<p><span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_255" id="Page_255">[255]</SPAN></span></p>
<h2>LESSON XLVI</h2>
<h3>ORGANIZING FOR SERVICE</h3>
<p>Whatever the organization of a body of Christians may be, the
body itself is a true branch of the Church if it consists of those who
believe in Christ. Nevertheless, if the Church is to be more than
an aggregation of individuals, if it is not only to be something, but
also to do something, it requires some sort of organization. This
fundamental need was clearly recognized in the apostolic age; and
it was met by certain provisions which we believe ought still to be
followed. These provisions, however, do not amount to anything
like an elaborate constitution; they do not hinder adaptation to
changing conditions.</p>
<h4>1. ELDERS ACCORDING TO THE PASTORAL EPISTLES</h4>
<p>In the Pastoral Epistles, which afford more detailed information
about organization than is to be found anywhere else in the New
Testament, the government of the local church is seen to be intrusted
to a body of "elders," with whom "deacons" are associated.
No one of the elders, so far as can be detected, possessed
authority at all different in kind from the authority of
the others; all had the function of ruling; all were "overseers" or
"bishops" of the church.</p>
<p>The functions of the elders are not described in detail; but evidently
they had a general oversight over the affairs of the congregation.
That is the meaning of the word "bishop" as it is
applied to them. Some of them at least also labored "in the word
and in teaching," but all seem to have been alike in their function
of bearing rule.</p>
<h4>2. ELDERS ACCORDING TO THE PRESBYTERIAN FORM
OF GOVERNMENT</h4>
<p>The similarity of such an arrangement to our own Presbyterian
form of government is plain. Our churches also are governed not
by an individual, but by a body of "elders" who are equal to one
another in authority. Changing conditions have of course introduced<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_256" id="Page_256">[256]</SPAN></span>
elaboration of the simple apostolic model. Thus the teaching
function, for example, which in apostolic times was perhaps
exercised more or less informally by those of the elders who
possessed the gifts for it, is now naturally assigned for the most
part to men who have received a special training. These "teaching
elders" in our church are the ministers. Conditions have become
so complex that men of special training, who devote their whole
time to the work of the Church, are imperatively required. The
pastors and teachers, Eph. 4:11, even in the apostolic Church,
seem to have formed a fairly definite group. This class of gifts is
exercised to-day especially by the ministers, though similar functions
should also be exercised by other members of the Church.</p>
<h4>3. HOW WERE ELDERS TO BE CHOSEN?</h4>
<p>With regard to the government of the apostolic Church a number
of interesting questions can never be definitely answered. For
example, how were the elders to be chosen?</p>
<p><strong>(1) Sometimes Appointed by the Apostles.</strong>—Such passages as
Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5, do not settle the question. According to
the former passage, elders were appointed in the churches of southern
Galatia by Paul and Barnabas. But it must be remembered
that the authority of the apostles was peculiar and temporary.
Because the apostles had power to appoint elders it does not follow
that any individuals at a later time would possess a similar power.
The situation, at the time of the first Christian mission, was
peculiar; small bodies of Christians had just been rescued from
heathenism; at first they would need a kind of guidance which could
afterwards safely be withdrawn. According to Titus 1:5, Titus
was to appoint elders in the churches of Crete. But clearly Titus,
like Timothy, was merely a special and temporary representative
of the apostle Paul; for Titus to appoint elders, under the definite
direction of Paul, was no more significant than for Paul to appoint
them himself.</p>
<p><strong>(2) The Right of Congregational Election.</strong>—On the whole, it may
be confidently maintained that the Presbyterian method of choosing
elders—namely the method of election by the whole congregation—is
more in accordance with the spirit of apostolic precedent than
any other method that has been proposed. Throughout the
apostolic Church, the congregation was evidently given a very large
place in all departments of the Christian life. The Jerusalem
congregation, for example, had a decisive voice in choosing the very<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_257" id="Page_257">[257]</SPAN></span>
first Church officers who are known to have been added to the
apostles. Acts 6:2-6. In Thessalonica and in Corinth the whole
congregation was active in the matter of church discipline. II
Thess. 3:14,15; I Cor. 5:3-5; II Cor. 2:6. The whole congregation
was also invited to choose delegates for carrying the gifts of the
Corinthian church to Jerusalem. I Cor. 16:3. These are merely
examples. It must be remembered, moreover, that the authority
of the congregation in the apostolic age was limited by the authority
of the apostles, which was special and temporary; when the apostles
should be removed, the congregational functions would be increased.
Yet even the apostles were exceedingly careful not to
destroy the liberties of the rank and file. Nowhere in the apostolic
Church were the ordinary church members treated as though they
were without rights and without responsibilities. Indeed, even
when the apostles appointed elders, they may have previously
ascertained the preferences of the people.</p>
<h4>4. THE APOSTOLIC PRECEDENT AND DEPARTURES FROM IT</h4>
<p>The presbyterial form of church government—that is, government
by a body of elders—which is found in the apostolic age, differs
strikingly from certain later developments. In several particulars,
at least, principles have become prevalent which are at variance
with the apostolic model.</p>
<p><strong>(1) The Monarchical Episcopate.</strong>—The first particular concerns
the relation of the church officers to one another. In the apostolic
Church, as we have observed, there was a parity among the elders;
the local congregation was governed, not by an individual, but by a
body. As early, however, as the first part of the second century, a
change had taken place, at least in many of the churches. The
supreme authority had come to be held by an individual, called
"bishop"; all other officers were clearly subordinate to him; the
government of the local congregation was no longer presbyterial,
but monarchical; the so-called "monarchical episcopate" had been
formed.</p>
<p>This state of affairs appears clearly in the epistles of Ignatius,
which were written a short time before A. D. 117. But all attempts
to find traces of the monarchical episcopate in the apostolic age
have resulted in failure. The Greek word <i lang="el" xml:lang="el">episcopos</i>, which is translated
in the English Bible—rather misleadingly, perhaps—by
"bishop," is applied, not to a special officer standing above the
elders, but simply to the elders themselves. "Elder" designates<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_258" id="Page_258">[258]</SPAN></span>
the office; <i lang="el" xml:lang="el">episcopos</i> designates one function of the office. The
latter word could hardly have been used in this general way if it
had already acquired its technical significance.</p>
<p>The efforts which have been made to discover references to the
office of bishop in the apostolic age are unconvincing. It is exceedingly
doubtful whether the "angels" of the seven churches to
which messages are sent in the Apocalypse are to be regarded as
church officers; and even if they were church officers it is by no
means clear that they exercised the functions of bishops. Undoubtedly
Timothy and Titus appear in the Pastoral Epistles with
functions similar in many respects to those of bishops, but it is also
clear that they exercised those functions, not as officers of the
Church who might have successors, but merely as temporary
representatives of the apostle Paul.</p>
<p><strong>(2) The Priesthood of the Clergy.</strong>—An even more important
divergence from apostolic conditions concerns the functions of the
church officers. According to a theory which has become widely
prevalent, certain officers of the Church are to be regarded as
"priests"—that is, they are mediators between God and man.
Curiously enough the English word "priest," is nothing but another
form of the word "presbyter," which means "elder"; "presbyter" is
only "priest" "writ large." In actual usage, however, "priest" means
vastly more than "presbyter"; it designates a man who represents
men to God and mediates God's actions to men. So understood,
the term is never applied in the New Testament to church officers as
such. According to the New Testament, the only priest (in the
strict sense) under the new dispensation is Christ; Christ is the only
mediator between God and man, I Tim. 2:5; the high-priesthood
of Christ is elaborated in the Epistle to the Hebrews. In another
sense, indeed, all believers are priests, I Peter 2:5,9; Rev. 1:6;
5:10; 20:6; all have the right of direct access to God; all are
devoted to a holy service. The idea of a special priesthood in the
Christian Church is strikingly at variance with the apostolic
teaching.</p>
<p><strong>(3) Apostolic Succession.</strong>—Another point of variance concerns
the manner in which the officers of the Church should receive their
authority. By a theory prevalent in the Church of England and
in the Protestant Episcopal Church in America as well as in the
Greek and Roman Catholic Churches, the authority of the clergy
has been received through an unbroken line of transmission from
the apostles; the immediate successors of the apostles received the<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_259" id="Page_259">[259]</SPAN></span>
right of handing down the commission to others, and so on
through the centuries; without an ordination derived in this way
no one can be a ruler in the true Church; and without submission
to such regularly ordained rulers no body of persons can constitute
a branch of the true Church. This theory places a tremendous
power in the hands of a definite body of persons whose moral
qualifications for wielding that power are often more than doubtful.
Surely so stupendous a claim can be made good only by
the clear pronouncement of a recognized authority.</p>
<p>Such a pronouncement is not to be found in the New Testament.
There is not the slightest evidence to show that the apostles provided
for a transmission of their authority through a succession of
persons. On the contrary, their authority seems to have been
special and temporary, like the miraculous powers with which they
were endowed. The regular church officers who were appointed
in the apostolic age evidently possessed no apostolic authority;
however chosen, they were essentially representatives of the congregation.
A true branch of the Church could exist, at least in
theory, without any officers at all, wherever true believers were together;
the Church did not depend upon the officers, but the officers
upon the Church.</p>
<h4>5. RELATIONS OF THE CONGREGATIONS TO ONE ANOTHER</h4>
<p>So far, the organization of the apostolic Church has been considered
only in so far as it concerned the individual congregation; a
word must now be said about the relation of the congregations to one
another.</p>
<p>That relation, in the apostolic age, was undoubtedly very close.
The Pauline Epistles, in particular, give an impression of active intercourse
among the churches. The Thessalonian Christians "became
an ensample to all that believe in Macedonia and in Achaia";
the story of their conversion became known "in every place."
I Thess. 1:7-10. In the matter of the collection, Macedonia
stirred up Achaia, and Achaia Macedonia. II Cor. 8:1-6; 9:1-4.
The faith of the Roman Christians was "proclaimed throughout the
whole world." Rom. 1:8. Judea heard of the missionary labors
of Paul, Gal. 1:21-24; fellowship between Jews and Gentiles was
maintained by the collection for the Jerusalem saints. Evidently
the apostolic Church was animated by a strong sense of unity.</p>
<p>This feeling of unity was maintained especially by the instrumentality
of the apostles, who, with their helpers, traveled from one<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_260" id="Page_260">[260]</SPAN></span>
congregation to another, and exerted a unifying authority over all.
Certainly there was nothing like a universal Church council;
Christian fellowship was maintained in a thoroughly informal way.
In order that such fellowship should be permanent, however, there
would obviously be an increasing need for some sort of official union
among the congregations. When the apostles passed away, their
place would have to be taken by representative assemblies; increasing
complexity of life brought increasing need of organization.
The representative assemblies of our own Church, therefore, meet
an obvious need; and both in their free, representative character
and in their unifying purpose it may fairly be claimed that they are
true to the spirit of the apostolic age.</p>
<h4>6. PRINCIPLES</h4>
<p>The apostolic precedent with regard to organization should
always be followed in spirit as well as in form. Three principles,
especially, are to be observed in the Church organization of the
apostolic age. In the first place, there was considerable freedom
in details. No Christian who had gifts of any kind was ordinarily
prevented from exercising them. In the second place, there was
respect for the constituted authority, whatever it might be. Such
respect, moreover, was not blind devotion to a ruling class, but
the respect which is ennobled by love. Finally, in Church organization,
as in all the affairs of life, what was regarded as really
essential was the presence of the Holy Spirit. When Timothy
laid his hands upon a new elder, the act signified the bestowal of,
or the prayer for, divine favor. This last lesson, especially, needs
to be learned to-day. Without the grace of God, the best of
Church organizations is mere machinery without power.</p>
<hr class="tb" />
<p><span class="smcap">In the Library.</span>—Davis, "Dictionary of the Bible": articles on
"Elder," "Deacon," "Deaconess," "Laying on of Hands." Hastings,
"Dictionary of the Bible": Gayford, article on "Church"; Gwatkin,
article on "Church Government in the Apostolic Age." Lightfoot,
"The Christian Ministry," in "Saint Paul's Epistle to the Philippians,"
pp. 181-269, and in "Dissertations on the Apostolic Age," pp. 135-238.
Charteris, "The Church of Christ," pp. 1-43, 130-170, 205-239.
Falconer, "From Apostle to Priest." MacPherson, "Presbyterianism"
(in "Handbooks for Bible Classes").</p>
<hr class="chap" />
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />
1 of 2
2 of 2
Previous
Next
Update Required
To play the media you will need to either update your browser to a recent version or update your Flash plugin.