"Now you are the body of Christ, and every one of you is a part of it. And in the church God has appointed first of all Apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues. (1 Cor.12:27-8 NIV)Throughout the centuries many men have left their mark on the pages of history in the service of God and Church. Great apostles led the way through times of great persecution, prophets spoke the Word of God to those hardened by sin and idolatry, men blessed with knowledge and understanding laid the doctrinal foundations of the faith and taught the masses, and unbelievers were converted when they witnessed mighty miracles performed through men of God. And though the names of many men (and women) are recorded in history according to their various functions, one group remains suspiciously absent; notice in the following verse:
Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret?[1]"Administration" is missing from the reiteration, and is also missing from church history. Who can name any great administrators of the church? Should not the church, which was at one time greatest economic power on earth, have provided us with the names of those who kept record of such vast wealth? Perhaps an important part of the "body of Christ" lies hidden and unused, waiting to be brought to its proper place for the work of establishing the Kingdom of God.
Go, say to this steward, to Shebna, who is in charge of the palace: 'What are you doing here and who gave you permission to cut out a grave for yourself here, hewing your grave on the height and chiseling your resting place in the rock? Beware, the Lord is about to take firm hold of you and hurl you away, O you mighty man. He will roll you up like a ball and throw you into a large country. There you will die and your splendid chariots will remain - you disgrace to your master's house! I will depose you from your office, and you will be ousted from your position.' [2]Shebna was subsequently demoted to the office of secretary, after which he vanishes from the pages of history. His empty tomb was discovered in 1870 just east of the Kidron Valley[3], a monument which no longer commemorated a man, but rather the power of God's word. God had a replacement in mind to fill the office which Shebna vacated:
In that day I will summon my servant, Eliakim son of Hilkiah. I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shut no one can open. I will drive him like a peg into a firm place; he will be a seat of honor for the house of his father. All the glory of his family will hang on him: its offspring and offshoots - all its lesser vessels, from the bowls to all the jars. [4]Eliakim was to indeed become the palace administrator, and later played a key role in negotiations with Senaccharib, king of the Assyrian Empire, when he besieged Jerusalem in the seventh century BCE. The importance of the negotiations is indicated by the fact that the account is given twice in the Bible (2 Ki.18:17- 37 & Isa.36:1-21).
Notice a number of key phrases in the passage above. First, Eliakim is told that he will receive Shebna's robe and sash; these, of course, are tokens denoting the official nature of the office of palace administrator, but the sash served the additional function of holding the purse.[5] The key which he was to carry on his shoulder (the manner in which they were normally carried at that time[6]) not only allowed him access to the royal palace, but also entitled him with chief administrative authority in the government. He not only had control over who could enter or leave the palace through physical doors[7], he also had administrative control over those issues that entered into and those policies that were issued forth from the palace. Included in this was his authority as treasurer, wherein he controlled both revenues that flowed in and the expenses that flowed forth from the palace treasury. The facts that "what he opens no one can shut," and "what he shuts no one can open," indicate that he is to have supreme authority regarding administrative matters, and is to be second only to the king himself. Even the king is dependent on him in certain matters, for without knowledge of the state of accounts, what ruler could make any decision to spend money or raise revenue? "I will fasten him as a nail in a sure place (KJV)," gives indication of the security and permanency of his position. It is noteworthy that such terminology was never applied to the kings of Israel or Judah; this would indicate that the functions of the palace administrator were to outlast the temporal reign of kings in the line of David. Certainly, David's "throne" was to be "established forever,"[8] but no promise was made that the throne was to remain on earth for all time. A nail fastened in a "sure place" does suggest permanence, yet no successors to Eliakim are to be found in the Old Testament. What, then, of his office?
A key phrase gives light to the problem of Eliakim's successors: "He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the house of Judah." Fatherhood not only speaks of his position over them, it also implies inheritance. And, now, just as the office of kingship has been transferred to Jesus Christ, so too has the office of administration been transferred to the Church, which is "spiritual Israel," and which is to inhabit "New Jerusalem."[9] So, if we are to find the one who holds the "keys of the House of David" and has the authority to "open and shut," we must look within the Church.
When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. "What do you think Simon?" he asked. "From whom do the kings of earth collect duty and taxes - from their own sons or from others?" "From others," Peter answered. "Then the sons are exempt," Jesus said to him. "But so that we may not offend them, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours."[12]
Notice that no mention is made of making payment for the other disciples, so it would seem evident that Peter's functions did not include those of treasurer. So who was the treasurer? Recall the events of John, chapter 12 (AV):
Then took Mary [of Bethany] a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair; and the house was filled with the odor of the ointment. Then said one of the disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, who should betray him, "Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred denarii, and given to the poor?" This he said, not that he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bore what was put in it.Clearly, then, Judas served as treasurer for the disciples. Notice that he knew the value of the ointment merely by sight, showing that he was versed in such matters. And if Peter, who denied Jesus and was addressed as "Satan" by him, should be instituted as Chief Apostle, is no less fitting that Judas, who was to betray Jesus and was possessed by the devil, should become the Treasurer of the Apostles. Jesus, who must have known that Judas was a thief when he selected him as an Apostle and appointed him as treasurer, still entrusted him with task of holding the funds for the entire group. Further, if a treasurer was necessary during the time that Jesus walked on earth with his disciples, surely it was necessary after he left; the office was to continue within the Church just as Peter's was to continue. After Judas' death and Jesus' ascension the disciples (about 120 of them[13]) gathered in Jerusalem, where they were addressed by Peter. Peter, speaking of Judas and quoting Psalm 109:8, said, "His bishopric (episcope) let another take." He continued:
Wherefore, of these two men who have accompanied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, Beginning from the baptism of John unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection. And they appointed two, Joseph, called Barsabbas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed and said, Thou, Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, show which of these two thou hast chosen, that he may take a part in this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place. And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias.[14]Some would say that this was not a valid succession due to the facts that they cast lots and that the Holy Spirit had not yet descended upon them, and that Paul was the valid twelfth Apostle; but they fail to realize that the Apostles did seek the Lord in prayer, casting lots was a valid practice of the Jews from ancient times, Paul was not converted until after the death of James, and Paul did not know Jesus in his earthly ministry (a requirement of Peter's, above). Thus, although Paul was to be considered an Apostle, he was not to be numbered among "The Twelve"; and twelve is the number required in Revelation 21:14. Therefore we can safely conclude that Matthias was the twelfth legitimate Apostle and immediate successor to Judas the treasurer.
Some have said (as further "evidence" against Matthias being the twelfth Apostle) that no trace of him can be found outside of Acts chapter one; but this is far from the truth. Irenaeus (c.125-c.202) confirms him as being "ordained" in place of Judas, and Eusebius (263-339) mentions that he was one of the original seventy. Furthermore, Clement of Alexandria (?- c.215) says that Matthias was a vegetarian, and suggests that he could have been the same person as Zacchaeus of the Gospel of Luke; and however unlikely this may have been, it is interesting to note that Zacchaeus was a tax-collector, thus indicating that perhaps Matthias was one as well, or that he at least had a financial background. According to Sacred Tradition, Matthias traveled to Armenia where he founded a number of churches[15]; he was later martyred in either Colchis or Sevastapol on the Black Sea, or possibly in Jerusalem. His remains have been divided and currently rest in Rome and Trier, Germany.[16] For a successor to Matthias, it is only natural that we look to those churches that he himself founded.
The Armenian Church has maintained the office of administrator (or treasurer) in the person of the present Catholicos (supreme arch-bishop) of Etzchmiadzin, and claims to have an unbroken chain of entries in the financial records of the Church all the way back to Matthias (with the exception of certain periods of economic recession, during which few or no entries were made).[17] The official Books reside at a marble and gold desk at the Catholicos' palace at Etzchmiadzin; the earliest portions date to the fourth century, and are copies of entries claimed to have been made in the first century. At various times in Armenian Church history, a number of anti-clerks have set themselves up as successors to Matthias, claiming to have the true Church Books, but were generally not successful in persuading others to follow them. In 1947 the official list of Armenian Clerks was revised after a thorough investigation of historical documents: six Clerks were dropped from the list, one was added and information was changed on 67 others; the Church claims that this does not affect the continuity between Matthias and the present Clerk. Many Clerks are known to have been very poor mathematicians, but the Church maintains that this would not affect their ability to keep the Sacred Books. One was even elected Clerk at the age of twelve (said to have been the illegitimate son of another Clerk), but none of his entries are in error. Another Clerk, Nefarius I (625-38), was excommunicated after his death by an Armenian Church Council which believed that he had either rejected or failed to properly support the practice of making double, rather than single, entries in the Books; however, his office remains untinged as none of the entries made during his clericate are considered too be in error. This heretical practice of single-entry accounting, called "mononomenism," is still adhered to in some western churches to the present day.
The Armenian Catholicos of Etzchmiadzin, when he acts from the desk (ex scrinium), that is, when he, exercising the office of Accountant and Book-keeper of the Church by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, makes entries as debits or credits in the sacred records, he acts with that infallibility by which the Divine Redeemer wished his church to have accurate books in matters of debits and credits; and therefore the entries of such Armenian Catholicos are of themselves, but not by virtue of the consent of the Church, beyond correction. If anyone (which God may prevent) shall presume to contradict this our definition, let him be anathema.Note that this does not include any guidance in the areas of spending or budgeting; the purposes and uses of the accounts are determined by other offices within the Church. Nor does this constitute a "divine revelation" in regard to the entries; the Holy Spirit simply guides the Catholicos so that he will not make incorrect entries. This infallibility does not apply to the books of individual churches, it only applies to those books which are representative of the Church as a whole, and which are maintained by the successor to Matthias. There is no guarantee that the Church will never be in debt or even insolvent, but simply that the accounts will never be out of balance. Note also that there is no requirement that all accounts be explicitly defined; the nature of certain expenditures or receipts may require that provisional entries be made or that certain accounts be imprecisely described. The Catholicos does not become a mathematical genius, nor is he protected from error in his personal life (e.g., maintaining personal bank accounts, making change, counting devotional prayers, etc.). The Catholicos might be mathematically inept, or incapable of long-hand division, or even a thief or embezzler, yet the Holy Records would never be inaccurate, as the Divine Gift is bestowed not the man himself, but on the office which he occupies.
Some would say that Our Lord never guaranteed to any man freedom from error in any of his endeavors, yet Jesus himself told us "I am with you all days, even unto the end of the world"[18]; and Christ is truth, and where Christ is error cannot co-exist. The preceding verse also speaks to the eternality of the office, confounding those who would say that the doctrine of Clerical Succession is invalid, or that the line of Valid Accountants was broken somewhere; for if Christ were to abandon his church and leave her without accurate financial records, how could she continue as an institution at all? And the fact that the Armenian Church has survived to the present day, in spite of the extreme nature of the political and religious opposition to her, is a testament to belief that God is indeed with her.
A number of official accounting practices were updated in recent years by the Armenian Church. The Second Basargecharian Council (1962-65) called for changes in the ways in which different foreign currencies were valued, and provided rules for the depreciation of Church property and limitations on the cancellation of debt. Rules were expanded to allow lay accountants to maintain certain supplemental church books and records, and requirements for the official Ink and Pens to be used were relaxed. The Council also sanctioned the use of modern "mechanical and electrical calculating machines" to aid in the accounting process.
Let no one make light of the evidence that has been presented herein, for similar arguments could be made (although, perhaps, less perfectly) for the doctrinal authority of the Roman church. In fact, so similar are these two cases that we can safely say that to deny the doctrines of Clerical Succession and Clerical Infallibility is to deny the Roman doctrines of Papal Succession and Papal Infallibility. And let him who does so be anathema.
1. 1 Cor.12:30.
2. Isa.22:15-19.
3. "Shebna," Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, Moody Press, Chicago, 1983.
4. Isa.22:20-4.
5. Albert Barnes, Notes on the Old Testament, Vol. 1, Isaiah,
Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Mi., 1977, p.373.
6. Ibid., p.374.
7. For more information on doors in Scripture, see The Thuran Doctrine,
Rediscovered, by Z.T. Blackwood, Green Lion Publications, 1991.
8. 2 Sam. 8:13.
9. Rev. 21.
10. Mt. 4:19.
11. Mt.16:19.
12. Mt.17:25-27.
13. Acts 1:15.
14. Acts 1;21-6.
15. Edgar J. Goodspeed, The Twelve, John C. Winston, Phildelphia, 1956.
16. William Steuart McBirnie, The search for the Twelve Apostles,
Tyndale House Publishers, Wheaton, Il., 1973, pp.241-8.
17. Source uncertain.
18. Mt. 28:20.
Copyright 1991 by Zechariah T. Blackwood