TIMOTHY (Τιμόσιος), Saint. — Collaborator and beloved disciple of St. Paul, born in Lystra in Lycaonia to a pagan father and a Jewish (or proselyte) mother, converted by the Apostle perhaps during his first mission in Asia (45–49), then his inseparable companion from the second journey (49/50–53) until the end of his first Roman imprisonment (c. 62–63). During his final journey to Asia (65–66), St. Paul placed him in charge of the important Church of Ephesus, later sending him two letters with directives for his pastoral office. At Ephesus, Timothy likely spent his final years, ending with martyrdom, perhaps in AD 97.
I. LIFE
Brought up religiously and instructed in the Holy Scriptures by his mother Eunice and his grandmother Lois (2 Tim 1:5; 3:15), Timothy was circumcised by Paul only to facilitate his work among the Jews when Paul took him as a missionary partner (Acts 16:1–3). His conversion to Christianity may have occurred during Paul’s first passage through Lycaonia, when Timothy witnessed the hardships and persecutions Paul endured (2 Tim 3:10–11). Taken by Paul in place of Mark, he became the Apostle’s friend and beloved disciple; he was at his side in the founding of the principal Churches and entrusted with confidential missions, including being sent to Corinth (q.V. Vol. IV, cols. 553–554) to quell the factional tumult there (1 Cor 4:17; 16:10–11), though his timid nature and sickly appearance (ibid., 16:10; 1 Tim 4:12; 5:23) may not have favored his success, which was later achieved by Titus. He may have accompanied Paul as a prisoner to Caesarea and Rome: the epistles from this period are written also in his name. It is unknown whether he went with Paul to Spain; Heb 13:23 may allude to his imprisonment or trial; yet he was again with Paul on his final journey to the East (1 Tim 1:3). It is difficult to determine Timothy’s age when he was appointed bishop of Ephesus; if Paul, “an old man” of about 65 years, calls him “young” (1 Tim 4:12), he may have been 35–40. After Paul’s martyrdom, Timothy returned to Ephesus from Rome, where he had been summoned by Paul (2 Tim 1:4; 4:8, 21), remaining there perhaps even after the arrival of St. John. If he died a martyr under Emperor Nerva and the proconsul Peregrinus in AD 97, the words of Rev 2:1–7 may indirectly refer to him. His body, transferred to Constantinople in 356 and later stolen in the 13th century, has recently been rediscovered beneath the apse of the cathedral in Termoli (q.v.). The Roman Martyrology commemorates him on January 24, immediately before recalling the conversion of his master.II. — THE LETTERS OF ST. PAUL TO TIMOTHY. — I and II Timothy, together with Titus, are so similar in content and style that they appear to have been written under the same circumstances and for the same purposes by the same author, St. Paul, thus forming the group of the three Pastoral Epistles (q.v.).
1. Authenticity
The literary authenticity, affirmed from the beginning except by some heretics of the 2nd century, was unanimous in Christian tradition until the 19th century, but today is denied by the great majority of Protestants, wholly or in part, solely on literary grounds. Catholics, however, and some Protestants, have shown the inadequacy of the arguments advanced in the face of historical testimonies, confirmed by important internal arguments, which justified the intervention of the Pontifical Biblical Commission (June 12, 1913; Denz.-U., 2172–2175). Marcion, Tatian, and Basilides rejected the Pastorals because they contradicted their heresies (though Tatian accepted Titus). The first critical doubts, raised by J. E. C. Schmidt (1804) regarding 1 Timothy, were soon extended to the other two and carried by the Tübingen school to a total denial of authenticity, based on five arguments: these writings cannot be placed within the life of St. Paul as known from Acts; their literary form is too different from the other epistles and contains many new words and phrases; their doctrine is also different, even on essential points of Pauline thought, e.g., regarding faith without works; the errors condemned are 2nd-century Gnosticism; the Church is presented with the hierarchical organization of the 2nd century, as seen in the letters of St. Ignatius.Catholics adduce in favor numerous historical testimonies, beginning with the earliest writers: St. Clement of Rome, the Didache, St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Polycarp, together with the unanimous manuscript tradition. These arguments are not invalidated by opposing internal arguments. Since Paul’s first Roman imprisonment (c. AD 61–63) ended in his release, after which he continued his activity until AD 67, it is at least possible to place the Pastorals within these years. Comparing these letters with Paul’s other epistles, especially with their parenthetical passages, the difference is less than with the captivity epistles; they thus represent a later stage. The false doctrines, as well as the counsels addressed to pastors, required new terms, and Paul was a creator of new words (A. Deissmann). There are also numerous similarities, even in the rarest expressions (it is therefore unlikely that Paul used a redactor, as supposed by Feine-Behm). In the “Pastorals” nearly all of Paul’s doctrines are found, not excluding that of faith without works; if there is an evolution, it corresponds to the new conditions in which the life of the Churches unfolded. The errors condemned may be Gnostic, but only in an initial stage: Harnack acknowledges that they may all be earlier than AD 64. Even the form of hierarchy here presupposed is earlier than that attested by St. Ignatius (supreme authority is not yet entirely in the hands of local bishops, and the terms “bishop” and “presbyter” are synonymous), in a transitional period between the initial phase (Acts 6:1–6; 14:23) and that of the 2nd century (q.V. DEACON; PRESBYTER).
Among non-Catholics, the fragmentary theory now prevails: a forger of the 2nd century, to combat Gnosticism and recommend Church hierarchy, would have composed these letters imitating the style of the Apostle, inserting passages from authentic letters, indeed entire “notes” (Harnack, Renan, von Soden, Bultmann). But the hypothesis raises more problems than it solves (Dibelius): among other things, why the hierarchy and errors are not presented as they existed in the 2nd century. There can be no doubt regarding the integrity of the Pastorals.
2. Time of Composition
The circumstances of composition cannot be determined with certainty in every detail. It is certain, however, that the personal notices refer to an activity of Paul subsequent to the Roman imprisonment described in Acts 28:30.It is generally held that the Apostle, immediately after his journey to Spain, undertook the journey to the East attested by the three Pastoral Epistles. The itinerary is very uncertain: some hold that he first went to Crete, leaving Titus there, then to Ephesus, where he installed Timothy; he would then have passed into Macedonia and from there written 1 Timothy and Titus almost simultaneously (AD 65–66). From Nicopolis in Epirus, where he would have spent the winter, he would have returned to Troas, Ephesus, and Miletus. Perhaps at this time he was arrested again and taken to Rome; others, however, maintain that the arrest took place in Rome, where Paul had returned of his own accord together with St. Peter. Shortly after arriving in Rome, he wrote 2 Timothy, from which we learn that his imprisonment was very severe, so much so that his friends had difficulty visiting him; though he emerged favorably from the first hearing of his trial, Paul did not expect any other outcome than death.
There is no reason to alter the chronological order hitherto universally accepted. 2 Timothy is certainly the last: according to it, Paul is a prisoner awaiting death. It remains uncertain which of the other two, which show him free and fully active, is the earlier; most scholars consider 1 Timothy to be so. Without any real foundation, von Soden, Moffatt, and others give precedence to 2 Timothy. The Latin canon places the two before Titus.
3. Doctrine
The doctrinal importance of 1 and 2 Timothy is noteworthy. The principal doctrines of Christianity are touched upon there with some development, in particular the universality of Redemption, the Church, the Sacraments, and biblical inspiration (cf. vol. VII, col. 320; 2 Tim 3:16); above all, the fundamental principles of ecclesiastical law: the authority of the hierarchical grades derives not from the assembly of the faithful but from apostolic authority through the rite of the laying on of hands (cf.). The bishop already appears as the future heir to the full apostolic powers.In 1 Timothy the main subject is the errors from which Timothy must preserve the faithful, the virtues required in Church officials, and the duties of various classes of people. After the introductory formula (1:1–2), Paul reminds Timothy that he left him in Ephesus to oppose the heretics who still adhere to the Law, which after the Redemption has no further reason to exist, the only precept remaining being that of charity. Timothy is to act decisively against those who thus make shipwreck of the faith (1:3–20). He is then to insist on prayer, which must be offered even for those in authority (God wills the salvation of all); it will be effective when it rises from a pure heart devoted to its duties (2:1–15). Special virtues are required in bishops, deacons, and women who assist Church officials; Timothy is to take care in making his choices (3:1–16). Timothy himself must prevent present and future errors through authoritative teaching corroborated by example, guarding against them first by the exercise of piety and holding fast to the grace of his ordination (4:1–16). Paul instructs him on how to conduct himself toward various classes of the faithful, how to regulate the admission of widows into their group, with what reverence he must treat the presbyters, and how cautious he must be before conferring spiritual powers upon them (5:1–25). He speaks of certain classes of people, especially servants toward their masters, particularly if Christian; the rich are to guard against avarice, the root of all evil (6:1–21). Here the letter ends abruptly with the wish: “Grace be with you.”
2 Timothy has its own distinctive features. With the poignant accent of a father leaving his beloved son his final recommendations, St Paul impresses upon Timothy the supreme duty of guarding the deposit of faith, working as “a good soldier of Christ” in the untiring preaching of the Gospel, and ends by begging him to come to Rome soon.
In the prologue he gratefully recalls to God Timothy’s faith, inherited from his mother and grandmother (1:1–5), then encourages him to devote himself to spreading the Gospel, rekindling the heavenly gifts he received at ordination, without taking scandal at the trials the Apostle is undergoing, since for this God has chosen both from eternity (1:5–18). Let him then work as a good soldier of Christ, keeping far from worldly cares, glad to share in the sufferings of the Lord, avoiding vain controversies, the preferred weapon of those sowing error, yet never tiring of teaching the truth (2:1–26). Paul foresees even graver errors and moral deviations in the future, but Timothy is not to lose confidence in the final triumph; rather, he is to work zealously, recalling the teachings Timothy received from him both in word and example, and especially making use of the Holy Scriptures, whose efficacy is guaranteed by their divine inspiration (3:1–17). Timothy is to treasure these recommendations: they may be the last, since the Apostle foresees his impending end through martyrdom, which he regards as a sacrificial libation, the term and reward of his labors (4:1–8c). Paul still longs to see Timothy one last time and asks him to come to Rome before winter, bringing Mark with him, who will help him in his ministry, which is too limited. Now Paul is almost alone: his former collaborators have gone elsewhere. Yet even if the first hearing of his case has ended well for him, he has no illusions about the near end. Meanwhile, in the solitude of his cold prison, he would be glad to have the cloak he left at Troas, and the books and parchments of Holy Scripture would afford him welcome company; he asks Timothy to bring them. During Timothy’s absence from Ephesus, Tychicus will take his place. There follow other minor notices, greetings, and the blessing (4:8d–22).
In this letter too (as in 1 Tim 1:15; 3:1; 4:9) there is cited perhaps one of the most ancient Christian maxims, introduced with the words “Faithful is the saying” (2 Tim 1:15). From Jewish tradition, on the other hand, is derived the name of the magicians Jannes and Jambres (Lat. Mambres), who opposed Moses before Pharaoh (3:8). The inspiration of the Old Testament is affirmed with particular force; unique in the New Testament is the mention here of prayer for the dead, certainly already in use among the faithful: the Apostle offers a moving prayer for the Christian Onesiphorus, who had benefited him and who at that time was almost certainly already dead (1:16–18; 4:19). The intimate, personal tone of the letter is a good internal argument for its authenticity, recognized by many Catholic scholars; it was almost solely its stylistic similarity to 1 Timothy that gave rise to doubts.