3. Tnidiliimiiri/ Close of his Career. — Whatever else remains is legendary, though it may contain elements of truth. Titus is connected by tradition with Dalma- tia, and h(4 is said to have been an object of much rev- erence in that region. This, however, may simply be a result of the passage quf)ted immediately above: and it is observable that of all the churches in modern Dal- matia (Xeale, Kcclesiolof/icdl No/es on Balm. p. 175) not one is dedicated to him. The traditional connec- tion of Titus with Crete is much more specific and con- stant, though here again we cannot be certain of the facts. He is said to have been permanent bishop in the island, and to have died there at an advanced age (Kusebius, HiM. Eccles. iii, 4, 2; Theodoret, Ad 1 Tim. iii, 1 ; Const. A post, vii, 4() ; Jerome, Ad Tit. ii, 7; Isi- dore, Vit. Sanct. 87). The modern capital, Candia, ap- pears to claim the honor of being his burial-place (Cave, Apostiiliri, 1716, p. 42). In the fragment De Vila et .Actis Titi, bv the lawyer Zeuas (Fabricius, Cod, Apoc. A'. T. ii, 831, 832), Titus is called bishop of Gor- tyna; and on the old site of (iortyna is a ruined church, of ancient and solid masonry, which bears the name of St. Titus, and where service is occasionally celebrated by priests from the neighboring hamlet of Metropolis {VA\kciw.r, Re mains in Crete, from a J/.S'. History of Can- dia. hij Onorio Belli, p. 23). The cathedral of Megalo- Castron, in the north of the island, is also dedicated to this saint. Lastly, the name of Titus was the watch- word of the Oelans when they were invaded by the Venetians; and the Venetians themselves, after their cou(|uest of the island, ado)ited him to some of the hon- ors of a patron saint: for as the response after the pray- er for the Doge of Venice was "Sancte jNIarce, tu nos adjuva,"so the response after that for the duke of Can- dia was "Sancte Tite, tu nos adjuva" (Pashley, Travels in Crete, i, 6. 17.5). The day on which 'J'itus is com- memorated is Jan. 4 in the Latin calendar, anil Aug. 25 in the (ireek.
We must not leave unnoticed the striking though extravagant panegyric of Titus by his successor in the see of Crete, Andreas Cretensis (published, with Am- philochius and Methodius, by Combefis, Paris, 1(544). This |)anegyric has many excellent points, e. g. it incor- porates well the more important passages from the Sec- ond Epistle to the Corinthians. The following are stated as facts. Titus is related to the proconsul of the island : among his ancestors are iMinos ami Hhada- manthiis (oi t/c Aioc). Early in life he obtains a copy of the Jewish Scriptures, and learns Hebrew in a short time. He goes to Judcea, and is present on the occa- sion mentioned in Acts i, 15. H is conversion takes place liefore that of Paul himself, but afterwards he attaches liimself closely to the apostle. Whatever the value of these statements may be, the following description of
Titns (p. 156) is worthy of (juofation : o vrpwroQ rrjc KpIiTiot' tKKXrjcriatj ifptXtoi; ' Ti)<; aXij^dag 6 (Tri'Xoij " 7"6 r/jt' TrioTnoQ iptKTjxa ' tmv ti'ayyfXtKujf Ki/pvynd- Tiitv i'i uaiyiiroi; auXiny^' to vi\/i\Xijv t;/(,' i\ai'Xov yXioTTiiQ aTrii\i)fia.
See Walch, i)e Tito Viro Apostolic. (.Ten. 1741 ; also in his Miscellun. Sacra [Amst. 1744], )i. 708 sq.) ; How- son, Companions (f St. I'aul (Loud. 1871), ch. v.
TITL'S, Ei'i.sTi.K TO. This is the third of the .so- called Pastoral Epistles of Paul, following immediately after those to Timothy.
L Authenticity. — In this respect there are no special- ties in this epistle which require any ver\- elaborate treatment distinct from the other Pastoral Letters of Paul. See Timothy, Fikst Episti.e to. If those two were not genuine, it would be difficult confidently to maintain the genuineness of this. On the other hand, if the Epistles to Timothy are received as Paul's, there is not the slightest reason for doubting the authorship of that to Titus. Amid the various combinations which are found among those who have been sceptical on the subject of the Pastoral Epistles, there is no instance of the rejection of that before us on the part of those who have accepted the other two. So far, indeed, as these doubts are worth considering at all, the argument is more in favor of this than of cither of those. Tatian accepted the Epistle to Titus, and rejected the other two. Origen mentions some who excluded 2 Tim., but kept 1 Tim. with Titus. Schleiermacher and Neander invert this process of doubt in regard to the letters ad- dressed to Timothy, but believe that Paul wrote the present letter to Titus. Credner, too, believes it to be genuine, though he pronounces 1 'I'im. to be a forgery, and 2 Tim. a comi^ound of two episites.
To turn now from opinions to direct external evi- dence, this epistle stands on quite as firm a ground as the others of the pastoral group, if not a firmer ground. Nothing can well be more explicit than the quotations and references in Irenasus, C. lUeres. i, 16. 3 (see Tit. iii, 10); Clem. Alex. Strom, i, 350 (comp. 'I'it. i, 12), and iii, 3, 4 ; by Tertull. De Prascr, //cer. c. 6 ( comii. Tit. iii, 10, 1 1), and A dr. Afaic v. 21 ; and by Origen, in many places (Lardner, Works, vol. ii, 8vo) ; to say nothing of earlier allusions in Justin Martj'r, IHal. c, Tryph. 47 (see Tit. iiij 4), which can hardly be doubted; Theoph. Ad Antol. ii, 95 (see Tit. iii, 5); iii, 126 (see ver. 1), which are probable; and Clem. Kom. 2 Cor. i (see ibid.), which is possible.