# English: bishop/German: Bischof



## Norawa

Dose the English word "bishop" have it's roots in an old Germanic language? 

I have heard that it means "being with the sheep". Dose anyone have any proof?
----------------------------------------------
Ist es richtig dass das Word "Bischof" von einer alten Deutschen Sprache stamt und "Bei den Schaffen" beutete? In Platt-Deutsch sagen wir "Bi de Schup". 

Ist da Beweis?


----------



## TheAmzngTwinWndr

It probably has something to do with sheep because the bishop (using Christian terminology) is the leader of his flock.


----------



## Æsop

Very briefly, I think the answers are no and no.  But I suspect that this is getting into linguistic history and is out of scope for this forum.  Perhaps we could get a ruling from a moderator before anyone spends a lot of time delving into the etymology of "bishop."


----------



## TheAmzngTwinWndr

Just looked it up on Google.
It comes from a Greek word which means "overseer" (used for officials and borrowed by the Church)


In my post above I was thinking of the word "Pastor"


----------



## GreenWhiteBlue

_Bishop_, travelling through the earlier English version _Biscop_, and before that the Latin _Episcopus_, comes from the Greek_ Episkopos_: one who watches (looks, sees) over something.

Its origins are not remotely Germanic, and it has nothing to do with sheep.

_Pastor_ is also not Germanic in its origins, but is the ordinary Latin word for a shepherd.,


----------



## Wroclaw

"Bischof" stammt ursprünglich aus dem griechischen Wort "ἐπισκόποις", was "Aufseher" bedeutet. Das Wort lautete auf Latein "episcopus" oder auf Vulgärlatein "(e)biscopus" und kam laut dem Oxford English Dictionary mit dem Aufstieg des Christentums in die germanischen Sprachen hinein. Mit Schafen hat das also eigentlich nichts zu tun, sondern das Wort wurde im Griechischen und im Latein als Bezeichnung für gewisse Zivilbeamte benutzt.


----------



## Æsop

The words for "bishop" in other Germanic languages look a lot like the English word and conform to the sound shifts that have occurred since "episcopus" was introduced.
German—Bischoff (note final "f" instead of "p")
Dutch—bischopp (note retention of two interior consonants—_s_ and _ch_—and the final "p" sound)
Danish—biskop (very close to Dutch)
Icelandic—biskup (also double interior consonant)


----------



## natkretep

From the OED:

OE _biscop _(also in North. _biscob_), _bisceop_, _biscep_, an early adopted word (cf. OS. _biskop_, MDu. _bisscop_, Du. _bisschop_), OHG. _biscof_, _piscof _(MHG., mod.G. _bischof_), ON. _biskup _(Sw. _biscop_, Da. _bisp_), a. Romanic *_biscopo _or vulgar L. _(e)biscopus_:L. _episcopus_, a. Gr. overlooker, overseer

As mentioned above, its roots are Greek. The word was borrowed into Latin (episcopus), and was altered in vulgar Latin (biscopus), from which the Germanic languages derived their words.


----------



## berndf

Wroclaw said:


> "Bischof" stammt ursprünglich aus dem griechischen Wort "ἐπισκόποις", was "Aufseher" bedeutet.


The base form is *ἐπίσκοπος *(nominative singular). The form you quoted, ἐπισκόποις, is dative plural ("den Aufsehern").


----------



## brian

There may be the possibility that _sheep_ is related to _bishop_ insofar as _sheep_ (< O.E. _scéap, scæp_) might ultimately be related to ἐπίσκοπος < (ἐπί +) σκοπός < *σκέπ*τομαι* (*skép*_tomai_), "to look about, to look after."

But since _sheep_, according to here and to the OED, is of unknown origin, that's really just a completely unsubstantiated guess and it might simply be a coincidence. 

*edit: this is basically the same verb as *σκοπ*έω (_skopéo_) since both verbs were used, as synonyms, to cover the full range of tenses. So I'm not sure whether σκοπός technically comes from σκέπτομαι or from σκοπέω, but it doesn't really matter, especially for our purposes.


----------



## berndf

It is interesting to note that catholic or ecumenical (probably in order not to alienate Catholics) Bible translations usually translate ἐπίσκοπος etymologically rather that _bishop_ for very obvious reasons:

King James:





> 1.Timotheus 3.2: A *bishop* then must be blameless, the husband of one wife...


New International Version:





> 1.Timotheus 3.2: Now the *overseer* must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife...


----------



## natkretep

berndf said:


> It is interesting to note that catholic or ecumenical (probably in order not to alienate Catholics) Bible translations usually translate ἐπίσκοπος etymologically rather that _bishop_ for very obvious reasons


 
But surely you don't consider the King James Version (Authorised Version or AV) of the Bible a Roman Catholic translation, being commissioned by the Protestant King James I? That translation just opted for the etymologically related word, and revisions of the AV such as the RSV (Revised Standard Version) or the NRSV (New Revised Standard Version) continued to use 'bishop':



> Now a bishop must be above reproach, married only once, temperate, sensible, respectable, hospitable, an apt teacher, [NRSV]


 
(Interestingly, of course, the Anglican church is also episcopal in structure.)

The Roman Catholic-preferred Bible is the Jerusalem Bible, which has:



> To want to be a presiding elder is to do a noble work. That is why the president must have an impeccable character. [1 Tim 3:1b, 2a]


 
and interestingly uses *'presiding elder'* and *'president'*, and its heading is *'elder-in-charge'*!


----------



## berndf

natkretep said:


> But surely you don't consider the King James Version (Authorised Version or AV) of the Bible a Roman Catholic translation, being commissioned by the Protestant King James I?


Of course not. That is why the KJV has no problem stating that a bishop must be married. Catholic translations obviously want to avoid this statement and prefer etymological translations.


----------



## natkretep

Ah, sorry, berndf, I misunderstood you: so the etymological translation is 'overseer', whereas 'bishop' is a cognate word with different connotations? I also got confused with the two translations supplied, because I thought you were trying to contrast an RC translation with a non-RC translation. So both are non-RC translations.


----------



## berndf

Yes, in this case I contrasted a protestant with an inter-denominational translation.


----------



## Kevin Beach

I think people are looking for non-existent distinctions here.

Many Roman Catholic clergy were married in the first 1,000 years or so of Christianity. The prohibition on married clergy is merely a second millenium discipline of the Catholic Church, not a doctrine. There are still married Catholic priests among eastern-rite (Roman) Catholics and even in the Latin rite. In England, several hundred married priests from the Church of England were re-ordained as Roman Catholic priests in the Latin rite in the 1990s under a special dispensation granted by Pope John Paul II.

Therefore there could be no theological or ecclesiastical reason for wanting to avoid the translation "bishop" in Catholic-approved English translations of the Bible.

Simply, ἐπίσκοπος = episcopus = Bischoff = Biscop = Bishop = overseer = President = presiding elder. In each case, the label describes somebody who is regarded as a successor to the twelve apostles. The precise label used in any particular place at any particular time reflects lexical usage, not ecclesiastical preferences.


----------



## berndf

Kevin Beach said:


> Many Roman Catholic clergy were married in the first 1,000 years or so of Christianity. The prohibition on married clergy is merely a second millenium discipline of the Catholic Church, not a doctrine. There are still married Catholic priests among eastern-rite (Roman) Catholics and even in the Latin rite. In England, several hundred married priests from the Church of England were re-ordained as Roman Catholic priests in the Latin rite in the 1990s under a special dispensation granted by Pope John Paul II.


The quotation does not say that bishops *may* be married. It says that bishops* must* be married. In many protestant churches this is taken seriously and the idea of an unmarried pastor or bishop is frowned upon.


----------



## natkretep

berndf said:


> The quotation does not say that bishops *may* be married. It says that bishops* must* be married. In many protestant churches this is taken seriously and the idea of an unmarried pastor or bishop is frowned upon.


 
But surely the emphasis is on the bishop/overseer/presiding elder (if married) having only _one_ wife, since polygamy was common in New Testament times. I know there are unmarried Anglican bishops.


----------



## berndf

I dare not voice an opinion about Anglican churches but in Lutheran churches an unmarried candidate would have a very hard time being accepted by the parish community as pastor let alone being accepted as bishop.


----------



## Outsider

There was another thread about this word in the All Languages forum.


----------



## Brioche

berndf said:


> Of course not. That is why the KJV has no problem stating that a bishop must be married. Catholic translations obviously want to avoid this statement and prefer etymological translations.



The Douay-Rheims Catholic translation of the bible uses the word *bishop*, both in the original translation of 1582, and the revision of 1752.

It is the English translation most used by Traditional Catholics.

The actual words from 1582 are "It behoueth therfore a bishop to be irreprehensible, the husband of one wife..."
*
*


----------



## No_C_Nada

_So does the "New American Bible", which is the version used in all English-speaking Catholic communities in USA._

"Therefore, a bishop must be irreproachable, married only once"


----------



## MarcB

Brioche said:


> The Douay-Rheims Catholic translation of the bible uses the word *bishop*, both in the original translation of 1582, and the revision of 1752.
> 
> It is the English translation most used by Traditional Catholics.
> 
> The actual words from 1582 are "It behoueth therfore a bishop to be irreprehensible, the husband of one wife..."
> *
> *





No_C_Nada said:


> _So does the "New American Bible", which is the version used in all English-speaking Catholic communities in USA._
> 
> "Therefore, a bishop must be irreproachable, married only once"


I agree with Brioch that traditional Catholics including those in the US use the Douay-Rheims, The New American published in1970 is preferred by liberal Catholics.


----------



## Kevin Beach

I don't know the detail of the meaning in the original biblical Greek, but to me "married only once" and "the husband of only one wife" mean either that that the Bishop must _not_ have more than one wife at a time, or that he must _not_ marry again when his wife dies. It doesn't mean that he _must_ marry. I believe that the Eastern Orthodox churches apply the second meaning, but I stand to be corrected.


----------



## natkretep

Kevin Beach said:


> to me "married only once" and "the husband of only one wife" mean either that that the Bishop must _not_ have more than one wife at a time, or that he must _not_ marry again when his wife dies.


 
I thought that in the context of the polygamic societies of the time, this meant that he should be the husband of one wife _at one time_ - so that a widower could certainly remarry.

I'm happy to be corrected if this is erroneous.


----------



## berndf

*Moderator note*

*I know it was me who started the discussion but please bear in mind that the topic of this thread is the word Bishop/Bischof and not the theological implications of the marital status of the clergy.*

*Berndf*
*Moderator EHL*


----------

