Foundations: Spiritual Authority

One of the goals of this blog is to look critically at some of the theology and processes at ACC and AMI that cause damage to believers.  I believe one of the most important ones is the leadership's buy-in to the belief that church authority should not be questioned.  This foundation of authoritarian rule comes from the teaching of Watchman Nee's book, Spiritual Authority.  It is required reading for any student going through the training school, and I often heard Jimmy Seibert talk about how important this book was in shaping new students.

If you are a church member attending a lifegroup, you might never realize that this is important.  However, if you are a lifegroup leader for a little while or go on to the training schools or staff training it becomes more and more clear.

Covering theology is gaining popularity in lots of charismatic-evangelical churches and has many dangers. It trains believers that all leaders above you (Christian and secular) are appointed by God so if you rebel against them you are rebelling against God.  This opens up people's hearts minds to undue manipulation because who wants to rebel against God!!!

The problem comes when this authority is given to new or unwise believers which is often the case in cell churches focused on fast growth (see previous posts).  If you are lucky and you are a pretty healthy person with a good understanding of the Bible and the character of God AND your leaders are also, then this theology only slightly screws with your understanding of the God.  However, if you or your leader don't fall in that category - huge messes happen.

One example when I was attending Highland Baptist Church was of a rising star of a lifegroup leader named James Stalnaker.  He always gave great testimonies during leadership meetings about people being saved and healed (later learned through friends that many of these stories were lies).  He had a charismatic personality and people liked him.  He got so much attention for the "fruit" that was borne in his cell groups, that he was one of the first college students to be selected by Jimmy and Jeff Abshire to work in their office as an administrative assistant.  Several months later about six college guys revealed to church leadership that he had used his position as lifegroup leader to sexually abuse them, usually after long periods of using spiritual influence to get them to drop their guard.

There is an excellent website that discusses the faults of this theology in detail:  http://coveringandauthority.com/

I will copy some of the more relevant stuff to Antioch, but please spend some time there.  It has great stuff.

Covering theology emphasizes the following:

• Sin is disobedience to God’s authority
• Grace is the power of God to obey him
• All authority is instituted by God
• God establishes his rule in the church through people he has delegated to be his authority
• The 5-fold ministry (apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers) represents God’s authority on earth
• Obedience to the Lord requires obedience to God’s delegated authorities (employers, church leaders, civil authorities)
• Rebellion against God’s delegated authority is rebellion against God
• Rebellion to authority opens one up to the demonic realm resulting in deception
• People should live by the principle of obedience rather than reason
• People should always obey authority unless they are clearly instructed to violate scripture
• The line of authority extends in the home where the father holds the highest authority
• Spiritual authority and blessing flows to those who suffer under authority
• God does not judge people on the fruit of their life but on how faithfully they followed authority
• Those outside the local church and the covering of its leaders are at serious risk of spiritual attack

Why it is False:

The lynchpin in Covering theology is the interpretation of Romans 13. Does God appoint all authorities in every realm of life? Do these authorities directly represent God? According to almost all Protestants the answer would be no. If human authority and God’s authority exist in two different realms then leadership has to look different. It doesn’t mean there are no leaders, but we give leaders the right and responsibility to lead organizations and guide people as long as they continue to be faithful, loving servants of Christ. We put people in positions of influence, positions of authority based on character and giftedness. We expect those leaders to lead by example, as servants, rightly dividing the word of truth. If it is proven that any leader doesn’t meet the criteria for leadership or begins to use underhanded or manipulative methods we are called to correct them. If that doesn’t work we must reject their leadership. In order to do this we need the body of the church to be active, discerning and think critically.

The challenge in crafting theology is coming up with ideas and concepts that best represent the whole counsel of scripture. To get “Covering Theology” to work requires ignoring significant relevant passages in scripture. It just doesn’t fit with Jesus’ words about leadership. It doesn’t fit with Paul's concept of the church as a body. If submission to church leaders is based on their position is so important why isn’t it clearly laid out in scripture and reinforced by example? Why would Paul go to such great lengths to convince the Corinthians that they should listen to him because of his life and ministry and not the people who had “letters of recommendation” and judge things according to the flesh? How could prophets like Jeremiah and John the Baptist say such negative things about their leaders if we are called to be unconditionally submitted to authority? Why aren’t we warned in the New Testament that we open ourselves up to demonic deception and spiritual disaster if we don’t submit to the authority of church leaders? This would be a really big deal if it were true and yet the entire New Testament is silent on it?

We must also consider the fruit. Have the churches that implemented this teaching ever experienced the revival that is promised will accompany this so called alignment? Why are there continual reports of abuse and spiritual shipwreck in the lives of the people?

I have no doubt there are sincere Christians that have accepted covering theology and a great many others that could rightly be considered wolves in sheep’s clothing. To those who are sincere I ask you:

• Do you really want to reject hundreds of years of protestant/evangelical biblical interpretation?
• Do you really think that you’ve discovered some hidden structural change to bring about revival? Has it worked so far?
• Do you really want to accept a theology that redefines the central concepts in our understanding of salvation such as faith, sin and grace?
• Have you ever winced inside when you observed the application of this theology and watched people go in to great distress?