It is important to note, as stated by Mick, “…that presiding at the Eucharist was not initially restricted to bishops and priests (presbyters)…the operative principle is that whoever was recognized as the community’s leader was accepted as the presider at Eucharist, whether that was an apostle, a prophet, a teacher, or a bishop”(115). The groundwork had been laid to show that the power lied in the strength of the community as opposed to any one person or singled out group of people. Ultimately, as noted by Power, “…all ministries tended to be absorbed in the course of time into the ordained ministry” (572). During this time in the history of the Church (2nd-5th centuries), there was a synthesis of communal involvement along with the tripartite order of bishop, presbyter, and deacon who had the responsibility of liturgical celebration and teaching authority. Though ministerial responsibilities began to fall more and more under the auspices of the bishop, the community was still involved in the selection of who would represent and lead them as bishop. Because this was still considered a communal event, the celebration of ordination would bring the community together, along with bishops from other churches where the central ritual action would be the laying of hands (Power 573). This was an important act because this was initially seen as the Holy Spirit transferring His power to the newly recognized bishop. Unfortunately, as the Church morphed into its institutional persona, the Holy Spirit would be pushed out in favor of the institution with respect to the transmission of office and power (Power 573). As the Church began to assume more ministerial authority, the communal connection was decreased while the clerical responsibility increased, thus beginning the schism between clergy and faithful. Though the bishop was seen as the chief presider of the
It is important to note, as stated by Mick, “…that presiding at the Eucharist was not initially restricted to bishops and priests (presbyters)…the operative principle is that whoever was recognized as the community’s leader was accepted as the presider at Eucharist, whether that was an apostle, a prophet, a teacher, or a bishop”(115). The groundwork had been laid to show that the power lied in the strength of the community as opposed to any one person or singled out group of people. Ultimately, as noted by Power, “…all ministries tended to be absorbed in the course of time into the ordained ministry” (572). During this time in the history of the Church (2nd-5th centuries), there was a synthesis of communal involvement along with the tripartite order of bishop, presbyter, and deacon who had the responsibility of liturgical celebration and teaching authority. Though ministerial responsibilities began to fall more and more under the auspices of the bishop, the community was still involved in the selection of who would represent and lead them as bishop. Because this was still considered a communal event, the celebration of ordination would bring the community together, along with bishops from other churches where the central ritual action would be the laying of hands (Power 573). This was an important act because this was initially seen as the Holy Spirit transferring His power to the newly recognized bishop. Unfortunately, as the Church morphed into its institutional persona, the Holy Spirit would be pushed out in favor of the institution with respect to the transmission of office and power (Power 573). As the Church began to assume more ministerial authority, the communal connection was decreased while the clerical responsibility increased, thus beginning the schism between clergy and faithful. Though the bishop was seen as the chief presider of the