Elders Worthy of Double Honor
By Rick Shrader
Let the elders that
rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially they who labour
in the word and doctrine (1 Tim. 5:17).
Baptists have never thought
they were the only believers in the world or the only ones with Bibles.
All believers have the obligation to apply the Scriptures to every part of life,
including church life. The great Southern Baptist Greek scholar, A.T.
Robertson, said however, “Give a man an open Bible, an open mind, a conscience
in good working order, and he will have a hard time to keep from being a
Baptist.”1 Baptists have always had a definite opinion about those
elders who are worthy of such double honor.
Baptists have
generally taken Paul’s instruction to mean that the one office of “pastor” is
also called “elder” and that any pastor/elder ought to be a good teacher as well
as ruler, and that some pastors/elders do a better job laboring in the Word and
proclaiming it in doctrine than others. There have been, since the days of John
Calvin (and especially among our Reformed friends), others who have taken Paul’s
words to mean that every local church should have two “kinds” of pastors/elders;
a less honorable kind to rule (“ruling elders”) and another kind worthy of
double honor (“teaching elders”). While neither Baptists (holding to one “kind”
of pastoral office) nor some others (holding to two “kinds” of pastoral office)
make this difference a matter of salvation or heresy, both strongly defend their
view as the Biblical structure for the church.
The Two Views Delineated
Calvin wrote of
this verse,
We may learn from this, that there were at that time two
kinds of elders; for all were not ordained to teach. The words plainly mean,
that there were some who “ruled well” and honourably, but who did not hold the
office of teacher. And, indeed, there were chosen from among the people men of
worth and of good character, who, united with the pastors in a common council
and authority, administered the discipline of the Church, and were a kind of
censors for the correction of morals. . . . To return to Paul, he enjoins that
support shall be provided chiefly for pastors, who are employed in teaching.2
Augustus Strong,
the most prominent Baptist theologian of the last two centuries, in describing
the Baptist view says,
The only plausible objection to the identity of the presbyter
and the bishop [being the same] is that first suggested by Calvin, on the ground
of 1 Tim. 5:17. But this text only shows that the one office of presbyter or
bishop involved two kinds of labor, and that certain presbyters or bishops were
more successful in one kind than in the other. That gifts of teaching and
ruling belonged to the same individual, is clear from Acts 20:28-31; Eph. 4:11;
Heb. 13:7; 1 Tim. 3:2-episkopon didaktikon.3
Rodney Decker,
following Strong, and writing in the Grace Theological Journal said,
The terms “teaching elder” and “ruling elder” do not appear
historically until Calvin. 1 Tim. 5:17 refers to elders who are ruling well—not
to a class of “ruling elders.” The noun is
oi presbuteroi,
modified by the participle, proestwtes,
which is further qualified by the adjective
kalws. It is thus
the “well-ruling elders,” not the “good, ruling-elders.”4
Which Is The Novel View?
It would be fair
to point out that even Baptists, at times, have had ruling elders in addition to
teaching elders. However, this is rare and is usually seen as ruling elders
(plural) and a teaching elder i.e. pastor (singular). For example, Peter
Masters (whom I greatly admire and whose services I attend when in London), now
pastor of Spurgeon’s Metropolitan (Baptist) Tabernacle in London is a Baptist
but also Reformed in theology. He defends the separate office of ruling elder
while maintaining a higher, and singular office of preaching elder or “pastor”
(which he is). He objects to the arrangement of the equality of elders as novel,
but maintains three offices in the church: pastor, elders, deacons, as the
historical position.5
Most Baptists
would maintain, however, that the New Testament teaches the local church has
only two biblical offices: pastor and deacons, an “elder” simply being another
name for the pastor. I have already quoted Strong and Rodney Decker commenting
that the third office of elder, separate from the pastor or deacons, began with
Calvin. Strong also has an interesting quote from Henry M. Dexter in a writing
on Congregationalism in which Dexter says,
Calvin was a natural aristocrat, not a man of the people like
Luther. Taken out of his own family to be educated in a family of the nobility,
he received an early bent toward exclusiveness. He believed in authority and
loved to exercise it. He could easily have been a despot. He assumed all
citizens to be Christians until proof to the contrary. He resolved church
discipline into police control. He confessed that the eldership was an
expedient to which he was driven by circumstances, though after creating it he
naturally enough endeavored to procure Scriptural proof in its favor.6
Now, whether one
agrees with Dexter, or even has a dislike for his tone, it is worthy to note
that it was the elder rule system that was seen as novel, not the two office
system of the Baptists. The greatest Baptist thinker of the eighteenth century,
John Gill, wrote in his commentary on 1 Tim. 5:17,
There are no other that rule in churches, but such who also
speak to them the word of God; wherefore by him that rules, and the labourer in
word and doctrine; are not meant two distinct orders, but different persons of
the same order; some of these ruling well, but do not take so much pains in the
ministry of the word; whilst others of them both rule well and labour in the
word, and who are to be reckoned deserving of the honour hereafter mentioned.7
In addition, Dr.
Gill wrote in his great work on theology, “These pastors, teachers, bishops, and
elders, are called rulers, guides, and governors. A pastor, or shepherd, is the
governor and guide of his flock; a teacher, and a ruling elder are the same, 1
Tim. v. 17.”8 Such a voice from the eighteenth century can hardly be
said to be “novel” to our time in history. Alexander Maclaren, who pastored the
Union Baptist chapel in Manchester, England for 45 years (1858-1903), wrote
concerning our text, “Of course a comparison with verse 17 shows that elder and
bishop were two designations for one officer.”9 Edward Hiscox,
writing a standard Baptist church manual in 1894 confesses that the pastor and
elder are two names for the same office.10 An older Southern Baptist
publication designed for use by their churches in 1907 delineates the same.11
Where Do Baptists Stand
Today?
For the last fifty
years, fundamental Baptists in similar practicing fellowships and associations
have also described their method of church polity as the two office system of
pastor and deacons. Elders have always been seen as a different title for the
office of pastor, not a third officer of the church. Richard V. Clearwaters, in
1954, in a book that became the standard for the Minnesota Baptist Association,
wrote, “By comparing Scripture references it seems obvious that both elder and
bishop (1 Tim. 3:1, 2) can designate the same office (Titus 1:5, 7); sometimes
referring to the officer or man at other
times the office or its function (Acts
20:28, 29).”12 Paul Jackson, in his book that has been a standard
for the General Association of Regular Baptist Churches, wrote, “Very honest
differences of opinion may exist unless it is understood that the terms pastor,
elder and bishop refer to the same office.”13 Mike Randall, writing
in the Baptist Bible Tribune (of the Baptist Bible Fellowship) in 1987, wrote,
“It seems unmistakable that the elders of the New Testament were all of them
teachers and preachers . . . . New Testament elders, then, were ministers in the
churches who exercised leadership as overseers and served their flocks as
shepherd or pastor.”14
Though there will
be exceptions to this view, they are just that, exceptions! The twentieth
century could hardly show anything other than the two office arrangement in
conservative or fundamental Baptist groups.
“Especially” in 1 Timothy 5:17
If it is true that
the apostle Paul was merely commending those elders that do a good job of
laboring in Word and doctrine, not delineating two different kinds of elders, we
would expect to find this expression reinforced in other uses in his writings.
My proposition is that in every instance where we find the expression
“especially” (always malista),
it carries the same meaning or picture of one among equals who stands out in
some particular thing. The word is used twelve times in the New Testament:
three times by Luke (Acts 20:38; 25:26; 26:3, though quoting Paul in one); one
time by Peter (2 Pet. 2:10); and every other time by Paul (Gal. 6:10; Phil.
4:22; 1 Tim. 4:10; 5:8; 5:17; 2 Tim. 4:13; Tit. 1:10; Phile. 16).
The word
“especially” or “specially” (“chiefly” in Phil. 4:22) always gives a unique
picture of a circle within a circle. The larger circle A, contains a large
group while the smaller circle B (placed within A) contains a smaller but
special part of A. If I said, “I like to watch high school basketball, but
especially when my own sons play,” I would be drawing a large circle (watching
high school basketball) but also drawing a smaller circle which points out a
special part of the same thing (my own sons playing high school basketball). We
might say, all B is A, but not all of A is B. In contrast, the elder-rule
system would give a picture of two distinct circles of ruling elders and
teaching elders. Due to space, I cannot illustrate all of Paul’s usages, but a
few will suffice to see the consistency in the way “especially” is used
throughout.
Gal. 6:10. As we have therefore
opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the
household of faith. Here the large circle is
all men. The smaller circle within the
larger circle is especially . . . . the
household of faith. Believers are still men, but they have taken
advantage of a special opportunity which is available to all men.
2 Tim. 4:13.
The cloak that I left at Troas with Carpus,
when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments.
Of all the books Paul had (the larger circle), the Scriptures on parchment (the
smaller circle within the larger) were of “special” desire to him. The Bible is
still a book, but is a “special” book.
Phile. 16. Not now as a servant, but
above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto
thee. Paul counted all converts dear (the large circle), but the ones he
had led to the Lord such as Onesimus (the smaller circle) were “specially” dear
to him. Our own sons in the faith are still converts, but they are “special” to
us.
I believe we would
find that the same pattern repeats itself in every usage of the word
malista (specially,
especially, chiefly). Some elder-rule brethren may object that they see all
elders as ruling elders and from among those there are a few teaching elders,
thus showing the same pattern. But my observation has been that when you view
their system from the top view it looks the same, but when you view it from the
side, it is a pyramid with two distinct levels or “kinds” of elders. The
Baptist view would be more like a slice out of an old tree: viewed from the top
you see the circles and circles within circles, and when viewed from the side
all the circles are still level.
Who are the elders?
All pastors are
elders and all elders are pastors. Every man who desires the office of a bishop
desires a good work (1 Tim. 3:1) and that work is both ruling (lit. “to do the
thinking”) and preaching. Those elders who labor diligently in the Word and in
the proclamation of its doctrines are worthy of a double amount of honor from
the fortunate people who hear them.
Notes:
1. In his book, A.T. Robertson:
A Biography (New York: MacMillan, 1943) 181, Everett Gill quotes
Robertson from his writing, “How To Make Baptists.”
2. John Calvin, Calvin’s
Commentaries, vol. XXI (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1981) 138-139.
3. Augustus Strong, Systematic
Theology (Old Tappan: Fleming H. Revell, 1970) 915.
4. Rodney J. Decker, “Polity and the Elder Issue,”
Grace Theological Journal 9.2 (1988)
275.
5. Peter Masters, “Confusion Over Eldership,” The Sword &
Trowel. Note: I apologize that my photographed copy did not have the date on
it.
6. Strong, 915.
7. John Gill, Dr. Gill’s
Commentary, vol. 6 (London: William Hill Collingridge, 1853) 614.
8. John Gill, Body Of Divinity
(Atlanta: Turner Lassetter, 1965) 864.
9. Alexander Maclaren,
Expositions Of Holy Scripture vol. 8 (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdman’s,
1959) 191.
10. Edward T. Hiscox, The New
Directory For Baptist Churches (Philadelphia: Judson Press, 1946) 90-91.
11. Montgomery Essig & others,
The Churchmember’s Guide and Complete Church Manual (Nashville: The
Southwestern Co., 1949) 68.
12. Richard Clearwaters, The
Local Church of the New Testament (Chicago: CBA, 1954) 32.
13. Paul R. Jackson, The
Doctrine and Administration of the Church (Schaumburg: RBP, 1968) 45.
14. Mike Randall, “A Defense of Baptist Elders”
Baptist Bible Tribune, April 24, 1987,
p. 12.
| 
