Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

subordinate matters; ever holding to the same general principles even in polity, but permitting different exemplifications of them; like its Divine Author, "the same yesterday, to-day, and forever," yet presenting the same diversity in circumstantials which every kind of real unity,—that is, every kind of unity which is founded in nature, and is not a merely artificial production, exhibits not less in the works of the natural, than in those of the spiritual, creation.

The Catholic theory of episcopacy being set aside as irreconcileable with the facts of the case, it remains to inquire whether we cannot, without the aid of that theory, satisfactorily account for the rise and progress of this form of ecclesiastical polity. This seems a task of no great difficulty. Episcopacy was bestowed upon the Church when, and no sooner than, the want of some such institution became felt. Like all the other regulations of the Apostles in matters of polity, it was instituted, not to give being to, but to meet the exigencies of, the Church; not because without it the Church was essentially imperfect, but because an extension of its organization had become desirable. The causes which gave rise to episcopacy were partly positive, and partly negative; or it may be regarded as, in one point of view, the manifestation of the unseen, essential, unity of Christians, and in another, as a provision against the evils of disunion, whether existing, or in prospect. They form but a low estimate of the power of union inherent in Christianity, who deem it necessary to allege a divine prescription for the forms into which the Church life of the age immediately succeeding that of the Apostles threw itself, episcopacy included. Even Romish theologians of the higher class-such as Moehler and others-have learned to take a truer view of the matter, and justly trace the whole of the higher organization of the Church, such as we find it in the fourth century, to the natural tendency of the strongest of all internal principles of unity-"the unity of the Spirit"-to produce a visible expression of itself. By means of this invisible tie, each Christian becomes one with all other Christians; each church naturally seeks an expression of its fellowship with other churches, acknowledging the same Lord, and professing the same faith; and the whole Church feels that Christ's prayer for the unity of His followers is but imperfectly realized, if there exist among its component portions only the invisible unity of the Spirit, without that appreciable inter-communion, in whatever way it may be exhibited, by which the "world" may be led to "believe" that

Jesus was the Sent of God. In the institution of the episcopate, the Church made the first advance towards the attainment of a visible expression of her internal unity.

Christianity, as it appears in the New Testament, knows nothing of the atomistic theory of modern independentism. There can be little doubt that, even in the apostolic age, the church of each considerable city-such as Rome or Ephesus-consisted, not of one congregation, but of several, who were collectively styled the church of that place; certain it is that such was the case towards the close of the first century. It could not be otherwise. The expansive power of Christianity caused it to break forth on all sides; and speedily the original congregation, or, in modern language, the mother church, of each city gave birth to other societies of Christians in the surrounding neighbourhood. In this way there were probably, in each locality, many distinct assemblages of worshippers; but, however numerous these assemblages may have been, they still formed but one Church, and were presided over, not each by its own isolated pastor, but by a college of presbyters, who, collectively, superintended the affairs of the whole society, or rather district. No notion is more at variance with the spirit of apostolic Christianity than that of societies of Christians existing in the same neighbourhood, but not in communion with each other, and not under a common government. The primitive Church of Jerusalem may be regarded as, in this respect, the model of the apostolic churches in general. The number of converts in that city, which rendered it impossible for them to assemble in one place for the exercise of public worship, must have given rise to a division into congregations; yet, in the inspired history, but one ministerial body is mentioned in connexion with this Church, viz. the college of "elders"-who, under the quasi-episcopate of James the less, appear to have regulated its affairs in common, forming a single deliberative assembly, in which all matters of moment were discussed and decided. An arrangement by which an effectual safeguard was interposed against the feeling of dependence, and helplessness, under which the pastor, who is in a state of isolation, labours, and which has been found by experience to operate prejudicially both upon his own spiritual interests and those of the flock over whom he presides. In the primitive Church, each presbyter felt himself sustained in his dealings with the Christian people by the whole weight of authority belonging to the college of which he was a member; and the people, on their part, learned to look upon their pastors, not

as creatures of their own, but as officers of the Church, occupying a recognised position and independent rights. In the apostolic council (Acts, xv.) we see the whole Church, consisting of "the elders," "the brethren," or representatives of the people, and those of the Apostles who were then in Jerusalem, discussing, in united and harmonious operation, the important question upon which differences of opinion had arisen.

This union of the congregations of a certain district under a common presbytery sufficed, for a time, to satisfy the cravings of the Christian mind for social combination. But a senate, or presbytery, is, at best, an imperfect exponent of social or corporate sentiment, which ever loves to see itself embodied in a person. It is only a person that can call forth, and attract to himself, the emotions of love and veneration to which Christianity gives peculiar scope; it is only around a person that men are found to coalesce heartily for a common purpose. The idea therefore of a centre of unity for each church must have soon presented itself to the minds of Christians, and the more strongly, the greater the number of congregations in a given circuit; for where there is a strong natural impulse to unity, a multiplicity of parts, instead of diminishing, adds intensity to it. How far this tendency to centralization inherent in Christianity may have succeeded in producing a living centre of unity previous to the apostolic appointment of bishops it is impossible to say; but it is extremely probable that from a very early period an informal episcopate had of itself sprung up in each church, that is, that in each there existed some one presbyter, who, on account of his personal qualifications, exercised an undefined influence over both presbyters and people, and served unconsciously as a visible bond of unity to the whole body; and that the Apostles only gave a fixed form and an Apostolic sanction to an arrangement which, in rudiment at least, they found already existing. In the eloquent language of Moehler, "the craving of the faithful in Christ for combination cannot rest satisfied until it sees itself expressed in some type, or representation. The bishop is the visible expression of this longing, the personification of the mutual love of the Christians of a given locality, the manifestation, and the living centre, of that Christian spirit which ever strives after unity."*

[ocr errors]

If we may suppose that an informal episcopate of the kind just mentioned had spontaneously arisen in the principal churches of

Einheit in der Kirche, p. 187.

Christendom, we shall have what the synagogue fails to supply us with,—an historical basis for the episcopate. Certainly this supposition is more probable than that adopted by several writers of eminence, who trace episcopacy to the practice, common in all deliberative assemblies, of selecting an individual, superior to the rest either in age, station, or capacity, to act as president for the time being: the authority of this presiding presbyter at first, as they conceive, ceasing with the occasion which gave rise to it, but gradually assuming a more permanent character, and a wider sphere of exercise, until at length he came to be styled, by way of distinction, "the overseer"—ó iлioxonos. * Moreover, thus possibly may the statements of Jerome be explained, who, as is well known, affirms that episcopacy is derived, not from a divine precept, but from the custom of the Church, and yet cannot be supposed to intend to contradict the unanimous tradition of antiquity, that it is of apostolical origin. It may be that the rudiment of episcopacy was, in fact, the spontaneous production of the Church-the result of the instinctive tendency of the Christians of each locality to gather round a visible centre; and yet that the formal institution of the episcopal office was an act of apostolic authority. The general spirit in which the Apostles proceeded in fixing the polity of the Church, permitting, as they did, the Christian society to develope as much as possible out of itself the elements of its visible organization, forbids the supposi tion that in establishing this new office they instituted one hitherto unknown even in idea, and without any existing rudimental basis.

But, whatever be the degree of weight that may belong to this hypothesis, certain it is that the idea of a visible centre of unity is one which naturally arises wherever there exists a community of Christians. In the case of the episcopate, as in every other, the visible organization of the Church developed itself from within outwards, not vice versâ. If the Apostles, when they instituted the new office, had no external rudiment of it before their eyes, they yet found an internal groundwork present, and only gave a visible expression to a pre-existing sentiment. Episcopacy was given to the Church, not as a law imposed from without, but as a suitable expression of the inner spirit; not (to adopt the language of a profound writer) as "a shape superinduced upon a passive

* Mosh. De Reb. Christian. Sæc. I. s. 41.; Calvin. Institut. lib. iv. c. 4. s. 2.; Neander, Allgemein. Gesch. 1. p. 292.

material, but an organic form" thrown out naturally by the energy of the life within. It may confidently be affirmed that, where Christianity is not enfeebled by adverse influences, its visible organization will always tend to something of an episcopal form, however much the name of episcopacy may be repudiated.

But, besides being positively the natural expression of the inner sentiment of union existing among Christians, episcopacy is to be viewed as a safeguard against the evils of division, whether among the pastors of the Church, or the Christian people at large. The testimony of Jerome on this point is well known: "Before there were factions in religion, and the people began to say, I am of Paul, I of Apollo, and I of Cephas, the churches were governed by a common council of presbyters. But when every man thought those whom he had baptized to be his own, and not Christ's, it was decreed throughout the world that one chosen out of the presbyters should be set above the rest, to whom the whole care of the Church should appertain, that thus the seeds of division might be rooted out." In fact, the state of the Church about the period to which the institution of the episcopate is to be assigned-viz. A. D. 70-was such as must naturally have given rise to apprehensions that, when once the controlling authority of the Apostles should be removed, Christendom would become a scene 'of intestine strife, and the pure doctrine of the Gospel perish amidst the corruptions of heresy. Both these noxious influences were, as we know from St. Paul's epistles, actively at work during the Apostle's own lifetime; and to his prophetic eye the future prospects of the Church were still more gloomy. The parties which divided the Christian community were, as we may gather from the instance of the Corinthian Church, in which four rival factions contended for the superiority, very numerous; but two principal ones were to be found, not only there, but in almost every Christian society, which derived their

"There is a difference between form as proceeding, and shape as superinduced; the latter is either the death or the imprisonment of the thing; the former is its self-witnessing sphere of agency."-"Confounding mechanical regularity with organic form. The form is mechanic when on any given material we impress a predetermined form, not necessarily arising out of the properties of the material; as, when to a mass of clay we give whatever shape we wish it to retain when hardened. The organic form, on the other hand, is innate: it shapes, it developes itself from within, and the fulness of its developement is one and the same with the perfection of its outward form."-Coleridge, Remains, vol. i. p. 229.; ii. p. 67. Pregnant words, which furnish the clue to a right apprehension of the history of the Church throughout its whole course.

† Quoted by bishop Bilson, Perpetual Government, &c. p. 268.

See Acts, xx. 29, 30.; 2 Tim. iii. 1-14.; iv. 3, 4.

« AnteriorContinua »