Questions and Answers
Protestants often reprimand us, Catholics, for disobeying Our Lord’s command by calling our priests “Father.” Are they right? Are we truly disobedient?
Protestants easily quote the Scriptures, but too often separating the words from their context and from any reference to parallel texts—while it is that context and reference which illuminates the true meaning of the expressions, a meaning that has been confirmed, many centuries before Luther, by the Catholic Church’s reading and understanding of them.
In the Gospel of St. Matthew (Mt. 23:8-10), we certainly read that Our Lord has said: But be not you called Rabbi. For one is your master; and all you are brethren. And call none your father upon earth; for one is your father, who is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters; for one is your master, Christ.
As Our Lord does not seem to make any exceptions, these words would demand that absolutely nobody could be called father or teacher or master. Therefore, if understood literally, it would be forbidden to use those terms even for those who have given us life or who have taught us at school… Nonetheless, He Himself, the Word of God, has applied those terms to men in the Scriptures He has inspired.
He has used the term “father” in reference to our biological parents when revealing and then restating the Commandments (Ex. 20:12, Lk. 18:20). But it is also abundantly used in reference to relationships that go beyond the purely biological generation.
The prophet Eliseus used the term in a spiritual sense, claiming after Elias when taken up to heaven in a chariot of fire: And Eliseus saw him, and cried: My father, my father, the chariot of Israel, and the driver thereof (IV Kings 2:12).
It is used when addressing a person deserving a special respect, as when the rich man calls up to Abraham from his damnation in hell: And he cried, and said: Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, to cool my tongue: for I am tormented in this flame (Lk. 16:24).
It is applied to our elders, even when they persecute us, as Stephen did when addressing those who condemned him: Ye men, brethren, and fathers, hear (Acts 7:2).
It is applied to those who have the temporal care of others, as the patriarch Joseph did in Egypt: Not by your counsel was I sent hither, but by the will of God: who hath made me as it were a father to Pharao, and lord of his whole house, and governor in all the land of Egypt (Gen. 45:8).
The Apostles considered themselves as the spiritual fathers of their disciples and called them sons and St. Paul glories himself in this spiritual paternity: I write not these things to confound you; but I admonish you as my dearest children. For if you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus, by the gospel, I have begotten you (I Cor. 4:14-15). It is in this sense that we, Catholics, call our priests “Father.”
It is therefore clear that Our Lord does not forbid us to use the term “father” in these senses, which the Word of God has abundantly used in the inspired Scripture. He expresses Himself forcefully, in a hyperbole, to condemn those who demand special titles and honors, seeking to exalt themselves above others.
Therefore, no, we are not disobedient to Our Lord’s commands, because we are doing exactly what He Himself has done.
In traditionalist circles, when talking about certain groups or individuals, we tend to toss around too much the accusation of heresy. But what is, exactly, a heresy?
Originally, the Greek word hairesis was a neutral term, signifying holding or choosing a particular set of opinions. Appropriated by Catholic theology, the term now commonly means the profession of an error against the faith.
When someone expresses an opinion that contradicts Catholic dogma, he is asserting a heretical view, but that does not mean, necessarily that he has committed the sin of heresy or that he has to be considered as a heretic.
As defined in Canon Law, heresy is a voluntary and pertinacious error, in the external forum and before God, against a truth which must be believed with divine and Catholic faith, by a baptized individual who confesses faith in Christ.
It is a voluntary error—a false judgment of the intellect, elicited by a malicious will. Although the person is aware that his opinion contradicts a dogma revealed and proposed as such by the solemn or ordinary Magisterium of the Church, he nonetheless willingly denies or positively doubts that truth of faith. It is neither an error arising from mere ignorance (even if such ignorance is culpable), nor the simple assertion of an error, by word or action, out of fear or other motive, insofar as the internal faith is kept.
The error must be manifested in the external forum, as canonical law deals only with what can be ascertained from the exterior, with words and actions externally manifested, and not with the internal dispositions of an individual.
It is a pertinacious error. This “pertinacity” is not simple stubbornness in holding one’s views, but a precisely defined canonical term; it means that the competent ecclesiastical authority has made the person aware of the fact that his opinions contradict Catholic dogma and that, in spite of those repeated warnings, the person persists in his erroneous opinions.
Finally, to be heresy, it also must be professed by a Catholic who has acknowledged the divine authority of the Church to teach men the truths of faith. Therefore, it is not heresy if it is professed by one who is not baptized (infidel, Jew, etc.) or who has been baptized in infancy but never made a personal act of faith.
In today’s world, it is evident that many Catholics hold heretical opinions, but—unless all the above elements are present—we cannot necessarily conclude that all of them have fallen into the sin of heresy.
Current Issue
