The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1881-07-13

all the fathers as to how the Episcopate
arose, ought to be accepted by both sides
on such question. We shall give it be-
low.
The Episcopate did, undoubtedly,
spring up in the primitive Church at a
very early date-not diocesan or pre-
latical episcopacy, but parochial or
congregational episcopacy-the pastor of
the parent church in city being the
bishop-the p'an'us inter pares, and this
episcopate rapidly grew into formid-
able affair. But in early times the do
cesar bishop was utterly unknown in the
Church. Every -toacn had its bishop.
Every parish had its bishop. The bish-
ops in Italy, North Africa, Asia Minor,
were as plenty as our mayors in the
United States. This is easily proved
There were thirty-fve bishops between
the Tiber and the Tuscan Sea. Ostia
was bishops see at the mouth of the
Tiber, sixteen miles from Rome. Two
miles from Ostia was the see of Portus
Romanus. Two miles in an opposite di-
rection resided the Bishop of Sylvia Can
dida. Between the dioceses of Phalaris
and Hortanum, which were nine miles
apart, lay the diocese of Nepi. The
Bishops of Subaugusta, Tusculum, Viii
tre, and Sigma, it has been observed
could drink tea together Cor the substi-
tute therefor), and each walk back to his
own palace by bedtime. The Bishops
of Minturne, Suessa, Teanum, and Gale
mum could without inconvenience ex-
change pulpits on the Sabbath.
We give the authority on this subject
of Sir Peter King (Lord Chancellor Of
England), who lays it down in his En-
quiry into the Constitution of the Print
tive Church, that:
The ancient dioceses were never said to con
tain churches, only a church.
All the people of diocese did every Sunday
meet together in one place to celebrate divine
service.
When the bishop of church was dead, all
the people of that church met together in one
pldCe W CHOOSe new DlSnOp.
1t is perfectly evident from these facts
that the bishop in the early Church,
after distinction sprung up between
the bishop and the presbyters, was moth
ing in the world but city pastor.
4. But let us return for moment to
the declaration of Dr. Armstrong that
the apostle was the prototype of the
bishop. Our dictum will have no weight
with Episcopalians; we therefore give
the declaration of the most learned and
eminent Bishop Lightfoot, than whom
there is no higher authority in the Epis-
copal Church of England or America. Hi
name is familiar to all the scholars o.
Europe and America. Bishop Lightfoot
in his Dissertation on the Christian Mn
istry, preixed to his commentary Of
Philippians, repudiates the idea of the
development of the Episcopate out of the
Apostolic office, and remarks: "The his
tory of the name itself suggests differ
ent account Of the origin of the Episco-
pate. If bishop was at first used as
synonym for presbyter, and afterwards
came to denote the higher office the
episcopate, properly so called, would
seem to have been developed from the
subordinate Office. In other words, the
episcopate was formed, not out of the
apostolic order by Jocahsatioaa, but out Of
the 2oresbytegiaJ by elevation."
5. We are fortunately able to explain
exactly ho'o the Episcopate (Which is not
referred to as distinguished from the
eldership in the Scriptures did develop
historically. We remarked above that
the testimony of one of the most learned
of all the Church Fathers ought to be &C.
copied by both sides on such question.
We refer to Jerome, who lived in the
fourth century. He has left on record
the following passage, which solves this
puzzle.
Jerome is commenting on Titus i Z: 5,
and we beg DR.. Armstrong to observe
that he reasons precisely as we did from
this passage, and ve'y differently from
DIR. Armstrong himself. Here is what
he says:
Let us carefully consider the words of the
apostle: that you may appoint presbyters