epistolary style, or from the first Epistle to the Corinthians, which
also has more of the same character. We are then entitled to ask,
whether there could not be other epistles still, which might differ
again from all the rest in a peculiar way ? Still, however, very
little is accomplished by this appeal to a mere abstract possibility.
Much more will depend on our being able to shew why precisely
these epistles differ from the others in this particular manner. Im-
portance has been given to the circumstance, that from all appear-
ances (?) the apostle wrote these epistles with his own hand, in-
stead of dictating them to an amanuensis. (Comp. Rothe, a. a. Q.,
p. 322.) But the Epistle to the Galatians was also written by the
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 535
apostle with his own hand (comp. on vi. 11) ; and, even although
it were shewn that this was the case in regard to these epistles, no
definite conclusion could he drawn from the influence of this circum-
stance, which is different in the case of different individuals. On
the other hand, I fully agree with Kothe when he explains the dis-
crepancy in style hy the essential difference in the situation of one
and the same writer, who at one time sends a didactic writing to an
entire church, and at another writes a confidential letter to a disci-
ple and a friend who is of the same rnind with himself, and not in-
tended to he publicly read, inasmuch as it rather contains hints
than enlarges on any topic. I also agree with him, when he further
refers to the difference which the diversity of subject could not fail
to produce. Look at the first of these circumstances, and there is
nothing surprising in the simplicity of style and laxity of connexion
which characterise these epistles. A remark such as that in 1 Tim.
v. 23, shews how little the writer was concerned about a skilful plan
and an elaborate execution. How strange beside such a remark
would the skilful dialectic of the Epistle to the Romans look, or
that of the Epistle to the Galatians, or the style of the Epistle to the
Ephesians, if the subject might admit of such. But the style of the
epistle is to be explained, not merely by its confidential character, as
addressed to a pupil between whom and the apostle there existed a
most intimate mutual understanding. It is moreover to be taken
into consideration, especially in regard to the first Epistle to Timo-
thy and the Epistle to Titus, that they are official letters, a point
of view in which already Schleiermacher has placed them both, al-
though even in this point of view he refuses to acknowledge the Pau-
line origin of the former. The second Epistle to Timothy, though
not an official letter, is still so closely related to those others in its
contents (namely its references to the office of Timothy), as well as
in its date, as sufficiently to account for such similarity of style as
exists. The character of these epistles, as official, must, however, be
insisted on chiefly on this account, because if there is any epistle
familiar and confidential, it is that to the Philippians, which, al-
though addressed to a church, is essentially indebted, both for its
matter and form, to the close personal relation that subsisted between
the apostle and the church. There is besides the Epistle to Philemon,
which, although not addressed to a church, yet, like that to the
Philippians, stands much farther from our epistles than near to the
rest. Precisely by this circumstance, I apprehend, is the peculiarity
in style to be chiefly accounted for. This may be made plain by
examples. Compare what the apostle writes to Titus on the sub-
ject of slaves, for the purpose of directing his conduct toward them,
with those passages in Paul's epistles in which the same point is.
elsewhere handled (comp. on Tit. ii. 9, 10), and it will at once bo
536 PASTORAL EPISTLES.
perceived what a difference of style is occasioned by Hie circum-
stance that the apostle does not here directly speak to the slaves.
Essentially the same thing is prescribed in those other passages, but
the injunction is there enforced by reasons entering int.. fcto rela-
tions and everything is held forth that may stimulate to a feithftd
performance of duty ! Is the apostle to speak to Titus in the same
way as to the slaves themselves ? Is it not enough that he con-
cisely states to him the points to which he is to refer, leaving to
him the enforcement of them and all else conned 1 with th> m ?
To this then we are to trace that peculiarity which is cham
as the indefiniteness, the vague generality ,.f the Pastoral Epistle*,
as compared with the others. W.-re those commentators right, who
suppose that these epistle* were only nominally addressed to Timothy
and Titus, and were really intended as public writings f .r t h- < l.un
this style might reasonably create surprise, and we mi- lit
grant that not much could have been learned from them. Hut re-
garding them as official communications, and consequently th:it to
Titus as intended concisely to state to him the points to which his
attention is to be directed, we perceive the appro], of this
style to the object. For almost the whole epistle is written in the
manner we have shewn in this particular instance. The requisite
qualifications of a presbyter are stated in chap. i. with the same
brevity ; in this way also is error ohftnoteriied, not so much in the
way of refutation, as of indicating to Titus the points which he is to
keep in view. This is self-evident in regard to the remaining portion
of this epistle in chaps. \. and iii. How should the sty 1. be dialectic*!,
or oratorical, or even elaborate as in the Epistle to the 1'hilippians
or that to Philemon, when all that was aimed at was such I
statement, the result of which is, that the epistle as a whole, ..win-.;
to the variety of its contents, has a summary, si-ntcnti-'us. asynthetic
appearance? The case, however, is different with respect to the
much-abused first Epistle to Timothy. This is evident at a glance,
in the parts which it has in common with the Epistle to Titus ; so
chiefly in chap. iii. The apostle treats more fully and with less of
summariness the point spoken of in chap. ii. ; t>ut here al*o } in my
opinion, the style approaches perceptibly nearer to that <>f tli<- cj.i<tl^
which, as might be maintained a priori, must bear the gre:;
resemblance to the Pastoral Epistles whenever tl. <'ii one
point or another enters into particulars, namely, th- tir-t l!i i-tl -
to the Corinthians, in those places where the circmns'an cs <!' th<>
church are spoken of, as in chap. xi. 14-34, sgages which
are also related in their special contents. The same apj 11
chap, v., in so far as this treats somewhat at lar_r !' th<- institution
for widows ; whereas the style of cliaj s. iv. ami v. M^ain lias m<
the sententious character. The second Kpistle to Timothy is hoth
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 537
in form and matter cognate with the first, although in it much less
of that generality and vagueness, as it is called, can be shewn.
Thus, considered generally, the style of these epistles, so far as it is
peculiar, cannot be assailed ; it is clearly vindicated by their design
and contents. Also that peculiarity of composition specially cha-
racterized by De We tte/ appears to me accounted for by these gen-
eral considerations, that, namely, which consists, as De Wette ex-
presses it, in the writer's digressing from what belongs to the subject
of the epistle to so-called common-places, and returning from such
a digression to an exhortation. How natural, for example, in Tit.
ii. 10, that the apostle should merge the special injunctions (which
he does not here enforce one by one because he is not addressing the
church), in the mention of the fundamental truth on which all
Christian morality rests, and should then return to Titus with the
exhortation : These things speak and exhort, etc. These funda-
mental truths form, as it were, resting-places on which the heart of
the apostle fondly leans, and where it delights to tarry ; the exhor-
tation, however, by which they are followed up, addressed to the
receiver of the epistle, shews that he never loses sight of the object
he has in view in referring to these truths. And how easily explic-
able that such fundamental truths addressed to Timothy or Titus,
are not further opened in an official letter. Comp. Planck, a. a. Q.,
p. 232.
We have hitherto been looking only at those portions of the
Pastoral Epistles in which may be perceived a style different from
that of the rest of Paul's epistles. We add, in support of their
Pauline origin, that particular portions, and especially those which
are kindred ia contents to those of other epistles, discover a genuine
Pauline style. Take as examples the two doctrinal passages which
occur in the Epistle to Titus ii. 11-14 and iii. 2-7. The style of
these passages must remind every reader of the apostle, even though
in others he may not be able to recognize him. Schleiermacher has
already remarked how much the introduction ch. i. 1-3 resembles
generally that in the Epistle to the Romans, or the Epistle to the
Galatians. In 1 Tim. i. 3, seq., we find a passage, which of all the
New Testament writers can be ascribed only to the Apostle Paul ;
comp. on the passage. We have already spoken of the similarity
in style between the second and fifth chapters and certain portions
of the first Epistle to the Corinthians. How close the resemblance
between the introduction to 2 Tim. i. 3, seq., and that to the
Epistle to the Romans, many have already observed. This circum-
stance namely, that these epistles approach in style to the rest of
the epistles in those passages in which the contents are of a kindred
nature, and differ most from them in those places where their spe-
cific contents and aim come most into prominence is certainly the
538 PASTORAL EPISTLES.
most favourable testimony to their genuineness, since it explains
the difference of style in a way which leaves the Pauline origin un-
assailed. If these observations are true, all will then depend on
the question, how this peculiar style is managed in these epistles.
The strongest testimony has been given by the opposing critics, to
the method and clearness of the Epistle to Titus ; less is said in
favour of the second Epistle to Timothy, in which De Wette finds
at least here and there the absence of a good grammatical and log-
ical connexion ; and least of all in favour of the first Epistle to
Timothy, in which Schleiermacher finds no intelligible connexion at
all. De Wette, however, thinks Schleiermacher's assertion exag-
gerated (p. 119); Baur acknowledges no decided superiority in the
other (wo epistles as compared with this, and admits that this epis-
tle also as a whole, is not wanting in unity and in the development of
a definite idea (p. 77). So think the representatives of the most
recent criticism, and from these opinions we may infer that, grant-
ing a difference of style as arising out of a difference of circum-
stances, these epistles after all do not appear in so unfavourable a
light. Baumgarten is the last who has come forward against
Schleiermacher, in the defence of the first Epistle to Timothy, in
this point in which it has been assailed, comp. a. a. Q., pp. 205-264,
and Planck, a. a. Q., p. 116, seq. We shall give special heed to
this point in the exposition.
Schleiermacher has gone still farther in his objections to tho first
Epistle to Timothy, denying to it in general the character of a didactic
epistle (p. 128, seq.) It is no real epistle at all, he contends, but
only a writing in this form, forged with considerable awkwardness.
The explanations he has given respecting the nature of the didactic
epistle, and its possible forms, are most worthy of perusal. But
he is justly charged with the inconsistency implied in vindica-
ting the genuineness of the Epistle to Titus, and the second
Epistle to Timothy, from this same point of view (pp. 141-152).
That the disfavour with which he has treated the first Epistle to
Timothy is unjust, and that the epistle, when viewed in the same
light as that in which he regards the Epistle to Titus, namely, as an
official letter addressed by the apostle to a confidential disciple
and fellow- teacher, may be explained just as easily as it has already
been shown by Planck, p. 105, seq., and is no longer 'denied by any
critic.
Finally, with respect to the peculiarity in ideas and views be-
longing to these epistles, which De Wette has also ably set forth, as
seen from his point of view, p. 117, we shall omit here what refers
only to special passages, and direct our attention to what may be
said to be common to these epistles. De Wette brings forward as
illustrations of this peculiarity, that the writer employs the term
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 539
ia to denote Christian piety, and so often enjoins the virtue of
ou<t>poavv7) ; and he observes, that this stands in connexion with the
predominating tendency to regard life from a moral point of view
(by the didaana^la vy. De Wette understands the doctrine of mor-
ality) with the frequent injunction and recommendation of good
works with the view that error is connected with an evil, and the
true faith with a good conscience with a vindication of moral merit
which stands almost in contradiction to the Pauline doctrine of
grace with the defence of the law, according to which it is ad-
mitted that the law may be used on a merely moral footing (which
he remarks in reference to 1 Tim. i. 8, seq.) On the other hand, the
doctrinal element of Christianity, he says, comes prominently for-
ward, in the frequent expression didaaicaXia and the like, in the ab-
stract view which is taken of the atonement (Tit. ii. 11, seq., iii. 4),
in the value that is attached to the holy Scripture. And with this
abstract view is connected a universalism, which indeed is not in it-
self unpauline, but which does not appear in the same polemical
relation as we find it in Paul's writings, for example in Rom. iii. 29.
Now, while it must be acknowledged that with some exceptions,
which we shall have to state, these characteristics have been ably
selected and set forth by De Wette, it will yet be found that this
peculiarity does not necessitate the supposition of another author,
but only of other circumstances with reference to the subject of
morality, than those which the apostle has before him in his other
writings. It is wrong to take the expression didaaiiaMa vy. at once
to mean the doctrine of morality. De Wette himself has truly ob-
served on Tit. i. 9, that the expression denotes the same thing as
dhijdeia i] Kar' e.voEfiiav, Tit. i. 1, consequently not the doctrine of
morality, but the Christian doctrine which leads to piety. It is the
opposite of the fta-aioXoyia and the ^rjT?jaeig, which produce no moral
fruit. That good works are recommended, is in itself not unpauline.
In Rom. xii. 17 he exhorts Christians thus : taking care to do
things of good report in the sight of all men; and in Eph. ii. 10 ;
Col. i. 10, thus : being created anew unto good works .... that
we should walk in them, " These are," as Harless observes on this
passage, " the works which the apostle views as the sound fruits of
the tree that has been again restored (Col. i. 10) ; these alone he
calls dyaOd, naka, ; all the legal performances of self-righteousness
on the other hand, lie under the curse (Gal. iii. 10)." As De Wette
himself acknowledges farther that the Pauline doctrine of grace is
to be found in these epistles, 2 Tim. i. 9 ; Tit. iii. 5, it is difficult to
see what can be inferred from this circumstance against their Paul-
ine origin. The frequency of this injunction (to good works) is cer-
tainly not to be denied, but, as will afterwards be seen, neither does
it want a sufficient reason. Although, according to De Wette, in
540 PASTORAL- EPISTLES.
such passages as 2 Tim. iv. 8 ; 1 Tim. ii. 15, iii. 13, iv. 8, vi. 18,
seq., the apostle seems to teach a doctrine of grace nowhere else in-
culcated by him, that, namely, of moral meritoriousness, as belong-
ing even to the individual himself, yet the consideration of these
passages respectively, will shew that they contain no doctrine which
the apostle does not not teach elsewhere, for example in Rom. ii. 6, seq.,
who ivill render to every man according to his deeds; to them ivho
by patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory and honour and
immortality, eternal life, etc. Further, the admission that a moral
use may be made of the law, 1 Tim. i. 8, in the case of the dvo^iotg,
etc., cannot at all be regarded as unpauline, when compared with
such passages as Gal. ii. 19, iii. 23 ; Rom. v. 20, etc. How other-
wise can the lawless, the disobedient, and the profane be helped, but
by the law first of all accomplishing its design upon them, of lead-
ing them to the knowledge of sin ? Comp. Usteri, a. a. Q., pp. 65-
75. Moreover, the special polemical reference in which the apostle
in this passage speaks of the design of the law, is well worthy of
consideration ; comp. the exposition. When again it is character-
ized as a peculiarity in the views of the writer, that he connects
error with a bad, and the true faith with a good conscience, we
would say in reply, that this is rather to be regarded as a peculiarity
in the errors which he combats, than in the writer's mode of viewing
them ; inasmuch as these errors take their rise from men who, just
because they wanted the moral energy which is requiste for the ap-
prehension as well as for the preservation of the simple Christian
truth, turned aside into those devious by-paths of a mystic Gnosis
and asceticism, and sought to propagate their wisdom, not from con-
viction, or in a spirit of moral earnestness, but for the sake of gain.
And this accounts for the same view not being urged in the same
degree, against the ordinary Judaistic opponents of the apostle ;
although we find something resembling this in passages such as Gal.
vi. 12, seq. Finally, with respect to what is further urged, namely,
that a universalism is found in these epistles which, though Pauline
in itself, is yet not expressed by Paul in the same polemical connex-
ion all will depend on whether this universalism is in place in the
passages concerned ; on which see the exposition. On the other
hand, we acquiesce in the truth of De Wette's remarks, that in
these epistles the view of life in its moral relations comes into prom-
inence, that good works are frequently recommended, and that, on
the other hand, the doctrinal element of Christianity is brought
prominently forward in the frequently recurring didaonaMa and the
like (I do not see why the view of the atonement, which we find in
Tit. ii. 11, iii. 4 ; 2 Tim. i. 10, can be said to be abstract, inasmuch
as the subject is there treated in a general way ; comp. on this what
has been said above). Here, however, it must be observed first of all,
GENEKAL INTRODUCTION. 541
that this mode of conception and expression on these topics must by
no means be regarded as merely accidental, or in general as having its
ground in the individuality of the writer ; for he very plainly shews,
what is his design in the selection of the expression evo(3eia or dtdaa-
Kakia. Compare Tit. i. 1, where the writer in the very outset desig-
nates himself in the inscription as dnoo-okog tear' emyvuatv dhrjdeia$
rift tear' evae[3eiav ; or the passage chap. ii. 1, where Titus is enjoined
in opposition to the ^aratoAoyot, to speak the things that become
sound doctrine, a TrpKiret, ry vyiaivova^ didaana'kia ; or 1 Tim. vi. 3,
where the KrepodidaaitaXeiv is explained negatively by [ii] -rrpoa^p^eaOai
vyiaivovai Aoyoff, and this again by rq icar' evaK/3et,av didaonaAia. It
can therefore be scarcely doubted, that this style of viewing and
presenting Christian truth, chiefly with regard to its moral influence,
as truth which is according to godliness ; as well as the weight that
is given in general throughout these epistles to the practical side of
Christianity, stands in close antithetical connexion with the nature
of the errors which are opposed. If, however, the one element the
moral is presented in its totality, this necessitates that the other
the doctrinal should also be presented more in its abstract form.
The true doctrine, is justly placed in opposition to the profitless
science of the opponents, which produces no moral fruit. Not to
repeat here what has been already said, we refer to the remarks
made above on the so-called heretics. In general, however, it must
be acknowledged that the danger was always becoming greater that
Christianity should be treated as a matter of science, to meet which,
a reference to its moral requirements was especially needed. This
was a danger most likely to spring up with the longer and by de-
grees familiar continuance of Christianity ; and the history of a
later age shews but too plainly how this danger was not without its
consequences.
We here close our investigation. A more discerning eye may
perceive much that has been here adduced in behalf of the genuine-
ness of the epistles to be untenable, but it must at least be acknowl-
edged by every unprejudiced reader, that the critical problem which
lies before us finds an easier and a more natural solution in the way
pointed out by us, than in that which is followed by the criticism on
the other side ; and that what remains yet unaccounted for, is as
nothing when compared with the enormous difficulties, in which the
result offered by that criticism is involved. We would also, in con-
clusion, merely call to mind (comp. 2) how considerable is the
weight which is laid in the scale of the genuineness of these epistles,
by the external testimonies, according to which the Pastoral Epis-
tles belong to the most favoured, so much so, that De Wette him-
self shews it to be impossible that they could have been written
after the middle of the second century, p. 120.
542 PASTORAL EPISTLES.
5. LITERATURE.
Olshausen has adduced (vol. i., Intro., 9) those exegetical
works which embrace the whole New Testament. The homilies of
Chrysostom, the exposition of Theodoret and of Jerome, the t-^/yTf-
OEI$ of (Ecumenius, and the Kpurfreia of Theophylact, extend also to
these epistles. As belonging to the period of the Reformation, is
first of all to be named Luther : Scholia et sermones in I. Jo. atque
annott. in ep. Pauli (priorem) ad Tim. et Tit. ed. Brims., Lub. 1797.
Then Mclancthon : Enarratio ep. 1 ad Tim., et duorum capp. secun-
das. Wittenb. 1561. And chiefly Calvin in his Comment, on the
whole epistles of Paul. Ed. by Tholuck, Berl. 1834.
As belonging to the later and the most recent time, may be
mentioned, Conr. Vorstii : Comm. in Omnes, epp. ap. exc. II. ad
Tim. ad Tit. ad Philem. et ad Hebr. 1631. Benson : Paraphras-
tical explanations of, and observations on several books of the New
Testament. J. D. Michaelis : Paraphrasis und Anm. ueber die
Bricfe Pauli an die Gal. Eph. Phil. Col. Thess. den Tim. Tit, und
Philem., Gott. 1750 u 1769. Heinrichs : Im Koppe'schen Bibclwerk.
7 Bd. Gott. 1798. 2 Aufl. 1828. Especially, Heydenreich : Die
Pastoralbriefe Pauli erliiutert 2 Bde. Hadain. 1826. Then J. F.
von Flatt : Vorlesungen ueber die Br. P. an Tim. u. Tit. heraus^e-
** O
geben von Kling Tiib. 1831. The Catholic commentator Mack :
Comm. ueber die Pastoralbriefe, Tiib. 1836. Matthies : Erkliir. der
Pastoralbriefo mit bes. Beziehung auf Authentic und Ort and Zeit
der Abfassung, Greifsw. 1840. De Wette in s. Kurzgefassten Hancl-
buch Bd. 2. Th. 5. 2 Aufl. Leipz. 1847. Huthers : Pastoralbriefe,
as continuation of the commentary by Meyer.
Mosheim has expounded only the two Epistles to Tim. : Erkla-
rung der beiden Briefe P. an den Tim., Hamburgh, 1755. Wegs-
cheider only the first : der erste Brief des ap. P. an den Tim., neu
uebers. und erkliirt, Gott , 1810. Then G. E. Leo, Pauli ep. 1 ad
Tim., grace cum perp comm. Lips. 1837. On the second Epistle
to Tim. ; J. Broechner, Commentatio de ep. II. ad Tim. Copenh.,
1829. On the Epistle to Titus : Kuinoel, explic. cp. P. ad Tit.
comrnentatt. theol. ed. a Volthusen, Ruperti et Kuinoel Vol. i.,
292. The literature of these epistles is given still more fully in
Matthies, p. 49, seq. Winer, Handbuch der theol. Literatur. Works
on special points, such as the authenticity, etc., are noticed at the
places in which these points are treated.
THE EPISTLE TO TITUS,
INTRODUCTION.
I. THE HISTORICAL TESTIMONIES OP THE EPISTLE CONCERNING
ITSELF.