Call No Man "Father"?
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).
In his tract 10 Reasons Why I Am Not a Roman
Catholic, Fundamentalist anti-Catholic writer Donald Maconaghie quotes
this passage as support for his charge that "the papacy is a hoax."
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).
How should Catholics respond to such objections?
The Answer
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).
A Change with the New Testament?
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.
So What Did Jesus Mean?
Jesus criticized Jewish leaders who love "the place
of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues, and salutations
in the market places, and being called ‘rabbi’ by men" (Matt. 23:6–7).
His admonition here is a response to the Pharisees’ proud hearts and their
g.asping after marks of status and prestige.
He was using hyperbole (exaggeration to make a
point) to show the scribes and Pharisees how sinful and proud they were
for not looking humbly to God as the source of all authority and fatherhood
and teaching, and instead setting themselves up as the ultimate authorities,
father figures, and teachers.
Christ used hyperbole often, for example when he
declared, "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). Christ
certainly did not intend this to be applied literally, for otherwise all
Christians would be blind amputees! (cf. 1 John 1:8; 1 Tim. 1:15). 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).
Since Jesus is demonstrably using hyperbole when
he says not to call anyone our father—else we would not be able to refer
to our earthly fathers as such—we must read his words carefully and with
sensitivity to the presence of hyperbole if we wish to understand what
he is saying.
Jesus is not forbidding us to call men "fathers"
who actually are such—either literally or spiritually. (See below on the
apostolic example of spiritual fatherhood.) To refer to such people as
fathers is only to acknowledge the truth, and Jesus is not against that.
He is warning people against inaccurately attributing fatherhood—or
a particular kind or degree of fatherhood—to those who do not have
it.
As the apostolic example shows, some individuals
genuinely do have a spiritual fatherhood, meaning that they can be referred
to as spiritual fathers. What must not be done is to confuse their form
of spiritual paternity with that of God. Ultimately, God is our supreme
protector, provider, and instructor. Correspondingly, it is wrong to view
any individual other than God as having these roles.
Throughout the world, some people have been tempted
to look upon religious leaders who are mere mortals as if they were an
individual’s supreme source of spiritual instruction, nourishment, and
protection. The tendency to turn mere men into "gurus" is worldwide.
This was also a temptation in the Jewish world
of Jesus’ day, when famous rabbinical leaders, especially those who founded
important schools, such as Hillel and Shammai, were highly exalted by their
disciples. It is this elevation of an individual man—the formation of a
"cult of personality" around him—of which Jesus is speaking when he warns
against attributing to someone an undue role as master, father, or teacher.
He is not forbidding the perfunctory use of honorifics
nor forbidding us to recognize that the person does have a role
as a spiritual father and teacher. The example of his own apostles shows
us that.
The Apostles Show the Way
The New Testament is filled with examples of and
references to spiritual father-son and father-child relationships. Many
people are not aware just how common these are, so it is worth quoting
some of them here.
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.
Spiritual Fatherhood
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).
All of these passages were written under the inspiration
of the Holy Spirit, and they express the infallibly recorded truth that
Christ’s ministers do have a role as spiritual fathers. Jesus is not against
acknowledging that. It is he who gave these men their role as spiritual
fathers, and it is his Holy Spirit who recorded this role for us in the
pages of Scripture. To acknowledge spiritual fatherhood is to acknowledge
the truth, and no amount of anti-Catholic grumbling will change that fact.
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
|
[TOP]
