Last week, I taught a lesson in one of the local congregations here in Cameroon on Matthew 23: Why were the Pharisees Jesus' greatest enemies? We looked at the faults and attitudes of the Pharisees. One section of that chapter got me to thinking and researching. Here is the lesson that I will be presenting out of that.
Question: How do we explain
Matthew 23:8-12?
Matthew 23 is a chapter of the
Bible that takes on the Pharisees, exposing their faults and their wrong
attitudes. In this passage, Jesus makes a statement about leadership.
“But
do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers. And
do not call anyone on earth your
father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. And do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is
Christ. But the greatest among you shall be your servant. And whoever exalts himself shall
be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted.” (Matthew 23:8-12 NASB).
What is the problem or the
question here? The issue is that this teaching of Christ seems to be
contradicted by other passages in the Bible. In Ephesians 4:11, we see that God
gave the Church, amongst others, teachers. Again in Hebrews 5:12, the author of
Hebrews admonishes the readers that they ought to have already been teachers.
Teachers thus is used a number of times in the New Testament- so was this in
disregard for Jesus’ teaching?
We see the other terms appearing
in the New Testament as well. In 1 Corinthians 4:14-16, Paul says that in
Christ Jesus he became the Corinthians’ father through the gospel. In Hebrews
13:17, we are told to obey our leaders, who keep watch over our souls. Again in
Romans 12:8, Paul says that those who lead are to lead with diligence. Thus,
one might see a contradiction- Jesus said don’t be called Teacher, Father or
Leader, and yet in the rest of the Bible, these terms are used. How do we
reconcile this seeming difference?
To start, we need to remember a
basic principle of Bible interpretation or understanding- always look at the
context! Many times, when people have trouble understanding a verse, it is because
that verse has been taken out of its context and is being looked at in
isolation. The case of Matthew 23:8-10 is great for teaching the importance of
looking at the context and broader picture to fully comprehend the point that
the speaker or author was making.
If we will start reading Matthew
23 from the beginning, what is the picture or context within which Jesus is
speaking? We see that He is addressing the issues of the Pharisees, and is
specifically looking at the attitude of the Pharisees towards being leaders. The
issues of leadership that the Pharisees had were many:
1-
They had assumed a position of authority not
given them by God. (Vs 2) They had seated themselves in the chair of Moses.
Moses spoke with authority and gave commands to the people- because God had told
him to do so! The Pharisees had no such authority from God, but had simply
assumed it for themselves.
2-
They did not lead by example, but rather laid
burdens that they couldn’t even carry on the people (Vs. 3-5). By weighing
people down with a preposterous list of laws, they kept people down and under
their power.
3-
They loved the honor and respect of being
leaders (Vss. 6-7). They were especially enamored of the honorific titles- “Rabbi.”
In a banquet, they loved to be seated at the high table; in the markets, they
loved to be given special greetings; in the synagogues, they loved the seats up
front.
We see then that Jesus was
responding to these attitudes of the Pharisees when He spoke in Matthew 23:8-10.
The issue was not so much these titles, but the attitude of desiring such
titles. Jesus was kicking back at a system of hierarchy. We can see this
especially in the word that He uses for leader- kathegetes- which contrasts
with the word used in Hebrews 13 which is hegeomai. Both of these words have
the root hegeomai, but the word used in Matthew 23 also has the prefix kata
which means “down.” We see then that this leadership was especially a leadership
from someone in a higher position- a hierarchical type of leadership.
Jesus was introducing a different
and a new perspective on leadership. The Jews’ perspective was one of levels-
leaders come in levels and are above their followers. The perspective was one
of masters and servants… the leader being the master and the followers serving
the leader, obeying what he says. While Jesus was talking about the Gentiles,
this model is well described in Matthew 20:25-28 and Luke 22:24-26.
Matt
20: 25-28 “But Jesus called them to Himself, and said, “You know that the
rulers of the Gentiles lord it
over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. It is not so among
you, but whoever wishes to become great
among you shall be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave; just as the Son of Man
did not come to be served, but to
serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”
Jesus perspective of leadership
is one in which someone’s influence is not based on them being in a position over
others or having a special title, but rather it is of influence that stems from
the utility provided- in other words, someone is a leader in Jesus’ view if
they are of service to others. Those who would provide the greatest service
would be the greatest leaders.
This is a widely acknowledged
understanding of Jesus’ view on leadership, but a rarely applied concept. If we
were to apply it though, we would look at the titles that appear in the New
Testament- such as teachers, evangelists, pastors, and leaders etc… not as
positions of hierarchy but rather as terms which describe the capacity or the
mode of service that is provided. Jesus had a functional versus positional perspective of leadership.
With this perspective, let us
reexamine those passages mentioned earlier on teachers, fathers, and leaders.
Ephesians 4:11 and Hebrews 5:12
talk of teachers, but both passages focus on the function and not position. Ephesians 4:12-13 gives us their function: to equip the saints for the
work of service and to build up the body of Christ. Hebrews 5:11-14 refers to
the function of teachers, as being
those who move beyond elementary things.
Paul calls himself a father to
the Corinthians, not because he had a title or position as their father, but
because he admonished them (1 Cor 4:14) and he was an example to them (1 Cor
4:16). Paul’s use of the term father is because he fulfills two important functions of fathers; admonishing and
providing an example.
Leaders, as defined in Hebrews
13, are those who spoke the word of God, and whose conduct and faith were worth
imitation (Hebs 13:7). Again in Hebrews 13:17, leaders’ functions are given: they keep watch over souls as those who will
give an account.
SO to come back to Matthew
23:8-12, the point of this passage is that we should not bestow on people
hierarchical titles. True leaders are not those who have the title; rather they
are those who serve. We can apply this principle then to all issues of
leadership in the Church, and I believe we will find that it helps us deal with
a lot of the problems and issues of leadership.
Let’s take an example. Generally,
in the hierarchical leadership systems that predominate in the Church, leaders
control finances. Much of the time, this is a problem, as men often misuse
finances, overly concentrate on giving in teaching and preaching, show
preference to the wealthy in the church, and many more such problems. If we
instead take a functional view of
leadership, we would look for those who already manage finances well, who are
not greedy, who are generous and transparent, and then recognize their service
and yield leadership to them in financial issues. We would not give them
financial control because they are leaders, but rather give them leadership because
they fulfill a vital function
financially.
Another area of control that
causes problems is in the area of teaching/speaking in the congregation. In the
hierarchical leadership system, the leader passes through some sort of seminary
or school or group affiliation (such as belonging to the Pharisees) and then is
given control over the teaching and preaching in the congregation. Because they
are the Preacher, they determine who is allowed to speak and what is taught.
Sometimes, they may do a very poor job of teaching and preaching, but they are
still given that control because that is their position. By contrast, consider
how this dynamic would work in a functional
system of leadership. Rather than giving teaching control to someone
because they are a leader, someone would be considered a leader because they
provide a vital service in the function of
teaching and preaching; such that people are edified, encouraged, and equipped
for the work of service.
We can continue to see how
helpful a functional view of
leadership is if we think of issues such as salary or support. With a functional system, we would not base
someone’s support or salary on how much such and such position should pay, but
rather would ask the question, “How much is needed to enable this person to
best provide the service or function
that they provide?” There would not be ill-feelings over some leader getting
paid too much or too little because it would not be the person that was being
supported, but rather the vital service that was being enabled.
Time will not permit us to
consider all the applications and implications of this change in view of
leadership, but I believe that the more that we look at the issue of
leadership, the more we will find that this view, which Jesus, the Great
Shepherd, put forth, would eliminate so many problems in the Church and would
in fact lead to far greater leadership, the leadership that Christ desires for
His church. Greatness in the church should never be an issue of who has the
highest title, but rather who humbles himself the most, who lowers himself the
most and serves. "Matthew 23:11 But the greatest among you shall be your
servant."
Questions? Comments? Corrections?
