Why I'm not a 'Reverend'

I object to being called 'Reverend'. I forbade the use of the word in any of our publicity and refuse to be addressed in such a manner. The word comes from the Latin reverendus, participle of the verb revereri ("to respect; to revere"), meaning "one who is to be revered/must be respected".

There is a whole dictionary of ecclesiastical titles out there, each sounding grander the higher up one goes. The following I took from Wikipedia, and just covers Anglican usage (Orthodox and Catholics have an even greater range of religious modes of address):
 
So why do I object to it?
 
1) The New Testament teaches the 'priesthood of all believers'. Unlike believers under the old covenant, we no longer have a special class of people through whom we must approach God, be these Levites or priests. Christ alone is our door to God; each individual Christian has complete access to the throne room. A special caste of Christian in holy clothing and religiously be-titled, flies in the face of the rent veil. A minister is no more to be revered than any other child of God. Let's stop looking at men, but rather 'looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God'' (Heb 12:2).
 
2) Jesus warned us against honouring religious leaders. To God alone belongs praise and glory. In Matthew 23:6 He says 'They love the best places at feasts, the best seats in the synagogues, greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called by men, ‘Rabbi, Rabbi.’  But you, do not be called ‘Rabbi’; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren. Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ.  But he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.' He is of course talking of pharisees and sadducees, who were certainly revered in their own day. 

3) Many who enjoy such titles are unworthy of them. How many revered Catholic priests fiddled with children? How many revered Anglican rectors joined the clergy for purely worldly reasons? How many nonconformist reverend ministers sold out to liberalism by denying the scriptures? Such men are not to be revered. Now don't misunderstand me, there are many worthy reverend gentlemen out there. John Wesley, Iain Paisley, Frank Mitchell and Barry Walton are just a few 'reverends' I admire, whose boot laces I'm not fit to tie. Be that as it may, I seek not the respect of men. The only words of praise I want to hear are from the Saviour Himself when, stood before Him, He says 'Well done, good and faithful servant'. 

4) Unknown to many, it's a discretionary title that anyone can use. Unlike 'doctor', which must be earned by achieving a medical degree or PhD, 'reverend' can be used by any Tom, Dick or Harry. It doesn't mean one has a theological qualification, has been ordained or even leads a church. If ever I award myself a title, it will be one properly obtained, not self-selected because it makes me feel good.

5) I am unlikely to be respected or revered by the world because I adhere to the foolishness of the Cross. If I am to be respected and loved by my church, it will be because of my pastoral qualities and faithful Bible teaching. This will be earned, not handed to me on a titular plate. 
 
 “A son honours his father, And a servant his master. If then I am the Father, Where is My honour? And if I am a Master, Where is My reverence? Says the Lord of Hosts to you priests who despise My name." Malachi 1:6.

Again, I stress, this post is not intended to undermine others' ministry or sincere use of ecclesiastical titles, but is a reflection on my own position.