Bishops vs. Emperors

Political Conflict Continues

Setting the Stage for the next 1000 years

As the Roman Empire began to break up, the Greco-Roman world reverted back to the pre-Roman Hellenistic scenario in which smaller political units--Rome, Greece, Syria, and Egypt (Before Rome - After Rome)--competed with each other for power. But now it was not Roman, Syrian, and Ptolemaic kings warring with each other for power and wealth, but ecclesiastical hierarchs: the Patriarchs and Popes of the Churches that governed the same geographical areas as the former Roman and Hellenistic kingdoms. Thus, the Christian Leadership Conflicts, which in the second and third centuries had been fought out within the Church itself, now from the fourth century on were extended to the world political arena.

This political history of the Church since its establishment as the official state cult of the Roman Empire in the fourth century is a story of conspiracy, intrigue, slander, deception, mob lynchings, falsification, fabrication, and suppression of documents, even war, all carried out under the guise of religion. This situation has continued even up to the present time.

Historical Maps of the Roman Empire

Behind it all:  Bishops Become Kings

The Origin and Development of the Monarchical Episcopate

Origin:

Review Conflict #4 to See How . . .
The Episcopate--the Office of Bishop--Emerged at the Beginning of the Second Century
as the new Church Leadership which had replaced the Original Offices of Prophet & Teacher.

Development:

From the Second Century on the Bishops Progressively Increased their Power
until They Became the Monarchs (Kings) of the Church with Absolute Authority over their "Flocks."
In Church, Book, and Bishop, Peter Kaufman Characterizes Bishops as Corporate-style "Executives"
whose Decisions Led to Profit or Loss and, Almost Always, to the Growth of Their Power.

How Did This Happen? What Is the Basis of Episcopal Authority?
(From Byzantium and the Roman Primacy by Francis Dvornik)

The Principle of Apostolicity: Catholic vs. Orthodox
The Currently Prevailing Model of Church Administration

Questions:

1. Did the Apostles Create the Episcopate and Ordain Bishops?
2. When did the Bishops become Equal in Rank to the Apostles?

Fact:

The earliest bishop lists included only Bishops
and NOT the Apostles who established them.

Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons,

The first to compose a list of bishops, and thus to promote the concept of Apostolicity--
the ordination of Bishops by the Apostles as their successors.

Don't forget: Irenaeus was also the creator of:

• the Scriptural Authority of the Gospels
• the Four-Gospel Canon
• the concept of an "orthodox" Church as opposed to various "heretical" Churches. 

Irenaeus writes in his "Against the Heresies":

"After having founded and established the Church, the holy Apostles confided to Linus the charge of the episcopate . . . his successor was Anacletus and after him, in the third place from the time of the Apostles, the episcopate was entrusted to Clement, who had seen the Apostles. Clement's successor was Evaristus and Evaristus was followed by Alexander. then as the sixth bishop after the time of the Apostles there was Sixtus and after him, Telesphorus, famous for his martyrdom. In turn there was Hyginus, Pius and Anicetus. Soter succeeded Anicetus and was followed by Eleutherius who, at the present time, occupies the episcopal see as the twelfth bishop since the time of the Apostles."

*Note that Irenaeus does NOT include the Apostles among the Bishops of Rome.

Eusebius, Bishop of Caesaria, in his Ecclesiastical History III, chapters 2, 15, & 21, also separates Peter from the Bishops of the Churches of Antioch and Rome, which, according to Eusebius, were founded by Peter. Neither does Eusebius place Mark at the head of the list of Bishops of Alexandria, whose Church he was supposed to have founded.

Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, was the first to remove the distinction between the Apostles and Bishops. In his Letters 3, 43, 66,  67 (4), and in his "Concerning the Unity of the Church," Cyprian claimed that the authority of the Bishops was the same as that of the Apostles.

Dvornik describes the Principle of Apostolicity
as a Major Departure from 
the Original Church Administrative System
which had been based upon . . .

The Principle of Accommodation . . .
to the Political Division of the Roman Empire into Dioceses and Provinces

Before the Fourth Century,
the Church Accommodated itself to the Political Division of the Roman Empire.
The Local Churches were Administered from the Capitals of the Imperial Provinces. 

• Rome was the Capital of the Province of Italy
• Ephesus was the Capital of the Province of Asia
• Corinth was the Capital of the Province of Achaea
• Thessalonica was the Capital of the Province of Macedonia
• Carthage was the Capital of the Province of Africa

Before there were Bishops, there were just Churches:

Paul, in his Second Letter to the Church of Corinth writes:

"to the church of God which is in Corinth together with the saints which are in all of Asia."

Clement, in his Letter to the Corinthians begins:

"The church of God which resides in Rome to the church of God which resides in Corinth."

After the Bishops had taken over the Church

Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, in his Letter to the Romans, II, 2, refers to himself as:

". . .the Bishop of Syria."

Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, elevated the Office of Bishop to the same level of Authority as the Apostles. He also caused the Councils of the Bishops of the Roman Province of Africa to meet in the Capital of the Province, Carthage, and to follow the Protocols of the Meetings of both the Senate of Rome and the Carthaginian Roman Provincial Magistrates (see Dvornik, p. 30, n.4).

Church Councils Officially Sanction the Principle of Accommodation and
Establish a Hierarchy among Bishops.

Canon IV of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicea establishes the Roman Provinces as independent units governed by their Bishops. This Canon also witnesses to the development of a hierarchy among Bishops:

Each new bishop should be installed by the group of bishops resident in the province. If it is not possible for the bishops to come together because of pressing difficulties or because of the distances involved, then at least three bishops [of the province] shall come together and, after having obtained the written agreement of the other bishops, they shall proceed to the consecration. It belongs to the metropolitan of each province to confirm what has been done.

Canon IX of the Synod of Antioch in 341 also supports the Principle of Accommodation and further defines the position and prerogatives of the Metropolitan, the Bishop of the Capital City of each Roman Province:

The bishops of each province should remember that the bishop resident in the capital should occupy himself with all of the province and should exercise surveillance over the whole. Any person with matters to be taken care of, from anywhere in the province, must go to the capital. For this reason, it is decreed that the bishop [of the capital] should have precedence over all the other bishops and they shall not undertake any serious matter without consulting him. This is in accord with the ancient canons of our Fathers.

Shades of Ignatius! Now even the Bishops have their own Bishop!

Popes Innocent I (402-417) and Boniface (418-422) affirm this system and declare that each Province must have its own Metropolitan and that no Metropolitan can meddle in the affairs of another Metropolitan's Province.

Canon VI of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicea recognizes the Roman Administrative Unit of the Diocese, made up of several Provinces and headed by an Exarch. The Bishops of the major capital cities of each Diocese--Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch--are elevated to a position of authority over the Metropolitans and eventually become known as Patriarchs.

In Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis, the ancient custom should be observed, that is, that the Bishop of Alexandria will have power over all this territory, as is the case for the Bishop of Rome who possesses the same power. In similar fashion the respective rights of the Church of Antioch and the churches of the other provinces are to be preserved.

Canon VI of the Second Ecumenical Council of Constantinople confirms Canon VI of Nicea in adapting the Ecclesiastical Organization to the Administrative Division of the Empire into Dioceses.

According to the canons the Bishop of Alexandria must limit himself to the administration of Egypt and the Bishops of the East should only rule over the East--provided that the rights of the Church of Antioch, as noted in the Canons of Nicea, are respected--and the bishops of the dioceses of Asia, Pontus and of Thrace should, respectively, restrict themselves to the administration of their dioceses.

Now that the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy is in Place. . .the Wars Begin!

• Antioch Invades Alexandria - Map  

Diocletian Reorganizes the Empire in 297,
incorporating Alexandria into the dioceses of the East under the control of Antioch

Bishop Meletius of Lycopolis, in the administrative district of Antioch,
ordains bishops in the administrative district of Alexandria

• Constantinople Attacks Alexandria and Antioch - Map

Constantine Moves the Capital of the Empire from Rome to Constantinople

Canon III of the Second Ecumenical Council of Constantinople promotes the Bishop of Constantinople to the second rank in the ecclesiastical hierarchy after the Bishop of Rome
and before the Bishops of Antioch and Alexandria.

• Alexandria Counterattacks Constantinople and Attacks Antioch - Map

Bishop Timothy of Alexandria participates in an intrigue that forces Bishop Gregory of Constantinople to resign from his Patriarchate. Gregory had been the President of the Second Ecumenical Council that had elevated Constantinople above Alexandria.

Bishop Theophilus of Alexandria (385-412) uses the most unethical means to conspire against the Church of Constantinople. He obtains an imperial decree humiliating that Church and causes Bishop John Chrysostom of Constantinople to be deposed and sent into exile, where he eventually died. 

Bishop Cyril of Alexandria (412-444), Theophilus' nephew and protege, caused Bishop Nestorius of Constantinople to be accused of heresy, condemned by the Council of Ephesus in 431, deposed and sent into exile where he died. Cyril reportedly influenced imperial officials with lavish gifts to accomplish his purpose. It was Cyril who prompted a mob of Christian monks in Alexandria to lynch the Greek philosopher Hypatia, Sources, Ginny Adair,  Ockham's Razor, Mangasarian, Hubbard, Lewis

Bishop Dioscorus of Alexandria attempted to impose Monophysitism on the whole Church at the Second Council of Ephesus in 449. Using the most unethical means, Dioscorus caused the Bishop of Alexandria to be ranked first at this Council, Rome second, Jerusalem third, Antioch fourth, and Constantinople fifth. Bishop Flavian of Constantinople died a few days after the Council from wounds received at the hands of the henchmen of Dioscorus. The Council of Ephesus was later nullified and has been known since as the "Robber Synod."

Just in Case You're Wondering. . .
Why the Popes Have Not Yet Become Involved in these Conflicts,
It's Because They Were Busy Dealing with the Germanic Barbarians
Who Were Overrunning the Western half of the Empire.
Attila the Hun Was on the Rampage!

• Constantinople Counterattacks Alexandria--Inadvertently Hits Rome - Map

Canon XXVIII of the Fourth Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon in 451, in the absence of representatives of Bishop Leo of Rome, gives the Bishop of Constantinople the title of Ecumenical Patriarch of New Rome and confirms his precedence over Alexandria and Antioch. This Canon also places within the Jurisdiction of Constantinople the three Dioceses of Thrace, Asia, and Pontus, as well as all future territories which would be converted by missionaries. This would become highly significant since all the Slavic nations which would be converted to Christianity in the Future would be under Constantinople.

• Rome Counterattacks Constantinople and Everybody Else Forever - Map - 4^th Crusade

Although Canon XXVIII of Chalcedon was aimed at Alexandria, Bishop Leo of Rome saw it as a threat to the Papacy and rejected it. From this point on, the Bishop of Rome actively promotes and pursues the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome over the entire Church. This will eventually result in the Petrine Doctrine and the Infallibility of the Pope. But that's another story. 

Later Developments in the Monarchical Episcopate

Caesaro-Papism vs. Papo-Caesarism
or
Kings vs. Popes

Some confrontations between Emperors and Bishops:

Constantine vs. Athanasius
Ambrose vs. Theodosius
Chrysostom vs. Eudoxia
Gelasius vs. Anastasius
Henry IV vs. the Pope
Charlemagne vs. the Pope
Napoleon vs. the Pope