Ok, I know this is borderline blasphemous (or fully so, for some). And, it is far easier to deconstruct than to construct – but on this first day of vacation I wonder why we really need bishops in the church and what it is, exactly, that they do (constructively, anyway), or should do – other than being some existential image of the church universal. In 19 years of ordained life I’ve served under four bishops and the best seemed to simply follow the dictum: “first, do no harm.”
Perhaps it is the colossal failure of the episcopal office these past 40+ years. Perhaps it is the abusive and corrosive overreach of the crusading riders of the purple shirt. Perhaps it is the failure (thus far, anyway) to construct a unified North American Anglicanism bereft of organizational and positional protectionism. Or, I might just be cranky and in need of a vacation. However, when I read this article (linked below) this morning it had me humming along with Lennon . . . Imagine. Of course, when I passed it along to a collegue he was worried about me “throwing out the baby with the bath water” – a disappointingly unimaginative rejoinder.
As an Anglican priest I understand (and assent to) the place of the historic episcopacy within Anglicanism. Equally, I recognize that the meltdown of Anglicanism in the West has been the product of all four orders of ministry. Yet when I look at the damage inflicted by the episcopal order through incompetency, the instinct toward acts of institutional self-preservation and through acts of commission and omission, there are days (like today) when I wonder if the energy necessary to reform the church might be better spent with a wholesale reordering of the church. So, on this first day of vacation, why is the historic episcopacy necessary and what should the remit of the office entail?
Here’s a snip from the aforementioned article:
This “apostolic succession” is the Ouija board theory of Christian communication – “Peter – are you there?” – and an absurd basis for any authority. It is nonetheless the only reason why bishops should exist in either gender, and the quarrel about female bishops ignores the fact that it’s the office itself that stinks. Serious-minded people who want to get on ecclesiastically presumably cross fingers behind backs when kneeling before a bishop while waiting for a dollop of heaven to drop down.
Greek and Russian Orthodox, Egyptian Copts, Armenians, German Lutherans, American Methodists, and Roman Catholics: all join the Anglicans in liking bishops. And the office’s antiquity can seem persuasive. Christianity may seem difficult and odd, but its churches have been around for ages, and the ubiquity of the bishop is something to hang on to in challenging times. There’s still, though, an obsessive quality about the Anglican attachment to episcopacy.
