The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1867-06-26
From the Southern Presbyterian.
Gillespies Testimony about Ruling Elders

From the Southern Presbyterian.
Gillespie's Testimony about Ruling Elders.
Mr.. Editor Having considered the West.
minister Standards, let me call the attention OF
vour readers to some extracts from the writings
of that distinguished man who impressed SO
much of the Presbyterian stamp upon the
Form of Government which it adopted.
I shall content myself with copying Giles
pies own words, for the most part without
comment My quotations are all from his
Assertion of the Government of the Church
of Scotland" 1t will be made plain to every
reader how nearly our Book of Order harmo-
MES with Gilespie's teachings.
"Before we come to speak particularly of
those elders, of which it is our purpose to
treat, it is fit we should know them by their
right name, lest we nickname and miscall them.
Some reproachfully, others ignorantly, call
them lay elders But the distinction Of the
clergy and laity is popish and anti-christian;
and they who have narrowly considered the re-
cords of ancient times have noted this distinc.
ton as one of the grounds whence the mys-
terry of iniquity had the beginning of it. The
name of clergy appropriate to ministers is full
of pride and vain-glory, etc., etc" (Chap.
l., p
"But if we will speak with Scripture, we
shall call them Ruling Elders: Rom. xii. g.,
he that ruleth /. Tim. v. II, Elders that
rule we'll. They are called ruling elders, non
quia soh, sed quia soluna prYsunt mot because
they rule singly but only.] Pastors rule the
church even as they do, but pastors do some
thing more from which they may be designed
designated j whereas the elders Of which we
are to speak have no other employment which
can give them a designation, except the ruling
of the church only" Up. l0.)
Gillespie's idea is that ruling elders are just
rulers and no more /; but there is class of the
rulers who add superior and higher function
to their ruling, viz, that of teaching, which
makes their office the highest in the church for
dignity and usefulness.
Now elders are of three sorts, first, preach
ing elders or pastors; second, teaching elders.
All these are elders because they have voice
in presbyteries and all assemblies of the Church,
and the government of the church is encum-
bent to them all not only to the pastor and
elder but to the doctor also.
"Now beside those elders which labor in the
word and those which labor in doctrine, Paul
speaketh to Timothy of third sort Of elders
which labor neither in the word nor doctrine,
but in ruling well. Hence it appeareth how
truly the Book Of Policy, chap. 2, saith, That
there are four ordinary, perpetual, and neces-
sary Offices in the church, the Office of the pas
tor, the doctor, the elder, and the deacon, ,"
etc. CHAP ii, p. 11.)
Iquote this passage for our brethren who
insist upon three orders of Office bearers
Here is high authority which divides the Of
fcers into four.
Gillespie proceeds in eight successive chapters
to present as many arguments forruling elders,
from the Jewish church; from Matt. xviii.
II; from Rom. xii 8; from Cor. xii. %
from Tim. v. 10; from Ambrose from other
testimonies of antiquity; from consent of Pro-
testant writers and the confessions of our OPP
|! ssSitss for r9|lss ell3ass = * last Ghl
besides their support, that of :" the practice Of
all well-reformed churches and the Confessions
of the French, the Belgic, and the Helvetic
churches. to be seen in the Harmony of Con-
LESSONS"
In the next chapter 1.-THE Ii. he answers five
objections of DIR. Field. In the course of this
chapter he approves the position that eth,
apostle in the third chapter (of Timothy COM
prehendeth all the Office bearers in the church
under these two, bishops and deacons; and
that under the name of bishops he compre-
hendeth both pastors, doctors, and ruling ell
ders, for as all these three are oyerseers, so to
them agree all the qualities of bishop here
mentioned, whereof there is only one which
seemeth not to agree to the ruling elder, viz,
that he should be apt to teach; ". q Yet
Beza (De Din. Ora. Minist cap. 81 maintaineth
against Saravia that the ruling elder teacheth
as we'll as the pastor, only the pastor doth it
publicly to the whole congregation; the ruling
elder doth it privately, as he fndeth every one
to have need. L. 81.
"Itwasno necessary that the apostle should
severally set down canons and directions, first
touching pastors, then doctors, lastly, ruling
elders, since they are all elders and all members
of the eldership or presbytery; it twas enough to
deliver canons and directions common to them
all, especially since the duties of ruling elders
are the same which are the duties of the pas
tors, only the pastors power is cumulative to
theirs and over-reacheth the same in the pub.
lie ministry of the word and sacraments, and
SO doth Paul difference them, Tim. Y. IT.
P. 49,
Surely the ruling elder both overseeth the
flock and feedeth the same both by discipline
and by private admonition; and for these re.
spects may be truly called both bishop and
pastor" Up. 3S.)
In chapter xiii he discusses the question
whether "ruling elders have the power of de-
cisive voices when they sit in Presbyteries and
Synods even in questions of faith and doctrine
and in the trial and appreciation of ministers. "
His position is that they haze; and that Sin
every congregation elders must be with power
of ordination, deprivation, suspension, excom-
munication, and absolution, ETC." Up. 3d.
In chapter xiv, he maintains that ordina-
ton is thing common to both preaching and
ruling elders" But he says the imposition
of hands is not an act but only a sign of ordi-
nation" and the ordination may be full,
valid, and complete without it," and SO it is
not necessary to them. II mean not to con-
denim imposition Of hands nor any other con-
uon;ont sinn In the ordinatio &c ELL. liz. |