I read a nice article in a theological journal written by a Presbyterian scholar named Torrence. He explained how, during the Reformation era, Geneva Switzerland looked into history for models for their city government. They discovered that certain Greek-speaking Christian communities in the 300's in North Africa and Syria had 'garousia'-- which translates elders. So they called their city leaders 'elders.' Since church and state were somewhat merged, these 'elders' were very much involved in the church communities affairs. They called their ordained ministers 'pastors' instead of 'elders.' (Maybe that had something to do with the German use of the equivalent 'priest'-- a word derived from 'presbuteros', used to refer to Old Testament descendants of Aaron, like we see in English.) The Genevans associated their 'elders' with 'governments' in I Corinthians 12, not Biblical elders.
The Scottish copied the Genevans and expanded and adapted their church and city government into a nation-wide church government structure. Originally, the Scottish Presbyterians considered their 'pastors' to be Biblical elders, based on the verses they applied to them. But they called this new office 'elder', and over the generations, Presbyterians got confused and many of them thought the made-up office of board elder referred to Biblical elders.
Many other churches copied. So there are churches with unordained, nonpastoral elders, with 'the pastor' who functions kind of like the extra-Biblical 'bishop' but on small local level. How is this Biblical?
This is not Biblical 'plurality of elders.' In the New Testament, we see the apostles appointed elders from within the local assemblies and instructed them to pastor the church of God (e.g. Acts 20:28.)
We also end up with the problem of a misunderstanding of requirements for this important ministry. Since we call our church leaders 'pastors', many people do not think the Biblical qualifications for elders/overseers apply to this role. But they think the requirements apply to the made-up nonpastoral role of committee member which their church calls 'elder.' Denominations will add requirements (education for example) the Biblical requirements, or allow someone who is not Biblically qualified oversee a church because they don't think the requirements apply. Some churches replace the Biblical requirements with an emphasis on having a 'call' and others require a certain level of education.
Then there are churches that have the committee member elder and read in the Bible the duties of elders, and try to encourage their committee-member elders to pastor.
I suppose if you see 'Presbyterian' as referring to a belief in one 'level' of elders and elders being bishops (with your elders being labeled 'pastor') you could say that is more Biblical than the episcopal view it was in opposition to. But if by Presbterian governance, you mean turning the Genevan city government into a church office and creating an extra-Biblical role of board elder, no that's not really Biblical.
Upvote
0
