imprimatur.
You say tomayto, I say tomahto.
 

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
StanJ said:
You say tomayto, I say tomahto.
Actuallly I don't like tomatoes, at least raw ones. I like cooked ones though.