bishop
S20
BISHOP
witnessed a gradual chaii^ ■ in th ■ application of the ■words, and in the epistles of Ignatius, even in their least interpolated or must mutilated form, the bishop is recognised as distinct from, and superior to, the pres- byters (Ep. ml Smyrn. viii; ad Trail, ii, iii, viii; ad Magn. vi). In those of Clement of Rome, however, the two words are still dealt with as interchangeable (1 Cor. xlii, xliv, lvii). The omission of any mention of an iiriaicoiroc in addition to the irotTjivTipoi and cia- kovoi in Polycarp's Epistle to the Pliilippians (c. v), and the enumeration of 'apostoli, cpiscopi, doctores, ministri,' in the Shepherd of Hennas (i, 3, 5), are less decisive, but indicate a transition stage in the history of the word. Assuming as proved the identity of the bishops and elders of the N. T., we have farther (in this connection) only to inquire into, 1, the relation which existed between the two titles; 2, the func- tions and mode of appointment of the men to whom both titles were applied ; 3, their relations to the gen- eral government and discipline of the Church. See also Elder.
"(I.) There can be no doubt that 7rpfrr/3i'rf pot had the priority in order of time. The existence of a body bearing that name is implied in the use of the correla- tive oi vtwTipm (comp. Luke xii, 26; 1 Pet. v, 1, 5) in the narrative of Ananias (Acts v, 6). The order itself is recognised in Acts xi, 30, and takes part in the de- liberations of the Church at Jerusalem in Acts xv. It is transferred by Paul and Barnabas to the Gentile churches in their first missionary journey (Acts xiii, 23). The earliest use of tTrioKowot, on the other hand, is in the address of Paul to the elders at Miletus (Acts xx, 18), and there it is rather descriptive of functions than given as a title. The earliest epistle in which it is formally used as equivalent to izpfajlvripoi (except on the improbable hypothesis that 1 Timothy belongs to the period following on Paul's departure from Ephe- sus in Acts xx, 1) is that to the Philippians, so late as the time of his first imprisonment at Rome. It was natural, indeed, that this should be the order; that the word derived from the usages of the synagogues of Pal- estine, every one of which had its superintending el- ders (D"1?!?! ; comp. Luke vii, 3), should precede that borrowed from th'j constitution of a Greek state. If the latter was afterward felt to be the more adequate, it in ay have ben because there was a life in the organ- ization of the Church higher than that of the syna- gogues, and functions of pastoral superintendence de- volving on the elders of the Christian congregation which were unknown to those of the other periods. It had the merit of being descriptive as well as titular; a 'nomen officii' as well as a 'nonien dignitatis.' It could be associated, as the other could not be, with the thought of the highest pastoral superintendence— of Christ himself as the iroipiiv teal tirimcoirog (1 Pet. ii, 25).
" (II.) Of the order in which the first ciders were ap- pointed, as of th.? occasion which led to the institution of the office, we have no record. Arguing from the analogy of the seven in Acts vi, 5, G, it would seem probable that they were chosen by the members of the < Ihurch collectively (possibly to take the place that had bee,, filled by tie- seven; comp. Stanley's Apost. Age, p. 64), and then set apart to their office by the laying on of the apostles' hands. l„ th.; case of Timothy(l Tim. jj> 1,: - liln- h 6), the 7rpe<rj3urlp«oj/, probably the body „f the elders at Lystra, had taken part with the apostle in this act of ordination; but here it remains doubtful whether the office to which Timothy was ap- pointed was that of the bishop-elder or one derived from th- special commission with which the two epistles ad-
to him show him to have been intrusted. The connection of 1 Tim. v, 22, is, „„ t|„. ,V|„,],N agam8t our referring the laying on of hands there spoken of to the ordination of elders (comp. Hammond, in loc), and tie- same may be said of Heb. vi, •_'. The imposition of hands was indeed the outward sign of the communi-
cation of all spiritual Y«p«rr/jor«, as well as of func- tions for which such ' gifts' were required, and its use for the latter (as in 1 Tim. iv, 14 ; 2 Tim. i, G) was con- nected with its instrumentality in the bestowal of the former. The conditions which were to be observed in choosing these officers, as stated in the pastoral epis-
j ties, are blameless life and reputation among those 'that are without' as well as within the Church, fit- ness for the work of teaching, the wide kindliness of temper which shows itself in hospitality, the being ' the husband of one wife' (i. e. according to the most
; probable interpretation, not divorced and then married to another; but comp. Hammond, Estius, Ellicott, in
, loc. ; see Hasaeus, De Episcopo SevTipoyapiji [Brem.
! n. d.] ; Walch, De Episcopo unius uocoiis vivo [Jen. 1733]), showing powers of government in his own household as well as in self-control, not being a re- cent and therefore an untried convert. When ap- pointed, the duties of the bishop-elders appear to have been as follows: 1. General superintendence over the spiritual well-being of the flock (1 Pet. v, 2). Ac- cording to the aspects which this function presented, those on whom it devolved were described as Troipivtg (Eph. iv, 11), TrpoioTwTic (1 Tim. v, 17), TrpoKTrd^uvoi (1 Thess. v, 12). Its exercise called for the \dpi<yna KvfiEpvhoewQ (1 Cor. xii, 28). The last two of the above titles imply obviously a recognised rank, as well as work, which would show itself naturally in special marks of honor in the meetings of the Church.