Episkopos, Presbuteros, Diakonos

[NoelFitz]

Utunumsint

Thank you so much for your detailed reply to me.

I appreciate the time and thought you put into it.

I am pleased that in general you agree with me.

You ask why we do not have Permanent Deacons in Ireland. Well they are thinking about it. It may be just a question of power.

You ask do I consider the Pastoral Epistles as Pauline. I do. I picked the word carefully, as Pauline may mean from a community reflecting what Paul would have thought, not necessarily written by Paul. But I did not want to discuss that issue. Also the Pasroal Epistles may have been written later than the “authentic“ Letters of Paul. It is another question.

You ask

I am wondering why you do not mention the office of deacon from the book of Acts?

I could not find DIAKONOS in Acts using either BibleWorks or Logos. I also could not find the English word deacon in Acts using NAB, NRSV, NASB or the Douay-Rheims (American Ed., 1899).

 

[NoelFitz]

U & U

I did a web search and found:

I. The origin of the office of deacon (Acts 6:1-4)
Now at this time while the disciples were increasing in number, a complaint arose on the part of the Hellenistic Jews against the native Hebrews, because their widows were being overlooked in the daily serving of food. And the twelve summoned the congregation of the disciples and said, "It is not desirable for us to neglect the word of God in order to serve tables. But select from among you, brethren, seven men of good reputation, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may put in charge of this task. But we will devote ourselves to prayer, and to the ministry of the word. (Acts 6:1-4, NASB) pbcc.org/sermons/morgan/7161.html

The word deacon does not occur in this passage.

 

[NoelFitz]

In the Apostolic Fathers DIAKONOS (and its inflected forms) are used 29 times, in 1 Clem (3), Ignatius (18), Polycarp (4), Didache (1) and Hermas (3). It is used in all the Letters of Ignatius, except To the Romans. Thus almost two thirds of the uses of DIAKONOS are in the Letters of Ignatius. The pattern here follows roughly the pattern for EPISCOPOS in the AFs, in that DIAKONOS is a more clearly structured office/ministry in Ignatius that in the other AFs.

1 Clem 42.4
1 Clem 42.5

Ign Eph 2.1
Ign Magn 2.1
Ign Magn 6.1
Ign Magn 13.1
Ign Trall 2.3

Ign Trall 3.1
Ign Trall 7.2
Ign Phld Title
Ign Phld 4.1
Ign Phld 7.1
Ign Phld 10.1
Ign Phld 10.2
Ign Phld 11.1
Ign Smyrn 8.1
Ign Smyrn 10.1
Ign Smyrn 12.2
Ign Pol 6.1
Pol Phil 5.2

Pol Phil 5.3
Did 15.1
Herm, Vision III, v, 1
Herm, Parable IX, xv, 4
Herm, Parable IX, xxvi, 2

**

---

Tentative Conclusions for the use of DIAKONOS in the Apostilic Fathersw.

1. DIAKONOS is used in 1Clem, Ignatius, Polycarp, Didache and Hermas.
2. Almost two thirds of the used of DIAKONOS are in the Letters of Ignatius.
3. DIAKONOS is translated as deacon usually.
4. The office/ministry of DIAKONOS is most formally structured in the Letters of Ignatius, where the officers/ministers of the Church are bishop, presbyter and deacon.
5. 1 Clem, Polycarp and the Didache consider two ministries in the Church, one of which is that of deacon.
6. In Hermas DIAKONOS is translated as minister once. It may be claimed that in this text DIAKONOS is considered both as a formal officer in the Church and in a less formal way.

---

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. 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.”

Holmes points out that the Septuagint mistranslated the Hebrew. However in 1 Clem there are considered to be two ministries in the Church.

**Ignatius **
So, then, I was permitted to see you in the persons of Damas, your godly bishop, your worthy presbyters Bassus and Apollonius, and my fellow servant, the deacon Zotion; may I enjoy his company, because he is subject to the bishop as to the grace of God, and to the presbytery as to the law of Jesus Christ.

This clearly shows that Ignatius considers three offices in the Church, bishop presbyter and deacon.

Polycarp
*Similarly, deacons must be blameless in the presence of his righteousness, as deacons of God and Christ and not of men …Therefore one must keep away from all these things and be obedient to the presbyters and deacons as to God and Christ. *

Here a DIAKONOS is considered a member of one of two types of minister/officer in the Church.

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.

This implies that deacons are one of the two offices/ministries in the Church, as was considered in 1 Clem.

Hermas
*“Now hear about the stones that go into the building. The stones that are square and white and fit at their joints, 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

The thirty-five are God’s prophets and his ministers (DIAKONOS), and the forty are apostles and teachers of the proclamation of the Son of God.”

the ones with the spots are deacons who carried out their ministry badly and plundered the livelihood of widows and orphans, and profited themselves from the ministry which they received to carry out. *

Here it is seen that DIAKONOS can be translated as minister. Thus in Hermas DIAKONOS may be considered as a Church helper or as a more formal office holder in the Church.

 

[NoelFitz]

Having considered EPISKOPOS, PRESBUTEROS and DIAKONOS in the NT and EPISKOPOS and DIAKONOS in the Apostolic Fathers, the final task is to consider the use of PRESBUTEROS in the Apostolic Fathers.

This is perhaps the most important comparison, as the number of priests in the west is rapidly declining. Perhaps the model of PRESBUTEROS in the AFs will show us the way ahead for the role of priest in the contemporary Church.

From the table below in is seen that PRESBUTEROS (and its inflected forms) are used 48 times in the AFs and in Hermas there is a third of the uses. PRESBUTEROS is used in 1 Clem (8), 2 Clem (2), Ignatius (9), Barnabas (1), Hermas (16), Papias (7) and Rel Elders (2). Rel Elders (Tradition of the Elders) will be excluded from this study, since they may be considered outside the AFs.

Other Translations (Lightfoot and Lake) were considered to see do they translate PRESBUTEROS as elder, as does Holmes, and they do.

---

Tentative Conclusions for the Use of PRESBUTEROS in the Apostolic Fathers.

1. PRESBUTEROS and its inflected forms are used 48 times in the Apostolic Fathers.
2. It is used in 1 and 2 Clem, Ignatius, Polycarp, Barnabas, Hermas and Papias, as well as in Rel Elders.
3. One third of the uses of PRESBUTEROS is in Hermas, where it is translated usually as elderly or elder, but is also translated as old man.
   4 Similarly in 2 Clem, Barnabas and Papias, PRESBUTEROS is translated as older or elder.
4. Polycarp considers that there are two ministries in the Church, PRESBUTEROS (presbyter) and DIAKONOS (deacon).
5. Ignatius considered there were three offices/ministries in the Church, bishop, presbyter and deacon.
6. In 1 Clem PRESBUTERPOS is translated as elder (older man) or presbyter.

---

PRESBUTEROS (and its inflected forms) in the AFs.

1 Clem 1.3
1 Clem 3.3
1 Clem 21.6
1 Clem 44.5
1 Clem 47.6
1 Clem 54.2
1 Clem 55.4
1 Clem 57.1
2 Clem 17.3
2 Clem 17.5
Ign Magn 2.1
Ign Magn 3.1
Ign Magn 6.1
Ign Magn 7.1
Ign Trall 3.1
Ign Trall 12.2
Ign Phld, Title
Ign Phld 10.2
Ign Pol 6.1
Pol Phil, Title
Pol Phil 5.3
Pol Phil 6.1
Barn 13.5
Herm, Vision II, iv, 1

Herm, Vision II, iv, 2

Herm, Vision II, iv, 3
Herm, Vision III, i, 2

Herm, Vision III, i, 8
Herm, Vision III, x, 3
Herm, Vision III, x, 4
Herm, Vision III, x, 5
Herm, Vision III, x, 9
Herm, Vision III, xi, 2
Herm, Vision III, xi, 3
Herm, Vision III, xii, 1
Herm, Vision III, xii, 2
Frag Papias 3.3
Frag Papias 3.4

Frag Papias 3.14
Frag Papias 3.15
Frag Papias 4.1
Rel Elders 13.1
Rel Elders 17.1

Barnabas

Manasseh, because he was the older, should be blessed (13:5).

Here PRESBUTEROS is translated as older.

2 Clem

… while we are being admonished by the elders….and we did not obey the elders when they spoke to us about our salvation……” (17:3-5).
PRESBUTEROS is used as elder and no special ministry is understood.

Polycarp

Therefore one must keep away from all these things and be obedient to the presbyters and deacons as to God and Christ (5:3).

In this case PRESBUTEROS refers to a special ministry in the Church. Polycarp considers two ministries, those of a PRESBUTEROS and of a DIAKONOS.

Papias

*I will not hesitate to set down for you, along with my interpretations, everything I carefully learned then from the elders and carefully remembered, guaranteeing their truth (3:3).

And if by chance someone who had been a follower of the elders should come my way, I inquired about the words of the elders—what Andrew or Peter said, or Philip, or Thomas or James, or John or Matthew or any other of the Lord’s disciples, and whatever Aristion and the elder John, the Lord’s disciples, were saying (3:4). *

In Papias a PRESBUTEROS is considered an elder, rather than the holder of an office. It is interesting to note that the apostles were considered elders.

1 Clem

*submitting yourselves to your leaders and giving to the older men among you the honor due them (1:3).

So men were stripped up: “Those without honour against the honoured,” those of no repute against the highly reputed, the foolish against the wise, “the young against the elders.” (3:3).

Let us respect our leaders; let us honor our elders (21:6)
because of one or two persons, is rebelling against its presbyters (47:6). *

In 1 Clem PRESBUTEROS is translated as elder or presbyter usually. However when it is translated as presbyter, this could mean a man honored in the Church or one with a special office.

Ignatius

*So, then, I was permitted to see you in the persons of Damas, your godly bishop, your worthy presbyters Bassus and Apollonius, and my fellow servant, the deacon Zotion; may I enjoy his company, because he is subject to the bishop as to the grace of God, and to the presbytery as to the law of Jesus Christ (Magn 2:1).

Similarly, let everyone respect the deacons as Jesus Christ, just as they should respect the bishop, who is a model of the Father, and the presbyters as God’s council and as the band of the apostles. Without these no group can be called a church (Trall 3:1).*

In the Letters of Ignatius it is clear that Ignatius sees in the Church the distinct and special ministries of bishop, presbyter and deacon.

Hermas

*As I slept, brothers, a revelation was given to me by a very handsome young man, who said to me, “Who do you think the **elderly woman **from whom you received the little book was?”… “Why, then, is she elderly?” “Because,” he said, “she was created before all things; therefore she is elderly, and for her sake the world was formed.” (2) …. The **elderly **woman came …But you yourself will read it to this city, along with the elders who preside over the church (Vision II, iv,1-3, PRESBUTEROS 5 times).

But in the second vision she had a more youthful face, although her body and hair were old (Vis III, x, 4).

Imagine an old man, who has already given up all hope for himself because of his weakness and poverty (Vis III, xii, 2).*

In Hermas PRESBUTEROS is translated as elderly woman, elderly, old and old man. No special office is envisaged.

 

[NoelFitz]

I am very grateful to all who took an interest in this thread about EPISKOPOS, PRESBUTEROS and DIAKONOS in the NT and in the Apostolic Fathers. There were some very insightful posts and I modified the conclusions due to these. The principal concern was whether Paul used PRESBUTEROS and EPISKOPOS interchangeably.

I summarize all the conclusions below.

If you would like any conclusion modified please let me know.

**
Tentative Conclusions about the use of EPISKOPOS, PRESBUTEROS and DIAKONOS in the NT and in the Apostolic Fathers.

*EPISKOPOS in the New Testament *

1. EPISKOPOS is generally used in the NT as overseer.
2. However it is preferably translated as guardian in 1 Pet 2:25.
3. Tentatively it is concluded that an EPISKOPOS was not a bishop in the modern sense.
4. 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.
5. EPISKOPOS and PRESBUTEROS are, in most cases, interchangeable terms in the NT. However this conclusion is not accepted by all contributors to this thread.

*PRESBUTEROS in the New Testament *

1. PRESBUTEROS in the NT is generally translated as an elder.
2. It can be used as a noun or an adjective (e.g. elder son).
3. PRESBUTEROS is also used for ancestor and old, or older, man in the NRSV.
4. Its feminine form is used as an older woman. The authors of 1 Peter and 3 John refers to themselves as PRESBUTEROI (elders).
5. PRESBUTEROS and EPISCOPOS may be used interchangeably; this has been questioned.
6. In different English versions of the NT various words have been used to translate PRESBUTEROS, namely presbyter, ruler of the church, ancient or leader.
7. PRESBUTEROS is never translated as priest.

*DIAKONOS in the New Testament *

1. 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).
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. In these Letters both Paul and Jesus Christ are referred to as DIAKONOI.
5. In most cases DIAKONOS refers to a servant in the ordinary sense and not to any formal office.
6. 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.
7. 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.

*EPISKOPOS in the Apostolic Fathers *

1. EPISKOPOS (and its inflected forms) are used in 1 Clem, Ignatius, Didache, Hermas, Martydom of Polycarp and Papias.
2. Of the 76 occurrences 75% are in Ignatius.
3. Usually EPISKOPOS is translated as bishop.
4. Ignatius clearly considers EPISKOPOS as a distinct office.
5. In Ignatius, Papias and the Martyrdom of Polycarp an EPISKOPOS is considered the leader of the Church in a city/area.
6. The Didache, Hermas or 1 Clem does not see an EPISKOPOS so clearly defined.

*PRESBUTEROS in the Apostolic Fathers *

1. PRESBUTEROS and its inflected forms are used 48 times in the Apostolic Fathers.
2. It is used in 1 and 2 Clem, Ignatius, Polycarp, Barnabas, Hermas and Papias, as well as in Rel Elders.
3. One third of the uses of PRESBUTEROS is in Hermas, where it is translated usually as elderly or elder, but is also translated as old man.
   4 Similarly in 2 Clem, Barnabas and Papias, PRESBUTEROS is translated as older or elder.
4. Polycarp considers that there are two ministries in the Church, PRESBUTEROS (presbyter) and DIAKONOS (deacon).
5. Ignatius considered there were three offices/ministries in the Church, bishop, presbyter and deacon.
6. In 1 Clem PRESBUTEROS is translated as elder (older man) or presbyter.

*DIAKONOS in the Apostolic Fathers *

1. DIAKONOS is used in 1Clem, Ignatius, Polycarp, Didache and Hermas.
2. Almost two thirds of the used of DIAKONOS are in the Letters of Ignatius.
3. DIAKONOS is translated as deacon usually.
4. The office/ministry of DIAKONOS is most formally structured in the Letters of Ignatius, where the officers/ministers of the Church are bishop, presbyter and deacon.
5. 1 Clem, Polycarp and the Didache consider two ministries in the Church, one of which is that of deacon.
6. In Hermas DIAKONOS is translated as minister once. It may be claimed that in this text DIAKONOS is considered both as a formal officer in the Church and in a less formal way.**

 

[utunumsint]

PRESBUTEROS in the Apostolic Fathers

1. PRESBUTEROS and its inflected forms are used 48 times in the Apostolic Fathers.
2. It is used in 1 and 2 Clem, Ignatius, Polycarp, Barnabas, Hermas and Papias, as well as in Rel Elders.
3. One third of the uses of PRESBUTEROS is in Hermas, where it is translated usually as elderly or elder, but is also translated as old man.
   4 Similarly in 2 Clem, Barnabas and Papias, PRESBUTEROS is translated as older or elder.
   5. Polycarp considers that there are two ministries in the Church, PRESBUTEROS (presbyter) and DIAKONOS (deacon).
4. Ignatius considered there were three offices/ministries in the Church, bishop, presbyter and deacon.
5. In 1 Clem PRESBUTEROS is translated as elder (older man) or presbyter.

I think number 5 is wrong for the following reasons:

1. Ignatius address him directly as the bishop of Smyrna, distinct from his two presbyters.

From the letter to the Smyrnias

“I salute your most worthy bishop, and your very venerable presbytery, and your deacons, my fellow-servants, and all of you individually, as well as generally, in the name of Jesus Christ, and in His flesh and blood, in His passion and resurrection, both corporeal and spiritual, in union with God and you. Grace, mercy, peace, and patience, be with you for evermore!”

1. Ireneaus records Polycarp alone, journeying to Rome as representative of the church of Smyrna on accound of the easter controversy.

Eusebius has this to say.

1. At that time Polycarp, a disciple of the apostles, was a man of eminence in Asia, having been entrusted with the episcopate of the church of Smyrna by those who had seen and heard the Lord…10. These things he wrote from the above-mentioned city to the churches referred to. And when he had left Smyrna he wrote again from Troas to the Philadelphians and to the church of Smyrna; and particularly to Polycarp, who presided over the latter church. And since he knew him well as an apostolic man, he commended to him, like a true and good shepherd, the flock at Antioch, and besought him to care diligently for it.

1. Polycarp forwards Ignatius’ letters to the Phillipians and never once questions his tripartite division in the clergy. If he was in any way opposed to his teachings, you’d think he would have hesitated to forward the letters, or included some kind of disclaimer since this is the central topic of all of Ignatius’ writings.

The Epistles of Ignatius written by him to us, and all the rest [of his Epistles] which we have by us, we have sent to you, as you requested. They are subjoined to this Epistle, and by them you may be greatly profited; for they treat of faith and patience, and all things that tend to edification in our Lord. Any more certain information you may have obtained respecting both Ignatius himself, and those that were with him, have the goodness to make known to us.

1. Also note the introduction to his letter to the Phillipians. Does this not imply a distinction?

Polycarp, and the presbyters with him, to the Church of God sojourning at Philippi: Mercy to you, and peace from God Almighty, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, our Saviour, be multiplied.

God bless,
Ut

 

[utunumsint]

My personal view on the development of the office of bishop, priest, and deacon is as follows.

While the apostles (in the extended sense) were alive, a centralized authority existed with them. In those areas where they were most active, and shortly after the apostles had passed on, or perhaps even shortly before, certain presbuteros/episcopose were apointed to take their place, be it by popular acclamation (as per Diadach – apoint for yourselves bishops), or via the appointment in conjunction with other bishops (as per 1st Clement). The authority vacuum left by the apostles required this development, and must have happened, in some sense, under their guidance, or with their blessing. The total lack of controversy with reguard to this three part division is due, in my opinion, to the fact that this new situation was clearly recognised by all as legitimate. This is not to say that there was no progression, and that some churches were slower than others to adopt this model, but in general, this is what became the church model.

God bless,
Ut

 

[NoelFitz]

Ut

I am delighted to hear from you. Thank you so much for contributing to this thread.

You say you disagree with conclusion 5 below.

1. Polycarp considers that there are two ministries in the Church, PRESBUTEROS (presbyter) and DIAKONOS (deacon).
2. Ignatius considered there were three offices/ministries in the Church, bishop, presbyter and deacon.

In your argument you quote from Ignatius. We are agreed Ignatius considered three offices.

It is dangerous to judge by the absence of a claim. You imply that as Polycarp did not object to the conclusions of Ignatius he agreed with all of them. I disagree with this.

I do accept that Polycarp had a high opinion of Ignatius.

I urge all of you, therefore, to obey the teaching about righteousness and to exercise unlimited endurance, like that which you saw with your own eyes not only in the blessed Ignatius and Zosimus and Rufus but also in others from your congregation and in Paul himself and the rest of the apostles (Polycarp 9:1).

All I was trying to do is to idetermine what the AFs believed from what they wrote.

Polycarp does not use the word EPISKOPOS (or any of its inflected forms), and he uses PRESBUTEROS only three times, as shown below.

Polycarp and the presbyters with him to the church of God that sojourns at Philippi (Title).

Therefore one must keep away from all these things and be obedient to the presbyters and deacons as to God and Christ (5:3).

The presbyters, for their part, must be compassionate, merciful to all, turning back those who have gone astray, visiting all the sick, not neglecting a widow, orphan, or poor person, but “always aiming at what is honorable in the sight of God and of men” … (2) Therefore if we ask the Lord to forgive us, then we ourselves ought to forgive, for we are in full view of the eyes of the Lord and God, and we must “all stand before the judgment seat of Christ,” and “each one must give an account of himself” (6:1,2).

These uses of PRESBUTEROS support my conclusions. Polycarp in verse 6:2 uses ‘us’ and ‘we’ indicating he includes himself among the PRESBUTEROI.

I do not think Irenaeus adds to this discussion, since his writings are not considered among the AFs. Perhaps it is better to include him among the Apologists.

 

[NoelFitz]

My personal view on the development of the office of bishop, priest, and deacon is as follows.

While the apostles (in the extended sense) were alive, a centralized authority existed with them. In those areas where they were most active, and shortly after the apostles had passed on, or perhaps even shortly before, certain presbuteros/episcopose were apointed to take their place, be it by popular acclamation (as per Diadach – apoint for yourselves bishops), or via the appointment in conjunction with other bishops (as per 1st Clement). The authority vacuum left by the apostles required this development, and must have happened, in some sense, under their guidance, or with their blessing. The total lack of controversy with reguard to this three part division is due, in my opinion, to the fact that this new situation was clearly recognised by all as legitimate. This is not to say that there was no progression, and that some churches were slower than others to adopt this model, but in general, this is what became the church model.

God bless,
Ut

I do not disagree with much of what you claim.

I consider it a good summary of my views, but I tried to show how the terms EPISKOPOS, PRESBUTEROS and DIAKONOS were used in the NT and in the AFs.

You claim ‘presbuteros/episcopose’ were appointed to replace apostles. I would agree. Polycarp and others do not distinguish between these terms, but Ignatius very definitely does. Before these offices arose, in the authentic Letters of Paul, EPISKOPOS and PRESBUTEROS were used for overseer and old man.

As time went on the three part division became the norm. In this we are both in agreement.

 

[utunumsint]

Ut

I am delighted to hear from you. Thank you so much for contributing to this thread.

Likewise.

You say you disagree with conclusion 5 below.

In your argument you quote from Ignatius. We are agreed Ignatius considered three offices.

It is dangerous to judge by the absence of a claim. You imply that as Polycarp did not object to the conclusions of Ignatius he agreed with all of them. I disagree with this.

Where do you see Polycarp objecting to Ignatius’ teachings? I don’t see this anywhere in his epistle… If we are not to judge based on the absense of a claim, them perhaps you are claiming to much as well.

I do accept that Polycarp had a high opinion of Ignatius.

All I was trying to do is to idetermine what the AFs believed from what they wrote.

Polycarp does not use the word EPISKOPOS (or any of its inflected forms), and he uses PRESBUTEROS only three times, as shown below.

So from this do you deduce that Polycarp rejected the office of bishop as defined by Ignatius, and that he actively held to only the two offices of presbyter and deacon?

These uses of PRESBUTEROS support my conclusions. Polycarp in verse 6:2 uses ‘us’ and ‘we’ indicating he includes himself among the PRESBUTEROI.

But if a bishop is also presbyter, then this is no rejection of the office of bishop, only a description of the duties of the presbyter. To be fair, Ignatius spends a great deal of time describing the office of Bishop but does not spend nearly as much time on the office of presbyter.

I do not think Irenaeus adds to this discussion, since his writings are not considered among the AFs. Perhaps it is better to include him among the Apologists.

He does when it comes to his knowledge of Polycarp. He was a hearer of Polycarp, afterall, was he not?

I can agree to disagree. I only wanted to voice my objection.

God bless,
Ut

 

[utunumsint]

I do not disagree with much of what you claim.

I consider it a good summary of my views, but I tried to show how the terms EPISKOPOS, PRESBUTEROS and DIAKONOS were used in the NT and in the AFs.

You claim ‘presbuteros/episcopose’ were appointed to replace apostles. I would agree. Polycarp and others do not distinguish between these terms, but Ignatius very definitely does. Before these offices arose, in the authentic Letters of Paul, EPISKOPOS and PRESBUTEROS were used for overseer and old man.

As time went on the three part division became the norm. In this we are both in agreement.

Actually, to specify my point, I believe only certain ‘presbuteros/episcopose’ were apointed as leaders among the presbuteros, and they slowly became identified with the rank of the episcopate exclusively.

If I take you correctly, I think you would like to suggest that Ignatius invented this three part division. If this is what you are getting at, then I would have to disagree.

God bless,
Ut

 

[NoelFitz]

Ut

I think my main disagreement with you is that you say we disagree. I think we agree, to a great extent.

My modest objective was to study the use of EPISKOPOS, PRESBUTEROS and DIAKONOS in the NT and in the AFs. I tried to show what these terms menat in the NT and AFs. I never intended to study the development of the concepts of bishop (overseer), presbyter (elder) and deacon (minister) in the early Church.

Thus I did not consider Acts, since the word DIAKONOS was not explicitly used, yet the office of deacon is implied.

And the twelve called together the whole community of the disciples and said, “It is not right that we should neglect the word of God in order to wait on tables.a 3 Therefore, friends,b select from among yourselves seven men of good standing, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint to this task, 4 while we, for our part, will devote ourselves to prayer and to serving the word.” 5 What they said pleased the whole community, and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, together with Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte of Antioch. 6 They had these men stand before the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them.
The Holy Bible : New Revised Standard Version, Ac 6:2-6 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1989).

You wrote:

Where do you see Polycarp objecting to Ignatius’ teachings?

I do not, so you see we agree.

You wrote:

So from this do you deduce that Polycarp rejected the office of bishop

I do not. He may have had ideas about the office of EPISKOPOS/bishop, but from his Letter to the Philippians he implied that he held there are two offices in the Church.

You also wrote:

But if a bishop is also presbyter, then this is no rejection of the office of bishop.

Agreed! The question might arise as to what was understood by EPISKOPOS/PRESBUTEROS.

You also wrote:

He (Irenaeus) was a hearer of Polycarp, afterall, was he not?

Again I agree with you. But his writings are not considered among the AFs.

Florinus was a Roman presbyter who lapsed into heresy. St. Irenæus wrote him a letter of remonstrance (a long extract from which is preserved by Eusebius, II, E., V,xx), in which he recalled their common recollections of Polycarp. "These opinions … Florinus are not of sound judgment … I saw thee when I was still a boy in Lower Asia in company with Polycarp, while thou wast faring prosperously in the royal court, and endeavouring to stand well with him. For I distinctly remember the incidents of that time better than events of recent occurrence … I can describe the very place in which the Blessed Polycarp used to sit when he discoursed … his personal appearance … and how he would describe his intercourse with John and with the rest who had seen the Lord, and how he would relate their words …
newadvent.org/cathen/12219b.htm

 

[utunumsint]

Fair enough. Thanks for all your work in this NoelFitz.

God bless,
Ut

 

[NoelFitz]

Ut
I am also very grateful to you and to all who contributed to this thread.

I wanted to try to sort out EPISKOPOS, PRESBUTEROS and DIAKONOS in the NT and in the AFs, as I am interested in both the NT (expecially the ‘authentic’ Letters of Paul) and the AFs.

Also, as I suggested a number of times, this study may provide background for discussing the changing nature of offices/ministries in the Church today, caused not by any new reflection on Lumen Gentium, but by the decrease in the number of priests.

This new discussion will, presumably, be more controversial, as personal views may emerge.

 

[NoelFitz]

Episkopos, Presbuteros and Diakonos have been discussed in the NT and in the AFs.

Does the study tell us anything about the Church in today’s world?

Is there a need, or any advantage, in having permanent deacons in the Church at present? With the lack of priests in the West, which will get worse as time goes on, there is a need for new initiatives. Are permanent deacons the optimum response?

Would parish assistants be a better response? They could be male or female, young or old married or single. They could lead prayers in Church and do all the ministries at present carried out by lay folk.

I would welcome opinions.

But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people, in order that you may proclaim the mighty acts of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light (New Revised Standard Version, 1 Pe 2:9).

There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus (New Revised Standard Version, Ga 3:27-28).

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Episkopos, Presbuteros and Diakonos have been discussed in the NT and in the AFs.

Does the study tell us anything about the Church in today’s world?

Is there a need, or any advantage, in having permanent deacons in the Church at present? With the lack of priests in the West, which will get worse as time goes on, there is a need for new initiatives. Are permanent deacons the optimum response?

Would parish assistants be a better response? They could be male or female, young or old married or single. They could lead prayers in Church and do all the ministries at present carried out by lay folk.

I would welcome opinions.

I havn’t been following this thread closely, but I noticed this today and felt like responding.

The priest shortage is really a shortage of passion. The areas of the world where orthodoxy is being radically defended and upheld have a solid and growing number of vocations (the mid-Western United States dioceses like Nebraska, Missouri, etc as a good example). In most of the US and Europe the Bishops are failing in their duty to speak up and become a role model which men WANT to model themself after, and that pushes men away. In places like Africa and India where the Church is growing rapidly, these people know and recognize the value of their faith and vocations are growing and being exported. It is almost laugable the way so many diocese sit around trying to come up with ways to bring in vocations when the answer is right infront of them: PREACH THE FAITH WITHOUT FEAR. Make Mass as reverent as possible, stop watering down teachings, have the bishop speak up, all these factors drive away people who otherwise would love a vocation to the priesthood or religious life. The EWTN religious orders are growing because people see they are genuine and passionate about their faith.

I believe the Church is just coming out of a huge storm (the 60s-90s) and is just now recovering and is actually roaring back stronger than ever. The liberal tendencies and proponents are dying off, leaving a young and astonishingly orthodox generation left to take over.

 

[NoelFitz]

CD

Thank you for your reply.

You see the future in a return to orthodox Catholic values.

However do you see a role for permanent deacons?

Do you feel there is no need for them? In the future we will have more priests. Alternatively deacons can do nothing that ordinary lay folk (male or female) cannot do.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

episcopate - Origin: 1635–45; < LL episcopātus the office of a bishop; Late Latin episcopātus, from episcopus, bishop.

bishop - Middle English, from Old English bisceope, from Vulgar Latin ebiscopus, from Late Latin episcopus, from Late Greek episkopos, from Greek, overseer : epi-, epi- + skopos, watcher; see spek- in Indo-European roots.

deacon - Origin: bef. 900; ME deken, OE diacon < LL diāconus < Gk dikonos servant, minister, deacon, equiv. to diā- *dia- + -konos *service.

priest - Origin: bef. 900; ME *prest(e), *priest, OE préost, ult. < LL presbyter; Middle English preost, from Old English prēost, perhaps from Vulgar Latin prester (from Late Latin presbyter; ) or from West Germanic prēvost (from Latin praepositus, superintendent.

One thing when discussing terms is to respect their origins. Most fundamentalists and avid protestants do not do this and sometimes refuse (or are totally ignorant of) the etymology of word usage, particularly with regard to church offices. I am a stickler on this because as words are used and translated into other languages, the words have a tendency to change their outward appearance giving the observer a totally different view, whereas, technically, their inner meanings remain the same. Priest, bishop, deacon have a long history as far as words go, and the above reveals the development of them into English and how they were derived from translations from other languages.

One thing to note: the Ealry Church did NOT use the pagan terms for priest in any language, Greek hieros, Latin sacerdot, etc. So much for the Great Apostacy.

I bring this up in particular on the attempt to get around the use of the priest by using elder or presbyter instead. The usage of koine Greek shows that it already had a acquired a hierarchal meaning.

The interchange between episkopos and presbyteros (e.g. Acts 19:17, 28) is because in the early church, due to the small numbers, most bishops were also functioning as parish priests, something that survived in the office of chorbishop. From the beginning, however, places (e.g. Jerusalem, Antioch) which had great numbers, the priests functioned as we know them today.

 

[NoelFitz]

Isa

Great to hear from you.

In general I agree with you.

But I am a bit picky, so please excuse me.

You wrote:

One thing to note: the Ealry Church did NOT use the pagan terms for priest in any language, Greek hieros,

IEREUS is used 31 times in the NT, but always as a Jewish priest and 9 times in the AFs (either as a pagan or Jewish priest).

You wrote:

From the beginning, however, places (e.g. Jerusalem, Antioch) which had great numbers, the priests functioned as we know them today.

I would query this. Would you like to give some evidence?

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Isa

Great to hear from you.

In general I agree with you.

But I am a bit picky, so please excuse me.

You wrote:

IEREUS is used 31 times in the NT, but always as a Jewish priest and 9 times in the AFs (either as a pagan or Jewish priest).

Precisely my point: never for a Christian priest. The Christian priesthood is not a copy of the pagan, and it is that of Melchizedec, not Aaron.

You wrote:

I would query this. Would you like to give some evidence?

In Acts 20 we see the Apostles hand off the Church to the bishops. St. Paul (v. 17-8) “called for the elders of the Church. And when they had come to him, he said to them…(v. 28) Therefore take hed to youselves and to all the flock among which the Holy Spirit has made you bishops, to shepherd the Church of God which He purchased with His own blood” (explain that JWs ). In Titus he says 1:5 This is why I left you in Crete, that you might amend what was defective, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you, 6 if any man is blameless, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of being profligate or insubordinate. 7 For a bishop, as God’s steward, must be blameless." This interchange between elder and bishop continued on in the instituition of the chorbishop (which btw, gives Arabic its word for priest, khuri, which makes sense, given the frontier/missionary nature of the Church amongst the Arabian tribes). At the Synod of Ancyra, when the Church had developed and legal, forbad the chorbishops to ordain priests and deacons (without implying that the ordinations they had being doing were invalid), and that of Sardica laid down that no chorbishop should be ordained when a priest would suffice. Thereafter, with the increased ease of synods among the bishops etc. the office of bishop and priest are more sharply delineated. In is precisely in Antioch (evidenced by St. Ignatius letters) that the is at the earliest part of the process, and it would seem from the greater numbers and more developed orgainzation in that city and region.