How does the Catholic Church interpret Matthew 23:9 so as to normalize priests being called Father?

Upvote:2

"Taking the Matthew passage at face value there is no clear prohibition against a priest, for example, accepting the designation (spiritual) 'Father' but there is clear prohibition against anyone actually assigning that designation to 'any man on earth'."

So, was Paul inciting the Christians of Corinth to disobey Jesus when he told them the passage below (translation from Berean Literal Bible)?

"For if you should have ten thousand guardians (paidagōgous) in Christ, yet not many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel." (1 Cor 4:15)

Clearly Paul is telling the Corinthians that they have one and only one father in Christ, Paul himself.

The key here is "in Christ". No Apostle, bishop or priest may become spiritual father of anyone by and of himself, but only in Christ.

Upvote:6

Taking the Matthew passage literally

This would be the key. Catholicism doesn't interpret that passage as a literal prohibition. For one, the New Testament doesn't or else Peter, John and Paul missed the memo.

Acts 4:25 - Who, by the Holy Ghost, by the mouth of our father David, thy servant, hast said: Why did the Gentiles rage, and the people meditate vain things?

Titus 1:4 - To Titus my beloved son, according to the common faith, grace and peace from God the Father, and from Christ Jesus our Saviour. (if Paul calls Titus "son", that implies Paul is "father")

I John 2:13 - I write unto you, fathers, because you have known him, who is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because you have overcome the wicked one.

As further evidence that the passage cannot be taken literally would be that literal interpretation would imply that one's biological father could not be called father because it does say "Call NO man father" but that would seem exceedingly bizarre (plus, no Protestant raising this question would accept that reading).

More post

Search Posts

Related post