HIERARCHY
HIERARCHY The classification will now follow of the whole docu- mentary material up to the second half of the second century. From the entire material we shall first collect those testimonies which evidently exhibit the most advanced stage of development and the closest resemblance to the institutions of this period. These dociunents will form the fourth group. We then gather all those accounts in which the plenitude of the Apostolic authority is shown in conjunction with a somewhat unfinished and fluctuating system of ec- clesiastical government; these form the first group. The remaining documents will be assigned to the secontl or third group accordingly as they are more nearly related to the first or to the fourth. II. Groups op Document.s. — A. Enumeration. — (1) The First Group includes: (a) the first six chap- ters of the Acts of the Apostles, and the passages in the Synoptics concerning the special call and unique position of the Twelve, (b) the two Epistles to the Corinthians, the Epistle to the Galatians, the two to the Thessalonians, and the Epistle to the Romans, (c) some texts from the Acts of the Apostles (to be collected later) about the Apostles as witnesses and preachers, about the obedience due to them, and about the fellow-labourers of St. Paul, (d) the ac- count in the Acts about the seven helpers of the Apostles (vi, 10), of the presbyters of Palestine (xi, 30; XV, xvi, 4; xxi, IS), of the presbyters in Asia (xiv, 23), of the prophets (xiii, 1-3; xv, 32; xxi, 8 sq.). (2) The Second Group includes : (a) the Epistles to the Philippians, Ephesians, Colossians, and to Phile- mon, (b) the twentieth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles (17 sq.), (c) the First Epistle of Peter, (d) the Didache. (3) The Third Group includes: (a) the Treatise to the Hebrews, (b) the Epistle of James, (c) the Second Epistle of Peter,- (d) the Epistle of Jude, (e) the Three Epistles of John, (f) the Pastoral Epistles, (g) the First Letter of Clement, (h) the Ascension of Isaias. (4) The Foiu-th Group includes: (a) the Apocalypse, (b) the Gospel of St. John, (c) the Seven Encyclicals of Ignatius, and the Letter of Ir'olycarp, (d) the Letter of Barnabas, and the homily known under the title of the Second Letter of Clement, (e) the Pastor of Hermas, (f) Justin, (g) Hegesippus, (h) Abercius, be- sides (i) a brief dissertation on Gnosticism and Mon- tanism. B. Explanation of the Groups. — (1) General Re- marks. — The Apologists (Justin excepted), the frag- ments of the presbyters and of Papias, the Letter to Diognetus (chaps, xi and xii are spurious), the "Acta" and "Passiones" of the martyrs of this period, except- ing a passage from the "Passio Polycarpi"; the Apocrypha properly so called, with the exception of the Ascension of Isaias; all these furnish nothing directly bearing on our matter. The same is true of the Christian papyri, the t )straka, and the inscriptions. One cannot attach the value of independent testimony to four passages dealing with the special call and vocation of the Twelve, viz. from the Eliionitic Gospel (Epiphanius, "Haer.", xxx, 13), from the Apology of Aristides (Texte und Untersuch., IV, iii, 1S93,9. 10), fromthe Mission Sermon of Peter (Ki;/)i;7/ua ll^rpov; Robinson, "Texts and Studies", 1S91, 86 sq., fragm. 1), and from a Coptic papyrus at Strasburg — (cf. Gottingergel. Anz., 1900,4Slsq.). In regard to the oldest Greek Christian papyri, see Wes.sely "Les plus anciens monuments du christianisme ecrits sur Papy- rus" ("Patrologia Orientalis", ed. Graffin and Xau, IV, 2). Even without taking into account the lack of a critical text, we must nevertheless abandon any attempt to argue from the Clementines, since even the oldest parts betray themselves more and more as a product of the third century. The writer of the original document may now and then have made use of vahd traditions, in questions affecting the con- stitution of the Church, but he is guilty of arbitrary inventions and changes. All the conclusions regard- ing primitive conditions which Hilgenfeld's acumen and learning enabled him to draw from the Clemen- tines, must give way imder the pressure of careful criticism. Neither does the present writer make use of the so-called ".postolic Church Ordinance", be- cause of the invalidity of Harnack's hypothesis ("Die Quellen der sog. Apost. Kirchenord.", 1886, 32 sq.), which would base Chaps. 16-21 : 22-28 on two ancient sources dating from the middle of the second century. The work belongs to the third century and hardly admits of critically safe conclusions. The same is true of the Syriac Dida.skalia. (2) Remarks on the First Group, Section (a). — .According to the restrictions made above, we consider here the Gospel accounts only in so far as their testi- mony enables us to form an idea of the Church as it existed in the first generation. The accounts about the position, the autiiority, the activity of the original Twelve in Jerusalem (Acts, i-vi) bear the most evitlent signs of antiquity and genuineness, and agree with all the other information about the dignity of the Apostles handed down to us from early times. (3) Remarks on the First Group, Section (d). — It will not suffice, with regard to the presbyters of the Acts of the Apostles, to establish historically the fact that about a. d. 50 there were presbyters in Jerusalem and in other localities in Palestine, and that at the same time, Paul on his first journey appointed pres- byters in Asia Minor. There remains another impor- tant question to be solved, whether all these presby- ters are, in a true sense of the word, the predecessors of that primitive college which we meet, for instance about 115, in the writings of Ignatius of Antioch. There is not the shghtest critical reason — we shall prove this later on at full length — why the presbyters of Asia Minor should be understood as different from the superiors mentioned in the First Epistle to the Thessalonians. On the other hand, we regard the presbyter-bishops of Ephesus (Acts, xx) as belonging to the second group of the sources, because they repre- sent an autJiority that is much more definite. (4) Remarks on the First Group, Section (b), and on the Second Group. — In the First Epistle to the Thessa- lonians, the state of the Church as a corporate body does not differ in any essential point from that de- scribed in the accounts of the first group. The Apostle Paul appears as the first, nay, the only authority. In the Epistles to the Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians, the conditions have changed a little. In- deed, the personal rule of the Apostle is still supreme; but some traits point to a gradual pa.ssing of power to other su])eriors. We are reminded of this fact Ijy the title of the Epistle to the Philippians, in which bishops and deacons are mentioned. We are again reminded of it by the mention of Archippus, the minister, in the Epistle to the Colossians. The note to Philemon is likewise connected to some extent with this change. In the second group we place also the Epistle to the Ephesians, since it shows a remarkable decrease in the importance of individuals endowed with the charis- mata as members of the organized Body of Christ. For similar reasons we insert here the Didache. (5) Remarks on the Third and I'ourth Group. — All the writings enumerated in the third group show the organization of the Church more developed. The fourth group witnesses the preponderance of the monarchic episcopate. It is not easy to find the right place for the Pastor of Hermas. The degree of organic development supposed in that work, the pronounced control of the presbyters, and the presence to all appearances of a leading personality, Clement, all this points to an intermediate stage, the place of which we are much mclined to fix between the First Letter of Clement and the Encyclicals of Ignatius. Only once is Clement mentioned and then
