so much the more certainly revealed them to those to whom they entrusted the churches themselves: for the apostles wished that those whom they left as their successors, transmitting to them their own ministration of the teaching, should be quite perfect and without a blemish in every respect.’ St. Cyprian: ‘We are the successors of the apostles, ruling the church of God by the same power.’ St. Ambrose: ‘The bishop represents in his person Jesus Christ and is the vicegerent of the Lord.’ St. Jerome: ‘With us the place of the apostles is occupied by the bishops.’” (pp. 214 and 215.)
Having armed itself with these proofs, that is, with the barren assertions of those men who appropriated to themselves the divine power, that this power had been transferred to them from God, the Theology now gives the direct definition of the church, a part of which (namely, the words of Gregory the Divine) I have quoted before. After that it says (from p. 217-229) that there are three degrees of the ecclesiastic hierarchy: the episcopal, the presbyteral, and the diaconal; but, it is necessary to remark that there are no more of them. The utterances of the fathers of the church confirm that:
“Clement of Alexandria: ‘The degrees of bishops, presbyters, and deacons, which exist in the church, are, in my opinion, the representation of the angelic order.’ Origen: ‘Paul speaks to the rulers and chiefs of the churches, that is, to those who judge the people who are in the church, namely, to the bishops, presbyters, and deacons.’ Eusebius of Casaria: ‘Three orders: the first of the presiding officers, the second of the presbyters, the third of the deacons.’” (p. 223.)
174. There is a detailed description of the different orders of the spiritual persons among themselves and in relation to their flocks.
“The bishop is the chief overseer in his own particular church (Acts xx. 28; cf. Epistle of the Eastern Patriarchs
