486 EPISCOPACY permanent or temporary, whether their authority was that of diocesan bishops, or, as was more probably the case, of vicars-apostolic, it is certain that their power was a delegated one, that they were acting as the substitutes of the apostle, and that their duties were in essence identical with those of the episcopate. In Dr Lightfoot s words, " they were in fact the link between the apostle, whose superintendence was occasional and general, and the bishop who exercised a permanent supervision over an individual congregation." If the " angels " of the seven churches addressed in the early chapters of the Apocalypse could be certainly identi fied with bishops, we should have a further evidence of localized Episcopacy in apostolic times of the highest value. B.ut this interpretation, though very generally accepted, is not sufficiently free from question to bear the strain of argument. III. An almost impenetrable cloud hangs over the closing years of the 1st and the opening of the 2d century. When it begins to disperse we see an episcopal organization every where established, and working with a quiet regularity, which gives no indications of its being a novel experiment, still less of its having been imposed by superior authority on a reluctant community. How is this momentous change, without a counterpart in history, to be accounted for? How, to adopt Professor Shirley s image, can we bridge over " the immense chasm which divides the rudi mentary order of the churches planted by St Paul from the rigorously denned and universal Episcopacy which we find described by Ignatius 1 The more we look into the circum stances the more the marvel grows." The solution of this problem which appears to satisfy the various conditions most adequately is that episcopal organi zation was developed gradually according to the require ments of different churches ; that, as Jerome more than once distinctly asserts, it was called into being by the experi ence of the need of some coercive power to check dissen sions, repress rising heresies, and supplement the authority of the rapidly diminishing body of the apostles ; and that, taking Tertullian as a trustworthy exponent of the tradi tions of the 3d century, its first appearance was con nected with the latest survivor of the Twelve, the Apostle John. An examination of the early history of the various churches founded in different parts of the world during the 1st century indicates that the establish ment .of Episcopacy was not a single definite and formal act proceeding from a central authority, such as the apostolic council after the fall of Jerusalem, imagined with out sufficient evidence by Rothe, but a gradual and pro gressive development, advancing faster in some places than in others, as the growth of the Christian community and the increasing inability of the apostles personally to regu late the churches they had founded required. St Paul s case presents a picture of what must have been occurring in every part of the Christian world. The apostle had at first to bear in his own person "the care of all the churches" (2 Cor. xi: 28), i.e., of all those which looked up to him as their founder. His insufficiency to bear such a burden alone forced itself upon him as these churches became more numerous. Presbyters and deacons, as Epiphanius has remarked (Heir., Ixxv. 5), could conduct the administration of a church for a while. But occasions arose, as at Ephesus and Crete, when the continuous presence of an authorized ruler became essential to check serious mischief. Letters, how ever " weighty," could not compensate for the want of personal influence. It was impossible for the apostle, even when there was no restraint upon his liberty, to meet all the claims upon him in his own person. He therefore dele gated his authority (whether temporarily or permanently does not materially affect the question) to others who acted by his eoininission, and who were charged among other duties with the perpetuation of the Christian ministry (1 Tim. iii. v. 22 ; 2 Tim. ii. 2 ; Tit. i. 5). We know from his pastoral epistles that St Paul did this to meet the special needs of the churches of Ephesus and Crete; and we may not unreasonably believe that the same measure was resorted to by him as well as by the other apostles in other churches where a similar emergency called for it. The language of St Jerome, which has been so often unfairly employed to weaken the cause of Episcopacy, when properly interpreted points to this origin. He asserts that the episcopal office was established as a remedy against schism, and to put a curb upon the factious spirit which, by the instigation of the devil, had sprung up in various churches, notably in that of Corinth. As long as the apostolic founder of a church was living, and was able personally to interpose, this need for a bishop s authority would not be felt. As this resort closed, as it did very gradually, the development of Episcopacy advanced, with a steady though uneven pro gress, until it became universal. Jerome s oft-quoted state ment that the superiority of bishops to presbyters was rather due to the custom of the church than to any actual ordinance of the Lord, " ex ecclesiae consuetudine magis quam dispositionis Dominican veritate" (Hieron. in Tit. L 5), does not in any way contradict its apostolical origin, which is indeed implied in the context of the passage, but merely signifies that the institution does not rest upon written words of Christ. 1 If we further ask by what authority it was decided that, in Jerome s words (u.s.}, "to root out the thickets of heresies all the responsibility should be deferred to a single person," the testimony of antiquity, scanty, it is true, but adequate, affirms that this authority was apostolic, and points to St John as its chief though not exclusive source. Tertullian expressly asserts that "the order of bishops, if traced back to its origin, will rest upon John as its author " (Adv. Marcion., iv. 5). This statement is confirmed by Clement of Alexandria, who relates that St John, after his return to Ephesus from Patmos, on the death of Domitian, was in the habit of making progresses through the neighbouring districts, " in one place to establish bishops, in another to organize whole churches, in another to ordain individuals indicated by the Holy Spirit" (Apud Euseb., Hist. Ecd. } iii. 23). Irenreus, the disciple of Polycarp, whose authority on such a fact is indis putable, says that his revered master had been " established by apostles in Asia as bishop in the church of Smyrna" (Iren., iii. 3, 4), a statement which is confirmed by Tertullian (De Prescript., 32). Polycarp is also distinctly mentioned as bishop of Smyrna, together with Onesimus, bishop of Ephesus, in the genuine letters of Ignatius. The names of Papias of Hierapolis, Sagaris of Laodicea, and Melito of Sardis, all contemporary bishops with Polycarp, supply " irrefragable evidence of the early and wide extension of Episcopacy throughout proconsular Asia, the scene of St John s latest labours" (Lightfoot, u.s., p. 212), and, " unless all historical testimony is to be thrown aside as worthless, demonstrate that the institution of a localized episcopate what Hooker calls "bishops with restraint," in contrast with the " episcopate at large" exercised by the apostles " cannot be placed later than the closing years of the 1st century, and cannot be dissevered from the aame of St 1 We may compare the language of St Paul, 1 Cor. vii. 10, 12, " to the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord ... to the rest speak I, not the Lord," where the contrast is not, as is sometimes supposed, between the apostle speaking by inspiration and without inspiration, but between the apostle s words and an actual " dictum " of our Lord (Markx. 11). Dean Stanley remarks, " the natural distinction between the sayings of Christ and the sayings of the apostles is here exempli fied, Christ laying down the general rule, the apostles applying it to the particular emergencies which arose out of the relations of the
particular churches with which they had to deal " (Corinthians, p. 110).