holy father?

[djrakowski]

MfM, your posts reflect a belief that you’re reading the Bible without an interpretive framework, or without the bias of a historical tradition of scriptural interpretation. I humbly submit that such a position is impossible. Nobody is able to shelve their personal experiences, church backgrounds and other biases when approaching sacred scripture. It would simply be more honest if you’d admit, as my fellow Catholics do, that you have a bias when reading sacred scripture that’s owed to your faith tradition, among other things.

 

[guanophore]

Yep, you guys say I don’t listen or pay attention but this is probably the 30th time i’ve responded to the same type of post.
ITS THE VAIN title. Not the one used in the term of fatherhood. Matt 23 clearly explains this.

You are right, mfm, I did not understand you to say this before. What criteria do you use to determine “vanity”? By what standards are we falling short by looking at the bishop of Rome as our spiritual father?

 

[myfavoritmartin]

You are right, mfm, I did not understand you to say this before. What criteria do you use to determine “vanity”? By what standards are we falling short by looking at the bishop of Rome as our spiritual father?

You can look at him as a spiritual father all you want…That is clear in scripture! Its the elevation by title such as I quoted in JOB earlier, that is clearly the offense the Lord speaks about.

 

[Wolseley]

Yep, you guys say I don’t listen or pay attention but this is probably the 30th time i’ve responded to the same type of post.
ITS THE VAIN title. Not the one used in the term of fatherhood. Matt 23 clearly explains this.

The problem is, you’re placing the emphasis on the wrong word here. Let’s look at the verse again:

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

You are interpreting this verse this way:

“And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.”

I suggest your interpretation is off. To rightly divide the word, you should interpret the verse thusly:

“And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.”

See how much better that is? God is the only one you should call “father”.

Your male parent (and all other men), you need to call “mother”. Scripture forbids anything otherwise.

This is the only true, correct, and infallible interpretation of this verse. I declare it so, and like Martin Luther himself, I am led by the Holy Ghost. Amen.

 

[djrakowski]

You can look at him as a spiritual father all you want…That is clear in scripture! Its the elevation by title such as I quoted in JOB earlier, that is clearly the offense the Lord speaks about.

That is only clear in your interpretation of scripture, which is in disagreement with the interpretations of ‘revmarty’ (who is, like you, a Protestant) and the churches of the Anglican communion (again, like you, they’re Protestant) and the Orthodox churches, both of which address their priests as ‘father.’

What is clear is that you believe your interpretation of scripture to be the only valid one, but who can I be sure that’s true? There are other non-Catholics who disagree quite strongly with what you’ve said. How am I to determine which of you has more of the Holy Spirit to guarantee that I’ll be led into all truth?

 

[myfavoritmartin]

You can look at him as a spiritual father all you want…That is clear in scripture! Its the elevation by title such as I quoted in JOB earlier, that is clearly the offense the Lord speaks about.

Job 32:21 Let ~me~ not, I pray you, accept any man’s ~person~, neither let me give ~flattering titles ~unto man~.

Job 32:22 For I know ~not~ to give flattering titles; in so doing my maker would soon take me away.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Job 32:21 Let ~me~ not, I pray you, accept any man’s ~person~, neither let me give ~flattering titles ~unto man~.

Job 32:22 For I know ~not~ to give flattering titles; in so doing my maker would soon take me away.

Is there another way I should interpret this???

 

[djrakowski]

Job 32:21 Let ~me~ not, I pray you, accept any man’s ~person~, neither let me give ~flattering titles ~unto man~.

Job 32:22 For I know ~not~ to give flattering titles; in so doing my maker would soon take me away.

Does that mean we should stop addressing judges as “Your Honor,” or royalty as “Your Majesty?” Does that mean we need to stop naming valedictorians in high schools, or referrings to people as PhDs after they have completed the appropriate courses of study? Are these not honorary terms, too?

 

[heisenburg]

Martin…

Quick question…
Do you have people that help you in learning about Christ? Hopefully, the answer is yes. If you do, this means you look up to them in matters of faith, not that they are equal to god, but more learned about god than you. There is nothing wrong with this in scripture.

Now, step back from the passage for a moment. which of these two situations is wrong…

1. A man who is learning about Christ goes to his pastor. Through many One on one meetings, the Man comes to Christ, and continues Using that same pastor to continue to Grow in christ.
2. A man is learning about Christ. The pastor seems to know about everything to the man, and the man begins to see him as an equal to god.

Obviously the first is OK, the second is wrong

Now, take that from a different point of view…

1. A Man has for many years studied the ways of Christ, scripture, the ECF’s etc. He begins to lead a local flock of followers as their Pastor to Christ. He always gives the GLory to God and God alone. His title is Father, but he understands that though while he is charged with guiding this part of Christs Flock, he is far from an equal.
2. A Man has for years studied about Christ. He becomes very arrogant, and thinks everyone should bow down to his understanding because “he is always right” Though he does not make himself equal to god, he believes that he is always right, no matter what. His title is Father

Case 1 is OK, because the title really doesn’t matter, its what you do with that title. Just like its ok to use Pastor, Bishop, Rev. etc. Christ is talking about what is going BEHIND the title by the person USING the title…

Case 2 is horrible because the man is abusing his title and not giving the Glory to God alone.

It is the arrogance of some people with these titles, not the titles themselves that Christ was condemning in Matt.

Now, take it to a differant level.

1. A man follows Christ and believes in Christ completely. He is given a title to indicate he is an elder. Say… Father.
2. A Man is given a Title, say Pastor, and abuses his title. Professes that since he is the Pastor he is the supreme arbiter. and is generally a bad guy

When (1) dies and is judged, Will God say, you know, you lead the ideal life I wanted for my servants, but you had the title Father… You go the hell

Or

When (2) dies, will God frown upon the Pastor, maybe still send him to hell, but say… Hey, thanks for not using the title Father

DO you think God cares more about the Title, or the action behind the title…

In Christ

 

[djrakowski]

Your male parent (and all other men), you need to call “mother”. Scripture forbids anything otherwise.

This is the only true, correct, and infallible interpretation of this verse. I declare it so, and like Martin Luther himself, I am led by the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Thank you, Wolseley, for illustrating the absurd ends to which private scriptural interpretation can be taken - this is an excellent post!

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Martin…

Quick question…
Do you have people that help you in learning about Christ? Hopefully, the answer is yes. If you do, this means you look up to them in matters of faith, not that they are equal to god, but more learned about god than you. There is nothing wrong with this in scripture.

Now, step back from the passage for a moment. which of these two situations is wrong…

1. A man who is learning about Christ goes to his pastor. Through many One on one meetings, the Man comes to Christ, and continues Using that same pastor to continue to Grow in christ.
2. A man is learning about Christ. The pastor seems to know about everything to the man, and the man begins to see him as an equal to god.

Obviously the first is OK, the second is wrong

Now, take that from a different point of view…

1. A Man has for many years studied the ways of Christ, scripture, the ECF’s etc. He begins to lead a local flock of followers as their Pastor to Christ. He always gives the GLory to God and God alone. His title is Father, but he understands that though while he is charged with guiding this part of Christs Flock, he is far from an equal.
2. A Man has for years studied about Christ. He becomes very arrogant, and thinks everyone should bow down to his understanding because “he is always right” Though he does not make himself equal to god, he believes that he is always right, no matter what. His title is Father

Case 1 is OK, because the title really doesn’t matter, its what you do with that title. Just like its ok to use Pastor, Bishop, Rev. etc. Christ is talking about what is going BEHIND the title by the person USING the title…

Case 2 is horrible because the man is abusing his title and not giving the Glory to God alone.

It is the arrogance of some people with these titles, not the titles themselves that Christ was condemning in Matt.

Now, take it to a differant level.

1. A man follows Christ and believes in Christ completely. He is given a title to indicate he is an elder. Say… Father.
2. A Man is given a Title, say Pastor, and abuses his title. Professes that since he is the Pastor he is the supreme arbiter. and is generally a bad guy

When (1) dies and is judged, Will God say, you know, you lead the ideal life I wanted for my servants, but you had the title Father… You go the hell

Or

When (2) dies, will God frown upon the Pastor, maybe still send him to hell, but say… Hey, thanks for not using the title Father

DO you think God cares more about the Title, or the action behind the title…

In Christ

Thought provoking post!

Question though, Why does the “holy father” b16 allow and expect the faithful to bow to him and kiss his ring?

cuz my pastor would be mightly offended by someone doing this, much like Peter was with Cornelius.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Thought provoking post!

Question though, Why does the “holy father” b16 allow and expect the faithful to bow to him and kiss his ring?

Out of respect. Much as a commoner who approaches the Queen of England. They do so by bowing. They address her as “Your Majesty” or sometimes, “Your Worship.”

The kissing of the ring isn’t limited to the Pope. When the Cardinal of PA came down to invite St. Barromeo’s Seminar, I kissed his ring.

cuz my pastor would be mightly offended by someone doing this, much like Peter was with Cornelius.

There is a difference, Cornelius was worshipping Peter in the place of God. When I kissed the Cardinal’s ring it was out of respect not putting him above God. If you put a man above God, you have issues.

You need to know the difference of respect, and honor, from what you preceived to be blasphemous.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

There is a difference, Cornelius was worshipping Peter in the place of God. .

Care to share how you jumped to this conclusion, each time I read Acts 10: I see nothing of the sort.

 

[JoeyWarren]

Yep, you guys say I don’t listen or pay attention but this is probably the 30th time i’ve responded to the same type of post.
ITS THE VAIN title. Not the one used in the term of fatherhood. Matt 23 clearly explains this.

But you believe calling the Pope the Holy Father is a vain title whereas we don’t.

 

[guanophore]

MfM, your posts reflect a belief that you’re reading the Bible without an interpretive framework, or without the bias of a historical tradition of scriptural interpretation. I humbly submit that such a position is impossible. Nobody is able to shelve their personal experiences, church backgrounds and other biases when approaching sacred scripture. It would simply be more honest if you’d admit, as my fellow Catholics do, that you have a bias when reading sacred scripture that’s owed to your faith tradition, among other things.

I disagree, dj. I believe MfM IS using an interpretive framework. It is a sola scriptura, sola fida, evangelical, anticatholic framework. It is not impossible at all, as he has repeatedly demonstrated. It just results in conclusions that are inconsistent with the teaching of Jesus and His apostles.

 

[guanophore]

You can look at him as a spiritual father all you want…That is clear in scripture! Its the elevation by title such as I quoted in JOB earlier, that is clearly the offense the Lord speaks about.

Well, I appreciate your permission to recognize the successor of Peter as my spiritual father. You have no idea how relieved I am!

So, what constitutes “elevation by title” in a situation such as this?

 

[mercygate]

But you believe calling the Pope the Holy Father is a vain title whereas we don’t.

Indeed. With all of the grand trappings and the “organization,” for Catholics, the Church is the Covenant family of God. In other words, the term “Father” is not a “vain title” but a loving appellation that affirms the fellowship of the faith as a familial bond and not as primarily a jurisdictional one.

 

[JoeyWarren]

Care to share how you jumped to this conclusion, each time I read Acts 10: I see nothing of the sort.

Acts 10: 25 And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.
26 But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.

MFM, you hatred of the Catholic Church is so deep, that when told, you still don’t see.

 

[djrakowski]

I disagree, dj. I believe MfM IS using an interpretive framework. It is a sola scriptura, sola fida, evangelical, anticatholic framework. It is not impossible at all, as he has repeatedly demonstrated. It just results in conclusions that are inconsistent with the teaching of Jesus and His apostles.

Oh, I must’ve been unclear… I agree 100% with this, and I was trying to illustrate that even though he believes he’s not using an interpretive framework, he really is. We all do - it’s just that we admit it, and others refuse to do so, claiming that their interpretations are simply the plain words of scripture.

So, we’re on the same page

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Out of respect. . . .The kissing of the ring isn’t limited to the Pope. When the Cardinal of PA came down to invite St. Barromeo’s Seminar, I kissed his ring.

And what is more Manny, I’m sure you kissed the Cardinal’s ring out of respect for God!

Just as the OT prophets were to be respected, as they came in the Name of God.

Christ himself described in the parable of the vineyard and the tenet how angry the landholder was with the tenet who did not respect those he sent, and who represented his authority. (Matt 21).

VC