"father"

[bradwill911]

look to your right at the top you will see post # 139 and just go with the #

Oh, I see now. I’ve been using hybrid mode and it shows post #1, switched to threaded and it was post #9, switched to linear and now it makes sense. Thanks! This one has been confusing to me for a long time

 

[bradwill911]

In the context of post #113 i should still call him father and recognise him as my authority?

Now that I was able to read post #113, I understand what you are saying. Does Paul contradict Jesus. Well, we believe that the NT is Scripture, it is God’s Word and God’s Word is Truth. That being said, it is not possible for Paul to contradict Scripture. What is possible is for the reader to interpret something incorrectly. One must be able to reconcile what the letters in the NT say with what Jesus said, if one cannot, one is interpreting incorrectly. That’s about as general of an answer I can give. If there is a specific apparent contradiction that you have in mind, it would be easier to answer.

Peace be with you.

 

[Steven_John]

In the context of post #113 i should still call him father and recognise him as my authority?

Sorry every one typo should have said post #133 sorry to have wasted you time

 

[Steven_John]

Thank you. I can use all the blessings I can receive.

I’m sorry you had that experience. It’s inexcusable. Sounds like he hurt the faith of many souls. What I’m going to say is not meant to be an excuse of any kind. The Irony is that priest has probably heard people confess the same sins and maybe worse. Satan is a succesful sifter. When a priest falls, his fall always echoes farther and louder.and felt by more people.

blessings in return

I was really trying to avoid using this situation but it seemed i was getting no where.

Please in posting dont consider my personal feelings we should all come here to bring out the truth.

Should i call this priest father and do you acknowledge him as my father Gods authority over us here on earth?

 

[Steven_John]

Now that I was able to read post #113, I understand what you are saying. Does Paul contradict Jesus. Well, we believe that the NT is Scripture, it is God’s Word and God’s Word is Truth. That being said, it is not possible for Paul to contradict Scripture. What is possible is for the reader to interpret something incorrectly. One must be able to reconcile what the letters in the NT say with what Jesus said, if one cannot, one is interpreting incorrectly. That’s about as general of an answer I can give. If there is a specific apparent contradiction that you have in mind, it would be easier to answer.

Peace be with you.

I was in error pointing to the wrong post i meant #133
I know this is off thread but what you state is how i read the whole book but paul ? i will leave it to that thread, appreciated your help.

 

[kalt]

No but i have a problem with discerning who has spiritual authority on earth.

And so you think you’ve found your answer by plucking one line out of the Bible and out of context.

When it comes to a priest being legitimised to be called father, i dont know of this, i know Peter was ordained and that ordination is to be given to believers.

Have i commanded you? i did not intend to, i can only share with you what is see, I hold no authority here the pure spirit in Jesus (pbwh) has authority here.

Yes, actually. You have told us that we shouldn’t call anyone Father. Or do I have you confused with another poster?

I respect for you it is priests.

This makes no sense. What you’ve written isn’t standard English. The sentence has no meaning. I think the language barrier is more of a problem than you realize.

Go back to when i was 13, we had a priest that did un speakable, i was told to call him Father, in your way he had authority over me.

How do i know he is my spiritual authority, (me respecting he is yours) he was ordained in the succession of Peter by men but i am not sure by God. I am not saying he is not my spiritual authority but given his fruits i am not confident to say he is.

To me better i walk in the way of Jesus (pbwh) taking him as my authority than walk in the way of that priest taking him as authority.

You are denying the priesthood, and that can’t be defended by anything in the Bible.

Of course we should all follow Jesus’ example, because it is perfect. Still, we can accept earthly authority and follow the examples of men who are Christ-like.

The priest you mention is a sinner. Of course you aren’t supposed to follow his example. Still, though, he is a priest. He is a priest because of Jesus and not because of any man.
He was ordained by the power of God, not by the power of a Bishop. All of this comes from God. The power is God’s.

That priests are human and sinful isn’t debated. We all know that no priest is perfect. No pope is perfect. No one in the pews is perfect.

What the priest did was outside of the Church. What he did was outside his vows, even.

To deny the priesthood based on what one priest did, which was not in keeping w/ the Church or even his own vows, is faulty reasoning.

I dont hold authority as you suggest and you can see him as your authority you have free will so submit to him and be pleased.

He was a priest. He was also a criminal. He was still capable of performiing his priestly duties–saying mass, giving Communion, etc.

No one has authority to molest another person, not even priests. He didn’t get this authority from his ordination. He didn’t have this authority at all. What he did was a crime. That is not authority. Criminals don’t have authority to commit their crimes.

You are saying that you won’t call any priest, Father, because another priest commited a horrible crime.

This crime has nothing to do with legitimate authority–the crime isn’t part of that legitimate authority. Molesters often use their positions of legitimate authority to commit crimes that are illegitimate–all crimes are illegitimate actions.

If a policeman beats a peaceful suspect over the head and knocks him out, does that mean that the person he later stops for running a red light doesn’t have to submit to his legitimate authority?

Of course the next person has to stop and pay whatever fine is legitimately levied. Of course the person has to pull over when the policeman turns on his flashing lights.

If the authority is legitimate, of course the person legitimately submits to the authority.

But as I said earlier, you do have a problem with authority. Understanably so.

Should you, though, try to tell others that they should refuse to call their priests, Father, when it has been proven to you in many posts in this thread that your plucking that one line out of context has rendered your interpretation false?

You are spreading a false teaching. Is that legitimate? Do you agree that you, as a member of society, and of this board, have the responsibility to present the truth, and that trying to pull others into your error, though your anger is justified and understandable, is not what Christ expects of us? You are angry and rebellious, and you are trying to legitamize your actions by convincing others that the priesthood is invalid, that they have no legitimate authority. You try to do this by plucking one line out of context and insisting that that action is valid.

I dont understand how you see my reason as circular to me to say calling a priest father because the fathers say so is circular when Jesus (pbwh) never told you to but told you he is your brother.

Again, you have to stop taking that one line out of context.When you say that we shouldn’t call someone father, but admit that you call your father, father (or some form of the same word), it becomes clear that you don’t have a problem with the word, Father, but with the authority that calling a priest, Father, denotes.

Again, and still, you are refusing to look at the passage. You are taking that one line and holding onto it, separtated from the passage, for dear life, so you can justify denying the priestood and priestly authority. You choose to lump all priests, I think, with that one priest, and you think you have Biblical justification for that by plucking that one line out of context.

If He so wills may God bless and guide you as you submit to your fathers.

I know that their authority, whether it is a priest, teacher, or policman, is legitimate. I know that their authority does not legitimize criminal actions against me.

It’s terrible that this happend to you. The priest should have been kept away from children forever. This is an incurable thing, and the man couldn’t have been trusted. This is also true of the Little League coaches, neighbors, fathers, uncles, and teachers who have done the same thing.

Their authority was legitimate, and they used that position (but not the authority, because the authority gave them no such right) to win trust or foster fear commit crimes.

That some people use their positions to commit crimes, doesn’t delegitamize the authority of that position in general. This is an abuse of power.

Would you say that because a teacher molested a child, no one should be called teacher.

After Jesus told us not to call anyone father, he told us not to call anyone teacher.

You are worrying yourself about authority needlessly.

The authority was legitimate. The abuse, which does NOT come from that authority, was criminal.

 

[kalt]

Walk the safest way, the way in which can be no error rather than one that is rarely of error

Steven John, that wasn’t my quote. In fact, it makes no sense to me.???

 

[planten]

**This is another problem with church teachings. kalt is telling it all. There is a priest in church system. Nothing can be done without a priest in christianity.

But it is not so in Islam (even though some bad work has crept in nowadays). In Islam there is no place for any priest or Mulla. They do not have any official status in Islam.

Also there is no father and no son. Good-bye to such terminology for ever. Thanks God.
**.

 

[kalt]

:banghead:

**This is another problem with church teachings. kalt is telling it all. There is a priest in church system. Nothing can be done without a priest in christianity.

But it is not so in Islam (even though some bad work has crept in nowadays). In Islam there is no place for any priest or Mulla. They do not have any official status in Islam.

Also there is no father and no son. Good-bye to such terminology for ever. Thanks God.
**.

And of course, since the Qu’ran says that all should interpret scripture for themselves, women are afforded equal say. We see that in practice. Just look at all the female Mullas in the Middle East.

Again you prove that you know nothing about Catholicism.

 

[Gamera]

Matthew 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

Should Catholics be using the term “father” for the priests or the pope?

It was good enough for St Paul. “For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.” 1 Cor 4:15.

 

[steve_b]

Should i call this priest father and do you acknowledge him as my father Gods authority over us here on earth?

Is he still functioning as a priest?

Here’s something to think about

All the baptized belong to the priesthood of all believers.

:
1 Pet 2:9
But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

Granted this priesthood is a different priesthood than the ministerial priesthood, but a priesthood just the same. BTW, a ministerial priest is both.

How many of THIS priesthood (the priesthood of all believers) has fallen short… some fall short BIG TIME ? When THAT priesthood falls short, what’s next? Is that priesthood over?

Biologically, maybe you’re a father with many children. Maybe even a grandfather with many grandchildrren. Or maybe you expect to be a father some day. Through your baptism you are part of a royal priesthood. Have you committed any serious sins AFTER you were baptized into this royal priesthood? Are you forgivable for those offenses? If you are a father NOW are you still a father after grievous sin? Do you not deserve your children’s honor and respect even though you may have committed grevious sin?? Granted it might be challenging depending on the sin, but isn’t that what we are called to do? Be forgiving and honor…

How about for the ministerial priest who falls short?

 

[Centos]

And the priests being unmarried (Due to church obligatory policy), should not be fathers at all. It is a complcated un-natural vicious circle of terminology which has been spun by the church, around simple real life matters/ relations.

It’s not at all unnatural. If you would read your Bible, you will see that St. Paul often called his converts “sons.”

I quote from the King James Bible – I trust it’s Protestant enough.

“I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.” (I Cor 4:14)

“For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son…” (I Cor 4:17)

"19 But I trust in the Lord Jesus to send Timotheus shortly unto you, that I also may be of good comfort, when I know your state. 20 For I have no man likeminded, who will naturally care for your state. 21 For all seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ’s. 22 But ye know the proof of him, that, as a son with the father, he hath served with me in the gospel. (Phil. 2)

“Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith…” (I Tim. 1:2)

“This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy…” (I Tim. 1:18)

“To Timothy, my dearly beloved son…” (2 Tim. 1:2)

“Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim 2:1)

“To Titus, mine own son after the common faith…” (Titus 1:4)

“I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my bonds…” (Philemon 1:10)

And St. Peter also used the same term for Marcus:

“The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son.” (I Peter 5:13)

St. Paul used “father” applied to himself when writing to the church in Corinth:

“For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.” (I Cor 4:15)

And to the church in Thessalonia he wrote:

“As ye know how we exhorted and comforted and charged every one of you, as a father doth his children…” (I Thess 2:11)

St. Paul wrote to the Corinthians:

“Now for a recompence in the same, (I speak as unto my children,) be ye also enlarged.” (I Cor 6:13)

And…

“Behold, the third time I am ready to come to you; and I will not be burdensome to you: for I seek not yours but you: for the children ought not to lay up for the parents, but the parents for the children.” (2 Cor 12:14)

And in Galatiians:

“My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,” (Gal 4:19)

And St. John wrote:

“My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:” (I John 2:1)

“I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name’s sake.” (I John 2:12)

“I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth.” (3 John 3:4)

Apparently the Apostles (who learned at the feet of Jesus) were not afraid of a spiritual father/son relationship with their converts. By your reasoning, shouldn’t they have called them their brothers and sisters instead of children and sons? Perhaps the one verse in the Gospel is not as clear cut as those who wish to attack the Catholic think.

May God be with you

 

[Centos]

**This is another problem with church teachings. kalt is telling it all. There is a priest in church system. Nothing can be done without a priest in christianity.

But it is not so in Islam (even though some bad work has crept in nowadays). In Islam there is no place for any priest or Mulla. They do not have any official status in Islam.

Also there is no father and no son. Good-bye to such terminology for ever. Thanks God.
**.

Actually, much can be done in Christianity without a priest. Baptism, prayer, alms, spiritual readings and other acts of religious devotion.

No Father or Son… in Islam. In my opinion that is your very deep loss.

May God be with you

 

[Steven_John]

Thanks for the posts.
Its very right to say i am a poor communicator.

Please keep my posts separate from others.

I have not questioned the authority given to the priesthood.

I advocate for our PPs and pastors and Imams / president not against them, i tell parishioners that want to do things in the parish that they believe God wants them to do and the PP says no, not to worry about this that when even if the PP is wrong God will fix it and it is best to follow direction of PP. If they think it grievous they should discuss it further with the PP after much prayer. If they ever inspired it need go further inform the PP and take loving action for support and higher authority.

I have offered that Jesus (pbwh) when making this priesthood he did not say you are to be called father.

He has told us we are all brothers greatest among us will be servant.

I agree the statement of don’t call anyone father is in different context so it has no bearing on my discussion.

In this thread the meaning of father for priests is spiritual fore father.

I understand better that many of how the priest i mentioned needs our love and compassion he is our brother.
i do not agree with the poster that say he is incurable, for My Father all things are possible, the best result is for this brother to come home.

The question is we know what is and what is not of God by fruit, given the priests fruit is he our spiritual for father?

Its ok to say yes, i dont dispute is he had legitimate priest hood authority over the parish when he was appointed until removed, he is now in the can.

But do we know for sure he is our fore father in the spirit?

Now for me personally i am not sure he ever was or is, i feel more comfortable with, for some he may have been and maybe not for some others. This statement also fits for other priests and all members of the body,

soooooooo for me and its ok for you to do whatever God calls you to, please read my posts i never intended to exert authority on any one. You should always do as you believe God calls you…

But i am very curious to know what you guys think form this perspective.

I dont discuss such with parishioners as most do better to just move on at home it is best to listen and pray with people if they bring it up.

But from the anger and pain they feel i doubt the would say he was ever their fore father in spirit.

 

[kalt]

Thanks for the posts.
Its very right to say i am a poor communicator.

Please keep my posts separate from others.

I have not questioned the authority given to the priesthood.

I advocate for our PPs and pastors and Imams / president not against them, i tell parishioners that want to do things in the parish that they believe God wants them to do and the PP says no, not to worry about this that when even if the PP is wrong God will fix it and it is best to follow direction of PP. If they think it grievous they should discuss it further with the PP after much prayer. If they ever inspired it need go further inform the PP and take loving action for support and higher authority.

I have offered that Jesus (pbwh) when making this priesthood he did not say you are to be called father.

He has told us we are all brothers greatest among us will be servant.

I agree the statement of don’t call anyone father is in different context so it has no bearing on my discussion.

In this thread the meaning of father for priests is spiritual fore father.

What you do you mean by forefather? The standard definition has nothing to do with this topic. (See a previous post where I copied the definition.)

I understand better that many of how the priest i mentioned needs our love and compassion he is our brother.
i do not agree with the poster that say he is incurable, for My Father all things are possible, the best result is for this brother to come home.

Then you are making the same mistake that the Chuch made in the 1970’s. The Church believed the 1970’s psychiatrists who told them that these men (priests, teachers, Little League coaches, fathers, uncles, neighbors, etc.) could be cured of their attraction to children. This is why, after therapy, the priests were allowed to have contact with children again. We know the results of that policy. The psychiatrists now admit that they were wrong, and that this is an incurable condition.

The question is we know what is and what is not of God by fruit, given the priests fruit is he our spiritual for father?

I’m sorry, but this question makes no sense, so I can’t answer it. Can you rephrase it in standard English?

Its ok to say yes, i dont dispute is he had legitimate priest hood authority over the parish when he was appointed until removed, he is now in the can.

But do we know for sure he is our fore father in the spirit?

Now for me personally i am not sure he ever was or is, i feel more comfortable with, for some he may have been and maybe not for some others. This statement also fits for other priests and all members of the body,

I think that if you are having this much trouble expressing yourself in standard English, you might be having difficulty understanding standard English as well. We have explained the priesthood to you several times and in several ways. Either you don’t understand what is written, or you refuse to accept that what is, is. At any rate, you are asking the same questions over and over again. You already have the answers.

soooooooo for me and its ok for you to do whatever God calls you to, please read my posts i never intended to exert authority on any one. You should always do as you believe God calls you…

But i am very curious to know what you guys think form this perspective.

We have answered the same questions several time. Are you reading the responses?

I dont discuss such with parishioners as most do better to just move on at home it is best to listen and pray with people if they bring it up.

But from the anger and pain they feel i doubt the would say he was ever their fore father in spirit.

Again, why are you using the word, forefather?

And again, it seems that you didn’t read or understand the responses that explained the priesthood to you.

You seem to think that anyone who is less than perfect can’t be a priest in the Catholic understanding of the priesthood, so only Christ is a true priest. I have no idea why you are going to a Catholic Church.:

 

[kalt]

What the priesthood is.

The ordination of priests - co-workers of the bishops

1562 "Christ, whom the Father hallowed and sent into the world, has, through his apostles, made their successors, the bishops namely, sharers in his consecration and mission; and these, in their turn, duly entrusted in varying degrees various members of the Church with the office of their ministry."43 "The function of the bishops’ ministry was handed over in a subordinate degree to priests so that they might be appointed in the order of the priesthood and be co-workers of the episcopal order for the proper fulfillment of the apostolic mission that had been entrusted to it by Christ."44

1563 "Because it is joined with the episcopal order the office of priests shares in the authority by which Christ himself builds up and sanctifies and rules his Body. Hence the priesthood of priests, while presupposing the sacraments of initiation, is nevertheless conferred by its own particular sacrament. Through that sacrament priests by the anointing of the Holy Spirit are signed with a special character and so are configured to Christ the priest in such a way that they are able to act in the person of Christ the head."45

1564 "Whilst not having the supreme degree of the pontifical office, and notwithstanding the fact that they depend on the bishops in the exercise of their own proper power, the priests are for all that associated with them by reason of their sacerdotal dignity; and in virtue of the sacrament of Holy Orders, after the image of Christ, the supreme and eternal priest, they are consecrated in order to preach the Gospel and shepherd the faithful as well as to celebrate divine worship as true priests of the New Testament."46

1565 Through the sacrament of Holy Orders priests share in the universal dimensions of the mission that Christ entrusted to the apostles. The spiritual gift they have received in ordination prepares them, not for a limited and restricted mission, “but for the fullest, in fact the universal mission of salvation 'to the end of the earth,”'47 "prepared in spirit to preach the Gospel everywhere."48

1568 "All priests, who are constituted in the order of priesthood by the sacrament of Order, are bound together by an intimate sacramental brotherhood, but in a special way they form one priestly body in the diocese to which they are attached under their own bishop. . . ."52 The unity of the presbyterium finds liturgical expression in the custom of the presbyters’ imposing hands, after the bishop, during the Ate of ordination.

V. WHO CAN CONFER THIS SACRAMENT?

1575 Christ himself chose the apostles and gave them a share in his mission and authority. Raised to the Father’s right hand, he has not forsaken his flock but he keeps it under his constant protection through the apostles, and guides it still through these same pastors who continue his work today.61 Thus, it is Christ whose gift it is that some be apostles, others pastors. He continues to act through the bishops.62

VII. THE EFFECTS OF THE SACRAMENT OF HOLY ORDERS

The indelible character

1581 This sacrament configures the recipient to Christ by a special grace of the Holy Spirit, so that he may serve as Christ’s instrument for his Church. By ordination one is enabled to act as a representative of Christ, Head of the Church, in his triple office of priest, prophet, and king.

1582 As in the case of Baptism and Confirmation this share in Christ’s office is granted once for all. The sacrament of Holy Orders, like the other two, confers an indelible spiritual character and cannot be repeated or conferred temporarily.74

1583 It is true that someone validly ordained can, for grave reasons, be discharged from the obligations and functions linked to ordination, or can be forbidden to exercise them; but he cannot become a layman again in the strict sense,75 because the character imprinted by ordination is for ever. The vocation and mission received on the day of his ordination mark him permanently.

1584 Since it is ultimately Christ who acts and effects salvation through the ordained minister, the unworthiness of the latter does not prevent Christ from acting.76 St. Augustine states this forcefully:

As for the proud minister, he is to be ranked with the devil. Christ’s gift is not thereby profaned: what flows through him keeps its purity, and what passes through him remains dear and reaches the fertile earth. . . . The spiritual power of the sacrament is indeed comparable to light: those to be enlightened receive it in its purity, and if it should pass through defiled beings, it is not itself defiled.77
The grace of the Holy Spirit

1585 The grace of the Holy Spirit proper to this sacrament is configuration to Christ as Priest, Teacher, and Pastor, of whom the ordained is made a minister.

1587 The spiritual gift conferred by presbyteral ordination is expressed by this prayer of the Byzantine Rite. The bishop, while laying on his hand, says among other things:

Lord, fill with the gift of the Holy Spirit
him whom you have deigned to raise to the rank of the priesthood,
that he may be worthy to stand without reproach before your altar
to proclaim the Gospel of your kingdom,
to fulfill the ministry of your word of truth,
to offer you spiritual gifts and sacrifices,
to renew your people by the bath of rebirth;
so that he may go out to meet
our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, your only Son,
on the day of his second coming,
and may receive from your vast goodness
the recompense for a faithful administration of his order.80

 

[Steven_John]

God bless you all for your patience with me.

What you do you mean by forefather?

We spoke of bible writings. We see in bible Paul was fore father to timothy as Paul was the one guiding him in the way of Jesus (pbwh). So timothy could go and do the same for others.

Then you are making the same mistake that the Chuch made in the 1970’s. The Church believed the 1970’s psychiatrists who told them that these men (priests, teachers, Little League coaches, fathers, uncles, neighbors, etc.) could be cured of their attraction to children. This is why, after therapy, the priests were allowed to have contact with children again. We know the results of that policy. The psychiatrists now admit that they were wrong, and that this is an incurable condition.

On this we just differ on who God is and what God can do, My Father can do all things, He can turn rocks into descendants of Abraham, He is so powerful that if i have faith i can move a mountain into an ocean. Your trust in psychiatrists above the word in scripture will get in the way of your parish healing ministry. What you offer is against My God but respect yours.

The question is we know what is and what is not of God by fruit, given the priests fruit is he our spiritual for father?

I’m sorry, but this question makes no sense, so I can’t answer it. Can you rephrase it in standard English?

Probably not my English is shocking hey sorry.
To discern what is of God and what is not, i look at the fruits produced, producers of good are of the right vine, producers of darkness are of the wrong vine.

The priest produced rotten fruit.

Paul is seen to offer timothy example to produce good fruit if he exampled timothy to produce the same fruit as the priest would you say paul is father to timothy?

I think that if you are having this much trouble expressing yourself in standard English, you might be having difficulty understanding standard English as well. We have explained the priesthood to you several times and in several ways. Either you don’t understand what is written, or you refuse to accept that what is, is. At any rate, you are asking the same questions over and over again. You already have the answers.

What you say is true about my English but even though you know this you give me longer and more scholarly answers.

when i asked

But do we know for sure he is our fore father in the spirit?

your answer is yes without doubt. and as you say we in your statement above other posters also agree.

We have answered the same questions several time. Are you reading the responses?

Well you have kind of answered this in your acknowledgment i have trouble with English, i really am trying, 2 meanings in that hey LOL.

You seem to think that anyone who is less than perfect can’t be a priest in the Catholic understanding of the priesthood, so only Christ is a true priest. I have no idea why you are going to a Catholic Church.:

That comment shows you have not listened to me about priesthood, clearly i have stated that even as a pedophile Charles had the priesthood but i am not sure he is a father as paul is seen as to timothy.
As for the you have no idea why i go to Catholic Church, do you mean,
The Catholic Church is the One True Church and you don’t belong today and you never will, we are a church for the well not those with lesser education that I. My mates that were effected by this priest keep a distance maybe you are right and i should do the same. “the fruits of your father”

Love ya and know you are trying to help, God bless

 

[guanophore]

Since it is clear jesus intended that we know God as our father, and he himself was never known as father, why would a priest insist on father as a title?

Priest’s don’t “insist” on titles. They consecrate their whole lives to God, body, soul, and spirit. They are taken up into the priesthood of Christ. They have died, and their life is hidden with Christ, in God. They are able to bring about spiritual birth because He who is Lord of creation works through them to begat sons and daughters in the Kingdom.

Peace and blessings steveb,
how does this fit with the instruction Jesus (pbwh) gave that we are all brothers and not to exult ourselves. The term father for a priest in this light suggests a priest is above or before not least as a servant?

It fits perfectly. One who is a priest after the order of Melchizedek patterns himself after the priesthood of Christ. He takes for his spouse, the Church, the Bride of Christ. He vows to love and serve the Church.

Eph 5:25-31
25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. 28 Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body.

As the spouse of the Church, the priest works in unity with the Bride of Christ to begat spiritual children, in all humility and sacrifice.

 

[guanophore]

Peace and blessings steveb,
how does this fit with the instruction Jesus (pbwh) gave that we are all brothers and not to exult ourselves. The term father for a priest in this light suggests a priest is above or before not least as a servant?

We are all brothers. Some of the brothers are given responsibility that others are not. How does fatherhood suggest that one is “above or before”? Do you not accept that the father is the servant of the family?

Do you think these instructions to fathers:

Eph 6:4
Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.

Indicate that fathers are “above or before” in the sense that they should abuse their authority over their children? Responsibility does not equate to superiority.

 

[Steven_John]

Priest’s don’t “insist” on titles. They consecrate their whole lives to God, body, soul, and spirit. They are taken up into the priesthood of Christ. They have died, and their life is hidden with Christ, in God. They are able to bring about spiritual birth because He who is Lord of creation works through them to begat sons and daughters in the Kingdom.

It fits perfectly. One who is a priest after the order of Melchizedek patterns himself after the priesthood of Christ. He takes for his spouse, the Church, the Bride of Christ. He vows to love and serve the Church.

Eph 5:25-31
25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. 28 Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body.

As the spouse of the Church, the priest works in unity with the Bride of Christ to begat spiritual children, in all humility and sacrifice.

Your post is great and makes much sense, i take it and love it much.

Indeed a father is to serve.

Did the priest i spoke of truly consecrate his whole lives to God, body, soul, and spirit.
Evidently not.

I dont deny he may not have aspired to, but what he did is inconsistent with “consecrate his whole lives to God, body, soul, and spirit”

God does not do as he did.

The example you offer fits the title of father but this priests actions are not of what you posted.

I guess the best thing i can take from this thread is that the title of father for a priest is just worldly and not of one to give indication of spiritual guidance or Christlike example.