Fr. vs Rev.

[big_al_40]

What is the difference between these prefixes for preists?
I noticed in my churches bulletin that 2 of the preists have Rev. before their name, and one has Fr.

 

[marty1818]

I am not sure why some have Rev. and the other has Fr. Usually I see priests listed as Rev. in writing as their formal title and Fr. is used when speaking to them. At least in my experience that is true.

God Bless,
Matt

 

[PhilotheaZ]

The title “Rev. Mr.” can also be used for deacons.

 

[PatrickJT914]

A formal address and title would be Reverend Father

 

[jbebeau]

One refers to being addressed in writing and one refers to address in conversation.

Thus Priest in conversation is addressed as Father, but in correspondence is addressed as Reverend.

Bishops (depending on the country) are addressed as Your Excellency in conversation, but Most Reverend in conversation.

Deacons are usually referred to as Deacon in conversation, and may be styled Revered Mister in writing although some diocese reserve this to transitional deacons. The usage is inconsistent.

When you throw in Archbishops and Bishops from other countries and Monsignors it can get more confusing.

If you see a man in a roman collar and you want to speak with him, it never hurts to address them as Father. A deacon will be flattered and will probably correct you. A Bishop will probably understand you don’t know the difference.

 

[bpbasilphx]

“Reverend” and it’s variants (Right, Most…) is an ADJECTIVE, not a title. Compare it’s use with Honorable: Honorable John Smith, Honrable Mayor Smith, but NEVER “Honorable Smith.” Saying “Reverend Surname” is a solecism.

“Father” is a TITLE and form of address.