THE TEACHERS AND MINISTERS OF THE CHURCH; THEIR ELECTION AND OFFICE.
We must now treat of the order which it has been the Lord’s will to
appoint for the government of his Church. For although he alone ought to
rule and reign in the Church, and to have all preëminence in it, and
this government ought to be exercised and administered solely by his
word,—yet, as he dwells not among us by a visible presence, so as to
make an audible declaration of his will to us, we have stated, that for
this purpose he uses the ministry of men whom he employs as his
delegates, not to transfer his right and honour to them, but only that
he may himself do his work by their lips; just as an artificer makes use
of an instrument in the performance of his work. Some observations which
I have made already, are necessary to be repeated here. It is true that
he might do this either by himself, without any means or instruments, or
even by angels; but there are many reasons why he prefers making use of
men. For, in the first place, by this method he declares his kindness
towards us, since he chooses from among men those who are to be his
ambassadors to the world, to be the interpreters of his secret will, and
even to act as his personal representatives. And thus he affords an
actual proof, that when he so frequently calls us his temples, it is not
an unmeaning appellation, since he gives answers to men, even from the
mouths of men, as from a sanctuary. In the second place, this is a most
excellent and beneficial method to train us to humility, since he
accustoms us to obey his word, though it is preached to us by men like
ourselves, and sometimes even of inferior rank. If he were himself to
speak from heaven, there would be no wonder if his sacred oracles were
instantly received with reverence, by the ears and hearts of all
mankind. For who would not be awed by his present power? who would not
fall prostrate at the first view of infinite Majesty? who would not be
confounded by that overpowering splendour? But when a contemptible
mortal, who had just emerged from the dust, addresses us in the name of
God, we give the best evidence of our piety and reverence towards God
himself, if we readily submit to be instructed by his minister, who
possesses no personal superiority to ourselves. For this reason, also,
he has deposited the treasure of his heavenly wisdom in frail and
earthen vessels,[798] in order to afford a better proof of the
estimation in which we hold it. Besides, nothing was more adapted to
promote brotherly love, than a mutual connection of men by this bond,
while one is constituted the pastor to teach all the rest, and they who
are commanded to be disciples, receive one common doctrine from the same
mouth. For if each person were sufficient for himself, and had no need
of the assistance of another, such is the pride of human nature, every
one would despise others, and would also be despised by them. The Lord,
therefore, has connected his Church together, by that which he foresaw
would be the strongest bond for the preservation of their union, when he
committed the doctrine of eternal life and salvation to men, that by
their hands it might be communicated to others. Paul had this in view
when he wrote to the Ephesians, “There is one body, and one Spirit, even
as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one
baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all,
and in you all. But unto every one of us is given grace according to the
measure of the gift of Christ. Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up
on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. (Now that he
ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower
parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up
far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) And he gave some,
apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors
and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the
ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ; till we all come in
the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a
perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ;
that we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried
about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning
craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; but, speaking the truth
in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even
Christ; from whom the whole body fitly joined together, and compacted by
that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in
the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying
of itself in love.”[799]
II. In this passage he shows that the ministry of men, which God employs
in his government of the Church, is the principal bond which holds
believers together in one body. He also indicates that the Church cannot
be preserved in perfect safety, unless it be supported by these means
which God has been pleased to appoint for its preservation. Christ, he
says, “ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all
things.”[800] And this is the way in which he does it. By means of his
ministers, to whom he has committed this office, and on whom he has
bestowed grace to discharge it, he dispenses and distributes his gifts
to the Church, and even affords some manifestation of his own presence,
by exerting the power of his Spirit in this his institution, that it may
not be vain or ineffectual. Thus is the restoration of the saints
effected; thus is the body of Christ edified; thus we grow up unto him
who is our Head in all things, and are united with each other; thus we
are all brought to the unity of Christ; if prophecy flourishes among us,
if we receive the apostles, if we despise not the doctrine which is
delivered to us. Whoever, therefore, either aims to abolish or
undervalue this order, of which we are treating, and this species of
government, attempts to disorganize the Church, or rather to subvert and
destroy it altogether. For neither the light and heat of the sun, nor
any meat and drink, are so necessary to the nourishment and sustenance
of the present life, as the apostolical and pastoral office is to the
preservation of the Church in the world.
III. Therefore I have already remarked, that God has frequently
commended its dignity to us by every possible encomium, in order that we
might hold it in the highest estimation and value, as more excellent
than every thing else. That he confers a peculiar favour upon men by
raising up teachers for them, he fully signifies, when he commands the
prophet to exclaim, “How beautiful are the feet of him that publisheth
peace;”[801] and when he calls the apostles “the light of the world,”
and “the salt of the earth.”[802] Nor could that office be more
splendidly distinguished than when he said to them, “He that heareth
you, heareth me.”[803] But there is no passage more remarkable than that
in Paul’s Second Epistle to the Corinthians, where he professedly
discusses this question. He contends, that there is nothing more
excellent or glorious than the ministry of the gospel in the Church,
inasmuch as it is the ministration of the Spirit, and of righteousness,
and of eternal life.[804] The tendency of these and similar passages, is
to preserve that mode of governing the Church by its ministers, which
the Lord appointed to be of perpetual continuance, from sinking into
disesteem, and, at length, falling into disuse through mere contempt.
And how exceedingly necessary it is, he has not only declared in words,
but shown by examples. When he was pleased to illuminate Cornelius more
fully with the light of his truth, he despatched an angel from heaven to
send Peter to him. When he designs to call Paul to the knowledge of
himself, and to introduce him into the Church, he does not address him
with his own voice, but sends him to a man to receive the doctrine of
salvation, and the sanctification of baptism. If it was not without
sufficient reason, that an angel, who is the messenger of God, refrains
from announcing the Divine will himself, and directs a man to be sent
for in order to declare it,—and that Christ, the sole Teacher of
believers, committed Paul to the instruction of a man, the same Paul
whom he had determined to elevate into the third heaven, and to favour
with a miraculous revelation of things unspeakable,—who can now dare to
despise that ministry, or to neglect it as unnecessary, the utility and
necessity of which God has been pleased to evince by such examples?
IV. Those who preside over the government of the Church, according to
the institution of Christ, are named by Paul, first, “apostles;”
secondly, “prophets;” thirdly, “evangelists;” fourthly, “pastors;”
lastly, “teachers.”[805] Of these, only the two last sustain an ordinary
office in the Church: the others were such as the Lord raised up at the
commencement of his kingdom, and such as he still raises up on
particular occasions, when required by the necessity of the times. The
nature of the apostolic office is manifest from this command: “Go preach
the gospel to every creature.”[806] No certain limits are prescribed,
but the whole world is assigned to them, to be reduced to obedience to
Christ; that by disseminating the gospel wherever they could, they might
erect his kingdom in all nations. Therefore Paul, when he wished to
prove his apostleship, declares, not merely that he had gained some one
city for Christ, but that he had propagated the gospel far and wide, and
that he had not built upon the foundation of others, but had planted
Churches where the name of the Lord had never been heard before. The
“apostles,” therefore, were missionaries, who were to reduce the world
from their revolt to true obedience to God, and to establish his kingdom
universally by the preaching of the gospel. Or, if you please, they were
the first architects of the Church, appointed to lay its foundations all
over the world. Paul gives the appellation of “prophets,” not to all
interpreters of the Divine will, but only to those who were honoured
with some special revelation. Of these, either there are none in our
day, or they are less conspicuous. By “evangelists,” I understand those
who were inferior to the apostles in dignity, but next to them in
office, and who performed similar functions. Such were Luke, Timothy,
Titus, and others of that description; and perhaps also the seventy
disciples, whom Christ ordained to occupy the second station from the
apostles.[807] According to this interpretation, which appears to me
perfectly consistent with the language and meaning of the apostle, those
three offices were not instituted to be of perpetual continuance in the
Church, but only for that age when Churches were to be raised where none
had existed before, or were at least to be conducted from Moses to
Christ. Though I do not deny, that, even since that period, God has
sometimes raised up apostles or evangelists in their stead, as he has
done in our own time. For there was a necessity for such persons to
recover the Church from the defection of Antichrist. Nevertheless, I
call this an extraordinary office, because it has no place in
well-constituted Churches. Next follow “pastors” and “teachers,” who are
always indispensable to the Church. The difference between them I
apprehend to be this—that teachers have no official concern with the
discipline, or the administration of the sacraments, or with admonitions
and exhortations, but only with the interpretation of the Scripture,
that pure and sound doctrine may be retained among believers; whereas
the pastoral office includes all these things.
V. We have now ascertained what offices were appointed to continue for a
time in the government of the Church, and what were instituted to be of
perpetual duration. If we connect the evangelists with the apostles, as
sustaining the same office, we shall then have two offices of each
description, corresponding to each other. For our pastors bear the same
resemblance to the apostles, as our teachers do to the ancient prophets.
The office of the prophets was more excellent, on account of the special
gift of revelation, by which they were distinguished; but the office of
teachers is executed in a similar manner, and has precisely the same
end. So those twelve individuals, whom the Lord chose to promulgate the
first proclamation of his gospel to the world, preceded all others in
order and dignity. For although, according to the meaning and etymology
of the word, all the ministers of the Church may be called apostles,
because they are all sent by the Lord, and are his messengers, yet, as
it was of great importance to have a certain knowledge of the mission of
persons who were to announce a thing new and unheard before, it was
necessary that those twelve, together with Paul, who was afterwards
added to their number, should be distinguished beyond all others by a
peculiar title. Paul himself, indeed, gives this name to “Andronicus and
Junia, who,” he says, “are of note among the apostles;”[808] but when he
means to speak with strict propriety, he never applies that name except
to those of the first order that we have mentioned. And this is the
common usage of the Scripture. But the province of pastors is the same
as that of the apostles, except that they preside over particular
Churches respectively committed to each of them. Of the nature of their
functions let us now proceed to a more distinct statement.
VI. Our Lord, when he sent forth his apostles, commissioned them, as we
have just remarked, to preach the gospel, and to baptize all believers
for the remission of sins.[809] He had already commanded them to
distribute the sacred symbols of his body and blood according to his own
example.[810] Behold the sacred, inviolable, and perpetual law imposed
upon those who call themselves successors of the apostles; it commands
them to preach the gospel, and to administer the sacraments. Hence we
conclude, that those who neglect both these duties have no just
pretensions to the character of apostles. But what shall we say of
pastors? Paul speaks not only of himself, but of all who bear that
office, when he says, “Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers
of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.”[811] Again: “A bishop
must hold fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be
able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and to convince the
gainsayers.”[812] From these and similar passages, which frequently
occur, we may infer that the preaching of the gospel, and the
administration of the sacraments, constitute the two principal parts of
the pastoral office. Now, the business of teaching is not confined to
public discourses, but extends also to private admonitions. Thus Paul
calls upon the Ephesians to witness the truth of his declaration, “I
have kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have showed
you, and have taught you publicly, and from house to house, testifying
both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and
faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.” And a little after: “I ceased not
to warn every one, night and day, with tears.”[813] But it is no part of
my present design, to enumerate all the excellences of a good pastor,
but only to show what is implied in the profession of those who call
themselves pastors; namely, that they preside over the Church in that
station, not that they may enjoy a respectable sinecure, but to instruct
the people in true piety by the doctrine of Christ, to administer the
holy mysteries, to maintain and exercise proper discipline. For the Lord
denounces to all those who have been stationed as watchmen in the
Church, that if any one perish in ignorance through their negligence, he
will require the blood of such a person at their hands.[814] What Paul
says of himself, belongs to them all: “Woe is unto me, if I preach not
the gospel,” because “a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto
me.”[815] Lastly, what the apostles did for the whole world, that every
individual pastor ought to do for his flock to which he is appointed.
VII. While we assign to them all respectively their distinct Churches,
yet we do not deny that a pastor, who is connected with one Church, may
assist others, either when any disputes arise, which may require his
presence, or when his advice is asked upon any difficult subject. But
because, in order to preserve the peace of the Church, there is a
necessity for such a regulation as shall clearly define to every one
what duty he has to do, lest they should all fall into disorder, run
hither and thither in uncertainty without any call, and all resort to
one place; and lest those who feel more solicitude for their personal
accommodation than for the edification of the Church, should, without
any cause but their own caprice, leave the Churches destitute,—this
distribution ought as far as possible to be generally observed, that
every one may be content with his own limits, and not invade the
province of another. Nor is this an invention of men, but an institution
of God himself. For we read that Paul and Barnabas “ordained elders in
the respective Churches of Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch;”[816] and Paul
himself directed Titus to “ordain elders in every city.”[817] So in
other passages he mentions “the bishops at Philippi,”[818] and
Archippus, the bishop of the Colossians.[819] And a remarkable speech of
his is preserved by Luke, addressed to “the elders of the Church of
Ephesus.”[820] Whoever, therefore, has undertaken the government and
charge of one Church, let him know that he is bound to this law of the
Divine call; not that he is fixed to his station so as never to be
permitted to leave it in a regular and orderly manner, if the public
benefit should require it; but he who has been called to one place,
ought never to think either of departing from his situation, or
relinquishing the office altogether, from any motive of personal
convenience or advantage. But if it be expedient that he should remove
to another station, he ought not to attempt this on his own private
opinion, but to be guided by public authority.
VIII. In calling those who preside over Churches by the appellations of
bishops, elders, pastors, and ministers, without any distinction, I have
followed the usage of the Scripture, which applies all these terms to
express the same meaning. For to all who discharge the ministry of the
word, it gives the title of “bishops.” So when Paul enjoins Titus to
“ordain elders in every city,” he immediately adds, “For a bishop must
be blameless.”[821] So in another Epistle he salutes more bishops than
one in one Church.[822] And in the Acts he is declared to have sent for
the elders of the Church of Ephesus, whom, in his address to them, he
calls “bishops.”[823] Here it must be observed, that we have enumerated
only those offices which consist in the ministry of the word; nor does
Paul mention any other in the fourth chapter of the Epistle to the
Ephesians, which we have quoted. But in the Epistle to the Romans, and
the First Epistle to the Corinthians, he enumerates others, as “powers,”
“gifts of healing,” “interpretation of tongues,” “governments,” “care of
the poor.”[824] Those functions which were merely temporary, I omit, as
foreign to our present subject. But there are two which perpetually
remain—“government,” and “the care of the poor.” “Governors” I apprehend
to have been persons of advanced years, selected from the people, to
unite with the bishops in giving admonitions and exercising discipline.
For no other interpretation can be given of that injunction, “He that
ruleth, let him do it with diligence.”[825] Therefore, from the
beginning, every Church has had its senate or council, composed of
pious, grave, and holy men, who were invested with that jurisdiction in
the correction of vices, of which we shall soon treat. Now, that this
regulation was not of a single age, experience itself demonstrates. This
office of government is necessary, therefore, in every age.
IX. The care of the poor was committed to the “deacons.” The Epistle to
the Romans, however, mentions two functions of this kind. “He that
giveth,” says the apostle, “let him do it with simplicity: he that
showeth mercy, with cheerfulness.”[826] Now, as it is certain that he
there speaks of the public offices of the Church, it follows that there
were two distinct orders of deacons. Unless my judgment deceive me, the
former clause refers to the deacons who administered the alms; and the
other to those who devoted themselves to the care of poor and sick
persons; such as the widows mentioned by Paul to Timothy.[827] For women
could execute no other public office, than by devoting themselves to the
service of the poor. If we admit this,—and it ought to be fully
admitted,—there will be two classes of deacons, of whom one will serve
the Church in dispensing the property given to the poor, the other in
taking care of the poor themselves.—Though the word itself (διακονια) is
of more extensive signification, yet the Scripture particularly gives
the title of “deacons” to those whom the Church has appointed to
dispense the alms and take care of the poor, and constituted stewards,
as it were, of the common treasury of the poor; and whose origin,
institution, and office, are described in the Acts of the Apostles. For
“when there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews
because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration,”[828] the
apostles pleaded their inability to discharge both offices, of the
ministry of the word and the service of tables, and said to the
multitude, “Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of
honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint
over this business.” See what were the characters of the deacons in the
apostolic Church, and what ought to be the characters of ours, in
conformity to the primitive example.
X. Now, as “all things” in the Church are required to “be done decently
and in order,”[829] there is nothing in which this ought to be more
diligently observed, than the constitution of its government; because
there would be more danger from disorder in this case than in any other.
Therefore, that restless and turbulent persons may not presumptuously
intrude themselves into the office of teaching or of governing, it is
expressly provided, that no one shall assume a public office in the
Church without a call. In order, therefore, that any one may be
accounted a true minister of the Church, it is necessary, in the first
place, that he be regularly called to it, and, in the second place, that
he answer his call; that is, by undertaking and executing the office
assigned to him. This may frequently be observed in Paul; who, when he
wishes to prove his apostleship, almost always alleges his call,
together with his fidelity in the execution of the office. If so eminent
a minister of Christ dare not arrogate to himself an authority to
require his being heard in the Church, but in consequence of his
appointment to it by a Divine commission, and his faithful discharge of
the duty assigned him,—what extreme impudence must it be, if any man,
destitute of both these characters, should claim such an honour for
himself! But having already spoken of the necessity of discharging the
office, let us now confine ourselves to the call.
XI. Now, the discussion of this subject includes four branches: what are
the qualifications of ministers; in what manner they are to be chosen;
by whom they ought to be appointed; and with what rite or ceremony they
are to be introduced into their office. I speak of the external and
solemn call, which belongs to the public order of the Church; passing
over that secret call, of which every minister is conscious to himself
before God, but which is not known to the Church. This secret call,
however, is the honest testimony of our heart, that we accept the office
offered to us, not from ambition or avarice, or any other unlawful
motive, but from a sincere fear of God, and an ardent zeal for the
edification of the Church. This, as I have hinted, is indispensable to
every one of us, if we would approve our ministry in the sight of God.
In the view of the Church, however, he who enters on his office with an
evil conscience, is nevertheless duly called, provided his iniquity be
not discovered. It is even common to speak of private persons as called
to the ministry, who appear to be adapted and qualified for the
discharge of its duties; because learning, connected with piety and
other endowments of a good pastor, constitutes a kind of preparation for
it. For those whom the Lord has destined to so important an office, he
first furnishes with those talents which are requisite to its execution,
that they may not enter upon it empty and unprepared. Hence Paul, in his
Epistle to the Corinthians, when he intended to treat of the offices
themselves, first enumerated the gifts which ought to be possessed by
the persons who sustain those offices.[830] But as this is the first of
the four points which I have proposed, let us now proceed to it.
XII. The qualifications of those who ought to be chosen bishops, are
stated at large by Paul in two passages.[831] The sum of all he says is,
that none are to be chosen but men of sound doctrine and a holy life,
not chargeable with any fault that may destroy their authority, or
disgrace their ministry. The same rule is laid down for the deacons and
governors. Constant care is required, that they be not unequal to the
burden imposed upon them, or, in other words, that they be endowed with
those talents which are necessary to the discharge of their duty. So,
when Christ was about to send forth his apostles, he furnished them with
such means and powers as were indispensable to their success.[832] And
Paul, after having delineated the character of a good and genuine
bishop, admonishes Timothy not to contaminate himself by the appointment
of any one of a different description.[833] The question relating to the
_manner_ in which they are to be chosen, I refer not to the form of
election, but to the religious awe which ought to be observed in it.
Hence the fasting and prayer, which Luke states to have been practised
by the faithful at the ordination of elders.[834] For knowing themselves
to be engaged in a business of the highest importance, they dared not
attempt any thing but with the greatest reverence and solicitude. And
above all things, they were earnest in prayers and supplications to God
for the spirit of wisdom and discretion.
XIII. The third inquiry we proposed was, by whom ministers are to be
chosen. Now, for this no certain rule can be gathered from the
appointment of the apostles, which was a case somewhat different from
the common call of other ministers. For as theirs was an extraordinary
office, it was necessary, in order to render it conspicuous by some
eminent character, that they who were to sustain it should be called and
appointed by the mouth of the Lord himself. The apostles, therefore,
entered upon their work, not in consequence of any human election, but
empowered by the sole command of God and of Christ. Hence, when they
wish to substitute another in the place of Judas, they refrain from a
certain appointment of any one, but nominate two, that the Lord may
declare by lot which of them he wills to be his successor.[835] In the
same sense must be understood the declaration of Paul, that he had been
created “an apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ,
and God the Father.”[836] The first clause, _not of men_, was applicable
to him in common with all pious ministers of the word; for no man can
lawfully exercise this ministry without having been called by God. The
other clause was special and peculiar to himself. When he glories in
this, therefore, he not only claims what belongs to a true and lawful
pastor, but likewise brings forward an evidence of his apostleship. For
whereas there were, among the Galatians, some who, from an eagerness to
diminish his authority, represented him as a common disciple deputed by
the primary apostles,—in order to vindicate the dignity of his
preaching, against which he knew these artifices were directed, he found
it necessary to show that he was not inferior to the other apostles in
any respect. Wherefore he affirms, that he had not been elected by the
judgment of men, like some ordinary bishop, but by the mouth and clear
revelation of the Lord himself.
XIV. But that the election and appointment of bishops by men is
necessary to constitute a legitimate call to the office, no sober person
will deny, while there are so many testimonies of Scripture to establish
it. Nor is it contradicted by that declaration of Paul, that he was “an
apostle, not of men, nor by man,”[837] since he is not speaking in that
passage of the ordinary election of ministers, but claiming to himself
what was the special privilege of the apostles. The immediate
designation of Paul, by the Lord himself, to this peculiar privilege,
was nevertheless accompanied with the form of an ecclesiastical call,
for Luke states, that “As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the
Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I
have called them.”[838] What end could be answered by this separation
and imposition of hands after the Holy Spirit had testified their
election, unless it was the preservation of the order of the Church in
designating ministers by men? God could not sanction that order,
therefore, by a more illustrious example than when, after having
declared that he had constituted Paul the apostle of the Gentiles, he
nevertheless directed him to be designated by the Church. The same may
be observed in the election of Matthias.[839] For the apostolic office
being of such high importance that they could not venture to fill up
their number by the choice of any one person from their own judgment,
they appointed two, one of whom was to be chosen by lot; that so the
election might obtain a positive sanction from Heaven, and yet that the
order of the Church might not be altogether neglected.
XV. Here it is inquired, whether a minister ought to be chosen by the
whole Church, or only by the other ministers and the elders who preside
over the discipline, or whether he may be appointed by the authority of
an individual. Those who attribute this right to any one man, quote what
Paul says to Titus: “For this cause I left thee in Crete, that thou
shouldst ordain elders in every city;”[840] and to Timothy: “Lay hands
suddenly on no man.”[841] But they are exceedingly mistaken, if they
suppose that either Timothy at Ephesus, or Titus in Crete, exercised a
sovereign power to regulate every thing according to his own pleasure.
For they presided over the people, only to lead them by good and
salutary counsels, not to act alone to the exclusion of all others. But
that this may not be thought to be an invention of mine, I will prove it
by a similar example. For Luke relates, that elders were ordained in the
Churches by Paul and Barnabas, but at the same time he distinctly marks
the manner in which this was done,—namely, by the suffrages or votes of
the people; for this is the meaning of the term he there
employs—χειροτονησαντες πρεσβυτερους κατ᾽ ἐκκλησιαν.[842] Those two
apostles, therefore, ordained them; but the whole multitude, according
to the custom observed in elections among the Greeks, declared by the
elevation of their hands who was the object of their choice. So the
Roman historians frequently speak of the consul, who held the
assemblies, as _appointing_ the new magistrates, for no other reason but
because he received the suffrages and presided at the election. Surely
it is not credible that Paul granted to Timothy and Titus more power
than he assumed to himself; but we see that he was accustomed to ordain
bishops according to the suffrages of the people. The above passages,
therefore, ought to be understood in the same manner, to guard against
all infringement of the common right and liberty of the Church. It is a
good remark, therefore, of Cyprian, when he contends, “that it proceeds
from Divine authority, that a priest should be elected publicly in the
presence of all the people, and that he should be approved as a worthy
and fit person by the public judgment and testimony.” In the case of the
Levitical priests, we find it was commanded by the Lord, that they
should be brought forward in the view of the people before their
consecration. Nor was Matthias added to the number of the apostles, nor
were the seven deacons appointed, without the presence and approbation
of the people.—“These examples,” says Cyprian, “show that the ordination
of a priest ought not to be performed but with the knowledge and
concurrence of the people, in order that the election which shall have
been examined by the testimony of all, may be just and legitimate.” We
find, therefore, that it is a legitimate ministry according to the word
of God, when those who appear suitable persons are appointed with the
consent and approbation of the people; but that other pastors ought to
preside over the election, to guard the multitude from falling into any
improprieties, through inconstancy, intrigue, or confusion.
XVI. There remains the Form of ordination, which is the last point that
we have mentioned relative to the call of ministers. Now, it appears
that when the apostles introduced any one into the ministry, they used
no other ceremony than imposition of hands. This rite, I believe,
descended from the custom of the Hebrews, who, when they wished to bless
and consecrate any thing, presented it to God by imposition of hands.
Thus, when Jacob blessed Ephraim and Manasseh, he laid his hands upon
their heads.[843] This custom was followed by our Lord, when he prayed
over infants.[844] It was with the same design, I apprehend, that the
Jews were directed in the law to lay their hands upon their sacrifices.
Wherefore the imposition of the hands of the apostles was an indication
that they offered to God the person whom they introduced into the
ministry. They used the same ceremony over those on whom they conferred
the visible gifts of the Spirit. But, be that as it may, this was the
solemn rite invariably practised, whenever any one was called to the
ministry of the Church. Thus they ordained pastors and teachers, and
thus they ordained deacons. Now, though there is no express precept for
the imposition of hands, yet since we find it to have been constantly
used by the apostles, such a punctual observance of it by them ought to
have the force of a precept with us. And certainly this ceremony is
highly useful both to recommend to the people the dignity of the
ministry, and to admonish the person ordained that he is no longer his
own master, but devoted to the service of God and the Church. Besides,
it will not be an unmeaning sign, if it be restored to its true origin.
For if the Spirit of God institutes nothing in the Church in vain, we
shall perceive that this ceremony, which proceeded from him, is not
without its use, provided it be not perverted by a superstitious abuse.
Finally, it is to be remarked, that the imposition of hands on the
ministers was not the act of the whole multitude, but was confined to
the pastors. It is not certain whether this ceremony was, in all cases,
performed by more pastors than one, or whether it was ever the act of a
single pastor. The former appears to have been the fact in the case of
the seven deacons, of Paul and Barnabas, and some few others.[845] But
Paul speaks of himself as having laid hands upon Timothy, without any
mention of many others having united with him. “I put thee in
remembrance, that thou stir up the gift of God which is in thee, by the
putting on of my hands.”[846] His expression, in the other Epistle, of
“the laying on of the hands of the presbytery,”[847] I apprehend not to
signify a company of elders, but to denote the ordination itself; as if
he had said, Take care that the grace which thou receivedst by the
laying on of hands, when I ordained thee a presbyter, be not in vain.
Footnote 798:
2 Cor. iv. 7.
Footnote 799:
Eph. iv. 4-16.
Footnote 800:
Eph. iv. 10.
Footnote 801:
Isaiah lii. 7.
Footnote 802:
Matt. v. 13, 14.
Footnote 803:
Luke x. 16.
Footnote 804:
2 Cor. iii. 6, &c.
Footnote 805:
Eph. iv. 11.
Footnote 806:
Mark xvi. 15.
Footnote 807:
Luke x. 1.
Footnote 808:
Rom. xvi. 7.
Footnote 809:
Matt. xxviii. 19.
Footnote 810:
Luke xxii. 19.
Footnote 811:
1 Cor. iv. 1.
Footnote 812:
Titus i. 7, 9.
Footnote 813:
Acts xx. 20, 21, 31.
Footnote 814:
Ezek. iii. 17, 18.
Footnote 815:
1 Cor. ix. 16, 17.
Footnote 816:
Acts xiv. 21, 23.
Footnote 817:
Titus i. 5.
Footnote 818:
Phil. i. 1.
Footnote 819:
Col. iv. 17.
Footnote 820:
Acts xx. 17, &c.
Footnote 821:
Titus i. 5, 7.
Footnote 822:
Phil. i. 1.
Footnote 823:
Acts xx. 17, 28, ἐπισκοπους.
Footnote 824:
1 Cor. xii. 28, δυναμεις, χαρισματα ιαματων, γενη γλωσσων,
κυβερνησεις.
Footnote 825:
Rom. xii. 8.
Footnote 826:
Rom. xii. 8, μεταδιδους, εν ἁπλοτητι, ὁ ελεων, εν ἱλαροτητι.
Footnote 827:
1 Tim. v. 9, 10.
Footnote 828:
Acts vi. 1-3.
Footnote 829:
1 Cor. xiv. 40.
Footnote 830:
1 Cor. xii. 7, &c.
Footnote 831:
1 Tim. iii. 1, &c. Titus i. 7, &c.
Footnote 832:
Luke xxi. 15; xxiv. 49. Acts i. 8.
Footnote 833:
1 Tim. v. 22.
Footnote 834:
Acts xiv. 23.
Footnote 835:
Acts i. 23.
Footnote 836:
Gal. i. 1.
Footnote 837:
Gal. i. 1.
Footnote 838:
Acts xiii. 2.
Footnote 839:
Acts i. 23.
Footnote 840:
Titus i. 5.
Footnote 841:
1 Tim. v. 22.
Footnote 842:
Acts xiv. 23.
Footnote 843:
Gen. xlviii. 14.
Footnote 844:
Matt. xix. 15.
Footnote 845:
Acts vi. 6; xiii. 3.
Footnote 846:
2 Tim. i. 6.
Footnote 847:
1 Tim. iv. 14.