# Two Office vs. Three Office



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Aug 2, 2008)

I have seen these two terms bandied about a lot since I became truly reformed after I left the PC(USA) (where there is a growing episcopacy) and am not 100% sure the difference between the two views. Could someone:

1) Explain it to me.

2) Point me to some works, either articles or books, that are pro/con these two views.


----------



## Bygracealone (Aug 2, 2008)

Hi Ben, 

The terms have to do with whether one believes there are only two or three offices within the church. Historically, most Reformed and Presbyterian Churches have held that there are three distinct offices: teaching elder/pastor/minister, ruling elder, and deacon. 

The two office view only sees two distinct offices: elders and deacons. They believe there is only one office of elder which serves two functions: teaching and ruling. 

I personally hold to the three office view. I would recommend reading the following:

"Form of Presbyterial Church Government" by the Westminster Assembly
"The Church of Christ" by James Bannerman
"The Ruling Elder" by Samuel Miller
"Jesus Christ the King of the Church" by James Moir Porteous
"Pressing Toward the Mark" essays commemorating fifty years of the OPC edited by Charles Dennison and Rick Gamble
"Order in the Offices" edited by Mark Brown
Perhaps also "Paradigms in Polity" edited by David and Joseph Hall
Also read Calvin, Hodge, Murray, and Clowney

That should get you started...


----------



## Bygracealone (Aug 2, 2008)

joshua said:


> Pastor Bradley, according to the three office view, does the teaching elder also have ruling jurisdiction?



Hi Josh, the short answer is yes...


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Aug 2, 2008)

Thanks Pastor Bradley. I'll look at some of those and come back with questions.


----------



## Marrow Man (Aug 2, 2008)

Of course, Ben, you have voiced a false dichotomy. In Presbyterian circles, there is at least one more option (I am not including the mongrel episcopacy of certain other presbyterian bodies here...  ). In the ARP, for instance, we have a 2.5 office view, since the standards are not quite clear on the difference between the TE (called the minster in the ARP FoG) and the RE. 

I jest a bit, of course, but there are places in the ARP standards that seem to suggest a three office view and others where there is almost an implicit two office view...


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Aug 2, 2008)

Bygracealone said:


> Hi Ben,
> 
> The terms have to do with whether one believes there are only two or three offices within the church. Historically, most Reformed and Presbyterian Churches have held that there are three distinct offices: teaching elder/pastor/minister, ruling elder, and deacon.
> 
> ...



I found Samuel Miller's work on Google Books for free download if anyone is interested.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Aug 2, 2008)

Marrow Man said:


> Of course, Ben, you have voiced a false dichotomy. In Presbyterian circles, there is at least one more option (I am not including the mongrel episcopacy of certain other presbyterian bodies here...  ). In the ARP, for instance, we have a 2.5 office view, since the standards are not quite clear on the difference between the TE (called the minster in the ARP FoG) and the RE.
> 
> I jest a bit, of course, but there are places in the ARP standards that seem to suggest a three office view and others where there is almost an implicit two office view...



Actually that is why I asked the question. I was looking at the ARP BCO for another reason and this question popped up because I did see both in places..


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Aug 2, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Bygracealone said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Ben,
> ...



The Form of Presbyterian Church Government
http://www.puritanboard.com/f117/westminster-directory-church-government-35047/

Don't forget to check the links manager too! 

Links and Downloads Manager - Ecclesiology - The Government of the Kingdom of Christ -- James M. Porteous - The PuritanBoard


----------



## Bygracealone (Aug 2, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Marrow Man said:
> 
> 
> > Of course, Ben, you have voiced a false dichotomy. In Presbyterian circles, there is at least one more option (I am not including the mongrel episcopacy of certain other presbyterian bodies here...  ). In the ARP, for instance, we have a 2.5 office view, since the standards are not quite clear on the difference between the TE (called the minster in the ARP FoG) and the RE.
> ...



We have the same issue in our directory in the RPCNA... In fact, I was a ruling elder before I was called to be a teaching elder and when it came time for my installation service, things were/are so unclear that I was asked what my preference was with regard to being ordained or installed to the office of teaching elder. I requested ordination... At the following synod some two office guys got wind of what we did and our presbytery received some attention over the matter... Funny thing is, the same thing happened with two other men I know who were ordained around the same time...  Oh well, I'm just happy I was given the option...


----------



## Marrow Man (Aug 2, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Actually that is why I asked the question. I was looking at the ARP BCO for another reason and this question popped up because I did see both in places..



As the ARP will be revising the FoG over the course of the next few years, I am hoping that the vagueness can be cleared up.


----------



## Southern Presbyterian (Aug 2, 2008)

*Four Offices*

How about the four office view? In the RPCUS, we hold that there is also the office of evangelist. Therefore you have 1) Teaching Elder, 2) Ruling Elder, 3) Evangelist, and 4) Deacon. You can see this document in support of this view: RPCUS FoG.


----------



## Bygracealone (Aug 2, 2008)

Marrow Man said:


> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> > Actually that is why I asked the question. I was looking at the ARP BCO for another reason and this question popped up because I did see both in places..
> ...



Yes, but cleared up in which direction?


----------



## Bygracealone (Aug 2, 2008)

Southern Presbyterian said:


> How about the four office view? In the RPCUS, we hold that there is also the office of evangelist. Therefore you have 1) Teaching Elder, 2) Ruling Elder, 3) Evangelist, and 4) Deacon. You can see this document in support of this view: RPCUS FoG.



Calvin also held to four offices and I believe Knox held to two more that he referred to as "extraordinary officers" which Andrew Melville in the Second Book of Discipline notes that these extraordinary offices are dropped.


----------



## bookslover (Aug 2, 2008)

The Bible knows but two offices: elder and deacon. *All* elders must be capable of ruling and teaching; *some* elders do these things full time.


----------



## Bygracealone (Aug 2, 2008)

bookslover said:


> The Bible knows but two offices: elder and deacon. *All* elders must be capable of ruling and teaching; *some* elders do these things full time.





Well, that sounds like the final word on this thread... next subject...


----------



## fredtgreco (Aug 2, 2008)

Marrow Man said:


> Of course, Ben, you have voiced a false dichotomy. In Presbyterian circles, there is at least one more option (I am not including the mongrel episcopacy of certain other presbyterian bodies here...  ). In the ARP, for instance, we have a 2.5 office view, since the standards are not quite clear on the difference between the TE (called the minster in the ARP FoG) and the RE.
> 
> I jest a bit, of course, but there are places in the ARP standards that seem to suggest a three office view and others where there is almost an implicit two office view...



I think the best answer to this question is that the "2.5 office view" comes about because (contrary much grandstanding on both sides) there are issues/problems with *both* views. Both have Biblical strengths, both have weaknesses (from a Biblical perspective). The Bible does not speak directly and categorically to this aspect of polity (clearing up all ambiguity) so we just have to live with the tension. I've both a RE and a TE, soI don't have a real dog in this hunt.


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (Aug 2, 2008)

I hold to the two office view.


----------



## Neogillist (Aug 2, 2008)

You should check out the following article written by Dr. McMahon. 
Lawful Ordination* - Dr. C. Matthew McMahon
According to him and the Westminster's Assembly's interpretation of 1 Tim. 5:17, Ruling elders only rule and do not preach in the Presbyterial form of Church Government. So this would be the three-office view.

In the URCNA (my denomination) the three-office system is recognized. However, elders are only elected (or ordained) for a term of three years rather than a life-long term, and I do not find that to be a Scriptural idea. I think the reason they do it is because of the time-consuming burden that eldership constitutes, especially with all the home-visits that elders are expected to perform throughout the year.


----------



## Neogillist (Aug 2, 2008)

Southern Presbyterian said:


> How about the four office view? In the RPCUS, we hold that there is also the office of evangelist. Therefore you have 1) Teaching Elder, 2) Ruling Elder, 3) Evangelist, and 4) Deacon. You can see this document in support of this view: RPCUS FoG.





How about the six-office view held in some Charismatic circles: Apostle, Prophet, Minister, Evangelist, Elder and Deacon?


----------

