Struggling on calling a priest "Father"

Markie Boy said:

So I just have never preferred the title "Father" for priests. So many other titles could be used that don't bump into Scripture at all.

But if we go with the idea that people can be our "father in the faith" like Paul refers to, this is my dilemma -

What about when the priest is in no real way your spiritual father? He hasn't really contributed to raising you in the faith?

At this point - what is one saying if they call him "father"?

Click to expand...

The recent history of Protestantism (except for some Lutherans and Anglicans) is to condemn Catholics for calling their ministers 'father'. But a hundred or more years ago these same Protestants would have tended to call THEIR ministers 'father' while Catholics would often call ours 'mister'. Go figure. Somebody hasn't been very consistent.

We can call our priests 'father' just as Paul let it be known that he was a spiritual father. The problem with the use of the term is when the term is used to identify competing schools of Judaism. We are to be one, not Paul vs Apollos vs Peter vs Christ. Or Luther vs Calvin vs Wesleyan. Those are condemned. Wesley is not our father, nor Calvin, nor Luther. It goes WAY beyond using a name and goes to our disunity, the real thing Jesus was condemning.

If a priest is a poor father to you that is a shame, just like some biological fathers are lousy fathers. They ARE still fathers, even if bad. We need to honor our fathers. We do not have to agree with them or blindly follow them or think they are perfect, or even adequate.

I have had to go through this same issue in regards to pope Francis. I have to honor him even while I consider him to be a bad pope. It's hard to do.

Markie Boy said:

Thanks Chevy! I came across the same thing, that Catholics did not always use the term Father. Seems neither protestants or Catholics are very consistent in the titles.

Click to expand...

We don't HAVE TO use the term 'father' but we can. We do need to respect and honor even our bad fathers though.

Protestants who attack us really just love to attack us, and that is a whole separate thing. They think they have us on the 'father' thing, but they really are rather clueless. That's what trying to be anti-traditional has gotten them as they are anti-historical as well. Newman was right. To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.

We have spiritual fathers, like biological fathers, for better or for worse. They suffer from the usual human weaknesses.

Markie Boy said:

So there is one traditional parish about two hours away, we may start driving to that one some. There they seem to call them "Cannon" not Father - any idea what that's about?

It's a Christ the King parish - and they seem to have ejected the average diocesan fluff and Vatican II hippie stuff.

Click to expand...

I presume you mean 'canon'. And that could mean simply that the priest is canonically installed as administrator or pastor. OR it could mean that something is really odd. Probably OK instead of odd.

Markie Boy said:

So I just have never preferred the title "Father" for priests. So many other titles could be used that don't bump into Scripture at all.

But if we go with the idea that people can be our "father in the faith" like Paul refers to, this is my dilemma -

What about when the priest is in no real way your spiritual father? He hasn't really contributed to raising you in the faith?

At this point - what is one saying if they call him "father"?

Click to expand...

Even our Lord referred to Abraham as the father of the Jews. St.Paul referred to Abraham as our father in the faith. Did Abraham personally raise any of us in the Faith? Obviously not and yet he is still our father if we are in Christ, thereby in the seed of father Abraham via the Gospel...
In the parable of the rich man and lazarus I believe you have the rich man calling upon Abraham "father", and Abraham calling upon the rich man "son". Yes, of course then you have St.Paul referring to himself as father also.

Ask yourself, would a Christian in 50 AD refuse to call St.Paul "father" who only has heard of the great acts of St.Paul thought he has never met him? Would St.Paul allow Titus to call him father but deny this to a proselyte that had just been baptized and just begun to believe upon the Lord?? I think you know the answer...
Would St.Peter refuse to be called father by the newly founded Church at Rome, when St.Peter remembers that our Lord referred to all the flock as His own lambs and sheep?? It is so hypocritical when protestants accuse Catholics of legalism and traditionalism and then on a dime are found to hold the sort of legalism they pretend to be against.

Shouldn’t be an issue but if it is just refer to him as pastor or reverend