Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

of interment, without which it is illegal | ficers to whom belonged some species of to inter the body, and the minister offici- superintendency. (See Harpocrat. or ating is liable to a penalty. The Registrar- Suidas in voc. níσkоTOS.) Cicero (Ad General's Bill is now the only true bill; Att. lib. vii. ep. 11) speaks of himself as and why the old one should still be pub- appointed an iσkоnos in Campania. lished, is only to be accounted for on the supposition that it is obligatory on the parish clerks by the terms of their charter. [REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS, &c.]

BISHOP, the name of that superior order of pastors or ministers in the Christian Church who exercise superintendency over the ordinary pastors within a certain district, called their see or diocese, and to whom also belongs the performance of those higher duties of Christian pastors, ordination. consecration (or dedication to religious purposes) of persons or places, and finally excommunication.

The word itself is corrupted Greek. *ExloκOTOS (episcopos) became episcopus when the Latins adopted it. They introduced it among the Saxons, with whom, by losing something both at the beginning and the end, it became piscop, or, as written in Anglo-Saxon characters, Birceop. This is the modern bishop, in which it is probable that the change in the orthography (though small) is greater than in the pronunciation. Other modern languages retain in like manner the Greek term slightly modified according to the peculiar genius of each, as the Italian, vescovo; Spanish, obispo; and French, évêque; as well as the German, bischof; Dutch, bisschop; and Swedish, biskop.

The word episcopus literally signifies "an inspector or superintendent ;" and the etymological sense expresses even now much of the actual sense of the word. The peculiar character of the bishop's office might be expressed in one word-superintendency. The bishop is the overseer, overlooker, superintendent in the Christian Church, and an exalted station is allotted to him corresponding to the important duties which belong to his office. It was not, however, a term which was invented purposely to describe the new officer which Christianity introduced into the social system. The term existed before, both among the Greeks and Latins, to designate certain civil of

It has long been a great question in the Christian Church what kind of superintendency it was that originally belonged to the bishop. This question, as to whether it was originally a superintendency of pastors or of people, may be briefly stated thus:-Those who maintain that it was a superintendency of pastors challenge for bishops that they are an order of ministers in the Christian Church distinct from the order of presbyters, and standing in the same high relation to them that the apostles did to the ordinary ministers in the church; that, in short, they are the successors and representatives of the apostles, and receive at their consecration certain spiritual graces by devolution and transmission from them, which belong not to the common presbyters. This is the view taken of the original institution and character of the bishop in the Roman Catholic Church, in the English Protestant Church, and, we believe, in all churches which are framed on an episcopal constitution. Episcopacy is thus regarded as of divine institution, inasmuch as it is the appointment of Jesus Christ and the apostles, acting in affairs of the church under a divine direction. There are, on the other hand, many persons who contend that the superintendency of the bishop was originally in no respect different from the superintendency exercised by presbyters as pastors of particular churches. They maintain that, if the question is referred to Scripture, we there find that bishop and presbyter are used indifferently to indicate the same persons or class of persons; and that there is no trace in the Scriptures of two distinct orders of pastors; and that if the reference is made to Christian antiquity, we find no trace of such a distinction till about two hundred years after the time of the apostles. The account which they give of the rise of the distinction which afterwards existed between bishops and mere presbyters is briefly this:

When in the ecclesiastical writers of the first three centuries we read of the

bishops, as of Antioch, Ephesus, Carthage, Rome, and the like, we are to understand the presbyters who were the pastors of the Christian churches in those cities. While the Christians were few in each city, one pastor would be sufficient to discharge every pastoral duty among them; but when the number increased, or when the pastor became enfeebled, assistance would be required by him, and thus other presbyters would be introduced into the city and church of the pastor, forming a kind of council around him. Again, to account for the origin of dioceses or rural districts which were under the superintendency of the pastors, it was argued that it was the cities which first received Christianity, and that the people in the country places remained for the most part heathens or pagans (so called from pagus, a country village) after the cities were Christianized; but that nevertheless efforts were constantly being made to introduce Christian truth into the villages around the chief cities, and that, whenever favourable opportunities were presented, the chief pastor of the city encouraged the erection of a church, and appointed some presbyter either to reside constantly in or near to it, or to visit it when his services were required, though still residing in the city, and there assisting the chief pastor in his ministrations. The extent of country which thus formed a diocese of the chief pastor would depend, it is supposed. on the civil distributions of the period; that is, the dioceses of the bishops of Smyrna, or any other ancient city, would be the country of which the inhabitants were accustomed to look to the city for the administration of justice, or in general to regard it as the seat of that temporal authority to which they were immediately subject.

All this is represented as having gone on without any infringement on the rights of the chief pastor, of whoin there was a regular series. Lists of them are preserved in many of the more ancient churches, ascending, on what may be regarded sufficient historical testimony, and with few breaks in the continuity, even into the second and first centuries. Bishops are, however, found in churches

for which this high antiquity cannot be claimed. In these cases they are supposed to be either in countries which did not fully receive Christianity in the very earliest times, or that the bishops or chief pastors delegated a portion of that superior authority which they possessed over the other presbyters to the presbyter settled in one of the churches which was originally subordinate. This is supposed to have been the origin of the distinction among the chief pastors of bishops and archbishops, there being still a slight reservation of superintendency and authority in the original over the newly created chief pastors.

If this view of the origin of the episcopal character and office be correct, it will follow that originally there was no essential difference between the bishop and the presbyter, and also that the duties which belong to the pastor of a Christian congregation were performed by the bishop. But when the increase of the number of Christians rendered assistants necessary, and this became a permanent institution, then the chief pastor would divest himself of those simpler and easier duties, which occasioned nevertheless a great consumption of time, as a matter at once of choice and of necessity. Having to think and to consult for other congre gations beside that which was peculiarly his own, and to attend generally to schemes for the protection or extension of Christianity, he would have little time remaining for catechizing, preaching, baptizing, or other ordinary duties; and especially when it was added that he had to attend councils, and even was called to assist and advise the temporal governors in the civil and ordinary affairs of state. When Christianity, instead of being persecuted, was countenanced and encouraged by the temporal authorities, it was soon perceived that the bishop would be a very important auxiliary to the temporal authorities; while in ages when few besides ecclesiastical persons had any share of learning, or what we call mental cultivation, it is manifest that the high offices of state, for the performance of the duties of which much discernment and much information were required, must necessarily be filled by

ecclesiastics, who might be expected, asking and the people in respect of all affairs connected with religion; and that they are a constituent part of that great council of the realm which is called Parliament.

we know to have been the case, to unite spiritual pre-eminence with their high political offices. The Lord High Chancellor of England was always an ecclesiastic, and generally a bishop, to the time of Sir Thomas More, in the reign of Henry VIII.

The functions which belong to the bishop are in all countries nearly the same. We shall speak of them as they exist in the English Church. 1. Confirmation, when children on the threshold of maturity ratify or confirm the engagement entered into by their sponsors at baptism, which is done in the presence of a bishop, who may be understood in this ceremony to recognise or receive into the Christian church the persons born within his diocese. 2. Ordination, or the appointment of persons deemed by him properly qualified, to the office of deacon in the church, and afterwards of presbyter or priest. 3. Consecration of presbyters when they are appointed to the office of bishop. 4. Dedication, or consecration of edifices erected for the performance of Christian services or of ground set apart for religious purposes, as especially for the burial of the dead. 5. Administration of the effects of persons deceased, of which the bishop is the proper guardian, until some person has proved before him a right to the distribution of those effects either as the next of kin or by virtue of the testament of the deceased. 6. Adjudication in questions respecting matrimony and divorce. 7. Institution or collation to vacant churches in his diocese. 8. Superintendence of the conduct of the several pastors in his diocese, in respect of morals, of residence, and of the frequency and proper performance of the public services of the church. And, 9, Excommunication; and, in the case of ministers, deprivation and degradation.

These are the most material of the functions which have been retained by the Christian bishops, or, if we adopt the theory of apostolic succession, which have from the beginning been exercised by them. To these it remains to be added, that in England they are the medium of communication between the

Whatever kind of moot, assembly, or council for the advice of the king there was in the earliest times of the English kingdom, the bishops were chief persons in it. The charters of the early Norman kings usually run in the form that they are granted by the assent and advice of the bishops as well as others; and when the ancient great council became moulded into the form of the modern parliament, the bishops were seated, as we now see them, in the Upper House. It is argued that they sit as barons [BARON], but the writ of summons runs to them as bishops of such a place, without any reference to the temporal baronies held by them. Down to the period of the Reformation they were far from being the only ecclesiastical persons who had seats among the hereditary nobility of the land, many abbots and priors having been summoned also, till the houses over which they presided were dissolved, and their office thus extinguished. Henry VIII. created at that time six new bishoprics, and gave the bishops placed in them seats in the same assembly. But before the nation had adjusted itself in its new position, there was a powerful party raised in the country, who maintained that a government of the church by bishops was not accordant to the primitive practice, and who sought to bring back the administration of ecclesiastical affairs to the state in which there was an equality among all ministers, and where the authority was vested in synods and assemblies. Churches upon this model had been formed at Geneva and in Scotland; and when this party became predominant in the parliament of 1642, a bill was passed for removing the bishops from their seats, to which the king gave a reluctant and forced assent. soon followed by an entire dissolution of the Episcopal Church. At the Restoration this act was repealed, or declared invalid, and the English bishops have ever since had seats in the House of Lords. They form the Lords Spiritual,

It was

and constitute one of the three estates of the realm, the Lords Temporal and the Commons (the tiers etat) being the other two. Out of this has arisen the question, now laid at rest, whether a bill has passed the House in a constitutional manner, if it has happened that no Lord Spiritual was present at any of its stages. When the House becomes a court for the trial of a peer charged with a capital offence, the bishops withdraw, it being held unsuitable to the character of ministers of mercy and peace to intermeddle in affairs of blood.

For the execution of many of the duties belonging to their high function they have officers, as chancellors, judges, and officials, who hold courts in the bishop's

name.

The election of bishops is supposed by those who regard the order as not distinguished originally from the common presbyter, to have been in the people who constituted the Christian church in the city to which they were called; afterwards, when the number of Christians was greatly increased, and there were numerous assistant presbyters, in the presbyters and some of the laity conjointly. But after a time the presbyters only seem to have possessed the right, and the bishop was elected by them assembled in chapter. The nomination of such an important officer was, however, an object of great importance to the temporal princes, and they so far interfered that at length they virtually obtained the nominatiou. In England there is still the shadow of an election by the chapters in the cathedrals. When a bishop dies, the event is certified to the king by the chapter. The king writes to the chapter that they proceed to elect a successor. This letter is called the congé d'élire. The king, however, transmits to them at the same time the name of some person whom he expects them to elect. If within a short time they do not proceed to the election, the king may nominate by his own authority; if they elect any other than the person named in the king's writ, they incur the severe penalties of a præmunire, which includes forfeiture of goods, outlawry, and other evils. The bishop thus elected is confirmed in his

new office under a royal commission, when he takes the oaths of allegiance, supremacy, canonical obedience, and against simony. He is next installed, and finally consecrated, which is performed by the archbishop or some other bishop named in a commission for the purpose, assisted by two other bishops. No person can be elected a bishop who is under thirty years of age.

The inequalities which prevailed in the endowments for bishops in England, have lately been in a great measure removed. Their churches, which are called cathedrals (from cathedra, a seat of dignity), are noble and splendid edifices, the unimpeachable witnesses remaining among us of the wealth, the splendour, and the architectural skill of the ecclesiastics of England in the middle ages. The cathedral of the Bishop of London is the only modern edifice. The bishop's residence is styled a palace. By 2 & 3 Vict. c. 18, bishops are empowered to raise money on their sees for the purpose of building houses of residence. The act 6 & 7 Wm. IV. c. 77, made provision prospectively for the erection of a residence for the new bishops of Ripon and Manchester.

In this country, and generally throughout Europe, an Archbishop has his own diocese, in which he exercises ordinary episcopal functions like any other bishop in his diocese, yet he has a distinct character, having a superiority and a certain jurisdiction over the bishops in his province, who are sometimes called his suffragans, together with some peculiar privileges. This superiority is indicated in the name. The word or syllable arch is the Greek element apx (which occurs in ȧpxʼn, ápxós, ápxwv, &c.), and denotes precedence or authority. It is used extensively throughout ecclesiastical nomenclature, as may be seen in Du Cange's Glossary, where there are the names of many ecclesiastical officers into whose designations this word enters, who were either never introduced into the English church, or have long ceased to exist. The word arch also occurs in some civil titles of rank, as arch-duke. Why this word was used peculiarly in ecclesiastical affairs rather than any other term de

BISHOP.

[377]

noting superiority, is probably to be ex-, rope was this:-An establishment was plained by the fact that the term apxepeús, gained by some zealous preacher in some one city; there he built a church, perfor chief-priest, occurs in the Greek text of the Scriptures. Patriarch is a com- formed in it the rites of Christianity, and pound of the same class, denoting the lived surrounded by a company of clerks chief-father; and is used in ecclesiastical engaged in the same design and moving nomenclature to denote a bishop who has according to his directions. From this authority not only over other bishops, central point, these persons were sent but over the whole collected bishops of from time to time into the country around divers kingdoms or states; it is analogous for the purpose of promoting the recepin signification to the word pope (papa), tion of Christianity, and thus other a bishop who has this extended super- churches became founded, offspring or intendence. There is an official letter of children, to use a very natural figure, of the Emperor Justinian which is addressed the church from whence the missionaries were sent forth. When one of these subto "John, Archbishop of Rome, and Patriarch; and several of Justinian's ordinate missionaries had gained an ecclesiastical constitutions are addressed establishment in one of the more conto "Epiphanius, Archbishop of Constan- siderable cities, remote from the city in which the original church was seated, tinople, and Patriarch." there was a convenience in conferring upon him the functions of a bishop; and the leading design, the extension of Christianity, was more effectually answered than by reserving all the episcopal Thus powers in the hands of the person who presided in the mother-church. other centres became fixed; other bishoprics established; and as the prelate who presided in the first of these churches was still one to whom precedence at least was due, and who still retained in his hands some superintendence over the Thus in England, newer bishops, archbishop became a suitable designation. when there was that new beginning of Christianity in the time of Pope Gregory, Augustine, the chief person of the mission, gained an early establishment at Canterbury, the capital of the kingdom of Kent, through the favour of King Ethelbert. There, in this second conversion, as it may be called, the first Christian church was established, and from thence the persons were sent out, who at length Christianized the whole of the southern part of England. Paulinus, in like manner, a few years later, gained a similar establishment in the kingdom of Northumbria, through the zeal of King Edwin, who received Christianity, and built him a church at York, one of his royal cities, which may be regarded as the chief city of Edwin's kingdom. From York Christianity was diffused over the northern parts of England, as from

Whatever might be the precise functions
of the episcopus (èníσKOTOS, bishop), the
term itself occurs in the writings of St.
Paul, Phil. i. 1, 1 Tim. iii. 2, and else-
where; but the word ἀρχιεπίσκοπος, οι
archbishop, does not occur till about or
after the fourth century. Cyrillus Ar-
chiepiscopus Hierosolymitanorum, and
Celestinus Archiepiscopus Romanorum,
occur under these designations in the pro-
ceedings of the council held at Ephesus,
A.D. 431. Other terms by which an arch-
bishop is sometimes designated are pri-
mate and metropolitan. The first of these
is formed from the Latin word primus,
"the first," and denotes simple precedency,
the first among the bishops. The latter
is a Latin word (metropolitanus) formed
from the Greek, which rendered literally
into English would be the man of the me-
tropolis or mother-city, that is, the bishop
who resides in that city which contains
the mother-church of all the other
churches within the province or district in
which he is the metropolitan. The Greek
word is metropolites (μητροπολίτης.)

The meaning of the term metropolitan
is supposed to point out the origin of the
distinction between bishop and arch-
bishop, or, in other words, the origin of
the superiority of the archbishop over
the bishops in his province, when it is
not to be attributed to mere personal as-
sumption, or to be regarded only as an
The way in which
unmeaning title.
Christianity became extended over Eu-

« ForrigeFortsett »