Thread: MW: Honorifics and Titles (was "I am The Incredibly Reverend Dr. Mark T. Punk") Board: Limbo / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=001076
Posted by MarkthePunk (# 683) on
:
Actually I'm not. But I am very curious about such titles in the Anglican and Catholic churches as well as in any other church bodies that use them.
In other words, what does it take to become "Reverend," "Very Reverend," "Most Reverend" and such? What is the significence of such titles?
I'm not knocking them (And I will refrain from doing so here, although I admit I find them amusing). But I am very curious about them.
Thank you.
[ 29. March 2004, 19:59: Message edited by: Siegfried ]
Posted by Elizabeth Anne (# 3555) on
:
"The Reverend" is for a priest. "The Very Reverend" is for the dean of a cathedral (among other things?). "The Right Reverend" is a bishop. "The Most Reverend" is for some sort of head bishop ie. The Most Reverend Frank T. Griswold, Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church USA, and The Most Reverend Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury.
Did I get all of this right?
Posted by MarkthePunk (# 683) on
:
I've noticed "Very Reverend" being used for an Episcopal or Anglican Rector.
Posted by Incensed (# 2670) on
:
That's about the length and breadth of it. Venerable is an archdeacon...
Posted by Sacristan (# 3548) on
:
"The Rev'd" could also be for a deacon.
Posted by CorgiGreta (# 443) on
:
Thinking of swithching, Mark? I think your theology would be pretty much in line with that of The Right Reverend Dr. James Monte Stanton, Bishop of Dallas, which I think includes Denton.
Greta
Posted by LatinMan (# 1892) on
:
In RC parlance (and please note this varies by country and language), a deacon is addressed:
The Reverend Mister N.
A priest is simply:
The Reverend N.
or:
Father N.
A bishop or archbishop is:
The Most Reverend N.
Abbots and certain Monsignori are:
The Right Reverend N.
Other Monsignori are:
The Very Reverend N.
Cardinals are:
His Eminence [first and middle names] Cardinal [surname]*
And the Pope is:
His Holiness Pope N.
Most Catholic clerics do not use the academic title "Doctor", which properly belongs to clerics holding the degrees Doctor of Divinity or Sacræ Theologiæ Doctor (Doctor of Sacred Theology).
*The modern practice of identifying Cardinals as Cardinal [first name, middle name] [surname] (e.g. Cardinal Joseph Doax) is execrable and boors identifying Cardinals in this manner should be soundly beaten.
Posted by irreverentkit (# 4271) on
:
Just don't call me "Mother"!
Sincerely,
The Rev. Katherine A. (Kit) Carlson
Posted by Rowen (# 1194) on
:
In the Uniting Church of Oz, both Ministers-of-the-Word and Deacons are addresed as the Rev. Name Name (John Doe or Jane Doe or whatever). No matter what you are and do... eg the National President of the Uniting Church- the Rev. Name Name. Such folk are trained and ordanined. A lay leader- who may choose to spend some time in a leadership role in a parish, may be called Pastor John Doe or similar. They may recieve some training but are not ordained.
Posted by golden key (# 1468) on
:
US Protestant ministers are generally simply "Reverend", which is the title they gain on ordination.
But some churches will only call a minister "Pastor", believing that only God should be revered.
I think I've only heard "Rev. Dr." for a couple of people--Martin Luther King Jr. and Billy Graham. Personally, not being terribly used to titles, I find that cumbersome. So I'll usually say Rev. or Dr., but not both.
Posted by jugular (# 4174) on
:
Basically the titles refer to how much you are revered, that is, how special and marvellous and wonderful and important you are:
Thus:
Johnny/Suzie: Children - not important at all.
John/Suzanne: Young Adults - only important inasmuch as they need to be tolerated until they turn into real people who can contribute to the building appeal.
Mr/Mrs Kafoops: Adult members, with cash in pockets - important, but primarily of value for their ability to warm seats
Verger: So important s/he gets to carry a stick.
The Reverend (revered one): Deacon or Priest - about as important as they come. Keepers of knowledge and and keys to the Parish Hall.
Very Reverend (very revered one): Dean - we say they are "very" revered in the same way we say children are "very" special, i.e to give them space to prance around and look cute before putting them to bed and getting on with the serious business.
Right Reverend (Like, really revered): Bishops - given this title to demonstrate the paradox of Christianity, that is, the one most derided and scorned is also the one who holds the code for the Diocesan bank account.
Most Reverend (you don't get any more revered than this!): Archbishops - title used as a reminder that it is our weakest and most spineless who are truly valued by God.
Posted by Erin (# 2) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by irreverentkit:
Just don't call me "Mother"!
Sincerely,
The Rev. Katherine A. (Kit) Carlson
Just out of curiosity, why? Our associate rector is quite happy to be known as Mother Patricia.
Posted by golden key (# 1468) on
:
Jugular ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
Posted by Degs (# 2824) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by MarkthePunk:
I've noticed "Very Reverend" being used for an Episcopal or Anglican Rector.
Then I guess he/she will be the equvalent of a Rural or Area Dean.
When I worked in ECUSA that was the practice.
Posted by Angelus Domini. (# 2343) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
quote:
Originally posted by irreverentkit:
Just don't call me "Mother"!
Sincerely,
The Rev(d). Katherine A. (Kit) Carlson
Just out of curiosity, why? Our associate rector is quite happy to be known as Mother Patricia.
May I second the question?
This is certainly how I address female priests; it sounds most rude to greet a male priest as 'Father', and then a female priest as 'Anne'.
I'm usually of the view that it is more rude to address somebody in a way other than that requested, than it is to omit their title/correct form of address; but I would be most uncomfortable addressing a priest by her/his first name only, unless I knew said priest personally, and even then in formal situations I would feel it inappropriate.
AD x
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on
:
MTP, if you were the 'Incredibly Reverend MTP', the 'incredibly reverend, of course, refers to the God you represent in whatever official status that has been given to you, not yourself.
While I find it very amusing to have these two words (Reverend Anselmina) in such close proximity - as I've said before my family still haven't stopped laughing - I remind myself of the above everytime I'm tempted to think it's actually meant to be a descriptor of who I am rather than whose I am in the grace of Christ.
Anyone know why Bishops are the Right Reverend? It kind of insinuates there must be some of the Wrong kind floating about. And usually when one is referring to someone as a 'right' something it's usually in the context of being, for example, 'a right royal pain in the backside' or 'a right old waste of space'. Maybe once upon a time it was meant ironically? 'Here's Bob, just been consecrated Bish of Barcestershire; a right reverend, he is!'
Posted by Cusanus (# 692) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
Anyone know why Bishops are the Right Reverend? It kind of insinuates there must be some of the Wrong kind floating about. And usually when one is referring to someone as a 'right' something it's usually in the context of being, for example, 'a right royal pain in the backside' or 'a right old waste of space'. Maybe once upon a time it was meant ironically? 'Here's Bob, just been consecrated Bish of Barcestershire; a right reverend, he is!'
'Right' in this context is an intensifying adverb modifying the following adjective, just like 'very'. It's now largely obsolete except for the uses you mention!
Posted by Chapelhead (# 1143) on
:
If you really want a mouthful of title, try
The Most Reverend and Right Honourable Doctor Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury.
Posted by Angelus Domini. (# 2343) on
:
Ahem, Lord archbishop of Canterbury, not so?
xxx
Posted by Chapelhead (# 1143) on
:
Quite so, AD.
As well as "Primate of all England and Metropolitan".
Posted by Dies Irae (# 2804) on
:
I am possibly wrong but would not the prefix "His Grace" also be appropriate here?
My understanding was that Dukes and Archbishops enjoyed this courtesy.
Posted by CorgiGreta (# 443) on
:
The title 'canon' is usually given to clergy (and sometimes laity) who are on the staff of a cathedral. To complicate matters the title can also be honorary. Thus, we have The Reverend Father Canon Barry E.B Swain, who is in fact rector of a church in a different diocese from that in which the title was conferred.
To confuse matters further, some retired bishops serve at the parochial level, so it would be possible to come across people who are functioning as parish priests but who have the the title 'Right Reverend'.
Greta
Posted by CorgiGreta (# 443) on
:
Also, a cathedral dean can sometimes be a 'Rt. Rev.', as will be the case starting this Tuesday in Hooker's Trick Land, when Bishop Chane becomes interim Dean of Washington National Cathedral.
Greta
Posted by Chapelhead (# 1143) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Dies Irae:
I am possibly wrong but would not the prefix "His Grace" also be appropriate here?
You are not wrong, the archbish is, indeed, graceful. ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Posted by Chapelhead (# 1143) on
:
As well as becoming more reverend the further up the tree they climb, Roman Catholic priests also get more tassles on their coats of arms (there are several pages).
Posted by MarkthePunk (# 683) on
:
All very interesting, if confusing.
Anselmina, no, I did mean by my title that I am Incredibly Reverend. ![[Angel]](graemlins/angel.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Greta, your suggestion is well taken. I admire Bishop Stanton.
Wouldn't it be interesting if we did have Wrong Reverends? Maybe they could be Devil's Advocates or such. ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
Posted by Mousethief (# 953) on
:
I believe that in the American Orthodox world, "Very Reverend" refers to an archpriest.
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
If you know the female priest very well (and she has a sense of humour) you can get away with calling her 'father'. Tongue firmly in cheek, of course
Posted by LatinMan (# 1892) on
:
It is not unknown for RC abbesses to be addressed as Reverend Mother.
Posted by Raspberry Rabbit (# 3080) on
:
When I was an army chaplain I was 'Captain the Reverend XXX XXXXX. I thought at the time that I might stick around long enough and behave myself in both military and ecclesiastical worlds until some day I achieved the next step up which would have been
Major the Venerable.....
I suppose there must be a 'Lt Colonel the Right Reverend' somewhere. Our bishop ordinary to the Canadian Forces (who is an archbishop in the Canadian Church remains simply....
Captain the Most Reverend XXXXX XXXXXX
Captain the Reverend Raspberry Rabbit
Montreal, Quebec
Posted by David (# 3) on
:
Isn't the opposite of a Right Rev. a Sinister Rev?
Posted by Angelus Domini. (# 2343) on
:
Well yes, quite, David. It's even funnier in light of your signature. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
AD x
Posted by golden key (# 1468) on
:
Somehow, I'm put in mind of
"I am the very model of a modern Major General..."
Posted by Degs (# 2824) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by David:
Isn't the opposite of a Right Rev. a Sinister Rev?
No, that would be Left Revd! The opposite of sinister is dexter.
Mixing languages ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
First franglais, then spanglish, now latish (short a)!!! Whatever next?
Posted by Pre-cambrian (# 2055) on
:
A recent former Dean of Lincoln was The Very Reverend The Honourable Oliver Twistleton-Wickham-Fiennes, which had a bit of style.
Posted by anglicanrascal (# 3412) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LatinMan:
It is not unknown for RC abbesses to be addressed as Reverend Mother.
The same is for Anglican abbesses. Hence, John Betjeman's ![[Not worthy!]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
"Felixstowe, or Last of Her Order" : quote:
....
In eighteen ninety-four when we were founded,
Counting our Reverend Mother we were six,
How full of hope we were and prayer-surrounded
....
Posted by ken (# 2460) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Angelus Domini.:
This is certainly how I address female priests; it sounds most rude to greet a male priest as 'Father', and then a female priest as 'Anne'.
I'm usually of the view that it is more rude to address somebody in a way other than that requested, than it is to omit their title/correct form of address; but I would be most uncomfortable addressing a priest by her/his first name only, unless I knew said priest personally, and even then in formal situations I would feel it inappropriate.
Many parts of the church find the idea of calling a male priest "father" odd, and would never think of calling a woman priest "mother".
For years now just about all the Anglican churches I've been associated with have called their priests by their names - George or Dave or Barry or April or Christine.
The formal alternative to that has just been to say "Vicar" as in "More tea, Vicar?"
Bishops and Archdeacons get similar treatment.
Posted by Sacristan (# 3548) on
:
I don't understand this practice of calling priests by their first names. We don't do it with our physicians, we don't do it with our lawyers or other professionals. Why does it seem necessary now to do it with clergy? Is it because of a sense of having to make them be "reg'lar folks just like us"? ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
Posted by ken (# 2460) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sacristan:
I don't understand this practice of calling priests by their first names. We don't do it with our physicians, we don't do it with our lawyers or other professionals. Why does it seem necessary now to do it with clergy? Is it because of a sense of having to make them be "reg'lar folks just like us"?
Since when was a priest a "professional" like a lawyer or doctor? A lawyer or doctor is someone you pay to do a job then they go away and you don't see them till next time you need the job done.
Your priest is also your pastor, someone you are in a day-to-day (or at least week-to-week) relationship with
The lawyer or the doctor, unless you know them personally, are in basically the same situation as the plumber or the plasterer you get in to fix something your house. The priest shoudl be more like one of the family.
You might see at doctro for 5 minutes every few months, if you make an appointment; in church you see the priest for an hour or so every week, and then some.
Also you are likely see more of the priest socially as well. Over the last few years I have spent far more time in conversation with our parish priest or the other ministers than I have with my doctor or lawyer. In fact I've spent more time with the bishop of the archdeacon than with any doctor.
Not that ANY of that has got to do with reasons for calling priests "father" or not - which here in the Chruch of England, as we know perfectly well, is merely a shibboleth of church politics. If you follow the innovations brought into the CofE by the Anglo-catholics in the 19th century you say "father"; if you don't, you don't.
Posted by Jengie (# 273) on
:
Actually those who refer to people by Rev. Other are the ones who are being over familiar. It is highly familiar to call someone Smith, Jones or such, and all you have done is put an adjective in front of it. So if you object to being called Tall Smith, or Short Jones it is equally incorrect to refer to Rev. Other. Reverend is not a title implying vocation but an adjective that says the person addressed should treated with Reverenced. If you do not wish to use first names then you have to use Rev. Mr. Smith or Rev. Mrs. Jones or whatever title is appropriate. This sounds awkward so many use Rev. John Smith, Rev. Jane Jones etc.
Theologically it is of course very suspect in English Non-conformity.
Jengie
Posted by Sine Nomine (# 3631) on
:
I've said it before. I'll say it again. All clergy should be required to have doctorates. Problem solved.
I was always told, in the Episcopal church anyway, that you never addressed a member of the clergy in conversation as "Reverend Smith". I stole the following from an Episcopal church website;
quote:
While we are on this, it is never correct to refer to any cleric as "Reverend." This word is an adjective and must always be preceded by the definite article. And it is never correct to address a priest directly as "Reverend Brown." The worst sin is to speak about a priest as "the reverend," as in "The reverend says I should double my pledge."
My brother, who really ought to know better, introduced his new priest to me as "Reverend So-and-So". I nearly died of shame.
Posted by Divine Outlaw-Dwarf (# 2252) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
Not that ANY of that has got to do with reasons for calling priests "father" or not - which here in the Chruch of England, as we know perfectly well, is merely a shibboleth of church politics. If you follow the innovations brought into the CofE by the Anglo-catholics in the 19th century you say "father"; if you don't, you don't.
That'll be RESTORED to the CofE! Given that 'Father language' regarding the clergy of one sort or another has been in use for the better part of two thousand years in the Christian Church, I scarcely think it was an 'innovation' in the 19th century.
I do think that the use of 'father' has good pragmatic arguments to support it. All this reverend, most reverend etc. can sound very pompous and seems to have more to do with worldly status than pastoral role. However, first names can make some people uncomfortable, and can create a big ousider/ insider split - I turn up at a church for the first time, everyone is calling the priest 'Bob', but I've never met this man, what do I call him? 'Father', quite simply, works, it is not overly formal, has resonances of family and pastoral care, and puts insiders and outsiders in the same boat.
Posted by Hooker's Trick (# 89) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LatinMan:
*The modern practice of identifying Cardinals as Cardinal [first name, middle name] [surname] (e.g. Cardinal Joseph Doax) is execrable and boors identifying Cardinals in this manner should be soundly beaten.
From the Boston Globe:
Q. I have noticed that Boston's Roman Catholic archbishop is referred to in the Globe as Cardinal Bernard Law. Years ago it was Richard Cardinal Cushing or Francis Cardinal Spellman. When and why did the title change?
P.D., North Eastham
A. On May 26, 1985, the Globe announced it had discontinued the practice of placing the title cardinal after the given name, as in Humberto Cardinal Medeiros. The practice, which derives from the old British custom of referring to nobility with identifications such as "William, Duke of Norfolk," generally had fallen out of favor. The Globe' s new style places the title before the name, making it read Cardinal Bernard Law. Two major news organizations, the Associated Press and United Press International, also adopted the style. Globe religion writer James L. Franklin says the Vatican and the Archdiocese of Boston still use the old British style.
Posted by Sine Nomine (# 3631) on
:
While we're on the subject. Another quote from the same church's website (not that it's necessarily, uh, gospel just because it's on a website):
quote:
"Do Episcopal clergy call themselves 'Father'? I thought that was a Catholic thing. What term refers to a female Episcopal priest?"
Reply: The question of appropriate titles for Christian clergy has been a complicated one. Many Protestant denominations in this country used the title "Father" for some of their clergy before we Episcopalians did. For a time American Roman Catholics called their parish clergy "Mister." When Irish Roman Catholic priests, all of whom were called "Father," came to America in large numbers, Protestants dropped their practice like a hot potato. The Anglo-Catholic movement gradually brought "Father" back into common usage in the Episcopal Church.
The use of a first name for a female priest can be overly familiar. If a female priest is a vicar or a dean then title of Vicar or Dean works. If she has a Ph.D. then Doctor works. In the UK female priests who are rectors are often called Rector. Some prefer Pastor; others prefer to be addressed as Mother, and this makes some kind of sense if male priests are called Father, but I'm not sure if people over 40 should call anyone Father or Mother, except one's own parents. Your best bet is to ask the priest what she prefers. Deacons are addressed as Deacon Dorothy. (This reminds me of that horrid expression: "You can call me anything, but don't call me late for dinner.")
Posted by ken (# 2460) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sine Nomine:
I was always told, in the Episcopal church anyway, that you never addressed a member of the clergy in conversation as "Reverend Smith".
Of course. We say, or used to say "Vicar" or "Archdeacon" or even "Bishop" if we weren't using their names. It's all in Trollope
Posted by Sine Nomine (# 3631) on
:
Everything I know about the Church of England I learned from Trollope. Unfortunately, some of it seems to be a bit out of date. Not the politics however.
Posted by angloid (# 159) on
:
Originall posted by Divine Outlaw-Dwarf quote:
That'll be RESTORED to the CofE! Given that 'Father language' regarding the clergy of one sort or another has been in use for the better part of two thousand years in the Christian Church, I scarcely think it was an 'innovation' in the 19th century.
Actually, D0D, much as I agree with your arguments for the practice (as long as women can be Mother), I doubt if you are correct. The pre-Reformation custom in England was to address priests as "Sir", as in Sir Christopher Trychay, the hero of Eamonn Duffy's book whose title I forget but a far from boring historical study of an English country priest and parish throughout the turmoil of the Reformation years. Was it the Chronicles of Morebath or something?
Roman Catholic priests likewise in England were 'Mr' until mass Irish immigration I understand. As at Ushaw College if not now certainly in the 1960s.
Posted by Divine Outlaw-Dwarf (# 2252) on
:
I chose my words carefully Angloid!
I talked about 'father language' - I agree that there has never been universal use of 'father' as a term of address, although it WAS in use, particularly liturgically, in pre-Reformation times. The use is and was patchy. My point was only that it is misleading to think of it as a 19th c. innovation.
Posted by Sine Nomine (# 3631) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw-Dwarf:
it WAS in use, particularly liturgically, in pre-Reformation times.
Pre-Reformation, Schmeformation.
Did they use it in the early church? And what did the councils say about it? That's what we need to know.
Posted by tomb (# 174) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hooker's Trick:
....On May 26, 1985, the Globe announced it had discontinued the practice of placing the title cardinal after the given name, .... Two major news organizations, the Associated Press and United Press International, also adopted the style.
Well, the Boston Globe, the Associated Press, and United Press International can just go to hell.
And while we're at it, sombody needs to point out the distinction between written honorifics and spoken titles used in introductions. You can call some priest to his or her face "Father" --or "Mother" if you're feeling advanced, but you would never address an envelope to them using those words. It is always "the Rev." or "the Rev'd." (if you're British). There's a lot of confusion on this thread about that, and it needs to stop because the posters should know better.
It is permissible to call a bishop "bishop" to his/her face and a cathedral dean (or an academic one, for that matter) "dean," but presbyters are properly called "Father" or--in the new dispensation--"Mother", but never "priest." And I agree, proper names work equally well for them, and the humility might just be salutary.
Posted by angloid (# 159) on
:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw-Dwarf quote:
My point was only that it is misleading to think of it as a 19th c. innovation.
Well yes, your legally and vertically-challenged holiness. Bishops at least are addressed as Father in the BCP.
Posted by LatinMan (# 1892) on
:
quote:
angloid sez:
The pre-Reformation custom in England was to address priests as "Sir", as in Sir Christopher Trychay, the hero of Eamonn Duffy's book...
In Sigrid Undset's Kristen Lavransdatter, she explains that Norwegian priests in Medieval times were called "Sira", in direct imitation of contemporary English practice. (Undset cited English evangelization of Norway.)
Posted by Divine Outlaw-Dwarf (# 2252) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by angloid:
Well yes, your legally and vertically-challenged holiness.
Posted by Sine Nomine (# 3631) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw-Dwarf:
I scarcely think it was an 'innovation' in the 19th century.
I'm certainly no expert in English church history, but didn't they have riots in the churches over this sort of thing? I'm thinking the nineteenth century "people in the pews™" must have thought it was an innovation, and a "Roman" one at that.
Posted by Divine Outlaw-Dwarf (# 2252) on
:
The version instilled in me as an A-C youf was this : the initiative in calling slum priests 'father' (which is what Irish RCs were by then calling their priests) was from the people, it made the priest more 'one of us' than did 'Mister'. Whether this is true, or pious Catholic myth, or (most probably) a bit of both, I do not know.
Posted by irreverentkit (# 4271) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
quote:
Originally posted by irreverentkit:
Just don't call me "Mother"!
Sincerely,
The Rev. Katherine A. (Kit) Carlson
Just out of curiosity, why? Our associate rector is quite happy to be known as Mother Patricia.
I don't want to mother my parishioners. I am their priest, not their parent.
Actually when "Mother Kit" comes out, it is usually to scold an acolyte or argue with the air conditioning repairman. She's pretty scary. Most people want to see just plain ol' Kit, or Reverend Kit if you want to say something formal.
(Yes, yes, I know Reverend is an adjective, not a title. What I really want to be is Pastor, but it's not very Episcopal.)
I tell them only call me Mother if you want me to speak to you the same way I speak to my children.
And if you want me to clean that smudge off your face with some spit on my finger ...
Posted by irreverentkit (# 4271) on
:
p.s.
You could call me Ms. Carlson. (Longstanding low church tradition of calling male clergy Mr. so and so.)
Or, if you can call someone with a Ph.D. "doctor", why can't you call someone with an M.Div. "master"?
"The Reverend Master Katherine A. Carlson"
Now THERE'S a title!!!!
![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
The woman who used to be our parish priest was one of the first women ordained to the priesthood in that diocese. She says that if she ever writes about her experiences, she's already figured out the title of her book: Even My Husband Calls Me "Father."
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
Clergy of the Church of Iceland still receive Sera as their title, as in Sera Thor or Sera Jon, presumably flowing from the Norwegian tradition. Perhaps a shipmate more up to date with Icelandic practice can fill us in with the title used for women presturinn??
Is there not an old thread somewhere on nomenclature for women clergy??
Posted by Thurible (# 3206) on
:
Surely, Archbishops are addressed as "Your Grace", your diocesan bishop "My Lord", other bishops "Bishop", deans and archdeacons "Mr. Dean/Archdeacon" (even if I do prefer the slightly incorrect Fr. Dean/Archdeacon), and everyone else is Father, unless they absolutely hate it.
Incidentally, it is permissible to use "The Revd. Fr." on an envelope if the priest is a member of an order such as SSC or OGS. (That's always what I've been led to believe anyway.)
Thurible
Posted by Arabella Purity Winterbottom (# 3434) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by jugular:
Basically the titles refer to how much you are revered, that is, how special and marvellous and wonderful and important you are:
Thus:
Johnny/Suzie: Children - not important at all.
Thanks Jugular, for the best laugh of the day thus far. Our minister is the Reverend Dr, but she's the only one who uses the titles, and then only in official situations. The rest of us, children included, call her by her first name. Those of us who spend more time with her call her by a diminutive of that name.
I personally hate honorifics. And I dislike even more those who insist on them. But then, I call my doctor and lawyer by their first names too. The exception to this is that I always address older people as Mr, Mrs or Miss until they invite me to do otherwise. And I always check with people what they prefer to be called, since I personally hate being called Debbie instead of Deborah.
Posted by multipara (# 2918) on
:
Arabella,I am with you on honorifics. I do not insists upon "dr"for myself since I am but a married bachelor (of medicine and surgery). At my main job (in an army barracks) I get "Ma'am" "Doc" (just perfect for a dwarf according to Sponsa Amabilis) or my baptismal name.
Small tangent-it is an odd tradition among British, Australian and Kiwi surgeons that they get "Mr" rather then "Dr" when addressed formally. As an intern, I offended one such character by suggesting that this was a hangover from the days when barbers did double-duty as surgeons.
Now that I am too old to worry about respecting my elders I address clerics by their given name, since I have not called anyone "Father" since my earthly father died many years back. Bishops, etc are easily avoided, not being on any of their invitation lists. Of the many female religious I know, none would expect the appellation of "Mother" or "Sister" these days, even (and especially) the octogenarians.
cheers,
m
Posted by irreverentkit (# 4271) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
The woman who used to be our parish priest was one of the first women ordained to the priesthood in that diocese. She says that if she ever writes about her experiences, she's already figured out the title of her book: Even My Husband Calls Me "Father."
ROFL!!!!
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on
:
This Episcopalian is so very happy that her Rector insists on being addressed as "David" and her Associate Rector as "Heather."
Posted by Thurible (# 3206) on
:
This Anglican is very happy that his parish priest will only answer to Father X or Rector.
Thurible
[ 02. July 2003, 11:14: Message edited by: Thurible ]
Posted by Rhisiart (# 69) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by multipara:
Small tangent-it is an odd tradition among British, Australian and Kiwi surgeons that they get "Mr" rather then "Dr" when addressed formally. As an intern, I offended one such character by suggesting that this was a hangover from the days when barbers did double-duty as surgeons.
I believe you're right - surgeons used to be chiefly concerned with amputations and so were often chosen for strength or skill with a saw rather than academic abilities. 'Proper' doctors looked down on surgeons as little better than butchers, and so refused to honour them with the title of 'Dr'. I am told that orthopaedic surgeons, who do most of the bone-crunching work now, are still considered to be a bit 'below' the rest of the surgical classes
Of course, now medics sweat blood to get the title 'Dr', then sweat more blood to become a 'Mr' or 'Miss' again ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
. Another reason to refuse to call anyone 'Dr' unless they have a Doctorate rather than a medical degree ![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
Posted by Divine Outlaw-Dwarf (# 2252) on
:
This Anglican goes through occasional bouts of referring to clergy in the way he calculates will most annoy the individuals concerned.
Posted by Jengie (# 273) on
:
Multipara:
Actually in the UK it is more pompous than that. A fully qualified medical doctor who is referred to as 'Mr' is a consultant. That is a sucessful doctor in the speciality. Yes I know surgeons who are Mr but I also know medicine specialists who are Mr.
I have made the mistake of doing this and felt the wrath of the consultant.
Jengie
Posted by Elephenor (# 4026) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by irreverentkit:
Or, if you can call someone with a Ph.D. "doctor", why can't you call someone with an M.Div. "master"?
You can indeed, though it is customarily abbreviated "Mr" (or, presumably, "Ms" in your case).
At certain universities, there still exists a tradition that only M.A.'s have the title `Mr' painted up over their door. Undergraduates are just initials+surname.
Considerably less well known (indeed outright forgotten) is the archaic title "Ds" (pronounced "Dominus"?), for those possessed only of a Bachelor's degree. (see eg. this glossary)
Posted by ken (# 2460) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie:
Actually in the UK it is more pompous than that. A fully qualified medical doctor who is referred to as 'Mr' is a consultant. That is a sucessful doctor in the speciality. Yes I know surgeons who are Mr but I also know medicine specialists who are Mr.
Of course if the surgeon gets a PhD...
Posted by Raspberry Rabbit (# 3080) on
:
I can imagine saying 'yes, bishop, no bishop' but not 'yes dean, no dean' Doesn't sound right. "yes, Mr Dean, no Mr Dean" - for some completely stupid reason that sounds better
Raspberry Rabbit
MOntreal, QC
Posted by Jengie (# 273) on
:
Ken:
They normally do not revert to using Dr if they have a research doctorate. They prefer Mr A. Smith M.D.
Very few medical Doctors get a Ph.d, they prefer a M.D. (Doctor of Medecine) and the only title that they drop the 'Mr' for is 'Prof'. Though maybe Sir or Lord is acceptable.
Jengie
Posted by ken (# 2460) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie:
the only title that they drop the 'Mr' for is 'Prof'. Though maybe Sir or Lord is acceptable.
Which might require us to explain that in Britain the title "Professor" indicates a very senior academic. It gets handed out for different reasons in different places but it a small minority of academics.
In Germany and the USA it is rather more liberally spread about and in France even schoolteachers get it.
At a university near me the numbers of staff members (not just academics) who use each of these various titles in their computer account is (very approximately give or take a grep):
Mr 446
Ms 445
Dr 422
Miss 106
Mrs 91
Prof. 75
And amongst the students:
Mr 4036
Ms 1673
Miss 1795
Mrs 858
Dr 123
Rev 6
Revd 1
Sir 1
So who is the hold-out "Revd." ? And why do a larger proportion of staff than students use "Miss"?
Posted by LatinMan (# 1892) on
:
At one time, the title "professor" was given to band leaders and even individual musicians.
[ 03. July 2003, 14:49: Message edited by: LatinMan ]
Posted by crunt (# 1321) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by multipara:
I have not called anyone "Father" since my earthly father died many years back.
m
I address anyone wearing clerical garb as Father until otherwise requested. As for my own parents, I have never called them anything but mum, or dad (to their faces). Calling your minister daddy, or mummy would be odd, but to my ears the honorific father or mother is both respectful and loving.
[fixed quote tags]
[ 04. July 2003, 20:20: Message edited by: Siegfried ]
Posted by Raspberry Rabbit (# 3080) on
:
I am about to take a parish which refers to its priest as its 'minister' and, while they're used to calling their *minister* by his first name (which is fine by me) might possibly be coerced to refer to him as Reverend Rabbit.
It's a battle I know I'll never win and don't even intend to try and fight
Reverend Rabbit
Montreal, Quebec (for the moment)
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
When the Venerable Ken Bolton was elected to the provincial duma in 1972, a member of a CBC radio panel on which he featured referred to him as Comrade Archdeacon. Would this not be a useful solution to the nomenclature challenge facing us?
Posted by ken (# 2460) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
When the Venerable Ken Bolton was elected to the provincial duma in 1972, a member of a CBC radio panel on which he featured referred to him as Comrade Archdeacon. Would this not be a useful solution to the nomenclature challenge facing us?
Only if he truly is a member of the Party.
Posted by Degs (# 2824) on
:
And only if he's a member of the proper party can a Revd Canon Dr become a Rt Revd Dr!!!!!
Posted by anglicanrascal (# 3412) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Thurible:
...if the priest is a member of an order such as SSC or OGS.
Know many of them here in Sydney?
Posted by irreverentkit (# 4271) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Elephenor:
quote:
Originally posted by irreverentkit:
Or, if you can call someone with a Ph.D. "doctor", why can't you call someone with an M.Div. "master"?
You can indeed, though it is customarily abbreviated "Mr" (or, presumably, "Ms" in your case).
Still doesn't have the same ring as "the Rev. Master ..." (also, have you noticed how many people use the honorific Mr. ...? Even if they DON'T have advanced degrees????? Maybe this is honorific inflation, so I could bump right up to Rev. Dr., even though I only have a Master's degree ...)
Posted by multipara (# 2918) on
:
anglicanrascal, I am acquainted with several Sydney priests who are OGS members....it appears to be very much a boys' club. A pity, really, I understand their annual get-togethers are a riot, albeit a popish one!
Posted by MarkthePunk (# 683) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by irreverentkit:
Maybe this is honorific inflation, so I could bump right up to Rev. Dr., even though I only have a Master's degree ...)
Heck, I bumped myself right up to Rev. Dr.
If anyone wants to complain about it, I'll just excommunicate him.
Posted by LatinMan (# 1892) on
:
quote:
If anyone wants to complain about it, I'll just excommunicate him.
On his way to Sunday school?
Posted by Maple Leaf (# 1429) on
:
I'm still trying to get my head around the idea that one can't possibly call one's doctor or lawyer by his or her first name. Whyever not? I have known my doctor for upwards of 18 years, she's my own age, and we call each other by our first names. I don't really have a lawyer, but I seem to recall the gentleman who did our last real estate transaction calling me by my first name, which in turn caused me to call him by his. I have always called my rector Harold, by his request. I refer to our bishop as Bishop Ann, and have managed to avoid calling her anything to her face, in our one or two conversations.
(BEGIN TANGENT: This reminds me of my husband's absurd situation: After 18-plus years of marriage, he still doesn't call my parents anything! He refers to them as "your mother" and "your father," and makes eye contact to get their attention. My mother (an old-school colonial) thinks being first-named is disrespectful, and I think calling the grandmother of your children "Mrs." is ridiculous, so he's betwixt and between. I wish he could just say "Ma" and "Pa!" END TANGENT)
Is this one of those Old World/New World things?
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
Dear Mrs Leaf--- it's not so much a new world/ old world thing, but it might be a cultural maze entwined with ethnicity, region, occupation etc etc. I use Mr & Mrs of friends of my mother, although I have known them for nigh-on forty years; my doctor, roughly my contemporary, gets Dr X; Folk with office or seniority get the formal moniker. This is how my father and mother addressed these people and both my brother and I still follow this practice.
As well, I have worked in offices with lots of African and Caribbean immigrants, who tend to use formal address and students are sent over to me with the admonition to ask Mr Aleut how to deal with a particular headache.
However, the francophones I work with and interact with always use the informal tu with each other, and use first names, even among very differing levels and while addressing the clergy. Oddly enough, teachers appear to get vous and their first names!
Of course, it may be that eastern Ontario is still a very backward place, and not yet caught up in the egalitarian whirlwind of the métropole.
Posted by ken (# 2460) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Maple Leaf:
I'm still trying to get my head around the idea that one can't possibly call one's doctor or lawyer by his or her first name. Whyever not?
[...]
Is this one of those Old World/New World things?
Not at all. It's just that I don't know the doctor's first name because when I see a doctor it is always someone different. I am less likely to recognise them than I am to recognise the people in the checkout at the supermarket.
I worked for a US company for 14 years. In general the Brits were less formal about names and ranks than the Americans.
Posted by anglicanrascal (# 3412) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by multipara:
anglicanrascal, I am acquainted with several Sydney priests who are OGS members....it appears to be very much a boys' club. A pity, really, I understand their annual get-togethers are a riot, albeit a popish one!
I told one of the ones I know about a post of yours where you commented on a sermon of his. He was rather tickled by the attention, I ween. So, would it be worth joining OGS (under false pretences, of course) just so I could MW the annual get-together?
Pax,
anglicanrascal
Posted by Degs (# 2824) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by anglicanrascal:
So, would it be worth joining OGS (under false pretences, of course) just so I could MW the annual get-together?
anglicanrascal, tat-queen!
Posted by anglicanrascal (# 3412) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Degs:
quote:
Originally posted by anglicanrascal:
So, would it be worth joining OGS (under false pretences, of course) just so I could MW the annual get-together?
anglicanrascal, tat-queen!
It would be more likely to be: "anglicanrascal, moderate tat-person". What's so funny about that?
Posted by angloid (# 159) on
:
Seeing as the customary abbreviation for Father is Fr, presumably Mother becomes Mr? Could be fun.
Posted by The Dumb Acolyte (# 1158) on
:
Angloid, The title is The Voices of Morebath: Reformation and Rebellion in an English Village . It's a truly great read.
Is "Father Deacon", as in Father Deacon Stephen, common outside of AC circles in the USA?
Posted by Sacristan (# 3548) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by The Dumb Acolyte:
Is "Father Deacon", as in Father Deacon Stephen, common outside of AC circles in the USA?
No.
Posted by jlg (# 98) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sacristan:
quote:
Originally posted by The Dumb Acolyte:
Is "Father Deacon", as in Father Deacon Stephen, common outside of AC circles in the USA?
No.
Which leads to the question: Is 'Father Deacon" commonly used inside AC circles in the USA?
Seriously, I have never heard this, but I'm hardly one to know.
Posted by Ben Goshi (# 4762) on
:
I don't think it's even used in Atlantic City . . .
Posted by Elizabeth Anne (# 3555) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by angloid:
Seeing as the customary abbreviation for Father is Fr, presumably Mother becomes Mr? Could be fun.
I have seen Mo. used as an abbreviation for Mother.
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
I open by apologizing to shipmates for giving breath to this awful thread, but I have just found a reference to the curate of S Andrew's, Las Cruces, New Mexico, as "Padrecita Jeanne."
Some may find this appellation twee, but I think that this approach has a certain charm and it may well fit some clerics.
Posted by Sacristan (# 3548) on
:
It might be useful for a priest who has trans-gendered. Otherwise, ordination of females aside, why not "Madresita". Or, perhaps an especially attractive one might be called "Mamasita".
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
I now doubly apologize to shipmates.
Posted by Thurible (# 3206) on
:
Being kind sorts in MW, we forgive you, Augustine.
Thurible
Posted by ken (# 2460) on
:
My inadequate ecclesiastical Spanish is deeply challenged byt this.
Would "Padrecita" Englishify as something like "cute little female father"?
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0