Bishop's Election, Synod Assembly Follow-Up

This morning, at our Rocky Mountain Synod Assembly, we elected Pastor Jim Gonia to serve as the next Bishop of our Synod. He will be installed and begin serving in that position in September, although I'm sure he'll be plenty busy over the next months in preparation for assuming that office.

I was pleased by the results of the election. I expect Pr. Gonia to serve very well as our bishop. I believe his gifts for ministry match well with the next steps we need to take in our synod.

It seems to me that one of the gifts it seems to me that Pr. Gonia brings to this office is that he's willing to consider staffing the office of the Bishop in ways that will be unusual in our synod. See, for my entire tenure in this synod, the professional ministry staff are all part of the same demographic group … well, besides gender. They're all white baby boomers.

Now, as I've noted before, I don't have any problem with baby boomers. However, I do find it problematic when the leadership for a diverse group doesn't reflect in their own makeup the diversity of that group. In this case, the membership of the congregations of our synod is fairly diverse ~ there are newborns, 100-year-olds, and everyone in between.

Unfortunately, though, the leadership of our synod (the synod office staff) has represented only a narrow slice of that diversity.

Obviously Pr. Gonia won't staff the synod office with a 90-year-old in the office next to the 12-year-old. But to call on the gifts and different perspectives on our changing world that are represented by people of different age groups would be a good move for the synod office. And maybe, with a variety of different perspectives on ministry in our contemporary world, our synod will begin in new ways to recognize and celebrate the exemplary ministries in our synod instead of simply lamenting decreases in giving and worship attendance.

Of course, simply installing a new Bishop won't alleviate the problems in our synod or in our congregations, and we'll probably discover new problems that we don't have (or recognize) now ~ but I believe, under Pr. Gonia's leadership, we'll make good strides in the right direction.

$0.02

Bishop's Election, Synod Assembly Edition, Part Two

This morning, we heard thoughts and musings, dreams and stories from the eight remaining candidates for Bishop of the Rocky Mountain Synod of the ELCA ~ and then we voted.  The results will be in after lunch, at which time we may have a bishop-elect ... but more likely is that we'll be gearing up for another round of voting.

Of the remaining eight candidates, they took eight very distinct approaches to their time at the microphone, which I imagine would be indicative of the distinct approaches they woudl take to the ministry of the office fo Bishop.

I voted for one (like I was supposed to do), and identified three who I would like to see move through to the next round of voting.  One of the three I expected to like before voting started, one I was completely unfamiliar with, and one of the three really surprised me. 

But even if those aren't the ones who make it through, I hope the next bishop takes seriously the perspectives brought by all of the other candidates, since those perspectives are mirrored among the children of G-d who are voting members of this assembly, as well as by the children of G-d who comprise this synod. 

$0.02

Bishop's Election, Synod Assembly Edition, Part One

The assembly has begun.  We started with worship ~ which is certainly a good way to start.  We've submitted our nominating ballot, seen the results, and have just turned in the second ballot.  We'll see soon who makes it to the next ballot, and then perhaps start to have a better idea about who our future bishop might be. 

During worship, the sermon that Bishop Bjornberg preached, in part, was about imagination and insight within our faith life ~ particularly about the role that imagination plays in thinking and dreaming about the future of the church. 

Our western culture is moving rapidly toward what has been labeled 'post-modernity'.  Folks have all kinds of opinions (some well-informed, some not so much) about the benefits and drawbacks of post-modernity.  Despite what any person thinks about that, it would be difficult to say that this is not the direction our world is moving. 

At this assembly, we have the opportunity to imagine and to begin to live into a new way of being church ~ a way of being church in this new era of life in the western world.  I hope and pray that the process which we are beginning to undertake at this very moment will be Spirit-filled, and that we as the Rocky Mountain Synod will begin to move away from the way we have been church for the past almost 25 years. 

See, the way we've been church together has been great, particularly during much of the previous century.  However, this is a new century, and the world is tremendously different from what it was 100, or 50, or 20, or even five years ago.

The church, also, needs to change in order that the Gospel message (which does not change) will continue to be communicated with a world which is so very desperately in need of hearing a message of grace and mercy and forgiveness and reconciliation and life into the midst of a world that hears more messages of death and destruction than anything else.

In our communal life of faith in and with and through the world in which we find ourselves today, may the process and the election of a new bishop move us forward in our work together at the church in today's world.

$0.02

Bishop's Election, Part Ten

When we first started the process to prepare for the election of a new bishop in our synod, I was skeptical. I was primarily worried that the people who were lifted up early in the pre-process would have greater name recognition once the process actually started at the assembly.

I'm still skeptical, since there seems to be some confusion about the process we're going to undertake in the very near future.  

See, here's the deal. About six months ago (maybe longer, but I can't remember), people in our synod were invited to submit the names of pastors who they thought might be a good bishop. The current synodical leadership tried to make it clear that those individuals weren't actually nominated ~ they were simply identified as potential candidates.

These potential candidates were invited to submit biographical information, and were invited to answer a number of questions about their vision for ministry in the synod. Seventeen potential nominees submitted information responses, and this was published. I believe that the synodical leadership was interested in trying to make the process as clear as possible.

Unfortunately, though, it seems to me that many people believe that they have seventeen people to choose from; namely, the seventeen who submitted biographical information and answers to the questions. And, despite the fact that every single time I talked about the bishop's election with people in my congregation, I made the point that these seventeen have not been nominated, and that others who aren't on the list might be nominated ~ despite my repeated reiterations, there are quite a few people from the congregation I serve who are wondering which of these seventeen will be bishop.

People don't seem to understand the process. And it didn't help even a little bit that the biographical information and responses from the seventeen are included in the pre-assembly packet. Including that information simply makes the misunderstanding about the process even more blatant.

The thing is, constitutionally there can be no nominees until the assembly begins. Further, the nominations for bishop are made by ecclesiastical ballot ~ which means that the first ballot is a blank sheet of paper, on which voting members may write down the name of any person eligible for the office (in this case, any ELCA pastor in good standing).

The field is wider open than the seventeen whose names are in the official pre-assembly materials.  I really hope this truth is clearer to most people than it seems to be to me.

$0.02

Bishop's Election, Part Nine

At the end of this week, we (in the Rocky Mountain Synod of the ELCA) will know who our new bishop will be. This week we meet together in assembly, the business of which will be the bishop's election.

I'm a little surprised by the agenda for this event. In the weeks before the assembly, we usually have a handful (or more) resolutions to read through and prepare to deal with. Often the resolutions are relatively innocuous; sometimes they're potentially contentious. I'm always interested to read them beforehand ~ partly so I can think and pray about how I might vote, and partly so I can try to predict who will be arguing for & against the proposal, and to guess about how long the fighting will go on.

This year, though, there is not one single resolution that's been submitted ahead of time. This is a really unusual situation. I wonder if we're all so preoccupied with the election of a new bishop that we're not considering what other changes to our life together that we might talk about.

On the one hand this makes sense. It seems appropriate to see who the new bishop will be, let that person take on that leadership role, and then determine the necessity for communal discernment about the direction of ministry in the synod.

On the other hand, this seems to me to be a cause for concern. Yes, it's important to see what kind of leadership a new bishop will provide. At the same time, the ministry of our synod is not all about the bishop. In fact, the polity of the ELCA seems to identify the congregation as the primary locus of ministry.

As I've stated before, I believe the primary role of the office of the bishop should be to facilitate connections between congregations, and after that to be mostly invisible. If we really are a priesthood of all believers, then the identity of the person being elected to be our next bishop should not stop us from considering the rest of the ministry of our syond.

In my opinion, we ought to be discussing resolutions this week, along with the election of a bishop. Of course, I didn't submit any resolutions, either.

For those who are interested, I'll be doing my best to offer my reflections on the election process. You can find them here at this blog, or you can follow shorter, more pithy comments on twitter and facebook.

$0.02

Bishop's Election, Part Eight

It's the season of Lent, which means that many church leaders are busier than they typically are. Actually, I'm not sure if others are, but I certainly find myself with less time to wonder and talk about the upcoming bishop's election.

Still, though, whenever we talk about the appropriate qualifications for bishop, we almost always come up with at least a few basic models for how a bishop should operate.

On the one hand, some folks want a bold and visionary leader ~ someone who can challenge the pastors and congregations of the synod in the work they do. Some believe we need a bold and visionary leader who can be a voice of the church promoting justice in the public sphere.

Others believe that the primary role of a bishop should be as a pastor to the pastors of the synod ~ and some would say the bishop should be a pastor to the congregations of the synod. Under this model, the bishop would provide pastoral care to congregations and leaders of congregations in the synod.

Another easy model to fall in to would be for the bishop to serve as the primary administrator of the synodical business ~ to manage official issues like pastoral mobility, candidacy, budget, advocacy ministry, etc.

I'm not sure any of these are appropriate job descriptions for a bishop given our current time and location.

We live in a completely different time and society from when our current bishop was first elected. Eighteen years ago, very few people had cell phones, and even fewer used the internet. Now, people all over the world access the internet using their cell phone.

I respect our current bishop, and appreciate the work he has done. However, it's time in our culture and in our synod to re-think the role of bishop.

What if, today, the primary role of the bishop and the office of the bishop, is to get out of the way of ministry? What if the primary role of the bishop and the office of the bishop is to receive the stories of what's happening in congregations and among communities ~ and then to share those stories with communities who are involved in ministry in other places?

I believe that the synod would benefit from a bishop, and an office of the bishop, that would be primarily concerned with facilitating networks with the goal of problem-solving and strengthening ministry. Other than in the occasional role of public ritual and prophetic voice, the bishop should be mostly invisible, and instead should focus on highlighting congregational ministry.

$0.02

Bishop's Election, Part Seven

My denomination, the ELCA, publishes a magazine. It's a pretty decent publication ~ could be better, could be much worse. This month, The Lutheran published in one of the articles a statistic. According to ELCA Research and Evaluation, “... the average age of worshipers at an ELCA congregation is 57 and the average age of an American is 33 ...” (March 2012, p. 25)

I'm not sure whether the Rocky Mountain Synod statistics are identical to the national statistics, but I'm sure they're not far off.

I'm going to assume that the church finds this problematic. I'm going to assume that the ELCA would prefer for our attendance and membership demographics to more closely reflect national demographics. I'm going to assume that the church would like to connect more with younger people.

The thing is, though, that if people don't see themselves reflected in the leadership, it surely must be less likely that they would fully participate.

We can make tell ourselves all day long that we value young people. Our statements won't matter, though, if we don't make it a point to install younger people into positions of significant leadership.

Which brings me to the question, 'What would it say about our synod, and the ELCA, for our synodical leadership to be closer to the average age of the country (33) than to the average age of worshipers in the ELCA (57)?

$0.02

Bishop's Election, Part Six

One of my seven readers posed a question the other day that I hadn't thought much about. She shared with me that when she was younger, she had served on the synod council as the token youth representative.

Then she wondered aloud, maybe since I've been writing about the obvious changes our society has experienced, whether the synodical structure didn't also need to change.

Does it still make sense for a synod to be staffed by: a bishop, one or more assistants to the bishop, and office staff? Does it still make sense for a synod to be governed (between assemblies) by a synodical council?

It might. It might not. But since our world is vastly different from when our current bishop first took office eighteen years ago (think internet), I got to pondering what a synod structure ought to look like, starting at the top.

Bishop

Should there be a bishop? Because of our constitution, having a bishop is necessary. But beyond that, I believe a bishop serves as the synodical minister of Word and Sacrament. In addition, I believe that a bishop can serve a valuable role as a public prophetic face of ministry in ways that congregational pastors are not always able to do.

One could argue that bishops are not necessary, since those roles can be filled in other ways ~ and those arguments are valid. However, one could argue that pastors are not necessary (and some denominations do). This, though, is not our polity, since we believe that some are gifted by G-d particularly for this work on behalf of the people of G-d.

Assistants to the Bishop

Should the bishop continue to have a staff? Probably. There is a great deal of coordination with and between congregations that has been facilitated by synodical staff. I believe this work is important. In fact, I believe more of this coordination is necessary.

What if the primary role of a synod staff would be to make connections, and then get out of the way? Since congregations are the places where most ministry actually happens, what if the synod staff worked to facilitate connections where they would be appropriate and helpful to ministry?

For instance, what if if there's a congregation doing great work teaching children to play guitar. And what if there's congregation on the other side of town thinking about helping the local elementary school, which has just been forced by the budget cut their music program. The congregations don't have any natural reason to pay attention much to each other ~ but if the synod staff did, then all of a sudden there's the potential for a connection and a sharing of best practices. Ministry is enhanced.

Plus, for the congregations in conflict. Surely there's another pastor who's gone through similar struggles. Surely there's a former congregational president who's waded through that muck and come out healthy. What if the synod staff connects the ones who struggled formerly with the ones struggling currently ~ not to shame, not to dictate, but to share best practices and as a reminder that the struggling congregation is not alone.

I think that, probably, the bishop should still have a staff ~ and that their primary goal should be to make connections between individuals, congregations, seminaries, and other entities in the church … and then get out of the way.

Synod Council

Constitutionally we're stuck with a synod council. Some may think the synod council is unnecessary, since at times (at least in my perception) it seems rather ineffectual. It may be the case that the council is not communicating the work they do very thoroughly. That's easy to remedy.

Or, it may be true that the synod council needs to be re-structured. It seems to me pretty big, and I wonder if it's unwieldy. Right now, each different geographical part of the synod is constitutionally required to be represented on the council all the time.

I wonder if it would make sense to streamline the council. Pare the membership from 24 members down to 10 or 12 (including officers). I wonder if it would make sense for the primary purpose of the synod council to be visioning for the present and future of the synod. And I wonder if the synod council ought to meet more often than three times per year. (Obviously, these meetings wouldn't necessarily have to be in person … there are amazing tools for online and video-conference meetings available today.)

***

I may not have fully addressed my one reader's questions, but this is a first stab at wondering whether the synodical structure that's been in place since (at least) 1988 is still appropriate 24 years later.

$0.02

Bishop's Election, Part Five

As my seven readers may know, we in the Rocky Mountain Synod of the ELCA are getting closer to the election of a new bishop. You who have been reading along know that I have some opinions about our next bishop.

You should also understand that I recognize the truth that most of my posts in anticipation of the election of the new RMS bishop have been negative ~ namely, I've complained about the way things shouldn't be more than I've offered suggestions which might lead to improvement.

Keith Anderson has written a very helpful piece in which he articulates five qualities he believes are important in a new bishop. Since he's written so well about qualities that any current bishop ought to embody, I'll not worry about the more general.

I'm especially concerned about the election of a bishop to this particular synod. In particular, what qualities and assets would be desirable for our bishop, given the peculiarities of the Rocky Mountain Synod?

1) We are an especially large synod. I often hear people refer to the geographic size of the synod as a problem to overcome. I would hope a bishop would actively help synod leadership to understand our vastness as an asset instead of a liability.

We who are called to ministry in the geographic area are bound together, in spite of our diversity, by the accident of bureaucratic proximity. However, instead of seeing this diversity as a liability, let's start to see the unique gifts our diversity brings us as blessing.

2) We find ourselves in a unique and fascinating cultural location. It's an intersection where the traditional mid-western Lutheran culture meets post-modernity; where western individualism meets congregational communalism; where Native and Mexican and white and African and African-American and Asian cultures intermingle (with greater or lesser degrees of comfort); where cultural Christians and cultural atheists argue; where some people talk on phones that are attached to the wall, and some people use their phones for everything but talking.

I would hope a bishop is not so steeped in church that she or he would not be able to recognize these intersections; and then, I would hope a bishop would enter into, and lead the synod into, the midst of these intersections.

3) I hope that our new bishop is able to articulate a vision for synodical staff which moves us away from a centralized and business-corporate mindset.

Of course, a synod office which operates out of a church basement doesn't think highly enough of itself; at the same time, a synod office operating out of a professional office building projects the wrong image of who the church is in the world. We need a bishop who will not try to make the synod something it isn't, and will not apologize for who the church is.

These are a couple initial thoughts. I may have more as we approach nearer to the election.

$0.02

Bishop's Election, Part Four

The Rocky Mountain Synod of the ELCA is not the only synod electing a new bishop this year. I've been lurking a little bit on Facebook timelines, watching what folks in other synods are saying about their own election process.

After perusing Keith Anderson's this morning, I started to think about how we talk with one another about the work of the church, particularly as we anticipate changes in synodical leadership.

Here's what I came up with:

One issue we run in to is the fact that the Bishop of our synod has been re-elected at least twice, and has been in office for over eighteen years.

It's much more likely, when a sitting bishop is available, that she or he will be re-elected. Unless there are huge problems with current leadership, my experience is that folks assume things will remain the same. When we believe things will stay the same, we don't tend to have serious conversations about what needs to change.

This year, though, we in our synod have the opportunity to take our changing culture and society seriously. This year, we have the opportunity to elect a bishop who recognizes that the world is different than it was 18 years ago.

Business as usual circa 1993 is not appropriate for the church of 2012.

It's time in our synod to talk about what needs to change in the synodical leadership … and we probably need to talk seriously about what needs to change in the (especially mainline) church at large as well.

But when we have those conversations, they tend to be reduced to language that sounds good but doesn't really mean anything. We talk about mission and ministry without defining those terms. We say we want to develop bold leaders and courageous congregations without articulating what that means.

We wonder what G-d is up to out in the world, but we fight about what happens inside the church while we tend to ignore the world around us.

We talk about transforming the culture around us, but don't understand the culture well enough to know what kind of transformation the culture is yearning for. What we need is a conversation that moves deeper than generalized language that makes us feel good, but doesn't really mean anything.

What we need is a bishop who is bold enough to consider the truth that church culture needs its own transformation.

$0.02

Bishop Election, Part Three

In the comments section of my post immediately previous to this one, someone made an astute observation. This person noted their discomfort with what they perceived as ageism in the church. This person draws an parallel between age discrimination and discrimination based on gender and sexuality and ethnicity.

You might agree with this person; you might disagree with their perspective. In some areas of our society, it certainly is true that there is discrimination based on age. In fact, through this recent economic downturn, I'm certain that some people I know had more trouble getting a job than they should have; and I'm certain the reason for this was their age.

However, it's also true that demographics are important. If we were to look around our congregations and see only women, we would recognize that we have a problem. And the truth is that we've been looking at ourselves for decades, recognizing the lack of ethnic diversity as problematic, and trying to address the white-ness of our congregations.

In the same way, it is necessary for the church to look around and see a dearth of young people. It is also necessary for the church to look around and not see young people in significant positions of leadership.

I don't see this as age discrimination. I see it as a problem that the church needs to address. I believe that people over 50 are vital to the vibrancy of the church. I also believe that no age group is more vital to the life of the church than any other.

The thing is, though, that when everyone in leadership is from the same generation, other age groups are necessarily alienated. In fact, this is one of the reasons that I've felt for years that younger leaders don't have a voice in this synod; the full-time ministry staff in the synod office are all demographically the same.

Because we don't have voices from a diversity of age groups in significant leadership positions, I'm afraid that the church is clinging to a way of existence that was life-giving in past decades, but that needs to be tweaked for our world today.

As we prepare for the upcoming election, I'm not asking that we ignore anyone over a certain age. What I'm asking for is that we consider the fact that many young adults are staying away from church, and what it would be like to seriously consider electing a 30-something- or 40-something-year-old bishop.

$0.02

Bishop Election, Part Two

As I mention here, our synod will be electing a new bishop in a couple months. So far, over 60 people were potentially nominated. Of those, seventeen potential candidates have not withdrawn their names from potential nomination.  (I say potential, because nothing official can happen until the April assembly.)

The next step in this potential process is for the remaining potential candidates to submit biographical information and their ideas about the office of bishop.

Those were published earlier this week, and I've taken a little time to glance at what these folks have written. I have to admit, I'm disappointed in what I see.

Of course I'll have to make a closer reading before too long, but the vision I see articulated by most of these potential candidates is a continuation of the status quo. “Let's do what we've been doing, let's just do it better.” And anything beyond what's always been is wrapped in church bureaucratic jargonistic language that doesn't really mean anything.

The world is shifting and changing all around us, and the church seems to be mired in a thought process that was successful at one point in history, but no longer makes sense.

Before you, my seven readers, throw up your hands in frustration, please understand that I'm not advocating that we eschew the essentials of our faith. Word and Sacrament should continue to remain at the center of who we are. Our Lutheran perspective on Christian theology is indispensable to the future of the church. The rest, though, should be up for negotiation.

See, if we don't begin to recognize that the world is changing, we'll remain stuck in the cultural trappings of the past.

What I don't see is any one of the potential bishop candidates voicing an articulate alternative to business as usual. Further, I don't hear any one of the potential bishop nominees talking about their actual shortcomings.

What we need, in my opinion, is a bishop who is solidly rooted and grounded in the essentials of our faith. What we need, in my opinion, is a bishop who is humble enough to recognize their own shortcomings, and who is willing to build a staff to fill those gaps.

What we need, in my opinion, is a bishop who recognizes the reality that the world is shifting and changing all around us, and who is willing to push the church into the future ~ not simply for the sake of change, but because the roots and foundation of our faith has an important Word to speak into the changing world.

$0.02

Bishop's Election, Part One

In my little corner of the church, in the Rocky Mountain Synod of the ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America), we have begun the process of thinking about electing a bishop.  What this means, for us, is that people have submitted the names of people who they'd like to see be considered in the election for bishop.  Given the fact that our polity and policy is for nominations to be made at the assembly that will elect the bishop, these submissions don't carry any real weight.

There are 64 people on the list of potential nominees ~ but the reality is that if any of these people are not nominated at the assembly, they won't be considered for bishop.  Also, there could be any number of other people who are not on this 'potential' list that do get nominated.  For instance, Pastor Bob might have been potentially nominated (his name is on the current list), but unless someone writes "Pastor Bob" on the nominating ballot at the assembly, he won't be considered.  Also, Pastor Lisa might not have been potentially nominated, but if someone writes "Pastor Lisa" on the first ballot, she could be elected bishop. 

Also, those 64 people now have the opportunity to write biographical information that will be published, so that assembly voting members can make themselves familiar with those on the potential list before the assembly begins. 


Besides the obvious problems with this process (that these 64 people will have greater name recognition, and therefore greater elect-ability at the assembly; and that it's convoluted and relatively unclear to many people), I also see problems with the demographics of the list.  As I peruse the list, I see only three out of the 64 who are younger than 50.  I have to admit that I'm guessing about people's ages, but I'm pretty sure I'm right. 

Now, there's nothing wrong with people over 50 ~ absolutely nothing.  The problem is that the church doesn't seem to recognize leadership potential in younger people. And before you say 'A bishop really ought to have some significant experience in church leadership', I'll tell you (my seven readers) that we used to much more regularly elect bishops when they were in their 30s and 40s than we do now.  Of course, the people who were in their 30s and 40s then are now in their 50s and 60s and 70s. 

We used to elect younger people to church leadership positions in synods and in congregations and in all expressions of the church.  However, it seems to me that over the last couple decades, the baby boom generation has not been willing to let go of power.  Sure, boomers are willing to let a 20- or 30-year-old lead, as long as the younger people do things the old way; but that's not giving up power, it's just managing from a distance. 

(Yes, I realize I'm stereotyping; yes, I realize that not everyone in the age groups I'm identifying fits the profile I'm articulating; yes, I understand that you might be different; you have to also admit that, despite examples to the contrary, there's truth to what I'm saying.)

So, to have a potential slate of 64 'potential nominees' which contains only three who are under 50 reflects the unfortunate reality that the church is aging (which we knew).  I think it also reflects the fact that the church is afraid to allow younger leaders to really lead. 

I think many people in the church long for perceived-but-never-really-lived glory days of the church.  Because of this, we continue to look for leadership from those who were around then, and neglect leadership from people who might have a different vision of who we are called to be as people of G-d in the world right now. 

I'm not trying to get rid of older people; I am, however, advocating for some room in leadership for some younger people to serve.  Electing, or at least seriously considering, a 40-something-year-old bishop would be a good start. 

$0.02

Bishop Election ~ some initial and scattered thoughts

My synod is entering a process of preparing to elect a new bishop.

* pause *

I'm not sure how many of my seven readers are familiar with the intricacies of the polity of the church I'm part of, so I want to briefly explain.  I'm a pastor in the denomination known as the ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America).  Our denomination is divided up into geographical areas known as synods.  (This use of the word 'synod' may cause confusion, because there are two other Lutheran denominations in this country that are known as synods.  In those cases, 'synod' is used to refer to the entire denomination.)

There is a bishop in each of the 65 synods of the ELCA.  The role of bishop is filled by a pastor who, upon election takes on the title 'Bishop'; and who, upon vacating the office of bishop (literally and ecclesiastically), takes again the title 'Pastor'. 

The only requirement to be elected bishop is that a person should be a pastor in good standing in the ELCA.

*resume*

The process of electing a new bishop is, appropriately, bringing up the question, 'What kind of pastor should we elect to be bishop?' ~ which leads to, 'What role should the bishop serve?', or 'What does a bishop do?', and then, 'What functions should the office of the bishop prioritize?'

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that if ten Lutherans got together in a room to respond to those questions, they would probably come up with a dozen different answers.  What most of us naturally will do is to look at previous bishops we've known, consider how they functioned compared with how they could have functioned better with regard to congregational life, and look for someone to serve as bishop who would fill the roles the previous bishop did not.

I wonder, though, if it helps to look back without also looking forward.  What if, instead of finding a bishop who will be what the previous bishop was not, we look for the best bishop for the future (instead of a bishop who would have been good in the past)? 

What's going on in the world that our election of a bishop ought to take into consideration?  Among other things, the world we move through is much less hierarchical, and much more interconnected, than it was when our denominational structure was established. We seem to be suited to make this denominational shift, since our polity never allowed for a hierarchical ecclesiastical structure ~ bishops, in our tradition, really have very little 'power over' congregations.  But will we embrace a newer worldview, or will it smack us in the ecclesiastical face as we try to hold on to an old model that doesn't work practically in the midst of a newer worldview?

Then, to consider function.  I have to say that I don't believe much actual ministry happens through the synod office.  This is certainly not a critique ~ rather, it is a statement of fact, and a recognition of reality.  Synod offices ought not be trying everything they can to do ministry ~ that is best left to congregations.  The synod office would better serve the Gospel, I believe, by actively equipping congregations in their role of living the Gospel in the particular communities where they find themselves. 

What would it be like for the bishop and the office of the bishop to actually act like most of the significant ministry in our synod is happening in congregations?  What would it be like for the (office of the) bishop to function as a clearinghouse for stories of good news, a place for congregations to search for resources, and a conduit for connecting people and congregations with one another?  

In short, what if the (office of the) bishop would become a real-life, ecclesiastical combination of Google and Facebook and Twitter? 

Some initial thoughts ~ I'm sure there will be more as the election nears.

$0.02