According to the other, or Presbyterian theory of bishops, the origin and general history of the institution are thus sketched. In the earliest churches no traces of a hierarchy, it is affirmed, are to be found. The superintendents or directors appointed over the first churches by the Apos tles or chosen by the members of the congrega tions. were unquestionably styled indifferently presbyters or bishops—the former title being bor rowed from the Jewish synagogue, the superin tendent or director of which was called the elder far. prcsbytcros) ; the latter (episcopos) being familiar to the heathen converts as the title of a civil office corresponding in function to that of a Christian pastor. But this original equality (lid not last long. As new churches multiplied, those formed round the original church, though each having its own bishop or presbyter, re mained in confederacy; and in the meetings of the pastors to regulate the common affairs one must of necessity preside, most likely determined by age, superior piety, or other qualification. From this simple circumstance, as is indicated by Clemens Alexandrinus in the beginning of the Third Century, sprang the habit of looking upon one of the bishops as superior to the others: and this superiority, at first personal and accidental, soon came naturally to be regarded as attached to the bishop of a particular congregation. In his case the word bishop came to signify an over seer of pastors rather than an overseer of peo ple. The monarchical form of State government favored this tendency, and converted the presi dent of a presbytery into the privileged superin tendent of his brother pastors. The assumption was resisted by the presbyters at first, but from the middle of the Fifth Century episcopacy, or the domination of bishops, continued to gain the upper hand over presbyterianism, or equality of all pastors.
In the Third Century bishops appear still de pendent on the advice of their presbyters and the consent of the people, and shared with the former the office of teaching and the cure of souls. As yet their exclusive privileges or func tions were limited to confirmation, ordination of ministers, consecration of sacred things, settle ment of secular differences among Christians, and management of the revenues of the Church. But the tendency to subordination and unity did not rest here. Among the bishops, at first all equal, those of the larger and more important cities began gradually to acquire a superiority over those of inferior cities. When Christianity was made the religion of the Roman Empire, the bish ops became more and more monarchical, and put themselves on the footing of ecclesiastical princes. The chief cities of the larger civil prov
inces rose to be seats of extensive dioceses, the bishops of these assuming the distinctive titles of patriarch, metropolitan, papa—titles of cour tesy that had long been applied to all bishops: while the less important provinces, with their capitals and bishops, became subordinate. Among these provincial bishops, again, three, from obvious causes, acquired a prominence that cast all the rest into the background—namely, Alex andria, Constantinople, and Rome. The begin nings of the ascendency of the Roman Pontiff, whatever may be thought of its claim to divine institution, are indisputably discernible as early as the end of the Second Century.
In the Roman Catholic Church the episcopal office is the foundation of the whole system. Christ's Apostles are held to have transferred their functions to the episcopacy as a body. Ev ery bishop, therefore, exercises within his own diocese, first, the jus magisterii—i.e. the right of maintaining and propagating the orthodox faith: and second, the jus ordinis, or regulation of the sacred and mysterious rites of the priestly office, some of which are transferred to the in ferior clergy-, as jura communia, while others re main the privileges of the bishop (jura propria). Among episcopal prerogatives, in addition to those already mentioned as assigned to them in the Third and Fourth centuries, are anointing of kings, consecration of abbots, etc. They have also the management of the Church property in their respective dioceses, and the oversight of all ecclesiastical institutions. They are appointed by the Pope. In the United States, the clergy of the diocese who are entitled to share this func tion send to Rome a list of three names in order of preference, designating them as dignissimus, dignior, and dignus: a similar list is submitted by the other bishops of the province. The Pope may be guided by these reeommendetions and nominate one of these men, or lie may set the lists aside altogether and make his own selec tion. In some European and South American countries, as a result of past compromises or concordats. the head of the State is allowed to nominate, subject, of course, to Papal eonfirma Hon. The consecration takes place normally at the hands of three bishops, this number having been required from post-Apostolic times, though a single consecrator would suffice for validity. After the elaborate ceremonies of consecration, the new bishop takes his place upon his throne, and gives his blessing to the people committed to his oversight. (For the duties of the special ments worn by Roman Catholic bishops, see