BRITISH AND FOREIGN

EVANGELICAL REVIEW.

APRIL 1873.

ART. I.-The New Testament Elder.

Tenure of the Elder's Office. Article in the Princeton Review, July 1872.

The Eldership Question. Princeton Review, April 1872.

The Theory of the Ruling Eldership, or the Position of the Lay Ruler in the Reformed Churches Examined. By PETER COLIN CAMPBELL, D.D., Principal of the University of Aberdeen. Blackwood & Sons. Edinburgh. 1866.

The Teaching Elder. By Rev. WILLIAM M'CLURE, Londonderry. Belfast. 1858.

The Ruling Elder. By Rev. JOHN MACNAUGHTAN, A.M. Belfast.

1858.

The Ruling Eldership of the Christian Church. By DAVID KING, LL.D. Third edition. London. 1851.

The Warrant, Nature, and Duties of the Office of Ruling Elder. By SAMUEL MILLER, D.D. Glasgow. 1835.

THE

HE growing divergences of opinion among the Reformed Churches on the subject of the Eldership, and the variety of practical suggestions to which these divergences lead, demand that we should review our present position, and reconsider the whole subject in the light of Holy Scripture. That such differences exist, there can be no doubt. In some churches where the institution was once in full operation, it is now extinct; while in others it is steadfastly maintained. Among those churches where the elder still survives, some regard him as a layman chosen merely to represent the

VOL. XXII.-NO. LXXXIV.

A

laity in the governing body; while others regard him as a spiritual officer, whose office is as clearly defined as that of the bishop or deacon. It is obvious that any suggestion in regard to the discharge of his duties must be very much coloured by the position, which the person giving the suggestion believes is assigned to him in the New Testament. Every difference on the subject must ultimately be brought to the test, not of human opinion or ecclesiastical practice, but of divine revelation. Even divine institutions administered by men have a strong tendency, in the lapse of years, and amid a change of circumstances, to veer away from their original positions; it is by constant reference to the divine chart and guide that we can keep them in their place.

Every one who has given attention to the constitution of the New Testament Church is of course aware that its officebearers are divided into two grand classes, which may be designated the itinerant and the stationary. In the former are comprised the apostles and evangelists, who went out into all' the world preaching the gospel, gathering their converts into little communities, and conferring on them a settled organisation; but as they were constantly moving about, and could remain but a short time in one locality, it was necessary to provide for affording to the little communities which they had formed a permanent supply of Christian ordinances. This was done by appointing in each local congregation two classes of officers resident at the spot, one of whom, the elder, attended to the spiritual, and the other, the deacon, who attended to the temporal wants of the little community. It is with the former of these that we are at present concerned.

The eldership is a divine institution. It has not originated with uninspired men; it is not a growth of ages, but has its roots in the New Testament. Yet the strange thing is, that, like sacrifice in the old dispensation, the history of its origin is not recorded. In Acts xi. 30 it meets us for the first time as an institution already existing in the church at Jerusalem. Paul and Barnabas set it up in the churches which they planted in Asia Minor. We find it in vigorous existence at Ephesus. Paul left Titus behind to establish it in Crete; and the Christians to whom James wrote were exhorted, in times of sickness, to avail themselves of the benefit of it.' As we

1 Acts xiv. 23, xx. 17; Tit. i. 5; James v. 14.

The Apostolic Eldership.

203

cannot doubt that the apostles acted by divine authority in organising the first Christian communities, we must believe that every institution which they set up and approved must have had the authority of God.

Elder and bishop, presbyter and pastor, are in the New Testament different names for the same office-bearer. No candid scholar now ventures to deny this fact. The elders of Ephesus were overseers, that is, bishops, by appointment of the Holy Ghost: the elders of Crete were to possess all the qualifications required in bishops. When Paul enumerates the qualification of bishops, he passes over in silence those of elders, which he was not likely to do if under the one name both had not been included; and Peter commands the elders to act as bishops by feeding the flock. But the New Testament bishop or pastor is the same office-bearer who is elsewhere designated presbyter, teacher, minister. These names, though all pointing out the same officer, are not strictly synonymous, but each presents him to us in a different point of view. The same man might be called a presbyter or elder, from his age or gravity, bishop or overseer from his having the oversight of the people, teacher, from the great work he was to discharge, pastor or shepherd, from his feeding and tending the flock, minister or servant, because that for Christ's sake he was the servant of all.

There was a plurality of these elders in every local congregation. It was so in Jerusalem, in the churches of Asia Minor, in Ephesus, in Philippi, in the churches of Crete; and it would have been impossible to obey the admonition of James, had there not been more than one of them in every congregation. It is interesting to notice how this plurality shews itself often undesignedly in the apostolic admonitions-" Remember them which have the rule over you"-" Obey them that have the rule over you"-"Salute all them that have the rule over you”—“ Know them which labour among you and are over you in the Lord." It was these elders of the local church, who, in their associated capacity, constituted the presbytery."

1 Acts xx. 28; Tit. i. 6–9; 1 Tim. iii. 1-7; 1 Pet. v. 2. Tischendorf, however, in his eighth edition, omits TOUTES in the last passage, on the authority of B. A KLP sustain the reading of the received text.

2 Acts xv. 2, xiv. 23, xx. 17; Phil. i. 1; Tit. i, 5; James v. 14. 3 Heb. xiii. 7, 17, 24; 1 Thess. v. 12; 1 Tim. iv. 14.

The qualifications of the bishop or elder are stated in. detail in the Epistles to Timothy and to Titus.' Of the twenty-two distinct qualifications there enumerated, six are found in the Epistle to Timothy which are not in Titus, and seven are stated in Titus which are not in Timothy. Nine, however, are common to both Epistles, and from this double statement of them we may infer that they are of special importance. These qualifications substantially are, that the eldermust be a man of experience, consistent in moral character; unselfish in his aims, an example to others in temper, in life, and in conduct. But, over and above these moral requirements, there are two others deserving of special attention. He must be "one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity," or as it is in the parallel passage, "having faithful children not accused of riot and unruly;" and it is added as a reason for this qualification, For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?" Want of success in ruling at home was to disqualify a man from ruling in the church. The other special qualification was skill in teaching. A bishop, says Paul to Timothy, must be didazizov, “apt to teach," that is, fit to communicate knowledge. The same qualification is presented in the Epistle to Titus in different words, the language in the latter passage having more of a polemic air. "Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers." It is in reality the same qualification, only with a double aspect; the elder must be fit to instruct believers on the one side, and to answer objectors on the other. It is noteworthy that no exception whatever is made; every elder must be able to rule, and also fit to teach.

The two qualifications now stated are important in this respect, that they point to the work that the elder was to perform. In absence of an apostle or other occasional visitor, the entire spiritual oversight of the congregation devolved upon the elders. The duties involved in this oversight may be summed up in two words, government and instruction. In the discharge of their duty as governors, they had to take care of the church, to receive its charities, to administer discipline,

1 Tim. iii. 2-7; Tit. 5-9.