Clerical Collars Poll
- Thread starter TylerRay
- Start date
- Status
TylerRay
Puritan Board Graduate
Wow. I can see why the name tags are in order.
Parakaleo
Puritan Board Sophomore
I completely understand. Hypothetically though, why would a name tag make you feel awkward but a clerical collar wouldn't? I would be far more comfortable snapping a name tag on whatever I happen to be wearing than putting on a collar and getting confused with the Anglo-Catholics all the time.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
I wonder if it goes back to the old idea that clothing represents an investiture of authority (we see it even today; police uniforms).
I voted that it should not be practiced. There has not been set forth any scripture to support the idea although I understand that God has not forbidden it, I can not see any reason for a man to just decide to do it. I don't buy the uniform argument. It seems boarder line self promoting/aggrandizement. It reminds me of the hyper Patriarchal Dad who is always saying I'm the leader I'm the leader. Ministers are to be humble servents of the people not seeking their own glory, their duty is to draw attention to Christ not themselves. Lastly, this is not a logical conclusion to my argument but only an observation of my own thoughts, whenever I see a man in a collar I think child molester simply due to all the ugly reports that we hear about RC Priests.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
The suit and tie has practically become a uniform today. Uniforms aren't avoided, they are only transferred. Whenever I wear a suit and tie to church, I always get asked if I am preaching.
TylerRay
Puritan Board Graduate
Very true. When my wife and I first met @Parakaleo at a Presbytery meeting, she assumed he was a minister before meeting him, simply because he was wearing a suit!
TylerRay
Puritan Board Graduate
I'll have to think about that. Perhaps it's because the collar is already a convention for ministers.
C. Matthew McMahon
Christian Preacher
Generally what happens, In my humble opinion and experience, is that people immediately tend to equate the collar and robe as something Reformed ministers borrow from "Roman Catholicism", where, in fact, it is Calvin's Geneva that dealt with that issue first. When they see the collar, then tend to think, "Why does the minister want to look like a Papist?"
Even if ministers muster up biblical arguments for pastors all through Scripture who "looked different" than laity, it still comes down to perception. And it is hard to be "upset" with others on an indifferent issue especially when it causes them to be distracted during worship if they have never been taught why a distinction may be helpful. Some, for example, see the Genevan Robe (think through why it is called Genevan) as OK, but the collar of Geneva not OK. Well, they equate it too much with Rome, too much with Papist perception.
Some ministers can wear a robe, and the people are fine with it, but not wear a collar, because they are not fine with that.
At the end of the day, when all is said and done, Calvin gave a myriad of reasons why Genevan ministers were going to wear a robe and collar, and then said, finally, but, its of an indifferent issue. They still wore the robe and collar, but at the end of the day, it didn't "really" matter, though they did it.
If someone asks me why I wear a robe, I answer, "I don't own a suit," and leave it at that.
Even if ministers muster up biblical arguments for pastors all through Scripture who "looked different" than laity, it still comes down to perception. And it is hard to be "upset" with others on an indifferent issue especially when it causes them to be distracted during worship if they have never been taught why a distinction may be helpful. Some, for example, see the Genevan Robe (think through why it is called Genevan) as OK, but the collar of Geneva not OK. Well, they equate it too much with Rome, too much with Papist perception.
Some ministers can wear a robe, and the people are fine with it, but not wear a collar, because they are not fine with that.
At the end of the day, when all is said and done, Calvin gave a myriad of reasons why Genevan ministers were going to wear a robe and collar, and then said, finally, but, its of an indifferent issue. They still wore the robe and collar, but at the end of the day, it didn't "really" matter, though they did it.
If someone asks me why I wear a robe, I answer, "I don't own a suit," and leave it at that.
TylerRay
Puritan Board Graduate
Dr. McMahon,
Is Calvin's writing on this subject readily available?
TylerRay
Puritan Board Graduate
C. Matthew McMahon
Christian Preacher
First, the picture above is hilarious. Me personally, I wouldn't go with that.
Second, my recollection of Calvin's info on that is via remembrance (Calvin is very voluminous). I'll have to check where its at. When I find it, I'll post it.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Very true. If you want to continue the anti-collar logic, the minister should wear the plainest of plain clothes: white polo shirt with some khaki pants (which is basically how I dress everyday).
The purpose can be (mho)attention, prestige and recognition, we can pretend it is not but that is what happens. It is not indifferent, it is not commanded or even hinted at in scripture.
Last edited:
TylerRay
Puritan Board Graduate
Scroll through the page below and see how many collars you see. Can you really say in good conscience that you know that each of these men is seeking glory and prestige in the ministry?
http://www.freechurchcontinuing.org/find-us/ministers
Do you feel the same way about RC ministers? History and popularity have no bearing on the biblical argument. When a minister wearing a collar fails to leave a fair tip, decided to take a peek at a young girl in a bikini or cuts someone off in traffic, should we see the man or the office as having done the act?
TylerRay
Puritan Board Graduate
We're not talking about Roman Catholics. The collars were developed by Reformed Christians, and were almost universal in Reformed churches until the 1900s.
What do the papists have to do with the question?
As to your second point, everything a minister does is done by the man. However, he has an official capacity according to which he is called to act. When he is acting according to that capacity, it is appropriate that he not dress or act in such a way that draws attention to his own quirks, peculiarities, or tastes because he is not acting on his own behalf.
Last edited:
Badly worded on my part
We just have to disagree unless there is a bible verse that you can use to support the practice.
TylerRay
Puritan Board Graduate
I can't; there's nothing in Scripture that specifically addresses what a minister should wear. It has to be guided by moral principles and common sense.
At the end of the day, he has to wear something, and almost everyone has an opinion about what it should be: necktie? bow tie? dress shirt with no tie? t-shirt? clerical collar? polo? Hawaiian shirt? An argument for any of these as the ordinary dress for a minister is going to be an argument from morality and common sense.
It's fine to agree to disagree on the subject, but none of the arguments can be made from the Scriptures in a direct way.
May I ask where there is a Bible verse that supports the practice of wearing a regular business suit, or any other particular garb? The clerical collar is purposefully distinguishing itself from the professionalism of a business suit and from the casualness of the Hawaiian shirt. Do you wonder if there was distinguishing dress for Rabbis in order for men to recognize who were teachers or not? This is not something about which I can be dogmatic, but it seems to me that folks would approach Jesus and call him master, teacher, Rabbi, without perhaps having never met him up until that point.
I am not arguing that men must wear the collar, or the robe, etc. But -regardless of what one is wearing- they're projecting a message of some sort. It may be unfair to interpret the message in a way not intended by the wearer, but it's still going to be there, whether they're sporting a t-shirt, a suit and tie, or a clerical collar.
I agree to a point. I am standing in Lowes right now there are a variety of people here dressed a variety of ways, if we line them all up nothing would stand out about them but if one of them was wearing a collar he would.
- Status