In the formative years of the church its ministry exhibited amazing variety and adaptability. Emerging at Pentecost as a Jewish sect, the church naturally modeled its ministry in part on patterns borrowed from the synagogue. But the Spirit of Christ also fashioned new functions and channels of ministry through which the grace of God might be communicated. The principal “orders” of ministry that arose were those of the elder (bishop) and the deacon.
From the early chapters of Acts it is evident that at the first the apostles directed the life of the infant church. Presently they were joined in their ministry by evangelists and prophets who assisted them in spreading the gospel far and wide. As new communities of Christians sprang up in Judea, Samaria, and throughout the Gentile world, the need emerged for official structures of ministry to direct the affairs of local churches. The New Testament generally employs three terms to designate the two official orders of ministry that were established: elder, bishop, and deacon. Alongside these orders existed a constellation of other local and itinerant ministries.
Elder-Bishops
There is no record to indicate when the office of elder, or presbyter (presbuteros), was instituted. Elders are found early in the Christian communities of Judea (Acts 11:30), while Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in charge of the congregations they established on their first missionary journey (Acts 14:23). This office was borrowed, though modified, from the Jewish synagogue, where a company of elders ruled the religious and civil life of the community. Primarily custodians of the Mosaic Law, these Jewish elders taught and interpreted its precepts and administered discipline to its offenders.
The New Testament also designates Christian elders by the name episkopos (“bishop,” or “overseer”). Although sometimes disputed, the evidence strongly points to this identification. In Acts 20:17 Paul summons the elders of the church at Ephesus, while in verse 28 he calls these same men “overseers” (bishops). In Philippians 1:1 Paul extends formal greetings to all the Christians at Philippi, along with their bishops and deacons, but he takes no notice of elders. This omission is inexplicable unless overseers (bishops) and elders were the same. In 1 Timothy 3:1–13 Paul sets forth the qualifications of overseers. Yet he specifically mentions elders in 1 Timothy 5, where he ascribes to them the same functions of ruling and teaching that in the earlier passage are attributed to bishops (cf. 1 Tim. 3:4–5; 5:17). In Titus 1:5–6, after commanding Titus to appoint elders in all the churches in Crete, Paul counsels him to restrict his choice to men who are “blameless.” He then qualifies this requirement by adding, “Since an overseer is entrusted with God’s work, he must be blameless,” a pointless argument if the two terms do not designate the same office (v. 7).
“Elder” and “bishop,” then, are synonymous, but whereas “elder” indicates the great dignity surrounding this office, “bishop” signifies its function of rule or oversight. In the New Testament oversight is especially related to the figure of the shepherd, who feeds and cares for his flock. It is therefore natural that pastoral language is interwoven with the use of the terms overseer and bishop (Acts 20:28; cf. John 21:15–17). In their pastoral oversight of congregational life, elders reflect Christ’s own office as the Shepherd and Bishop of souls (1 Pet. 2:25; cf. John 10:11–16; Heb. 13:20; 1 Pet. 5:4).
The comprehensive character of their office involved elders in a wide variety of duties. They engaged in the ministry of preaching and teaching the Word (1 Tim. 5:17). Moreover, there is no New Testament basis for distinguishing between “teaching” and “ruling” elders, as if they formed two separate classes. Elders also guarded the churches against false doctrine (Titus 1:9), rendered pastoral service (James 5:14), and administered ecclesiastical discipline. Their participation in the Jerusalem council along with the apostles (Acts 15:1–6) indicates that their authority, though essentially local, extended to the whole church. They are charged not to rule in lordly fashion, nor for financial gain, but they are to exercise their authority with humility (1 Pet. 5:1–5). It is likely that they conducted worship, although anyone in the congregation possessing a suitable gift of the Spirit might participate in the service (1 Cor. 14:26–33). Nothing is said in the New Testament about sacramental duties, but since the sacraments were closely tied both to the ministry of the Word and to worship (Matt. 28:19; Acts 2:41–42; 8:35–38; 20:7; 1 Cor. 11:17–22), it is possible that elders were largely responsible for their administration. Clement of Rome, writing near the end of the first century, says specifically that they officiated at the Eucharist. Local churches apparently appointed their own elders, who were then ordained by other elders in a solemn ceremony of laying on of hands (1 Tim. 4:14). Presumably, the elders of the apostolic church were the equivalent of pastors today (although it appears that each local congregation had not one but a plurality of elders, who shared in the exercise of the responsibilities of the office). It is especially notable that the apostles Peter and John both refer to themselves by this title (1 Pet. 5:1; 2 John 1; 3 John 1).
Deacons
Forming a secondary order of ministry were the deacons (Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3:8–13.). Not copied from any Jewish or Gentile prototype, the office of deacon (diakonos) was a wholly new creation of the Christian church. Its origin is frequently traced to the “seven,” who were appointed to administer the distribution of welfare in the Jerusalem church (Acts 6:1–6). Nowhere are the seven called “deacons,” although the word diakonia is used in this passage to contrast their ministry of serving tables with the apostles’ ministry of the Word. Moreover, two of their number, Stephen and Philip, soon distinguished themselves as highly gifted preachers (Acts 6:8–10; 8:4–8; 21:8). While there is no evidence to link the seven with the deacons of Philippians and 1 Timothy, their appointment may have provided the basic pattern for the later office.
The specific functions of the deacons are clouded by nearly as much uncertainty as to their origin, and their duties must be inferred from the nature of their qualifications. They were required to be of serious mind and character, honest in speech, temperate, and free from greed for money; they were to “hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience” (1Tim. 3:8–9 rsv). This list of qualifications, together with the natural associations of the word diakonia, meaning “service,” suggests that household visitation and administration of local benevolence funds were among their responsibilities. At a later date, this was certainly so. It is further known that in the post-apostolic church deacons served as personal assistants to the bishops in conducting worship, especially at the Eucharist, and in managing church affairs. It is possible from 1 Timothy 3:11 to infer that women also held this office, and Romans 16:1 describes Phoebe as a diakonos of the church at Cenchrea. The masculine form of the noun may signify that it is a common noun, meaning “servant,” and not an official title. In any event, deaconesses do not appear to have been common until the third century. The New Testament nowhere indicates the manner in which the deacons were appointed to office, but as in the case of the seven, they may have been chosen by the local congregation and ordained by the laying on of hands.
In view of New Testament evidence, there seems to be no reasonable doubt that the apostolic church had only two official orders of local ministry: presbyter-bishop and deacon. The ministry exercised by these orders assumed three forms: Word, rule, and service. To this threefold ministry the body of Christ, equipped and empowered by his indwelling Spirit, is unceasingly summoned by its living Head.