The Selection of a Successor

The recent rejection of gay marriage in Maine and the candidacy of the out-and-partnered Rev. Bonnie Perry as Episcopal bishop of Minnesota may hearten traditionalists in the Church (and in society in general), but I would caution against reading too much into these events. While gay marriage has gained no traction anywhere in the country (going 0-31 in every state where the issue has been put to a vote of its citizens: and pro-gay activists cannot say that it is a regional phenomenon, confined to the red states or the Bible belt), gay candidates for bishop are playing in a different arena. Episcopal dioceses elect bishops at conventions, and voting at those conventions is divided into clergy and lay persons. The process of selecting candidates for bishop has gone from ridiculous to absurd: in Minnesota, three clergy (including Ms. Perry) put their own names forward for consideration, and two more were "nominated by petition" (that is by supporters after seeing the slate of self-selected candidates). Gone evidently are the days of having a committee of clergy and laity who know their diocese comb the country for a prospect who has proved faithful in his life and teaching. But once the slate is in place, the convention votes by rank, and a candidate has to achieve a majority of both the clergy and laity voting. In Minnesota, there were almost an equal number of clergy as lay delegates, with the upshot being that 51% of the clergy can veto an overwhelming majority of laypersons who support a different candidate. (Of course, it works the other way, too.) But the difference is that a bishop ministers not only to the clergy in his diocese, he confirms new members, counsels candidates for the ministry and mediates disputes between a parish minister and his flock. Can a diocese function when only the clergy support a bishop? Fortunately in Minnesota, the clergy followed the laity. The winning candidate, the Rev. Brian Prior, showed early strength in the lay votes, and by the 3d ballot, he had a majority in that rank. Though he was second in the clergy votes through three ballots, the clergy heeded the will of the laity and after narrowly losing a majority on the 4th ballot (by 2 votes), on the 5th, he had a 58% majority (against two other candidates). The Bible is not too strong on democratic principles as determining the identity of a successor (see Acts 1: 23-26; II Kings 2:9-12). Yet, for 200+ years, the Episcopal Church has survived with this makeshift system. May the election of the 9th Bishop of Minnesota stand as a beacon of hope for those in the church who may long for more rigor in the selection of our leaders, yet remain wary of a system where power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.