How Informal Is Too Informal?

[Barrett Young]

Over at The White Horse Inn, they just ran a program on the radical informality that is in our American churches today. It is a fascinating program (as they all are), but I tend to disagree with some of their conclusions on this one.

I want to know what you all think, specifically on Dress and Title. These were two issues they brought up. One was the tendency for some preachers to discard the coat and tie in favor of blue jeans and a Hawaiin shirt. The other was the familiarity the congregants have with the pastor, calling him Pastor Bob, not Dr. Smith or Pastor Smith. They concluded that both of these were leading to a disregard for the Word of God and causing members to devalue the Authority of the Preacher. These were the two issues I disagreed with, to some degree.

As far as the clothing issue goes, and I know I'm treading on thin ice, I think that the pastor should be dressed in the same manner as his congregation. If your congregation is wearing blue jeans, wear blue jeans. If they're wearing suits, don't be the one to wear blue jeans! This one I am less sure of, because I do think there is some relation between the way you dress and the respect you give the Word, just not enough to justify my wearing a robe...

The title thing is a little different. I know John Piper doesn't want to be called Dr. Piper, but prefers Pastor John. When I began attending my church, I asked the pastor what I should call him: Pastor MacGregor, Pastor Jamie, or Jamie. He told me to call him what I was comfortable with. I now call him Jamie, and we are close friends. We joke around a lot and I don't think seeing him as my brother erodes away at the authority he commands when he is preaching God's Word. Of course, I would never stand up in church and call him out. But I am also able to distinguish the various roles he plays. When he is behind the pulpit, it is no longer "Jamie" speaking. I know that if what he says is true, it has authority in my life and I better pay attention.

What are everyone else's thoughts on this? Is the dress and title one holds as a preacher directly related, indirectly related, or not related at all to the authority of his office and his preaching?

[Dennis Bryan]

I think it is great that you have the personal relationship with your Pastor, but you must keep in mind not everyone can draw the lines that you seem to be able to draw.

And there are certainly lines that can't be crossed, I also have a personal relationship with my Pastor but, it is like the old saying if you don't respect the person you must respect the office. don't blurr the lines.

And I feel dress must be appropriate to the office.

I guess I might come off as old fashion, but hey that's who I am. I think the problem today is there are no distinguishing lines drawn.

Db

[luke geraty]

I'm all for casual dress and friendship with pastors. I'm also all for respecting the Word of God. I don't think that casual dress erodes the respect for the Scriptures.

[ben hind]

It is bad logic and reasoning to say that informal dress and first-name terms erodes the authority of the person. I see it as a false dilemma, the two aren't mutually exclusive. I think it's a question of 'where does the preacher get his authority from?' If it's in his title and dress, then that's not really biblicaly authority in the first place! If someone stops respecting the authority of the preacher because they dress informally and are on first-name terms, then they really weren't respecting the authority of the preacher in the first place. Because the authority comes from the word of God, not from titles and dress. It's a respect for the bible they need, not respect for titles and dress. That's my thought anyway, I'm all for informal dress and first-name terms when it's appropriate.

I think it helps more than hinders in certain circumstances. I really would be put off if the preacher wore a full snazzy suit and tie and insisted on themselves being called 'pastor' using their surname. I just wouldn't relate to that and it would make me feel like they were being arrogant, 'who do they think they are?'. But that's just the kind of background I come from, to other people informal dress and first-name terms would be very off-putting.

Just a thought, did Jesus and the apostles insist on themselves being called 'Apostle Paul', 'Jesus the Son of God' or the like? And did they wear the equivalent of suits when they preached? Or is this just a contemporary issue that has only come about because of man-made traditions we've built up over the years?

- Ben

[Lionel Woods]

1. We should all address each other by our names. Jesus was quite clear with this when he talked the dicsiples about Lording it over and his woes to pharisees about being called teacher. As Christ says we have but one teacher! I am disgusted by this man made layity/clergy distinction which stinks of Rome! We are all brothers in one common faith.

2. Dress is 100% liberty. If we were to go to the early church we would see them in their work clothes as they would have met on the first day of the week which was a work day for them. Once again Rome has a huge influence on our minds.

3. Finally the last has to do with the first. Isn't shepherding a gift of the Spirit? Is it now a title or position far above other Christians? Can the eye say to the foot "I don't need you" or "because I have a more important function you should honor me by calling me Mr. Eye"? I don't think so. Once again Matthew 23 is huge on this. Elders are to Shepherd the body and their desire should be to be called brother not pastor, father, reverend, elder or any other such title which is considered an office of SERVICE by 1 Timothy 3 not an office of entitlement! Boy Rome got us good!

[Jack]

To Ben and Lionel, I say: BINGO! uh...I guess thats not a Bible word , but It reflects my agreement. God's Word is THE authority!
Jay E. Adams has a book out: "The Place of Authority in Christ's Church", good read.

[Char]

I am somewhat ambivalent to the issue of clothing. I dress up to go to church because we are doing something important there and I understand what they mean when they say the pastor's dress and demeanor should reflect his role and yes, his authority. I would ask who would go to see the Queen (or some other dignitary) in ratty clothes, but probably many would. Of course those people wouldn't dress to intentionally disrespect the Queen, but neither does their demeanor show any signs of due attention or an effort to actually be respectful to the place she holds either.

I am reminded of Tertullian's rant about veils. While I don't agree that women all have to wear veils I have long thought he made an incisive observation when he complained that women were wearing the littlest string they could get away with and calling them veils. That attitude is troublesome because the person asks not what can I do that would be the most honouring to God, but how much can I get away with before God is really mad at me? On the other hand, his argument obviously highlights how different dress is now than it was then, and such things do not and can not remain static. Even jeans are no longer seen as being as informal as they once were.

I would add that our culture has mostly lost the notion of "appropriateness". This is simply part of living in our age and while I think it's unfortunate in some respects, I wouldn't say we are in the proverbial handbasket because of it.

As to other things mentioned, I am reminded of the saying no one despises man's authority but first despises God's authority. I think we despise authority too much-especially those who wield what authority they have been given like a weapon to harm others rather than serve. The role of a pastor (which means shepherd) is not the same as the role of the sheep, but this does not make them unequal. Like it or not the Church has always had a hierarchy.

[Rey Reynoso]

Paul says to treat older women as mothers, younger women as sisters, younger men as brothers and older men as fathers. No elevation of authority but a general respect to all those groups, reflecting godliness in dealing with each other.

Clothing then winds up being a matter of respect, not to the Bible (the Bible doesn't care) or the pulpit (the pulpit doesn't care either) but to the sensibilities of our fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters. If dressing in a suit is making these family members feel as if one is lording it over them, by all means, drop the suit. If jeans is making the younger men stumble, then by all means, don't wear jeans.

Of course, one won't be able to please everyone but one should hold everyone in mind.

Now, as a secondary concern its a darn shame that folk don't put their pastor's to the test as the Bereans did. Paul came, spoke to them and taught them and they didn't swallow his pill until they were sure of its contents and its agreement with Scripture. I don't think a person should be standing up in the middle of the meeting yelling "heretic!" but I do think that we take everything being said to be examined by Scripture. If not, we might as well put away our Bibles and have the dude tell us what we should do six of the seven days of the week when we're not in front of him.

[Curt Lovelace]

I agree with the statement regarding clothing being a statement of respect or disrespect. I have other issues with clothing being too casual, as well. Society, in general, works hard at looking like bums (beach, tennis, ski, and street). We are called to stand out like a sore thumb. There isn't much question where you're going when you're dressed up on Sunday morning. OTOH, if we dress up to go to church just because we think we should, we've got another problem (see Amos 5:21-27).

As a pastor, I think it's the right thing for me to do to wear a suit (or robes). When Zwingli introduced what we call the Geneva robes in Zurich he was making a statement that he was different from the priests who wore all sorts of vestments but spent little time either in the Word or in the homes of their congregants. I do not, however, try to put any restrictions on people in this regard. If they will only come to hear God's Word (which, BTW, provides the only authority needed) if they can wear jeans, then I say please come.

My wife likes to tell women (only when they ask) that if they see the church as the "mud room" to eternity, they might want to take off the muddy boots and parkas and get into something more appropriate.

Regarding the titles, I have the habit of addressing that when I first come to a congregation (which, at my age, I hope not to do again!). I tell adults that they can address me in any manner that's comfortable for them. For some folks it is difficult to address the pastor by his first name. I do not wish, then, to say, "hey, address me as Curt."

[Nick Alander]

While I'm not one to wear robes, I do feel that the dress that a Pastor wears should reflect a respect the the message that God has given him to present. With that said, I also agree that someone preaching in a area where most of the congregation wears jeans and T-shirts should probably not wear a 3 piece suit. I pastor a church in a farming community, and it is on rare occasion that anyone else is wearing a tie. I wear a tie because I want to give respect to the message God has given to me to give to others. As far as the congregation, they wear what they want to. We do not shun people period (not for clothing or anything else).

On the title thing, it is what ever people are comfortable calling me. I admit that I prefer Pastor to Brother, but that is simply because of how I grew up.

[Barrett Young]

So Nick, your stance on clothing would probably be one step up from the majority? I think this would be where I fall in. It is hard for me to surrender to the idea that the way I dress may reflect something of the respect I hold. But then, I spent four years in the Marines, so I may be reacting to an over-emphasis on uniforms!

[Carol Weaver]

Of course you cannot read a book by its cover, but I agree we need to show respect. God said to Moses, " Take off your shoes you are on Holy ground" He was telling him to show some respect that God was in his presence.

Certainly I would not say we should throw someone out of church, unless it was showing areas of personally business only.

Why come and try to entice people into sin? Why come when you know your dress is going to upset people and cause trouble in a church?

The day I see a man come in with bathing trunks or a woman in a bikini is the day we need to close the doors. we have gone too far.

Adam and Eve had to be "covered" up once they realized they had sinned, and we are ALL sinners according to Romans. Our eyes have been opened and we know right from wrong. We need to awaken that area of our mind.

[Jeff]

I have heard, and it has already been mentioned. That one should dress up. Because if you were having dinner with the queen, you would. How much more for the king of kings?
But the difference being is that I am a child of the king. And with such a relationship would not feel obligated to dress so formally. Because He is more concerned about other issues with me.
When we discuss this it might be good to look at the only portion of scripture that teaches how someone should dress in the N.T. Church:
1Ti 2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
1Ti 2:10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

Now although this addressed to women, and not men. We do see that God is concerned about not wearing expensive clothing, not being to flashy etc...
So if there is any hint as to a dress code for the saints in the meeting it is casul, not formal (I would say).
But when I was in fellowship in a local church that dressed very formal, I too dressed very formal because it was important to the saints there. Now I bout my suits on ebay for 20 bucks. But I still wore a suit.
A conversation came up with a brother who refused to dress up. He was surprised to find out that I agreed with him about dressing down. He asked me then why I dressed in a suit every week? My answer was that I dress up so that I can tell them we don't have to. But if I am rebelious and defiant, do you think they would be open to my suggestion?
He too began to wear a suit :)