Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T17:52:05.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Episcopal Succession in Egypt

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2011

W. Telfer
W. Telfer
Affiliation:
Master of Selwyn College, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In most English minds, episcopal succession from the apostles is associated with the unbroken series of impositions of episcopal hands, stretching right back to certain layings-on of hands by apostles whereby the first bishops were set apart for an office that perpetuated something of apostolic authority. That this notion is thus prevalent is due to the Tractarians. Characteristic is their emphasis upon a particular action, the imposition of episcopal hands. Professor Einar Molland doubtless had this in his thought when, in the first issue of this Journal, he showed that Irenaeus, when upholding the importance of a regular and continuous succession from the apostles, laid no such emphasis on the imposition of episcopal hands. Professor Molland went on to indicate that Irenaeus himself cannot have received episcopal consecration at the hands of bishops. Only his fellow-presbyters of the Rhône valley can have solemnized his succession to the office of the martyred Pothinus. Professor Molland says, ‘Irenaeus may have been consecrated in the same way as the bishops of Alexandria’. It is probable that a majority of scholars hold the opinion that the early bishops of Alexandria received their episcopal office at the hands of their fellow-presbyters. Nevertheless Bishop Gore claimed that the opinion had not become a certainty, even after the discovery of the support it receives from Severus of Antioch. Gore saw clearly what were the consequences as touching the nature of valid episcopal succession, and endeavoured to maintain doubt concerning the fact of presbyteral ‘consecration’ at Alexandria.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Ecclesiastical History , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , January 1952 , pp. 1 - 13
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1952

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 1 note 1 i. (1950), 12–28.

page 1 note 2 Ibid., 28.

page 1 note 3 ‘On the ordination of the early bishops of Alexandria’, Journal of Theological Studies, iii (1902), 278–282Google Scholar . Gore thinks that while, originally, there had been no distinction between the orders of bishop and presbyter in Alexandria, that stage did not last till the lifetime of Origen. He endeavours to prove Jerome mistaken in thinking that it lasted as late as the time of Heraclas.

page 1 note 4 First published by Brooks, E. W. as a Note in J.T.S., ii (1901), 612–3Google Scholar, entitled ‘The ordination of the early bishops of Alexandria’.

page 2 note 1 Eusebius, H. E., v. 25 (P.G. xx. 508). Both Demetrius and Victor succeeded in a.d. 189 and controversy followed immediately. See Lawlor, H. J. and Oulton, J. E. L., Eusebius (1928), ii. 185Google Scholar.

page 2 note 2 The clergy of the city and the clergy of the Mareotis are the recipients of separate letters from Alexander, Athanasius, and the Synod of Sardica. Perhaps the first expansion of Christianity beyond the city limits was provided for by the creation of a second presbyteral chapter, but equally under the pope of Alexandria.

page 2 note 3 Bibliotheca, 118 (P.G. ciii. 397 BC).

page 2 note 4 See Lawlor and Oulton, op. cit., 218–220. Though Photius says that Origen was ‘ordered to depart from Alexandria’, he had not returned thither. Only news had reached Alexandria of what had been done at Caesarea.

page 3 note 1 Ep. 33, ad Paulam, sect. 4. (P.L. xxii. 447).

page 3 note 2 M. J. Routh, Reliquiae Sacrae, iv. 92.

page 3 note 3 Liberatus Diaconus, Breviarium. (P.L. lxviii. 1012 BC).

page 3 note 4 Chaeremon of Nilopolis and Colon of Hermopolis (Eusebius, H.E., vi. 42 and 46) in the time of Dionysius the Great are the earliest named Egyptian bishops and sees. Hermopolis became El Eschmounein, and Severus calls this bishop Conon. (Patrologia Orientalis, i. 185).

page 3 note 5 See Telfer, W., ‘St. Peter of Alexandria and Arius’, Analecta Bollandiana, 67 (1949), 128CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

page 4 note 1 The Letter to Serapion, in the collection of Festal Letters of Athanasius, and Festal Letter xix. (P.G. xxvi. 1412–1414 and 1423–1430). For the argument by which E. Schwartz fixes the dates of these letters as a.d. 337 and a.d. 346 (for Easter 347) see ‘zur Kirchengeschichte des vierten Jahrhunderts’, Sect. I. (Zeitschrift für d. NT. Wissenschaft u. Kunde d. älteren Kirche, xxxiv [1935] 129–137Google Scholar).

page 4 note 2 Ep. 146, ad Evangelum. (P.L. xxii. 1194 A).

page 4 note 3 Loc. cit., 280.

page 4 note 4 Ipsum dicit episcopum, quem superius presbylerum nominavit. (P.L. xxx. 896 D).

page 5 note 1 Panarion, haer. lxix, 11. (P.G. xlii. 220 B).

page 5 note 2 Sect. 4. (P.G. xii. 744 D).

page 5 note 3 Loc. cit., 281.

page 5 note 4 P. L. xxxv. 2213–2416. For Ambrosiaster, see O. Bardenhewer, Geschickte d. altkirchlichen Litteratur, iii. 520–525.

page 5 note 5 L.c. 2301–2303.

page 5 note 6 L.c, 2302 B. The assumption of episcopal powers by Colluthus in a.d. 324. illustrates the saying of Ambrosiaster. The support given to Ischyras shows that the validity of Colluthian ordinations was widely accepted in Egypt. Athanasius' argument is all from a post-Nicene standpoint.

page 6 note 1 P.L. xvii. 45–508.

page 6 note 2 Denique apud Aegyptum presbyteri consignant, si praesens non sit episcopus. Ibid., 388 CD.

page 6 note 3 The text is given in vol. i of The Sixth Book of the Select Letters of Severus, (Text and Translation Society Publications, 1902), edited by E. W. Brooks. An English translation is in vol. ii, Part I. The passage cited is p. 213. A footnote on p. 207 indicates a marginal entry, to the effect that this letter was written very soon after Severus was banished to Alexandria, thus fixing the date. By ‘orthodox faith’ Severus means, of course, Monophysism.

page 6 note 4 Edited by B. Evetts, with English translation, in Patrologia Orientalis, i. 103–211 and 383ñ518.

page 7 note 1 See the First and Third Prefaces.

page 7 note 2 Op. cit., 383. The history of Peter occupies pp. 383–401.

page 7 note 3 Edited, with French translation, by Hyvernat, H., in Actes des Martyrs de l'Égypt (1886), 247–262.Google Scholar

page 7 note 4 Op. cit., 257.

page 7 note 5 The text is in P.L. lxviii. 969–1050.

page 8 note 1 In his preface (P.L. lxviii. 969C) he claims to relate illa quae in Graeco Alexandriae scripto accepi, vel gravissimorum hominum didici narratione fideli.

page 8 note 2 P.L. lxviii. 1036–1037A. Theodosius was patriarch, a.d. 536–576, and a friend of Severus of Antioch.

page 8 note 3 Patrologia Orientalis, i. 456–461.

page 8 note 4 Edited by Viteau, J., in Passions des saints Écaterina et Pierre d'Alexandrie, Barbara et Anysia (1897)Google Scholar.

page 8 note 5 Op. cit., 83. For the nature of this and the paraphrase described below, see Teller, W., Analecta Bollandiana, 67 (1949), 118–122Google Scholar.

page 8 note 6 Published in Illustrium Christi martyrum lecti triumphi (1660), by F. Combefis, O.P. The passage in question is on p. 220. This paraphrase was one of the sources of Severus Ibn el Moquaffa. Where it says, of Peter's corpse, τῷ ⋯ρχιɛρατικῷ συνθρ⋯νῳ ⋯νἰδρυσαν, Severus' translator was puzzled by the Byzantine ecclesiological term τ⋯ σ⋯νθρονον, meaning the bench round the apse behind the altar, flanking on either side the bishop's throne. The term was often used, as here, as a synonym for the episcopal throne itself. (Cf. our use of ‘the Bench’ in a court of law.) The translator mistook the dative for masculine, transliterated into Arabic characters, and rendered, ‘They took Peter to the church and placed him on the synthronus, until the celebration of the liturgy’. (Patrologia Orientalis, i. 400).

page 9 note 1 Have we here a mystic presence of St. Mark at Alexandria, corresponding to that of St. Peter at Rome, proclaimed by the Roman see since the days of Siricius?

page 9 note 2 See the Appendix to this article.

page 9 note 3 Christian sentiment would not permit the removal of organs, or drawing off of the brain, usual in preparation of bodies for mummification. Such of the funeral technique of Egypt as was inoffensive passed into Christian use.

page 10 note 1 Ap. c. Arianos, 6. (P.G. xxv. 258).

page 10 note 2 H.E., ii. 11. (P.G. lxv. 473 A).

page 10 note 3 ‘A bishop should be made by all the bishops of the province. If time presses, or distance is an obstacle, there must, at the least, three bishops assemble for the consecration, and they must have the written consent of all the absent. In each province confirmation lies, by absolute right, with the metropolitan.’

page 11 note 1 Panarion, haer. lxix. 11. (P.G. xlii. 220 B).

page 11 note 2 Patrologia Orientalis, i. 106.

page 11 note 3 Op. cit., i. 403.

page 11 note 4 Poemen, Apophthegm 78. (P.G. lxv. 341 B).

page 11 note 5 The Annals (also called Contextio Gemmarum) are printed, after Selden's version and another Latin version in P.G. cxi. 903–1156. Our passage is at 982 BC.

page 11 note 1 ‘Let the ancient custom be maintained that the bishop of Alexandria has jurisdiction over all Egypt, including Libya and Pentapolis, on the same lines as hold for the bishop of Rome’.

page 11 note 2 De Baptismo, iii. 16. (P.L. xliii. 149 B).