I started reading/listening to Augustine's City of God today - we'll see how far I go with it as it is a daunting book to read.
At the beginning, in the preface, Augustine makes the following comment about the earthly city.
we must speak also of the earthly city, which, though it be mistress of the nations, is itself ruled by its lust of rule.
I've got a discussion here of power in human relationships and I make the following reference to Genesis 3:16 which I believe offers a pretty good paradigm for understanding the dynamics involved in relational breakdown, on a large and small scale.
5. The first discussion of the use of power in a human to human sense is in Genesis 3:16, where Eve is told:
Your desire will be for your husband and he will rule over you.
In this passage the "desire" which Eve will have for her husband is a desire to control. The word for "desire" here is used in Genesis 4:7 of sin's desire to "have" Cain. This desire is not a benevolent desire, it is the original "will to power." So, Eve will desire to control her husband and the husband will "rule" over her. Again, because this is in the context of the fall, it is difficult to see this desire to rule on the part of the man as being a benevolent desire. It seems to be more of a desire to conquer the woman.
Again, my point is not that the exercise of power in human relationships is always in and of itself sinful. But we must keep in mind that the fall introduced a kind of desire for power that is tyrannical and despotic by nature.
Augustine seems to back this up, and this offers all kinds of implications for life, particularly our public life. If Augustine is correct then the rules of the game for the world center around a lust for rule. As such, when Christians try to influence the powers and authorities of our world, at least those on a human scale, we've got to realize they play by a set of rules that are foreign to the Christian (i.e. the Christian's identity is that of servant, not ruler Phil. 2:5ff). We have to be careful to not think we can adopt their presuppositions, their ways and their "rules of the game," and then think we'll be able to persuade them to change all of that. We also have to understand that if we are faithful to our own presuppositions, ways and "rules of the game" we'll be largely unintelligible to them.
Recent Comments