Replies

Now this is confusing. You say:

the notion of papa or Pope is being used precisely in the manner that Saint Paul speaks of being a Father to the Corinthians.

But in post 412 you seem to suggest there can only be one pope. So now you have a problem. Because if, as you say, the sense of the title is exactly the same, then you cannot be limited to one pope, because you would have Peter being "papa" at the same time as Paul being "papa." Ergo, two popes. But if you say no, no they're not the same, then the sense of the title cannot be the same. "precisely in the manner" means "precisely in the manner," not "almost the same except for some raft of unspoken qualifiers."

Bu there are further problems. Let's say I accept your hypothesis that the Papa is the Papa in precisely the manner of Paul being father to the Corinthians. To be true, that would mean the Papa was personally involved in in-person Gospel ministry, and further actually participant in the conversions of everyone who can relate to him as Papa. Because that is Paul's sense, inescapably evident from the text. So are you saying the Papa was really personally involved in the Gospel conversions of every Catholic on earth? But if not, then the sense is different, is it not?

One more thing. None of what Paul said makes go away the command of Jesus to avoid certain ecclesiastical titles. For review:

Mat 23:8-10 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. (9) And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. (10) Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.

So now we have a new conundrum: How can Paul's statement be reconciled with Christ's command? If Paul is assuming an ecclesiastical title to himself, then He is in violation of the command of Christ, because that is what is forbidden here. It was a practice among the rabbinics of His day to allow themselves to be called "Father Paul," or "Father Jose ben Jochanan," or "Father Chanan," or "Father Chelphetha," to name only a few examples. See Gill on Matthew 23:9.

Those are ecclesiastical titles, tokens of high honor given to the sages. And it is against those ecclesiastical titles that Jesus' command is specifically directed, not the sense of a man as father to his natural son, nor even the sense of an evangelist to those converted under his ministry. Those do not represent an office of universal scope, but a real, and very local, human relationship. So Paul's sense is of personally begetting children in the faith, not an ecclesiastical title worn as a crown of authority over billions of people he never even met, let alone evangelized.

But the command of Christ does not go away. "Papa's" title is a standing rejection of that command.

Peace,

SR

I cited this earlier. Papa is just a word that means “Daddy”. Pappa was used by priests and other Bishops but eventually the word was exclusively used for the Bishop of Rome as a term to relate which Bishop/Church had the Primacy [not that you all agree with Rome having a primacy but that is the context].

As for calling no man Father, the use of the term Father or other terms like Pope to refer to all priests or to see them as having a spiritual Fatherly role, as opposed to a biological one, is perfecting in keeping the NT.

In the OT, God said Honor your Father and Mother. Do you really think Christ meant “oh, btw, honor them, but don’t call them Father and Mother”. In Mt. 15 Christ tells scribes and Pharisees that God Commanded you to “Honor your Father and Mother” and he who speaks evil of father and mother, let him die [Mt 15:4-5]. The Gospels of Mark and Luke both cite Christ stating that a Christian should honor his Father and Mother [Mk. 10:19; Luke 18:20] and Matthew cites Christ again stating honor your Father and Mother [Mt 19:19]. Saint Paul tells the Christian Community at Ephesus to “Honor your Father and Mother” [Eph 6:2]. Did Saint Paul miss the memo, is he a heretic for using that theology.

In another Gospel passage, when Christ enters Jerusalem Saint Mark calls David “Father” [c.f. Mk 11:10]. In Luke 16:24, the parable of bosom of Abraham, we read “and he called out Father Abraham”.

The passages above are enough to show your views are not correct with respect to the term father. But lets go even further. Saint Paul, writing to the Thessalonian Church states “for you know, like a {father} with his children, we exhorted each one of you...” [1 Thess 2:11]. In 1 Timothy 5:1, Saint Paul states regard an older man exhort him as you would a {father}. Perhaps the greatest kicker is this one “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. I urge you then be imitators of me. [1 Cor 4:14-16, which has already been cited using the Catholic Latin Vulgate rendering or Douay-Rheims which is a direct translation from the Vulgate]

In numerous other passages, Saint Paul called Timothy his Child [obviously not his biological child, so in this sense, Paul was like a spiritual or theological father in the same sense Catholics call their priests Father]. For example, “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).

In other passages, he refers 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). Titus was also called by Saint Paul his child: “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).

In summary, if your view is correct that Father can’t be used in any context save for “God the Father” [and it is NOT], then all the Gospel writers and Saint Paul are heretics. Catholics call priests Father in the sense of a spiritual Father just as many of the Apostles referred to Abraham [as cited earlier] and Isaac [Romans 10:9] as spiritual fathers and Saint Paul referred to himself as a spiritual father. You can also read Saint John’s Letters were he referred to those Christians and those Churches that he was writing to as his children several times.