The Ruling Elder’s Reasonable Service in the Courts of the Church
Consistent Participation For Denominational Health

Some presbyters seem to believe that entering the arena of ecclesial/denominational controversy is—to quote the military supercomputer in the prescient 1983 teen movie WarGames—“a strange game. The only winning move is not to play.” In the film, the drama was supplied by the assumption that thermonuclear combat led to the mutually assured destruction of all participants. 

A ruling elder’s participation in the courts of the church, though, need not necessitate mutual assured destruction, to stick with Cold War imagery. Rather, the goal is the peace and purity of the church; the hope is divinely assured edification and protection of Christ’s flock. The Great Shepherd rules the church, but he does it mediately through weak and fallible men—presbyters—who are always plural in the New Testament and in biblical presbyterian order. This means power is not concentrated in one or a few elders or (as we shall see below) in one type of elders. Weakness and fallibility (also known as the fact of total depravity) demand the plurality of elders and the accountability of courts we find modeled in Acts and the Epistles. 

The fact of total depravity means the ruling elder’s service in any level of the church courts can be less than enjoyable. A newly ordained ruling elder may soon be shocked by discipline cases and thorny issues in his local church. Romantic notions of the eldership are quickly dispelled. There may be trouble enough “at home,” but a presbyterian ruling elder’s responsibilities and concerns ought not end at the local church’s property lines. 

 

Called To Enter Into The Conflict

“It’s a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door”—so said Bilbo to his nephew. One might say the same to a ruling elder sent for the first time to presbytery or General Assembly, even though attending the higher courts of a presbyterian church may not be physically dangerous—apart from hours of sitting in uncomfortable chairs! The biggest casualty is lost time for ruling elders who are usually otherwise employed in the service of occupation or family when the courts meet. There are yet more participation costs. Showing up regularly can get you tasked with more responsibilities (such as committee service) since ruling elders are often in short supply. There is a steep learning curve for most ruling elders and staying in touch with and informed about the wider church is tough for a ruling elder. Little about the church courts is familiar, especially to a new ruling elder. The rules and processes of church courts can be bewildering. And there’s controversy and conflict. The problems of other churches and pastors and disagreements about doctrine and practice are anything but pleasant.

Gresham Machen famously wrote, “In the sphere of religion, as in other spheres, the things about which men are agreed are apt to be the things that are least worth holding; the really important things are the things about which men will fight.” The church doesn’t need men who look for fights or love to fight, but she does need ruling elders who bring common sense and practical experience to the courts…and who are willing to fight for truth and good order when needed. Total depravity means the need often arises.

Can’t pastors (teaching elders in Presbyterian Church in America parlance) be trusted to handle the affairs of the wider church? History says otherwise, and the polity of the PCA requires otherwise. The PCA has arguably the most robust principle of the parity of elders among conservative presbyterian denominations. Book of Church Order (BCO) section 8-9 reads: Elders being of one class of office, ruling elders possess the same authority and eligibility to office in the courts of the Church as teaching elders. 

Equal “authority and eligibility to office in the courts of the Church” does not require exactly proportional representation of the two types of elder at the General Assembly (GA) and presbyteries, but many consider near-equal representation to be ideal. Indeed, the BCO (Rules of Assembly Operation 15-1) requires (with a “shall”) that each presbytery elect one ruling elder and one teaching elder to the powerful Overtures Committee which conducts the lion’s share of deliberation on proposed changes and actions that will affect the order and life of the church. Nearly all committees and boards of the GA require roughly equal TE/RE representation as well. Indeed, many GA and presbytery committees cannot function without a measure of ruling elder participation. 

 

Wise Words Today From A Past Problem

The problem of ruling elder participation is not new. A word from the past reminding ruling elders of their responsibilities is helpful at this point. This (presented with some slight modernization of language) was published in 1877 in The Christian Observer, an old Southern presbyterian newspaper: 

This obligation to attend presbytery is as binding on our consciences as the very existence of a presbytery is essential, for whatever will justify habitual absence in one, will justify the absence of all, and this would soon terminate the presbytery’s existence. Dear brethren, if it seems unimportant to you, whether you go to Presbytery or not, and if, on this account, you are seldom there, reflect seriously that your course tends to the very destruction of a court appointed by your divine Master, and essential to the success of His cause among you. 

Consider your solemn promise to God: “I accept the of office of ruling elder or pastor and promise faithfully to perform all the duties thereof.” One of the most important of these duties is to have your church of icially represented in presbytery. My brother elder, how can you, in view of the above promise, as a godly and honest man, be careless about having your church duly represented? Dear brethren, your promise to discharge such duties, given to God and the church, is just as sacred and as binding as human language can well make it. When next you feel inclined to shirk your duty and remain at home from your presbytery, just take your ordination vows, and having read them, ask God whether He will bless their disregard to your soul’s peace and your life’s usefulness. 

Does anyone answer us, “I am too busy to attend the courts of the Church.” We desire to suggest whether, with equal pertinence, business engagement may not be pleaded in to avoid the duty to preach or to pray? My dear brother, if too busy to perform the duties, you ought not to occupy the place of preacher or elder. 

These are strong words from another century, but given the principles of our polity, are they not fitting? Ruling elders must consider their responsibilities and make sacrifices to fulfill their duties to the church. It may be that some ruling elders consented to serve without understanding their responsibilities beyond the local church. Perhaps the “church” they had in mind when vowing to “strive for the purity, peace, unity and edification of the Church” was simply the local one. But, brothers, we are not independents or congregationalists. The presbyterian office of elder is unique and carries with it uniquely demanding responsibilities. The voice from the past quoted above goes so far as to assert that elder participation in the church’s higher courts is “essential to the success” of Christ’s cause. Do we believe this? 

 

How To Move Forward In Faithfulness

Let’s close by considering reasons why ruling elder participation (including staying informed) is more important than ever, even for the benefit of the local church:

1) Doctrine matters. We live in times when all truth is under attack, especially orthodox Christian teaching. The higher courts of the church are essential to preserve truth and to ensure that the church’s ministers teach and live in accordance with sound doctrine. Ruling elders are part of the firewall that protects the sheep of today and tomorrow from error and wolves. 

2) We are a connectional church. Members of PCA churches look for other PCA churches when they travel or move. Our common standards of doctrine and order must be maintained across the denomination for the good of our people and their children in an increasingly mobile society. What happens anywhere in the PCA affects all of the PCA. 

3) Involved elders are better shepherds. Service and attendance to the higher courts are educational experiences, and contact with other faithful elders can only encourage greater faithfulness. Being involved, for instance, in a judicial commission or discipline cases may help elders prevent or avoid similar problems in their own local churches. Serving on examination committees can inspire confidence in PCA ministers and sharpen ruling elders’ doctrine. Connection leads to learning. 

4) Staying informed is essential. Church members will hear about issues in the church; they are rightly worried about the state of the church. First-hand involvement can help elders speak confidently and accurately about the church and can assure members that their shepherds are working and fighting (if necessary) for them and for the cause of Christ. 

May the Lord help ruling elders to see that the church is greater than our local congregations, that their role is wider than monthly session meetings, and that Christ the Great Shepherd’s provision for his under-shepherds can make even hard service joyful. 

—- 

Brad Isbell has served as a ruling elder at Covenant Presbyterian Church in Oak Ridge, TN since 2009, serves on the board of MORE in the PCA, and is co-host of the Presbycast podcast.