Calvin - Institutes Of The Christian Religion Book4 Chapter4

62

CHAPTER 4 THE CONDITION OF THE ANCIENT CHURCH, AND THE KIND OF GOVERNMENT IN USE BEFORE THE PAPACYF71 (Historical development of the ministry; three classes of ministers: teaching and ruling presbyters: one presbyter selected to be bishop: the archbishop, 1-4) 1. FIDELITY OF THE ANCIENT CHURCH TO THE SCRIPTURAL ARCHETYPE Up to this point we have discussed the order of church government as it has been handed down to us from God’s pure Word, and also those ministries established by Christ.F72 Now to make all these matters clearer and more familiar, and also to fix them better in our minds, it will be useful to recognize in those characteristics of the ancient church the form which will represent to our eyes some image of the divine institution. For even though the bishops of those times promulgated many canons, by which they seemed to express more than was expressed in Scripture, still they conformed their establishment with such care to the unique pattern of God’s Word that you may readily see that it had almost nothing in this respect alien to God’s Word. But though something might be wanting in their arrangements, yet because they tried with a sincere effort to preserve God’s institution and did not wander far from it, it will be most profitable here briefly to ascertain what sort of observance they had. We have stated that Scripture sets before us three kinds of ministers. Similarly, whatever ministers the ancient church had it divided into three orders. For from the order of presbyters (1) part were chosen pastors and teachers; (2) the remaining part were charged with the censure and correction of morals;

63

(3) the care of the poor and the distribution of alms were committed to the deacons. “Readers” and “acolytes,” however, were not the names of definite offices; it was these whom they called “clerics,” and whom through definite exercises they trained from youth to serve the church in order that they might better understand the purpose for which they had been appointed and might, in time, be more ready to step into office. This I shall soon show more fully.F73 Therefore, Jerome, in setting forth five church orders, lists bishops, presbyters, deacons, believers, and catechumens; he gives no special place to the remaining clergy and monks.F74 2. THE POSITION OF THE BISHOP All those to whom the office of teaching was enjoined they called “presbyters.” In each city these chose one of their number to whom they specially gave the title “bishop” in order that dissensions might not arise (as commonly happens) from equality of rank. Still, the bishop was not so much higher in honor and dignity as to have lordship over his colleagues. But the same functions that the consul has in the senate—to report on business, to request opinions, to preside over others in counseling, admonishing, and exhorting, to govern the whole action by his authority, and to carry out what was decreed by common decision—the bishop carried out in the assembly of presbyters. And the ancients themselves admit that this was introduced by human agreement to meet the need of the times. “Thus Jerome, commenting on the letter to Titus, says: “Bishop and presbyter are one and the same. And before, by the devil’s prompting, dissensions arose in religion and it was said among the people, ‘I am of Paul, I of Cephas’ [<460112> 1 Corinthians 1:12; cf. chapter 3:4], churches were governed by the common counsel of presbyters.” Arterward, to remove seeds of dissensions, all oversight was committed to one person. Just as the presbyters, therefore, know that they are, according to the custom of the church, subject to him who presides, so the bishops recognize that they are superior to the presbyters more according to the custom of the church than by the Lord’s actual arrangement, and that they ought to govern the church in cooperation with

64 F75

them. Jerome, however, tells us in another place what an ancient arrangement it was. For he says that at Alexandria from the time of the Evangelist Mark to that of Heraclas and Dionysius, the presbyters always elected one of their number and set him in a higher rank, calling him “bishop.”F76 Each city, then, had a college of presbyters, who were pastors and teachers. For all exercised among the people the office of teaching, exhorting, and correcting, which Paul enjoins on bishops [<560109> Titus 1:9]; and, to leave successors after them, they labored hard to teach the younger men who had enlisted in the sacred army. A certain area was assigned to each city from which its presbyters were drawn, and it was thought of as belonging to the body of that church. Each college was under one bishop for the preservation of its organization and peace. While he surpassed the others in dignity, he was subject to the assembly of his brethren. But if the field under his episcopate was too large for him to be able to fulfill everywhere all the duties of bishop, presbyters were assigned to certain places in the field, and carried on his duties in lesser matters. These they called “country bishops”F77 because they represented the bishop throughout the province. 3. THE CHIEF DUTY OF BISHOP AND PRESBYTERS But as far as concerns the office with which we are now dealing, both bishops and presbyters had to devote themselves to the dispensing of Word and sacraments. For at Alexandria alone (since Arius had disturbed the church there) it was ordained that no presbyter should preach to the people, as Socrates says in Book 9 of the Tripartite History.F78 Yet Jerome does not hide his displeasure at this fact.F79 Surely it would have been considered a monstrous thing for anyone to claim to be a bishop who had not in fact shown himself a true bishop. Such, therefore, was the severity of the times, that all ministers were compelled to discharge the office which the Lord required of them. I do not refer to the custom of a single age only. For even in Gregory’s time, when the church had well-nigh collapsed (surely it had deteriorated much from its ancient purity), it was not tolerable for any bishop to refrain from preach-lng. “A bishop,” he says somewhere, “dies, if no sound is heard

65

from him; for he calls upon himself the wrath of the hidden Judge, if he goes about without the sound of preaching.” And in another place: “When Paul testifies that he is clean of the blood of all [<442026> Acts 20:26], by this statement we are convicted, we are constrained, we are shown guilty—we who are called bishops, we who (besides possessing our own evils) add also the deaths of others. For we kill as many as we, lukewarm and silent, see going to their death each day.F80 He calls himself and others “silent,” for they were less constant in their work than they should have been. Since he spares not even those who half fulfilled their office, what do you think he would have done if anyone had ceased entirely? Therefore, it was a principle of long standing in the church that the primary duties of the bishop were to feed his people with the Word of God, or to build up the church publicly and privately with sound doctrine. 4. ARCHBISHOPS AND PATRIARCHS That each province had one archbishop among the bishops, and that at the Council of Nicaea patriarchs were ordained to be higher in rank and dignity than archbishops,F81 were facts connected with the maintenance of discipline. However, in this discussion it cannot be overlooked that this was an extremely rare practice. These ranks, therefore, were established so that any incident in any church whatever that could not be settled by a few might be referred to a provincial synod. If the magnitude or difficulty of the case demanded larger discussion, the patriarchs, together with a synod, were summoned, from whom there was no appeal except to a general council. Some called the government thus constituted a “hierarchy,” an improper term (it seems to me), certainly one unused in Scripture. For the Holy Spirit willed men to beware of dreaming of a principality or lordship as far as the government of the church is concerned.F82 But if, laying aside the word, we look at the thing itself, we shall find that the ancient bishops did not intend to fashion any other form of church rule than that which God has laid down in his Word.

66

(Deacons and archdeacons: the administration of property and alms: minor clerics, 5-9) 5. THE OFFICE OF DEACON At that time the character of the diaconate was the same as that under the apostles.F83 For they received the daily offerings of believers and the yearly income of the church. These they were to devote to proper uses, that is, to distribute some to feed the ministers, some to feed the poor, but according to the decision of the bishop, to whom they rendered an account annually of their distribution. The fact that the canons everywhere make the bishop the steward of all the possessions of the church is not to be understood as if he personally handled the task. Rather, it was his duty to designate to the deacon the ones to receive public support from the church, and with regard to what was left, to specify to whom it should be given and how much to each. For he had to investigate whether the deacon faithfully executed his responsibility. So we read in the canons ascribed to the apostles: “We decree that the bishop have in his power the affairs of the church. For if the souls of men (which are more precious) have been entrusted to him, it is much more fitting that he have to do with the care of funds, so that on his authority all things may be distributed to the poor through the presbyters and deacons, and be administered with fear and all carefulness.”F84 And in the Council of Antioch it was decreed that the bishops who administer the affairs of the church without the presbyters’ and deacons’ knowledge be restrained.F85 But we need not discuss this point any longer, since it is clear from very many letters of Gregory that, at that time, when many other ordinances of the church had been vitiated, this observance still remained, that the deacons were, under the bishop, the stewards of the poor. It is likely that subdeacons were at first assigned to deacons to assist them in poor relief; but that distinction was gradually confused. Moreover, archdeacons began to be created when the wealth of possessions demanded a new and more exact kind of administration, although Jerome relates that they already existed in his day.F86 In their charge were the whole of the revenues, possessions, and equipment, and the collection of the daily offerings. Accordingly, Gregory declares to the

67

archdeacon of Salona, that he is to be held guilty if any goods of the church be lost due to anyone’s negligence or fraud.F87 But they were entrusted with the reading of the gospel to the people and with the exhortation to pray, and were given as well the office of extending the cup in the Sacred Supper.F88 These tasks were enjoined to enhance their office that they might therefore fulfill it with greater scrupulousness, since by such signs they were admonished that it was not secular management that they were undertaking, but a spiritual function dedicated to God. 6. THE USE OF CHURCH POSSESSIONS From this we may also judge what use was made of church possessions and how they were dispensed. You will frequently find both in the decrees of synods and in ancient writers that all that the church possesses, either in lands or in money, is the patrimony of the poor. And so this song is often sung there to bishops and deacons, that they should remember that they are not handling their own goods but those appointed for the need of the poor; and if in bad faith they suppress or waste them, they shall be guilty of blood. Accordingly, they are admonished to distribute these goods to whom they are owed, with the greatest awe and reverence, as if in God’s presence, without partiality. Hence arise those grave protestations in Chrysostom, Ambrose, Augustine, and other bishops like them, by which they affirm their uprightness among the people. But it is fair and sanctioned also by the law of the Lord, that those who work for the church be supported at public expense [<460914> 1 Corinthians 9:14; <480606> Galatians 6:6]; and some presbyters in that age also consecrating their inheritances to God made themselves voluntarily poor. Consequently, the distribution was then such that the ministers did not lack food, and the poor were not neglected. Yet provision was meanwhile made that the very ministers, who ought to give others an example of frugality, should not have so much as to abuse it to the point of luxury and indulgence, but only enough to meet their needs. For those clergy who can be supported by their parents’ possessions, says Jerome, if they receive anything belonging to the poor, commit sacrilege, and by such an abuse they eat and drink judgment upon themselves [<461129> 1 Corinthians 11:29].F89