02.06. Part Three: An Examination of the Post-biblical Era
PART THREE, AN EXAMINATION OF THE POST-BIBLICAL ERA When did the supra-congregational hierarchies, exemplified by today’s denominations, begin? Hints of such a structure are found in the early years of the Second Century. However, it was slow in being fully developed. It is not until the Third Century that we find the concept of a bishop overseeing a full-blown hierarchy over larger geographical areas. One of the problems in discovering the details of this development is the unreliable character of most of the documents from the period immediately following the death of the apostles. Some are genuine, but others seem to be written years later, with the name of one of the early fathers appended to the document to give it credibility. The question must be asked, Was the episcopate and its hierarchy established by the apostles, as a replacement for their presence, or did it evolve as an individual elder first became the “president” of a local council of elders, and then ascended to the role of overseer of several congregations? The answer to this question is very important. If the apostles did establish an episcopal hierarchy, then we must conclude that denominational hierarchies are God’s will for the Church.
If, on the other hand, the hierarchy is an evolution of the eldership from the biblical pattern of local autonomy to a more formalized supra-congregational institution, then we must consider the human element in its development.
Even though Episcopalians, Roman Catholics, Orthodox Catholics, and others contend for the apostolic origin of the hierarchy, the evidence presented to substantiate this view requires interpretation and some assumptions. As Philip Schaff states, “The latter view is more natural and better sustained by the facts.”
24 16 In other words, an inductive examination of the body of evidence available leads to the following conclusion, Early in the Second Century many local councils experienced the rising in prominence of one of their council members; he became the “president” of the elders council. He was primus interperes, “the first among equals.” In time, perhaps because of age or gifting, one of these presidents rose in importance, and became the “bishop” over all of the churches in the city. After about two centuries, the concept of a plenary bishop began to develop. The primary reason for the development of the episcopate was the rising number of heresies in the First Century. When the Revelatory Apostles were living, they passed judgment on any questionable doctrine and instructed the Church to reject it. As in the case of Paul’s Corinthian Epistle, and in his letter to the Galatians, these doctrinal aberrations were called “a different Gospel” (2 Corinthians 11:4 ff; Galatians 1:6 ff). Many varied doctrines arose shortly after the death of the apostles. In the earliest years of the Second Century, the New Testament Scriptures had not been collected and uniformly distributed. The churches felt a need to have someone who could declare what was true and what was false doctrine. One of the elders in each locality became that person. In time, a bishop over a region occupied that role. Cyprian (died 258 AD), wrote that there was general unity among the bishops (Cyprian was among the first to describe the bishops as a superior clergy, even expressing the view of modern day Roman Catholicism that the clergy are the Church). It must also be noted that those who today view the early church councils as the origin of doctrinal orthodoxy are only partially correct. In most instances, the councils only made official what had become the consensus of the Church at large.
It should be noted that even Cyprian described the bishop as being closely related to the elders. The Fourth General Council, held at Carthage in 398 AD, declared that any pronouncement made by a bishop, without the concurrence of his local elders, was null and void.
Another thing that promoted the rise of the episcopacy was persecution. In the time of persecution, the church felt a demand for compact unity. The principle, “union is strength, division is weakness,” prevailed. This need occasioned the rise of strong leaders, usually a single individual, who held the church together. This leader became the bishop.
Other motivations and forces promoted the rise of extra-local hierarchy, but these two are the most obvious.
CONCLUSION
Even though there is no evidence of a supra-congregational hierarchy in the New Testament, an hierarchy did develop in the first two centuries (the Second and Third Centuries) after the death of the apostles. The rise of the episcopate was the result of need. It was not long before this hierarchy began to depart from the New Testament concept of “church.”
ß By the time of Cyprian, the spiritual unity of the Church was blindly identified with unity of organization.
ß The scriptural principle, “Out of Christ, there is no salvation,” was replaced with, “Out of the (visible) church, there is no salvation.” The next step was, “out of the Roman Church, there is no salvation.”
ß Some bishops became poor examples of godliness. Hippolytus (ninth book of Philosophurmena) reproached the Roman bishops, Zephyrinus and Callistus (202223), with charges of corruption, avarice, and lax discipline. Paul Samosata was deposed in 269 on charges of false doctrine, and bad moral character. Origen 17 complained that in the larger cities the bishops surrounded themselves with bodyguards and were inaccessible to the poor.
We must conclude that although the need for the development of a supra-congregational hierarchy seemed to be overpowering, the means of meeting the need became a mixed blessing; in some ways, it became a curse.