How did the Apostles appoint the first bishops?

Answer 1

Bishops began to exist with the ordination of the twelve apostles at the Last Supper. Every legitimate bishop in the world is ordained by a legitimate bishop who can trace his ordination all the way back to those first twelve apostles. St. Paul speaks of the Bishops and not doing anything without them.

Answer 2

A:

Catholic tradition says that the apostle Peter travelled to Rome to lead the Church there, taking the role of bishop and becoming the first pope. In spite of that tradition, we do not really know who was the first bishop in the Christian Church or how he was appointed. Acts of the Apostles tells us that the apostles were the early leaders of the Church, but the role of bishop did not exist until the second century, when the Church had grown large enough to require 'supervisors', or bishops to be appointed in each major Christian centre. It therefore appears that the apostles did not appoint bishops, nor did they create a precedent for the appointment of bishops after they were gone.

The epistle known as 1 Clement provides us some evidence for the later development of the role of bishop, as does the Shepherd of Hermas. Francis Aloysius Sullivan (From Apostles to Bishops: The Development of the Episcopacy in the Early Church) says that when 1 Clement was written, in the 90s of the first century, the structure of leadership at Rome did not differ much from that at Corinth. That letter gives us good reason to conclude that there was no bishop in charge of the church of Corinth at the time. The terms used in the letter to describe the leaders of the Corinthian church - hegoumenoi, episcopoi, presbuteroi, archontes - are all in the plural. The term most frequently used is presbuteroi; Clement calls on those guilty of the schism to "submit to the presbyters," and to allow the "flock of Christ to be at peace with its duly appointed presbyters." It seems inconceivable that, if there had been a bishop in charge of the church of Corinth at that time, Clement would not have said something about the obligation of the guilty parties to submit to their bishop or about his role in restoring good order to his church. On this evidence, neither Corinth nor Rome appears to have yet had a bishop appointed by the end of the first century, and it is equally unlikely that that any other Christian centre had.

The Shepherd of Hermas is a work generally agreed to have been written in Rome during the first half of the second century. As in 1 Clement, the term used here to refer to people in leadership roles are all in the plural: "leaders" (prohegoumenois); "presbyters who preside over the church (tôn presbuterôn tôn proistamenôn tês ekklesias); "leaders of the church and occupants of the seat of honour" (prohegoumenois tês ekklesias kai tois prôtokathreditais). The Shepherd makes no mention of any one person having a role of leadership in the church.

Answer 3

It appears that bishops began to be appointed some time in the first half of the second century, as the Christian Church grew large enough to require the appointment of 'supervisors', or bishops, in major Christian centres.

Francis Aloysius Sullivan (From Apostles to Bishops: The Development of the Episcopacy in the Early Church) says that 1 Clement, written in the 90s, gives us good reason to conclude that there was no bishop in charge of the church of Corinth at that time. The terms used in that letter to describe the leaders of the Corinthian church hegoumenoi, episcopoi, presbuteroi, archontes are all in the plural. The term most frequently used is presbuteroi; Clement calls on those guilty of the schism to "submit to the presbyters," and to allow the "flock of Christ to be at peace with its duly appointed presbyters." It seems inconceivable that, if there had been a bishop in charge of the church of Corinth at that time, Clement would not have said something about the obligation of the guilty parties to submit to their bishop or about his role in restoring good order to his church. Sullivan also says that the consensus of scholars is that the available evidence indicates that the church of Rome was led by a college of presbyters, rather than a single bishop, for at least several decades of the second century.

Another reason for the common opinion that a college of presbyters led the church of Rome well into the second century is based on the Shepherd of Hermas, a work generally agreed to have been written in Rome during the first half of that century. As in 1 Clement, the term used here to refer to people in leadership roles are all in the plural: "leaders" (prohegoumenois); "presbyters who preside over the church (tôn presbuterôn tôn proistamenôn tês ekklesias); "leaders of the church and occupants of the seat of honor" (prohegoumenois tês ekklesias kai tois prôtokathreditais). The Shepherd makes no mention of any one person having a role of leadership in the church.

The first bishop was not necessarily appointed in either Rome or Corinth, but such an appointment was unlikely before the beginning of the second century.

Answer 4

The first bishops were appointed by Our Blessed Lord, Jesus Christ, as the Last Supper, the night before His passion - they were the twelve Apostles.