Gifts

The practice of making presents is very common in oriental countries. The custom probably had its origin among those men who first sustained the office of kings or rulers, and who, from the novelty and perhaps the weakness attached to their situation, chose, rather than make the hazardous attempt of exacting taxes, to content themselves with receiving those presents which might be freely offered, 1Sa 10:27. Hence it passed into a custom, that whoever approached the king should come with a gift. This was the practice and the expectation. The custom of presenting gifts was subsequently extended to other great men; to men who were inferior to the king, but who were, nevertheless, men of influence and rank; it was also extended to those who were equals, when they were visited, Pro 18:16. Kings themselves were in the habit of making presents, probably in reference to the custom in question and the feelings connected with it, to those individuals, their inferiors in point of rank, whom they wished to honour, and also to those who, like themselves, were clothed with the royal authority. These presents, namely, such as were presented by the king as a token of the royal esteem and honour, are almost invariably denominated in the Hebrew, שחד and ברכה , 1Ki 15:19; 2Ki 16:8; 2Ki 18:14; Isa 36:16. The more ancient prophets did not deem it discreditable to them to receive presents, nor unbecoming their sacred calling, except when, as was sometimes the case, they refused by way of expressing their dissatisfaction or indignation, 2Ki 5:15; 2Ki 8:9. In later times, when false prophets, in order to obtain money, prophesied without truth and without authority, the true prophets, for the purpose of keeping the line of distinction as broad as possible, rejected every thing that looked like reward. Gifts of this kind, that have now been described, are not to be confounded with those which are called שחד , and which were presented to judges, not as a mark of esteem and honour, but for purposes of bribery and corruption. The former was considered an honour to the giver, but a gift of the latter kind has been justly reprobated in every age, Exo 22:8; Deu 10:17; Deu 16:19; Deu 27:25; Psa 15:5; Psa 26:10; Isa 1:23; Isa 5:23; Isa 33:15. The giver was not restricted as to the kind of present which he should make. He might present not only silver and gold, but clothes and arms, also different kinds of food, in a word any thing which could be of benefit to the recipient, Gen 43:11; 1Sa 9:7; 1Sa 16:20; Job 42:11. It was the custom anciently, as it is at the present time in the east, for an individual when visiting a person of high rank, to make some presents of small value to the servants or domestics of the person visited, 1Sa 25:27. It was the usual practice among kings and princes to present to their favourite officers in the government, to ambassadors from foreign courts, to foreigners of distinction, and to men eminent for their learning, garments of greater or less value, Gen 45:22-23; Est 8:15. The royal wardrobe, in which a large number of such garments was kept, is denominated in Hebrew בגדים , 2Ch 34:22. It was considered an honour of the highest kind, if a king or any person in high authority thought it proper, as a manifestation of his favour, to give away to another the garment which he had previously worn himself, 1Sa 18:4. In the east, at the present day, it is expected, that every one who has received a garment from the king will immediately clothe himself in it, and promptly present himself and render his homage to the giver; otherwise he runs the hazard of exciting the king’s displeasure, Mat 22:11-12. It was sometimes the case, that the king, when he made a feast, presented vestments to all the guests who were invited, with which they clothed themselves before they sat down to Matthew 2 :2Ki 10:22; Gen 45:22; Rev 3:5. In oriental countries, the presents which are made to kings and princes are to this day, carried on beasts of burden, are attended with a body of men, and are escorted with much pomp. It matters not how light or how small the present may be, it must either be carried on the back of a beast of burden, or by a man, who must support it with both his hands, Jdg 3:18; 2Ki 8:9.

Have been common from the earliest times as tokens of affection, honor, or respect. The dues to a king were often rendered in this form, 1Sa 10:27 Isa 36:16 ; and men of high position were approached with presents, Gen 43:11 Jdg 6:18 1Sa 9:7 1Ki 14:3 . Kings made gifts of garments to those they wished to honor, Gen 45:22,23 1Sa 18:4 ; and of treasures to other princes, out of esteem or of fear, 2Ki 16:8 18:14 2Ch 9:9,12. Conquerors scattered gifts from their triumphal cars, and special privileges in token of generous joy, Psa 68:18 Mal 1:2,4 . Prophets received gifts, or declined them, as duty required, 2Ki 5:15 8:9 Dan 2:48 5:17. The word gifts often denotes bribes, Exo 23:8 Psa 15:5 Isa 5:23 . The same word is also applied to the offerings required by the law, Deu 16:17 Mat 5:23,24 ; to the blessings of the gospel and eternal life, which are preeminently gifts, Mal 8:20 ; to the Christian grace, for the same reason, Zep 4:8,11 ; and to the miraculous endowments of the apostles, 1Co 12:1-14:40. See TONGUES.\par

So common in the East that there are 15 distinct Hebrew words for them. Minchah, from an inferior to a superior (Jdg 3:15). Maseeth, vice versa (Est 2:18). Berakah, "a blessing," i.e. complimentary (2Ki 5:15). Shochad, a bribe (Exo 23:8; 2Ki 16:8). Many were not voluntary, but a compulsory exaction: tribute (2Ki 17:3). "To bring presents" is to own submission (Psa 68:29). That to a prophet was his consulting fee (1Sa 9:7), not a bribe (1Sa 12:3). To refuse a present was an insult; the wedding robe offered and slighted was the condemnation of the disrobed guest (Mat 22:11).

These have a large place in the O.T. history, and several different words are used which are often translated PRESENTS. There were

1. Gifts from a superior to an inferior in good will and kindness and as rewards. Est 2:18; Dan 2:6; Dan 2:48.

2. From an inferior to a superior. 2Ch 9:24; 2Ch 17:5; 2Ch 17:11. This also took the form of tribute, an acknowledgement of submission. 1Sa 10:27; 1Ki 4:21. When Solomon reigned supreme, ’all the earth’ sought to Solomon to hear his wisdom, and brought presents, as did the queen of Sheba. 1Ki 10:2; 1Ki 10:24-25. This is a type of Christ’s kingdom as established on earth, when presents, as willing tribute, will be sent from all nations to the Lord Jesus. Psa 45:12; Psa 72:10; Psa 72:15; Isa 60:9.

3. Gifts to judges: these were very apt to become bribes, and were strictly prohibited. Exo 23:8; Deu 16:19; 2Ch 19:7. It was usual also to take presents to prophets, 1Sa 9:7; and as the prophets were sometimes judges, the gifts were liable to become bribes, as they did with the sons of Samuel, though Samuel himself could challenge the people, and they admitted the fact, that he had never taken a bribe to blind his eyes therewith. 1Sa 8:3; 1Sa 12:3.

By: Emil G. Hirsch, Julius H. Greenstone, Solomon Schechter

—Biblical Data:

The interchange of gifts was a custom common among the early Israelites in the ordinary transactions of life as well as at all family celebrations. The subordinate gave presents to his superior "to smooth his face" and to make him gracious (Ps. xlv. 13 [A. V. 12]). Gifts were also given to appease anger (Prov. xxi. 14), to procure admission to the palaces of nobles (ib. xviii. 16), and to strengthen the bonds of friendship (ib. xix. 6). One did not come before God (Ex. xxiii. 15), a prophet (I Sam. ix. 7; I Kings xiv. 3; II Kings viii. 9), or a king (I Kings x. 10) with empty hands. Still, the proverb "He that hateth gifts shall live" (Prov. xv. 27) was considered of great weight and was often quoted by later authorities.

Gifts were frequently offered as tribute by a conquered people to its conqueror (Judges iii. 15; II Sam. viii. 2, 6; I Kings v. 1; II Kings xvii. 3; II Chron. xvii. 11, xxvi. 8, xxxii. 23); hence the expression "to bring presents" often means to offer submission (Isa. xviii. 7; Ps. lxviii. 30). Jacob sent presents to Esau in the hope of appeasing his anger (Gen. xxxii. 14). Neglect to send gifts to kings by way of homage on the day of their ascension to the throne was considered an insult (I Sam. x. 27). Kings sent presents to each other at the conclusion of a treaty (I Kings xv. 18). They also frequently distributed gifts, either indiscriminately among their subjects (II Sam. vi. 19), or to favorites (Gen. xli. 42; II Sam. xi. 8), or to officers in recognition of their services (Esth. viii. 2).

Gifts played an important part in marriage ceremonies. Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, gave presents to Rebekah, the bride he chose for his master's son (Gen. xxiv. 22, 53). Solomon on marrying Pharaoh's daughter received some valuable gifts from her father (I Kings ix. 16; comp. Judges i. 14). In addition to the DOWRY ("mohar"), the groom gave presents ("mattan") to his bride-elect (Gen. xxxiv. 12). The custom for guests invited to the wedding to present the newly married couple with some gift extends to the present day. Among the Polish Jews such gifts are called "drosho-geschenk" (presents for the sermon) because they are presented soon after the groom delivers the lecture which he has prepared for the occasion.

In Ex. xxiii. 8 and in Deut. xvi. 19 it is forbidden to offer gifts as bribes ("shoḥad") to administrators of justice. Such gifts "blind the eyes of the wise" and pervert the words of the righteous (Ecclus. [Sirach] xx. 29; comp. Bribery). It is also forbidden to bring as an offering upon the altar the hire given to a harlot ("etnan"; Deut. xxiii. 19 [A. V. 18]; Isa. xxiii. 17, 18; Ezek. xvi. 31, 34; Hosea ix. 1; Micah i. 7).

In the simple agricultural state it was natural that gifts should consist of grain, fruit, or cattle (Gen. iv. 3, 4; xii. 16; xxxii. 15, 16; xliii. 11; I Sam. xxv. 18); but money (I Sam. ix. 8; II Sam. xviii. 11; Job xlii. 11; comp. Matt. ii. 11), ornaments (Gen. xxiv. 22, 53), robes (Gen. xli. 42, xlv. 22; II Kings v. 22), furniture and utensils (II Sam. xvii. 28), armor (I Kings x. 25), and other costly articles were also given. These presents were usually conveyed either by servants (Gen. xxxii. 17) or on the backs of beasts of burden (II Kings viii. 9).

Bibliography:

Hamburger, R. B. T. s.v. Geschenk;

Smith, Dict. Bible;

Hastings, Dict. Bible;

McCurdy, History, Prophecy, and the Monuments, ii. 211, New York, 1894.

—In Rabbinical Law:

Property voluntarily conveyed or transferred without compensating consideration. Any person has the right to give away part or all of his possessions, as he may desire. The law governing the acquisition of gifts considers (1) whether the donor is in good health ( ), or (2) whether the donor is in ill health ( ), and varies accordingly.

1. The gift of a healthy person is valid only when the following conditions have been complied with: (a) The donor must be an intelligent, responsible being. An idiot can make no gifts. A minor, even though possessed of intelligence, and a deaf-mute can give away only movable property (Giṭ. 59a; Maimonides, "Yad," Mekirah, xxix. 1 et seq.; Caro, Shulḥan 'Aruk, Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, 225, 1 et seq.). A minor who shows no signs of intelligence, and an idiot can not acquire gifts. But a minor who has reached the age of discrimination, and a deaf-mute may be made recipients of gifts (Giṭ. 65a; Maimonides, "Yad," Zekiyyah, iv. 6, 7; Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, 243, 14-17).

Validity of Gifts.

(b) While a sale transacted under duress is valid, since it is presumed that at the acceptance of the money the seller becomes reconciled, in the case of a gift made through compulsion where this argument does not exist, the donor may afterward retract, if he has previously protested before witnesses, or if it is generally known that the gift was made under duress (B. B. 40b, 43b, 47b; Zekiyyah, v. 4; Mekirah, x. 1; Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, 205, 1-7; 242, 1, 2). A gift, therefore, must never be made in secret, and the deed of gift, drawn up by the witnesses, must contain the phrase "and the donor told us, 'Sit down in the market-places and in the open squares and write a bill of gift openly and publicly'" (B. B. 40b).(c) If there is an evident cause for the donor's action, as when one, for instance, on hearing that his son has died, gives away all his possessions to another, he may retract when the cause is removed by the disproval of the report. If, however, he does not give away all his property, but retains some portion of it, showing thereby that he does not entirely believe the report, he can not retract (B. B. 146b; Zekiyyah, vi. 1; Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, 246, 1).(d) The object presented must be in existence at the time of the transaction. A gift of the future produce of a tree or field, or of what a slave or cattle may bear, has no validity (B. B. 79b et al.; Mekirah, xxii. 1; Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, 209, 4). Some authorities are of the opinion that the thing bestowed must be described in detail in the bill of gift, as in the case of a field, where all its boundaries must be given (ib. 241, 4; see Zekiyyah, iii. 5, and Maggid Mishneh ad loc.). The object must be in the possession of the donor at the time of the transaction. An expected inheritance can not be given away during the life of the testator (B. M. 16a; Mekirah, xxii. 5; Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, 211, 1; 60, 6). Just as the object must be in existence at the time of the transaction, so must the donee be in existence. A gift to another's unborn infant is invalid; one to his own child, provided his wife is pregnant with it at the time the gift is made, is valid (B. B. 141b; Mekirah, xxii. 10; Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, 210, 1).(e) The bill of gift must be so worded as to enable and empower the donee to take possession of the object during the life of the donor. A gift that can take effect only after the death of the donor is invalid. If, however, it contains the word ("from to-day"), or ("from now"), then the object itself belongs to the donee, but the fruit that the object may yield belongs to the donor during his lifetime (B. B. 136a; Zekiyyah, xii. 13-15; Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, 257, 6; 258, 1, 2).(f) The gift as well as the sale is valid only when accompanied by one of the forms of acquisition. The testimony of witnesses is not necessary to establish the gift when both donor and donee testify to it. A gift may also be made through a third party, without the knowledge of the donee, but in this case the latter may refuse to accept it (Giṭ. 14a; Zekiyyah, iv. 2; Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, 243, 1). The language of the donor in making a gift must be either in the past or in the present tense. If the term ("I shall give") be used, even though it be spoken before witnesses, and, according to some authorities, even though some form of acquisition has been complied with, the gift is not valid unless it contains also the word ("from now on"), which makes it immediately effective (Giṭ. 40b; Zekiyyah, iv. 11; Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, 245, 1-4).

2. "The utterance of a person who is near his death is considered as if written down and delivered." "It is a commendable act to gratify the wishes of a dying person." Therefore, the Rabbis ordained that a gift by a person who deems himself in danger of death, either when suffering from a dangerous illness, or before going out on a sea-voyage or on a journey into the desert, or when convicted of a crime which makes him liable to capital punishment, should be valid even without any formality of acquisition, and should take effect soon after his death. The only condition necessary in such a case is that it shall be known to have been done in contemplation of death.Since this is merely an institution of the Rabbis for the purpose of quieting the mind of the ill, the donor is allowed to retract not only when he recovers from his illness, but also during his illness. A later wish or document always annuls a former one (B. B. 151a, 152b; Zekiyyah, ix. 15; Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, 250, 2, 13-16). If, however, the donor says , the gift has the same validity as that of a person who is well, if the necessary conditions have been fulfilled (B. B. 135b; Zekiyyah, viii. 18; ḤoshenMishpaṭ, 250, 9). In all cases the court can collect, immediately after the donor's death, from the property thus given away money due to the widow by her marriage contract, or to the children of the widow for their sustenance, and all other debts that fall upon the property (B. B. 133a; Zekiyyah, viii. 8, 9; Ḥoshen Mishpaṭ, 252, 1; Shulḥan 'Aruk, Eben ha-'Ezer, 93, 20).

See Alienation and Acquisition; Assignment; Bequest; Derelict; Inheritance; Orphans; Widow.

Bibliography:

Bloch, Der Vertrag nach Mosaisch-Talmudischem Recht, pp. 87-90, Budapest, 1893;

idem, Erbrecht, pp. 43-68, ib. 1890;

Frankel, Der Gerichtliche Beweis, pp. 368-370, Berlin, 1846;

Saalschütz, Das Mosaische Recht (see Index), Berlin, 1853;

Mielziner, Legal Maxims, Cincinnati, 1898.

We may distinguish for the purpose of this article between gifts and giving generally, and the particular endowments which are connoted by the term ÷áñßóìáôá, translated in Authorized Version and Revised Version gifts.’

1. General.-It is clear that in the Apostolic Age the Church had learnt the implications of the fact of the Incarnation. From the literature of the time we note the connexion between the gift of God’s grace in Christ, the ‘Unspeakable gift’ (2Co_9:15), and the ethical practice of Christ’s followers. The Greek verbs äßäùìé and äùñÝïìáé are hallowed by new associations and duties to which both the theology and ethic of Christianity give notable contributions. Specific deeds of charity and kindness (see Alms) enter naturally, as the result of our Lord’s teaching, into Christian practice (see article Christian Life for the appointment of deacons and systematic giving in the Church). The generosity of Stephanas (1Co_16:15), which impelled him at his own expense to journey to the Apostle with Fortunatus and Achaicus (his slaves), is singled out by St. Paul for special mention, as setting forth a new duty to the Church on the lines of the old Greek ëåéôïõñãßá or service done to the State. The same Epistle (1Co_16:1) emphasizes the duty of the Christian community in the matter of the Collection (q.v. [Note: quod vide, which see.] ): St. Paul insists on the duty of supporting not only the Church and its ministry but also poorer churches at a distance (2Co_8:1-5; 2Co_9:12-13) and of supplying a portion for the communion-meal, while his eulogy of cheerful giving (2Co_9:7) in general sets the standard and model of Christian liberality and of systematic gifts to spiritual objects, to the support of the poor and helpless (cf. Aristides, Apol. xv.), as well as to the furtherance of the gospel. Philanthropy is bound up with the Christian life and can never be dissociated from it.

The group of words translated ‘gift’ (äῶñïí, äùñåÜ, äüìá, äüóéò, äþñçìá) forms an interesting study, upon which see note on Jam_1:17 in J. B. Mayor’s Commentary (3 London, 1910). äþñçìá (Jam_1:17, Rom_5:16) is used of a gift of God, and so is äùñåÜ wherever we find it in the NT; äῶñïí is used of offerings to God; äüìá (except in Eph_4:8, a quotation from Septuagint ) is used of human gifts; while äüóéò may refer to either a human or a Divine gift. The use of äùñåÜ as the ‘free gift’ of God, springing from His ÷Üñéò, or ‘grace,’ is found in Act_2:38; Act_8:26; Act_10:45; Act_11:17, Rom_5:15; Rom_5:17, 2Co_9:15, Eph_3:7; Eph_4:7, Heb_6:4, and is also used by apostolic writers like Clement (cf. 1 Clem. xix. 2, xxiii. 2, xxxii. 1) and Ignatius (Smyrn. vii. 1).

Christ is pre-eminently the gift of God’s voluntary favour to the race, and is at once the type and source, along with the Holy Spirit, of all spiritual impartations and endowments. It remains to add that all gifts of love are gifts to God in the apostolic teaching. Gifts of the sacrificial order are mentioned by the author of Heb. in connexion with the Jewish priesthood only to be elevated into the region of Christian thought and to be liberated from the externalism and legalism of the Mosaic system. The gifts of the one High Priest, ‘the mediator of a better covenant,’ are inward; the new law is written on the heart, and the covenant is one of forgiveness and grace (Heb_5:1; Heb_8:1 ff.). Likewise, the approach to God by the believer is ‘a new and living way’ in that it is by the medium of the soul and conscience, unaccompanied by outward gift or sacrifice, except that, like his Lord, the believer offers himself, or rather his body (cf. Rom_12:1). This is the foundation of all giving, as St. Paul hints in 2Co_8:5, the giving up of self to God being the act that hallows all other gifts. The sanctions of Christian magnanimity, practical sympathy, and liberality are rooted in Christian doctrine, and especially its doctrine of God as the eternal love eternally imparting itself and historically manifest in the gift of His Son. The grace of God and His kindness (öéëáíèñùðßá) have both appeared (Tit_2:11; Tit_3:4); and the Apostle asks elsewhere ‘shall he not with him also freely give (÷áñßóåôáé) us all things?’ (Rom_8:32).

2. Special.-The quotation last given reminds us that ÷Üñéóìá (‘charism’), formed from the verb ÷áñßæïìáé, means a ‘free gift,’ not of right but of bounty. Unlike äùñåÜ, which has a similar meaning, ÷Üñéóìá comes to be used almost in a technical sense in Christian terminology, of gifts or qualifications for spiritual service. F. J. A. Hort (The Christian Ecclesia, London, 1897, p. 153f.) thus defines ÷Üñéóìá as used by St. Paul and by one other writer only in the NT, namely St. Peter:

‘In these instances it is used to designate either what we call “natural advantages” independent of any human process of acquisition, or advantages freshly received in the course of Providence; both alike being regarded as so many various free gifts from the Lord of men, and as designed by Him to be distinctive qualifications for rendering distinctive services to men or to communities of men.’

Even in the passages in the Pastoral Epistles which refer to the charism of Timothy (1Ti_4:14, 2Ti_1:6) Hort does not regard the specific gift of the young Apostle as a supernatural endowment suddenly or by miraculous means vouchsafed for a special mission or service: ‘it was a special gift of God, a special fitness bestowed by Him to enable Timothy to fulfil a distinctive function’ (p. 185); but also an original gift, capable of being wakened into fresh life* [Note: 1Co_12:31, where the two-fold idea of the Divine origin of charisms and the necessity of human effort to attain them is suggested.] by his own initiative; it was so distinctive as to mark Timothy out as a fit colleague of St. Paul himself, the fitness being authenticated to the Apostle by a prophetic oracle or message, and consecrated by a solemn act of benediction-the laying on of the hands of the body of elders. Schmiedel (Encyclopaedia Biblica , s.v. ‘Spiritual Gifts’) distinguishes between the non-technical use of ÷Üñéóìá in such passages as Rom_5:15 (where the term means ‘the whole aggregate of God’s benevolent operation in the universe’; cf. Rom_1:11; Rom_6:23; Rom_11:29, 2Co_1:11), and its technical use elsewhere, where ‘charism’ and ‘charisms’ denote distinctive aptitudes on the part of Christians; cf. Rom_12:6 (where ‘the grace of God’ is mentioned as the source of the several capacities designated), 1Co_7:7; 1Co_12:4; 1Co_12:9; 1Co_12:28; 1Co_12:31, 1Pe_4:10. In the great passage of Eph_4:11 (with which Justin Martyr, Dial. c. Tryph. xxxix. is to be read) the term ÷Üñéóìá is not mentioned, but it is implied in the words ‘He gave’ (áὐôὸò ἔäùêåí) with which the specification of functions or services commences. The term is not found in the Apostolic Fathers; in the Did. i. 5 it is used only once, and then of temporal blessings in the general sense.

The locus classicus for charisms is 1Co_12:4-12 and v. 28, which has to be studied along with Eph_4:11. The latter, which specifies the ministries of apostles, prophets (see Prophecy, Prophet), evangelists, pastors, and teachers, indicates the types of Christian service which tended to become permanent in the life of the Church. The Corinthian passage, on the other hand, in addition to the more stable and authorized modes of ministry, mentions several others of a special order, perhaps peculiar to the Corinthian Church with its exuberant manifestations of spiritual energy, and certainly, as the evidence of later Church history shows, of a temporary character, and exhausting themselves (cf. H. B. Swete, The Holy Spirit in the NT, London, 1909, p. 320) in the Apostolic or sub-Apostolic Age. The Apostle mentions ‘diversities of gifts,’ ‘diversities of ministrations’ (äéáêïíéῶí), and ‘diversities of workings’ (ἐíåñãçìÜôùí); these are but different aspects of the same function; but, whereas the two last are appropriately related to the Lord Christ and God the Father, ÷áñßóìáôá are regarded as the graces bestowed by the Holy Spirit (cf. a similar three-fold relationship with the three Persons of the Trinity in Eph_4:4). St. Paul mentions, first, charisms of the intellectual order, ‘the word of wisdom’ and ‘the word of knowledge’; second, miraculous gifts: (a) ‘faith,’ (b) ‘gifts of healing,’ (c) ‘workings of miracles’; third, ‘prophecy, or the gift of spiritual instruction; fourth, ‘discerning of spirits,’ or the gift of discrimination, the discerning between the true and the false; and finally, ‘tongues’ and ‘the interpretation of tongues’ (see Tongues), or ecstatic powers and the power of interpreting them. Then in 1Co_12:28 we have the following classification: ‘God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps (ἀíôéëÞìøåéò), governments (êõâåñíÞóåéò, literally ‘pilotings’), divers kinds of tongues’; this is a classification of charisms in order of spiritual rank and dignity. It has been suggested that ‘helps’ and ‘governments’ indicate the services rendered respectively by ‘deacons’ and ‘bishops,’ in which case we have here ‘the faint beginnings of the separation of offices’ (T. C. Edwards, Com. On 1 Corinthians 2, London, 1885, in loc.). The absence of any reference to officials later designated as ‘bishops,’ ‘presbyters,’ ‘deacons,’ ‘pastors’ (in Eph_4:11), suggests a rudimentary church organization, or rather a purely democratic government in the Christian community at Corinth; and it may be that the profusion of services and functions with the accompanying perils of spiritual pride and disorder suggested to the Apostle the necessity of the more disciplined and edifying forms of service and administration which afterwards prevailed in the apostolic churches. In fact, this is the burden of the Apostle’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 14, following on the exhortation to ‘covet earnestly “the greater charisms” ’ (1Co_12:31), and the noble hymn (1 Corinthians 13) which sets forth love as ‘a still more excellent way’ in that it transcends all the ÷áñßóìáôá and is the real foundation of the Church. It is love that is to regulate the use of the spiritual gifts, inasmuch as under its influence the individual will subordinate himself to another, will avoid ostentation and self-advertisement, and will do all things ‘decently and in order’-that is, he will keep his own place and exercise his particular functions, so that unity may be attained in variety, and each several capacity may be subordinated to the good of the Church as a whole.

As to the meaning and nature of the charisms, guidance must be sought in the particular articles which deal specifically with them; nor can we enter into a detailed examination of the problems which such a classification as ‘faith,’ ‘gifts of healing,’ ‘workings of miracles’ creates. Suffice it to say that, though love is the charism par excellence, the fount and source of all others, faith is second only to it in the order of ethical dignity. It is a charism out of which spring others described in 1Co_12:9 as ‘charisms of healing,’ where the plural appears to indicate different powers for healing different forms of disease, and ‘workings of powers or miracles.’ The relation of faith and its offspring prayer to healing and miracles generally is clearly seen in the Gospels which record our Lord’s cures and in His declaration that faith is the sole condition of miracle-working (cf. Mat_17:20, Mar_11:23-24); while the use of physical means such as oil (see the notable passage in Jam_5:14) in combination with prayer is paralleled not only by our Lord’s method, but by the method employed by the Twelve in Mar_6:13. The charisms of miracle-working lasted down to the 2nd cent., if we may trust the evidence of Justin Martyr (Apol. ii. 6); they never were intended, as the extreme faith-healer of to-day contends, to supersede the efforts of the skilled physician; they represent the creative gift, the power of initiating new departures in the normal world of phenomena, which is rooted in faith (see A. G. Hogg, Christ’s Message of the Kingdom, Edinburgh, 1911, pp. 62-70); and as such reveal a principle which holds good for all time.

To sum up, an examination of the passages in apostolic literature which treat of spiritual gifts inevitably brings us to the conclusion that the life of the early Church was characterized by glowing enthusiasm, simple faith, and intensity or spiritual joy and wonder, all resulting from the consciousness of the power of the Holy Spirit; also that this phase of Spirit-effected ministries and services was temporary, as such ‘tides of the Spirit’ have since often proved, and gave way to a more rigid and disciplined Church Order, in which the official tended more and more to supersede the charismatic ministries. At first, as E. v. Dobschütz remarks (Christian Life in the Primitive Church, Eng. translation , London, 1904, p. 283), this strikes us as ‘a limitation and a moral retrogression’; but on reflexion we see that while the principle of spiritual gifts as originating in the individual with the immediate action of the Holy Spirit is a permanent truth for the Christian consciousness, the transient character of many of the charismatic gifts is due largely to the abuses to which they were liable. The growing ethical standard of the Church rejected all self-chosen teachers or ministers who were proved by the test of character to be without a Divine call. By their fruits they were known; and the ÷Üñéóìá, which, however admirable in itself, was not associated with personal worth and holy influence, could not in the nature of things be recognized as making for edification and order in the Church life. The particular injunctions in the Pastoral Epistles as to the character of bishops and deacons point to a developing sense of Christian fitness in the official life of the Church and a growing feeling for the honour of Christianity. Thus, sooner or later, the true charismatic was sifted from the false charismatic, whose personal vanity and self-seeking nullified all usefulness, The increase of discipline of course had its own perils. Sometimes, as in John 3, we detect the narrow intolerance which resented any new influence or development in the Church life, Diotrephes being a type of mind which is ecclesiastically conservative and ‘so loses impulses of the greatest value’ (E. v. Dobschütz, op. cit., p. 221f.). To Diotrephes the Ephesian John is a charismatic itinerant preacher, whose letters must be withheld from the Church and whose messengers must not be welcomed. Here we see the seed of conflict, which was afterwards to germinate into the Montanist controversy. But the authority of St. Paul determined once for all the inner character of Christian community life. His symbol of the single body with many members (Rom_12:4, 1Co_12:12-27) shows that he aimed at a unity in which the witness of the individual should have free play and yet be subordinated to the welfare of the community. The Christian Church gave full scope to the individual ÷Üñéóìá; nevertheless, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit the impulse towards association, so far from, being overpowered, was most powerfully intensified by the encouragement which St. Paul (cf. Harnack, Mission and Expansion, Eng. translation 2, i. 433) gave to the development of spiritual capacity in the individual, while pointing to errors of unregulated spiritual enthusiasm, he none the less pleads with his converts to ‘quench not the Spirit’ and ‘despise not prophesyings’ (1Th_5:19).

Literature.-On the general subject of Christian giving the following works may be consulted: G. Uhlborn, Christian Charity in the Ancient Church, Eng. translation , Edinburgh, 1883; A. Harnack, Mission and Expansion of Christianity, Eng. translation 2, London, 1908, vol. i. ch. 4. For spiritual gifts (÷áñßóìáôá), in addition to the works quoted above, the following authorities may be consulted: R. Sohm, Kirchenrecht, Leipzig, 1892; H. Weinel, Die Wirkungen des Geistes, Freiburg i. B., 1899; H. Gunkel, Die Wirkungen des Heiligen Geistes3, Göttingen, 1909; T. M. Lindsay, The Church and the Ministry in the Early Centuries2, London, 1903; together with articles by Cremer on ‘Geistesgaben’ in Realencyklopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche 3 (Leipzig, 1899) and Gayford in Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols) on ‘Church.’

R. Martin Pope.

» See: Spiritual Gifts

—New Believer’s Bible Glossary