/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

Obviously Jesus isnt prohibiting us to call our father father. Common sense is enough to know what He meant, there's nothing here to defend or attack.

But whatever lets post something on the topic:

Jerome

AD 420

No one should be called teacher or father except God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ. He alone is the Father, because all things are from him. He alone is the teacher, because through him are made all things and through him all things are reconciled to God. But one might ask, “Is it against this precept when the apostle calls himself the teacher of the Gentiles? Or when, as in colloquial speech widely found in the monasteries of Egypt and Palestine, they call each other Father?” Remember this distinction. It is one thing to be a father or a teacher by nature, another to be so by generosity. For when we call a man father and reserve the honor of his age, we may thereby be failing to honor the Author of our own lives. One is rightly called a teacher only from his association with the true Teacher. I repeat: The fact that we have one God and one Son of God through nature does not prevent others from being understood as sons of God by adoption. Similarly this does not make the terms father and teacher useless or prevent others from being called father.

John Chrysostom

AD 407

“You are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers.” One has nothing more than another. For in respect to his knowledge he knows nothing from himself. This is why Paul says, “For who is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers?”—not masters. Again, “call no man your father.” This is said in order that they may know whom they ought to call Father in the highest sense. It is not said frivolously as if no one should ever be called father. Just as the human master is not the divine Master, so neither is the father the Father who is the cause of all, both of all masters and of all fathers. The Gospel of Matthew, Homily

George Leo Haydock

AD 1849

Call none your father . Neither be ye called masters The meaning is, that our Father in heaven is incomparably more to be regarded, than any father upon earth: and no master is to be followed, who would lead us away from Christ. But this does not hinder but that we are by the law of God to have a due respect both for our parents and spiritual fathers, (1 Corinthians iv. 15,) and for our masters and teachers. (Challoner) This name was a title of dignity: the presidents of the assembly of twenty-three judges where so called; the second judge of the sanhedrim (Bible de Vence) Nothing is here forbidden but the contentious divisions, and self-assumed authority, of such as make themselves leaders and favourers of schisms and sects; as Donatus, Arius, Luther, Calvin, and innumerable others of very modern date. But by no means the title of father, attributed by the faith, piety, and confidence of good people, to their directors; for, St. Paul tells the Corinthians, that he is their only spiritual Father: If you have 10,000 instructors in Christ, yet not many Fathers. (1 Corinthians iv. 15.)

>>847726

The "Abba" traditions of the monastics is probably where a lot of this started in the first place. Which is why Jerome leaned on it, I think. You didn't even see titles of "Patriarch" or "Pope" until later either, let alone there being a trend of clerics being called fathers in general. Even in the Council of Nicaea, which recognized three "Sees" (Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch), the bishops presiding over these super-metropolitan regions were still called Bishops. And it seems like the whole "father" language was still novel in Jerome's day for the very fact that he felt the need to defend it. He was obviously seeing objections of some sort. So why aren't these very objections part of "tradition" too? He didn't have a clear defense that stood on it's own legs and just made an appeal to somebody more respected (the desert fathers). But this just begs the question: What if the desert fathers were wrong themselves? I'm not saying they're bad. Just wrong in one case. They ignored a pretty explicit teaching of Christ. There's no way around it.

I've seen some defenses that Jesus was only referring to "false teachers", but he clearly says in the same passage that "you are all brothers". So he wasn't speaking of false teachers. He was warning his own disciples.

>>847726

>Common sense

"Do only that which makes social and cultural sense in the era you live in."

Jesus 4:20

>>847723

Yeah, it says that but winnie the pooh the Bible. The Saints are far better than the Bible.

"Follow the Martyrs when the Bible's broken."

Powerwolf 7:42

>>847723

>You aren't going to be calling anyone "father" in heaven except God, so you better get used to it now.

The passage says this.

Matthew 23:

> 8 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.

Now notice how the first and third command are phrased: be not called masters or Rabbi and then Christ tells you the reason. This is very straightforward.

The second command, being in the middle, is phrased differently. This should call our attention to the difference in detail. It says, call no man your father upon the earth. This is a command for them not to call any man "their" (2nd person plural) father upon the earth.

Obviously this means that it is still possible to express the fact that one is relationally their own father, either biologically or even spiritually, as Paul said in 1 Cor. 4. 15. However, it means the specific prohibition in verse 9 is against calling anyone "their father" as in the Father of the entire crowd, or literally the Father of everyone. This means someone can relationally be the father of someone else as usual; but they cannot attach the title to their name in the expectation that everyone should refer to them as such.

This is what the title "pope" implies, however. It implies that everyone in the world should call this person Father, regardless of seniority. This then is prohibited by Matthew 23:9. Additionally, so is the title of patriarch and father. Only God the Father should have such a title, being that he is the Creator.

Further, I can understand why Christ Jesus would specify "on earth" here for two equally valid reasons. Firstly because the Lord Jesus is in heaven, he is a man and we may refer to him as this in the spiritual sense. Saved people are sons of God. (Gal. 4:6-7, Rev. 21:7, John 1:12). Secondly also because from a biological sense if you go back far enough people do ultimately share a biological father as well but they are not present and alive on earth right now so the commandment does not exclude them.

Hopefully this exegetically explains how the titles of Father, Pope, Patriarch are specific violations of this commandment and why it keeps getting brought up.

>>847742

Thank you for the exegesis. I knew that seemed to be cases where the "relational" term of father somehow still applied, and was confused myself on how it all balances out. You helped here.

>>847742

No, Christ isn't advocating your tradition of individualism. It's much simpler when you aren't coping.

He meant we should not call anyone but God Father in the same sense we shouldn't call anything good but God.

>>847806

I don't know how you could come to the conclusion that was individualism, unless you think people had a hive mind in the past and so there was no actual such thing as an individual. Regardless, until you can substantiate your interpretation with exegesis (or at the very least make it even slightly intelligible), it has no value.

>>847811

Sounds like a canned Orthodox retort (although traditional Catholics sometimes do it). A lot of them go for the "muh individualism" attack. They see most things that dispute their traditions as having some root in Western liberal/enlightenment thinking (i.e. individualism). They sidestep plain discussions of exegesis and scripture and try to turn the discussion towards politics.

>>847811

If consistent exegesis isn't a good argument, you've been educated dumb.

Leave midwitdom.

>>847813

How would I talk about your traditions before they were invented?

>>847816

>How would I talk about your traditions before they were invented?

You're the one leaning on traditions. We're trying to talk about Scripture and the plain words of Christ. Kind of the whole point of the thread.

Please don't interpret Scripture for yourself - sola scriptura is the mother of heresy for a reason. You can say that things are 'good' even if they aren't God, and the people who wrote and canonized the bible know something that you don't.

>>847818

Scripture is a Tradition, although Prots did defile the Bible and excise some Holy Scripture to please the Jews of their own day for purposes of evangelism. It didn't work, the Jews stayed Jewish and Martin Luther got even madder than you are.

>>847817

The Holy Fathers have articulated why you're a heretical iconoclast ad nauseum Why should anyone else waste more his time on you? Don't you have a pop-psychology lecture and music concert to throw your hands in the air and cry to? Dig into SOME WORD, BRUH.

>>847834

It is for all to see, even you. God has given you over to your passions as a punishment for your hatred and heresy just as is explained in Romans 1, but it's never too late. Memes can't and won't save you.

>>847723

Father is also in the bible after Jesus said those words so it settles that it's not a pharisaic style word prohibition.

John-

1 John 2:13:14 I am writing to you fathers because you know him who is from the beginning.

Paul-

1 Corinthians 4:15 For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For i became you father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.

Stephen-

Acts 7:2 Brethren and fathers, hear me. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham (…)

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.

1 Corinthians 4:15

answers OP's question with scripture and historical evidence

>>849017

>>849020

>>849073

These are all answered by this:

>>847742