Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

When some people learn that I preach, they refer to me as “Reverend” or “Rev.” I understand that they are trying to show respect and courtesy toward me. Such religious titles are commonly worn by the “clergy” of the denominations and, judging the churches of Christ to be just another denomination, they refer to gospel preachers just like they refer to the denominational clergy. Nevertheless, I refuse to accept the religious titles commonly worn by denominational clergymen.

Here are the reasons why I reject the wearing of religious titles:

1. There is no New Testament authority for the practice.

Though there were many gospel preachers in the first century, not one of them accepted and wore a religious title. I cannot read where Paul was ever called “Reverend Paul,” Peter was ever called “Archbishop Peter,” James was ever called “Pope James,” Timothy was ever called “Pastor Timothy,” or John was ever referred to as “The Right Reverend, Dr. John.” The wearing of religious titles is a practice that arose centuries later. They were never worn with the approval of God by those in the Lord’s church. Consequently, I refuse to go beyond the things which God has revealed that we should do in our worship of Him (2 Jn. 9-11; 1 Cor. 4:6; 1 Pet. 4:11; Rev. 22:18-19).

2. Wearing religious titles is expressly condemned.

The Lord Jesus forbade the practice when He said,

But be not ye called Rabbi; for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ (Matt. 23:8-10).

The wearing of religious titles to elevate one brother above another was soundly condemned by Jesus. The practice is contrary to the spirit of Christianity that “all ye are brethren.”

Long ago Job said, “Let me not, I pray you, accept any man’s person, neither let me give flattering titles unto man. For I know not to give flattering titles; in so doing my maker would soon take me away” (Job 32:21-22).

3. Wearing religious titles exalts man too highly.

Paul warned us “not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another” (1 Cor. 4:6). Man should not be an object of worship. Peter would not allow Cornelius to bow to him (Acts 10:26); an angel would not allow John to worship him (Rev. 22:9). Man steps outside his proper bounds of his habitation when he allows himself to be worshiped.

When man exalts himself through flattering titles such as “reverend,” “right reverend,” “worshipful master … .. most worshipful,” etc., he encourages others to offer praise to him, rather than giving praise to God. In this practice, man sins.

4. Wearing religious titles exalts one brother above another.

Jesus condemned the scribes and Pharisees saying that they “love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi. But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren” (Matt. 23:6-8). By “all ye are brethren,” Jesus forbade exalting one brother above another (also see Gal. 3:27-28; Jas. 2:14).

5. Wearing religious titles contributes to a clergy-laity distinction.

The first century church did not have a clergy separate from the members. In Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, McClintock and Strong wrote,

In the apostolical Church no abstract distinction of clergy and laity, as to privilege or sanctity, was known; all believers were called to the prophetic, priestly, and kingly offices in Christ (1 Pet. v. 3). The Jewish antithesis of clergy and laity was at first unknown among Christians; and it was ‘only as men fell back from the evangelical to the Jewish point of view’ that the idea of the general Christian priesthood of all believers gave place, more or less completely, to that of the special priesthood or clergy (McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature, Vol. II, p. 386).

In the years since the New Testament was written, a clergy has developed. The clergy is composed of those ordained for performance of Christian worship and teaching. The ordained clergy has these jobs to perform; (1) interpret the Bible for the people, (2) administer the sacraments (usually defined as the Lord’s supper, baptism, marriage, etc.), and (3) administer excommunication.

Only those who meet certain qualifications can become part of the clergy. In the Presbyterian denomination, a man must have a diploma from college, a diploma from an approved seminary, and be willing to submit to the teachings of their accepted creeds in order to become a member of their clergy. The Wesleyan Methodists encourage their men to attend a 4-year ministerial school operated by their denomination, hold membership in the Wesleyan Church and pass an examination from their denominational hierarchy. Neither Jesus nor one of His apostles could have been part of the clergy of the modern denominations of men.

The establishment of a clergy undermines the New Testament concept that all believers are priests (1 Pet. 2:5, 9), having the right to approach God directly in worship without the intervention of a human intermediary. Jesus is the only High Priest we need through whom to approach God (Heb. 2:17-3:1). Every man can read and understand the Bible; he has no need for an official interpretation by a church official.

The only biblical passages which could be used to authorize a separate priesthood must be found in the Old Testament. To appeal to those passages for authority for a separate priesthood is to revert to Judaism with its animal sacrifices, rather than accepting the all-sufficiency of the blood of Christ as revealed in the New Testament.

Noted Religious Titles Worn Today

Here are some of the religious titles which men wear today. All of them are unauthorized by the New Testament.

Pope Father

Reverend Right Reverend

Bishop Archbishop

Cardinal Pastor

Masonry has always shown a propensity for flattering titles. The master of a symbolic lodge is addressed as “Worshipful Master.” The prevailing title of a Grand Master is “Most Worshipful.” A thirty-second degree Mason is “Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret.”

The New Testament teaching on wearing religious titles condemns the practices of most denominations and the Masons.

New Testament Terms Show What A Man Does

A man is a “doctor” because he doctors the sick; a man is a plumber because he plumbs; a man is a builder because he builds. These terms explain what a man does and are not titles. In the same way, the New Testament uses terms to describe what men do. A preacher (1 Tim. 2:7; 2 Tim. 1:11) preaches (2 Tim. 4:2). An evangelist (Eph. 4:11; 2 Tim. 4:5) evangelizes. (There is no difference in a preacher and an evangelist in the New Testament.) Overseers (Acts 20:28, sometimes translated “bishops”) oversee a local congregation. “Pastors” (Eph. 4:11) tend or shepherd a flock (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 5:1-3). These are not religious titles to exalt one brother over another; they are descriptive terms which tell what a man does.

A preacher does not oversee the affairs of a local church and is never called “The Pastor” in the New Testament. Bishops, overseers, pastors and elders are different terms for the same work – the work of guiding and directing the affairs of a local church. This office or work is limited to the local church and is not to be confused with the evangelistic labors of a preacher. A preacher has no right or authority from God to pastor or oversee a church; therefore he is not properly called “The Pastor.” God ordained that each local church has a plurality of elders, bishops, or pastors – men chosen within the local membership – to oversee the local congregation. Preachers are not to usurp that office for themselves. Like all other members in a local church, the preacher serves under bishops, elders, or pastors. If we properly understand the work of a preacher and the work of a pastor, we will not confuse the two terms.

Conclusion

A generation which does not learn the thoughts and language of New Testament Christianity will soon embibe the thoughts and language of modern denominationalism. Like the Israelites in Nehemiah’s day who began speaking the speech of Ashdod (Neh. 13:24), untaught Christians will begin speaking the language of denominationalism.

This has already happened in the Christian Churches. Isaac Errett, former editor of Christian Standard, received a silver doorplate which read, “Rev. l. Errett.” Errett displayed the door-plate and J.S. Lamar, his biographer, justified it saying that “the Savior’s words do not prohibit the use of any designation which simply makes known the fact that the man to whom it is applied is a preacher. It is distinctions among preachers – the acceptance of highsounding titles which elevate the parties above their brother ministers – that the divine word seems to forbid” (Memoirs of Isaac Errett, Vol. 1, pp. 277-278). Wearing religious titles is accepted practice among the Disciples of Christ denomination.

We will do well to be reminded of the danger of wearing religious titles, even in incipient form, among us. Sometimes men who have academic degrees are advertised as gospel preachers with these titles: “Dr. . .” The term “brother,” which is used in the Bible to refer to a relationship sustained by all Christians, is sometimes reserved only for the preacher. Others are introduced by their names but the preacher is introduced as “Brother .” We must never forget that “all ye are brethren” (Matt. 23:8).

The wearing of religious titles is a practice condemned of God. Let us avoid every form of evil (1 Thess. 5:21). Let us resolve to call no man father who is not our fleshly parent, who is neither married nor has children, and who does not teach the gospel which enables children to be begotten of God (1 Cor. 4:15); to call no man reverend who does not revere what God spoke about wearing religious titles (Matt. 23:9); to call no man pastor who does not meet the qualifications of 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 but usurps to himself the rule over a local congregation; to call no man bishop who oversees a collectivity of churches unknown to God’s word; to call no man cardinal who exalts himself as if he held a chief office in the church; and to call no man pope for God alone is our Father.

Let God alone be exalted among those who profess to serve Him.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 10, pp. 290, 310-311
May 21, 1987

By Raymond E. Harris

As we read the first three chapters of the book of Romans, we find the apostle Paul declaring in no uncertain terms, the fact that Jew and Gentile alike, stood condemned before God.

In Romans 1, Paul indicts the Gentiles by saying “. . . when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened” (v. 21). Hence, he tells us that, “God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lust of their own hearts” (v. 24), “God gave them up unto vile affections” (v. 26), “God gave them over to a mind void of judgment” (v. 28). One might say God “washed His hands” of the Gentile world when they so utterly departed from His righteousness.

On the other hand, in Romans 2, we find the Jews possessed an unbelievable capacity to doubt, murmur and sin against Jehovah. This was true, despite all the special instruction and treatment they had received. In the Old Testament, God lamented the fact that even the cattle of the field knew their master, but Israel did not seem to be mindful of God (Isa. 1:3).

So when Jesus was born into the world, He arrived upon the scene to find the whole population lost in sin. What was to be done? How could mankind ever be saved? Prophets of old and even the angels of heaven had wondered throughout the centuries, how mankind – God’s prize creation – could ever be saved. Was it possible to restore peace? Was there any way for an honorable and just reconciliation to come about? What was man to do? Was there any way man could be forgiven? It seemed doubtful.

Not even the angels of heaven can fathom the mind of God! However, in 1 Peter 1:20, the apostle explains that God had foreordained, before the foundation of the world, that Jesus would come in these last times. He would come not only to reveal the Father, and give a new law; but, He would also give Himself upon the altar of the cross, as a lamb without spot or blemish. Yes, the Almighty Father allowed His Son to come and “stand in,” to die for you and me and everyone. God did not want His prize creation, the whole human race, to be lost eternally. Hence, He set in motion a grand scheme whereby men could be justified and forgiven.

That is what Christianity is all about! The gospel points to Jesus as man’s only hope. The gospel sets forth the terms of salvation. The church has been established. Now all responsibility rests with man. Man sinned against God! Man is not at liberty to legislate the terms of his own forgiveness! Man’s only hope for forgiveness and salvation is in compliance to God’s terms.

For the sake of your own eternal welfare, won’t you look to Jesus as your Savior? Won’t you repent of your past sins (Acts 2:38), confess that Jesus is the Christ (Rom. 10:10) and be baptized (Mark 16:16)? The Bible explains that when we do these things we are born into the family of God, we are Christians, members of the Lord’s body, the church. This is all possible in that through these acts of obedience all past sins are forgiven. What a glorious thought! Won’t you act now! Behold, today is the day of salvation!

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 9, p. 270
May 7, 1987

By Hoyt H. Houchen

Question: I do not believe that it is scriptural for benevolent institutions to be supported out of the church’s treasury. As an individual, is it right for me to help such a home?

Reply: The Scriptures do not authorize churches to build and maintain any human institution, whether it be a school, a hospital or a benevolent home. This issue, along with others, has resulted in division among the Lord’s people. Faithful brethren oppose this practice because the New Testament does not authorize it. They oppose it on the same ground that they oppose instrumental music in worship. There is no scriptural authority for it. The issue of churches contributing funds out of their treasuries to human institutions has been discussed on the polemic platform several times, and as yet, the Scripture has not been produced that will authorize the practice. We do not question the sincerity of brethren who favor this practice nor those who are involved in it. Their motive is not the issue. The issue is: do the Scriptures authorize it? If all brethren would be guided by the Scriptures instead of human reasoning and sentiment, we would not have division over it.

There are some organizations which cannot even be scripturally supported by individuals. Even though they do much good, they nevertheless donate to unscriptural religious bodies such as the Roman Catholic Church; and for that reason alone, brethren with conviction will not contribute their money to them.

The last part of our question is: “As an individual is it right for me to help such a home?” The reference, of course, is to benevolent institutions as referred to in the first part of the question. If our querist means is it right to donate money to such a home in order to support and maintain it, the answer is “no”; for the reason that it is being financially supported by churches out of their treasuries, as well as by individuals. However, if our querist has in mind buying services from the home, the answer is “yes.” Churches and individuals may buy services from a utility company or purchase books and supplies from a Baptist bookstore. Such institutions have services to sell, and there is a vast difference in buying their services and in donating money to their support. No effort is made here to establish a parallel between the structures of benevolent homes and utility companies, etc. The point involved is the difference between making contributions to them and buying their services.

Churches in the New Testament did benevolent work by caring for the needs of saints for whom they were responsible (1 Cor. 16:1-4; 2 Cor. 8,9; Rom. 15:26; etc.). They did not build and support benevolent institutions through which to do the work that God authorized them to do. When we all submit ourselves to the authority of the Scriptures, a “thus saith the Lord” in all matters of faith and practice, we shall have the unity for which our precious Lord Jesus Christ prayed (Jn. 17:20, 21).

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 9, p. 261
May 7, 1987

By Irvin Himmel

When the Rich Are Poor and the Poor Are Rich

There is that maketh himself rich, yet hath nothing: there is that maketh himself poor, yet hath riches (Prov. 13:7).

It is paradoxical that some are rich, despite their poverty, and others are poor who five in affluence. There are people who are poor “because all they have is money!” And there are people who are rich, in spite of privation, “because they do not measure wealth by monetary standards” (George Kufeldt).

The Rich Are Poor

(1) When they do not use wealth to God’s glory. It is not to be supposed that wealth itself is an evil. Abraham was “very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold” (Gen. 13:1). Job had great substance (Job 1:3). Both these men were faithful servants of God. It is the failure to use wealth properly that makes people barren before God.

When a certain man asked Jesus to speak to the man’s brother about dividing the inheritance, Jesus warned, “Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth” (Lk. 12:15). He spoke a parable about a rich man whose ground brought forth plentifully, but in his prosperity he thought only of himself and the accumulation of more and more goods. God said to the man, “Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee: then whose shall those things be which thou hast provided?” Jesus remarked, “So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God” (Lk. 12:21).

(2) When they trust in riches. The inclination of some people is to put their time, efforts, and powers into amassing a fortune. Money becomes their god. They rely solely on material prosperity. Jesus said to the disciples on one occasion, “Children, how hard it is for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God” (Mk. 10:24, 25).

(3) When they are spiritually miserable and empty. Behind seeming wealth there may lie spiritual poverty and wretchedness. This was the case with the church at Laodicea. The members of that congregation were saying, “I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing.” The Lord saw them as “wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked” (Rev. 3:17). “Instead of being rich, as they thought and claimed to be, He declares that they are in a distressing condition, worthy of pity, having the cringing attitude of a beggar, unable to see, and without clothes to cover their shame” (C.H. Little).

The Poor Are Rich

(1) When they lay up treasurers in heaven. Just as Laodicea was the rich poor church, Smyrna was the poor rich church. The Lord said of the brethren at Smyrna, “I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich). . . ” (Rev. 2:9). Their destitution “was offset by a far greater wealth than silver and gold; they were rich in faith and favor with God and in all the attendant blessings of glory that belong to the heavenly citizenship. Their treasure was in heaven (Matt. 6:20), which is the true riches of life (Lk. 16:11) that cannot be touched by the world” (H. Hailey).

(2) When they are rich in faith. In the apostolic age, many Christians were in poverty and were victims of oppression by wealthy men. James said, “Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats?” (Jas. 2:6) He also said, “Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he has promised to them that love him?” (Jas. 2:5) One may be poor in temporal goods but rich in faith. This is to be rich in a higher and more important sense. To be an heir of God’s kingdom through the exercise of faith in Jesus Christ is more valuable than hoarding piles of gold and silver.

(3) When they abound in good works. After warning against the danger of riches and the love of money, Paul wrote, “Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not high-minded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy; That they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate; Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life” (1 Tim. 6:17-19). Any Christian can be rich in noble deeds, even if he is poor in worldly wealth.

(4) When thy possess the treasures of wisdom and knowledge found in Christ. Paul taught that in Christ “are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Col. 2:3). The gospel makes known the hidden purpose of God that centers in Christ. Those who share in the eternal blessings provided in Christ possess all things. They are truly rich. Paul, in devoting his life to serving Christ and preaching the gospel, was “as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things” (2 Cor. 6:10). In Christ we have riches that kings and princes do not bestow, that banks do not exchange, that misers do not hoard, and that thieves cannot steal.

Indeed, the rich (in material things) are often poor (spiritually), and the poor (in temporal goods) are sometimes the richest people on earth!

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 9, p. 263
May 7, 1987