Subscribe via RSS Feed Connect on Pinterest Connect on Google Plus Connect on Flickr Connect on YouTube

And to the Author, All in Authority Must Answer – A Meditation on the Gospel of the 31st Sunday of the Year

October 29, 2011

The Gospel today is familiar to many Catholics from a negative point of view, in that many a Protestant has summoned the verse: Call no one on earth your father, to assail the Catholic practice of calling priests, “Father.” Never mind that the text also says to call no one on earth teacher. Never mind either that the New Testament contains almost 200 uses of the word “father” to refer to earthly male people. Apparently Matthew, Mark, Luke and John along with Paul and Peter and Stephen, never got the memo banishing all use of the word in reference to “anyone on earth.” (We will see some of these quotes later). Never mind all that.

Alas, to turn this into a gospel about terminology, is to miss its main point, which is to teach us about authority. And the teaching is both beautiful and essential, especially in modern times when the notion of authority is so misunderstood and frequently maligned.

Before looking at Jesus’ teaching on authority it is good to be clear one point: While it is true you and I are under authority, we also have authority. Whether it is as a parent, at work, as a community leader, Church leader, or just because you’re older; you have authority.

Because we live in a culture that largely despises authority, we tend to think it is always the “other guy” who has authority and needs to be “put in his place.” Maybe it’s that jerk in the corner office, or those nasty politicians, or the boorish and backward pastor. But, look in the mirror, this gospel isn’t just for “them,” it’s for you. So, as we explore this teaching on authority,  remember it applies to you and me just as much as “them.”

Let’s look at the teaching in four stages.

I. The Tenure of Lawful Authority.  Jesus says, The scribes and Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses. Therefore do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you but do not follow their example. Jesus teaches the disciples that, for now, they are to remain under the lawful authority of the Scribes and Pharisees. In the future, Jesus will fully send forth his Church and establish the authority of the Apostles themselves. But for now, they are to follow lawful authority, just as Jesus will expect the Church to be under the lawful authority of the Apostles and their successors in the future.

Christians are not encouraged anywhere in scripture to withstand, ridicule, resist or overthrow lawful authority. The human tendency, especially evident in modern times, to be insubordinate and disrespectful of lawful authority is neither encouraged nor supported in the Biblical teaching. Consider some of the following examples:

  1. Rom 13:1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
  2. 1 Peter 2:13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every authority instituted among men.
  3. Titus 3:1 Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good
  4. 1. Tim 2:1 I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone– for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.
  5. 1 Peter 2:17 Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king.
  6. Matt 22:21 Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.

Hence, the Lord Jesus, indeed, Scripture in general, upholds the proper need and place for authority. Modern tendencies to celebrate rebellion and disrespect toward authority are not countenanced by Scripture, no matter how popular and pleasing such negative attitudes may seem.

And these tendencies are exhibited at every level in our western culture. Children are bold and disobedient toward parents, younger people toward elders, subordinates in the workplace toward supervisors, citizens toward elected officials, Catholics toward the hierarchy, and so forth.

One may argue, “Well, the one in charge is a pain, or a bad leader.” Perhaps, but consider what Biblical times featured: from the Scribes and Pharisees, all the way up to Herod and the likes of Nero. Yet still this teaching went forth.  Others may rush to assert, “Authorities need to be corrected.” Yes, at times they do, and a Christian should use means that are both respectful and non-violent.

Vigorous political discourse is surely a feature and a genius of our modern democratic republic. However, too much of the discourse strays into the hateful, and the hyperbolic, toward personal attack and ridicule. Such extremes are unfit discourse for a Christian, who is called to speak the truth with both clarity and charity.

So in setting forth a teaching on authority, the Lord Jesus first establishes that there IS authority and that, other things being equal, lawful authority is to be respected and obeyed. And though, as the Lord clearly indicates, there are times when the example of those in authority should not be imitated (more on that in a minute), their lawful and moral directives are to followed.

Thus, in cases where you are under authority, pray, strive to cooperate, and correct where necessary with reverence. And in cases wherein you have authority, do not be ashamed that you DO have it. Use it well, for the common good, and to provide necessary direction and unity for those under your authority. Remember too, as we shall see, if you have authority, it is to serve.

II. The Tyranny of Arrogant Authority. Jesus does acknowledge the burdensome and insensitive qualities of the leadership of that time. He says, Do not follow their example. For they preach but do not practice. They tie up heavy burdens, hard to carry and lay them on people’s shoulders. But they will not lift a finger to move them.

Here is a sober assessment by Jesus of the problems of leadership in his day. They will have to answer to God for their tenure. And Jesus holds them up as a kind of warning to the future leaders of his Church, who will also have to render an account for their leadership one day. “Do not follow their example,” Jesus warns.

As we shall see, true authority exists to serve, not to crush or merely exhibit its power. It exists to unite people around a common purpose and direct people and resources to a good and focused end. It exists to help others to accomplish their tasks in a unified and directed way. Hence we may ask the following questions of authority:

1. Does it make wings to lift a person up, or is it a deadweight to drag a person down?
2. Does help a person or haunt him?
3. Does it carry him does he have to carry it?
4. Does it bring joy to life or depression
5. Does it unite people around common goals or merely unite them in unproductive anger against authority?

How would those under your authority answer these questions?

III. The Trappings of Self-Centered Authority. Jesus sets forth how the Scribes and Pharisees loved titles, honors, and ostentation: All their works are performed to be seen. They widen their phylacteries and lengthen their tassels. They love places of honor at banquets, seats of honor in the synagogues, greetings in the marketplaces and the salutation, “Rabbi”

And so the Lord distinguishes the following problems:

  1. Their Actions are Acted – Jesus often called them hypocrites, not as derogatory, but as a descriptive. For the word hypocrite, in Greek, means “actor.” Now an actor performs and plays his role only when there is an audience. He does so for money and applause. But when the crowd is gone he does not pay his role.  There would be no point in that, since neither money or applause will result. The point here, in terms of authority, is that some in authority have forgotten the reason they have authority, or the goal to which it is directed. They care only about the praise that may increase their authority or build their ego.
  2. They Parade their Piety – The point here about authority is that the one in authority wants to be noticed as having authority. Rather than pointing to the end to which his authority is directed (in this case, God), some in authority see the acknowledgement of their authority as the proper end and desired goal.
  3. They Hunger for Honor – They seek the front seats, and to be seen as having authority. They take the honor due those in authority personally, as directed to them, rather than to the office they hold.
  4. They Take after Titles – But a title is only good if the one bearing it does not disgrace it. Having a title is not so much an honor as a responsibility.

So, in the end the poor example comes down to the fact that those in authority in Jesus’ time, mistook the “trappings” for personal ends and glory, rather than for the ends to which they were intended: the glory of God, the serving of his people and the common good and unity of all.

But leadership is not about trappings, it is about service and the glory of God.

IV. The Truth of Christian Authority. The text says,  Do not be called teacher (Rabbi) You have but one teacher. Do not be called Father, you have but one Father in heaven..Do not be called master, have but one master the Christ. The greatest among you must be your servant. Whoever exalts himself will be humbled. Who ever humbles himself will be exalted.

Jesus emphasizes Three fundamental things here, and I would a fourth.

1. All authority is under the headship of God – In critiquing the use of terms like “teacher,” “master” and “Rabbi,” Jesus is insisting that all teachers and “experts” must first be under the teaching and authority of God. All their teaching and “mastery” of any subject must be in conformity to, and submitted to the revealed truth of God. For someone to be worthy of the title “teacher,” “Rabbi,” or “Master” means that they are first submitted to what God teaches and reveals.

2. All Fatherhood, all headship, is submitted to the Father and Lord of us all and reflects His Fatherhood. No one deserves the title “father” who does not first have God for his Father. In this sense, Jesus is not so much banning a word, as insisting on a conformity to the one and perfect Father of us all. In this sense, St Paul can say, You do not have many fathers, For I became your father in Christ Jesus our Lord (1 Cor 4:15). And again, For you know how, like a father with his children, we exhorted you and charged each of you lead a life worthy of God (1 Thess 2:10).  St Paul takes up this title “Father” with them, only in relation to how he guides them to what the Heavenly and true Father would want.

3. Authority exists for service – Jesus says of those in authority: The greatest among you must be your servant. In other words those who have authority have to serve those under them, not to “lord it over.” Jesus says elsewhere:

You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many. (Mk 10:42ff)

Hence, those who have authority, have it not for their glory, but as a sign of their servitude. The priest who has authority, has it to serve his people in teaching, sanctifying and governing (uniting). The Parent has authority to serve their children, raising them to become the man or woman God intends them to be. The police officer has authority to protect and give order to the people. The teacher has authority in order that she may teach. And so forth. Authority is not for its own sake, it is for the sake of others.

4. Authority is exercised among equals – In the world, authority is equated to power, and is often ascribed to those who gain it because they are smarter, richer, more connected, and so forth. In a way, there is an assumption that “I have authority because I am, some how, better than you.” But among Christians authority is always exercised among equals. For the greatest title one can have is “Child of God.” Adding titles like CEO, President, Grand Knight, Monsignor, Excellency, and so forth, are but mere footnotes. The Pope has authority in the Church, but he is no more baptized than you or I. Please understand, he DOES have authority, and we have an obligation to submit to it. But his greatest title is not “Pope,” or “Supreme Pontiff.” His greatest title is “Child of God.” Authority does not make me greater than you, it makes me your servant. But before God we are all equally his children. This final point is my own addition and I fully open it for critique.

So there it is, a Gospel not about terminology (as in “Father”), but about authority and how to understand it and live it as a Christian. Remember it is not just about “that jerk in the corner office.” It is about you, since you too, have authority. One day we will answer to God about how we have used our authority, whether to build or destroy, enable or disable, inspire or unnecessarily infuriate. We will also render an account for how we have acted toward those in authority. And, no matter the laughter and praise this world gives to disrespect and disobedience, God is neither impressed or pleased. Authority, how we use it, and respect it, is critical to God.

Note the word “Author” in authority. For no authority exists unless it is granted from God (cf Jn 19:11).  And to the Author, all in authority must one day answer.

Here’s one of my favorite hymns: Crown Him with Many Crowns. It is here sung on the 50th Anniversary of the Coronation of Queen Elizabeth of England. It is fitting to see those in authority, even if (these days) more ceremonially so, to be seen praising to true King from who all kings, queens and leaders take their authority.

Of this King, Jesus, we can say he is the only King who died for us. And so the second verse of the hymn says, Crown him the Lord of Love, Behold his hands and side. Rich wounds yet visible above, in beauty glorified. No angel in the height, can truly bear that sight, so downward bend his wondering eye, at mysteries so bright.

Indeed, For the Son of man did not some to be served, but to serve, and give his life as ransom for many (Mk 10:45)

Filed in: homilies, Uncategorized • Tags: , ,

Comments (0)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Nick says:

    There was one Catholic king, I believe of France, who went into the fields to work alongside the poor. When his royal subjects told him he was humiliating himself by doing work unfit for a king, he said something along the lines of, “I must work for the poor,” implying that if Christ had been so humble, how could he not be so humble?

  2. mark says:

    St. Louis IX!

    “He was renowned for his charity. The peace and blessings of the realm come to us through the poor he would say. Beggars were fed from his table, he ate their leavings, washed their feet, ministered to the wants of the lepers, and daily fed over one hundred poor.”

    From the Catholic Encyclopedia;

    Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, ora pro nobis peccatoribu, nunc et in hora mortis nostrae!

  3. Jay Everett says:

    I beg your pardon but the Queen is not Catholic. Neither is Westminster Abby. So what is the point of the video?

    • Alright Jay, time to take a chill pill, also a deep breath. Just a nice picture of a queen a possible king praising the King of Kings. I think my “point” was clear enough. I am happy to see any leader or legislator, Catholic or not, acknowledge God. Would that all the world were Catholic. But a journey of 1000 miles begins with one step (hymn).

  4. Anne says:

    Excellent article! The average Catholic’s closest encounter with Catholic authority is usually the parish priest or articles by priests. However, we often run into troubling confusion. Currently, there is an article on New Advent about Jesus and the disciples on a plane ride, by the renowned author James Martin S.J. He has the apostles watching the inflight movie Bridesmaids and “ENJOYING IT”. The movie is rated O by the USCCB. Bridesmaids has graphic non marital sex throughout and blasphemy. Jesus does not rebuke them but gives a rather unclear reply which the apostles discuss. I think it is heartbreaking to picture the apostles enjoying this movie. I then end up questioning the Faith I learned as a child. Perhaps I am truly out of step and need to liberalize my ideas. Any advice?

    • Well, I am not sure I understand your question. Perhaps I’ll have to look at the article in question. Also, I have not heard of the movie. Generally however I cannot understand why a priest or any Catholic would uphold a movie described by you. I recall, about 6 years ago, a priest that I have great respect for, did a movie review of a certain movie series I will not name. Based on his review I purchased a set of the movie and was shocked to see within the first 10 minutes very graphic (nothing hidden) sex scenes. The scene I saw, trouble me still, and are hard to purge. To this day I wonder why he gave a favorable review to any movie or series of this sort. I cannot “overlook” such graphic and lewd content and say, “Yeah, but the movie was great, otherwise.” I just can’t do that.

      As for what this says of authority, recall this, if any leader, priest or otherwise gives an immoral direction, we not only are free to disregard it, we must. All leaders fail to some extent. However, when that same leader is giving direction that is not immoral we do have obligations to follow. Of course in the case of a priest who is only a very local leader, shall we say, if that priest is generally perceived to be a problematic leader one is free to find another parish, and/or consult with the bishop.

      As for Fr. Martin SJ I I have not read his article, and so, in making these comments and do not, per se direct my concerns to him or the article. I do not thereby disregard your concerns Anne, but your concerns remain hearsay for me until I get a chance to read for myself.

      • Daniel says:

        “Of course in the case of a priest who is only a very local leader, shall we say, if that priest is generally perceived to be a problematic leader one is free to find another parish, and/or consult with the bishop. ”
        Doesn’t this point work against your instruction about the obligation to follow authority? If I believe the leader is wrong, can I simply shop around until I find one (priest or bishop) with whom I agree? This seems precisely the example which tests a person’s true sense of obedience…

        • Our essential obligation is to the Bishop. Usually this is worked out at the local level by being submitted to the priest. However, if there is trouble, as there is in some cases, one is free to inform the bishop or seek counsel from another priest who is under the Bishop. This is an exception but Catholics do have the right to appeal concerns to higher ecclesiastical authority, this is spelled out in canon law.

          • Joseph says:

            I’m told that the local church is the diocese and the primary ecclesiastical teacher is the bishop. The priests are his hands and feet extended into the diocese. The deacons too but in a different way.

          • Daniel says:

            That’s a nice analogy, but it becomes weak when one looks at the interconnectedness of culture–blogging, for instance, becomes a way to bypass or override one’s allegiance to one’s own bishop by tuning in to a particular message which agrees with one’s particular beliefs. It happens with TV news as well. Sources like “RealCatholic TV” make it a point to denigrate the teaching and even the character of certain bishops when it disagrees with them. NCR does the same. The internet has been touted as a tool of evangelization, but it certainly has also challenged geography (diocese of residence) as a factor of our Catholicism.
            I have noticed this on this blog. Msgr. Pope has noted that I have a tendency to be critical of some of his postings, and this may be true, but only because it appears on the website of the diocese in which I reside and I don’t think the posts are necessarily reflective of Catholics in the DC region. I still have the (perhaps archaic) notion that it is important to participate in the local Church. Often the supportive comments are from people from many parts of the world, indicating to me that people “shop around” for the blog which suits them. In an age when less people are connected at the human (parish) level, and more and more are forming like-minded communities via technology, I wonder what the implications are for authority and unity in the Church.

          • Kate says:

            The beauty of the Universal Church is that it lives outside of geographical nuances…I don’t want a Catholic blog to be reflective of Catholics in a specific region, I want it to be reflective of the Truth. The Faith of the Church cannot specialize and “regionalize” and conform to a particular member’s situation.

  5. Alan says:

    “Authority exists for service”

    A beautiful truth of our faith! I think the “Servant of the Servants of God” would agree!

  6. Rolando Rodriguez, SFO says:

    Msgr. Pope,
    Thank you for this meditation. This is what I shared with our sisters and brothers.
    Paz y Bien, Rolando, SFO.

    All of the controversies with, and the parables against Jesus’ opponents culminate in the stinging attack we hear in today’s Gospel passage. (Matthew 23:1-12) The audience for Jesus’ attack on the scribes and Pharisees consists of his disciples and the crowds. The scribes were intellectuals, skilled in interpreting the Old Testament and in applying it to everyday life. The Pharisees belonged to a religious fraternity that expressed its fellowship in communal meals, and prided itself on the exact observance of the law. A modern Christian equivalent of the phrase “the scribes and the Pharisees” would be something like “the theologians and the Jesuits.”
    1Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying, 2”The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses. 3Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you… The chair of Moses was the seat of honor in the synagogue from which the teacher delivered his teaching. Jesus honored the authority of the rabbis and the tradition behind it, urging his followers to follow the rules and keep the tradition.
    3…but do not follow their example. While Jesus honored the authority and the place of the scribes and Pharisees, he objected to a style of leadership some of them pursued. Many religious leaders set themselves above the good of their communities. These leaders sought power for its own sake, desired the approval of an audience, and promoted their own “cult of personality.” They acted and dressed for effect. Religious practice was only a means to their own ends. They were imposing priestly regulations on lay people, laying a heavy burden upon them. Jesus pointed out that “3they preach but they do not practice.” This contrasted with Jesus’ invitation, 29Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart; and you will find rest for yourselves. 30For my yoke is easy, and my burden light.” (Matthew 11)
    Jesus criticized their behavior because they were not acting like the community of the Messiah. If they were to be faithful to God’s covenant, the community and its leadership had to follow Jesus’ example of service to all. If they wanted to reach the kingdom of God, titles and dress were of no use. Only God is “Father” and “Master.” Only Jesus is “Rabbi.” Headdress, vestments, titles and protocol have no place in the Kingdom of God.
    God has called all of his children to come Home. It is a difficult journey, so God has given his family shepherds. Those called to leadership have not earned their office and benefits because leadership is a gift not a right. The gift of leadership is not for personal profit or pleasure. It is a grace to see others through the eyes of the Giver, and to act accordingly by serving each other as we make our way Home together.

    The character of the community depends upon the quality of its leadership. This statement is a truth that highlights the role of leaders. While we are aware of weak and even sinful leaders in our history, our human family has had, has now, and will continue having good leaders. This is part of God’s covenant with his people: I will appoint over you shepherds after my own heart, who will shepherd you wisely and prudently. (Jeremiah 3:15)
    God has given us, gives us now, and will always give us good leaders. But the mission of living and sharing the Good News is not just for our leaders. God also gives us situations where we are called upon to lead. In our 2nd Reading, Paul reminds us that we are all called to evangelize. 13And for this reason we too give thanks to God unceasingly, that in receiving the word of God from hearing us, you received not a human word but, as it truly is, the word of God, which is now at work in you who believe.

    • Thanks for these insights. I especially liked your inclusion of the respect due to the rabbinic tradition and the handing on of the teaching, implied in Jesus’ statement.

  7. Mike says:

    My parish priest included the following comments about the reading in his homily:
    Matthew seems to have a bee in his bonnet about the Pharisees and the Sadducees
    Biblical scholars have shown that Matthew’s treatment of the Pharisees and the Sadducees was influenced by two things:
    Firstly, the ban on Christians using the synagogues for their services (Thus he had a grudge against the Pharisees and the Sadducees.)
    Secondly, concern among Christians at that time about the behaviour of some of their leaders.
    He then went on to talk about how the Pope no longer wore the tiara that Popes used to wear and how Popes were no longer carried around in a grand chair. These changes he considered to be beneficial.
    The comments about the tiara and the chair may be ones which many might agree with but the ones about the Pharisees and the Sadducees sound a bit like suggesting that God is not the author of the Bible. I would be interested in your thoughts about this.

    One other thing, Elizabeth is Queen of the United Kingdom. There is no such thing as a Queen of England and never has been since 1707.

    • Yes, I agree, too much modern biblical scholarship focuses on the possible human dimensions of the text. While not denying that there were human interactions and many layers, I prefer to emphasize and remember that the Holy Spirit is the author. And the Holy Spirit has neither a bonnet not a bee in said bonnet. And as for the human layers, we tend too often to simplify, read back many of our issues into the text, and, as psychoanalysts, we prove very amateur and base our conclusions on scanty evidence of someone we’ve never met. I wonder how your pastor would conclude that Matthew had a bee in his bonnet, having never met him. Is it possible that Matthew was merely recording what Jesus actually said? Perhaps, taking up your homilist’s approach, I think I can almost guess his age, based on his comments, as well as the close years of his ordination date.

      • Mike says:

        If you care to post a date I will tell you how close you are!

        I think that he suggested that Matthew has a bee in his bonnet about the Ps and the Ss because of the number of times he refers to them in his Gospel – always adversely.

        • Well my guess is that he is no less than 50 and more likely 60-75. Likely ordained in 1970s-to early 1980s.

          And surely, if Matt has a bee in his bonnet that was unjust surely the Holy Spirit would have cleansed all that which was unjust. Of this we agree, but I wish some modern commentaries would greater place for the Spirit.

  8. Mike says:

    The more likely guess is correct.
    The actual date of ordination is a bit earlier than your guess.

    As to St Matthew either we take his Gospel to be divinely inspired or we don’t. Looking for historical explanations for what he said seems to suggest that his Gospel is not divinely inspired. It even suggests that Matthew was not even reporting what Jesus said, which I find somewhat questionable to put it politely.