HOME | ARTICLES

Keeping in mind here, the issue is the application of titles among Rabbi Yeshua's followers, and not about practical, casual, or temporal references such as when a child refers to his natural mother and father. Terms of endearment are not the issue at hand.

The Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches have used the title "father" in various forms, as pope¹, papa, padre, pater, father, patriarch, etc. There is no question that those bearing this title feel entitled to some degree of exaltation.

This is the essence of Yeshua's prohibition against certain lofty titles. It is not a prohibition against the common uses of the term. 

The Pope and his church exalt themselves against the most high God, and at will they attempt to change his unchangeable commandments. Whether they admit it or not, they act as if they were the heavenly Father, while bearing his title. By using the title they imply they carry an authority which they do not have.

Once again they attempt to twist the writings of Pulos (Paul) to help justify their custom. They point out that Pulos appears to refer to himself as a "father". However he never uses it as a title, or in self exaltation, but in a purely practical and generative sense. There is no record of anyone referring to him as "Father Pulos", not even in Catholic literature.

Pulos explains² his role as one of nuturing and teaching, and that he sees the Corinthians as his evangelical children. For the sake of this prohibition, perhaps it would have been beneficial to have made a different choice of words, however there could be no better intent. Pulos was not establishing for himself justification for a title he never used or accepted.

The Church has attempted to defend their use of the titles prohibted by Yeshua with the explanation that he was referring to false teachers (rabbis), and therefore fathers, outside of his flock³. However this interpretation dissolves because Yeshua was directing the instruction to his flock that they were not to be called those titles, and rather because they are "brothers"⁴.

Nowhere in the scriptures does the Christian interpretation exist, in fact the act of a so called follower of Yeshua calling themselves "father" is the heresy in itself. No other heresy needs to accompany it.

It is because of their obedience to the instruction of Rabbi Yeshua that none of his disciples, emmisaries, or followers of his ever bore the title "Father" until there was invasion by the Church which corrupted some to adopt the custom⁵. The emphasis of Yeshua and his disciples were on fulfilling useful roles, and not on collecting titles to elicit adoration or to impress men.

The church derived this appellation from Roman culture where the exalted caste were known as "patricians". Even if it were permissable in any other corner of society, whether the arts, judicial, socially, family, technology, philosophy, the line was drawn around religion and spirituality. In this realm, there was to only be one titled as father, and that was God in heaven.

One can not claim to follow Rabbi Yeshua and ignore his teaching. One can not claim to honour the Father alone, when they refer to themselves or others as "Father". Anyone claiming to represent or follow Rabbi Yeshua and yet allow themselves or others to refer to them as rabbi should be treated with suspicion and their motives questioned.

YHWH is not equal to all other fathers, nor inferior to any, but rather he is superior to and the Father of us all, even Yeshua. He alone deserves the title of Father in the hierarchy of Israel and the universe.

---

1. Wikipedia - pope - "Pope comes from the Greek word pappas, "father".

2. 1 Corinthians 4:15

3. 'Call No Man Father', Fr. Richard Ballew - "For after saying only "One is your Father", Jesus proceeded to declare, "And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ".6 Yet He Himself acknowledged Nicodemus to be a "teacher of Israel".7 And in the church at Antioch certain men were called "prophets and teachers".8 Then again, the Apostle Paul not only recognized teachers as gifts of God to the Church,9 but he also did not hesitate to call himself "a teacher of the Gentiles"... Therefore, in saying we should call no one "father" and "teacher", except God the Father and Christ Himself, the Lord Jesus appears not to be taking issue with the use of these particular titles in and of themselves. The context of the passage gives us the interpretive key we are looking for. In this "call no man father" passage, our Lord is contending with certain rabbis of His day who were using these specific titles to accomplish their own ends. And had these same apostate rabbis been using other titles, such as "reverend" and "pastor", Jesus, it seems to me, would have said of these as well, "Call no one reverend or pastor".

4. Yeshua's aim was to sustain a brotherhood, not a caste system. "But you are not to be called 'Rabi' for only one is your greater, but you are all brothers." - Mati 23:8

5. e.g. the formation of the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church after the Synod of Diamper