As I understand it, the “bishops” with no diocesan episcopate and the self-named “apostles” are modelling themselves on an interpretation of the language used to describe the primitive church in the Acts and Letters, where the titles were often allusive to the Chief Elder or the original founder of an incipient Christian community.
Many of these may cast themselves as “apostles” meaning they’re being sent by Jesus to found new churches that’ll bring The Real Christianity[sup]TM[/sup] to a society dominated by secularism or mainstream denominations they do not consider The Real Christianity[sup]TM[/sup]. So it tends to hit you as needlessly self-aggrandizing. Plus of course, you jump straight up to “Apostle” ( and Prophet!) w/o going through other fine titles of holiness like Patriarch, High Pontiff, just because the latter are not in the Book…
“Bishop”, OTOH, one can deal with in the sense of being used to mean someone who is at the head of a number of other ordained ministers who do their own day-to-day pastoring (be it as boss or as first-among-equals). One would expect that you’ll wait before promoting yourself to Bishop until you do have such a structure, though.
It’s interesting, how many Protestant holiness/fundamentalist churches were traditionally very critical about churches where clergy was addressed by exalting titles, specially the use of “Father” as a title for the priesthood (and many still are), yet this other trend of exalted titles for really modest congregations has arisen from more or less the same sociocultural milieu.
I get tired of all titles, but especially when church titles are expected in social situations.
I’m not going to call someone Reverend or Deacon or Your Holiness when I ask them to pass the mustard at the town barbeque.
Like Eureka, I’m a lifelong United Methodist, and I find the hierarchy of my church to be my comfort zone. I am always leery and uncomfortable around the denizens of the self-styled, free-lance churches, of which there are many, many around here. From the small black churches to the huge Mega-church around the corner, I’m uncomfortable with churches led by the personality of one person (or couple) and to ones that seem to love to give everyone a title such as Apostle, Bishop…everyone is an Elder, or a Sister, or a Ladywife, or one other title that truly rankles (but of course I can’t remember it now!). I find the Apostle thing a bit presumptious. Not so much offensive…but it does make me suspicious.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints calls it’s 15 highest leaders “Apostles.” They have the President of the Church, his two counselors, and a “Quorum of the Twelve.”
In each semi-annual conference, these 15 men are not only “voted *” on as “Apostles,” but as “prophets, seers, and revelators.” Their authority is traced back to the founder of the LDS church, Joseph Smith, who claimed to receive this authority through Peter, James, and John, who visited him in the early 1800s and ordained him to these offices.
*The actual term used by the LDS is “sustaining.” There is very rarely opposition in these conferences and if there is opposition, the person who opposes is usually quietly removed from the conference and taken elsewhere, where he or she must explain their opposition. No public mention is ever made of this opposition or the reason.