| OCR Text |
Show OTHER VOICES Don't Say, "Reverend" In Direct Address . . . Wonder how ipany people living in the Valdeses area are making the same mistake we have been making? If you call your minister "Reverend Adair,"' "Reverend Beaman," "Reverend Clark," Reverend Devine," "Reverend Ross," or "Reverend Styles," you are making a grave social error! The correct term is plain old "Mister." Even Emily Post says so! But as many of us of the so-called common herd tend to scoff at what she' has' to say, we'll quote other sources also. 1 Alexander Wolcott used to call this error in speech "a light hearted vulgarity." Time Magazine took it more seriously, commenting on the abolition of its usuage by the' ministers of Lansing, Michigan, when it said "Nothing so infuriates a minister named Jones as being called 'Reverend Jones.' Reverend is an adjective, not a title. If a parson is not a doctor, he is, like other men, a mister." mis-ter." " ' ' ...... In commenting on the' protest of those Lansing ministers, the Christian Century called the error "an odious practice, which, beginning with the illiterate and unchurched, has spread in recent years until, one' is no longer safe from it even in the columns of metropolitan dailies or on the platforms of urban churches." Frank Colby, in his syndicated word column, makes it clear "Reverend should never be used as a noun. It is not a title like Doctor, Captain, Mayor." The World Almanac puts it succinctly: "A Clergyman should never be referred' to as 'a Reverend' or addressed as 'Reverend Blank.' 'Reverend' should be used only as 'Honor-, able' is used. It is 'The Reverend Mr. Blank, or 'The Rev, John Blank' but never 'Rev. Blank.' " Once a man (or woman) realizes that' the word means "worthy of reverence," he is reluctant to acquiesce in its use. Most ministers that we know want to be respected or admired or to be cordially regarded, but they don't want to be' "reverends." "rever-ends." They choose to be considered on a much more friendly basis. And' even if a man did feel himself to be "worthy of reverence," it would not be good form to placard himself with the claim. In view of the confusion 'resulting from the use and misuse' mis-use' of this term even by some ministers it is not surprising that the once considered illiterate practice has made its gains. There are two courses which might be followed: ! One would be to teach the correct usage as these para graphs seek to do. Many people want to know what is considered proper. They want to understand this point. Therefore, if it is worth the effort, we can teach the' correct usage by precept and example. And, by example, in the future your Valdese News will use the term correctly. There is also another course, but we don't know how many would be willing to follow it. That way would' seem to be in the spirit of that Man of Galilee who never seemed much concerned about titles and proper pro-per recognitions and the like. You could never conceive of addressing the first Christian minister as "The Reverend Jesus Christ." It is as difficult to think of speaking to any of apostles so, including Paul. They had a simpler way about them. Doubtless they would make a stand for that simplicity today the sort that existed before clergymen in the Middle Ages or earlier became concerned about forms and' ceremonies and whether or not they were accorded the full honors due them. After all', the one place this word is used in the Bible is not about man but' in reference to God: "Holy and reverend in HIS name," (Ps. 111:9). Someday, all ministers may rise up to renounce all the smacks of forms that seek to accord them . a preferment that must be earned. For them, "Minister," or plain "John ' Smith," will be good enough. It would seem,: to clarify the' point enough to say, use "The Reverend" only with a man's full name or initials, as "The Reverend John T. Smith," or "The Rev. J. T. Smith," and never use it as a direct address. The usage is difficult for some people because they think of "reverend" as a' title like "Doctor" or "Rabbi" or "Father." It is like none of these. Rather, it is an adjective descriptive of character, not of an office. You may describe a minister's responsibility re-sponsibility in terms of a pastor, or a minister he pastors, he ministers but he does not reverend! At least, he ought not to, Valdese (N. C News (Reprinted from the Publisher's Aux-, Aux-, iliary) vEv Spinal Column That which keeps you from being legs all the way up to your shoulders. t Leisure time is the finished product of greater efficiency. 30 |
