At Prayer & Fasting this week Terry Virgo preached a magnificent message about God’s call upon us as pastors. Terry spoke movingly about his own experience as a young man, when an encounter with God resulted in him no longer calling his church minister "Mr Rudman," but "Pastor Rudman." This happened when he realised that his pastor was not just preaching sermons at him, but had responsibility for nourishing his soul.
Despite Terry’s experience, we have made a deliberate attempt to stamp out such formalities as calling a church leader “Pastor.” This was in response to a dead traditionalism encountered in many churches, where status and formality seemed to matter more than spiritual anointing and community. It also reflected a wider shift in a society which was becoming less and less deferential.
I experienced a similar transition myself in the way that adults were addressed. As a boy, at the church I attended we referred to adults – at least those who were themselves parents, or single people older than (I guess) about 35 – as “aunt” or “uncle.” By the time I was 13 and moved to a different church this form of address seemed completely anachronistic – from then on it was first names all the way.
But I wonder if in gaining a relaxed informality we have lost something that was valuable.
There is still something in me that feels it isn’t quite right when a small child addresses an adult – especially an older person – by their first name. And as well as the respect it inferred, knowing the adults in my church as aunt and uncle definitely gave a genuine sense of family – these weren’t just distant strangers, but people I somehow felt related to. I knew they were to be obeyed, but I also knew that they were (in a good way) watching out for me.
And in our wider culture our problem is no longer too much formality and deference, but a general lack of respect. So perhaps resurrecting the title “Pastor” wouldn’t be such a bad thing, as long as it were genuinely given, just as Terry did to Pastor Rudman, and not falsely imposed.
Hermeneutical ‘Humility’
-
[image: Hermeneutical ‘Humility’ primary image]
One of the reasons I talk about hermeneutics so much, both here and
elsewhere, is that it undergirds almos...
3 hours ago
7 comments:
Interesting post. I understand that you are writing this with one eye on respect for those in positions of responsibility for us. What do you think about the possible issue of a clergy / laity divide that could subtley creep in?
Well, that's why we ditched the terminology, but perhaps the problem now is not a false deferential divide, but overfamiliarity.
There is no doubt that a general lack of respect is prevalent and I share your desire to see this trend reversed. IMHO - respect is from the heart of the giver rather than the title of the receiver.
Matt, what do you mean by overfamiliarity?
Hi Tim. I think I should have thought more about this post before posting it!
Overfamiliarity - well, obviously, your definition is going to reflect your personal bias and temperament. But, for me, it would be the kind of scenario where some young person in sales or the public services refers to an OAP by their first name without checking they are okay with this. And - for me - it would be what I see as a broader problem with the general 'Dianafication' of culture.
My main point on the post though was that I thought Terry had made a good point!
Interesting thoughts.
My preference is for informality.
I have been listening to a lot of Mars Hill preaches of late and the only thing about them that troubles me is that Mark Driscoll seems to be referred to as Pastor Mark. Seems wierd, Do they have plumbers at that church called "Plumber Brian"?
I think that these titles can re-enforce the idea that preachers/elders/leaders/pastors are somehow better or more spiritual than everyone else. Clearly this is not a good thing for a church to promote!
Having said that, I have recently become a deacon in my church and would love it if I were to be called Deacon Tim...
Have you read the section in Confesssions of a Reformission Rev where Driscoll explains this - kinda makes sense in the context.
Post a Comment