tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22980286.post8392379261862468232..comments2024-03-28T10:26:20.408-04:00Comments on Ponderings on a Faith Journey: The Teaching office of the Bishop in a Free Church settingRobert Cornwallhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04581876323110725024noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22980286.post-27080287742787677412013-08-24T15:23:53.349-04:002013-08-24T15:23:53.349-04:00Jeff, thank you for your reflections -- helpful r...Jeff, thank you for your reflections -- helpful remembrances of the old systems. And mention of college presidents and deans is important. As a graduate of Northwest Christian University -- the President and Deans did function in this way for both the Disciples side and the Independent side. <br /><br /><br />As a pastor with a Ph.D. who was a college/seminary professor before coming to the pulpit full time, it is the teaching ministry that is closest to my heart, but many congregations find it difficult to invest that in a pastor. Unfortuantely pastor as therapist is more popular than pastor as authoritative teacher.Robert Cornwallhttp://bobcornwall.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22980286.post-69439363518736504822013-08-24T14:10:38.320-04:002013-08-24T14:10:38.320-04:00Bob, I suspect that even in the most Disciples-ish...Bob, I suspect that even in the most Disciples-ish of regions, there's still a strong influence of "state evangelist" in the congregational perception of our regional ministers, aka bishops. Our senior staff person in most states was titled "Evangelist So-and-so" until a hundred years ago, and many state societies (such as the Ohio Christian Missionary Society) had staff evangelists until 70 years ago or so. These folks had two (well, three) actual functions: they preached to pull in an audience for new church starts, they preached to draw in the community for revivals, sometimes a missions oriented revival, but revival meetings for a week of evenings or so at an existing Christian Church, and they were the person you contacted when you were looking to make a move (if you were clergy; it was the evangelists and the college presidents who knew what was open and what was opening), or if you wanted to call a new preacher (if you were a ruling elder in a congregation, a largely life-tenured lay leadership position in the local church, whose grip on calls and contracts was part of what Restructure was designed to counteract).<br /><br /><br />Anyhow, this was a robust model for us from about 1830 to 1950, so it's no surprise that sociologically, it's still strong even if relabeled. We don't have a healthy sense of a teaching office tied to that role, since their task is more one of exhortation (in our history, that is) than of instruction or even of counsel. And it's still the case that if you want to get a congregation to listen to you as a regional staffer, the best case scenario is that you come, preach their socks off, then meet with whatever the concern or committee is after lunch -- because that's what we're subtly conditioned to respect. Teaching can be threaded back through that paradigm . . . but I'm going over all this history because my own sense is that, despite what folks like Ron Allen & Clark Williamson tried to do in the 80's & Michael Kinnamon in the 90's and after, the model of "the teaching minister" let alone the teaching bishop is still an "ex nihilo" experience for many life-long Disciples & congregations led by them.Jeff Gillnoreply@blogger.com