[237:5] Acts vi. 4.  “Here,” says Mr Litton, “no mention is made of government or of ordination, as the special prerogative of the apostolic office; and if it were not dangerous to lay too much stress upon a single passage, it might from this one be plausibly inferred that the special function of the apostles, as representatives of the ordinary Christian ministry, has descended, not to bishops, but to presbyters, to whom it specially pertains to give themselves to prayer and the ministry of the Word.”—­Litton’s Church of Christ, p. 407.  It is certainly not dangerous to lay as much stress upon any Scripture as it will legitimately bear, and the inference hero drawn is in accordance with the rules of the most exact logic.

[238:1] 1 Cor. i. 17.

[238:2] Eph. iii. 8.  In dealing with individuals, the apostles seldom challenged obedience on the ground of their divine authority.  When they are represented as directing the movements of ministers, the language generally implies simply that the parties in question undertook certain services at their instigation or request, or by their advice.  Thus, Paul says that he besought Timothy to abide in Ephesus, that he left Titus in Crete, and that he sent Epaphroditus to the Philippians (1 Tim. i. 3; Titus i. 5; Philip. ii. 25).  But Paul himself is said to have been sent forth to Tarsus by the brethren (Acts ix. 30).  When Mark refused to accompany Paul and Silas into Asia Minor he did not therefore forfeit his ecclesiastical status (Acts xiii. 13, xv. 37-39).  Apart from their special commission, the apostles were entitled to deference from other ministers on account of their superior age and experience; and Paul sometimes refers to this claim.  See Philem. 8, 9.  On the same ground all who have recently entered the ministry are bound to yield precedence to aged pastors, and to respect their advice.  See 1 Pet. v. 5.

[238:3] It can scarcely be necessary to remind the reader that the postscripts to these epistles setting forth that Timothy was “ordained the first bishop of the church of the Ephesians,” and that Titus was “ordained the first bishop of the Church of the Cretians,” are spurious.  See Period i. sec. ii. chap. i. p. 181.

[239:1] 1 Tim. i. 3.  Paul says (1 Cor. iv. 17) to the Corinthians—­“I have sent unto you Timotheus .... who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ;” and, according to the mode of reasoning employed by some, we might infer from this text that Timothy was bishop of Corinth.  “It is a suspicious circumstance,” says Dr Burton, “that several persons who are mentioned in the New Testament, are said to have been bishops of the places connected with their names.  Thus Cornelius is said to have been bishop of Caesarea, and to have succeeded Zacchaeus, though it is highly improbable that either of them filled such an office.”—­“Lectures,” i., p. 182.