Ralph Earle's discussion of the words EPISKOPOS and PRESBUTEROS is linked to the passage in 1 Timothy 3:1. The operative word there is EPISKOPHS, which is commonly translated "the office of a bishop" or overseer. In 1 Tim. 3:2, Paul employs TON EPISKOPON as he delineates the qualifications of "the overseer" who is appointed to humbly and lovingly shepherd God's congregation.
EPISKOPOS apparently occurs five times in the NT (1 Tim. 3:1, 2; Acts 20:28; Phil. 1:1; Tit. 1:7; 1 Pet. 2:25), and its "basic meaning" is "overseer." Earle states: "The ancient Greeks thought of their gods as EPISKOPOI. This usage is found in Homer's Iliad and many later writings."
BAGD also notes that EPISKOPOS in Pre-Christian usage denoted an overseer. The word is used of a transcendent being in Iliad 22:255; in Aeschylus, Sept. 272; Sophocles, Antigone 1148; Plato, Leg. 4, 717D. BAGD also cites 1 Pet. 2:25 and says the following: "guardian of the souls 1 Pt 2:25. The passages IMg [Ignatius to the Magnesians] 3:1 QEWi TWi PANTWN E.; Cf. 6:1 show the transition to the next mng" (299).
Concerning the word PRESBUTEROI, Earle uses Tit. 1:5-7 to show that an EPISKOPOS and a PRESBUTEROS are the same. True, PRESBUTEROS evidently has a Jewish background--although this point does not mean that the elder arrangement (the "presbytery") was confined to early Jewish congregations: "The name 'elders' emphasizes the fact that the leaders of the church were to be older men, as was the case with the elders of Israel" (Earle 412). It was "older men" whom Paul told Titus to appoint on the isle of Crete, so that they might correct the things that were defective (Tit. 1:5-7).
To prove that the "elders" and the overseers are identical, however, Earle cites Lightfoot--who gives six proofs showing us that PRESBUTEROI and EPISKOPOI are applied to the same referents in the NT. Not only Lightfoot, but Jerome and John Chrysostom can also be invoked to demonstrate the truthfulness of Lightfoot's claims. EPISKOPOS did not originally mean "bishop": it did not denote a hierachy, nor was there simply one ANHR in the early ecclesiae who served as a "bishop." All congregations evidently submitted to the "older men and apostles" in Jerusalem who faithfully communicated apostolic teaching to every congregation in the Mediterranean world (Acts 15:1, 2).
2 comments:
While some passages, like Titus 1:5-7 and Acts 20:28, seem to use episkopos and presbuteros interchangeably, this does not imply that the two roles are identical in function or authority. Rather, it reflects the early, less formalized structure of the Church. As the Church grew and developed, the roles of bishops and elders became more distinct, with bishops assuming a unique pastoral and authoritative role over a local church or region.
In 1 Timothy 3:1-7, the qualifications for a bishop (episkopos) are listed, but in 1 Timothy 5:17-19, Paul specifically addresses the role of elders (presbuteroi), stating that “elders who rule well are worthy of double honor.” This passage suggests that elders functioned under the oversight of bishops, who had a higher level of governance and authority.
The writings of the early Church Fathers further clarify the distinction between these offices. St. Ignatius of Antioch, in his letters written around the early second century, repeatedly emphasized the role of the bishop as distinct from both priests and deacons. For example, in his Letter to the Smyrnaeans (8:1-2), he writes, “See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God.”
This hierarchical structure of bishop, priest (presbyter/elder), and deacon is clearly outlined in Ignatius’ letters and reflects the already established ecclesiastical order in the early Church, further corroborated by the Didache and other early Christian writings. Thus, the claim that episkopos and presbuteros were synonymous fails to account for the clear development of hierarchical roles seen in the early Church.
As the Church expanded geographically, the need for a more formalized hierarchy became apparent. Bishops (episkopoi) began to oversee multiple congregations within a region, while presbyters (presbuteroi) served in individual congregations under the authority of the bishop. This development can be seen in the writings of St. Clement of Rome, who refers to the establishment of bishops and deacons in the early Church and emphasizes the apostolic succession through which bishops receive their authority.
The argument that episkopos and presbuteros were identical roles ignores this natural and necessary evolution of Church governance. While they may have initially shared similar responsibilities, by the second century, bishops had emerged as distinct leaders with greater authority, a structure that persists in the Catholic, Orthodox, and many Protestant traditions.
In conclusion, while there may have been some overlap in the use of episkopos and presbuteros in the earliest days of the Church, this does not negate the eventual, and doctrinally significant, distinction between the two offices. The New Testament provides the foundation for this distinction, and the early Church Fathers confirmed it through their writings and teachings. Thus, bishops and priests (elders) should not be viewed as synonymous, but rather as distinct, hierarchical roles within the early Christian Church.
Jerome’s writings, particularly his famous Letter 146 to Evangelus, do suggest that bishops and presbyters were once more fluid in terms of their roles in the early Church. He writes, “The presbyter is the same as the bishop, and before the parties through the instigation of the devil arose, the churches were governed by a common council of the presbyters.”
However, it is important to understand why Jerome made these statements. His emphasis on the equality between bishops and presbyters was primarily driven by the situation he was responding to—where deacons in some regions were attempting to elevate themselves above presbyters. Jerome sought to defend the dignity of the priesthood by emphasizing the ancient close connection between the two offices. His focus was on ensuring that presbyters were not being overshadowed by deacons, but he did not deny the eventual hierarchical development that placed bishops in a distinct and superior role.
While Jerome made statements that seem to equate bishops and presbyters in earlier times, he also fully recognized the current ecclesiastical hierarchy. In the same letter, Jerome acknowledges that the distinction between bishops and presbyters had become an established and necessary part of Church governance. He writes, “What does a bishop do, except ordination, that a presbyter does not?” Here, Jerome concedes that bishops do indeed hold a higher office, as they alone have the authority to ordain, a function not granted to presbyters.
Thus, while Jerome emphasized the historical closeness of the two roles, he did not argue against the later distinction that developed, particularly with regard to the episcopal authority of ordination and governance. Jerome’s argument was not that the offices should be merged, but that the dignity of the presbyterate should be upheld in light of its foundational role in the Church.
Moreover, Jerome’s views were not the dominant theological position within the Church on this matter. The Church Fathers, including Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome, and later figures like Augustine and Gregory the Great, consistently recognized the bishop as holding a unique and higher office compared to the presbyter. Ignatius, for example, explicitly distinguished the bishop from both presbyters and deacons, and urged Christians to be in unity with their bishop as the representative of Christ in the local church (e.g., Letter to the Smyrnaeans 8:1-2).
Finally, the Council of Trent (1545–1563) definitively addressed the hierarchical structure of the Church, affirming the distinct offices of bishop, priest, and deacon. This council, in response to Protestant objections, made it clear that bishops held a unique and higher sacramental authority, especially in the administration of Holy Orders (ordination), confirming the longstanding tradition that bishops are successors to the apostles with a distinct role in the Church’s governance.
Post a Comment