ut all their works they do to be seen by men. They make their phylacteries broad and enlarge the borders of their garments. They love the best places at feasts, the best seats in the synagogues, greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called by men, "Rabbi, Rabbi." But you, do not be called "Rabbi", for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren. Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ. But he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whoever exalts himself will be abased, and he who humbles himself will be exalted (Matt. 23:5-12).
On some issues, it is astonishing how easy it is to miss the plain meaning of Scripture. In this passage, Christ forbids the use of honorific titles within the church. He knew the temptation to self-exaltation and personal ambition was going to be strong in the church. From the history of the church, we can see how important this prohibition was, and how much it has been disregarded. The Christian church has managed to avoid the use of the term Rabbi, but in all other respects, Christ's requirement is ignored. He forbade titles of spiritual respect for the leaders of the church; we are not in the clear if we substitute Reverend for Rabbi.
There are of course two errors that must be avoided with regard to this. The first is the error of spiritual aristocracy the error Christ is addressing here. A clergy/laity distinction is established, contrary to Scripture, and churches govern themselves according to that distinction. A church is run by a "pastor" or "minister"; the honorific titles given to him are merely a symptom indicating that the governmental structure of the church is not biblical. But Christ was insistent that the leadership of the church must never set itself through the use of titles. The leaders of the church are to be distinguished and set apart, but this is to happen through service and self-sacrifice.
The second error is one of spiritual egalitarianism. Christ established a government in His church; the leadership provided by the elders of a church is very real, and their authority is genuine (Heb. 13:7,17). God requires the members of a church to obey their leaders. While God has not established a spiritual aristocracy in the church, neither has He established a democracy. There is true authority vested in the eldership.
There are several protections God has set forth in His word to keep this required obedience from becoming a yoke of bondage. One protection is that when the leadership in the church is following the pattern of the New Testament the leadership consists of a plurality of elders. We have no example in the New Testament of a church governed by a solitary pastor. Each church was governed by a group of men called bishops (Phil. 1:1) or elders (Acts 14:23).
The second protection is Christ's prohibition of titles in this passage. Men who are hungry for power and prestige will generally not be content to forego the distinction of such titles. Certainly there will be some who embrace the sin and suppress the symptom, but they will be rare. There will occasionally be a church run by a Diotrephes, who loves to have preeminence (3 Jn. 9), but which avoids such titles. Like a communist tyrant, who goes by a simple "comrade," it is possible for a dictator in a church to be simply called "brother." But over time, the lust for preeminence will result in a verbal acknowledgement of that preeminence.
This does not mean that every leader in a church who uses such titles is guilty of the gross sin of selfish ambition. Great and good men have allowed themselves to be addressed in this manner. But for whatever reason, whenever this happens, the purity of the church is endangered.
It is important to remember that Christ is here referring to titles, not offices. Christ established teachers within the body. He established elders, who shepherd the flock. If Smith is qualified, he should be an elder. He must not be Elder Smith. If he is a gifted communicator, he should teach the body. But he must not be Teacher Smith. If he is holy, the Christians in the church should be aware of it, and imitate the outcome of his way of life. But they must not acknowledge it by calling him Reverend Smith. Why?
Christ forbade it.
