ACTS 20:28.
WE are all losers by reason of tradition having made the word of God of none effect. It is as much part of our redemption, in the age in which we live, to be redeemed from our “vain conversation received by tradition from our fathers,” as it was for the Jewish believers to be redeemed out of their hereditary and traditional religion through the precious blood of the Lamb (1 Pet. 1:18, 19). But there is danger lest in seeking to emancipate ourselves from tradition we throw aside that which is really valuable, because it is scriptural.
Episcopacy has been so generally known in its traditional character of prelacy, that many in repudiating prelacy have also with it thrown aside episcopacy, as if it had no scriptural foundation. Our duty is to separate the precious from the vile, and to recognize every gracious provision which the Holy Ghost makes for the present well-being of the saints.
“This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work” (1 Tim. 3:1). It is an honorable work; for its high pattern is the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. “Ye were,” says the apostle, “as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls” (1 Pet. 2:25). The Shepherd and Bishop, although having one common object—namely, care for the sheep—are, nevertheless, to be distinguished in their functions. If the Lord Jesus presents Himself to us in all the gracious characters of the Good Shepherd (John 10), we find Him exercising the no less important functions of the Bishop in His inspection of the Churches. (Rev. 2, 3).
Sheep not only need green pastures and still waters, but diligent inspection also, lest there be disease among them; as disease in one sheep, if not checked, might infect the whole flock. “Be thou diligent to know the state of thy flocks, and look well to thy herds” (Prov. 27:23). Tender care and suited teaching, together with “vigilant” inspection, would be found in one whom the Lord had gifted to be, under Himself, a shepherd and a bishop. But these qualifications are not always found in the same servant of the Lord. The ready detection of any departure from the faith, or of any attempt to corrupt it—the detection of an evil principle at work, before it is manifested in its results, are truly valuable qualifications; and yet they may be unaccompanied with that truly shepherdly characteristic to strengthen that which is diseased, to heal that which is sick, and to bind up that which is broken, and to bring again that which is driven away, and to seek out that which is lost (Ezek. 34:4).
Among the gifts of the ascended Jesus for the building up of His body, the Church, “pastors and teachers” are linked together. (Eph. 4) “Apt to teach,” is also one of the needed qualifications of a bishop, but it is not the only qualification, and may be found where other qualifications of the bishop are wanting. Many of these qualifications are moral and circumstantial, of which those without are quite competent judges, Sobriety of demeanor, not addicted to wine, not greedy of filthy lucre, not passionate, and being at the head of a well-ordered household (see 1 Tim. 3), do not require a spiritual judgment in order to be recognized. But a great deal of the truly shepherdly character can only be appreciated by those who are spiritual, and often finds its exercise among individuals at home, rather than among the congregation in public. If the Lord in mercy gives pastors, He gives them according to His own heart, to feed His people with knowledge and understanding (Jer. 3:15). But in Israel the accredited pastors—those who made pretension to be so, and those whom the people acknowledged had scattered the flock—they had “become brutish and sought not the Lord” (Jer. 10:21; 23:1-4). It was so again in the days of the Lord Jesus Himself. He came to “the lost sheep of the house of Israel” there was an accredited fold and accredited shepherds; but the fold was no place of safety for the Lord’s sheep, so He put them forth from it, and pronounced the most withering woes on the accredited shepherds; and then assumed that blessed title Himself. Jesus, the Lord of glory, feeds His flock like a Shepherd: He gathers the lambs with His arm, and carries them in His bosom, and gently leads those that are with young (Is. 40:10, 11). We learn from Jesus Himself, “the good Pastor” and the true Bishop, what would be according to His heart; whom love led both to “lay down His life for the sheep,” and to counsel, rebuke, and chasten them, in their diseases, wanderings, and lukewarmness (Rev. 3:18, 19). If it be according to the heart of Jesus to, unite in the same individual the pastoral and episcopal qualifications, so as to relieve and help one another, how gladly should we accept what He graciously bestows. But to “every one is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ;” and we are equal losers, if we recognize not all that Christ is pleased to give; or, if any presume, because one gift is manifest that therefore another is present. This is the way of office, but it is not the way of Christ. In the parting address of the apostle Paul to the elders of the Church of Ephesus, he pointedly addresses them as Bishops, yet at the same time recognizes them as called upon to tend the flock. These elders were “stewards of the manifold grace of God”—among them doubtlessly some were more apt to teach than others, some more qualified to rule, others more able in meekness to instruct and to sympathize with the sheep in their wanderings and trials. But “all are yours,” says the apostle; and the flock would be losers if they did not profit by all as their several circumstances might require. Now, the assumption of office, on the one side, and the appropriation of a teacher to oneself, or to a congregation, on the other, has tended to hinder this gracious provision of the Shepherd and Bishop being carried out for the blessing of the flock. The Church at Philippi, in the absence of immediate apostolic superintendence, flourished under that of bishops. The provision at Philippi was not a bishop, but bishops; and in this plurality we may safely conclude that vigilant inspection and tender pastoral care were alike secured to the Church at Philippi, as the both were secured to the Church at Ephesus, by the gracious provision of the Holy Ghost. “Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, [i.e., bishops,] to feed the Church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood” (Acts 20:28). It is the way of man to merge the individual into the official character, and to demand a respect for the office apart from the personal qualifications of its holder. But this is not the way of Christ. There the sense of individual responsibility to the Lord, the exercise of conscience towards God and man, the tasting and valuing personally the doctrine taught to others (see 1 Tim. 4:16), is the very soul and power of ability to help those who have believed through grace. “Take heed to yourselves.” It is by personal exercise of soul before God, that one is made useful in counselling or comforting others in their soul-trials. It is this feature which distinguishes gift in the Church from office in the world. We are bound to acknowledge “the powers that be,” irrespective of their moral qualifications; but it is disobedience to Christ to recognize anything like office in the Church in the absence of the qualifications which are plainly laid down by the apostle. (1 Tim. 3). The assumption of office in the Church has generally led to usurpation over the conscience of others, whilst the gift of the ascended Jesus ever brings with it a sense of direct responsibility to the Lord the giver. “We preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus’ sake.”
It is to all the flock that the apostle directs the attention of the bishops whom he addressee. He knew how rapidly the entrance of an evil, trivial in itself, would spread; and therefore every individual believer ought to be regarded as a member of the one body of which Christ is the Head. Again, the exercise of their episcopacy was to be in the recognition that it s as the Holy Ghost who had qualified them, and set them in so responsible a position—such a consideration would tend alike to quicken diligence and hinder usurpation. They were also to feed, that is, tend the Church of God; vigilant oversight was to be tempered with shepherdly tenderness. There are cases in which sharp rebuke is needed; but for the most part reproof, rebuke, and exhortation, should be “with all long-suffering.” But, above all, the value to God Himself of that which was the object of their attention and oversight must never be lost sight of. “It is the Church of God which He hath purchased with His own blood.” If this thought were kept before the soul, it would tend to make the bishop attach a far higher value to that which he tended, than to himself or to his service.
The same outline is given also by the apostle Peter in addressing elders in his Epistle. “The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight, [that is, exercising episcopacy,] not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind: neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. And when the Chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away” (1 Pet. 5:1-4).
Here, first we notice, that the care and oversight of the flock of God is so honourable a work as to be desirable for its now sake, and by no means to be regarded as a burdensome duty. The yoke of Jesus is easy, and His burden light. It should therefore be undertaken, “not by constraint, but willingly.” The apostle then warns against two dangers, and in this case, as well as others, the warning itself has been prophetic of the corruption which would ensue. Greediness of gain and lordship over the conscience—yea, even the bodies of men have been the prominent features of the false episcopate of the corrupt Church. The Chief Shepherd went before the flock to point out the way, and give them an example; and, with their eye on Him, the under shepherds should be patterns to the flock, waiting the time when care for Christ’s sheep should be made manifest as the most honorable of employments. The gain and lordly honor of the false episcopate pass away, but the crown of glory that fadeth not away is given by the Chief Shepherd Himself to those who have fed His flock, and not themselves.
If by the repudiation of prelacy as anti-christian in its principle, we have underrated the value and blessing of a scriptural episcopacy—there is also a hindrance to our recognition of this blessing arising from an opposite quarter. The same apostle Peter who describes so beautifully the true episcopacy, warns not only against avaricious prelatical lordship, but against another kind of false episcopacy. “Let none of you suffer as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evildoer, or as a busybody in other men’s matters” (1 Pet. iv. 15). This is but one compound word in the Greek αλλοτριἱοεπἰσκοπος – “allotrioepiscopos”—one who takes for himself the oversight of other men’s matters, to the neglect of judging himself. The lordly domination of prelacy may be honestly repudiated by those who nevertheless assume to themselves the exercise of an equally false episcopacy. It is no legitimate part of true scriptural episcopacy to canvass the character of Christians, or to intrude into their domestic concerns. To do so is really to lord it over God’s heritage. It is a sad degradation of the episcopacy, if it be supposed to consist in meddlesome interference with the private affairs of Christians. Yet this is not unfrequently to be found even among real Christians, and has helped, among other things, to obscure the blessing of a truly scriptural episcopacy. God owns the place of the head of a family, as much as He owns the civil governor, and there are corresponding responsibilities on the part of the civil governor and of the head of the family, whether they acknowledge them or not. The general rule will here apply, “Them that honour Me, I will honour; those that despise Me shall be lightly esteemed.” This general rule is not confined to the household of faith. It requires, therefore, spiritual intelligence to know the proper limits of a scriptural episcopal superintendence; and not to cloke, under the good work of the episcopacy, the “busy-body in other men’s matters.”
Whether the gift of oversight be rare, or whether it be lightly esteemed, both which should lead us to humiliation on account of the general sin of insult offered to the Spirit of grace, one thing still remains to us, “self-episcopacy,” as the apostle teaches us. “Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord: looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled” (Heb. 12:14, 15). The word here rendered looking diligently, is the same as that which is rendered (1 Pet. 5:2) “taking the oversight.” And well would it be for Christians if they practically owned such an episcopacy— “the root of bitterness” and profaneness would be less common among us. Diligent self-inspection would, at the same time, preserve us from the tendency to be busy-bodies in other men’s matters, give healthful tone to scriptural episcopacy where it exists, and make its value to be truly appreciated. He who is the most honest bishop over his own soul, will regard and value any whom the Holy Ghost has really made bishops, as gracious helps to Him personally; and, above all, will ever turn to Jesus, the Shepherd and Bishop of his soul, humbly yet confidently saying, “Thine eye seeth me.”