Paul also referred to Abraham as the father of all who believe (
Romans 4:11), specifically including the Gentiles, who are not biologically descended from Abraham. So Abraham is the spirtual father of believing Gentiles, according to Paul.
Looking further in the New Testament, we find that the first Christian martyr, Stephen, addressed the Jewish high priest and the Sanhedrin as brothers and fathers (
Acts 7:2). Also, the apostle John, the disciple whom Jesus loved, routinely referred to his followers as my little children (e.g.,
1 John 2:1,
2:12,
2:28,
3:7,
3:18, etc.) Lastly, Jesus himself referred to Abraham in a parable twice as Father Abraham (
Luke 16:24,
16:30). So it would seem that either Paul, Stephen, John, and even Jesus Himself, misunderstood Jesuss command, or some modern Protestants have. Id put my money on the latter.
But if Jesus didnt mean to forbid the use of the word father in a biological context, or in a spiritual context, what
did He mean? Whats left? Well, the key to understanding this verse is to understand that the ancient, Eastern people to whom Jesus spoke these words often used hyperbolic, exaggerated statements that are not meant to be taken literally. According to Protestant author John W. Haley,
The people of the East are fervid and impassioned in their modes of thought and expression. They think and speak in poetry. Bold metaphors and startling hyperboles abound in their writings and conversation. . . . He who does not remember the wide difference between the Oriental and Occidental mind, must necessarily fall into error.
1
Examples of this vivid hyperbole abound in the New Testament (see, e.g.,
Matt. 5:29-30,
Matt. 17:20,
Luke 14:26, etc.) We Americans tend to forget this. We approach the New Testament as if it were originally written in English and its authors were contemporary Americans. We expect them to write as we would write, and thus we tend to read the Bible as if it were a contract drawn up by lawyers. Too often we mistake the Eastern poet for a Western essayist, and when we run across examples of the vivid exaggeration that was typical of ancient semitic writing, we dont know what to make of it. And so we fret about whether we are allowed to call someone father (a practice to which the apostles had no objection), when in reality Jesus was simply expressing, in typically flambouyant Eastern style, the idea that no man is to take the place of God in our lives. The Protestant
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia acknowledges that this is the true meaning of the text:
Christs condemnation is clearly of the praise-seeking or obsequious spirit, rather than of a particular custom.
2
This verse has nothing whatsoever to do with the proper use of the word father, it has to do with the proper attitude of Christians toward their brothers, and toward God. Therefore, it is perfectly appropriate for Catholics, and others, to give the title father to their ministers. In doing so they are not being disobedient to Jesus, rather they are following the apostolic example established by Paul and John.
