In the earlier Epistles Paul addresses his churches both with authority in the name of Christ and with paternal solicitude (1 Co 1" 11^ 16', Gal 4i---»,
1 Th 4"). In the Pastorals also the same notes rise clear in his urgent commands or appeals to Timothy and Titus ( 1 Ti 1", 2 Ti 4>- ', Tit l'^- »). As formerly he hande<l on 'traditions' (irapaddaeLi, 1 Co IT'', 2 Th 21= 31) and ' injunctions ' (jrapayyeXiai, 1 Th 4=), so now his lieutenants are to guard and transmit the Pauline deposit, which he claims to be the sound teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ (1 Ti 118 g3. w. ^0)^ committing it to trustworthy and cap- able successors (2 Ti 2^, Tit P) — a procedure in which some have discovered, though without sufficient reason, the beginnings of 'apostolic succession ' and the mark of later Catholicity, 'quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus.'
The function of Timothy and Titus was to repre- sent the Apostle with the authority of his gospel and of the order which he had established in his churches. Their duty seems to have been, for the time, confined to definite regions, being unlike that of the later monarchical bishop, who pre- sided permanently over the church in one city. On former occasions also they had been sent on missions (1 Co 4" 16i», 2 Co 2'3 12i8, I'h 2'»-=3), but it is quite possible that Titus had also evangelized on an independent authority, both he and Timothy apparently being regarded as ' apostles ' (cf. Ro 16', 2 Co 823 . cf_ ph 225, 1 Th 2'). In Ephesus and Crete, however, their duties are more arduous and more permanent, because of the necessity of getting distracted or turbulent communities into an ordered administration. Their ability to do this was due to the fact that they understood the Apostle's mind and practice as well as his gospel.
In the Second Epistle of Timothy the Apostle recalls to his disciple the fact that he is an evan- gelist and must speak with the authority of his gospel. When he was ordained this gift had de- scended on him with power, but its glow seems to have become hidden under a cooled surface ; now he is to stir up his gift and to preach a pure gospel with courage, love, and prudence (1 Ti 4'i'i',
2 Ti 1« 3'"-" 41-5). Here is a challenge not to missionary evangelism of new regions, but to a revival of faith in old churches ; and it rests not on extrinsic authority but on the power of the gospel of Christ.
In 1 Tim. and Titus the function of both these lieutenants is more of an organizing than an evan-
gelizing character. They have great authority, and yet they are to act as brethren (1 Ti 5', Tit 07. 8. IS 3iu)_ Timothy is to rebuke even an elder openly, to assign him honour or promotion, and not to invest with ottice by weak concession the wrong type of man. This authority seems to be personal rather than official.
There was still in the churches a remnant of the primitive charismatic gifts, for apparently it was under the guise of Christian projihecy that false prophets introduced their errors (1 Ti 4' ; cf. 1 Co 12^). But the sudden overpowering cbarism of earlier days seems to have given way to an endowment of more permanent and illuminating inspiration (1 Ti V« 4»-i», 2 Ti 3"'- "). Against irresjionsible, unrestrained, and immoral teachers, who profess to rely on the Spirit, a well-onlered and organized church becomes a bulwark of the faith.
In these Epistles no definite form of organiza- tion is prescribed, but an order is accepted as already in existence — one object of the letters being to emphasize the necessity that Timothy and Titus shall secure men of the proper character and qualifications to fill the constituted offices. The first order in government is that of the ' bishop ' (1 Ti 3-, Tit 1'), who seems to be identical with the 'presbyter' (1 Ti 5", Tit P- '), of whom there were probably more than one in each church, though the article ( 1 Ti 31, Tit V) does not of itself indicate this. The office was invested with peculiar dignity (1 Ti 5i'"2i)and was much sought after (3i) ; it was, therefore, the duty of the Apostle's dele- gates to select from the aspirants those whose character, abilities, and experience fitted them for directing the Church at the present crisis. It can- not be shown that the office was elective, h\it it may be that the function of Timothy and Titus was that of selecting suitable candidates from whom the brethren would make their choice (cf. 1 Ti 3-- 1» 5").
The qualifications for the bishop given in 1 Tim. and Titus are almost identical, though their order seems to be casual, and it cannot be assumed that they were meant to be an exhaustive list or had been codified ; the emphasis was probably determ'ined by local conditions. The bishop as the steward, with oversight of the house of God, should be a married man of proved capacity to govern, as shown in the lesser sphere of his own family. Free from the faults of youth, he must have won in the eyes of the world a character for uprightness and piety. Great stfess is put upon tlie practice of self-restraint in all its forms, (jn tact and active goodness— probably to counteract the temptations to an undue exercise of authority. More distinctly official requisites are hospitality, freedom from avarice — needful in one who may have been responsible for finances — and ability to teach. If 'bishop' and 'elder' were identical it may be inferred from 1 Ti 5" that some elders did not teach, inasmuch as those who did were to receive either double pecuniary support or to be regarded as holding a more honourable office. In Tit 1", however, the ability to teach and to resist heresy is emphasized as being so essential as almost to suggest that this distinction in the elder- ship did not exist in Crete. These officials were evidently to be supported by the churches which they served (1 Ti 51").