Liberty and Authority
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
“God helps those who help themselves.”
Quick, which quote is from the Bible? Sorry, it was a trick question. Neither quote is in scripture; instead, they were both made up by Founding Fathers, one a deist and the other a rake who sometimes attended meetings of a Satanist group. Great men, both of them, but they gave God only lip service; when He didn’t suit their purposes they were happy to shove Him into a closet (to say nothing of Christ). These quotes were indeed “made up” to suit the agendas of these politicians, and both are actually at direct odds with Christian orthodoxy.
The idea of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as a Christian goal can be defended on the basis of God’s real concern for each individual life. Jesus’ declaration was that God cares deeply about the life of every sparrow, much less every human being. There can be no doubt about that. But to extend His statement to individual liberty and pursuing whatever direction a man’s heart takes him — to declare these things as God-given rights — is simply mistaken. For this argument I’m going to concentrate only on the question of liberty as a gift from God guaranteed every child.
This ideal is certainly a democratic doctrine, but it is nowhere to be found in scripture. It is political doctrine, not spiritual doctrine, which is not to say it’s a bad thing, but the two should not be confused. For the Founding Fathers to ascribe it to God is to make the same claim that its intended target, George III, made: While the king declared divine right for his royal rule, the rebels claimed divine right for their self-rule. That was all there was to it, and to look in scripture, the king was more right than the rebels. But both were wrong in that they cynically used scripture to promote their desires upon the vain, passing things of this world, while scripture’s import concentrates upon eternal things.
An article written a few months ago by Alan Keyes, a brilliant Christian, unfortunately made the same mistake. While arguing the point that fundamentalist Islam and freedom of conscience are incompatible, he made the claim that the God of the endowed-right-of-liberty was superior to the god of fanatics who enforce believe-or-die theology. It is true that these fanatics elevate the here-and-now upon Earth over eternal matters, but so does Keyes’ god of vain prosperity. Followers often tested Jesus with worldly questions, but He always turned them aside (sometimes refusing them outright, Lk. 12:14 for example) and emphasized instead His listeners’ standing before God, which would determine their eternal habitations.
Actually, the scriptural call is quite the opposite from proud liberty. Throughout both testaments God’s people are directed to submit to authority: to God, to political leaders, to spiritual leaders, to husbands, to parents. There’s no end to it. Paul does not encourage Christian slaves to stand up for their God-given right to freedom; he tells them to submit and be content to serve Christ as they serve their masters in a holy way.
Now, why is this an important issue to most of us white bread evangelicals? Because the idea of a God-granted right of liberty is running amok in Protestant churches. American Protestant congregations often find themselves in an uproar because they are run by the office staff or a body politic, or worse yet cliques of busybodies. The lack of a standard of leadership leads to a tyrannical minister in one church, laissez-faire committees in the next. Often when things don’t go one group’s way, the political campaign begins immediately to undermine the result. When a minister rubs somebody the wrong way, the backstabbing drives him out of the pulpit faster than the Spanish Inquisition. But why not? We all have the right to force things in the direction we want — it’s the American way. After all, God helps those who help themselves.
As a result, even evangelical Protestant churches have fallen away from living the gospel, local congregations have been on their own as they face onslaughts by secular humanists who want to change the church to fit their agenda, and the discipleship of believers has been thrown to the wind, each man his own priest. Compare the Catholic church, with all its warts, and see how its evangelical factions have withstood the same attacks without bending: Liturgy and the monastic tradition offer rules for worship and daily life, the Pope flatly says no to abortion and elevating homosexuality, and parishioners thirsting for Christ know to go to their leadership for help. Strange as it sounds, even this last point is not true at many Protestant churches.
I’m not suggesting that everyone convert to Catholicism — I wouldn’t myself — nor that Protestants should adopt a Catholic-style power structure. But it is a fact that Catholics are under the power of authority, Protestants generally are not. I think the best solution for evangelicals is simply for individual congregations to submit to the leadership of elders as described below, and, like the apostolic church, rely on the apostles for oversight; I can’t do any better than that. This still leaves local church bodies to face challenges from the world basically alone, but where submission to the Holy Spirit is present, so also is the Holy Spirit present. “For I also am a man set under authority, (and) having under me soldiers ...”
“God is not of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.” He has set authorities for His churches, clearly laid out in scripture. Each congregation is called to have elders to lead and deacons to serve, and all members are expected to submit to their authorities. The authorities themselves are given guidelines to promote wise appointments and prevent abuses. And this, friends, is truly liberating, for younger, inexperienced Christians are not expected to make important, spiritual decisions as liberty-endowed individuals. Instead, they can rely on their more mature, wiser leaders who as a group can seek out the Holy Spirit’s leading for their flock and counsel them. Congregations need no longer fear the tyranny of the majority, instead relying on the trusted intercession of seasoned leaders. This is orthodox church organization, truly found in scripture. The trick for Americans is, it requires humility, not proud reliance on self-determination.
The United States is not a Christian nation and never was. Certainly God will not heal this land as long as His churches in it are in chaos.
“God helps those who help themselves.”
Quick, which quote is from the Bible? Sorry, it was a trick question. Neither quote is in scripture; instead, they were both made up by Founding Fathers, one a deist and the other a rake who sometimes attended meetings of a Satanist group. Great men, both of them, but they gave God only lip service; when He didn’t suit their purposes they were happy to shove Him into a closet (to say nothing of Christ). These quotes were indeed “made up” to suit the agendas of these politicians, and both are actually at direct odds with Christian orthodoxy.
The idea of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as a Christian goal can be defended on the basis of God’s real concern for each individual life. Jesus’ declaration was that God cares deeply about the life of every sparrow, much less every human being. There can be no doubt about that. But to extend His statement to individual liberty and pursuing whatever direction a man’s heart takes him — to declare these things as God-given rights — is simply mistaken. For this argument I’m going to concentrate only on the question of liberty as a gift from God guaranteed every child.
This ideal is certainly a democratic doctrine, but it is nowhere to be found in scripture. It is political doctrine, not spiritual doctrine, which is not to say it’s a bad thing, but the two should not be confused. For the Founding Fathers to ascribe it to God is to make the same claim that its intended target, George III, made: While the king declared divine right for his royal rule, the rebels claimed divine right for their self-rule. That was all there was to it, and to look in scripture, the king was more right than the rebels. But both were wrong in that they cynically used scripture to promote their desires upon the vain, passing things of this world, while scripture’s import concentrates upon eternal things.
An article written a few months ago by Alan Keyes, a brilliant Christian, unfortunately made the same mistake. While arguing the point that fundamentalist Islam and freedom of conscience are incompatible, he made the claim that the God of the endowed-right-of-liberty was superior to the god of fanatics who enforce believe-or-die theology. It is true that these fanatics elevate the here-and-now upon Earth over eternal matters, but so does Keyes’ god of vain prosperity. Followers often tested Jesus with worldly questions, but He always turned them aside (sometimes refusing them outright, Lk. 12:14 for example) and emphasized instead His listeners’ standing before God, which would determine their eternal habitations.
Actually, the scriptural call is quite the opposite from proud liberty. Throughout both testaments God’s people are directed to submit to authority: to God, to political leaders, to spiritual leaders, to husbands, to parents. There’s no end to it. Paul does not encourage Christian slaves to stand up for their God-given right to freedom; he tells them to submit and be content to serve Christ as they serve their masters in a holy way.
Now, why is this an important issue to most of us white bread evangelicals? Because the idea of a God-granted right of liberty is running amok in Protestant churches. American Protestant congregations often find themselves in an uproar because they are run by the office staff or a body politic, or worse yet cliques of busybodies. The lack of a standard of leadership leads to a tyrannical minister in one church, laissez-faire committees in the next. Often when things don’t go one group’s way, the political campaign begins immediately to undermine the result. When a minister rubs somebody the wrong way, the backstabbing drives him out of the pulpit faster than the Spanish Inquisition. But why not? We all have the right to force things in the direction we want — it’s the American way. After all, God helps those who help themselves.
As a result, even evangelical Protestant churches have fallen away from living the gospel, local congregations have been on their own as they face onslaughts by secular humanists who want to change the church to fit their agenda, and the discipleship of believers has been thrown to the wind, each man his own priest. Compare the Catholic church, with all its warts, and see how its evangelical factions have withstood the same attacks without bending: Liturgy and the monastic tradition offer rules for worship and daily life, the Pope flatly says no to abortion and elevating homosexuality, and parishioners thirsting for Christ know to go to their leadership for help. Strange as it sounds, even this last point is not true at many Protestant churches.
I’m not suggesting that everyone convert to Catholicism — I wouldn’t myself — nor that Protestants should adopt a Catholic-style power structure. But it is a fact that Catholics are under the power of authority, Protestants generally are not. I think the best solution for evangelicals is simply for individual congregations to submit to the leadership of elders as described below, and, like the apostolic church, rely on the apostles for oversight; I can’t do any better than that. This still leaves local church bodies to face challenges from the world basically alone, but where submission to the Holy Spirit is present, so also is the Holy Spirit present. “For I also am a man set under authority, (and) having under me soldiers ...”
“God is not of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.” He has set authorities for His churches, clearly laid out in scripture. Each congregation is called to have elders to lead and deacons to serve, and all members are expected to submit to their authorities. The authorities themselves are given guidelines to promote wise appointments and prevent abuses. And this, friends, is truly liberating, for younger, inexperienced Christians are not expected to make important, spiritual decisions as liberty-endowed individuals. Instead, they can rely on their more mature, wiser leaders who as a group can seek out the Holy Spirit’s leading for their flock and counsel them. Congregations need no longer fear the tyranny of the majority, instead relying on the trusted intercession of seasoned leaders. This is orthodox church organization, truly found in scripture. The trick for Americans is, it requires humility, not proud reliance on self-determination.
The United States is not a Christian nation and never was. Certainly God will not heal this land as long as His churches in it are in chaos.
posted by Crrrrrrraig | 12:09 PM
|
1 comments
