Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Calling Priests "Father"
Catholic Answers ^ | August 31, 2013 | Tim Staples

Posted on 09/01/2013 2:10:47 PM PDT by NYer

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last
To: NYer

If nuns are called “sisters” why not call priests “brothers”?


21 posted on 09/01/2013 2:53:31 PM PDT by Proud2BeRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FourtySeven

Avoiding social awkwardness seems to be “the easy way” of which we have been warned not to pursue. We are also properly admonished to make no oaths, none at all. I know that most would consider such a formality to be harmless, but God takes it very seriously, nevertheless.


22 posted on 09/01/2013 2:54:35 PM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

HAHAHA. I’m sorry - I used to be tolerant, but after Hasan’s sudden Jihadi syndrome here in Ft Hood, I had enough.

I have near and dear friends who mean the world to me working at the bases. It could have very easily been them who were killed.


23 posted on 09/01/2013 2:59:44 PM PDT by JCBreckenridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Let’s also remember, not everything done today in the Church was done in the first century Church. I mean that’s just a fact. I don’t know why that fact isn’t used more often as an apologetic. There’s nothing wrong with admitting the Church today doesn’t exactly resemble the Church from the first century.

So, when Jesus was saying these words, it’s not like He was describing priests. He wasn’t and even couldn’t have been, as the Church wasn’t even set up yet. And even after Pentecost, when it was set up, I don’t think the first priests back then were called “father” in a spiritual sense. Those first priests were probably married if anything.

So it’s absolutely rediculous to apply this passage to the title of a modern day Catholic priest. It wasn’t speaking about that kind of use of the term “father” at all.


24 posted on 09/01/2013 3:00:16 PM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Proud2BeRight

The male equivalent of a Nun is a Monk.


25 posted on 09/01/2013 3:00:59 PM PDT by JCBreckenridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Proud2BeRight

The male analogue of a nun is not a priest, but a monk, and in the Latin West, monks are called “brother” just as nuns are called “sister”.

In the Orthodox East, both priests and monks are addressed as “Father”, and nuns are addressed as “Mother”. Deacons are addressed as “Father Deacon [Christian name]”, but written of simply as “Deacon [Christian name]”.


26 posted on 09/01/2013 3:06:22 PM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

I do not think there is anything wrong with being polite as long as Truth is not sacrificed for politeness.

And as I do believe, this article and/or what I posted above clearly shows how, even if one does not wish to be Catholic, you aren’t going to offend God if you call a priest “father”.


27 posted on 09/01/2013 3:12:33 PM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
Even if someone is not catholic, must that person call the catholic priest “father”?

Let's expand the question: "Even if someone did not vote for Obama, must that person call him "President"?

both are titles of respect for the office, regardless of the faith one practices or the party to which one belongs. Should a christian call a rabbi, "Rabbi"?

28 posted on 09/01/2013 3:16:13 PM PDT by NYer ( "Run from places of sin as from the plague."--St John Climacus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FourtySeven
And as I do believe, this article and/or what I posted above clearly shows how, even if one does not wish to be Catholic, you aren’t going to offend God if you call a priest “father”.

As with many practical Truths in scripture, it all depends on what is known. Certainly, someone ignorant of scripture and Christian principles will not be called to account by violating such a specific command to "call no man on earth father," but those cognizant of such an admonition are committing a sin of doubtfulness if they violate their consciences, no matter what YOU may think of the issue.

29 posted on 09/01/2013 3:19:19 PM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Proud2BeRight

Because they take different vows.


30 posted on 09/01/2013 3:25:53 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: NYer
With his obvious misunderstanding of the Scriptures I don't think I would rely on the author of this piece for answers to anything.

Just to take a quote at random:

“Sounds okay so far, but here's the problem. In I John 2:13-14, St. John refers to the leaders of the church in Ephesus to whom he is most likely writing as “fathers” twice. And notice he gives them the title “father.””

Uhhh...No, John isn't using “father” as a title. John also addresses his letter to young men and young/little children in the same sense as to “fathers”. John speaks to their level of spiritual maturity and experience in vss. 13, 14 and even calls all them “my children” in vs.1 of chap. 2.

In no way does John use “father” as a title anymore than “young men, little children” is used as a title.

The rest of the article is even worse.

31 posted on 09/01/2013 3:26:58 PM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

**For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.**

One nail in the coffin.


32 posted on 09/01/2013 3:31:02 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

**Ultimately, Jesus is condemning the usurpation of the fatherhood of God in Matthew’s Gospel, not the proper participation in that fatherhood.**

Secon nail in the coffin lid.

Case closed.


33 posted on 09/01/2013 3:32:05 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Case closed.

And thus the words of Yeshua are made null. Just as the word of YHWH was made null in the past.

Teaching as Gospel the traditions of men.

34 posted on 09/01/2013 3:55:04 PM PDT by roamer_1 (Globalism is just socialism in a business suit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: roamer_1

I guess you missed that I used the words of Jesus! Along with the words of St. Paul.

Did you miss that?


35 posted on 09/01/2013 3:58:30 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Second nail


36 posted on 09/01/2013 3:58:54 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I call my biological father “Daddy.” I call my pastor “Father Gary.” (That’s his surname. When we had an African pastor, I called him “Father Paul” and didn’t attempt to pronounce his last name.)

I don’t think Jesus wanted us to be in a fuss over this. If we are, we’ve misunderstood Him. We use family titles for all sorts of people. My boss in Hispanic Ministry is the children’s Abuela. Asuncion is “la hermana de mi alma” and Kathleen’s Tia. The cute guitarist with Grupo Kerygma is “Brother Francisco.”

The Catholic Church is about making everyone into one family.


37 posted on 09/01/2013 4:20:42 PM PDT by Tax-chick (One drink away from telling everyone what I really think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Of all the objections to Catholicism, this is the Charlie Browniest.


38 posted on 09/01/2013 4:29:24 PM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas (Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
The article starts out with a false teaching anyway. It’s another obfuscation to get the people to focus on something other then the underlying error. ALL believers are priests after the resurrection of Christ.

1 Peter 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

The veil was torn and there is now only one High Priest, the Lord Jesus Christ, and all believers are priests.

The RCC has set up a false, unscriptural, hierarchy so the debate of calling a false office holder by any name is moot.

39 posted on 09/01/2013 4:55:46 PM PDT by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JCBreckenridge
Reason number 130249 for using Douay Rheims.

That doesn't make any sense...The official Catholic bible is the NAB...If it was any good, your religion would have stuck with it...

40 posted on 09/01/2013 5:06:37 PM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson