Author: Denny Smith
I recently got into a discussion with a messianic Jew who insisted he
had the right to use the title “Rabbi” without any violation of
scripture. I pointed him to Matt. 23:8, “but you, do not be called ‘Rabbi’; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren” (NKJV) to no avail. He is not alone for you could point a Catholic priest to Matt. 23:9, “do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven,” (NKJV) and it would have no effect upon him either.
Not only are men accepting religious titles, contrary to Jesus’
teaching, but the general public is just as guilty in granting these
titles. I have never seen a single instance in my lifetime of a
Catholic priest being interviewed on TV without the interviewer calling
him Father. Indeed, I suspect any interviewer who tried to do so would
lose his job. There is little doubt his superiors would call him on the
carpet and accuse him of being disrespectful. There is no problem
being disrespectful to Jesus and what Jesus said but just do not offend
the Catholic priest or the Catholic Church.
What did Jesus teach on this subject? The answer is found in Matt. 23:1-12:
“(1) Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, (2)
saying: ‘The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. (3)
Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do
not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do. (4) For
they bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders;
but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. (5)
But all their works they do to be seen by men. They make their
phylacteries broad and enlarge the borders of their garments. (6) They
love the best places at feasts, the best seats in the synagogues, (7)
greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called by men, ‘Rabbi, Rabbi.’
(8) But you, do not be called ‘Rabbi’; for One is your Teacher, the
Christ, and you are all brethren. (9) Do not call anyone on earth your
father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. (10) And do not be
called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ. (11) But he who
is greatest among you shall be your servant. (12) And whoever exalts
himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.’ ” (NKJV)
In his condemnation of the scribes and Pharisees Jesus says (verse 5) “all their works they do to be seen by men.”
The desire to be seen as a man superior to his fellow man, a man who
ought to be bowed down to figuratively, if not literally, was the desire
of the heart and the sin of the pride that resided within them. Jesus
gives several examples of things they were doing and things they enjoyed
that manifested this attitude. One of these things was to be called
Rabbi, Rabbi. It was not a threat of something that might happen in the
future but was a present reality. These men were actually being called
Rabbi and loved it. It was wrong then to do this but my messianic Jew
says it is fine to do it today.
Albert Barnes, in his commentary on Matthew, says of the word Rabbi
used here that, “It was a title given to eminent teachers of the law
among the Jews; a title of honor and dignity, denoting authority and
ability to teach.” No doubt Barnes was correct in also saying that each
time the word was used “it implied their superiority to the persons who
used it.” (comments on Matt. 23:7) They thus reveled in having the
title for their desire was to be seen (recognized) by men (verse 5).
Jesus clearly gave the command in verse 8 of Matthew 23 to not accept the title of Rabbi for he says, “But you, do not be called ‘Rabbi’; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren.”
(NKJV) He gives two reasons. (1) Christ only is our teacher. (2) You
are all brethren. The Rabbi I was in discussion with says that what
Jesus wanted us to understand from this passage was only that Christ is
our ultimate teacher, that we need to keep that in mind, and that we are
not specifically forbidden from using the word Rabbi as a title. He
never considers the second reason Jesus gave for forbidding the use of
the title—”you are all brethren.” We all stand on equal footing before
God. No one is special, no one gets a pass, and no one gets to exalt
himself above the rest of the brethren.
The reader might find it interesting to note that you will not find
the word Rabbi in the Old Testament. The Bible commentator Adam Clarke
says of the word Rabbi, “None of the prophets had ever received this
title, nor any of the Jewish doctors before the time of Hillel and
Shammai, which was about the time of our Lord.” (commenting on Matt.
23:8) Man had come up with a title to give to himself that pleased his
vanity.
Jesus likewise forbids our calling anyone Father as a religious title
in Matt. 23:9 already quoted. The word father is used in the New
Testament as well as in the Old Testament many times in many different
ways. Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words lists 9
different applications of the noun as used in the New Testament alone.
This means, obviously, that the word father can be used by men when used
appropriately and not in the way Jesus condemned. What did Jesus
condemn?
Jesus condemned me, you, and the neighbor next door from calling any
man Father as a title in the spiritual realm. Reread Matt. 23:1-12 as
many times as it takes to get the gist of what Jesus is getting at.
There is a problem among men (the scribes and Pharisees in particular)
in that they are seeking the praise, honor, and glory of men. They are
proud and puffed up. They want to be recognized and acknowledged as
superior. They desire titles. They do not want to be the servant of
Matt. 23:11. They want to be exalted among men (Matt. 23:12). The
warning to you and me is don’t do it, don’t allow it, don’t call them
what they want to be called, and don’t reward their pride and vanity.
I am in full agreement with what Albert Barnes says in his commentary
on the word father in Matt. 23:9 where he says, “But the word ‘father’
also denotes ‘authority, eminence, superiority, a right to command, and a
claim to particular respect.’ In this sense it is used here. In this
sense it belongs eminently to God, and it is not right to give it to
people. Christian brethren are equal.”
Yes, it is true Paul said to the Corinthians, “For though you
might have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet you do not have many
fathers; for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.” (1 Cor. 4:15 NKJV) Paul also referred to Timothy as his “true son in the faith.” (1 Tim. 1:2 NKJV) He referred to Titus (Titus 1:4) and to Onesimus (Philemon 1:10) in a similar way.
In 2 Cor. 12:14 Paul implies that the church at Corinth is his
children (making him their father) and likewise in Gal. 4:19 with
reference to the churches of Galatia. John, the apostle, does the same
sort of thing when he says, “My little children, these things I write to you.” (1 John 2:1 NKJV) There are other passages with similar import.
It is said that Paul and John, and Peter also (1 Peter 5:13), are
referring to themselves as spiritual fathers so we can use the word
father as a title in reference to priests who are spiritual fathers over
their flock. There is a lot wrong with that line of thinking. Neither
Paul nor John nor Peter was using the word as a title. They were
rather simply describing the fact that by teaching and preaching the
gospel children of God had been begotten. That they felt some duty or
obligation toward those whom they had taught the gospel there is no
doubt. Those who had obeyed the gospel under their preaching felt like
children to them. They had a love for them and felt a kinship to them
much like a father toward his children but that is as far as it went.
They did not adopt the title Father and attach it to their name.
All three of these apostles would have recoiled in horror at the thought of being given the title Father. Paul says, “There is one God and Father of all.”
(Eph. 4:6 NKJV) Paul was not seeking the title of Father, had no
desire to be called Father Paul, and that is just the opposite of the
desire of the Catholic Church for their priests. I wonder what would
happen in a Catholic congregation if all the membership would suddenly
stop calling their priest Father and refused to do so. Would the fur
start to fly?
[Paul compared himself and his companions not only to a father but
also to a mother. In 1 Thess.2:7-8 Paul says to the church of the
Thessalonians, "We were gentle among you, just as a nursing mother
cherishes her own children. So affectionately longing for you, we were
well pleased to impart to you not only the gospel of God, but also our
own lives, because you had become dear to us." (NKJV) Dear to us like a
mother's children are to her.]
None of the apostles even took the word apostle as a title. They
claimed to be apostles for such they were but not one time in scripture
(I just searched my online concordance) will you find the word apostle
before their name. An apostle was what they were just as a man might be
an elder (a bishop) or an evangelist in the church. These words were
never meant to be titles or given as titles but were rather descriptive
of the work or role one had.
But there is a lot more wrong with the Catholic position than just
this. Their idea is that only certain men are priests (one per local
church) and they have a spiritual fatherhood over “their flock.” Peter
and John both teach that all Christians are priests, not just a select
few. (Read 1 Peter 2:9 and Rev. 1:5-6.) There is also nothing in the
New Testament giving authority to one man only to rule a congregation or
flock if you want to designate it that way. This desire for position
over others is what led to one man rule. If you will read your New
Testament you will find that every congregation was to be overseen by a
plurality of elders (bishops), not just by one.
Paul and Barnabas on their first missionary journey “appointed elders in every church”
(Acts 14:23 NKJV). That is plural, not singular. Every church was
overseen by a group of men known as elders or bishops, not by a singular
man designated the one and only priest of the congregation with the
title of Father. Paul told Titus “appoint elders in every city as I commanded you.”
(Titus 1:5 NKJV) Remember in New Testament times there was only one
church within a city, unlike today, so when Titus appointed elders in a
city he was appointing them within the church in that city. Every
church had not a single elder but plural elders. The terms elder and
bishop were used interchangeably and describe the same set of men (read
Titus 1:5-7).
The Catholic position is thus wrong not just on a single count but on
multiple counts. The desire for position and importance, for power and
prestige, is what led to the concept of one man rule and the title of
Father within the Catholic Church but as all know it did not end just
within the local congregations. Indeed, it only started there for all
know there is now a hierarchy within the Catholic Church. The next step
up after being a Father or priest in a local congregation is to become a
bishop with the highest position being that of Pope but we must
remember (a little sarcasm here) it is not about titles, power, and
position (Oh, really!).
It is said by both the messianic Jew I was in discussion with and by
the Catholics that we cannot take the passages literally in Matt. 23.
Why not, Jesus did. He was describing a real situation that then
existed—men being called rabbi—and he said to stop doing it. That is as
literal as it can get. He was attempting to stop a practice then in
existence. It is still in existence because men desire the titles and
the glory that goes with them and thus want to get around Jesus’ command
by trying to make his language out to be figurative when the context
will not allow it.
In Matt. 23:10 Jesus says, “And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ.” (NKJV) The word rendered teachers
here is in other versions rendered masters (ASV, KJV, HCSB),
instructors (ESV, NRSV), leaders (NAS, LITV), or directors (YLT). All
of these translations are helpful when taken as a group for they give us
a better idea of the meaning than any one single word alone. God wants
teachers of his word or else the Great Commission cannot be fulfilled
but a man can go out and teach and preach the word without taking a
title. It is good to teach, not bad. What is bad is to want to be
exalted for doing so. Don’t allow men to give you a title. You do not
need it.
Often preachers are given titles like Reverend or Pastor. This is
certainly a violation of the principle Jesus taught in Matt. 23
regarding the giving of titles. We can do the work God has given us to
do without a title. Why desire a title? If I have a Ph.D. I can preach
perfectly well without being called Dr. Smith. I do not need the title
and if my pride demands it and I want the attention then I have a
problem don’t I? If I want to be called Pastor or Reverend I have a
problem don’t I? To ask is to answer.
It is not wrong to say what we do. If I preach it is not wrong to
say I preach. If I teach it is not wrong to say I teach. But the
desire for a title and the recognition that goes with it is where the
wrong comes in. Who am I? Who are you? We are just brothers and
sisters in Christ all equal within the body of Christ.
Finally, we have to recognize that Jesus was talking about the
spiritual realm of life and not the secular in Matt. 23. He was talking
about religion, not about medicine, not about education, not about the
military, not about secular government. We must have titles in the
secular world. But I think this is so obvious that a child can see it.
Jesus was not talking about the things of the world.
In this world in secular affairs we must have titles to designate
knowledge and authority or power but that is the whole point of Jesus’
argument in Matt. 23 for he is saying in the spiritual realm it is
different as there is only one authority and that is God so don’t go
around acquiring titles and making some pretense of authority you don’t
have. Don’t accept a title and don’t give one to others. That includes
the uninspired Pope.
No comments:
Post a Comment