What does the Bible say to the current Global Methodist discussion over the role of bishops? The question is easier asked than answered. This is due, in part, to the fact that the New Testament does not include a manual of church polity. It does describe some of the ways early Christians organized themselves, but it does not prescribe a single ecclesial structure for every church and for all time. Consequently, a variety of church government forms have emerged - whether episcopal or presbyterian, single elder or multiple elder, independent or connectional. Proponents of each of these organizational systems appeal to scripture for their legitimization. So, again, questions of polity aimed at the Bible are easier asked than answered.
That said, I do believe an episcopal system (that is, a church government structured with bishops) is built on solid biblical foundation. I also think there are texts that speak to some of the questions currently being raised as we prepare to decide between traveling bishops and residential bishops at the upcoming convening conference. What are those questions? Two in particular come to mind. Should we have multiple levels of oversight? And should we delegate some of the things bishops used to do to regional officers called conference superintendents? The Florida Plan answers "no" to both questions, while the General Superintendency Plan answer them affirmatively. We'll start with the first question and then move to the second.
The Bible and Levels of Oversight
One key text that forms a biblical foundation for a system with bishops is Titus 1:5.
The reason I left you in Crete was that you might put in order what was left unfinished and appoint elders in every town, as I directed you (NIV).
This verse comes just after the letter greeting and articulates Paul's plans for the work Titus will do on the Mediterranean island of Crete. Of particular importance, Paul has created a structure with at least three levels of oversight for the early church: (1) Paul oversees the work of Titus, (2) Titus oversees the elders on Crete, and (3) the elders oversee the churches in the towns of Crete.
At the highest level, Paul himself provides leadership to the larger early Christian movement. He has a team of people that he's deployed in various places (e.g., Timothy in Ephesus and now Titus in Crete). Paul seems to concern himself primarily with the advancement of the mission into unreached territories, and he seems to focus on what we might call spiritual and doctrinal leadership. Once a church is established, he travels somewhere else and leaves the regional administration to someone else, though he continues to instruct those leaders in a variety of ways. His work is focused on furthering faith in the truth that leads to godliness (Titus 1:1). He articulates character qualifications for elders (Titus 1:6-9). He sets forth what should be taught in the churches (Titus 2:1) In short, Paul traveled around starting churches and mentoring the regional leaders of the early church advising them on matters of ordination and doctrine and calling on them to do good works that bear faithful witness to the gospel (Titus 3:4-8).
At the second level of pastoral oversight, Titus is responsible for the selection of elders (or pastors) of the churches under his regional oversight on Crete. There were perhaps twenty or so towns on the island, and we don't know how many of them may have had Christian assemblies. Nevertheless, Titus' job was to administer the system in that area focusing especially on leadership selection and development. Paul gave Titus instructions on the character and qualifications of the persons who should serve as pastors of the churches, but Paul doesn't seem to have gotten too deeply involved in the selection of specific people. Titus was to select and deploy the elders. Paul sets forth a vision, principles, and boundaries within which Titus is to do his work of regional administration.
The third level of oversight comes at the level of the elders in the churches in the towns and cities of Crete. Paul expects them to be faithful people of character who are able to exercise self-control. The elders teach the gathered assembly of believers and refute false doctrine at the local level (Titus 1:6-9).
We want to be careful to avoid anachronism; that is, we should not read later developments of ecclesial structure back on to the biblical texts. I'm not suggesting that Paul thought of himself as a bishop or of Titus as a conference superintendent. Nevertheless, there is strong similarity between what Paul and Titus are doing and what is proposed in the General Superintendency Plan for traveling bishops. We want bishops who will be apostolic, spiritual, and theological leaders focused on the larger movement and on keeping it faithful. I think this is similar to the role Paul takes up in his relationship with Titus and others on his team of regional leaders.
The role Paul articulates for Titus in 1:5 is similar to what we envision for conference superintendents, who will manage the administrative ministry of a regional body especially as it relates to finding qualified pastors to lead the churches in their area. Who is qualified for ministry? Where will they serve? Those are the questions Titus was responsible for. Those are also the chief questions that will occupy the conference superintendents if the General Episcopacy Plan is passed and implemented.
Oversight vs. Bureaucracy
Taking the point that Titus 1:5 offers biblical precedent for multiple levels of ecclesial leadership, it's worth taking a moment to talk about the difference between oversight and bureaucracy. Proponents of the Florida Plan suggest that the General Superintendency Plan creates too many levels of "bureaucracy" and increases the institutional footprint of the GMC. We should all recognize that the word "bureaucracy" is often used pejoratively and thus takes on a certain rhetorical function. In north American English, "bureaucracy" is a negative word and it functions (regardless of intent) to color the hearer against whatever system is labeled bureaucratic.
Our discussion would be healthier if we spoke in terms of oversight instead of bureaucracy. It is entirely possible to have multiple levels of oversight without those levels being weighed down by burdensome bureaucracy. Go back to Paul and Titus. Nothing about their system seems overly bureaucratic in the negative sense that word carries for us, yet they very clearly had a system of church governance with multiple levels of oversight. Paul gave oversight to Titus, who gave oversight to the elders in his region.
The question we should be asking is which of the plans before the GMC has most potential to move us down a path on which our oversight becomes laden with bureaucratic dysfunction. Of the two plans before us, the Florida Plan would create an Assembly of Bishops that could number in the thirties or forties within a matter of just a few years. While these bishops would be employed by annual conferences, they would be agents of the General Church. It's difficult to imagine how such a large Assembly of Bishops could function as the visionary and apostolic leaders that we need. Getting that many people to speak with strength, resolve, and unity on any single issue will be exceedingly difficult, and the potential is there for such a large group to become a top-heavy burden on the denomination very quickly.
Alternatively, the General Superintendent Plan keeps the Assembly of Bishops small and nimble. It puts them in a position to think about the larger strategic mission of the whole Church. It frees them up to spend time casting a vision for the GMC as a missional movement focused on "knowledge of the truth that leads to godliness" (Titus 1:1). I think this approach slows the path to a burdened bureaucracy, and that's one of the major reasons I think it's the right plan for the GMC.
The Question of Delegation
We need to return briefly to the question of administrative delegation. Proponents of the Florida Plan oppose the shift of conference administration from bishops to conference superintendents. The suggestion has even been made that the division of labor between bishops as spiritual leaders and conference superintendents as administrative (or temporal) leaders runs against the grain of biblical models. Here's the way it was put in a recent email promoting the Florida Plan:
Jesus is a spiritual AND temporal leader. He taught and healed people, cast out demons, and fed the hungry. When Jesus sent out the disciples and all of us to Judea, Samaria, and all the ends of the earth we were tasked with both functions (emphasis original).
But this statement doesn't really grapple with the evidence we find in scripture. Jesus' own ministry was very targeted in and around Judea and thus it was quite limited in scope. Jesus himself made this explicit in Matthew 15:24. That sort of geographically limited ministry did not require significant delegation of administrative responsibilities. However, after Jesus sent the apostles to Judea, Samaria, and the ends of the earth, the apostles very quickly began delegating various tasks in order to focus themselves on ministries of Word and prayer. Acts 6 tells the story. As the movement grew in number, the administrative ministry also grew in complexity, especially with regard to the distribution of food to widows. The apostles determined that if they didn't delegate that work, it would result in neglecting their responsibility for the ministry of the Word (Acts 6:2). You could say that they delegated the administrative leadership of some ministries in order to focus themselves on the spiritual leadership of the larger movement. The argument could also be made that part of the problem leading to the dysfunction in the United Methodist Church was that our bishops neglected spiritual leadership because it was crowded out by administrative responsibility. The sort of thing we find in Acts 6 provides a biblical basis for the General Superintendency Plan and the way it envisions the relationship between bishops and conference superintendents.
Returning to the development of leadership structures in the Bible, the delegation of some ministry in Acts 6 soon led to the sort of structure Paul was building with Titus in Crete. Paul himself focused on big picture spiritual, apostolic, and theological leadership of the larger movement. We have little evidence in the letters that he became deeply involved in the administrative work of Titus' region. Paul instructed and advised Titus, but he didn't appear to micromanage the work on the ground. He's the top-level spiritual strategist, not the local administrator. Both were vitally important. So important, that is, that all that work needed to be delegated to different levels of oversight in order to cultivate maximum effectiveness.
Global Methodist Bishops as General Superintendents
In short, we have strong biblical foundations for structuring the office of bishop in the GMC as it is set forth in the General Superintendency Plan. Multiple levels of oversight are thoroughly biblical as is the delegation of some administrative oversight that frees up bishops to focus on spiritual and theological shepherding of the larger movement. This is what the apostles did in Acts, and it's what we see in the ministry of Paul. Multiple levels of oversight do not have to become a frustrating bureaucracy. In fact, a single level of oversight could just as easily (if not more so) became a bureaucratic burden to the GMC. It falls to us ensure that doesn't happen. The General Superintendency Plan gives us a pathway to being that kind of movement.
Dr. Matt O’Reilly (Ph.D., Gloucestershire) is Lead Pastor of Christ Church in Birmingham, Alabama, Director of Research at Wesley Biblical Seminary, and a fellow of the Center for Pastor Theologians. A two-time recipient of the John Stott Award for Pastoral Engagement, he is the author of Paul and the Resurrected Body: Social Identity and Ethical Practice, The Letters to the Thessalonians, and Bless the Nations: A Devotional for Short-Term Missions. Follow @mporeilly on X and @mattoreillyauthor on Instagram.
This page contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
Comments