Quote:
Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah
And having no delegated authority is the machination of anarchists. This is not an easy topic. Human authority has been the biggest issue we have had for the last 2000 years.
I am a teacher. I went to school in England and the US and have been a teacher in the US and Taiwan. England and Taiwan give teachers a lot of delegated authority relative to the US. There are pros and cons for each. I think the US system should get top marks for empathy, but overall they should score the lowest on this one criteria. In the US individual students are allowed to bring down the school to a much higher degree than is allowed in England or Taiwan.
I have also travelled to a number of countries other than the US. Based on my personal experience and first hand observation I would say that the US has the best government in the world. However, that is much more a comment on how poor human government is rather than on how good the US government is. Also, to my opinion the negatives of the US government are becoming more negative (primarily the negative impact of the US on its neighbors, economically, environmentally, and militarily) while the positives are not getting more positive (primarily human rights).
Likewise, delegated authority in the family is a major issue with no clear answer. In this country, more than any other, we protect the rights of children and women. However, one result is that 40% of families are now headed by a woman, which is much, much higher than other first world nations. There are many negative consequences of removing a father from a family. As a teacher I know that when I call home due to some child's very poor behavior it is my hope that I will get a father. If I get a father I rarely ever have to make a second call. If I get a mother, aunt, grandmother or step dad then the problem is rarely resolved. Instead the most common response is "I can't do anything with him".
So I would hope that if someone is going to argue that WN was wrong that they would at least point out who was right.
|
I appreciate this perspective very much,
when it comes to human relationships and structures. But I find an absolutely fundamental flaw in this sort of analogy between human organizations and the work of God.
Before Christ, there was an inherent
need for
delegated authority. God needed "representatives" through whom He could speak and exercise authority.
But Christ
entirely changed that paradigm at the most fundamental level. The fact that the Spirit can and does indwell a believer; that a believe can receive a leading, a restricting, a speaking, a psalm, a message - directly from God means that God "delegates" through
every believer. Indeed, He does so differently through each and at different times. But His
authority is not "delegated." Through Christ, He can execute his authority
directly.
To say otherwise - or to contrive a
system of delegated authority - or to compare the need for it with human institutions and structures - is to disbelieve the gospel of Christ.
You can say I am over spiritualizing, but I don't know how to understand the gospel of Christ differently. Either Christ can speak to each one directly (albeit aided through much care and shepherding of one another) and thus does not need "delegated authority" or God cannot do this and thus we must set up a system of
delegated authority.
It cannot be both - otherwise, the central question would always be: do I trust the speaking within, or do I trust the "delegated authority of God". That sort of doctrinal set-up is shizophregenetic.
Thoughts?
P.S. None of that is to say that believers do not submit to other believers. Indeed, through Christ within, this happens all the time. But the source of that submission is different. It is not inherent and automatic submission because of someone's status, but rather because of the restricting Spirit.
P.P.S. The waters muddy, of course, when you ask the question abouth whether a believer is really responding to a command of the Lord within, or just being anarchic. To know the Lord's voice is not automatic. The counsel of older, wiser believers is needed. Shepherds are needed. Scripture teachers are needed. But there is a key difference: when a believer errs under the "each believer answers directly to the Lord's authority" paradigm, he hurts himself and must learn from that before the Lord... When a believer errs under the "delegated authority" paradigm, the effect can be extremely damaging to entire congregations.