C
chicago
Guest
Of course not! I’m just noting that the ancient description offered in that statement suggests a stylistic and standard which is not particularly of the preference which most here (including yourself it would seem by your insistent argumentation) approve. It is not calling for a bishop who cracks the whip demandingly to divide the wheat from the chaff, but exhoring him to be one who patiently and meekly bears hardship while faithfully instructing, exhorting, and - yes - gently reproving I am sure, on occasion when required. It fits well, indeed, with the witness that many bishops (and the body of bishops as a whole) strive for and generally accomplish in contemporary times; much to the dissatisfied chagrin of many who post here that consider them weaklings. It is ironic, then, that such an ancient document (which some would consider to be in many ways strict) would seem to endorse this model of episcopal governance.
Look at who is taking about meeting an agenda. Do you not think a bishop can exhort while at the same time incorporate the other attributes. Even today – a bishop is to reprove when it is called for—or is this considered to extreme by your standards.