One thing that we do know from the historical and
linguistic data--the term "bishop" was not used in the
early Christian community. Yes, EPISKOPOS and
PRESBUTEROS were employed, but these terms did not (at
that time) mean "bishop."
1 Clement is dated circa 96 C.E. So, it does not tell us much about the authority structure of the church discussed in the NT. One thing that we do know from the historical and linguistic data is that "bishop" was not used in the early Christian community. Granted, EPISKOPOS and PRESBUTEROS were employed; but these terms did not, at that time, mean "bishop."
After providing classical, septuagintal and NT
denotations for EPISKOPOS, Ralph Earle observes:
"When we come to Ignatius early in the second century
(about A.D. 115), we find a very different picture.
Now there is one bishop over each local church,
together with several elders and several deacons. The
bishop is supreme in authority . . . Here we see the
beginnings of the episcopal hierarchy that flowered
during the second century. But 'in the beginning it
was not so'" (Word Meanings in the NT, page 389).
"For the distinctive NT use of EPISKOPOS it must be
sufficient to refer to Hort's Christian Ecclesia,
where it is shown that the word is descriptive of
function, not of office, thus Phil 1:1 SUN EPISKOPOIS
KAI DIAKONOIS, 'with them that have oversight, and
them that do service [minister]'" (Moulton-Millgan
Vocabulary of the Greek NT, page 245).
"The ecclesiastical loanword 'bishop' is too technical
and loaded with late historical baggage for precise
signification of usage of EPISKOPOS and cognates in
our lit., esp. the NT" (BDAG, page 379).
This reference work (BDAG) does nevertheless say that EPISKOPOS
"In the Gr-Rom world" frequently "refers to one who
has a definite function or fixed office of guardianship
and related activity within a group . . ." (ibid).
"The monarchical bishop appears first in Ignatius. It is not certain, however, whether Ignatius describes existing conditions or sets up ideal requirements that do not correspond to reality" (J. Rohde, Exegetical Dictionary of the NT, Vol. 2:36).
Sporadic theological and historical musings by Edgar Foster (Ph.D. in Theology and Religious Studies and one of Jehovah's Witnesses).
The fact that episkopos did not immediately refer to what later became known as a monarchical bishop does not negate the presence of a structured authority in the early Church. In the New Testament and early Christian writings, episkopos referred to those who had oversight in the local congregations, and this function laid the groundwork for what became the office of the bishop.
ReplyDeleteThe titles episkopos and presbuteros were used somewhat interchangeably in the first century, but this usage reflected the fluidity of titles rather than a lack of distinction in roles. The early Church, even in the apostolic era, had recognized leaders with oversight responsibilities, as seen in Acts 20:28, where Paul tells the episkopoi to "shepherd the church of God," indicating that they already held an important leadership function within the community.
While it is true that Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110 AD) gives us one of the clearest early descriptions of the threefold hierarchy of bishops, priests, and deacons, this does not mean that the structure was invented at his time. Ignatius refers to the bishop as an established authority in each local church and exhorts the faithful to obey the bishop as they would Christ. His writings do not suggest that he was introducing a novel concept but rather defending and reinforcing an already developing structure.
Ignatius' writings describe the bishop as the leader of the community, distinct from presbyters and deacons, and his letters indicate that this structure was already in place in many churches by the early second century. This suggests that the role of episkopos was already evolving toward the more distinct office of a bishop even before Ignatius wrote.
The New Testament itself provides evidence for a structured leadership within the early Church. For example, in Philippians 1:1, Paul addresses the "overseers" (episkopoi) and "deacons" (diakonoi) in the church at Philippi, indicating a recognized leadership structure. Although there is not yet a clear distinction between a single bishop and multiple presbyters in this text, it is clear that some individuals held positions of oversight and authority.
In Acts 20:28, Paul refers to the episkopoi as those tasked with shepherding the flock, a term that implies spiritual authority and guidance. Similarly, in 1 Timothy 3:1-7, Paul outlines the qualifications for an episkopos, reinforcing the idea that this office carried significant responsibility in the early Christian communities.
The letter of 1 Clement, traditionally dated to around 96 AD, offers further evidence of hierarchical structure in the early Church. Clement describes the appointment of leaders by the apostles and emphasizes the authority of those chosen to serve in leadership roles. While Clement does not use the specific term "bishop" in the monarchical sense, his writing reflects an organized leadership that was understood as authoritative and divinely instituted.
The development of the role of episkopos into the more defined office of the bishop is part of the natural growth of the Church’s understanding of leadership and governance. This development does not invalidate the authority structures present in the New Testament or the early Church. Rather, it reflects the Church's response to the needs of growing Christian communities and the safeguarding of apostolic teaching.
The argument that the role of bishop only emerged in the second century does not align with the historical evidence that shows a gradual, organic development from the New Testament episkopos to the later monarchical bishop. The early Church was hierarchical from its inception, with leadership roles that eventually became more clearly defined as bishops, presbyters, and deacons.