partly
because the reason of this charge to honor, &c., refers only to
maintenance, ver. 18. Thus far we grant, that the text speaks of
maintenance. 2. It may be further yielded that all the presbyters here
spoken of are to be counted worthy of double honor, of honorable,
liberal maintenance; even they that rule well (if need require) are to
be thus honored, but the principal care of maintenance ought to be of
them that labor in the word and doctrine, because the apostle saith
_especially they that labor, &c._: the like injunction, see Gal. vi. 6,
"Let him that is catechized, communicate to him that catechizeth him in
all good things;" and thus much this text plainly evidenceth. 3. What
then can be inferred hereupon by the adversaries of ruling elders?
"Therefore the ruling elders (in the reformed churches) that take no
maintenance of the church, are not the elders that rule well here
mentioned?" This follows not: the apostle Paul took no wages of the
church of Corinth, 2 Cor. xi. 7-9, and xii. 12, 13, &c., was he
therefore not an apostle to them, as to other churches of whom he took
maintenance? Divers among us in these days labor in the word and
doctrine, and are not sufficiently maintained by their churches, but
forced to spend of their own estates to do others service; are they
therefore no ministers? _Forgive them this wrong_. Most churches are not
able (or at least not willing) to maintain their very preaching
presbyters and their families comfortably and sufficiently, as the
gospel requireth: if therefore in prudence, that the Church be not
needlessly burdened, those ruling elders are chosen generally that need
no maintenance, doth their not taking maintenance of the church make
their office null and void? Or if the church do not give them
maintenance (when they neither need it, nor desire it, nor is the church
able to do it) is the church therefore defective in her duty, or an ill
observer of the apostolical precepts? Sure maintenance is not
essentially and inseparably necessary to the calling of either ruling
or preaching elder. There may be cases when not only the preaching, but
the ruling elders ought to be maintained, and there may be cases when
not only the ruling but also the preaching presbyter (as it was with
Paul) should not expect to be maintained by the church. 4. It is as
observable that the apostle here saith, let them be counted worthy of
double honor, though the reformed churches do not actually gi