S
Spirithound
Guest
So you propose that there were several “overseers” in a given city?
Episkopos, Presbuteros, Diakonos
- Thread starter NoelFitz
- Start date
- Status
Spiritbound
You ask:
The purpose of theis thread is to learn, and I am getting more insight into what the terms EPISCOPOS, PRESBUTEROS and DIAKONOS mean. Thus if anyone disagrees please let us know.
I enclose some posts from Paul’s Letters t support my view.
You ask:
Thank you so much for your post. Your question is fundamental. I consider there could be several house churches initially in the one city. However as stressed before very soon the church structures changed and one bishop/overseer was in charge of one area, such as Clement, Polycarp and Ignatius.
The purpose of theis thread is to learn, and I am getting more insight into what the terms EPISCOPOS, PRESBUTEROS and DIAKONOS mean. Thus if anyone disagrees please let us know.
I enclose some posts from Paul’s Letters t support my view.
Annem,
Many thanks for your perceptive post.
You wrote:
At the start of this thread I stated that it would focus on the three words EPISCOPOS, PRESBUTEROS and DIAKONOS and that APOSTOLOS would be explicitly excluded.
However in the NY APOSTOLOS (apostle) is used about 80 times, usually in the accepted sense.
You refer to 1 Pet 2:25, which I mentioned in the first post in this thread and give the NRSV translation in post #6:
For
Thus I now, thanks to you, include modified conclusions.
Once again I am very grateful to you for your post, and your initial encouragement. I hope the modified conclusions will be satisfactory to you and to others.
**
Tentative conclusions about EPISCOPOS in the New Testament.
It is understood that the office of EPISCOPOS changed very soon after the NT was written.
Many thanks for your perceptive post.
You wrote:
I would consider that Peter was suggesting a replacement for Judas, as an apostle (APOSTOLOS).
At the start of this thread I stated that it would focus on the three words EPISCOPOS, PRESBUTEROS and DIAKONOS and that APOSTOLOS would be explicitly excluded.
However in the NY APOSTOLOS (apostle) is used about 80 times, usually in the accepted sense.
This use is not universal:
Paul considered himself an apostle:
He also used the term in a broader sense (essentially as one sent):
Thus I do not think Peter’s seeking of a replacement for Judas alters our conclusions.
You refer to 1 Pet 2:25, which I mentioned in the first post in this thread and give the NRSV translation in post #6:
For
In post #6 I also wrote, when considering possible translations:
To simplify the study I did not include guardian in the main conclusions.
Thus I now, thanks to you, include modified conclusions.
Once again I am very grateful to you for your post, and your initial encouragement. I hope the modified conclusions will be satisfactory to you and to others.
**
Tentative conclusions about EPISCOPOS in the New Testament.
It is understood that the office of EPISCOPOS changed very soon after the NT was written.
- EPISCOPOS is generally used in the Bible as overseer.
- However it is preferably translated as guardian in 1 Pet 2:25.
- Tentatively it is concluded that an EPISKOPOS was not a Bishop in the modern sense.
- It may be suggested that an EPISKOPOS was probably usually a married head of a household who lead the celebration of the Eucharist in his house.
- EPISKOPOS and PRESBUTEROS are, in most cases, interchangeable terms in the NT.
U
utunumsint
Guest
Hmmm. I’m not sure we can conclude this with certainty.
Yes
What this tells us about the word remains to be seen.
In non essential components, maybe, but in essential components, I would question whether you can say this. How you distinquish between the two is up for grabs.
OK.
Can we definitively say that a PRESBUTEROS is an EPISKOPOS?
Or could it be that an EPISKOPOS is a PRESBUTEROS, but a PRESBUTEROS is not necessarily an EPISKOPOS?
My point in raising this is that Ignatius of Antioch is so definitive about episcopal monarchy, that I find it very unlikely that it was not in some sense present in the NT.
So my point is as follows. Is there even enough evidence in the NT to say anything conclusively about point 5?
God bless,
Ut
Utunumsint
I was delighted to hear from you. Many thanks.
I am encouraged that many of those who contribute most constructively to this part of CA are involved with this thread.
Initially the conclusions for EPISCOPO were more definite, but as time went on and more contributions were received they have become more tentative. I would not like them to become too vague, with scholarly “but on the other hand” or to contradict in the second half of a conclusion what was written in the first half.
However it is important to remain open to changes and modifications, hence the iterative procedure. Thus at present I think we will stay with the current conclusions about EPISCOPOS, bearing in mind the use of the word tentative.
For PRESBUTEROS we have not had so many comments or disagreements, so at present we will also make no changes.
You wrote:
We see in Acts:
Thus, until we hear to the contrary:
Tentative conclusions about EPISCOPOS in the New Testament.
It is understood that the office of EPISCOPOS changed very soon after the NT was written.
Tentative conclusions about PRESBUTEROS in the NT.
The next step is to consider DIAKONOS.
I was delighted to hear from you. Many thanks.
I am encouraged that many of those who contribute most constructively to this part of CA are involved with this thread.
Initially the conclusions for EPISCOPO were more definite, but as time went on and more contributions were received they have become more tentative. I would not like them to become too vague, with scholarly “but on the other hand” or to contradict in the second half of a conclusion what was written in the first half.
However it is important to remain open to changes and modifications, hence the iterative procedure. Thus at present I think we will stay with the current conclusions about EPISCOPOS, bearing in mind the use of the word tentative.
For PRESBUTEROS we have not had so many comments or disagreements, so at present we will also make no changes.
You wrote:
I agree fully with you about Ignatius. That is why at present the focus is on the NT. After discussing the NT it is hoped to discuss the terms in the Apostolic Fathers, if there is interest, which I think there is.
We see in Acts:
This shows that EPISCOPOI and a PRESBUTEROI were the same, supporting the idea of interchangability of these terms.
Thus, until we hear to the contrary:
Tentative conclusions about EPISCOPOS in the New Testament.
It is understood that the office of EPISCOPOS changed very soon after the NT was written.
- EPISCOPOS is generally used in the Bible as overseer.
- However it is preferably translated as guardian in 1 Pet 2:25.
- Tentatively it is concluded that an EPISKOPOS was not a bishop in the modern sense.
- It may be suggested that an EPISKOPOS was probably usually a married head of a household who lead the celebration of the Eucharist in his house.
- EPISKOPOS and PRESBUTEROS are, in most cases, interchangable terms in the NT.
Tentative conclusions about PRESBUTEROS in the NT.
- PRESBUTEROS in the NT is generally translated as an elder.
- It can be used as a noun or an adjective (e.g. elder son).
- PRESBUTEROS is also used for ancestor and old, or older, man in the NRSV.
- Its feminine form is used as an *older woman.*5. The authors of 1 Peter and 3 John refers to themselves as PRESBUTEROS (elder).
- PRESBUTEROS and EPISCOPOS may be used interchangeably.
- In different English versions of the NT various words have been used to translate PRESBUTEROS, namely presbyter, ruler of the church, ancient or leader.
- PRESBUTEROS is never translated as* priest.*
The next step is to consider DIAKONOS.
P
peary1
Guest
**from catholic.com/library/Bishop_Priest_and_Deacon.asp
Bishops (episcopoi) have the care of multiple congregations and appoint, ordain, and discipline priests and deacons. They sometimes appear to be called “evangelists” in the New Testament. Examples of first-century bishops include Timothy and Titus (1 Tim. 5:19–22; 2 Tim. 4:5; Titus 1:5).
Priests (presbuteroi) are also known as “presbyters” or “elders.” In fact, the English term “priest” is simply a contraction of the Greek word presbuteros. They have the responsibility of teaching, governing, and providing the sacraments in a given congregation (1 Tim. 5:17; Jas. 5:14–15).
Deacons (diakonoi) are the assistants of the bishops and are responsible for teaching and administering certain Church tasks, such as the distribution of food (Acts 6:1–6).
In the apostolic age, the terms for these offices were still somewhat fluid. Sometimes a term would be used in a technical sense as the title for an office, sometimes not. This non-technical use of the terms even exists today, as when the term is used in many churches (both Protestant and Catholic) to refer to either ordained ministers or non-ordained individuals…
Thus, in the apostolic age Paul sometimes described himself as a diakonos (“servant” or “minister”; cf. 2 Cor. 3:6, 6:4, 11:23; Eph. 3:7), even though he held an office much higher than that of a deacon, that of apostle.
Similarly, on one occasion Peter described himself as a “fellow elder,” [1 Pet. 5:1] even though he, being an apostle, also had a much higher office than that of an ordinary elder.
The term for bishop, *episcopos *(“overseer”), was also fluid in meaning. Sometimes it designated the overseer of an individual congregation (the priest), sometimes the person who was the overseer of all the congregations in a city or area (the bishop or evangelist), and sometimes simply the highest-ranking clergyman in the local church—who could be an apostle, if one were staying there at the time.
Although the terms “bishop,” “priest,” and “deacon” were somewhat fluid in the apostolic age, by the beginning of the second century they had achieved the fixed form in which they are used today to designate the three offices whose functions are clearly distinct in the New Testament. **
U
utunumsint
Guest
I can agree with this in a tentative sense bearing in mind that it is not a complete picture because it focuses exclusively on what is captured in the NT. Without an analysis of Didache, Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, and Policarp of Smyrna, I believe we can only go so far. I’d also like to point out that the NT is not a catechism, or a code of canon law, therefore the evidence we get in these accounts are often on the perifery of the intent of the author. For example, in the quote provided from Acts in support for the interchangeability of PRESBUTEROS and EPISKOPOS, I will recognise that Luke makes no distinction, but this does not necessarily mean there was no distinction.
God bless,
Ut
Peary1
I am very pleased that you have contributed here, many thanks.
I emphasize that term in the NT are being discussed. I do hope to extend the study to the use of the terms in the Apostolic Fathers next.
You wrote:
The points you make are valid, but do not change the tentative conclusions already give.
I am very pleased that you have contributed here, many thanks.
I emphasize that term in the NT are being discussed. I do hope to extend the study to the use of the terms in the Apostolic Fathers next.
You wrote:
In the NT PRESBUTEROS is never used for priest, but IEREWS is.
The points you make are valid, but do not change the tentative conclusions already give.
P
peary1
Guest
**IEREWS etymologically means “spiritual ruler.”
The etymological root of the English word ‘priest’ is PRESBUTEROS.
The origin dates from around1590–1600 A.D.; the late latin use meant ‘older’ . The Greek word ‘presbýteros’ is equivalent to ‘présby(s)’ [old[ + -teros.
The Late Latin origin was from the Greek ‘presbuteros’, from ‘presbus’, meaning “old man”. But the connotation here was not how Tyndale translated it and later the KJV which is why the Catholic Church has an issue with it. It was in reference to a special charism of the Holy Spirit and one of His gifts of this office, which is wisdom*.
It would seem to me that IEREWS is more in line with the Jewish priesthood than with that as understood in meaning by the Church. Bishops were referred to as ‘patriarchs’ very early on - taken from Old French, from Late Latin patriarcha, from Greek patriarkhēs : patriā, lineage (from patēr, father; pəter). The lineage referred to here is that of apostolic succession in the Eastern Church.
I do not understand why you would deny me a forum by requesting that I do not change the ‘tentative’ conclusions, especially if they are not agreed upon.
M
mijac
Guest
Iwould strongly argue the point from Scripture that PRESBUTEROS does not equal EPISKOPOS
From Scripture purposes this can be stated as true.
A EPISKOPOS is a PRESBUTEROS, but a PRESBUTEROS is not necessarily an EPISKOPOS, This is similar to the idea that A Bishop is a priest but a priest is not necessarily a Bishop…
For starters look at the following definitions for Episkopos, you will not find this defintion forPresbuteros.
Word Study dictionary a watchman. Superintendent, overseer. The overseer of public works (Sept.: 2Ch_34:12, 2Ch_34:17); of cities, e.g., a prefect (Isa_60:17). In Athens epískopoi (pl.) were magistrates sent to outlying cities to organize and govern them. In the NT, used of officers in the local churches, **overseers, superintendents.**General Editor: Spiros Zodhiates, Th.D.
G1985
ἐπίσκοπος
episkopos
ep-is’-kop-os
From G1909 and G4649 (in the sense of G1983); a **superintendent, **that is, **Christian officer **in general charge of a (or the) church (literally or figuratively): - bishop, overseer.----Strongs
Now note Timothy was appointed to be in charge of Ephasus, as Titus was in Charge of Crete, They became Bishops for each of those two locals. They were given the ability to ordain PRESBUTEROS through prayer and te laying on of the hands. Similar to ordination for Catholics, Eastern Rite Churches etc. Note Presbuteros were never given the authority in Scripture to ordain more Presbuteros. Only the EPISKOPOS was given the authority to ordain new Presbuteros.
1 Timothy 1:3
As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus , when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine,
**Timothy’s superintendence of the church at Ephesus **was as temporary overseer, locum tenens, for the apostle. Thus the office at Ephesus and (Titus 1:5) Crete, in the absence of the presiding apostle, subsequently became a permanent institution on the removal, by death, of the apostles who heretofore superintended the churches. The first title of these overseers was “angels” (Rev 1:20). (from Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary)
Titus 1:5 from Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible Ordination of Elders
4. That** Titus, though inferior to an apostle, was yet above the ordinary fixed pastors **or bishops, who were to tend particular churches as their peculiar stated charge; but Titus was in a higher sphere, to ordain such ordinary pastors where wanting, and settle things in their first state and form, and then to pass to other places for like service as there might be need. Titus was not only a minister of the catholic church (as all others also are), but a catholic minister. Others had power habitual, and in actu primo, to minister any where, upon call and opportunity; but evangelists, such as Titus was, had power in actu secundo et exercito, and could exercise their ministry wherever they came, and claim maintenance of the churches. They were every where actually in their diocese or province, and had a right to direct and preside among the ordinary pastors and ministers. Where an apostle could act as an apostle an evangelist could act as an evangelist; for they worked the work of the Lord as they did (1 Cor 16:10), in a like unfixed and itineran
From Scripture purposes this can be stated as true.
A EPISKOPOS is a PRESBUTEROS, but a PRESBUTEROS is not necessarily an EPISKOPOS, This is similar to the idea that A Bishop is a priest but a priest is not necessarily a Bishop…
For starters look at the following definitions for Episkopos, you will not find this defintion forPresbuteros.
Word Study dictionary a watchman. Superintendent, overseer. The overseer of public works (Sept.: 2Ch_34:12, 2Ch_34:17); of cities, e.g., a prefect (Isa_60:17). In Athens epískopoi (pl.) were magistrates sent to outlying cities to organize and govern them. In the NT, used of officers in the local churches, **overseers, superintendents.**General Editor: Spiros Zodhiates, Th.D.
G1985
ἐπίσκοπος
episkopos
ep-is’-kop-os
From G1909 and G4649 (in the sense of G1983); a **superintendent, **that is, **Christian officer **in general charge of a (or the) church (literally or figuratively): - bishop, overseer.----Strongs
Now note Timothy was appointed to be in charge of Ephasus, as Titus was in Charge of Crete, They became Bishops for each of those two locals. They were given the ability to ordain PRESBUTEROS through prayer and te laying on of the hands. Similar to ordination for Catholics, Eastern Rite Churches etc. Note Presbuteros were never given the authority in Scripture to ordain more Presbuteros. Only the EPISKOPOS was given the authority to ordain new Presbuteros.
1 Timothy 1:3
As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus , when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine,
**Timothy’s superintendence of the church at Ephesus **was as temporary overseer, locum tenens, for the apostle. Thus the office at Ephesus and (Titus 1:5) Crete, in the absence of the presiding apostle, subsequently became a permanent institution on the removal, by death, of the apostles who heretofore superintended the churches. The first title of these overseers was “angels” (Rev 1:20). (from Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary)
Titus 1:5 from Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible Ordination of Elders
4. That** Titus, though inferior to an apostle, was yet above the ordinary fixed pastors **or bishops, who were to tend particular churches as their peculiar stated charge; but Titus was in a higher sphere, to ordain such ordinary pastors where wanting, and settle things in their first state and form, and then to pass to other places for like service as there might be need. Titus was not only a minister of the catholic church (as all others also are), but a catholic minister. Others had power habitual, and in actu primo, to minister any where, upon call and opportunity; but evangelists, such as Titus was, had power in actu secundo et exercito, and could exercise their ministry wherever they came, and claim maintenance of the churches. They were every where actually in their diocese or province, and had a right to direct and preside among the ordinary pastors and ministers. Where an apostle could act as an apostle an evangelist could act as an evangelist; for they worked the work of the Lord as they did (1 Cor 16:10), in a like unfixed and itineran
Mijac
I really am delighted to hear from you. I am very pleased that so many are contributing to this discussion.
You wrote:
You quote the commentaries of both Henry and Jameson, Fausset and Brown, but you to not prove their contentions.
For example you quote:
However if the general consensus in this thread is to modify any of the tentative conclusions I am pleased to do it, as we are here to learn and develop our knowledge and love of the Bible.
I really am delighted to hear from you. I am very pleased that so many are contributing to this discussion.
You wrote:
However I do not consider you have not shown this.
You quote the commentaries of both Henry and Jameson, Fausset and Brown, but you to not prove their contentions.
For example you quote:
You do not prove this contrention.
However if the general consensus in this thread is to modify any of the tentative conclusions I am pleased to do it, as we are here to learn and develop our knowledge and love of the Bible.
U
utunumsint
Guest
I’d like to note that one of the tentative conclusions offered in that the office of bishop in the New Testament, is not the same as in the modern sense. I think, in order to assess this claim, we need to also look at what that modern sense of the word is, how the church defines the office of Bishop in the modern sense.
From what I understand, the office of the bishop of Rome was defined explicitly in Vatican I. The office of bishop was defined more explicitly in Vatican II. Specifically in CHRISTUS DOMINUS Decree Concerning the Pastoral Office of Bishops Second Vatican Council . Here we see the following statement in paragraph 2,
I do believe that mijac has shown that the process of this succession of authority was taking place even in the NT.
So based on this, I question 3 and 5. 3 because we have not sufficiently looked at what the modern sense of the word bishop is, and 5 because I do believe there is evidence for a succession of authority from the apostles to the bishops.
God bless,
Ut
From what I understand, the office of the bishop of Rome was defined explicitly in Vatican I. The office of bishop was defined more explicitly in Vatican II. Specifically in CHRISTUS DOMINUS Decree Concerning the Pastoral Office of Bishops Second Vatican Council . Here we see the following statement in paragraph 2,
What mijac has shown is that in the letters from Paul to Titus and Timothy, we have Paul giving them special authority to appoint bishops/prebyters in the territories in which they reside. These men were not merely on the same level as the bishops, nor where they at the same level as the apostles, but they were clearly, in my opinion, the transition point at which a special authority was given to the title bishop, as the successors to the apostles, over and above that of the presbyter.
I do believe that mijac has shown that the process of this succession of authority was taking place even in the NT.
So based on this, I question 3 and 5. 3 because we have not sufficiently looked at what the modern sense of the word bishop is, and 5 because I do believe there is evidence for a succession of authority from the apostles to the bishops.
As for 4, I believe that this was true, but the character of the household Eucharistic celebration was in flux even during the days of Paul. Specifically its character as a normal every day meal was quickly changing to one of special liturgical significance. The regular meal was being relegated to each person’s home. Since this was happening, is it not reasonable to assume that these household churches were becoming more and more formalized places of worship?
God bless,
Ut
Utunumsint
You wrote:
Thus I think the foillowing stands.
Hence now I propose:
Tentative conclusions about EPISCOPOS in the New Testament.
It is understood that the office of EPISCOPOS changed very soon after the NT was written.
You wrote:
I fully agree with you. What we are trying to decide here is the use of these terms in the NT.
Thus I think the foillowing stands.
However as there are a number of posts raising substantial objections to conclusion 5. I think it should be modified.
Hence now I propose:
Tentative conclusions about EPISCOPOS in the New Testament.
It is understood that the office of EPISCOPOS changed very soon after the NT was written.
- EPISCOPOS is generally used in the Bible as overseer.
- However it is preferably translated as guardian in 1 Pet 2:25.
- Tentatively it is concluded that an EPISKOPOS was not a bishop in the modern sense.
- It may be suggested that an EPISKOPOS was probably usually a married head of a household who lead the celebration of the Eucharist in his house.
- EPISKOPOS and PRESBUTEROS are, in most cases, interchangable terms in the NT. However this conclusion is not accepted by all contributors to this thread. **
Having considered EPISCOPOS and PRESBUTEROS in the NT, now DIAKONOS will be discussed.
The focus will be on the NT, but at the back on my mind is the changing ministries in the Church now. As I wrote before deacons are not in the Irish Church, which I agree with, but we have Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist and the ministries of reader, bereavement counsellor, baptismal preparation etc.
With the lack of priest there will be more changes. We will probably go back to ways similar to those in the early Church, thus it is important to know what the offices of EPISCOPOS, PRESBUTEROS and DIAKONOS meant in the NT and also in the Apostolic Fathers.
From these it can be seen that many English words are used to translate DIAKONOS, the most used is servant. It is also striking that often where the NRS version uses servant for DIAKONOS, the NAB uses minister.
Thus the following is proposed as initial conclusions:
**
Preliminary Conclusions on the use of DIAKONOS in the NT.
The focus will be on the NT, but at the back on my mind is the changing ministries in the Church now. As I wrote before deacons are not in the Irish Church, which I agree with, but we have Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist and the ministries of reader, bereavement counsellor, baptismal preparation etc.
With the lack of priest there will be more changes. We will probably go back to ways similar to those in the early Church, thus it is important to know what the offices of EPISCOPOS, PRESBUTEROS and DIAKONOS meant in the NT and also in the Apostolic Fathers.
Thus DIAKONOS is used 29 times in the NT. Selected examples are given below.
From these it can be seen that many English words are used to translate DIAKONOS, the most used is servant. It is also striking that often where the NRS version uses servant for DIAKONOS, the NAB uses minister.
Thus the following is proposed as initial conclusions:
**
Preliminary Conclusions on the use of DIAKONOS in the NT.
- DIAKONOS is used in the Gospels of Mat, Mar and Joh, and in the Letters of Paul (Rom, 1Co, 2Co, Gal, Eph, Col and 1Ti).
- In the Gospels the NRS version uses *servant *for DIAKONOS in most cases but attendant is also used. There is no indication in the Gospels that DIAKONOS refers to an office among the followers of Jesus.
- In the Pauline Letters the NRS version uses servant usually for DIAKONOS, but other terms such as deacon and *minister *are used. Often where the NRS version uses servant, the NAB uses minister.
- In these Letters both Paul and Jesus Christ are referred to as DIAKONOI.
- In most cases DIAKONOS refers to a servant in the ordinary sense and not to any formal office.
- However in the deuteropauline (Pastoral) Letter 1Ti, DIAKONOS may be used in the accepted way as a servant, but also as a recognized minister of the Church.
- DIAKONOS is used to refer to Epaphras, Tychicus and Phoebe. This may be in the sense of servant or in a more formal way of some definite office of minister/deacon.**
U
utunumsint
Guest
Sounds good.
Changing ministeries… OK.
I’m wondering why this is the case since the Permanent Diaconate has been restored since Vatican II?
Agreed.
The Catechism also presents this discription:
for DIAKONOS in most cases but attendant is also used. There is no indication in the Gospels that DIAKONOS refers to an office among the followers of Jesus.
In the Gospels, yes, agreed. This office was not present there.
and *minister *are used. Often where the NRS version uses servant, the NAB uses minister.
It seems that either or both can be used, depending on the what the translator wants to emphasise.
I agree, but I’m wondering what conclusions you will draw from this. Also, do you consider the pastoral letters of Pauline origine?
Are you sure about that? What about the description of the office of deacon in 1st Timothy 3?
OK. You anticipated my questions.
Agreed.
This is from the NAB, a footnote from 1st Philipians 1.
1st Timothy 3, according to the NAB, is where the office of deacon is described.
God bless,
Ut
P.S. I find that the topic of the diaconate is a good one to illustrate the evolution of all three offices in the New Testament. If there was already a progress in formalizing the diaconate, can we not suppose the same process was taking place in the episcopate and the office of presbyter? Especially considering the evidence from the church fathers that supports this?
P.P.S. I am wondering why you do not mention the office of deacon from the book of Acts?
Having considered EPISKOPOS, PRESBUTEROS and DIAKONOS in the NT, their use will now be considered in the Apostolic Fathers.
For this study the Logos suite of programs was used and The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations, M. W. Holmes, Updated ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 1999. The study of Holmes is based essentially on the work of Lightfoot and Harmer.
This study should be less controversial than the NT study, as there seems to be agreement that Ignatius considered three different offices/ministries in the Church, while Clement considered two.
EPISKOPOS is translated as bishop usually, but not always. This is also the case in the older translations of Lake and Lightfoot.
The word EPISKOPOS and its inflected forms are used 76 times in the Apostolic Fathers.
The results are summarized here:
**AF Times used
1 Clem 4
Ignatius 57
Didache 1
Hermas 3
Martyrdom of Polycarp 2
Papias 9**
Thus it is seen that 75% of the uses of EPISKOPOS in the AFs are in the letters of Ignatius, and in each of the seven Letters of Ignatius EPISCOPOS occurs. This word is not used in 2 Clem, Barnabas, Polycarp, or Diognetus. Quadratus, often considered among the AFs, is not so considered by Holmes.
Tentative Conclusions on the Use of EPISKOPOS in the AFs
In the list below gaps indicate second or third uses of EPISKOPOS in a verse.
1 Clem 42.4
1 Clem 42.5 (2)
1 Clem 59.3
Ign Eph 1.3
Ign Eph 2.1
Ign Eph 2.2
Ign Eph 3.2
Ign Eph 4.1
Ign Eph 5.1
Ign Eph 5.2
Ign Eph 5.3
Ign Eph 6.1
Ign Eph 20.2
Ign Magn 2.1
Ign Magn 3.1
Ign Magn 3.2
Ign Magn 4.1
Ign Magn 6.1
Ign Magn 6.2
Ign Magn 7.1
Ign Magn 13.1
Ign Magn 13.2
Ign Magn 15.1
Ign Trall 1.1
Ign Trall 2.1
Ign Trall 2.2
Ign Trall 3.1
Ign Trall 3.2
Ign Trall 7.1
Ign Trall 7.2
Ign Trall 12.2
Ign Trall 13.2
Ign Rom 2.2
Ign Phld, Title
Ign Phld 1.1
Ign Phld 3.2
Ign Phld 4.1
Ign Phld 7.1
Ign Phld 7.2
Ign Phld 8.1
Ign Phld 10.2
Ign Smyrn 8.1
Ign Smyrn 8.2
Ign Smyrn 9.1
Ign Smyrn 12.2
Ign Pol, Title
Ign Pol 5.2
Ign Pol 6.1
Did 15.1
Herm, Vision III, v, 1
Herm, Parable IX, xxvii, 2
Mart Pol 16.2
Mart Pol 23.2
Frag Papias 1.1
Frag Papias 2.1
Frag Papias 5.1
Frag Papias 6.1
Frag Papias 16.1
Frag Papias 17.1
Frag Papias 21.1
Frag Papias 22.1
Didache
Therefore appoint for yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord, men who are humble and not avaricious and true and approved, for they too carry out for you the ministry of the prophets and teachers (Did 15:1).
This implies that, possibly, one area can have more than one EPISKOPOS.
M of P
Polycarp, who proved to be an apostolic and prophetic teacher in our own time, bishop of the holy church in Smyrna (M of P 16:2)
This shows that the M of P considers an EPISKOPOS as the person in charge of the Church in a city.
Hermas
these are the apostles and bishops and teachers and deacons who have walked according to the holiness of God and have ministered to the elect of God as bishops and teachers and deacons with purity and reverence (Her Vis III, v, 1).
bishops, hospitable men, who were always glad to welcome God’s servants into their homes without hypocrisy. And the bishops always sheltered the needy and the widows by their ministry without ceasing, and conducted themselves in purity always (Her par IX, xxvii, 2).
A bishop is one of several ministries in the Church.
1 Clem
So, preaching both in the country and in the towns, they appointed their firstfruits, when they had tested them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons for the future believers (1 Clem 42:4).
And this was no new thing they did, for indeed something had been written about bishops and deacons many years ago; for somewhere thus says the Scripture: “I will appoint their bishops in righteousness and their deacons in faith.” (1 Clem 42:5).
the Creator and Guardian of every spirit, who multiplies the nations upon the earth (1 Clem 59:3)
Here two ministries are considered in the Church and EPISKOPO is not used for a bishop but as a guardian.
Papias
Irenaeus and others record that John, the theologian and apostle, survived until the time of Trajan. After this Papias of Hierapolis and Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, both of whom had heard him, became well known (Pap 1:1).
For Papias, the bishop of Hierapolis, who had seen him with his own eyes (Pap 6:1).
Indeed, [Stephen Gobarus follows] neither Papias, the bishop and martyr of Hierapolis, nor Irenaeus, the holy bishop of Lyons, when they say that the kingdom of heaven is the enjoyment of certain material foods (Pap 17:1).
The fragment of Papias in every case consider an EPISKOPOS as the bishop (Church leader) of a city.
Ignatius
Since, therefore, I have received in God’s name your whole congregation in the person of Onesimus, a man of inexpressible love who is also your earthly bishop (Ign Eph 1:3).
Since, therefore, in the persons mentioned above I have by faith seen and loved the whole congregation, I have this advice: Be eager to do everything in godly harmony, the bishop presiding in the place of God and the presbyters in the place (Ign Mag 6:1).
Therefore be on your guard against such people. And you will be, provided that you are not puffed up with pride and that you cling inseparably to Jesus Christ and to the bishop and to the commandments of the apostles (Ign Trall 7:1)
These examples show that Ignatius considered an EPISKOPOPS (bishop) as the head of the Church in an area/city.
For this study the Logos suite of programs was used and The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations, M. W. Holmes, Updated ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 1999. The study of Holmes is based essentially on the work of Lightfoot and Harmer.
This study should be less controversial than the NT study, as there seems to be agreement that Ignatius considered three different offices/ministries in the Church, while Clement considered two.
EPISKOPOS is translated as bishop usually, but not always. This is also the case in the older translations of Lake and Lightfoot.
The word EPISKOPOS and its inflected forms are used 76 times in the Apostolic Fathers.
The results are summarized here:
**AF Times used
1 Clem 4
Ignatius 57
Didache 1
Hermas 3
Martyrdom of Polycarp 2
Papias 9**
Thus it is seen that 75% of the uses of EPISKOPOS in the AFs are in the letters of Ignatius, and in each of the seven Letters of Ignatius EPISCOPOS occurs. This word is not used in 2 Clem, Barnabas, Polycarp, or Diognetus. Quadratus, often considered among the AFs, is not so considered by Holmes.
Tentative Conclusions on the Use of EPISKOPOS in the AFs
- EPISKOPOS (and its inflected forms) are used in 1 Clem, Ignatius, Didache, Hermas, Martydom of Polycarp and Papias.
- Of the 76 occurrences 75% are in Ignatius.
- Usually EPISKOPOS is translated as bishop.
- Ignatius clearly considers EPISKOPOS as a distinct office.
- In Ignatius, Papias and the Martyrdom of Polycarp an EPISKOPOS is considered the leader of the Church in a city/area.
- The Didache, Hermas or 1 Clem does not see an EPISKOPOS so clearly defined.
In the list below gaps indicate second or third uses of EPISKOPOS in a verse.
1 Clem 42.4
1 Clem 42.5 (2)
1 Clem 59.3
Ign Eph 1.3
Ign Eph 2.1
Ign Eph 2.2
Ign Eph 3.2
Ign Eph 4.1
Ign Eph 5.1
Ign Eph 5.2
Ign Eph 5.3
Ign Eph 6.1
Ign Eph 20.2
Ign Magn 2.1
Ign Magn 3.1
Ign Magn 3.2
Ign Magn 4.1
Ign Magn 6.1
Ign Magn 6.2
Ign Magn 7.1
Ign Magn 13.1
Ign Magn 13.2
Ign Magn 15.1
Ign Trall 1.1
Ign Trall 2.1
Ign Trall 2.2
Ign Trall 3.1
Ign Trall 3.2
Ign Trall 7.1
Ign Trall 7.2
Ign Trall 12.2
Ign Trall 13.2
Ign Rom 2.2
Ign Phld, Title
Ign Phld 1.1
Ign Phld 3.2
Ign Phld 4.1
Ign Phld 7.1
Ign Phld 7.2
Ign Phld 8.1
Ign Phld 10.2
Ign Smyrn 8.1
Ign Smyrn 8.2
Ign Smyrn 9.1
Ign Smyrn 12.2
Ign Pol, Title
Ign Pol 5.2
Ign Pol 6.1
Did 15.1
Herm, Vision III, v, 1
Herm, Parable IX, xxvii, 2
Mart Pol 16.2
Mart Pol 23.2
Frag Papias 1.1
Frag Papias 2.1
Frag Papias 5.1
Frag Papias 6.1
Frag Papias 16.1
Frag Papias 17.1
Frag Papias 21.1
Frag Papias 22.1
Didache
Therefore appoint for yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord, men who are humble and not avaricious and true and approved, for they too carry out for you the ministry of the prophets and teachers (Did 15:1).
This implies that, possibly, one area can have more than one EPISKOPOS.
M of P
Polycarp, who proved to be an apostolic and prophetic teacher in our own time, bishop of the holy church in Smyrna (M of P 16:2)
This shows that the M of P considers an EPISKOPOS as the person in charge of the Church in a city.
Hermas
these are the apostles and bishops and teachers and deacons who have walked according to the holiness of God and have ministered to the elect of God as bishops and teachers and deacons with purity and reverence (Her Vis III, v, 1).
bishops, hospitable men, who were always glad to welcome God’s servants into their homes without hypocrisy. And the bishops always sheltered the needy and the widows by their ministry without ceasing, and conducted themselves in purity always (Her par IX, xxvii, 2).
A bishop is one of several ministries in the Church.
1 Clem
So, preaching both in the country and in the towns, they appointed their firstfruits, when they had tested them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons for the future believers (1 Clem 42:4).
And this was no new thing they did, for indeed something had been written about bishops and deacons many years ago; for somewhere thus says the Scripture: “I will appoint their bishops in righteousness and their deacons in faith.” (1 Clem 42:5).
the Creator and Guardian of every spirit, who multiplies the nations upon the earth (1 Clem 59:3)
Here two ministries are considered in the Church and EPISKOPO is not used for a bishop but as a guardian.
Papias
Irenaeus and others record that John, the theologian and apostle, survived until the time of Trajan. After this Papias of Hierapolis and Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, both of whom had heard him, became well known (Pap 1:1).
For Papias, the bishop of Hierapolis, who had seen him with his own eyes (Pap 6:1).
Indeed, [Stephen Gobarus follows] neither Papias, the bishop and martyr of Hierapolis, nor Irenaeus, the holy bishop of Lyons, when they say that the kingdom of heaven is the enjoyment of certain material foods (Pap 17:1).
The fragment of Papias in every case consider an EPISKOPOS as the bishop (Church leader) of a city.
Ignatius
Since, therefore, I have received in God’s name your whole congregation in the person of Onesimus, a man of inexpressible love who is also your earthly bishop (Ign Eph 1:3).
Since, therefore, in the persons mentioned above I have by faith seen and loved the whole congregation, I have this advice: Be eager to do everything in godly harmony, the bishop presiding in the place of God and the presbyters in the place (Ign Mag 6:1).
Therefore be on your guard against such people. And you will be, provided that you are not puffed up with pride and that you cling inseparably to Jesus Christ and to the bishop and to the commandments of the apostles (Ign Trall 7:1)
These examples show that Ignatius considered an EPISKOPOPS (bishop) as the head of the Church in an area/city.
U
utunumsint
Guest
On a quick note, Polycarp does forward the letters of Ignatius to the church in Phillipi, thus it seems to me that by so doing, he is aproving of the content, even if his letter does not specifically address the topic of bishop.
I’d also like to note that the subject matter of 2nd Clement, Barnabas, Quadratus, and the fragments of Diognetus does not address the issue of Bishop, either directly or indirectly.
God bless,
Ut
U
utunumsint
Guest
Agreed.
OK.
OK
Agreed
Agreed. But I would also include Polycarp’s letter in his implicite approval of the letters of Ignatius, and also in the manner in which he is addressed in Ignatius’ letters to him (e.g. as the leader of the church in Smyrna).
Agreed.
Thanks for doing this. I’ll have to bookmark this thread.
God bless,
Ut
U
Usagi
Guest
I’m also wondering, as that would seem to be a clear case of an actual distinct ministry being defined for the first time as the Church’s needs developed. A very important consideration in this analysis.
Usagi
- Status