Timothy to Hebrews - The Preterist Archive

64 First Timothy III. 1-13.
had hitherto presided over churches, and the appointment of others.
For I neither think myself justified by what is said of the false
teachers in supposing that they exercised such a disturbing influence,
nor do I find any trace of directions having respect to a new organization,
nor anything about the deposition of presbyters and deacons.
Paul writes, as we learn from iii. 15, for the purpose of letting
Timothy know how he is to conduct himself in the house of God,
t. e., as the immediate context shews, how he is to act in the appointment
of ecclesiastical office-bearers—and why not also what he
is to require of those who have been already ordained ? These directions,
as we find in iii. 14, 15, are given with the view of making
provision for a peiiod of an uncertain length, it may be longer or
shorter according to circumstances. What ground for surprise, then,
is there in the fdct, that instructions are given to Timothy with
reference to this subject also, which is of so great importance to the
prosperity of the church ?—If even these remarks indicate a writer,
of whom it must be admitted in comparing this with the Epistle to
Titus, that
ho kee2:)s in view the historical difference in the circumstances
peculiar to each, it is no less decisively manifest in the fiict,
that only in this epistle is anything said of deacons, while that to
Titus makes no mention of them. While the Epistle to Titus deals
with those who, although they had long been Christians, had not
yet been formed into a church, ours has to do with a church which
had been long in existence, and was fully organized. The former
therefore treats of the office, without which church-fellowship cannot
subsist, that, namely, of presbyter ; in our present epistle, on
the contrary, the office of deacon also as well as an institution for
widows has been already called into existence, by the wants which
have become felt in the course of a longer continuance. This circumstance,
as already noticed in the Epistle to Titus, is of great
importance to a right understanding of the nature of the diaconate,
which must by no means be placed on a level with the office of presbyter,
and legarded as equally necessary and universal with it. I
would refer to the excellent observations on this subject in the Zeitschrift
fiir Protest, u. Kii'che, Sept. 1849, p. 140, scq., where it is
said with truth, " There were only two offices for the administration
of the Christian church— 1, the apostolic, for the administration of
the whole ; 2, the presbyterial, for the individual congregatiuns.
The diaconate, which was called forth by a necessity (Acts vi. 1),
was by no means an essential part of the ecclesiastical constitution.
What we at present need is the service of the deacon, not the
ojice."
With respect now to the qualifications required of a presbyter
as also of a deacon, it is alleged that here also, as in the Epistle to
Titus, instead of a treasury uf striking and weighty directions, we