DEFENSE OF THE TITLE
BY A ¿FATHER?
Roman Catholic, who seems to be a "father," wants me to consider the possibility
that God didn't really mean for us to take the teaching of Christ literally:
Matthew 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth:
for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
So, I thought you
would like to see how the Alexandrian Club jumps the broom stick of pagan Mother
Subj: call no man father
From: TMcDonald@nccbuscc.org (Tim McDonald)
Steve, I happened on to your website this
afternoon while browsing. I find you site very professionally done, but I must
admit that I have a little difficulty with the content, particularly regarding
"His hellishness." A rather unflattering monicker for the Holy "Father," which
brings me to my point. I read your article regarding Mt. 23:9, "Call no man father,"
and I would like to makes several points on behalf of the Whores.
First, the Bible as a whole continually uses the term "father" in referring to,
well, to someone's father. This would seem to fall under the injunction to call
"no man" father, and, therefore, many of our Biblical saints would have their
sins immortalized in Scripture, while defending Scripture.
Even when others use the term father in the presence of Jesus, he does not rebuke
him (Mt. 8:21)
What are we to do with the commandment which
tells us to honor our "Father" and mother? Are we to honor him without calling
him "Father". If so, what difference does using the term make? Isn't the
REALITY of faither more significant than the use of a particular term? What would
God simply not wish us to use the term "father"?
that it is not the use of the term as denoting a purely biological relationship
of paternity that is important, but the use of the term father as denoting "he
whom one follows," in a paternity of faith. Matthew's context is an excoriation
of the scribes and Pharisees, who call Abraham their father (Jn 8:53; Rom 4: 11-18),
Rom 7:32). The reference is clearly to a fatherhood of faith, supplanting Jesus
with human traditions they ascribe to Abraham and Moses. This is shown when Jesus
condemns them for "doing the works of their father", i.e. Satan. (Yes, I
realize that this is exactly what you think us Roman streetwalkers do when we
claim the Holy Father as our emissary from Christ, but we can debate the Pope's
authority later, if you wish).
The fact that the priest
in Judges is a nasty example of a priest has no relevance to the fact that he
is called to be a "father and priest" to them. One might as well say that
pizza is immoral because someone ate it while murdering his victim; it would have
the same connection and logic, which is, none.
states that "I became your father in Christ Jesus through the Gospel" (1 Cor 4:15).
John greets his readers with "I am writing to you fathers"
(1 Jn 2:131-4)
Again Paul writes how "as a child with his
father he served along with me" (Phil 2:2) and "we treated each one of you as
a father treats his children" (1 Thes 2:11)
not only does not condemn references to fathers, but advises: "Do not rebuke and
older man, but appeal to him as a father" (1 Tim 5:1)
Hebrews we find another use: "For what son is there whome his father does not
discipline" (Heb 12:7)
As for your desire "not to give
you any slack" about idolatry, I will admit that there are people in the Catholic
Church who are idolaters. I would also claim that there are people in ANY denomination
who are idolaters. So what? The Catholic Church condemns idolatry; the fact
that people idolize anyway does not effect what the Church teaches.
I look forward to your response.
TO THE TITLE PAGE