"Call no man on earth 'father' for One is your Father". What's an example?

This is a case that Jesus Christ of Nazareth said they can claim a forgiveness on the authority of Him not on the authority of themselves.
Blessings

Silverback said:

I could be wrong, but I believe the Roman Catholic Bible omits this verse, and a few others as well. I have called Anglican, and Catholic Priest Father, It never felt wrong to me, maybe I should reassess!

Click to expand...

I have been to a number of Catholic functions and around hospitals and found it very appropriate to ask the priest what should I call him to give him respect. They have a long winded explanation of why they do it but I have yet to meet one that does not understand that we strictly follow the instruction of our teaching..., "So, what would you like me to call you knowing I cannot in good conscience call you father? Most of them say "Pastor" is fine, or "Minister", or something like that. Some even ask if I minded a particular title or, just call me John or Dan.

Monk Brendan said:

You ARE wrong.

Click to expand...

Ok

Where the scripture says "you will have many teachers but very few fathers" - I have always understood this to mean that plenty will want to tell you what to do, but few will come along side...

This is as it is today - pastoral ministry had declined in our country but teaching has thrived - and the church is not better for it.

Jonathan Mathews said:

Jesus says "Call no man on earth father, for One is your Father". (Matthew 23:9)

So then, please give me an example of violating this command of Jesus. What is an example of calling a man on earth father, when Jesus said not to?

Click to expand...

He meant that we should not call (consider to be) any man on earth father in the same sense that we would call our heavenly Father (God) our father. It does not mean that we aren't supposed to call our own dad our father, or our priest father (1 Corinthians 4:15).

CodyFaith said:

Catholic Church calling priests Father. Amusing how "in your face" it is actually. Another example would be Messianic Jews calling teachers/pastors Rabbi.
Acceptable examples of calling someone father would be your actual father or referring to a patriarch as father (for example, "father Abraham"). Father here does not mean a spiritual teacher or anything but simply our patriarch ancestors in the faith.
Rabbi is never acceptable however.

Pretty cut and dry. Always able to justify Christ's teachings away of course. "Original Greek yadda yadda yadda", "he meant do not exalt someone, using the actual words is fine", etc.

Jesus said it he meant it. Leave it to man to add unto his words.

Click to expand...

CodyFaith said:

1 Corinthians 4:15
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.

Paul is saying he is their only metaphorically adoptive father. He taught them and instructed them as if they were his own children. They were new in the faith and he was there for them.

This is not the same as being called "Father". This is completely a metaphor and Paul would have rebuked them for calling him Father, for he knew the only true teacher and mentor was God himself, Paul being a mere human and flawed vessel of God's grace.

And if you won't hear that, have fun with believing whatever suits your desires best.

Click to expand...

I think you missed the point that Paul was actually warning his "children" in Christ, because some among them, he'd heard, had been behaving arrogantly, and he warns them that if they do not amend their ways, he may have to come to them bearing a "rod", rather than in Love and with a gentle spirit.

Fathers "bear rods" to discipline children (Proverbs 13:24). Those with authority within Christ's Church are often called "father". But we don't assign to them the authority over us that properly belongs only to God. What authority they do have in the Church, as ordained pastors, comes from God, yet at times one with authority may have to be "resisted... to his face" (Galatians 2:11), not from a place of pride and arrogance as with the spiritually unstable, but rather, from necessity. (i.e when a "father" has succumbed to some sort of damnable temptation and is inflicting harm upon others, or is teaching false things which are contradictory to any of Christ's revealed Truth. Paul called himself their father, so 0he would not have rebuked them. If he had, he would have been acting utterly hypocritically, because he himself wrote that he was their father in Christ.

Maria Billingsley said:

This is a case that Jesus Christ of Nazareth said they can claim a forgiveness on the authority of Him not on the authority of themselves.
Blessings

Click to expand...

I don't think that any of us is claiming that their authority to forgive sins comes from anyone but Him.

Rubiks said:

I don't think that's Jesus speaking...

Click to expand...

Jesus Is The One Telling The Parable to The Disciples.

Maria Billingsley said:

These verses do not mean they have all authority to forgive sins. These are men they are not God through Jesus Christ of Nazareth. All Christians are to forgive one another. You may need to do a more in-depth study. But please, lets not do this argument, it is a denominational disagreement.
Blessings

Click to expand...

I think you should read the entireity of the verse and prove yourself wrong.
Some try to argue "those sins you would forgive, will be forgiven them" has some kind of linkage to spreading the gospel to avoid the obvious meaning , that the apostle or in this case successor is actually instrumental in forgiveness.

But that clearly does not apply to: "those sins you would retain, will be retained " which can only be viewed as an active not passive statement. So a man really is instrumental in the retaining.

You also presume it is a person doing the forgiving. It is not.
It is God doing the forgiving, the priest so apostolic successor is just the channel "in loco christi" Which the bible makes clear in 2 corinthians 2:10

10To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;
Which is where the phrase in persona christi comes from.

Delegated authority is clearly in many contexts.
Take "what you bind on earth will be bound in heaven"

It seems you need the indepth study!

Mountainmike said:

I think you should read the entireity of the verse and prove yourself wrong.
Some try to argue "those sins you would forgive, will be forgiven them" has some kind of linkage to spreading the gospel. But that clearly does not apply to: "those sins you would retain, will be retained "

You also presume it is a person doing the forgiving. It is not.
It is God doing the forgiving, the priest so apostolic successor is just the channel "in loco christi" Which the bible makes clear in 2 corinthians 2:10

10To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;

Delegated authority is clearly in many contexts. Take "what you bind on earth will be bound in heaven"

It seems you need the indepth study.

Click to expand...

If I may be more clear, this is a denominational issue. And yes, it is most certainly God through Jesus Christ of Nazareth in the New Testament who forgives.

Maria Billingsley said:

If I may be more clear, this is a denominational issue. And yes, it is most certainly God through Jesus Christ of Nazareth in the New Testament who forgives.

Click to expand...

Which is also true of sacramental confession as given by Jesus to the apostles in John 20:23
Clarified in 2 corinthians 2: 10 the priest acting in persona christi - the point I make is the fact a man is delegated as the channel is still forgiveness by the Lord. It is both.

It is not a denominational issue in the sense it is the entire catholic church of Orthodox and Catholic prior to the reformation. Denominations are a product of the product of the reformation , only later did some contest what was always true.

Jonathan Mathews said:

Jesus says "Call no man on earth father, for One is your Father". (Matthew 23:9)

So then, please give me an example of violating this command of Jesus. What is an example of calling a man on earth father, when Jesus said not to?

Click to expand...

While our earthly parents had a hand in producing the vessel we call our bodies, the Most High God is the one who actually creates and raises our spirit. No other human on the planet except for the Word of God Himself can raise our spirits. The one who raises us, and raises our spirit upright like we do on this plane of existence is the Father.

Some people have a literal father of satan; others have their own ego or other humans' ego. Very few are actually raised by the Most High God - He tells us this repeatedly.

truefiction1 said:

I don't think that any of us is claiming that their authority to forgive sins comes from anyone but Him.

Click to expand...

Amen.

Another thing that can help to realize: Before John wrote down the divinely-inspired words we know have written down --

8 If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us.

1 My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. 2He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

3 We know that we have come to know him if we keep his commands. 4 Whoever says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person. 5 But if anyone obeys his word, love for God is truly made complete in them. This is how we know we are in him: 6 Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did."

1 John 1, 2 NIV
--------

Before these divinely-inspired words from above were written down for us, in the time before, then how would believers that stumbled into sin know whether or how they could be forgiven?

Before John wrote down how.

They would know because the apostles could directly communicate to them the forgiveness of their sins, after confession.

But now we live in the time after we are given this truth from 1rst John. As I think of it: if we confess in our hearts sincerely to God, then we are forgiven by the amazing grace earned for us by Christ Jesus.

Additionally, we know there is another key thing we need to remember and apply about being forgiven also --

14 For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15 But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

Silverback said:

I could be wrong, but I believe the Roman Catholic Bible omits this verse, and a few others as well. I have called Anglican, and Catholic Priest Father, It never felt wrong to me, maybe I should reassess!

Click to expand...

I just checked in 2 Catholic Bibles, the New American Bible and the RSV-Catholic Edition and both of those have the verse. They explain it as a prohibition on seeking and using honorific titles to exalt oneself in the eyes of other people.

wheatpenny said:

I just checked in 2 Catholic Bibles, the New American Bible and the RSV-Catholic Edition and both of those have the verse. They explain it as a prohibition on seeking and using honorific titles to exalt oneself in the eyes of other people.

Click to expand...

agreed

wheatpenny said:

I just checked in 2 Catholic Bibles, the New American Bible and the RSV-Catholic Edition and both of those have the verse. They explain it as a prohibition on seeking and using honorific titles to exalt oneself in the eyes of other people.

Click to expand...

Correct - the Catholic Church does not omit this verse; rather understands it in its context.

Matthew 23:9 has our Lord and Savior telling us to call no man on earth “father”. He doesn’t qualify “spiritual” father - He just says “father”.

So can we annunciate the word “father”?
In Ephesians 6:2-4 St. Paul writes
“Honor your father and mother” (this is the first commandment with a promise), “that it may be well with you and that you may live long on the earth.” Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.” So inspired by the Holy Spirit St. Paul calls someone on earth “father”. Is this a contradiction?

Even though Our Lord doesn’t say religious leaders he really couldn’t have meant that either because in telling the story of Lazarus in Luke 16:24 He says:
And he (the rich man) called out, “FatherAbraham, have mercy upon me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in anguish in this flame.”

Abraham is clearly a “religious leader.” And Jesus is not alone in referring to him as “father.” St. James refers to Abraham as “father” in James 2:21, while St. Paul refers to Abraham as “father” 7x in Romans 4:1-18. If you believe in the inspiration of Sacred Scripture, St. James and St. Paul cannot contradict Jesus in Matthew 23:9.

So could He have meant no spiritual leaders on earth (even though Jesus doesn’t say that He just says “no man on earth”)?

Well, in 1 John 2:13-14 St. John refers to the leaders of the church in Ephesus as “fathers”.

In Acts 7:1-2 St. Stephen, again under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, calls the leaders in Jerusalem as “fathers” while also calling Abraham “father”.

“And the high priest said, “Is this so?” And Stephen said: “Brethren and fathers, hear me. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham…”

And in 1 Corinthians 4:14-15 St. Paul (again under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) refers to himself as “father” because of his spiritual leadership.

So then what is the Catholic teaching on this? We look at the context of Matthew 23:9.

Matthew 23:8 says to call no man rabbi (“teacher”) because we have “one teacher” and yet many are referred to as teacher in Sacred Scripture (e.g. James 3:1 Ephesians 4:11...). Matthew 23:10 tells us to call no one master (leader) yet Sacred Scripture records people being called leader (e.g. Hebrews 13:27).

We reconcile this by grounding on the fact that God, the Father, is our one true Father. All other fatherhood, be it a father “on earth,” spiritual leaders in the Church, or our spiritual forefathers in heaven, participates in the Father’s unique Fatherhood and represents it to us. They neither take away nor add to this one unique Fatherhood; they establish it on the earth.(some translations of Ephesians 3:14-15 get at this).

The context of Matthew 23 emphasizes the sin of pride among the scribes and Pharisees. Recall that they loved to be called “teacher”, “father”, or “Rabbi,” but their pride pointed men to themselves rather than to God the Father from whom they received true fatherhood and in whom their fatherhood subsisted. Outside of God the Father, there are no fathers at all in the true sense of the term. But in God, we have all sorts of true “fathers” who can legitimately participate in that fatherhood established by God. Ultimately, Jesus is condemning the usurpation of the fatherhood of God in Matthew’s Gospel, not the proper participation in that fatherhood.

So a priest (spiritual father) or a “dad” (biological or adoptive or foster father) who rightly carries out their vocation and participates in fatherhood as established by God can rightly be referred to as “father”. But anyone who inserts pride and fails to serve through participation in Gods fatherhood is not worthy of the name.

Hope that helps - God bless you all (this would have been more fun if we were closer to “Father’s Day” ).