Following a brief historical background to ecclesiology, I intend to begin my exploration with episcopal ecclesiology. This is far and away the most successful ecclesiology in terms of numbers. One billion Christians are Catholics, half the Christians in the world. And we must also add to their number Orthodox and several Protestant Churches.
In view of these numbers it is important to take seriously the claim that episcope is the key to ecumenism. If all the churches could only adopt episcopal ecclesiology then ecumenism would be much easier. This is a persuasive argument although it has to be said that ecumenism between episcopal churches seems to have been just as elusive as it has for everyone else. Indeed, it could be argued that the non-episcopal churches have so far shown the greatest success in this respect.
There are several uniting or united churches around the world and these are usually several non-episcopal churches with sometimes one episcopal church. This is complicated though because (1) those which include episcopal churches, particularly Anglican, will be episcopal themselves as a result, and (2) some churches that are not episcopal in their origins have reinvented bishops and organise along episcopal lines. So, we have here a highly flexible and potentially uniting approach to ecumenism. As a non-episcopal Christian myself, I can see the attraction .
It seems to me the episcopal approach has two big advantages. The first is personal episcope. The Bishop exercises oversight over his (or occasionally her) diocese. In theory this gives the people an advocate amongst the clergy. In practice I'm not sure how effective it is. But there is definitely an element of accountability introduced into church structures by this method, largely missing from congregational churches for example.
The second big advantage I can see is the parish and diocese system. This is fundamentally inclusive. Such churches carry with them a concern for everyone within the parish without exception. It should lead churches to be less inclined to condemn those who do not believe as they do, although I'm not saying it always does. It is a formidable way to be organised and offers significant opportunities for mission and ecumenism.
I do not aim in these posts to arbitrate between traditions and I will try to present as positive a view of each approach to ecclesiology as I am able. I think the disadvantages of episcopal ecclesiologies are largely matters of prejudice rather than integral to the approach. Primary amongst these is the prejudice against woman priests and bishops. Based in part I believe on the idea that laying on of hands goes back to the first apostles and somehow women were never included. I summarise but maintain these are dubious arguments. They do not undermine the principle of episcope itself.
Comments