|
 The day after I was elected to the office of district superintendent (DS), the primary question in my heart was, “Lord, what have you done to me?” Gratefully, that question quickly gave way to a more useful question, “Lord, what do you want me to do?” It’s not as if I had no idea at all.
For 14 years, I had the privilege of serving under the leadership of Keith Wright, and I learned much from his good modeling of what a superintendent should be and do. I also knew that I would have to find my own way.
One of my first assignments helped me: I was faced with the daunting prospect of trying to help one of the largest congregations in our denomination select a new pastor. Here I was, a rookie DS, facing a church board of 25 capable, passionate, and opinionated leaders. What was my job there? To exercise command and control? Even a rookie could see the end game of that approach. Or was my primary role in that situation (and every subsequent situation) to cast a biblical and theological framework for what that church board was trying to do?
 Naturally, they had a tendency to default to their workday orientation and approach the search as a business transaction. They did not need me to help them conduct surveys, build profiles, research candidates, and conduct interviews. They did need me, however, to call them to a thoroughly biblical ecclesiology that would help them to ask the right questions and to ask them in the right way. Through a long process that was fraught with peril, from innocent miscommunication to carnal lobbying, someone needed to take a leadership role to locate and name God’s presence in the process.
That experience, and many others far less noticed by the larger church, shaped my thinking about the work of superintendence. More deeply, a commitment to a Wesleyan theological foundation shapes the work of ministry in particular ways. Russell Richey, Professor of Church History at Candler School of Theology, has done significant work in this area, encouraging a Methodist “reconsideration” of the superintendency.1 Richey works with the notion of episkopos, defining the office as serving “to express and promote the visible unity of the body.” That sounds like something to which I can give my life. I am unwilling to give my life to this work if it is only about managing conflict and gathering statistics. I am willing to give my life to this work if it is about prophetically calling a people to live together in ways that promote the “unity of the Sprit in the bond of peace” (Ephesians 4:3). I would also submit that this is a way of superintending that congregations hope for even when they would be unable to name it.
We need superintendents to be less like managers and more like teachers.
I have sensed my share of resistance to “the district” (which I eventually figured out meant me) when the role of DS was obviously being understood as one who comes to put the squeeze on a church to grow more, pay more, or shut it down. I have also witnessed a melting of suspicion and a warming of esteem when the role of DS is perceived as one who comes alongside to help restore a sense of hopeful imagination by rearticulating the rich biblical vision of participation in God’s mission in the world. It’s this broader vision, this truly missional perspective that enables one who could be viewed as nothing more than “middle management” to be one who pastorally calls the church to live into and out of the vitality of the in-breaking kingdom of God.
Practically, then, the superintendent can see every interaction with pastors and laity as an opportunity to shape this kind of Kingdom vision. We need superintendents to be less like managers and more like teachers. Whether it is a church/ pastor review, meeting with boards in pastoral transition, preaching to a congregation, or seeking to guide church leaders through a time of conflict, the role of district superintendent is to call out a community that orders its life around the values and priorities, not of this world, but of the kingdom of God as expressed when God’s people live together in a covenant of selfsacrificing love. Even while doing practical and perhaps mundane work, it is possible for the episkopos to shape a culture of biblically grounded theological reflection; whereby, pastors and lay leaders begin to move from pragmatism (what will get up a good crowd this week?) to incarnational gospel (what would it mean to serve our neighbors as Jesus would serve them?).
This is the sense in which I want to be the district pastor. This is language that some are using today, but I would suggest that we use it precisely. It certainly is not about being the district buddy or the district grandfather. It is about fulfilling the pastoral roles that are classically defined as the offices of Christ, namely: prophet, priest, and king.
Prophet speaks to the role of truth telling in the midst of a people. Superintendency provides profound opportunity for this kind of work, particularly when dealing with congregations that have become embroiled in conflict. A culture steeped in consumerism and self-sovereignty has recast pastors as targets of customer dissatisfaction rather than priests, prophets, and shepherds over God’s people. In the face of unrealistically high expectations and consumer-driven demands, pastors grow weary, lose sight of their mission, and finally give up. Nazarenes need to be called away from this idolatry and into a renewal of covenant with the people of God. District superintendents can have a strong, prophetic voice in this.
 Priest is the most loved form of our ministry, in that we are privileged to guide the people into the presence of God. We gather the people in the name of our risen Lord Jesus Christ. We proclaim the Word of the Lord and joyfully announce the Gospel. We help our people to use the divine grace through the gift of the sacraments, and we pronounce the blessing of God upon them in Jesus’ name. Can a district superintendent still fulfill this priestly calling? I believe we can as we re-imagine the role of superintendent from outside expert (business model) to spiritual overseer (ecclesial model), one who teaches, corrects, and loves.
Finally, the idea of shepherd-king speaks to the most common aspects of our work. We are comfortable with the shepherd metaphor, but the idea of king should not be lost. It is not, properly conceived, a “lording over” role. It is rather the role of loving administration; whereby, our leadership encourages structures of ministry that promote the common good. It is a means by which the people feel secure, cared for, and loved. As superintendents work at the myriad of administrative detail that does shape much of the role, it is possible to move from seeing it as choking "administrivia"2 to loving our people through the wise administration of discipline.
If we accept that these classical pastoral offices are also accurate descriptions of what the church had in mind when the idea of overseer was conceived, then the poignant question may be, “What does it take to do the work of superintendent from this kind of theological framework?” There are many ways to approach such a question, but two implications have sharpened in my mind during my tenure as superintendent. These two are presence and time.
By presence I mean to reflect on the sense of itinerancy that is essential to the work of superintendent. Simply put, superintendents have to get “out there” among the people. As Richey says, “it is an odometer thing.” It has been remarkable to realize just how much it matters when I show up in one of our churches. Certainly some are wholly unimpressed, but generally I have found a genuine We need superintendents to be less like managers and more like teachers. sense of appreciation that someone who represents the connectional nature of our church would show up and be willing to learn something about what is happening in that location. This seems true for pastors and laity alike. Further, the very Bible word ἐπίσκοπος (episkopos) has in its essence the meaning of “going to see” or “keep an eye on.” Pastoral, incarnational presence has everything to do with working at this role with theological intention.
Time is also a critical factor. By this I mean something akin to what Eugene Peterson said to me when I had the privilege of sitting with him one day at his home to talk about pastoral life. He said, “I discovered that it took me a lot of time to be a pastor.” He was not speaking of appointments, meetings, and getting up sermons. He was talking about prayer, immersion in the Scriptures, and the grace-enabled ability “to be unhurried with another person.”3 After about one year as superintendent, I faced the unpleasant reality that I was neglecting my core work in favor of the busy work of “running a district” (an idea which makes me laugh now). Consequently, my soul was dry, and I could feel the withering of my capacity for imaginative and prophetic speech. I remembered what Dennis Kinlaw said when he realized that an administrative job was keeping him from nurturing his mind and heart in the deepest ways. He said one day it hit him, “If I do not read, I will die!” It comes down to discipline, no way around it. I have to get to my calendar before anybody else does and intentionally carve out times for solitude, reading, and reflection. I’m thinking about more than daily devotions, but about time to think, time to pray, time to immerse in the Scriptures, and to engage spiritual conversations with brothers and sisters who help me to go deeper in my journey.
These are some ways of episkopos, ways that help me in the role of district superintendent to find my true moorings in the offices of Christ rather than in the strategies of contemporary corporate models of leadership. I do want to fulfill the duties assigned to me by the Manual of the Church of the Nazarene. Even more, I want to be part of helping to create a culture in which pastors are spurred on to be biblically grounded, theologically reflective, and relationally rich in love. I want to help shape a district family of congregations that are seeking to function as an authentic expression of the kingdom of God in the world.
NOTE: Be sure to read the responses from other people below this article.
|
Comments
Is the role of District Superintendent best described by the Scriptural term: episkopos?
A response to Dr. Jeren Rowell’s fine article on
“A Wesleyan Theology of Superintendency ”
By Stan Reeder, superintendent, Oregon Pacific District
I’ll admit, I’ve got a bit of a DS iden-y complex – I don’t know what to call myself in my new role as a District Superintendent. I’ve seen other DS’s call themselves by any number of -les: District Pastor, District Team Leader, Network Facilitator, Pastor to Pastors, District Coach … I’m beginning to think that perhaps a simple “Your Excellency” might be fine.
Jeren Rowell has provided a great service to me and to all who serve as District Superintendents in this succinct and personally transparent examination of “A Wesleyan Theology of Superintendency .” His examination of the New Testament term of episkopos goes a long way toward helping define some of the nuances of the complex and sometimes slightly convoluted role of District Superintendent.
Although traditionally the church has migrated toward episkopos (the root for the word “bishop”) as the word used to refer to an ecclesiastical administrator, it might be worth re-questioning the assumption that episkopos is the best or only term to describe the role of the District Superintendent. One of the limitations of the term is that it is only used five times throughout the entire New Testament. In those 5 usages the term is translated as “guardian” (one time), “overseer” (2 times), and “overseers” (2 times). Of those five occurrences, one time it is clearly referring to Jesus as the overseer of our soul (1 Peter 2:25), the other four times it appears to be describing the role of what we would consider a local pastor of one church (-us 1:7; 1 Timothy 3:2; Philippians 1:1; Acts 20:28). It could be that the word episkopos, as it is used in the New Testament, has significant limitations in helping us understand the complex role of a District Superintendent.
There are other significant New Testament words used to describe the role of Christian Leadership that may shed light for a theology of superintendency . It appears that the most basic form of Christian Leadership is described by the word diakonos, translated “deacon” (3 times), “minister” (seven times), but most frequently as “servant” (19 times). It was not unusual for Paul to refer to himself as a “servant,” and he actually uses the even stronger -le of doulos, that is, slave (Romans 1:1, Philippians 1:1, -us 1:1). It is interesting to note that both Stephen and Philip started as a diakonos but ended their ministries as evangelists, demonstrating that those who began ministry as deacons may take others roles of leadership. Perhaps Paul started his ministry as a diakonos, but as his leadership developed, the servant aspect of his ministry was never lost. Surely, the role of District Superintendent has this strong element of service that pervades almost every function.
A better Scriptural word that could be used to describe the Superintendent role is presubteros. It is used much more frequently (72 times) than either episkopos or diakonos. The term presuteros differs most greatly from the other two in that 57 times it is translated “elder” with the definite implication of “older age.” The usage of the term presbuteros has the assumption that wisdom and understanding grow with years of walking with Christ in the leadership experience. In fact, 10 times throughout the New Testament the term is used to refer to “older man” and on one occasion to “older woman” (1 Timothy 5:2). Given that District Superintendents could be considered “older men and women in leadership” – perhaps the presbuteros term is also needed along with episkopos and the disposition of diakonos to mine the depth of the role.
However, along with diakonos, episkopos and presbuteros for understanding the role of the District Superintendent, the office might be best described by comparing it – with complete humility – to the role of Paul. Paul’s ministry was largely itinerant and ultimately developed into a superintending role of a geographic area as expressed in his epistles’ attempts “to express and promote the visible unity of the body” (Dr. Rowell’s quote from Russell Richey). The term Paul uses to define his role is apostolos (Romans 1:1; 1 and 2 Corinthians 1:1; Galatians 1:1; Ephesians 1:1; Colossians 1:1; 1 and 2 Timothy 1:1; -us 1:1). Drawing from a mixture of the lofty term of apostolos, with Dr. Rowell’s insights from episkopos, the more mature age of the presbuteros, and the servant-disposition of diakonos might provide a fuller definition for the multifarious, multifaceted role of the District Superintendent.
Back to my DS iden-y complex… the one -le that resonates with my brief-2-years of experience as a District Superintendent and also seems to capture some of the serving, apostolic role was created by Pope Gregory the Great who led the church from 590 until his death in 604. He referred to himself as Servus Servoram Dei (Servant of the Servants of God). I’m not thinking that the abbreviation of SSD will take the place of the familiar DS any time soon, but Gregory’s self-description does capture elements of diakonos, episkopos, presbuteros and apostolos. It also demarks both the target and the disposition of theology of superintendency .
A Wesleyan Theology of Superintendency : A Warm Conversational Response
By Phil Fuller, Virginia District Superintendent
Jeren Rowell’s essay on the superintendency is a warm and encouraging read. Rowell’s poignant reflections on Russell Richie’s work is insightful and helpful, particularly Rowell’s expansion on the shepherd-king role, a strong reminder to the church and to the superintendent that our ordination charged us to ‘take authority.’ Rowell is correct that presence and time are foundational for a theologically informed superintendency , principles which have practical implications on the formation and sustainability of our districts. A few strategic district mergers in recent years seem to imply that larger districts are necessarily stronger districts, but for the role of the superintendency this may bring pause. Presence and time are reason to carefully assess the size of our districts and/or the staffing thereof, and the possibility to consider multiplication by division so that our districts and superintendents are freed for more presence and time essential to encourage, equip, to call to excel with accountability, to evangelize, disciple and to help every congregation envision and live out the “authentic expression of the kingdom of God” (to use Rowell’s phrase) in the world.
Our theological reflection on the superintendency can include these powerful words from our Manual, which at their very least, give evidence to our historical theological reflection on the role of the superintendent. Notice the evident hints to the prophet, priest and shepherd-king roles:
We are agreed on the necessity of a superintendency that shall complement and assist the local church in the fulfilling of its mission and objectives. The superintendency shall build morale (priest/pastoral), provide motivation (prophetic vision), supply management and method assistance, and organize and encourage organization of new churches and missions everywhere. (shepherd/king authority)” (Manual Church of the Nazarene 2009-2013, paragraph 28.1, emphasis and added descriptions mine)
As the conversation continues, perhaps we can reflect more fully on what theological premise distinguishes a uniquely Wesleyan superintendency .
A response to Jeren Rowell’s “A Wesleyan Theology of Superintendency ”
By Tom Knees
In his reflection on the role of district superintendents Jeren Rowell has made a significant contribution to a much‐needed larger theological project: a theology or ecclesiology for the Church of the Nazarene. I’ve heard a few DSs question whether or not the superintendency fulfills their call to ministry given the almost exclusive demands of the position for administration, conflict resolution, finding pastors that congregations will accept and intervening in no‐growth situations.
In that range of responsibility, it’s hard to find the pastoral role of prophet, priest and shepherd‐king that Rowell advocates for DSs. Rowel wants to see the superintendency as the fulfillment of the Biblical notion of the “episcopos” or overseer, drawing on Russell E. Richey’s book, Doctrine in Experience, A Methodist Theology of Church and History. Richey has also written a fine monograph on the theology of district superintendency .
A theology of the superintendency , or a comprehensive ecclesiology for that matter, must be contextual. Richey writes for Methodism where bishops are appointed for life, district superintendents are assigned for limited terms and pastors are appointed to congregations. That system sets the context for the role and relationship of district superintendents to their pastors and congregations.
The Church of the Nazarene was formed in part as a reaction to the command and control of Methodist bishops and superintendents . While the Manual assigns administrative responsibility to district and general superintendents , their control is limited and, perhaps more important, they are subject to periodic re‐elections by an open ballot in district and general assemblies.
Rowell is right to disavow command and control leadership styles for district superintendents . Not simply because the Manual doesn’t provide much room for control, but as Freidman writes in “The World is Flat: a Brief History of the Twenty-first Century,” the days of command and control are over—it is a time for leaders to “connect and collaborate.”
An ecclesiology answers the question, “what is the Biblical rationale for a particular church structure?” The justification for a connectional church structure with authority given to “overseerers” is viewed quite differently by various denominations: Roman Catholics, Episcopalians, and Baptists to name a few of the most diverse.
Where then is the ecclesiology to support the unique context of the Church of the Nazarene with elected and re‐elected superintendents and congregations that elect their own pastors?
Rowell grounds his assignment as district superintendent in the Biblical role of an overseeing pastor, “unwilling,” as he says “to give my life to this work if it is only about managing conflict and gathering statistics.”
RSS feed for comments to this post.