 |
 |
 |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
 |
The Ruling Elder as Presbyter Part I: Preface
The following essay, entitled The Ruling Elder as Presbyter, was written in three stages - first as an assignment for a church polity course while at Regent College in 1988; second while serving as Associate Pastor at Christ Community Church in the early 1990’s; and third for submission to the Journal Faith and Practice in 1996 while also serving as Pastor of Covenant Fellowship ARP Church in Greensboro NC.
The gist of the article is an argument for a “two office” view of church leadership.
While at Regent I had no idea really what to write about in a church polity class, and a friend back at First Presbyterian Columbia suggested I address the classic debates between Thornwell and Hodge regarding the ruling elder. So I did so. Out of that came the exegetical aspect of this paper. In its second phase I was challenged to try to bring the principles down to the reality of local churches at that time. It is very important to note that in the late 80’s/early 90’s the movement to enthrone pastors as church CEO’s was in full swing throughout the church growth movement, and the CEO model was even creeping into Presbyterian churches. That was the devil I was most anxious to exorcise in my updates to the paper. The idea of the “pastor” as CEO and the elder as “board member” was then, and is now, the primary "target" of this essay if there is one. The third update mainly consisted of editing. I don’t think any new content was added for its publication in Faith and Practice.
It is important to me to state that I still keep posted this paper for its possible exegetical value primarily, hoping that it will be useful in the overall discussion. However, it must be underlined that the paper was written within the context of a Presbyterian system of church government. As much as I may take issue exegetically with the three office view, I find the two office view taken to extreme, such as one might find in independent Brethren churches, much worse, and ultimately less in keeping with the overall spirit of the Scriptures regarding church polity. I fear that some of my questions and comments in the paper could seem to inflame or encourage such a Brethren view.
Covenant Fellowship, where I serve at present, seeks to balance a two office view within the context of a larger three office world. That is, we as elders are in parity with and under the submission of Presbyterian brothers the majority of whom hold to a different view, and to a Form of Government that retains much of a three office practice. At the same time there is much in our Form of Government that supports the view that the elder’s office is pastoral in nature, which is the primary point of the exegetical parts of my essay (and thereby debunking the elder as "board member" concept.) We also live with the very real practical ministry realities of having a full-time paid presbytery-ordained pastor whose membership is held by the Presbytery amongst a session of part-time non-paid session-ordained equals whose membership is held by the local church. It does not go without saying, nor is it a given, how best to balance duties and responsibilities in such a context. Every church much struggle with these issues. We try to lean as far toward a two office approach as our Form of Government and the practical realities will allow, while remaining firmly Presbyterian and gladly connected to the larger body.
For the sake of integrity of the paper as written for Faith and Practice, I keep it posted as written, but I find many of my own reflections following the exegetical arguments to be somewhat naïve, perhaps what one would expect of the young green whipper-snapper I was at the time. I will comment on those matters in the prologue.
Finally, it must be stated, that the thoughts shared and stated in this essay represent only myself. They do not represent either the session of the church where I serve or the presbytery of which I am a part.
Here is the paper:
The Ruling Elder as Presbyter Part II: The Paper
Some of the most profound thinking about Presbyterian church government grew out of the great church polity debates of the 1830's and 1840's in the United States(1). Of particular interest was the prolonged written engagement between Dr. Charles Hodge of Princeton Seminary and Dr. James Henry Thornwell of Columbia Seminary, over the issue of the role and status of the ruling elder. Hodge took the position that the ruling elder was not to be equated with the presbuteros (normally translated as "elder" and which I refer to as "presbyter") of the New Testament. That is, where we read the word "elder" in our New Testament translations, we should not generally, according to Hodge translate or interpret this as "ruling elder," the latter being a different office altogether from the New Testament presbuteros. Thornwell, on the other hand, tended to equate the ruling elder with the New Testament presbyter(2). Thus, according to Thornwell, it is proper, indeed necessary, to include in our understanding of those New Testament presbuteros passages the idea of "ruling elder."
Though differing on whether a ruling elder was a presbyter, Hodge and Thornwell were both very concerned to distinguish the role of the ruling elder from that of the minister or teaching elder. If Thornwell’s view is right, then both the minister and ruling elder can look to the New Testament presbuteros passages for guidance, for both are new Testament presbyters. Nevertheless they differ in other significant ways, since for Thornwell only the minister carries out the ministry of the word and sacraments. If Hodge’s view is right then only the minister, or "teaching elder," can rightfully look to the New Testament presbuteros passages for guidance. To Hodge, the ruling elder, along the lines of thinking of the Westminster Divines, is another office altogether, based on the Old Testament pattern of "elders of the people," elders who served in a civil capacity yet "shared with the religious leaders responsibility for governing the public life of the people of God"(3).
This issue of biblical eldership was revisited in an important essay by T.F. Torrance, "The Eldership in the Reformed Church," published in 1984 in the Scottish Journal of Theology(4). This paper was important in that it called for a fundamental re-examination of the very concept of ruling elder, a concept undoubtedly close to the core of distinctive Presbyterianism. Although he does not address the Thornwell debate directly, Torrance stands with Hodge in refusing to equate the ruling elder with the New Testament presbuteros (5). Yet Torrance stands against Hodge in challenging Hodge's theory that there were two kinds of elder in the New Testament—a teaching elder and a ruling elder(6). In Torrance’s view there is only one kind of New Testament "elder," and this is the equivalent of our minister of the word. Because of semantic confusion around the use of the word "elder," Torrance would prefer not to use that term for the biblical office of presbuteros. Thus the real challenge of Torrance is more profound than whether Hodge or Thornwell is more right in his respective analysis of the relationship between the ruling elder and teaching elder. Torrance’s challenge is that we should question the very notion of the ruling elder as a New Testament office.
This paper is a preliminary response to Torrance's challenge. Its burden is to determine who can lay claim to being the equivalent of the New Testament presbuteros. Is Hodge right that only the minister can lay claim to being a presbuteros? Is Thornwell right that the "ruling elder" is also a New Testament presbuteros? Is Torrance right that whoever the New Testament presbuteros is, only this person should lay claim to the title of elder? Whatever the answer is, the implications are far reaching.
The paper is divided into three parts: 1) a review of the pertinent New Testament texts, 2) a tentative appraisal of the issue, and 3) a reflection upon the implications of this appraisal.
THE BIBLICAL TEXTS
The term "elder" in most versions of the New Testament is a translation of presbuteros in one or another of its forms. There are several key passages and groups of passages which are particularly revealing as to the meaning of this important term. These will be examined in turn.
Acts 14:21-23
After having established and encouraged disciples in various Asia Minor communities, Paul and Barnabas appointed elders, or presbuteroi, in every church, after having prayed with fasting:
They preached the good news in that city and won a large number of disciples. Then they returned to Lystra, Iconium and Antioch, strengthening the disciples and encouraging them to remain true to the faith. "We must go through many hardships to enter the kingdom of God," they said. Paul and Barnabas appointed elders [presbuteroi] for them in each church and, with prayer and fasting, committed them to the Lord, in whom they had put their trust (Acts 14:21-23).
Three things are of special note here. First, presbuteroi here is plural, as it almost always is in the New Testament. It is a plurality of presbuteroi that is appointed. Second, this plurality of presbuteroi is appointed in every church. No church (whether a city-church or a more local congregation) was to be without presbuteroi. Third, the matter of appointing is very serious, as evidenced by the prayer with fasting. For Paul, moving on as he was from these fledgling church bodies, it was imperative that they be placed in the hands of the right leaders.
Acts 20:16-31
This text is central to the discussion. Paul, in a hurry to get to Jerusalem by Pentecost, was unwilling to stop over in Asia Minor, so, landing on a nearby island of Miletus, he sends word for the elders of the church at Ephesus to meet him at Miletus:
Paul had decided to sail past Ephesus to avoid spending time in the province of Asia, for he was in a hurry to reach Jerusalem, if possible, by the day of Pentecost. From Miletus, Paul sent to Ephesus for the elders [presbuteroi] of the church (Acts 20:16-17).
Speaking to these Ephesian presbuteroi on the waterfront in Miletus Paul says:
"Now I know that none of you among whom I have gone about preaching the kingdom will ever see me again. Therefore, I declare to you today that I am innocent of the blood of all men. For I have not hesitated to proclaim to you the whole will of God. Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock [poimnio] of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers [episkopous]. Be shepherds [poimanein] of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood. I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock [poimniou]. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. So be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears" (Acts 20:25-31).
There are several things to note in this passage. First, the Ephesian presbuteroi have care over a flock, which they are to shepherd. Poimanein, "to shepherd," (and translated in the NIV here as "Be shepherds") is the infinitive form of the verb poimaino, which means to tend like a shepherd, to keep sheep, to tend a flock, etc. Our concept of pastoring is rooted in this rich Greek word group. Jeremias summarizes the shepherd's task: "the pastor's task is to care for the congregation, seek the lost, and to combat heresy"(7). These Ephesian shepherds in Acts 20 are thus to protect the flock against dangers which threaten from within and without. As Jeremias puts it: "Here for the first time they appear ‘in corpore’ as guardians of the tradition of the apostles who appointed them and entrusted the guidance of the community to them"(8). The presbuteroi of Ephesus, therefore, are pastors, and have the function of shepherding the flock of God.
The second thing to note is that the presbuteroi of Ephesus are also episkopoi, translated variously as "overseers" or "bishops," and have been made such by the Holy Spirit. As episkopoi, these presbuteroi are to exercise loving oversight and governance of the congregation. They are to keep watch as guardians of the flock.
In summary, the Ephesian presbuteros is also an episkopos and a poimein; that is, the Ephesian elder is an overseer is a pastor. There is no evidence in this passage for a subgroup of prebuteroi who rule only, who are not involved in the ministry of the word. Nor is there any evidence for a separate group of leaders apart from the presbuteroi who oversee and pastor the flock.
Acts 15
On six occasions in Acts 15, variations of the phrase apostoloi kai presbuteroi (apostles and elders) are used of the governing leaders in Jerusalem, leaders who, in the words of Jeremias, "clearly function as a supreme court and normative teaching office for the whole church"(9). This function was that of the "elders" as well as of the apostles; thus, whoever the elders were, they, with the apostles, had control of doctrinal or teaching matters.
1 Peter 5:1-4
Once again an apostle makes an appeal to the leadership of the churches to whom he is writing:
To the elders [presbuteroi] among you, I appeal as a fellow elder [synpresbuteros], a witness of Christ's sufferings and one who also will share in the glory to be revealed: Be shepherds [poimantei] of God's flock [poimnion] that is under your care, serving as overseers [episkopountes]—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not greedy for money, but eager to serve; not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock [poimniou]. And when the Chief Shepherd [archipoimenos] appears, you will receive the crown of glory that will never fade away (1 Peter 5:1-4).
As in the previous passage, the presbuteroi are to function as shepherds or pastors over the flock. And, again, these presbuteroi are also designated as "overseers." The admonition not to "lord over" the church suggests that the "elders" had disciplinary powers(10). The exhortation that they are not to be "greedy for money" suggests either that they had charge of the community purse(11), or that they were recompensed for their labors. Their charge to shepherd voluntarily, not under compulsion, and with eagerness, suggests that the shepherds were in an office or recognized position which carried obligation"(12). Clearly these presbuteroi are the recognized leaders of the congregations. Once again, in an important passage dealing with the ministry of the New Testament presbuteroi, there is neither evidence for a subgroup of presbuteroi who rule only, nor is there evidence of any other group of leaders who would correspond to Hodge’s non-presbuteros ruling elders.
Titus 1:5-11
Although we know relatively little about Paul’s mission in Crete, it appears that he had had to leave Crete with unfinished business, and so he had left Titus there to complete what he had left undone:
The reason I left you in Crete was that you might straighten out what was left unfinished and appoint elders [presbuterous] in every town, as I directed you. An elder [presbuteros] must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient (Titus 1:5-6).
We do not know how many elders were appointed in each town, how many separate fellowships may have existed in each town, or whether Titus appointed them by himself(13). But we do know that Paul was very concerned that the appointees be solidly committed to sound doctrine and able to discern truth from error. Interestingly, as Paul goes on to describe in more detail the needed character of these appointed elders, he shifts to the use of the word "overseer" or episkopon in verse 7.
Since an overseer [episkopon] is entrusted with God's work, he must be blameless—not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. Rather he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it. For there are many rebellious people, mere talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision group. They must be silenced, because they are ruining whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach—and that for the sake of dishonest gain (Titus 1:7-9).
Once again the appointed presbuteroi are also referred to as overseers(14). And again, these elder-overseers must have a firm grasp on orthodox doctrine, so as to be able refute those (in this case, the circumcision group) who bring false teaching into and ruin upon the churches. And although the shepherding word group is not used here in Titus, one is struck by the similarity in function between the elder-overseers in Titus and the elder-overseer-shepherds in Acts 20 and 1 Peter 5. In both cases these elders were to be guardians of sound doctrine. In both cases they were to be able to discern truth from error. In both cases they were to protect the flock from deceivers and false teachers.
1 Timothy 3:1-13
This passage is possibly the first to which an average reader of the New Testament today would turn in order to discern the qualifications and necessary character traits of "elders." Yet, to be precise, this passage deals with the characteristics of "overseers," not "elders."
Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer [episkopeis], he desires a noble task. Now the overseer [episkopon] must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach….(1 Tim. 3:1-2)
The word presbuteroi does not appear in this passage. However, the similarities between this list of qualifications and the list are too striking to suggest that the Timothy list does not deal also with presbuteroi. This overseer in 1 Timothy must be able and willing to teach, which implies an ability to discern that which constitutes sound doctrine. This overseer must also be able to "rule" or "manage" his household well, since he will also be called to manage God’s household:
He [the overseer] must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?) (1 Tim. 3:4-5).
The household which the overseer was to manage or rule well was more extensive than the household of today. This phrase "managing his own family well" probably included managing servants or slaves, managing a business or estate, as well as managing children. That the proisteimi word group means more than "rule" in the normal sense in which the word "rule" is used today is clear from the way it is set in parallel to the verb "to take care" of in verse 5. As F. F. Bruce notes, this verb group "combines the ideas of leading, protecting, and caring for"(15). These responsibilities dovetail nicely with those of the elder-overseer-shepherds in the previous sections.
1 Timothy 5:17
Another hint that this overseer is, after all, our familiar presbuteros, is the way that Paul picks again up the discussion of leadership later in the 5th chapter:
The elders [presbuteroi] who direct the affairs [proestotes] of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching (1 Tim. 5:17).
Although presbuteroi had appeared back in 1 Timothy 5:1 as a reference simply to older men, here Paul is referring to the leaders of the churches under Timothy’s care(16). He speaks of the presbuteroi who direct the affairs of the church well. The word translated as "direct the affairs" (proestotes) is the participial form of the same word used for "managing the household" back in chapter 3, the prohisteimi word group. And again, the ministry of teaching is brought up here in 1 Timothy 5 in connection with these leaders (we will look below at the problems raised by the phrase "especially those"). Given the similarity between the lists in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1, given the likelihood that the presbuteroi of 1 Timothy 5 are the same folk as the episkopoi of 1 Timothy 3, and given the repeated emphasis on the ministry of teaching in reference to these leaders, the evidence builds that the overseer of 1 Timothy 3 is a presbuteros.
Agreement So Far
Thornwell, and Torrance would all basically agree that all New Testament presbuteros passages refer at least to our office of minister or pastor or teaching elder. That is, the New Testament presbuteros certainly corresponds at least to our office of minister or pastor or teaching elder. Neither Thornwell, Torrance, nor Hodge would doubt that the minister of the word, or pastor, or teaching elder, whatever word is used, is a New Testament presbuteros.
Hodge however allows for another office in the church which is not a New Testament presbuteros, an office he calls "ruling elder." Torrance denies completely that another such office exists. Thornwell agrees that there is another type of elder office, but includes it within the meaning of presbuteros. But we have just looked at all the pertinent presbuteros passages and have found no evidence at all of two types of presbuteros. Certainly Thornwell cannot be right. There is only one sort of presbuteros.
So the question remains, is there another New Testament office which would correspond either to Hodge’s "ruling elder" or Westminster’s "other church governors.?"
A Separate Office?
Several key texts are cited by those who would allow for a separate class of officers, whether called "ruling elders" or something else. These are Romans 12:6-8; Thessalonians 5:12-13; 1 Corinthians 12:28; 1 Timothy 5:17-19, and Ephesians 4:11-12.
Romans 12:6-8
We will begin by looking at the passage in Romans 12:
We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man's gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach, if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership [proistamenos], let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully (Romans 12:6-8).
The traditional interpretation of Romans 12:8 is in line with Calvin, who, in his commentary on Romans, asserts that the ones whose gift is leadership, and who use this gift to "govern," are those to whom the government of the church is committed, and who constitute another office of leader apart from the ministers(17). These leaders, to Calvin, were "the elders who presided over and ruled others and exercised discipline," who were the "correctors of morals" in the community(18). The Westminster Divines use Romans 12:8 as a proof text for the office of "other church governors." They just cite the verse, assuming that the verse is straightforward on the issue(19).
The word translated as "leadership" here in Romans 12:8 is equivalent both to that translated as "manage" in 1 Timothy 3:4-5 (where the reference was to managing a household), and to that translated as "direct the affairs of" in 1 Timothy 5. It has the idea of "taking care of" as well as governing or ruling in an absolute sense(20). Hodge goes into some detail regarding this word in its context. "Here again," concludes Hodge, "the right discharge of ecclesiastical duties is principally intended"(21). For Hodge, the word is certainly used for official leaders. The real question to Hodge is whether the word is to be taken in reference to rulers in general (civil or ecclesiastical), to church rulers or elders, or to the pastor of a congregation(22). In the context of the somewhat prioritized list of gifts in Romans 12:8, this gift of leadership is placed down among the list of gifts ordinary Christians possess. As Hodge explains, it would be incongruous to read the list of duties as "He that gives, he that acts as pastor, he that shows mercy"(23). Thus, this gift must refer to anyone who "exercises authority" in the church, not just the pastor(24). Although Hodge does not specifically state it in his commentary, he is trying to show that these ordinary Christians who have gifts for leadership would (or could) correspond to official lay leaders, to the "ruling elders" or "other church governors"(25), as opposed to ministers or teaching elders.
But there are three problems with Hodge's analysis. First, after noting the incongruity of equating the one gifted with leadership with the pastoral office, Hodge goes on to suggest that the one whose gift is "showing mercy" corresponds to the deacon(26). Would it not be equally incongruous to make the list read, "He that gives, he that rules, or he that acts as a deacon"?
I Thessalonians 5:12-13
The second problem with Hodge's argument is his reference to 1 Thessalonians 5:12 as an explanation of his summary position concerning Romans 12:8. 1 Thessalonians 5:12-13a reads as follows:
Now we ask you, brothers, to respect those who work hard among you, who are over you in the Lord and who admonish you. Hold them in the highest regard in love because of their work.
The word which is translated by the English phrase "are over you" is of the same word group as was translated as "leadership" in Romans 12:8, as "manage" in 1 Timothy 3:4-5, and as "direct the affairs of" in 1 Timothy 5. Paul does not use the word presbuteros here in the 1 Thessalonians passage. Yet we know from the passage in Acts 14 that it was already by this time Paul’s pattern to appoint presbuteroi in the churches. It is striking that these leaders who labor among the Thessalonians have the same two-fold function of the presbuteroi in the passages analyzed above, that is, leading and teaching (who are over you and admonish you). These leaders in Thessalonica sound a great deal like the elder-overseer-pastors of Acts 20:17 and 1 Peter 5:1-4. At any rate, Hodge’s use of 1 Thessalonians 5:12 actually counters his assertion that the "ruling" of Romans 12:8 does not have reference to the pastoral office. His attempt to equate the one gifted in leadership in Romans 12 with a non-presbuteroi type elder just does not hold up to scrutiny.
Third, we cannot assume, despite rather extensive attempts to do so(27), that these gifted ones are necessarily official office holders anyway.
1 Corinthians 12:28
Here the reader finds another enumeration of spiritual gifts:
And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues. (1 Corinthians 12:28).
The word translated here as "gifts of administration," kyberneiseis, has to do with giving guidance or direction(28). Its cognate in Acts 27:11 and Revelation 18:17 refers to the helmsman or pilot of a boat. Gordon Fee comments that our likely modern association of the word "administration" with "administrative skills," or with planning and paper-working skills, is a far cry from what Paul had in mind, and that this administration refers to "acts of guidance," wise counsel given to the community as a whole, to steer it in the right direction as a helmsman would do with a boat(29). So we are dealing with a kind of leadership gift, perhaps paralleling that in Romans 12:8. But are we to conclude that this gift is restricted to office holders alone? Or may this be possessed be many people exercising leadership in a variety of ways in the local assembly?
Beyer(30), as well as Barrett(31), make note of the fact that here in 1 Corinthians 12:28, the first three gifts, or gifted persons—the apostles, prophets, and teachers—were clearly involved in the proclamation of the word, whereas the gifts beginning with miracles were not associated with teaching. This loose division of what some call "enabling gifts" and "helping gifts" mirrors the list in Romans 12:8. In addition, the plural nature of "gifts of administration" suggests that this gift is given to several members, and probably not just the same members who are teachers. So this is not likely an exclusive gift of presbuteroi.
But does the text warrant restricting those gifted with "administration" to another official class of leaders, perhaps to Westminster’s "other church governors" or Hodge’s "ruling elders"? The relation between office and gift is tricky at best, and beyond the scope of this paper. The importance of this relation has intensified in the context of the current every-member-ministry movement and the rather passionate responses to it. And generally the letters which speak much of office speak relatively little of gift, and vice versa. The question remains, is there a necessary correlation between these gifts and official offices in the church?
Without going into a lengthy and technical discussion of this issue, I would offer to the readers the following approach. Read through the lists of gifts enumerated in Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12. Try to match an official church "office" with each of these gifts. I don’t think you can. But if you can, ask yourself the question, "what is left for everybody else who does not hold one of these offices?" And if there is nothing else, what was the point of Paul’s gift enumeration in the first place? And if you cannot match each gift with a specific office, then what warrant is there for attaching some gifts to some offices, unless these offices are clearly delineated elsewhere?
The upshot is that we just cannot use the gift/office correlation as strong evidence that Paul was intending an "office" of "ruling elder" or "other church governor" when he brought up leadership and administration in his enumeration of gifts. Although we can say that the presbuteroi/episkopoi must be able to "rule" or "manage" (according to Timothy’s list), we cannot say with certainty that they have the spiritual gifts of leadership or administration. Nor can we say that those who do possess these spiritual gifts must of necessity be office holders of whatever kind. What we can say is that there is little evidence at all to warrant following Hodge or the Westminster Divines in equating those listed as having these gifts as office holders distinct from ministers.
1 Timothy 5:17
This is a very important passage for those who would make a distinction between the ruling and the teaching elder:
The elders [presbuteroi] who direct the affairs [proestotes] of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching (1 Tim. 5:17).
Several comments need to made about this verse. First, the purpose of this passage is not to answer our question as to whether there are one or two types of leaders. Paul simply wants to affirm that certain presbuteroi are worthy of double honor, which probably means the combined honor of respect and financial support(32). In other words, this verse is about how the churches under Timothy’s care should honor those who teach and preach in their midst.
Second, the difficult wording of the passage at least opens up the door to the possibility that there are two sorts of presbuteroi, those whose primary work is preaching and teaching and those whose primary work is ruling. It is also possible that presbuteroi refers simply to older men, as it did in 1 Timothy 5:1, and that among these older men, certain ones function as "other church governors" who do not teach, while the others preach and teach and are worthy of double honor. In my judgment the use of presbuteroi in this passage more likely refers back to the overseers of the 3rd chapter. If in fact those who rule well are presbuteroi in the sense of official leaders of the church (and not older men in general), the passage admits of the possibility of distinction between presbuteroi, but says nothing as to the possibility of non-presbyter officers who rule.
But what is the distinction? Is it between those presbuteroi who rule well and those presbuteroi who don’t rule well, the former ruling well by virtue of preaching and teaching? In this case "especially" could carry the sense of "that is" or "in other words." Or, is the distinction between those presbuteroi who merely rule well on the one hand, and those who both rule well and preach and teach on the other hand? In this case, "especially" would carry the sense of "particularly." A quick survey of the twelve New Testament occurrences of "especially" (malista) generally supports the meaning of "particularly." Among those presbuteroi who rule well, some in particular have the work of preaching and teaching. These get the double honor. But that leaves us other presbuteroi who rule well but who do not teach and do not get the double honor. But the passage clearly says the presbuteroi who rule well get the double honor.
Obviously, the text is problematic. There seem to be problems with every approach, possibly because we are trying to make the passage answer a question it was not intending to answer. In every other case so far analyzed, the presbuteroi have had a teaching function. Now are we to suppose that there are presbuteroi that do not have a teaching function? I do not think this is likely.
Possibly the answer lies in there being two separate distinctions being drawn out in the passage. As we read in the beginning of the epistle, Paul has left Timothy in Ephesus to deal with an urgent problem of false teachers.
As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer… (1 Timothy 1:3).
As Fee notes, it is quite possible that Paul’s prophecy to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20 has come true: "Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them" (Acts 20:30)(33). Given that these bearers of false doctrine were teachers, and given the likelihood that the official teachers were presbuteroi, it is likely that "the church is being led astray by some of its own elders"(34) The problem of false teachers pervades the book of 1 Timothy, even the section just prior to 1 Timothy 5:17, where we find the young widows being led astray by these false teachers. So perhaps Paul is drawing a distinction between good elders and bad elders, elders who are faithfully leading and shepherding the flock on the one hand, and elders who are renegades, who are false teachers, who need reproof (verse 19) on the other. This would fit well into the context of the book as a whole and with the general problem of false teachers in the church in Ephesus. Then, amongst these good elders, all of whom do in fact direct well the affairs of the church, Paul is making special mention of those whose special work it is to carry the load of the preaching and teaching ministry. The question of who gets the double honor remains an open one, depending partly on the sense given to "particularly." Does this mean that only those whose work it is to carry the load of preaching and teaching get the double honor, or does this mean that all who rule well are to receive the double honor, with special mention going to those who carry the teaching load? Very tentatively, I think the latter.
In summary, this passage does not justify a distinction between two separate types of generic presbuteroi (Thornwell’s view). Nor does it in any way suggest a leadership office as distinct from that of the presbuteroi/episkopoi (Hodge’s view).Thus, in my tentative judgment, neither Hodge nor Thornwell can find much comfort in 1 Timothy 5.
Ephesians 4:11-12
We turn now to a final text that has been used to distinguish types within the general presbuteroi:
It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors [poimein] and teachers, to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up (Ephesians 4:11-12).
Most present-day commentators, because of the way the sentence is structured in the Greek, conclude that Paul had one ministry office in mind here—what we would call a pastor-teacher. The noun poimein, found only here in the New Testament, and translated as "pastor," is of the same "shepherding" word group that has been used all along. This suggests some kind of equivalency with the elder-overseer-shepherds of 1 Peter 5 and Acts 20. The question is whether "pastor" and "teacher" refer to two functions of the same person (in which case the person is a presbuteros who both teaches and pastors); whether these refer to two groups with differing but overlapping functions (in which case perhaps all pastors may have been teachers but not all teachers pastors, or vice versa); or whether the pastor/teacher refers to a subset of presbuteroi (i.e., those presbuteroi who do a lot of teaching, as in our construction of 1 Timothy 5). I don’t know if there is any way of deciding based on the lack of evidence from the verse and its context. At any rate, there is no support whatsoever in this passage for a ruling office in the church other than a presbuteros, and little if any conceivable support for two kinds of presbuteroi.
(Continued in The Ruling Elder As Presbyter II)
|
 |
|
 |
|
||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||
