Chapter 8. — The Ministry — Different Orders — Ordination of the Ministry — Its Connection With the Churches.
CHAPTER 8. — THE MINISTRY — DIFFERENT ORDERS
— ORDINATION OF THE MINISTRY — ITS CONNECTION
WITH THE CHURCHES.
THE Christian Church is evidently an institution not only divine in its origin, but vastly important in its character. As is clear from the Scriptures, it was intended by its sovereign Founder that it should supersede the Mosaic institution, and “break in pieces and consume” all earthly kingdoms. According to the decree of God, it was to be universal in extent and everlasting in duration. Such being its character and importance, we might reasonably suppose that, in the divine arrangement and procedure, it would not only be furnished with an inspired code of moral and religious duty, of faith and practice — a clear exposition of the plan of salvation under the gospel — but also with an intelligible outline of the great and leading features of the organization and polity of the Christian Church itself, so far as necessary to its validity, purity, and success.
I. Among the prominent features connected with the organization of the apostolic Churches, it will strike the careful examiner that the CHRISTIAN MINISTRY occupies a conspicuous place. This ministry was instituted by the great Head and Founder of the Church as the leading instrumentality through which the gospel should be propagated, Churches organized, and the ordinances and discipline duly administered.
In the New Testament a variety of terms are used to designate the office-bearers of the Church. We are not, however, authorized to suppose that each of these terms points to a separate and distinct officer. St. Paul gives the following enumeration: “And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers.” Ephesians 4:11. In addition to these, we are informed that the Church was supplied with bishops, elders, and deacons. It is very evident that all these different terms are not intended each to describe a separate and distinct officer. It is manifest that the peculiar work indicated by several of these terms often pertains to the same person, and that person was designated sometimes by one of the terms, and sometimes by another. St. Paul more than once styles the same persons both bishops and elders. The import of the terms themselves will plainly indicate the sense in which they were used, thus:
1. The term “apostle” signifies one sent; and in this sense it is applicable to every minister called and sent of God to preach the gospel, and is evidently, as has already been shown, intended to be perpetuated to “the end of the world.”
2. The term “prophet” means one who foretells; and, in this connection, is applicable to every minister of the gospel, implying that he proclaims the promises of God to the faithful, and his denunciations against the wicked.
3. The term “bishop” means overseer, or superintendent, and applies to every gospel minister as he may have the spiritual oversight of a Church, or of Churches and ministers.
4. The term “presbyter,” or “elder,” denotes one of age or experience, or, in this connection, one ordained with ministerial authority for the governmental control of a Church or Churches.
5. The term “deacon” means one who serves or acts for others, and applies to those ministers who were ordained in special charge of the poor and the sick. That these were not mere laymen, appears not only from the fact of their ordination, and from the additional fact that several of the deacons ordained in the Church at Jerusalem were able and successful preachers, but from the necessary qualifications of this order, as stated by St. Paul.
6. The term “pastor” signifies a shepherd, and applies to every minister placed in care of a Church.
7. The term “evangelist” denotes a proclaimer of good news, and applies to every gospel minister, as he may spread the gospel abroad, or get up new Churches.
8. The term “teacher” implies one who instructs, and pertains to every minister of the gospel, as he may expound the sacred word. From the foregoing it will be readily perceived that nearly all these offices may meet in the same person, or that a person may be authorized to perform only a small portion of them. In the New Testament view, all of God’s ministers in this wide sense are apostles, for they are all called and sent of God to preach; they are all prophets, for they all authoritatively declare the promises of God to the faithful, and his threatenings against the wicked; and they are all teachers, for they all, more or less, explain the gospel system. But they are not all pastors, for all have not the care of Churches: they are not all evangelists, for all are not engaged in spreading the gospel in new places, or organizing new Churches; they are not all deacons, for all are not ordained to minister to the sick and the poor; they are not all elders, for all are not ordained as spiritual rulers of the Church; nor are all bishops, for all do not preside over Churches, or over Churches and ministers.
That deacons are the inferior order of ministers, and elders, or bishops, the superior order, appears from these words of St. Paul: “They that have used the office of a deacon well, purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith.” This clearly implies promotion to a higher position in the ministry.
II. As respects the NATURE of that government which the office-bearers are warranted in exercising over the Christian Church, it is purely spiritual. Christ’s kingdom being “not of this world,” the rulers of his Church have no authority to inflict pains and penalties by fines, imprisonment, or corporal punishment, like civil governments, but must rely solely on admonition, reproof, and excommunication. It is plainly the duty of the rulers of the Church to advise and counsel with those over whom they exercise spiritual control, and secure, as far as maybe, their approval and cooperation; but still these Church-rulers are held responsible to the Head of the Church — “who hath counted them worthy, putting them into the ministry” — as much for the due administration of his ordinances and discipline as for the faithful preaching of his word; and hence they cannot, as faithful stewards, relinquish to the laity this governmental responsibility with which they have been intrusted by the Lord Jesus.
The constitution and laws according to which the government and discipline of the Church should be administered, are comprised in the New Testament; and these statutes are not subject to modification, amendment, or repeal. But should the rulers of the Church attempt to “lord it over God’s heritage,” the remedy of the people against any supposed usurpation or maladministration is in remonstrance, protestation, appeal to a higher ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and finally, when the evil becomes so great that it can only be submitted to by the sacrifice of a good conscience, withdrawal from a corrupt and apostate Church.
ORDINATION OF THE MINISTRY.
We now present it as one of the foundation principles in connection with the ministry of the New Testament Church, that —
Each organized Church should be placed under the pastoral charge of one or more ordained elders or ministers; and other ministers, not in pastoral care of Churches, should be employed as evangelists or missionaries for the purpose of spreading the gospel, and getting up and organizing new Churches.
Christ “ordained twelve that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach.” Mark 3:14.
The apostles, with the solemnities of prayer and the casting of lots, set apart Matthias to fill the vacancy in the apostolate caused by the apostasy of Judas (Acts 1.).
The apostles, by prayer and the laying on of hands, consecrated chosen men to the office of deacon (Acts 6.).
Saul and Barnabas, by the solemnities of fasting, prayer, and the laying on of hands, were set apart to the special work of a mission to the Gentiles (Acts 13.).
Timothy was consecrated by the laying on of the hands of St. Paul and of the presbytery (1 Timothy 4:14; 2 Timothy 1:6). Timothy and Titus, under the express instructions of St. Paul, ordained elders and deacons, of approved character, in all the Churches in Crete and the regions of Ephesus (1 Timothy 3., 5:22; Titus 1:5.). From these examples, recorded in the inspired history of the Christian Church, of numerous approved persons being expressly chosen and solemnly ordained to the ministerial office, and in the absence of any intimation that any were allowed to exercise the functions of the sacred office without such approval and ordination, we deduce the inference that an ordained ministry is the divinely established instrumentality through which a properly organized Church was to be established and perpetuated, and the ordinances and discipline duly administered.
IV. We next invite attention to the CONNECTION established, according to the New Testament history, between the ministers and the Churches. On this point, in modern times, a diversity of sentiment has obtained. Some have contended for the ordination of a settled pastorate over all the Churches, whilst others have advocated a transient itinerancy as being most in accordance with the apostolic plan.
If we understand the teachings of the New Testament on this subject, the elements of the regular pastorate relation and of the itinerancy were both embodied in the apostolical plan and operations. The one was needed for the government and pastoral charge of organized Churches; the other for the spreading of the gospel and the getting up of new Churches. The apostles were extraordinary, ministers, endued with all the authority of Christ himself in the establishment, organization, and control of the Churches. In the grand commission under which they acted, they were commanded to “go into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” As yet no Churches existed under the New Testament economy. The world was before them as their parish. Accordingly we find them traveling at large, gaining converts to the new faith, and organizing Churches.
Others, such as Timothy, Titus, and Barnabas, were soon ordained to the ministry, and associated with the apostles as evangelists or missionaries in the great work of extending the influence of the gospel abroad, and organizing Churches in distant lands; hence it is clear that we find in the history of the Church, as recorded in the New Testament, ample authority for an itinerant ministry in the propagation of the gospel. This was the grand evangelistic or missionary lever which, under God, “turned the world upside down,” and in one century spread the doctrines of the cross commensurate with the Roman Empire.
On the other hand, it is equally clear, from the testimony of New Testament history, that, in all places where the apostles, or the evangelists under them, established and organized Churches, they placed over them regular pastors having the oversight and care thereof. To this important feature in New Testament history we now turn our attention. In the fourteenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, we have an account of the course pursued by the apostles in the organization of the Churches. St. Paul and St. Barnabas, according to the record, took an extensive tour in visiting the newly-formed Churches, “confirming the brethren,” and setting things in order. They “ordained them elders in every Church” to exercise over these several congregations the pastoral care. Dr. Clarke, in his comment on the twenty-third verse of this chapter says: “They appointed persons, the most experienced and the most advanced in the divine life, to watch over and instruct the rest.” And he adds: “I believe the simple truth to be this, that in ancient times the people chose, by the lifting up of hands, their spiritual pastor; and the rulers of the Church, whether apostles or others, appointed that person to his office by the imposition of hands.”
Upon the same passage Mr. Benson remarks: “This custom of ordaining elders in the Churches which he planted Paul invariably observed, in order that the brethren, being united together under the direction of stated teachers and leaders, might increase the more in grace.”
As an evidence that such was the general course in all the apostolic Churches, we find St. Paul giving express instructions to Titus as to the course to be pursued in the Churches in Crete, which at that time was a very populous island, containing, as historians state, about a hundred cities; and yet St. Paul tells Titus to “ordain elders in every city.” And he then goes on to describe the character and duties of these elders, in such style as to leave the conclusion inevitable that they were to be the regular pastors and rulers of the Churches. Mr. Benson, in commenting on this passage, remarks as follows: “That is, that thou shouldest perfect what was left unfinished at my departure, or mightest settle the affairs which I had not time to settle myself; and ‘ordain elders (pastors or teachers, the same with bishops) in every city’ where there are Churches.”
Here, then, we have the testimony of Mr. Benson that these “elders” were regular pastors, and that every Church, according to the instructions of St. Paul, was to be thus supplied. Dr. Clarke’s comment on the passage is in the following words: “It appears from this that St. Paul did not spend much time in Crete, and that he was obliged to leave it before he had got the Church properly organized. ‘Ordain elders in every city,’ that thou mightest appoint persons well instructed in divine things, who should be able to instruct others, and observe and enforce the discipline of the Church. It appears that those who are called ‘elders’ in this place are the same as those termed ‘bishops,’ verse seventh.”
Now, according to Dr. Clarke, St. Paul did not consider a Church “properly organized” till a regular pastor, or bishop, was ordained and placed over it as its stated teacher and ruler. Perhaps it would be superfluous to give the testimony of any additional commentators on the passages under review; but, lest it might be thought that the views of Benson and Clarke are not in accordance with the general sentiment of learned commentators, we add a few other authorities.
Mr. Burkitt, in his notes on Acts 14:23, uses the following language: “Here we have two farther instances of the apostle’s care of these new-planted Churches; and the first was, to settle them in Church-order, ordaining elders in every Church to be the guides and teachers of the rest.” Here it appears, according to Burkitt, that, without a regular pastor ordained over each and every Church, the Churches could not be “settled in Church-order.” On Titus 1:5, Mr. Burkitt remarks as follows: “To ‘ordain elders in every city,’ such as might govern, and teach, and administer to God in holy things; wherever a Church is planted, there is an absolute necessity of a settled ministry.”
Dr. Macknight gives it as his opinion, in his comment on Titus 1:5, that “elders were to be ordained in every city where the converts were so numerous as to form a Church.”
Thomas Scott, in his comment on Acts 14:23, says: “These elders were their stated pastors, who presided in the worship of God, and preached his word unto them.”
We will not stay longer to quote from commentaries on the subject before us. The testimony given from Clarke and Benson, especially as we find the highest authorities in the Episcopalian and Presbyterian ranks coinciding with them in opinion, is sufficient to satisfy us that, without the utmost violence to the text, no other construction than the one we have presented can be given to the passages. Indeed, we may say, fearless of successful contradiction, that the great mass of learned commentators agree with Clarke and Benson in asserting that over all the apostolic Churches regular ruling pastors were placed; and, till such was the case, they were not considered “properly organized.”
Therefore we may conclude that the New Testament history sufficiently demonstrates the following points:
1. That a regularly ordained ministry is established.
2. That this ministry comprises, first, an itinerant evangelistic department, for the spreading of the gospel and the getting up and organizing of new Churches; and, secondly, a regular pastorate relation, for taking care of the Churches organized.
We will next call attention to the confirmatory evidence on this subject furnished by the history of the Church in succeeding ages. Aside from the Acts of the Apostles, the earliest Church-history which has come down to us is that of Eusebius. This author wrote in the fourth century, and brings down the history of the Church to the Council of Nice, which took place in the year 325. He is the only author who wrote a history of the Church during the centuries immediately succeeding the apostles, whose writings have reached us; consequently all subsequent writers have been mainly dependent on him for their account of the Church during that period. Eusebius is the more valuable as a Church-historian because he quotes extensively from the writings of others, furnishing us in this way with the only extracts now extant from the works of various individuals in reference to the Church in those primitive times. He says himself that he had “collected the materials that had been scattered by his predecessors, and culled, as from some intellectual meadows, the appropriate extracts from ancient authors.”
On the points to which we have directed our present inquiry, Eusebius is very clear and satisfactory. He gives, in regular and consecutive order, the names of the bishops of a number of the principal Churches, even from the apostles themselves down to his day, and often specifies the number of years they respectively served. Among the principal Churches concerning which he is thus specific, may be mentioned that of Rome, of Alexandria, of Ephesus, of Antioch, of Jerusalem, and of Corinth. He proceeds to give an account of the course pursued by many who, after the apostolic age, prosecuted the work of “evangelists,” and who, in his own words, “after laying the foundation of the faith in foreign parts, as the particular object of their mission, and after appointing others as shepherds of the flocks, and committing to these the care of those that had been recently introduced, went again to other regions and nations, with the grace and cooperation of God.”
Thus it appears that such as acted the part of missionaries or evangelists, after the apostles’ day, still adhered to the same plan — they placed pastors over all the organized Churches. We believe it is admitted by all Christian writers of eminence on Church-polity that, from the time the apostles first “ordained elders in the Churches” down the stream of history for the space of three hundred years, there never was a Christian Church, properly organized, over which a regular pastor or pastors did not preside. We may, with safety, go even farther, and affirm that, while there is satisfactory evidence to prove that the general practice, both in the apostolic and succeeding ages, was to place regular ruling pastors over all the organized Churches, there is no evidence to show that there existed a solitary exception to the rule for the space of fifteen hundred years. But what are we to infer from these facts? First. That the Churches were not left to their own government and control, on the plan of Independency. Secondly. That neither the settled pastorate principle nor the itinerancy should be adopted, to the exclusion of the other, but that the two should be blended.
One plan by which the elements of these two systems may be advantageously united is that of a regular itinerancy, giving to each Church a settled pastorate over it for a limited time, yet subject to a systematic and periodical change. Such is the general economy of Methodism. This system, while it comprehends more extensively than can be done by most Church-organizations the itinerant or evangelistic department, at the same time embraces, to a considerable extent, the settled pastorate relation; thus happily combining the two great gospel elements. It is true, this system, as a general rule, does not recognize a pastorate relation settled for life; but it is none the less really a settled or fixed relation, because the period of its unconditional continuance may be limited. A Church may have a pastorate regularly settled over it for twenty years, although the incumbent of the office may: be changed a dozen times, In this sense the pastorate over a Methodist Church never dies. The moment the pastoral jurisdiction of one minister ceases, that of another begins; so that the Church has always a pastor, and the pastor always a Church.
It must be admitted that the Methodist organization exhibits the evangelistic or missionary feature of the apostolic plan more fully and successfully than can be done by any other system known since the days of Timothy and Titus; and it may truly be doubted whether any other platform of organization approximates so nearly to the apostolic plan in keeping all the Churches regularly supplied with pastors. Among those Churches having no regular and systematic evangelistic or itinerant department, but organized with special reference to a settled pastorate relation, how many hundreds of them are left much of the time without pastors, and how many pastors without Churches! The essence of the pastorate relation depends less upon the question, whether it is a life-time or a periodical arrangement, than upon the fact as to the constancy and regularity of the supply of a pastor or pastors for each Church, and a Church or field of operation for each minister. If this be the essence of the apostolic plan, then it will follow that this plan is nowhere more fully and successfully realized than in connection with the Methodist organization. The fact that regular pastors, exercising the power of government and control, were placed over all the apostolic Churches, is sufficient evidence that the government of the Churches was not modeled by the apostles either after the Congregational or the Presbyterian form. The power of government was neither vested in each congregation collectively, nor yet in the pastor and his lay elders; but in the ordained ministerial elders. To what extent these ministerial elders, in whom we have shown the apostles deposited the power of jurisdiction and control over the Churches, may engage and admit the assistance and cooperation of the laity in the management of ecclesiastical affairs, is a question depending much upon considerations of expediency. We may safely conclude that such method should be pursued as will best secure the zealous and efficient aid and influence of the whole Church, and, at the same time, retain in the hands of the ordained ministry that highest power of government and control over the kingdom of Jesus Christ with which the Head of the Church has intrusted them.
Provided the two apostolical elements be retained and efficiently carried out, so as to secure a regular pastorate over the organized Churches, and an ample degree of evangelistic influence be sent abroad for the spread of the gospel — provided these two grand objects be secured, it may well be left to the dictates of expediency to determine how transient or how permanent shall be the connection between the individual pastor and the flock of his charge. Whether that connection be continued for life, for a long period, or for a shorter period, to be determined by a presbytery, a conference, or a recognized episcopacy, or whether it be limited by a definite, agreed period, these are questions not settled by the New Testament record; and, consequently, each Christian organization may adopt such plan on the subject as they judge to be the best adapted to secure the grand objects of the gospel.