Thread: Does the PCA allow ruling elders to preach?

Yes.

Who may preach is under the oversight of the session. And having an RE preach is very common.

I believe the PCA refers to it as "exhortation," limiting "preaching" to ordained ministers of the Gospel (Teaching Elders).

I have been in my church for 1.5 years and have never seen it happen. What is strange to me is that we have 4 TEs, not sure why they aren't preaching, but they probably have their reasons.

Actually, it is a requirement (in many presbyteries) that REs be willing and able to preach if called upon. It is regular preaching that is restricted to teaching elders.

Originally Posted by brianeschen

I believe the PCA refers to it as "exhortation," limiting "preaching" to ordained ministers of the Gospel (Teaching Elders).

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.

Originally Posted by brianeschen

I believe the PCA refers to it as "exhortation," limiting "preaching" to ordained ministers of the Gospel (Teaching Elders).

This is a distinction typically employed in OPC circles. It is incorrect in the PCA, since the entire premise of being licensed to preach is that such licensure applies to those who preach "regularly." Others who preach may do so on an irregular basis.

(This is also, by the way, why the dictum that "a woman may do anything an unordained man may do" is wrong on its face. Unordained men may preach in accordance with the BCO.)

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Originally Posted by brianeschen

I believe the PCA refers to it as "exhortation," limiting "preaching" to ordained ministers of the Gospel (Teaching Elders).

This is a distinction typically employed in OPC circles. It is incorrect in the PCA, since the entire premise of being licensed to preach is that such licensure applies to those who preach "regularly." Others who preach may do so on an irregular basis.

(This is also, by the way, why the dictum that "a woman may do anything an unordained man may do" is wrong on its face. Unordained men may preach in accordance with the BCO.)

Thanks for the info. I had heard this distinction not only from friends, but also at last year's GA in the outgoing moderator's sermon. It seems then that the PCA holds less distinction between teaching and ruling elders than the OPC. Is that accurate?

Originally Posted by Archlute

Originally Posted by brianeschen

I believe the PCA refers to it as "exhortation," limiting "preaching" to ordained ministers of the Gospel (Teaching Elders).

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.

Do you have a citation for this sermon, Mr. Myer? I would love to read it.

Originally Posted by brianeschen

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Originally Posted by brianeschen

I believe the PCA refers to it as "exhortation," limiting "preaching" to ordained ministers of the Gospel (Teaching Elders).

This is a distinction typically employed in OPC circles. It is incorrect in the PCA, since the entire premise of being licensed to preach is that such licensure applies to those who preach "regularly." Others who preach may do so on an irregular basis.

(This is also, by the way, why the dictum that "a woman may do anything an unordained man may do" is wrong on its face. Unordained men may preach in accordance with the BCO.)

Thanks for the info. I had heard this distinction not only from friends, but also at last year's GA in the outgoing moderator's sermon. It seems then that the PCA holds less distinction between teaching and ruling elders than the OPC. Is that accurate?

Yes, that would be accurate. The OPC tends very strongly to a three office view (TE, RE, Deacon), whereas the PCA's BCO is explicitly two-office (elder, deacon). In practice it sometimes works itself out with a greater or lesser distinction, hence the term "two and one half office" view.

In my PCA we have always had one or two interns (WTS, PTS, online at Reformed). This year we have three interns. They do various things in the church. We have an evening service with a shorter (20 minutes) sermon and the various interns and REs preach. My husband has an MDiv from WTS but is not an elder (being Baptist excludes him) and preached twice this winter (but not on Baptism ) Thinking back, we had an intern who was in his last year at WTS a couple years ago and he preached on a Sunday AM when the pastor went on vacation, as has another WTS intern. One intern did a Good Friday service that draws some vistors.

My pastor is very into obeying the BCO so I have to assume there must be some provision for letting unordained seminary students have a chance to preach now and then. One of them in particular was excellent. Is this not common in the PCA? I would hope seminary students are offered a pulpit now and then at churches, at least for an evening.

Originally Posted by KMK

Do you have a citation for this sermon, Mr. Myer? I would love to read it.

Ken (and, by all means, please feel free to call me Adam!),

You will find it in Owen's sermon The Duty of a Pastor in vol. 9 of his Complete Works. He writes something similar as part of an essay entitled The Duties of Pastor and People Distinguished in vol. 13 of the same, yet addressing a somewhat different issue.

Although I do not have a direct citation for you here, I did notice that I had footnoted p. 454 of vol. 9 in a summary review I had written of several of his works regarding the pastoral ministry, and in particular the issue of preaching authority and ordination, so you may want to begin there.

-----Added 7/7/2009 at 07:15:49 EST-----

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Originally Posted by brianeschen

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

This is a distinction typically employed in OPC circles. It is incorrect in the PCA, since the entire premise of being licensed to preach is that such licensure applies to those who preach "regularly." Others who preach may do so on an irregular basis.

(This is also, by the way, why the dictum that "a woman may do anything an unordained man may do" is wrong on its face. Unordained men may preach in accordance with the BCO.)

Thanks for the info. I had heard this distinction not only from friends, but also at last year's GA in the outgoing moderator's sermon. It seems then that the PCA holds less distinction between teaching and ruling elders than the OPC. Is that accurate?

Yes, that would be accurate. The OPC tends very strongly to a three office view (TE, RE, Deacon), whereas the PCA's BCO is explicitly two-office (elder, deacon). In practice it sometimes works itself out with a greater or lesser distinction, hence the term "two and one half office" view.

As I am sure Fred is aware, much of that comes from the Dutch Reformed influence found in the OPC. Most of the students arguing for that position during my seminary years were URCNA students, and following upon their heels some of the OPC students. The Belgic confession divides the offices into "minister, elder, and deacon", and it has been a tradition in Dutch churches, from what I understand, to make this distinction that attaches the authority of preaching to formal ordination.

Yes, hence the Dutch "domine" title for the minister.

(This is also, by the way, why the dictum that "a woman may do anything an unordained man may do" is wrong on its face. Unordained men may preach in accordance with the BCO.)

How does one understand th following?

Recommendation No. 4:
That the General Assembly reaffirm the historic Presbyterian position expressed in LC 158, that none should preach the Gospel but those who are called and gifted of God; and therefore only those men who are properly ordained or licensed may preach in the pulpits of the PCA; and that Ruling Elders be allowed and encouraged to renew the historic practice of exhorting the people of God (See Rec. No. 5, paragraph D.). Adopted

Tim,

that would be an "in thesi" non binding statment of a GA. It does not have the force of the BCO.

Thanks!

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

Tim,

that would be an "in thesi" non binding statment of a GA. It does not have the force of the BCO.

Is that preacher for 'dicta'?

Sort of. But it is actually less binding than dicta.

We did it in a former PCA church I attended, sometimes with painful results.

The only time I've seen ruling elders preach in the PCA is when there was no one to fill the pulpit on a given Sunday in absence of the pastor and another ordained man to fill his place. In our church, it is the practice of the elders to teach and exhort, and the TE (pastor) to preach. When our pastor is going to be out, he finds an ordained man from the presbytery to replace him.

I sure hope so, because I'm expected to stand behind the pulpit and talk for 30-45 minutes 4 out of the next 8 Sundays!

(Our pastor's going on sabbatical, so our intern and I are splitting the preaching duties during that time.)

-----Added 7/7/2009 at 09:37:27 EST-----

Originally Posted by caoclan

I assumed to preach in worship, one must be ordained.

It's already been pointed out here that the BCO allows for unordained men to preach, but please keep in mind -- ruling elders are ordained to that office.

Originally Posted by caoclan

I am relatively new to the PCA. Does the PCA allow for a ruling elder to preach? I guess it must because it is going to happen i my church this week, but is this something that occurs with any regularity? I assumed to preach in worship, one must be ordained.

Yes, though I've only seen an RE preach once in 3 decades in the PCA - the rest of the sermons were presented by TEs. Interesting that it's common in some churches, presumably smaller congregations.

Originally Posted by fredtgreco

(This is also, by the way, why the dictum that "a woman may do anything an unordained man may do" is wrong on its face. Unordained men may preach in accordance with the BCO.)

I agree with you, Pastor Greco. However, in all the hundreds of PCA services I've attended across the country, I've never heard an unordained man preach. So while technically correct, in practice I doubt unordained men preach in Sunday services very often. In a large church with multiple TEs, I suspect it never happens.

Originally Posted by ColdSilverMoon

I agree with you, Pastor Greco. However, in all the hundreds of PCA services I've attended across the country, I've never heard an unordained man preach. So while technically correct, in practice I doubt unordained men preach in Sunday services very often. In a large church with multiple TEs, I suspect it never happens.

My guess is that is exactly the case. If I recall correctly, before you were at Redeemer you were are Briarwood, right? It would be unusual for a large church with multiple TEs to use an unordained man (or even an RE for that matter). I don't think there is a subtext there, but rather the Lord has gifted those congregations with the means to call multiple men devoted to preaching the Word.

But in smaller congregations (especially those near seminaries), and in churches without a pastor, it is actually relatively common. That is in fact the reason for the Licensing provision in BCO 19. It is up to Presbyteries to determine what constitutes "regular" - in Great Lakes we decided 12 times in a year, regardless of which church. In Mississippi Valley, I believe it was more than once per month in the same church; the difference being MS Valley has many small churches without pastors, and has a seminary in it (RTS Jackson).

Since we've established that the PCA allows both TEs and REs to preach, may I ask why it is that only TEs can administer the sacraments? I can understand the reason from a three-office view (TEs are charged with preaching and the sacraments accompany preaching), but I feel like I'm missing something about the PCA two-office view.

Originally Posted by SRoper

Since we've established that the PCA allows both TEs and REs to preach, may I ask why it is that only TEs can administer the sacraments? I can understand the reason from a three-office view (TEs are charged with preaching and the sacraments accompany preaching), but I feel like I'm missing something about the PCA two-office view.

It is more than just the act of preaching. The sacraments are tied to the ministry of the Word, which is not the primary ministry of the Ruling Elder (hence the difference in terms, "Ruling" vs. "Teaching"). This connection is more systematic (or perhaps, intrinsic) than an individual act of preaching a sermon.

The PCA recognizes that distinction not only in the administration of the sacraments, but in the act of Licensure itself.

This is why in our OPC church before we called a Pastor the RE's would read sermons from the pulpit rather than preach a sermon however our RE's are very involved in teaching in Bible Studies and other forums. We also have several elder (notice I didn't say "elders" ) women in the Church who have taken on the responsibity of teaching the younger women through weekly Bible studies.

Originally Posted by whitway

This is why in our OPC church before we called a Pastor the RE's would read sermons from the pulpit rather than preach a sermon however our RE's are very involved in teaching in Bible Studies and other forums. We also have several elder (notice I didn't say "elders" ) women in the Church who have taken on the responsibity of teaching the younger women through weekly Bible studies.

I have to say that here is one reason that I disagree with the three office view. I have been both an RE and a TE. The idea that you must read a sermon because you are not permitted (note I did not say unable) to preach God's Word is ridiculous to me.