Call No Man Your Father on Earth; Did Paul Contradict Jesus?

By James Quansah, Pastor

WE FIND the use of the title “father” in both the Old and New Testaments. It is often used to refer to God, biological male parent, foster male parent and metaphorically used to refer to leaders of the church. In the Decalogue, God speaking by the mouth of His servant, Moses, used the word “father” and “mother” in relation to one’s biological parents while instructing the children of Israel (Exodus 20:12).

And in our generation, most Christian denominations call their ordained ministers “father” as an ecclesiastical title. It appears they were influenced by Paul, the apostle, who often used the father metaphor umpteenth times to refer to himself in his writings.

“I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus, WHOSE FATHER I BECAME in my imprisonment (Philemon 1: 10- 19).   Paul wrote again, “For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I BECAME YOUR FATHER in Christ Jesus through the gospel,” (1 Corinthian 4: 15). “But you know Timothy’s proven worth, how as a SON WITH A FATHER he has served with me in the gospel” (Philippians 2:22).

However, Jesus Christ plainly proscribed the use of the title “father” to be referred to any of His disciples no matter the height they attained in ministry. He insisted that His followers were true brothers and sisters and that none among them should act like the rabbis of His day who elevated themselves above their fellow countrymen. Jesus said, “And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven…” (Matthew 23:9-11).

Did Paul then contradict Jesus Christ in the use of the title “father”? The Merriam Webster dictionary defines contradiction as, “the act of saying something that is opposite or very different in meaning to something else”.  This means a contradiction is a flaw or an inconsistency or illogicality.

In the words of Stephen Finland, “whenever Jesus uses the term “father”, he is speaking either of literal biological descent, or of God as Father, but never of one disciple in relation to another. Writing about the family metaphors in Jesus’ teaching, Finland further points out: “The most noticeable characteristic teaching of Jesus is his focus on the character of God, on God as a loving Father. His remarkable teaching is that God is not only his father, but the personal and loving father of believers as well.

Now, if God, in the Decalogue, commands His children in the Old Testament to honour their father and mother which is tantamount to endorsing the use of the honourary title “father” for humans on earth, why would He forbid its use in the Gospels in relation to the disciples of Christ? Is God contradicting Himself?

Darryl M. Erkel rigorously argues that, “Jesus is not denying functional differences and roles within the church; nor is He suggesting that it is wrong to term one’s biological parent “father.” Rather, He is prohibiting the use of self-exalting and honourific titles of distinction among those who have chosen to follow Christ. While conferring honourific titles upon prominent religious authorities may be the way of the world, it is not the path that Christ has called us to pursue”.

However, Josephine E Armour thinks that Jesus’ words in Matthew 23:9 strongly aim at disallowing organized hierarchical leadership of the church. She quotes Schillebeeckx as arguing that Jesus’s words “is fundamentally…the view of all the primitive Christian communities. “Schilleneeckx’s demonstration of the fact that the church’s ministry has not always been hierarchically ordered invites us to consider other possibilities for organizing ministry today”.

She further quotes Fiorenza as suggesting that “the early discipleship of equals would have rejected the patriarchal power of fathers and teachers and understood itself to have one father and teacher in God. She adds, “Fiorenza draws attention to the fact that the church has not obeyed Jesus’ command in this matter and has in fact legitimized ecclesial patriarchy, using the term “Father” for its ministers and thereby “using the name of God in vain”.

First, it has been established that Jesus’ words in Matthew 23: 9 does not contradict the Old Testament commandment to the children of Israel to honour their father and mother as recorded Exodus 20:12. In other words, God permits that children call their parents as father and mother. Hunter shares this view when he notes, “Father is not used in Scripture to denote a particular human office other than the head of the family”.

It can clearly be seen from the discussions, so far, that Jesus and Paul seem to be talking about two different things contextually. Thus, Stott dismisses any contradiction between Jesus and Paul. He writes, “Paul’s claim to spiritual fatherhood is at first sight perplexing since Jesus told us not to call anybody our father on earth because we have a Father in heaven (Mt. 23:9).

So did Paul contradict Jesus? Did he do what Jesus told us not to do? No, he did not. Jesus was telling us not to adopt towards any Christian leader in the church, or to expect anybody to adopt toward us in our own leadership roles, the dependent relationship of children to their parents.  He continues, “The followers of Jesus are to grow into a healthy independence and interdependence.

In other words, Jesus was forbidding that we assume the authority of a father; Paul by contrast, is referring to father’s affection for his children”.  Making a strong supportive point on Paul’s use of familial metaphor in describing his relationship with the Corinthians, Yong Lim says, Paul “was authoritative, yet filled with intimacy and love for them. As a father, he instructed and disciplined his children for their benefit.”