| HeyBub 2008-02-18, 6:56 pm |
| Judson McClendon wrote:
>
> I answered that elsewhere, but my interpretation is that it seems
> unlikely that Jesus would be forbidding the use of "father" for a
> relationship that the Bible uses the term "father," i.e. biological
> or adopted male parent. That leaves only the spiritual/authoritative
> possibility. A Roman Catholic priest is both, so if Jesus forbid the
> use for either case, it would include priests. I don't see any other
> reasonable way to view it that is consistent with Scripture, but I
> would like to know the official RC view. Perhaps they have a very
> reasonable explanation that I would agree with
> myself.
There are other possibilities for "father" besides biological and spritual.
Honorific comes to mind, similar to "M'lord."
Also recognition of position, as in "Doctor" or "Reverend."
Courtesy or convention as in "Sir," or "Madam."
Recognition of rank as in "Yes, captain."
As a complete outsider, it seems to me the complaint by non-Catholics over
the Church's use of "Father" (but not Monsignor or Bishop or Cardinal) is a
soufflé issue - all puff and no substance.
As a non-Catholic, when I encounter a Roman Catholic priest, I address him
as "Reverend" or "Padre." I think this helps him deduce I'm not a member of
the tribe (wait, that's a Jewish shorthand...).
|