This
president was called bishop, at first only by eminence, as primus inter pares; afterwards in the
exclusive sense. In the smaller churches there was, perhaps, from the beginning, only one presbyter,
who of himself formed this centre, like the chorepiscopi or country-bishops in the fourth century.
The dioceses of the bishops in Asia Minor and North Africa, owing to their large number, in the
second and third centuries, can hardly have exceeded the extent of respectable pastoral charges.
James of Jerusalem, on the other hand, and his immediate successors, whose positions in many
respects were altogether peculiar, seem to have been the only bishops in Palestine. Somewhat
similar was the state of things in Egypt, where, down to Demetrius (a.d. 190–232), we find only
the one bishop of Alexandria.
We cannot therefore assume any strict uniformity. But the whole church spirit of the age
tended towards centralization; it everywhere felt a demand for compact, solid unity; and this inward
bent, amidst the surrounding dangers of persecution and heresy, carried the church irresistibly
towards the episcopate. In so critical and stormy a time, the principle, union is strength, division
is weakness, prevailed over all. In fact, the existence of the church at that period may be said to
have depended in a great measure on the preservation and promotion of unity, and that in an outward,
tangible form, suited to the existing grade of culture. Such a unity was offered in the bishop, who
held a monarchical, or more properly a patriarchal relation to the congregation. In the bishop was
found the visible representative of Christ, the great Head of the whole church. In the bishop,
therefore, all sentiments of piety found a centre. In the bishop the whole religious posture of the
people towards God and towards Christ had its outward support and guide. And in proportion as
every church pressed towards a single centre, this central personage must acquire a peculiar
importance and subordinate the other presbyters to itself; though, at the same time, as the language
of Clement and Irenaeus, the state of things in Egypt, and even in North Africa, and the testimony
of Jerome and other fathers, clearly prove, the remembrance of the original equality could not be
entirely blotted out, but continued to show itself in various ways.
Besides this there was also a powerful practical reason for elevating the powers of the
bishop. Every Christian congregation was a charitable society, regarding the care of the widow and
orphan, the poor and the stranger as a sacred trust; and hence the great importance of the bishop as
the administrative officer by whom the charitable funds were received and the alms disbursed. In
Greek communities the title bishop (
, μ
), was in wide use for financial officers. Their
administrative functions brought them in close relation to the deacons, as their executive aids in
the care of the poor and sick. The archdeacon became the right arm, the "eye" and "heart" of the
bishop. In primitive times every case of poverty or suffering was separately brought to the notice
of the bishop and personally relieved by a deacon. Afterwards institutions were founded for widows
and orphans, poor and infirm, and generally placed under the superintendence of the bishop; but
personal responsibility was diminished by this organized charity, and the deacons lost their original
significance and became subordinate officers of public worship.
187
86
Whatever may be thought, therefore, of the origin and the divine right of the episcopate, no
impartial historian can deny its adaptation to the wants of the church at the time, and its historical
necessity.
187
The philanthropic and financial aspect of episcopacy has been brought out very fully by Hatch, in his Bampton Lectures
on The Organization of the Early Christian Churches, Lect. II.
90
Philip Schaff
History of the Christian Church, Volume II: Ante-Nicene
Christianity. A.D. 100-325.
But then, this primitive catholic episcopal system must by no means be confounded with
the later hierarchy. The dioceses, excepting those of Jerusalem, Ephesus, Alexandria, Antioch, and
Rome, must have long remained very small, if we look at the number of professing Christians. In
the Apocalypse seven such centres of unity are mentioned within a comparatively small compass
in Asia Minor, and at a time when the number of Christians was insignificant. In the year 258,
Cyprian assembled a council of eighty-seven bishops of North Africa. The functions of the bishops
were not yet strictly separated from those of the presbyters, and it was only by degrees that
ordination, and, in the Western church, confirmation also, came to be intrusted exclusively to the
bishops.
§ 45. Development of the Episcopate. Ignatius.
It is matter of fact that the episcopal form of government was universally established in the
Eastern and Western church as early as the middle of the second century. Even the heretical sects,
at least the Ebionites, as we must infer from the commendation of the episcopacy in the
pseudo-Clementine literature, were organized on this plan, as well as the later schismatic parties
of Novatians, Donatists, etc. But it is equally undeniable, that the episcopate reached its complete
form only step by step. In the period before us we must note three stages in this development
connected with the name of Ignatius in Syria (d. 107 or 115), Irenaeus in Gaul (d. 202), and Cyprian
in North Africa (d. 258).
The episcopate first appears, as distinct from the presbyterate, but as a congregational office
only (in distinction from the diocesan idea), and as yet a young institution, greatly needing
commendation, in the famous seven (or three) Epistles of Ignatius of Antioch a disciple of the
apostles, and the second bishop of that see (Evodius being the first, and Hero the third). He is also
the first who uses the term "catholic church," as if episcopacy and catholicity sprung up
simultaneously. The whole story of Ignatius is more legendary than real, and his writings are subject
to grave suspicion of fraudulent interpolation. We have three different versions of the Ignatian
Epistles, but only one of them can be genuine; either the smaller Greek version, or the lately
discovered Syriac.
188
87
In the latter, which contains only three epistles, most of the passages on the
episcopate are wanting, indeed; yet the leading features of the institution appear even here, and we
can recognise ex ungue leonem.
189
88 In any case they reflect the public sentiment before the middle
of the second century.
188
The question of the genuineness will be discussed in §165. Cureton (1845) Bunsen, Lipsius, and others accept the Syriac
version as the original form of the Ignatian epistles, and regard even the short Greek text as corrupt, but yet as dating from the
middle of the second century. Rothe, Hefele, Schaff (first ed.), Düsterdieck, Uhlhorn, Zahn, Harnack, defend the genuineness
of the shorter Greek recension. The larger Greek recension is universally given up as spurious. The origin of the hierarchical
system is obscured by pious frauds. See below, §164 and 165.
189
In the Syriac Ep. to Polycarp, the word bishop occurs four times; in the Syriac Ep. to the Ephesians, God is blessed for
having given them such a bishop as Onesimus. In the shorter Greek Ep. to Polycarp episcopacy is mentioned in the salutation,
and in three of the eight chapters (ch. 5 twice, ch. 6 twice, ch. 8 once). In the 21 chapters of the Greek Ep. to the Ephesians, the
word bishop occurs thirteen times, presbyter three times, and deacon once (in the first six chapters, and ch. 21). In the Greek
Trallians, the bishop appears nine times; in the Magnesians, eleven times; in the Philadelphians, eight times; in the Smynaeans,
nine times. Thus in the three Syriac Epistles the bishop is mentioned but six times; in the seven shorter Greek Epistles about
fifty times; but one of the strongest passages is found in the Syriac Epistle to Polycarp (ch. 5. and 6.).
91
Philip Schaff
History of the Christian Church, Volume II: Ante-Nicene
Christianity. A.D. 100-325.