Originally Posted by Archlute

This statement is untrue, and is a distinction only pushed with regularity in our circles by high church ministers who would like to promote their particular view of the offices.

The BCO makes no separation between teaching elders, ruling elders, or even licentiates when it comes to the authority of preaching. Furthermore, in every case the BCO rightly employs the term "exhort/exhortation" in accordance with its biblical use, namely, in describing a particular function of preaching, and not as an attempt to make a distinction in levels of authority regarding the message given.

Our authority in preaching comes not from our formal ordination (which is Romanism), but from our accuracy and faithfulness in expounding the Scriptures, and from the power of the Holy Spirit applying the truth of the given message to the heart and to the mind. I have yet to receive a satisfying answer from those who promote this "class distinction" when they are asked whose sermon has more authority - the chump who is ordained, but through laziness and/or theological error puts out a poor sermon, or the formally unordained man who through prayer, diligence in study, and the grace of the Holy Spirit gives an outstanding sermon? I seem to remember that Christ himself was not ordained by the authorities in Jerusalem, and yet the people were amazed, because he "taught them as one having authority, not as the Scribes".

Btw, John Owen makes the same argument in a sermon on the pastoral ministry, so this is nothing original.