On the Distinctions Between

Teaching Elders and Ruling Elders:
ACCORDING TO THE NORMS OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN AMERICA (PCA)




by
Roger Smalling, D.Min
© June, 2000. Quito, Ecuador

Reviewed and approved by an informal group of pastors
of the Western Carolina Presbytery of the PCA, June, 2000

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Part One: Are Teaching Elders and Ruling Elders Different Offices?

Are Ruling and Teaching Elders different offices? .
Does the PCA recognize the concept of parity in government between the two offices? .
Who has authority to preach in PCA pulpits?
Who has 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?
What is the PCA position regarding equality of vote?
Some have asserted that the PCA position is merely American tradition. Do these views have a history preceding America?
What does the PCA say should be the attitude of the two offices to one another?
Who may read the Scriptures in a PCA pulpit?
Does the PCA recognize both classes of elder as “ministers of the Word”?

Part Two: Who May Preach and Administer the Sacraments?

Is it right to use the Old Testament as a guide to New Testament ecclesiology?
Are we free to limit our understanding of ecclesiology to the New Testament only?
Do we see two offices of spiritual leadership in the Old Testament?
New Testament fulfillment of Old Testament precedents…

Evidence One: The pattern in 1 Timothy 5:17
Evidence Two: The use of the word “minister”
Evidence Three: Timothy, Organizing Pastor
Evidence Four: The mentoring function of the pastor-teacher
Evidence Five: Teachers and administrators in 1 Corinthians 12:28

Part Three: Who May Preach and Administer the Sacraments?

Does the mentoring function of the Pastor-Teacher, along with his exclusive function as administrator of the Word and sacraments, make him superior in rank to the Ruling Elder?
What happens if the Ruling Elders refuse to accept or recognize the mentoring function of the Teaching Elders with respect them?

It is very clear from certain texts that the Ruling Elders also have a pastoral relationship with the congregation. Does this not support the view that they are one and the same with Teaching Elders, and are also “pastors”?

What is the Scriptural authority by which the Westminster Confession asserts that only ordained ministers might administer the sacraments?
What is the Scriptural support for the PCA view that the two offices have different ordinations?

 

Introduction
This thesis has been reviewed by a group of pastors of the Western Carolina Presbytery of the PCA, the presbytery in which I have my ordination. Their conclusion was that I have “fairly and properly presented the PCA position on the matter of teaching and ruling elders.”

Controversies arise on the mission field during the church-planting process. These occur because nationals may challenge doctrines and procedures missionaries take for granted. Missionaries find themselves defending things they never thought would come into question. Worse, they may wind up dealing with issues they considered insignificant.

Attacks of the enemy occur through divisive people who draw away disciples after themselves. (Acts 20:30) Although this happens in any ministry, the precarious nature of a church plant on the mission field seems to lend itself to such occurrences.

Just such a scenario developed while I was in South America. A divisive and controlling missionary from another mission than the PCA, a member of one of our churches, promoted doctrine on church government contrary to Presbyterian norms. This man, a Ruling Elder, convinced the other Ruling Elders of our fledgling Presbytery that certain aspects of Presbyterian government are wrong, and the PCA missionaries were teaching American culture rather than biblical church government.
Specifically, the points at issue were a denial of any distinction between Teaching Elders (Pastors) and Ruling Elders. He insisted that Ruling Elders had just as much right to preach and administer the sacraments as Teaching Elders; that Teaching Elders must be members of the church and under the authority of the Session, which is dominated by the Ruling Elders.
This created a dictatorship of the Ruling Elders over the Teaching Elders, led by this man. The national presbytery nearly discarded from the Book of Church Order (BCO) all references to distinctions.

I wrote a warning letter to the Presbytery, along with a brief paper, defending our Presbyterian distinctives as biblical. This temporarily stopped the drift away from reformed norms.
In the process, we were challenged to rethink our traditions and ask how solid they were. The result: I am more convinced than ever that our standards on this issue are biblical.
The thesis is in three parts. First, statements of PCA views on the issues as found in our WESTMINSTER STANDARDS and in the PCA POSITION PAPERS, 1973-1993. Then follows scriptural defenses of the key points. Finally, a question and answer part to clarify misconceptions.
I presuppose that the reader has basic knowledge of the principles of Presbyterian government, as well as a covenantal perspective of the Bible. Otherwise, parts of the argumentation may not make sense. A recommended reading is THE APOSTOLIC CHURCH by Thomas Withrow.

My letter to the presbytery in South America:

Dear Fellow Elders,
In the past it has been my privilege to address the Presbytery on one matter or another, sometimes in person and sometimes in writing, as in this case. I have been pleased to see the Presbytery has always given serious consideration to my theses and am profoundly appreciative for such a mature attitude, as is proper among fellow elders.

I therefore request serious consideration to both of the documents I am submitting, since they address the future welfare of the Presbytery.

The Presbytery is considering including in the Book of Church Order (BCO) certain points having to do with the definition of elders, their roles, and their relationship to the church courts. Though these specific points may not seem serious in themselves, nevertheless, they may reflect a tendency toward a philosophy of ecclesiastical government contrary to the continuity of Scripture as a whole, as well as contrary to 500 years of Reformed experience. This should not be taken lightly. In this letter, I will mention what has been the standard and practice of Presbyterianism for 500 years.

I have attached a thesis that shows, via the continuity of Scripture, why those standards are justified.
Specifically, it appears there may be a change in ecclesiological philosophy within the Presbytery, as reflected by changes in the new BOCO, which could blur the distinctions between Teaching and Ruling Elders. This philosophy seems to be reflected in the rule that all Elders, including Teaching, must be members of a local church. Their Session would therefore be their first Court of Appeals, resulting in their submission to it.

These measures, in themselves, may not seem serious. But the consequences are long range and dangerous. The thesis that accompanies this letter will show why it is unscriptural to obliterate these distinctions, or take measures to which tend to do so. Our Presbyterian forefathers felt it necessary to institute basic rules of operation to safeguard this distinction, rather than blur it. First, I will list below several rules the Presbyterian movement took centuries to elaborate:

1. The Presbytery is defined as an association of Teaching Elders, supported by Ruling Elders.
2. Teaching Elders are members of Presbytery only and may not be members of a local church.
3. Teaching Elders are moderators of the Sessions.
4. Teaching Elders are permanent members of Presbytery. Ruling Elders are temporary members sent on a rotational basis to specific Presbytery meetings, according to limitations governed by the number of members of a church.

5. As a general principle, Teaching Elders represent the Presbytery to the church. Ruling Elders represent the church to the Presbytery.

Note it is unnecessary to find justifying verses for these particular rules. It is only necessary to show these rules tend toward the protection of biblical principles, whereas their opposites do not. I will attempt to demonstrate this in the thesis.

The WESTMINSTER CONFESSION says: …there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature, and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed. Ch.1, Art.6

This means Scripture provides a general framework of government. Within that framework, we use our reason, what our standards call the light of nature, to apply specific measures to ensure the principles are respected.

We need not justify every detail with a biblical text. As long as we show such a measure corresponds with the continuity of scripture, then the particular measure requires no further vindication. These rules safeguard Teaching Elders from being instructed by Ruling Elders on what to preach or when and how to administer the sacraments.

Teaching Elders would end up, in practice, as mere functionaries of a Board of Elders, as in congregationalism. Such would be neither biblical nor Presbyterian, but an ecclesiastical perversity.
While the content of the BCO is not final authority, its intent is to preserve a biblical system of government.
Respectfully Submitted,
TE Roger Smalling,
WC Presbytery, PCA
******
• The manner of expression in this letter was as mild as conscience would allow. In fact, the divisive person mentioned in the introduction had already convinced the Ruling Elders that no substantial difference existed between the two orders of elder. The difference was merely a description of what the elder happened to be doing at the time. If he is teaching, he is a Teaching Elder. If he is administrating the next day, he is then a Ruling Elder.
• Our seminary-trained pastors had become mere functionaries of those elders, suffering what they called the dictatorship of the Ruling Elders.

The following is the entire essay that corrected the situation. For the full documented essay, including diagrams, historical citations, and extended scriptural defense, download the PDF below:
Download PDF
Download Word

Related articles:

Biblical Rights of Christian Ministers

The Dangers of Hierarchy in Christian Organizations

Mentoring for Christian Leadership