--

5

3

on which it shall rise. This interpretation is borne out by the fact 2 that Peter was the first to preach Christ to both Jews and Gentiles.* Olshausen seems to lean towards the idea that Peter's enunciated truth was the "rock," yet he says, "the faith itself, and his confession of it, must not be regarded as apart from Peter himself personally; it is identified with him- not with the old Simon, but with the new Peter." And as to "the power of the keys," it is enough to suggest that, so far as the natural idea of opening which attaches to a key is modified by Biblical use, it gets mainly the sense of the power of superintendence with reference to the bestowal of certain privileges, and its simple use would seem to be to promise to Peter that he shall be made the instrument for opening the door of the Church to the world; as he was made after the ascension. And if any idea of vesting power over the Church in Peter, as an individual, or as representing the Apostles, be insisted on in connection with this verse; by turning over to the 18th chapter (v. 18), it will become clear that the same power of binding and loosing was there conferred—and in the same language—upon the whole body of the disciples; the entire Church, as then existing. So that this passage, in no sense, contradicts or modifies those teachings of fraternal equality among his followers, which Christ had before solemnly promulged.

So far, then, as the Gospels are concerned, it appears to be settled that as Christ was the visible and only head of his Church so long as he remained on earth, and besides him there was no superiority and

1 « The name Πέτρος

denotes the personal position of this apostle in the building of the Church of Christ. He was the first of those foundation stones (Eph. ii: 22; Rev. xxi: 14) on which the living temple of God was built: this building itself, beginning on the day of Pentecost by the laying of three thousand living stones on this very foundation. That this is the simple and only interpretation of the words of our Lord, the whole usage of the New Testament shows in which not doctrines, nor confessions, but men, are uniformly the pillars and stones of the spiritual building. See 1 Pet. ii: 4-6; 1 Tim. iii: 15; Gal. ii: 9; Eph. ii: 20; Rev. iii: 12."— Alford. Com. Matt. xvi: 18.

2 "Another personal promise to Peter, remarkably fulfilled in his being the first to admit both Jews and Gentiles into the Church; thus using the power of the keys to open the door of salvation." Alford. Com. Matt. xvi: 19.

3 Acts ii: 14.

4 Acts x: 34.

5 Vol. 1, p. 550. Kendrick's revision.

6 Tertullian (de jejuniis adv. Psych. c. 15,) says,-alluding to Paul's permission (1 Cor. x: 25), to eat "whatsoever is sold in the shambles," "claves macelli tibi tradidit; "-Paul has given to you the keys of the meat-market'-meaning free authority to buy and eat whatever is sold there.

no ruling, but all were brethren, equal in rights, however unequal in their performance of service, or their earning of honor; so it was his idea and intention in regard to the practical development of the Christian Church through all the ages, that he should still remain, though ascended, its invisible yet real and only head; and that its membership should permanently stand on the same broad platform of essential equality.

SECTION 2. The Testimony of the Apostles in regard to Church Government.

Passing on now to the Acts of the Apostles, we shall see that they bear the most decided testimony that this teaching of Christ was received, and acted upon, by his followers, in the sense which we have put upon it. The Christian Church of the first century. so far as the fifth book of the New Testament conveys its history-was governed, not by Peter, or by any other Apostle, as in Christ's stead; nor by all the Apostles, in their own right, or by any delegation of power from Christ; but by itself, under Christ as its great head; by its entire membership-debating, deciding, doing.1

This will be made evident by the examination of those passages which contain a record of Church action. In the appointment of

1 "The essence of the Christian community rested on this: that no one individual should be the chosen, preeminent organ of the Holy Spirit for the guidance of the whole; but all were to coöperate, each at his particular position, and with the gifts bestowed on him, one supplying what might be wanted by another, for the advancement of the Christian life and the common end."— Neander, Church History. Torrey's Translation. Vol. 1, p. 181.

"The Jewish and later Catholic antithesis of clergy and laity has no place in the apostolic age. The ministers, on the one part, are as sinful and dependent on redeeming grace as the members of the congregations; and the members, on the other, share equally with the ministers in the blessings of the gospel, enjoy equal freedom of access to the throne of grace, and are called to the same direct communion with Christ, the head of the whole body."- Schaff. History of the Christian Church, A. D. 1-311; p. 131.

"The assembled people, therefore, elected their own rulers and teachers, or by their free consent received such as were nominated to them. They also, by their suffrages, rejected or confirmed the laws that were proposed by their rulers, in their assemblies; they excluded profligate and lapsed brethren, and restored them; they decided the controversies and disputes that arose; they heard and determined the cause of presbyters and deacons; in a word, the people did everything that is proper for those in whom the supreme power of the community is vested..... Among all the members of the Church, of whatever class or condition, there was the most perfect equality; which they manifested by their love feasts, by the use of the appellations, brethren and sisters, and in other ways.". Murdock's Mosheim, Vol. 1, pp. 68, 69. "All believers in Christ were called brethren and sisters, and were such in feeling and reality."-Guericke's Manual. Shedd's Trans. p. 128.

some one in place of Judas,1 it appears that an hundred and twenty Church members were present, and Peter, after referring to the fate of the apostate, expressed his conviction of the necessity that some one who was competent, in virtue of a sufficient attendance on Christ's teachings, should [yevέoba-genesthai, 'be constituted,' or 'appointed'] to be an official witness, with the eleven, of his “ resurrection." And they [eornoav dvo-estesan duo, 'stood forward,' or selected to stand forward,'] two; and then, recognizing Christ, who had chosen all of the eleven, to be still their Master and Head, and entitled to choose now as before,2 they prayed him to exercise his choice in the lot by "the whole disposing thereof," and then ‘gave forth their lots,' and the lot fell upon Matthias, who was thenceforth numbered with the eleven Apostles.

4

Mosheim goes, indeed, so far as to urge that the translation of this phrase "gave forth their lots," [dwxav xλýpovs — edōkan klērous] should be they cast their votes'-making the passage teach that the suffrage of the one hundred and twenty was exercised not merely as it confessedly was in the selection of the two, but also in the subsequent election of the one. And even Chrysostom 5 says:"Peter did everything here with the common consent; nothing, by his own will and authority. He left the judgment to the multitude, to secure their respect to the elected, and to free himself from every invidious reflection. He did not himself appoint the two, it was the act of all."

Perhaps the real sense of the passage may be cleared by considering the nature of their subsequent action, which it is natural to - in the absence of any evidence to the contrary—would be in harmony with what was then done.

assume

6

We find, then, that when it became needful to appoint deacons to

1 Acts i: 15-26.

2 If any element in the idea of an apostle is clear and well established, it is that of his having been chosen by the Lord himself. (See Luke vi: 13; John vi: 70; xiii: 18; xv: 16, 19; Acts i: 2). Indeed the assembly is so firmly convinced of this prerogative of the Lord in the appointment of an apostle, that they considered the choice of the Lord to have been made already (ver. 24.); so that the lot is only the manifestation of this act of the Lord, which, though secret to them, was already concluded."- · Baumgarten's Apostol. Hist. Clark's ed. Vol. 1, p. 38. 8 Proverbs xvi: 33.

4 Comment. de Rebus Christ. pp. 78-80.

5 Hom. ad. Act. 1, p. 25.

6 Acts vi: 1-6.

aid the apostles in "serving tables," the twelve assembled "the multitude of the disciples," and, having explained the existing necessity, said: "Brethren, look ye out among you [inoxέyuofe-episkepsasthe] seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost, and wisdom, whom we may appoint [xarαorýooμev — katastēsomen, 'set in place,' 'induct to office,'] over this business. And the saying pleased the multitude [navτòs τov пhýlovs-pantos tou plethous, the all πλήθους of the fulness of people,'] and they chose [¿§ɛɛžavτo — exelexanto, 'selected out,'] Stephen, etc., etc., whom they set before the apostles;"

- for what purpose appears from the record of what followed. "And when they [the apostles] had prayed, they laid their hands on them" [the deacons]; not for the purpose of electing them, but by way of solemnly inducting them into the office to which they had been already chosen by the free suffrage of all.

In like manner there is collateral evidence that the whole membership acted in the choice of the messengers or delegates, of the churches, as Paul says1 in honor of Titus, that it was not only true that his praise was in the gospel throughout all the churches, but that he had also been "chosen [xegorovnoeis — cheirotonetheis, ' appointed [χειροτονηθεὶς by vote of the outstretched hand,'] of the churches to travel" with himself.

So the whole Church appear to have voted in the choice of their presbyters or pastors. The authorized English version indeed says of Paul and Barnabas: 2 "and when they had ordained them elders in every Church, and prayed, with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, etc.," leaving the impression that the elders, or presbyters, or pastors, were put over the churches by Paul and Barnabas, in right of their apostleship; and without any intimation that those churches were even so much as consulted in the matter. But whatever the passage really does mean, it is evident that it does not mean this. Nothing is said about "ordination" in the Greek. The word upon which the real force of the text hinges is χειροτονήσαντες· cheirotonēsantēs, which limits and defines the action here described with reference to the elders. That word is derived from two [xelocheir, and reivo-teino,] which signify to 'stretch out,' or 'lift up the hand,' and it is conceded by all that its original use was to de

scribe the method of voting by 'a show of hands,' in the election of magistrates by the public assemblies of Athens, and hence its primary sense is, to choose by hand-vote. It is conceded also that it subsequently took on the secondary sense of electing or appointing in any manner. The question which must determine its meaning here, is then in which of these senses it was used by the author of the Acts; and, in regard to this, commentators have been divided. Many, most respectable in philological attainments, and eminent for varied learning, have taught that the word was here employed in its primary sense. Others scarcely less eminent, have been equally positive that it is used in a secondary sense, and some would even justify our version in translating it by the word ordain.' In this contrariety of opinion, it seems clear that no certainty can be arrived at from the study of the etymology of the word alone, and that the only way of gaining a reasonable security of its intention here is to compare its possible meanings with the circumstances of the case, and settle upon that which best maintains the consistency of the Sacred Record. If we read it "ordained them elders in every Church," we strain the sense of the word beyond any secondary meaning which was natural to that time; we assume, without proof, the previous existence of elders (which were now merely ordained) in those churches; we render tautological the account (of seeming public consecration by

4

1 See Liddell and Scott, Robinson, and Suicer; also Smith's "Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities," art. Cheirotonia, p. 271; also Owen's True Nature of a Gospel Church," works, Vol. xvi, p. 62, where numerous citations are given from Demosthenes, Thucydides, Aristophanes, etc., showing this use; also Colman's "Primitive Church," pp. 59-63.

2 See quotations from Philo, Lucian and Maximus Tyrius, in Davidson's "Eccles. Pol. of New Test." pp. 201-2.

3 Vox orta ex more Græcorum, qui porrectis manibus suffragia ferebant. Beza. in loco. "Significat hos suffragiis delectos fuisse." Erasmus, in loco.

"Cum suffragiis, sive per suffragia, creassent," is cited by Poole, as the formula in which agree Piscator, and the versions Flacii Illyrici, Tigurina, Pagnini and Piscatoris. — Poole. Synopsis Crit. in loco.

4 See Luther, Brennius, Hammond, etc., in loco.

A further idea is suggested by some in connection with this word, which is not without interest, namely that its chief significence here is in its conveyal of the gift of the Holy Ghost by the imposition of hands. Lightfoot says: "non placet quia in Ecclesiis his recens plantatis ac cosversis nulli adhuc erant idonei ad Ministerium, nisi qui per impositionem manuum Apostolorum Spiritum Sanctum acceperunt." Chronicon, 97. And Poole (Annotations, Acts. xiv: 23), says the word means "here, to ordain to any office or place; which might the rather be done by stretching out, or laying on of the hands of the apostles, because by that means the Holy Ghost (or a power of working miracles) was frequently bestowed, (Chap. viii: 17, 18,) which in those times was necessary to authorize their doctrine to the Infidel world.”