Lecture I · Address and Salutation

THE Epistle begins, as the letters of the ancients usually did, with an announcement of the name of the writer, and of the persons addressed. Here, at the very outset, an evidence presents itself that Paul had full confidence in the love and obedience of the Philippians. In most of his letters he appends to his name his official designation ‘apostle,’ and in some he finds himself compelled even to maintain by argument in the body of the Epistle the reality and completeness of his apostolic authority. Here, as in the Epistles to the other prominent Macedonian church, that of Thessalonica, the official title is not employed, plainly because he knew that no such assertion of his rightful claim to be heard with deference and obedience was at all needed.

With his own name he associates in the superscription that of ‘Timotheus, or Timothy. This eminent evangelist, and dear friend of the apostle, was well known to the Philippians. He had been with Paul and Silas when the church was founded ; and during the eleven or twelve years intervening between that time and the date of the Epistle, had paid several visits to the town. In the Epistle, too, Paul speaks of sending him again speedily. The introduction of his name was therefore very natural. It was, however, only a courtesy. The letter, as regards its substance, is Paul’s alone, and carries with it full

apostolic authority. You will observe that the very first words of the 3d verse, which begins the letter proper as distinguished from the mere heading and salutation, are plainly Paul’s alone: ‘I thank my God.’ The same mode of expression continues throughout ; and where Timothy is referred to, he is spoken of in the third person: ‘I trust in the Lord Jesus to send Timotheus shortly unto you’ (ii. 19).

The designation ‘servants of Jesus Christ, is a modest and beautiful one. James, the brother of the Lord, similarly begins his letter: ‘James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ.’ You feel that, in its connection, the phrase suggests official position in the church ; but only suggests it. It is in itself quite general, describing all who, by taking Christ as their Master and Lord, have entered into true freedom.

‘ To all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippt’ We have here a most instructive paraphrase for ‘ church.’ According to the true idea of a church, you see, ‘church members’ and

‘saints’ are exchangeable terms. The radical thought in the name ‘saints, or ‘holy’ persons, as it is employed in Scripture, is consecration, separation to the special service of God. A reader goes back at once instinctively to this primary idea, when he finds it stated that the official garments of the Jewish priests, and the vessels used in the sanctuary services, were

‘holy.’ In the prayer recorded in the 17th chapter of John, the Lord said, speaking of those whom God ‘had given Him,’

‘For their sakes I sanctify myself’ — set myself apart as High Priest, to offer up an all-sufficient sacrifice for sin— ‘that they also might be sanctified through the truth.’ His consecration was to the intent that His people also might be consecrated, Here enters the thought of purity of soul, for true acceptable service can be rendered to God only by him who is consecrated, not simply by certain external symbols, but by the anointing of the quickening and purifying Spirit. Believers in Christ are by their Saviour’s grace separated from the world to serve God, and this by the absolute devotion of their

whole nature. Our secular life, our business and recreation, Christ would have us make holy, as really as the hours we spend in the house of public worship, or in any definite, formal religious service. As the prophet has it, ‘ Upon the bells of the horses should be ολίγον» unto the Lord, and every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah should be holiness unto the Lord of hosts.’ Among true believers ‘no man liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself; for whether we live, we live unto the Lord, and whether we die, we die unto the Lord; whether we live therefore or die, we are the Lord’s.’

It is of the very highest importance that this truth should be most seriously pondered by us. We are apt to think of a Christian as one who accepts certain doctrines and performs certain formal services. But the purpose of God in revealing to us the truth, and appointing religious ordinances, was that men’s whole being should, through the influence of the truth and of the ordinances, be made saintly. ‘Christ loved the church, and gave Himself for it, that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word; that He might present it to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish.’ His prayer was, ‘ Sanctify them through Thy truth; Thy word is truth’ The only really satisfying proof that the gospel has been truly, intelligently, cordially believed,—that the means of grace have been savingly efficient,—is holiness of character. If we were as profoundly impressed with the conviction of this fact as its importance claims, dear friends, would there not be change in the life of all of us? Would not the issue of ‘searchings of heart’ in some of us be a sense that the needful radical/ change is still lacking, church-goers though we all are, and most of us church members?

Paul tells us the secret of true saintliness in the addition he makes to the simple word ‘saints,’—‘ in Christ Jesus” Out of Christ none are saints; but all genuine believers are saints,

because they are ‘in Him,’ members of His mystical body, and thus have within them the pulsations and working of His life. And the more that by faith we draw from His life, ever the more are we saintly. The thought of the union of Christians to their Lord is one most precious to them all ; for in that union they recognise the spring of all spiritual happiness and strength. The Apostle Paul dwells everywhere upon this union with manifest and exceeding delight. The frequency with which the expression ‘in Christ’ occurs in his letters, strikes every attentive reader, and shows the constancy of his joy and gratitude that he lived and moved ‘in Him.’ In the course of our examination of this Epistle we shall find many passages giving opportunity for illustrating the subject in various aspects.

In the address ‘to ad the saints which are at Philippi,’ we see the warmth of the apostle’s affection for his friends there. Similarly, we have at the end of the letter, ‘salute every saint in Christ Jesus.’ It is as if he said, ‘I wish every one of you individually to feel that he is dear to me.’ It is not improbable that another thought also was meant to be suggested to his first readers by the mention of them σα. There are several indications in the letter, more or less distinct, that Paul had been pained by learning of some alienations of feeling among certain of the prominent members of the church. These brethren, I apprehend, could hardly help hearing him say to them in the ‘all,’ ‘I have ardent brotherly love for every one of you, because I have good reason to think of you as all in Christ, and all loved by Him: should you not all love one another ?’

To the mention of the church generally, the apostle appends ‘with the bishops and deacons? It is not his custom thus to specify the office-bearers in the headings of his letters, and various reasons have been suggested for his doing so here. By some expositors it has been thought that Paul wished in this way to acknowledge special liberality on the part of the

office-bearers, in contributing to the gift which Epaphroditus had brought to Rome; by others, that there had been evidence of a disposition among some of the private members of the church to disregard the legitimate authority of their spiritual rulers, and that by this reference the apostle desired to give the office-bearers his support, as holding their position by the law of Christ. Either of these suppositions may be true; we cannot tell. But you may remember that when ‘it pleased the apostles and elders, with the whole church (of Jerusalem), to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas, they wrote letters by them after this manner,—The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting’ (Acts xv. 22, 23). Now it is in every way probable that the church of Philippi had by Epaphroditus, along with their pecuniary gift, sent Paul also a letter, which, like the letters just referred to, may have had in the heading some special mention of the office - bearers, thus,—‘ The brethren at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons, send greeting.’ The employment by Paul, in his reply, of the same words, may possibly then mean nothing more than that, in a letter which, to some little extent, had the character of a formal acknowledgment of money received, he courteously accepted the givers’ own way of describing themselves.

It is obviously probable in the highest degree, that, in a passage where the warmth and delicacy of his love have led the apostle to speak expressly of ‘ad the saints,’ his special mention of the office-bearers leaves out’no class of them. Now, throughout the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles, we find very frequent reference made to ‘ elders,’ as the principal office-bearers in the church ; as essential, indeed, to the full regular organization of a Christian society. Paul and Barnabas, we are told, ‘ordained elders in every church’ (Acts xiv. 23). It is evident, therefore,—the deaconship being well known as a distinct office from that of the elder,—that, if all the office-bearers of the

church of Philippi are mentioned in the verse before us, then ‘bishop’ is simply another name for ‘elder.’ This conclusion is supported by abundant evidence in other parts of the New Testament. The most distinguished recent Episcopalian expositors of Scripture, such as Bishop Ellicott, Dean Alford, and Canon Lightfoot, admit that, beyond all reasonable disputation, in the primitive church the office of ‘bishop’ was identical with that of ‘ elder’ (or ‘ presbyter,’ the Greek equivalent of ‘ elder’); and that, however early episcopacy in the prelatical sense may have appeared, it does not find support in the New Testament. I need not here go at length into the proofs of this position. It is perhaps well to remark, however, that in our English version some of these proofs are hidden. Thus, when Paul, having from Miletus ‘sent to Ephesus, and called the e/ders of the church,’ enjoined on them to “ take heed to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost had made them overseers’ (Acts xx. 17, 28),—this last word is the same which is usually rendered ‘ bishops,’ and from which the word ‘episcopacy,’ and, indeed, in a more remote way, the word ‘bishop’ itself also, are derived. Again, when Peter says, ‘The edders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder. Feed the flock of God which is among you, faking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly’ (1 Pet. v. 1, 2),—the expression ‘ taking the oversight’ is, strictly, ‘ acting as bishops.’

The earliest Christian churches, as you know, were composed of persons who had been trained in Judaism. The arrangements of the synagogue were therefore naturally followed in various respects in their meetings, and, in particular, the officers chosen by the authority of the apostles to regulate their affairs were named ‘ elders,’ like the rulers of the synagogue. Among the Greeks, the word to which ‘ bishop’ corresponds, and which according to its derivation means ‘ overseer,’ was a familiar one, being the name given to government officials charged with certain duties. When Christianity entered the Gentile world,

then, this name, familiar to the ear, came somehow, not unnaturally, to be given to the rulers of the churches, as well as the name ‘elders,’ which, as applied to rulers, was strange to the Greeks.

In all parts of the church a certain precedence naturally, and with apostolic sanction, fell to those of the ‘ elders,’ or ‘bishops, who not merely discharged the function of ruling, but also had the gift of teaching, and therefore ‘laboured in the word and doctrine.’ One of these, no doubt, generally had the presidency in the meetings of the ‘presbytery,’ or body of elders. That from this presidency, or moderatorship, among equals, there should arise, in course of time, and that no long course, the system of prelatical episcopacy, in which the bishop and the presbyter belong to distinct orders of the ministry, will not seem wonderful to any one who has either carefully read history, or studied the workings of human nature around him and within him.

Of the institution of the office of ‘deacon,’ a narrative is given in the 6th chapter of Acts, where we are told that on account of ‘a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews’ in the church at Jerusalem, ‘because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration,’ the people were asked by the apostles to choose ‘seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom,’ whom they might ‘appoint over this business, —and that, an election having been accordingly held, the men chosen were brought to the apostles, and set apart to their special work by prayer and the imposition of hands. These seven are not called ‘deacons’; but there can’ be no reasonable doubt, from the nature of their duties, that we have here, in fact, the origin of this office. The duties of the deacons were chiefly to take charge of the money contributed by the brethren for the relief of the poor members, and to see to its judicious and equitable distribution. From the comparatively late and, so to speak, occasional origin of this office,

11 Tim. v. 17.

and from the fact that when Paul speaks of having left Titus in Crete to ‘set in order the things that were wanting, and ordain elders in every city’ (Titus i. 5), no mention is made of deacons, we may perhaps fairly conclude that the deaconship, while a most useful and honourable office, is yet not absolutely essential to the regular organization of a church, as the eldership is. In almost every Christian society, however, there will be found a fulfilment of the Lord’s words, ‘ The poor ye always have with you ;’ and if the church is at all faithful to her calling, she will always ‘remember’ her poor. By some means, therefore, the work of the deacon must be done.

The announcement of the name of the writer and of the persons addressed is followed, as was usual in the letters of the ancients, and as we find almost always in the apostolic Epistles, by an affectionate salutation. The highest form of the Christian life, my brethren, is seen when energetic love is fully pervaded by a spirit of gentleness and sympathy, exhibiting itself in true politeness to all of all social positions, and in little things as well as great, according to the broad apostolic precept, ‘ Be pitiful, be courteous.’ The apostles themselves rose in conduct to this height, enforcing precept by example. Their letters, written in the midst of arduous and harassing work, yet show diligent attention to all the kindly courtesies of social life. The last chapter of Romans, which is almost wholly taken up with greetings and expressions of personal affection, deserves more study, because it is fitted to give more instruction as to how peace and joy are to be maintained in beauty and sweetness in Christian intercourse, than many believers seem to think.

The salutation to the Philippians is that which, in various forms, occurs most frequently in the letters of the apostles. How beautiful it is! How rich in holy affection ! Good wishes for the temporal welfare of friends have their own place. John, writing to ‘the well-beloved Gaius,’ expresses his desire ‘ that

he may prosper and be in health, even as his soul prospereth.’ But this ‘ prospering of the soul’ must always stand first in a Christian’s wishes. If we know Christ,—then, as our chief desire for ourselves is growth in the beauty and strength and blessedness of religion, so for others, and specially for those who are personally dear to us, our most earnest wish and prayer must be, that ‘grace and peace’ may be given to them, and that ever more and more; that the Lord would ‘ remember them with the favour which He beareth unto His people, and visit them with His salvation, that they may see the good of His chosen, that they may rejoice in the gladness of His nation, that they may glory with His inheritance.’

From ‘ grace,’ the free favour of God, come all our blessings. In its use in the salutation, ‘ peace’ being named separately, the chief reference is, no doubt, to the manifestation of the divine favour in the bestowal of the enlightening and sanctifying influences of the Holy Ghost. You remember the statement of Luke, that the child Jesus ‘grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom ; and ¢he grace of God was upon Him!’ Every day revealed in Him new excellences. The lovely bud of a perfectly holy childhood was seen opening into the glorious flower of a perfectly holy manhood. There was not here ¢rams- Jorming grace. None was needed for Him who, from the beginning, ‘knew no sin.’ Yet the use of the word is plainly analogous to what we find in the apostolic salutation, in so far as it refers specially to holy beauty. Grace to transform the naturally sinful into the likeness of the sinless Jesus, this is what is asked of God—for the words are really a prayer—in the salutation.

The meet companion of such ‘ grace’ is ‘peace,’ also given through the free favour of God,—peace springing from the knowledge of His love in Christ, ‘peace passing all understanding, keeping the heart and mind through Christ Jesus.’ An Eastern, when he enters a house, says, ‘ Peace be to this house,’ as thoughtlessly as we commonly say ‘Good morning’ to a casual acquaintance whom we meet on the street. Our Lord taught the apostles and the seventy disciples to employ the familiar salutation with depth of meaning, thinking, while they uttered it, how alone true peace could come to the house, and praying that God would send it. ‘ Into whatsoever house ye enter, first say, Peace be to this house: and if the son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it; if not, it shall return to you again.’ Think you not that the courtesies of Christians should a/ways have reality of significance? If the spirit of our Master filled us, diffusing its genial power through the whole being, and ever in bright activity, would not blessing go forth from us, through the energy of prayer, even at the slight touches of social kindliness, as virtue went out from the hem of the Lord’s garment? I doubt not that, with the apostle’s affectionate ‘ Peace be unto you,’ it was so.

The prayer of the salutation is presented to ‘ God our Father, —Him ‘from whom cometh down every good gift, and every perfect gift.’ How broad and stable is the ground of confidence for us, exhibited in that sweet name ‘Father!’ He who ‘of His own will begat us with the word of truth ;’ who ‘hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father ;’ who has told us that, if earthly parents, ‘ being’ evil, know how to give good gifts unto their children, much more shall He, our Father which is in heaven, give good things to them that ask Him,’—this God, my brethren, will certainly not leave unregarded any petition of His children. ‘And the Lord Jesus Christ? who ‘humbled Himself and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross,’ in order that a way might be opened by which, consistently with the glory of the divine character, ‘grace and peace’ might be bestowed on men,—will He, now possessing ‘ all power in heaven and in earth,’ fail to employ it toa bestow ‘grace and peace’ on longing hearts, or to answer the cry of loving Christian souls for the quickening of those who are dear to them ?