'^ PRINCETON, N. J. jY Di visio n/ ...y.i— BV 680 .K5 1844 King, David. The ruling eldership of the Christian church / THE RULING ELDERSHIP CHRISTIAN CHURCH REV. DAVID KING, LL.D. EDINBURGH: WILLIAM OLIPHANT & SONS. LONDON : HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO. GLASGOW : DAVH) ROBERTSON. MDCCCXLIY Glasgow: printed by s. and t. dunn, 48, Buchanan Street. psiiieaToiT THSOLOSIGiL At a meeting of the United Associate Presbytery of Glasgow, held in June last, I delivered an Address on the Duties and Encouragements of Elders. The office-bearers then assembled, consisting of the Mem- bers of Presbytery and of the Elders within its bounds, requested me to publish the Addi'ess, and a wish at the same time was pretty generally expressed, that I would extend my remarks, and discuss the subject of the Ruling Eldership in all its more important rela- tions and bearings. With this latter suggestion I have in some measure complied — whether Avisely or not, it remains for others to determme. I have been indebted both to friends and books for directing me to sources of information ; but I have gone to these sources to draw for myself, and have, in no case, quoted at second-hand without acknowledging my obligations. If there be any instance to the con- trary, it is an oversight. IV PREFACE. In defending an important constituent of Presby- terian chui'cli government, I have avoided, as much as possible, the questions now agitated among Presby- terians themselves ; and if all who acknowledge the Divine warrant of the elder's office would miite in ele- vating its character and efficiency, they would perform an invaluable service to the interests of religion. Some may object strongly, and especially our Congregational brethren, to any assembly of Chris- tians being represented as a judicatory, or court. I have so expressed myself for the sake of brevity ; but, to remove causeless offence, let it be clearly un- derstood, that 'the word court, as used here, and throughout these pages, simply denotes ministers and elders regularly met for the discharge of their de- liberative duties in Session, Presbytery, or Synod ; and that it conveys no idea of authority beyond that of spiritual administration.' * It may be thought that, in some instances, I have fixed the standard of an elder's duties too low — in pro- posing, for example, that he visit his district once in the half year, when it is known that the elders of the National Church were expected, in fonner times, to visit their quarters once every month. But, in such cases, I have stated what I considered the minimum * Rules, &c., of the United Secession Church. PREFACE. V of duty, and spoken of what elders should at the least perfoim, without meaning to discourage more abun- dant labours where they are practicable. Besides, I have thought it better to err on the side of caution than of excess, as I have never found that exaggerated representations of duty were productive of much good. My aim has been to give such a moderate estimate of an elder's obligations, that no reasonable objection can be taken to its requirements. I would willingly have deferred the publication, and used farther exertions to render it more worthy of the reader's attention, had it not been strongly represented to me, that a degi'ee of interest is now felt on the subject which may not be easily revived if it be permitted to languish. A conviction of this truth has disposed me to sow the seed while the spring lasts; but I have bestowed on the duty assigned me all the pains and care which circumstances permit- ted. It is my humble hope, that the manual, with all its defects and faults, may be blessed of God to promote its object; and, if only a single elder were stirred up, by a perusal of its pages, to execute more faithfully the duties of his office, I would deem myself amply rewarded for any labour it has cost me. D. K. Glasgow, Oct. 16, 1844. CONTENTS. PAGE INTRODUCTION, 1 PART I. OFFICE OF RULING ELDER. Chap. I. — The Primitive Churches received from their Divine Head a Constitution which was intended to be Permanent, . . 9 Chap. II. — Each of the Primitive Churches had a Company of Elders for its Spiritual Office-bearers, . . . . .17 Chap. III. — While all these Office beai'ers Ruled, only some of them Taught, so that a distinction subsisted among them of Teaching and Ruhng Elders, . . . . . . . '21 Chap. IV. — WhUe this system has the sanction of Scripture, it is most reasonable in itself, . . . . . . G'2 PART II. THE OFFICE OF DEACON, . . . . _ ^^ PART III. DUTIES OF ELDERS. Chap. I. — Duties common to them with others — Deportment in Secu- lar Affairs, ...... Government of their own Families, . Chap. II.— Official Duties of Elders viewed Individually :— Each his District, ..... District Roll-Book, . . . . Visitation of District, ..... Visitation of the Sick, ..... Expostulation with Offenders, Attentions to the Toung, Classes, &c.. District Prayer Meetings, .... 95 97 102 103 104 107 115 12.3 133 CONTENTS. Chap, III.— Official Duties of Elders viewed Collectively:— Frequency of Meeting, and Minutes, . . . . Congregational List, and Apportioning of the Congregation Admission of Members, .... Discipline, ...... Measures affecting Public Worship, etc.. General Encouragement to Beneficent Institutions, Conclusion, ...... 139 140 141 148 150 150 151 PART IV. QUALIFICATIONS OF ELDEKS. Chap. I. — Age, etc., . . . . . . .155 Chap. II.— Piety, . . . . . . .156 Chap. III.— Knowledge, ....... 168 Chap. IV.— Soundness in the Faith, . . . . .172 PART V. ENCOURAGEMENTS OF ELDERS. 1. The Office is Honourable in itself, . . . . .179 2. All its Engagements are of a Beneficent Character, . . 180 3. They who fill it in dependence on God's grace are secured of all Needful Assistance in Discharging its Duties, . . .183 4. All who have filled it in its own spirit have borne Testimony to its Desirableness, . . . . , . .187 5. A Faithful Discharge of its Duties shall be abundantly Recom- pensed in a Future State, . . . . . . . 189 CONCLUSION, 196 APPENDIX. Note A. — Jewish Synagogues and Primitive Churches, Note B. — Remarks on Q,uintilian, Note C. — Modes of Electing and Ordaining Elders, . Note D.— Exposition of 1 Cor. ix. 13-23, INDEX, 213 223 226 233 THE RULING ELDERSHIP. INTRODUCTION. Scotland is deeply indebted to the Ruling Elders of its Presbjrterian denominations. A large portion of them have sustained a character becoming their office, and by their disinterested labours have done unspeakably much to build up the congregations with which they were more immediately connected, and to promote, in a wider range, the general interests of a common Christianity. Theu' lives, if intimately known and faithfully recorded, would furnish, in many instances, most genuine additions to Christian biography. It would be found that numbers of them were led in early life to consider the things which belonged to their peace. Possibly they were distracted for a season by doubts and fears, and much occupied in anxious reading, reflection, and prayer ; but ulti- mately they were rescued from these perplexities, and 'being justified by faith, had peace with God A 2 INTRODUCTION. tlu'ough our Lord Jesus Christ.' Their personal piety commended itself in its fruits, and more and more developed itself in a diffusive usefulness. Yet their attainments and services becoming so appreciable by others, may have been very lowly esteemed by them- selves. The consciousness of much deficiency and sinfulness may have often distressed them almost to despair — often clouded theii' interest in Christ, and, to their otnti view, brought its very existence under sus- picion. So that, when they were chosen by the chm-ch to take an oversight of its interests, they may have shrunk from the proffered appointment, as only rebuking the defects and faults which unfitted them for its duties. Pressed, however, by influences which they were bound to respect, they did enter, possibly with trem- bling step, into sacred office. Its duties, even at the first, did not prove to a willing mind so fomiidable as had been dreaded. Ere long they became congenial and pleasing to beneficent habits, and thus the faithful servant gi'ew in affection and adaptation for his call- ing, till he who assigned the service exchanged it for rest, and 'an abundant entrance was administered into the heavenly kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.' Such, "vvith due allowance for that diversity which prevails in the spiritual, as well as natural creation — such is an epitome of the career, steadfastly prosecuted and triumphantly concluded, by many who have held in our churches that honourable trust of which I liave to treat. And we might lament that so little justice is done to theii* memory, were we not assured that their works, and labours, and patience INTRODUCTION. 3 are fully and ineffaceably written in the 'Lamb's book of life.' The usefulness of our elders has often been pro- longed in their families. Many of their children, enjoying the best of examples and training, have done credit to their parentage in their own good behaviour and success. As respects the church more especially, it might create surprise to learn how many of its elders are the sons of elders, and to what a large extent the roll of our ministry has derived its supplies from the same som'ce. Such remarks dis- pose for commendation rather than for counsel, and fill wdth gratitude to Him who hath so cared for his chm'ch, in providing it with office-bearers after his own heart. We must not, however, extend our eulogies beyond due limits. So far they may have the sanction of the King and Head of the church, while he has too abun- dant cause for subjoinmg the complaint, 'Neverthe- less, I have somewhat against thee.' There are few sessions in which some members are not comparatively inefficient — even the best have need of improvement ; and the instances are not rare where the eldership of a congregation are generally remiss in the dischai'ge of important obhgations, to be afterwards considered. Happily these evils are nowhere more felt and la- mented than among the class to whom they attach ; and a movement has lately commenced among them- selves to elevate the standard of their own proficiency. This spontaneous effiart at reform is of very high con- sequence. Any amelioration appearing in our churches 4 INTRODUCTION. would be questionable in its character, and ephemeral in its duration, if it did not include the session ; and if it should originate in the session, and there strike deep its roots, and fortify its upright stem with goodly branches, the consequent benefit would be illimitable — ^the leaves of such a tree would be for ' the healing of the na- tions.' The ministry would be stimulated on the one hand, and the people on the other ; classes, schools, missionary societies, all beneficent institutions, would feel the impress of a new energy, the glow of a new life, and many a tongue would uplift the ejaculation, ' The time to favour Zion is come ; the time which God hath set.' Even a single elder may be greatly influential. The statement has two aspects ; for he may do great harm, or great good. One elder may do much injury. It is not necessary to this that he be a liar, or swearer, or drunkard; for such a man would bring himself under discipline, and could neither become nor remain an elder in any of our churches. It is enough to make him worse than useless, that he be an imprac- ticable and troublesome individual. If such a cha- racter is rarely to be found, yet, to complete a sketch, he may at least be supposed. We naturally depict a person of this sort as possessing a very good opinion of himself. The like favourable estimate he may not entertain in relation to others, or his very respect for them may secure them a measure of his jealousy and ill-will. Being of a soured disposition, he may have a morbid discontent with existing ar- rangements and regulations, and speak as if aU things INTRODUCTION. O were amiss for want of his mending. In sessional deliberations he may have many cases to bring for- ward, and motions to submit, and speeches to make, and become very wrathful and intractable if any im- patience be manifested under his inflictions. In for- warding his views, he may communicate much with elders Avhom he is most likely to influence ; and thus form something like a party in the session, and then talk of opposite sides. If poorly supported by his brethren in the eldership, he may set to work in the congregation, and by ex parte representations of what is passing, stir up dissatisfaction there, and then plead a 'pressure from without' in apology for his earnestness. By no means deficient in the love of power, he may feel as if power were most expressively shown in op- position. To aid another, might rather seem to him to be weakness. When good proposals, therefore, are made, and do not emanate from himself, it may be his frequent course first to doubt of them, and then labour to defeat them. He may be commendably devoted to the cause of civil liberty ; and, transfemng his notions of political abuses to ecclesiastical admini- stration, and tliinking that the extravagances of the state have all crept into a Presbyterian church, however spare may be its finances and economical its outlay, he may suppose that he acts the patriot and reformer, in calling for indiscriminate retrenchment, and frown- ing on every kind and generous suggestion. Yet this elder may not be mthout traits of excellence ; or, as some would say, redeeming qualities. He may be versed in scriptm-e — he may be dihgent in a good 6 INTRODUCTION. work when it meets his mind; and no one would feel entitled to pronounce him positively a bad man. But, if an office-bearer in the church have the cast of mind which has just been indicated, or anything resembling and approaching it, he may not only be prevented by his temper from accomplishing much in Christ's cause himself, but become a fearful hindrance alike to ses- sional and congregational reformation. On the other hand, a single elder may do gi'eat good. It is not necessary to this that he be a man of extraor- dinary powers, or of immense wealth ; nor must we depict him, to account for his successful services, as a paragon of moral excellence. He has his failings, but he knows them himself, and an humbling consciousness of them sheds a sobriety over his bearing, and inclines him to be respectful in his communications with others. That abuses exist, he sees and deplores ; and he applies himself, but mth the meekness of wisdom, to effect the correction of them, and reckons it better, in accomplishing his object, to avoid a battle than to gain a victory. He tlii'ows his soul into beneficent enterprises, and it takes the mould of them, expands to their capaciousness, rises to their altitude, and re- cedes to their immeasurable distance from meanness and vice. In prosecuting the cause of Christ, he is drawn more into fellowship with Christ, imbibes more of the spirit of Christ, and hence becomes more thoroughly Christian in all his views, feelings, and engagements. One can mark a discernible progress in his piety. There is a ripening aversion to evil, a deepening delight in true goodness wherever found. mTEODCCTION. 7 and a growing readiness for every good work. Even his friendship, always sincere and trustworthy, e^dnces more of a mellowing kindliness, a purer tone of sacred- ness in its sympathy, more of that exquisite tender- heartedness which ' rejoices ^vith them that rejoice, and weeps with them that weep.' How valuable is such a man to all with whom the providence of God allies him ! What a treasure is he to a minister ! — what a treasure to a session! — what a treasure to a congi-egation ! While he lives, he does far more good than is ever suspected by himself, or shall be known to others, till ' the day shall declare it ;' and when he dies, good men carry him to his grave, and make great lamentation over him. If, then, a single elder may be so influential, so perniciously or profitably influ- ential, what importance should we not attach to a movement begimiing with elders themselves to advance the well- working of their entire order ! My aim, in what follows, is humbly to contribute to this result ; and happy shall I esteem myself if I am enabled in any measure, however small, to facili- tate and expedite so deskable a consummation. The design of this treatise is wholly practical. It may be proper, however, to begin with a statement of proof, since appeals have little force when they are not based on conviction. The main position to be established is, that the office of Ruling Elder is a Divine institution : but as justice could not be done to the argument if the subject were not viewed some- what more generally, I shall endeavour to show, — I. That the piimitive churches received from their 8 INTRODUCTION. Divine Head a constitution which was intended to be permanent. II. That each of the primitive churches had a com- pany of elders for its spmtual office-bearers. ni. That while all these office-bearers ruled, only some of them taught, so that a distinction subsisted among them — of teaching and ruling elders. rV. That while this system has the sanction of scripture, it is most reasonable in itself. I shall then view the office of Ruling Elder rela- tively to that of Deacon, and inquire how fai' the arrangement founded bj some churches on the differ- ence of these offices, is substantiated by proof, and conducive to edification. AU these topics are important in themselves ; they have been aU made the subject of voluminous discus- sion : and though some of them may appear more pertinent than others to the present undertaking, they will be found unitedly conspiring to corroborate our conclusions. THE RULING ELDERSHIP PAKT I. CHAPTER I. THE PRIMITIVE CHURCHES RECEITED FROM THEIR DIVINE HEAD A COX- STIinXIOX WHICH WAS INTENDED TO BE PERMANENT. So:me tell us that no scheme of church government is laid down in the New Testament. We readily ac- knowledge, that no denomination of Christians is entitled, on the ground of its ecclesiastical polity, to regai^l itself as exclusively the Chiistian Chmxh. That blessed society comprises all who love the Lord Jesus in sincerity. "We admit, also, that no perfection of external order can rank in importance with soundness in the faith ; and that a great liistorian waiTantably rebukes those theologians ' who are burning with zeal for the letter and forms, as if on these depended the essence of religion, whose life and spiiit ai'e rooted in 10 THE RULING ELDERSHIP. facts.'* But when it is said that no government has been appointed for the New Testament Chm-ch, and that fallible men may give it one constitution or ano- ther, just as their convenience or caprice may dictate, we are disposed to dispute, we are prepared to deny, the allegation. Even though all governments were equally good, we may believe that the Prince of. Peace would have selected one out of the number, and given it his special sanction, had it only been to exclude causeless contentions. But all governments are not equally good. Few things are precisely equal in value, and it would be absurd to assert this of kinds of rule, which may so evidently incline to one extreme or another. If, then, different church polities have their degrees of excellence, is it not probable, is it not certain, that He who so ' loved the chm'ch as to give himself for it,' must have favoured it "u^th the best? It is vain to say that the differences are im- material. It can never be proved to be of no con- sequence whether government be such as to preserve rights or to destroy them, and whether the members of the church be treated by its rulers as citizens or serfs. The greatest freedom consistent with perfect order, is a precious boon in itself; and this is what a good government secures. It estabUshes presidency mthout oppression, and liberty without Hcentiousness. But though all these considerations were set aside as frivolous or inapplicable, we would still contend * Dr Neandcr — History of tlic Planting and Training of the Christian Churches by the Apostles ; Preface, vol. i.— Biblical Cabinet. THE RULING ELDERSHIP. 11 that government is of moment, if anything be of moment, in the Christian chm'ch, inasmuch as all things else are affected by its influence. A tyi-anny, for example, is impei-illed by truth, and therefore it per- verts sound doctrine ; a tyranny is in danger from pure administration, and therefore neglects or corrupts discipline. The influence of government is thus most extensive, not to say all-comprehensive, for good or evil ; and surely the importance of a cause must be estimated by its effects. But in all this line of remark, we are reasoning, it may be said, from mere probability, stating what we might expect, and not what we actually find. To come to facts, then, ascertained and undoubted facts, we know that the primitive church had a constitution. Who can deny that its affairs were regulated in a definite and orderly manner ? ' For God,' says the apostle of the Gentiles, ' is not the author of conftision but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.'* If, then, a certain order was instituted in the primi- tive church, by which confusion was excluded, why should not this 'chui'ch order' be retained ? Although the apostles had said nothing about retaining it, yet as they set it up, and acted on it themselves, should we not recognise, in their example, an imperative precept ? ' Those tilings,' says one of their number, * which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do, and the God of peace shall be with you.'f It may be objected, that a retention of * 1 Cor. xiv. 33. f Piiil- iv. 9. 12 THE RULING ELDERSHIP. the primitive system is impracticable — that it was adapted for its own day, and no other ; and now, when it is gone, admits not of recal. But let this ground be considered, before it is occupied. What does it suppose ? Tliat Chidst appointed a government for his church which could not be perpetuated, — ^that he nurtm-ed habits and attachments in favom- of a certain . system, to be ruptm-ed almost as soon as formed! Wliat does it suppose ? That the chm'ch had a con- stitution by which to guide itself under the apostles, and was then cast on a sea of change, just when apostolic pilotage was withdi*awn ! It is surely more credible that the apostles set in operation a i^lan which the churches would do well, after their decease, to have always in remembrance. Still it may be objected that much of the apostolic administration was manifestly extraordinary, and therefore cannot be upheld in ordinary times. The reply is obvious, that what was manifestly extraor- dinary can give us no perplexity, as on that very ac- count it is manifestly not binding. The apostolic office itself is of this character. Scripture has told us with sufficient clearness the peculiar and indispensable qualifications of the apostles. They were to be eye- witnesses of Christ's resmTection, and therefore they requu'ed to have seen him alive after his decease. Theii' proclamation was, ' This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are ^vitnesses.'* That Paid might be qualified to join in this testimony, he was favoured * Acts ii. 32. THE RULING ELDERSHIP. 13 with a sight of the risen and ascended Saviour : ' Last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time; for I am the least of the apostles.'* The apostles also received their commission directly from Christ himself. That the twelve did so is sufficiently- obvious from the evangelical history; and it is no less evident that Paul had this high appointment, for Christ said to him, 'Ihave appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness, both of those things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I ^vill appear unto thee.' The apostles were farther instructed by immediate inspiration in the whole will of God. This was emphatically the pro- mise of the Father; and in fulfilment of it they were baptized on the day of Pentecost with the Holy Ghost and with fire. Paul was not then of their number, and was accused, on that account, of a deficiency in his credentials. But this want was made up to him ; and he could say, in vindication of his apostleship, ' I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man ; for I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revela- tion of Jesus Christ.' The apostles, in a word, had the power, not only of working miracles, but of con- ferring miraculous gifts on others. When the covetous Simon saw that ' thorough the laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, saying, give me also this power, that on whom- soever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.'f * 1 Cor. XV. 8 9. t Acts viii. 18, &c. 14 THE RULING ELDERSHIP. Paul had this qualification; and having, in vii-tue of it, communicated preternatural gifts to the Christians at Corinth, he could say to them, ' I am become a fool in glorying; ye have compelled me; for I ought to have been commended of you ; for in nothing am I behind the very chiefest apostles, though I be nothing. Truly the signs of an apostle were wi'ought among you, in all patience, in signs and wonders, and mighty deeds.' From all this it appears that the apostles had distinctive seals of office ; and the possession of cer- tain qualifications by all of them is the more remark- able, that one of their number did not o])tain these in the same manner as the rest, and yet was provided with them in a way suitable to his circumstances.* If I have said more than enough on this point, I may find an excuse for the too lengthened illustration in the necessity which a great crisis is laying upon us, of proving, and urging the proof, that the apostolic office was extraordinary — ^that, being extraordinary, it was temporary — and that the apostles neither liave, nor can have, any successors. Tlie same doctrine could be established as to the evangelists, who performed like work as the apostles, under their direction; and no demonstration is needed, that miracles, and gifts of healing, and diversities of tongues, belonged exclusively to the age of superna- tural endowments. * See this subject satisfactorily handled in the fifth of Prin- cipal CamphcU's Lectures on Ecclesiastical History. THE RULING ELDERSHIP. 15 If, then, all the offices in the primitive church had borne the impress of this uncommon and transient character, there would have been no gi'ound for pleading their permanency. But if some were different in their nature — if some had duties attached to them which may still be performed, and qualifications requh-ed for them which may still be possessed — if these were instituted universally in the primitive churches; and if the discharge of theii* fimctions would secm-e, at all times, the maintenance and extension of the Eedeem- er's kingdom — then, are we not equally bound to hold such offices inviolate, as if they alone had subsisted fi'om the beginning ? If ever they could have been readily dispensed with, it was sm-ely in the apostoHc age, when inspu-ation and miracles might have ac- complished their objects; and why should they, even at that time, have been assigned to the chm'ches, if not to mark the more emphatically then- indispensable and ever-enduring chai'acter? Thus far the case has been stated h}YOthetically, that the natm-e of the ar- gument might be better apprehended. But I now state positively, that there were such offices; and that we have no right whatever to abolish or alter them. Whenever a number of persons were converted under the preaching of the apostles or theu' fellow-labourers, these converts were formed into a society, and ob- tained for their stated and proper officers, bishops and deacons. Only some chm'ches were favoured with tlie ministrations of apostles and evangelists, and these churches enjoyed that distinction only for limited periods, and at remote intervals ; but every church — 16 THE RULING ELDERSHIP. no matter when planted, or by whom watered, or to what country belonging — had bishops and deacons for its fixed and abiding office-beai'ers. The epistle to the Philippians is addressed to 'all the saints in Christ Jesus, which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:' no mention is made of other office-bearers. In the first epistle to Timothy, Paul gives directions about the necessary qualifications of the same office- bearers, and he speaks of no others. The Rev. Her- bert Thomdike, a divine of the Church of England, who flourished in the reign of Charles I., says of the apostle Paul, that 'neither in the relation of his planting and ordering the churches, nor in the style of his epistles, nor in his instructions concerning ministers of these churches, is there any remembrance or respect to be found but of presbyters and deacons.'* Here, then, is a great and palpable fact : the pri- mitive churches had stated functionaries; and if they allowed no diversities, and no casualties, to molest this dissociating and assimilating feature of identity, we shall do well to hold that in common ^vith them, which they held in common with one another. Here we take our stand; here we construct our defences; and here we consent and insist that the war of ecclesiasti- cal systems be decided. * Government of Churches. Cambridge, ICil. THE RULING ELDERSHIP. 17 CHAPTER II. EACH OF THE PRIMITIVE CHURCHES HAD A COMPANY OF ELDERS FOR ITS SPIRITUAL OFFICE-BEARERS. It has already appeared, that the functionaries of the primitive churches were bishops and deacons. The standing of deacons shall be afterwards considered, and for the present, therefore, it need not be dis- cussed. , This only may be stated respecting them, that they were specially put in charge with pecuniary affairs ; and this renders it the less necessary to speak of their duties in directing attention to the spiritual superintendence of the churches. Deacons, then, being omitted meanwhile from the list of officers, there remain — ^bishops. The word ' bishop ' signifies an overseer. It was applied by the government of Athens to those magis- trates who were engaged in organising its dependent states ; and being transfen-ed fi'om these pohtical to ecclesiastical relations, came to denote among Chris- tians their spiritual superintendents. But the heading of this chapter alleges that elders were the spiritual office-bearers of the primitive churches. How, then, were they bishops ? There is no discordance between the statements. The same persons who were called bishops were also called presbyters, or elders. The word which in our version of the Bible is translated elder, and which would be more literally rendered presbyter, was ex- B 18 THE RULING ELDERSHIP. pressive originally of age, denoting a man advanced in years. But as such elderly individuals had the benefit of experience and of mature judgment, as well as the influence of established character, they were naturally elevated to a presidency over the more youthful portion of society. Hence the name elder passed from expressing age, to denote the station or trust for which it qualified. 'Days,' said Elihu, ' should speak, and multitude of years should teach vdsdom.'* These words embody the principle now remarked upon, that the elder members of society are its natural counsellors : and it is curious to find this principle infixing itself in the languages of all nations. In Latin, ' senior' means an elder person ; and hence ' senator ' among the Romans, ' signore ' among the Italians, and ' seigneur' among the French. Our own term ' alderman ' is just elder man, with a difference of one letter in the spelling. The primitive churches, then, had for their spkitual ofiice-bearers a class of men who were sometimes called bishops or overseers, and sometimes presbyters or elders. That the same ofiice-bearer was called indifferently a ' bishop' and an ' elder,' is perfectly obvious in reading the New Tes- tament. The importance of this fact Avill be afterwards more apparent ; at present I remark upon it simply as a fact, and as clearly established by the New Testament scriptures. Paul, in journeying to Jerusalem, sent for the 'elders' of Ephesus to meet him at Miletus, * Job xxxii. T. THE RULINCx ELDERSHIP. 19 and he exhorted these elders to feed the church of God, over which the Holy Ghost had made them ' bishops,' — rendered in our version overseers. The same individuals designated elders in the 17th verse, are designated bishops in the 28th verse ; and how could it be made more manifest that the two designa- tions respected one class of office-bearers ? We find Paul saying to Titus, ' For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee. If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly. For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God.'* Here we have in one verse a re- quirement to ordain elders ; in the next verse their requisite qualifications ; and in the verse succeeding, a reason why such qualifications were to be demanded of them: 'For a bishop must be blameless.' It Avill be observed that the term elder, used at the com- mencement, is exchanged for the term bishop in the conclusion, while the same office-bearer is spoken of An elder must have such and such qualifications. Why ? Because a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God. Does not this identify the elder and the bishop ? If not, identification is impossible. If it were said, the lord mayor of London must devote himself to his duties, for the chief magistrate of such a city has great responsibilities, — would not the language bear that the lord mayor and the chief * Titus i. 5-7. 20 THE EULING ELDERSHIP. magistrate were the same ofl&ce-bearer ? Otherwise, the representation would be absm-d ; for why should the mayor devote himself to his duties because some other person had great responsibilities'? Yet the mayor and the chief magistrate are not more identi- fied in this comparison, than are the elder and the bishop in Paul's instructions to Titus.* These obser- vations bring us to an important conclusion : that each of the primitive churches had one, and only one, general order of spiritual office-bearers, who were indifferently called bishops and elders. * ' The next opinion about the origine of Episcopacie is that of Jerome, and he hath given it very fully, both in his epistle to Evagrius, and on the epistle to Titus. He holds that all things at first were governed in the church, communi preshytero- rum consilio, and that the bishops were above the presbyters, non ex dispositione dominicd, sed ex ecclesice consuetudine ; [not by the Lord's appointment, but by the practice of the church.] And by divers arguments from scripture, he proves that bishop and presbyter are one and the same. Acts xx. they who, v. 17, are called presbyters, are v. 28, called bishops. Titus i. 5, he left him to ordain elders, and v. 7, it is added, For a bishop, 8fc. Whence he infers, that bishop and presbyter are one and the same.' — (Bishop Burnet's Observations on the First and Second of the Canons, commonly ascribed to the holy Apostles, p. 7. — Glasgow, 1673.) THE RUINING ELDERSHIP. 21 CHAPTER III. WHILE ALL THESE OFFICE-BEARERS RULED, ONLY SOME OF THEM TAUGHT, SO THAT A DISTINCTION SUBSISTED AilONG THEM, OF TEACH- ING AND RULING ELDERS. It has been already shown, that in each of the primi- tive churches there was one, and only one, general order of spii'itual office-bearers, who were indifferently called bishops or elders. At first sight, this conclu- sion might seem to mihtate against modern presby- tery, since we make a distinction between ministers and elders, and thus appear to have not one order merely, but two orders of spiiitual superintendents in our churches. If, however, I succeed in showing that the primitive elders, though one order as rulers, were not all occupied in preachuig the word — that some of them ruled only, while others of them, besides ruling, taught, — then a close conformity will be established between our present church order and the scriptural standard. That the elders of primitive churches were not all public teachers may be argued, — 1st, From the constitution of the Jewish syna- gogues. Many facts relating to the synagogues are involved in gi'eat obscurity, and have hence given rise to much disputation. But diversity of opinion on many points makes agreement about others more remarkable and persuasive ; and on this principle it is worthy of consideration, that while some learned writers suppose the rulers of the synagogue to have all received the same sort of ordination, and to have 22 THE RULING ELDERSHIP. been all entitled by their office to discharge the same class of duties, yet the highest authorities are agreed in admitting, that some rulers of the synagogue con- fined their attention to the regulation of its affairs, and that only some of them adventured on a public exposition of the scriptures. By this weakest state- ment of the case, then, the usage of the synagogue and our existing practice are in agreement. The admitted resemblance of the synagogues to the first Christian assemblies,* creates a probability that the same statement was applicable to the primitive churches. That the elders of the primitive churches were not all public teachers may be argued, — 2d, From the nmnher of them. — Every church, the smallest as well as the largest, was presided over by an assemblage of these office-bearers. But what would have been the use of so many stated instructors? Had they been all ministers of the word, and had twelve, or six, or so few as three of them, been placed over a handful of people, how would they have found room for the exercise of their gifts'? There would have been here such a waste of means as we nowhere find in a Divine administration. Our Lidependent brethren allow of no elders but teaching elders ; and what is the consequence? "With very few exceptions, each of their churches has but one elder, where each of the primitive churches had a council of them. A fact of this kind is very significant, and deserves to be * Appendix, Note A. THE KULING ELDERSHIP. 23 well pondered. Each of our Presbyterian churches has a number of elders; each of the primitive churches had a number of elders : but our Independent friends, who plead so earnestly for scriptural institutions, have in this departed from apostoHc precedent, and, even in the case of their largest chiu'ches, have substituted one elder for a college of them. Why is it so ? The reason is, that they think all elders must be teach- ing elders ; and since the pulpit can be supplied as well by one as by a dozen, and the support of more than one minister is burdensome, or impossible, they content themselves with one such elder for a church as equal to its necessities. But should they not doubt their interpretation of scripture, when it brings them into collision mth scriptural facts ? Should they not reason with themselves: one teaching elder suffices for a large congregation ; therefore they cannot have been all teaching elders, of whom the apostles assigned certainly more than one, and Hkely a considerable number, to the most diminutive of Christian assem- bhes? The importance of this point has been felt by intel- Mgent Congregationalists, and they have endeavoured, as they could, to obviate its difficulties. We shall act fairly, then, in allowing them to speak on it for them- selves. Dr Bennet, in his theology of the 'Early Christian Church,' a learned and valuable work,* says, — ' The language of scripture often leads to the conclusion that it was not the design of Clmst to require * Delivered as a course of lectures under the auspices of the Committee of the Congregational Library; published in 1841. 24 THE RULING ELDERSHIP. a plurality of bishops in every chiu'ch ; for this office is mentioned in the singular, when the deacons are spoken of in the plural. (I Tim. iii. 2, 8.) The argument of the apostle, derived from the father of a family, as Clemens Alexandiinus observes, leads to the same conclusion : "A bishop must rule well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gi'a- vity ; for if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God ? " Here a single ruler is supposed to preside in the church as in a family. In the Revelation, the seven stars are the angels, as Origen observes, or presidents of the seven chmxhes. The term pastor supposes one shepherd over one flock.' — (p. 223.) In this passage, the supposition of each of the primi- tive churches having had a plurality of eldei-s is con- troverted, and an attempt is made to show that scrip- ture favours the one elder system now common with Independents. What, then, are the defences of this position ? "We are told that this officer is mentioned in the singular, when the deacons are spoken of in the plural; and we are referred for an example of this to 1 Tim. iii. 2, 8. Li the 2d verse of that chap- ter it is said, ' a bishop must be blameless ;' in the 8th verse it is said, ' likewise must the deacons be grave.' Does not this look as if there were to be one bishop and a number of deacons ? Such is the argument of Dr Bennet; but it surely rests upon a very small circumstance. If we read the first verse, we easily perceive why one bishop is mentioned in the second. The apostle says in the former, ' This is a true saying, THE RULING ELDERSHIP. 25 if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.' Here it is plain enough why one bishop is specified : ' K a man desire the office of a bishop.' Could the apostle have said, ' If a man desire the office of two bishops, or a college of bishops V It is surely enough that one man desire the office of one bishop. "WTien the apostle, then, had used the singular in the first verse, was it not most natural and proper to continue it in the second, and to say, ' a bishop then must be blameless ? ' Again, Dr Bennet argues that the comparison instituted by the apostle between rul- ing one's own house and taking care of the church of God, impUes that there is to be one ruler in the church, as there is in the family. The danger of thus extend- ing the emblems of scripture beyond the exact use which scripture makes of them, could easily be shown. But in this case the task is superfluous. When the phrase ' church of God ' is used, as it is here, without any locality being mentioned, it denotes not a frac- tional society of Christians, but the church universal. Siu'ely in this church there is more than one subor- dinate office-bearer ; and to it, therefore, the criticism of Dr Bennet cannot apply. That the apostle is to be so understood in this connexion, is farther evident fi'om what he says in the 15th verse of the same chap- ter : ' But if I tany long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.' What the apostle had before called the ' church of God,' he here calls the ' church of the living God,' and when he represents it, more- 2Q THE RULING ELDERSHIP. over, as the ' pillar and ground of the truth,' we see that he speaks of the faithful collectively, over whom there are many office-bearers. Once more, Dr Ben- net tells us, that in the Revelation the seven stars are the angels or presidents of the seven churches. By this he means to prove, that each church had a single president. But he knows well enough, that eminent men have understood the term 'angel' collectively, as denoting either the church or its associated rulers. Dr Goodwin, an eminent Independent, says, that the seven Asiatic churches ' were fixed bodies, having each their elders, an angel, collectively taken, as the use of that plu-ase in that book is.'* The Rev. Herbert Thorndike, an Episcopalian already quoted, says, 'To the argu- ment drawn from the angels of the seven churches of Asia, I add only a reply, that angels stand there for presbyteries, or colleges of presbyters.' f Bishop Stil- lingfieet says, 'If many things in the epistles be directed to the angels, but yet so as to concern the whole body, then of necessity the angel must be taken as a representative of the whole body ; and then, why may not the word angel be taken by way of repre- sentation of the body itself: either of the whole chtirch, or, which is far more probable, of the con- sessus, or order of presbyters in that church f| Mucli * Government of the Churches, book ii. chap. 3. t Right of the Church in a Christian State, chap. 3. p. 92. X Irenicura. I cannot at the moment find this paragi-aph in the Irenicum, and I therefore give it as it is quoted in Dr IVIason's work on Episcopacy, — an admirable book, which I am glad to have an opportunity of recommending. THE RULING ELDERSHIP. 27 might be said to confirm this exposition. But the use which Dr Bennet has made of the passage, admits of being combated by a shorter and easier method. One of the seven churches was Ephesus ; and Dr Bennet admits himself, that, ' as the church at Ephesus had more than one elder, the apostle addresses them in the plural as bishops.' — (p. 222.) What, then, becomes of the angelic argument? Who was the one president at Ephesus, when the church in that city had more than one elder ? By the author's own showing, we have elders at Ephesus, and among them a presiding elder. So it is not in any Independent church ; but so it is exactly in Presbyterian churches, where elders who rule are presided over, in their sessional assem- blies, by one elder, who both rules and teaches. Finally, Dr Bennet argues that the term pastor sup- poses one shepherd over the flock. This argument is not happier than the rest. One flock may have a plurality of shepherds. The term shepherd in the plural is associated with the term flock in the singular, very often in the sacred volume, 'Neither did my shepherds,' says God by Ezek., xxxiv. 8-10, ' search for my flock, but my shepherds fed themselves, and fed not my flock : therefore, O ye shepherds, hear the word of the Lord : thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I am against the shepherds ; and I will requu-e my flock at their hand,' etc. In addressing the Ephesian elders, Paul exhorts them to ' take heed unto them- selves, and to all the flock.' So that we have here one flock, and a number of shepherds ; and how then does the emblem of a shepherd suppose singleness of 28 THE RULING ELDERSHIP. superintendence? Bishop Stillingfleet, after quoting this passage, says, it is ' observable, firsts that the body of Christians in Ephesus is called the flock of the church, and not the several- flocks and churches over which God hath made you bishops. Secondly, that all those spoken to were such as had a pastoral charge of this one flock.'* On a review, then, of these arguments, I feel war- ranted to say that they utterly fail of their object, and that the language of scripture never leads to the conclusion of its not being the design of Christ to requii'e a plurality of bishops in every church. But there is much evidence leading to a conclu- sion directly the reverse. It has akeady appeared that there was a close resemblance between the Jewish synagogues and the first Chi^istian chui'ches; and we know that every synagogue had at the fewest three elders. Dr Good^vin says, ' They (the syna- gogues) used to have three at least, that a major vote might cast it among the rulers.' f Dr Neander says, ' Since the appointment of presbyters in the Christian church entu-ely corresponded with that of presbyters in the Jewish synagogue, at least in theu' original constitution ; so we may conclude, that if a pluraHty of elders stood at the head of the synagogue, the same was the case with the first Christian chm'ch.'| If this reasoning be objected to as analogical and infer- ential merely, there is no want of direct scriptural * Irenicum, chap. 7. p. 347. t Government of the Churches, book ii. chap. 4, X Planting of the Christian Church, vol. i. p. 41 — Note. THE RULING ELDERSHIP. 29 testimony to the same effect. We read of elders in each of the churches of Jerusalem, Ephesus, and Phi- lippi. Paul, in addressing the Hebrews, says, 'Obey them that have the rule over you.'* James exhorts him who is sick to ' call for the elders of the church.' These are individual cases ; but we have more com- prehensive examples on record. Paul says to Titus, ' For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee.'| On this passage Dr Bennet remarks, that ' as every city is mentioned, the plurality of bishops may refer to the plurality of chm-ches.' — (p. 223, note.) If the author admitted that it was common in these days to have several churches in one city, then it would be easy to perceive that Titus might ordain elders in every city, and yet only one elder in every church. But he con- tends, on the contrary, that each of the largest cities had in these days but one church, — (p. 204, etc.); and, if this opinion be correct, how can the mention of cities have any such effect as he alleges ? On this supposition, Luke avers that they ordained elders in every city. Dr Bennet says, no ; they ordained one elder in every city : but in this way they ordained a number of elders in every country. How is the one of these to be brought out of the other, without charging gross inaccuracy on the historian ? Who would say that we had a number of magistrates in every city, if we had only one magistrate in every city, and * Hebxiii. 17. t Titus i. 5. 30 THE RULING ELDERSHIP. the meaning were that we had a good many magis- trates throughout the nation ? Yet the error would not be more glaring in the Greek than it is in the English. Nor is this the only instance where such comprehensive language occurs. We read of Paul and Barnabas, that ' they ordained elders in every church.' * Here it is not said ' in every city,' but ' in every church ;' so that the only evasion Dr Ben- net could think of, is in this case unavailing. The early Chi'istian fathers, in speaking of churches, al- ways suppose each of them to have a number of elders, so often as they give us any intimation on the subject. The Rev. Herbert Thorndike, a learned Episcopalian already quoted, says, in relation to these points, 'Now the form of government estated by St Paul over these churches is pointed out to us. Acts xiv. 23 : where we read, in the end of their first journey, that "Paul and Barnabas, having ordained them presbyters in every church, returned to Antioch." But unto Titus the apostle writeth thus (Titus i. 5) : " For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou mightest set in order the things that are wanting, and constitute elders in every city, as I had appointed thee." Elders in every church in the one place, and elders in every city in the other : both to the same effect ; not meaning one in a place, but presbyteries ; that is, colleges, bodies, companies of presbyters, with common advice to order the churches planted in these cities. Such a college of presbyters it was that we spoke of in the last chap- * Acts xiv. 23. THE RULING ELDERSHIP. 31 ter, instituted by the apostle in the church of Jerusa- lem, the pattern whereof St Paul followeth in the churches which he converted out of the Gentiles. And then, in the church of Ephesus, you shall see St Paul (Acts XX. 17) sending for the bench of elders there to Miletus. Tlius, in the church of Philippi, you shall find that the apostle directeth his epistle to the bishops and deacons there, which must be to the college of presbyters next above the order of deacons. Thus, when the apostle wi-iteth to the Thessalonians, (1 Thess. V. 12,) " And w^e beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord," the multitude whereof he speaketh is to be understood of the like company of presbyters. Thus, in Ignatius, his epistles, you shall find him, up and down, reckoning next after the bishops the pres- byteries of all the chiu-ches to which he Avriteth. The like in St Cy]man's epistles for the presbyteries of Kome and Carthage.' — (p. 17.) Dr Owen says, ' The pattern of the fii'st churches constituted by the apostles, which it is our duty to imitate and follow as our rule, constantly expresseth and declares that many elders were appointed by them in every church. There is no mention in the scripture, no mention in antiquity, of any chm'ch wherein there was not more elders than one, nor doth that clim'ch answer the ori- ginal pattern where it is othenvise.'* The proof, then, we hold to be complete and decisive, that each of the primitive chm'ches had not one elder, as the * True Nature of a Gospel Church, chap. 7. 32 THE RULING ELDERSHIP. Independent churclies have now, but a number of elders, as we see exemplified in our Presbyterian polity. Dr Bennet, not quite satisfied with his contrary reasoning, nearly admits as much. ' It is probable,' he says, ' that at first this practice (of having more than one bishop to a church) most frequently ob- tained, not only on account of the abundance of gifts bestowed to fit men for the work of the ministry, but also on account of the persecutions which usually fell upon the bishops; and when the most conspicuous was removed, it was desirable that another should be left to watch over the flock.' — (p. 224.) Here the difference between primitive churches and Indepen- dent churches is acknowledged. It is admitted that the former had a number of elders or bishops, where the latter have but one ; and the fact being conceded, an attempt to account for it is subjoined. In those early days, we are informed, they had many gifts fitting men for the ministry, and many persecutions cutting off the ministers after they were appointed. These two explanations go to neutralise each other. If gifts qualified men to be ministers as fast as they were needed, why provide a superabundance of them by anticipation? T\ie supposition that elders were so generally slaughtered is a great exaggeration, for comparatively few of them resisted unto blood, striv- ing against sin. But had the fact been as alleged, would it have been kind to appoint more of them than were necessary, just to expose them to destruc- tion ? This idea of a reserve store of ciders is nowhere countenanced in the New Testament. THE RULING ELDERSHIP. 33 But Dr Bennet tells us fui'ther, that 'the first churches were designed to be the parents of others ; so that, while one bishop was presiding over the church first formed, another pastor would go into the vicinity to form a new church, which might detain him permanently to watch over those to whom he was a father in Grod.' This argument does not well con- sist with what he attempts to prove elsewhere, that in each of the largest cities, such as Jerusalem and Rome, there was, dm-ing the first century, but one congregation. Congi-egationalists are earnest in main- taining, that the word church always signifies in scrip- ture either the whole church, or a single Christian society, and in support of this doctrine, they must prove that the greatest capitals of those days contained no more than one Christian church. But when we ask, why each chm'ch had so many elders ; we are then informed that a number of them were occupied in erecting churches in then- neighbourhoods. Surely the evangelising pastors, then, had not been very successful, when they laboured for a hundred years in the streets and lanes of the largest cities, without adding a single new church to the number ! Apart from this seeming incongruity, we have seen that elders were the stated office-bearers in a particular church, and not itinerant missionaries ; and that the New Testament, in any allusions made to them, sup- poses them to be labouring for the good of that church which they were appointed to superintend. Farther, and finally, was it only in the apostolic age that churches were designed to be the parents of others ? c 34 THE RULING ELDERSHIP. Is not the extension of Christ's cause just as incum- bent on churches now as it was then, and why does not a like obligation create in Congregational churches a like multiplicity of office-bearers? We insist, then, on pleading with our Congregational brethren, that they return to apostolic usage, and obtain for each of their churches a number of bishops or presbyters. We plead with them to resume, in this particular, their own usage, for Independency and ruling elder- ship were not of old times deemed to be incompatible ; and Dr Goodwin thought he honoured the Congre- gational system in saying, ' Every church is a city unto God : it is the city of the living God : it is the holy city, and hath a foundation within itself, of elders within its own gates.' Of course these elders cannot be all ministers of the word; so that some will rule only, and others wiU labour also in word and doctrine. This will be the inevitable result of reverting to a scriptural plurality of elders ; and it surely favours presbytery, that a resumption of apos- tolic usage necessarily brings along with it our ses- sional arrangements. That the elders of the primitive churches were not all teachers, and that some of them ruled only, may be argued, — 3d, From various passages of the New Testament scriptures. — In his epistle to the Romans, Paul says, ' Having, then, gifts, differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith ; or ministry, let us wait on our ministering ; or he that teacheth, on THE RULING ELDERSHIP. 35 teaching; or he that e:Khorteth, on exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence ; he that sheweth mercy, \\4tli cheerfulness.'* That the apostle, in this language, points out a number of distinct offices, appears plainly enough from the connection. He exhorts, in the third verse, that no one 'should think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, ac- cording as God hath dealt to every man the mea- sure of faith.' No one was to exalt himself above his brethren, as possessing higher gifts than they. The faith exercised in duties was the most important ele- ment in them ; and as this faith refers all to Divine favom', it would, in the measure of it, produce sobriety of thought as to personal attainment. The apostle continues — ' For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office ; so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.' Each member of the body, it is here reasoned, has a distinct office ; but none of them is so independent of the rest that it may glory over them. They are one body ; and if, there- fore, one member should disparage others, it would, in virtue of this relation, be disparaging itself, — it would be dishonouring the whole of which it formed part. Each member is to be honoured, not by de- * Rom. xii. 6-8 : "E^ovrtf Si ^a§i(r//.aTx xxra t»v x^oiv tyiv So^itaav ri/j.tv S'ta