Hello To All:
In the first three essays of this series ("Authority In The Church"), much has been stated that can be difficult to understand. In many ways, this matter of authority is a mystery to us. We, typically, think of authority only in the context of obedience; and it is in this narrow context of obedience, that we most often come to wrong understandings with regards to authority. In this last essay of the series, we shall seek, with the help of our Lord Jesus Christ, to bring us to a place where we can find the right understanding.
The first essay of this series (see: "Authority In The Church: Who Has It?" - May 24, 2014), concluded with the following statement:
"Let us close, by saying in a most emphatic way, that the only authority that we should be subject to is the authority of Jesus Christ. Anyone else or anything else that seeks to make us subject to their claimed authority is a usurper and should be rebuked and ignored. Usurpers are typically puffed up and filled with words empty of power. We should be praying for them! We should not be following after them; nor should we be giving our allegiance to them."
As we seek to comprehend the fullness of this statement, let us look to the closing words: "nor should we be giving our allegiance to them." It is right to recognize that an important element of authority is with regards to obedience. The question we need to ask is: Who are we obeying? The next question being: To whom or what are we submitted to; and thus - To whom or what are we giving our obedience? We need to be asking ourselves: With whom or what does our allegiance rest? Are we exclusively submitted to Jesus Christ; or have we succumbed to the seduction of the institutional church?
Most of us, particularly in western churches, still struggle with allegiance and submission. We know that we should follow Jesus; but we still allow others to define how that "following" should look. Through the years and in my travels, I have been blessed to visit a lot of churches (with a variety of institutional perspectives). I have yet to visit a local assembly that was willing to consider the possibility that they were, in some way, in error.
Every assembly believes that they have the truth; and it does not matter, to them, that the assembly down the road, who also believes that they have the truth, has a perspective that is different from their own. As it is written: "Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the Lord pondereth the hearts." (Proverbs 21:2). When our Lord Jesus Christ "pondereth" our hearts: What does He find? Where does our allegiance rest. Who or what do we obey?
This conflict of interest, posed by the preceding questions, is most dramatically illustrated, by an event recorded in the gospels. We take our text, for this event from Mark 3:1-6:
1. "And he entered again into the synagogue; and there was a man there which had a withered hand."
2. "And they watched him, whether he would heal him on the sabbath day; that they might accuse him."
3. "And he saith unto the man which had the withered hand, Stand forth."
4. "And he saith unto them, Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? to save life, or to kill? But they held their peace."
5. "And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith unto the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it out: and his hand was restored whole as the other."
6. "And the Pharisees went forth, and straightway took counsel with the Herodians against him, how they might destroy him."
In this text from Mark, we have a clear and stated conflict of interest. The institutional perspective, represented by the Pharisees; and God's perspective, represented by Jesus Christ. Now it can and should be argued that the institutional perspective, as evidenced in the text from Mark, is pretty extreme: "The Pharisees - took counsel - with the Herodians - how they might destroy him." (Mark 3:6).
But, the reality that this was an institutional perspective, should be self evident. Consider these portions of the text: "they watched him" - "that they might accuse him" - "but they held their peace" (in response to the challenge that Jesus laid before them) - "the hardness of their hearts" - "the Pharisees went forth" - "and straightway took counsel" - "with the Herodians" - "against him" - "how they might destroy him." Please take note of the group speak and group thought and group action, as evidenced by these portions of the text. The Pharisees were a group. The Herodians were a group. Both of these groups were set against the way of Jesus Christ.
The text makes it clear that they were of one heart and one mindset. They were united in their perspective. This unity of perspective, can be certainly understood as an institutional perspective; and in many ways, it is the perspective of the various western institutional churches; and the western institutional church is not immune to the extremes of the Pharisees. Down through the centuries, Christians with a certain institutional perspective have brought about the suffering and death of other Christians, whose perspective was different from their own. God be merciful to us, for we are sinners!
The institution does not have a heart; but, by using its' usurped authority, it can and often does harden the hearts of its' members, in a way that can be and historically has been, very destructive. It is reasonable to assume that all who call themselves Christian, make some sort of claim with regards to their relationship to Jesus Christ. The question that each of us must be asking is this: How much is the institutional influence corrupting our individual relationship with Jesus of Nazareth, who is the Christ, the Son of the Living God?
Right about now, most of us are probably crying out with a certain amount of despair and asking ourselves: what can we do? With rare exceptions, most of us are subject to some sort of institutional perspective. Sadly and tragically, this is the condition of the western church. But God has a plan to deliver us. We see evidence of His plan in our opening text:
"And we know" - "That the Son of God is come" - "And hath given us an understanding" - "That we may know him" - "That is true" - "And we are in him" - "That is true" - "Even in his son Jesus Christ" - "This is the true God" - "And eternal life". (1 John 5:20).
There is a progression of thought, experience and action, evidenced in this text from First John. The problem that we are having is that we often skip the part that states: "And hath given us an understanding." We all too often accept the understanding given us by the various institutional perspectives that we have chosen to be subject to and loyal to. We are corrupted by the understanding that comes from the natural mind of men and women who have organized themselves around certain institutional perspectives. Their influence is significant; and sometimes they seek to destroy. God be merciful to us, for we are sinners.
The only way that we can defend ourselves against the pervasiveness of the institutional church and its' influence is to turn to Jesus - ask His forgiveness - and then look for Him to: "Give us an understanding." Our journey is really very simple: It is all about Jesus of Nazareth, who is the Christ, the Son of the Living God. Amen and Amen and Amen!
Until next time, my beloved brethren, in Christ Jesus, I continue to be:
Your servant and your fellow pilgrim,
Elder Theophilus
No comments:
Post a Comment