What is impartation?

It is indeed great joy to think of a beloved soul here and there, thus marked out by the Spirit, not only in time but for eternity; to think of such as an object of God's love, and in the nearest relation to Christ. It is a sweet comfort in shame and sorrow to look on a friend who by "unfeigned faith" is witness for God in an unbelieving world. Such was Timothy in the apostle's eyes, which, if they were soon about to close on that world, looked back at the faith which dwelt first in his grandmother Lois and in his mother Eunice, as he emphatically adds, "and, I am persuaded, in thee also." Timothy was not the less but the more dear to the apostle, because he had been deeply exercised and severely sifted. But he could not leave him under possible discouragement, nor simply bring before him those who had preceded him in faith, nor cheer himself in a merely general way. He adds, "For which cause I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God which is in thee by the putting on of my hands" (ver. 6).

This gift (χάρισμα) was the special energy of the Holy Ghost imparted to Timothy. There is no reasonable doubt that it is the gift spoken of in 1 Tim. 4:14. Only there it is said to have been given through prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the elderhood; here, through the laying on of Paul's hands. The presbyters were associated with Paul; but the power was solely in the apostle. He only was the divinely employed channel of so great a gift. And this is indicated by the difference of the prepositions "with" and "by."

Permit me now to press another question. Which is the most scriptural course — to do what was always becoming in a Christian, or to copy an apostolic delegate? Which commends itself most to your conscience, to your heart, to your faith? We will suppose now in this place an assembly of God's children. They see in the word of God that, beside the common privileges and duties of all saints, there were certain gifts for ministry, and that there were also certain offices which needed an apostle or his representative to fill them up. They would like to have them all of course; but what is to be done? Are they to neglect what was written to the assembly at Corinth or to the saints at Ephesus, and to ape what was not written to the church but to Timothy or Titus? Would it not be humbler to consult the word of God and inquire of Him, that they might learn what is His will concerning this matter? What do we see there? That as to the gifts of Christ they never required any sanction here below before their exercise; nay, they never admitted of human intervention. The only exception is where there was a positive power of the Holy Ghost conveyed by the laying on of the apostle's hands. Fully do I admit that there was an exception in such circumstances. Timothy was designated by prophecies beforehand for the work to which the Lord called him. (Compare Acts 13:1-2.) Guided by prophecy (1 Tim. 4:14; 2 Tim. 1:6), the apostle lays his hands upon Timothy and conveys to him a direct power (χάρισμα) by the Holy Ghost, suited to this special service he had to accomplish. Along with the apostle, the elders who were in the place joined in the laying on of their hands. But there is a difference in the expression the Spirit of God employs, which shows that the communication of the gift depended for effective agency not in any way on the elders but only the apostle. The particle of association (μετὰ) appears where the presbytery are spoken of, that of instrumental means* (διὰ) where the apostle speaks of himself. It was an apostle that communicated such a gift. Never do we hear of elders thus conferring a gift: it was not an episcopal function but an apostolic prerogative, either to communicate spiritual powers or to clothe men authoritatively with a charge. Hence it is admitted that in the peculiar case of Timothy there was by the laying on of apostolic hands a very special effect produced; but who can do this now? Were this the claim (however one might desire to view, not indifferently but with the patience of God, the prevalent and superstitious perversion of a sign, admirable in itself when applied and understood scripturally), yet if any man now presumed to convey a spiritual power like an apostle, should one hesitate to call him an impostor? A mistaken course in assuming the rights of an earthly sovereign is or may be treason. What is it to pretend falsely to communicate the Holy Ghost or a distinct power of the Holy Ghost in the name of the Lord?

We were looking, on our last occasion, at the testimony of Scripture as to spiritual gifts, and tonight we shall see what the New Testament says as to what, for want of a better term, I call spiritual offices, for offices indeed they be, and most certainly, spiritual, that is connected with the Church of God, and only to be rightly fulfilled in the power of the Holy Ghost. These offices are those of bishops and deacons. The function of these is different, as their origin, and mode of appointment is different. We saw that spiritual gifts flow from the ascended Head of the body — the Lord Jesus, whereas these spiritual offices, you will find presently, take rise from the choice of the assembly, in one instance — that of deacons — and by the authority of the apostles, or delegates of the apostles, only in the other. Spiritual gifts can never be conferred by man, but local offices may be. When I say that spiritual gifts cannot be conferred by man, I do not forget that which the Holy Ghost tells us about Timothy. The apostle Paul bids him "stir up the gift of God, which is in thee, by the putting on of my hands" (2 Tim. 1:6); and in another epistle he says, "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). Clearly, then, the reception by Timothy of this spiritual gift was, in a certain sense, instrumentally obtained through the apostle laying his hands on him; but let it be understood that, notwithstanding this, it flowed from the Lord, even as it is called "the gift of God." That Paul's hand was the instrumental means, the Greek particle dia, used in 2nd Tim. 1:6, makes plain. It is the particle that expresses instrumental means, hence "by the putting on of my hands" is said. When you come to look at verse 14 of the fourth chapter of the first epistle you find Timothy received the gift "with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery." The Greek particle there used is meta — implying association with an act, not instrumental means. The laying on of the hands of the presbytery had nothing whatever to do with the imparting of the gift, save this, that they had full and hearty fellowship with Paul in the act, by which Timothy received the gift, hence, as far as the presbytery is concerned, it was only "with the laying on of hands." They were merely associated with Paul in his act by which Timothy received his gift.

With regard to the laying on of hands, it would seem to have been of several distinct kinds. In the first place, the Holy Ghost was given, on several occasions, in connection with the apostles laying their hands on believers. (See Acts 8:17, 19:6.) Secondly, persons were in this way designated, or rather set apart, for some special office. In Acts 6, for example, the seven who were selected to "serve tables" were "set before the apostles," who, when they had prayed, laid their hands upon them (v. 6); and Paul directs Timothy not to "lay hands suddenly" on any one; that is, as we understand it, Timothy was not to appoint any one to be an elder or a deacon without first satisfying himself as to the possession of the requisite qualifications. Next we find that gift was bestowed on Timothy through the laying on of the apostle's hands. (2 Tim. 1:6.) In all these cases it will be noticed that the laying on of hands is either by the apostles or by Timothy, who was an apostolic delegate, and who therefore acted under Paul's direction and authority. In none of these instances consequently could it be now practised, unless "apostolic succession" were claimed; for which there is not even the shadow of a proof in the Scriptures, but which rather is easily disproved by them. The contention for it indeed rests upon ecclesiastical pretensions and presumption, and not upon the word of God. There are, however, two other kinds of laying on of hands to be noticed. When the Holy Ghost had said, "Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them," those who were gathered together with them "fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them," and sent them away. (Acts 13:2-3.) This could in no sense be said to be an appointment to an office; for it was not an office they were called upon to fill, but rather service on which they were sent. The Holy Spirit had designated His servants for their mission. The laying on of hands here was rather of the nature of identification, expressive of entire fellowship, with Barnabas and Saul in their work. This significance of laying on of hands is seen in the Old Testament in connection with the sacrifices. By putting their hands upon the head of the ram of consecration, Aaron and his sons were identified before God with all its sweet savour when it was burnt upon the altar. (Exodus 29:15-19, etc.) An instance of the same meaning may be found in 1 Timothy. As we have already seen, gift was bestowed on Timothy through the laying on of Paul's hands. In the first epistle, referring to this, Paul alludes to the laying on of the hands of the presbytery. (Chap. 4:14.) But the very words he uses show its character. Here it is not through, as in the second epistle, where he speaks of the laying on of his own hands, but with, teaching plainly that they were but associated with him in the act, and that thus they were identified with what was being done, as well as with Timothy in the service to which he was being called. Such laying on of hands is simply an act of fellowship. The only other kind to be mentioned is in connection with healing the sick. The Lord Himself laid His hands on the sick (Luke 4:40), and He commissioned His disciples, after His resurrection, to do the same thing. (Mark 16:18.) But while "gifts of healing" were found in the assembly at Corinth, there is no sign of the commission entrusted to the disciples being extended beyond themselves. Enough has been written to aid in the investigation of the question; and the reader, by referring to all the cases mentioned, with their context, will be enabled to apprehend the truth involved, and to estimate at their proper value presumptuous ecclesiastical claims.

Before dismissing the subject of the Christian Ministry, we would offer a remark upon the practice of laying on of hands, which is presented in the New Testament in two ways. First, we find it connected with the communication of a positive gift. "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.) This is again referred to in the second epistle: "Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God which is in thee by the putting on of my hands." (2 Tim. 1:6.) This latter passage fixes the import of the expression "presbytery," as used in the first epistle. Both passages prove that the act of laying on of hands, in Timothy's case, was connected with the imparting of a gift. But, secondly, we find the laying on of hands adopted simply for the purpose of expressing full fellowship and identification, as in Acts 13:3. It could not possibly mean ordination in this passage, inasmuch as Paul and Barnabas had been in the ministry long before. It simply gave beautiful expression to the full identification of their brethren in that work to which the Holy Ghost had called them, and to which He alone could send them forth.

Secondly, a positive gift of God, or carisma, had been communicated to Timothy by the imposition of the apostle's hands (2 Tim. 1:6), the elderhood having also joined in laying on their hands at the same time (1 Tim. 4:14) as not only witnesses but as having fellowship with the apostle's act. The believer in God's word needs no argument to prove that such a power of the Spirit is wholly distinct from any qualities previously possessed by Timothy, though no doubt all he had before was the vessel in and through which the gift wrought. But such a phrase, like so many common among evangelical, as well as Catholic, 'sanctified intellect', is wholly misleading; because it expresses the error of human nature rehabilitated or improved by grace, denies the judgment of the fleshly mind in the cross to which faith thoroughly bows, and leaves out the special energy of the Spirit according to the gift of Christ. This Timothy then received and in the way Scripture describes: which none should doubt because of the powerless, not to say profane, imitation of some bodies in Christendom from early days till now. With Timothy it was a special way for a special work. It is error and ignorance to generalize it, and to assume that others did not receive gifts, carismata, without any such laying on of hands; as it is also to aver that the Holy Ghost was given to the faithful only after a similar sort. That He was so given in peculiar circumstances by imposition of apostolic hands is true; that it was always so is to neglect the still weightier instances of Acts 2 and Acts 10. So with the gifts; they were given in sovereign grace without any such act ordinarily; and this is of all moment for the saints at all times since, when there were and could be no apostles to lay hands on any. But superstition is as blind as rationalism, though seemingly more reverent.

The act of the imposition of hands seems to have been practised from very early times, as we see, right through the Scriptures. Thus, "Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it upon Ephraim's head … and he blessed them" (Gen. 48:14-20). Again, the Lord took children into His arms, laid His hands upon them, and blessed them (Mark 10:16). Further, hands were imposed as an external sign of countenance, approval, or fellowship, as is our manner of greeting each other in this country. And, lastly, hands were imposed as an expression of conveyance, as in Leviticus, where we read of the offerer transferring or conveying, ceremonially, his sins to the head of the sacrificed lamb; and also in 1 Tim. 1:6, and Acts 8 etc., where we read of the Holy Ghost being communicated mediately to the Samaritan converts by the laying on of hands. I should remark here that Timothy, who was specially indicated before by prophecy, received his gift for ministry mediately by the laying on of Paul's hands. At the same time, however, the Presbytery (the elders) associated or had fellowship with Paul. In 2 Tim. 1-6, dia, through, or by means of, is the particle used; whereas, in 1 Tim. 4:14, meta, which implies community or participation, is the word employed. I do not remember another similar instance, in which the Lord employed one of His servants as the honoured channel through whom He conveyed a gift; and, of course, it were absurd of any not thus specially commissioned to pretend to the position. The Queen may charge one of her ministers to confer a title in her name, and the act would be valid; but without such royal commission the ceremony would be just child's play.

So, now that we have neither prophecy to indicate, nor apostolic authority to convey a gift, the act of imposing hands with that object would be mockery. Therefore, to impose hands to-day on any one, and by any one, with a view to the conferring of a gift as for ministry, is sinful mimicry of apostolic power.

These are the passages which refer to ordination. We must now look at the persons thus chosen, and the manner of their induction into office. This latter is said to have been by the laying on of hands. This expression is used frequently in the Gospels, as showing our Lord's manner of healing. The significance of the act seems to be that of taking possession for the bestowment of blessing. In the Acts we have it used in connection with the bestowal of the Holy Ghost (Acts 8:17-18; Acts 19:6). The thought of conferring something is evident here, as well as in the case of Timothy (1 Tim. 4:14; 2 Tim. 1:6), where a gift was actually bestowed in this way. No sober student of Scripture would claim such a thing from ordination now.

I do not think that there is any difficulty in the apostolic communication of a χαρισμα, when the Lord was so pleased. There was an express prophecy so directing it in Timothy's case. In general the New Testament shows that such a channel was not necessary, nor often employed, though it was sometimes, in the wisdom of God. The same remark applies not merely to the χαρισματα, but to the δωρεα of the Holy Ghost (i.e. the Holy Ghost himself given to believers in general). Occasionally this was associated with the imposition of apostolic hands, as in the case of Peter and John (Acts 8), and in Paul's case (Acts 19). But Acts 2, 10, etc. are decisive that it would be all error to suppose anything of the sort to be the invariable rule. Hence, while God by times attached either the one or the other to the apostles, He maintained His own sovereignty all the while; and certainly He has not failed either in giving the Holy Ghost, or in distributing such gifts as He sees fit to continue, and this directly, now that apostles are no longer found on earth. Rom. 1:11, does not necessarily mean a ministerial gift. Guernsey.

The way in which Timothy's gift was given was evidently exceptional, for we read of nothing like this of others. "By prophecy" seems to indicate that God revealed beforehand to at least one other what character of gift Timothy was to have. 2 Timothy 1:6 appears to show that this exercise of prophecy was on the part of Paul, for the gift was given, he says, "by the putting on of my hands." It is not "by the laying on of the hands of the presbytery," but "with"; so that apparently the actual gift was given by God by means of Paul's putting on of his hands, but accompanied by the same gesture of fellowship on the part of elders, simply as expressing their concord with this. It does not, of course, deny the fact that "one and the selfsame Spirit divides to every man severally as he will" (1 Cor. 12:11), but in this exceptional case the Spirit used the apostle Paul as the medium of the communication of the gift. The general rule is Plainly the free and independent action of the Spirit of God in giving gift according to His own will.