CHURCH GOVERNMENT

that are consecrated (10"- ") are come to the Church of the first-born (12»), which includes the spirits ol the perfected saints lib.) in the fellowship of God's house-hold (Eph 2", He 10")- See also following article.

J. G. Simpson. CHURCH GOVERNMENT.— 1 . The general develop-ment seems fairly clear, though its later stages fall beyond NT times. The Apostles were founders of churches, and therefore regulated and supervised the first arrange-ments; then were added sundry local and unlooal rulers; then the unlocal died out, and the local settled down into the three permanent classes of bishops, elders, and deacons. The chief disputed questions concern the origin of the local ministry, its relation to the other, and the time and manner in which it settled down under the government of (monarchical) bishops.

2. Twice over St. Paul gives something like a list of the chief persons of the Church. In 1 Co 12'8 he counts up — 'first, apostles; second, prophets; third, teachers; then powers; then gifts of healing, helps, governments, kinds of tongues.' It will be noticed that all the words after the first two plainly describe functions, not offices. A few years later (Eph 4") he tells us how the ascended Lord 'himself gave some sis apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, for the work of service' (fOakonia) — they are all of them 'deacons' {diakonoi), whatever more they may be.

3. At the head of both lists is the Apostle. The Apostles were not limited to the Eleven, or to the number twelve, though twelve was always the ideal number (1 Co 1S>, Rev 21"; perhaps Ac 2" &). Whether Matthias remained an Apostle or not, Paul and Barnabas were certainly Apostles (e.g. Ac 14"), and so was James the Lord's brother (Gal 1"). The old disciples Andro-nicus and Junias (not Junia) were 'notable' Apostles (Ro 16'). On the other hand, Timothy seems excluded by the greetings of several Epistles (e.g. 2 Co.), and Apollos by the evidence of Clement of Rome, who most likely knew the truth of the matter.

The Apostle's first qualification was to have seen the risen Lord (Ac 1^2, 1 Co 9^), for his first duty was to bear witness of the Resurrection. This qualification seems never to have been relaxed in NT times. A direct call was also needed, for (1 Co 1228, Gal 1', Eph 4") no human authority coidd choose an Apostle. The call of Barnabas and Saul was acknowledged (Ac 13^) by a commission from the church at Antioch; and if Matthias remained an Apostle, we must suppose that the direct call was represented by some later Divine recognition.

Therefore the Apostle was in no sense a local official. His work was not to serve tables, but to preach and to make disciples of all nations, so that be led a wandering life, settling down only in his old age, or in the sense of making, say, Ephesus or Corinth his centre for a while. The stories which divide the world among the Twelve are legends: the only division we know of was made (Gal 2') at the Conference, when it was resolved that the Three should go to the Jews, Paul and Barnabas to the Gentiles. With this preaching went the founding and general care of churches, though not their ordinary government. St. Paul interferes only in cases of gross error or corporate disorder. His point is not that the Galatians are mistaken, but that they are altogether falling away from Christ ; not that the Corinthian is a bad offender, but that the church sees no great barm In the matter. He does not advise the Corinthians on further questions without plain hints (1 Co 6' 10" 11") that they ought to have settled most of them for themselves.

4. Next to the Apostle comes the shadowy figure of the Prophet. He too sustained the Church, and shared with him (Eph 2^" 3') the revelation of the mystery. He spoke 'in the spirit' words of warning, of comfort, or it might be of prediction. He too received his com-mission from God and not from men, and was no local

CHURCH GOVERNMENT

officer of a church, even if he dwelt in the city. But he was not an eye-witness of the risen Lord, and 'the care of all the churches' did not rest on him. Women also might prophesy (1 Co 11»), like Philip's daughters (Ac 21") at Csesarea, or perhaps the mystic Jezebel (Rev 22«) at Thyatira. Yet even in the ApostoUc age prophecy (1 Th 5™) is beginning to fall into discredit, and false prophets are flourishing (1 Jn., 2 Pet., Jude). This may be the reason for the marked avoidance of the name ' Apostle ' by and of St. John.

6. It will be seen that St. Paul's lists leave no place for a local ministry of office, unless it comes in under 'helps and governments' on 'pastors and teachers.' Yet such a ministry must have existed almost from the first. We have (1) the appointment of the Seven at Jerusalem (Ac 6) ; (2) elders at Jerusalem in the years 44, 50, 58 (118" 15«- » 2118), appointed by Paul and Barnabas In every church about 48 (14a), mentioned Ja 5"; at Ephesus in 58 (Ac 20"), mentioned 1 P 5'; (3) PhcEbe a deaconess at Cenchrese in 58 (Eo 16'), bishops and deacons at Philippi in 63 (Ph 1'). Also in the Pastoral Epistles, Timothy at Ephesus about 66 is (1 Ti 3, 4) in charge of four orders: (1) bishops (or elders) (5'); (2) deacons; (3) deaconesses (3") ('women' [in Gr. without the article] cannot be wives of deacons); (4) widows. With Titus in Crete only bishops are mentioned (Tit 1'). To these we add (5) the prominent guasi-episcopal positions of James at Jerusalem in 44 (Ac 12"), in 50, and in 58; and (6) of Timothy and Titus at Ephesus and in Crete.

To these we must not add ( 1 ) the ' young men ' (neoteroi) who carried out Ananias (Ac 6'). [The tacit contrast with presbyteroi is of age, not office, for it is neaniskoi who bury Sapphira]; (2) the indefinite proistamenoi of 1 Th 5" and Ro 128, and the equally indefinite hegoujnenoi of some unknowp church shortly before 70 (He 13'- "). [If these are officials, we can say no more than that there are several of them]; (3) the angels of the seven churches in Asia. [These cannot safely be taken literally.]

6. The questions before us may be conveniently grouped round the three later offices of Bishop, Elder, and Deacon. But bishop and deacon seem at first to have denoted functions of oversight and service rather than definite offices. The elder carries over a more official character from the synagogue; but in any case there is always a good deal of give and take among officials of small societies. If so, we shall not be sur-prised if we find neither definite institution of offices nor sharp distinction of duties.

(1) Deacons. The traditional view, that the choice of the Seven in Ac 6 marks the institution of a per-manent order of deacons, is open to serious doubt. The opinion of Cyprian and later writers is not worth much on a question of this kind, and even that of Irenseus is far from decisive. The vague word diakonia (used too in the context of the Apostles themselves) is balanced by the avoidance of the word 'deacon' in the Acts (e.g. 21« Philip the evangelist, one of the Seven). Since, however, Phoebe was a deaconess at Cenchrese in 58, there were probably deacons there and at Corinth, though St. Paul does not mention any; and at Philippi we have bishops and deacons in 63. In both cases, however, the doubt remains, how far the name has settled into a definite office. See art. Deacon.

(2) Elders. Elders at Jerusalem receive the offerings in 44 from Saul and Barnabas. They are joined with the Apostles at the Conference in 50, and with James in 58. As Paul and Barnabas appoint elders in every city on their first missionary journey, and we find elders at Ephesus in 58, we may infer that the churches generally had elders, though there is no further certain mention of them till the Pastoral Epistles and 1 Peter. Probably Ja S'" is earlier, but there we cannot be sure that the word is official.

The difference of name between elders and bishops may point to some difference of origin or duties; but in NT (and in Clement of Rome) the terms are practl-

141