Episkopeo is translated `looking diligently' in Hebrews 12:15, and `taking the oversight' in 1 Peter 5:2; while

episkope is translated `visitation' in Luke 19:44 and 1 Peter 2:12, `bishoprick' in Acts 1:20, and `office of a bishop'

in 1 Timothy 3:1.

The tendency of the Saxon to soften some of the harsher sounds of the Greek is seen in the transition from the

original episkope to `bishop', and from the Greek kuriake (retained in the Scotch `kirk') to the Saxon `church'.

When applied to Christ Himself, the office of Bishop is linked with that of Shepherd:

`For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls' (1 Pet.

In chapter 5 of the same epistle we find the figure of `feeding the flock' associated with `elders', and Christ

Himself as `the Chief Shepherd'. Paul uses the same figure in Acts 20, where he speaks of the `elders' being made

`overseers' (or `bishops') over `the flock' (Acts 20:28).

It is a striking tribute to Dean Alford's honesty to read in his Greek New Testament the following frank

statement concerning the A.V. translation `overseers' in this passage. Irenaeus is quoted as teaching (1) that

`bishops' and `elders' were two distinct titles, and (2) that neighbouring churches were brought in so that there

might not seem to be episkopoi in one church only.

`That neither of these was the case', the Dean comments, `is clearly shown by the plain words of this verse: he

sent to Ephesus, and summoned the elders of the church.  So early did interested and disingenuous

interpretations begin to cloud the light which Scripture might have thrown on ecclesiastical questions. The A.V.

has hardly dealt fairly in this case with the sacred text, in rendering episkopos (verse 28) "overseers": whereas it

ought to have been "bishops", that the fact of elders and bishops having been originally and apostolically

synonymous might be apparent to the ordinary English reader, which now it is not' (Alford in loco).

If we turn to the pastoral epistles we shall receive abundant confirmation of the fact that the words `presbyter'

and `bishop' are synonymous:

`For this cause left I thee in Crete ... and ordain elders (presbyters) in every city ... if any be blameless, the

husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. For a bishop (episkopos) must be

blameless, as the steward of God; not self-willed, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to

filthy lucre; but ... a lover of good men, ... just, holy, temperate' (Titus 1:5-8).

It is quite clear here that the apostle uses the two titles presbuteros and episkopos of one and the same office.

This can also be confirmed by comparing the passage quoted above (Tit. 1:5-8) with 1 Timothy 3:1-7:

`If a man desire the office of a bishop, he ... must be blameless, the husband of one wife ... apt to teach; not given

to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre ... one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in

subjection with all gravity' (1 Tim. 3:1-4).

The next two verses provide further light upon the `office of a bishop':

`For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?' (1 Tim. 3:5).

The word `rule' here must be carefully interpreted if we are not to fall into the very error to which the apostle

refers in Acts 20:

`Of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them' (Acts 20:30).

There is nothing so likely to produce an overbearing prelacy as a misconception of the kind of `rule' a `bishop'

was called upon to exercise. Peter refers to the evil consequences of attempting to be `lords over God's heritage',

and John puts his finger on the same temptation when he speaks of Diotrephes, `who loveth to have the

preeminence' (3 John 9).

We are reminded by such passages as these of the following words, which will no doubt be familiar to some of

our readers: