By DR. AYODEJI AWE
QUESTION 54:
ANSWER:
You sound like someone who has all your life has been in a good bible believing, teaching and practicing church. That is a real good compliment. You couldn’t have been better situated because you are saved the hassles of seeing or being exposed to many questionable things that are common in churches that are not run according to scripture.
The caps of the bishops having an anticline bordered by two synclines flat rounds in front and at the rear is formed after the fish head designed mitre, identified with the worshipers of the philistine god called Dagon (cf. 1 Samuel 5). This symbol was a hat shaped like a fish-mouth with one or two long pieces of
cloth that draped down over the back of the wearer, painted or embroidered to look like the body of a fish.
The early Pope in an attempt to balance the distancing of his power by Constantinople (cf. the History of early and medieval Christians) resorted to fostering an image of awe. First was the usurping of Janus and Cybele (two Roman gods derived from Babylon) keys and Dagon’s hat. Janus was the two headed god who had lived in two worlds, the Babylonian divinity highly touted as an incarnation of Noah, (how absurd!).
Dagon the fish god represented that deity as a manifestation of the same patriarch who had lived so long in the waters of deluge. As the pope bears the keys of Janus embroidered, so he wears the wears the mitre of Dagon.
In spite of the murkiness of the foundation of his attire, the pope is seen as the model of appearance of the bishops of all ages. However, if the clergies of the Catholics, Anglicans and some other orthodox denominations could be excused as drowning in the sea of scriptural lethargy, how could some of these so called gospel era bishops escape so much scrutiny as they are flagrantly fouling the simple dictates of the New Testament?
Ask a typical bishop today where he got his mitre or and the skull cap from, the slightly honest simple minded ones would point to the Levitical codes of dressings as found in the Books of Exodus and Leviticus, but the awe seeking simpletons among them will like to either dodge the question or bold facedly shrug it off as undue critic’s needling. But it must be simply presented that the Priest code can no longer apply. The roles of the Levites, priests and high priests of the old are significantly disparate with the functions of the New Testament pastors and bishops. Even if there is any parity in their functions thus justifying a similar look, some part of the modern look is a betrayal of the right reflection of the original. According to Daryl Owen,( you may see his writing- ‘Something is fishy’),the archaeological findings of the excavation of Nineveh have powerfully backed the fact that put this beyond all possibility of doubt, that the papal mitre is entirely different from the mitre of Aaron and the Jewish high priest.
Whereas the mitre of the Jewish priest was a turban (Exo.28:4, Lev. 16:4, Zec. 3:5), but the mitre as we have today as was previously presented by the Catholic and later absorbed by others, was a gradual modified form of the eastern priests prevalent about 500 yrs before Christianity. Eventually the taily fish design was removed but the upper mitre part remains the norm today leaving the original intent and design to be rooted in the worship of the false gods of the Babylonians and the Philistines. The question is: why would a gospel based clergy copy the head covering that is rooted in false religion? Huh! Let’s pause for a moment and move on to the general dressing.
In the New Testament, no dress code is particularly scripted for ministers, pastors, prophets, bishops, etc. That in itself can be an argument in favor or against the huge, heavy and beautiful cassock often worn by some of the priests and bishops of today’s churches. In favor because if no specific is recommended, then anything in dress or clothing style that honors the basic nakedness- sidelined reflection in dressing is welcome. That makes any dressing that covers the body to be subject to no controversy. But on the flip side, any educated fellow must define dressing from the angle of compatibility with vocation of the wearer especially if he/she is on duty. Herein lays the highly questionable choice of some of these dressings that we see today. Maybe in the catholic or some of other churches like the Episcopal, Methodist, etc that the roles of the bishops have been ‘revised’ or reduced to standing by the altar to pass holy communion and pray liturgies may have made these types of long, heavy gorgeous robes fit. But can we say that of the gospel/ Christian churches of today? The images of the pastors and bishops of the New Testament that modeled the modern testament pastors are significantly different. So do the roles and functions.
The present day true pastors and bishops are called to lead and serve. True pastors lead in preaching the gospel, fasting and praying, serving in every capacity, sing, dance, play instruments (nothing bars them from such, especially if the need arises and there is none available to engage) etc. During genuine baptism service, a true pastor/ bishop enters the river/ water just like the candidate. They were not too dressy to enter the river or lake nor do they have to revert to releasing a little sprinkle on a baby in disguise from the fear of getting the heavy embroiled cassock wet and soggy. True pastors dress in a manner that allows the work of ministries to be done. Like a true shepherd he dashes after a sheep that veers off; when a member falls down on Gessner Road, like the Good Samaritan, a true pastor can kneel by his side, treats his wounds, and lift him up on his feet and the beat goes on.
For those who feels uneasy about how endangered the embroider cassock is to smart and highly demanding pastoral work, for a moment ponder on a bishop wearing a mitre. Beyond the fragility vis a vis the pastoral functions and its questionable origin- evolving from the priests of Dagon, the ancient Philistine god, a clear look at the scripture makes the bishop who wears cap in church especially while ministering look like a spiritual rebel or a scriptural illiterate. Either way, the visage and the symbolism are neither good nor befitting.
The word of God categorically states that a man who covers his head while praying or prophesying has dishonored his head, who is the Lord Jesus Christ himself (1Cor. 11:4). Why would you want to do that to your Savior and Lord, the One who chose and called you to ministry? The instruction goes further: “a man ought not to cover his head (in this situation) since he is the image and the glory of God” (v.7, NIV). Why does this matter to God? We do not know more than the plain commonsensical fact that the spiritual matters are the focus and the specialties of God; the ministers are ordained of God and they must serve him to his own dictates and specifics. Knowing this as clearly spelt in scripture, then you begin to wonder: is the bishop who appears with a mitre or a skull cap on his head on the pulpit or by the altar a rebel or he simply does not understand what he is doing. Either way: it is sad!
Another symbol of the Popes power, copied by some of the modern day bishops, which must not be overlooked, is the pontifical crosier. What is the origin? The Pope stole it from the Roman Augur. Those who have read extensively on this topic remind us that when the Roman Augur consulted the heavens, or took prognostics from the sky, it was imperative that they were equipped with ‘lituus’or a crooked rod, now identical with the pontifical crosier. Catholic literature in the dark ages when no deceit or hiding of facts was deemed unnecessary had used both as synonyms (see, Papal Sin: Structures of Deceit by Gary Wills). A papal writer describes a certain pope or papal bishop as “adorned with mitre and crosier”. But the crosier, or lituus or the divining rod of the Roman augurs was a concept borrowed from the Etruscans who along with their religion derived from the Assyrians.
As the Roman augur was distinguished by his crooked rod so the Chaldeans soothsayers and priests in the line of their duties of performing magic rites, were generally equipped with a crook or crosier. This magic crook can be traced up directly to the first king of Babylon, Nimrod who according to Berisus was the first to bear the title of the Shepherd King.
Again today that curved headed stick carried by some bishops is intended to depict the symbol of a shepherd but I doubt if a modern day bishop understands the origin of the concept nor care to reason the need for such, which for me will say that engaging in some of these things is at best petty and unnecessary but at the worst, after digging deep on the intent is idolatrous, spiritually inappropriate and evil.
With every good sense brought into play the Bible would be a better symbol to carry by the bishop in the line of duty. It is the lamp unto our feet and the light unto our path (Psa. 119:105). It is the collation of precepts that that form a believer’s doctrine and way of life. It is the pronouncement that alerts us when we are going the wrong way and simultaneously shows us the right way to the end that we become the best we can be, not a fatten cow tended by a wolf in shepherd’s outfit that will be roasted at Xmas but a highly commended child of God nurtured by the true shepherd and bishop of our souls. Yes, good judgment would have induced a bishop to be attracted to the Bible than a huge crosier stick.
Watch a typical procession into a service (where such is the norm), a bishop is more likely to hold a huge stick than a Bible. And some one is saying that he is born again and Holy Ghost filled?
In closing, I believe that as it was in the beginning so it is today. Many priests and bishops of the old (post New Testament period) stepped into the glamour of the bishopric as shaped by the early popes and bishops and that was enough to engage their minds. Whether the original intent of God is reflected and served and whether other things attached to it are right or wrong won’t matter so long the pomp and the power are radiating. Yet the body of Christ is in crisis because the bishops have fundamentally erred. So have the sheep continued to bleed because the shepherds have abandoned their ordained roles. They care less about the very ones they have been appointed to nurture. Other superficial interests have overtaken the original mandate.
Thanks to the Lord for the true remnants, the God ordained, Jesus following and sheep tending pastors and bishops who are not only appropriate and model setting in their appearance but whose hearts and souls are into preaching the gospel unto every creatures of all class and all nations, whose goal is to get the sheep to the green pastures on their way to ultimate salvation that ends with man being in the presence of his father God for ever.
Copyright © 2015 The Christian Herald. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy
