from the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus; therefore neither need concern us any further.
1 TIMOTHY 3 AND ITS INTERPRETATIONS
The only passage in the New Testament that treats the episcopal ministry in any detail is found in Paul’s First Letter to Timothy (1 Tim. 3:1–7). Although modern scholars have called Paul’s authorship of this epistle into question, it is generally agreed to be a work of the first century or of the first decade of the second century. The patristic authors who later referred to it certainly took for granted that it was genuine. The passage follows:
The saying is sure: whoever aspires to the office of bishop (episkopen) desires a noble task. Now a bishop must be above reproach, married only once, temperate, sensible, respectable, hospitable, an apt teacher, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, and not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, keeping his children submissive and respectful in every way—for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how can he take care of God’s church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may be puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace and the snare of the devil.
This passage provides the baseline for all later reflection on the nature and character of the ideal bishop. In order to gain a closer understanding of the interpretation of these sentences in the patristic literature, I have traced the quotations of these verses by later authors.47 After an overview of the use of citations from 1 Timothy 3:1–7 among the church fathers, I turn to the exegetical homilies that make this epistle their subject.
Late antique reflection on the ideal bishop developed in step with the historical development of the episcopate. In the first centuries, while there were several episkopoi whose duties were largely administrative, all that was expected of them was that they be respected and upright members of the community. Beginning in the fourth century, the enhanced visibility of the representatives of the church and the increased array of their responsibilities in a largely pagan world were not without consequence: on the one hand, they triggered new reflections on the relative worth of the public activities of the bishop versus the private pursuit of asceticism, and on the other, they made it more imperative than ever that the bishop lead an exemplary life. If that was the case, it was anticipated that his congregation would readily accept his teaching, while the pagans would recognize in him a worthy paragon of the new religion.
Quotations from 1 Timothy 3 in the Church Orders and in Patristic Works
The pattern of citations from 1 Timothy 3:1–7 is surprisingly uneven. Paul’s advice is reiterated in the early church orders in the context of the identification of a suitable candidate for the episcopal ministry, his election, and his ordination. The Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus contains only the briefest allusion to 1 Timothy 3, when it demands that the bishop be “without reproach.”48 The most extensive treatment of the selection of a bishop, his qualities, and his duties is found at various points in the Didascalia, which makes ample use of 1 Timothy 3, augmented by other quotations from scripture. Beyond the usual advice to adhere to a virtuous lifestyle that holds up to all scrutiny, this work is particularly concerned with the financial and judicial aspects of the episcopal office. To discharge these duties properly, the Didascalia notes, the bishop must be impartial, immune to bribery, and capable of discernment.49
The use of citations from the First Letter to Timothy outside the church orders undergoes a significant change after the third century. Authors of the earlier period tend to treat individually each of the positive characteristics that, according to the epistle, recommend a man for the office of episkopos. Snippets of this passage are usually taken out of context, broken up into smaller segments, and reapplied wherever the author sees fit. This is in contrast to later authors, beginning in the late third century, who usually regard 1 Timothy 3:1–7 and the sequence of virtues it contains as an established and immutable list that has to be quoted in its entirety. Moreover, when the earlier writers extract smaller quotations from the original context, they do so to bring home the point that these character traits are expected not just of the episkopos but of every member of the congregation. Later authors continue to postulate the general applicability of these virtues, but they now also relate them specifically to bishops. Over time, the expectations of virtuous conduct of all Christians thus become focused on the person of the bishop as a model of Christian virtues.
In the earlier period, 1 Timothy 3:1–7 is rarely cited anywhere, except the church orders. The tendency at this time to take shorter segments out of context and to apply them in a general sense can be seen in Tertullian’s use of Paul’s demand that the bishop be married only once. Tertullian repeated this injunction of single marriage in his Exhortation to Chastity 50 and On Monogamy.51 In both instances, he explains that the apostle’s advocacy of a single marriage for the priesthood was intended to apply to all the faithful, since all Christians partake of the royal priesthood. Similarly, Tertullian in his On the Soul cites Paul’s introductory phrase “whoever aspires to the office of bishop (episkopen) desires a noble task,” but he does so in a general discussion of concupiscence or desire.52 Tertullian’s Eastern contemporary, Clement of Alexandria, made equally generalized use of Paul’s recommendation that the bishop not be avaricious or litigious. In his On Virginity, he included these words in a general exhortation to virtuous living.53 These authors understand Paul’s words as applying to all Christians, regardless of their rank and status within the community. The episkopos is not singled out, neither because of his exceptional virtues nor by his function nor through his ordination.
Origen, in the late third century, oscillates between the generalizing application of Paul’s passage that had been typical of the earlier period and the assumption that certain men, because they possess the virtues catalogued by Paul, are identified as episkopoi before God. Origen addresses this issue in two passages in his Commentary on Matthew. In the first passage, he explains that those who conform to the virtues set out by Paul for bishops rightfully exercise the power to bind and loose.54 In other words, the possession of virtues precedes and indeed is the precondition for the exercise of penitential authority that is largely the prerogative of bishops. In the second passage, Origen says that Jewish rabbis receive recognition in the eyes of the people because of the external markers of their position, such as the most prominent seat at banquets or in the synagogue. Bishops, by contrast, are recognized in the eyes of God because of their virtues: “For he who has in him the virtues that Paul lists about the bishop, even if he is not a bishop among men, is a bishop before God, even if the [episcopal] rank has not been bestowed on him through the ordination by men.”55 To illustrate his point, Origen invokes the example of the physician and the pilot of a ship. These men retain their skill and ability, even if they lack the opportunity to exercise them. The physician remains a physician even if he has no patients, and the pilot remains a pilot even if he has no ship to navigate. Taken to its logical conclusion, Origen’s reasoning allows that there may be many more “bishops before God” than there are bishops among men. Moreover, it opens the door to the possibility that men who do not qualify as “bishops before God” are nonetheless ordained to the episcopate. This is in tune with Origen’s general tendency to expose the worldliness of the church as an institution. Criticism of this nature would become even more pronounced in the post-Constantinian era.
Origen also seems to be the first author to apply Paul’s catalog of virtues to bishops specifically, although not exclusively. Paul’s advice that the episkopos should enjoy a good reputation, for example, is reiterated by Origen in order to drive home the point that the bishop should be recognized by all as outstanding in every way and that he should thus be a worthy representative of the whole community.56 In his Commentary on the Letter to the Romans, Origen explains that the different ministries of the church must observe the scriptural precepts that apply to them. The bishop will fulfill his ministry, Origen says, by practicing the virtues listed in
