The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1867-03-20
For THE CENTRAL PRESBYTERIAN.
Structures on the Revised Constitution.


Mr.. Editor,-In previous communi-
cation 1 proved, as I humbly think, that
the title Bishop in its Scriptaral, Official,
plenary sense, does not belong to Ru-
ling Elder.
I will now attempt to prove that the
title Presbyter, in its Scriptural, Official,
plenary sense, does not belong to Ru-
ling Elder. This necessarily follows,
from what I have said concerning the
title Bishop-for Bishop and Presbyter
are synonymous, convertible terms, and
express identity of Office. If then the
title Bishop in its official, plenary sense
does not belong to Ruling Elder, neith-
er does Presbyter in its official, plenary
sense belong to Ruling Elder. If two
things are perfectly equal, and one of
them differs from third, the other must
also differ from the third in like man.
ner.
A Scriptural Bishop, Presbyter, or
Pastor is an officer in the Church, whose
principal duties are to preach the Gospel
and administer the sacraments. His
secondary duty is to take oversight of
the flock or church. I suppose that no
real Presbyterian will deny this. But if
any doubt this statement, let them read
for their conviction of its truth, Acts
XXX: II, %, and the succeeding context to
the 32d verse inclusive, also, Peter V:
2, l Tim. iii: 2, and Titus i: I'll.
The term "feed,' in the first and second
passages, means principally, to pasture,
to afford nourishment, and as the address
is made to Presbyters or Bishops, it prin-
cipally means, in these passages, to af-
ford spiritual instruction and nourish-
ment, and includes the secondary idea or
duty of ruling and guiding. Now, be-
cause there is an officer in the Church,
who is appointed to this secondary duty
only, shall he be called by the same title
with him who performs this secondary
duty, and also the first and principal du-
ty? l think not; for this confounds and
destroys the distinction in office. The
correct view is, that he who performs
this secondary duty fills a distinct Office,
and should be called by distinct title.
Our present Form of Government calls
him Ruling Elder, in contradistinction
to Bishop, or Pastor, or Presbyter.
The commission of Bishop, or Pres
byter, or Pastor is not the same with that
of Ruling Elder; their duties are not
the same, and therefore they do not fill
the same Office, and ought not to be called
by the same titles.
There is a gradation of Offices, and this
ought to be marked distinctly by the tt
ties, as it is really and correctly done in
our Form, bishops, or Pastors, Ruling
Elders, and Deacons." Here the term
Elder as descriptive of the second Office
is qualified by the term ruling. Here
too are three distinct Offices with distinct
titles. In the Revised Form, might
suppose from the list of off s there
given, that there are only t8 Offices;
but in speaking of the officers in con-
gregation, it mentions three, and again in
speaking of the application of titles, it
might be supposed that there are really
two Offices. (See Revised Form, "of
the Ruling Elder" paragraph 2.)
I conclude then, that as the chief duty
of Bishop or Presbyter, as Church
officer, is to preach the Gospel, and as
"ths chief duty Of a Raling Elder is to
serve Christ diligently in the exercise Of
government" therefore the titles Bishop
and Presbyter, in their official, plenary
sense, do not belong to Ruling Elder.
1 disagree with the Revised Form on
another point connected with this subject.
1t is contained in the declaration that
Ruling Elders, Gas ecclesiastical rulers,
are of the same rank, and possess the
same authority, with the Teaching El7
der" That this is not true is evident
from the fact that Ruling Elders have
not the same rights or powers as ecclesi-
astical rulers, with the Teaching Elder,
and of course do not belong to the same
rank.
1st. Ruling Elders cannot constitute a
Presbytery, unless there are three Teach
ing Elders present. If they are of the
same rank and authority, why cannot
three Ruling Elders and one minister
constitute Presbytery, as we'll as three
ministers and one Ruling Elder? A
dozen Ruling Elders and only two minis
ters cannot constitute Presbytery, even
according to the new Constitution. So