This coming Sunday is the 31st Sunday in Ordinary Time. In the previous posts we considered the three critiques of the scribes and Pharisees. At this point the conversation seems fully directed to Jesus’ disciples.

8 As for you, do not be called ‘Rabbi.’ You have but one teacher, and you are all brothers. 9 Call no one on earth your father; you have but one Father in heaven. 10 Do not be called ‘Master’; you have but one master, the Messiah. 11 The greatest among you must be your servant.  12 Whoever exalts himself will be humbled; but whoever humbles himself will be exalted. 

By the second century the title “Rabbi” (etymologically “my great one”) was properly used for those who had been trained and formally recognized as scribes (like our Catholic  “Reverend”), but this technical use probably came in after the time of Jesus. In Jesus’ time it is thought to be an honorary title, based on the public’s perception of his ministry rather than his formal training and position.

Having set the stage, Jesus now turns to his disciples and admonishes them to avoid honorific titles. Could this be a simple warning or is Jesus addressing a problem already present among his disciples? In any case, the admonition makes clear that concern for status, a given in secular society, is not to be a factor among those who would call themselves followers and disciples of Jesus. Another scholarly view is that Matthew is using this incident to point out that the problem still exists in his time, some 40 years after the death of Christ. The three titles singled out were probably all being used in Matthew’s church. It is not difficult for a modern reader to think of similar honorifics in use today, and to discern behind the titles an excessive deference to academic or ecclesiastical qualifications.

In the same verse where Jesus says: “You have but one teacher” rather than students or disciples, Jesus reminds them they are all brothers. The point is not their training or results, but that what binds them together is not the Law, but it is the Law Giver. As a consequence, they are not to seek differences of status, but rather to act as brothers – or perhaps as “little ones.” (cf. Mt 18).

In Matthew’s gospel Jesus himself is addressed as “Teacher” only by outsiders, never by his disciples, and the actual Hebrew term “Rabbi” is heard only from the lips of Judas after his apostasy (26:25, 49). But the title is not in itself objectionable, since it is here forbidden not for Jesus himself but for his disciples, and the reason for the ban is to avoid confusion with the only true “teacher” they have, Jesus himself. To recognize him as such is not false adulation but sober fact, but not even the most prominent of his followers is to be placed alongside him in this position of authority. Cf. the comment in 7:28–29 on the unique authority of Jesus the teacher in contrast with “their scribes” who are here under the spotlight. If anyone is entitled to “sit on Moses’ chair,” it is Jesus. [R.T. France, 2007, 863]

The introduction of familial terminology in “you are all brothers” now leads into another family title, which is also open to abuse: “father.” It is found in the OT as a term of respect, usually applied to someone older and/or socially superior to the speaker. Its use in Judaism for an authoritative teacher is illustrated by the title of the mishnaic tractate ʾAbot, “The Fathers,” a collection of sayings of revered teachers past and present. But Jesus’ special emphasis on the disciple’s relationship with God as the one “heavenly Father” (especially prominent in the Sermon on the Mount) means that it should no longer be thoughtlessly used of other people—except of course in its literal sense. Paul will speak of his evangelistic role as that of a “father” to those whom he has brought to faith (1 Cor 4:15; cf. Phm 10), but there is no NT record of him or any other Christian leader being addressed as “father.”

Which raises the question of the Catholic use of the term “father” for ordained men. The Catholic Church refers to priests as “father” based on the understanding of their role as spiritual fathers in the Christian community. This practice finds its roots in the New Testament, where St. Paul refers to himself as a spiritual father to the early Christian communities he founded (1 Corinthians 4:15).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains the use of the title “father” for priests in paragraph 1540, which states: “The apostolic tradition of the Church has recognized men who are chosen for the ministerial priesthood to be configured to Christ the Priest in such a way that they can act in the person of Christ the Head. Because of this sacramental configuration, priests are called to exercise a spiritual paternity towards the faithful, leading them to spiritual birth and growth in Christ.” This spiritual paternity is understood to be a participation in the fatherhood of God, who is the ultimate source of all fatherhood. By using the title “father,” the Church acknowledges the priest’s role as a spiritual guide, teacher, and caregiver, who nourishes and nurtures the faith of the faithful.

A linguistic note before moving forward. The next title after “Father” and “Rabbi” is kathegetai. The word means instructor and in the Catholic tradition is the source of our word “catechist.” Virtually all Bibles translate the word as “instructor” which helps separate it from v.8 where Rabbi and “teacher” are combined. The Catholic New American, the word is translated as “Master” which in American English takes on the sense Master-servant/slave, which is unfortunate. In the Vulgate (Latin) the word is magister which is an academic term

The third title, “instructor,” occurs only here in the NT, nor is it found in the LXX. Its original sense was “leader” or “guide,” one who shows the way, but it came to be more commonly used for teachers, those who show the way intellectually or spiritually. It may therefore be a virtual synonym of “teacher” in v. 8; perhaps our term “mentor” might convey the same sense. As in v.8, Jesus is the only person who truly fulfills that role for his followers.

It is surprising that Matthew here portrays Jesus as using “the Messiah” as a third-person title (Mark 9:41 is the only other synoptic example), especially as he has forbidden his disciples to use that term to describe him (16:20) and has previously carefully avoided doing so himself. His disciples were, of course, well aware by now that Jesus did see his mission in messianic terms, and would have understood him here to be speaking of himself, as in v.8. But the audience is still, according to v. 1, the general public as well as his disciples. We noted above, however, that from v. 8 the primary audience is clearly Jesus’ disciples, and in such a context Matthew has not found the title inappropriate, perhaps because the wording does not actually say that “the Messiah” is Jesus, however obvious this must have been to his disciples at the time, as it would be also to Matthew’s Christian readers. [R.T. France, 2007, 864]

Image credit: Woe unto You, Scribes and Pharisees (Malheur à vous, scribes et pharisiens) James Tissot, 1886-1894, Brooklyn Museum, PD-US