Why the Fatherhood of Priest cannot be against the Teaching of Christ?

Why the Fatherhood of Priest cannot be against the Teaching of Christ?

I. Derivatives:

A. Priest is derived from:
a) Anglo-Saxon “Preost”
b) Late Latin “Presbyter”
c) Latin “Sacerdote”
d) Spanish “Sacerdote”
e) Greek “Presbyteros”
f) Hebrew “Kohen”

B. Father is derived from:
a) Hebrew ba (av)
b) Greek Papas, Pater
c) Italian papa
d) Latin Patri, Pater
e) Spanish Padre
f) English Father

II. Definition of Terms:

A. The term “Priest” has varied meaning:

1. In Hierarchical Christian Churches, a clergyman authorized to administer the sacraments and pronounce absolution.
2. A clergyman
3. A minister of any religion
4. A person whose function is to make sacrificial offering and perform other religious rites (Gen 14:18-19).
5. A seer, as well as one who has to do with divine things (cf. 1 Pet 2:5, 9, 25).

(cf. Dt 17:8-9; Heb 3:1, 7:11-12; 1Pet 2:5-9; Rom 15:16; Rev 1:5-6, 5:10, Isa 61:6; Mal 2:7 - GNB )

B. “Father” has also varied definitions:

1. God is Father; as Creator of all things seen and unseen, the Source of all Fatherhood (cf. Mal 2:10; James 1:7, KJV ).
2. As Counselor and Ruler of a kingdom- Isa.9:6-7.
3. Biological Fatherhood, the immediate male progenitor or a male parent (cf. Sir 7:23-24, 27; Eph 6:1-4, GNB).
4. A Forefather, Ancestor (cf. Gen 27:21, 28:13; Lk 1:32; Acts 7:2; Rom 9:10, KJV).
5. An Originator, Founder, inventor (cf. Gen 4:21, KJV).
6. Originator of a mode of life (cf. Gen 4:20, KJV).
7. Herds of Clans (cf. Ex 6:14; 1 Chr 27:1, KJV).
8. Royal Advisors and Prime Ministers (cf. Gen 45:8, KJV).
9. Early Christians who have died (cf. 2 Pet 3:4, KJV).
10. A Source (cf. Job 38:28, KJV).
11. Spiritual Ancestor (cf. Rom 4:11, 16, GNB).
12. Bad Spiritual Ancestor, the Father of all Murderers and Liars (cf. Jn 8:44, GNB).
13. Leader of Nations (cf. Rom 4:18, GNB).
14. The Leaders of Assembly (cf. 1 Jn 2:12, KJV).
15. Any of the Early Christian Religious Writers or Church Fathers like St. Jerome who made the Bible.
16. One in whom people habitually confide (cf. 2 Kgs 6:21, KJV).
17. Bearer of the Good News (cf. Rom 15:16; 1Cor 4:15, GNB).
18. A Priest (cf. Jdg 17:10, 18:19, KJV).
19. Christian Spiritual Fatherhood (cf. Phlm 1:10-11.
20. Father of those who have died (cf. Lk 16:19-31, GNB).

III. OBJECTION: Call no man “Father”.

Many non-Catholics claim that when Catholics address a priest as “Father”, they are going contrary to what the Holy Bible says, and are actually doing against what Jesus Himself teaches. Full of confidence, they will quote their favorite passage to disprove the Catholic stand, pointing out that we Catholics are law breakers. The text referred is Mt 23:9 (“Do not call anyone on earth your father. Only one is your father, the One in heaven”).
I wonder why our detractors are fond only of quoting Mt 23:9, disregarding verses 7, 8 and 10? Why not take into account the whole content of Christ's statement from Mt 23:7 to 12? Why of all the subject matter of Chapter 23, the fundamentalists give emphasis only to verse 9? It is highly conclusive and in fact common sense would tell us, that it is with deliberate malice - their malicious intention is to poison both the minds of the Catholic and non-Catholic readers in order to discredit the integrity of the priesthood (cf. 1Pet. 2:5, 9), and the Catholic Church as a whole.

Below is the whole content of Mt 23:6-10, GNB version :

1. Mt 23:6-8 - “They love the best places at feasts and the reserved seats in the synagogues; they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to have people call them “Teacher”. You must not be called “Teacher”, because you are all brothers of one another and have only one teacher.”
2. Mt 23:9 - “And you must not call anyone here on earth “Father” because you only have one Father in heaven.”
3. Mt 23:10 - “Nor should you be called “Leader” because your one and only Leader is the Messiah.”

If we will only focus our attention to these subjects of discussion and try to understand it literally without the aid of hermeneutics, it will appear that Christ is forbidding us to call anyone here on earth as Teacher, Father, and Leader. If this is true, the fundamentalists would then be just as guilty using the words “Teacher” and “Leader” or “Master” as Catholics for saying “Father.” If Catholics are wrong for using “father” then the Protestants should as well criticized everyone called “teacher” or “leader.” In fact, they should stop teaching or leading their people lest they be branded the title “teacher” or “leader” and this goes against what the Lord has taught, as they interpret the text. But clear enough that would be a misunderstanding of Christ's words. A careful study of the whole chapter 23 in its contextual sense confirms that it was addressed by Jesus to the teachers of the Law and to the Pharisees in the synagogues to show them how sinful and proud they were for not looking humbly to God as the source of all authority and fatherhood and teaching. Instead they themselves become the source of authority, father figures and teachers. God is the foundation of the fatherhood we have on earth, whether a biological father to his child or a priest (spiritual father) to the Christian community. God as well is the basis for the authority in the task of teaching and leading the society.

Jesus criticized Jewish leaders who love “the places of honor at feasts and best seats in the synagogues, and salutations in the market places and being called ‘Teacher’ (Rabbi) by men.” His admonition is a response to the Pharisees’ proud hearts and their grasping after marks of status and prestige (Mt 23:1-7, 11-12).

The words of Christ should not always be taken literally. He often used hyperbole (exaggerated for emphasis). The following are examples:

1. Mt 5:29 - “So if your right eye causes you to sin, take it out and threw it away! It is much better for you to lose a part of your body than to have your whole body thrown in to hell” (GNB).
2. Mt 18:9 - “And if your eye makes you lose your faith, take it out and throw it away! It is better for you to enter life with only one eye than to keep both eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell” (cf. Mk 9:43-48, GNB).

Christ certainly did not intend this to be applied literally, for otherwise all Christians would be blind amputees because we are all subject to the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life. The Apostles will be the first victims of amputation just to enter the kingdom of heaven. St. Paul accepted that he was the worst among the sinners; so with St. John the Apostle:

1 Tim. 1:15 - “This is true saying, to be completely accepted and believed: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners. I am the worst of them.”

Rom. 7:14, 23 - “We know that the Law is spiritual; but I am a mortal man, sold as a slave to sin… but I see a different law at work in my body--a law that fights against the law which my mind approves of. It makes me a prisoner to the law of sin which is at work in my body.”

1 Jn. 1:8 - “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and there is no truth in us.”

Another example of hyperbole or exaggerated statement by St. John that should not be taken literally:

Jn 21:25 - “Now there are many other things that Jesus did. If they were all written down one by one, I suppose that the whole world would not hold the books that would be written.”

If Jn 21:25 should be understood literally, it would appear that the world was not made for the habitation of mankind but intended as storage for books. The writer did not intend this to be applied literally but as a hyperbole statement--to emphasize that the Bible is not the only source of Divine Revelation (cf. 2Thess. 3:6, 2:15, Eph 3:10; 1Tim 3:15, KJV).

IV. EISEGESIS AND EXEGESIS

There are two types of approaches in studying the Bible:

1. Eisegesis (the fundamentalist approach) - this refers to literal sense of interpreting the Bible. What is written must be believed; what it is, it is. Further, this is private interpretation. This kind of approach does not conform to the teaching of the Bible:

Sir 3:21 - “Don’t try to understand the things that are too hard for you or investigate matters that are beyond you power to know” (GNB).

Sir 3:24 - “Many people have been misled by their own opinions; their wrong ideas have warped their judgment” (GNB).

2 Pet 1:20 - “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation” (KJV).

2 Cor. 3:6 - “Who also hath made us able ministers of the NT; not of the letter, but of the Spirit: for the letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life” (KJV).

2 Pet. 3:16 - “This is what He says in all his letters when he writes on the subject. There are some difficult things in his letters which ignorant and unstable people could explain falsely, as they do with other passages of the Scriptures. So they bring on their own destruction” (GNB).

1. Exegesis - Historico (Critical Approach) - this refers to the following scopes:
   a) Scholarly approach based on hermeneutics.
   b) It is not what the Bible says but what the Bible means.
   c) Study the original language being used, the audience, biblical setting, customs of the time, place and person (the so-called, sitz em leben in Biblical study).
   d) Study the literary style.
   e) Study the deeper meaning of the message.
   f) Under the guidance of the Church Magisterium the pillar and foundation of truth (Eph 3:10; 1Tim 3:15: Mt 16:18-19, 18:17-20, 28:18-20).

Is 28:13 - “That is why the Lord Is going to teach you letter by letter, line by line, lesson by lesson.”

Acts 8:30-31 - “Do you understand what you are reading?” the official replied, “How can I understand unless someone explains it to me.” (GNB).
Neh 8:1, 8 - “They asked Ezra, the priest and a scholar of the law which the Lord had given Israel through Moses, to get the book of the law…they gave an oral translation of God’s Law and explained it so that the people could understand” (GNB).

Eph 3:10 - “To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known but the Church, the manifold wisdom of God” (KJV).

V. “You must not be called Teacher” ([Rabbi] (Mt 23:7-8)

A figure of speech called hyperbole, an exaggerated statement address by Jesus to the teachers of the Law and Pharisees setting themselves as the authority and teachers of the law, showing how sinful and proud they were for not looking humbly to God as the source of teaching authority. The first problem is that although Jesus seems to prohibit the use of the term “teacher”, Christ never intend this word to be understood literally. Christ himself appointed certain men to be teachers in his church with full authority.

Mt. 28:18-20 - “I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth. Go then, to all peoples everywhere and make them my disciples. Baptized them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and teach them to obey everything I have commanded you. And I will be with you always, to the end of the age.”

St. Paul speaks also of his commission as a teacher:

1 Tim 2:7 - “And that is why I was sent as an apostle and teacher of the gentiles, to proclaim the message of faith and truth. I am not lying; I am telling the truth.”

2 Tim 1:11 - “God has appointed me as an apostle and teacher to proclaim the Good News.”

He also reminds us that the Church has an office of teacher.

1 Cor 12:28 - “In the Church God has put all in place: in the first place apostles, in the second place prophets, and the third place teachers.”

2 Tim 2:2 - “Take the teachings that you heard me proclaim in the presence of many witnesses, and entrust them to reliable people, who will be able to teach others also.”

There is no doubt that St. Paul was not violating Christ's teaching. In Mt 23:7-8 by referring so often to others as “teachers.”

VI. “You must not be called “Leader”, because your one and only leader is the Messiah” (Mt. 23:10).

Throughout the world, some people have been tempted to look at religious leaders who are mere mortals as if they were an individual’s supreme source of spiritual instruction, nourishment and protection. The tendency to turn mere men into “gurus” or teacher and spiritual leader is worldwide. This was also a temptation in the Jewish world in Jesus’ day, when famous rabbinical leaders, especially those who founded important schools, such as “Hillel” and “Shammai”, were highly exalted by their disciples. It is this elevation of an individual man--the formation of a “cult of personality” around him--of which Jesus is speaking when he warns against attributing to someone an undue role of master (leader) father, or teacher. Ultimately, God is our supreme leader and protector, the source of all leadership and the master of all masters. Correspondingly, it is wrong to view any individual other than God as having this ultimate rule. Jesus is not forbidding the perfunctory use of honorifics nor forbidding us to recognize our national, local and spiritual leaders or human masters.

A. Domestic Leadership.
Eph 6:5 - “Slaves, obey your human masters with fear and trembling; and do it with a sincere heart, as though you were serving Christ” (GNB; cf. Jn 13:13).

Eph 5:9 - “Master’s, behave in the same way toward your slaves and stop using threats. Remember that you and your slaves belong to the same master in heaven who judges everyone by the same standard” (GNB).

B. Political Leadership.
Sir 10:1-2 - “A wise ruler (leader) will educate his people, and his government will be orderly. All the officials and all the citizens will be like the ruler.” (Good News Bible)

Sir 10:3-4 - “An uneducated king will ruin his people, but a government will grow strong if its rulers are wise. The Lord sees to the government of the world and brings the right person to power at the right time” (GNB).

Sir 10:5 - “The success of that person is in the Lord’s hands. The Lord is the source of the honor given to any official” (GNB).

Rom 13:1 - “Everyone must obey state authorities (civil leaders), because no authority exists without God’s permission, and the existing authorities have been put there by God.”

Jn 19:10-11 - “Pilate said to him, “you will not speak to me? Remember, I have the authority to set you free and also to have you crucified.” Jesus answered, “You have authority over me only because it was given to you by God” (GNB).

C. Spiritual Leadership:

Num 16:1-2 - “Korah son of Izhar from the Levite clan of Konath, rebelled against the leadership of Moses” (GNB).

Mt 2:6 - “For from you come a leader who will guide my people Israel” (GNB).

Heb 13:7 - “Remember your former leaders, who spoke God’s message to you. Think back on how they lived and died, and imitate their faith.”
Heb 13:17 - “Obey your leaders and follow their orders. They watch over your souls without resting, since they must give to God an account of their service. If you obey them, they will do their work gladly; if not, they will do it with sadness, and that will be of no help to you.”

VII. Fatherhood of Priest cannot be against the teachings of Christ (Mt 23:9).

Objection: In his tract 10 reasons why I am not a Roman Catholic, fundamentalist anti-Catholic writer Donald Maconaghie quotes this passage Mt 23:9, as support for his charge that “the Papacy is a hoax” (meaning, “fake/fraud”). Bill Jackson, another fundamentalist, who runs a full-time anti-Catholic organization, says in his book “Christian’s Guide to Roman Catholicism” that a study of St. Mt 23:9 reveals that Jesus was taking about being called Father as a title of religious superiority… which is the basis for the Catholic hierarchy (53). It is a book written by a non-Catholic with a very deceptive title. The title itself can already catch-up the attention of Catholic believers to buy the book. It is a poisonous presentation against a Catholic priest. Now, how should Catholic respond to such objections?

Call no man Father? Why the charge using Mt 23:9 do not work? One must understand the use of the word “father” in reference to our earthly fathers. If the word “father” is absolutely reserved only to God the Father, then all of us have violated the rule, by calling our male parent “fathers”? No one would deny a little girl or boy the opportunity to tell someone that he or she loves his or her father. Common sense tells us that Jesus was not forbidding this type of the word “father”. The concept of the spiritual fatherhood of the priest cannot be against the teachings of Christ and the Bible itself because granting without admitting that fatherhood is absolutely confined or reserved only to God the Father, then it will appear that Christ is contradicting himself and violating his own law? A careful study using the Bible itself will clear out the clouds of doubt. One of Christ's sermons with the same audience, the Pharisees and the teachers of the Law of Jewish religion, spoke thus:

Mt 15:1, 3-7 - “Jesus answered, ‘and why do you disobey God’s command and follow your teaching? For God said, respect your father and your mother, and whoever curses his father and his mother is to be put to death. But you teach that if a person has something he could use to help his father or mother, but says, this belongs to God, he does not need to honor his father,” in this way you disregard God’s command, in order to follow your own teaching. You hypocrites! How right Isaiah was when he prophesied about you’” (GNB).

Question: Which among of the two teachings of Christ should we follow, Mt 23:9? Mt 15:3-7? Is Mt 23:9 absolute and should be taken or understood literally? But how about the fourth commandment of God? and how about the teaching of St. Paul? Was he against the teaching of Christ?

Eph 6:1-2 - “Children, it is your Christian duty to obey your parents, for this the right thing to do. Respect your father and your mother” (GNB).

Ex 20:12 - “Respect your father and your mother” (GNB).

Since the invention and development of a practical printing process by Johannes Gutenberg in 1450 and Emergence of the “only-the-Bible” principle (the Sola Scriptura brought about by Martin Luther’s separation from the church in Oct. 31, 1517), there has been a proliferation of various Bible sects stemming from the following three factors:

1. The process of presenting the biblical testimonies has become varied and oftentimes conflicting.
2. The process is constantly in danger of separating itself from the real basis in the Bible.
3. The plurality of testimonies threatens to create ambiguities and doubt regarding which to follow.

What will be our response?

1. Understanding the word of God is not a matter of opinion and personal interpretation (cf. Sir 3:21, 24).
2. There must be a method of understanding what is found in the written form of God’s revelation which is the Holy Bible (cf. 2 Tim 3:15-17, 14, 1 Tim 3:15; We must study hermeneutics).
3. In reflecting the biblical testimonies in concrete community, self-reflection must be concluded in the faith experience of the Church, and interpretation must be guided by the fact that acceptance of the books of the Bible is the product of the judgment of the Catholic Church.

God is the source of all fatherhood and we are his adopted children by virtue of baptism. The Catholic Church never denies this unique relationship and the rest of Christian religious denominations also believed this:

Gal 3:26-27 - “For we are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”

Gal 4:5-7 - “To redeem those who were under the law, so that we might become God’s sons; to show that you are his sons, God sent the spirit of his Son into our hearts, the spirit who cries out, “Father, my Father”. So then you are no longer a slave but a son. And since you are his sons, God will give you all that he has for his sons.”

But spiritual fatherhood in relation to us his adopted children, is not only confined to God the Father but also to the priests both in the OT and NT. If our biological or male parents we address them as our fathers, the priests and chosen leaders of God becomes also a father in God’s name and in Jesus Christ through the gospel.

1. St. Peter called St. Mark as his son although biologically they are not related.
   1 Pet 5:13 - “Your sister Church in Babylon, also chosen by God, sends your greetings, and so does my son Mark.”

2. St. Paul also referred to other of his converts as his son.
   Tit 1:4 - “I write to Titus, my true son in the faith that we have in common.”

3. The apostles sometimes referred to entire churches under their care as their children.
   Gal 4:19 - “My dear children! (The church in Galicia) once again, just like a mother in childbirth, I feel the same kind of pain for you until Christ's nature is formed in you.”

4. St. John followed the same custom.
   1 Jn 2:1 - “I am writing this to you my children, so that you will not sin; but if anyone does sin, we have someone who pleads with the father on our behalf--Jesus Christ…”

5. Catholics knew that as members of a parish, they have been committed to a priest’s spiritual care, thus they have the great filial affection for priests and call them “father.” Priests, in turn follow the apostle’s biblical example by referring to members of their flock as “my son” or “my child.”

1 Tim 1:18 - “Timothy, my child, I entrust to you this command, is in accordance with the words of prophecy spoken in the past about you.”

2 Tim 2:1 - “As for you, my son, be strong through the grace that is ours in union with Christ Jesus.”

3 Jn 2:1 - “Nothing makes me happier than to hear that my children live in the truth.”

1. The bible is the word of God - biblically, priest were also called fathers.

Jdg 17:10 - “And Micah said unto him, “Dwell with me, and be unto my father and a priest” (KJV).
Jdg 18:19 - “And they said unto him, hold thy peace, lay thy hand upon thy mouth, and go with us and be to us a father and a priest” (KJV).

Rom 15:16 - “Of being a servant of Christ Jesus to work for the Gentiles. I serve like a priest in preaching the good news from God” (GNB).

Rom 15:16 - “He was appointed me as a priest of Jesus Christ, and I am to carry out my priestly duty by bringing the Good News from God to the pagans (Jerusalem Bible).

1. St. Paul as a priest explained that God the Father is the source of all fatherhood. Yet, St. Paul himself, being a priest, recognized himself as a father, a guardian of the Christian, a father in union with Jesus Christ by the power of the Good News.

1 Cor 4:15 - “For even if you have ten thousand guardians in your Christian life, you have only one father, for in your life in union with Christ Jesus I have become your “father by bringing the Good News” (GNB).

Phlm 1:10 - “So I make a request to you on behalf of Onesimus, who is my son in Christ, for while in prison, I become his spiritual father” (GNB).

Rom 4:16-17 - “For Abraham is the spiritual father of us all as the scriptures says, ‘I have made you father of many nations’”(GNB).

St. Paul is telling us that he has a son in Christ and he admitted that he is a priest (cf. Rom 15:16). He further teaches us his spiritual fatherhood (cf. 1Cor 4:15; Phlm 1:10) and the spiritual fatherhood of priests through Christ for the Good News is for all nations like the faith of Abraham (see Rom 4:16-17). This is so because spiritual fatherhood is universal and biblically is not confined to God the Father alone. Careful study shows that even in the OT time spiritual fatherhood was also extended to the prophets of God.

2 Kgs 2:12 - “Elisha saw it and cried to Elijah, ‘my father, my father! Mighty defender of Israel! You are gone and I never saw Elijah again’” (GNB/KJV).

2 kgs 13:14 - “The prophet Elisha was sick with a fatal disease, and as he lays dying, King Jehoash of Israel went to visit him, ‘My father, my father,’ he exclaimed as he wept” (GNB).

All of this biblical passages were written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and they express the infallibly recorded truth that Christ's or God’s ministers of the OT and NT do have a role as spiritual fathers. Jesus is not against acknowledging that it is He who gave these men their role (cf. Gal 4:14; 2Cor 13:3) as spiritual fathers (1Cor 4:15) and it is Holy Spirit who recorded this role (Is 34:16) for us in the pages of the Scriptures.
To acknowledge spiritual fatherhood is to acknowledge the truth and no amount of anti-Catholic grumbling will change the fact. Repeatedly, Mt 23:7-10 should not be understood literally but should be taken as a hyperbole to express a point of emphasis to the teachers of the Law and the Pharisees of the Jewish religion showing sinful and proud actuation of their positions (Mt 23:1-7, 11-15).

VIII. Objection: The Vow of Celibacy of the Priests of the Catholic Church is not of God but of the devil.
In line with this kind of attack, the Protestants would usually quote the letter of St. Paul to St. Timothy, to wit:

1 Tim 4:1-3 - “Now the spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by giving need to the deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, through the presentations of liars whose consciences are seared who forbid marriage and enjoin abstinence from foods when God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth.”

Answer: The doctrine of demons referred to by St. Paul was not the practiced of Catholic Church of having abstinence on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday and celibate of the priest. What he was referring to were the teaching of the Gnostics in history forbidding legitimate marriage and certain foods. The following explanation can be seen in the contextual footnote of 1Tim 4:1-3 by the Oxford Annotated Bible (a Protestant translation): “Doctrines Demons… Gnostics Teachers forbade legitimate marriage and certain foods.”

To abstain in honor of the Lord is not of the devil. Even St. Paul as a priest and minister of God is also practicing abstinence. Is he of the devil? Abstinence practice by Catholics is in a reasonable manner for the purpose of benefiting the soul. The Church law regarding abstinence does not forbid foods because they are impure; it considers abstaining a means of spiritual good.

Gal 6:7-8 - “Do not be afraid, God is not mocked for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. For he who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption; but he who sows to the spirit will from the spirit reap eternal life” (OAB ).

1 Cor 8:13 - “Therefore, if food is a cause of my brother’s falling, I will never eat meat.”

Rom 14:6 - “He who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. He also who eats, eats in the honor of the Lord since he gives thanks to God; while he who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and give thanks to God” (OAB).

Also, the vow of celibacy or single-blessedness imposed on clerics includes the obligation of observing perfect chastity under the vow. The reason for this are:

1. That those being ordained may serve God with greater singleness of purpose.

1 Cor 7:32 - I would like you to be free from worry. An unmarried man concerns himself with the Lord’ work because he is trying to please the Lord.”

1. And that living a life of continence they observe the state of virginity which is holier and higher than that of marriage life” (GNB).

1 Cor 7:38 - “So the man who marries does well but the one who does not, does even better.”

The celibate or virginal state is raised to a higher calling than that of married life, but this must be voluntary because not everyone can accept this teaching but only those to whom it is given to do so for the sake of God’s reign. This teaching is not of the devil but from God through virginity or celibacy. Observed for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, priests are consecrated to Christ in a new and distinguished way. They more easily hold fast to him with undivided heart. They more freely devote themselves in him and through him to the service of God and men. They more readily minister to his kingdom and to the work of heavenly regeneration, and thus become more apt to exercise paternity in Christ, and do so to the greater extent.

Jer 16:1-2 - “Again the Lord spoke to me and said, ‘Do not marry or have children in a place like this.’”

Mt. 19:11-12 - “Jesus answered, ‘This teaching does not apply to everyone, but only to those to whom God has given it for there are different reasons why men cannot marry: some because they were born that way; others, because men made them that way; and others do not marry for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let him who can accept this teaching do so’” (GNB).

If the celibate life or virginal state of the Catholic priests who decided to be ordained and not to marry is of the devil, does the teaching of God and of Jesus Christ comes from the devil? What a foolish teaching! This argument will not hold water based on the textual evidence coming from God Himself.