Did Corinth have a bishop when St. Clement wrote to them?

In St. Clement’s letter to the Corinthians, did Corinth have a bishop at that time? Didn’t Jerome talk about Apollos being a bishop there? Or am I confused… :whacky:

In St. Clement’s letter to the Corinthians, did Corinth have a bishop at that time? Didn’t Jerome talk about Apollos being a bishop there? Or am I confused…

Hi, I think “the elders” mentioned in the letter were indeed bishops that “the young” rebelled against. Otherwise, why did Clement talk about how the office of bishop was foreshadowed in the OT, and then the apostles appointed bishops.

It seems bishops arrived very early. I believe Paul mentions a bishop in 1 Phil.

However, what information do you have, and what do you think?

God bless, Anneml

You can read this letter at: www.bringtoyou.to/apologetics/a122.htm ,This book ,The Primitive Church by Luke Rivington has an Imprimatur:)

Thank you so much…I will check it out! Although for others, the link is actually:

I saw more than one website say that according to Jerome, Apollos was made bishop of Corinth. However, those sites did not reference where in Jerome this is, and I hoped someone else knew. Or could at least tell me if Corinth had it’s own bishop in those earliest times. There are definitely bishops from the get-go…that’s not the issue. The question is Corinth specifically. Thx! :o

As I recall, Saint Paul founded the church at Corinth. I doubt he would have left without installing a bishop to carry on after him.

wrong area

You know…I had forgotten about this about Apollos at Corinth, which would validate Jerome’s claim that Apollos was Corinth’s first bishop:

1 Corinthians 3:5-7 What then is Apol’los? What is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, as the Lord assigned to each. I planted, Apol’los watered, but God gave the growth. So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth.

As well, Clement addresses them as “the church sojourning at Rome”. I was in a debate thread on the Papacy and someone in the “peanut gallery” was suggesting Corinth was simply “part” of Rome, and that Clement was not showing authority “above” someone in Corinth. Of course, Jerusalem was also “part” of Rome, headed no less by Pontius Pilate, but James was their first bishop (Eusebius, Church History, 1.2). Despite being under Roman rule, the Christian realm still had bishops for these regions. :smiley:

Eusibius is silent on corith yet covers every other area, the first known was Primus considerably later nearly 100 years depending on dating from Clement.

Or Apollos, appointed by Paul, as discussed in this thread…

I’ve been thinking about this, and I wonder, was it a usual occurrence for any bishop to send a reprimand, so to speak to another bishop’s flock? In today’s Church, that would be highly, highly irregular, unless it was the bishop of Rome.

It certainly would have been irregular if you look on a map and see how far Rome is to Corinth compared to Ephesus or Thessalonica. Especially at that time when communication and travel was slow. The Apostle John was still alive at that time in nearby Ephesus by all accounts, yet Corinth made an appeal to distant Rome where no living apostles remained. Check out the link to the book in post #4…that first chapter on Clement is only a few pages and it goes into this. Or PM me and I’ll send you a link to my debate this past month on the subject! :slight_smile:

I think someone tried to PM me for the link to my debate. My mailbox was full. I emptied it now. :o

By the way…Eusebius was not “silent” on bishops of Corinth: (Church History, 4.23.1) as having a bishop, Dionysius…and even before that he quotes Higgesepius mentioning a Corinthian bishop prior to Dionysius (4.22.2). So any “list” he does not provide is not because he didn’t think Corinth had a line of bishops.

There are many examples from Antioch especially…

Dionysis was 170 sorry yes I was well aware of this though I thought you meant much earlier as in reference to the Clement letter.

Did Paul and John do this? Yes.
Did Ignatius do this? Yes.
Did Polycarp do this? Yes.
Did Clement do this? Yes.
Is Eusebius FULL of people who did this? Yes, it is.

And his quote of Higgesepius citing Primus prior to that. There is succession there, which fits well with Jerome’s claim that Paul instituted Apollos first bishop (cf. 1 Cor 3:5-7). For their part, the Orthodox claim Silas, one of the 70, was first bishop of Corinth. However you want to slice it, by all accounts, Corinth had a bishop when Clement wrote them in the 1st century.

Ignatius is submissive to Rome, unlike in his other letters when he typically calls his audience for unity. He specifically tells Rome he issues them no commands. In the same letter he calls the Roman church the teacher who instructs others. For Polycarp and this full host of others, send us reference citations so we can compare and study.

Might serve you to read through his nonspurious epistles again.
So he says to Rome I issue "No commands?"
How does this help you thoughts on this?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.