over the whole Church, a general control. They retained in their own hands the exclusive power of ordination: they gave directions to the inferior ministers for the administration of Divine service; they instituted forms of worship; they prescribed rules of discipline; they silenced erroneous teachers; they inflicted censures on notorious offenders; they expelled the contumacious from the society. As, however, congregations in various quarters of the earth continued to increase and multiply, the care of all the Churches became too great a labour for the small number of Apostles originally ordained; which number had, from the first, been diminished by the apostacy and death of Judas, and afterwards by the martyrdom of James. cordingly St. Matthias, St. Barnabas', and St. Paul were added by our Lord himself to the apostolic or episcopal college, and invested with the same powers as the original members. Ac But even this addition was at last inadequate to the increasing exigencies of the Church: besides that the advancing years of the apostles, and their prospect of removal from the sphere of their earthly labours, made it necessary to provide for the spiritual wants of future generations. They, therefore, under the direction of the Holy Ghost, consecrated other persons, to be invested with powers somewhat similar to their own; but who, deriving those powers not immediately from Divine, but from human election, would in some respect be inferior and subordinate. Thus St. Paul, in the prospect that he might not be able, in his own person, to visit the Church of Ephesus for some time, and never perhaps again; appointed Timothy to preside over it with apostolical or episcopal authority. In his first epistle to this beloved disciple, whom he calls "his own son in the Faith," he instructs the newly consecrated bishop "how to behave himself in the house of God," and 1 "Which" (design to offer them sacrifice) "when the Apostles, Barnabas and Paul heard of, they rent their clothes." Acts xiv. 14. 2 "The first Bishops in the Church of Christ were the blessed Apostles. For the office whereunto Matthias was chosen, the sacred history doth term ironomy an episcopal office, which being expressly spoken of one, agreeth not less unto all, than unto him.”– Hooker's Ecc. Pol. Book vii. Sec. 4. expresses his apprehensions of being "constrained to tarry long" away from his Ephesian friends and converts. And in his second epistle, written in the last year of his life, he inculcates diligence on the Ephesian bishop, from the consideration that his own ministry was now about to close. "Preach the word," says the Apostle to his youthful representative and successor; "be instant in season, out of season, reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all long suffering and doctrine: for I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand'." That the powers entrusted to Timothy were the same with those which have been assigned by all churches to bishops ever since, will be abundantly evident from the following instructions :-" I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine, neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies. Let the Presbyters that rule well be counted worthy of double honour; especially they who labour in the word and doctrine. Against a Presbyter receive not an accusation but before two or three witnesses. Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear. Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men's sins. Keep thyself pure 2. In these words we see the power of granting ordination, together with the peculiar rights of jurisdiction and coercion to be exercised not only over the laity, but also over the two subordinate ranks of clergy, conveyed in the amplest form. Another example of a Church officer elevated to episcopal authority is Titus, whom St. Paul appointed over the Presbyters and Deacons of Crete, investing him with the same powers which he gave to Timothy over those of Ephesus. Titus is directed to "ordain Elders (Presbyters) in every city," after due inquiry into the character and qualifications of each candidate: he is instructed "to set in order things that were wanting," by providing rules of discipline, and formularies of public worship: he is required to "exhort and to convince the gainsayers;" to stop the mouths of unruly and vain talkers and deceivers: to "rebuke" the 1 2 Tim. iv. 2. 6. 66 2 See 1 Tim. & 2 Tim. passim. 20 These appointments not occasional but permanent. [CHAP. Cretans "sharply, that they might be sound in the faith: he is empowered and enjoined to "rebuke with all authority;" to "admonish heretics," and if they continued contumacious "after a first and second admonition," to "reject" or excommunicate them. More extensive powers than these, or more unequivocally expressive of episcopal preeminence could not easily be devised. It has sometimes been conjectured that Timothy and Titus may have held the government of the Ephesian and Cretan Churches, under the title and character of Evangelists. This office of Evangelist is imagined to have been superior in rank to that of Presbyter, though inferior to the Apostleship and to have been intended only for occasional purposes and for temporary duration. The original notion of an Evangelist is that of a person bringing glad tidings, (εvayyέlia,) or to speak more strictly, the glad tidings of salvation through Jesus Christ. Sometimes the term is applied to a person miraculously inspired to write a gospel, (evangelium,) in which latter sense two of the Apostles, St. Matthew and St. John, were Evangelists; as well as St. Mark, who, in the capacity of Deacon, accompanied Paul and Barnabas in their apostolic journey'. St. Luke, the remaining Evangelist, seems to have held the same rank of Deacon. The other sense in which we find the word Evangelist employed is to designate a preacher among unbelievers; or, as we should call him in modern diction, a missionary. Philip the Deacon is on this account termed an Evangelist2. These ancient missionaries, like missionaries of the modern Church, might be of various orders in the ministry. Eusebius informs us, that "whoever planted the Gospel first in any country was entitled an Evangelist," and another ancient but somewhat later authority, seems to intimate, that Evangelists generally held the station of Deacons. "Evangelists," he says, are Deacons, as was Philip." When, therefore, St. Paul gives a charge to Timothy, "Do the work of an Evangelist "," he could not mean that the Ephesian Bishop was to exercise his episcopal functions 1 Acts xiii. 5. 66 S Euseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. iii. c. 37. 2 Acts xxi. 8. 5 2 Tim. iv. 5. in the character of a missionary: more especially as the Apostle subjoins immediately afterwards, in the very same verse, "make full proof of thy ministry or deaconship," (diakoviav,) from which expression we might as well infer that Timothy governed the Church of Ephesus, in the capacity of a Deacon: as we might infer from the previous title given him, that he exercised his authority in the character of an Evangelist. What St. Paul meant by "the work of an Evangelist," may be sufficiently gathered from a preceding verse already quoted from the same chapter: "Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine 1." These duties cannot surely be pronounced incompatible with the episcopal office. 1 To prove that Timothy resided constantly at Ephesus, or Titus in Crete, is not necessary to our argument. Both of these distinguished individuals derived, without question, episcopal powers, immediately from the hands of an Apostle: and this fact is all that our case demands. If, therefore, it should be alleged that Timothy and Titus were not constantly resident, each in his own diocese, we are not, on this account, warranted in supposing that they discharged a merely transient or temporary function: or that their occasional departure from Ephesus, or from Crete, dissolved their ecclesiastical connexion with the Presbyters and Deacons over whom they were appointed. For, as the Apostles themselves could not but be generally absent from many churches over which they retained episcopal authority; and which they continued to regulate by means of such visitations and correspondence as circumstances rendered needful: so also when they delegated that authority to Bishops, it would happen that those Bishops, though holding a permanent jurisdiction, might, from time to time, be indispensably called away to other districts, by the exigencies of the infant Church. The probability is, that Timothy 1 See Bishop Taylor on Episcopacy, sec. xiv. p. 61. Potter on Church Government, c. iii. and note (D) at the end of the volume. 2 It has been insinuated that the occasional absence of Timothy and Titus from Ephesus and Crete respectively, would be a dangerous precedent for episcopal non-residence. But the difference must be obvious and Titus did in the end reside permanently, each in his own diocese. They are denominated Bishops of Crete and of Ephesus, respectively, by the unanimous voice of all Christian antiquity; by no less than twenty distinct authorities, which mention the one as holding the Episcopate of Ephesus; and by eighteen equally plain authorities, which allude to the other as enjoying the episcopate of Crete 1. So that we might almost as reasonably call in question the fact, that Epistles were ever written by St. Paul to either of these distinguished overseers of the Church, or deny that they ever were at Ephesus or Crete, as doubt the fact that they were actual Diocesans of those places. It was before observed, that the Apostles, when they appointed Presbyters, and bestowed on them the honourable privilege of ministering in the congregation, reserved to themselves exclusively the power of granting ordination. This is evident from the circumstance, that, on this subject, there is not a single precept in Holy Scripture, addressed to Elders; nor any passage in which they are represented otherwise than as assistants merely to their Bishop or their Apostle, in the performance of this solemnity. We find their other duties in other parts of the New Testament, clearly and fully pointed out, but not one direction, not one injunction with respect to their laying on of hands. regulations on this point are addressed to persons of a higher order. This total silence of the word of God, on the subject of non-Episcopal ordination, is calculated to leave the deepest impression and conviction on every candid mind. All As an exception to this rule respecting ordination, the only case which can, with any plausibility be urged, is that of Timothy, alluded to by St. Paul in the following injunction :-" Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery' From this passage it has been con 2 99 between the case of an infant church and of an ancient establishment: between the absence of a primitive bishop, called from his own peculiar see to other places of laborious exertion; and the absence of a modern prelate from his only sphere of diocesan labour. See for the list of these authorities Taylor on Episcopacy, sects. xiv. & xv. 2 1 Tim. iv. 14. |