|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Addressing clerical persons
|
(S)pike couchant
Shipmate
# 17199
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
quote:
Originally posted by (S)pike couchant:
Is there perhaps an element of class prejudice at work here?
No
Do you care to elaborate on that point? I think my theory is a very probable one. Irish travelers call their priest 'Father', nice respectable English middle class MotR Anglicans couldn't possibly do something so 'Romish' — which in fact means 'Irish', which in fact basically means 'working class'— anymore than they could decorate their homes with pictures of the Immaculate Heart of Mary that light up at night. So, they develop an exaggerated distaste for these things, based on supposedly theological grounds but in fact on a desire for class distinction.
--------------------
'Still the towers of Trebizond, the fabled city, shimmer on the far horizon, gated and walled' but Bize her yer Trabzon.
Posts: 308 | From: West of Eden, East of England | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spike
Mostly Harmless
# 36
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by (S)pike couchant:
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
quote:
Originally posted by (S)pike couchant:
Is there perhaps an element of class prejudice at work here?
No
Do you care to elaborate on that point?
No, I don't believe there is any element of class prejudice.
I am of the Anglo Catholic tradition where we routinely call our male priests "Father". The church I attend at the moment is predominently middle class, but the church I used to attend was also Anglo Catholic but in a more urban area where the congregation was more of a multi-racial working class demographic. The priest there was also addressed as "Father"
The majority of Church of England churches probably don't identify themselves as Anglo Catholic and don't address their priests as "Father", instead calling them by their Christian name. It's got nothing whatsoever to do with class.
Maybe in the past such clergy would have been addressed as "Mr" but those days are long gone.
[ 27. July 2012, 08:07: Message edited by: Spike ]
--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing
Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zacchaeus
Shipmate
# 14454
|
Posted
It's churchmanship, not class that is the decider.
Coming from the evangelical wing of the church I have been in churches in very middle class areas and also areas as working class as you can get.
Inside the church the vicar was always 'firstname' or 'vicar,' historically they had been 'Mr lastname'
However in the working class area which had a strong RC influence, outside of the church he was often known as father. However inside the church nobdoy would have dreamt of 'fathering' him
Posts: 1905 | From: the back of beyond | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
When I was minutes secretary to a Deanery Synod, I tried referring to all priests as "Pastor" to be non-gender specific. I believe it is the form used by German RC priests.
Unfortunately it never caught on.
Reverend Christianname is just ghastly. The Reverend Miss Surname is the usage, and far too pompous nowadays.
I can imagine the use of Christian names all round being slightly patronising - but equally it could be friendly.
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Bit of a tangent, but how do those of you who use the term 'Father' deal with Matthew 23:9 where Jesus says 'don't address anyone here on earth as 'Father' '?
Primarily because Jesus was speaking hyperbole in condemning self-aggrandizement. We also don't fuss about people calling their biological male-identified parents "Father", but strictly thinking, the same logic applies to biological fathers as well as to fathers in the spiritual sense.
I'd hesitate to apply this passage to biological relationships as Jesus is clearly talking about spiritual relationships and the unholy practices of the religious teachers.
quote:
Originally posted by otyetsfoma:
Also, taken literally and strictly, this verse would forbid mister (master), And St Paul himself breaks this "law" at Acts 22:1.
So he does! Hmm, what do I make of that...? Just because Paul used the term once, does that mean it's okay for us to use it? Maybe Paul made a mistake. And I'd take the the wider point from Jesus' command, which I'd say is about not using titles of deference, because 'all of you are equal as brothers and sisters'.
Anyhow, sorry for the tangent but I just wanted to acknowledge these replies. I'll shut up about this now....
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oxonian Ecclesiastic
Shipmate
# 12722
|
Posted
Perhaps I am naïf, but it has never seemed to me that complicated.
On an envelope I am the Reverend John Smith; to people who know me I am John; and to people who do not know me (and, in the parish, children and one or two people who prefer a more formal relationship) I am Mr Smith.
I always thought that was pretty universal.
Posts: 174 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Corvo
Shipmate
# 15220
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
Perhaps I am naïf, but it has never seemed to me that complicated.
On an envelope I am the Reverend John Smith; to people who know me I am John; and to people who do not know me (and, in the parish, children and one or two people who prefer a more formal relationship) I am Mr Smith.
I always thought that was pretty universal.
Not quite universal. In this parish - and most of the others round here - you would be Father John rather than John, and Father Smith rather than Mr Smith. Calling the Vicar Mr would almost certainly lead to a correction.
Posts: 672 | From: The Most Holy Trinity, Coach Lane, North Shields | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oxonian Ecclesiastic
Shipmate
# 12722
|
Posted
If a clergyman corrected me for calling him Mr <Surname>, I would report him to his archdeacon.
Posts: 174 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
When I was in a parish everyone called me by my Christian name, from toddlers upwards. And that was what I was used to in every type of church I'd worshipped in before I was ordained. It was only when I started working in schools that I had to have a title, and I found that very hard to adjust to.
In my experience "Rev Smith" is now almost universal. Very few people know it should be "Rev John Smith", and even fewer use it.
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Corvo
Shipmate
# 15220
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
If a clergyman corrected me for calling him Mr <Surname>, I would report him to his archdeacon.
It's not the Vicar himself who would correct you. Many people think (wrongly of course) that it's somehow disrespectful or even wrong to call a clergyman 'Mr' so they (also wrongly) use 'Reverend' instead. Here they would be 'corrected' to 'Father'.
Anyway my point was that it's not quite universal to call the clergy 'Mr', and in these parts 'Father' is usual.
Posts: 672 | From: The Most Holy Trinity, Coach Lane, North Shields | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
american piskie
Shipmate
# 593
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
If a clergyman corrected me for calling him Mr <Surname>, I would report him to his archdeacon.
Better just to laugh. Systematically used that curbed the controlling instincts of even a former Principal of ****.
Posts: 356 | From: Oxford, England, UK | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
Clerical memoirs of Stalinist repression are now making their way into English. Fr Vinkentiy Frolov tells how, when he had been drafted into the Red Army during the war, some of his fellow recruits, on learning that he was a cleric, began to call him "comrade priest."
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sebby
Shipmate
# 15147
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Bit of a tangent, but how do those of you who use the term 'Father' deal with Matthew 23:9 where Jesus says 'don't address anyone here on earth as 'Father' '?
Primarily because Jesus was speaking hyperbole in condemning self-aggrandizement. We also don't fuss about people calling their biological male-identified parents "Father", but strictly thinking, the same logic applies to biological fathers as well as to fathers in the spiritual sense.
I'd hesitate to apply this passage to biological relationships as Jesus is clearly talking about spiritual relationships and the unholy practices of the religious teachers.
quote:
Originally posted by otyetsfoma:
Also, taken literally and strictly, this verse would forbid mister (master), And St Paul himself breaks this "law" at Acts 22:1.
So he does! Hmm, what do I make of that...? Just because Paul used the term once, does that mean it's okay for us to use it? Maybe Paul made a mistake. And I'd take the the wider point from Jesus' command, which I'd say is about not using titles of deference, because 'all of you are equal as brothers and sisters'.
Anyhow, sorry for the tangent but I just wanted to acknowledge these replies. I'll shut up about this now....
Presumably those with such scruples about 'Father' would never dream of using it to the person who slept with their mother?
--------------------
sebhyatt
Posts: 1340 | From: yorks | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sighthound
Shipmate
# 15185
|
Posted
I suppose I am really quite happy to call anyone by whatever title pleases them, but the trouble is these days there is no 'correct form' you are just expected to know. And I don't always.
Generally society has become much more informal in the last 40 years. When I first started work I would have never have dreamed of calling my boss by his Christian/first name. It would have been disrespectful. But by the time I left the world of offices, even 14 year olds on work experience had no hesitation in using my Christian name. (Not that I minded - I'm not even a bit precious about such things.)
All I am saying is it's far harder to 'get it right' now than when titles and forms of address were codified. And, sadly, some people, even clergypeople, get their feelings hurt because evidently these things *do* matter to them, even if they shouldn't.
[ 27. July 2012, 16:29: Message edited by: Sighthound ]
--------------------
Supporter of Tia Greyhound and Lurcher Rescue.http://tiagreyhounds.org/
Posts: 168 | From: England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
I don't really care what people call me as long as it's not offensive. But two points come to mind:
There is a trend in secular society for anonymous people (especially cold-callers selling gas, electricity or whatever over the phone) to address one by one's first name. This I hate. At the very least they should say 'May I call you Fred?' or whatever. They rarely do.
In a church context, especially when there is a long tradition for clergy to be addressed as 'Father', 'Pastor' etc, some people can take to addressing the clergy by first name as a way of manipulating. 'We treat you as a friend'. If it had always been first names between Christians - no doubt the ideal - there wouldn't be a problem. It's when such informality is taken to imply a special relationship that there can be.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
And it can go the other way.
Think of a secular context. The bastard of a boss makes you redundant at no notice, he (or she) tells you you're moving to their Scunthorpe office next week, s/he tells you that you are working for the next four weekends with no overtime...
And s/he expects you to call him Mike (or Sheila), rather than Mr/s Gradgrind.
It's not friendly. It's manipulative.
Formality can encourage forelock tugging servility, but it can also allow for personal distance.
[ 27. July 2012, 16:57: Message edited by: venbede ]
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
seasick
...over the edge
# 48
|
Posted
I usually tell people I'll answer to anything if it's not rude. If people ask what to call me, I tell them to call me Mark. Out and about, I get the whole range of Vicar, Father, Minister, Reverend, Priest and so on... I do inwardly cringe at misuse of reverend but I don't correct people.
--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley
Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
aig
Shipmate
# 429
|
Posted
I am a medical doctor so known as Dr Aig. If I become an ordained minister, what should my formal title be?
--------------------
That's not how we do it here.......
Posts: 464 | From: the middle bit at the bottom slightly to the right | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
The Reverend Doctor Aig, surely?
(Incidentally, CofE bishops are Lords even if they don't have a seat in the House of Lords. I have a Victorian Crockfords or other directory that calls all the American bishops Lord Bishop of Mid Western Minnesota or whatever.)
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
sebby
Shipmate
# 15147
|
Posted
Thwe Reverend Doctor Aig most certainly.
--------------------
sebhyatt
Posts: 1340 | From: yorks | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Corvo
Shipmate
# 15220
|
Posted
Are there any Anglican Archpriests other than the one of Haccombe?
[ 27. July 2012, 17:39: Message edited by: Sacred London ]
Posts: 672 | From: The Most Holy Trinity, Coach Lane, North Shields | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
sebby
Shipmate
# 15147
|
Posted
Gosh I remember an individual who held this post. he wore a fur cape that came with it.
--------------------
sebhyatt
Posts: 1340 | From: yorks | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
I have a Victorian Crockfords or other directory that calls all the American bishops Lord Bishop of Mid Western Minnesota or whatever.
![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif) I know a bishop or two who probably wouldn't mind it.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seasick:
I usually tell people I'll answer to anything if it's not rude. If people ask what to call me, I tell them to call me Mark. Out and about, I get the whole range of Vicar, Father, Minister, Reverend, Priest and so on... I do inwardly cringe at misuse of reverend but I don't correct people.
My practice and experience are the same, only, in addition, I occasionally hear 'Mother' as well as 'Father.'
[ 27. July 2012, 18:29: Message edited by: Amos ]
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by aig:
I am a medical doctor so known as Dr Aig. If I become an ordained minister, what should my formal title be?
There was a Baptist minister from Nova Scotia who served in the First World War as an officer. He was the Rev. Capt. William A. White.
He was also the first black officer in the Canadian Army.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Clavus
Shipmate
# 9427
|
Posted
Sebby, answering Aig, said: quote:
Thwe Reverend Doctor Aig most certainly.
Pretty certainly in America where Aig is. Not so certainly if he were in the UK as (I imagine) Sebby is.
Medical doctors in America hold the MD degree and are therefore doctors by qualification. General practitioners in the UK do not usually hold a doctoral degree, though they have had to put in many years' study. They are called Doctor by custom - although if they go on to specialise in surgery they revert to Mr for historical reasons.
A cleric who holds a PhD or other doctoral degree is The Revered Dr, but I'm not sure if this applies to medical doctors. I know one; he has not practised medicine after his ordination and has never used that title.
Posts: 389 | From: The Indian Summer of the C of E | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wilfried
Shipmate
# 12277
|
Posted
Maybe this is the right time and place to ask. I once had occasion to shake the Rev. Jesse Jackson's hand at Trinity Wall Street. All I really had to say was, "Pleased to meet you, ______," but I wasn't sure what to insert. "Reverend" probably would have worked, though not stictly speaking correct. So what else is there? "Mr."? "Pastor"? What would have been correct, or best practice? Whatever I actually did say, I don't think he noticed or cared.
Posts: 429 | From: Lefty on the Right Coast | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pancho
Shipmate
# 13533
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sebby:
Hence RC bishops are often addressed as 'My Lord' or 'Your Excellency' in the US.
I'm not aware of any Catholic bishop in the US who is addressed as "My Lord".
--------------------
“But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market places and calling to their playmates, ‘We piped to you, and you did not dance;
we wailed, and you did not mourn.’"
Posts: 1988 | From: Alta California | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
I have a history of the Benedictine nuns of Dunkirk/Teignmouth.
Each chapter, IIRC, is named after the Abbess of the day as "The Right Reverend Lady Abbess Smith".
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
kingsfold
Shipmate
# 1726
|
Posted
quote:
posted by aig:
I am a medical doctor so known as Dr Aig. If I become an ordained minister, what should my formal title be?
See, according to the Ceremonial Forms of Address listed in the back of my dictionary (Collins, for those who are up on such matters) The Rev'd. Dr is strictly reserved for a Doctor of Divinity and I suppose one's title should therefore be Dr. The Rev'd. Bloggs. Which does sound really rather painful... Though Crockfords woudl seem to suggest that the Ecclesiastical title takes preference, hence Rev'd Dr....
I did once have to address an envelope to a married couple, both of whom were PhDs, as well as the female half of the partnership being an ordained minister. That made for an interesting time...
--------------------
I came to Jesus and I found in him my star, my sun.
And in that light of life I'll walk 'til travelling days are done
Posts: 4473 | From: land of the wee midgie | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sebby
Shipmate
# 15147
|
Posted
The appoinmtents section of the Church Times refers to 'Rev Dr' and one assumes this is PhDs.
I'm not so sure of the correctness of 'Canon Dr' which one hears from time to time introducing speakers on Thought for the Day.
Might it not be 'Canon John Smith PhD' or 'The Rev Dr John Smith, Honorary Canon of Hereford Cathedral' or just settle for 'Canon' or 'The Rev Dr'. 'Canon Dr' sounds just plain daft IMO.
--------------------
sebhyatt
Posts: 1340 | From: yorks | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
aig
Shipmate
# 429
|
Posted
I am a jobbing paediatrician so no MD. Revd Dr Aig sounds like someone I'm not. How about Dr the Revd Aig?
--------------------
That's not how we do it here.......
Posts: 464 | From: the middle bit at the bottom slightly to the right | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spike
Mostly Harmless
# 36
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Wilfried:
Maybe this is the right time and place to ask. I once had occasion to shake the Rev. Jesse Jackson's hand at Trinity Wall Street. All I really had to say was, "Pleased to meet you, ______," but I wasn't sure what to insert. "Reverend" probably would have worked, though not stictly speaking correct. So what else is there? "Mr."? "Pastor"? What would have been correct, or best practice? Whatever I actually did say, I don't think he noticed or cared.
That last sentence is probably the most sensible I've read on the entire thread
--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing
Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Uncle Pete
Loyaute me lie
# 10422
|
Posted
Here, a new late vocation was ordained to the priesthood. Previously, he had been a medical doctor.
He chooses The Reverend John Smith, MD.
--------------------
Even more so than I was before
Posts: 20466 | From: No longer where I was | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
(S)pike couchant
Shipmate
# 17199
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by aig:
I am a jobbing paediatrician so no MD. Revd Dr Aig sounds like someone I'm not. How about Dr the Revd Aig?
Never. 'Dr Aig' is perfectly acceptable, but — if used at all — 'the Rev'd' comes before all other titles (there's an exception for archbishops who are 'His Grace, the Most Rev'd', but I take it you're not one of those). Furthermore, styles like 'the Rev'd' and 'the Hon.' go before ones like 'Dr'. The correct order if 'Major-General the Hon. Sir George Stoddart', or 'the Rev'd the Hon. Fr Hugh Chantry-Pigg'. Incidentally, the only case in which 'The Rev'd Sir XX' is correct is when the holder is a baronet (I've seen this once or twice in the archives of the Society of Mary). The combination of secular and religious titles is complicated, because it really shouldn't happen, although it has at all times in Christian history, as in the case of Rt. Rev. Frederick Augustus Hervey 4th Earl of Bristol DD PC, the Bishop of Cloyne from 1767 to 1768 and Bishop of Derry (both in the then-established Church of Ireland) from 1768 to 1803.
--------------------
'Still the towers of Trebizond, the fabled city, shimmer on the far horizon, gated and walled' but Bize her yer Trabzon.
Posts: 308 | From: West of Eden, East of England | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by (S)pike couchant:
Incidentally, the only case in which 'The Rev'd Sir XX' is correct is when the holder is a baronet (I've seen this once or twice in the archives of the Society of Mary).
I was, for some years until his death in 1997, a friend of one such. The Reverend Sir David Gibson, Baronet.
--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse
Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Wilfried:
Maybe this is the right time and place to ask. I once had occasion to shake the Rev. Jesse Jackson's hand at Trinity Wall Street. All I really had to say was, "Pleased to meet you, ______," but I wasn't sure what to insert. "Reverend" probably would have worked, though not stictly speaking correct. So what else is there? "Mr."? "Pastor"? What would have been correct, or best practice? Whatever I actually did say, I don't think he noticed or cared.
This reminds me of what the late Duke of Norfolk used to say when advising individuals who were meeting the Queen and were nervous about getting the protocol wrong: "Those who mind, don't matter and those who matter don't mind."
--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse
Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Corvo
Shipmate
# 15220
|
Posted
Originally posted by (S)pike couchant:
The combination of secular and religious titles is complicated, because it really shouldn't happen, although it has at all times in Christian history . . .
The Rev Canon Lord Pilkington of Oxenford (life peer 1985) was not I think the only example of a cleric made a life peer in recent years.
[ 28. July 2012, 08:14: Message edited by: Sacred London ]
Posts: 672 | From: The Most Holy Trinity, Coach Lane, North Shields | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
sebby
Shipmate
# 15147
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by (S)pike couchant:
quote:
Originally posted by aig:
I am a jobbing paediatrician so no MD. Revd Dr Aig sounds like someone I'm not. How about Dr the Revd Aig?
Never. 'Dr Aig' is perfectly acceptable, but — if used at all — 'the Rev'd' comes before all other titles (there's an exception for archbishops who are 'His Grace, the Most Rev'd', but I take it you're not one of those). Furthermore, styles like 'the Rev'd' and 'the Hon.' go before ones like 'Dr'. The correct order if 'Major-General the Hon. Sir George Stoddart', or 'the Rev'd the Hon. Fr Hugh Chantry-Pigg'. Incidentally, the only case in which 'The Rev'd Sir XX' is correct is when the holder is a baronet (I've seen this once or twice in the archives of the Society of Mary). The combination of secular and religious titles is complicated, because it really shouldn't happen, although it has at all times in Christian history, as in the case of Rt. Rev. Frederick Augustus Hervey 4th Earl of Bristol DD PC, the Bishop of Cloyne from 1767 to 1768 and Bishop of Derry (both in the then-established Church of Ireland) from 1768 to 1803.
There was also 'The Reverend the Earl of Devon'. He was rural dean of Powerham at some stage. I think parishoners called him 'Your Lordship' or 'My Lord'.
Fictionally there was 'The Reverend Lord Henry D'Gascoyne' a younger brother of the Duke of Chalfont. He was known simply as 'Lord Henry'.
There was also a former Bishop of Exeter - Lord William Cecil, whose brother was the Marquis of Salisbury. He was affectionally regarded in the diocese most notably for his appalling memory and bad cycling skills.
Whilst at Exter station fumbling for his train ticket, the collector said 'it's quite all right My lord, we all know who you are.' The bishop replied 'yes but until I find the ticket I don't know where I should be going.'
--------------------
sebhyatt
Posts: 1340 | From: yorks | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sacred London:
Originally posted by (S)pike couchant:
The combination of secular and religious titles is complicated, because it really shouldn't happen, although it has at all times in Christian history . . .
The Rev Canon Lord Pilkington of Oxenford (life peer 1985) was not I think the only example of a cleric made a life peer in recent years.
The mingling of secular (noble) titles and ecclesiastical ones has always been around, certainly as the notion of post-Roman hereditary nobility developed from the mediaeval period. Perhaps we could distinguish secular titles as a peculiar form of family name and a secular title or distinction as an office of state, as in a life baron of the UK (effectively, a senator) or a mayor or member of a legislature. As an example, if Prince Harry takes orders, he would simply be His Royal Highness the Reverend Prince Harry of Wales, unless he preferred to take a name similar to his military usage of Captain Harry Wales, such as the Reverend H. Wales. In the latter case, the late Archdeacon Ken Bolton, when a member of the Ontario assembly, signed as Ken Bolton MLA, but manifested himself on the diocesan list of licensed clergy as the Venerable Ken Bolton.
Current RC practice seems to discourage the use of noble titles by clerics. No coronets or supporters or distinction of civil rank are permitted in ecclesiastical heraldry. While European clerics bear titles (as have many popes, most recently Count Mastai-Ferreti aka Pius IX), I have not seen them used officially (e.g, Count von Schönborn, Cardinal Archbishop of Vienna, does not) in current usage.
I think that the Orthies drop noble titles entirely, as Count Boris Bobrinskoy became Archpriest Boris Bobrinskoy of the S Sergius Institute in Paris and Prince Dmitri Shahovsky became the monk John (later Bishop of Brooklyn and then Abp of San Francisco).
Anglican challenges of addressing bishops of noble birth would be greatly reduced if we simply restricted the episcopacy to members of the older religious orders.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
I either call my Bishop by his first name or 'Bishop First-name'. Again, I would try to find out his preference of address.
Knowing the present encumbent, he has never objected to 'My Lord' ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
quote:
Originally posted by (S)pike couchant:
It does seem to me that priests who insist on first names must be trying to make some kind of point, and I'm pretty certain that most congregants who insist on addressing their parish priest that way are as well.
Or it could be that that's all they've ever known as it's how they were brought up.
Rather boringly - and perhaps disappointingly for (S)pike C - that's the answer in my case. I can't answer for every priest of course. But I like to be called by the name by which I am known. I have no problem with titles either, if parishioners like to use them. Funnily enough, the situation I find strangest is when people 'insist' on using the long-form of my name, as it's fairly alien to me. But I know they prefer it, so I don't mind.
As for it being a class issue. I'm not aware that class has anything to do with however each and every individual priest and parishioner chooses to name themselves or each other. Churchmanship, tradition, custom certainly comes into it. I guess if one has a deep knowledge of an individual's class prejudices it might be possible to guess why they prefer to call their clergy, or be called, by some particular title. But as a generalism, I can't see how one would even begin to prove that.
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by (S)pike couchant:
Incidentally, the only case in which 'The Rev'd Sir XX' is correct is when the holder is a baronet (I've seen this once or twice in the archives of the Society of Mary).
I think this is wrong... A person who is ordained after receiving a knighthood also becomes 'the Revd Sir' or 'the Revd Dame', it is only if they receive their honour post-ordination that the title is not used.
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Corvo
Shipmate
# 15220
|
Posted
I remember some discussion about clerical knighthoods when Grahmam Leonard got one.
The argument against was that knights by definition are 'warriors' which clerics obviously are not, and are/were, in fact, in English law not allowed to bear arms (I think this is why British military chaplains unlike American ones cannot carry guns).
Posts: 672 | From: The Most Holy Trinity, Coach Lane, North Shields | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
But I like to be called by the name by which I am known. I have no problem with titles either, if parishioners like to use them. Funnily enough, the situation I find strangest is when people 'insist' on using the long-form of my name, as it's fairly alien to me. But I know they prefer it, so I don't mind.
At the local TEC place, when a new [female] cleric was to show up, they did something very simple and very effective: in the newsletter, the other priest ("Father X") simply wrote something like, "People will certainly wonder what to call our new one. She simply wishes to be called Vicky." It worked.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
sebby
Shipmate
# 15147
|
Posted
Knighthoods AFTER ordination are noted by abbreviation only. So When the former Dean of St Paul's was 'knighted' (rather prestigiously in the Royal Victorian Order, so the personal gift of the Sovereign) he became 'The Very Reverend Alan Webster KCVO'. 'Sir' is never used.
--------------------
sebhyatt
Posts: 1340 | From: yorks | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
As for it being a class issue. I'm not aware that class has anything to do with however each and every individual priest and parishioner chooses to name themselves or each other.
I think (S)c's comment about class was rather less straightforward than the 'middle class prefer to say Fred'; 'working class prefer Father' sort of thing. His (his?) point was more that class snobbery affects many Anglican (especially MOTR Anglican) attitudes towards RCism and customs perceived as being RC: not because in themselves they are theologically suspect but because they are associated with the 'ignorant working-class Irish.' I'm not sure that I buy this entirely, but there is a grain of truth there somewhere.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Peter Owen
Shipmate
# 134
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sebby:
Knighthoods AFTER ordination are noted by abbreviation only.
And the recipient does not receive the accolade.
--------------------
Πετρος
Posts: 266 | From: overlooking Liverpool Bay | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
Really? The Revd Prof Diarmaid MacCulloch KB did a few weeks ago. At Windsor, IIRC.
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Peter Owen
Shipmate
# 134
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
Really? The Revd Prof Diarmaid MacCulloch KB did a few weeks ago. At Windsor, IIRC.
I think that you will find that he received the badge of a knight bachelor, but not the tap on the shoulder with the sword. It is this latter which is the accolade.
And the abbreviation is Kt, not KB (or KT).
--------------------
Πετρος
Posts: 266 | From: overlooking Liverpool Bay | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
The eminent musician Thalben Ball was once asked if he had ever thought of becoming a church minister. He replied that it could create difficulties if he was to be made a canon of the Anglican Church as he would be known as Canon Ball.
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
