Quote
Pilgrim said:

And just an aside, this same allocation of authority within the Eldership seems to also apply to the distinction between Elders and Deacons. In many churches I have been involved with, Deacons are looked upon as "second-class" officers, which bothered me to no little extent. Any thoughts on this?

I would agree that it IS a problem, because I think the office of deacon actually could be used as a counterweight if the elders fell into sin. What I would like to see, for example, would be that the elders have final authority over SPIRITUAL issues, but the deacons would have authority over FINANCIAL matters. (I realize some if not most Presbyterian elders would not like this at all.)

I guess it seems to me that a church with absolute authority by the elders over all things could wind up finding the elders voting themselves financial benefits they really might not be due.

In Anglican churches the clergy have jurisdiction over spiritual matters, but the vestry (lay officers) has jurisdiction over temporal matters including financial--which does serve as a counterbalance to any clergy who fall into financial temptation.

Theo