44. If it be asked, Why then was not Timothy called a Bishop, the answer is given in the plain statement of the fact, that those who bore the relation he did to the Church, were then called Apostles: and that afterwards it became their practice to use the title of Bishop instead of that of Apostle, and to distinguish the Elders by the title Presbyter alone.

45. With regard to the assertion that those who had the charge of Churches were originally called Apostles, we find that Paul gives that title, in his second Epistle to the Corinthians,1 to Titus and another who was with him. In our English Testament the word is translated messengers; but the word in the Greek is arogodoi, apostles. This word, arosodot, signifying messengers, is used to designate the messengers of GOD sent to preach the gospel. It is not, therefore, proper to translate the word in this case messengers merely-seeing that these men really were messengers of GOD; of one of whom it is said in the 18th verse of the same chapter, that his praise was in the gospel throughout all the Churches, and of both that they were the glory of CHRIST.m

Epaphroditus is also called messenger in the English Testament; but the word in the original is the same, (anosolov, in the singular number,) and the strong words used with it, show that he was what he is called in the original, the Apostle of the Philippians: Yet I supposed it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, MY BROTHER AND COMPANION IN LABOUR (assistant or colleague) AND FELLOW-SOLDIER, but YOUR APOSTLE, and he that ministered to my wants.

46. It may be objected to this, that Epaphroditus carried to Paul the contribution of the Philippians, and therefore he was their messenger literally. But this was what Paul himself frequently did-if carrying a contribution is evidence that the bearer is not an Apostle although so called, and called by Paul colleague, or assistant and fellow-soldier, Paul must have been merely a messenger. In those times of persecution, when the leading men of the Church were continually liable to be arrested and carried to Rome, while prisoners there they were visited by their brethren, colleagues and fellow-soldiers, who governed the Churches in the countries around the Mediterranean sea, and they very commonly carried them something to render their imprisonment comfortable. Thus, between forty and fifty years after the death of Paul, Ignatius Bishop of Antioch, was carried to Rome, and during his long journey, Onesimus Bishop of the Ephesians, Damas Bishop of the Magnesians, with two Presbyters and a Deacon, and Polybius Bishop of the Trallians, went to attend to him and comfort him on his way. These Bishops in these cases carried the contributions of their respective Churches; but this did not make them mere messengers.. 47. The objection to considering as Apostles, any but the

n Philip. ii. 25. o See the Appendix.

twelve and Paul, and to reject the claim of others whom Paul in his epistles calls Apostles, leads to the rejection of the claim of Barnabas likewise. Accordingly, Dr. Miller attempts to show that he also is but a messenger of the Churches. It has however been satisfactorily shown that Barnabas was an Apostle (p. 206 ss. of this volume,) and Paul himself calls him an Apostle in the following passage in which he is speaking of his own claim to the title of an Apostle, My answer to them that do examine me, is this: Have we not power to eat and to drink? Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as other Apostles, and as the brethren of the LORD, and Cephas? Or I only and BARNABAS have not WE power to forbear working ?q The objection to Epaphroditus, Titus, and others whom Paul calls Apostles, is equally invalid.

48. The assertion that those persons who occupied the chief station in the Church and were originally called Apostles, were afterwards called Bishops, is of such a nature that it can be shown to be true or false only by evidence, and the appeal therefore is to evidence. This, in the very nature of things, must be drawn from the writings of those who succeeded the Apostles in the care and charge of the Church. These men are the best witnesses that possibly could be thought of; men who spent their lives in the service of the Church, devoted to GOD; men who chose rather to suffer affliction with the people of GOD, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season; men who had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover, of bonds and imprisonment; men who not only hazarded their lives for the name of our LORD JESUS CHRIST, which the Apostles, Elders, and brethren at Jerusalem speak of as a high recommendation of Barnabas and Paul, but who deliberately yielded up their lives to a violent death by the sword, by fire, and by wild beasts, rather than deny the LORD that bought them. Let any man read the Martyrdom of Ignatius, and the third to the eighth Seetions of his Epistle to the Romans, in the Appendix to these pages, and then, laying his hand on his heart and looking up to GOD, say that Ignatius is not to be credited as a witness respecting the order of the Church in his time.

49. Ignatius was an old man when, for his steadfast refusal to deny the SAVIOUR, he was thrown into the amphitheatre at Rome and devoured by lions. This occurred in the year 116 of the Christian æra, and about forty-six years after the death of Paul. He was about forty years in the service of the Church, and consequently he was in that service almost the whole interval between Paul's death and his own. He was a disciple of the Apostle John, and as the latter lived till about the year 96, he died only twenty years before Ignatius.

50. In his Epistles, written in the year 116, on his way to

P MILLER'S Letters, p. 59, [p. 36, 2d ed.] r Acts xv. 25, 26.

q 1 Corinth, ix. 3—6.

Rome to suffer martyrdom, Ignatius speaks very frequently of all the orders of ministers. He speaks of the Bishop in the singular number in every instance, and in such terms as carry conviction to the mind that there was but one in a Church at one time. He attributes to him powers and authority fully equal to that exercised by the Apostles. The Bishop, according to Ignatius, was the source of authority in the Church; without his approbation nothing was to be done; in his absence the flock had no other shepherd but GOD. Timothy was no more, Timothy was no less, in Ephesus. According to Ignatius, the Presbyter had no longer the title of Bishop: but he was no less than the Presbyter of Ephesus under Timothy. He was the very same in every duty, but derived all his authority from the Bishop. The same is true of the Deacon. These all, according to Ignatius, were still, as in Ephesus, ministers in the word. There was no change whatever in the constitution of the Church. The principal minister had adopted another name, perfectly appropriate, Bishop or Overseer of the Church: and this, which in the beginning belonged to the second order of ministers, they no longer retained; but with the name of Presbyter, they retained all the duties of the Presbyter of Ephesus.

51. It is, moreover, admitted by the Presbyterians, that Timothy exercised authority over the Elders in the Church at Ephesus; but they allege that it ceased with him. Of this, however, there is not the slightest evidence. The Scriptures say nothing about it. To the fathers only can they go for evidence, and they are decidedly against them. Ignatius, in his Epistle to the Ephesians, speaks of Onesimus their Bishop-of course such a Bishop as he continually alludes to-exercising all the power that Timothy did.

52. It may also be remarked that the manner in which Ignatius speaks of the three orders of ministers, shows that the change in the name of two of them had been made some time: for there is not, I think, one syllable of allusion to the change in all his epistles: it was therefore not a recent one; and the whole tenor of the epistles shows that it had become the settled practice of the Church..

53. In these epistles, then, we observe the fact, that that man who exercised the authority in the Church, which the Apostles in their lifetime exercised, was called Bishop.

54. It is also to be observed, that there is only one Bishop spoken of in one Church at a time, but many Presbyters; Bishop always in the singular, Presbyters always in the plural; and often mentioned together, the Bishop and Presbyters, or the Bishop and his Presbytery or council of Presbyters, so as to show, as perfectly as language can show, the difference between them.

s Sect. 9th of the Epistle to the Romans.

t Sect. 4th of the Epistle to the Philadelphians,

t

J

55. The same state of things existed in one of the Churches to which Ignatius wrote an epistle, in which he, for obvious reasons, was not led to say any thing of their ministers: I mean the Romans. This we learn from a passage from Irenæus."

"The Apostles, founding and instructing that Church, (the Church of Rome,) delivered to Linus the Episcopate; Anacletus succeeded him; after him Clemens obtained the Episcopate from the Apostles. To Clement succeeded Evaristus; to him Alexander; then Sixtus; and after him Telesphorus; then Hugynus; after him Pius; then Anicetus; and when Soter had succeeded Anicetus, then Eleutherius had the Episcopate in the twelfth place. By this succession, that tradition in the Church, and publication of the truth, which is from the Apostles, is come to us."

This passage, extraordinary as it may seem, with the words marked in italics, is taken from MILLER'S Letters, p. 151, [p. 98, 2d ed.] It will be noticed again hereafter.

56. Others of the fathers state distinctly that Timothy was Bishop of the Ephesians, as appears from the following quotations from Dr. BOWDEN's Letters to Dr. Miller, Vol. I. p. 257, [Vol. I. p. 124, 2d ed.]

"1. From a fragment of a treatise by Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus, towards the close of the second century. This fragment is preserved in Photius' Bibliotheca, and quoted by Archbishop Usher in his Discourse on Episcopacy. In that fragment it is said, that 'Timothy was ordained Bishop of Ephesus by the great Paul. 2. It appears from Eusebius, who says, 'it is recorded in history that Timothy was the first Bishop of Ephesus.' 3. From the Commentary under the name of Ambrose. He says, Being now ordained a Bishop, Timothy was instructed by the epistle of Paul how to dispose and order the Church of GOD.' 4. From Epiphanius, who says, "The Apostle, speaking to Timothy, being then a Bishop, advises him thus -Rebuke not an Elder,' &c. 5. By Jerome, who in his tract Of Ecclesiastical Writers, says, 'Timothy was ordained Bishop of the Ephesians by the blessed Paul. 6. By Chrysostom, who says, 'Paul directs Timothy to fulfil his ministry, being then a Bishop; for that he was a Bishop appears from Paul's writing thus to him, Lay hands suddenly on no man.' 7. By Leontius Bishop of Magnesia, one of the fathers in the great council of Chalcedon, who declared, that 'from Timothy to their time, there had been twenty-six Bishops of the Church of Ephesus.' 8. By Primasius, who says, 'Timothy was a Bishop; and had the gift of prophecy with his ordination to the episcopate.' 9. By Theophylact, who gives this reason for St. Paul's writing to Timothy, 'because that in a Church newly constituted, it was not easy to inform a Bishop of all things incident to his place by word of mouth;' and in his Commentary on the fourth chapter of the first Epistle, he styles Timothy, Bishop. 10. By Oecumenius, who, on these words, I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, gives this gloss' He ordained him Bishop.""

In remarking on Dr. Miller's omitting the striking passages in

u IRENEUS, Book III. Chap. iii.

v [In Dr. MILLER'S 2d ed. this reads thus:-" by this appointment and instruction that tradition," &c.—a DIRECT FALSIFICATION of the passage! See the Latin of Irenæus in the Appendix }

favour of Episcopacy, in his quotations from the fathers, Dr. Bowden says:

"Thus, you do not exhibit the following pointed testimonies from Hilary. The Bishop is the chief; though every Bishop is a Presbyter, yet every Presbyter is not a Bishop.' He declares that 'James was constituted Bishop of Jerusalem by the Apostles, and that the Apostles were Bishops.' He affirms, that 'Timothy and Titus, and the Angels of the Asiatic Churches were Bishops'-Bishops in the appropriate sense of the word. He says, 'In the Bishop all orders are contained, because he is the Prince or Chief of the Priests.' He affirms that 'the Bishop is the Vicegerent of CHRIST, and represents his Person;' and that 'he decreed every Church should be governed by one Bishop, even as all things proceed from one GOD THE FATHER.' And in several other places this author affirms, 'that in a Church there were several Presbyters and Deacons, but never more than one Bishop, even in the Apostle's times.'"w

He asks Dr. Miller:

"Why, Sir, did you not inform your Christian brethren that Theodore maintains, that those who had the appropriate title of Bishop in his day, and for ages before, were called Apostles in the first age of the Church? Why did you not lay before them the following passage? Epaphroditus was called the Apostle of the Philippians, because he was entrusted with the episcopal government, as being their Bishop. For those now called Bishops, were anciently called Apostles; but in process of time, the name of Apostle was left to those who were truly Apostles, and the name of Bishop was restrained to those who were anciently called Apostles; Thus Epaphroditus was the Apostle of the Philippians, Titus of the Cretans, and Timothy of the Asiatics." "x

Here, therefore, we have a perfectly satisfactory account of the reason why the names Bishop and Presbyter were no longer applied to the same office as they had been in the Scripture-the name of Apostle was dropped-and the name of Bishop was now restrained to those who were anciently called APOSTLES.'

"There is another writer who was contemporary with Theodoret, that deserves to be noticed-I mean Isidore, Bishop of Pelusium, of whom Mosheim gives the following character. 'He was a man of uncommon

learning and sanctity. A great number of his epistles are yet extant, and discover more piety, genius, erudition, and wisdom, than are to be found in the voluminous productions of many other writers.' Isidore says, 'The Bishops succeeded the Apostles-they were constituted through the whole world in the place of the Apostles.' He then says, that 'Aaron, the high priest, was what a Bishop is,' and that 'Aaron's sons prefigured the Presbyters.' "y

57. Having thus established, by abundant evidence drawn from Scripture, that Timothy exercised all the powers of a Bishop in the Church at Ephesus, the Presbyters and Deacons deriving their authority from him, and being subject to his superintendence and government, receiving from him honour when honour

w See p. 37 of Bowden's Letters, Vol. I. [p. 19, of 2d ed.]

x See p. 41 of the same. [p. 21, 2d ed.]

y See P. 46 of the same. [p. 23, 2d ed.]

3