Monday Morning Insights

Photo of Todd
    .

    John MacArthur on Respect in the Pulpit

    Bookmark and Share

    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.

    1. 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?”

    2. 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

    3. 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.

    4. Leonard on Tue, April 08, 2008

      In my church the Raider Shirt I wore Sunday makes a better first impression than a tie would.

    5. 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!

    6. 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!

    7. 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.

    8. 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.

    9. 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

    10. 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.

    11. Lee on Tue, April 08, 2008

      Let’s see, started a church from scratch (i.e. no existing Christians besides wife and myself), didn’t grow up in church at all, and 80% of NewChurch wasn’t attending church prior to coming to our church.  Yea, probably right, probably shouldn’t have spoken on a topic I know nothing about.


      Since you say it is Scriptural at least banty some proof texts.

    12. PT on Tue, April 08, 2008

      Lee,


      Please, let’s not continue to make everything personal.  I NEVER said or suggested that you “know nothing about” anything.  All I did was reference your own statement about not having any personal experiences with non-believers responding in this manner.  Period.  Nor did I in any way make any suggestion that “you shouldn’t have spoken about a topic you know nothing about.”  All I did was assert that just because you didn’t have such experiences (regardless of your background) does not mean that others have not.  I don’t think that is so unfair or deserving of a harshly sarcastic response.


      Regarding, ‘proof texts,’ you’ll have to see my previous posts.  I also continue to find it interesting that you instantly question my credibility by asking for proof texts while you apparently see no need for you to do so yourself.


      In any case, folks, I’d done with this topic - I’m sure I’ve reached my post limit.  Besides, I do not feel and never intended this to be seen as a ‘big’ issue worthy of great time, etc.  I simply sought to add to the general discussion. 


      It’s sad that, even on a blog for Christians in ministry, it is becoming increasingly difficult to have a reasoned discussion and sharing without personal assumptions and innuendos.


      I would still love to hear from others who might add to and not just prolong this discussion.

    13. Tom on Tue, April 08, 2008

      @PT


      I get your point.  I just disagree with the point you are making.  Don’t take it personal.


      Concerning JM…I have made no comments about him as a person….I just feel his comments we arrogant and misplaced.  I’m certain I’ve made many arrogant and misplaced statements myself.


      You are absolutely correct in the FACT that the world will make judgements concerning what you wear.  That is my point! 


      In Jesus time, people made the same sort of pre-judgements about rich people, Gentiles, lepers, Samaritans, etc. 


      That is precisely why Jesus passionately taught what is the most important - the person.


      Of all people, we, the leaders of the church should place the same emphasis on the person on not on the shell.


      Wear what you WANT.  People will talk no matter what.  Lead people in what is weightier…..do you love God and love people?


      My definition of legalism would be, in addition to that which you have superbly defined, is to in any way try to improve ones standing with God by what we do.


      You have not answered my most pointed questions though.  Who determines what is respectful dress?  What standard do we use?  Who does our dress honor or dishonor?  How?  What is our best that God desires?


      Is it not our heart?  Is it not our very soul?  Is it not our devotion to Him and our fellow man?  Honestly I don’t think God gives a flip about what we wear.  And you will find people who both like or dislike what you wear.  My point is simply this….It is a non issue for those whose focus is on what God cares about.


      Be free.  Wear what you want!

    14. Leonard on Tue, April 08, 2008

      PT, the assumption that being casually dressed at church means approaching worship causally.  I simply don’t agree.  You are using the same argument that was used to enforce short hair for boys, dresses for girls, no make up and jewelery, collars on the shirt… etc. during my bible college days.  Mac says what he does is special, is it more special than any other gift being used?  Should those with the gift of service wear suits too?

    15. Larry Cobler on Sun, July 06, 2008

      I think if you go down this road you have to put yourself in earlier cultures to see if the belief/comment still works for you. For example, if we were back in the times where only robes could be worn in the pulpit, would the same argument be held for those “disrespecting” the pulpit by wearing only a coat and tie?

    16. Page 3 of 4 pages  <  1 2 3 4 >

      Post a Comment

    17. (will not be published)

      Remember my personal information

      Notify me of follow-up comments?

    Sponsors