8ὑμεῖς δὲ μὴ κληθῆτε ῥαββί · εἷς Î³Î¬Ï á¼ÏƒÏ„ιν ὑμῶν ὠδιδάσκαλος, πάντες δὲ ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί á¼ÏƒÏ„ε. 9καὶ πατÎÏα μὴ καλÎσητε ὑμῶν á¼Ï€á½¶ τῆς γῆς, εἷς Î³Î¬Ï á¼ÏƒÏ„ιν ὑμῶν á½ Ï€Î±Ï„á½´Ï á½ Î¿á½Ïάνιος. 10μηδὲ κληθῆτε καθηγηταί, ὅτι καθηγητὴς ὑμῶν á¼ÏƒÏ„ιν εἷς ὠΧÏιστός. 11ὠδὲ μείζων ὑμῶν ἔσται ὑμῶν διάκονος. 12ὅστις δὲ ὑψώσει ἑαυτὸν ταπεινωθήσεται καὶ ὅστις ταπεινώσει ἑαυτὸν ὑψωθήσεται. (NA26)
8 But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. 9 And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. 10 Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ. 11 The greatest among you shall be your servant. 12 Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted. (ESV)
One of the best commentaries on Matthew is written by Davies and Allison, who are by no means conservative. About this passage, they say:
Although one might urge a less literal interpretation, we assume that, taken together, the injunctions against ‘rabbi’, ‘father’, and ‘instructor’ constitute a general prohibition against all ecclesiastical titles. Thus there is no more room for ‘bishop’ or’the most reverend’ than ‘rabbi’. If so, one could scarcely find a biblical text so little heeded (3: 278).
I don’t want to do more here than simply raise the question. I think it’s easier to think about this issue when you’re younger than when you’re older. Before you have titles than after. You can read the whole passage, particularly the previous 7 verses where Jesus is denouncing the Pharisees for doing the opposite of this. The question is, what would Jesus say to your church, or your school, or to you about this matter. How should we apply it? If we can’t quite maintain the proper tension, on which side of the fence is it better to fall off? Woe to you if you get it wrong.
Ouch. A sincere thanks, Todd. :)
I always appreciated that you had your students call you “Todd,” even though I realize that institutions sometimes have policies (written or unwritten) that their instructors must go by certain titles among the students.
Seems that one implication of vv. 8-10 is that if we do call people according to their “ecclesiastical titles,” they will soon replace Christ as our leaders and instructors (and even if they remain humble and don’t try to replace Christ, we may view them this way ourselves). More importantly, the fact that we do identify people with their titles is probably an indication that we’ve already done so. And the fact that they accept the titles may say something about them, too. Each day I feel more and more strongly that this is the atmosphere of most academia where you’re respected mainly for where you graduated from and who you studied under and who you know and how many sources you cited in your paper.
As you mentioned, there’s a balance, but it seems obvious which side we’re on (and which side we need to work on). Thanks for bringing this up.
Personally, it’s exactly what I’m wrestling through as I consider doctoral studies. I just don’t want to be that person, and though I can never blame an environment for who I become, I do think that the typical atmosphere of conservative-evangelical higher education breeds this exact way of thinking, and I’m sincerely frightened by it.
I find more and more that we are not usually on Jesus’ side when it comes to His interactions with the Pharisees.
If you have more thoughts on this in the coming days/weeks, I’d love to hear them.
Gunner – some of what you mention are not issues I’m prepared to address. But a couple of thoughts. 1) I think that if you do good scholarship, you’ll have an impact. I think the recent election of Dr. Merrill to future president of ETS is a good example of that. 2) I think that if you are on guard, you need not shun academia for this reason. There are other dangers in this field that could trip you up, and dangers in all fields. What is important is to be aware of the dangers and to guard your heart throughout.
What an interesting text. I’m with you on your #2, Todd.
It seems to me that the larger context is about hypocrisy (up to v. 35), but vv. 5-12 are a little excursus on arrogance. I don’t know if I would apply these rules (“don’t call anyone father”) any more literally than I would apply “cut off your hand” or “gouge out your eye” – it’s hyperbole to make a point about humility. And as you’ve rightly pointed out here before (and I remember Gunner’s comments on this, as well), pride is not inherently connected to the title “Dr. Bolen,” and neither is humility with “Todd.” It’s an issue of the heart (isn’t everything?).
And p.s. – how are “father” and “teacher” “ecclesiastical” titles? That title seems like a stretch to me.
Pingback: White Washed Tombs « Teaching to Learn and Learning to Teach
I’m with Danny: In what way was “father” an ecclesiastical title in Jesus’ day?
Check this out.
Go to http://www.torahresource.com
Then click on Articles In English
Scroll down to “The Term Rabbi in the Gospels”
Some food for thought for you.
Chag Semeiach!
Mike
Pingback: marcpitman.com » Is my first name now “pastor”?