# Reverend vs. Pastor



## N. Eshelman

Many of my Presbyterian friends go by 'pastor' (the ones that are pastors, of course). Many of my Dutch Reformed friends go by Reverend. Of course, there is some cross-over. 

My question: 

Is the term 'reverend' biblical to call a man- even an ordained man? Or is pastor more in line with the Scriptures? 

(For the record: My Presbyterian minister goes by Reverend, not Pastor... so it is not a preference question, but a serious one.)


----------



## Grace Alone

I refer to our pastor as pastor, but when addressing an envelope to him, his title would be Reverend.


----------



## PastorSBC

Pastor for me, dont care for anyone other than God to be called Reverend


----------



## Marrow Man

Janis' point is well stated. Reverend is more of a title. Most folks address me as "pastor", but I sign things with "Rev."

The framers of the WCF were referred to as "Divines." That troubled me at first, but I got over it. Reverend doesn't sound nearly so bad next to "divine"!


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/title-rev-7110/
http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/does-reverent-comes-reverence-23225/


----------



## N. Eshelman

Marrow Man said:


> The framers of the WCF were referred to as "Divines." That troubled me at first, but I got over it. Reverend doesn't sound nearly so bad next to "divine"!



That is for sure. I was discussing the Dutch 'dominae' (or however the Dutch spell it) with a friend saying how it makes me a little vomit-ish  when people use that title, but then they stopped me dead in my tracks by reminding me that the Divines surely did not have trouble taking deity titles in their names! 

The traditions of men are hard to shake loose, huh?


----------



## Contra_Mundum

There's not a thing wrong with the term "divine" for a theologian, its only a modern linguistic quirk that makes some uncomfortable.

A person dealing with wood is a carpenter.
A person dealing in drugs (pharmacology) is a pharmacist.
A person dealing with history is a historian.
A person dealing in chemicals is a chemist.
A person dealing with electricity is an electrician.
A person dealing with law is a lawyer.
A person dealing in divinity (theology) is a divine.

As for "Rev.", its origins probably go back to the fact that officers of the church were "men of religion," that is they were not men to BE "revered" (worshiped) but were themselves "reverent" (allegedly) as in: "professionally reverent." Just as the farmer was professionally spade-handy, and the scholar professionally bookish. And so the hierarchy added terms like "very Rev." and "most Rev." etc. for their grades of prelacy.

That might not be the best beginning, however, we don't get to write our own history. And so "Rev." is the professional title for ministers today.

By the way, if you are going to write it out, instead of using the abbreviation (which abbr. I recommend), then it is proper to write it "The Reverend" with the definite article. Pretty pretentious, I must say.

The word "Rev." (as I take it today) is simply a designator, a title, for licensed and ordained minister. It lets people who don't know anything about you know what you are, and especially if you are a minister in an established church, it once again alleges "I am actually trained and skilled in the office in which I am lodged; I was called to this position, and I didn't start up a church by posting a shingle." That the title is abused is more a strike against the populace, which runs after the self-anointed, than it is against the profession which has no guild or association to chase off charlatans. That's Christ's job, outside our denominational self-police.

I use/have used "Rev" "Pastor" and "VDM" (Verbum Dei Minister) in various circumstances.


----------



## DMcFadden

When I was a working pastor, I always prefered to have people refer to me as "His Holiness, the Most Rev. Dr. Pooh Bah" before kissing my ring. But, maybe that was just me?

Actually, "pastor" was fine (I HATED Rev.).


----------



## Ivan

Pastor for me. 

Sometimes in SBC circles you hear members of the church call their pastor "brother" and/or "preacher". Of course, "brother" is a more general term used for all men of the church. Rarely do we use Reverend.

I have one member that likes to call me "Herr Pastor".


----------



## Zenas

Ivan said:


> I have one member that likes to call me "Herr Pastor".



And that's Baptists for ya'. 

I didn't vote because I'm honestly ignorant. I found Rev. Buchanan's post to be quite instructive however.


----------



## JonathanHunt

Fragments of Popery among Nonconformists

Here is Spurgeon's take on the situation, entitled 'Fragments of POPERY among nonconformists'.


----------



## Pergamum

Call me anabaptist but I like the term "Brother" myself.


----------



## Pergamum

Here they call me "Servant of the Lord" - which has a nice ring too. Servant might be the most Biblical from Paul's example.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

I concur with _Rev._ Buchanan. One of the issues we have in the Church today is the informality many Pastors take to their work. Just like dressing to "fit in" and be "hip" some of the clergy have gotten rid of these "outdated" titles in order to be more "relevant" to their congregation when in fact I believe that this being a symptom of the greater problem of the loss of the "dignity" of the Office of Overseer. There is a dire and real seriousness with being called to be an undershepherd in the Church of Christ, which many expect their Pastor to take seriously (not saying that anyone here does not) and the effort to be tragically hip does not help but I believe hinders one's ministry. This is one of the reasons why we see young people going to Rome, Constantinople, and Canterbury.


----------



## Wannabee

Good question.
I find "reverend" to be pretentious, so ignore it and won't use it in regard to anyone else.
The term "pastor" means shepherd, and is, in my opinion, the greatest compliment I can be paid. A shepherd cares for the sheep. He is the tool of the Master-shepherd. His life is focused on ministering God's Word to His people. In light of this, he either is a true shepherd, or he is not. If he is, call him "pastor" out of love for him. If he is not then don't denigrate the true shepherd by calling a hireling "pastor." Let him be reverend - he can have it.
In light of this understanding, I do not call myself pastor. I answer to it. If someone asks if I'm the pastor then I say I am. But I do not present myself, nor sign my name, "Pastor Joe." As far as I'm concerned self-given titles are self-promoting titles, as are letters after one's name. Give honor where honor is due, sure, but that doesn't mean we seek it for ourselves... we might find ourselves relegated to the back seats in the synagogues. Men who seek the respect of men will get their reward. True shepherds have a greater reward as "good and faithful slaves."
Once in a while someone comes along calling me "father." But they always want something, usually money.
What it comes down to: If you write me a letter, call me by my given name. If you introduce me, introduce me by my given name. If I shepherd you, or you can with confidence call me a true shepherd, then feel free to call me "pastor." It's humbling, thrilling and convicting while conveying honor and respect; as long as one remembers the nature of the calling.

Blessings
Just plain old "Joe," a slave of Christ


----------



## LawrenceU

JonathanHunt said:


> Fragments of Popery among Nonconformists
> 
> Here is Spurgeon's take on the situation, entitled 'Fragments of POPERY among nonconformists'.




Thumbs Up all the way through!!


----------



## yeutter

Why not use the term Presbyter?


----------



## BobVigneault

I was invited to preach at a Lutheran church and they asked if I wanted to be listed as Pastor or Reverend. I told them that not being an ordained man, why don't they just list me as Brother Bob. They said, "But then people will think you are a monk."

I told them that Mr. would be perfectly appropriate. (I ruined my vows of chastity and obedience long ago but I'm holding the line on poverty pretty well.)

For Pastors I prefer..... pastor. The other titles seem way too pretentious.


----------



## JonathanHunt

yeutter said:


> Why not use the term Presbyter?



Because no-one will understand what you mean!!


----------



## Mushroom

What's wrong with Teaching Elder?

Rev. is good, so is Pastor. Besides the questionable affect on the membership that a casual or egalitarian view of Church Office can have, I think it may also tend to cause the officeholders themselves to take their positions less seriously than they should. I'm all for titles, especially since I don't have any.


----------



## ChristopherPaul

Some may not like terms such as "Reverend" or "Divine" but how many refer to their ordained fathers as "Angels?" The Holy Scriptures go that far do they not?


----------



## Marrow Man

BobVigneault said:


> I was invited to preach at a Lutheran church and they asked if I wanted to be listed as Pastor or Reverend. I told them that not being an ordained man, why don't they just list me as Brother Bob. They said, "But then people will think you are a monk."


----------



## Pergamum

I think a certain amount of informality is good. Nothing worse than stuffy formalism...maybe even worse than "hip" youth pastors saying dude and man.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

Pergamum said:


> I think a certain amount of informality is good. Nothing worse than stuffy formalism...maybe even worse than "hip" youth pastors saying dude and man.



True but I think there is a difference between being formal and stuffy.


----------



## Wannabee

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think a certain amount of informality is good. Nothing worse than stuffy formalism...maybe even worse than "hip" youth pastors saying dude and man.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True but I think there is a difference between being formal and stuffy.
Click to expand...

... and pride.


I strongly recommend reading "The Minister as Shepherd." It's very helpful in regard to this, and challenging for any minister of God's Word.


----------



## Jimmy the Greek

Contra_Mundum said:


> . . . As for "Rev.", its origins probably go back to the fact that officers of the church were "men of religion," that is they were not men to BE "revered" (worshiped) but were themselves "reverent" (allegedly) as in: "professionally reverent." . . .



From the online Etymology dictionary:
Rverend: 1428, "worthy of respect," from M.Fr. _reverend_, from L. _reverendus_ "(he who is) to be respected."

The etymolgy does not suggest reference to "one who himself is reverent" but one who is to be revered (respected).


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

Wannabee said:


> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think a certain amount of informality is good. Nothing worse than stuffy formalism...maybe even worse than "hip" youth pastors saying dude and man.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True but I think there is a difference between being formal and stuffy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... and pride.
> 
> 
> I strongly recommend reading "The Minister as Shepherd." It's very helpful in regard to this, and challenging for any minister of God's Word.
Click to expand...


Right. 

I think this is an issue that really shows one of the differences between Presbyterians/Continentals and the independents/congregationalists in the Reformed world.


----------



## Ivan

Zenas said:


> Ivan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have one member that likes to call me "Herr Pastor".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And that's Baptists for ya'.
Click to expand...


He's a former Lutheran.


----------



## Contra_Mundum

Gomarus said:


> Contra_Mundum said:
> 
> 
> 
> . . . As for "Rev.", its origins probably go back to the fact that officers of the church were "men of religion," that is they were not men to BE "revered" (worshiped) but were themselves "reverent" (allegedly) as in: "professionally reverent." . . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From the online Etymology dictionary:
> Rverend: 1428, "worthy of respect," from M.Fr. _reverend_, from L. _reverendus_ "(he who is) to be respected."
> 
> The etymolgy does not suggest reference to "one who himself is reverent" but one who is to be revered (respected).
Click to expand...


ˇOˇ (that's my emoticon for a shrug) I still wonder whether the word was originally adopted as a means of accruing honors to the person so designated.

Did clerics need to remind people to respect them back then? Maybe so. But it seems odd in a stratified, feudal society where the pecking order was "fixed", and churchmen were already elevated. But I suppose, as a person went "up the ladder" as regards the hierarchy, they might be "getting closer to God", hence: Bishop "the MOST Rev."?

It would be nice if today, the title had more to do with the object of their profession than the men wearing it. But I think worrying about where the word came from in our own time is just a way to frustration. I guarantee, no one wants to try to be "consistent" as far as that goes. Imagine trying to watch all our words, and picking and choosing them based on how they were coined, and judging them by their history.

Can't use the word "nice" because that's a bad word.
Call everyone who lives in a detached dwelling a "villain".
Etc.

Use or abandon "Rev." as you will. As far as I'm concerned, its not much different than "Esq."


----------



## LawrenceU

What's wrong with Biblical titles? I just don't get this seeming need to classify it any other way.


----------



## Jimmy the Greek

I see no scriptural basis for religious titles. Besides, pastor-teacher is a gift not an office. (Eph. 4:11)


----------



## ADKing

Gomarus said:


> Besides, pastor-teacher is a gift not an office.



 I Timothy 3.1 _This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. _

The idea in Ephesians 4 is that the risen Christ has given gifts to _his church_ i.e. men who are pastors and teachers.


----------



## LawrenceU

I agree Jim. That's my point. Biblically I see no warrant for titles. If someone wants to describe me as a pastor that is fine.


----------



## Jimmy the Greek

ADKing said:


> Gomarus said:
> 
> 
> 
> Besides, pastor-teacher is a gift not an office.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Timothy 3.1 _This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. _
> 
> The idea in Ephesians 4 is that the risen Christ has given gifts to _his church_ i.e. men who are pastors and teachers.
Click to expand...


I agree. My point was that even though we see Elder as an office, there is no example religious titles used -- and even so, pastor-teacher is not an office, but a gift. It is a gift we should expect in our Elders, if not a qualification. But there is no biblical warrant for designating one as the Pastor of a church.


----------



## Contra_Mundum

Beside 1 Tim.3:1, I can say this: I have been "installed" in an office. The office exists, regardless of me. It belongs to the church. I am not "significant" enough to "create" this office or "own" this position. It is a privilege to be in this office. King Jesus has commissioned me an officer in his service.


----------



## Contra_Mundum

Gomarus said:


> ADKing said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gomarus said:
> 
> 
> 
> Besides, pastor-teacher is a gift not an office.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Timothy 3.1 _This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. _
> 
> The idea in Ephesians 4 is that the risen Christ has given gifts to _his church_ i.e. men who are pastors and teachers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree. My point was that even though we see Elder as an office, *there is no example religious titles used* -- and even so, pastor-teacher is not an office, but a gift. It is a gift we should expect in our Elders, if not a qualification. But there is no biblical warrant for designating one as the Pastor of a church.
Click to expand...

The bolded statement is simply wrong, factually. Whatever you think of the extraordinary office of Apostle, versus the lesser ones, Paul, etc., certainly DID use the designation as a title.


----------



## JBaldwin

> The word "Rev." (as I take it today) is simply a designator, a title, for licensed and ordained minister. It lets people who don't know anything about you know what you are, and especially if you are a minister in an established church, it once again alleges "I am actually trained and skilled in the office in which I am lodged; I was called to this position, and I didn't start up a church by posting a shingle." That the title is abused is more a strike against the populace, which runs after the self-anointed, than it is against the profession which has no guild or association to chase off charlatans. That's Christ's job, outside our denominational self-police.



Frankly, after having moved about in numerous religious circles over the years (everything from RCC to Reformed and almost everything in between), I have found that the title Rev. more often than not is used to put a person higher than everyone else, and this fosters an idea of class which I do not find biblical. While I don't mind a person using Rev. as a title. I refuse to call someone Rev. unless I am using the title in a formal sense. 

Pastor is good, but I don't find that in the Scriptures either. I call my pastor by his first name, but when speaking of him to others, I call him Pastor Ron.


----------



## N. Eshelman

JBaldwin said:


> The word "Rev." (as I take it today) is simply a designator, a title, for licensed and ordained minister. It lets people who don't know anything about you know what you are, and especially if you are a minister in an established church, it once again alleges "I am actually trained and skilled in the office in which I am lodged; I was called to this position, and I didn't start up a church by posting a shingle." That the title is abused is more a strike against the populace, which runs after the self-anointed, than it is against the profession which has no guild or association to chase off charlatans. That's Christ's job, outside our denominational self-police.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Frankly, after having moved about in numerous religious circles over the years (everything from RCC to Reformed and almost everything in between), I have found that the title Rev. more often than not is used to put a person higher than everyone else, and this fosters an idea of class which I do not find biblical. While I don't mind a person using Rev. as a title. I refuse to call someone Rev. unless I am using the title in a formal sense.
> 
> Pastor is good, but I don't find that in the Scriptures either. I call my pastor by his first name, but when speaking of him to others, I call him Pastor Ron.
Click to expand...


Pastor is quite biblical:
Ephesians 4:11-16 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: 14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; 15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: 16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

JBaldwin said:


> The word "Rev." (as I take it today) is simply a designator, a title, for licensed and ordained minister. It lets people who don't know anything about you know what you are, and especially if you are a minister in an established church, it once again alleges "I am actually trained and skilled in the office in which I am lodged; I was called to this position, and I didn't start up a church by posting a shingle." That the title is abused is more a strike against the populace, which runs after the self-anointed, than it is against the profession which has no guild or association to chase off charlatans. That's Christ's job, outside our denominational self-police.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Frankly, after having moved about in numerous religious circles over the years (everything from RCC to Reformed and almost everything in between), I have found that the title Rev. more often than not is used to put a person higher than everyone else, and this fosters an idea of class which I do not find biblical. While I don't mind a person using Rev. as a title. I refuse to call someone Rev. unless I am using the title in a formal sense.
> 
> Pastor is good, but I don't find that in the Scriptures either. I call my pastor by his first name, but when speaking of him to others, I call him Pastor Ron.
Click to expand...


Just because Rome and others have misused it does not mean it is unbiblical or incorrect to use the term.


----------



## JBaldwin

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> JBaldwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The word "Rev." (as I take it today) is simply a designator, a title, for licensed and ordained minister. It lets people who don't know anything about you know what you are, and especially if you are a minister in an established church, it once again alleges "I am actually trained and skilled in the office in which I am lodged; I was called to this position, and I didn't start up a church by posting a shingle." That the title is abused is more a strike against the populace, which runs after the self-anointed, than it is against the profession which has no guild or association to chase off charlatans. That's Christ's job, outside our denominational self-police.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Frankly, after having moved about in numerous religious circles over the years (everything from RCC to Reformed and almost everything in between), I have found that the title Rev. more often than not is used to put a person higher than everyone else, and this fosters an idea of class which I do not find biblical. While I don't mind a person using Rev. as a title. I refuse to call someone Rev. unless I am using the title in a formal sense.
> 
> Pastor is good, but I don't find that in the Scriptures either. I call my pastor by his first name, but when speaking of him to others, I call him Pastor Ron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just because Rome and others have misused it does not mean it is unbiblical or incorrect to use the term.
Click to expand...


The question in the OP is the title Rev. biblical. As it is used most often in many religious circles, I don't believe it is. Most of the time when it is used, especially in non-reformed circles, the title is used with the words "the" or "the most" as if this person was more right or more holy than the rest of us. While that is not the meaning of the word, that is how it is used. 


If someone has earned that title by study, I will use it in correspondence or when writing their name in a formal setting to show recognition for what they have achieved, but I will not call someone that intentionally as it is too often misunderstood.


----------



## Wannabee

What have we "earned" that we were not given? Is not taking a title assuming recognition for what the Lord has actually done? Titles conferred out of respect show humility. Titles demanded because of achievement or status show pride. 

My sons call me "dad," or sometimes "daddy."
My wife calls me dear, honey, sweetheart and a number of other things... mostly nice.
Some in the church call me Joe. Some call me pastor. Some know me better and call me knucklehead. Simply put, the title pastor should be earned by being one before one is called one; and then it should be out of recognition of a heart and character that typifies Christ; not because of one's vocational status/position/calling, etc.


----------



## Archlute

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Wannabee said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> 
> True but I think there is a difference between being formal and stuffy.
> 
> 
> 
> ... and pride.
> 
> 
> I strongly recommend reading "The Minister as Shepherd." It's very helpful in regard to this, and challenging for any minister of God's Word.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Right.
> 
> I think this is an issue that really shows one of the differences between Presbyterians/Continentals and the independents/congregationalists in the Reformed world.
Click to expand...


Agreed.

I think that the title of Bishop would be fine as well, since it is describing one of the functions of the office, but even though it is a more 'biblically accurate' term I could almost guarantee that most here who object to the term 'Reverend' would gladly take up calling their minister by the latter term before they would ever think about using the former.

Again, as has been noted, that kind of reaction is a result of the effects of history upon the conscience, rather than a proper grasp of one aspect of the office.


----------



## jawyman

Dr. Beeke just spoke on this subject yesterday. What Dr. Beeke said was that he has been called both and used both. He said that the use of "reverend" addresses more the office than the man and pastor is more a title of respect for the man.


----------



## Poimen

I use the term Pastor since I think that 'Reverend' could be easily misunderstood (that I am to be revered - I am thinking here mostly of non-Christians). However I usually sign my name as Rev. Daniel Kok. 

We should note that there is a difference from receiving honour on the basis of the office as services performed on behalf of Christ, and taking that honour for oneself. The apostles were to be servants of all, but it did not stop them from asserting their office when it counted most. See 1 Corinthians 9. 

We would do well to remember 1 Timothy 5:17:

"Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of _double honor_, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine."

There is a sense in which the teaching elder (pastor etc.) is to be treated with greater honour because of what he does: preaches God's Word - His mouthpiece and instrument. This however is from the Lord and thus ought to be received in humility and not arrogance and pride. 

Authority, even in the secular world, is respected and maintained. How much more so for those who are in the kingdom of God!


----------



## KMK

What is important is that the members of a church recognize that a man has indeed filled the office, whatever it is called.

At my church there is an office of Pastor/TE/Rev/Minister and I happen to be the one in the office. I don't think it is that important for everyone to address me as such every time they talk to me as long as they accept *me* as holding the office.

We had a group of people years ago at my church who were glad to call me 'Pastor Ken' but by their actions and words it was obvious that they did not consider me to be *their* Pastor.

I got sick of it and told them that if they did not consider me to be *their* Pastor, then they needed to go find *their* Pastor at whatever church he is at. Needless to say, they left.


----------



## jaybird0827

I have always preferred "Rev." unless the pastor himself indicates "Please call me, ..."


----------



## panta dokimazete

apropo of nothing - I'd like to be called _maestro_


----------



## KMK

panta dokimazete said:


> apropo of nothing - I'd like to be called _maestro_



I am often called 'maestro' by my spanish speaking students.


----------



## Mushroom

I can say that I call my first Reformed Teaching Elder Reverend without reservation, and without ever seeing his name written that way. He led me out of darkness into the light, and I love him. I don't agree in every way with everything he's ever said, but I heard him preach again two weeks ago after many years, and it reminded me of why he deserves more than double honor from me. I address him that way in public, although I know him as Bob when we are alone. My present Pastor I feel the same way about, but I confess that I have had Pastors that would have thought I was being sarcastic by using the title of Reverend. That was due to my own sin.

From the perspective of this commited layman, I have no problem with titles that connote honor, both because it reminds the sheep and the shepherd of the biblical importance of the office.

If I'm willing to call an American Judge "Your Honor", why would I chafe at addressing a man ordained by my Saviour to be my undershepherd with a title of honor?


----------



## panta dokimazete

KMK said:


> panta dokimazete said:
> 
> 
> 
> apropo of nothing - I'd like to be called _maestro_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am often called 'maestro' by my spanish speaking students.
Click to expand...


They must *really* respect you.


----------



## Pergamum

Wouldn't the most "Biblical" title, by Paul's example and Christ's action, be "Servant" - which is what they call us here.


----------



## panta dokimazete

Not really fancy, though...


----------



## py3ak

In Mexico people tend to call the pastor/missionary "the Brother", and refer to him as "Brother N_____" even if they don't use that for other congregants. There brother rather functions as the official title.


----------



## Pergamum

The early church was poor and plain. I sort of like my titles like that too.


----------



## markkoller

I use the title Rev. because I have grown weary of the abuse and disrespect that people show toward ministers of God's Word. Sadly, even people in the church do the same. The world today is ignorant of the office and has no respect toward anyone claiming to be an ordained minister. True, many ministers have abused the office and act foolish or whatever, but the office is one that we should all be working diligently to lift back to its proper place in society. We're the good guys, so we should be the ones winning back the respect of a fallen world. 

Most objections that I have seen here and elsewhere are purely an opinion and usually these objections are by people who prefer church to be informal. I have nothing against those who want to wear blue jeans and Tshirts in the pulpit , but please don't object to a perfectly fine and historically solid title that does nothing but honor those rightly ordained to a rightfully honorable position in the church. 

By the way, most of us Revs are quite humble  and see nothing in the title that is in any way prideful.

By the way, again, its hard for us pastors to be critical of all the people who fail to show us any respect (or people who dont care about our opinion) on anything if we wont at least insist on a title that is respectful.


----------



## N. Eshelman

markkoller said:


> Most objections that I have seen here and elsewhere are purely an opinion and usually these objections are by people who prefer church to be informal.



Actually, my question was 'which is more BIBLICAL, not which one do you prefer. 

I attend a church where most of the men wear suits, the minister reads from the King James version, he wears a Genevan gown... it is anything but bluejeans and such. 

I just do not see the usage of 'Reverend' in the Scriptures or in our confessional statements (I am willing to be corrected though). I am not hard and fast against the term, but I see that pastor is a more biblical title given to the men that hold the office of overseer.... of course, in classic KJV language, I guess we could go with Bishop as well!


----------



## Wannabee

Pergamum said:


> Wouldn't the most "Biblical" title, by Paul's example and Christ's action, be "Servant" - which is what they call us here.



Actually, as I mentioned this a few posts ago, it should be slave - the Greek word "doulos" does not mean servant, though most of our English translations have translated it that way. It means "slave." We are to be slaves of Christ; douloi Christou.


----------



## Pergamum

Okay, then _slave_ it is.... still seems more biblical than "Reverand" or "Divine"

The word "Minister" is nice - it denotes one who serves as well.

Our titles should reflect our role, and our role is service.


----------



## Wannabee

Amen Pergy!


----------



## Leslie

In exegeting the scriptures, there are places where one interprets specific commands as generalized. For example, the command to honor one's father and mother is taken to extend to all legitimate authority.

How about Jesus' command to call no man your father, and not to be called rabbi? Does this not extend to all titles of distinction between believers? There is only one Pastor, namely God. Only One is Reverend. Similarly with other titles. I hold an M.D. but will not be called "doctor" within the church because there is only One who heals.


----------



## N. Eshelman

Leslie said:


> In exegeting the scriptures, there are places where one interprets specific commands as generalized. For example, the command to honor one's father and mother is taken to extend to all legitimate authority.
> 
> How about Jesus' command to call no man your father, and not to be called rabbi? Does this not extend to all titles of distinction between believers? There is only one Pastor, namely God. Only One is Reverend. Similarly with other titles. I hold an M.D. but will not be called "doctor" within the church because there is only One who heals.



If your doctorate was relevant to theology of church history or some other related subject, I imagine that many would call you doctor. 

I see your point, although we see clearly in the NT that titles do apply- for example the *Apostle Paul*.


----------



## KMK

panta dokimazete said:


> KMK said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> panta dokimazete said:
> 
> 
> 
> apropo of nothing - I'd like to be called _maestro_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am often called 'maestro' by my spanish speaking students.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They must *really* respect you.
Click to expand...


Not to throw this thread off topic because I do think it is relevant: Spanish speaking children often address the teacher as "Teacher". To English speaking ears this sounds like a slur but they mean it with all due respect. They often do not know how to pronounce "Mister Klein" (not being German) and use the English word they do know: Teacher. 

I think that some people may revere the title 'Pastor' while others revere 'Reverend' while others revere 'Minister'. What is really important is not the title but the heart of the individual. 

That is why I do not demand people call me one thing or another. I figure I must earn their respect first and then they will address me respectfully.


----------



## markkoller

KMK said:


> panta dokimazete said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KMK said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am often called 'maestro' by my spanish speaking students.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They must *really* respect you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not to throw this thread off topic because I do think it is relevant: Spanish speaking children often address the teacher as "Teacher". To English speaking ears this sounds like a slur but they mean it with all due respect. They often do not know how to pronounce "Mister Klein" (not being German) and use the English word they do know: Teacher.
> 
> I think that some people may revere the title 'Pastor' while others revere 'Reverend' while others revere 'Minister'. What is really important is not the title but the heart of the individual.
> 
> That is why I do not demand people call me one thing or another. I figure I must earn their respect first and then they will address me respectfully.
Click to expand...


These are good statement to make and very helpful. 

Points made in above posts in favor of Reverend are to a certain degree speaking in favor a title that is both respectful AND formal. I think it good to mention that Reverend is not really better or worse but it does emphasize a set-apartness that is lacking in most titles given to "preachers". I would never demand anyone call me anything, but in my informal and rural surroundings I always find ample opportunity to defend the Reverend title. It gives me opportunity to lift the office and teach about what a minister does. In the same way I defend the geneva gown and even the dreaded collar (though I dont wear one myself). 

By the way, Pastor is a fine title to be given as well.


----------



## raekwon

Being a two-office guy, I really like the way Mars Hill Church in Seattle handles it. All of their elders, whether or not they're on the church's staff, are referred to by their people as "Pastor (first name)". Bucking the prevailing idea that "elder" and "pastor" are different offices.


----------



## Wannabee

Rae,

Good point. We don't make a distinction either, though the guys here are struggling with it. They agree that it's biblical (Pastor=elder), but hadn't quite throught through it that way until we studied it a few months ago. But we're still in the early stages of everyone really interacting accordingly. Interestingly, I'm not even an elder yet. I told them that they needed to evaluate my character before they could possibly make me an elder in the church... so I'm a sort of pastor in training, or something.


----------



## Christusregnat

Pergamum said:


> Nothing worse than stuffy formalism...



Self-righteous _*in*_formalism?


----------



## Ivan

Christusregnat said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing worse than stuffy formalism...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Self-righteous _*in*_formalism?
Click to expand...


To each his own?


----------



## Wannabee

Being informal is self-righteous????? Wha....???


----------



## Christusregnat

Wannabee said:


> Being informal is self-righteous????? Wha....???



Indeed, because it snubs its nose at formality, something which Scripture gives examples of, requires of men, and which the saints in all ages have recognized as a part of reverence for God.

Take, for instance, the Psalms. These are liturgical prayers and odes intended to be recited, read or prayed: formality. Paul demands certain protocol be followed in the churches with regard to all things being done decently and in order: formality. Civil justices are to observe certain rules of protocol and procedure in carrying out their tasks: formality. Elders, deacons and missionaries are sent out in Scripture after following a pattern of prayer, fasting, laying on of hands, etc.: formality. Don't get me started on the Levitical Laws: formality. Jesus organized His disciples, at the sending of the 70 into a strict pattern of conduct (two by two, what to say when entering a house, and how to respond to the unrepentant): formality. Jesus told His disciples to "say these words" and "pray after this manner" when teaching on prayer: formality. 

When we look down on formality as an evil thing, we have created a righteousness of our own, derived from modern man's hatred of certainty.

Cheers,


----------



## Neogillist

I used to call my minister "Pastor Pols", but after sometimes, I started feeling that "pastor" is not respectful enough because everyone at my church calls him Rev. , so now I call him "Reverend Pols." I think he likes it.


----------



## py3ak

I think there's a shorter way to arrive at "self-righteous informality". Many people see their informality as being somehow meritorious, and pride themselves on it: informality becomes as rigidly codified and demanding as any sort of formality. And anyone who is formal, is despised as a formalist.


----------



## DMcFadden

As a child of the 60s (once with the long hair and really bushy beard to prove it), I HATED the implicatons of "Rev." back in '78, eschewing it scrupulously. Upon receiving my D.Min. in '82, it was a delight to go by "Dr." in the place of "Rev." However, the implications of Matthew 23:8 trouble me even more. 

"Pastor" would seem to balance the admonitions of 1 Timothy 5:17 with the proscription of Matthew 23:8.

During most of my ministry, people in the congregation called me "Pastor" or "Pastor Dennis," particularly in more recent years and the hair began to gray. Interestingly, since I serve on the executive committee of our denomination, lead the retirement home ministry across the street from our church, and do preach at our church a few times each year, some of people insist on calling me "pastor" even now!


----------



## FrielWatcher

The pastor of my PC (USA) where I grew up received his Ph.D. and now signs his name 'Rev. Dr.' I think everyone called him Pastor Jeff though. 

I have seen "The Right Reverend ..." How's about using that title? 

Yet titles of respect are required for the position of either called authority or granted authority. Like I have a very hard time calling my professors by their first names because of their granted authority given by the college over the class. That may be a carryover from the Navy though.


----------



## Mushroom

So "Hey, Preacher Boy!" isn't good enough?

Preacher Boy Dennis sounds cool to me....


----------



## FrielWatcher

Mister Pastor?


----------



## KMK

py3ak said:


> I think there's a shorter way to arrive at "self-righteous informality". Many people see their informality as being somehow meritorious, and pride themselves on it: informality becomes as rigidly codified and demanding as any sort of formality. And anyone who is formal, is despised as a formalist.



i.e. the ubiquitous Hawaiian shirt!

The previous Pastor of the church I pastor now came to visit one Sunday and told to "Take that darn tie off!" He was visibly offended that I wore a tie. I didn't know what to say.


----------



## DMcFadden

KMK said:


> py3ak said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think there's a shorter way to arrive at "self-righteous informality". Many people see their informality as being somehow meritorious, and pride themselves on it: informality becomes as rigidly codified and demanding as any sort of formality. And anyone who is formal, is despised as a formalist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i.e. the ubiquitous Hawaiian shirt!
> 
> The previous Pastor of the church I pastor now came to visit one Sunday and told to "Take that darn tie off!" He was visibly offended that I wore a tie. I didn't know what to say.
Click to expand...


Hah! I wear a suit and bow tie (since Zenas converted me to bow ties a couple of months ago) every day to work. So, UNLESS I'm preaching, it is a polo shirt and cheap Walmart "Dockers" clone pants. I spoke a couple of weeks ago and one of our newer visitors "complained" Sunday that he misses my bow tie.


----------



## Mushroom

> i.e. the ubiquitous Hawaiian shirt!


I thought that _*was*_ formal wear! And here all along I'm thinking the strange looks I've been getting was because I was _overdressed_! I even tried to 'casualize' with sandals, but still get the looks....


----------



## JonathanHunt

Joshua said:


> Quite frankly, all the objections to _Reverend_ I've seen are due to one's own anecdotal experiences or the import of sinful pride to title bearer. Just because one _feels_ or _thinks _that it is _pretentious_ or _prideful_, et cetera, doesn't make it so.



What of Mr Spurgeon's objections, Joshua?


----------



## Pergamum

From Calvinists I have seen MUCH MORE stuffy formalism than I have self-righteous informalism. Let me correct that....I guess one needs to delete the adjectives "Stuffy" and "Self-rightous" because we cannot know the motives. 

Corrected statement: In our circles I have seen a much higher emphasis on dressing up rather than dressing as one normally does throughout the week.


And I have never seen a hawaiian shirt in any reformed churches, though I have seen folks that think that a tie and a suit is necessary for laymen as well as pastor. 

I am confident that the pendelum is not going to swing too far in the direction of informalism among our circles.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

See these threads for dressing for the Lord's Day...

http://www.puritanboard.com/f24/dress-code-church-3338/

http://www.puritanboard.com/f67/sunday-best-casual-31254/


----------



## kvanlaan

I don't know, Perg, I see _too much_ informalism in the BR circles, way too much. In my home church, the transformation from 'Dominee'/Reverend to "Pastor (insert first name here)" was accompanied by the removal of the pulpit from its place at the center of the raised area at the front of the church, a change in the list of songs sung, an increase in 'entertainment' in worship, and general theological dilution. For me, I'll stick with Dominee for the most part (especially pastors of Dutch background) or Reverend, especially if the gentleman is older. "Pastor" is about as informal as it gets (usually for good buddies only, but maybe younger ministers). Scriptual background on that: none. Just a personal idiosyncrasy.


----------



## markkoller

nleshelman said:


> markkoller said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most objections that I have seen here and elsewhere are purely an opinion and usually these objections are by people who prefer church to be informal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, my question was 'which is more BIBLICAL, not which one do you prefer.
> 
> I attend a church where most of the men wear suits, the minister reads from the King James version, he wears a Genevan gown... it is anything but bluejeans and such.
> 
> I just do not see the usage of 'Reverend' in the Scriptures or in our confessional statements (I am willing to be corrected though). I am not hard and fast against the term, but I see that pastor is a more biblical title given to the men that hold the office of overseer.... of course, in classic KJV language, I guess we could go with Bishop as well!
Click to expand...


I haven't really argued that any term was more Biblical or not(though I realize this was the original question). All of the terms are acceptable and biblical. The respect due to ministers is implied all throughout the New Testament, so Rev. does not violate Scripture. 

1 Timothy 5:17 "Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine."

I really don't care what they call me, as long as they call me for dinner  . Just kidding, I like Rev. because it emphasizes what everyone seems to so easily forget...the office of elder/minister is one that demands great respect and honor.


----------



## Elimelek

In South Africa the titles of ministers can be quite confusing. Due to eleven official languages, a you may be called: _Dominee_ (Afrikaans), _reverend_ (English), _umfundisi_ (Zulu-Nguni etc.), _moruti_ (Sotho-language group),_bafunsi_ (Venda-Tsonga-Shangaan) and _pastor_ (again English).

If someone doesn't feel comfortable to call me by my name, I prefer _Dominee_ due to the various indigenous independent churches in the country. 

I don't think that one can really say that the use of any specific title is Biblical or not, as title were not used the same way as we use it today.

_Pastor_ is usually used in S.A. to indicate a minister of charismatic and pentecostal persuasion, while _Reverend_ is used more for Methodists and some Presbyterian churches. _Dominee_ is often used for Reformed ministers (even in English). _umfundisi_, _moruti_ and _bafunsi_ can be used for almost any preacher (ordained or not). 

I answer to all, prefer my name, but use _mr._ in correspondence not pertaining to my vocation. In a military or police environment I always use _dominee_. 

Some people in S.A. are of the opinion that title and learnedness goes together. A _pastor_ would be someone with limited theological education (less than 3 years study), a _reverend_ / _dominee_ more that 3 years of theological study usually 6 and more. 

In pentecostal churches like the Apostolic Faith Mission, some ministers will be called _reverend_ if they studied at a reformed theological faculty.


----------



## brymaes

We call our clergy "Father"


----------



## Pergamum

kvanlaan said:


> I don't know, Perg, I see _too much_ informalism in the BR circles, way too much. In my home church, the transformation from 'Dominee'/Reverend to "Pastor (insert first name here)" was accompanied by the removal of the pulpit from its place at the center of the raised area at the front of the church, a change in the list of songs sung, an increase in 'entertainment' in worship, and general theological dilution. For me, I'll stick with Dominee for the most part (especially pastors of Dutch background) or Reverend, especially if the gentleman is older. "Pastor" is about as informal as it gets (usually for good buddies only, but maybe younger ministers). Scriptual background on that: none. Just a personal idiosyncrasy.



Wow, that informalism goes much further than mere dress and title...its affecting the architecture!


----------



## Theognome

I prefer the term pastor when referring to teaching elders, though I do sometimes use Luke's honorific 'Most Excellent Graceandpeace'

Theognome


----------



## kvanlaan

> Wow, that informalism goes much further than mere dress and title...its affecting the architecture!



Indeed - and once it gathers speed, there is no stopping it!


----------

