WHAT IS THE PCA POSITION ON THESE THREE PROPOSITIONS?
Are Ruling and Teaching Elders different offices?
Diagram taken from The PCA Position Digest
Part V, P.456
The diagram shows one
class of office called elder,
with two orders of elder that are not
interchangeable.
The official
declaration of the PCA is as follows:
Recommendation No.1: That the General Assembly affirm that the Scriptures teach that in addition to the fundamental office of all believers, there are also special perpetual classes of office in the church, elder and deacon; and that there are within the class of elder two orders, Teaching Elder and Ruling Elder. Adopted, 7th General Assembly, 1979
Position Papers, Vol.5, P.457
Our standards therefore
recognize one class of elder, divided into two orders: Ruling Elder and
Teaching Elder. A Ruling Elder does not become a Teaching Elder merely because
he happens to teach a class or preach a sermon. Nor does a Teaching Elder
become a Ruling Elder because he exercises some administrative functions. The
difference between them is not a particular function at a given moment. They belong
to different orders, according the PCA. (Scriptural defense will follow in Part
Two.)
Does the PCA recognize the concept of parity in government between the two
offices? Yes.
The following
diagram illustrates
The concept of
governmental parity. Notice the two offices overlap. Together, they govern the
congregation, but do not govern each other. 1Timothy 5:17
Who
has authority to preach in PCA pulpits?
The
Larger Catechism
states:
QUESTION 158: By whom is the Word of God to be preached? ANSWER: The Word of God is to be preached only by such as are sufficiently gifted, and also duly approved and called to that office.
There appears to be
a slight ambiguity in this statement. Traditionally, it has been understood the
Westminster delegates meant ordained Teaching Elders, although the term pastor or minister is not used. After all, what if a Ruling Elder can preach
better than a particular Teaching Elder? The 1979 PCA Assembly answers:
Recommendation No.4: That the General Assembly reaffirm the historic Presbyterian position expressed in LC 158, that none should preach the Gospel but those who are called and gifted of God; and therefore only those men who are properly ordained or licensed may preach in the pulpits of the PCA; and that Ruling Elders be allowed and encouraged to renew the historic practice of exhorting the people of God. Adopted, P.457-458
The above
Recommendation links to Recommendation No.5, which deals with the relationship
of the Pastor to the Session. From this we see the PCA considers the pulpit to
be the habitual domain of the Teaching Elder, although the Ruling Elder may
exercise whatever ministerial gifts of exhortation he may possess in other
domains and circumstance.
In the PCA, it is unacceptable
to program into the regular preaching schedule, those not ordained as Teaching
Elders.
Who has authority to administer the sacraments?
Westminster Confession of
Faith:
Chapter 27, Art.4. There be only two sacraments ordained by Christ our Lord in the gospel; that is to say, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord: neither of which may be dispensed by any, but by a minister of the Word lawfully ordained.
Larger Catechism:
QUESTION 169. How hath Christ appointed bread and wine to be given and received in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper?
ANSWER. Christ hath appointed the ministers of his Word, in the administration of this sacrament of the Lord's Supper,...
QUESTION 176. Wherein do the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper agree?
ANSWER. ... Both are seals of the same covenant, are to be dispensed by ministers of the gospel, and by none other; From these points, it is clear the position of the Westminster Standards is that ordained ministers of the Gospel, and these only, have the authority to administer the sacraments in our churches.
The official
declaration of the PCA is as follows:
Recommendation No. 8: That the General Assembly affirm that in keeping with the Confessional Standards of the church, only properly ordained Teaching Elders may administer the sacraments. Adopted, 7th General Assembly, 1979 Position Papers, Vol.5, P.461
As justification for this
recommendation, the committee made two points:
If the PCA were to make the major change of allowing Ruling Elders to administer the sacraments, it would be necessary that major changes be made to our Confessional Standards. While the Standards must never be set above the Scriptures as the rule of faith and practice, yet we have certainly given strong testimony to their lasting quality and trueness to the Scriptures, and changes should only be made when there is clear and overwhelming evidence, biblically, that they are wrong. We find no such evidence in the case of administration of the sacraments. Position Papers, Vol.5, P.460
Notice how the committee put
the burden of proof on those who oppose our Standards, rather than on the
committee to prove the validity of the Standards. The committee added:
The administration of the sacraments, by its very nature, is a proclamation of the Word of God by example, and....should only be done in conjunction with the preaching of the Word. Position Papers, Vol.5, P.460
The committee reasoned that if Teaching Elders alone had authority to preach from the pulpit, then logically, they alone have authority to administer the sacraments.
Does the PCA recognize one ordination to the office of Elder, or two: One for
Teaching Elder, and another for Ruling Elder?
Recommendation No.7
says,
We affirm that the ordination of Elders is to a particular order within the class of Elders, either Teaching Elder or Ruling Elder. Both orders of Elder include certain functions which are listed in Scripture, ....[here follows a long and tedious list]...In addition, the order of Teaching Elder includes the functions of the public preaching of the Word and administering the sacraments; plus such things required in the contemporary pattern of church life and custom as performing marriage ceremonies and officiating at funerals. Adopted, 7th General Assembly, 1979 Position Papers, Vol.5, P.459-460
Since the office of
Teaching Elder includes functions the Ruling Elder does not have, the PCA recognizes
two different ordinations. The difference extends beyond the particular
function of administering the Word and the sacraments. It is a calling and
ordination to perform those functions.
What is the PCA position regarding equality of voting?
The official
declaration of the PCA is as follows:
Recommendation No.5, Point A3: church courts above the Session level seek to express parity with a numerical balance of Ruling Elders and Teaching Elders. On the Session level there is usually only one, or at most a few, Teaching Elders to a much larger number of Ruling Elders. It helps to preserve parity by giving the moderatorship to one of the minority of Teaching Elders. Adopted, General Assembly, 1979, Position Papers, P.458
The entire Recommendation
No.5 is a long and tedious response to a suggestion of a church in Florida that
a Ruling Elder may also moderate Sessions rather than the Pastor being
automatically the moderator of the Session. The recommendation reaffirms the PCA
practice that the Pastor is the moderator, and rejects the suggestion of the
Florida church. Since the entire recommendation is long and wordy, the key
reasons are summarized here:
- The Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 was presided over by a Teaching
Elder, James. This is a scriptural precedent.
- The general practice of churches from the time of the apostles has
been that local churches are presided over by their ministers. This has
proven beneficial. Anything else would be a break from Reformed practice
for 500 years.
This practice promotes parity since Teaching Elders
are normally outnumbered in the Session.
- Since the Teaching Elder is a member of Presbytery, his connection
with the Presbytery helps to strengthen the bonds of unity between the
local church and the Presbytery.
- Were the Teaching Elder not
moderator, he might be regarded as an administrative secretary
rather than a minister of the Word.
The introduction to the
recommendation also mentions that when a church elects a pastor, they are also electing
him, automatically, as Moderator of the Session.
The PCA endeavors to
preserve parity of numbers within the church courts. Where numerical parity
cannot be achieved, other administrative devices, such as the above mentioned,
are implemented to encourage such.
Is the PCA position on
these points mere American tradition? Do these views have a history preceding
North America?
While tradition is not
authoritative, it has value in revealing the true nature of reformation history
and practice. If the PCA position accords with reformed practice throughout
time, then American missionaries have not taught mere cultural norms on such
points.
The quotes below come
from Confessions of Faith from various cultures and languages, dating back to
the 16th century. Again, we acknowledge that the Bible alone is authoritative.
References to tradition or culture are not authoritative. Yet, a review of
history should give a sense of caution to those who would deviate from the
established norm.
Observe the following
quotes from historical Reformed Confessions, along with their datess
Helvetica Confession: 1536
...that the mysteries of Scripture be daily expounded and explained by qualified ministers....
Lausanne Articles, Switzerland:
1536
The said church acknowledges no ministry except that which preaches the Word of God and administers the sacraments.
Geneva Confession, 1536 by John Calvin
We recognize no other pastors in the church than faithful pastors of the Word of God, feeding the sheep of Jesus Christ...
We believe that the ministers of God's Word,
and the elders and deacons, ought to be chosen to their respective offices by a
lawful Election of the church.... (Note here the distinction made between ministers
of the Word on one hand, and elders and deacons on the other.)
French
Confession of Faith: 1559
...we believe that the order of the church, established by his authority,
ought to be sacred and inviolable, and that, therefore, the church can not
exist without pastors for instruction, whom we should respect and reverently
listen to, when they are properly called and exercise their office faithfully.
The practices of the PCA
have their origin in a trans-cultural movement, 400 years old, known as the
Reformation, not in American culture.
What does the PCA say should be the attitude of the two offices to one another?
Although the PCA has not
made any official pronouncement on this point, an appendix in the Position Papers Digest,
Vol.5, touches on the subject. Such articles are occasionally inserted to
reflect a general feeling of the Assembly, rather than an official
pronouncement.
In his article, the
writer, Rev. Don Dunkerley, warns of a dangerous pendulum swing that sometimes occurs
in relationships between the two classes of Elders.
On one hand he warns that
Ruling Elders may be treated as nothing more than a Board of Directors, without
spiritual functions. They, along with the Teaching Elders, also have
responsibilities for nurturing and
disciplining the flock On the other hand,
Ruling Elders may consider the minister as little more than the church administrative secretary and their hired
employee. Worse, such Elders may see no difference between themselves and the minister... And this attitude might develop if a Ruling Elder
teaches a Bible class, or has some other teaching ministry. He may not
consider that there is any difference between the minister of the Word and
himself, except that he supports himself in a secular employment and the minister
does not. P.487-489
Who may read the Scriptures in a PCA pulpit?
The Larger Catechism:
QUESTION 156. Is the Word of God to be read by all?
ANSWER. Although all are not to be permitted to read the Word publicly to the congregation, yet all sorts of people are bound to read it apart by themselves, and with their families...
This negative answer, all
are not to be permitted, leaves an ambiguity, since it does not clarify to
whom this duty accrues. On Page 475 of the Position
Papers, Dunckerley clarifies
the point by referring to the Directory of
Public Worship, also written by the
Westminster theologians. Reading of the word in the congregation, being part
of the public worship of God...is to be performed by the pastors and teachers.
The only exception
recognized by the Westminster theologians was candidates to the office of
Pastor. They said, Howbeit, such as intend the ministry, may occasionally
both read the word, and exercise their gift in preaching in the congregation,
if allowed by the Presbytery thereunto. Directory of Public Worship, P.375.
Does the PCA recognize both classes of Elder as ministers of the Word?
No. The PCA recognizes
the Teaching Elder as the minister
of the Word. This is evident from
the very long dissertation in the Position
Papers (Appendix B, P.471-488)
too long to reproduce here. Dunkerley gives a good treatment of the scriptural
evidence and logic for this position, which will be discussed below in the Scriptural Defense portion of this thesis. He shows both from
Scripture and the entirety of biblical history from the time of Moses, that the
term minister has never been used in
any other sense than those church officers, as distinct from other kinds of
church officers, who have been ordained to administer the Word and the sacraments
to the people.
Scriptural Evidences for the Positions of the PCA
Is it right to use the Old Testament as a guide to New Testament Ecclesiology?
It
is obligatory, according to the Apostle Paul:
Do you not know that those who minister
the holy things eat of the things of the temple, and those who serve at the
altar partake of the offerings of the altar? 14 Even so the Lord has commanded
that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel. 1Corinthians 9:13,14
Paul argues for the
full-time support of New Testament ministers on the basis of their Old
Testament counterparts, the priests. He views the priestly service at the altar
as a fore type of the Gospel ministry. As the priest lived exclusively from
this service via a special calling from God, so New Testament ministers are to
live exclusively from the preaching of the Gospel.
Paul, using this
argument, reveals he considers it legitimate to apply general Old Testament
principles as the pattern for New Testament ecclesiology. Paul uses a
rhetorical question to show he considers the answer obvious. He talks to
Christians as though they ought to know these things from their knowledge of
the Old Testament.
As with Old
Testament priests, this is a calling to the gospel ministry distinct from any
other office or function.
And no man takes this honor to himself, but he who is called by God, just as Aaron was. Hebrews 5:4
Paul would not
encourage Ruling Elders to give up their secular secular occupations to preach
full time. His concepts support a two-officer view with distinct callings and
ordinations.
Likewise, in Romans
15:16 Paul uses Old Testament ministry terminology to describe his service as a
preacher of the Gospel:
...that I might be a minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering of the Gentiles might be acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.
The word minister here
is leitourgos and the word ministering is hierourgeo.
Both words refer to the ministry of the priests in the Old Testament.
Conclusion
We have established two
facts from these texts:
- New Testament ecclesiology is based on Old Testament patterns. We
are not free, therefore, to interpret New Testament ecclesiology without
reference to the general Old Testament principles.
- Both Testaments indicate, as Paul shows, some are called to the
ministry of the Word and sacraments and some are not. As a rule, those who
are called, do it full time. Are we free to limit our understanding of ecclesiology
to the New Testament only? Definitely not.
Reformed hermeneutics
examines the continuity of the Bible as a whole. Though we agree the New
Testament has authority over the Old as the final revelation, nevertheless if
something seems to contradict the principle of continuity, we need to take
another look. Our conclusions must always be fulfillments of the Old Testament,
not negations.
This global view of
Scripture in dealing with ecclesiology questions is not our own modern
interpretation. The Westminster authors, in their booklet, The Form of Church Government
stated:
As there were in the Jewish church elders of the people joined with the priests and Levites in the government of the church, so Christ, who has instituted government, and governors ecclesiastical in the church, hath furnished some in his church beside the ministers of the word, with gifts for government, and with commission to execute the same when called thereunto, who are to join with the minister in the government of the church. Which officers reformed churches commonly called elders. (P.402) Quoted in PCA Digest, P.476
Old Testament Fore Types of New Testament Government
Do we see two
offices of spiritual leadership in the Old Testament?
Yes.
Before going
further, let's clarify a point. It has been said the elders of Israel were mere
politicians, civil authorities and governors, not spiritual leaders. Both
Testaments, however, make a distinction between the elders of Israel and other leaders
in Israel.
In the Old Testament
And Jehu wrote and sent letters to Samaria, to the rulers of Jezreel, to the Elders, 2Kings 10:1
... according to the instructions of the leaders and elders... Ezra 10:8
In the New Testament
And it came to pass, on the next day, that their rulers, elders, and scribes... Acts 4:5
Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, Rulers of the people and elders of IsraelÉ Acts 4:8
Principle one: Two related offices of spiritual leadership existed
from the beginning.
So the LORD said to Moses: "Gather to Me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom you know to be the elders of the people and officers over them; bring them to the tabernacle of meeting, that they may stand there with you.Ó Numbers 11:16,24,25
So Moses went out and told the people the words of the LORD, and he gathered the seventy men of the elders of the people and placed them around the tabernacle. Verse 24
Then the LORD came down in the cloud, and spoke to him, and took of the Spirit that was upon him, and placed the same upon the seventy elders; and it happened, when the Spirit rested upon them, that they prophesied, although they never did so again. Verse 25
Note the
particulars:
- Both the priest, (Moses), and the elders enjoyed the same Spirit of
God and manifestations thereof.
- Both shared in governmental authority over the congregation. But the
priest retained the sacramental functions.
This text shows how the
role of the elders was a spiritual function, not just a political appointment.
Nevertheless, their spiritual participation was never regarded as making them
equivalent to the officiating ministers in the functions of the latter.
Principle Two: The Word of God was committed to both types of
leaders, first to the priests, those with sacramental authority, then to the elders
of the people.
So Moses wrote this law and delivered it to the priests, the sons of Levi, who bore the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and to all the elders of Israel. Deuterononomy 31:9
So Moses came and called for the elders
of the people, and laid before them all these words which the LORD commanded
him. Exodus 19:7
Principle Three: The elders participated in sacramental functions,
under the authority and leadership of the priests. But these offices and
functions were never confused.
Now if the whole congregation of Israel sins unintentionally, and the thing is hidden from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done something against any of the commandments of the LORD in anything which should not be done, and are guilty; Leviticus 4:13-17
when the sin which they have committed becomes known, then the assembly shall offer a young bull for the sin, and bring it before the tabernacle of meeting. Verse 14
And the elders of the congregation shall lay their hands on the head of the bull before the LORD. Then the bull shall be killed before the LORD. Verse 15
The anointed priest shall bring some of the bull's blood to the tabernacle of meeting. Verse 16
Then the priest shall dip his finger in the blood and sprinkle it seven times before the LORD, in front of the veil. Verse 17
The elders participated
in the process, but the priest offered the blood. Thus, the elders participated
in a way the common people could not. This, however, did not cause any
confusion between the elder and the priest. No elder thought he had sacramental
authority just because of this.
Principle
Four: The elders were primarily representatives of
the people. This is shown in both testaments by the repeated term elders of the people. Exodus 19:7; 11:16;
11:24; Jeremiah 19:1; Matthew 21:23; 26:3; 26:47; 27:1; Luke 22:66
The conclusions are inescapable
- There was a congregation.
- There was a category of officials officiating at the altars whose
function was to proclaim the Word of God and offer sacrifices, i.e., sacraments.
These represented God to the people.
- There was a category of officials helping the above, whose primary
function was governmental.
- There was some overlapping of both governmental and sacerdotal
participation, but the distinctions between the two kinds of officials
were never confused.
Note also it cannot be
argued that those elders were merely government officials over the nation, and
there is no correspondence between these and New Testament elders,
because:
1. They were baptized in the same Spirit as Moses.
Thus, their calling was a spiritual one, from God.
2. To them was also committed the safekeeping of the
Word of God.
3. They had a limited right to participate in the
offering of the sacrifices.
Therefore, the Old
Testament elders who cooperated with the spiritual leaders to rule the people,
could very appropriately be considered Ruling Elders.
The Jews carried this
through to New Testament times. Note Luke 22:66,
As soon as it was day, the elders of the people, both chief priests and scribes, came together and led Him into their council, saying,...
This verse is interesting
because it is one of three in which the Greek word Presbytery (Presbyterian)
occurs in the New Testament. A literal translation would be: And at
daybreak, the Presbytery of the people gathered together, both chief priests
and scribes, and brought him to the Sanhedrin.
Here the word Presbytery
is defined as a body composed of priests, (those with sacramental functions),
accompanied by scribes, (those without such functions.)
Obviously this Presbytery
was not a Christian one. Nevertheless, it reflects the continuity through the
Bible of a general concept of government the apostles adopted afterward.
Conclusion: We see from
these texts there existed a category of spiritual leaders in the Old Testament,
called priests, who officiated at the altar, proclaimed the Word via fore types,
and offered sacrifices. Another category of spiritual leader existed also,
which had governmental functions, but were not politicians. Their office was
spiritual in nature, and they participated at times with the priests in
sacramental functions.
NEW TESTAMENT FULFILLMENTS OF OLD TESTAMENT PRECEDENTS
Evidence One
The pattern in 1Timothy 5:17
Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine.
In the context and verse
we notice:
1. There is a congregation, called the church.
2. There are officials whose primary function it is to
labor in preaching and teaching the Word, although they govern also. By logical
extension, this must also include the sacraments, since it is the Word that
authorizes the sacraments.
3. There are officials whose primary function is
governmental, not preaching and teaching the Word. By logical extension, this
must also exclude sacramental functions.
4. There is a clear overlapping in the way the text is
worded.
What precisely is the
difference between this and the Old Testament pattern? Very little in
principle. Since there appears to be continuity in government between the two
Testaments, applying the same principles is justified. This clears up the
ambiguities in 1Timothy 5:17, just as the continuity of the Covenant clarifies
the ambiguities in the New Testament on the issue of sacraments.
Evidence Two
The Use of the Word minister
A study of this term
throughout Scripture is complex since it translates various Greek and Hebrew
words. The words have varied usages, many of which are figurative.
1. When used in the Old Testament in reference to
ministering the Word, it is in connection with priests. The two terms, minister
and priest are used together 41 times in the Old Testament. Examples:
...and with the Levites, the priests, My ministers. (Jeremiah 33:21) Let the priests, who
minister to the LORD...
Joel 2:17
2. In the New Testament, it is frequently associated
with any one of those offices in Ephesians 4:11 associated with ministering and
mentoring the body of Christ.
3. Apostles: That he may take part of this ministry and
apostleship. Acts.1:25
But we will give ourselves continually to prayer and
the ministry of the Word. Acts
6:4
4. Pastors: (Note: Timothy was a pastor. That is why 1&2Timothy are called Pastoral Epistles.) ... and sent Timothy, our brother and minister of God, and our fellow laborer in the gospel of Christ, to establish you and encourage you concerning your faith, (1Thessalonians 3:2.) If you instruct the brethren in these things, you will be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished in the words of faith and of the good doctrine which you have carefully followed. 1Timothy 4:6
Conclusion: Both
Testaments support a distinction regarding those called to preach the Word to
God's people, versus any other ecclesiastical office.
Evidence Three
Timothy, Organizing
Pastor
In 1Timothy 3, we see
character qualifications for elders. How do we explain there exists no
distinction between Teaching and Ruling Elders in this text? This question fails
to account for the nature of the Pastoral Epistles. Let's keep in mind who
Timothy was and what he was doing.
Timothy was an organizing
pastor, sent by Paul to put churches in order. We see this in the following
texts:
For this reason I have sent Timothy to you, who is my beloved and faithful son in the Lord, who will remind you of my ways in Christ, as I teach everywhere in every church. 1Corinthians 4:17
Éand sent Timothy, our brother and minister of God, and our fellow laborer in the gospel of Christ, to establish you and encourage you concerning your faith, 1Thessalonians 3:2
Additional clues:
Timothy was a minister.
He is called minister of God in 1Thessalonians 3:2. A Presbytery had ordained him,
(1Timothy 4:14.)
He had been sent by Paul to establish in the faith
those churches Paul had left. He had been instructed to find faithful men,
capable of teaching others. 2Timothy 4:2 He had authority to ordain elders.
1Timothy 5:22
From these clues we see
1&2Timothy are instructions to a young pastor in how to organize a church.
In Chapter 3, Paul gives Timothy some character qualifications for elders. It
is possible therefore that when Paul wrote this chapter, he was thinking
principally of Ruling Elders.
This may explain the
use of the term overseer in Verse 1, rather than teacher or pastor. If
anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. (NIV) The
term bishop here is episcopes, meaning ÒoverseerÓ or Òsupervisor.Ó
Supervision is primarily a governmental function.
Notice also the use
of able to teach in Verse 2. A Teaching Elder must be more than just
able to teach. He must be a
teacher, capable of refuting and rebuking his opponents and defending sound
doctrine effectively, 1Timothy 1:9. This requires he be skillful in argumentation
and didactics, areas not mentioned in Chapter 3. But they are mentioned
elsewhere in the epistles, directed to Timothy, an ordained minister.
Note also in
2Timothy 2:2, Paul tells Timothy to find faithful men who can teach others
also. It is unlikely he would bypass his Ruling Elders in this, if they
existed. Apparently Paul was instructing Timothy on how to form his Session.
If this is the case,
then it is difficult to see how any text in the Pastoral Epistles could support
a one-office view.
Evidence Four
The Mentoring Function of
the pastor-teacher In Ephesians 4:11-16
In this text, we see both
the titles and the functions of ministers. The long sentence in verses 12-16
describes the goals of their ministry toward all other Christians. They are:
Equip Christians to minister, teach them the knowledge of the Son of God,
mature them in Christ, affirm them in sound doctrine, and in general, to grow them
to maturity.
The word mentoring
summarizes this. The means by which they do it is the teaching of the Word.
Notice Ruling Elder is
not mentioned in this context. If it were, we would have a contradiction,
because none of us believe the teaching ministry is the primary function of
Ruling Elders.
This in turn suggests a
distinction in the two offices, which is a difference of office, rather than a
mere coincidence of function.
In verses 10-12, we see Christ has
given gifts to men. What are these gifts? They are the men in Verse 11, which
Christ is giving to the church to bring them to maturity.
This cannot logically be
said of all church officers in the same way. Otherwise, all would be teachers.
Dunckerley expresses
this clearly:
It is not simply that he gives some men the gifts to function as apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. The thought is more that the men who are apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors are given to the church to minister the Word and to equip the saints for other forms of ministry. Position Papers, Vol.5, P.484.
Who is included in this
mentoring function? All members of the body of Christ, including Ruling Elders.
In the Ephesians text, no one is excluded. The possession of an ecclesiastical
title does not exempt anyone in the congregation from being mentored.
Conclusion: From the
Ephesians text alone, we deduce a distinction between the two offices.
Evidence Five
Teachers and administrators
And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues. 1Corinthians 12:28
Paul puts offices
and gifts in a specific order, based on the importance of the gift relative to
the edification of the church. In no way does this contradict the concept of
parity of voice and vote within church courts. Paul is talking about
edification of the body of Christ, not the relationship of the officers to one
another in terms of government.
Notice the third
ministry-gift in the church is teacher. It could hardly be argued that pastors
are not included, since we have already seen the term "pastor" is
linked inseparably with teacher in Eph.4:11, as one office. Further down, we see administrations.
This must include Ruling Elders, since administration is their function.
This text therefore
supports a distinction between the two officers by listing and enumerating
them.
Important note: Using this text is not intended to support the
Episcopalian notion that the Teaching Elder is superior in governmental
authority over other elders. He is not. It is intended to show distinction, not
inherent personal superiority. We can only speculate why Paul puts the
list in this way. Perhaps it is because the correct functioning of the other
gifts must be based on the Word, soundly taught.
Summary of Evidences
It has been shown by the
Scriptures in the section above there exists in both Testaments two orders of
spiritual leaders. One, to whom the ministering of the Word of God and the
sacraments has been specially committed. This is a calling, ministry and
office, not a mere description of function. In the Old Testament, these are
called priests and prophets. In the New Testament, they are
called pastor-teachers. The other office mentioned in both Testaments,
serves to assist in governing the people of God and to participate with the
ministers. Ephesians 4:11-16
GENERAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Does the mentoring
function of the Pastor-Teacher, along with his function as administrator of the
Word and sacraments, make him superior in rank to the Ruling Elder? No.
Not a single
Presbyterian writer I can find asserts these duties make the Teaching Elder superior
in rank, or in terms of governing authority. While PCA writers affirm
consistently the exclusivity of the sacramental functions of the Teaching
Elder, they are all careful to assert the parity of Ruling Elders in terms of
church administration.
In Episcopalian thinking, the mentoring function
automatically assumes a superiority of rank. This may seem natural to some
people, but it is a non-rational leap. Why would the ability to teach, grant a
person greater voice or vote than one who does not teach? None of the PCA
writers assume any governmental superiority on the mere basis of the authority
to minister the Word and sacraments.
Therefore, asserting
the spiritual authority of the Teaching Elder as regards mentoring, preaching,
teaching or administering the sacraments is not, in any sense of the word, an
affirmation of an Episcopalian viewpoint. Nor is there any rational reason to assume
recognizing such authority must necessarily lead to a form of hierarchicalism.
In this diagram, we notice the Ruling Elders are
objects of the ministry of the Teaching Elders, because they also are members
of the congregation.
Note the Teaching Elders have this relationship
with the Ruling Elders, not because of any superiority of rank, but
because the Ruling Elders are members of the congregation. What happens if the
Ruling Elders refuse to recognize the mentoring function of the Teaching Elders
with respect to them?
The ministry of the Teaching Elders can
become stagnated, to the detriment not only of the congregation, but of the
Ruling Elders as well. This happens if the Ruling Elders get confused and
imagine that governmental parity means they do not need mentoring by the
Teaching Elders.
It is very clear from certain texts that the Ruling
Elders also have a pastoral relationship with the congregation. Does this
support the view they are one and the same with Teaching Elders, and are also pastors?
No.
This is a logic
error. The word pastor, meaning Òshepherd,Ó
is used in Ephesians 4:11 within the title, pastor-teacher. Then we see in
Acts 20:28 the word feed is the verb form of the noun for Òshepherding.Ó This would appear to lend support to the above-mentioned view.
A fallacy is
involved here. The mere fact there is overlapping within the functions of two
offices proves nothing. For example, Peter called himself a fellow-elder while addressing
the elders in 1Peter 5:2. Yet Peter was an apostle. Should we conclude from
this that elders are also apostles? Or there is no distinction between apostle
and elder?
What is the
Scriptural authority by which the Westminster Confession asserts that only
ordained ministers may administer the sacraments?
This is one of those
points the Confession terms a necessary consequence... deduced from
Scripture. No text exists commanding that only Teaching Elders
administer the sacraments. But the nature of their ministry forces this
deduction.
Notice the Old
Testament fore type of the priest. To these alone were given the combined
function of proclaiming the Law and administering the sacrifices, which were fore
types of New Testament ministry, as Paul mentioned in 1Corinthians 9. These two
are inseparably joined. Administering the Law meant also administering the
sacrifices.
In the same way, to certain New Testament offices is
committed the ministering of the Word to God's people. But the same Word cannot
be ministered without also administering the sacraments, because the two are
inseparably joined.
The
conclusion is forced.
What is the scriptural
support for the PCA view that the two offices have different ordinations?
We
have here another necessary consequence in which no clear statement from
the Bible exists. We must proceed according to the overall pattern of
Scripture.
The priests in the
Old Testament received a special ordination, distinct from prophets or elders.
In Numbers 8, we see the prescription for the ordination of priests.
Conclusion
The continuity of both
Testaments shows two offices have always existed within one class of elder:
Teaching and Ruling Elders. Overlapping functions occur within the two offices.
While these have governing authority in common, the Teaching Elder alone
ministers the Word of God and the sacraments. The Teaching Elders uses these
particular responsibilities to fulfill his role of pastoring and mentoring the
people of God.
Smalling's
articles and books are available at www.smallings.com