| Since GA 2016, I have thought periodically about the (in)appropriateness of the term *bishop* in our church. While I agree with some of the reasons given for restricting *bishop* to a group smaller than all of those at the third level of ordination, below are the primary reasons that I think we should keep *bishop* in this broader sense. I offer them as an affirmation of our leadership�s recognition that this topic could benefit from public discussion in our church.1. Although many ordained bishops do not provide oversight of regions of churches�one of the most important responsibilities of bishops in the history of Christianity�they do provide oversight of our church�s doctrine and polity�another of bishops� most important historic responsibilities. Bishops called the Son *of one essence* with the Father, called the Holy Spirit the *Lord and Giver of Life,* and gave us the rest of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed. Bishops continue to meet to determine doctrine and polity, whether at the Second Vatican Council or the Church of God International General Council. This is the work of overseers, the work of bishops, because it is pastoral work of a particular kind. It is *pastoring* the universal church in its various traditions.2. Keeping *bishop* maintains important continuity with other historic church traditions who also have a three-tiered structure for ordination and use *bishop* for the third level of ordination. The terminology helps bind together church traditions that�in my opinion, correctly�believe in episcopal church government. If we are going to consider terminological change for our levels of ordination, perhaps it should be *exhorter* to *deacon* and *ordained minister* to *presbyter* or *elder,* rather than *bishop* to something else. *Exhorter* to *deacon* could parallel nicely with other churches who affirm that ordination as a deacon can be either a permanent status or a step towards other levels of ordination, since some COG exhorters remain exhorters and some do not. It could help rehabilitate *exhorter* as a level of ordination at which one discerns whether or not to proceed to other levels of ordination or faithfully to fulfill the responsibilities of an exhorter for the rest of one�s ministry, something in which there should be no shame. In this way, *stopping at exhorter* would not necessarily be a failure to follow through with one�s ministerial ambitions.3. There is already a mechanism in place for making the distinction�an important one that needs to be made, I believe�between bishops who provide oversight of regions of churches and bishops who do not. We do not need to change the name of the level of ordination itself to do this. We use terms like *administrative bishop* and *presiding bishop,* which do not distinguish different levels of ordination but different roles carried by various persons, all of whom are *bishops* by ordination. Neither should we restrict the constituency of the IGC to those who are administrative bishops or executive bishops since a group that small should not have exclusive hold on such a grand responsibility.4. Another of the most important responsibilities of a bishop is *to pastor pastors,* to be a shepherd to those who have direct oversight of a local church. This can come in the form of the practical training and advice that many administrative bishops provide well for their pastors. And yet, those of us who are theological educators�even if we are not administrative bishops�also *pastor (future) pastors* by teaching them the historic Christian faith. We have devoted our lives to careful and detailed academic study of the Christian faith in order to teach it�in all of its breadth, complexity, and beauty�to others who will in turn teach it to others. This, too, is the work of a bishop. And, by the way, several of us are women.I do not oversee a region of churches or even pastor a single church. However, I, and many others, help oversee the doctrine and polity of our church and *pastor pastors* by teaching them the Christian faith. We do not perform all of the historic responsibilities of bishops, but we perform enough of the most important ones to retain the title *bishop.*I am a bishop, and I take that responsibility seriously.I also look forward to continued discussion of this issue in our church. |