Both ministers and elders are, in our polity, presbyters and have taken solemn vows that differ only as to function. In governing bodies, we proclaim the parity of presbyters, and make this a main feature of our church’s life.
When the idea of limited terms became a reality in the church, two situations arose. Some elders served with distinction and had no desire to be placed on a ready list. A congregation I served made the decision that one particularly long-term and honored elder would be placed in a special category and made an elder for life.
The other situation is that many elders are elected, serve, and then cease to serve while retaining ordination without any relationship to a governing body.
The rotary system is good in intent. Its adoption may have created a situation not expected.
Let’s look at the office of Minister of Word and Sacrament. First, and foremost, he or she is a presbyter who must be a member of a presbytery. If a minister ceases to be related to a presbytery, he or she may be allowed to lay aside the office.
There is no rotary system for ministers.
An elder can be freed of the exercise of the office, as well. The process for elders is described in G-14.0211a ff; for ministers, G-11.0415b.
Ministers being restored to office must answer the ordination questions in the affirmative; elders being restored to office only have to make application to the Session. No repeated vows are required.
So, the parity of presbyters is a myth.
Presently, an elder no longer serving on a session continues to be an elder, a presbyter unless the process set forth in the Book of Order is followed. This can be useful at times, since congregations can have a pool of non-serving elders who can be counted on to attend presbytery meetings, or for that matter, the meetings of any governing body. Elders ‘on the loose’ in one congregation I served were elected to serve as clerks of session, thus permitting all the serving and governing members of the session to engage in the decision making process without the distraction of taking minutes.
My concern is that our congregations may be filled with non-serving elders, who may or may not view themselves as continuing to be persons under vows.
Let me give an illustration. One “inactive elder” approached a minister whom that elder thought was bending ordination vows. That particular minister responded to the critical elder: “Your actions in a particular matter might also be a source of concern to some.” As it was reported, the elder replied: “You know, since I went off session, I no longer think of myself as an elder.”
This troubling conversation revealed the possibility that with all good intentions, we have created elders who serve for a term or two on a session and then feel they no longer need to be involved in the work of the office. It is easy at that point to think that one is dismissed from the obligation to study the peace unity and purity of the church, or to serve the people with energy, intelligence, imagination and love!
What solutions are available at this point?
First, we need to strengthen the process for preparing elders in particular churches. Six weeks of classes will not do the job. A few generations ago the work of the elder was learned by osmosis and the process might take a large part of a lifetime to be completed. The elder could become a very seasoned person over the years. Or, the elder might have certain gifts acknowledged by the members, or to have been a person of strong convictions.
Better training and development might impress upon prospective elders the enormousness of what they are doing–taking serious vows that go beyond desiring to be good administrators, or doing a great job “running the church.”
Secondly, it is time for our church, built as it is on the presbyterial principle, to take a serious look at the consequences of so many ordained but unattached persons in many congregations. The Book of Order, as noted, does allow for laying aside of the office; I have never seen this happen.
Third, would it be radical to suggest that when an elder ceases to be a member of a session that he or she be considered as laying aside the office?
We are still left with the curious position taken by the Book of Order that ordination can be resumed by the affirmation of the ordination vows, or (as in the case of elders) an application to the session to be restored.
We may think that no problem exists, or that the solutions offered make little sense. However, I have been concerned about this issue for a number of years. Behind all my questions is a definite reality–the commonality of the vows ministers and elders take and that some elders may take their vows rather lightly.
And I also ask: Is the notion of parity a reality or a pious fiction?
A conversation on these topics might be helpful to the church, not only as it faces the future, but as it converses with other branches of the church catholic on matters of unity.
Lawton W. Posey is a retired minister living in Charleston, W.V.
