Doctrine of Authority – Lesson 10: By What Authority?
Description
Professor: Rushdoony Dr. R.J.R.
Subject: Systematic Theology
Genre: Speech
Lesson: 10 of 19
Track: #10
Year:
Dictation Name: 10 By What Authority
[Rushdoony] Let us worship God. Our help is in the name of the Lord who made heaven and earth. Thus saith the high and lofty one who inhabiteth eternity, whose name is holy. I dwell in the high and holy place with him also that is of a humble and contrite spirit. To revive the spirit of the humble and to revive the heart of the contrite, if thou shalt seek the Lord thy God thou shalt find Him. If thou seek Him will all thy heart and with all thy soul. Let us pray.
Oh Lord our God unto whom all power, rule, and authority belongs we come into Thy presence acknowledging indeed that we have gone astray, that the whole world is in rebellion against Thee and needs Thy grace and Thy mercy and Thy judgment. Use us oh Lord in these troubled times and empower us by Thy word and by Thy spirit. That we may set forth the claims of Thy kingdom, establish the guidelines of Thy justice or righteousness, and make paramount Thy law and Thy word of truth into the hearts of all men. Bless us to this purpose in Jesus name, amen.
Our scripture is from Matthew the 21st chapter verses 23-27 and our subject “By What Authority?” we continue our studies in the doctrine of Biblical authority. Matthew 21 verses 23-27.
“ 23 And when he was come into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came unto him as he was teaching, and said, By what authority doest thou these things? And who gave thee this authority?
24 And Jesus answered and said unto them, I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell me, I in likewise will tell you by what authority I do these things.
25 The baptism of John, whence was it? From heaven, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, if we shall say, from heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him?
26 But if we shall say, of men; we fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet.
27 And they answered Jesus, and said, we cannot tell. And he said unto them, neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.”
The implications of this text for the doctrine of authority is sometimes bypassed by scholars and the reason for doing so is they say that the authority of Jesus is as that of God incarnate, and therefore there is a difference between His authority and that of the rest of us. However this is an invalid statement because our Lord places the issue on the human level by raising the question of John the Baptist’s authority. So that our Lord very definitely makes clear that He was not claiming any authority as He was teaching other than that which scripture provided.
Now the Greek word which is used here for authority is exousia so that we have no particular special problem with the word, it is a word we’ve dealt with previously, exousia, so that authority here is exactly what we would think it to be. The question “By what authority?” is important. It is interesting that the question has been raised most in the Western churches, protestant and catholic. And that it has been a question which has repeatedly created problems and disorders have arisen because of the question of authority. However it is significant that precisely where this question has been raised again and again the greatest vitality in Christendom has been shown, it has been in the Western churches. Obviously therefore it is an important question.
Now let us examine the nature of the problem of authority in terms of this question “by what authority?” historically first of all. A good place to begin is with Saint Francis of Assisi. Before his death in 1226 Francis commissions {?} had reached England, France, Germany, Spain, Morocco, Turkey, and Palestine. Less then 20 years after his death Franciscans had reached the court of the great Mogul in India. The Franciscans had a missionary zeal, a dedication, and the ability of Francis himself was truly remarkable. On the other hand there were many semi-heretical undercurrents present in Francis and his followers. With good reason the Vatican looked on Francis with great misgivings, as did many other churchmen. The strict Franciscans, who came to be known after Francis death as spiritual Franciscans, were strong adherents of the thinking of Abbot Joachim of Fiore. This was third age thinking, very heretical. It has had a long and ugly history in Western thought.
Also Francis was in essence a communist. He believed the ideal state for Christians who really took the faith seriously was communism, to own no property. Armstrong tells us, and I quote “When he found that a house had been built in which to hold a chapter meeting he was so incensed that the brethren should be involved in holding property that he clambered to the roof and began ripping off the tiles, only stopping when it was pointed out to him that the house did not belong to the friars.” Francis here harked back to an element in Greco-Roman culture. The Greco-Roman’s believed in a golden age in the past, a golden age which was property-less, and therefore this was the ideal state. And many of the philosophers and lawyers who came into the faith brought with them this Greco-Roman concept of the golden age and of a property-less ideal. They went to the Bible and misused a few verses here and there to justify their golden-age thinking.
For example one of the most powerful and influential bishops in the early church was in the late third and early fourth century Saint Ambrose. Ambrose was a very prominent person; he was showing interest in the faith and attending a catechumen class. He had not even been baptized, nor set a date, or indicated as of yet that he was ready to be baptized when the bishop died and both church and state moved to make this man, a very prominent Roman, bishop; because he was such a powerful force. And so he was made bishop by acclamation and then baptized and made bishop. Now Saint Ambrose was a very powerful thinker, powerful preacher, who simply assumed in terms of his background that Communism was the ideal Christian state. That vein continued in the church, many of the monastic orders in particular as well as prominent preachers harked back to it. However the popes were beginning to see that this was not scriptural, that there were serious problems with the whole concept when Francis and Peter Waldo of Lyon, founder of the Waldensians, asked for approval of the Vatican. In 1179 Alexander the 3rd gave limited confirmation to the poor men of Lyon who later became the poor Catholics, an order with the church. In 1210 Innocent the 3rd did the same for the Franciscans. Both did this with misgivings. Both recognized however there were elements of faith and dedication here which they could not condemn. Subsequently the papacy did condemn the whole idea of communism and the spiritual Franciscans had to be condemned totally. And the Franciscans who did not share that point of view, and who had really departed from Francis of Assisi went their way developing those approved ideas of Francis of Assisi.
Now I cite this as a problem case, and how it was dealt with. It is easy for us to be wise at a distance, seeing the beginning and the end. But we must remember that there are no perfect movements in history. God alone is perfect, and even when we a part of God’s movement we bring our sin and our fallibility into it. Moreover we bring ourselves, and unfinished product. Very often as we see someone whom we’ve known a long time and see the outcome we’re horrified that we didn’t see it earlier. But no one, including ourselves, is a finished product. We either develop our implications to an epistemological self-consciousness, or at least ones that others can spot, or we develop in terms of our consciousness as a Christian.
Now, we are told by Saint Paul in I Corinthians 4:5 “Judge nothing before the time” we are to suspend our judgment, we are to give things an opportunity, the tares in opportunity to grow, before they are rooted out. Premature judgment can prevent many problems, but it also leads to sterility because nothing is ventured. The churches which are very strict and rigid in preventing anything from starting that might be suspect, are also the sterile churches. Suspended judgment therefore, judging nothing before the time can lead to serious problems, but it also allows for growth in both direction, tares and wheat, and then a time for judgment because our Lord requires judgment. As we are very definitely told in John 7:24 “Judge righteous judgment” and in Matthew 6:22 our Lord says “By their fruits shall ye know them” then you can judge them; and you have to. If you do not then you are sinning. Because God says, look at their fruits, judge them. It’s that simple. Time is thus a factor here, judgment is a necessity.
Now there was enough in the position of Saint Francis of Assisi to give ground for suppressing him and his work before he ever began. There was also enough there to give grounds for great rejoicing in his joyful view of creation and redemption, and for bringing such a light to the faith. We really owe, by the way, a great deal of the joy of the Christmas season to Francis. He was the first one to build a crèche at Christmas time. Now of course we have had efforts to suppress what Francis began. A great deal of trouble could have been eliminated in the church if Francis had been suppressed immediately, but a great deal of good would also have been eliminated and the result would have been deadly.
Now I cite Francis because we have similar things today; the charismatic movemen