SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY HAS ONE, AND ONLY ONE, BASIS:

The exercise of authority is valid and therefore should be obeyed, if, and only if, it is based on Truth, the Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth.

Over the years, much has been said concerning spiritual authority. The Spiritual Authority referred to in this article has to do with the authority those persons in leadership positions in the church exercise over those whom they lead.

There is a pervasive thought that the congregation should abide by the words, ruling and instructions of the Minister without question. This thought is widespread throughout the body of Christ and forms part of church culture, so to speak.

For many ministers who, themselves, were brought up in such a culture this is the only style of leadership known to them and, consequently, this is the style they adopt. In many instances, members refrain from raising legitimate concerns for fear of the treatment that may follow. The bold among the membership who dare ask the question would usually be viewed as a trouble maker and as anathema to authority even by those who share the same concern, so embedded is the culture.

Is this the kind of blind obedience taught in the scripture? Is this the kind of unquestioned loyalty that God expects us to place in men who, themselves, are subject to errors?

It is in the nature of men (meaning here the flesh) to desire authority of their fellowmen. Luke Chapter 22:24 speaks of a debate among the twelve disciples of the Lord. This debate revolved around “authority”, which among them “should be accounted the greatest”. The Lord intervened with these words:

The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve.

But ye shall not be so means that your view, example and style of leadership would be different. In other words, you do not lead the church in the same manner that the leaders of the world lead their subjects.

Some may say, “But at no time, I have ever taught such a thing.” And that may be true. But are members encouraged to raise issues, even concerning finances, knowing that their concerns would be treated with respect? Are their persons in your church branded as troublemakers only because they raised issues perceived as challenging to the dictates of the pastor? Is the definition of a humble person, one that only agrees with the leadership?

 This unhealthy culture is allowed to continue for two (2) reasons:

1. This kind of obedience is satisfying to the ego and gives the leader dictatorial authority over people. It also makes his/her job of ruling easier because it is practiced without challenge. A leader inclined to make selfish decisions, which is decisions in his/her interest relishes this style. Indeed, this kind of obedience, itself, suits his/her interest.
2. A number of such leaders are insecure. Insecure concerning their ability to even respond intelligently to issues which calls their handling of matters into question. Insecure to hold their positions and the respect of others.

 
Luke 9: 51 – 56 gives an account of the Lord sending messengers in a village of the Samaritans to prepare the way for his visit. They (the Samaritans, did not receive him (the Lord). How did his disciples deal with this rejection?  This was their proposal:

Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did?

This was the Lord’s response: But he turned and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.

And so it has always been that leaders will go at all lengths in what they say, imply and how they act, who they favor and does not favor to demand obedience. The idea is that once their authority is challenged, even by a question, they speak in a manner or take action intended to discourage any repeat of the challenge. Challenges or perceived challenges are usually visited by some kind of punishing word or act.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

 There is another issue to be looked at:

There would always be persons in the membership who are simple in mind, often unthinking and easy to be deceived. The objective of the truth is always to develop these individuals to the point where they become wise, learn to think and learn to discern good from evil, that which is true from false. This indeed should be the objective of those in leadership positions and upon whom a number of these people depend for guidance.

Emerging from under the leadership of the Lord, Peter and John marveled the elders of Israel, opposed to the Lord, who knew them to be unschooled and illiterate men and took note that they had been with Jesus. In other words, they were now speaking with a wisdom they never had being illiterate and it was because they were under the leadership of the Lord. Truth always liberates and never holds in bondage. Truth never fears that the liberated would one day pose a challenge to its authority. Truth is mainly concerned about fulfilling its responsibility and is never insecure.

Leaders sharing the vision of Truth would never use the circumstances of such individuals, referred to above, to secure for themselves blind loyalty by ensuring that they remain in a virtual unthinking state. This amounts to deception.

Without, themselves, thinking, such leaders greatly hinder their own development for they would never be prepared to provide spiritual leadership to persons who may be more naturally intelligent than they, and who may raise legitimate issues and pose challenges.  The plan of Truth for leaders is that they further develop for greater leadership responsibilities.

In Acts Chapter 10, God sends Peter to the Gentiles. Up until that time, the body of Christ was comprised mainly of Jews. The Jewish folks avoided Gentile contact having the belief that they were unclean. The Lord in sending peter to them had to re-educate Peter telling him, What God had cleansed, that call not thou common. (Acts 10:14) And so Peter went to the home of Cornelius the Gentile and gave him the gospel. But word reached the apostles and brethren that Peter had been to the house of a gentile and when he returned to Jerusalem they took him to task.

The scripture says that Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning and expounded it by order unto them. (Acts 11:4).

While the brethren here were in ignorance their inquiry was legitimate. That they had no fear challenging Peter, their leader, itself says something about Peter’s leadership. They had the right to ask and they felt free to do so. And Peter, the chief leader, and an apostle and elder never took the position that he was beyond questioning. Rather he gave them a detailed answer as to why he went to the Gentiles. Peter himself later exhorted elders that they ought not to be lords over God’s heritage but rather leadership should be by examples. (1 Peter 5:3)

However in Galatians 2, an incident occurred involving Peter which shows the possible negative influence of leadership. Peter, personally, had no problems fellowshipping with the Gentile believers. Indeed, as we saw a while ago, God had first sent him to the Gentiles. There were other Jewish brethren, however, who continued to see the Gentiles as unclean and avoided them. Peter was aware of their thinking.

At Antioch, Peter was eating with the Gentiles. Then came some brethren from the church where James was leader. When they arrived Peter withdrew from the Gentiles and separated himself, fearing them (the Jewish brethren). (Galatians 2:12) Other Jews, including Barnabas, carried away by Peter’s actions also disassembled themselves from the Gentiles.

Paul mentioned how he had cause to speak to Peter when he saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel (Galatians 2:14).

Were the brethren right to follow Peter in this instance? Obviously not!  We consider this therefore a statement worthy of all acceptation:

The exercise of authority is valid and therefore should be obeyed, if, and only if, it is based on Truth, the Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth.

And, in this regard, we can all prayer: So help me God!