Elizabeth Kaeton recently commented on the use of "Father" as a title. In light of the many comments her posting drew, she had a follow-up about the face the parish presents to newcomers.

The "balancing and softening" approach is idolatry plain and simple. As a priest for over 20 years, I have known parishioners and colleagues who, because of their less than ideal fathers, wish to diminish the greatness of God because they cannot see Him in light of Scriptural revelation. Jesus was the Son of God. He asks us to approach HIS Father with 'Abba', a very intimate address. If I cannot see God as my Father and be able to address Him as such, then I am still blinded by sin and have not the Holy Spirit! See Romans 8! Hence, my need for a savior! To impose my experiences unto God is extreme self-centeredness! Hence, Idolatry, a sin!

I'm all for using many images and metaphors to describe God, but I wonder if sometimes "balancing and softening" risks coddling in our more liberal branches of Christianity. Good mothers, fathers, teachers, friends...the rocks of our lives...hold us accountable, too.

The blogger Numerian, who usually expounds on economical matters (Numbers, like), today ruminates on the curious indifference to actual families on the part of the Family Values crowd:

'. . . As of 2009, there were 424,000 children in the US foster care system, which is a fraction of those in need of a home. If you are in the system and you reach age 16, you are kicked out – “emancipated” is the term – since you are presumed to be an adult capable of living on your own. Over 100,000 of the children in foster care were awaiting adoption, since their parents were declared unfit to raise them. They usually wait in vain to be adopted, in part because they are older or troubled with a history of behavioral problems, and in part because they aren’t white children, and are not a preferred choice to the typical couple looking to adopt (white father and mother unable to have children on their own). Over 60% of the children in foster care are black, Hispanic, or some other non-white race.

'There is lots of debate over the importance of providing children with both a father and a mother when they are growing up, but if you talk to workers in the child welfare system, what children need are stability, love, and support. Welfare workers prize these qualities more than any others. . . .

'But there is something that can be done on a smaller scale. We can broaden the definition of who gets to participate in Father’s Day, and Mother’s Day for that matter. We can include Moms and Moms, and Dads and Dads. We can stand up to the Roman Catholic Church, which has lost all mooring with the teachings of Jesus, and which has chosen the path of discrimination and exclusion, and which resorts to sophistry and twisted, deceitful logic to defend its bigotry. If it is within our means and our capabilities, we can look seriously at participating as a foster parent. My wife and I have done so for 15 years now, and let me tell you, it means something very special to hear “Happy Father’s Day” from young adults who know all too well how life could have turned out very differently if someone hadn’t taken an interest in them when they were children.'

(Numerian calls the Roman prelate "Cardinal," but although he's been elected president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Ratz has yet to give him a scarlet beanie.)

As to the actual topic of this Café posting, I feel more and more that symbolic use of the title "Father" distorts relationships in a fellowship. I had a pretty-good father who did the best he knew how, and a couple of priests who deserved the affection and respect connoted by "Father," though they didn't lord it over anyone. Now I feel I've had enough fathers for one lifetime. Jesus and Paul both preached a radical equality in their communities. Better the UCC model than our hierarchy-heavy one. My husband Gary is down on the episcopate nowadays, and I keep saying to him, "How can you have an Episcopal church without bishops?" You need a concept of the office that doesn't involve top-down, he replies.

As St. Paul rightly saith, 'we see through a glass darkly.' None of our metaphors embrace the fullness of the mystery of God. At least on Trinity Sunday we acknowledge 'one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth,' for a whole third of the sermon while God the Son gets most other Sundays for himself and God the Holy Spirit gets her one day.

According to the catechism, Jesus is 'the only perfect image of the Father, and shows us the nature of God,' so why can't we stick with that and forget all the psychological jargon so many want to layer on the faith?

Liturgical observance of maudlin secular days like mothers and fathers day tends to muddy the issue. If they didn't help fill the pews on a couple more Sundays, I would suggest we just skip them, then duck behind the altar.

As for Father and Mother as priestly titles, when I was young more people called me Father which I found sort of funny but respected their respect. Now that I'm older most just call me Paul. I suspect it has something to do with time, whether my age or the times, I'm not quite sure.

Given the time, would Jesus have had any option other than Father? Had he used Mother, would he have been viewed as silly?

My father was less than ideal, and I am less than ideal as a father. My comfort is that I have a father in heaven who is ideal. He knows me better than I know myself and loves me better than I love myself. I find great comfort in that, and, strange as it seems to me, some people find comfort in seeing me as "father." I don't insist on being called that, but I don't resist it either. I do try to inhabit the role of father in a non-patriarchal way, but as I said, I am less than ideal as a father.

Bunker Hill+
Spearfish, SD

"Had he used Mother, would have have been viewed as silly?"

Of course not. The worship of the Magna Mater had by then been around for centuries.

Shelley, Rick:

Perhaps he wouldn't have been seen as silly; but I also think he wouldn't have been seen as maintaining the Jewish heritage that was his, and in him is ours.

Marshall Scott