A Brief Thought on the Election

The beautiful gift of a wife in my life clerks at the front check-out of a nearby drugstore. She interacts with a wide variety of people. Just prior to the election, she engaged an older couple in conversation. She used over-heard comments about a candidate as her lead-in for personal conversation. Before long she knew the two people as US citizens, though the man’s accent and brief story placed him in Europe much of his life.

He commented he really didn’t understand the American emotional reaction across our society to politics generally. In comparison to our culture, elections in Europe produce much open even passionate debate over issues; but in contrast, people’s differences are accepted as natural and do not end friendships or even discussions. The give and take of disagreement are an accepted social discourse. Whereas here, speaking up for an issue or candidate is likely to cause an immediate and often awkward end to a conversation.

Even allowing for some faulty memory on his part, the point is obvious: we fail our own value of freedom of speech. Why? Perhaps we are so spoiled that being emotionally able to handle disagreement is beyond us. We are selfish in this country to want everything to be like we think it should be including the way others think. And in my view, we Christians are very willing to use a cold-shoulder or worse, condemnation and shunning, to enforce our view as the correct one.

It is ironic and pitiful to hear people on the one hand espouse the wonder of a political system which guarantees freedom of speech and religion–intended undeniably by our fore-fathers as a protection of the right to function according to one’s own conscience–and on the other to berate the choices of others in demeaning and disrespectful terms. Or maybe, just become quietly dismissive of the other person.

For those who espouse Christ and mouth words of being an alien on earth to do such strikes me as much more than irony, but a symptom of a lack of faith and a large infection of hypocrisy. These folks need to take two prayers, one of repentance and one begging God to reveal His love in their hearts for all those in the "enemy" political camp, and get a good night's rest.

Reality check: when was the last time a conversation with a "politically" different acquaintance or friend ended with a heart-felt affirmation of the person regardless of their views? A kind of statement that assured the other person of a love true to all that 1 Corinthians 13 describes. Counter possibility: when was the last time a conversation with a "politically" different acquaintance or friend ended with a personally held concern for the moral failures of the person evidenced by their views? The conversation ended with keeping one's thoughts veiled under empty but socially accepted niceties.

The Estate of God: No Moral Code Honors Him

This is the final part of series on authority that begins at the bottom of this page.


The word estate emerged from English/French languages roughly of the 12th-13th centuries. A noble of the day owned a large house amid an expanse of land and from which common folk would gain purpose and security. Working the lord's lands provided food, a hovel in which to rest, and in many cases military protection. The Magna Carta was forced upon the English king by nobles and the church as a guarantee of the rights of Englishmen (read land-owners) in 1215. England thereby entered a time of transition from the feudal period and toward a constitutional monarchy established in 1688. During this period the estate system developed into codified laws around land ownership and thereby became a legal term still used today.

The church has become an estate to be managed. Literally holding real estate, the church estate includes leadership as lord of the manor, a taxation system supporting the structure of governance, resulting assets needing to be managed, and a common people who serve, support and receive from a controlling elite. This organized system evolved from a simple format of association of believers into a structured hierarchical authority system which became formerly state-sanctioned under Constantine. From pre-Reformation to today, ecclesiastical authority has functioned as part of a three-pronged force in culture: a balance of political and religious authority often in conflict over the economic production capacity of human labor. Political and social thinking of Western culture moved from monarchy to democracy; so too the organized church mirrored this progression. Thus, organized church currently includes constitutions, church charters, whole books of instruction, and/or simply accepted practices of governance. These established codes uphold the shared beliefs and doctrines about God and serve to recognize the interests of those whose labor supports the whole. This strikes me as a logical consequence of the historical development of church experience within changing social/political thought over time. That church thinking and expression forms a corollary to human social and political development is predictable. This is not a charge of failure against the institutional church, but an observation of a consequence of the church's historical development.

Along that developmental line a basic theme of the Bible was lost. In Genesis, our Lord warned Adam not to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and to only eat from the Tree of Life. God did not want His creation to attempt to establish moral codes of right and wrong. No such code could honor Him, as our righteousness is nothing but filthy rags. He intended Himself as the source of life and the fullness of the goodness possible within the human experience. The sum of the story between the Fall and now includes the revelation that righteousness is by faith, and that faith is in Jesus Christ alone. He is the Tree of Life. He intends His perfect conscience to substitute for our fallen one by the guidance of the in-dwelling Holy Spirit.

I recently read there are about 33,000 identifiable Christian denominations around the planet! Within these are variations and thereby extrapolations of church governance among this plethora of groups. However, I suspect a common denominator. In most, the leader or leaders function with authority over church direction generally, teaching of accepted doctrines specifically, the application of moral codes of conduct usually, and to greater and lesser degrees leaders exercise authority over the lives of believers. This circumstance, a splintered faith yet a fairly common view of authority is a direct function of the passage of time coupled with a knowledge of good and evil. Which of the 33,000 organizations produce life in the spirit as a function of faith in the Presence of the Holy Spirit and which do not? How shall we judge the good or evil of any of these? However, I contend our building of communities of believers into earthly estates with Christian moral codes as the organizing feature fails the plan of God. God is not pleased by moral codes. Examine His correction of the pharisees. Faith pleases God. Our complete trust in His governance, provision, and guidance in life honors Him.

(This post now extends past a usual barrier I have set for myself of length. However, I am going to finish these thoughts as one post. Apologies to those who prefer posts of more nominal length. Here is a good spot to which one could logically return, depending on level of interest, at another time.)

As I examined my experience both with authority and as a designated authority within a body of believers, I found myself lost in a very complicated maze created by the scriptures, the practice of my particular group and the practices generally of the larger church historically. The execution of authoritative practice became an issue for me as previously narrated.

I confronted a huge dilemma.
1.I knew the world and individuals to be lawless. I had fully proven that point in my life experience. I knew personally both as victim and as agent, the pain caused by selfish human decision-making. I had recognized and accepted God's solution to the rebellion--Jesus, crucified and resurrected.
2.However, the entity which held out Jesus to me, the church, had proven to be seriously flawed in practice. I held not just my particular group as faulty. I regarded the historical system as equally culpable.

Among the questions I needed to answer:

• Why do men jockey for position within church leadership and other body life, while faulting others for the same?
• Why do men trust manipulation as a tool?
• Why did submission to church authority as taught from the scripture become onerous to me? And its corollary,
• Was I just re-entering the rebellion?
• How could a group where love had seemed to flow so honestly become so misguided?
• Why did the larger expression of church often produce leadership that could not be personally engaged in the simple human act of eye contact? And its corollary,
• How did some believers manifest personal authority when leaders didn't?
• Does one group represent the Truth of Jesus more fully than the next? If so, why and how?

The solution I came to realize that answers all of the above and more:

Love.

God is love.

God's love is the order rebellious humans need.

God calls humans out of the rebellion against Him. This is an authoritative act.

God's love established the spiritual means for humans to escape the power of the rebellion—the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus.

This is an authoritative plan on the part of the Father, which is entered willingly by Jesus as a personal choice of His in response to both the expressed will of Father and the joy it will bring. Jesus thus exercises the human will in an act of personal authority fully in line with the authority of the Father.

Jesus fulfills the passion of the act itself motivated by His love.

Therefore, God's love is the basis for His authority, and His authoritative actions have love as the end purpose.

Always.

God is love is authority.

Jesus taught not to call anyone rabbi (honored one), teacher, or leader (guide or master) for you are all brothers. This is recorded in Matthew 23:8-12. Just prior to this instruction, when the mother of the sons of Zebedee asked that her sons be lifted into His authority sphere by being allowed to sit at His right and left in His Kingdom, He summarized His answer with

Matthew 20:25. But Jesus called them to Himself and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them...”

Authority here and in the companion recording of this incident in Mark 10:42 is the only use of katexousiazo in the NT, which means to exercise authority, wield power. This is in stark contrast to the dominion reign of Jesus in context.

Most uses of the term authority in the NT as already noted are translated from exousia, which bears the first meaning of power of choice. It is a very interesting exercise to read the places where this word is translated as authority and substitute the meanings of

• power of choice; leave or permission
• physical or mental power
• power of authority (influence)

in contrast with the meanings of

• power of right (privilege)
• the power of the rule of government.

Finally, I conclude a simple shift in our understanding of authority within a body of believers will support an increase in love within individuals, among them as brethren, and thus develop and significantly increase life in the Spirit of God within a body of Christ.
Where I had identified three areas of authority

• parental/familial
• governmental/business
• ecclesiastical

It should instead be understood as

• parental/familial/ecclesiastical
• governmental/business
  

Within a body, I believe we need to shift understanding elders from “those in charge over the flock” to “those who know the authority of the familial love of God and lead others by example.” When I think about ones of more mature love simply regarding all other believers as brothers to be served, questions I asked on the nature and execution of authority all find logical and reasonable answers.

How the suggested model might function is the stuff of more posts. This lengthy one is ended.

Next to Last Post on Authority

In order to write what I'm thinking on authority, I have been studying in the NT.

Here's what I have found:

There are seven words in Greek I have been able to identify which are translated "authority."

I list them here as a basis for stating my conclusions from my personal experience, feedback I have had from others, and a brief study of the Bible (for a list of scripture references click on the word):

1. exousia -- 93 uses

• power of choice; leave or permission
• physical or mental power
• power of authority (influence) and of right (privilege)
• the power of the rule of government

2. huperecho (v) -- 5 uses

• to have or to hold over
• to stand out above
• superior in rank

3. huperoche (n) -- 2 uses

• elevation/pre-eminence/superiority

4. katexousiazo -- 2 uses

• to exercise authority
• to wield power

5. kuriotes -- 4 uses

• dominion/power/lordship

6. baros -- 6 uses (once as authority, most often as burden)

• heaviness/weight/burden/trouble

7. authenteo -- 1 use (authority of women over men--they are not allowed to kill men!)

• one who with his own hands kills another or himself
• one who acts on his own authority/autocratic
• an absolute master
• to govern/ exercise dominion over
  

There are other words which may mean authority but are translated into English as command, commandment or related terms. These are mostly used with specific reference to principles being taught and not with people that I have noticed. That strikes me as a separate discussion.

Presuppositions and Questions

After hearing back from a few readers, I am altering the three categories slightly.

• parental/familial
• governmental/business
• ecclesiastical

A few presuppositions:

• All authority ultimately begins and rests in God.
• Creation was an act of His authority.
• Further, He established authority as a condition of the human experience.
• There is an intent on His part expressed in establishment of authority and a thwarting of that intent, as
  
• These three categories of authority are expressed within our human experience and reflect the spiritual divide between the Spirit of Jesus Christ and the spirit of the age, the anti-Christ.

Authority, like most topics, is not lived in neat compartments. Expressions of authority overlap and inter-mingle. As craig v. pointed out, a person holding recognized social authority may be single-minded and possess a personal authority which others will follow. The good judgment of an authority figure may be misdirected in its overall focus and impact on others, but nonetheless, the affect of the authority figure's personal authority garners followers. Presidents, tele-evangelists, CEO's, middle managers, parents et al. may fall into this condition.

The topic becomes, for me, a function of a question. How shall a disciple of Jesus understand his/her life experience, and thereby, fulfill the Father's intent in living under authority? This question leads to other more specific questions, which I think divide as follows:

1. What level of personal authority does an individual carry; how is it established and matured; and toward whom is it manisfested?
2. What amount of responsibility is required of the believer in responding to societal authorities; what development of social authority within the world system should be supported by believers; and consequently, when is civil disobedience called for, if ever, against authority that clearly is directed in a rebellion against God?

What other questions go through your mind regarding authority?
What presuppositions would you add or delete from the above list?

Authority Part 2

I started the whole series with a picture of a night when my father was arrested for violence against our family. In that picture from my life were three concepts of authority.

First was parental authority. For a great majority of us, we understand authority from what we know firsthand growing up.

Second, the police in that picture are a symbol of earthly authority in the form of government.

The chaotic, angry behavior of my dad despite his authority illustrates the Fall of man into sin; the rebellion against God is a rejection of His authority. Understanding this turn of an earthly authority toward that which is not of God is a dynamic that must be sorted out.

In the next installment of the story I related joining a Methodist church as a teenager. I meet and begin to be influenced by ecclesiastical authority.

Taken together then, the memoir begins with four expressions of authority. Authority exists on earth which is ordained by God. These are are parental, governmental, ecclesiastic, and an anti-authority expression which is the rebellion against God. This reverse or negative authority is part of our natural human experience and needs consideration in understanding the other three.

What do you think? Are there other natural authority structures shaping our lives which you think should be part of the analysis?

Authority Part 1

Not a very creative title, I know.

Somewhere in what I just narrated, I realized I threw scriptures at situations based on my human insight of what was happening and according to an accepted interpretation of scripture. To use an analogy, it is a bit like an algebra student with a rudimentary mastery of the subject facing off with a word problem. Sorting through the words constructing the problem using faulty reading skills leads to a complete misinterpretation of what is needed in algebraic applications. Nonetheless, the student has no idea the problem is misread and plows ahead. Applying true algebra knowledge in his/her command, a wrong approach to writing a solution is selected. In the end, the student finishes believing a reasonable solution is achieved. When the work is evaluated by the instructor, the answer is wrong, but the instructor notes in the margin, "Even though you applied an incorrect algebraic principle which didn't fit the problem, your actual algebra was correct. Glad to know you have learned how to do that algebra function. Now work on better insight into the problem. Once that is mastered, we will move to more elegant solutions."

I realized I was that student as a Christian. I lived my walk of faith according to my human insight, which included my emotional baggage of the old nature, and the perspective inherent in my group's interpretation of the scriptures. Thus my reading of the scripture and understanding of its applications were continually slanted by other factors. I needed to address the cause of the slant before I would find the freedom in Christ the scripture described. I was waking up to how I relied on my religion about the Father, while not fulfilling His elegant solution to life--living it through His in-dwelling Spirit.

Yet, the story I just narrated of coming to faith in Christ and living within a body I labeled GCC is my common connection with others. Using our commonality is the basis for communication and understanding. What happened to me, is one little, little piece of a much larger picture. The story has no real importance or value except in its use to describe the bigger picture.

The bigger picture, His Story, is God's creation, the resulting rebellion against Him, and His answer to the rebellion. The story has pieces: our role in that rebellion, the force or authority supporting our rebellion, and the grace of God to fully overcome the rebellion and enter into His dominion under His authority. The part of the story my narrative illustrates is a set of solutions man has developed to achieve God's grace. Though well intentioned, this solution set is less than elegant. In fact, many current practices are often not even a correct application of principle though technically appearing correct.

Hence, I write this current series. I do not write to describe my solution. I seek to share my thoughts to develop and further an elegant and true solution which will be finally described in the putting together of our knowledge and love for the Father.

May the peace of His reign be yours.

Postlude to Graceland and the Start of Authority Analysis

Two final pieces to the story: throughout the events described below, I had an intellectual understanding that my brothers believed what they believed about authority strongly and as a function of their faith in and understanding of the Bible. The conundrum of their choices and positions being hurtful on one hand and their integrity of conscience being their motivation was a puzzle I could not fathom. Throughout, from that first July confrontation of my error until the meeting over my resignation that I did not attend, my anger would cool and upon reflection I would realize they did what they believed. They held what they did as their responsibility before God and their conscience insisted they follow through. I could not fault them at all. I still do not.

Also, I am not vindicated in the telling of these events. Removing the log from my own eye became my goal in the first months following the end of my grieving process, and grief is the word for how my wife and I felt for many months. Had I not joined, willingly and in good conscience, with many of the behaviors I now had experienced on the receiving end? Was I not a sinful man just as they? After six months, or so, conviction came on me that I had been impatient with them and had reneged on my commitment to love them as people, while I had traversed the woods of error in authority and fellowship we created trying to find my way out. I had fallen into the error of self-protection against them, even as I was waking to the Father through the Holy Spirit as my all in all. Thus my own condition of heart was often against God even while I sought to renew my walk of faith with Him more fully. Irony! Thank our Lord for the wonder of the righteousness of Christ covering all our failures of sin!

Interestingly, the head-pastor of my story would end up leaving GCC about four years later over the same issue in reverse! GCC moved him out stating it would follow a more pluralistic leadership. Six years after that, all but two elders would separate over issues of authority and fellowship between brethren being undermined by a controlling spirit. Can we doubt that we wrestle not with flesh and blood but against principalities and powers?