If I Were Bishop by Pastor Fryer

For some of us, our enthusiasm for the Concordat had to do with its image of the bishop as the synod's "minister of unity" both geographically and temporally stretching back through the generations to the apostles. That is, we take the episcopal office to be chiefly an office of labor within the communion of saints for the sake of unity within that vast communion. "Call to Common Mission" puts the point this way:

Both churches value and maintain a ministry of episkope as one of the ways, in the context of ordained ministries and of the whole people of God, in which the apostolic succession of the church is visibly expressed and personally symbolized in fidelity to the gospel through the ages. (CCM, A12)

...the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America receives the historic episcopal succession as a sign of and service to the continuity and unity of the Church and in no way as a guarantee of the faithful transmission of the faith; (CCM, E9)

The bishop, then, should be the best theologian and preacher around, trying with all his might, with all her might, to equip the brothers and sisters of the synod, both lay and ordained, to live holy lives and to speak God's Word in such a manner that St. Paul, St. John Chrysostom, St. Augustine, Martin Luther, Mother Teresa, our grandmothers and grandfathers in the faith, and ten thousand millions of Christians across the world and across the ages, and Him whom they all worship and adore, will not have to hang their heads in sorrow at how we are living or what we are saying, but will rather lift up their faces with joy and say to themselves, "That right! That's the faith of the Church! That's the mind of Christ!"

So, if I were bishop, here's how I think things should go:

1) First off, at the synod assembly I would forsake the presider's chair and rather sit in the episcopal chair. This seems so very obvious to me. The miserable thing about the presider's chair is that the presider is expected to be neutral... expected to preside even-handedly over a fair and open discussion. Well, fine! It's just that that is not for the bishop. If I were bishop, I imagine that I would be off to the side, politely listening in and enjoying the doings, like everyone else, except that my ears and my mind would be keenly searching the theology of the case, as best I could. Not everything has theological implications, and not everything puts the faith of the Church at risk, so let those matters go as seems best to people who have expertise and gifts in those areas. But the bishop is to tend to questions of the continuity of faith across the synod and back to the apostles.

2) Second, the "Counsel and Reference Committee" would be my committee and nothing stupid would even reach the synod floor. Well, maybe some stupid things would, but not things offensive to the faith of the Church. That's just the way it would have to be. No point in me being bishop unless I can exercise the ministry of oversight.

3) Third, the BIG person in the synod would not be me, but another kind of minister - not the bishop, but more along the lines of the "synod administrator." I have heard that in the medieval church, the really ambitious church people coveted the office of "archdeacon," not "bishop." I am trying to get at an important point here concerning the gifts of the Spirit. Whether or not I like it, God seems to distribute his gifts differently, and to some he has granted great gifts for organization and administration. Such gifts are so very important for the flourishing of the synod! In each synod, God willing, there are clergy among us who are extraordinary at forging a staff, creating a vision of what needs to be done, and inspiring people to their best efforts. Such an archdeacon-like clergyperson could be the "real power behind the throne." He or she could be the one who oversees the synod budget, serves as the gatekeeper to the resources of the synod, hires and fires synod staff, builds an efficient synod bureaucracy, and so on. That archdeacon-like-person could be the one before whom people tremble a bit. He or she could get the largest synod salary and would certainly be a strong liturgical presence in synodical gatherings. He would need to be a strong liturgical presence... she would need to be a strong such presence because it must be visible and evident that the good deeds over which this person presides are grounded in the Church's liturgy.

4) The Synod Assembly. If I were bishop, there would be a massive rethinking of the synod assembly. The goal would be that when the synod assembly discusses matters of Christian faith, that assembly should be a solemn, liturgical, deliberative assembly striving to be able in all honesty to say, "It seems good to the Holy Spirit and to us..." That is, our deliberations concerning matters of faith would be encompassed by prayer, mindful and obedient to the Bible and to the Church's tradition of interpreting the Bible, to the dogmatic settlements of the Church, to the liturgical and sacramental substance of the Church, and the bishop would serve in his or her proper episcopal role. We would not overturn in forty-five minutes of deliberation what the Church has believed in every time and every place. I would invite theologians to become friends and lecturers and theological consultants to our synod assemblies. If we face some question with gospel implications, I would select theologians to help set the stage for our thinking. If there were no burning theological issues before us, still I would love to have certain theologians instruct us in basic matters of the faith, including the Catechism and its application in our modern world.

5) If I were bishop I would strive that in our synod the Bible should regain its standing. I would bring in theologians who know the historical/critical methods and results, but who also know how to use them in a Churchly way to illumine and honor the canonical text that actually lies before us. Above all, I would want us to seek and love the Church's traditional interpretation of controverted scriptural passages - indeed of all scriptural passages.

6) I would lift up the law/gospel distinction in the manner I think Luther actually used it: as a hermeneutical guide for plumbing the depths of scripture, not as a principle of proclamation, and certainly not as a method for setting aside or even denying what the Bible plainly says.

7) I would invite our synod clergy to study and rejoice in the writings of the Church fathers and the Great Tradition in general. We are not to be like those "lazy-bellies and presumptuous saints" of whom Luther complained in his "Large Catechism" - people who think they can read great matters of the faith once and then "toss the book into a corner as if they are ashamed to read it again." The history of the Church includes great and inspiring preachers, for example. We should be studying their sermons and learning from them, and trying to carry on in their method. We should not be delivering mini-theological lectures to our people. That is not preaching.

8) If I were bishop, I would want to befriend theologians, seminary professors, and seminarians. While the archdeacon is attending to things in the synod, one of the ways I would love to use my time would be to visit at our Lutheran seminaries, especially our synod's seminary. I loved my own seminary days and would be glad to be a presence on a campus, but what would bring me to the seminary would not be the fun of it, but rather the sense that my ministry as bishop requires that I attend to the formation of those who would be ordained. I would need to know our synod seminarians and what they are learning at our seminary. It would be an honor to know the faculty at our seminaries and to share what life has taught me about ministry.

9) Another of the chief things I would want to do, while the archdeacon is attending to the administration of the synod, is to get to know the situations, the hopes, the dreams, the fears, and the longings of our synod clergy and congregations. This is what pastors do; I figure that is what bishops do too. So I imagine that I would spend a lot of time on the phone or email or visits trying to get to know the truth of things throughout the synod and to help if possible.

10) Synod Worship Committee. As with the Council and Reference Committee above, so with the synod Worship Committee: It would be my committee, and it would be part of my episcopal oversight to urge that our synod worship is to be paradigmatic and splendid. There shall be no strange gods, for example, in our synod worship. Let me give you an example. I once heard about a nursing home chaplain who thought he could lead nursing home worship in the name of "Our Father, our Mother." There were Christians in that nursing home. They had lived to old age in the Christian faith, and now in old age they find themselves praying to a new god. The chaplain's motives were good, no doubt, but it is pretty depressing to have to try to convince an ordained minister that he really ought not to use names for God which have no scriptural, creedal, or dogmatic support, especially when the great accomplishment of scripture, creeds, and dogma is to specify which of the multitude of claimants to godhead is the real one. Likewise, in our synod worship there shall be no strange gods, nor depersonalized "God this" and "God that," and never actually getting around to using a personal pronoun in referring to Him!

11) Straying clergy. They will have a problem. Of course, there is freedom for repentance and amendment of life, but for straying clergy who refuse, it will not be enough for them to "get their mobility papers in order." No, that is not good enough, because they cannot be unleashed on other parts of Christ's Church on earth. They must leave the ministry. I do not know what my legal limitations would be, but whatever spiritual and pastoral authority I had would be used to get straying clergy out of the ministry. And on the other side, I would want the best clergy in the ELCA to come flocking to our synod.

12) I would encourage clergy and all delegates to synod assemblies to bring along their Bible and Book of Concord, hold them in their hand, and quote from them when they stand at the microphone.

13) There is to be no preaching politics from the pulpit. This is part of the "two kingdom" teaching:

Inasmuch as the power of the church bestows eternal things and is exercised only through the ministry of the Word, it interferes with civil government as little as the art of singing interferes with civil government. For civil government is concerned with other things than the Gospel. The state protects not souls but bodies and goods from manifest harm, and constrains men with the sword and physical penalties, while the Gospel protects souls from heresies, the devil, and eternal death. Therefore, ecclesiastical and civil power are not to be confused. The power of the church has its own commission to preach the Gospel and administer the sacraments. ¹³ Let it not invade the other's function...( Augsburg Confession XXVIII. Ecclesiastical Power)

Again, there is to be no preaching politics from the pulpit. It is an offense to Luther's doctrine of the "priesthood of all believers" because it trespasses on the authority of Christian brothers and sisters who in their individual Christian vocations actually know something about political matters. And it is divisive of the Church. If clergy want to be mini-politicians, let them leave the ministry and do so full time. Politics can be a noble profession.

14) I would establish a cathedral. The synod should have a cathedral, no matter how humble it might need to be. In the cathedral, the liturgy and preaching should be paradigmatic. The cathedral should be a second spiritual home for every Christian of the synod, and the bishop should be a second pastor available for every Christian of the synod.

15) If I should find myself in conflict with the ELCA or constitutions or guidelines or whatever, I would want to have confidence in the old conviction of Lutheranism that the Bible is the true norm, source, and judge of Christian doctrine. The ELCA "Model Constitution for Congregations" would give more weight to the Bible than to itself, to ELCA social teaching statements, to guidelines, and ELCA synod resolutions:

This congregation accepts the canonical Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the inspired Word of God and the authoritative source and norm of its proclamation, faith, and life.

16) I would seek collegiality with other bishops - especially with those bishops who seem to be doing the best job at the ministry of the historic episcopate. I would seek collegiality with them both to express the unity of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church, and to benefit from their wisdom.

17) The ideal and the image I would urge for our synod is that we Lutherans are to be the best catholics around! We are to search out the best in the whole ecumenical church throughout the ages - the best hymns, the best liturgies, the best theologians, the best preachers, and we are to take joy in these best things. We are to seek charitable interpretations of the Great Tradition, including those catholic doctrines and practices that might at first seem alien to us. The churches of our synod are to be the ones where Christians throughout the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church, whether Methodist or Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox or whatever... our churches are to be the place where they can come and find themselves saying, "These folks are on to something. This is splendid. Why! This is the very house of God!"

In conclusion, as I survey these things, I fear for the poor soul who would be bishop. It would probably cause chaos to try to do these things all of a sudden, and it would take someone of strong character to weather that chaos. But if any of these ideas seem worthy, perhaps they could be worked in, a bit at a time, according to the wisdom of our bishops.

(End)