The Apostolic Direction
The ecclesias, as the apostles left them, were autonomous and self-governing. There were bishops and traveling overseers selected for their duties by the apostles, but there was no provision for the continuation of a hierarchy. Bishops (overseers), elders and deacons appear in the apostolic church, and since qualifications are given for the guidance of the ecclesias in choosing their elders, it must be assumed that they would be assigned to their positions by the will of the membership.
In the New Testament the words bishop and elder seem to be used interchangeably, as in Titus, chapter 1:5-7: “…ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee…for a bishop must be blameless…” 1 Tim. 3:1-13 qualifies both bishops and deacons, emphasizing that those who serve the ecclesia must be responsible and dedicated disciples.
The Second Century
At the beginning of the second century the same order prevailed. Presbyters (elders) were elected in some manner by their respective ecclesias. The larger ecclesias would have a bishop who was also one of the presbyters. There were also deacons (and deaconesses) who took care of various arrangements, and looked after the welfare of individual members. Each of the ecclesias was independent, though they formed a collective body. Letters of exhortation, sometimes containing reproof, were sent between the ecclesias, but one did not exercise authority over another.
The following are New Testament terms when properly used:
Bishop (episkopos) — “overseer,” “caretaker” (from skopos – “watch,” “sentry”)
Presbyter (presbyteros) -”elder”
Presbytery — “body of elders” Deacon (diakonos) — “assistant,” “one who ministers.”
These terms came gradually to designate a Christian hierarchy far beyond the apostolic intent.
Order of the meetings
Justin Martyr (AD 110-165) gives a description of the regular meeting arrangement which may be taken as typical. “And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles (the New Testament) or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks has been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons” (The First Apology of Justin, ch. lxvii). The writer also mentions the collection (a free-will offering) used to support those in need.
Authority of the Bishops
An early contributing factor to the growing authority of the bishops was the prevalence of heresy in the body. Confused ideas and false teachings abounded in the second and third centuries. As a result, the ecclesias were strongly exhorted to follow the lead of their bishops so as not to be led astray. This was good up to a point, when the elders were themselves sound in the faith. But as a result of this attitude the bishops came to exercise a great deal of power and control.
This factor is quite evident in some of the early epistles, especially those of Ignatius (AD 30-107). Understandably concerned about the effect of false teachings on the ecclesias, the bishop of Antioch urges this point more than any other in all of his epistles. “…being subject to the bishop and the presbytery;” “we should look upon the bishop even as we would look upon the Lord Himself, standing, as he does, before the Lord” (To the Ephesians); “…do nothing without the bishop. Nor let anything appear commendable to you which is destitute of his approval” (To the Magnesians). These statements are typical.
Christian Priesthood
Early Christianity was distinguished from both Judaism and the pagan religious system by the fact that it had no priesthood. Jesus Christ was the only high priest; all believers constituted a “royal priesthood.” There were no orders of priests acting as mediators between the believer and his God. Justin Martyr says: “So we, who through the name of Jesus have believed as one man in God, the Maker of the universe, having divested ourselves of our filthy garments, i.e., our sins, through the name of His first-born son, and having been refined by the word of his calling are the true highpriestly race of God” (Dialogue, cxvi). Irenaeus says “all the disciples of the Lord are Levites and priests:” Origen writes that “(the Lord’s) disciples are true priests.”
In Greek and Latin the words for “priest” are hiereus and sacerdos, whereas ecclesial elders were designated by the Greek word presbyteroi (presbyters or elders). It was not until late in the third century that priestly terms were used for Christian clergy. Origen is the first of the “fathers” to employ them to any degree. In the decree of the council at Antioch the clergy are called a hieration or body of priests.
The Clergy Appears
The Greek word kleros had a number of meanings including “rank,” “social class,” and “function.” Ignatius had used it to describe the whole assembly of Christians, “that I may be found in the company of those Christians at Ephesus;” but gradually kleros or “clergy” came to be limited to the bishops and presbyters. The separation between the clergy and the people then became a reality.
What came to be known as a “monarchical hierarchy” began with the church in Rome, and as that community increased in influence, its organization became standard for most of the churches. The term diocese, which came to mean “the extent of a bishop’s jurisdiction,” was the Latin word for a governmental district. In Roman towns, there was a Council, called the ordo. When convened, this body occupied a special place, referred to as a “bench”. The common people, or plebes, stood in the body of the hall. So also in the church (as opposed to the earlier ecclesia), the officials sat on a seat apart from the congregation. “It is the authority of the Church which makes a difference between the order (ordo) and the people…Thus where there is no bench of clergy, you present the offerings, and baptize, and are your own sole priest, for where two or three have gathered together, there is a Church” (Tertullian, Exhortation to Chastity, vii).
Apostolic succession
The apostles did not designate successors. Their office was unique, as those who were sent forth from the Lord Jesus himself. They did appoint others to carry on the work of assisting the ecclesias, but there is no hint in the New Testament of that doctrine which has come to be called “the apostolic succession.”
The idea first developed by way of establishing orthodoxy, distinguishing those who were thought to be holding apostolic principles as opposed to those who were seeking to promulgate new teachings. Irenaeus points to the Roman church as having a direct line of bishops from Clement, who was associated with the apostles. Churches with a history going back to the apostles were considered to be the ones most likely to hold apostolic doctrine (Against Heresies, Book III, chs. 1-3).
Tertullian’s reasoning is similar. Let the heretics give evidence that their teachings come down from the apostles. “Let them produce the original records of their churches …For this is the manner in which the apostolic churches transmit their registers: as the church of Smyrna, which records that Polycarp was placed therein by John…” (Prescription Against Heretics, ch. xxxii).
There was a serious pitfall in these arguments. The churches which had been established by the apostles were held in high esteem; when they strayed from apostolic concepts, others would follow their lead. Faithfulness to apostolic teaching was what was necessary, rather than allegiance to those who claimed to be the apostles’ successors.
Development of the papacy
The development of the papacy did not occur in the period we are considering, but the process had begun. Because of the importance of the city of Rome and the prestige of the church there, the bishop of Rome came to have great influence. “There was sometimes strenuous opposition to the claim of the bishop of Rome, but in the end the churches of the West acknowledged his supremacy” (B. K. Kuiper, The Church in History, ch. 6). Succeeding centuries saw this supremacy growing, and the bishop of Rome came to assume the titles previously held by the Roman Emperor.
The clergy and apostasy
At the beginning of the post-apostolic era, there was no “clergy” or “laity”. All believers were essentially equal, sharing the benefits and responsibilities of brethren in Christ. The development of the clerical system exactly paralleled the growth of apostasy. Ecclesial elders were called upon to settle disputes, etc., and consequently the eldership evolved into an ecclesiastical hierarchy elevated above the congregation and, eventually claiming divine authority. Getting back to New Testament principles, we believe, rightly includes a rejection of clerical distinctions. “Ye are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:26-28).
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One