Titos, epistle to

i. Historical Situation of the Letter. ii. Analysis. UL Literary Dependence. It. Situation at Crete : (a) faUe teaching ; (6) organUation. T. Authorship, vi. Iiiteirrity. vii. Value. Literature. i. Historical Situation.— Paul and Titus had been tOKetlier in Crete. It is probable that they found tlie island already evangelized before their arrival (cf. Ac 2"); for by the time this letter is written whole families (!'

• "), and people of all cla&ses and ages (2'"'°), consisting botli of Jews and Gentiles (1'"), belong to the Church. But the communities were unorganized, and there were false teachers. St. Paul himself began to com- plete the organization ; probably meeting with opposition from thefal.se teachers (3'°- ")> and calling out hearty affection from others (o'*- '°). But for some reason he could not stay to finish his work, and left Titus with definite instructions to com- plete it (1"). Time elap.

sed after he left, but ap- parently only a short time, before this letter was written. St. Paul was moving about with some of his disciples (3'°), — perhaps in Macedonia (if we may argue from the likeness to 1 Tim.), — intend- ing to winter at Nicopolis. Possibly he received some communication from Titus, reporting progress at Crete (so Zahn, Einl. i. p. 430 ; but uncon- vincingly).

More likely, he took the opportunity of the fact that Zenas and AnoUos were starting on a journey which would take them past Crete to send a letter to Titus in order to prepare him to join him in Nicopolia, and to strengthen him to enforce a high moral standard in Crete, in spite of the dangerous tendencies of the false teachers. The dates both of the visit to Crete and of the composition of the letter are uncertain.

The organization of the Church is so little advanced that it might easily fall within the period covered by the Acts ; and it is possible that the visit may be that of Ac 27' (l/cavoO xp^"""), and that this letter was written early in the Roman imprison- ment (so Bartlet, Apostolic Age, p. 182) : but Titus is not mentioned as being present at the time of Ac 27, and the surest indication for the date of the letter is its likeness to 1 Tim.

; so that probably both the visit and the letter fall after the release from the Roman imprisonment [see 1 TiM.] ii. Analysis.— I'A Salutation (with special emphasis on the writer's own apostleship and on the conmion faith). l»-3". Advice to Titus. A. 1^16. Seed o/ appitijiting proper ministerg. Reminder of Paul's past instructions to appoint presby. tera (»). Importance of high moral character in an overseer (*^.

that he may (a) strengthen the sound teaching, (o) refute the oiiponents of it (9). I>e8cription of these opponents, as inHui)ordinate, quib- bling, money-making, caring for fahk-H and comniand- mente of men, forgetting the ^reat (."Iiristian truth — * AU things pure to the pure,' — mconsistent and worth- less fioio). B.SI-S". Sketch of iht true fealunt i^f the Chrittian character ichicft Titxit it to eiyfoTM.

(a) For ChrUtiaru among Oievuelvcg (2-'^) ; for the elder men and women, for the younger women and men, for Titus himself, and for s'lavcs,— all are to live a life true to the sound teaching : (1) in order to avoid giving offence to the iieathcn world around (0-«. 10); (2) because the saving grace of God and Christ's atone ment have trained us to rise above sin, and live an attractive lite (>>■'*).

') For Christians in rflation tc tht otiter vorld (3-8) : («) subordination to authority (i) ; (fi) gentleoeas to all men (*). Reason — God's loving-kindness to us has raised nfl from the old heathen lite of hatred to a new life of right- eousness ; so that believers in God are bound to set an example of noble and useful lives (3-8). (c) For Titus himself.— He is to avoid foolish questionings (»), and to reject from the Church a 'heretic' who refuses to listen to his admonition (10- ^1).

Personal message about his own movements (2. IS), Final word of advice to those who obey him at Crete 0X Salutation (I'X Like 1 Tim., it is essentially a private letter of instructions, probably never intended to be read aloud in the churches at Crete, though a word of "reeting to the whole Church (or pos.sibly only to Titus and his helpers) is added (3"). The main stress is throughout on character, on a useful fruitful life, as the outcome of a wliulosome teach- ing; and (as in 1 Tim.)

each section ciilmin.atcs in an important doctrinal statement — 1" 2""" 3^"', the last saying being called ' faithful' [vurbs 6 X67os). iii. Literary Dependence. — One Christian saj'ing is quoted (ttio-tAs o XAvos, 3'), and one line of Kpimenides (1"). The OT is never appealed to in direct quotation, but its language is consciously used in l"=Is 29" (cf. Mt 15», Mk V, Col 2, ), 2« = Is 52» (cf. Ro 2-", 1 Ti 6'), 2"=Ps 130*, Dt 14^ cf. Ezk 37^ (cf. 1 P 2\ .■?« = Jl 31 (cf.

Ac 2"- ^) ; all of them passages which belong to the common stock of early Christian writers, and half of which are used in the Pauline Epistles. Reminiscences of our Lord's teaching may be foundinl">( = Mk7", Lkll"),3»(=Jn35), 3"'{ = Mt 18'°'"), but are not such as to iniply literary de- pendence on the written Gospels. The same is true of points of similarity with 1 Peter, which are very slight : P-" = 1 P 5'-"S 3' = 1 P 2", S''"' = 1 P P-».

(But see Bigg, International Critical Commentary on 1 and S Peter, p. 21, who would regard 1 Peter as older than and as having influenced this Epistle). There are more verbal points of contact with the earlier Pauline Epistles ; cf. l'-< with Ro 1' 16=«-". P» „ „ 14»>. 2'« „ Gal P(?) 3» „ Ro 13'. 3» „ Eph 2^ 1 Co 6»-". 3' „ „ 2«5^. But they all suggest the same mind dealing with the same subject at a different time, rather than a different writer borrowing from literature.

The relation to 1 Tim. and, in a less degree, to 2 Tim. is more complex. As compared with 1 Tim. the purpose is the same, and the structure is the same ; the warning against false teachers form- ing a framework in which the rules about organi- zation and character are inserted ; in the same way each section culminates in a doctrinal climax. There is also verbal similarity of a marked type. Cf. Tit I'-'withlTil''. ]»-» ^1-7 II * II II "^ .

Ill '10 o Ti 3« II t ti ••» — -* I •» • 01-9 07 II 4". 2'J. 10 1. 6'. gu 1. 20. QIS „ 4'»5«>6'. 3' 2 Ti 2-' 3". 3» „ 1". 3" 1 Ti 4' 6", 2 Ti 2'«- In nearly every case there is a freshness of treat- ment whicli is against the theory of deliberate borrowing ; even in 1''", the most continuous instance of similarity, there are changes (e.q.

the omission of ^i; vtOipi'roii, 1 Ti 3°) which are suitable to the circumstances of a comimratively new Church, and this list of req^uiremcnts may easily have been drawn up in a written form by St. Paul for frequent use, and be jiartly indebted to Jewish or Gentile lists of ollicial ret|nirements (cf. 1 TiM.) The more complex organization and the fullei 1 784 TITUS, EPISTLE TO TITUS, EPISTLE TO detaUs aliout worship in 1 Tim. apparently favour the priovHv of Titus; but all the d.lferences .

nay be d'rto -the dilleront circumstances othe^t^ delegates and the two Churches. Tl e.e js notlnn in the letters to make it ""P-^o^^i-'ti, L the were written on the same day and sent by the "The™Sor;-of the relation ot Ephesians to teachers are partly J'^"'«^ P^^'yTV. " are 'influ Jews hein-the more prominent.

They a« mnu =nt;^l iinsettin" whole tamihes (1'), opposing «mVnd'tc hin" (1''), tendiuK to reject the authority orTitus(1^2':i3'»^^^ «PPkin" ( '»-i^l inconsistent in their lives with the r profe".ed knowledge of God (l- but these words proie.seu R. c j^ teachers). Ihe iihsUnce of the^^SciLg consists of foolish and -!:E investigation^, .enea lo^ie^. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ rnrctira'; S^ m^n t;, 'apparenUy fayin. i^r °i° tntir™^t .

]^tf^ Fnstle no trace of anything akin to 2nd cent L not confined to one place, but extends over IS not connneu w r extends to ordaining Llarnt^r' temporary is not clear -the nio^^^^^^^ ?^^s^i!:^:^rf^:r^™p^S^^"|>t NoUiing is said about any ordination for the '' Fo; permanent organization, he « to appoint f^nJoxl'VVXi?m*orll?

^alI°lti^fo^^^^^^^^ tntpd- and t may be inferred that their Sutiettere' to teach (A perhaps to contro^ the V^vrti:ft^u:t'r^^^^^^;=^cKd w, ■d>':";:- St ti: ie^l' famll'y of ijod-o^M^xepo. n» There is no reference to common wor.sh.,. ^mnrrsaivaUr<3',r;ediapsi;»(o^^^ ^ti^°.Snr^Tr=ari:id^^ V. AuTllORfelllP. 1 » evidence of its rejec- m. 3. 4) Uem. A ex V r ^^^ Mmatonan ^Z:::'U wkrf:cei'tedby Tatlan in spit, of his re- and waa iectinn of 1 and 2 Tim., but rejected by Marcion H'l'.ilides (Tert. adv.

Mairwnem, v. 21). it ..-.- i^^odted in the Syriac and Old La U° VX^- Auulvc ii p. 126, where the command of 3 is kaqnes. e. 8 = 3^ and Clem. Kom(i. 2-3 ). Tt claims to be by St. Paul in 1 ; ana im- r ni ;n\i= » nassages which are indeed separ- SlTe' ?om the ^es't! But in the body of the letter th re is nothing in tone, teaching or, umsUnce ^^^t^tnS^iT trriaSe ^'oft^ elsewhereTc" T^ITUS) : the character of the writer hi, his^stence on his own teaching and wishes (cf.

1 Con the sharpness of tone against fa se teachers (Pf Gal " Cor ), the quick passage from luoral nference to doctrinal premiss, the quotation from Greek poetry, the adaptation of of language the than ' heretical' ; and it is f^ft/ofphase which '" Jts K^e^lcTs" / "7'-"^^^^^^^ "^'i"- ^- suggests lateness, «••<'"'. ™. )„ but Kaipif l:rrln'^2C';nlytoChSt;.T:^. fl Thn.'only), ^ 5.5...aX(a i, p'-^o..ail and 2 Tn .

) 'Sve'are^'the presence of a large vocabulatT freS Sxed, and shared to a ^-t j;=^te"t ^^''^f writer of 1 and 2 Tmiothj ll>e aUe ^_^^^^^^^ authorship a.re either that 't >« > y^ intimate writing late -^Uhr^ can Ve little doubt that if ?r'ErUelt^d*Se."this would be the natural exphmation; or by ^r"^"^'" :'':'^^^^ i^:-^srM35^||=k"i'^ 1 Tim. would «<=eny^l"<ost certain as the rt^rf%''T!

mtr in^xlrnCand intendei as a ^^vi^'f^TEGRT'^ -The MSS suggest no insert ion or disloSn i^ihe text ; nor does the sequ euc o. TITUS JUSTUS TOBIT, BOOK OF 785 thought require such a theory. '■• is indeed easilj- Ei'parable from the rest, but no conclusive reason requires its separation ; and 3" comes in awkwardly after 3", but there is a possible connexion of thought between them, and such postseripta are found elsewhere, Ro 16"-*, 1 Ti i5"-">.

The question of the integrity has arisen only on the theory of a non-Pauline authorship : for critics are aljuust entirely agreed in regarding 3', " or 3ia-i» JJ3 Pauline, and tlie question arises whether there are other Pauline fragments, and whether they are separable. The chief attempts to distinguish are these— 11-6. Pauline (-McGiffert, Harnack, Clemen) ; but expanded from some simpler form by a late hand (von Soden). 17 ». Non-Pauline (i6.)

, added to strengthen the episcopate in the 2nd cent. (Hamack) ; but the distinction between tlie ir.rju^tt and rrpiff^iiriui would have been clearer. 17-11. Non-Pauline (Hesse, Clemen). lia.13. 16. Pauline. 114-15 non-Pauline (t6.)(as not suiting the other descriptions of the false teachers ; but there is no real inconsistency). 2, Non-P.iuline (IleK.-ie). 81-7. Pauline (McGiffert).

Non-Pauline (Clemen): partly be- cause S-" is a repetition of 2n H, but there is a difference in the motive appealed to, which suits the exhortation of $1.2. (•-11. Non-Pauline. S'^1 Pauline (Hamack, McOiffert, Clemen). Hie Pauline fragment so obtained is supposed to be a letter from Paul written to Titus at Corinth after 2 Cor. ; this was de- veloped into a letter to Crete at tlie end of the 1st cent, because of the outbreak of Judaism there (Clemen).

There is, however, no substantial ground for distin'.ruishing between Paulino and non-Pauline, except in li- and 3l'i 1^ : the grounds for separa- tion elsewliere arc hj-percritic.tl and the divisions arbitrary. For fuller details cf. McGiffert, Apostolic Afje, p. 400; Har- nack, Chronolofti^, i. p- 4S0 ; Clemen, Die EinhfitUchkeit der Paul. Britfe, pp. 157-163 ; Moffatt, Ilutorical ST p. 70a vii. Value. — As with 1 Tim.

(wliich see), the value is a good deal independent of its authorship, and due to the fact of its canoniz.it ion. On the point of the organization of the Church it adds notliing to that in detail or principle; but it has a historical value as showing the method of organ- izing coinmnnities in a very early stage of develop- ment, as showing the persistence of Judaism as a danger to the early Church ; and the atmosphere of a suspicious and critical heathenism in which it lived.

In such an atmosphere, and dealing with communities of rough islanders on a low social level and disposed to anarchy, the WTiter, while laying stress on faith and the salvation wrought by the appearance of Christ, organizes a ministry, insists on moral qualilications for it, and tries to develop an orderlj', disciplined, useful, fruitful life in all ages and classes, and inspires even slaves witli the hope that they maj' adorn the true teaching : it is an attempt to convert heatlienisin by the attractive beauty of an ordered family life and a loyal citizenship.

Doctrinally, the hpistle oilers no new point of interest unless it be the identifica- tion of Christ with ' the Great God,' 2" (but see Ezr.a Abbot, Critical Essays, xviii.), or the refer- ence to baptism as Xovrpiv iraXii^eMfflas, 3*. LiTKKATCRB. — The same introductions and commentaries as are referred to under 1 Timotiiv are useful for this Epistle, with the exception of H. P.

Lid'lon ; to the Patristic com- mentaries should be added a short coiiinientary by Jerome, and a long extract on 3"^- n from Origen's lost coinmentiiry pre- served in a Latin translation by Pamphilus. W. LoCK.