Those careers that are part of what may broadly be construed as the “service sector” often involve some means of identification. Policemen sport badges, salesclerks wear tee-shirts of a particular color, waiters don aprons, and nurses wear scrubs. The idea is that such telltale signs allow the proverbial “man on the street” to identify these people and seek out their assistance—whether that takes the form of a refill of one’s soda or lawful intervention in some transpiring crime.
Traditionally clergymen have also worn some token of their profession. In times past most ministers wore large robes, called cassocks, to identify themselves as representatives of the Church. Today cassocks are still worn by some clergymen, but their use is rather limited to the most formal of settings and to the most formalistic of ministers. In contrast, the clerical collar has enjoyed a significantly wider and longer lasting use among pastors. By way of example, a clerical collar is still a fairly common symbol of the ministry in popular culture and can be seen sported by such divergent figures as the Rev. Timothy Lovejoy of the animated comedy The Simpsons, the mysterious Preacher from Clint Eastwood’s gritty Western Pale Rider, the Rev. Graham Hess from M. Night Shyamalan’s sci-fi thriller Signs, and the mild mannered Pastor Alden of the classic family drama Little House on the Prairie.
Some may wonder though why pastors would want to distinguish themselves at all. Why would one advertise his “spiritual credentials”, especially in light of the temptation to pride that such a practice can entail? Jesus Himself even seems to have decried this very thing—special clothes and titles for ministers—as demonstrated by passages such as Matthew 23… or did He?
When one looks to Jesus’ words concerning the ministers of His own time, one finds His distinctive use of didactic hyperbole (cp. Matthew 5:29-30, 17:20; Luke 14:26). This interpretation is necessary for otherwise the God-ordained uniform for the priests of the Old Testament (Exodus 28:1-2) and the willingness of New Testament authors to refer to themselves and others by the title “leader” (Hebrews 13:7) and even “father” (1 Corinthians 4:15) would be rather difficult to explain. And if this is the case, then we can see that Jesus didn’t so much condemn the Pharisees’ externals as the discontinuity between their outward presentation and their inward disposition. That is, Jesus’ objection to the Pharisees seems to be that while they were willing to “lengthen their tassels” and “broaden their phylacteries”—the rough equivalent of wearing a clerical collar in their day—they also “devour[ed] widows’ houses”, and while they placed mountains of religious obligations on their listeners backs, they were themselves “unwilling to move them with so much as a finger.”
Jesus’ critique of the Pharisees is aptly summed up Matthew 23:25 and 28: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside they are full of robbery and self-indulgence.” And, “you, too, outwardly appear righteous to men, but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.” Jesus’ main concern then was not with attire and titles at all, but with a lack of consistency. A cup which shines forth in its cleanliness on the outside is not a bad thing, but it is certainly a deceptive and useless thing if its inside is covered with filth.
But even so, are there any benefits to wearing a clerical collar? Or, with an eye towards Paul’s words to the Corinthians, even though such a practice may be permissible, is it helpful?
From personal experience, the answer is an unequivocal “yes”.
First, it’s traditional and fun. The world is simply a more interesting place when people dress like what they are, whether they happen to be plumbers, chefs, dentists, or clergymen.
Additionally, a collar advertises to everyone (including the minister himself) what he is and, more importantly, for Whom he stands. A good example of this occurred at a ministerial prayer meeting in which I participated a while back: 25 pastors from a variety of evangelical denominations were praying for our city and our churches and I was by far the youngest person present (I’m in my twenties and most of the other pastors had either grey hair or bald heads). And yet, when a woman wandered in off the street looking for prayer, she panned across the room, saw me, and remarked, “Oh, a collar, you must be someone important.” In a room full of much more distinguished, much more experienced men, she approached me because I was the only one “flying the flag”.
This kind of recognition is particularly helpful during hospital visits and the like. In my own ministry I have found that a collar allows me access to patients that are “off-limits” even to their own families.
The collar is also something of a conversation starter which lends itself very nicely to evangelism. On one occasion I stopped in at a grocery store on my way home from a meeting and while I was standing in line, silently holding a twelve-pack of Coke, the cashier leaned over to the bagger and whispered, “I need to go back to church.”
Of course, Christ’s words still stand. A good show on the outside means nothing unless it is accompanied by faithfulness, virtue, and humility on the inside; this is something no Christian, ordained or lay, ought to forget. But as a minister I would encourage my fellow pastors to consider wearing a clerical collar in certain, appropriate situations. Who knows, your congregation may enjoy it and I’m sure that Lifeway (which sells clericals) would appreciate the business.
Well argued. I would like more of an explanation for your comments on Matt. 23, but your scriptural references and personal experiences were quite thought-provoking–even persuasive.
There is a flipside to the coin which has not been mentioned. Many people with some type of church background also relate the collar to very specific denominational affiliations. When my sister-in-law commented on the fact that you were wearing a collar while doing the Good News ministry at the local ES, and I told her you were from First Baptist, she was shocked. She then questioned if the collar meant you were trying to pander to or even mislead the school’s catholic population.
As a former First Baptist member, I couldn’t see myself returning to a church where the collar and the “Reverend” door plaque were such a visible presence — and, yes, it does look prideful. The absence of these things and the humble way the two pastors overseeing the flock during our time there carried themselves was what drew my family and I in and why we stayed so long.
The “clothing” a pastor needs to convince himself he is ready to be in the world and live the example as God commands is in Eph. 6, is it not?
I’m so glad that you visit the blog, SC. You are, of course, certainly correct that many people associate a clerical collar with a particular denomination. But I think that that association is a bit more fluid than you may realize. A person from largely Catholic southern California may very well associate the collar with Catholicism, but then again, a person from largely Lutheran Wisconsin is just as likely to associate it with Lutheranism and a person from certain parts of South Dakota is equally as likely to associate it with Episcopalianism, and so on. People simply tend to interpret their observations with reference to their past experience and thus, if a person has some experience with collar-wearing ministers, the sight of a minister wearing a collar is rather naturally linked to that reference point.
With that said, your relative’s concerns about a possible attempt to mislead others with a collar are well taken. Allow me to assure you that such is not my intention. It is precisely because of this possible misunderstanding that I have avoided wearing a specifically Roman collar and have further avoided the “black on black†look. When I lead the Good News Club at Tulsa Elementary I generally wear a blue, red, or grey short-sleeved shirt and, to make misidentification even more unlikely, my wife is present and I, of course, wear my wedding ring. Further, the name tag I wear at the school is labeled “Pastor Curry” and not “Father Curry” or even the more generic “Rev. Curry”. If lapsed or nominal Catholic families begin attending FBCGH as a side effect of the Good News Club I would be delighted, but I certainly don’t want to steal active members away from St. Euphrasia’s or St. John the Baptist de la Salle’s: I have no intention of trespassing on Fathers Wakefield and Milbauer’s “turf”.
The reference to Ephesians 6:11-17 is also spot-on. This is precisely the kind of “clothing”the Pharisees lacked–a deficiency for which Jesus condemned them. All ministers (and all Christians for that matter) ought to model the virtues mentioned in Ephesians 6. My only contention is that ministers ought to model these virtues and, in specific situations, make their profession apparent through some symbol, something which, as I wrote, the ministers of God were called to do in the Old Testament. Of course, as members of the New Covenant, the specific strictures of the Old Testament law no longer apply to us, but the spirit of that law, its underlying values, ought to continue to guide us who live by faith. And it seems that an identifiable clergy is one of those values.
Speaking for myself, I cannot imagine a collar and a “Reverend” door plaque (Is this really a problem?!) keeping me away from a church, if, in fact, the humility of the pastor and, (dare say it?) of the laity is more important than these things…which, of course, it is.
Eugene, it sounds to me like you have a well-thought-out reason for this, that you’re in no way trying to deceive anybody, and that your heart is in the right place. I commend you and, did I not live on the other side of the country and were I not a pastor myself, I’d certainly come check you guys out, collar or not!
God-speed!
Kudos for clerical collars. I am a Baptist minister and wear a non-black clerical shirt at least 3 times a week and especially on Sunday. My church is located in the midst of many Catholic Churches. The gray clerical shirt helps identify me as a minister.
I had people come up to me at resturants and other community locations and asked spiritual questions. I made many counseling appointments this way and won many people to Christ.
I humbly say to ministers not doning clerical attire, “you’re missing out on evangelistic opertunities!”
I am an Anglican Priest with an Assembly of God background, I am a prison minister and I alternate between shirt and tie and clergy collar. Sometimes I like it and sometimes I don’t, but no doubt the clerical collar opens many doors, I think the problem lies more with insecurity of living up to the one in whom I represent.
>>I think the problem lies more with insecurity of living up to the one in whom I represent.<<
Well said, JGH.
I’m a new pastor for a small church plant of Hispanic/Latinos.
That demographic is largely Roman Catholic and I KNOW a collar would open many evangelistic doors.
My biggest concern is having someone be turned off to Christ because they saw me act “less than Christ-like” on any given day.
I don’t see the collar as a “Pride” issue. If anything it’s a “Huge responsibility” issue for me and constantly humbles me.
GOOD ARTICLE PASTOR CUURY!
I agree with what has been said. As a minister I try to wear my collar as much as possible. I heard of a story once a long time ago. A minister who was wearing the collar was in a major department store when all at once, a young man came and grabbed the arm of the minister.Please he’s dieing !! the young man said. Running back with the young man the minister saw the young man’s father collasped on the floor dieing of a heart attack. “I dont know the Lord will you help me?” The minister wiped away his tears and prayed for the man. Later after the man was taken to the hospital, the minister had the oppertunity to minister to the man’s family. The man recoved and is now going to church, with the minister that helped him…..is the collar for all ministers regaurdless of denomination, Iam not sure. But God used it to bring a heart attack victim to Christ that day.
Yes, Jesus condemned the fact that the Pharisees do “all their works to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders [i.e., "tassels" or "fringes", "tzitsith" in Hebrew, "krasepedon" in Greek] of their garments”, yet few remember that Jesus himself wore “borders” on his garments:
Luke 8:43-44, “And a woman having an issue of blood twelve years, which had spent all her living upon physicians, neither could be healed of any, Came behind him, and touched the BORDER of his garment: and immediately her issue of blood stanched.”
Same Greek word, “kraspedon”, so apparently Jesus wore the same thing as his Pharisaical opponents. That he wore fringes identified him as a Rabbi, and so those who see him call him so. What Christ condemned was that the Pharisees made their fringes and phylacteries extra large and long so that they can be obvious. Yet Jesus had no qualms about wearing them himself (they were presumably shorter, of course, than those worn by the Pharisees).
There is nothing wrong about a Protestant pastor wearing a clerical collar (it was invented by a Presbyterian anyway: Roman Catholics used to wear plain black collars). Like many have already noticed, wearing it has become a form of evangelism. What is wrong is the misuse of its wearing, like wearing it so as to avoid long lines. Just as a police badge can be misused, so can the collar, but wearing one isn’t necessarily wrong. Just because bad cops wear badges does not mean good cops should not wear theirs. Just because many ministers who wear collars are full of pride does not mean a humble minister ought not wear a collar.