Close Topic Options

When Do You Stop Calling Your Bishop, Bishop?

I was in Sunday school and the teacher made a statement that a Bishop is always a Bishop, So if my Bishop released he is still suppose to be called Bishop. I didn't agree with this and felt very uncomfortable with the idea. Can anyone help find doctrine on this fact or is it some unwritten doctrine?

Bishop Bishop Calling Stop You When

While I don't have any official source to provide right now, that is definitely what I have been taught. Once a Bishop always a Bishop. I think this is true of Presidents too. However, I think we are not expected to continue to call them such. I think it is honorary and allows for you to comfortably transition from calling them Bishop or President without being required to immediately stop.

I will do some research to see if I can find official doctrine on this.

****************

Update:

I found a source to say it is true, once a Bishop always a Bishop.

Because of the way the Church's search engine works, it appears I can't simply post the link as a reference so here is the information regarding my search.

The article was :

Q&A:
Questions and Answers
Answers are for help and perspective, not as pronouncements of Church doctrine

"If a bishop in the ward has just been released and another bishop put in, do you refer to the former bishop as brother or as bishop?"
Roy W. Doxey, "Q&A: Questions and Answers," New Era, June 1980, 14
Answer/Brother Roy W. Doxey

You can go to www.lds.org and then go to the Church Publications and do a search on "When do you stop calling a released Bishop, Bishop" and you will find this as one of the articles, toward the bottom of the list.


From the same article is a reference to whether or not you should continue to call a released Bishop by that title:

For a complete understanding, I recommend reading the entire article.

Edited: funbikerchick on 9th Jan, 2006 - 5:34pm

When Do You Stop Calling Your Bishop, Bishop? Studies Doctrine Mormon

I think Tena explained it very good and the sources she used are also valid. A Bishop is always a Bishop as a Patriarch is always a Patriarch (both of them are "offices" therefore they cannot be released of their offices, only of their duties).

I think you are exactly right. I think it is normal for the members through the transition period to call the old Bishop by that title but what it is appropiate after that is call them "Brother so and so". It does not matter really, nobody can take away that office from him anyway whether he is called or not by the title of Bishop.

Bishop Bishop Calling Stop You When

I agree. I know that my with my last Bishop I would feel uncomfortable calling him anything other than Bishop, though I called him by his first name before he was called. My Bishop 10 years ago, however, I call Brother. My last Bishop said that when he was first called, he would stand in the grocery line and hear someone call, "Bishop", and ten men would turn their heads to see who called them. Here in Utah, there are many past and present Bishops!

Edited: Valla on 13th Apr, 2006 - 9:06pm

Bishop Bishop Calling Stop You When

I have experienced that the use of the title Bishop is common in formal settings. On Stake conferences for example, when being introduced before a talk.

When Do You Stop Calling Your Bishop, Bishop?

Our ward is blessed with several former Bishops in the congregation.

I asked one of them (who teaches our Gospel Principles class) if I should call him Bishop or Brother when I address him, and he said, "Whatever you feel comfortable with." Then he went on to explain to me about "once a Bishop, always a Bishop" and that if he were called to be a Bishop again in some other ward, they would merely "activate" him again, not ordain him again.

Personally, I feel that a ward only has ONE active Bishop, and that he should be the only one I address as Bishop. Former Bishops should be addressed as Brother. They may be former Bishops, yes, but they are not THE active Bishop. It might be a bit strange to call a former Bishop "Bishop" in the presence of the active Bishop. He might wonder if I actually know who the active Bishop is. The former Bishop might feel a bit awkward, also, since he is being called "Bishop" in the presence of the active Bishop of the ward. Also, if an investigator or new member were standing beside me, they might become confused as to how many Bishops a ward actually has.

When You Stop Calling Bishop Bishop

I agree with the above. If we see the role of 'Bishop' as an office of the Aaronic Priesthood then we will fully understand the implications of saying "Bishop". No one goes around calling me "Elder" even though I am an Elder in the Melchizedek priesthood and a former return missionary. Some people are still caught on calling me "President" as well because of past callings, and I always say "I am Brother Borde".

When You Stop Calling Bishop Bishop Mormon Doctrine Studies

I disagree. I think these are totally different situations. Your called on a mission for two years, and then released, so after that two year period there's no reason to call you elder, because your no longer an elder. However a bishop is a permanent calling. Even after there's a new bishop, he still holds that calling. Growing up, whenever I met a bishop, past or present, he was introduced as bishop, and in most cases I think thats how it should be, because that's what he is. He still holds those keys.