Bishop is a man-made role?

[Stylteralmaldo]

I was having a conversation with a Protestant friend of mine (I think she is Episcopalian) regarding the British show Doctor Who becoming a female space alien character (the character up to this point has been exclusively male by the 13 previous actors who played the role). The conversation evolved from there to the reality that a monarch (Queen Elizabeth II) can be female which had once been seen as only able to be fulfilled by a male. Then the conversation turned towards bishops also being able to fulfill that role by females.

My response was that unlike the role of monarch and fictional characters, the role of Bishop can only be filled by man and that Jesus established it as such. My reasoning being that one can change the rules on how one becomes a monarch and one can change the storyline to provide for a gender fluid alien race. However, one can not change Christian teaching as taught by Scripture.

Her response was one of confusion as she does not believe Jesus instituted bishops. This surprised me. However, maybe that is a common belief among non-Catholics?

 

[lanman87]

I was having a conversation with a Protestant friend of mine (I think she is Episcopalian) regarding the British show Doctor Who becoming a female space alien character (the character up to this point has been exclusively male by the 13 previous actors who played the role). The conversation evolved from there to the reality that a monarch (Queen Elizabeth II) can be female which had once been seen as only able to be fulfilled by a male. Then the conversation turned towards bishops also being able to fulfill that role by females.

My response was that unlike the role of monarch and fictional characters, the role of Bishop can only be filled by man and that Jesus established it as such. My reasoning being that one can change the rules on how one becomes a monarch and one can change the storyline to provide for a gender fluid alien race. However, one can not change Christian teaching as taught by Scripture.

Her response was one of confusion as she does not believe Jesus instituted bishops. This surprised me. However, maybe that is a common belief among non-Catholics?

The common belief among non-Catholics is that the Apostles appointed a group of elders or presbyters(bishops) to oversee the early churches. From that point on elders either groomed someone to take their place or a new elder would be appointed or elected by the church. The elders were not seen as Priest but as overseers. Their duties included preaching, teaching, overseeing the ministry of the church and the meetings of the church. Of course, the meetings included communion, baptism, teaching/preaching and singing.

The roles started to change as the church grew and took on more and more attributes of Roman culture. The early bishops didn’t wear special clothing, carry a staff, hear private confession, and so forth.

In the evangelical view, the early churches moved away from a group of elders and started to appoint monarchical/metropolitan bishops. This movement started toward the end of the 1st century and by the middle of the 2nd century the major churches had metropolitan bishops. From that point the role of the bishops started to change into what we call bishops today.

Many evangelical protestant churches are modeled after the early churches and see the early model as a more pure and simple form of Christianity. The name bishop/priest was changed back to elder or changed to pastor or preacher, mainly to differentiate from the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[Wesrock]

I was having a conversation with a Protestant friend of mine (I think she is Episcopalian) regarding the British show Doctor Who becoming a female space alien character (the character up to this point has been exclusively male by the 13 previous actors who played the role). The conversation evolved from there to the reality that a monarch (Queen Elizabeth II) can be female which had once been seen as only able to be fulfilled by a male. Then the conversation turned towards bishops also being able to fulfill that role by females.

My response was that unlike the role of monarch and fictional characters, the role of Bishop can only be filled by man and that Jesus established it as such. My reasoning being that one can change the rules on how one becomes a monarch and one can change the storyline to provide for a gender fluid alien race. However, one can not change Christian teaching as taught by Scripture.

Her response was one of confusion as she does not believe Jesus instituted bishops. This surprised me. However, maybe that is a common belief among non-Catholics?

Bishops and Deacons are among the oldest biblical roles. The emergence of presbyters (priests) as distinct from the role of Bishop was also quite early, happening no later than the late first century, if it wasn’t already apparent sooner.

The Twelve were the first Bishops (overseers). After Judas’ betrayal and Christ’s ascension, the Apostles appointed Matthias to this role. Saint Paul was also made a bishop, and he had Timothy and Titus made bishops, too. Saint Paul even briefly touches on the ordination process in one of his letters.

Clement of Rome’s epistle to the Corinthians and Saint Ignatius of Antioch’s seven valid letters show how clearly this episcopal framework was understood by the end of the first century, and there’s plenty of second century documentation on the structure as well. This was the model used by the primitive Church, whatever claims some make to the contrary.

There were many woman involved in the early ministry. Some were very saintly women. Some were mentioned in Paul’s epistles. Mary Magdalene was also a very important disciple of Christ, as was the Blessed Virgin Mary. But we never once see them acting in the role of bishop. Paul is clear that Timothy is to select men for ordination, and in Corinth that had a strong cult of women priestesses, Paul was clear that this was not to be. His words can sometimes be interpreted harshly, but even a tamer understanding of him just referring to whether women should be ministers within the Church (instead of just applying his words to women in general) supports the point.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

From Vatican II’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church,* Lumen Gentium:*

1. That divine mission, entrusted by Christ to the apostles, will last until the end of the world, since the Gospel they are to teach is for all time the source of all life for the Church. And for this reason the apostles, appointed as rulers in this society, took care to appoint successors.

For they not only had helpers in their ministry, but also, in order that the mission assigned to them might continue after their death, they passed on to their immediate cooperators, as it were, in the form of a testament, the duty of confirming and finishing the work begun by themselves, recommending to them that they attend to the whole flock in which the Holy Spirit placed them to shepherd the Church of God. They therefore appointed such men, and gave them the order that, when they should have died, other approved men would take up their ministry. Among those various ministries which, according to tradition, were exercised in the Church from the earliest times, the chief place belongs to the office of those who, appointed to the episcopate, by a succession running from the beginning, are passers-on of the apostolic seed Thus, as St. Irenaeus testifies, through those who were appointed bishops by the apostles, and through their successors down in our own time, the apostolic tradition is manifested and preserved.

Bishops, therefore, with their helpers, the priests and deacons, have taken up the service of the community, presiding in place of God over the flock, whose shepherds they are, as teachers for doctrine, priests for sacred worship, and ministers for governing. And just as the office granted individually to Peter, the first among the apostles, is permanent and is to be transmitted to his successors, so also the apostles’ office of nurturing the Church is permanent, and is to be exercised without interruption by the sacred order of bishops. Therefore, the Sacred Council teaches that bishops by divine institution have succeeded to the place of the apostles, as shepherds of the Church, and he who hears them, hears Christ, and he who rejects them, rejects Christ and Him who sent Christ.

 

[exnihilo]

My response was that unlike the role of monarch and fictional characters, the role of Bishop can only be filled by man and that Jesus established it as such. My reasoning being that one can change the rules on how one becomes a monarch and one can change the storyline to provide for a gender fluid alien race. However, one can not change Christian teaching as taught by Scripture.

Her response was one of confusion as she does not believe Jesus instituted bishops. This surprised me. However, maybe that is a common belief among non-Catholics?

One cannot change what Holy Scripture teaches, but one could view rules as having been for a certain time and place. In fact that is certainly true for some rules. The problem with any Scripture alone argument is it is easy enough to bend it to your own interpretation. That is why we need a reliable guide.

Many evangelical protestant churches are modeled after the early churches and see the early model as a more pure and simple form of Christianity. The name bishop/priest was changed back to elder or changed to pastor or preacher, mainly to differentiate from the Roman Catholic Church.

I agree many think they are so modeled. And even if their model is otherwise true they are missing one essential element, an authority. The local church was clearly initially subject to an authority. These Protestant churches clearly have no authority outside their local body and Scripture as interpreted by that local body.

 

[dje101]

I was having a conversation with a Protestant friend of mine (I think she is Episcopalian) regarding the British show Doctor Who becoming a female space alien character (the character up to this point has been exclusively male by the 13 previous actors who played the role). The conversation evolved from there to the reality that a monarch (Queen Elizabeth II) can be female which had once been seen as only able to be fulfilled by a male. Then the conversation turned towards bishops also being able to fulfill that role by females.

My response was that unlike the role of monarch and fictional characters, the role of Bishop can only be filled by man and that Jesus established it as such. My reasoning being that one can change the rules on how one becomes a monarch and one can change the storyline to provide for a gender fluid alien race. However, one can not change Christian teaching as taught by Scripture.

Her response was one of confusion as she does not believe Jesus instituted bishops. This surprised me. However, maybe that is a common belief among non-Catholics?

And how many of the Apostles were women?

 

[midori]

re: the throne, that really only counts for places with a basis in Salic law, which had a great influence on the European legal system. One of the things that came from Salic law was the practice of Agnatic succession. It’s only been post-1980 that the (remaining) European monarchies have begun turning towards absolute primogeniture, although male-preference primogeniture is what we were mostly used to prior to that.

However, there are plenty of thrones that didn’t have that Salic influence, and they had their own systems. In Ancient Egypt, for example, a pharaoh’s legitimacy came from his marrying the daughter of the previous pharaoh. In Heian Japan, rule wasn’t expected to be held for a lifetime… many would reign for ten or fifteen years, starting off as a child-emperor who was the puppet of a regent, and then they would head off into retirement, to be replaced by another young emperor. Among the Nayar of India, they had a fascinating matrilineal family structure that was reflected in their governance.

But ultimately, what is a bishop? A bishop is a priest in charge of other priests within a certain area. What is the function of a priest? To act in the person of Christ. God isn’t gendered, but Jesus did have gender. If gender was irrelevant, wouldn’t Mary, Mary, Martha, or Mary have been chosen as one of the Twelve? They get way more screen time than, say, Simon the Zealot, or Judas-not-Iscarot, or St. James Minor. But while those women were some of his most faithful followers, they weren’t incorporated into the priesthood that was left behind to lead the Church on Earth. To get things like church structure muddled up with a biologically-awarded form of government doesn’t really fit-- it would be like saying, “Hey, NFL football players are male-only. But because Queen Elizabeth and Dr. Who, ergo, female linebackers should exist.”

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

…God isn’t gendered, but Jesus did have gender. If gender was irrelevant, wouldn’t Mary, Mary, Martha, or Mary have been chosen as one of the Twelve?..

I believe this is the question that this will be ultimately leading to. Is it important that Jesus had a gender? Even if it is important that Jesus had a gender, that doesn’t necessarily mean that Mary, Mary, Martha, or Mary would not have been chosen as one of the twelve because of their gender. It could have been for another reason. I don’t think Scripture is clear as to the reason why the twelve were chosen. Naysayers would conclude that it is possible that it was a coincidence that the twelve all happened to be male. Maybe there is Scriptural evidence to support an all-male priesthood - including the Savior? And if so (or if not for that matter), why is this important?