p. 50 | ORDINATION by George Ide Butler

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Feb 13, 1879

ORDINATION

By George Ide Butler

ELD G. I. BUTLER.

Ordination is the formal act by which a person is set apart to an office in the Christian church, and it is usually performed by the laying on of hands, and prayer. There has been a diversity of views held by individuals and churches concerning the manner of ordaining, the authority conferred by ordination, and the persons who have the authority to perform this ceremony. Some churches do not consider the imposition of hands at all necessary, but nearly all professed Christian churches have ordained by the laying on of hands. It is certainly in accordance with Scripture.

For ages there has been a conflict among professed Christians concerning the authority of different classes of ministers, or between Episcopacy and Presbyterianism. Those who put forth the high claims of the former hold that the bishops of the church succeeded to the authority held by the apostles; that they alone are to ordain priests, ministers, pastors, and deacons; and that in the act of ordination these receive the Holy Spirit through the laying on of the hands of the bishops, and are thus qualified to perform their work. The Roman Catholic and Greek churches have defined this subject with great minuteness, and other Episcopal bodies follow their views to a greater or less degree, in proportion as they approximate to the mother from which they sprung. Holding their view, we should be constrained to accept the conclusion that unless we could trace the ordination of the ministry back through an uninterrupted succession from the time of the apostles to our time, we should have no well-grounded assurance that they were properly authorized to act as ministers of the Lord Jesus Christ, however sound they might be in the faith, or faithful and devoted in their lives.

In the latter view it is claimed that bishops and elders are of the same rank, and that the two original words from which these words are rendered refer to one and the same office; that all ordained ministers of Jesus Christ are of the same spiritual rank so far as their office is concerned, though of course some may possess greater ability and influence than others; and that ordination is but a solemn ceremony marking the point when the candidate steps from the ranks of the laity into those of the ministry, his brethren by this act recognizing him as a proper person to fill the position of a minister of Christ, and by the act of ordination installing him in that position. It certainly becomes a matter of considerable moment to us to know which of these views is true.

If the former position be the true one, in order that a person may be properly ordained, and thus qualified to perform the office of the ministry, those who ordain him must necessarily have been properly ordained, and their predecessors must be able to trace their ordination in an uninterrupted line back to the apostles and to Christ. It would indeed in that case become a matter of great difficulty to ascertain what ministers were properly qualified. We should need tables kept with all the care with which the Jews anciently kept their genealogical tables, stating explicitly when and by whom every minister in the whole church had been ordained; for if the matter be of any importance at all, it must be one of great moment. For instance: if, in order that his baptism may be valid, a man must know that the minister who performs this ordinance has been ordained by properly ordained ministers in uninterrupted succession from the apostles, surely it would require considerable labor and much knowledge of history to trace this matter up in every part of the world, and thus satisfy his conscience.

And so of every other duty or ordinance to be performed by the gospel ministry. The establishment of this episcopal claim of lineal succession would throw the whole Christian world into the direst confusion, unsettle the consciences of Christians everywhere, and make it utterly impossible to be sure we have a properly authorized ministry unless we acknowledge the strongest claims of the Roman Catholic Church. And even taking the claims of that church for a standard, it is exceedingly doubtful if such a succession as we have referred to can be established. We have never heard of tables being kept wherein the ordinations of a tithe even if the Catholic clergy were recorded. Guessing and probabilities in such a matter would not answer. If it be necessary that there be an uninterrupted succession from the time of the apostles till our time in order to a properly qualified ministry, and in order to the valid performance of Christian ordinances, then we must know we have such a succession; and to know it is really impossible; for during the past ages of darkness the connecting links have been lost, at least so that they cannot be found with certainty.

Again, these lines which can be traced up, perhaps through the popes or possibly through some of the most important bishoprics, have come through some notoriously bad men, monsters indeed some of them were. Would the ordination of a wicked man who happened to occupy the papal chair or the position of a bishop be a valid Christian ordination, and necessary to the authenticity of the ordination of his successors? We are very thankful that we are under no necessity to accept such conclusions, and are driven to no such extremities. We claim that those who hold such views have simply made a mistake in reference to the design of ordination. They attach a meaning and importance to it which God and the Bible never meant it to have.

Ordination is simply an outward ceremony by which a body of believers set apart or install a person into some official position, as that of minister, local elder, or deacon. If a person is to be separated from the ranks of the laity, and placed in an official position, there must be some act by which this is done; and ordination is this act. As there is order in the church of Christ, and as there should be proper ceremonies, such as would strike the mind of the candid beholder as being fitting and proper, connected with every act of an official character in the church, this act has connected with it prayer, and the laying on of hands. In the case of the minister, the church, through its official authority, whether of a conference, synod, presbytery, council, or association, designates the person whom it considers worthy of receiving such a position. Then a sufficient number of individuals properly representing that body, proceed to perform the ceremony. The official act of ordination shows that the person is now entrusted with the authority of the church to act in this capacity.

The same principle, as regards ceremony, applies in other things, as marriage and baptism. When two persons choose each other as companions for life, to associate together in a new and important relation, the laws of God and man prescribe that there shall be some public act, or ceremony, which shall mark this point. Hence the marriage ceremony. When a person leaves the world and its pleasures, and espouses Christ for his master, to follow him for time and eternity, this is an important step. Baptism is the divinely appointed ceremony to mark this point; it shows faith in the burial and resurrection of the Master, and in the final resurrection of all who sleep in him.

So in ordination. A man is considered by his brethren to possess the proper character and qualifications for the ministry, and he is chosen to take upon himself the important position of a public teacher, a shepherd of the flock. This new relation marks an important era in his life. How reasonable that appropriate ceremonies be connected with it. Prayer is most fitting. He will need divine help. If God does not help him, he will surely make a failure. Earnest prayer in his behalf is most proper, to solemnize the minds of all, and to call down the blessing of God. And how often a special blessing is then and there bestowed. Such a blessing may not be granted in every case, but very often it is.

The blessing comes from God in answer to prayer, not through the laying on of the hands of the poor mortals officiating, though it should come even at the moment the hands are imposed.

What significance is there in the laying on of hands? Through the hands we bestow blessings upon others. Gifts are usually presented by the hand. In early ages and in oriental countries, before the age of writing, many gestures, as a shrug of the shoulders, or a bowing of the head as a mark of respect from an inferior to a superior, had a symbolic meaning. So the laying on of hands signified by an outward sign the imparting of something to another, whether a good gift or a bad one. Thus Jacob laid his hands on the heads of the two sons of Joseph. Gen. 48:13. Moses laid his hand on Joshua's head when Joshua took his position as leader of the hosts of Israel. Num. 27:18. The sinner, by laying his hand on the head of the victim he was about to offer, implied that his own sin was transferred to the victim. Lev. 3:2. The high priest confessed the sins of the people over the head of the goat on the day of atonement, thus in figure imparting to the scapegoat the sins of the people which had been transferred to the sanctuary during the preceding year. Lev. 16:21. And our blessed Saviour placed his hands upon the children's heads. Mark 10:16. In all these instances the transference of something to another is implied. Hence we conclude that the laying on of hands in ordination is but an outward symbol of the bestowal of blessings through the church.

Great blessings come to individuals and the world through the church of Christ. Those who officiate in ordination represent the authority of the church. When they thus lay their hands upon the head of the candidate, it is an outward symbol of the bestowal of authority upon the person to act in the position to which he is being set apart, and as a symbol of the blessings coming through the church to others by his means. What could be more fitting to symbolize these than the ancient ceremony of the laying on of hands? Because God has often chosen the moment when hands are imposed as the very point when he sends his Holy Spirit upon the candidate and all concerned, many have concluded that the laying on of hands is the essential condition necessary in order that the Spirit might be given, and hence that there must be an uninterrupted succession from apostolic times through which this special blessing should come,—a position involving a host of absurdities.

In that case, in every great reform from previous corruptions it would be necessary that the servants of God leading out in such reforms should have been ordained by the old leaders in those corruptions, in order to be properly qualified for their work. God's true people are not to be identified by a lineal descent from good men of past ages; but they are to be known by the possession of the truth of God, and the Holy Spirit of God. All that the true disciple will care to know about the setting apart of the ministry will be, Has it been done by the properly constituted authority of the people having the characteristics of the true church? and was the man himself worthy to occupy the position? Indeed, we boldly take the position that tracing back ordination into any past generation is a matter wholly useless, of no consequence whatever. Where do the Scriptures intimate that after generations must trace the ordination of the ministry back to the apostles, or back to anybody? The ministry then existing were to ordain faithful men to take charge of the affairs of the church, and this God's faithful ministers are ever to do. But they are not made “faithful ministers” by an ability to trace their ordination to previous generations.

Some of the most important ordinations recorded in Scripture were not only not performed by the apostles, but were performed by those who held a less exalted position than that which the candidates were to fill. We notice those of Paul, and Barnabas, and Timothy. “Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery,” 1 Tim. 4:14. It seems, then, that Timothy did not receive ordination through the laying on of the hands of the apostles, but of the “presbytery.” The common presbyters, or elders (for the same Greek word is used for both), ordained this celebrated minister, who was a fellow-laborer with the great apostle Paul, and acted as his special representative after Paul's imprisonment.

But how was Paul himself ordained? Acts 13:1–3. “Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away.”

Here was the ordination to that brilliant ministry of labor which Paul gave to his Master and to the church. One would suppose on hearing the high claims of Episcopacy set forth, that the whole conclave of apostles would have been present at Jerusalem; that a grand round of ceremonies would have been exhibited; and that Peter, James, and John, at the least, would have laid their hands on the heads of Paul and Barnabas, and that thus the needful unction would have been bestowed upon them. But no. In distant Antioch a few devoted souls were humbly seeking God by prayer and fasting, that they might be qualified for the ministry of the word. With the exception of Paul and Barnabas, we know very little about these persons. They were not apostles. Most likely they were simply teachers, persons of no great authority. But there were some particulars connected with this ordination of great interest. The men to be set apart were those who were “called by the Holy Spirit,” and these humble representatives of the church sanctioned this call of the Spirit of God by laying their hands on these apostles' heads, to show by an outward ceremony that the Spirit, and the church which they represented, were in unison in calling these men. This was enough, and this constituted a valid ordination. No doubt these men were qualified to represent the church, so that their act was really the act of the church itself; and this was all that was necessary.

The most important thing was the evidence that God's Spirit sanctioned their act. God would not have his ministers go out independent of his church. If he represents the church, the church should show, by the act of ordination, that the minister goes out by their concurrence, and this, we believe, is all that ordination signifies. Hence we conclude that in the Christian dispensation, wherever a body of Christ's faithful disciples assemble, and there is found among their number a man blessed with the necessary qualifications to enable him to teach the truth, and with a good moral character and sterling sense, one who gives clear evidence of having the Spirit of God with him and a burden of saving souls upon his heart, should those of good judgment in that church, after humbly seeking God in prayer for light, feel that the Lord called this brother specially to the work of the ministry, and lay hands upon his head with prayer to God for his blessing, it would be to all intents and purposes a valid Bible ordination. This, in short, is what the brethren at Antioch really did in the case of Paul and Barnabas. Bishop Watson says, “It is a well-known fact that presbyters ordained their own bishops in the church of Antioch for more than two hundred years after Christ.”

We conclude that the high claims of Episcopacy, as put forth by Catholic, Greek, and some of the Episcopal writers, as well as by some Baptists who try to trace their ordination through the Waldenses and others, are wholly baseless so far as scriptural foundation is concerned. In this way Catholic writers have perverted most of the simple ordinances of Christ's church, and founded the high claims of Catholicism upon them. These ordinances, when properly understood, will be found simple, plain, sensible, and every way fitted to accomplish the object Christ had in view in their institution.