preston. Ignatius constantly contends for the recognition of the authority of the ministers of the church. "Do nothing", he writes to the Magnesians, "without the bishop and the presbyters." The "three orders" are essential to the church, without them no church is worthy of the name (cf. Trall. 3). "It is not lawful apart from the bishop either to baptize or to hold a love-feast" (Smyrn. 8). Respect is due to the bishop as to God, to the presbyters as the council of God and the college of apostles, to the deacons as to Jesus Christ (Trall. 3). These terms must not, of course, be taken in their developed modern sense. The "bishop" of Ignatius seems to represent the modern pastor of a church.
if number 3 is correct, then we can place no credence in any form that Peter himself ordained ignatius, since that office is one that the chruch itself is involved in, by calling themselves a Pastor.
friends it cant be both ways, if the office of a bishop needed to have an Apostle lay hands on him, then it is more than a Pastorate,
if it is less, then peter was never involved, for what ever reason
I can see that it "seems" like the bishop is like a pastor. But remember in Antioch, Peter(the Apostle) was the first bishop, then assigned Evidius....And Paul(the Apostle) established Ignatius as the 3rd bishop...(Galatians 2:11 puts Paul there.) So the first three are considered Apostolic Fathers of the Church, as they were alive during the time of the Apostles....After that, the Church became more centralised to the teachings of the Apostles, to keep the unity of the faith, otherwise it would have been torn apart. Thus Apostolic Succession took place to do both of these..
After the time of Jesus came the Apostles.
After the time of the Apostles came the "Apostolic Fathers" which merged into Early Church Fathers.