Theory of the Eldership [pp. 702-759]

Theory of the Eldership.
exclusive occupation, so much so, that in order to give themselves wholly to it they must be supported.
We thus perceive that by the established use of the term
presbyter; by the general tenor of the passage; by the context; by the force of its several terms; this passage must be
interpreted as applying only to ministers, and that the invariable application of it to such by ancient interpreters, and by
the very general consent of modern commentators, renders this
interpretation certain, and most assuredly overthrows the
theory which BUILDS upon IT a twofold order of ruling and
teaching presbyters.*
Finally, on this passage let it be noted, that the Westminster
Assembly, which perfected the Form of Government which is
constitutionally that of all Presbyterian churches except our
own and the Continental, rejected this text as a proof text
for ruling elders, but employed it to prove that the minister
had a ruling power in the church as minister, and that while
there ought to be in every church one both to rule and labour
in word and doctrine, "the precedence is due to ministers. "t
1 Thessalonians v. 12.
This conclusion, however, will be still further strengthened
by referring to the very analogous passage in 1 Thess. v. 12, 13,
"And we beseech you, brethren, to know them who labour
among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you;
and to esteem them very highly in love, for their works' sake."
In making this the text for his discourse before a convention of
ruling elders on the nature of their office, Dr. Thornwell
said, "Commentators are universally agreed, that the rulers of
the church are the persons to whom the apostle here refers."
Now, this is true. But the rulers to whom these commentators
refer it are ministers, and ministers only. We have been able
to find no diversity among all within our reach, except one,
who is of no permanent authority, referred to by Poole in his
* Poole in his Crit. Sacra, scarcely alludes to such an interpretation, and in
his Annotations, after enumerating several interpretations (not including this)
declines giving an opinion.
t See in Gillespie's Notes in his Works, vol. ii. pp. 4, 20, 58, 64.
1 Held in Charleston in January, 1860. See Report of, in the Courier.
734
[OCTOBER