Why does the Church object?

[KathyH]

That is precisely the difference between “us” and you, then, Kathy. We do care. We care very deeply. We care that you would come to know the Truth of our Savior, Jesus Christ. We care that your heart would be softened to see Him in his Body, the Church. We care that you would stop your anti-Catholic bias and actually have an invested interest in the salvation of souls, rather than propaganda and rhetoric.

We care, Kathy, because we also follow the word of God. We believe His holy Word when St. Paul writes:

Just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others. (Romans 12:4-5)

We care because we know that if you are, indeed, a member of His Body, the Church, then it is our resposiblity to love you because you belong to us.

Catholic teaching would not disagree. What is your point?

We are also called to to not judge.

Thank you for your concern.

Tell us, Kathy, how exactly do you interpret John 6?

(John 6) has much we could discuss, but I’ll assume you are asking me about the Eucharist, if I’m wrong please forgive me.

I know that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ.

You are absolutely correct. We are trying to give you answers to your challenges. You seem to be more concerned with preaching to us than with discussion.

We have been very explicit in our answers. We have given you a multitude of Scripture to explain our position. Your response has been: “well, maybe Paul was a sinner. Maybe he was wrong.” That is weak. You either believe the word of God or you don’t.

I understand that you feel overwhelmed by the defensive responses you have gotten here. You must understand, however, that you came here to offensively challenge the Catholic Faith. You came to us. We are Catholic. We are not putting you down. We are merely defending our faith.

There are many here who are searching for answers. Questioning does not equal fear. There is a reason you are here and, believe it or not, it may be for the salvation of your own soul. Stay a while. Simmer down. Put away the shotgun. Don’t pull out every arguement you’ve ever heard all at once. If you truly are interested in why we call our priests “Father,” how about you start a new thread on it. I know why, and it is dangerous.

Give us your Scriptural references. Your historical resources. Your reasoning and interpretations. We’ll discuss it. That’s what we’re hear for.

 

[KathyH]

PS: I heard the funniest story not too long ago - I don’t think it was supposed to be funny, though.

I was having a conversation with a Protestant on this issue of “call no man Father” and he was proudly bragging to me how he had been the MC at some function or other - anyhow there was a Catholic priest in attendance there, and so instead of introducing him as “Father Soandso,” he bragged to me that he had called him “Mr. Soandso,” and he was so proud of himself for doing this. (I don’t know what he thought he actually accomplished - the priest probably just figured he was an idiot.)

I asked him, “Well, doesn’t that passage also forbid calling anyone “Mister” (which is another spelling of Master)? Didn’t you just replace one forbidden title with another one?” God has killed may people, but that doesn’t give us the right to kill. He is the boss we do as we are told.
He was silent for about a week, and then when he came back to the topic, he went on a really long song and dance about how “mister” comes from a word meaning “lord” and it’s not bad to call someone “lord” because Sarah called Abraham “lord” - anyhow, I just left him to it, because with all that Bible study, I’m sure he’ll eventually discover that Jesus Himself called people Father, and that the Apostles often used a variety honorific titles for themselves and for each other in their conversations and communicatio - including Father, among others.

 

[alexaustralia]

The difficulty lies in the way Protestant and other Christians are thaught to read Scripture. One absolutises one passage and try to make all others fit. And if one can’t well the author just didn’t know what he/she were saying. Because what is important is “MY” interpration and must be held at whatever cost. It is the same thing that hapens with the sola fide (specially OSAS) argument. They make “faith” absolute but in order to do so they have to go in circles explaning other passages. And some like Luther just prefer to get rid of books from the Bible…after all “MY” interpretation is infallible the Bible just has to adapt to the fact.

Here is an issue if we take Kathy’s position regarding the term “teacher” (and for that matter father as well). If the term cannot be used for people it isn’t the word but the action it is associated with that we should refrain from. For as long as one takes as a role that action he or she are in actual fact teaching. Whatever other name people use to describe the role you remain being a “teacher”. So if the term “teacher” should only be used for God then God has to be the only one doing the teaching/educating etc.

If one adheres to only the word being offensive…well was that in aramaic only? For any english equivalent whether being educator etc… is just another transation of the original aramaic word. Basically a word is a written or verbal representation of a reality (wether be it an object an action etc). And as long as the reality exists we need a written and verbal representation to communicate that reality.

And Kathy as for the accusations you placed forward before about things that the Catholic doesn’t teach…well that just shows your ignorance on the matter… do some more research as to what the Catholic Church “teaches”…or to be in line with your interpretation “hands down”.

 

[levi86]

The difficulty lies in the way Protestant and other Christians are thaught to read Scripture. One absolutises one passage and try to make all others fit. And if one can’t well the author just didn’t know what he/she were saying. Because what is important is “MY” interpration and must be held at whatever cost. It is the same thing that hapens with the sola fide (specially OSAS) argument. They make “faith” absolute but in order to do so they have to go in circles explaning other passages. And some like Luther just prefer to get rid of books from the Bible…after all “MY” interpretation is infallible the Bible just has to adapt to the fact.

Exactly.

A true protestant should not only interpret the Bible as they wish, but they should also choose which books they accept as inspired.

The Bible was compiled by The Catholic Church. How can a true protestant accept one catholic teaching (the contents of the bible) and not accept others?

 

[MariaG]

Hi Kathy,

I find it ironic and sad that you accuse the Catholic Church of not teaching the whole Bible but yet believe in the same Bible where Paul AND OTHERs refer to spiritual fathers must be mistaken.

You hold your own personal revelation and leading of the Holy Spirit over God’s inspired word. Scripture even warns us that some scripture may be hard to understand yet you trust your leading even though it contradicts inspired scripture.

Was the Holy Spirit able to reveal this truth to you but unable to get it through Paul and the others whom God inspired to write Scripture?

Who am I to say Paul was wrong? What Paul did he must have thought didn’t fit under the word that Jesus gave. He may have thought that calling himself father was OK as long as no one else did. Besides Paul wasn’t perfect either. Because Paul may have made a mistake doesn’t give us the right to make the same mistake.

That is kind of cute, of course you are us??? I am not against the Catholic Church, my problem with the Church is; it doesn’t teach the whole Word of God

.

One more chance to read that scripture contained in the below link.

We read the whole of Scripture, weighed in full. We do not excise micro-bits, taking single sentences, like this one, out of their matrix.

catholic.com/library/Call_No_Man_Father.asp

Again: I am uncertain how this relates to the subject of the thread? You surely are not saying: the Holy Spirit tells me that “call no man Father” means ***what I believe it means. ***Therefore, Jesus, John and Paul in other scriptural passages may be ignored?

But possibly more in tune with the actual stated intent of this thread I RESUBMIT the following.

But even if you choose to disagree with me still, I ask you, by your own requirements, I followed the Holy Spirit’s leading, and the Holy Spirit has led me to the Truth of the teachings of the Catholic Church as well as the truth to the interpretation of scripture “call no man Father”.

You say you have been led by the Holy Spirit to an opposite truth. We both claim to be have a personal relationship with Christ and have been baptized by the Holy Spirit. But we both have come to opposite conclusions.

Is there no absolute Truth? Or is one of us wrong? And how do you know who is wrong since I testify to you that I know the Holy Spirit led me to where I am today?

Maria

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Hey KathyH
How about you explain Matthew 21:43. Jesus says the vineyard will be given to those who reaped wine and killed the owner’s slaves and son? Could Jesus be more clear?

Are you having any luck on the history of your bible? How about we make the question easier lets just address between the year 33AD and 330

 

[MariaG]

Hey KathyH
How about you explain Matthew 21:43. Jesus says the vineyard will be given to those who reaped wine and killed the owner’s slaves and son? Could Jesus be more clear?

Are you having any luck on the history of your bible? How about we make the question easier lets just address between the year 33AD and 330

I want her to share her story on how hard it must be for her to type or read the words when she has to have plucked out at least one eye and cut off at least one hand if not both since I can’t believe she has never sinned.

Jesus clearly tells us to do both just as He clearly told us to call no man Father.

“If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell” (Matt. 5:29, cf. 18:9; Mark 9:47).

We are all subject to “the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life” (1 John 2:16).

 

[JaneFrances]

There are many here who are searching for answers. Questioning does not equal fear. There is a reason you are here and, believe it or not, it may be for the salvation of your own soul. Stay a while. Simmer down. Put away the shotgun. Don’t pull out every arguement you’ve ever heard all at once. If you truly are interested in why we call our priests “Father,” how about you start a new thread on it.

I know why, and it is dangerous.

Kathy, I actually agree. Well. . .sort of. Putting your trust in someone is always potentially dangerous. You could get hurt. You could be misled. You could be disappointed. You could be ignored. You could be lied to. You could be lied about. You could be abused. You could be persecuted. You could suffer. You could even be killed.

“Danger” is the plight of all Christians.

Just because something is “dangerous” doesn’t mean that it is wrong. Being a Christian can be dangerous.

You have yet to reply to the many Scriptures provided you regarding St. Paul, St. Peter, and St. John all referring to themselves in the sense of spiritual fatherhood. So far, you have only said essentially that you think St. Paul could have made a mistake when he wrote Scripture. . .

With this as your only defensive premise, you have called into question the very Word of God in Sacred Scripture.

This is curious. . .You trust that St. Matthew accurately quoted Jesus, yet you question the veracity of St. Paul?

Please further your explanation.

 

[jmcrae]

God has killed may people, but that doesn’t give us the right to kill. He is the boss we do as we are told.

I agree with that, but you seem to be changing the subject.

What did I say that had anything to do with that?

 

[Eireann]

What is the objection of the Church, after it brings someone to know Jesus and getting the person baptized with the Holy Spirit, of letting that person be led by the Holy Spirit to their salvation? Isn’t a person’s salvation his or her own to be decided by them?

Well freewill is the first step, “let go and let God” but the Sacraments are important too.
And if we think the Priest isn’t all that great, then it just confirms the power of the Sacrament, even if we think he’s no good, he’s still a Priest, and the power is in the Sacarment and not the human person.

 

[KathyH]

Kathy, I actually agree. Well. . .sort of. Putting your trust in someone is always potentially dangerous. You could get hurt. You could be misled. You could be disappointed. You could be ignored. You could be lied to. You could be lied about. You could be abused. You could be persecuted. You could suffer. You could even be killed.

“Danger” is the plight of all Christians.

Just because something is “dangerous” doesn’t mean that it is wrong. Being a Christian can be dangerous.

You have yet to reply to the many Scriptures provided you regarding St. Paul, St. Peter, and St. John all referring to themselves in the sense of spiritual fatherhood. So far, you have only said essentially that you think St. Paul could have made a mistake when he wrote Scripture. . .

With this as your only defensive premise, you have called into question the very Word of God in Sacred Scripture.

This is curious. . .You trust that St. Matthew accurately quoted Jesus, yet you question the veracity of St. Paul?

Please further your explanation.

Jesus told us not to call another man father, because it was dangerous to be called father and dangerous to call another man father. To be called father one can start to think he is superior. Calling one father, one might start believing them superior, and believing he is right about God and stop asking Jesus, who is our father.

You know I mentioned other area where the Catholic Church doesn’t teach the Word of God and it seems calling a man father is the area everyone is so eager to defend.

For all those who say Protestants don’t have the complete Bible well I am not a protestant and I use a Catholic Bible, and also read the King James.

 

[Eireann]

Jesus told us not to call another man father, because it was dangerous to be called father and dangerous to call another man father.

Depends how you interpret that phrase, call no man father, could simply mean don’t call every Tom, Dick or Harry father, but only those for whom the title is reserved.

 

[mercygate]

Jesus told us not to call another man father, because it was dangerous to be called father and dangerous to call another man father. To be called father one can start to think he is superior. Calling one father, one might start believing them superior, and believing he is right about God and stop asking Jesus, who is our father.

Fatherhood DOES imply superiority. If it didn’t God would not have used fatherhood as the primary revelation of his personhood throughout the history of Israel. Teaching is one of the tasks of fatherhood. Didn’t Christ himself command his Apostles to “teach all nations?” I suppose that when you say “Jesus is our father” you are clear on the relationship between himself and his father?

KathyH:

You know I mentioned other area where the Catholic Church doesn’t teach the Word of God and it seems calling a man father is the area everyone is so eager to defend.

And we have defended it very well. Would you care to move on to the next item?

KathyH:

For all those who say Protestants don’t have the complete Bible well I am not a protestant and I use a Catholic Bible, and also read the King James.

Not a protestant? If you are neither Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, or Catholic, that pretty much leaves only one remaining option. You certainly are protesting the Catholic faith and you are using protestant arguments to do it.

 

[MariaG]

Jesus told us not to call another man father, because it was dangerous to be called father and dangerous to call another man father. To be called father one can start to think he is superior. Calling one father, one might start believing them superior, and believing he is right about God and stop asking Jesus, who is our father.

You know I mentioned other area where the Catholic Church doesn’t teach the Word of God and it seems calling a man father is the area everyone is so eager to defend.

For all those who say Protestants don’t have the complete Bible well I am not a protestant and I use a Catholic Bible, and also read the King James.

Yet you still do not explain why you feel you are more Spirit filled and understand Christ’s directive better than Paul and others in the New testament were since they CLEARLY used and refered to themselves and others as spiritual Fathers.

You stated before that maybe Paul was mistaken. There is no maybe about it. Either you are right and Paul was wrong. Or you are wrong and do not understand what Christ was teaching and Paul did understand.

Which is it?

Was Paul wrong or are you?

 

[Sir_Knight]

If Paul was wrong, then the other authors of the Bible MIGHT have also been wrong and Jesus MIGHT have been mis-quoted about calling nobody “father”.

 

[Saul.Tentmaker]

Jesus told us not to call another man father, because it was dangerous to be called father and dangerous to call another man father. To be called father one can start to think he is superior. Calling one father, one might start believing them superior, and believing he is right about God and stop asking Jesus, who is our father.

Christ is the only true Priest. All the others are just instruments of Christ. When they say “I absolve thee”, or “This is my body”, they are no longer speaking. Christ speaks through them.

For this reason, we call such men Father. St. Paul gave us this president.

You are very insightful to pick up on the connection between St. Paul’s words and Christ’s. St. Paul teaches us to call him Father. Christ says that only God should be called Father. So when we attribute to our priests (who follow in the line of Saints Peter and Paul) the title Father, it is to remind us that Christ, God among us, speaks now through them, every day.

And that makes the priesthood cool!

 

[Milliardo]

Jesus told us not to call another man father, because it was dangerous to be called father and dangerous to call another man father.

What is dangerous in being called “father”? if my son calls me father, is that dangerous? Am I taking from God’s glory when he calls me father? When Paul told his audience to call him their father in faith, was he taking glory away from God? Does it sound that he is taking glory, or had he taught anywhere, that glory should be his?

To be called father one can start to think he is superior. Calling one father, one might start believing them superior, and believing he is right about God and stop asking Jesus, who is our father.

Did Paul ever believed he is superior than Jesus? Does my father believe he is better than God? Do fathers (in a biological sense) think that they’re God?

You know I mentioned other area where the Catholic Church doesn’t teach the Word of God and it seems calling a man father is the area everyone is so eager to defend.

Because this is one of those straw man issues that anti-Catholics like to put up. Of course, the “ooppss” moment comes up when one mentions Paul’s declaration that he is a father in faith, just as Abraham is described as a father in faith.

For all those who say Protestants don’t have the complete Bible well I am not a protestant and I use a Catholic Bible, and also read the King James.

Well, we’re interested in knowing what are you then. Or what church do you go to?

 

[jmcrae]

You are very insightful to pick up on the connection between St. Paul’s words and Christ’s. St. Paul teaches us to call him Father. Christ says that only God should be called Father. So when we attribute to our priests (who follow in the line of Saints Peter and Paul) the title Father, it is to remind us that Christ, God among us, speaks now through them, every day.

And that makes the priesthood cool!

And there I was, thinking that we call priests “Father” as a term of affection because they are the “head” of the spiritual “household” of the parish.

 

[SPH1]

What is the objection of the Church, after it brings someone to know Jesus and getting the person baptized with the Holy Spirit, of letting that person be led by the Holy Spirit to their salvation? Isn’t a person’s salvation his or her own to be decided by them?

The Holy Spirit will lead one into full communion in the Church and Sacraments. Never away from them. Furthermore, the Holy Spirit, acting in individuals, is different from how the Holy Spirit guides the leadership/magisterium of the Church. A person cannot trump the Church leadership by claiming to being guided by the Holy Spirit into something else.

 

[alexaustralia]

Jesus told us not to call another man father, because it was dangerous to be called father and dangerous to call another man father. To be called father one can start to think he is superior. Calling one father, one might start believing them superior, and believing he is right about God and stop asking Jesus, who is our father.

You know I mentioned other area where the Catholic Church doesn’t teach the Word of God and it seems calling a man father is the area everyone is so eager to defend.

For all those who say Protestants don’t have the complete Bible well I am not a protestant and I use a Catholic Bible, and also read the King James.

The use of the term “father” in itself does not lend one to think of others or themselves as superiors. It is the type of relationship one has with another person that could lead to that. The word is NOT what matters, instead it is the REALITY of the relationship.

If you have allowed yourself in your life to be guided spiritually by a minister, pastor, preacher, apostle or just a regular joe etc … you accepted him as a father figure. Now I don’t care what letters you put together to construct the word that communicates the reality of the relationship…YOU ALLOWED YOUSELF TO BE FATHERED UPON…and by doing so you thought of him in some level as FATHER otherwise you would not have allowed yourself to be moved by that person.

Does that mean that any one has superior DIGNITY as a human due to their role/relationship with others…ABSOLUTELY NOT…and the Catholic Faith does not allow for this in its teachings.

BTW my brother just got married yesterday. My bother and my sister in law asked the Bishop, together with 4 other priests to celebrate the sacrament with them because the reality of their relationship with them is one of deep spiritual fatherhood/son-daugthership… it is a wonderful thing to allow one’s self to look up to the people that have led us closer to Christ. In my opinion it is pure arrogance to do otherwise.