Matt wrote:He says the (pastoral) 'office' was a late development, but then says it started with Ignatius and lists his life as (35-107). That's pretty early!
What's more, he says the 'one bishop' rule didn't catch on in other regions, but then the footnote lists a bunch of regions that it DID catch on in that early. This hurt his point in my opinion.
Food for thought:
Eusebius wrote:History of the Church, Book 2,
Chapter 1 -- The Course Pursued by the Apostles After the Ascension of Christ.
1 First, then, in the place of Judas, the betrayer, Matthias,1 who, as has been shown was also one of the Seventy, was chosen to the apostolate. And there were appointed to the diaconate, for the service of the congregation, by prayer and the laying on of the hands of the apostles, approved men, seven in number, of whom Stephen was one. He first, after the Lord, was stoned to death at the time of his ordination by the slayers of the Lord, as if he had been promoted for this very purpose. And thus he was the first to receive the crown, corresponding to his name, which belongs to the martyrs of Christ, who are worthy of the meed of victory.
2 Then James, whom the ancients surnamed the Just on account of the excellence of his virtue, is recorded to have been the first to be made bishop of the church of Jerusalem. This James was called the brother of the Lord because he was known as a son of Joseph, and Joseph was supposed to be the father of Christ, because the Virgin, being betrothed to him, "was found with child by the Holy Ghost before they came together," as the account of the holy Gospels shows.
3 But Clement (of Alexandria, circa 180-215) in the sixth book of his Hypotyposes writes thus: "For they say that Peter and James and John after the ascension of our Saviour, as if also preferred by our Lord, strove not after honor, but chose James the Just bishop of Jerusalem."
History of the Church, Book 4,
Chapter 5 -- The Bishops of Jerusalem from the Age of Our Saviour To the Period Under Consideration
(First Fourteen Successors (till about 134 A.D.):
All Relatives of James/Jesus)!
1The chronology of the bishops of Jerusalem I have nowhere found preserved in writing; for tradition says that they were all short lived. 2But I have learned this much from writings, that until the siege of the Jews, which took place under Adrian, there were fifteen bishops in succession there, all of whom are said to have been of Hebrew descent, and to have received the knowledge of Christ in purity, so that they were approved by those who were able to judge of such matters, and were deemed worthy of the episcopate. For their whole church consisted then of believing Hebrews who continued from the days of the apostles until the siege which took place at this time; in which siege the Jews, having again rebelled against the Romans, were conquered after severe battles. 3But since the bishops of the circumcision ceased at this time, it is proper to give here a list of their names from the beginning. The first, then, was James, the so-called brother of the Lord; the second, Symeon; the third, Justus; the fourth, Zacchaeus; the fifth, Tobias; the sixth, Benjamin; the seventh, John; the eighth, Matthias; the ninth, Philip; the tenth, Seneca; the eleventh, Justus; the twelfth, Levi; the thirteenth, Ephres; the fourteenth, Joseph; and finally, the fifteenth, Judas. 4These are the bishops of Jerusalem that lived between the age of the apostles and the time referred to, all of them belonging to the circumcision.
History of the Church 3:11:1-2
After the martyrdom of James (62AD) and the conquest of Jerusalem which immediately followed (70AD), it is said that those of the apostles and disciples of the Lord that were still living came together from all directions with those that were related to the Lord according to the flesh (for the majority of them also were still alive) to take counsel as to who was worthy to succeed James. They all with one consent pronounced Symeon, the son of Clopas, of whom the Gospel also makes mention; to be worthy of the episcopal throne of that parish. He was a cousin, as they say, of the Savior.
History of the Church 4:22:4-5
The same author [i.e. Hegesippus (a very early Jewish Church historian, circa 110-180)] also describes the beginnings of the heresies which arose in his time, in the following words: "And after James the Just had suffered martyrdom, as the Lord had also on the same account, Symeon, the son of the Lord's uncle, Clopas, was appointed the next bishop. All proposed him as second bishop because he was a cousin of the Lord. Therefore, they called the Church a virgin, for it was not yet corrupted by vain discourses" (bold, mine).
Do Barna and Viola comment on any of this?
See also!!!
Evidence of the Jewish Background of the Early Church:
Jewish Leadership in the Early Church
(and Influence of the Synagogue, etc.)
by Dr. Ron Moseley
Btw, Moseley identifies each successor of James as "elders" in a singular sense (something like we'd say "a senior pastor"). While that's a separate discussion; I thought it noteworthy that Eusebius identified them as "bishops." Moseley has a lot of good information regardless of his ecclesiology.
In Acts 15, James suddenly "appears" as the final decision maker. Something like a "head elder, senior pastor"... or bishop....
Thanks,
