Voting in a New Bishop

[document]

I really wanted to post this here, but the site was down at the time. I wrote this a few weeks ago after our diocese voted in a new bishop. I was part of that election process, and as it contrasted with my experiences growing up LDS, I wanted to share:

I had an interesting experience this weekend, and it made me reflect on my Mormon past. I was a life-long Mormon, BIC, mission abroad, married in the temple, etc. When I left the church I found myself in an Episcopal church. Originally I went because I was hired as an organist, I fell in love with the people, the attitudes, the openness to theology (I’m a non-literal Christian, I embrace the myth of Christ), and I felt home. I eventually joined and was confirmed almost 2 years ago. I’m very active in my parish.

This weekend (Oct. 14 - 16), I was a representative of my parish (think ward) for the election of a new bishop (think Stake President, but with far more autonomy and a larger geographical area). We walked into the election informed on the candidates (selected by committee, not by the existing bishop) through about 100 pages of information, resumes, meet-and-greet, question-and-answer sessions, and discussion groups. No matter your background, or how long you were a confirmed Episcopalian, we were all equal in our house (two houses have to vote majority, clergy and non-clergy). We cast our initial ballots, and we didn’t have an election, so we discussed among ourselves for a while, then we cast again. Repeat until we had a bishop elected. It took 6 ballots and about 12 hours of voting and discussion for us to come up with an election.

Throughout the weekend I could not help but reflect on my Mormon experience. For the first time in my religious life, I had a voice. Leadership did not just tell us who was going to be our new bishop and we just symbolically voted in unison. Leadership appointed a committee of both clergy and laity to select those candidates. Leadership did not tell us how to vote, but provided us with information and backgrounds and let our brains do the rest. Our decisions were open, where we were given high level budgets, giving records (from parishes), programs, needs, and all sort of information: we discussed these issues amongst ourselves.

As an ex-Mormon, it was a fascinating process to see a republican process for church leadership. I won’t even say that one form of governance is better than another (because that is opinion), it was just so different I thought I would share. I enjoyed my weekend, even though it was long and hard.

Oh, and if you are wondering, we elected the person that I had originally picked. I never had to change my vote. I am sure that she will be a wonderful bishop for our diocese.

[Korihor]

That's cool, congrats on actually having a voice.

Not to sidetrack too much, but does anyone even discuss if someone is literal or mythological Jesus? Even if all are equally welcomed, it is something the culture even discusses?

[Silver Girl]

What a great experience! The Presbyterian church I am attending is just now completing a yearlong search for a new pastor. The search committee was nominated by the congregation and screened and interviewed the applicants in accordance with the goals of the congregation. The final candidate will be brought in for approval by the entire congregation.

Oh yeah - and the person (whomever it will be) will actually be trained in theology, trained in counseling people, and vetted to make certain there are no legal issues. What a contrast.

[Corsair]

I really wanted to post this here, but the site was down at the time. I wrote this a few weeks ago after our diocese voted in a new bishop. I was part of that election process, and as it contrasted with my experiences growing up LDS, I wanted to share:

Part of the difference seems to be in having a professional clergy. I like your description of how the process worked and it seemed like very sober consideration from the voters. I can confirm that bishops are pretty level headed when they are consider people for callings, but because the average ward member has no voice, leader selection evolved into the Mormon comedy of "whodunit". The aggravating condition is that members have no real ability to choose which congregation they can attend.

In the defense of the LDS church, they often promote pretty good men into the office of bishop, notwithstanding some of the worse examples that leadership roulette has produced for some people. It's pretty astonishing the problem they don't more frequently create. Do let us know how your new bishop works out. It helps to see examples of religious leadership to give better perspectives for people reevaluating their faith.

[GoodBoy]

That's neat. The way our church leadership works, it is no wonder that we are 70 years behind on social issues.

[document]

We are Episcopalian so "sober" may be an overstatement.

[2bizE]

Isn't it just easier to skip the whole democratic process and just settle for communist Mormonism methodology?

[document]

Not to sidetrack too much, but does anyone even discuss if someone is literal or mythological Jesus? Even if all are equally welcomed, it is something the culture even discusses?

A few times personally. We had a long discussion over the book "Zealot" where we talked about the mythological Jesus the Christ vs. Jesus of Nazareth. We actually had that discussion at convention with two priests and a deacon at our table. One of the retired bishops in the Episcopal church, John Shelby Spong, has actually pushed for a less theological approach to reforming Christianity. So, the conversations occur, and it is always interesting.

[Hagoth]

Puts on apologist hat: If God is choosing the leaders you don't need a vote.

Removes hat and throws up into it.

Glad you found NOM again, Document.

[document]

If God is choosing the leaders you don't need a vote.

I should have specified that each person entered into "discernment" when we started the process. I felt called to participate, which led me to prayer and contemplation. I decided to put my name into the hat to be a representative. I had to write up a biography and why I felt called to attend the diocesan convention. The congregation received my biography a week ahead of time along with all items up for vote and they were encouraged to vote. The ballots were cast during our annual meeting. Six were nominated, five were selected, and the last was an alternate should one of us fail to go.

We received our materials in March. We were encouraged to study out each candidate, watch their videos, and be in constant prayer during our discernment process. We consulted with each other often. We prayed together, we listened together. Before the first ballot, we had Eucharist (in fact, we had Eucharist 4 times in two days). Each ballot, we would pray and chant a psalm. Upon election, we sang a doxology. While it was a republican process, it was still a very spiritual process. Part of the discernment process (much like in Mormonism) is to use your brain: in Mormonism the people are encouraged to "study it out in your mind" and then to pray. This was very similar, we just received far more information than I had run into.

I'm quite sure that the process is very similar when calling new people to the quorum of the twelve. I'm sure that they have search committees that present what they feel are adequate and vetted choices for the Apostleship. I'm sure that the fourteen then go through the list carefully and study each one coming to their own conclusions. I'm sure they discuss it at length and pray throughout the process. Why am I sure? Because I've heard similar anecdotes from people up there and I've heard Elder Holland in the MTC say just as much regarding the 70, so I'm confident the same process goes doubly for an apostle.

In the Episcopal framework, it is the same as the Mormon concept of "God choosing the leaders", only that God works through the members and clergy rather than the bishop/stake president/seventy/apostle. The primary difference is that the clergy makes these decisions in conjunction and in agreement with the laity.

[Zadok]

I'm fine with the Episcopal theory which as I understand it is, "You guys choose who you want for a leader, and I, God will work with whomever you select. (Which is exactly how the Mormon church works, even though they won't admit it).

[Corsair]

I'm fine with the Episcopal theory which as I understand it is, "You guys choose who you want for a leader, and I, God will work with whomever you select. (Which is exactly how the Mormon church works, even though they won't admit it).

I generally feel like the theory in the LDS church is "You guys choose who you want for a leader, and I, ward member, will work with whomever you select." I think the track record for bishops and stake presidents is actually pretty good, but that is reflective of the good people of the church, not a clear sign of divine favor.

[document]

I generally feel like the theory in the LDS church is "You guys choose who you want for a leader, and I, ward member, will work with whomever you select."

For the majority of Episcopalians, the sentiment is probably the same. We have 260 active Episcopalians in our parish and we were represented by 5 delegates (not counting clergy). Each congregation, for every active 50 congregants we get a delegate.

There were 92 delegates at the convention, representing roughly 4,600+ Episcopalians in our diocese at the convention. Essentially, 2% of the Diocese got a direct voice in the selection process. However, because it is a republican process, the 4,600 people theoretically got the ability to vote in those 92 delegates for the convention, which gave them an indirect voice in the selection process.

So, their statement to those 92 delegates and 60 clergy were, "You guys choose who you want for a leader, and I, parish member, will work with whomever you select". The big difference is that they got to choose who makes the choices.

[Zadok]

My point was that God doesn't tell the Episcopalians who to pick for their leaders, any more than HE does the Mormons. It's just that the Episcopalians are honest about it, and the Mormons aren't.

[Zack Tacorin Dos]

Oh yeah - and the person (whomever it will be) will actually be trained in theology, trained in counseling people, and vetted to make certain there are no legal issues. What a contrast.

Oh Silver Girl, don't you see that in the True Church (™), we don't need training in theology and counseling because we have the gift of divine inspiration to know what to say (you know, stuff like people of certain color were less valiant in the pre-Mortal existence so they can't have the super-duper, one-and-only, real priesthood). And on top of that, why waste money on background checks and otherwise making sure there are no legal issues? I mean, in the True Church (™) we have the gift of discernment, so we make leaders of men like George P Lee (I know lots of people irreverently joke that the "P" stands for "Pervert" or "Pedophile," but I'm sure it really stands for "Prisoner," and we all know that almost no one in prison is really guilty). (end barf-inducing sarcasm)

In all seriousness though, great to hear you enjoy your church experience so much now. I've grown to really appreciate some of the benefits of what we used to call "priestcraft." I still go to sacrament meeting most every Sunday, and I so wish we could consistently have a trained professional at the pulpit. I know other churches have priests or pastors with problems, but training--what a concept.

[moksha]

If I were looking for a possible Bishop candidate to vote for, I would check out whether they were wearing an Elder Scrolls pin. Makes you feel more comfortable to know they share your values as to what is best for your family and the rest of Tamriel. Wouldn't want someone who looked like they came straight from the gates of Oblivion with an orange-tinged complexion and bragging how they could grab multiple wives with their 'huuuge' tentacles and pincers.