The Episcopate: Plene Esse 

I think even someone with the Bene Esse view could distinguish between their assessment of Presbyterian and Congregational forms of ministry if they accepted the presbyterate as the means of continuity.

Absolutely brilliant and yours is a position I hold to Jonah. Would love to know if you'll do a video on GAFCON

Great video. Somewhat unrelated, but I understand that the Baptisms of Low Church Prots is valid so long as they do it in the name of trinity, but do you believe that Lord's Supper is valid when they do not believe in the Real Presence? It feels like if we carried over the same standard from one dominical sacrament to the other there might be some discrepencies

"If you do not have a bishop..." could explain what you define by bishop? You don't simply mean to prefer that word over pastor? Right?

Regarding your point about valid baptisms outside the Church. If we were to extend your logic even further, we would be required to conclude that none of the threefold offices are essential to the Church, since even a laymen can baptize. Also, they would only be incorporated into the mystical body only if invincible ignorance applied. Regarding Ignatius, he never says that presbyters are successors of the apostles, he merely uses an analogy comparing the presbytery to the assembly of the apostles, and the bishop as a representation of God the Father or Jesus Christ. I challenge you to produce the relevant quote, and also any other quotes you had in mind from the Church Fathers. To the contrary, Ignatius says straightforwardly that the three tiered hierarchy is essential to the constitution of the Church: “In like manner, let all reverence the deacons as an appointment of Jesus Christ, and the bishop as Jesus Christ, who is the Son of the Father, and the presbyters as the sanhedrim of God, and assembly of the apostles. Apart from these, there is no Church” (Trallians 3). Furthermore, he implies that the presbytery can't even exist without bishops: "For your justly renowned presbytery, worthy of God, is fitted as exactly to the bishop as the strings are to the harp." Underlying your argument is the notion that what is absolutely essential to the constitution of the Church is the sacramental aspect. However, the Church is both mystical and visible. You seem to be neglecting the latter element, since the Church is also fundamentally jurisdictionally. To prove my point, we would both agree that at least one of the sacraments requires jurisdiction, namely, confession. As proof of this I will cite 1 Corinthians 5 and 2 Corinthians 2:10, in which some sins required a greater authority than that which presbyters possessed to both impose and commute the sentence of excommunication. An argument can be made that since SOME sins require a higher authority to commute, and that the forgiveness of sins is essential to the salvation of souls, that bishops are essential to the constitution of the Church.

❤❤❤

Is there a position between the esse and plen esse position?

Then why can't Deacons consecrate the elements? They're ordained aren't they?