Matthew 23:9 says, “And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in Heaven.” Notice, however, that this makes no distinction between spiritual fathers, which is what our priests are to us, and biological fathers. In other words, if you interpret this passage to say, absolutely, that no man is to be called father, you cannot distinguish between calling a priest “father” and calling the man who is married to your mother “father.” But, is that actually what this passage is saying? Or is Jesus warning us against trying to usurp the fatherhood of God? The latter intention, in many ways, is what the Pharisees and Scribes were doing. They wanted all attention focused on them…they were leaving God, the Father, out of the equation, which is why Jesus goes on to call them hypocrites, liars, and whitewashed tombs. 
 
If you interpret this passage from Matthew 23 as an absolute ban against calling anyone your spiritual father, then there are some problems for you in the rest of Scripture. For example, Jesus, in the story of Lazarus and the rich man in Luke 16, has the rich man referring to Abraham as “father” several times. Paul, in Romans chapter 4, refers to Abraham as the “father” of the uncircumcised, the Gentiles. That’s referring to spiritual fatherhood, not biological fatherhood. 
 
In Acts 7:1-2, the first Christian martyr, Stephen, referred to the Jewish authorities and elders who were about to stone him as brothers and “fathers,” as does Paul in Acts, chapter 22. This is referring to spiritual fatherhood. So, if you interpret Matthew 23 as saying we cannot call anyone our spiritual father, then you would have to argue that Jesus, Paul, Stephen, and the Holy Spirit must have all gotten it wrong. 
 
It is okay to call priests “father,” just as it was okay for Jesus and Paul to call Abraham “father” and for Stephen and Paul to call the Jewish elders “father.” As long as we remember that our true Father is God the Father and that all aspects of fatherhood, biological and spiritual, are derived from Him, and as long as we do not allow anyone else to usurp that role in any way, shape, or form, as the Pharisees and Scribes were prone to do.

Church teaching on the ordination of only men to the priesthood finds its origins in the teaching and practices established by Christ. While He was on earth, Jesus chose men to be His apostles and He passed on authority to these men to carry out His work of preaching the good news (Luke 9:1-2) and forgiving sins (John 20:23). 
 
The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains, “The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason, the ordination of women is not possible” (CCC 1577). Furthermore, the Catechism informs us that “No one has a right to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders. Indeed no one claims this office for himself; he is called to it by God” (CCC 1578). 
 
Jesus came to us on earth in the form of a man. It makes sense, then, that He chose His successors—his “representatives” on earth—to be men. 
 
Finally, though we cannot always know exactly why Christ made some of the choices He made, we do know that He did not view women as inferior to men. Christ simply made clear that this particular vocation—the priesthood—would be reserved for men. In obedience to the will of God, the Catholic Church has and will continue to follow this practice of ordaining only men to the priesthood.