Ghost to judge him; see xi. 1, 2, 7-13. The remarkable features in the prophets of this document is that, like those at Antioch in the Acts, they become, wherever they appear, the chief ministers of worship, no less than of teaching, and hold, with the less defined figures of apostle and teacher, the first rank in the church hierarchy. The Didache is, as was said, the last document in which prophets appear clothed with this higher dignity. Prophetic bishops take the place of episcopal prophets. There is not, however, as has been pointed out elsewhere (p. 259), sufficient reason to hold that the latter ever held their quasiapostolic position in the Church on the mere ground of their prophetic gifts, without ordination.

In the Shepherd, Hermas appears as the recipient of veritable visions which are to be communicated to the Church. If thus he is to be considered as a true prophet,1 he gives us also a vivid picture of the false prophet inspired of Satan (Mand. xi). His characteristic is selfseeking and ambition. He is represented sitting on a 'cathedra,' answering the questions of those who come to consult him. No spirit given from God, says Hermas, is thus questioned, but speaks of itself according to the divine power given. The spirit which is questioned and answers according to the lusts of men is earthly and devilish. Again, in order to secure reputation, the false prophet isolates himself and prophesies in a corner, whereas the true prophet only speaks (where the pretender is dumb) in the congregation of just men. Again, the false prophet is ambitious of ecclesiastical preferment, he desires the 'chief seat,' while the true prophet is humble and meek. Again, the false prophet requires to be paid before he will speak. Thus the true and false prophets are to be distinguished by their conduct.

It is clear that at the time of the Shepherd the prophet did not hold anything like the position which he held in the Didache. No doubt the abundance of pretenders to inspiration made it plain that prophecy, even if an abiding endowment of the Church, was a rare one and not intended for the Church to depend upon for a supply of her chief ministers, In the Apostolical Constitutions we have a clear intimation of the transitory character of the miraculous 'charismata' of the early Church, and of prophecy among them. The Apostles are there represented as declaring that in contrast to the fundamental spiritual gift which is the essence of Christian life miracles were only vouchsafed in view of the conversion of the world and would become superfluous when all were Christians: accordingly those who possess the exceptional gifts are warned not to exalt themselves on that account over the church rulers, and the exorcist, in spite of the gift of healings which marks him for his special office without any ordination, is yet required to be

1 See Salmon's Introd. p. 577 f.

ordained in the usual way, 'if there be need that he should become a presbyter or bishop.' See Apost. Const. viii. I and 26.

The earlier functions of the prophet passed in a certain sense, as has been pointed out (p. 260), to bishops and readers. Ambrose, we may further note, regards interpreters of the Scriptures as their representatives in his day.

K.

THE ORIGIN OF THE TITLES

'BISHOP,' 'PRESBYTER,' 'DEACON,'

WITH REFERENCE TO RECENT CRITICISM.

I. The purpose of this note is, first, to offer evidence for what has already been advanced on this subject in the text (pp. 220, 231, 240). (a) The title PRESBYTER is derived confessedly from the organization of the Jews, but in order to show that the Christian organization was not imitated from the Jewish as a whole, it is necessary to give some account of what the Jewish organization was, as far as we know it, both in Jerusalem and in 'the dispersion.'3

It was fourfold. (1) There was the priestly organization for the purpose of the temple worship, with high-priests, priests, and Levites. This, however, did not of course exist anywhere except at Jerusalem.

(2) Representing the traditional religious learning amongst the Jews, we find, both in Jerusalem and in the dispersion, the recognised order of the scribes, who may be said to have taken the place of the prophets. Their name occurs commonly in the Jewish inscriptions found at Rome.

(3) For the purposes of the synagogue worship, both in Jerusalem and throughout the Jewish world, there was a ȧpxiovváywyos, with his ὑπηρέτης or clerk, or several ἀρχισυνάγωγοι (see Acts xiii. 15 ; cf. St. Mark v. 22, where however the reference may be to the rulers of different synagogues; for the inпpéтns see St. Luke iv. 20). The 'ruler of the synagogue' selected and regulated the readers or preachers. (4) For judicial and disciplinary purposes there was a πреσßитéριov,

1 See Cornelius a Lapide in Eph. iv. 11.

2 However, as the reverence for age is universal, so we have not only the ancient Greek γερουσία, but a later use of πρεσβύτεροι for members of a γερουσία, at least in Asia Minor. See Hatch B. L. pp. 65, 66.

3 The following account is largely derived from Schürer Die Gemeindeverfassung der Juden in Rom in der Kaiserseit, Leipzig, 1879. His results have been verified by Kühl in Die Gemeindeordnung in den Pastoralbriefen, Berlin, 1885, p. 117.

or body of peoẞúrepoɩ, of whom we hear often in the New Testament (e.g. St. Luke xxii. 66, Acts xxii. 5) as constituting the sanhedrin. Apparently, however, this name was not much used except at Jerusalem: Schürer does not find the name in his Roman inscriptions.1 In the Jewish communities at Rome2 we have äpxovtes, or ‘rulers' (in St. Matt. ix. 18 however äpxwv=ȧpxiovváywyos, St. Luke viii. 41, St. Mark v. 22; and see Acts iv. 5, 8), presided over by a yepovσiápxns, who was primus inter pares. These presidents are called #pwтEÚOVTES Tis yepovolas by Josephus Bell. Iud. vii. 10. 1 (=maiores or primates). The aρxovтes seem to have been elected annually; cf. pseudoChrysostom Opp. [ed. Paris, 1588] ii. p. 1086. These four organizations were essentially distinct, though it might happen that the presbytery at Jerusalem might consist of 'high-priests and scribes,' as in St. Luke xxii. 66 (but on the other hand see Acts xxii. 5), or that an ǎpxwv at Rome might also be an ȧpxiovváywyos (as in Schürer's inscriptions 19, 42), or a priest an apxwv (inscr. 5). Besides these officers we hear also of the title of 'father' or 'mother of the synagogue' being given to persons of age or influence.

This sketch of the Jewish fourfold organization will suffice to show within what limits the Christian Church can be described as having borrowed from it. The important points to notice are two.

First, that the Christian Church borrowed none of the Jewish titles except that of 'presbyter.' Epiphanius indeed mentions (Haer. xxx. 18) that the Ebionites used the title ȧpxiovváywyos, but this is an instance of reversion, for there is no evidence for the use of the title in the Christian Church. Lucian again, the pagan, speaks of Peregrinus as προφήτης καὶ θιασάρχης καὶ ξυναγωγεύς of the Christians, but this last title, no more than the second, was recognised in the Church. The Christian place of meeting is called a ovvaywyń by St. James

1 These Roman inscriptions belong apparently to the third or fourth century A.D. The word "peoẞúrepos occurs once among the Hebrew inscriptions found at Venosa, in South Italy, perhaps of the sixth century and later: see a paper of Ascoli in the Atti del IV Congresso dei Orientalisti, Florence. 1880, vol. i. pp. 239 f.; esp. p. 281 note 2, 292 and 350. Kühl, .c. p. 117, discounts this on account of its date. Also the more frequent occurrence of the female form #peσßurépn (sic) indicates that it has no longer its official meaning. Ascoli says, 'piuttosto dev'esser titolo d'onoranza, che non di vera dignità, poichè gli sta accanto la mpeoßvrépa.' There is, however, one instance of the use of the term out of Jerusalem in an inscription at Smyrna; see C.I.G. 9897.

2 At Alexandria, it should be noticed, the Jews formed one community under one Gerusia. At Rome, on the contrary, they constituted a number of separate communities (or 'colleges' in the eye of the State); each had its own synagogue and officers. The Christians in Rome, before they were organized into a Church, seem to have formed a number of separate congregations (see Rom. xvi. 5, 14, 15).

3 It is said that they often held office for life, and that on this account an archon came to be known as diáßios (diabius), but Ascoli denies this latter assertion, and regards the word as an exclamation or condensed prayer, see l.c. p. 344.

(ii. 2). This, however, is the only case in which it is used in the Christian Church in the specific Jewish sense: see, for its use in the more general sense of a gathering, Ignatius ad Polyc. 4 and Lightfoot's note, Hermas Mand. xi. 9, Heb. x. 25. Epiphanius also (.c.) mentions that the Ebionites used the term, and the author of the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs endeavours to give his work a Jewish colouring by speaking of Christian Churches as 'synagogues of the Gentiles,' and their ministers as 'archons' (Benj. 11). The Christian council' is also called a σvvédpɩov in Ignat. ad Philad. 8, ad Magn. 6, ad Trall. 3, but, as is noted below, in the way of metaphor.

Secondly, that the Christian Church had only one gradually developed organization. It is true that this organization embodied various principles-the principle of authority and rule, the veneration due to age, the power derived from inspiration or spiritual gifts, and the devolution of special tasks on special executive officers, owing to the natural exigencies of organization. It is true also that amongst the Jews the same person might be at once a scribe, a ruler of the synagogue, and a presbyter—that is, the distinct organizations might be represented by the same person. Still it remains the case that all our evidence goes to show that the Christian Church had only one organization, while the Jews, with their temple, schools, synagogue, and sanhedrin, had four. All the functions and powers of Ministry were, in fact, summed up at first in the Apostles-with whom however must be reckoned other 'prophets' in whom the Church recognised a supernatural inspiration -and were gradually imparted under their authority and leading to different officers, who shared she same ministry in distinct grades. Thus, if the function of worship, which in the Christian Church formed the spiritual counterpart of the temple Necroupyla, was (as Harnack says 2) 'the primary function' of the episcopate—if it was the bishop's office to offer the gifts' (Clem. ad Cor. 44), yet they are said to share the Xerovpyla of the prophets and teachers in this respect (Did. xv. 1), and these prophets and teachers are in the Acts specially brought before us as fulfilling this function of worship (Acts xiii. 2). Then, again, with reference to this function of teaching. This 'ministry of the word' or 'stewardship of the mysteries of God' belongs primarily to apostles and prophets with teachers or evangelists, but it is shared also by the bishops' (1 Tim. iii. 2, v. 17, Tit. i. 9; the local 'pastors' are called 'teachers' in Eph. iv. 11). Once again, if the presbyterate as derived from Judaism held the judicial and 'pastoral' function

1 See Harnack Texte u. Untersuch. B. ii, H. 2, p. 146 f. He calls these principles the aristocratic, the patriarchal, the spiritual, and the administrative.

2 Dogmengesch. i. p. 155; cf. Expositor, May 1887, pp. 340-342. He includes the deacon also. The matter is discussed below.

(Acts xx. 29-30; 1 Pet. v. 2), yet in the Christian Church the Apostles are the chief ministers of discipline (cf. I Cor. v. ; Acts xv. 2), and the presbyters, as will be shown, were also bishops, and, as such, teachers and leaders of worship; they share, in fact, the whole apostolic pastorate (1 Pet. v. I, 2), and in St. James's Epistle they perform a function which involves a spiritual ministration (James v. 14); later, when they are distinct from the bishop, they sometimes indeed appear as the special ministers of discipline, as in the Ebionite Clementines (Ep. Clem. 7-10; Hom. iii. 67, 68), but even so under the bishop Ep. Clem. 2, 3, 6; Ep. Petr. 4), and not to the exclusion of the deacons (Ep. Clem. 12; Apost. Const. ii. 44, 57, viii. 28). Finally, if the administration of alms was in some special sense a function of the diaconate in its original idea, yet it does not cease to be part of the apostolic office to organize almsgiving (see Gal. ii. 10, 2 Cor. viii., etc.), nor should it surprise us to find it specially mentioned in connection with the presbyterate (Acts xi. 30; Polycarp ad Phil. 6, 11; cf. Eg. Ch. Ord. c. 18), though when the presbyterate came to be the name for a distinct office from the episcopate, the function of the administration of alms came to belong generally to the bishop, with the assistance of the deacon (Canons of Hippolytus c. v.).

(6) The title EPISCOPUS was common among the Greeks. In Attic it is used for a commissioner appointed to regulate a new colony or acquisition' whom the Spartans would have called a 'harmost.' Among writers of the period of the empire, it is used by Arrian for the inspectors employed by Indian kings; by Appian for a commissioner appointed by Mithridates in Ephesus; by Dionysius of Halicarnassus for the inspectors of agriculture whom Numa Pompilius is supposed to have instituted. It is used also in inscriptions of the Haurân (a district of the ancient Bashan) for civic officers who seem to represent the agoranomi,' 'qui praesunt pani et ceteris venalibus rebus quae civitatum populis ad quotidianum victum usui sunt' (so Charisius, a jurisconsult of Constantine's time, explains their office, Digest. 1. 4 18); and also for 'committees' appointed to superintend any work, see Le Bas et Waddington Inscriptions Grecques et Latines, 1990, 2330, 2308. This last commemorates the restoration of a conduit and temple in Commodus' time at Soueida ἐπισκοπούσης φυλῆς Zoμainvwv. It seems also to be used for the officer of a guild, though his functions are not clear.3 MM. Le Bas and Waddington remark 1 For refs. see Lightfoot Philippians p. 95.

2 Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. ii. 76: διεῖλε τὴν χώραν ἅπασαν εἰς τοὺς καλουμένους πάγους καὶ κατέστησεν ἐφ' ἑκάστου τῶν πάγων ἄρχοντα ἐπίσκοπόν τε καὶ περίπολον τῆς ἰδίας μοίρας.

3 Hatch B. L. pp. 37, 38, note. The matter is not of great importance. Dr. Lightfoot calls the evidence 'slight' (Dissert. p. 194). So also Kühl pp. 93-96. Sanday, Expositor, Feb. 1887, pp. 98-100: 'I confess that I cannot quite satisfy