Paul and fatherhood

Paul and fatherhood

Recent decades have seen a growing interest in counselling. Among various emphases there has been a prominent focus on fatherhood. This has become so prominent that it even overshadows sound exegesis. Many (English) translations render Ephesians 3:14-15 in the following way:

“For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth derives its name” (NASB)
“For grace of this thing I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom each fatherhood in heavens and in earth is named” (Wycliff)

The phrase ‘every family’ or ‘fatherhood’ renders the Greek “πατριὰ”. It resembles the word “πατήρ” translated ‘Father’ in verse 14. The lexical meaning is not a family in the narrow sense of parents and children. This word encompasses all kinship and speaks of a people or nation in the sense of one big family. The rarer translation ‘fatherhood’ is totally off track. Hoehner, for example, shows in his  commentary on Ephesians, that the Greek language has a different word for ‘fatherhood’, which Paul could have used here.
The translator might feel uneasy with translating the word ‘family, nation’ in the vicinity of the word ‘father’ and not connecting them. There is certainly no reason to discount the appearance of these two words in one sentence as being by chance. Even more so, since this is the only time Paul uses this word. But I think it is a wrong decision to seek an explanation in some illusory notion of Paul as a counselor for broken family relationships. I understand all those counselors who want to heal their clients' father-child relationships and are in need of a good biblical justification for the ‘fatherhood of God’. I am not against the idea itself - on the contrary. But it has to be done in a biblically responsible way.
When a given theory is superimposed on a biblical text we lose part of the underlying message. The use of the pair πατήρ/ πατριὰ by Paul would better be explained in the light of the text and other witnesses, which are closer to the text than family counseling. And in the final analysis there are enough hints to grasp the meaning. In fact the pair under consideration was a famous political slogan in the days of the Apostle. Since the time of Caesar Augustus the Roman Emperor bore the title “pater patriae”, father of the nation. It doesn’t come as a surprise that Paul alludes to this title.
Firstly, in those days the city of Ephesus was desparate for state subsidy from the Roman Empire. Ephesus had recently been through troubled times. Now the economy was experiencing an upturn. If Ephesus could establish good relations with Rome, they might be guaranteed the right to host the imperial cult in their city. This in turn would boost the fame and economy of Ephesus. The majority of its inhabitants were of Roman origin, but the city had a rich Greek heritage and they were proud of it. To call Caesar ‘father of the nation’ showed their devotion to the heritage Rome and hopefully might please the Imperial capital.
Secondly, the sentence (Eph 3:14-19) contains other allusions to political events. Noticeable is the unusual expression “to bow knees” (verse 14), an expression more likely linked to Greek worship than Hebrew. Politics in those days was a matter of religion. In order to enhance ones approval in the eyes of the authorities dedications are made, temples built and festivals organised. The inscriptions in commemoration of these donations contain phrases similar to verse 16. The donations were made with the aim of the benefactor - or the person honoured - granting their goodwill.
What then does Paul accomplish by using such political and religious associations in a letter about Christ, the Church and its unity? Let’s paraphrase the sentence:

“The society in which you live places its hopes in authorities described with exalted titles; I direct the same effort towards the One who is truly worthy of bearing the title of Origin and Father of every nation, the One who is able and willing to give even more than you could expect.”

Paul identifies a wrong attitude in society. Instead of judging it he uses its force to point to a goal much better and more worthwhile. He leaves it to the reader's conscience to judge. Paul shows what is really desirable. And he does so without introducing a new concept, but by starting with existing political and religious customs well-known to all.