THE PASTORAL EPISTLES
[Sidenote: The Author.]
1 and 2 Timothy and Titus form the fourth and last group of St. Paul's
Epistles, and are known as the Pastoral Epistles,[1] because they deal
so largely with the duties and qualifications of the men entrusted with
the pastoral care of the Church. St. Paul here teaches the teachers.
Their genuineness is more frequently denied than that of any other of
St. Paul's Epistles, and this attack upon their genuineness has been
mostly based upon the character of their teaching about the
office-bearers of the Church. Attempts have sometimes been made to
separate some fragments supposed to be genuine from the remaining
portions. All such attempts have failed. These Epistles must either
be rejected entirely or accepted entirely. Otherwise we become
involved in a hopeless tangle of conjectures.
The _external evidence_ is excellent. They are found in the Syriac and
Old Latin versions, and in the _Muratorian Fragment_. They are all
quoted by Irenaeus, and also by Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian.
Their authenticity was therefore regarded as a certain fact in the
latter part of the 2nd century, and early in the 4th century Eusebius
was unaware that any doubts concerning them existed in the Church.
Moreover, St. Polycarp, A.D. 110, quotes both 1 and 2 Timothy. The
{196} combined evidence of these writers forms a very substantial
argument. Against it we sometimes find urged the fact that the heretic
Marcion rejected them. Such an objection borders on frivolity.
Marcion held a definite doctrinal heresy, and rejected everything which
he could not make to coincide with his own belief. The value which is
set on the Old Testament (_e.g._ 2 Tim. iii. 16), the assertion of a
real incarnation (_e.g._ 1 Tim. ii. 5), and the sustained opposition to
a false spiritualism, which these Epistles exhibit, must have been
intensely distasteful to Marcion. We have therefore no reason for
believing that he would hesitate to reject them, while knowing them to
be genuine, any more than he hesitated to reject all the Gospels except
Luke.
The _internal evidence_ is called in question for the following reasons.
1. _Historical difficulties._--We cannot place the journey referred to
in 1 Tim. i. 3 during the three years' stay at Ephesus mentioned in
Acts. The visit to Miletus in 2 Tim. iv. 20 cannot have taken place on
the journey to Jerusalem in Acts xx., because Trophimus was with the
apostle when he reached that city (Acts xxi. 29). Again, in 2 Tim. iv.
20 Erastus "abode at Corinth." But he had not been to Corinth for a
long time before the journey to Rome recorded in Acts. In Tit. i. 5 we
see Titus left by St. Paul at Crete; he is to join the apostle in
Nicopolis (iii. 12). But Acts allows no room for this, and the
reference to Apollos (iii. 13) implies a later period than St. Paul's
stay at Corinth (Acts xviii.).
_Answer._--All three Epistles may quite well be later than the history
related in Acts. There is no reason for denying that St. Paul was set
free after his trial at Rome, and arrested again at a later date.
Assuming that this liberation did take place, all historical
difficulties vanish. There are several points in favour of this
liberation. First, the attitude of the Roman government towards
Christianity was fairly tolerant until Nero began his persecution in
A.D. 64, and the state of the law would {197} have allowed St. Paul's
acquittal. Secondly, it was believed in the early Church that St. Paul
was set free. The Muratorian Fragment says that he went to Spain, and
St. Clement of Rome, writing from Rome about A.D. 95, says that he went
"to the boundary of the west," which seems to point to Spain. Thirdly,
the chronology implied in the ancient list of the bishops of Rome will
not allow us to put St. Paul's martyrdom earlier than A.D. 64.
Fourthly, the apostle himself expected to be set free (Phil. ii. 24;
Philem. 22). There is therefore no historical reason for denying that
St. Paul was set free from the imprisonment in which Acts leaves him.
2. _References to heresies._--It has been said that these Epistles
contain references to heresies later than the apostolic age, such as
the Gnosticism of the 2nd century. More especially, it is said that 1
Tim. vi. 20, which speaks of "oppositions of gnosis falsely so called,"
refers to a work by Marcion called the "Oppositions" (Antitheses), in
which he tried to demonstrate that the Old Testament was antagonistic
to the New.
_Answer._--The heresies here rebuked are not so definitely described
that we can determine their precise character. This fact is in favour
of the idea that the heresies belong to the 1st century rather than to
the 2nd. Stress has been laid upon statements which seem to imply
Gnostic heresy, and heresy of a "Docetic" character, _i.e._ teaching a
denial of the reality of our Lord's human nature. But there is
certainly nothing which suggests that the error here rebuked was as
developed as the heresy rebuked by St. Ignatius, or even that denounced
by St. John. It is most unlikely that the word "oppositions" can refer
to a book bearing that title. The passage 1 Tim. vi. 20 does not
suggest this. And if Marcion is really quoted in 1 Tim., how could
Polycarp have quoted 1 Tim., as he does, before Marcion's book was
written? Something of a Gnostic tendency is betokened by the scorn of
material life and the human body shown in 1 Tim. iv. 3, 8 and 2 Tim.
ii. 18. But the error is mainly Jewish. The false {198} teachers
professed to be "teachers of the Law" (1 Tim. i. 7), which was exactly
the title claimed by the Jewish rabbis (see Luke v. 17). The general
character of their teaching was "vain talking" (1 Tim. i. 6; cf. Tit.
i. 10; iii. 9). It consists of "profane babblings" (1 Tim. vi. 20; 2
Tim. ii. 16). It is further characterized as "foolish questionings,
and genealogies, and strifes, and fightings about the law . . .
unprofitable and vain" (Tit. iii. 9). It is summed up in the phrases
"old wives' fables" (1 Tim. iv. 7), "Jewish fables" (Tit. i. 14). All
this shows that the error was not a definite Gnostic heresy with a
fundamentally false view of God. It was something intrinsically
ridiculous. Therefore the "endless genealogies" (1 Tim. i. 4) can
hardly be Gnostic genealogies of the semi-divine beings who took part
in the creation. They are Jewish tales about the heroes of the Old
Testament. The error is, in fact, primitive, and does not belong to
the 2nd century.
3. _Church organization._--It is said that these Epistles lay down the
rules for an organization of the Church which is later than the
apostolic age, and resembles the Episcopal system, such as we find it
in the 2nd century. Titus and Timothy act as delegates of the apostle,
and as the highest officials of the ministry, and they appoint
presbyters and deacons. We thus find a threefold ministry which
derives its sacred authority through the apostolate. The apostle lays
his hands upon his delegate (2 Tim. i. 6), and this delegate lays his
hands upon others (1 Tim. v. 22).
_Answer._--It is perfectly true that there is a threefold ministry
mentioned in these Epistles. But there is no sufficient reason for
denying that such a ministry is of apostolic origin. It seems quite
certain that at Jerusalem the presbyters and deacons were under the
authority of St. James, and after his death under that of Symeon. The
same form of government can also be traced back in other places to
apostolic times. Moreover, the organization which is mentioned in Acts
is fundamentally the same as that in these Epistles. In Acts we {199}
find the apostles first appointing deacons and then presbyters. All
the additional evidence which has lately been discovered to support the
genuineness of Acts therefore favours the genuineness of these
Epistles. Finally, we must notice that the titles of the ministry in
these Epistles do not correspond with the titles used in the 2nd
century. The government is substantially "Episcopal," but the title
"episkopos" was in the 2nd century only applied to the chief dignitary
who ruled over the "presbyters." But here the title "episkopos" is
applied to the presbyters themselves as the overseers of the
congregation. We find the same thing in the letter of St. Clement,
A.D. 95. St. Clement, although Bishop of Rome, still gives the title
of "episkopos" to the presbyters. This inconvenient practice was given
up soon after that date, for we find that St. Ignatius, about A.D. 110,
applies the title "episkopos" only to the highest ministers of the
Church. We conclude, therefore, that while the organization of the
Church described in the Pastoral Epistles supports the belief that the
threefold ministry, which we now call Episcopal organization, is of
apostolic origin, it does not prove that these Epistles are forgeries.
And it is natural that St. Paul, knowing that his death must before
long come to pass, should devote a large measure of attention to
questions of Church government and discipline. The history of the
Church in the 2nd and 3rd centuries proves to us that the organization
of the Church was almost as important as the inspiration of the Church.
4. _Language._--This is an important difficulty. There are in these
Epistles many words and phrases which do not occur in the other
Epistles of St. Paul. We find different Greek words used for "Lord"
and for the second "advent," and a fondness for the words "wholesome,"
"godliness," and "faithful saying." The new element is most prominent
in 1 Tim. and Titus.
_Answer._--Private letters to individuals and friends in reference to
one particular subject are not likely to resemble public letters which
were written in reference to other subjects. It {200} would therefore
be unreasonable to expect that the style of the Pastoral Epistles
should be cast in the same mould as that of the other Epistles of St.
Paul. Nevertheless, the objection would have considerable weight, if
St. Paul's aptitude for varying his vocabulary could not be shown. But
it can be shown; for his other Epistles are marked by an astonishing
variation in the Greek. Beneath this diversity there exists a unity.
The Pastoral Epistles have many Pauline phrases,[2] many graphic
touches, many forcible and original statements, and glow with that
personal devotion to Christ combined with a practical capacity for
guiding Christians which St. Paul possessed in so singular a degree.
If the Pastoral Epistles are spurious, or if they are composite
productions written by a forger who inserted some notes of St. Paul in
his own effusions, it becomes almost impossible to account for the fact
that 2 Tim. differs delicately both in language and subject from 1 Tim.
and Titus. In view of this fact we can admire the sagacity of a recent
opponent of their authenticity who deprecates "the possibility of
extricating the Pauline from the traditional and editorial material"!
[3]
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO TIMOTHY
[Sidenote: The Author.]
Reasons have already been given for rejecting the arguments which have
been alleged against the Pauline authorship of this Epistle. We may
add that it is unlikely that a forger would have inserted the word
"mercy" (i. 2) in the usual Pauline greeting "grace and peace." The
reference to Timothy's "youth" (iv. 12; cf. 2 Tim. ii. 22) has seemed
strange to many. But although {201} St. Paul had been acquainted with
Timothy for about twelve years, Timothy must have been greatly the
junior of St. Paul. Even if Timothy was as old as thirty-five, the
word "youth" would be quite natural from the pen of an old man writing
to a pupil, whom he had known as a very young man, and whom he was now
putting in authority over men old enough to be his own father. We can
attribute this Epistle to St. Paul without hesitation.
[Sidenote: To whom written.]
Timothy was one of the apostle's own converts, his "child in faith."
We learn from Acts xvi. 1 that he was the son of a Greek-speaking
Gentile father and a Jewish mother. He had received a strictly
religious Jewish training from his mother Eunice and his grandmother
Lois (2 Tim. i. 1-5; iii. 14, 15). He was converted by St. Paul on his
first missionary journey, at Lystra or Derbe. On St. Paul's second
visit to that district, Timothy was so well reported of that he was
thought worthy of being associated with the apostle in his work.
Before employing him as a colleague, St. Paul had him circumcised, that
he might be able to work among Jews as well as Gentiles (Acts xvi. 3).
Some Christian prophets pointed him out as destined for his sacred
office (1 Tim. i. 18). He was ordained by the laying on of the hands
of St. Paul himself and the presbyters of the Church (1 Tim. iv. 14; 2
Tim. i. 6). He was frequently associated with the apostle in
travelling and in the writing of Epistles. His name occurs as sending
a salutation in Rom. xvi. 21, and as the fellow-sender of six of the
apostle's letters. He was with the apostle during his first
imprisonment at Rome (see Phil., Col., and Philemon). From this
Epistle we learn that after the apostle's release he was left in charge
of the important Church at Ephesus. While he was in this position, the
two Epistles which bear his name were written to him.
[Sidenote: Where and when written.]
It is impossible to ascertain the precise direction of St. Paul's
journeys after his release, and it is wisest to refrain from mere
conjecture. Before writing this letter he had been recently {202} at
Ephesus and had been called away to Macedonia (i. 3). He intended to
return before long, but had been unexpectedly delayed (iii. 14, 15).
This delay rendered it necessary for him to send directions to Timothy.
The precise date cannot be exactly fixed. If St. Paul's martyrdom was
as early as A.D. 64, and his release as early as A.D. 61, we may
reasonably put this letter in A.D. 63.
[Sidenote: Character and Contents.]
The letter is personal, but it is also official. It is intended to
guide Timothy in his work of apostolic delegate. In speaking to the
presbyters of Ephesus at Miletus (Acts xx. 29, 30), St. Paul had
already expressed fears about the future of the Church, and these fears
now seem to have been partly realized. Ephesus was a meeting-place of
east and west, a place where religious speculations and religious
divisions were likely to increase, and where wise supervision of the
Christian Church was essential. The contents of the Epistle therefore
mainly consist of warnings against Judaism and false knowledge, and
directions as to the duties of various classes of Christians, and
especially the clergy.
ANALYSIS
The danger of Jewish and Gnostic heresy (i.).
The order of common prayer (ii.).
The qualifications of _episkopoi_ (translated "bishops" in the English
versions) and deacons (iii.).
Condemnation of Gnostic asceticism and the duty of Timothy towards
heresy (iv.).
Counsels as to the treatment of presbyters (translated "elders" in the
English versions) and widows (v.).
Warnings against disobedience towards masters, vain disputations,
covetousness, and a wrong use of wealth--concluding with a direct
appeal to Timothy (vi.).
{203}
THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO TITUS
[Sidenote: The Author.]
This is exactly the kind of letter which we should expect to be written
by a writer of strong individuality addressing a disciple entrusted
with the duty of ruling a Church threatened by the same troubles as the
Church which was under the supervision of Timothy. It is attributed to
St. Paul by Irenaeus, and is amply supported by other early writers.
[Sidenote: To whom written.]
"To Titus, my true child after a common faith" (i. 4). Titus was
converted by St. Paul (i. 4), and was an uncircumcised Gentile (Gal.
ii. 3). He must have been converted at an early period in the
apostle's career, for he was with Paul and Barnabas on their visit from
Antioch to Jerusalem in A.D. 49. He was therefore present during the
great crisis when the freedom of the Gentiles from the ceremonial part
of the Jewish law was vindicated. It is suggested by Gal. ii. that
Titus was personally known to the Galatians, and possibly he was
himself a Galatian. Titus was prominent at another important crisis.
When the Church at Corinth was involved in strife, Titus was sent
thither. His efforts were attended with success, and he was able to
report good news on returning to St. Paul in Macedonia (2 Cor. vii. 6,
7, 13-15). He carried the Second Epistle to the Corinthians to
Corinth. We hear no more of him until the period when this Epistle was
written. After St. Paul's release from his first imprisonment, Titus
was with him in Crete, and was left by the apostle to direct the
affairs of the Church in that island (Tit. i. 5). It is plain that the
tact and wisdom which he had shown at Corinth had not failed him in the
interval, and that St. Paul still regarded him as a worthy delegate and
a true evangelist of the gospel of peace.
[Sidenote: Where and when written.]
The similarity to 1 Timothy makes it almost certain that Titus was
written about the same time, and before 2 Timothy. {204} The apostle
is expecting to winter at Nicopolis, probably the Nicopolis in Epirus.
The letter was therefore possibly written from Greece. It seems from
iii. 13 that Zenas, a former teacher of the Jewish law, and Apollos,
had occasion to travel by Crete, and St. Paul takes the opportunity to
send a letter with them to Titus.
[Sidenote: Character and Contents.]
The greeting at the beginning of the Epistle and the character of its
general contents show that this letter is official as well as private.
Possibly the gospel was first brought to Crete by those Jews or
proselytes from Crete who saw the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at
Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost (Acts ii. 11.) Fully thirty years had
passed since then, but the Church had not hitherto been sufficiently
organized to be independent of the apostle. Now, however, the
apostolic delegate will be able to ordain the presbyters required in
every city. The manner in which the "episkopoi" are mentioned
immediately afterwards (i. 5, 7) strongly favours the idea that the
name "episkopos" is here used as a title of the presbyters, as in Acts
xx. They form the order under the apostle's delegate. Useless
speculations of a Jewish character had invaded the Church (i. 10-14;
iii. 9). The teachers of these "fables" were influenced by love of
"filthy lucre." St. Paul quotes the saying that the Cretans are
"liars, evil beasts, idle gluttons," and attributes it to "one of
themselves, a prophet of their own." The saying is by the poet
Epimenides, c. B.C. 600. He was a native of Cnossus in Crete, who was
regarded as a seer, and his reputation for second-sight is testified by
Plato giving him the epithet "divine." St. Paul seems convinced that
the Cretan character was as prone to sensuality as in the days of
Epimenides, and it is immediately after alluding to their dangers that
he utters the memorable words, "unto the pure all things are pure."
The apostle's exhortation to "maintain good works" (iii. 8) is one of
the verses which have been absurdly alleged to be out of harmony with
{205} St. Paul's insistence upon the importance of justification by
faith. There is a definite allusion to baptismal regeneration in iii.
5.
ANALYSIS
Titus to ordain elders; the requisite character of "episkopoi",
Judaizing talkers to be checked (i.).
Duties of aged men and women; young women and men; servants; the grace
of God and the hope inspired by it (ii.).
Duty towards rulers and all men; the kindness of God; foolish
discussions to be avoided; how to deal with a heretic; personal notes
(iii.).
THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO TIMOTHY
[Sidenote: The Author.]
It is generally considered that the authenticity of this Epistle stands
or falls with that of the First Epistle. But it bears its own peculiar
marks of genuineness. One thoroughly Pauline feature is _thanksgiving_
at the beginning, a feature which is found in eight of his other
Epistles, but not in the two other Pastoral Epistles. A forger might
have had the critical insight which would lead him to compose this
thanksgiving. But it is highly improbable that a forger would have put
twenty-three proper names into the Epistle without tamely copying names
which occur elsewhere, or without betraying any wish to glorify some
saint who became popular after the death of the apostle. Neither of
these two suspicious tokens can be detected here. For instance, Demas,
concerning whom nothing that is discreditable is narrated elsewhere, is
here rebuked with a pathetic regret (iv. 10; cf. Col. iv. 14); while
Linus, afterwards a famous bishop and martyr of Rome, is mentioned
without any honourable distinction at all. Even if the Linus of this
Epistle is not the bishop of that name {206} the argument still holds
good. For a forger, if he inserted the name of any Linus, would have
been almost certain to mention _the_ Linus and no other.
[Sidenote: To whom written.]
"To Timothy, my beloved child" (i. 2).
[Sidenote: Where and when written.]
It was written from Rome, where St. Paul is again a prisoner, the
reason of his imprisonment being the witness that he has borne to
Christ (i. 8, 12, 17). His imprisonment had already lasted some time,
for it was known at Ephesus. The apostle had apparently requested two
of his friends, Phygellus and Hermogenes, to come to him at Rome, but
they had declined. The Ephesian Onesiphorus had acted otherwise, and
when in Rome had sought him out. St. Paul anticipates death. His case
has already had a first hearing, when no witness appeared in his
defence (iv. 16). He is now ready to be offered up. But he does not
anticipate an immediate martyrdom, as he urges Timothy to come to Rome
before winter. The date is therefore probably some weeks or months
before St. Paul's martyrdom. The year is either A.D. 64 or very soon
afterwards.
[Sidenote Character and Contents.]
This Epistle is the apostle's farewell pastoral charge. He looks
forward to his fate with courage and confidence. He has fought a good
fight, and is sure of the crown of righteousness which the Lord will
give him. But he sees that a dark future is in store for the Church.
Some professing Christians have already deserted him, others have
perverted the faith. Among the latter are Hymenseus and Philetus, who
assert that the resurrection is past already. It is probable that they
were influenced by some Gnostic dislike of the human body, and taught
that the only resurrection possible for a Christian was the spiritual
resurrection of becoming acquainted with their own Gnostic doctrine.
Such a heresy is described by Irenaeus. St. Paul warns Timothy that
there are "grievous times" to come (iii. 1). Scripture will be a means
of security against the mischief-makers. {207} The various
exhortations given to Timothy are of great force and beauty; he is to
endure hardship like a good soldier, and is charged before God to
preach and rebuke with long-suffering. The solemnity of these words is
equalled by the pungent sarcasm with which the writer alludes to the
schismatics who "lead captive silly women" or will "heap to themselves
teachers, having itching ears."
We may notice that ii. 11-13 seems to contain part of a Christian hymn,
that iii. 8 contains a reference to a Jewish story not found in the Old
Testament, and that i. 18 is perhaps a prayer for the dead. The Second
Book of Maccabees xii. 44 shows that in the century before the
Christian era the Jews were wont to pray for the departed.
ANALYSIS
Exhortation to energy, the failure of friends, the fidelity of
Onesiphorus (i.).
Exhortation to endurance as Christ's soldier, profane discussions to be
shunned; the error of Hymenseus and Philetus; varieties of character
like varieties of vessels; the way to become a vessel of honour (ii.).
Coming corruption, the creeping mischief-makers; Timothy is reminded of
St. Paul's manner of life and of the value of Scripture (iii.).
Exhortation to fidelity in ministerial work; the apostle's course
drawing to an end, Timothy urged to come; personal notes (iv.).
[1] This title seems to have been first applied to them in 1810 by
Wegscheider.
[2] Cf. "according to my gospel" (2 Tim. ii. 8; Rom. ii. 16); "the
gospel of the glory" (1 Tim. i. 11; 2 Cor. iv. 4). The Greek phrase
for "give occasion to" (1 Tim. v. 14) is found in 2 Cor. v. 12, and
nowhere in the New Testament except in St. Paul.
[3] B. W. Bacon, _Introduction to the New Testament_, p. 140.
{208}