I think officially the whole Presbytery (the assembly, not the geographical region) is our equivalent of a bishop.Indeed, it is clear that the offices of Presbyter and Bishop diverged between the mid 1st century and the time of St. Ignatius of Antioch, who outlines the hierarchy we have at present. I suspect this division was due to the repose of the Apostles, with the archpresbyters assuming the title episkopoi, but it could have gone the other way.
Practically speaking, the Presbyterians reinvented the bare minimum function of tne episcopal office in the form of the Moderators of your assemblies - that function being the traditional Episcopal function, but I am sympathetic to why the trauma of the Western church caused you to wish to jettison the monarchial bishops. In the East we love our bishops, but the laity can usually with some difficulty force out a noxious bishop or override their decisions (this has happened - it is rare, but the classic example of the laity overriding the decisions of the hierarchy was the rejection of the Council of Florence, which was approved by both the Eastern Orthodox and Armenian Apostolic hierarchies, with the exception on the EO side of St. Mark of Ephesus - I can’t recall exactly how things occurred in the Armenian church, but it was along these approximate lines.
Upvote
0