part of the sacred canon of Scripture. In the oldest versions they are not to be found.

Dr Whitby expressly declares, in regard to the great controversy whether Timothy and Titus were indeed bishops, the one of Ephesus and the other of Crete, 'I can find nothing of that matter in any writer of the first three centuries, nor any intimation that they bore that name. There is no satisfactory evidence of Timothy having resided longer at Ephesus than was necessary to execute a special and temporary mission to that Church' (Pref. to Com. on Titus '). When the Roman Commonwealth was in danger a dictator was appointed for six months with absolute powers, the only limitation being that he was to take care to preserve the Republic. That fact did not prove that the dictatorship was a standing office. No more will the extraordinary duties of Timothy and Titus prove that their office was perpetual. All that the example warrants is that extraordinary circumstances should be met by extraordinary officers. The elders of Ephesus and of Crete were bishops, and so soon as ordained had authority to perform all the duties belonging to the office. Dr Whitby proves that the other was temporary. As for Titus, he was only left at Crete to ordain elders in every city,' &c. Having, therefore, done that work, he had done all that was assigned him in that station; and therefore St Paul sends for him the very next year to Nicopolis (Tit. iii. 12).'

EPAPHRODITUS

is also claimed as a prelate, because the term 'apostle,' in the unofficial sense of messenger, is applied to him, when he carried money from the Church at Philippi to Paul, who was in bonds (Phil. ii. 25, and iv. 18). This was the only errand on which Epaphroditus was sent. Did this constitute him an apostle in the peculiar sense of the term? and if so, will that constitute him a diocesan bishop? The translators of the English version of the Bible, though prelatists, could not endorse such fallacious reasoning; therefore they term Epaphroditus a messenger. This claim is a castle in the air.

R

QUESTIONS.

1. Give the assertion made regarding Timothy.

2. What circumstance in the history of the Ephesian Church disproves this?

3. Who might more justly be held to have been bishop of Ephesus?

4. Show that Timothy was sent as an evangelist, and mention some who admit this.

5. What short method may be taken in the matter about Titus? 6. Who were with Titus in Crete?

7. Give some statements showing that Timothy and Titus were under orders.

8. Why were such extraordinary officers employed?

9. Are not the postscripts reliable evidence?

10. What eminent writer repudiates the theory? 11. What is to be said as to Epaphroditus?

CHAPTER XVIII.

THE ANGELIC AND OTHER THEORIES.

'Another angel, having the everlasting gospel to preach.'

WERE THE ANGELS OF THE SEVEN CHURCHES DIOCESAN

BISHOPS?

THE epistles to the seven Churches in Asia Minor were addressed to the angels of these Churches. These angels, prelatists assert, were diocesan prelates. This is not so plausible a theory as some others, and it becomes less evident the more carefully it is examined. The meaning of the word 'angel' is the only basis on which the argument for Prelacy rests. Is, then, a mystical term sufficient foundation on which to rest the divine authority of an essential order of ministers?

No book of Scripture is more difficult of interpretation. The

Apocalypse or Revelation is throughout symbolical. It is not possible that its metaphors should be as easily understood as the distinct utterances of other parts of the Bible. Is it, then, the part of reason to apply these difficult metaphors for the explanation of that explicit language? Can the mystical word 'angel' throw light upon the simple term 'bishop?' Would it not rather be reasonable to apply explicit terms to explain what is highly figurative? In all the narratives and doctrinal statements of the New Testament no trace of a prelatic bishop appears. Notwithstanding, say prelatists, it must be found in Scripture, seeing that Prelacy has been for a long period found in the Church. Ere the field of New Testament Scripture be forsaken, let us take a last look at the Apocalypse. Ah! there it is, sure enough. There in these angels all men may evidently recognize diocesan bishops.

Many distinguished commentators have had considerable difficulty in explaining this metaphor. Various interpretations have been given, as-guardian-angels of the Church, a collective body, a well-known individual. Christ Himself gives an explanation, but still in symbolic language: "The seven stars are the angels of the seven Churches.' It is not said the seven stars are the 'seven angels,' but indefinitely 'angels.' In addition, John shows the position of these angels or stars. They are held in the right hand of the Son of Man. They have a relation to the several Churches; and yet they are so easily separated from these, as to be associated together without inconvenience to these Churches. These declarations, along with the meaning of the term, constitute the key. Angel (ȧyyshos) signifies a messenger. Star, in prophetic language, means a ruler. Christ was called the Angel or Messenger of the covenant (Mal. iv. 1) as one of His peculiar titles of office. The spies in the wilderness are called angels or messengers (Heb. xi. 31; James ii. 5). The metaphor evidently speaks of a messenger who is a ruler in the Church. Nay, say prelatists, diocesan bishop must be meant, as each epistle is addressed to the angel. Unfortunately, this short method is not so evident to all men, 'stars giving light' applying more fully to presbyters than to modern bishops. Two modes of solution may therefore be noticed.

1. A company of men. Thus the angel of the Church in Smyrna is addressed in the plural: 'The devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried, and ye shall have tribulation ten days' (Rev. ii. 10). So in other instances. To employ the singular for the plural was common among the Jews. Jewish mothers are represented as Rachel weeping for her children.' The indefinite use of the word 'angel' shows that it is not to be restricted singularly. If the one candlestick represented all the congregations in the city of Ephesus, the star or angel may well represent all the ministers collectively. The angel may here be the symbol of a human ministry, who, though spoken of as one, are very numerous; for the term 'angel' is so used in this same Book of Revelation: 'I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach to them that dwell on the earth' (Rev. xiv. 6). By 'heaven' there is meant the Church on earth; and 'angel' must mean the multitude of those who are commissioned to carry glad tidings to every creature.

Ought not this certain use of the term, therefore, to be used as explanatory in the epistles also?

2. One representative man. Some regard the term as applicable to the moderator or president, the secretary or clerk, of the presbytery—the analogy being taken from the presiding officer of the synagogue. Others hold that 'angel' applies to the messengers of the several Churches. Let it be remembered that the Apostle John was then a prisoner in the Isle of Patmos for the testimony of Jesus. Regarded with great veneration, as the last of the apostles, and possessing the special friendship of the Lord, intimate communion must have been maintained between him and these Churches. Frequent messengers would be despatched, not only to convey information and sympathy to him, but to receive his instructions and advice. Under bitter persecution, no mere carrier of an epistle would suffice. Only one of the highest wisdom, reputation, and energy would be selected. Much was to be said and heard that could not be written. The messengers

must be persons well known to John, and who were esteemed capable of properly representing the Churches in these important interviews. This explanation is suitable to all the circumstances of the case, while it conforms to the meaning of the terms

'angel' and 'star,' and to the position which these officers occupied both in relation to Christ and to each particular church. The circumstances demanded an elder worthy of double honour for this position. But here the conditions are fulfilled. No higher

rank is necessary. The presbyter of influence and esteem selected for the dangerous and important position was the proper channel. He is, therefore, addressed as the medium of communication to the Church.

If one representative man be the proper meaning of the symbolic term, this supposition is, of all others, the most probable and satisfactory. That 'angel' means a prelatic diocesan bishop, having sole authority and exclusive jurisdiction, is simply an assumption of everything that requires to be proved.

That this symbolic word is a stronghold of Prelacy, is evident from the Commentary of Dr Trench on the Seven Churches. He says—The argument for the existence of the episcopate in the later apostolic times, and that as a divinely-recognized institution, which may be drawn from the position of the angels of the seven Churches, and from the language in which they are addressed, is exceeding strong.' What, then, is the exceeding strength derived? It lies simply in the supposition of Dr Trench. Who can he be but a bishop-a bishop, too, with the prerogatives which we ascribe to one?' He denies that the angel can mean the president of the presbytery—' primus inter pares, with only some authority and jurisdiction, as the others, his peers, may have lent him.' The reason alleged is the responsibility of the angel for the condition of the Church, which could not be charged unless he were possessed of power to prevent the evils. But has not a presbytery such power? He denies that a messenger can be the meaning, as men do not write to the messenger, but by him, and that there is no correspondence between a messenger and a star; that as Christ held the stars in His right hand, and as stars are a symbol of authority, therefore none but a bishop with full prelatic power can be meant.

This is well put, and very plausible, but not conclusive. For, first of all, 'star' is not always emblematic of ruling power. They that turn many to righteousness by preaching are represented as stars. And, secondly, though in ordinary times men send a