The Bible does not explicitly prohibit or command the use of honorific titles like “reverend” for church leaders. However, there are some principles and examples that can help guide Christians on whether using the title “reverend” for church leaders is appropriate.
The Meaning and Origin of “Reverend”
The word “reverend” comes from the Latin word “reverendus” which means “to be revered or respected.” It is used formally as a courtesy title for members of the clergy in many Christian denominations. The term signals that the person bearing the title is deserving of respect due to their ordained role as a minister of the church.
Historically, the use of the title “reverend” for clergy dates back to at least the 16th century during the Protestant Reformation. It was intended to convey the reformers’ renewed emphasis on the authority and respect owed to those holding church office as sanctioned by God. The title replaced the Catholic honorifics of “father” for priests and “doctor” or “master” for theologians and professors.
Principles from Jesus and the Apostles
Although Jesus and the apostles did not directly address the use of a title like “reverend,” their teachings highlight principles that are relevant:
- Jesus condemned the religious leaders who loved distinctive titles and flaunting their authority (Matthew 23:5-12). He taught his followers not to exalt themselves but to serve others.
- The apostles prohibited Christians from using flattering titles to elevate church leaders, as was common in surrounding cultures (Acts 10:25-26; 1 Thessalonians 2:6). All believers were considered “brothers” in Christ.
- However, the apostles still exhorted Christians to respect those who served faithfully as leaders in the church (1 Thessalonians 5:12-13; 1 Timothy 5:17). There is a biblical distinction between role and worth.
Based on these principles, the New Testament seems to promote humility and shared status among believers, while maintaining that roles like elder/pastor still deserve honor and respect. So an acceptable approach might avoid flattering titles that inflate a leader’s ego, while still showing deference to the authority of their office using a modest title.
Objections to Using “Reverend”
Here are some potential objections Christians may raise against using “reverend” as a clergy title:
- Only God deserves reverence – Since “reverend” signals someone deserving special respect, this seems to conflict with verses like Psalms 111:9 that reserve reverence for God alone. Some believe no mere human should be revered in this way.
- Risks spiritual pride – Bestowing lofty titles like “reverend” on church leaders may promote harmful spiritual pride and ego inflation that takes focus off Christ.
- Unbiblical tradition – The New Testament never applies a title like “reverend” to ministers. It may represent an unbiblical church tradition that adds manmade rules beyond Scripture’s mandates.
- Inconsistent usage – Unlike titles like pastor or elder which denote an office, “reverend” is used inconsistently, as some clergy opt not to use it. This blurry distinction may enable confusion or misunderstanding.
Given these concerns, some Christians advocate that the title “reverend” should be avoided to prevent exalting church leaders in an unbiblical manner or straying into extrabiblical traditions.
Arguments for Using “Reverend”
Here are some potential reasons Christians may argue for continuing to use the title “reverend”:
- Shows respect for the office – The title “reverend” can distinguish and honor the clergy office itself, rather than exalting the individual.
- Church history precedent – Longstanding use dating back centuries gives weight to continuing to use “reverend” as a clerical title.
- Common courtesy title – Much like “doctor” or “professor,” “reverend” serves as a courtesy title recognizing credentials and training completed to hold church office.
- Not inherently prideful – Using an honorific does not necessarily lead to pride. That depends on the heart attitude of leaders and congregations.
- Clarifies identity – Titles like “reverend” help identify who holds official clerical duties and provide clarity when addressing church leaders.
Given these rationales, Christians who favor using “reverend” believe it fittingly conveys the respect owed to those serving in ordained church leadership capacities.
Alternative Views
There are also alternative approaches Christians take on whether “reverend” should be used as a ministerial title:
- Limit to formal uses – Some believe “reverend” may be appropriately used in formal communications or introductions, but should be avoided in personal conversation.
- Always include name – Using “Reverend John Smith” keeps focus on the individual rather than an inflated title detached from identity.
- Replace with alternatives – Titles like “pastor” or “preacher” may convey comparable respect and clerical identity without signaling reverence.
- Leader preference – It could be left to each clergy member’s personal conviction whether they are comfortable being addressed as “reverend” or not.
These options attempt to retain respect for church office while sidestepping any perceived issues with the specific title “reverend.”
8 Biblical Principles to Guide Perspective
When evaluating appropriate titles for church leaders, Christians would do well to filter their assessment through these biblical principles:
- Only God deserves glory, praise and worship (Isaiah 42:8). No human merit warrants reverence in that exclusive sense reserved for God.
- However, the apostles taught Christians to respect those who serve faithfully in leadership roles like elder/pastor (1 Thessalonians 5:12-13).
- Jesus opposed the religious leaders who demanded prestige and flaunting of authority (Matthew 23:5-12). Kingdom greatness comes through humility and service, not self-exaltation.
- At the same time, Paul exhorted believers to give honor where honor is due (Romans 13:7). Clergy have completed specialized training and been entrusted with solemn duties that can merit esteem.
- The New Testament avoids flattering titles that inflate human worth, instead emphasizing shared status as brothers in Christ (Matthew 23:8-10; Acts 10:25-26).
- Yet even the apostles accepted some terms conveying identity and role, like their own title of “apostle” (2 Peter 3:15).
- The church must avoid adopting traditions, rules or practices that go beyond Scripture’s authority (2 Thessalonians 2:15; 3:6).
- However, traditions are not necessarily unbiblical, so long as Scripture remains the supreme authority (2 Thessalonians 2:15).
This balanced approach affirms honoring clergy roles while rejecting inflated egos or extrabiblical requirements. Appropriate titles should aim to reflect that nuance.
Practical Considerations in the Modern Context
A few implications also emerge from today’s specific cultural moment:
- As broad society moves away from using formal titles like “reverend,” their necessity decreases. Alternatives may communicate clerical identity just as effectively.
- However, in contexts where formal titles signal respect, discarding “reverend” may unintentionally communicate disregard for clergy rather than biblical humility.
- Since many non-Christians don’t grasp the meaning of “reverend,” its use can create more confusion than clarity when interacting with the wider community.
- Younger generations seem to prefer informality, authenticity and relationship over rigid formalities. Adapting language could aid connecting with them.
These considerations should spur reflection on whether maintaining older traditions like “reverend” truly serves the gospel witness in a changing culture, or risks erecting unnecessary barriers.
Conclusions and Application
In summary, the New Testament does not definitively settle whether using “reverend” as a ministerial title is right or wrong. Faithful Christians differ given lack of absolute clarity on the issue. However, biblical principles do provide helpful guidance:
- The term risks exalting humans to improper status reserved for God alone. This concern behind objections should be heeded. But a modest title need not necessarily convey divine reverence.
- The church should exercise caution to avoid inflating egos or binding requirements beyond Scripture’s authority.
- Yet deference and honor to those faithfully serving in church office seems biblically warranted, so titles can still have value in signaling identity, role and respect.
- Individual leaders and churches should thoughtfully weigh arguments on both sides to discern what approach best affirms biblical values in their specific context.
- No matter what titles are used, the heart attitudes of both leaders and congregations are most crucial, not mere words ascribed.
The title “reverend” arose from sincere desire to show honor to clergy office. But it risks subtly fostering pride and rigid formalism that can undermine gospel values. Biblical wisdom and sensitivity to current culture is needed to assess if its benefits still outweigh potential issues, or if alternatives might better affirm truth while connecting with society.
The central truths of Scripture remain central regardless of what honorifics the church employs. Revering God over all, preaching Christ faithfully, loving others sacrificially, and pursuing humility and service matter far more than any outward title ascribed. When believers have that eternal perspective, questions of clerical titles find their proper place.