MondayMorningInsight

John MacArthur on Respect in the Pulpit

Posted by: Todd
Posted on: Tue, April 01, 2008
Viewed 39
(51) comments so far

This is the most serious occasion anyone will attend in their life: the preaching of the Word of God. I don’t want to join with our culture in sinking into the casual. We have a generation that’s never been to anything formal. And if my dress goes down, the people at the bottom go down, and then we gym shorts!…

Because all I’m trying to do is explain the meaning of the Word of God. And you want to use any avenue to do so short of affirming the culture. I don’t need to borrow or certainly not to accredit the culture by being overly familiar with it. Becoming all things to all men means looking into the situation and seeing where they are in their religious thinking, to find a starting point to move them into Scripture.”

Amen, Dr. MacArthur. I couldn’t have said it better. When will some of you show your respect for your responsibility? I’d love to hear from any of your who will commit this week to wear a tie as you preach. Let’s show some respect, people.

SOURCE

Dr. MacArthur writes: "Some people ask, why do I wear a tie? Because I have respect for this responsibility. I wear a suit because this is a more elevated experience for people. I’m trying to convey what people convey at a wedding: this is more serious than any normal activity.

Comments

if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.

Russell on Thu, April 03, 2008

We agree completely!

And I get casual in Austin TX. I’m in Fort Myers, FL, and we’re pretty laid back as well . . .

Russell
deaubry on Thu, April 03, 2008

i was told a few times if i wore pants i would go to hell, did you know there are still people around like that, one woman had on a long dress, no makeup, she said to me dont i look holy, i have heard all kind of dress codes, but people will damn you to hell if you are different than them, i dont mean everyone will, but there are a few that just looks for things to damn you with, but i do not let it bother me, because jesus saved me when i had a pair of pants on , i think he knew what he was doing,
Kurt on Sat, April 05, 2008

who let the dogs out…
Tom on Mon, April 07, 2008

Who set the standard for what is and is not formal? How more worldly can you get than adopting the worlds form for formality? I think Jesus spoke to this issue when He condemned the religious bigots of the day of focusing on the outside rather that what is on the inside. Dr. McArthur is just perpetuating this age old religious arrogance.
Pastor Byars on Mon, April 07, 2008

I like MacArthur but I do not see anywhere in the bible where Jesus, Paul or any of the others wore ties nor have I found in my exegetical study…LOL that a tie is in any needed. Let’s let go of the legalism MacArthur and just preach the Word of God..why do we need more rules in the church when we do not follow the one’s that already exist?..Jesus said, “It is finished!” But I guess some people think that He forgot something even though He said it is finished!..If we preach the Gospel and get that right, repent of our sins, walk in truth and not hypocrisy, focus on the issues that Jesus focused on, I believe God will be wholly happy! Leave the nonesense to the pagans…..

Pastor Byars
Matt Brown on Mon, April 07, 2008

Of course, if this was 225 years ago, Dr MacArthur would start out by saying, “Some people ask me, why do I wear this powdered wig?”
JDBonelli on Mon, April 07, 2008

John has his personal convicion. The point is not cloths . As Paul said be all things to all men that you might win the more. Do not identify yourself by your cloths. Identify yourself with Christ and let your love for the ones around you guild you in your choices. By the way Ozzy and God don’t mix. God says be ye Holy as I am Holy
Larry on Tue, April 08, 2008

I have had church members say that wearing a tie or even a suit is not important. I agree with John when he talks about respect for the pulpit. It is one thing to go visit in someone’s home wearing a suit and tie and quite another to be in the pulpit. We only have one time to back a first impression for our visitors. I think it comes back to a basic premise: is what we do as pastors and preachers of the Word of God, a calling or a job? Too many today see the later instead of the former.
Leonard on Tue, April 08, 2008

In my church the Raider Shirt I wore Sunday makes a better first impression than a tie would.
PT on Tue, April 08, 2008

1.) Kudos John MacArthur, Russell and Min. KAC.

2.) Why is it that we are all so quick to read our own hurts, wounds and personal preferences into others’ statements, principles and generalizations?

All J.M states above is an explanation of why HE wears a tie in the pulpit and, by implication, why he SUGGESTS this might be a good idea for others. In now way, in the quote above, does he suggest it being required for anyone nor a definitive sign of actual personal righteousness or holiness. And, yet, most of the anti- responses here are focused on rejecting this idea and J.M. personally with an insistence of legalism, judgment, and universal application that is NOT actually there! And, yet we feel justified in being so quick to judge J.M.’s character, intent, and ‘secret agenda’?

3.) Why is it that to so many people, it is always legalistic and pharisaical to recommend someone wear a suit and tie in the pulpit, but to suggest that someone should not wear a suit & tie is perfectly acceptable and graceful?

I have been in more churches that have specifically instructed me to have to dress casual, than ones that have asked me to be sure to have a suit and tie!

4.) I feel that we may again be focusing in too little on the real principle that is being espoused here. As I read and re-read J.M.’s statement, it has nothing to do with clothes or dress code itself.

The premise really is about what kind of a statement/attitude should we - as preachers - present to the people concerning a proper attitude for scheduled worship in the church! Like it or not, intend to or not, our physical appearance DOES send a message. What we actually wear is just the ‘garnish’ that accentuates the ‘main dish.’ First, we must define the ‘main dish.’

What should be our attitude to worship? Is this supposed to be a ‘normal’ time or a special time? Is planned, corporate worship of God something to be entered into casually or in seriousness and sincerity? Should it be preceded by little or much thought and preparation? Should we offer whatever is available, convenient or comfortable at the moment, or make an extra effort to offer something different and special?

Our answers to those questions should then be reflected in our physical dress and presentation. There is absolutely nothing legalistic about that!

5.) In reflection to the above questions, does not the Word of God repeatedly and consistently refer to and even require that entry into His Presence, the giving of sacrifice (even the sacrifice of our lives - Ro. 12:1), offerings, and corporate presentation are all to times of great ‘specialness’ never entered into lightly or ‘less than the best’? Does not God’s Word repeatedly tell us that the Tabernacle and the Temple are patterns of the timeless worship in the Heavens? Were not the synagogue and then church buildings and services originally designed to continue to reflect this? Do not the books of Hebrews & Revelation make it abundantly that even after Jesus’ “It is finished!” declaration on the cross, these timeless patterns are to be continued and honored? Is not an intentional, worshipful gathering of God’s set-apart people and holy priesthood biblically described as a holy event that makes its venue a holy place that is to be respected differently than any other?

BTW: I’m a 38-yr-old, GenX pastor who mostly dresses business casual in the office and for Bible Studies and regular casual for any casual functions, but chooses to always wear a suit and tie on Sunday mornings and special services. Not because I have to (I don’t), not because people would be offended if I didn’t (they wouldn’t), but because it more accurately reflects the attitude of my heart that this is a particularly special and honored time before my Lord!
Tom on Tue, April 08, 2008

@PT…How does whatever we wear show respect? Who determines what is the “best” and “respectful” clothing?

Wear whatever you want, who cares….that is not the issue. The issue is when John M. makes the arrogant statement that he takes his role more serioius because he wears a suit and a tie…. How ludicrous!

Look at this statement again:

And if my dress goes down, the people at the bottom go down, and then we gym shorts!…

What style of dress we wear on Sunday should be a non issue. To say one is more respectful because they wear what the world decides is respectful clothing is absolutely worldly.

Check out the disciples at the Lord’s Supper. What do you think they were wearing? I wasn’t there….neither were you. But, if that time of worship required some special clothing, don’t you think the scriptures would have told us something?

Whenever I’ve gone to the side of a person who has lost a loved one, they’ve never looked at me and said, “Man, I sure would feel better if you had worn a suit and a tie!”

This whole notion of limiting our worship and honor of God to a room in a building once a week also adds to this nonsense. What is important comes from within…not from what we wear.

Wear what you want…just don’t connect it with anything spiritual. Be free!
Leonard on Tue, April 08, 2008

PT, I think the inference from John Mac is how he is perceived and his criticism of things that are not Fundamental in their wiring. He is says the pulpit is a special place and honor, I do as well but I do not wear a suit and tie. His legalistic approaches and dogmatic statements have earned him the reaction he gets here.

Again, his thinking does not hold in so many parts of the world where one pair of pants, shirt and shoes are all that is available. The inference is strong that those who dress casual are pandering to culture. Wear a tie, I don’t care but when you put special meaning on it, then you inadvertently or directly impugn those who are different.

To make the connection that my polo shirt reflects less of a spirit of reverence or shows my inability to understand the special place of the pulpit or the special place of worship is legalism at its core. That is something Dr MacArthur has been known for.
PT on Tue, April 08, 2008

Tom & Leonard,

Thanks for the responses, but it seems you’re still missing the point I’m trying to make!

Forget J.M. This dialogue isn’t supposed to be about J.M. personally. If it is, then it’s gossip. The dialogue IS supposed to be about the CONCEPT or idea espoused here by J.M.

That is: what relationship, if any, should or does our personal appearance have in respect to either our real OR PERCEIVED attitude and beliefs?

HOW one’s appearance as interpreted will differ according to culture, sub-culture and circumstance. The point is that, in a given culture, sub-culture and circumstance it WILL BE interpreted in a culturally-conditioned manner.

Again, like or not (I don’t), it is still a reality of human nature that we DO naturally and often sub-consciously judge and draw conclusions about others on the basis of appearance. Our book is judged by our cover. In fact, it is also a proven sociological truth that we tend (sometimes consciously, sometimes sub-consciously) to reflect our moods and attitudes in our appearance. In turn, our dress also tends to impact how we feel and even act. Social science and most anyone’s experiences has proven this again and again!

We don’t have to like this reality, but to deny it or run away from it is blindness and foolishness indeed!

Personal Example: When I got saved in College I had a mullet (quite long in the back, often as a ponytail) and an earring and wore little other than jeans and a t-shirt (often ratty). Even after getting saved, I saw no reason to change my appearance in least. Even after studying Scripture, I was convinced that there was nothing sinful about it ‘in and of itself’ so why change. (BTW: I still believe that!) In fact, I took it to another level believing that it was my ‘duty’ not to change my appearance in order to show others that how you look on the inside doesn’t necessarily reflect who you are on the inside (I still believe that too). HOWEVER, in the course of the following 2 yrs. I learned that while there should be nothing wrong with it, and people should not judge or holding another against me based on my appearance, they almost always did (young or old, grunge or preppy, saved or unsaved, white or blue collar - it didn’t matter). As a result, it DID also adversely affect my witness for Christ more often than it helped. So, I made the decision to cut my hair and take out my earring and pay more attention to my dress. Not because it was sinful in itself. Not because I had to or anyone told me to. But, because it made me more effective for Christ!

I’m simply suggesting here that the same can also be true of how we dress for church, and especially in the pulpit. It is and should be an individual choice, and there is not one set ‘holy’ dress but nor does that mean that all choices are equal.

Back to the charge of legalism. It seems some of us need to buy a dictionary. Requiring and enforcing (even forcing) something is legalism. Recommending, suggesting, encouraging, or expecting something (even strongly and passionately) is NOT!

PS: I find it interesting that the same people who in regard to most other topics refer to the need to be culturally relevant and even, at times, use that as a reason to ‘dress down’ in the pulpit, are now criticizing the wearing of a tie & suit as being an accommodation to the culture.
Lee on Tue, April 08, 2008

If you took them out believing it impact your witness for Christ, then I would suggest you were usually sharing with the already convinced.

Seriously, since when does a non-follower who is becoming a friend with a follower give credence to a story of faith based on one’s appearance? I have seen it happen frequently with “Christians” who chose to reject or accept a message based on appearance. Good grief, even Samuel couldn’t believe David was the chosen king because of his “appearance” and God had to remind him it wasn’t about the “outside” that was important to God.

I fear your changing of your appearance was based NOT on the perceptions of non-followers of Jesus, but probably on an unspoken perception received from “Christians”.

The reality is that Scripture speaks exactly the opposite of what we should do compared to the story of why you changed.

I have no problem with the suit and tie. In fact, if you want to find the “deeper” problem with MacArthur’s view read “Pagan Christianity by Viola” and you will find his “high view of the pulpit and office of pastor” is actually NOT in the Scriptures either.

Lee
PT on Tue, April 08, 2008

Lee,

As convenient as your assumptions may be or as limited as your personal experience in this regard may have been, I can assure you that I frequently and regularly experienced my appearance to be a stumbling block toward my witness TO NON-CHRISTIANS. And, yes, I can assure you that I do know the difference. Nor would I have referred to this if it were not the case.

As I elucidated earlier, Scripture confirms this view and not the opposite as you so flippantly assert.

I do, however, thank you for reinforcing my previous point about the problem of too many people responding on the weight of unknown assumptions (often personal) rather than a reasonable debate of the issue itself.

And, again, I am not concerned with nor defending J.M. as a person or on any other issues. I am addressing this specific issue of the relationship between appearance and message.

BTW: in response to the many, erroneous analogies to the dress of Jesus and His first disciples, please note that: (1) that is not the culture or people we are communicating to today; (2) I don’t recall Paul or anyone else waltzing around in open togas, or prancing naked in the spas and bathhouses in order to ‘fit in’ and prove they aren’t legalists; (3) the simple clothes/robes it is assumed they wore was not only the best but all they had.