c. Paul sends greetings to the "bishops" and "deacons" of Philippi, but omits the presbyters
because they were included in the first term; as also the plural indicates.^711
d. In the Pastoral Epistles, where Paul intends to give the qualifications for all church
officers, he again mentions only two, bishops and deacons, but uses the term presbyter afterwards
for bishop.^712
Peter urges the "presbyters" to "tend the flock of God," and to "fulfil the office of bishops"
with disinterested devotion and without "lording it over the charge allotted to them."^713
e. The interchange of terms continued in use to the close of the first century, as is evident
from the Epistle of Clement of Rome (about 95), and the Didache, and still lingered towards the
close of the second.^714
With the beginning of the second century, from Ignatius onward, the two terms are
distinguished and designate two offices; the bishop being regarded first as the head of a congregation
surrounded by a council of presbyters, and afterwards as the head of a diocese and successor of the
apostles. The episcopate grew out of the presidency of the presbytery, or, as Bishop Lightfoot well
expresses it: "The episcopate was formed, not out of the apostolic order by localization, but out of
the presbyteral by elevation; and the title, which originally was common to all, came at length to
be appropriated to the chief among them."^715 Nevertheless, a recollection of the original identity
was preserved by the best biblical scholars among the fathers, such as Jerome (who taught that the
episcopate rose from the presbyterate as a safeguard against schism), Chrysostom, and Theodoret.^716
The reason why the title bishop (and not presbyter) was given afterwards to the superior
officer, may be explained from the fact that it signified, according to monumental inscriptions
recently discovered, financial officers of the temples, and that the bishops had the charge of all the
funds of the churches, which were largely charitable institutions for the support of widows and(^711) Phil. 1:1: πᾶσιν τοῖς ἁγίοις ... σύν ἐπισκόποις καὶ διακόνοις
(^712) 1 Tim. 3:1-13; 5:17-19; Tit. 1:5-7.
(^713) 1 Pet. 5:1, 2: πρεσβυτέρους ... παρακαλῶ ὁ συνπρεσβύτερος; ποιμάνατε τὸ ἐν ὑμῖν ποίμνιον τοῦ θεοῦ, ἐπισκοποῦντες ...
The last word is omitted by א and B. Tischendorf (8th ed.), Westcott and Hort, but ποιμάνατε implies the episcopal function,
the oversight of the flock.
(^714) Clem., Ad Cor. c. 42 ("bishops and deacons "), c. 44 ("bishopric ... the presbyters"). The Didache (ch. 15) knows only
bishops and deacons, as local officers, the former being identical with presbyters. Irenaeus still occasionally calls the bishops
"presbyters," and uses sussiones episcoporum and successiones presbyterorum synonymously, but he evidently recognized the
episcopal constitution. The higher office includes the lower, but not conversely.
(^715) L. c., p. 194. He illustrates this usage by a parallel instance from the Athenian institutions. Neander has the same view of
the origin of the episcopate. It dates, in fact, from Jerome.
(^716) See the patristic quotations in my Hist. of the Ap. Ch. pp. 524 sq. Even Pope Urban II. (a.d. 1091) says that the primitive
church knew only two orders, the deaconate and the presbyterate. The original identity of presbyter and bishop is not only insisted
on by Presbyterians, Lutherans, and Congregationalists, but freely conceded also by Episcopal commentators, as Whitby,
Bloomfield, Conybeare and Howson, Alford, Ellicott, Lightfoot, Stanley, and others. It is also conceded by purely critical
historians, as Rothe, Ritschl, Baur (K Gesch I. 270), and Renan (Les Evangiles, p. 332). Renan calls the history of the ecclesiastical
hierarchy the history of a triple abdication: first the community of believers committed their power to the presbyters, then the
corps of presbyters abdicated to the bishop, and, last, the bishops to the pope (in the Vatican council). "La création de l’épiscopat
est l’aeuvre du IIe siècle. L’absorption de l’Eglise par les ’presbyteri’est un fait accompli avant la fin du premier. Dans l’èpître
de Clément Romain, etc., ce n’est pas encore l’épiscopat, c’est le presbytérat qui est en cause. On n’y trouve pas trace d’un
’presbyteros’’supérieur aux autres et devant détrôner les autres. Mais l’auteur proclame hautement que le presbytérat, to clergé,
est antérieur au peuple." Comp. also Renan’s Saint Paul, 238 sq., and L’Eglise Chrétienne, ch. VI. p. 85 sqq. This subject then
may be regarded as finally settled among scholars. At the same time it should in all fairness be admitted that the tendency toward
an episcopal concentration of presbyteral power may be traced to the close of the apostolic age.
A.D. 1-100.