The strange phenomenon of individual bishops going their own way. . .

In my seminary days I often argued that the Missouri Synod already had bishops but we need to name them such and dispense with such democratic holdovers as re-elections and term limits.  I still feel much the same about this.  But at the time (mid 1970s) I never envisioned the situation we would have today in which bishops (in the churches that have bishops) have increasingly flaunted their episcopal collegiality and unity in order to go their own way on any number of issues (gay clergy and marriage being but one).

At the time I argued thus, bishops more or less acted as a unit even in more liberal church bodies.  Bishop James Pike was an abnormality and treated somewhat as an embarrassment for his eccentricities.  In the LCA there were clandestine ordinations of women before the church moved to approve the ordination of women but this happened at the same time and within the context of a still somewhat congregational bent in Lutheranism -- even of the LCA stripe!  Bishops were for the most part those who challenged and reined in such aberrations.

Since then we have had dioceses and bishops almost glory in their complete independence to define the faith as they see fit and this has spilled over from the traditionally liberal churches (Episcopal Church) now to the German bishops (and cardinals) fomenting change in the Roman Catholic Church and at the recent Synod in Rome.  Now we read of a Finnish Orthodox bishop who is likewise unlocking hands with his fellow bishops and choosing to chart his own way in ecumenical and sexuality issues.  It is a strange and unheard of idea that would surely have shocked and appalled the bishops of the early church (think Nicea through the seven great ecumenical councils).

The whole point of having bishops is the issue of catholicity.  Novelty comes through every crack in the church door.  One was consecrated to an office as guardian of the sacred deposit and custodian of the tradition handed down through the generations.  The bishop was never thought to have had innovative power to redefine the faith or depart from apostolic doctrine or practice but to ensure the continuity of what was believed, taught, confessed, and lived out from one generation to another, from one place to another, the same.

One might have thought that Rome might be insulated from the episcopal independence of gay bishops or bishops who were intent upon retaining power even at the sacrifice of basic Christian teaching (such as John Shelby Spong or Gene Robinson was in the Episcopal Church or someone like lesbian Swedish Bishop Eva Brunne who wants to remove Christian symbols to create Muslim prayer room).  The Synod in Rome has proven that bishops have an independent streak even in Rome and where a confusing Pope like Francis will seem to allow it, they are more than ready to go their own way and flaunt papal authority and unity.  Now I read the following:

Met. Ambrosius of the autonomous Finnish Church under the Ecumenical Patriarchate is well-known as a very liberal bishop, even among the other liberal bishops of the very liberal Finnish Church of the liberal Ecumenical Patriarchate.  Recently, Met. Ambrosius, who has been noted as a supported of ‘gay rights’, and ‘inclusion of women in ordination’, etc, invited a Finnish Lutheran female bishop into the altar during an ordination he was performing; he even commanded his deacons to commemorate the Lutheran bishopress.  Complete with an organization such as the “Orthodox Rainbow Society” and their report encouraging ‘discussion’ and ‘re-evaluation’ of traditional dogmas, the recent report and conference held on marriage is not surprising.

The American Greek Archimandrite John Paneleimon Manoussakis stated that “when the rule about priestly celibacy was overruled with the reformation, it was the first step towards the goal, that we are now about to give marital status also to homosexual couples.”  The “Marriage Seminar” was hosted by the Ecumenical Patriarchate’s Diocese of Helsiniki.  Met. Ambrosius has made additional statements encouraging more ecumenism with the Finnish Lutherans and other groups.

The teachings of Met. Ambrosius, the Finnish group under the Ecumenical Patriarchate, as well as the Ecumenical Patriarchate, on these issues of morality as well as their embrace of modernistic and ecumenistic theology is rejected by True Orthodox Christian clergy and laity, who refuse to have any communion with the Ecumenical Patriarchate or any group in union with it.

Met. Ambrosius of the autonomous Finnish Church under the Ecumenical Patriarchate is well-known as a very liberal bishop, even among the other liberal bishops of the very liberal Finnish Church of the liberal Ecumenical Patriarchate.  Recently, Met. Ambrosius, who has been noted as a supported of ‘gay rights’, and ‘inclusion of women in ordination’, etc, invited a Finnish Lutheran female bishop into the altar during an ordination he was performing; he even commanded his deacons to commemorate the Lutheran bishopress.  Complete with an organization such as the “Orthodox Rainbow Society” and their report encouraging ‘discussion’ and ‘re-evaluation’ of traditional dogmas, the recent report and conference held on marriage is not surprising.
The American Greek Archimandrite John Paneleimon Manoussakis stated that “when the rule about priestly celibacy was overruled with the reformation, it was the first step towards the goal, that we are now about to give marital status also to homosexual couples.” 
The “Marriage Seminar” was hosted by the Ecumenical Patriarchate’s Diocese of Helsiniki.
Met. Ambrosius has made additional statements encouraging more ecumenism with the Finnish Lutherans and other groups.
The teachings of Met. Ambrosius, the Finnish group under the Ecumenical Patriarchate, as well as the Ecumenical Patriarchate, on these issues of morality as well as their embrace of modernistic and ecumenistic theology is rejected by True Orthodox Christian clergy and laity, who refuse to have any communion with the Ecumenical Patriarchate or any group in union with it.
- See more at: http://nftu.net/met-ambrosius-finnish-church-greek-archimandrite-we-re-evaluate-understanding-marriage/#sthash.Y3dUrxrg.dpuf

The point is this.  This localization of doctrine and practice within the smaller jurisdiction of a single bishop is not merely a breech in the face of unity within the tradition but it empties the very witness of Christianity before the world until faith becomes merely an extension of the personal conscience and opinion of the individual alone.  The bishops were made bishops not to substitute their own personal opinions for the teaching of the Scriptures or the church but to safeguard the church from the tyranny of self, preference, and individual judgment that renders the Word of the Lord one voice among many subject to the whims of the individual mind and heart and will.

I still feel that the structures of a church should not be borrowed from political or secular source but be true to biblical words and structures (like bishop) but it is worthless to have bishops unless they are willing to defer their own ideas to the words and witness of Scripture and the catholic tradition.  For Lutherans, this is a betrayal of the very Reformation principle that insisted we were not those introducing novelty but those who were intent upon holding to the catholic doctrine and practice of the ages.  Scripture alone does not place the Word of God under the shackles of personal and individual opinion -- not even a bishops.  To see this same episcopal independence so cavalierly flaunted in Rome and Orthodoxy raises grave concerns about the ability of any church to speak with one voice before the world and to have that voice carry the authority of the Lord.