Archbishops - What kind of leader?
David Powys, editor/collatorSometime in the year 2000, at the close of the second Christian millennium, some one thousand Melbourne Anglicans will assemble to elect a new archbishop. The one chosen will lead us into the third millennium. Mindful that God's gifts are manifold, and that no individual possesses them all, what candidate qualities and abilities ought we to focus upon as we attempt to identify the person God is calling to this office?
The best part of two thousand years ago, Paul or his successors listed qualities needful in a person appointed as overseer in the church. A list can be formulated on the basis of 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:6-9. A level of integrity which prompted universal high regard was primary - a 'bishop' was to be above reproach, blameless, respectable, upright and well thought of by outsiders. The weight of this cluster cannot be ignored. A second cluster indicates the importance of self discipline - being temperate, self-controlled and not quick-tempered. Other qualities deemed necessary were that the person be sensible, hospitable, a lover of goodness, and prudent, gentle and devout.
Within the same passages there are listed behaviours and characteristics which precluded people from the office of bishop. To be guilty of debauchery, to be a drunkard or addicted to wine, to be violent, quarrelsome, rebellious, a lover of money or greedy for gain, to be arrogant or a new believer, was in each case to be ineligible for this office.
The writer laid two further emphases. A bishop was to be one with a strong track record in getting relationships right, and a gifted teacher and preacher.
The precise meaning of the requirement that a bishop be "married only once" is debated. It would certainly have excluded any polygamists. It may have extended to those who had remarried, possibly even, someone has argued, to those remarried after being widowed. This, together with skilful management of one's household, winning the obedience and respect of one's children, and having encouraged them to make the faith their own, were tangible evidences of a capacity for righteous relationships and effective leadership.
The last emphasis in these key biblical passages is on the teaching role of the bishop. Negatively, there was to be an ability (and presumably willingness) to refute those who attacked true teaching. Positively there was to be a firm hold and appreciation of divine revelation, an ability to expound it and also to move hearers to faithful response.
While commentators cannot agree about the dating of the letters containing these passages, it is clear that the church then was different to what it is now. Itinerant evangelists and apostles probably played major roles then. The work of bishops may well have been limited to nurture, consolidation and pastoral care. The church had undergone phenomenal expansion, and consolidation of this growth was a priority. Nurture and pastoral care remain central to the task of modern bishops. But our context demands that they possess other gifts and abilities. This is especially true of the archbishop of a diocese set in a huge multicultural post-modern metropolis, where the church, though once a central institution, is declining and becoming increasingly marginalized.
This suggests that the bishop to lead the Diocese of Melbourne into the third millennium should be gifted in additional key areas. Ideally, this man will be: a person responsive to new movement of the Holy Spirit; a radical Christian thinker; and an enabling and visionary leader.
What our church needs more than anything else is to be renewed. This is the Spirit's work, and the winds of renewal have blown time and again through the church in bleak times past. Renewal cannot be engineered or orchestrated. It is a matter of waiting on God, recognizing the Spirit's stirring in unexpected ways, and then embracing it rather than fighting it. A future archbishop open to the movement of the Holy Spirit will have a 'missional' orientation, will wait on the Lord expectantly, will know the renewing and redirecting power of prayer, and will be a wise risk-taker.
Our next archbishop will also need to be a radical Christian thinker. Each word is important. Not all clergy think well, and not all think 'Christianly'. Too much church endeavour is driven by non-Christian thinking. Our leader will need to be a fine Christian thinker, with a thorough understanding of the Gospel and our society, and capable of radical reapplication of the former to the latter. The era of Christendom is long past, though much ecclesiastical practice has not 'caught up'. A radical Christian thinker will remind us that our goal is Christ rather than church, will assist us to live faithfully 'in the present' rather than ineffectually 'in the past'. He will be a prophet - cogently addressing both church and wider society.
Last, but not least, the archbishop for the new millennium will need to be a leader extraordinaire. As a thinking leader he will be a creative and competent strategist, willing to leave the minutiae to others. As a person secure in his own God-given but limited abilities, he will rejoice in the competencies of others and will be more given to permitting rather than to prohibiting. Inspiring in manner, he will be an effective role model for fellow clergy. He will find new ways to enable the episcope of his regional bishops, and will advance diocesan unity whilst enabling a liberating decentralization of initiatives and resources. He will be appreciative of the diversity of Anglican conviction, willing to foster what is exemplary in each tradition. Lastly, he will be able to listen to others, but then to take decisions, ultimately being beholden to none but God.
Let us be thankful for our past and present leaders. Let us pray that Melbourne's electoral process will be responsive to this or some superior ideal, rather than being enslaved to blind and unthinking politics.
- David Powys, editor/collator - August 1998