Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Reverencing Elders

"He sent redemption unto his people: he hath commanded his covenant for ever: holy and reverend is his name."  (Psa. 111: 9)

"God is greatly to be feared in the assembly of the saints, and to be had in reverence of all them that are about him."  (Psa. 89: 7)

"Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear."  (Heb. 12: 28)

When I was with the Hardshells I commonly heard them declare how they were against their ministers being called "reverend" and often said, based upon the above Scriptures, that such a title belonged only to God and that it would be robbing God of what belongs to him to call any minister, or any man, "reverend."  For instance, an early 20th century Hardshell leader, Elder James Bibler, wrote:

"The Primitive Baptist ministers are called "El­ders," a New Testament word. (It is interesting to note: that the Strict Baptists of England refer to their ministers only as "Mr.") The title "Reverend" belongs only to God, never to man."  ("What is a Primitive Baptist," see here)

On a leading Hardshell web site we read:

"Question: Why do Primitive Baptists refer to their ministers as elders?

The scriptures offer two alternate titles for preachers. These are bishop and elder (I Tim 3:1-7, Tit 1:5-9, I Pet 5:1). The importance of using these scripturally authorized titles is emphasized by Jesus' condemnation of the Pharisees for taking aggrandizing titles to themselves (Mt 23:5-12). The term reverend is use only once in the scriptures where it has reference to God (Ps 111:9). We are therefore unworthy to wear this title."  (see here)

Elder Hoyt Simms answers the same question and says:

"The Bible gives the title elder to preachers; therefore, we would use no other title. "The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder..." (I Peter 5:1). New Testament preachers are referred to as "elders" or "bishops." The term bishop is much misunderstood and we do not use it for that reason, but it would be a legal title for a minister. We do not use the term reverend because it is never used in connection with a man in God's Word. This title appears only once in God's Word and there it has reference to God alone: "holy and reverend is his name" (Psalm 111:9). Should any man take upon himself a title that is reserved for God alone?"  (see here)

Yet, such a reasoning is unreasonable.  Have the Hardshells not read the following verses?

"Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence (phobeō) her husband."  (Eph. 5: 33)

"Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement."  (I Peter 3: 6)

"Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence (entrepō): shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?"  (Heb. 12: 9)

From these verses we see that there is no reason why one cannot call one's husband or father "reverend," or to give them reverence.  In the old testament, kings were reverenced, as was David.  Certainly elders deserve also to be reverenced. 

The same text that says of God - "holy and reverend is his name" would as much condemn calling any man "holy" as calling any man "reverend," if Hardshell logic is accepted.  But, do we find the word "holy" applied to men and angels in Scripture?  We read of holy angels (Matt. 25: 31; Rev. 14: 10), holy apostles (Eph. 3: 5; Rev. 18: 20), holy brethren (I Thess. 5: 27; Heb. 3: 1), holy men of God (II Peter 1: 21), holy prophets (II Peter 3: 2; Rev. 22: 6)

Many of these Hardshells who condemn calling any man holy or reverend will nevertheless use the word "saint" when referring to Matthew, Mark, or Luke.  But, "saint" means holy.  When they say "saint Paul" or "saint Peter," do they not realize that they have violated their own rule? 

It seems to me that their extremism regarding the use of "reverend" for ministers is simply a mere "show of humility." It is a kind of "putting on airs." 

No comments: