Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadEzekiel, Jonah, and Pastoral Epistles by Patrick Fairbairn - 1 Timothy 3:8 - 3:9
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Vers. 8, 9. In like manner that the deacons be grave.—The likeness indicated here has respect to the qualifications being substantially of the same kind as those connected with the higher office of the pastorate; it is necessary that the deacons, too, have a measure of such characteristics. Two things specially call for notice in this transition to the deacons. One is, that the apostle plainly knew nothing of an intermediate class of officers between those he had designated episcopoi, and those he now calls deacons. Chrysostom’s reason for the omission—namely, of the presbyters as a distinct order—can satisfy no unbiassed interpreter. He thinks it was done because “there is no great difference between them and bishops; for presbyters also have received the right of teaching and the presidency of the church; and the things which he had said of the bishops are applicable also to the presbyters. For in ordination alone are they superior, and in this only do they appear to surpass the presbyters.” Jerome, on the corresponding passage in Titus, gives the only tenable explanation: “Presbyter, therefore, is the same with him who is bishop; and before that through the prompting of the devil ambitious strivings entered into religion, and it was said among the people, ‘I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Christ,’ churches were governed by the common council of presbyters,” etc. The other thing to be noticed is, that while deacons are named here as a class of officers familiarly known, requiring no description as to their distinctive place and duties, no mention is made of them in the Epistle to Titus. Had the inverse order been adopted, the matter would have been inexplicable; but as it is, the difference may justly be regarded as an evidence of genuineness and of mutual independence. It naturally arose out of the diverse position and circumstances of the churches in the regions respectively of Crete and Ephesus. Crete, where Titus had been left to complete the arrangements originated by the apostle, appears to have been but recently visited by the gospel, and in ecclesiastical matters everything was as yet in comparative infancy. In Christian communities so small, the simplest possible organization would be sufficient; in most cases, indeed, all that was practicable. A beginning must be made, as elsewhere (Act_14:23), with a few respectable elders in each. At Ephesus, however, and in the larger towns of Asia Minor, the churches had already grown into large communities, and inferior as well as superior officers were required (as previously in the church at Jerusalem) for the proper distribution and management of its affairs. The distinct place, therefore, assigned to deacons here is perfectly in keeping with the historical circumstances of the time. It is the only occasion on which they are formally discoursed of in St. Paul’s writings; but in epistles of considerably earlier date, they are incidentally noticed as an existing order, more generally in Rom_12:7, 1Co_12:28; and more specifically in Php_1:1, also Rom_16:1, where Phoebe is designated a deaconess of the church at Cenchreae.
It is not necessary to dwell at any length on the several qualifications mentioned by the apostle; they are for the most part such as were needed to beget in the members of the church a feeling of respect and confidence towards them. They must be grave, of serious deportment, as opposed to unbecoming levity; not double-tongued ( äéëüãïõò ), prevaricating in their speech, and so giving rise to misunderstandings and differences; not addicted to much wine; not lovers of base gain ( áἰó÷ñïêåñäåῖò ), the base qualifying the gain, as a thing which becomes base when it is taken as the leading aim and object of persons filling a sacred office (comp. Tit_1:11; 1Pe_5:2),—“greedy of filthy lucre,” A.V., “greedy of base gain,” Ellicott, seem both rather too strong; holding ( ἔ÷ïíôáò , having or possessing) the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. Faith might here be taken either objectively—what the parties apprehended and believed; or subjectively—the apprehensive and believing principle itself,—but more naturally the former: and what is meant by the mystery of it is the once secret or hidden nature of the things about which the distinctively gospel faith is conversant, now brought to light by the revelation of Jesus Christ. Reuss (in his Histoire de la Theol. Chrétienne, vol. ii. p. 88) has given a good explanation of this peculiar phraseology. After referring to the partial revelations made through the prophets, he says: “The plan of God could not be understood so long as the manifestation of Him who was to accomplish it had yet to be made good. It continued to be a mystery—a matter concealed, not comprehended, and only ceased to be such by the fact of the definitive revelation ( ἀðïêÜëõøéò ) of Christ (Rom_16:26; 1Co_2:7; Gal_3:23; Eph_3:3, etc.). We ought to draw attention to the difference which subsists between the notion of ìõóôçñßïí with Paul, and that of a mystery in the scholastic sense; that is, of an incomprehensible dogma. In all the passages just referred to, as in some others, Paul opposes to mystery the revelation which puts an end to it; whereas in the scholastic sense it is with the revelation that the mystery commences. The apostle qualifies the plan of God’s salvation sometimes as the mystery of God (Col_2:2; 1Co_4:1, 1Co_2:1), with reference to its Author, and more completely as the mystery of the will of God (Eph_1:9); sometimes as the mystery of Christ (Eph_3:4; Col_4:3), with respect to its Mediator or executor: besides, as the mystery of faith (1Ti_3:9), or of godliness (1Ti_3:16), with respect to its practical condition; in fine, as the mystery of the gospel (Eph_6:19), inasmuch as it is the object of apostolic preaching.”