the third chapter of the first epistle to Timothy, fairly imply, that he had left the church at Ephesus, according to his usual practice, without officers; for he gives this evangelist, not a new commission (he already had power to ordain), but instructions as to the choice of bishops and deacons. These had been complied with before he landed at Miletus. Acts xx. 17. This record of the existence of elders at Ephesus, compared with the directions given to Timothy (ch. iii.) not only renders it probable, that Timothy had ordained them, but fortifies the presumption, that the first epistle to Timothy was written in Macedonia, before this visit to Jerusalem, and consequently before his first imprisonment.

The language of the first epistle (ch. i. 3.) "I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia," did not form a permanent connexion between Timothy and Ephesus. The very greatest extent of the instructions given in this letter, was to continue only till Paul should come to him (ws "Eexoa). 1 Tim. iv. 13. iii. 14. But it is certain, that Timothy did_not remain at Ephesus, even till Paul passed on his way to Jerusalem.

Timothy is nowhere called a bishop in the scriptures, he is exhorted to do the work of an evangelist, (2 Tim. iv. 5,) and every duty assigned him by the apostle was comprehended in his original commission. The office was like those of apostle and prophet, extraordinary, and unconnected with a particular church. Ephes. iv. 11. But in whatsoever church he preached, he could as evangelist ordain pastors, or bishops, or there was no propriety in the caution, "lay hands suddenly on no man." This office was superior to that of "pastors even teachers."*

The writer in the Christian Observer speaks of congregations, but

* Τους ποιμένες καὶ διδασκάλους, Ephes. iv. 11. denote the same officers.

we read only of a church at Ephesus. Acts xx. 17-28. 1 Tim. iii. 15. v. 16. Rev. ii. 1. The singular is often used for the universal church; in all other instances it denotes, in the New Testament, one congregation or assembly. Where more are intended the plural is adopted.† After the days of the apostles, when one church became in some instances too numerous to worship in one place, they became several congregations under the name of one church; but we know no proof that this impropriety had taken place in their days.

He appears to have been himself ordained to his high office by (dia) the hands of the apostle; and as this was done in the presence of some presbytery, we suppose at Lystra, they also united in the imposition of hands, and thus his ordination was with (ra) the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.

Evangelists were not personally instructed and commissioned by Christ, nor had they the extraordínary gifts in equal extent; nor, except in writing, the unerring assistance, or inspiration of the apostles. But evangelists had greater advantages than the first bishops, the pastors of churches, because they were the companions of the apostles, in their travels.

The second epistle to Timothy will prove itself written by Paul, when a prisoner at Rome; and at least establishes the absence of the evangelist from his spiritual father, at the time it was written. But he was at Rome in the time of the first imprisonment, as has been proved by his having joined with Paul in the letters to the Colossians, Philippians and Philemon. Demas and

† See Acts ix. 31. xv. 41. xvi. 4, 16. 1 Cor. vii. 17. xi. 16. xiv. 33, 34. xvi. 1, 19. 2 Cor. viii. 1, 18, 19, 23, 24. xi. 8, 28. xii. 13. Gal. i. 2, 22. 1 Thess. ii. 14. 2 Thess. i. 4. Rev. i. 20, &c. The singular is intended of one congregation in 1 Cor. xi. 18, 22. xiv. 4, 5, 12, 19, 23, 28, 33, 34. 3 John 6, &c.

Mark were also there in the first imprisonment, but were absent when this letter was written.

It has been supposed to have been written before the epistles to the Colossians, Philippians and Philemon, which were during the first imprisonment. But in 2 Tim. iv. 20, Paul tells him, Erastus abode at Corinth, and this needed not to have been told to Timothy, if Paul meant that Erastus abode at Corinth, when he went to Jerusalem, and so to Rome, for Timothy was then with him, and must have known the circumstance, had it been so. In like manner he says, (ibid.) "Trophimus have I left at Miletus, sick;" but Trophimus was not left at Miletus, on the

voyage to Jerusalem, for he was the occasion of the jealousies of the Jews. Acts xxi. 29.

These two facts, compared with this, which appears in the epistle, that it was written by Paul a prisoner at Rome, afford sufficient certainty, that there was a second imprisonment, and that this letter was then written.

But it by no means follows, that Timothy was at Ephesus when the second epistle was written. This ought not to be assumed, but shown. If Timothy was then at Ephesus, why should he have been told, “I have sent Tychicus to Ephesus? 2 Tim. iv. 12. He must have arrived at that place before the letter, and the fact have been known. And Tychicus needed no introduction to Timothy. Had Timothy been at Ephesus, Paul would not have sent him one hundred and fifty miles to Troas, and three hundred out of his course*, for a cloak. It appears

*The nearest and most frequented route was by Corinth to Rome. Aquila and Priscilla came from Rome to Corinth, and from thence to Ephesus. Apollos went from Ephesus to Corinth, and back again to Ephesus. Paul came once from Corinth to Ephesus, and would have repeated that voyage, but his enemies laid in wait for him, and he was obliged to pass circuitously by Macedonia and Troas.

more probable that Timothy was, at the time the epistle was sent to him, at Troas, or in the neighbourhood of that place. The salutations will not establish the destination of the epistle. Onesiphorus resided in Asia, but the particular place of his abode is not shown. He helped Paul both at Ephesus, and Rome. Also Aquila, who had resided at Rome, at Corinth, at Ephesus, and again at Rome, was a native of Pontus, on the margin of the Euxine.

If Timothy was not at Ephesus, when the second letter was written to him, there is no evidence of his being in that city, after Paul's first imprisonment. But if he had been at that time at Ephesus, he must have then left it, the letter calling him to Rome; and the sacred records speak not of his return to that city.

1

If Paul constituted Timothy bishop of Ephesus, it is an affirmative and ought to be proved. But Paul tells the presbyters of Ephesus, at Miletus, that the Holy Ghost had made them bishops (EIXOTOUS) of that church. Those general terms suppose the powers which were necessary to ordaining others, as Timothy well knew, for a similar presbytery had laid their hands on his head at his ordination. This circumstance will not prove, that a presbytery could have ordained an evangelist, if an apostle had not been present; because evangelists were extraordinary officers of a higher grade; but it must prove, that a presbytery have some authority to ordain. They were the highest fixed officers in a church, and the power of ordination was necessary to their succession. They could not have been appointed coadjutors to Timothy in the ordination of themselves. And if they were ordained before he was left at Ephesus, it ought to be shown. If there were no officers in that church, the direction to Timothy, who was an evangelist, to ordain pastors in Ephesus, was to do no more than his

specting them, in determining the Searcher of hearts, to utter nothing on this occasion without a parable. "Therefore" added he, "speak I to them in parables; because they seeing see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross; and their ears are dull of hearing; and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them." Mat. xiii. 13-15. Such was the moral state of this multitude; and being such, it was on two accounts expedient that Christ should speak to them in parables. In the first place, they would not have endured a plainer method of instruction : (Mark iv. 33.) "And with many such parables spake he the word unto them, as they were able to hear it." In the second place, while this method left their violent prejudices undisturbed, its obscurity was adapted to secure the infliction of a very suitable punishment on them, for entertaining these guilty dispositions: (Luke viii. 10.) "To others in parables ; THAT seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand." See also Mark iv. 12.

Let us first briefly review the testimony of Christ concerning the moral state of the multitude ; and then inquire, why it was expedient, that Christ should address such persons in parables.

I. Let us consider the testimony of Christ concerning the moral state, or character of this people. Thus he describes them, "they seeing see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand." Many mighty works have been done before their eyes, and many glorious truths proclaimed in their ears; but

they are benefited no more, than if they had been destitute of the faculties of seeing and hearing; notwithstanding all their excellent opportunities for spiritual improvement, they are no wiser nor better than at first.

It is important to recollect, that our Lord was now in the vicinity of Capernaum, which lay on the borbers of lake Gennesareth; that in this city he had principally resided during his public ministry; that here and in the surrounding region, he had performed most of his miracles, and communicated most of his heavenly instructions; and that the multitude of whom we speak, were inhabitants of this highly-favoured district.

Recollecting this, we shall regard the auditory of Christ as one of no ordinary description. In one important respect, there was no people like them in all the earth. None had seen what they had seen, nor heard what they had heard. Such evidences of power and wisdom, such instances of kindness and condescension, had never been vouchsafed to mortals before. Honoured by personal co-residence with the divine Messiah, witnesses of the most brilliant miracles ever wrought among men, attendants on the ministrations of him in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, what ought not their attainments to have been? Yet seeing they had seen not, and hearing they had heard not. While Omnipotence performed its wonders in their presence, while Eternal Wisdom spake in their hearing, they gazed-they listened and then remained as before-blind to the glory of Christ, insensible to the excellence of truth, immersed in spiritual darkness, and in bondage to the god of this world.

From this representation their character seems sufficiently hateful; but Christ throws over it a darker shade, when he applies to them the passage from Isaiah, which has been recited. It is that prophecy (quoted

from Is. vi. 9, 10. with verbal variations) which God commanded the prophet to proclaim to the Jews, perhaps on his first investiture with the sacred office. "Go and tell this people" said Jehovah to his servant, "Hear ye indeed, but understand not, and see ye indeed, but perceive not:" Words not imperative but predictive; declaring a certainty, not prescribing a duty; telling how it would be, not how it ought to be with them, in regard to the consequences of the means of knowledge and salvation afforded them by the distinguishing mercy of God.

The prophet was further directed to "make," in his predictions, "the heart of this people fat; and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert and be healed."

What is here prophetically affirmed as certain, with respect to the Jewish people in general, is declared by him who put the words into the prophet's mouth, to have received fulfilment in the multitude to whom he had just been preaching. Their's was the very condition described in the prophecy, and to them the Holy Spirit had direct and special reference when the words were first uttered. Not only had they derived no benefit from the most excellent opportunities both of seeing and hearing; but through their own perverseness, these opportunities had proved the means of sealing them up in spiritual stupidity, and of fixing on their souls the brand of reprobation. Their hearts had waxed gross; their ears were dull of hearing, and their eyes had they closed. Moral renovation they seem to have contemplated as a calamity; and to have been afraid, lest at any time, they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted and healed by Christ.

VOL. I.

Let me add another observation respecting this people. They had, before this time, fallen under the vindictive sentence of the Saviour. They were, we have said, inhabitants of those places in which Christ had performed the most of his mighty works; of Capernaum and the neighbouring cities; among which the principal were, Chorazin and Bethsaida. But in what tremendous terms does Christ speak concerning these places, in the eleventh chapter of the gospel by Matthew? "Woe unto thee Chorazin! woe unto thee Bethsaida! for if the mighty works which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes: but I say unto you it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon, at the day of judgment, than for you. And thou Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shall be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works which had been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day; but I say unto you it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom, in the day of judgment than for thee." We may hence derive some impression respecting the moral condition of this people.

Let us inquire,

II. Why it was expedient that Christ should address such persons in parables.

1. They would not have endured a plainer method of speaking. Of this we are informed by the evangelist Mark, who observes (iv. 33.) that Christ "spake the word to them with parables as they were able to hear it;" well knowing,as Doddridge remarks, that so many enemies were then hovering round him, that had he declared the mysteries of the kingdom in plainer terms, he would have been in continual danger, and without a series of repeated miracles, have been cut off by their malice.

There is abundant reason to think,
P