The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1885-03-11
Bishop Lightfoot on the "Teach-
ing of the Apostles"
(From the Expositor, london !


script at Constsntinople, the two Epistles
of Clement complete, he gave list OF
the other contents of the same volume.
Among these was work entitled The
Doctrine of the TiOeIUe APOSTLES AS a
work of this name Is mentioned by Fuse
bus and others among early apocryphal
writings, hope was excited in the minds
OF those interested in such studies, that
this might be the book alluded to, and
that it would throw some light on the
vexed question of the origin of the ApoS
tOIlcaL Constitutions Eight or nine years
however elapsed and no more was heard
OF it. At length, at the close of last
year (l893), it was given to the world
Its interest and Importance have far ex-
ceeded our highest expectations. 1t is
found indeed to be the basis of the sew
enth book of the ApoStohcoI ConStitu-
tons; but this is the smallest item in our
gain. Its chief value consist in the light
which it throws on the condition of the
infant Church. We are met however
with this preliminary difficulty, that it
does not carry its date on its face, and
we must have recourse to critical infer
ences in establishing its age. There can
be little or no question however, that it
is not only the work mentioned by Fuse
bus, but also the work quoted by Gle
ment of Alexandria as scripture" In
the absence of any direct indication, il
has been placed as late as A. D. l40-160|
by Bryennios, but l do not doubt that
we should be more near the mark in dat
ing it with most English and some Ger
n
SOLO. The reasons are briefly these
In the first place, the Eucharist still re.
mains part OF the Agape. This follows
from the fact that, in connection with the
Eucharlstlc prayers directions are given
about what is to be done when the per-
sons present are filled, "are satisfied.
But the separation of the two seems to
have taken place about the time of the
Bithynian persecution under Pliny CA.
ID. ll2); and in the age of Justin Mar
tyr they are evidently distinct In the
corresponding passage of the later work.
the ApostOhc0J Constitutions, the words
after they are filled" are replaced by
after their participation, the altera-
tion of usage requiring an alteration OF
phrase. Again, the picture which it ex-
hlbits OF the Christian ministry suggests
a very early date. The points to be OBJ
served are twofold. First, as in St
Paul's account in the First Epistle to the
Corinthians and in the Epistle to the
Ephesians, so here also we have both an
itinerant and localised ministry-the
former consisting mainly of apostles and
prophets, and the functions of the two
shading off into one anotL er, so that it is
not easy to draw the line between them
and, secondly, the localised ministry is
confined to two orders, who are called
bishops and deacons, as in the Epistle to
the Philippians and elsewhere in the
Apostolic writings. Here again the com
parison with the ApostohcaI ConStitu-
tons is suggestive. Where our docu-
ment has bishops and doacons," the
later work in the corresponding passages
substitutes bishops, presbyters, and dea.
cons. Thus, when our author wrote,
bishops" still remained synonym for
"presbyter," and the episcopal Office,
properly so called, had not been consti
tuted in the district in which he liz ed.
Now there is no distinct trace of this
first state of things-the itinerant min
istry side by side with the localized
after the Apostolic writings, not even in
the Apostolic Fathers while as regards
the second point-the identity of mean
ing in the terms bishop" and "presby-
ter"-the latest example is found in Gle
ment's Epistle, which was written about
A. D. 95 and in Asia Minor and Syria
at all events. episcopacy proper was a
recognised institution when Ignatius
wrote in the early years of the second
century. AS our work however NAV
with some probability be assigned to
Alexandria-for all its affinities are Alex
andrian-and the march of events was
probably not so rapid there as elsewhere,
we may perhaps allow the latitude of
few years more But, it will be urged,
the description of the Two Ways" with
which it commences, is obviously plagiar-
ised from the Epistle of Barnabas, and
this Epistle cannot be placed as early as
this date for the plagiarist would require.
In replying to this question, 1 would al
tog' ther waive the question respecting
the date of the Epistle of Barnabas,
though / might have something to say
on this point. But when l find two sets
OF critics, each maintaining with equal
| confidence and with some show of reason,
the one that Barnabas borrows from the
Doctrine, the other that the Doctrine is
indebted to Barnabas, third solution is
suggested to my mind as more probable
than either. May it not have been that
Il II 4