THERE would be a great deficiency in Our knowledge of the constitution of the early churches were it not for the epistles to Timothy and Titus. It was the absolute impracticability in which Paul found himself personally to overlook the numerous churches which were springing up throughout the Roman Empire, that obliged him to delegate his authority, more especially to two men—the one Timothy, very young when his career began, the other Titus, a Greek, possibly rather older; and the Holy Ghost in indicting these letters by the hand of the apostle, has left us a chart for our own guidance. It is not the purpose of this paper to trace the misuse which the professing church has made of these letters, in setting up a hierarchy which, absorbing into itself both office and gift, restrains the free action of the Holy Ghost in the members of Christ; but only to give an outline of the labors of these men in connection with the apostle of the Gentiles. This much, however, may be said, that both Timothy and Titus were men of their own order (creations, one might say, of the apostle Paul himself) who had no successors, at all events no power of naming them; their powers, as those of every delegate, reverting back when their mission was terminated to him who employed them. What a world of difficulties would have been avoided, if to questions of ordination, succession, &c. we were content to give the answer, that whatever the apostle employed these men to do, we cannot find them now, any more than we can find an apostle. We may and ought to own an elder, or a Titus when we see him, rendering thanks to God for the gift, but we cannot find an apostle to ordain him.
Titus was, it appears, a convert of the apostle, and one of his earliest associates, for he accompanied him to the council at Jerusalem, when he went there with Barnabas. (Gal. 2:11Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also. (Galatians 2:1).) Although most trustworthy and reliable, and having, as we learn from 2 Corinthians, been thoroughly imbued with the mind of Paul, and still more of Christ Himself, conscientious and painstaking (2 Cor. 7. 8.), yet he never seems to have possessed that place in the heart of Paul which belonged to Timothy, who was thoroughly identified with him. "I have no man likeminded with Timothy." The probability was that there was wanting in him that soul-affinity for Paul which Timothy had. It is certain that just before his martyrdom he allowed, willingly or unwillingly, Titus to depart to Galatia (2 Tim. 4:1010For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed unto Thessalonica; Crescens to Galatia, Titus unto Dalmatia. (2 Timothy 4:10)), whilst his poor heart was mourning over Timothy's absence, and begging him to return. "Do thy diligence to come shortly unto me. Do thy diligence to come before winter." (2 Tim. 4:9, 219Do thy diligence to come shortly unto me: (2 Timothy 4:9)
21Do thy diligence to come before winter. Eubulus greeteth thee, and Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia, and all the brethren. (2 Timothy 4:21).)
Nor in the affairs of the church does Titus appear so high in office, if such a term be allowed. Although a delegate of the apostle, and empowered to ordain elders, according to the several characteristics marked out for him, he never occupied quite the same ground with Timothy. Thus we have no injunction to Titus, "Lay hands suddenly on no man." (1 Tim. 5:2222Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men's sins: keep thyself pure. (1 Timothy 5:22).) There is no "Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery." (1 Tim. 4:1414Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery. (1 Timothy 4:14).)
And no "I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands." (2 Tim. 1:66Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands. (2 Timothy 1:6).) In general, Paul's manner in writing to Timothy takes a wider sweep, as if to one occupying a larger space in his thoughts. Titus seems to have been thoroughly trusted in his line, but his sphere was more limited, whether that one apostle, when he wrote, was not himself fully aware of his own powers, or from the caliber of Titus being less weighty than that of Timothy. On such matters we must speak with caution. In the instructions to both, there is a deep sense of the corruption abiding in man after he has been taken up by the grace of God—a corruption which requires the vigilant eye of those raised up in spirit, as those men were, above the common level of Christians. An habitual walk with God, the avoidance of every custom or habit which a discerning worldly eye could cavil at is demanded on the part of those who are to have the oversight, much more must the positive godly virtues be cultivated, and of course were to be found in such as Titus who was to judge of their possession by others.
As to the recorded events in Titus' life, we meet with him first as accompanying Paul to Jerusalem on his third visit upon the question of circumcision. "And took Titus with me." (Gal. 2:11Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also. (Galatians 2:1).) By this mention he seems, when Paul wrote, to have been known personally to the Galatians. This was at least fourteen years after the apostle's conversion. Subsequently we know he made two visits to Corinth entirely to Paul's satisfaction, the one as his medium of communication with the Corinthians, during Paul's hesitancy about going there in person (2 Cor. 2. 7. 8.); the other in the matter of a collection for the Jewish poor. Thirdly, we have an epistle addressed to him in Crete. Fourthly and lastly, a notice in 2 Timothy that he had left Rome for Dalmatia, not like Demas as a forsaker of Paul, so we hope, but on the Lord's service.
Although it can be shown by induction that he was often in company with the apostle, yet his name was never, as was the case with Timothy, conjoined in any address to the churches.
It is universally conceded that the Acts of the Apostles contain only the great landmarks of either Peter's or Paul's journeys. The filling up of the coast line is left to us, not devoid of healthy action in regard to study of the men themselves whose fortunes we follow, but it must be allowed that our conclusions have often only the value of a surmise. One thing may be said with reference to these travels, written, as they were by Luke, that whenever he was present with the apostle (and we can generally discover when he was) there is much more detail than when he was absent, and these times of non-detail are those into which the tracers of the life of Paul usually trace the journeys which he took as known to us only by his letters.
Perhaps of all the epistles that which has given rise to most speculation is this to Titus; some have put it very early, others very late. Let us try all the places —gaps, as we call them, in Paul's life—and see if we can place it. There is no notice of any voyage to Crete, or any coming in sight of it, except during his last, in the course of which he was shipwrecked at Malta; but the words, "For this cause left I thee" (κατέλιπόν) in Crete, demand for himself a stay of some length there, which certainly could not have been at that time. Suppose we try the interval between our apostle's return from Jerusalem about the circumcision question, and his alienation from Barnabas. (Acts 15) Is there room to slip in such a voyage? Hardly. Again, when he had chosen Silas, and "went through Syria and Cilicia confirming the churches." (Acts 15) It is possible, but not very probable, that he might have run across to Crete and left Titus there, always remembering that we have him upon the scene after Barnabas earlier than any of the others. In so far as this the time would do; especially, too, as it accounts for the absence of Titus at a very critical period. But there is a weighty objection. Apollos is mentioned as to come to Crete. Now, as Paul did not know Apollos until after (Acts 19:11And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, (Acts 19:1)), and as he was with him when he wrote his first epistle to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 16:1212As touching our brother Apollos, I greatly desired him to come unto you with the brethren: but his will was not at all to come at this time; but he will come when he shall have convenient time. (1 Corinthians 16:12)), we should have a lapse of five years between the time of his leaving Titus in Crete, and the writing of the letter to the Corinthians. Now such a period would be too long in those early days for the stay of so eminent a servant in one place, to say nothing of the mention of Apollos as recognizing some acquaintance between him and Titus, which could not have been the case upon our present supposition. Tychicus is also mentioned, who otherwise comes late upon the scene. (Comp. Acts 20:1414And when he met with us at Assos, we took him in, and came to Mitylene. (Acts 20:14)). And Nicopolis, a place in Europe, would seem as if the regions in which the apostle was residing were well known. We have done, then, with this supposition.
Another unaccounted interval might be found in Acts 18:21, 22,21But bade them farewell, saying, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem: but I will return again unto you, if God will. And he sailed from Ephesus. 22And when he had landed at Caesarea, and gone up, and saluted the church, he went down to Antioch. (Acts 18:21‑22) where Paul sails from Ephesus for Cesarea. On this voyage he might easily have taken Crete on his way, and something is to be said in its favour, inasmuch as the three oldest uncials have not in v. 21 The clause, "I must by all means keep this feast that cometh at Jerusalem." If this clause does not stand, his movements would not be hurried to be in time for a feast, and he might have sojourned a time in Crete and left Titus there; "when he had landed at Cesarea, and gone up and saluted the church;" happening of course after his return from that island. Titus was back again at Nicopolis in time to do the Lord's work in Corinth for the apostle. Luke appears to have been absent all through Acts 18,19, and hence the narrative is conducted in the third person singular, instead of in the first person plural. Supposing all this true, Titus met Paul at Nicopolis, between the writing of the first and second Corinthians. Paul from Nicopolis goes into Asia, hoping at Troas to meet Titus on his return from Corinth; but not doing so, hastens after him into Macedonia. Apollos meanwhile, unwilling perhaps to be made a center at Corinth (1 Cor. 1:1212Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. (1 Corinthians 1:12)), goes to Crete before Titus leaves it, carrying possibly the letter itself; and Paul on receiving good accounts from Titus writes his second letter, and soon after makes his third visit to the Corinthians. This supposition, the best we can find, is, it must be allowed, a hazard upon whether a certain clause in Acts 18:2121But bade them farewell, saying, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem: but I will return again unto you, if God will. And he sailed from Ephesus. (Acts 18:21) stands or not. We now arrive at a last and very convenient supposition, as it has few or no puzzling difficulties to contend with, viz., that the epistle was written after a release which Paul had from the prison at Rome. Now as chronologists make an interval of six years between his release and his martyrdom, it is possible that he may have gone any number of journeys. On this point we are entirely at sea. He might have quitted Rome, left Titus in Crete, wintered either at Nicopolis of Epircis or of Macedonia, and Titus subsequently have been found at Rome with the apostle. So also Tychicus (3:12) may have relieved him, and still have had time to rejoin the apostle, and afterwards have been sent to Ephesus. (2 Tim. 4:1212And Tychicus have I sent to Ephesus. (2 Timothy 4:12).) The light which the epistle itself sheds is all against so late a date being assigned to it. Its contents do not bear upon subjects that must have occupied the apostle's mind after his release. Although there are complaints against "unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, especially they of the circumcision," yet there seems to be no bewailing of a wide and deep-rooted deflection from the truth, such as we find in 2 Timothy, or even in those epistles which confessedly were written during his earlier imprisonment. We tend, then, to the view that the epistle was not written after a release from Rome, but most probably after a first visit of Paul to Corinth, or, at all events, after the writing of first Corinthians.
WE only really enjoy our blessings "in Christ" as we enter practically into "the fellowship of His sufferings.”