Musings on Authority and the Weak and Righteous Rebellions (against “Crying it Out,” and Beyond)

I once believed that Authority is a major crux upon which the  Christian either stands or falls.  Satan was the first to rebel against authority, therefore rebellion against authority was the “original sin,” so to speak, of the universe.   That rebellion was not something I wanted to participate in.   

In this system, God was believed to set up delegated authorities in all facets of life, which the humble Christian was to either a.) rightly reflect God as the delegated authority in that situation, or b.) rightly reflect a submission to said delegated authority (who spoke for God).  No matter where you turned, someone was in authority and someone else was called to yield to that authority.  There were no neutral situations or relationships.   

The article (that I took this excerpt from) below is an excellent example of the above explained paradigm:

Opposing Parents Is Opposing God’s Authority

God has established the various organizations of authority in this world: family, human government and the church. It is a clear violation of his mandated lines of authority to undermine a parent by siding with that child against his parents. To take up the cause of a child in rebellion against parental authority is to implicitly say that God has made a mistake in giving those specific parents to that child. What pride and audacity to suppose I can improve on the family circle God has established!

No one knows the needs of a child better than his God-given parents. While there is no doubt many parents can and should improve their parenting skills, there is no excuse to supplant and undermine a parent’s authority with their children because of supposed failures we perceive in their role as parents. Be careful dear friend, as you feel compelled to intervene in the way a parent is disciplining, correcting or counseling their child. On what authority do you gainsay a parent’s guidance of their child?

Rebels Seek Rebels

It is no excuse that a rebel has sought you out for help. In fact, if a rebel seeks your assistance, it is very likely you yourself are a rebel because rebellious hearts have “rebel radar,” and will instinctively seek out those with whom they have a compatibility. “Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners” (1 Cor. 15:33). “As in water face answereth to face, so the heart of man to man.” (Prov. 27:19). You will note that when Absalom ran, he did not run to anyone who would be spiritual or likeminded with his father David, but rather to permissive, indulgent grandparents who were only too glad to subvert David’s authority as a father…     [Read Entire Article, Subverting Parental Authority, here]

While there are aspects of the above that I agree with (running down a kid’s parents in front of him is, er, not exactly compatible with the kind of Love we are called to in Christ, not to mention it’s just plain tacky), the over-all concept that the child’s parents are Right, period, just because their sperm and egg came together and a baby was born to them, is something I find repugnant. 

This sort of teaching doesn’t affect the kid from the good and happy home.  But it most assuredly means that the weak are left without a voice on their behalf.  If I believe the above article’s view, then when I see a child being treated harshly, I am highly unlikely to intervene on the child’s behalf—for fear of getting in the way of God’s Delegated Authority and therefore of God Himself! 

But did we forget something?  The weak and the downtrodden of this world are those we are called to, as followers of the Christ who came for them. 

I don’t think it does children any favors when we let abusers continue to abuse them (”Oh, but it’s only once in a while,” or “Well, it’s fairly mild most of the time),” all in the name of the fatalistic, “Well, God let those children be born into that family, so I don’t want to stand in the way of His will…”  

Or another argument that I love (note sarcasm, please): the notion that, “Methods like the Pearls and/or the Ezzo’s are usually employed by well-meaning parents who love God, so it’s really rude and presumptious of you to suggest that they might be harming their children by adopting such methods.  Why can’t you just shut up and give parents the freedom to make their own choices?  Hello, show some grace here!” 

Why do we galvanize quickly to protect the lives of unborn babies, who do not have the ability to speak for themselves, and yet advocate a policy of silence when it comes to parental choices that involve forcing babies to cry until the clock says it’s time for a feeding, and/or swatting babies for crying when they are put down for naps?  

What is gracious about not speaking out when parents are taught that babies cry “in order to manipulate them?”  Who’s going to show mercy to the babies?   

Babies can’t speak for themselves.  Psychological studies can, though, at the very least.  It’s not a theory but a fact: babies need touched and nurtured for comfort as well as for food, for proper development as well as full stomachs.  They need touch, not “alone time,” for proper brain development!  [See Harvard on this, if you don't believe articles like this or this or this]. 

And little toddlers literally need to explore, need to begin asserting their newly discovered power of choice, and need to know that the world is a safe place.  The only way they can do that is with their grubby little hands and unstable fat feet.  When they are swatted on a regular basis for all “un-adult-like” behaviour, they quickly learn that the world is not a safe place, and neither is their parent [see here and here and specifically the last paragraph here. 

I believe rebellion is just as ugly as I used to.  I just question now the “sane-ness” (and the Scriptural-ness, if that’s a word) of a theological outlook that believes humans are conduits for God’s authority in any way that is not also in humble submission to the fallibility of our humanity—which means, all good human authorities should be willing to submit to questions, correction and rebuke.   

Admitting one’s humanity and therefore one’s need for community (for others speaking into our lives, for the fact that sometimes we will need corrected and even rebuked) does not ”ruin” authority.  It makes it that much better.